|
Wondering
Tyngsboro, MA
|
STEPHMAR wrote: I fully support the removal of the ban against LGBT.I am rather surprised by Mitt Romney's support.I still don't know why sexual orientation is such a problem for some people? Are you against clubs that want to set their own rules? Should the government set the rules for all clubs? Should all clubs that aren't open to everyone be disbanded? Should the Atlanta Gay Men's Chorus be forced to accept women and straights? Instead of being intrusive and disruptive why don't people just start their own clubs?
|
|
“Unconvinced”
Since: Nov 09
Seattle, WA
|
Please wait...
grinder wrote: Society has laws that say an adult cannot have sex with a minor even if they consent. Using your view above, that means that you think this law is wrong and that pedophiles should be able to do as they please? If not, are you a pedophile-phobe, a bigot, a hater? Maybe you're new to this discussion, and you haven't put any thought into any of these issues. This argument is ridiculous, I recommend you abandon it in the future. Taking advantage of a child doesn't allow the CHILD to craft the best life for THEM. We are talking about consenting ADULTS here. The consent of children cannot be trusted in adult matters. A child may consent to driving a car, but we don't issue them a license based on their consent. It is NOT my view that anybody should be able to do anything they want, with no disregard for anyone else's well-being. It's possible to make a good life for yourself, without making someone else's life bad at the same time. grinder wrote: The issue comes down to moral standards. That's right, it does. And the moral standard is that free adults should be allowed to pursue happiness in their own way. The moral standard is NOT that straight people may pursue THEIR happiness, while gay people may not. grinder wrote: You may disagree that homosexuality is a moral issue but others do not. Well, they are wrong. They would be right if they were being forced to be gay themselves, but that is not what's happening. They are being asked to keep their noses OUT of how other people live. THAT is the moral issue here: Intrusion. Control. Should they be in charge of how gay people live? Is there a "moral" issue if they are not allowed to do this? Should gay people be expected to live celibate, just to make other people happy? Would THAT be "moral"? grinder wrote: It is not acceptable for you to judge people b/c they do not believe just like you do. To try and do that makes you a bad person. They can believe anything they like, EXCEPT the belief that they have the authority to tell me how to live. THAT belief would be called "over-reach". If someone thinks that homosexuality is not for them, then they are free not to practice it. But there is no defensible position for preventing someone ELSE from doing so, or for treating them like a criminal for it. grinder wrote: Both sides of the issue are fighting for what they believe is right. No, one side is fighting for their own freedom, and one side is fighting for control of the other side. That side needs to go enjoy their lives, and stop worrying that the other side might do the same thing a little differently.
|
|
Wondering
Tyngsboro, MA
|
Judged:
1
EdmondWA wrote: No, one side is fighting for their own freedom, and one side is fighting for control of the other side. I agree, and gays might just find themselves more acceptable if they knock it off.
|
|
“Unconvinced”
Since: Nov 09
Seattle, WA
|
Please wait...
Wondering wrote: I agree, and gays might just find themselves more acceptable if they knock it off. And in what way do you think you're being "controlled"? Is someone forcing you into a marriage that you don't want? Is someone blocking a marriage that you DO want? Is someone trying to make you keep your personal life a secret, before allowing you to serve your country? Is someone trying to fire you from your job, or evict you from your home? Is there some right that you CAN'T exercise, that you think you SHOULD?
|
|
Wondering
Tyngsboro, MA
|
EdmondWA wrote: <quoted text>
And in what way do you think you're being "controlled"? http://www.youtube.com/watch... http://www.youtube.com/watch...
|
|
“Headed toward the cliff”
Since: Nov 07
Tawas City, Michigan
|
Please wait...
Wondering wrote: <quoted text>
Segregation isn't coming back. But I know there are black clubs and organizations that won't take anyone in that isn't black. There are gay clubs and organizations that won't take anyone in that isn't gay. There are women's clubs and organizations that will only accept women. So what and good for them. For someone that wants understanding and tolerance it seems you have none of either. Why should I tolerate those who want to discriminate against me? Now that they can ban gays, the Bigot Scouts of AmeriKKKa will return to segregated troops too. It's only a matter of time.
|
|
“Headed toward the cliff”
Since: Nov 07
Tawas City, Michigan
|
Please wait...
Wondering wrote: <quoted text>
Are you against clubs that want to set their own rules?
Should the government set the rules for all clubs?
Should all clubs that aren't open to everyone be disbanded?
Should the Atlanta Gay Men's Chorus be forced to accept women and straights?
Instead of being intrusive and disruptive why don't people just start their own clubs? When the Bigot Scouts of AmeriKKKa stop getting tax breaks and preferential treatment at taxpayer expense, THEN they can set their own rules. Until then we'll keep harassing them and pressuring them to drop their discriminatory policies.
|
|
“Unconvinced”
Since: Nov 09
Seattle, WA
|
Please wait...
