Gay pride, black prejudice

[Roberto]

Gay pride, black prejudice………

How is sexually deviant and disordered behavior anything to be proud of……

and how is a prejudice against this sexually deviant and disordered behavior a bad thing?

Can someone answer that?

[dew4794]

Roberto wrote:

Gay pride, black prejudice………
How is sexually deviant and disordered behavior anything to be proud of……
and how is a prejudice against this sexually deviant and disordered behavior a bad thing?
Can someone answer that?

Who determines your judgments? Obviously you are judging their behaviors, not gay people in your post. The deviant and disordered was removed from DSM, 35 years ago from APA Psychiatric, APA Psychologic, The AMA, The Am Assoc of Peds. Sodomy LAWS between consenting adults was overturned 1993 by SCOTUS. Are those reasons that determine bias, prejudice, and homophobia? hummm.

[Freddy Pickle]

Roberto wrote:

<quoted text>
My final word.
I believe you hate God and Christ.

You're wrong. I don't hate either. You're the only one demonstrating hatred in our conversation. I love our country and our way of life, two other things you have demonstrated that you do not.

Roberto wrote:

I also think that you are, in fact, a homosexual claiming to be straight as a way of making yourself less vulnerable to attack.

My heterosexual female fiance can attest that I most assuredly am not. Your baseless attacks, Roberto, are just that: baseless attacks.

Roberto wrote:

You have called me a homophobic, hateful bigot. And yet, you have failed to convince me of any of that.

You have demonstrated, over and over again, that you are all of those. I don't need to convince anyone, you do a good enough job without me.

Roberto wrote:

I guess argumentation is not your strong point.
But let's take this point by point:
I oppose same-sex marriage because I respect the tradition of marriage, because I am aware of the potential for disorder should it be allowed, and because there is no legitimate state purpose to it. None of these make me a homophobic, hateful bigot.

You do not respect the tradition of marriage, as a matter of fact, you have demonstrated that you are AGAINST marriage. Your words, not mine.

Roberto wrote:

I believe homosexuality is a disordered behavior because the consequences of it are so… well, disordered. This does not make me a homophobic, hateful bigot.

But homosexuality is not a behavior. Your belief that it is so proves your homophobia.

Roberto wrote:

I believe that the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality will overturn the Christian ethical paradigm upon which Western civilization has been founded. This does not make me a homophobic, hateful bigot.

But that is not true and we both know it. More importantly, you have demonstrated repeatedly your dislike for the Christian ethical paradign upon which Western civilization has been founded. Again, your words, not mine.

Roberto wrote:

Your take on this is that if anyone disagrees with the goals of gays, this makes them homophobic, hateful bigots.

No, of course it is not. Anyone that says hateful, bigoted or homophobic things probably IS hateful, IS a bigot and IS a homophobe.

If you're not any of the above, why do you give us reason to believe you are?

Roberto wrote:

I asked you how one could disagree with the goals of gays without being a homophobic, hateful bigots and you did not answer that. Why?

Because thats irrelevant to the conversation at hand. There isn't some huge worldwide "gay agenda". Thats all in your bigoted head and only demonstrates further that you're a homophobe: you believe in a worldwide gay conspiracy. There is not one.

Roberto wrote:

Because it is dogma that any disagreement with homosexual goals is hateful, homophobic and bigoted. That's right!

Not at all. Perhaps in your sick little head, but not in mine nor the heads of most homosexuals. You're the one that called homosexuals "spoiled brat retards" when you're the only one acting that way.

Roberto wrote:

So I must assume these labels as the price I must pay to remain true to my convictions.

Yes, when you act like a bigot, talk like a bigot and vote like a bigot, people are going to assume you're a bigot. If you've been this way for any length of time, you should already be very used to it.

Roberto wrote:

But that also renders your arrogant judgements of me ineffectual, unserious and not credible when all you can counter with is dogma and not reason.

You're the one being unreasonable, not me. You're the one approaching this issue with dogma, not me. You're the one posting incredible things, not me. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones Bobby.

[Freddy Pickle]

Roberto wrote:

Gay pride, black prejudice………
How is sexually deviant and disordered behavior anything to be proud of……
and how is a prejudice against this sexually deviant and disordered behavior a bad thing?
Can someone answer that?

We're not talking about sexually deviant or disordered behavior, we're talking about homosexuality.

You've been answered.

