Preemptive post: Virginia's governor election is NOT a reflection of Obama

[melon]

at least this Christie guy campaigned on the economic issues of government spending and jobs, instead of the typical conservative social issues of gay and immigrant bashing

It seems the Virginia winner did the same, these guys might not be that bad.

There's the old adage that "all politics are local." Democrats held New Jersey for 12 years and Corzine was long unpopular. A party switch in the governor's office here was likely inevitable. And Republicans appear to have run a better campaign in Virginia and earned the victory. Considering, currently, that the largest political affiliation in the U.S. these days is "Independent," what does Obama really have to do with either of these races? Probably nothing. Can you really imagine New Jersey voting for, hypothetically speaking, Sarah Palin in 2012? Hah!

NY-23 is interesting only because GOP conservatives pinned all their hopes on this race all by themselves as a referendum on Obama, and they still lost. I think this race stands as a greater metaphor for the state of American politics in that substance still matters over ideology, even if that doesn't make for a very good soundbite for pundits.

 

[Irvine511]

Not really as I only compare my life to Christ's. Kinda humbling actually.

this is priceless. the very definition of self-righteousness. you gave me a smile on a rather sad morning.

 

[Irvine511]

i think we're also seeing the conservative end of the independents slowly move back to the GOP. they moved away because of, 1) Bush and his disastrous presidency, and 2) Palin.

in both NJ and VA, two states that have elected a governor the opposite of who is in the white house for the past, what, 25 years, two Republicans who ran on issues won against 1) a poor candidate in VA, and 2) an unpopular governor in NJ. in both states, Obama's approval ratings remain quite high.

and given the closeness of the Bloomberg race, i think we can say that the greatest economic catastrophe since the Great Depression is bad news for incumbents.

and i can't say i'm all that upset by that.

what i do fear is that the Blue Dogs will get cowardly, that health care reform is doomed this year, that the DNC will get cautious, and that gay people will continue to be kept at arms length by the Democratic establishment.

Obama has the least to worry about.

 

[INDY500]

this is priceless. the very definition of self-righteousness. you gave me a smile on a rather sad morning.

Main Entry: 1com·pare
Pronunciation: \kəm-ˈper\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): com·pared; com·par·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French comparer, from Latin comparare to couple, compare, from compar like, from com- + par equal
Date: 14th century
transitive verb
1 : to represent as similar : liken <shall I compare thee to a summer's day? — Shakespeare>
2 a : to examine the character or qualities of especially in order to discover resemblances or differences <compare your responses with the answers> b : to view in relation to <tall compared to me> <easy compared with the last test>
3 : to inflect or modify (an adjective or adverb) according to the degrees of comparison

I thought I was in the company of those that knew the definition of, or understood the meaning of the verb "compare."

I guess I thought wrong.

 

[A_Wanderer]

I know what He said about sin. And I know what He said about the log in my own eye. Which is why I don't argue against same-sex marriage because I think homosexuals to be morally or civilly inferior to myself or heterosexuals in any way.
It has to do with what I, indy500, personally feel is the best thing for society, children and to guarantee generational cohesion. Which is a mother and a father as the nucleus of a family.

Maybe it's not hip or politically correct. But it is my personal belief and dictates how I vote.

Regardless of the evidence?

Lesbian parents yield better outcomes than heterosexuals for their children on plenty of benchmarks, does your attitude exist independently of what happens in the real world?

 

[melon]

I thought I was in the company of those that knew the definition of, or understood the meaning of the verb "compare."

I guess I thought wrong.

Well, you're both right, in some regard. Yes, comparing oneself to Christ is a common narrative and aspiration in Christianity, so, in that regard, I do not find it unusual nor that one can automatically presume that it was stated out of self-righteousness.

On the other hand, as a matter of historiography, Christian comparisons to Christ or Satan were often as arbitrary as liking or disliking someone, and so it is not much of a stretch to note such self-righteousness and to say that others are, by nature of contrast, "Satanic" by default when such statements are made. It is, more or less, part of the medieval "Christian tradition."

 

[melon]

Regardless of the evidence?

Lesbian parents yield better outcomes than heterosexuals for their children on plenty of benchmarks, does your attitude exist independently of what happens in the real world?

Frankly, it is regardless of the evidence. White supremacists, as an example, will rail against blacks for being "stupid," thus proving the supremacy of the "white race," while they will also rail against "Asians" (which are typically visualized as Chinese and Japanese) for being too smart and working too hard, thus being a threat to the dominance of the "white race." In other words, if whites are deemed as the ideal from the onset, any other argumentation is merely justification after the fact.

One can clearly see the same kind of "logic" amongst the "heterosexual supremacist" movement of today, considering the haphazard arguments we've seen from them as to why gays should be marginalized over the years. Fortunately, I think more and more people are seeing them for what they are, and that's why we're seeing the ballot initiatives running on closer margins that one could ever have seen possible even five years ago.

