equality blooms with spring, pt. II - Page 15 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-19-2009, 08:19 AM   #281
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by melon View Post
Neither has the right to impose their will over the civil rights of the other.
Not even by a vote?? Why do you hate democracy? What have those socialist/fascist Canadians done to you?
__________________

martha is offline  
Old 11-19-2009, 08:23 AM   #282
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 03:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by melon View Post
What African Americans think of gay people has as much relevance as what white people think of blacks. Neither has the right to impose their will over the civil rights of the other.


clearly, in the 1960s, the only legitimate way for blacks to have entered the University of Alabama would have been if the voters of the state of Alabama had voted to allow those 5 students to enter. blacks should only have the rights that white people agree upon and have voted on and can thusly give to them on Christmas morning wrapped up with a bow and a nice little note thanking them for their request, and this is what customer service was able to do.
__________________

Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-19-2009, 08:25 AM   #283
Breakdancing Soul Pilgrim
 
UberBeaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: the most serious...douch hammer ever
Posts: 20,318
Local Time: 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
How come you never mention Malcolm X (who was a black segregationist ), or Bobby Seale and Huey Newton of the Black Panthers, or Stokely Carmichael of the Black Power Movement.

There were some things (black-liberation, Marxism, Maoism) in the 60's civil rights movement that SHOULD have scared Americans back then. In fact, they STILL SHOULD scare Americans.

Was one automatically a racist if they fought against any concept, idea or action, put forth in the name of civil rights in the late sixties?

Are there any concepts, ideas or actions WE DID take or accept (with the best of intentions) that, in hindsight, now appear to have been a mistake?
Are you honestly unable to disassociate Malcolm X from MLK? Huey Newton from Medgar Evers? Many people sided with MLK and Evers (sane, fair, hopeful, honest and right), and rejected The Black Panthers and Malcolm X (radical, irrational, extreme, wrong). It's not an issue of being racist, it's an issue of common sense and fairness. Saying YES to MLK is far from saying YES to Black Segregation. One is, in fact, the opposite of the other. But you lump them as equal ideas? Huh? Making mention of MLK does not warrant making a mention of Malcom X in the same way that talking about Derek Jeter doesn't warrant a mention of Eli Manning - even if they both play for teams based in NY, that's where the similarity ends.
UberBeaver is offline  
Old 11-19-2009, 11:22 AM   #284
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Are there any concepts, ideas or actions WE DID take or accept (with the best of intentions) that, in hindsight, now appear to have been a mistake?
I'm assuming you're trying to vaguely reference affirmative action.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 11-19-2009, 11:44 AM   #285
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 03:12 PM
affirmative action gave the Republicans Colin Powell -- they get to point to him as an example of why they're not racist.

thus, Republicans should love affirmative action.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-19-2009, 11:46 AM   #286
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,663
Local Time: 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by martha View Post
My "broad strokes" comment was in reference to your "white guys" statement.
Diemen is offline  
Old 11-19-2009, 12:19 PM   #287
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 11:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfan26 View Post
Because the other three things have nothing to do with what we're talking about? Because they're all legitimate statuses that anyone can have?

I mean, seriously, INDY (and AEON, et al.) ... what is the problem with gay marriage? Why do you want it to be a union and not a marriage? Is there some difference there that's important, some distinction that matters? Something I'm missing here? I mean, you wouldn't so vehemently be against gays being allowed to marry unless there was something really dangerous about it happening, right?
A person is either married or single. Why have the divorced or widowed classification?

I voted no on Prop 8 in CA because I have no problem with gays getting married.

But I stand with all the gay people and gay supporters in Washington State that put 'Civil Unions' on the ballot this last election and won their rights for equal protection.

The "everything but the word marriage" was put on the ballot in Washington by gay rights supporters because they wanted 'equal rights' and 'equal protection'.

The ballot was not sponsored or supported by 'anti- gay' groups.

Sure, we have a handfull of places were gay 'marriage' can win, but it appears only to be a few places. With initiatives like the one in Washington other states will flip. I really believe CA and Maines losing margins were close enough that by just leaving out the word 'marriage' gays would have won their rights by a popular vote, just like what happened in Washington.

That would be much better to have a record like 6 wins and 28 loses, win the most recent elections being 'wins' instead of losses.

Right now the record is something like 1 win and 33 loses?

and what won at the ballot? Equal rights and protections for gays by a popular vote! Under the term, "Unions".

The best way to win an argument? Is to frame it in away most likely to win!

Once 'unions' are law. Gays will be able to get married and have all the same rights and benefits of 'marriage' as everyone else.
deep is offline  
Old 11-19-2009, 12:39 PM   #288
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
A person is either married or single. Why have the divorced or widowed classification?

I voted no on Prop 8 in CA because I have no problem with gays getting married.

But I stand with all the gay people and gay supporters in Washington State that put 'Civil Unions' on the ballot this last election and won their rights for equal protection.