[yoda55]

zona 16 wrote:

TO BLACKMAMBA: For much of history what you ranted about black americans is true. Not today. Oh the inner city slums and what goes with it exists. And it is hardship. You can talk and threaten and beat people until hell freezes over, but your people are the your own worse enemies. Stop the babies. Should I repeat that? I will...STOP THE BABIES! You have convinced us hatemongers that your the coolest people in America if not the world. But you are not cool enough to STOP THE BABIES!!!!!! Coolness means you understand and you will do what needs to be done. The act of sexual relations is a behavior thing. STOP THE BABIES!....This is common sense. You have people of all backgrounds on your side. But you spit on them as they themselves head into lower living lifestyles and some into poverty.

You have not heard, talk underway now to have taxpayers foot abortion costs.

I already pay school taxes and dont have kids in school, now I have to pay for people getting abortions.
Does it get any better?

[Question]

Freddy Pickle wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm not sure you can talk sense into zealots like her, Rose.

Please clarify what makes her a senseless zealot and you level headed? Isn't your view just the opposite extreme of hers? Doesn't that make you just as much a zealot as her?

That's part of the issue. It takes moderates to resolve issues. Zealots are unable and unwilling to accept compromise. I believe you both demonstrate that mindset quite well.

[Question]

Freddy Pickle wrote:

<quoted text>
We're not talking about sexually deviant or disordered behavior, we're talking about homosexuality.
You've been answered.

By your standards. One extreme or the other. Your way or the highway, right? You are the tolerant one, correct? Again please clarify what makes you the level headed one and those with opposing views zealots or hateful or uninformed or ...

Tolerance takes compromise. You aren't capable of that based on your posts. That makes you as biggoted as those you are arguing with.

[Freddy Pickle]

Question wrote:

<quoted text>
Please clarify what makes her a senseless zealot and you level headed? Isn't your view just the opposite extreme of hers?

No....its not. The opposite extreme would be creating a two-caste society where homosexuals wear crowns and eat heterosexual babies while the rest of us straight folks slave Pol Pot style in the fields.

The Truth wrote:

That's part of the issue. It takes moderates to resolve issues. Zealots are unable and unwilling to accept compromise. I believe you both demonstrate that mindset quite well.

I am a moderate. Are the white people in the country who don't judge people on account of their skin color zealots? No...they're....normal.

[Liberals Hate America]

Angela wrote:

Hi Zone. I am an African American that has to say this: I AGREE WITH YOU. I can no longer say that there is not enough education for our race in reference to sex education. My dausghter is now in the 9th grade and she is being taught sex education. I can't agree with the myth of it being passed down through the generations either because there has been a lot of good seeds that have come out of the "projects". Let just say that it is up to the individuals and up to the parents to make sure that the curse is broken. THERE ARE NO MORE EXCUSES.<quoted text>

That sentence "up to the parents" is most telling.Poor parenting is a multi cultural malaise.

[Independent]

Question wrote:

<quoted text>
Please clarify what makes her a senseless zealot and you level headed? Isn't your view just the opposite extreme of hers? Doesn't that make you just as much a zealot as her?
That's part of the issue. It takes moderates to resolve issues. Zealots are unable and unwilling to accept compromise. I believe you both demonstrate that mindset quite well.

Please stop posting sensible posts like this! It disturbs the other posters who only want to hear their own voices and their own rants.

My opinion is this: Keep marriage defined the way it is [one man, one woman] and make a civil union ceremony for homosexuals with the same rights and responsibilites as a marriage. The various religions of the world who have been performing marriage ceremonies for millenia have defined marriage that way. However, we live in a secular, democratic country and there is no reason, morally or legally, to prevent homosexuals from engaging in a civil union.

However, this is only my opinion. I am on this thread looking for food for thought and alternate (but logical) viewpoints and all I've seen here [excluding your post] is a lot of name calling and close-mindedness on both sides. For what it's worth.

[shorty]

Whatever, to each its own. I wish the gays would stop crying about everything and please stop trying to compare gays with being black, take your own troubles for youself. If youre gay so what everybody doesn't have to know about it. The mere fact of knowing that someone is gay everyone can draw their on picture from that, but don't come up in here trying to get your partners 401k and live domesticated is just nasty.

[Freddy Pickle]

Independent wrote:

My opinion is this: Keep marriage defined the way it is [one man, one woman] and make a civil union ceremony for homosexuals with the same rights and responsibilites as a marriage.

