"Duck Dynasty"...is our freedom of speech being stifled?
Quote: TwirdmanNo you realize that it was a gay person hitting on you not the gay community. A straight man rapes somebody or molest a little girl and we say he is a monster, but we don't say that all straight men are monsters. Same goes for when a straight woman does it. So why does it suddenly become right to say all gay men are monsters because a small group of them happen to be child molesters. http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html less then 1% of identified molesters were gay. Given the prevelence of homosexuality is found to be roughly 5% give or take 1% does not seem to be an overabundance of homosexual molesters. Most studies have found no link between homosexuality and molestation so you can say as a child you were hit on by gay men that can easily be true, you should not then jump to the conclusion that gay men are child molesters, the only conclusion you can reach is that gay man or those gay men were probably child molesters.
Okay. I'll rethink my views on the subject. But here's a little more history. What happened to me was an everyday occurance. I got hit on by hundreds of gay men. I was asking myself "How come so many of these guys want to have sex with complete strangers? And they don't care how old they are." My stepfather was no dummie. He knew what was going on. We lived on the corner of 19th and Castro. The neighborhood was changing at a very rapid rate. When we moved there it was a family neighborhood. My stepfather didn't want his kids to be affected by the change. He moved us all up to Sonoma.
And guess what. He wasn't the only one thinking like that. All of the families moved out of the neighborhood. The school I went to, Douglas, no longer had any kids to teach. It became the Harvey Milk Civil Rights Academy. And 18th and Castro became known as the gayest four corners on the planet earth.
Quote: terapinedWhat happens when science one day finds a cure for conservatives to become smart libs?
What will happen to the people that choose treatment? Will they be shunned by society and the right?
It was a joke regarding the above post.
Of couse my post was in humour, not accurate at all. Nothing can cure conservatives.
I think you are afraid to lose to crummy chess player terapined.
Yea, cant blame you for not showing up, you would be embarrassed losing to a crummy speller and chess player like me.
Quote: rxwineYou may have the right to say anything, but all opinions are not equally tolerable.
Keep in mind, folks, that the above comment comes from a "tolerant" liberal.
Quote: rob45I agree, and that is why I do not have a problem; however, I do witness both "sides" using/abusing the issue constantly.
:)
It's jingoism of the worst sort. People want to feel a) part of a tribe and b) have a common enemy. I'm not sure tribe mentality has any place in politics. It's there, of course, but it's in no way helpful.
Quote: Beethoven9thQuote: rxwineYou may have the right to say anything, but all opinions are not equally tolerable.
Keep in mind, folks, that the above comment comes from a "tolerant" liberal.
So you think all opinions are equally acceptable. The statement "Mexicans are lazy pieces of human garbage." is just as acceptable as "Mexicans are normal people just like everyone else." Tolerating that kind of intolerance is what leads to atrocities. So yes I do condemn statements like "gays are going to hell" or statement of that ilk because it serves the exact same purpose to make gays somehow less worthy of respect and ultimately less human.
Quote: TwirdmanI do not doubt that some homosexuals would rather be "cured" but that is because society tries to continually tell them that being homosexual is wrong.
Oh, you mean all those anti-gay shows like Glee?
Modern Family?
Will & Grace?
And so on...
Or do you mean all those anti-gay celebrities like Madonna?
Brad Pitt?
Steven Spielberg?
And so on...
Quote: TwirdmanNo you realize that it was a gay person hitting on you not the gay community. A straight man rapes somebody or molest a little girl and we say he is a monster, but we don't say that all straight men are monsters. Same goes for when a straight woman does it. So why does it suddenly become right to say all gay men are monsters because a small group of them happen to be child molesters.
You need to have a talk with the countless libs out there who say: Catholic prieset = child molester
(Of course, you won't though)
Quote: TwirdmanSo you think all opinions are equally acceptable. The statement "Mexicans are lazy pieces of human garbage." is just as acceptable as "Mexicans are normal people just like everyone else." Tolerating that kind of intolerance is what leads to atrocities. So yes I do condemn statements like "gays are going to hell" or statement of that ilk because it serves the exact same purpose to make gays somehow less worthy of respect and ultimately less human.