Wondering wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =G7MzM8ABzCk&feature=relat ed http://www.youtube.com/watch... So, in other words, NO, you are NOT denied ANY of the rights that I've listed. You get to enjoy those freely, with NO FEAR of having them infringed, EVER. But, poor baby, you DON'T have the right to tell gay schoolchildren how much they disgust you. How do you get through your daily life, with shackles like these? What a brave person you are. We MUST fight for you right to make innocent children feel like criminals! Did you bother to read the COMMENTS that followed your videos? It's nothing but the most VICIOUS attacks on people who have done NOTHING to earn it. It's clear that schools NEED to educate students on the varieties of the human experience. There is no justification for treating gay people as "unacceptable". Acceptance is a basic human desire. You might be justified in withholding it from criminals, from those who seek to harm others, but NOT from people who are just trying to live the life that fits them best. Next time, take the effort to frame your OWN thoughts, in your own words. You don't impress anyone by letting Fox News and YouTube do your thinking for you.
|
|
|
|
“laugh until your belly hurts”
Since: Dec 06
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Judged:
1
grinder wrote: <quoted text>
Society has laws that say an adult cannot have sex with a minor even if they consent. Using your view above, that means that you think this law is wrong and that pedophiles should be able to do as they please? If not, are you a pedophile-phobe, a bigot, a hater?
The issue comes down to moral standards. You may disagree that homosexuality is a moral issue but others do not. It is not acceptable for you to judge people b/c they do not believe just like you do. To try and do that makes you a bad person.
Both sides of the issue are fighting for what they believe is right. wtf does pedophilia got to do with this issue?
|
|
Wondering
Tyngsboro, MA
|
WeTheSheeple wrote: <quoted text>
When the Bigot Scouts of AmeriKKKa stop getting tax breaks and preferential treatment at taxpayer expense, THEN they can set their own rules.
Until then we'll keep harassing them and pressuring them to drop their discriminatory policies. You didn't answer any of the questions: Are you against clubs that want to set their own rules? Should the government set the rules for all clubs? Should all clubs that aren't open to everyone be disbanded? Should the Atlanta Gay Men's Chorus be forced to accept women and straights? Instead of being intrusive and disruptive why don't people just start their own clubs?
|
|
Wondering
Tyngsboro, MA
|
Judged:
1
1
EdmondWA wrote: <quoted text>
1. So, in other words, NO, you are NOT denied ANY of the rights that I've listed. You get to enjoy those freely, with NO FEAR of having them infringed, EVER.
2. But, poor baby, you DON'T have the right to tell gay schoolchildren how much they disgust you. How do you get through your daily life, with shackles like these? What a brave person you are. We MUST fight for you right to make innocent children feel like criminals!
3. Did you bother to read the COMMENTS that followed your videos? 4. It's nothing but the most VICIOUS attacks on people who have done NOTHING to earn it. It's clear that schools NEED to educate students on the varieties of the human experience.
5. There is no justification for treating gay people as "unacceptable". Acceptance is a basic human desire.
6. Next time, take the effort to frame your OWN thoughts, in your own words. You don't impress anyone by letting Fox News and YouTube do your thinking for you. 1. Neither are you. 2. No one is doing that in any public school. Why do you think it's happening? No one should tell any child they're disgusting. In fact, elementary school kids wouldn't even know if they were gay. 3. Why bother? 4. No one is attacking gays in public school classrooms and why would straight families want their kids sent home with gay story books? The average class size is 20, if each class had a proportionate number of gay children in it there would be less than one gay child in every class. 5. Acceptance is earned and you're doing a pisspoor job. 6. I agree with the Parker family, they wanted an opt out and were refused, and I was happy to see Alemeda's Lesson 9 tossed into the garbage. We've strayed from the topic which is the BSA. They should be free to set their own rules. Gays are free to start their own boy scouts if it's that important to them.
|
|
“Headed toward the cliff”
Since: Nov 07
Tawas City, Michigan
|
Please wait...
Wondering wrote: <quoted text>
You didn't answer any of the questions:
Are you against clubs that want to set their own rules?
Should the government set the rules for all clubs?
Should all clubs that aren't open to everyone be disbanded?
Should the Atlanta Gay Men's Chorus be forced to accept women and straights?
Instead of being intrusive and disruptive why don't people just start their own clubs? If ANY club gets special tax breaks or preferential treatment at taxpayer expense- like the Bigot Scouts of AmeriKKKa get- then YES, they should be either opened to everyone or disbanded or harassed & sued until they change their discriminatory policies. Starting MORE bigoted discriminatory clubs is what the KKKer's of the world support. Why is the BSA so afraid of gay people?
|
|
grinder
Fort Lauderdale, FL
|
Judged:
1
1
grinder wrote: <quoted text>
Society has laws that say an adult cannot have sex with a minor even if they consent. Using your view above, that means that you think this law is wrong and that pedophiles should be able to do as they please? If not, are you a pedophile-phobe, a bigot, a hater?
The issue comes down to moral standards. You may disagree that homosexuality is a moral issue but others do not. It is not acceptable for you to judge people b/c they do not believe just like you do. To try and do that makes you a bad person.
Both sides of the issue are fighting for what they believe is right. WeTheSheeple wrote: <quoted text>
The obvious difference being 2 cosenting ADULTS compared to an adult and a minor who is unable to give informed consent.