 

[Irvine511]

I thought I was in the company of those that knew the definition of, or understood the meaning of the verb "compare."

I guess I thought wrong.

no, you don't get it, which makes it even more self-righteous.

i only compare myself to ... Ghandi/Steven Spielberg/Michael Phelps/JFK. kind of humbling, actually.

but that's okay.

i still like you.

 

[INDY500]

no, you don't get it, which makes it even more self-righteous.

i only compare myself to ... Ghandi/Steven Spielberg/Michael Phelps/JFK. kind of humbling, actually.

but that's okay.

i still like you.

But how do you rate yourself? When I say I'm humbled when comparing myself with the example of Christ it's because I see how short I come up in the results of the comparison. Comparing myself to others could easily lead to feeling either pride or low self-esteem. Neither of which is good.

Nothing wrong, however, with observing and learning from others for the purpose of self-improvement. I think you can learn something from anyone.

BVS being the possible exception. (joke)

 

[deep]

But how do you rate yourself? When I say I'm humbled when comparing myself with the example of Christ it's because I see how short I come up in the results of the comparison.

I don't see how you can use 'humble' in regards to yourself,
when the below post is anything but.

I know the issue means a lot to you so I won't brag, but what now, 0 - 31.

I have no idea how the campaign was run in Maine, but if you bad-mouth the citizens tomorrow morning as intolerant or hateful, I promise you it will be 0 - 32 the next time it comes up.

Just some friendly advice.

 

[Irvine511]

But how do you rate yourself? When I say I'm humbled when comparing myself with the example of Christ it's because I see how short I come up in the results of the comparison. Comparing myself to others could easily lead to feeling either pride or low self-esteem. Neither of which is good.

good point.

Christ stood in solidarity with the marginalized, so i guess you are coming up short there.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

How many people here are scared to death?

ABC News’ Rick Klein and Z. Byron Wolf report: The top Republicans in the House and Senate took something of a victory lap today, jumping on the results from yesterday’s elections in Virginia and New Jersey to predict GOP gains in the 2010 congressional contests.

In a joint interview with ABC News, House Minority Leader John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said they were thrilled to see independent voters supporting Republican candidates in both of the day’s big contests.

Boehner, R-Ohio, said the wave of anger at President Obama and Democrats in Congress is only growing as 2010 approaches

“There’s a political rebellion going on in America, and what we saw last night was just a glimpse of it,” Boehner said.

Asked if that means Republicans will win back the House, he responded: “I think we’re looking for a very good year.”

McConnell, R-Ky., said the election results will make it more difficult for the president to convince Democrats to support a sweeping health care bill.

“You’ve got a lot of newly elected Democrats -- as they had two good years in a row -- who are hanging on by their fingernails, and being pushed by the speaker and the majority leader to support legislation that they now know for sure their constituents don’t approve of,” McConnell said.

“I don’t know whether they’re going to find the votes or not,” Boehner said. “But I can tell you they don’t have the votes.”

Boehner rejected the notion that the race in New York’s 23rd congressional election suggests that the GOP should be concerned about its divisions, pointing out that GOP primaries will sort out virtually all such scenarios next year.

Both he and McConnell, though, endorsed a “big tent” approach to growing the party’s numbers in Congress.

McConnell offered strong support for Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, the one Republican who has voted in favor of Democrats’ health care proposals to date. Yesterday, Gov. Tim Pawlenty, R-Minn., said Snowe “can't say she's a Republican and then vote against the Republican position much of the time.”

Said McConnell: “Olympia Snowe is a member of our conference in good standing. Maine is a very, very left of center state. We’re extremely grateful to have her in our conference, and we have a ‘big tent’ party here in the Senate.”

Added Boehner: “We want Republicans of every stripe.”

Both men said they were happy to have an Election Day where Republicans made up some ground.”

“Been a while,” McConnell said. “The return of the independents is extremely important. And if they’re there a year from now, we’ll have another very good election.”

Said Boehner: “Clearly it’s been a difficult year. For us it’s been like standing in front of a machine gun -- liberal ideas every single week, one after another. It think it really has the American people concerned. They’re scared to death, actually.”

 

[Bono's shades]

^I'm not particularly frightened. It's just a couple of elections, and the ones the Republicans won were for governor, not Congress. If the Conservative Party guy had actually won the New York congressional seat, then I would be scared.

 

[diamond]

equality blooms with spring

i guess it's Autumn now..

and a horse is a horse of course..

<>

 

[Diemen]

Putting minority rights to a vote is immoral.

Just think this bears repeating.

