THEOCRACY WATCH!!! Texas Gov signs anti-gay, anti-choice legislation in church

[Irvine511]

That's not "my" terms of argument. I've been talking about Conservative Republicans in general, not just politicians.

yes. you've been working under a misformulation of the terms of argument. i was encouraging you to get your terms in order so that a proper comparison can be made. conservative republican politicians can damage that gay man on the pride float in ways that that gay man on a pride float could never damage a conservative republican politician.

but if you'd like to shift the terms, and compare your average gay man (we'll assume, for the sake of argument, that he's liberal and democrate even though many gay men are quite libertarian and would probably be Republicans if it were not for the party definining itself around homophobia, which it is doing as evidenced in countless gay bashing legislation at the state level and proposing to amend the constitution at the federal level) to your average Conservative Republican. firstly, the number of Conservative Republicans out numbers the number of liberal democratic gay men by a lot. secondly, it's the Conservative Republicans who seem to be much, much more interested in what that gay man does behind doors than the gay man is in what goes on behind closed doors in the life of your average conservative Republican. the result, you see, is that Conservative Republicans, through the ways in which they vote, which is usually but not always for other Conservative Republicans, provides their representatives with incentives to regulate and, essentially, discriminate against the personal life of a liberal democratic gay man. he has neither the political means, nor even the interest, to do damage to the life of a Conservative Republican whereas said Conservative Republicans -- as we've said before, not all, and it is the sign of a mature person who can speak in broad strokes while understanding that, obviously, we do not mean *everybody* -- base much of that political identity around taking anti-gay stances. this might not apply to you, as an individual, but if you ask anybody, from Conservative Republicans to libertarians to Liberal Democrats, they will pretty much all agree that one componant of a Conservative Republican identity is the belief that the government must be used to regulate and control personal behavior. Rick Santorum believes this; Tom DeLay believes this; the states of Texas and Alabama believe this. they've made gay people scapegoats for any number of social failures in this country, and manipulated both the bible and the Church as justification for their invective, and that's why you see people like myself and Melon (and a whole bunch of straight people) get up in arms about Conservative Republicans.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

one componant of a Conservative Republican identity is the belief that the government must be used to regulate and control personal behavior.

Heh...you know what I find amusing about the government feeling a need to do that? Our government has a hard time getting itself together. So the absolute last thing I'd want is for them to be controlling my personal life.

And that goes for a president of either side. Until those guys on Capitol Hill get their problems worked out, leave my private life the hell alone.

Angela

 

[80sU2isBest]

yes. you've been working under a misformulation of the terms of argument. i was encouraging you to get your terms in order so that a proper comparison can be made. conservative republican politicians can damage that gay man on the pride float in ways that that gay man on a pride float could never damage a conservative republican politician.

Irvine, you are the one's who been arguing under a "misformulation of the terms of the argument". There is no comparison in my argument at all. I brought up the gay pride parade solely as response to melon saying that he shopuld protest at Christian events because f***** Christians protest gay events. I said that when Christians start throwing parades in which they act like gays do at gay pride parades, I'll stand by his side protesting with him.

Where do you get anything about comparison teher?

 

[Dreadsox]

I said that when Christians start throwing parades in which they act like gays do at gay pride parades, I'll stand by his side protesting with him.

How exactly do "gays act"?

I have seen gay pride parades and your comment is really very stereotypical.

 

[Scarletwine]

Dread,

I haven't read everything he's written but that wasn't mentioned in that book. Most Episcopalians (I know) do believe in the divinity of Christ though many Unitarians do not. He is an Episcopalian Bishop. I still like many of his theories, nobody's perfect.

 

[Irvine511]

Oh yeah, Irvine, I forgot that all conservative Republicans fan the flames of hatred against gays. I'll try to remember that from now on.

