A note to the straight supremacists and those verbally beating the tar out of them

The BBQ Pit
41

Harmful actions couched in polite terminology are much worse than foul language by itself, wouldn’t you say? Would you rather I punched you and then apologized, or called you a name?

I appreciate your effort to cast everybody in that thread as rabid, frothing lunatics. However, you know very well that it’s an inaccurate portrayal of the tone of that thread.

Your constant accusations of hysteria are getting pretty rote, by the way; every time this discussion takes place, you take the worst examples of overreaction on the part of the pro-gay contingent, and the bluster about hissy fits and hysteria. You completely ignore the rational opinions of posters advocating equality for gays, and focus entirely on anger being expressed by people with a pro-gay viewpoint. Meanwhile, you completely ignore the hatred and violence being espoused by straight supremacists like awd_dsm.

I wonder if you’ll ever stop criticizing posting styles, and actually contribute anything to this debate. Like, say, what your point of view is on the issue.

42

I think that Shodan, by mischaracterizing pro-gay posters as rabid, drooling lunatics and giving tacit support to H4e and her cronies, has made his views perfectly clear.

43

are you referring to tea-bagging???
:wink:

44

DREAMER says:

DRASTIC replies:

Just pointing out that she didn’t say that. She can’t find in the Bibile where it says she should judge or condemn people, literally or not. You can be a Bible literalist and still refrain from going around damning people to hell; indeed, there’s a strong argument that that is what you must do, if you’re a Bible literalist.

45

Libertarian, you make a damn fine point.

I cannot respect people who absolutely and unrepentantly feel that they have last say in determining what other people think, feel, and believe. I have absolutely no tolerance for Christians who insist that Wiccans, Hindus, and other polytheists are “really” worshipping devils. I cannot take a person seriously who tells Mormons, despite their objections, what their church “really” believes and why these beliefs make that Mormon un-Christian and wrong. What I find most absurd is Christians harping up and down that homosexuality is a choice that they have the right to hate when gay folks keep saying over and over, “I didn’t choose”.

Let’s ask ourselves honestly: do fundamentalist Christians call homosexuality a choice because

a) They have patiently examined all of the evidence available or
b) Because they really, really want it to be a choice so that it fits in with the beliefs of an ancient people whose God they revere.

I think the answer is obvious. I’m not saying that Christianity is without redeeming values, mind you; I simply think that dragging ancient ideas into the modern world without examination is nonsensical. Hating gays belongs right up there with animal sacrifice, genocide, and stoning people to death on the pile of ideas which may be in the Bible but that any reasonable person in the modern world wouldn’t support.

Attraction is not something we sit down and choose. I know I can’t choose who I’m attracted to, and I don’t think anyone really does either. Why would any sane person sigh over the unattainable figures of celebrities or fictional (even animated) characters if they could simply choose to be attracted to people who are readily available? Perhaps it’s nature, maybe it’s nurture, maybe it’s a bit of both. Nobody looks at another human being and says “Hmm, should I choose to be attracted to them?” Likewise, there’s no gay on-switch where a man decides “All right, I’m tired of women. Despite all of the cultural taboos, religious hatred, and other negatives, I choose to be attracted to men now and I choose to desire sex with them.” As Lib said, how? Honestly, I’d like to know how you think this happens. It would be indeed helpful, because if we could determine this mysterious process, surely we could solve the problem of how to make people choose not to be gay and instead be heterosexual (and various ministries have been struggling with, and failing at, this task).

Yes, everyone chooses to have sex or not have sex. A gay person can choose celibacy; so can a heterosexual. However, it is both unfair and unreasonable to say “You should not have sex because you are attracted to the wrong people. I, however, am allowed”. (If homosexuality is a choice, then so is heterosexuality – I don’t see how you can validate one and not the other.) Can you turn off your sexual drives? Even those who are celibate often struggle and it’s not a lifestyle that many choose deliberately.

awd_dsm, can you defend yourself?

46

Besides, he was banned for continuing to flame people in GD, even after repeated warnings. Gaudere said as much in the “What Will It Take” thread.

What makes you think you’re such a catch?

47

So we cannot forbid pedophilia? Are you serious?

48

{sigh}

:frowning:

Esprix

49

You know, if you are going to make explicit comparisaons of homosexuality to pedophilia, you might as well draw the same comparisons to heterosexuality–after all, there are more “funny uncles” going after little girls, are there not?

Still, I feel confident that you’ll ignore this, or any post that might make you question your blind bigotry and ignorance. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

50

May I interject a comment without being jumped upon?

Religion, sexuality and politics are age old arguments. Nothing will ever come from calling names, or stating your beliefs until you are blue in the face. We won’t know who is really right until we are dead, so, who cares? Believe what you want to believe, and leave others to believe what they want to believe.