What part of Brown v. Board of Education don't you understand?

Independent wrote:

I am on this thread looking for food for thought and alternate (but logical) viewpoints and all I've seen here [excluding your post] is a lot of name calling and close-mindedness on both sides. For what it's worth.

Please read through my posts. Not only are they free from namecalling but they're also logical, thoughtful and mature.

[JohnInToronto]

Daniel P from Long Island wrote:

I haven't been bashing Christians. I just don't want the DAMN Roman Catholic Church imposing their narrow views on Christians and NON-Christians alike.
Pope Benedict The Dopey recently publicly said that Protestant churches are NOT "real churches", and that Protestant ministers had "no right" to give Communion.
You think I, and millions of other Protestants, are going to listen to ANYTHING this insulting idiot has to say ?!
Dream on.
Pay no attention to that man wearing the curtain and the funny hat !

So, curious what you think about the Orthodox branch of Christianity. If you've ever read anything they write, especially the hard-core Russian ones, you'd know they thinK the pope is the devil incarnate. But they are even more rabidly ant-gay than he is. Is the enemy of thy enemy thy friend?

[Daniel P from Long Island]

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.(That's not what Dick Tracy said tho.)

And the Orthodox Christians are NOT trying to impose their beliefs, thru civil law, here in the U.S. as the Roman Catholics are doing.

[Independent]

Freddy Pickle wrote:

<quoted text>
What part of Brown v. Board of Education don't you understand?
<quoted text>
Please read through my posts. Not only are they free from namecalling but they're also logical, thoughtful and mature.

I understand it quite well, thank you. I also understand that the point you are trying to make is a specious one. Brown v Board of Education addressed the issue of the legal status of blacks regarding denial of their equal opportunities in education. The schools in question were public schools funded by taxpayer dollars including monies from black taxpayers. I assume the doctrine of separate but equal is the point you are trying to address and use it as an analogy to homosexual marriage. However, your argument fails to take into account that private schools operate differently from public schools. There are parochial schools that conduct religious services and training that would not be conducted in a public school. Yet each of these schools graduates students accordingly. As a matter of fact I believe there is a high school in Chicago that is seeking to have a student body made up exclusively of gay students. Would you oppose the opening of this school even though it segregates and makes the gay student separate but equal from other students? Somehow I don't think you would.

The fact that a student can receive a diploma from a public or private school and both are equal in the eyes of the law is the point I made. A Marriage as it is now defined and a civil union allowing homosexual marriage would seem to be a fair and logical solution that anyone should be able to live with.

The tone of your reply is at odds with your contention that your posts are "free from namecalling but they're also logical, thoughtful and mature." I have read your posts and they can be a close-minded as any of those who oppose your views.

[Question]

Freddy Pickle wrote:

<quoted text>
No....its not. The opposite extreme would be creating a two-caste society where homosexuals wear crowns and eat heterosexual babies while the rest of us straight folks slave Pol Pot style in the fields.
<quoted text>
I am a moderate. Are the white people in the country who don't judge people on account of their skin color zealots? No...they're....normal.

I have actually spent some time reading through your posts. However it is that you may view yourself, the fact remains that your take a polar opposite view to the poster you are arguing with. That is not moderate by any definition that I can find.

I don't believe you understand or perceive the tone of your own posts. For example, you just used the most extreme view point you could think of to illustrate how you believe your view is not extreme. Wow. There are religious factions in the world today that are causing havoc using the same kind of self view.

Take a minute to review your own posts independent of the ones you are responding to. See if you don't find what we're talking about. The answer to this issue is somewhere inbetween what the two of you are arguing, but you can't see it from where you are.

[Freddy Pickle]

Daniel P from Long Island wrote:

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.(That's not what Dick Tracy said tho.)
And the Orthodox Christians are NOT trying to impose their beliefs, thru civil law, here in the U.S. as the Prostestants are doing.

I fixed it for you Daniel. It appears that you're not only gay, but you're also misinformed.

[Freddy Pickle]

Independent wrote:

<quoted text>
I understand it quite well, thank you. I also understand that the point you are trying to make is a specious one. Brown v Board of Education addressed the issue of the legal status of blacks regarding denial of their equal opportunities in education.

It appears you do not understand Brown v. Board of Education whatsoever. The legal case was the one setting precedent for "separate is not equal".