The average "conservative Republicans" isn't even in congress, Irvine. Do you really how many conservative Republicans there are in the US, as opposed to how many actually serve political office of any kind at all? And yet, you state the average conservative Republican has the power to strip gays of their rights.

this was the post i was responding to -- here, you can see your misunderstanding of what we were talking about when we spoke of "Conservative Republicans." i was speaking about the politicians themselves, and how they shape and form that identity. you tried to protest this by claiming that since we don't know every last Conservative Republican personally, we can't possibly say that they are anti-gay.

being a Conservative Republican is inextricably tied into believing that homosexuality is not a choice, that it is immoral, and that while we shouldn't hate homosexuals, they should go back into the closet. i didn't make this stance up, DeLay, Santorum, Henry Hyde, and George Bush have. the Republican party has seized on this issue and placed it at the core of their party's social/domestic platform. you might not agree with what they are doing, but that means you deviate from what it means to be a Conservative Republican. which is fine to do, but this would be an example of being different from a Conservative Republican, not that all Conservative Republicans are different. if they were all different, on a macro level -- and we can easily label being anti-gay a macro issue, since it basically gave them the White House -- then you wouldn't have a political identity.

you'd have Democrats.

on a side note, this is what i think is wrong with the Left. it's all about, "how is the party addressing my specific, individual needs?!?!?!" i admire how Republicans are able to place their differences aside (i.e., John McCain) and present something of a united front to the American people. you may not like them, but you at least know who they are. and one thing they are is anti-gay.

 

[Irvine511]

How exactly do "gays act"?

I have seen gay pride parades and your comment is really very stereotypical.

Dread: have you never seen the "Handbook to the Gay Lifestyle"? it's what we get from Gay HQ when we choose to be gay. it's essentially filled with a step-by-step guide to the gay lifestyle, complete with listings of leather shops and tips for recruiting your friends and neighbors into the gay lifestyle. and GLSEN passes them out to first graders.

 

[financeguy]

Dread: have you never seen the "Handbook to the Gay Lifestyle"? it's what we get from Gay HQ when we choose to be gay. it's essentially filled with a step-by-step guide to the gay lifestyle, complete with listings of leather shops and tips for recruiting your friends and neighbors into the gay lifestyle. and GLSEN passes them out to first graders.

That is just SO typical of the gay agenda!! This is all the stuff that Pat Robertson's being warning us about for years!!

 

[OneBadStay]

"Anti-choice" is such a ridiculous, stupid term. These people are anti-abortion, not anti-choice.

 

[martha]

"Anti-choice" is such a ridiculous, stupid term. These people are anti-abortion, not anti-choice.

No, it's quite accurate. It's all about them making choices about my reproductive system.


But if you want to go there, this thread will most likely end up closed, and quickly. Notice the rest of us oldbies have avoided this issue here like the plague. There's a good reason for that.

 

[financeguy]

But if you want to go there, this thread will most likely end up closed, and quickly. Notice the rest of us oldbies have avoided this issue here like the plague. There's a good reason for that.

In fairness, there have been some almost rational debates on the issue here. But you're dead right about it not being the issue to bring up in this thread.

 

[martha]

recruiting

Oh wow. I was just thinking today that this was a term I hadn't heard in a while. And "special rights."

:flashback:

 

[indra]

No, it's quite accurate. It's all about them making choices about my reproductive system.

Absolutely. I may never choose to have an abortion, but I danm well want the right to make that choice instead of having anyone else make it for me. And I feel that there are times when abortion is absolutely a very good thing.

 

[80sU2isBest]

How exactly do "gays act"?

I have seen gay pride parades and your comment is really very stereotypical.

dreadsox, read my post earlier and you will see that I am referring to lewd behavior, including the simulation of s & m.

Nowhere did I say that every gay acts that way at gay pride parades. However, if you think it does not happen at gay pride parades, you're wrong.Melon himself said he doesn't like what goes on at gay pride parades, and Irvine didn't deny that it happens.

But I don't know why I should even care if people think I'm stereotyping at all. Where is your concern with people stereotyping against Christians and Conservatives? Jiminy cricket, that goes on every 3rd or 4th post in these forums, and it hardly ever gets called for what it is by anyone but me.

Dadgum.

 

[80sU2isBest]

And I feel that there are times when abortion is absolutely a very good thing.

That view makes me want to vomit.

 

[indra]

That view makes me want to vomit.

You never have the possibility of facing the decision, so you have that luxury.

 

[Irvine511]

"Texans have made a decision about marriage and if there is some other state that has a more lenient view than Texas then maybe that's a better place for them (gay and lesbian families) to live." - Texas governor, Rick Perry, last Sunday.

http://www.nbc5i.com/news/4572168/detail.html



so, here's the message: "Gays Be Gone!" Texas is only for straight people.

yes, this is the American Taliban, only not as powerful.

yet.

 

[pax]

Aren't you Texans glad you have such a friendly, welcoming governor who's trying to pull more young, diverse talent into your state?

Oh, wait...you don't.

