Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

And The Brown Shirts March On....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    Well, a key difference here is that the phrase "White Pride," when used by a group like the KKK, is clearly racist and has connotations of oppressing black people. So no, I wouldn't want black people to do that. But gay pride festivals don't have connotations of oppressing straight people or Christians.
    I find it ironic how people like you try to equate being against homosexuality or same sex marriage with racism against in order to gain sympathy for gays, yet when I or someone else brings up an example such as above, all of a sudden you want to distance homosexuality from racism.

    my, my.

    Homosexual advocates do try to oppress straight people and Christians, or anyone that disagrees with them. They not only want tolerance, they want the rest of the world to condone their behavior and will do anything to get their way, including trying to force a business to print up their T-shirts promoting their lifestyle, or sue them into submission.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by seer View Post
      Nonsense, speech is speech. So you would allow discrimination in one case but not another.
      "White Pride" has clear racist connotations and ultimately means "White is good, pure and superior and should be promoted over black, which is evil/filthy/inferior." It's not an innocuous phrase. People who use it generally want to oppress, harm or expel black people from the land. Of course black people shouldn't have to serve them.

      Meanwhile, "gay pride" is simply saying "We've survived oppression based on being gay and we refuse to let others try to put us to shame for merely being who we are." The festival itself isn't concerned with hating or harming anyone.
      Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

      I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by square_peg View Post
        "White Pride" has clear racist connotations and ultimately means "White is good, pure and superior and should be promoted over black, which is evil/filthy/inferior." It's not an innocuous phrase. People who use it generally want to oppress, harm or expel black people from the land. Of course black people shouldn't have to serve them.

        Meanwhile, "gay pride" is simply saying "We've survived oppression based on being gay and we refuse to let others try to put us to shame for merely being who we are." The festival itself isn't concerned with hating or harming anyone.
        So "Black Pride" is racist too, and BET television? and using your logic "Gay Pride" must have clear connotations that ultimately means "Gay is good, pure and superior and should be promoted over Heterosexuality which is evil/filthy/inferior"

        You don't think before posting do you?

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          Homosexual advocates do try to oppress straight people and Christians, or anyone that disagrees with them. They not only want tolerance, they want the rest of the world to condone their behavior and will do anything to get their way, including trying to force a business to print up their T-shirts promoting their lifestyle, or sue them into submission.
          The bolded part is my impression too, of how at least some gay advocates act. And it's a big reason why I'm against 'gay rights' - those people are dangerous, because they are not content to 'live and let live'. I feel that they are somehow compelled to seek not just acceptance - 'you do your thing, we'll do ours, just keep out of each others faces' - but rather active endorsement - 'gays are great, homosexuality is normal, healthy behaviour'. And when someone merely accepts them, but won't endorse their behaviour... ...look out!
          ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
            I find it ironic how people like you try to equate being against homosexuality or same sex marriage with racism against in order to gain sympathy for gays
            Actually, I do that because I believe it's a valid comparison (a minority group fighting against oppression based on an inherently harmless characteristic that they didn't choose and will likely never be able to change), not to "gain sympathy" for people.

            yet when I or someone else brings up an example such as above, all of a sudden you want to distance homosexuality from racism.
            Because in this instance, your comparison isn't quite valid. Nothing ironic about that.

            Homosexual advocates do try to oppress straight people and Christians, or anyone that disagrees with them. They not only want tolerance, they want the rest of the world to condone their behavior and will do anything to get their way, including trying to force a business to print up their T-shirts promoting their lifestyle, or sue them into submission.
            I'm an advocate for gay rights, and I don't try to oppress straight people, Christians, or people who disagree with me, nor would I try to force people in protected religious institutions to turn over their sermon material. So clearly, the above statement is a gross overgeneralization. Besides, gay pride festivals themselves aren't concerned with any of that; as I explained to seer, the participants there are merely sending a message that they won't be put to shame for merely being themselves. There is a stark difference between this and the malevolent intentions that are inherently behind the "White Pride" movement's KKK members.

            Additionally, I don't think it's at all accurate to portray certain advocates as "oppressing straight people," unless you know of anyone saying straight people are inferior to gay people and should be subjugated or forced to live separately from society. And really, the only example I know of that could legitimately be said to be oppressive towards Christians is the Houston mayor's subpoena of sermons. As has been explained in the other threads, requiring people who provide business services in public accommodations to provide those services for all people isn't oppression, since public accommodations are places where all people are supposed to have access.
            Last edited by fm93; 10-16-2014, 09:06 AM.
            Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

            I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              So "Black Pride" is racist too, and BET television? and using your logic "Gay Pride" must have clear connotations that ultimately means "Gay is good, pure and superior and should be promoted over Heterosexuality which is evil/filthy/inferior"