Just curious...are you gay, or do you have a gay family member by any chance? I ask only because I don't recall seeing many posts from you until this issue came up.
(Mods: This is an honest question, not a veiled insult)
Quote: Beethoven9thOh, you mean all those anti-gay shows like Glee?
Modern Family?
Will & Grace?
And so on...
Or do you mean all those anti-gay celebrities like Madonna?
Brad Pitt?
Steven Spielberg?
And so on...
Is this the part where we pretend a few tv shows, one of which has been over the air for over half a decade and another of which shows the stereotypical effeminate gay as a laugh, make up for countless religious leaders and communities telling gays they are inferior. Also the vast majority of gay portrayals you see are of an effeminate man so we've got it ingrained in society that all gays are like that when they are no different than your average guy. Same goes for lesbians we portray them as butch and manly when again no different than your average woman. So people feel the need to hide being gay for fear of being thought of as less of a man. Also gays have one of the highest suicide rates amongst any group, if not discrimination I'd love to hear your explanation.
Quote: TwirdmanIs this the part where we pretend a few tv shows, one of which has been over the air for over half a decade and another of which shows the stereotypical effeminate gay as a laugh
Such as...?
Keep fabricating those 'facts', man. *facepalm*
Quote: Beethoven9thYou need to have a talk with the countless libs out there who say: Catholic prieset = child molester
(Of course, you won't though)
Just curious...are you gay, or do you have a gay family member by any chance? I ask only because I don't recall seeing many posts from you until this issue came up.
(Mods: This is an honest question, not a veiled insult)
Catholic priest are different because the cloth did try and cover that up and that was one of the big issues. But I was raised Catholic and no not all Catholic priest are child molesters. Also no I'm not gay, happen to be asexual, but I do find gays rights to be a massive issue just as I would have found civil rights had I grown up in the time that was being fought for. No person should be treated as less than human for any reason. Being gay does not make you an inferior person and we need to stop acting like it does.
Quote: rudeboyoithe only thing worthy of debate here is whether A&E made the most profitable decision because obviously gays have the right to be gay and religious nuts have the right to be religious nuts.
They just can't help it. Without the name calling, they're left with very little.
Quote: Beethoven9thSuch as...?
Keep fabricating those 'facts', man. *facepalm*
What are you talking about I was responding to the 3 shows you said. Will and Grace was cancelled in like 2007 and the gay men in Glee have become stereotypes of themselves, though admittedly all the characters in that show are now caricatures so why would one expect gays to be any different. If you are disagreeing with my later point about religious leaders there is a mountain of evidence. The former pope, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jim Daly, and a number of others. These people also influence politicians in numerous different states. So yeah a couple tv shows hardly compares.
The reader is free to assume I've stated the rest of the obvious.
Quote: TwirdmanPeople want to find a cure for homosexuality. How offensive is this
.
Actually, not offensive at all. How many men kill
themselves every year because they're Gay and
hate it. How many would change if they could.
Quote: mickeycrimm"How come so many of these guys want to have sex with complete strangers? And they don't care how old they are." .
Most, not all, of the Gay men I knew in Calif
were obsessed with sex. With 'doing' as many
men as possible in their lifetimes. Not having
it done to them, doing it to other men. It's all
they talked about and joked about. Even the
ones that had partners were always on the
make. It's an odd lifestyle, to be sure.
Quote: EvenBobActually, not offensive at all. How many men kill
themselves every year because they're Gay and
hate it. How many would change if they could.
