Your statistic shows who has died of HIV. What about the1.2 million people infected with the virus?
- Honesty
Believe what you feel you must. But I maintain that these images will be popping up in advertisements in future ballot initiatives regarding SSM and the like. Like for most things these day, it’s about winning over the middle. And this will not gain them one vote there, but will lose them some.
Guess we’ll just have to wait and see who is right.
Hmmm. Is there a way to bet on this on that site where you can place money on just about anything? Anyone?
There are lots of people who are pro-gay in this thread pointing out how offended they are. Not that it’s going to change any of our votes, but “well, it didn’t lose us any votes” is not a very good measure of success as an activist.
[QUOTE=Honesty]
Your statistic shows who has died of HIV. What about the 1.2 million people infected with the virus?
- Honesty
[/QUOTE]
It’s horrible. It still doesn’t support your claim that “millions of Americans were dying of HIV” during Reagan’s term.
And perhaps one day people like you will realize that people can disagree with them on one aspect of an issue they feel strongly about and not be assholes. But due to my interaction with you an many others on these boards, I am less than optimistic.
So hold your breath or not, not matter to me. On second thought, I’d prefer you breathe. I can see that those brain cells need all the help they can get.
You want to place bets on some future outcome that would never be demonstrable anyway? Whatever the election result, how would it be determined that this had made any difference?
Now I know for certain not to take anything you say seriously in the future.
[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
There are lots of people who are pro-gay in this thread pointing out how offended they are. Not that it’s going to change any of our votes, but “well, it didn’t lose us any votes” is not a very good measure of success as an activist.
[/QUOTE]
But that was the claim I was responding to – that it would lose votes. If you don’t think that’s a useful thing to discuss, why are you telling me rather than the person who made the claim?
A friend and role model of mine was also at that reception. I’ve watched her amazing Campaign for Southern Equality take root in our state and do some amazing activism. She recognizes that the current batch of people who believe in gay rights is insufficient: to win this fight, we’ve got to convert some current homophobes.
I cannot possibly imagine she’s happy about these jackasses.
I’ve disagreed with plenty of people about plenty of things without believing that they are assholes. I believe in a progressive taxation system, but don’t believe that you need to be an asshole to disagree with me. I believe in the right to on-demand abortion, but don’t believe that you need to be an asshole to disagree with that either. People can arrive at very different conclusions than me on a variety of issues, and while i might never agree with them, i can understand and at some level respect the worldview that shapes their position.
You can argue against progressive taxation on the libertarian notion of rights, or on a more utilitarian notion of the best way to distribute wealth and opportunity in society. You can argue against abortion on the idea that the fetus is a living creature that deserves some rights of its own, or that it is preferable to bring the baby into the world and have someone else look after it. As i said, i would disagree with those positions, but they have, at least, some rational basis.
But on the gay marriage issue, in all my reading and all my discussions on the subject, i can’t come to any conclusion that those who oppose it are anything but irrational bigots. There is no argument against gay marriage that boils down to anything more than one or more of: “God says we shouldn’t do it”; “It’s how we’ve always done it”; or “If gays marry, it devalues straight marriage.” The first two of those are not a reasonable basis for public policy, and the last is nothing but a self-serving delusion propagated by people who prefer to blame the queers for the decline of the marital bond.
Those opposed to gay marriage are effectively saying, “We don’t want you to have this because we don’t like you. We know it won’t actually hurt us in any way, but we will still deny you this because we can.” Luckily, the underlined bit of that sentence is becoming less reflective of reality all the time.
:rolleyes: While we may not be able to ascribe a particular portion of a particular outcome to the pictures being used, my main point was that the pictures will be used, by those opposing gay rights. And that it’s really easy thing to determine, isn’t it? You look at the advertising for issues like SSM that will be on ballots in the near future and see if the images are used or not.
Do you think they won’t be used? Do you think they might be used by the Pro SSM crowd?
Would you like to wager on if they are used? And by whom?
