Forum: Weblog comments

Political Views

Seiten (2): |< 1 [2] (Beitrag 11-15/15)

AutorBeitrag

Mysterious Andy

aus US

zitieren
From a "leftist"
@ancestor (and by extension @Gervase Markham):

I recognize the internal consistency of your argument against gay marriage; I used to make the same argument. It took me years to get past what amounted to knee-jerk homophobia brought on by a lifetime of religious indoctrination.

Try this: Make the same argument, but substitute "bi-racial" for "homosexual". Roll that around a bit and see how it feels. It's the same language used to defend segregation and "anti-miscegenation" laws in the US until about a generation ago.

It boils down to claiming "separate but equal" is good enough. It isn't.

As I see it, unless you are willing to declare only English Christians should be allowed to marry people (i.e. give the CoE a monopoly on "marriage" in the UK), you're arguing inconsistently. If Hindus, atheists, and Jedi can get married, you've already acknowledged that people with multiple gods, no gods, and professing a belief in a Sci-Fi religion are just as entitled to "marriage" as Christians.

Explain how gays (whom several religions are more than willing to wed) differ.

Quoting you: "So yeah, I agree with KaiRo that many left-wingers have perfected the paradoxical art of acting intolerant under the pretense of defending tolerance."

Your argument boils down to "I don't want people telling me I can't tell them what they can and can't do." The GOP has been using that same reasoning to play the victim for years, and it's no less disingenuous today than it was when the Moral Majority first tried it on for size.

I am very tolerant of beliefs, opinions, prejudices, etc., and everyone's rights to express them. I have no such tolerance for acts of oppression, though, no matter how they are couched in terms of "defending cultural norms" or "religious freedom".

I don't care what your god told you; you don't get to force me to live by its rules. This is true for all variations of "you", "me", and "god".

@KaiRo:

Quoting you this time: "I'm shocked once again how everything not conforming to 'elite' far-left-wing views is being seen as rude, backwards, and unacceptable."

I'm center-right by most European standards, but if you want to label me a far-left-wing elitist because I recognize the inherent equality of all people, that's fine. As I said, I'm big on freedom of speech.

Call me a leftist all you like. I'm still right.
08.03.2012 22:36

Asa Dotzler

zitieren
Mozilla is about PEOPLE and Planet should be too
If you enjoy having planet that personalizes the people on the project and helps you learn more about them than the particular bits of code or whatever that they're working on, you should speak up because those who would have an editorial regime put in place are going to be vocal about it. Let your voice be heard. http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/browse_thread/thread/6abe8b6a24eb3102/952101e4dd0bd0c7
09.03.2012 02:10

jmdesp

zitieren
far left != gay rights
Really, far left is a political stand that is about the economy, not "gay rights".
Gays in the USSR were not only legally discriminated, but beaten up, tortured, deported to gulag, and frequently put to death in dark alleys by KGB agents.
You must quite confused about the subject if you are equaling the two.

Some did feel personally threatened by Gerv's stand. They also are definitively confused about what Gerv really stands for, I know he'd firmly consider any physical abuse of someone for any reason whatsoever for as a personal disgrace. And given that Gerv would *never* approve any abuse of a person because of his sexual orientation, I think they are very wrongly headed when trying to restrict his speech.
But I don't believe they are just acting out or taking that position only out of a political stand, but are really confused about what Gerv's position against same-sex marriage means about the attitude he would show when meeting someone who's gay.
09.03.2012 10:19

KaiRo

Webmaster

zitieren
Just as a note, my comments were in way broader context than this tiny matter of what the choice of words is for the legal union of gay couples. There seems to be a common thread that those who most loudly claim to be open for everything are very sensible and downright offending to anyone who doesn't share their views of the world.
09.03.2012 14:34

Jay

aus Peoples Republic of California

zitieren
I confess, I am a pedant.
Homophobe is a misnomer. Almost no one fears gays. I confess I might wish to mis-understand that also if others found my lifestyle repulsive! Okay, that was a little mean, but that word is virtually meaningless and thrown around nearly as often as racist, and to my mind with the same intent and microscopic chance of being true.
14.03.2012 10:33

Seiten (2): |< 1 [2] (Beitrag 11-15/15)

Antwort verfassen