You edited my post the how offensive is this was referring to the next line where I asked how offensive would it be to try and find a cure for being black. Also people hate being gay because we think they need to be cured. You are assuming something is wrong with them from the start. The people who need to be cured are the ones who say gays are subhuman not the gays. You didn't ask blacks to kindly stop being black since it offended the KKK you realized the KKK were the bad guys, or at least I hope you would. I mean is the solution any time someone is being disciminated against to punish that person and make him change since I would figure you want to change the person doing the discrimination. So again if curing being black is wrong why isn't curing being gay. I mean blacks face many obstacles and in the past plenty were killed for it.
Quote: TwirdmanCatholic priest are different because the cloth did try and cover that up and that was one of the big issues.
I find it ironic that you'll rail on another member for bringing up gay child molesters, yet you'll defend those who go on & on about Catholic molesters.
????????????????????????????????????????????????????Quote: TwirdmanAlso no I'm not gay, happen to be asexual
Quote: EvenBobMost, not all, of the Gay men I knew in Calif
were obsessed with sex. With 'doing' as many
men as possible in their lifetimes. Not having
it done to them, doing it to other men. It's all
they talked about and joked about. Even the
ones that had partners were always on the
make. It's an odd lifestyle, to be sure.
Yeah because straight men are oh so different. Every straight man you know I'm sure just wants to find a nice happy family and settle down and would never think about cheating on his wife but oh the gays just can't control themselves. The truth of the matter is people like sex and a lot of people like sex with a lot of different people. The only difference is when a straight guy does it hes the man, a woman does it and shes a slut, and a gay guy does it and he's a sexual deviant. Why can't we just admit people like having sex and there's nothing unusual about it I mean bars are filled with people who want to have sex.
Quote: TwirdmanWhat are you talking about I was responding to the 3 shows you said. Will and Grace was cancelled in like 2007 and the gay men in Glee have become stereotypes of themselves, though admittedly all the characters in that show are now caricatures so why would one expect gays to be any different. If you are disagreeing with my later point about religious leaders there is a mountain of evidence. The former pope, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jim Daly, and a number of others. These people also influence politicians in numerous different states. So yeah a couple tv shows hardly compares.
So you don't believe that the public is bombarded with a pro-gay message?????
Quote: Beethoven9thI find it ironic that you'll rail on another member for bringing up gay child molesters, yet you'll defend those who go on & on about Catholic molesters.
????????????????????????????????????????????????????Quote: TwirdmanAlso no I'm not gay, happen to be asexual
You did notice I said no we shouldn't say Catholic priest are child molesters, but there was a massive cover up so the 2 are not necessarily related. Again though no Catholic priest are not child molesters and I do call people out for saying priest are child molesters. The exception being when its clearly done in jest I'm not going to ruin a joke to point out its wrong, but yes it is wrong to say that all priest are child molesters.
As for asexual I have no desire to have sex with anyone male or female.
Quote: TwirdmanYou edited my post the how offensive is this was referring to the next line where I asked how offensive would it be to try and find a cure for being black. Also people hate being gay because we think they need to be cured. You are assuming something is wrong with them from the start.
And THEY think something is wrong from the
start. Hate to break it to ya, but a lot of Gays
hate being that way and would do anything
not to be. Science is proving it's a chemical
imbalance that doesn't exist in non Gay's. You
would deny people treatment because you
think there's something noble about being Gay?
Quote: TwirdmanSo yeah a couple tv shows hardly compares.
There's more than just "a couple" pro-gay TV shows.
But tell me something.....please name one anti-gay sitcom/drama.
Quote: Beethoven9thSo you don't believe that the public is bombarded with a pro-gay message?????
What the hell is a pro gay message. Acting like gays are normal people is not a pro gay message it is reality. And are you denying that there is a glut of anti gay messaging from religion and local communities. I simply said that tv shows do not make up for the day to day occurrence of anti gay bigotry.
Quote: TwirdmanThe people who need to be cured are the ones who say gays are subhuman not the gays.
Who said gays are "subhuman"?
Quote: Beethoven9thWho said gays are "subhuman"?
Really again people I've mentioned before along with Phelps a number of US politicians like Santorum. They may not use the exact wording but that is exactly what they are saying.