My money is that this won’t be more than a blip on the radar, forgotten in weeks. The only people who will remember it are people who hate gays anyway and will never vote to give them their rights. Most decent people will recognize that two people acting like jackasses one time is no reason to deny millions of people their human rights.
Also, no one familiar with your posts believes that you have gay people’s best interest at heart, so please stop concern-trolling.
Eh. They probably will. The anti-marriage-equality crowd is composed of people stupid enough to do lots of dumb things. I got an email from the National Organization for Marriage the other week about a protest against Starbucks’s support for marriage equality – in which the instruction is to buy Starbucks coffee and then dump it out.
I mean, hell, by the standards of these organizations, someone like you who wants to take bets on an outcome that will never even be determinate is smart enough to be in a leadership position. But it still won’t end up changing a single vote in whatever states have something on the ballot (Minnesota, at least, and I think Washington).
Why would I bet on something so obviously, stupidly irrelevant? There are a million of these little fly-by-night advocacy groups anyway. Hell, if you were concerned you were losing the bet you could probably start one yourself since half of these weird little right wing groups appear to be one or two people.
I get that you’re dumb enough to bet on things like that but don’t assume everyone you meet is as dumb as you.
Oh, I see. You’re not reading enough translates to you feeling justified in considering those you disagree with assholes. My advice, get your nose out of The Dope and read some people who hold positions you don’t agree with. You’ve got a search engine, use it. And no, I’m not going to turn this into a SSM thread. If you care one iota what my views actually are, there’s another search engine built into The Dope. It too is free. Knock yourself out.
Not that I mind people who think the way you do thinking me an asshole. Kinda makes me feel I’m on the right track actually. So, thanks!
Obviously, you are not familiar with my posts then. But don’t let that stop you from spout nonsense.
As far as who will be using these…the point is that, yes, the photos will be used by those who do not agree with SSM and those who hate gays. But the destructive part is that they will use them to sway the same people that the pro-SSM crowd will be trying to sway with their feel-good imagery of SS couples. If you think that the images we’re talking about aren’t powerful ones, you’re kidding yourself.
I know what they are. I was involved in a lot of the SSM debates around here before and after Prop 8 was passed, and i’ve seen you lay out your position. It fits perfectly into the model i outlined in my previous post.
No, that’s a perfectly fair description of how one sided the debate over SSM is. The anti-SSM people have been challenged again and again to provide some other rational reason to oppose it, including here on the SDMB and failed over and over.
You are a wide ranging bigot. Whenever there’s a thread on a civil rights issue and I see you post, I know before reading what you say that you’ll almost certainly take the bigoted side.
Translation: Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, I guess you’re right, they will be used and by the people who you claimed would use them, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So there!
So, we agree.
Like I said, use the Search feature. Fight your own ignorance.
I said it won’t change any votes, you asked if I wanted to make a bet, I pointed out how stupid that was, and you acted like a six-year-old.
Yep. You’re living down to expectations all right.
Well, I’m certainly not surprised that you have confusion when it comes to the word “rational”. You foaming at the mouth. Manson-crazy ball of hate and stupidity.
:rolleyes: You know, without even know what you’re referring to (you know, kindle like yourself) as a general rule, if I take the position opposite you, I’m comfortable that I’m on the right side of the debate. The sane side. You get my drift, Mr. Kill All American Military?
I sincerely hope you post with one hand handcuffed to a hospital bed inside a secure sanitarium, you waste of DNA.
BUt I beg you for more condemnation. MORE. You have no idea the degree that it both lift my spirits and reminds me that I am on the right side of things.
I asked you if you wanted to bet they would be USED. YOU claimed that I wanted to bet that they would affect the outcome, even though I said there would be no way to determine that.
Tsk, tsk, tsk.
If they were 16 I’d laugh and be glad they at least know who Reagan is.
At their age it makes them look like childish prats. I think most people will see that, and this won’t nudge many fence-sitters one way or the other.
Nazi white supremacists and other hate groups will add the photos to their collections, but who cares?