So Michael Sam Is Gay, Who Cares? Can He Rush The QB?

[Ring 6]

I agree with everything you said here, but is a difference in preferences/biases 'wrong', when not effected upon? So trans people make you somewhat uncomfortable, and you're mature enough to realize you shouldn't let that affect the way you treat them. So you treat them well, and even make sincere efforts to change your mindset, though not thoroughly successfully.

Is it right for me to, despite the soundness of your actions, shame you for not being the paragon of tolerance, label you a bigot, etc? Live and let live, right? If you're fair to another person (regardless of their race/orientation etc) by every objective and observable measure, then what right and what business do they have to change what you believe? You said it yourself, your biases are your own problem. So as long as your biases are not negatively affecting someone else, then what's anyone's problem?

No one has uttered a word that conflicts with this.

 

[fnordcircle]

So you think someone who associates transsexuals with mental illness is nice?

That seems to be to be a person who doesn't want to bother to understand why things are the way they are and would prefer to stay very sheltered in his church were such things presumably do not exist.

I'm more concerned with how someone will treat a gay person than what they believe about being gay. That's all society should care about as well. As long it doesn't result in discrimination I'm not sure why anyone would care.

 

[PP2]

Because we have 80+ pages of you telling us he is.

And 80+ pages of bigotry coming from you, including bizarre advices such as where homosexuals should 'bounce their eyes away from selective targets' or train their minds not to dwell on sex, or something like that.

 

[PP2]

I think you are missing a tremendous distinction here.
I dont want to speak for PP2, so he can correct me if I am wrong, but I assume he feels the same way.

I am talking about my opinion of gay people vs yours

I am talking about a gay person opinion of themselves, their lifestyle and their morals vs your opinion of THEM and their lifestyle and morals.

I am not saying my opinion of gay people's life, sexuality and morals is better than yours I am saying that THEIR OWN opinion is better than yours.

Perhaps this is confused by me taking the side of the correct opinion about them being their own.

I think he is just playing dumb as it seems he has nothing useful to say or do anything else than trying to goad.

 

[Ring 6]

I have to disagree Boogs is a very nice person and is NOT an arrogant Bigot. I am not sure how you keep coming to such conclusions. Boogs doesn't agree with the gay lifestyle, but would still befriend a gay person nonetheless.

I could believe that Boogs is a nice guy, but the problem is someone has convinced Boogs that his version of right and wrong or natural and unnatural is better than anyone who disagrees with him.

As I said before this isn't an argument about my opinion and beliefs about gayness or Boogs opinion and beliefs about gayness is right or wrong, but that the correct opinion about gayness is the actual gay person opinion and beliefs.

I have not attempted to argue that my opinion on the topic is right, I have argued that it is up to the person who is gay to decide the morality, right or wrong and feelings about it, and the rest of us should allow them to do as they see fit.

"God says you are wrong" is bigotted because it is stating that my opinion about you is better than your opinion about you, and God is on my side.

 

[PP2]

Do you see any slaves around?

Own any yourself?

There are still slaves around..especially sex slaves.

 

[Ring 6]

Hush you bedraggled scalliwag!

Given the thread bedazzled may have been a better choice.

 

[PP2]

I'm more concerned with how someone will treat a gay person than what they believe about being gay. That's all society should care about as well. As long it doesn't result in discrimination I'm not sure why anyone would care.

Primetime made an excellent point a few pages back when he (I'm assuming it is a he) stated that no matter how carefully concealed, a person's bigotry or righteous opinion, will always show through in some way, shape, or form.

So Condon84 can be nice to gay people all he wants, including his gay son, but his belief that gay sex is unnatural and furthermore his belief that there can be no other viewpoints to this (including the possibility that gay people do not find what they do to be unnatural), will find a way to manifest themselves, even if unconsciously.

 

[Mountain_Commando]

I took it as you summarizing the debate, which was soft selling the antigay comments as 'disagreeng but accepting'.
The left handed thing was idioitc.