              You don't think before posting do you?
              It appears that it's actually you who doesn't think before posting. Look up the phrase "White Pride." It's used almost exclusively by supremacist and neo-Nazi groups, like the KKK or Stormfront. In your hypothetical example, you even stated that it was the KKK who was doing this. "White Pride" isn't simply an issue of adding the word "pride" after the term for a racial group; it has a specific malevolent meaning based on its historical usage by inherently hateful groups. Don't like that fact? Blame the racists (and come on, there's no denying that the KKK and Stormfront are clearly, undeniably dripping with evil racism) who hijacked the term. "Black Pride" and "Gay Pride" were never used in that manner; to the contrary, they were used to indicate self-esteem and refusal to be shamed, not a desire to be supreme and return black people to slavery and other inequality.
              Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

              I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
                The bolded part is my impression too, of how at least some gay advocates act. And it's a big reason why I'm against 'gay rights' - those people are dangerous, because they are not content to 'live and let live'. I feel that they are somehow compelled to seek not just acceptance - 'you do your thing, we'll do ours, just keep out of each others faces' - but rather active endorsement - 'gays are great, homosexuality is normal, healthy behaviour'. And when someone merely accepts them, but won't endorse their behaviour... ...look out!
                Absolutely! They are desperate for everyone else to not only accept their behaviour but to condone it as well. And when they run across someone who doesn't, they inevitably get the legal system involved. Which usually is, of course, liberally-minded.

                It is always a double standard with the left. They are tolerant of everybody except those who disagree with them.


                Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by square_peg View Post
                  Actually, I do that because I believe it's a valid comparison (a minority group fighting against oppression based on an inherently harmless characteristic that they didn't choose and will likely never be able to change), not to "gain sympathy" for people.


                  Because in this instance, your comparison isn't quite valid. Nothing ironic about that.


                  I'm an advocate for gay rights, and I don't try to oppress straight people, Christians, or people who disagree with me, nor would I try to force people in protected religious institutions to turn over their sermon material. So clearly, the above statement is a gross overgeneralization. Besides, gay pride festivals themselves aren't concerned with any of that; as I explained to seer, the participants there are merely sending a message that they won't be put to shame for merely being themselves. There is a stark difference between this and the malevolent intentions that are inherently behind the "White Pride" movement's KKK members.

                  Additionally, I don't think it's at all accurate to portray certain advocates as "oppressing straight people," unless you know of anyone saying straight people are inferior to gay people and should be subjugated or forced to live separately from society. And really, the only example I know of that could legitimately be said to be oppressive towards Christians is the Houston mayor's subpoena of sermons. As has been explained in the other threads, requiring people who provide business services in public accommodations to provide those services for all people isn't oppression, since public accommodations are places where all people are supposed to have access.
                  yeah like I said, it is obvious you don't think through your arguments before making them. The same logic you try to use to say my example of "white power" is invalid and racist can be used to claim that "gay pride" is racist (well, whatever the equivalent of racism is in sexual orientation)

                  Your double standard is what is invalid.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
                    The bolded part is my impression too, of how at least some gay advocates act. And it's a big reason why I'm against 'gay rights' - those people are dangerous, because they are not content to 'live and let live'. I feel that they are somehow compelled to seek not just acceptance - 'you do your thing, we'll do ours, just keep out of each others faces' - but rather active endorsement - 'gays are great, homosexuality is normal, healthy behaviour'. And when someone merely accepts them, but won't endorse their behaviour... ...look out!
                    How would this logic sound if you replaced "gay advocates" with Christians?

                    Originally posted by bizarro Sparko
                    Christians not only want tolerance, they want the rest of the world to condone their behavior and will do anything to get their way
                    The bolded part is my impression too, of how at least some Christian activists act. And it's a big reason why I'm against Christian rights--those people are dangerous, because they are not content to "live and let live." I feel that they are somehow compelled to seek not just acceptance--"you do your thing, we'll do ours, just keep out of each others faces"--but rather active endorsement--"Christians are great, being religious is normal, healthy behavior." And when someone merely accepts them, but won't endorse their behavior...look out!


                    You're overgeneralizing, for one thing, and it's strange to oppose a group's activism on the basis of some advocates being overzealous, unless you think abortion ought to stay legalized to a large part because some anti-abortion protesters engage in poor behavior.
                    Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                    I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by square_peg View Post
                      "White Pride" has clear racist connotations and ultimately means "White is good, pure and superior and should be promoted over black, which is evil/filthy/inferior." It's not an innocuous phrase. People who use it generally want to oppress, harm or expel black people from the land. Of course black people shouldn't have to serve them.