 

[AEON]

I must admit, after years of the same discussion, I wonder if the matter can be resolved in the near term. It "seems" to me that homosexuals want very much to be FULLY seen as normal, or at least in the range of what people consider normal. Normal desires, normal lifestyles, normal families, normal marriages, white picket fence, walking their kids to the park...fill in the blank.

And I can see that desire, and I believe it is real. Perhaps if I were gay, I would demand the same things. Yet, I can never fully understand what it means to think like a homosexual. And a homosexual can never fully understand what it means to be purely heterosexual.

I wonder if science can back up the fact that many heterosexuals feel naturally repulsed by visible homosexuality (is it nature or nurture that many feel that way?). It is difficult to be repulsed and have the major believe systems (for the most part) agree that they should be repulsed. In essence, I wonder where the repulsion comes from? Are people simply raised to be repulsed? Or is it something engranied as deeply as sexual orientation itself?

It is my opinion - that even if/when gay marriage is allowed - homosexuals will still fight to be seen as "normal" by the heterosexual community - and in the end, it is probably a losing fight.

BTW - if you think we are making "progress" in terms of teaching the next generation to be more sensitive to gay issues - just spend some time around 18 - 22 year old heterosexual males while nobody with PC authority is looking/listening...in my day, the worst insult was to be called a geek - to this next generation (black, white, hispanic...etc included), the worst insult is to be called - well, you know what...

Gay marriage will probably pass eventually, but I would suspect it would only create further division.

 

[deep]

Hey Aeon

Nice to see you make an appearance.

I hope all is well with you and your family.

Have you been stationed overseas? or have you been stateside?


back on topic,

I don't think we can break it down to what is "normal".

Why is it necessary to think of the sex act when one encounters gay people. The only reason for gays to exist is to be engaging in sex?

I have some friends that are married, she weighs 300 pounds and he is around 400. They have two kids. Watching then have sex might be considered repulsive by many. Mutual friends have even brought this up when they were not around. I found the discussion very distasteful. Whatever my friends wanted to do behind their closed doors was none of my business. And thank goodness people did not vote on how comfortable they would feel about obese people having sex and even kids.

Real old people with no teeth have sex. Again many might find that repulsive.

I don't find any sexuality between consenting adults that have genuine affection and concern for each other repulsive. I may not want to include it in my porn collection.

As for why many find gay sex repulsive?
I am convinced it is nurture. I am old enough to find it very similar to same repulsion some people had for black / white sex. There was a time when in casual conversation among friends people would say things like, "It would make me vomit, how repulsive, it is not normal, not the way God made us. He made us different for a reason."

I believe inter-racial relationships are a choice people make. They have a right to do that, and the law protects them with equal protection.

Yes, young males do anti-gay talk. I would not be surprised if some of this talk was done by closet gays for social acceptance. Young males talk about f*cking anything and anybody. Their sexuality is at the top of how they express and define themselves. Eventually we grow out of it.

I bet you said things and thought things at 17-19 that you would not do now.

This Maine vote was led by some Catholic media person on loan from their church. Maine has a 35% Catholic population. In CA the vote was led by the LDS Church and the Black Church.

It is disappointing to me that people had their rights taken away by a small margin that would not have happened it tax-exempted religions had not gotten involved in politics.

 

[melon]

As for why many find gay sex repulsive?
I am convinced it is nurture.

Considering that "bisexuality," so to say, was a matter of routine in Greco-Roman culture, I'm inclined to agree. And considering that in some native cultures homosexuals are actually placed at an elevated status over others, it is also possible for the majority of a culture to not be attracted to the same sex while still being accepting of those who do.

And definitely, what deep says is true. Most of the arguments being used against gay marriage are the same that were used against interracial marriage: that it's repulsive, that it goes against nature, that it goes against God/the Bible, etc. Interestingly enough, it also took a Supreme Court case to legalize it, because you were never going to get a majority of people to vote in favour of it.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

If I believed that heterosexuality meant "normal" then maybe I could have some clue. I know plenty of abnormal heterosexuals and I don't know what defines "normal" anyway. I do know that it's not just hetero=normal.

It was also a Catholic governor from Maine who attempted to make gay marriage happen there-so kudos to him. And not all males grow out of defining themselves by their sexuality- of course neither do all females either.

 

[AEON]

Hey Aeon

Nice to see you make an appearance.

I hope all is well with you and your family.

Have you been stationed overseas? or have you been stateside?

Thanks!

I've been here for quite some time. I just took a break from posting, but I've been reading the forum quite a bit.

I have some friends that are married, she weighs 300 pounds and he is around 400. They have two kids. Watching then have sex might be considered repulsive by many.

Good point - and funny.

As for why many find gay sex repulsive?
I am convinced it is nurture. I am old enough to find it very similar to same repulsion some people had for black / white sex.

Good point.