No you totally missed the point.
You acting as if saying to your friend what he does is gross but you won't hold it against him is the same as telling a minority that something unique to them is gross but you look the other way.
Such as telling an Asian, "those slanty eyes are really creepy, but I won't hold that against you and I'll still let you be my friend".

Then it is you who missed the point. I would never tell someone something about them is "gross" or "creepy", and not realize that I'm being hurtful. You may not believe me, but I'm really not THAT dense.

If I say I don't understand something, does that make me hateful?

 

[mb6592]

Hell. Well, you being so enlightened I'm sure you've already dismissed this ridiculous conundrum. The reason some religious types see this as a moral issue is because the sex act (any sex act) has a huge complex psychological component to it. I could go into the phenomenon know as desensitization (this is shown in many areas of life including Hollywood types becoming bored with one woman and bedding as many as possible or drug addicts going after that next great drug), but, I'm sure you got it covered. Religious types view the sex act in a moral way (and even some as a moral test). It is undeniable that some heterosexual males will engage in anal sex in prison while others will not. Anal sex is an act not a skin color. Is it wrong for religious types to judge this (their word - deviant, I use type of) behavior by heterosexual inmates? You seem to have all the answers so I'll defer to you. I'm sure you'll enlighten us all.

I'm not really certain where you're going with this. Are you comparing consensual sex by adults to sexual assault in prison? You don't need to be religious to condemn sexual assault, but if you don't condemn sexual assault you're probably a sociopath.

Now who's the ignorant one? Or is that just your way of not dealing with the issue? Not all prison sex is sexual assault or consensual between two gay men. There are plenty of heterosexual males engaging in various sex acts during their incarceration.

Get back to me when you’re serious.

Yeah, I thought so. Same reply you'd give if someone suggested, quite logically, let's let three people marry since same sex marriage is all the rage. Fallacy, red herrings and ad hominems - the last refuges of a scoundrel.

You really aren't making any sense.
Would you like to explain your position, because I really don't understand what you are trying to say.

Sure you don't. Just leave it alone already. Get the f-ck off your high horse and acknowledge that the human condition (including lust, mores, moralities, sexuality, religious beliefs, etc, etc, etc) is extremely complex and doesn't lend itself to speaking in absolutes. You browbeating everyone is just making you look foolish. No one should bully gay (or any other people). Be courteous and polite to your neighbor. Why isn't that enough for you? Why the need to speak in such absolutes. Who really knows why the f-ck we're here or what the f-ck we should be doing? You seem so sure of yourself, which sheds a very poor light on you.

Again, I really don't understand what your position is other than angry. Let me explain mine. I believe that a person (gay, straight, white, black, yellow, male, female, etc, etc) has a right to live their life to their own morals, standards and beliefs, and that it is wrong for someone to expect that other person to conform to their morals, standards and beliefs. I'm not sure how you find that to be browbeating or foolish, or speaking in absolutes. Also not sure why you are so angry.

The point the other side makes is that a world with morality (however you define it) banished from the public square (leave it in your homes and speak about it in only in whispers) is untenable. I ask you - what's your stance on two men and a woman being married. If you answer is like your last one ("get back to me when you're serious"), then I know you've chosen to continue along your disingenuous path.

I frankly don't really have an opinion on 3 people being married, I've never put any thought into. What does jailhouse sex and 3 people being married have to do with the topic? That's why I made that comment, your posts seem like jokes, not serious discussion.

You know what you're doing. And it's kind of childish. Nothing I wrote was confusing. I explained that some heterosexual males engage in various (CONSENSUAL) sex acts with other males during their incarceration and some do not. I showed this example to illustrate the complexity of human sexuality. Given this complexity it should not shock that there are differing views on the subject. I then asked if it was improper for religious types to attach a morality judgment to this type of behavior from heterosexual males. Are they bigots if they do? I then presented a logical sequitur (should the public, in this age of enlightenment, accept three people marrying?) which you, of course, glossed over. Finally, I tried to explain why the religious types do what they do. I explained their belief that that a world with morality (however you define it) banished from the public square (leave it in your homes and speak about it in only in whispers) is untenable. To all this you feigned ignorance or lack of understanding. Whatever.