                      Meanwhile, "gay pride" is simply saying "We've survived oppression based on being gay and we refuse to let others try to put us to shame for merely being who we are." The festival itself isn't concerned with hating or harming anyone.
                      Again, nonsense. Speech is speech. Even unpopular speech is protected. You are being hypocritical.
                      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by square_peg View Post
                        It appears that it's actually you who doesn't think before posting. Look up the phrase "White Pride." It's used almost exclusively by supremacist and neo-Nazi groups, like the KKK or Stormfront. In your hypothetical example, you even stated that it was the KKK who was doing this. "White Pride" isn't simply an issue of adding the word "pride" after the term for a racial group; it has a specific malevolent meaning based on its historical usage by inherently hateful groups. Don't like that fact? Blame the racists (and come on, there's no denying that the KKK and Stormfront are clearly, undeniably dripping with evil racism) who hijacked the term. "Black Pride" and "Gay Pride" were never used in that manner; to the contrary, they were used to indicate self-esteem and refusal to be shamed, not a desire to be supreme and return black people to slavery and other inequality.
                        Oh bull crap. Black pride is used by black racists all the time, like Black Panthers. And Gay Pride is used by Gay activists to suppress anyone who disagrees with them, as in the case of trying to force businesses and people to agree with them and serve them or be sued. They are nothing but bullies. Pure and simple.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                          yeah like I said, it is obvious you don't think through your arguments before making them. The same logic you try to use to say my example of "white power" is invalid and racist can be used to claim that "gay pride" is racist (well, whatever the equivalent of racism is in sexual orientation)

                          Your double standard is what is invalid.
                          *sighs deeply*

                          Okay, let's work through this step by step. A double standard by definition means that I'm using two or more different standards to arrive at different conclusions. Now let's count the standards that I've used.

                          1) A particular phrase used for a movement is unacceptable if it's taken on malevolent meanings due to its historical usage.
                          2) ...?

                          Oh, that's right. I've only used one standard to arrive at different conclusions, and hence, there is no double standard. The logic I used to say your example of "white pride" is invalid (and on that note, why'd you all of a sudden use "white power" here? Not that it makes a difference, because "White Power" has even more racist connotations, but your inconsistency is duly noted.) absolutely cannot be used to claim that other "pride" based movements are invalid, because those other terms were never used in malevolent contexts--which I already said in my previous post.
                          Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                          I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by square_peg View Post
                            *sighs deeply*

                            Okay, let's work through this step by step. A double standard by definition means that I'm using two or more different standards to arrive at different conclusions. Now let's count the standards that I've used.

                            1) A particular phrase used for a movement is unacceptable if it's taken on malevolent meanings due to its historical usage.
                            2) ...?

                            Oh, that's right. I've only used one standard to arrive at different conclusions, and hence, there is no double standard. The logic I used to say your example of "white pride" is invalid (and on that note, why'd you all of a sudden use "white power" here? Not that it makes a difference, because "White Power" has even more racist connotations, but your inconsistency is duly noted.) absolutely cannot be used to claim that other "pride" based movements are invalid, because those other terms were never used in malevolent contexts--which I already said in my previous post.
                            Your double standard is that it is OK for one group to have free speech and force others to bow down to their demands to support their views by printing t-shirts for them, but not OK for another group. Especially since the group you deny that right to has the protection of the constitution, while the group you support does not, just a city ordinance.

                            But hey, continue to show yourself to be an intolerant jerk. It just hurts your own argument.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by square_peg View Post
                              *sighs deeply*

                              Okay, let's work through this step by step. A double standard by definition means that I'm using two or more different standards to arrive at different conclusions. Now let's count the standards that I've used.

                              1) A particular phrase used for a movement is unacceptable if it's taken on malevolent meanings due to its historical usage.
                              2) ...?

                              Oh, that's right. I've only used one standard to arrive at different conclusions, and hence, there is no double standard. The logic I used to say your example of "white pride" is invalid (and on that note, why'd you all of a sudden use "white power" here? Not that it makes a difference, because "White Power" has even more racist connotations, but your inconsistency is duly noted.) absolutely cannot be used to claim that other "pride" based movements are invalid, because those other terms were never used in malevolent contexts--which I already said in my previous post.
                              Out of curiosity, what about "straight pride"?
                              I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                Your double standard is that it is OK for one group to have free speech and force others to bow down to their demands to support their views by printing t-shirts for them, but not OK for another group.
                                Actually, I didn't even say that. I just asked why the shirt-makers had an issue with the shirt design. You then responded with an analogy about White Pride, and I explained that White Pride has a very clear malevolent meaning that's starkly different from gay pride, and that your comparison is therefore invalid. I didn't specify whether I thought the gay pride shirt issue was okay or not.

                                But hey, continue to show yourself to be an intolerant jerk. It just hurts your own argument.
                                You repeatedly misrepresent my arguments or ignore them while insulting my character and intelligence, yet *I* am the one who's a jerk?
                                Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                                I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by rogue06, Today, 12:45 PM
                                1 response
                                13 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Gondwanaland, Yesterday, 08:04 PM
                                2 responses
                                25 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Gondwanaland  
                                Started by KingsGambit, 08-05-2022, 07:37 PM
                                8 responses
                                64 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post KingsGambit  
                                Started by Starlight, 08-04-2022, 07:49 PM
                                26 responses
                                192 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by seer, 08-04-2022, 08:57 AM
                                7 responses
                                63 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X