Watch "Glee" for an example.Quote: TwirdmanWhat the hell is a pro gay message.
Which has a bigger audience, "Modern Family" or your local church?Quote: TwirdmanI simply said that tv shows do not make up for the day to day occurrence of anti gay bigotry.
Quote: TwirdmanYeah because straight men are oh so different.
I've known straight men who like sex with
a lot of different women. But never to the
obsession that some Gay men carry it to.
Like I said, it's all they talk about and think
about, doing strange men. They are always
cruising, always looking. The younger the
better. When I got into the antique business,
I found it had a ton of Gay men. I got to know
a lot of them very well. Even the older ones
never got over the obsession. We had a well
respected member of the antique community
killed last year at 75 because his obsession
let the wrong two young guys into his home,
and they murdered him for his money. I'll
post the link if you like.
1.) The views expressed basically are of Christian faith from the New Testament. From which several quotations are attributed!
2.) A&E did know what they signed and have had a good financial run.
3.) IIRC all the males in the family served our country.
4.) The viewpoints expressed are their own and does not (necessarily) reflect the view of the network.
5.) They still make damn good duckcallers AFAIK.
Facepalm to A&E. Killing the goose that laid your golden egg is rather stoopid, no? Or is it just just a
marketing tactic, let alone the outerwear, and hats that now pervade the stores even in the North East.
"I speak Duckenese" is everywhere.
Quote: TwirdmanThey may not use the exact wording but that is exactly what they are saying.Quote: Beethoven9thWho said gays are "subhuman"?
So people say that gays are "subhuman", but they just don't use the word "subhuman"???? LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Quote: EvenBobHate to break it to ya, but a lot of Gays
hate being that way and would do anything
not to be
It's ironic that libs always claim that "no one would ever choose to be gay", yet they get their panties all ruffled when someone mentions a cure.
Quote: EvenBobAnd THEY think something is wrong from the
start. Hate to break it to ya, but a lot of Gays
hate being that way and would do anything
not to be. Science is proving it's a chemical
imbalance that doesn't exist in non Gay's. You
would deny people treatment because you
think there's something noble about being Gay?
No they don't think they are wrong from the start society and church tells them they're wrong. And yes there is a difference in both brain structure and chemistry that mostly explains being gay. However a deviation from the norm isn't the definition we use for a disorder. Homosexuality hasn't been listed as a disorder in DSM since 1973 over 4 decades. So uh yeah your missing a lot of science there. Now I'm not saying there is anything inherently noble about being gay I am simply saying there is nothing inherently wrong about it. Just like there is nothing inherently wrong with being Black but I also don't think it is something we need to find a cure for. Even though it is just an overabundance of melanin which is not found in non blacks.
Thats the problem with a lot of conservatives you see gays as want something special to be better then straights but no most just want equality. The right to marry who they love not a special right. The right to not be looked on as inferior not a special right that makes them great just a right everyone should have.
Quote: TwirdmanNo they don't think they are wrong from the start society and church tells them they're wrong. And yes there is a difference in both brain structure and chemistry that mostly explains being gay. However a deviation from the norm isn't the definition we use for a disorder. Homosexuality hasn't been listed as a disorder in DSM since 1973 over 4 decades. So uh yeah your missing a lot of science there. Now I'm not saying there is anything inherently noble about being gay I am simply saying there is nothing inherently wrong about it. Just like there is nothing inherently wrong with being Black but I also don't think it is something we need to find a cure for. Even though it is just an overabundance of melanin which is not found in non blacks.
Thats the problem with a lot of conservatives you see gays as want something special to be better then straights but no most just want equality. The right to marry who they love not a special right. The right to not be looked on as inferior not a special right that makes them great just a right everyone should have.
Guess what the population of the Earth was at 3000B.C. ... 100AD ... and today?
Do you think those "Laws" handed down in 3000B.C. and in 100 A.D. were put in place to ensure that the Human Race survives as a whole?