The "everything but the word marriage" was put on the ballot in Washington by gay rights supporters because they wanted 'equal rights' and 'equal protection'.

The ballot was not sponsored or supported by 'anti- gay' groups.

Sure, we have a handfull of places were gay 'marriage' can win, but it appears only to be a few places. With initiatives like the one in Washington other states will flip. I really believe CA and Maines losing margins were close enough that by just leaving out the word 'marriage' gays would have won their rights by a popular vote, just like what happened in Washington.

That would be much better to have a record like 6 wins and 28 loses, win the most recent elections being 'wins' instead of losses.

Right now the record is something like 1 win and 33 loses?

and what won at the ballot? Equal rights and protections for gays by a popular vote! Under the term, "Unions".

The best way to win an argument? Is to frame it in away most likely to win!

Once 'unions' are law. Gays will be able to get married and have all the same rights and benefits of 'marriage' as everyone else.
Do you understand why I support marriage? Shit, I'm straight. I have nothing invested in this whatsoever. I support marriage because that's what gays want. And I support it because they want something reasonable, something they deserve, something that does no harm to anyone. If they just wanted civil unions, then I'd support civil unions. But because they want marriage and that desire is in no way unreasonable, I support that.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 11-19-2009, 12:42 PM   #289
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 11:12 AM
Would you have voted against Civil Unions in Washington State?
deep is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 01:58 AM   #290
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:12 PM
Not at all, but that's not the point.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 05:56 AM   #291
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 03:12 PM
I support equal rights, including calling it marriage. I do agree with deep on a strategy level, that with the defacto rights in force, the term marriage will follow. However, it's not up to me to strategize and I understand why calling it anything less than marriage is discriminatory, so I defer to the judgment of those making the call. I think it's a harder road but a better destination.
BonosSaint is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 07:13 AM   #292
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
My "broad strokes" comment was in reference to your "white guys" statement.
I know, but the was for the "you're not" follow-up.
martha is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 08:03 AM   #293
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 03:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
The best way to win an argument? Is to frame it in away most likely to win!

Once 'unions' are law. Gays will be able to get married and have all the same rights and benefits of 'marriage' as everyone else.
The way we got gay marriage in Canada was by eroding basically all differences under the law over a 20 year period and then going in for the marriage kill (though there was no "union" before that as a bridge). So your argument is likely sound in my view.

However, I doubt that it would get you much farther than you are now. You're right that those two states, CA and ME may have flipped...but the states that are hostile to the idea of equal rights for gays and lesbians (ie. most of your country) would not budge for unions either.

The thing that will defeat the anti-gay marriage crowd at the ballot will be time. In my view, they probably have about 20 years to go at most in a great number of states. There are some that will likely take longer, however.
anitram is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 09:34 AM   #294
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:12 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Would you have voted against Civil Unions in Washington State?
careful, others have been labeled as bigots by previously taking this stance.

<>
diamond is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 09:35 AM   #295
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
careful, others have been labeled as bigots by previously taking this stance.

<>
False, no one has...

Quit trolling.
BVS is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 11:47 AM   #296
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:12 PM
diamond is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 12:19 PM   #297
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 02:12 PM
Which part of that is confusing for you?

No one has been called a bigot for saying they would vote for civil unions in Washington State, and we all know that you know what trolling is.
BVS is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 02:49 PM   #298
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:12 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Which part of that is confusing for you?

No one has been called a bigot for saying they would vote for civil unions in Washington State, and we all know that you know what trolling is.
Let's stop with the obfuscating and name calling.

Plenty of times people who have said that they're ok with Civil Unions for gay people instead of Gay Marriage are labeled bigots.

<>
diamond is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 02:54 PM   #299
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,663
Local Time: 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
Let's stop with the obfuscating and name calling.

Plenty of times people who have said that they're ok with Civil Unions for gay people instead of Gay Marriage are labeled bigots.

<>
No, they're called bigots for the reasons behind not wanting to extend marriage to gays.
Diemen is offline  
Old 11-20-2009, 03:15 PM   #300
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:12 PM

Silly me thanks for the clarification, benevolent one.


<>

PS

And somebody tell Barney Frank he is all wrong in his approach.



Quote:
"Don't call straight people who disagree with you bigots".
__________________

diamond is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Random Risque U2 Pictures (PT II) FallingStar PLEBA Archive 147 07-28-2003 02:01 PM
MERGED --> When will Cleveland II be? + Rock Hall Celebration (Spring) CMM Interference Gatherings 80 04-14-2003 09:02 PM
Getcher Classical on! Psst...Dieman. Johnny Swallow Lemonade Stand Archive 8 03-07-2003 03:53 PM
the Europe photos pt. II (including interferencers!!!) sulawesigirl4 Lemonade Stand Archive 61 01-05-2003 02:29 PM
When hormones go bad Pt. II: MacPhisto WildHonee PLEBA Archive 9 11-02-2001 06:36 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×