There's nothing immoral about being gay.
One side is fighting or equal rights, while the other is fighting to discriminate. That doesn't resolve the issue b/c the age of who and who is not an adult is also assigned by society. Are you age-phobic? If a person concludes they are an adult 2 years, a month or even a day or two prior to the law identifying them as one, then who are you to say they cannot consent to sex with someone else. What this proves out is that society does set boundaries on behaviors, especially those related to sex. And people hold various opinions. Again, good people do not become bad people for not agreeing with gays on the moral concerns of homosexuality. You don't see the homosexual lifestyle as immoral, however there are many people who do and their opinions are valid whether it agrees with your views or not.
|
|
grinder
Fort Lauderdale, FL
|
Judged:
1
dances with weebles wrote: <quoted text>
wtf does pedophilia got to do with this issue? It is an example of a sexual behavior that society identifies as immoral. And guess what - the pedophiles likely find it to be discrimination and bigotry. They do not have sexual equality. Pedophilia also is widely opposed by many gays that post on topix. It demonstrates that they participate in the same moral judgements against pedophiles as people who do not accept the homosexual lifestyle as moral. There is a hypocrisy there.
|
|
grinder
Fort Lauderdale, FL
|
EdmondWA wrote: <quoted text>
Maybe you're new to this discussion, and you haven't put any thought into any of these issues. This argument is ridiculous, I recommend you abandon it in the future.
Taking advantage of a child doesn't allow the CHILD to craft the best life for THEM. We are talking about consenting ADULTS here. The consent of children cannot be trusted in adult matters. A child may consent to driving a car, but we don't issue them a license based on their consent.
It is NOT my view that anybody should be able to do anything they want, with no disregard for anyone else's well-being. It's possible to make a good life for yourself, without making someone else's life bad at the same time.
<quoted text>
That's right, it does. And the moral standard is that free adults should be allowed to pursue happiness in their own way.
The moral standard is NOT that straight people may pursue THEIR happiness, while gay people may not.
<quoted text>
Well, they are wrong. They would be right if they were being forced to be gay themselves, but that is not what's happening. They are being asked to keep their noses OUT of how other people live. THAT is the moral issue here: Intrusion. Control.
Should they be in charge of how gay people live? Is there a "moral" issue if they are not allowed to do this?
Should gay people be expected to live celibate, just to make other people happy? Would THAT be "moral"?
<quoted text>
They can believe anything they like, EXCEPT the belief that they have the authority to tell me how to live. THAT belief would be called "over-reach".
If someone thinks that homosexuality is not for them, then they are free not to practice it. But there is no defensible position for preventing someone ELSE from doing so, or for treating them like a criminal for it.
<quoted text>
No, one side is fighting for their own freedom, and one side is fighting for control of the other side. That side needs to go enjoy their lives, and stop worrying that the other side might do the same thing a little differently. I don't know, maybe you are the one new to the discussion? Three seconds before turning an adult a minor is a victim but then magically becomes a consenting adult? Please... The age of consent is set based on society's sense of a physical time that a person matures. We all know that people mature at different rates and based on their life experiences. And who are you to decide what is the best for some other person be they a child or not? It's not up to you to decide for others. People can believe what they want EXCEPT that they agree with your views? Hardly. You do not possess the authority to tell people what their views are - just as you have posted about others.
|
|
Teaching Teachers
Minneapolis, MN
|
Why shouldn't anyone be surprised that an obvious queer like Obama supports adult male homosexuals having physical custody and control over little boys? The question answers itself.
|
|
grinder
Fort Lauderdale, FL
|
WeTheSheeple wrote: <quoted text>
Just as black will have to start their own Black Scouts of America when the bigots bring back segregation.
Ahhhh, the good old days...... Being black is not immoral. The BSA stated policies do not limit blacks from joining nor assuming position of leadership over young men. So your statement is a lie, an attack, an expression of hate, of racism and bigotry.
|
|
Teaching Teachers
Minneapolis, MN
|
grinder wrote: <quoted text>
Being black is not immoral. The BSA stated policies do not limit blacks from joining nor assuming position of leadership over young men.
So your statement is a lie, an attack, an expression of hate, of racism and bigotry. Well and succinctly said, sir. What an excellent post because it gets right to the actual facts and questions at hand regarding cases like these.
|
|
Wondering
Tyngsboro, MA
|
WeTheSheeple wrote: Why is the BSA so afraid of gay people? What makes you think they're afraid? They just don't want you. It's a boys club, not a club for boys who like boys.
|
|
Wondering
Tyngsboro, MA
|
Judged:
1
WeTheSheeple wrote: <quoted text>
If ANY club gets special tax breaks or preferential treatment at taxpayer expense- like the Bigot Scouts of AmeriKKKa get- then YES, they should be either opened to everyone or disbanded or harassed & sued until they change their discriminatory policies. So you think the Boy Scouts should merge with the Girl Scouts? They could have some wild overnighters. Should the Boy Scouts change their flag to the rainbow flag?
|
|
Tell me when this thread is updated:
(Registration is not required)
Add to my Tracker
Send me an email
|
Virgo