Quote: TwirdmanThats the problem with a lot of conservatives you see gays as want something special to be better then straights but no most just want equality. The right to marry who they love not a special right. The right to not be looked on as inferior not a special right that makes them great just a right everyone should have
Just curious, are polygamists born that way?
Quote: Beethoven9thWatch "Glee" for an example.
Which has a bigger audience, "Modern Family" or your local church?
OK which has a bigger audience Modern Family or the former pope. Well the pope had roughly 1.2 billion so I'm gonna guess him.
Quote: TwirdmanHomosexuality hasn't been listed as a disorder in DSM since 1973 over 4 decades.
So what. When I was a kid all the special kids
rode a short blue bus and we had uncomplimentary
names for them. Those kids still exist and we don't
use those names anymore. But the kids haven't
changed, have they. Words and entries in books
don't change anything. A rose is still a rose. Many
Gay's think it's a disorder, and it's not because of
what the Church told them.
Quote: beachbumbabsSeems to me this whole thread went quickly into a DT discussion and could be taken over there.
Too bad it has about 6 active posters, if that many.
Quote: TwirdmanOK which has a bigger audience Modern Family or the former pope.
I'd say that the average American is far more familiar with pop culture & pro-gay celebrities, TV shows, etc. than the teachings of Pope Benedict.
Go ask people yourself. I'll bet you $1,000 that more people are familiar with, say, Kim Kardashian than Pope Benedict.
Quote: Beethoven9thJust curious, are polygamists born that way?
The question is nonsensical I mean what do you mean by that. Evolution say yes we should want to find as many partners as possible but marriage and hence polygamy are social constructs and as such cannot be ingrained at birth. The question makes slightly more sense if you are just talking about having multiple partners and then it becomes a complex question that I as a non psychiatrist couldn't possibly answer especially not in the context of a short message board post.
But lets go with the trap I'm sure you wanted to catch me in. If we allow gays to marry and give equal rights because they were born that way why not polygamist. The answer is multifaceted one of the big reasons for banning it was it tends to be exploitative and coerced. Though putting that aside for the moment if we could show these things were not happening and all parties were entering willing I'd have no problem allowing polygamy as long as the issues with contract law could get sorted out. I mean that is a big problem as how do you decide who makes ends of life decisions how does division of property go if there is a divorce or anything of that nature so it can get messy though I don't think there is any moral or ethical reason to ban it. Perhaps a legal one because of the problems laid out though I'm sure with work and a good contract attorney those could be worked out.
And FWIW 50,000 years ago when mankind was in the midst of "The walk around the world" 1/4 Million is optomistic.
I put this here because the thread still moves fast.
Quote: Beethoven9thI'd say that the average American is far more familiar with pop culture & pro-gay celebrities, TV shows, etc. than the teachings of Pope Benedict.
Go ask people yourself. I'll bet you $1,000 that more people are familiar with, say, Kim Kardashian than Pope Benedict.
I'll still put Jesus at the top of any list dealing with "The most important person that ever lived" poll.
Quote: TwirdmanI mean bars are filled with people who want to have sex.
Including me! LOL. I developed a grudge against gays at a young age. But I can also tell you this. You know the saying about blood is thicker than water. I have a gay first cousin. I don't want him discriminated against in any shape, form or fashion because of what he is.
Quote: onenickelmiracleI don't see how the boycotts are supposed to work if both sides boycott it.
Follow the money.
Networks need the money from the advertisers.
Advertisers need the money from the manufacturers, etc.
The manufacturers, etc. need the money from the consumers, which in this case is the audience tuned into the network.
The audience watches the show for whatever reason, therefore getting exposed to the advertising.
The network changes something about the show; ratings drop (fewer viewers).
Smaller audience (consumers) is now not as good for the advertiser.
Network must now accept less for advertising time slots.
Network now cannot afford to run premium programming that attracts large body of viewers.
Network has went from hero to zero, and must now start all over again.
Anytime something like this happens, unavoidable damage from somewhere is probable.