 

[fnordcircle]

Primetime made an excellent point a few pages back when he (I'm assuming it is a he) stated that no matter how carefully concealed, a person's bigotry or righteous opinion, will always show through in some way, shape, or form.

So Condon84 can be nice to gay people all he wants, including his gay son, but his belief that gay sex is unnatural and furthermore his belief that there can be no other viewpoints to this (including the possibility that gay people do not find what they do to be unnatural), will find a way to manifest themselves, even if unconsciously.

So you will accept nothing but full assimilation to your world view? Hopefully we can get the re-education camps going soon.

As long as someone doesn't stand in the way of consenting adults engaging in whatever behavior they choose and does not deny them employment, housing or services due to any other consenting adults I don't care about the sort of nebulous 'manifestations' to which you're referring.

Demanding that everyone must believe what I believe is a stupid way to live. But it is how you have come across in this thread no matter how conciliatory the 'bigots' have been.

 

[Mountain_Commando]

No one has uttered a word that conflicts with this.

Then you and I agree.

But you will (hopefully) agree, that many overly-PC people do NOT agree with 'live and let live', and least not by way of their actions. For them, it's their way completely, else it's bigotry. There's no in-between.

And THAT is what ticks off people of moderate and conservative mindsets alike. Such people are doing the greatest disservice to their own cause. It's exactly due to their extremism on the other end of the spectrum, that they sometime end up alienating and even antagonizing otherwise fair and liberal people.

 

[PP2]

So you will accept nothing but full assimilation to your world view? Hopefully we can get the re-education camps going soon.

As long as someone doesn't stand in the way of consenting adults engaging in whatever behavior they choose and does not deny them employment, housing or services due to any other consenting adults I don't care about the sort of nebulous 'manifestations' to which you're referring.

Demanding that everyone must believe what I believe is a stupid way to live. But it is how you have come across in this thread no matter how conciliatory the 'bigots' have been.

I only pointed out that his viewpoints will eventually show itself.

Why have you interpreted this to mean that everyone must believe as I believe?

I am only stating an interesting point that was raised by someone else. I would think that after this many pages, you would understand what my position is.

Once again, people have a right to their opinions, and to decide what is 'natural' and 'unnatural,' for themselves, but once they try to impose their views on other people, instead of respecting that what they see as 'unnatural' is not necessarily that, from the viewpoint of other people, then I will unhesitantly call them out on their bigotry.

 

[condon84]

So you will accept nothing but full assimilation to your world view? Hopefully we can get the re-education camps going soon.

As long as someone doesn't stand in the way of consenting adults engaging in whatever behavior they choose and does not deny them employment, housing or services due to any other consenting adults I don't care about the sort of nebulous 'manifestations' to which you're referring.

Demanding that everyone must believe what I believe is a stupid way to live. But it is how you have come across in this thread no matter how conciliatory the 'bigots' have been.

There is no such thing as a stupid way to live. PP2 is just livin

 

[condon84]

Then you and I agree.

But you will (hopefully) agree, that many overly-PC people do NOT agree with 'live and let live', and least now by way of their actions. For them, it's their way completely, else it's bigotry. There's no in-between.

And THAT is what ticks off people of moderate and conservative mindsets alike. Such people are doing the greatest disservice to their own cause. It's exactly due to their extremism on the other end of the spectrum, that they sometime end up alienating and even antagonizing otherwise fair and liberal people.

Extremists never know that their stance is extreme.

 

[fnordcircle]

I only pointed out that his viewpoints will eventually show itself.

Why have you interpreted this to mean that everyone must believe as I believe?

Because I can do math and your statement clearly indicates that no matter what someone's beliefs will ultimately influence their behavior and the bigotry will come out.

I just don't appreciate totalitarianism in all of its forms. I'm probably more liberal than most and I'm likely the only person in this whole thread who ever had a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex.

But I've lived long enough to learn that brow beating and tossing out judgmental labels does nothing to truly change viewpoints. At best it merely marginalizes the opposing viewpoint when enough join in. Maybe I'm too idealistic but that's not the world I want to live in.