Calling homosexuals marriages "civil unions" would be the same thing as calling them "magical Sunday breakfast parties". That is, it undermines the entire legitimacy of their union.

Gay marriages that are not called gay marriages are not going to be treated as marriages, its that simple. Separate is not equal, it can't be. Until you get over this fundamental fact, its going to keep holding you back.

Independent wrote:

Would you oppose the opening of this school even though it segregates and makes the gay student separate but equal from other students?

We're not talking about opening gay schools. We're talking about calling gay marriage what it deserves to be called.

Independent wrote:

A Marriage as it is now defined and a civil union allowing homosexual marriage would seem to be a fair and logical solution that anyone should be able to live with.

No, its something no one should be able to deal with. Calling gay marriages "civil unions" undermines their marriage from the get go. The only logical next step in your line of thinking is to call all marriages "civil unions" and let churches decide whether or not that will call them marriages. But to simply tell the homosexuals that what they have is NOT what the rest of us has is discriminatory and anti-American.

Independent wrote:

The tone of your reply is at odds with your contention that your posts are "free from namecalling but they're also logical, thoughtful and mature."

Not at all, no.

Independent wrote:

I have read your posts and they can be a close-minded as any of those who oppose your views.

Yes wanting others to have the same rights as me is very close-minded.

[Freddy Pickle]

Question wrote:

<quoted text>
I have actually spent some time reading through your posts. However it is that you may view yourself, the fact remains that your take a polar opposite view to the poster you are arguing with. That is not moderate by any definition that I can find.

So since I want black people to have the same rights as me, too, I'm a polar opposite to "normal people".

You're a clown if you believe that. I'm the voice of moderation here. I'm a straight white man extending my arms to my gay brothers because I care about them, care about our country and our way of life. That doesn't make me a radical by any stretch of the word, it makes me NORMAL.

Question wrote:

I don't believe you understand or perceive the tone of your own posts. For example, you just used the most extreme view point you could think of to illustrate how you believe your view is not extreme. Wow.

Yes, wanting gay people to have the same rights of me is very extreme. Get a clue.

Question wrote:

There are religious factions in the world today that are causing havoc using the same kind of self view.

No, they're the ones trying to deny my gay brothers and sisters their civil rights. They are the ones who created the "polar opposite" where gays take rights away from other people, change the definition of marriage and try to force their "gayness" down other people's throats. That polar opposite does not exist, but the hateful religious extreme does.

Question wrote:

Take a minute to review your own posts independent of the ones you are responding to. See if you don't find what we're talking about. The answer to this issue is somewhere inbetween what the two of you are arguing, but you can't see it from where you are.

Whats the "in between" of the two polar opposites, then? Is it the side that doesn't give homosexuals their civil rights? Is it the side that tramples upon the Constitution, slaps America in the face and has its way with our way of life?

Tell me, please, what the moderate voice is in this debate?

[Question]

Freddy Pickle wrote:

<quoted text>
So since I want black people to have the same rights as me, too, I'm a polar opposite to "normal people".
You're a clown if you believe that. I'm the voice of moderation here. I'm a straight white man extending my arms to my gay brothers because I care about them, care about our country and our way of life. That doesn't make me a radical by any stretch of the word, it makes me NORMAL.
<quoted text>
Yes, wanting gay people to have the same rights of me is very extreme. Get a clue.
<quoted text>
No, they're the ones trying to deny my gay brothers and sisters their civil rights. They are the ones who created the "polar opposite" where gays take rights away from other people, change the definition of marriage and try to force their "gayness" down other people's throats. That polar opposite does not exist, but the hateful religious extreme does.
<quoted text>
Whats the "in between" of the two polar opposites, then? Is it the side that doesn't give homosexuals their civil rights? Is it the side that tramples upon the Constitution, slaps America in the face and has its way with our way of life?
Tell me, please, what the moderate voice is in this debate?

This is actually going to be my last response to you because you do not have the ability to step back and look at how you are approaching things.

A moderate voice has not entered this debate yet because you and your apparent enemies are unable to allow for that. You have called me a clown. You do not have the ability to recognize the extreme nature of your own discourse. You see yourself as moderate.

I think it's safe to assume that the mojority of the posters on this board would disagree with your view of yourself. You have presented yourself as all or nothing. You have firmly contended that no one else has any kind of point whatsoever. In your narrow view of things, you hold the only answer. So, I'll end with this: If you want to be right, you're right. No one could tell you otherwise anyway.