A fact of doing business is the acceptance of that risk.
If the business must face damaging circumstances, it then becomes an issue of minimizing the damage.
In the case of A&E, considerably more damage is apt to result from the suspension of Robertson than any damage from the advertisers. (I admit that I side with Beethoven on the possibility that A&E may simply be trying to push an agenda, while conveniently using the advertisers as an excuse.)
As long as the show has a high amount of viewers, there WILL be other advertisers willing to take that spot.
Do something to drastically reduce the amount of viewers (like suspending Robertson), then the network has lost a major bargaining chip with ANY advertiser.
Quote: TwirdmanThe question is nonsensical I mean what do you mean by that. Evolution say yes we should want to find as many partners as possible but marriage and hence polygamy are social constructs and as such cannot be ingrained at birth. The question makes slightly more sense if you are just talking about having multiple partners and then it becomes a complex question that I as a non psychiatrist couldn't possibly answer especially not in the context of a short message board post.
But lets go with the trap I'm sure you wanted to catch me in. If we allow gays to marry and give equal rights because they were born that way why not polygamist. The answer is multifaceted one of the big reasons for banning it was it tends to be exploitative and coerced. Though putting that aside for the moment if we could show these things were not happening and all parties were entering willing I'd have no problem allowing polygamy as long as the issues with contract law could get sorted out. I mean that is a big problem as how do you decide who makes ends of life decisions how does division of property go if there is a divorce or anything of that nature so it can get messy though I don't think there is any moral or ethical reason to ban it. Perhaps a legal one because of the problems laid out though I'm sure with work and a good contract attorney those could be worked out.
But at some early point, it was NECESSARY for the human race to survive.
OK, I gotta give you props on this one. Most pro-gay people are total hypocrites when it comes to polygamy, but at least you're being consistent. Even though I disagree, I can respect that position.Quote: Twirdman...if we could show these things were not happening and all parties were entering willing I'd have no problem allowing polygamy...
Quote: TwirdmanI as a non psychiatrist couldn't possibly answer especially not in the context of a short message board post.Quote: Beethoven9thJust curious, are polygamists born that way?
So you'll answer for gays, but not polygamists? LOL!
Quote: EvenBobSo what. When I was a kid all the special kids
rode a short blue bus and we had uncomplimentary
names for them. Those kids still exist and we don't
use those names anymore. But the kids haven't
changed, have they. Words and entries in books
don't change anything. A rose is still a rose. Many
Gay's think it's a disorder, and it's not because of
what the Church told them.
Thats because the names in the books have changed. There are new names for many of the disorders for instance some of the non verbal ones or just those with difficulty socializing got moved over to one of the autism spectrum disorders. Mental retardation or words like idiot, imbecile, and the like were replaced by intellectual disability and an adjective to describe the level. Mongoloid was replaced with down syndrome. All these are disorders are still in DSM and ICD its just the names have changed to remove them from the extreme negative connotation. Homosexuality is not anywhere in the DSM or ICD. It hasn't just had a name change there is no disorder to describe being attracted to members of the same sex. Also why would you think its inherently a disorder and say the gays think so but not because of church or society. Countless societies throughout history approved of homosexuality and people then didn't classify it as a disorder.
Quote: Beethoven9thOK, I gotta give you props on this one. Most pro-gay people are total hypocrites when it comes to polygamy, but at least you're being consistent. Even though I disagree, I can respect that position.
So you'll answer for gays, but not polygamists? LOL!
Simple truth I know more gays and I know more about the research into homosexuality. I don't study human sexualty or infact psychology at all so I am not up to any research on polygamy or multiple partners.
Quote: TwirdmanThats because the names in the books have changed. .
Here's a shocker. A name is not a disorder
and a disorder is not a name. Perception
is reality. The majority, vast majority, of
the world perceives homosexuality as a
disorder. That's the reality. Screw what
some book says, they're all written by
people with an agenda. Including the
religious books.