 

[Irvine511]

^ great point.

if anyone's read Rick Florida, he points to the "tolerance index" and how it corresponds to the desireability of certain cities. the cities that do the most to lure young, creative talent tend to lead the way in urban revitilization. often, young urban talent is either significantly gay, or this talent is appreciative of many of the things that gays bring to cities -- restaurants, cafes, local music scenes, interesting bars, theather, etc.

look at the nation's most deisreable cities -- one of which is Austin -- and you'll see just how tolerant they are: NYC, SF, LA, Chicago, DC, Boston, Austin, Seattle and Portland. the three most educated cities in America -- NYC, SF, and DC -- all have excellent domestic partnerships laws, among other protections for gay people.

it's rather simple: out gay people tend to be educated, willing to live in downtrodden neighborhoods and then willing to spend their sometimes considerable disposable incomes supporting the cultural life and vibrancy of their cities.

being good to gays is simply good for business.

but, it seems, Perry would rather be governor of Saudi Arabia than Seattle.

so be it.

 

[Do Miss America]

This whole thread just makes me sad.

 

[80sU2isBest]

You never have the possibility of facing the decision, so you have that luxury.

IThe view that makes me want to vomit is calling any abortion "absolutely a very good thing" because it treats a baby as if it's as expendable as an unwanted mole on someone's face. I would think that even if you didn't view an abortion as murder, if you didn't view the baby as a human life, you would view abortion as the termination of a potential life, and therefore at the minimum, treat abortion as "regrettable that it came to this", not as "absolutely a very good thing".

 

[Dreadsox]

But I don't know why I should even care if people think I'm stereotyping at all. Where is your concern with people stereotyping against Christians and Conservatives? Jiminy cricket, that goes on every 3rd or 4th post in these forums, and it hardly ever gets called for what it is by anyone but me.

Dadgum.

All do respect, I believe my time in this forum leaves enough of a record to show I have defended Christians and Conservatives...

 

[unosdostres14]

It truly is incredible how narrow-minded, stubborn and just plain pig-headed some people are.

 

[80sU2isBest]

All do respect, I believe my time in this forum leaves enough of a record to show I have defended Christians and Conservatives...

You're right. Sorry about that.

Likewise, however, have you ever known me to lump all gays in with the ones who act lewdly at gay pride parades?

 

[MissMoo]

IThe view that makes me want to vomit is calling any abortion "absolutely a very good thing" because it treats a baby as if it's as expendable as an unwanted mole on someone's face. I would think that even if you didn't view an abortion as murder, if you didn't view the baby as a human life, you would view abortion as the termination of a potential life, and therefore at the minimum, treat abortion as "regrettable that it came to this", not as "absolutely a very good thing".

Read the book Freakonomics and you may change your mind.

 

[melon]

My biggest pet peeve is how a lot of Christians lump homosexuality and abortion in the same breath. It infuriates me beyond no end. I see them as two very distinct concepts that have nothing to do with each other. And fucking Texas Gov. Perry just keeps on feeding that stereotype. That's what infuriates me the most about this entire article.

Melon

 

[Dreadsox]

You're right. Sorry about that.

Likewise, however, have you ever known me to lump all gays in with the ones who act lewdly at gay pride parades?

That was why asking....

it seemed out of character.

Peace

 

[80sU2isBest]

That was why asking....

it seemed out of character.

Peace

Now you know that I wasn't doing that anyway.

Thanks

 

[80sU2isBest]

IThe view that makes me want to vomit is calling any abortion "absolutely a very good thing" because it treats a baby as if it's as expendable as an unwanted mole on someone's face. I would think that even if you didn't view an abortion as murder, if you didn't view the baby as a human life, you would view abortion as the termination of a potential life, and therefore at the minimum, treat abortion as "regrettable that it came to this", not as "absolutely a very good thing".

Read the book Freakonomics and you may change your mind.

I just read the Amazon reviews of the book, and I see that what he does is link the legalization of abortion to a drope in the crim rate.

Well, I don't need to read the book to realize that if a fetus is a living human lives, as I believe it is, then the "crime rate" point he's trying to make is moot, as murder of innocent human lives is a crime.

Reading the book wouldn't change my mind at all. I strongly believe abortion is murder, so the author saying something like "abortion of unwanted babies decreases the burden of welfare" makes absolutely no difference to me at all.

 

[Rono]

Can i survive as liberal Dutchman in Texas ?