So, in the matter of the “straight supremacists”, can we call the whole matter a draw and close the damn thread?

This is worse that hearing your parents argue.

51

I’m pretty sure that most rapes of any kind are perpetrated by Straight Men.

52

Oh for heaven’s sake.

Yes, I draw exactly the same comparison to heterosex as I do to gay sex. If it is morally wrong, it should not be done even if the person has a strong inclination to do so.

Would it help if I changed the analogy to adultery instead of child molestation? Or how about if we limit the discussion to males molesting female children only?

My point was and remains that the sexual impulse is not irresistable, nor does a strong urge exempt anyone, gay or straight, from abiding by the rules of morality.

If it is wrong for me to cheat on my wife, ** then** it is wrong even if I really, really want to. Even the fact that I was born with a strong impulse to have sex with as many different people as I can does not make it OK.

Is this any better? Or am I going to see some nonsense two pages down that says “Shodan thinks all gays are child molesters!”

Regards,
Shodan

53

That would be ver nice, and iIm sure every gay-friendly poster here will agree. But the self-righteous fundies do not agree. They band together to organize referendums to restrict the civil rights of gsy people. They advocate firing gay people and evicting gay people because they disapprove of gay sexuality. The fundies, like H4E are religious totalitarians, wishing to impose their will on the rest of us.

54

Well, I’m glad you clarified your position.

Whose rules of morality are we talking about? There is no absolute standard. By the rules of the fundamentalist Wahabi Muslims, drinking beer is highly immoral and is punishable by public flogging. Adultery is a capital crime (for women). Should we have adulterers beheaded?

Or how about the penalties the Pilgrim fathers imposed, like the death penalty for blasphemy and imprisonment for adultery?

55

Your morals - obviously not mine, or, it would seem, a whole lot of people. (And what an exponentially silly thing to be “immoral” - sex. Big whoop. Killing someone, doing things to harm other people, those are bad. But who has sex with whom? What a waste of your time to be concerned about.)

How is promiscuity wrong?

The more I read these threads (and there are so very many of them these past couple of weeks) the more I feel sorry for these close-minded fundamentalist religion-types. This entire fiasco pains me.

Esprix

56

Oh no, not this again. Shodan, while fluidruid may not have actually said the words “consenting adults”, I believe it was more than implied. You are correct if you believe that some sexual practices should be outlawed, but incorrect if you believe that a valid comparison can be made between homosexuality and these forbidden sex crimes.

Simply put, the litmus test for “wrong” sexual practices is the two words alluded to above. If it’s not consensual, it’s rape, and should be outlawed. If one of the parties involved is not an adult, it is either child molestation or statutory rape, and should be outlawed. Since homosexuality is both consenting and practiced by adults it should not be forbiden. There is no victim. It’s not a difficult concept to grasp.

Now, if you want to believe that it is morally wrong, go right ahead … just don’t bring up the “forbid” spectre. There are those who think my having a pork chop for dinner is morally wrong. However, even those who are against pork for religous or animal-rights reasons cannot forbid me my culinary lifestyle.

57

Shodan,

Adultery can only be immoral if you have committed to not do it. Since the general understanding is that marriage contains this promise it is by default immoral. If two people enter into a contract of marriage and both consent that it is OK to have sexual relationships with others it is no longer immoral. Consenting adults making adult decisions.

Sparc

58

Although your cardiologist might! :smiley:

59

If those who so strongly and vehemently dislike/disagree with homosexuality/think it’s “wrong” and sinful and all that stuff would just shut their pieholes and not go around saying “Sinner! You’re going to hell for being gay/choosing to be gay!”, then there would in all likelihood be much less discussion. HOWEVER, as long as there are people who think someone’s sexuality and what that person does does with human consenting adults is their business, and that they have a right to leglislate against non-hets to effectively punish them for who they are, and any number of other offensive, unnecessary, degrading (and very often against the spirit of the religion they claim to follow) things, I very much doubt you’ll see any cessation in the fight for equality.

And IMO, quite frankly, calling a draw would be akin to giving up. You may be okay with that, but I am sure as hell not. And I doubt any of my compatriots (so to speak:)) are/will either. It’s about who we are. How the hell do you actively give up that fight? It’s almost inconceivable:)

60

Lyllyan,

I have to disagree. I think people do move on these issues. Asking someone to justify what they said often causes them to examine how they feel and why they feel that way.

Don’t enjoy the debates and arguements or “been there, done that” - don’t read it. No one is forcing it on you.

And I won’t know that I’m right after I’m dead - since I’ll be dead. So I only have one chance to get it right.