I truly believe that reaching common ground and working from there is the best way to change people's views. That tolerating intolerance and engaging people as human beings not punching bags is more likely to open someone's eyes. If Boogs wants to believe that the relationship I had is wrong that's fine with me as long as it ends there - with his belief.

But I'm naive, I guess.

 

[Mountain_Commando]

Because I can do math and your statement clearly indicates that no matter what someone's beliefs will ultimately influence their behavior and the bigotry will come out.

I just don't appreciate totalitarianism in all of its forms. I'm probably more liberal than most and I'm likely the only person in this whole thread who ever had a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex.

But I've lived long enough to learn that brow beating and tossing out judgmental labels does nothing to truly change viewpoints. At best it merely marginalizes the opposing viewpoint when enough join in. Maybe I'm too idealistic but that's not the world I want to live in.

I truly believe that reaching common ground and working from there is the best way to change people's views. That tolerating intolerance and engaging people as human beings not punching bags is more likely to open someone's eyes. If Boogs wants to believe that the relationship I had is wrong that's fine with me as long as it ends there - with his belief.

But I'm naive, I guess.

Well said, fnord. Through the whole thread, I recalled that you're bi. And yet I applaud your acceptance of differing opinions.

I can't understand why you'd like a guy, any more than I understand why a woman would like a guy. I am aware of the differences in masculine and feminine traits, and which of each can be sexually attractive. So the same masculine traits which attract females are attractive to you. I get that on an intellectual level, but not on an emotional level, but I'd still have a beer with you and discuss the Pats and rip on the Jets (and since you're bi, we can even be wingmen at the bar).

So does that make me a bigot/hateful/close-minded etc? (rhetorical question, I'm just taking this opportunity to illustrate the point again).

 

[Joker]

I'm probably more liberal than most and I'm likely the only person in this whole thread who ever had a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex.

not so fast there, bunky...I have sex with myself almost every night...I just call my alter ego Lefty Palmer...

 

[PP2]

Because I can do math and your statement clearly indicates that no matter what someone's beliefs will ultimately influence their behavior and the bigotry will come out.

I just don't appreciate totalitarianism in all of its forms. I'm probably more liberal than most and I'm likely the only person in this whole thread who ever had a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex.

But I've lived long enough to learn that brow beating and tossing out judgmental labels does nothing to truly change viewpoints. At best it merely marginalizes the opposing viewpoint when enough join in. Maybe I'm too idealistic but that's not the world I want to live in.

I truly believe that reaching common ground and working from there is the best way to change people's views. That tolerating intolerance and engaging people as human beings not punching bags is more likely to open someone's eyes. If Boogs wants to believe that the relationship I had is wrong that's fine with me as long as it ends there - with his belief.

But I'm naive, I guess.

So why aren't you having that discussion with boogs so that you both can reach common ground?

I am not interested in changing people's point of views, or their opinions. That is a waste of my time. I don't think anyone here will leave this thread with a substantially changed opinion or attitude. However I will call out a bigot when I believe I see one.

I am not going to stand idle if I see what I feel is a wrong. I do not believe it is right for a person to engage in bigotry as far as telling, suggesting, or insinuating to another person that their lifestyle is wrong. In many ways, those subtle suggestions are far worse than outright hatred.

Boogs and others claim that there is nothing wrong with having opinions that what certain people do are 'unnatural' and claim they would not impose those opinions, but at the same time boogs says that he would tell a gay teammate to "keep details of his sex life to himself" as if he would do the same to a straight teammate?

I am not threatened by the lifestyles of gay people, diversity, ethnicity, liberalism, whatever they do is fine by me, and it is none of my business, except when another person is adversely affected, whether physically, mentally, or verbally, as a result of bigotry or oppression.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

scoundrel????

I LOVE that word...nobody uses that 18th century lingo anymore and its our loss...I would love to have been a scandalous scoundrel in my youth..instead I was just an insipid ingrate with an inferiority complex...

You suh are a scoundrel, a bounder, and a scallawag. You burst in here and eat up half my hardtack and fatback, yet have done nothing to assuage mah suspicions of untoward intentions.