Yes, young males do anti-gay talk. I would not be surprised if some of this talk was done by closet gays for social acceptance. Young males talk about f*cking anything and anybody. Their sexuality is at the top of how they express and define themselves. Eventually we grow out of it.

Yes, I agree we grow out of it (hopefully). I guess my point is that despite different cultural backgrounds and despite the strong PC push in the schools - these kids still think that being gay is the worst possible thing

This Maine vote was led by some Catholic media person on loan from their church. Maine has a 35% Catholic population. In CA the vote was led by the LDS Church and the Black Church.

Do you find it interesting that the Catholic Church, which is much more "liberal" when it comes to social justice issues than the Protestants (immigration for instance) - and the "Black Church" which understand the struggle for equality as well as anyone - both oppose gay marriage?

It is disappointing to me that people had their rights taken away by a small margin that would not have happened it tax-exempted religions had not gotten involved in politics.

I think that gay marriage is just not universally agreed upon. Maybe it will be, but not today. Enough mainstream believers and non-believers are opposed to it and they do not deserve to be considered bigoted and evil (maybe ignorant is fair). I think the comparison of the black's fight for equality can only be taken so far. Many people feel that being black is neither a choice nor a birth defect. Thus, there is no reason for either special or negative treament. Others feel that being gay is a either a choice or a birth defect - and this makes it different than racial issues.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I think there were always plenty of people who believed that being black was some sort of "birth defect"-thus slavery was allowed to exist, for starters. Maybe some people still believe that. I will never understand believing that people can "choose" to be gay, considering what results for them sometimes, what they are subjected to. But I have always believed that people will use that as an argument-that being black is not a choice and being gay is. Seems more than unfair to me, but that's my view. I definitely don't believe it's any sort of "birth defect" to be born gay.

 

[Irvine511]

equality blooms with spring

i guess it's Autumn now..

and a horse is a horse of course..

<>

love is love.

all eyes on DC, NY, and NJ.

enormous progress has been made in just 6 years, but this was a setback.

i'm sure the Mormons are happy that there might be a group more ridiculed and despised than they are.

 

[Irvine511]

Others feel that being gay is a either a choice or a birth defect - and this makes it different than racial issues.

and they're wrong. it's that simple. and people hold onto this belief so that they can justify their prejudice.

the world is a vastly more interesting, creative place because of gay people. you would all miss us if we all suddenly chose to be straight.

and i think it's less that all gays want kids a dog and a white picket fence. gay people are as varied as straight people when it comes to what they "want."

what gays want is to be treated equally under the law. even if i choose never to marry, i would like to at least have that option.

 

[BVS]

I guess my point is that despite different cultural backgrounds and despite the strong PC push in the schools - these kids still think that being gay is the worst possible thing

What exactly your exposure to teens across the country?

Do you find it interesting that the Catholic Church, which is much more "liberal" when it comes to social justice issues than the Protestants (immigration for instance) - and the "Black Church" which understand the struggle for equality as well as anyone - both oppose gay marriage?

No, I still see the Catholic church being very backwards on many things, and are EXTREMELY slow to reconcile their past mistakes.

Others feel that being gay is a either a choice or a birth defect - and this makes it different than racial issues.

There are still those that believe black people are black because they are "marked" should we give their ignorance equal say? Ignorance is ignorance no matter if it's a majority or minority.

 

[Irvine511]

children have to be taught that there's something wrong with gay people. for most families who have visible, out aunts and uncles (or mothers and fathers or cousins or whoever), children under the age of 10 or so have absolutely no problems with two men or two women who love each other. it does have to be taught, not just at home, but by peers. adults might find some subjects complicated, but children don't.

you know, like racism.

 

[INDY500]

the world is a vastly more interesting, creative place because of gay people. you would all miss us if we all suddenly chose to be straight.

the world is a vastly more populated, colonized place because of straight people. mankind would all but disappear if we all suddenly chose to be gay.

 

[BoMac]

the world is a vastly more populated, colonized place because of straight people. mankind would all but disappear if we all suddenly chose to be gay.

If being gay was a choice, and we all chose this then, yes, mankind would disappear.

Except homosexuality is not a choice, so there's no threat that we'd all suddenly wake up one day and decide to become gay.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

the world is a vastly more populated, colonized place because of straight people

And we have really made a mess of so much of it-including our marriages and families. But as long as we keep that population going, who cares. Just don't allow those gay people to screw things up for us.

 

[BVS]

the world is a vastly more populated, colonized place because of straight people. mankind would all but disappear if we all suddenly chose to be gay.

You should go into the business of making tea baggers signs...

 

[Irvine511]

the world is a vastly more populated, colonized place because of straight people. mankind would all but disappear if we all suddenly chose to be gay.

i'm not advocating second class citizenship for straight people.

i wish you loved me as much as i love you.