Re: Interesting thread…

Forums Other Forums The Pub Political Ravings of Intolerance Re: Interesting thread…

#68622
Anonymous
Guest

[quote=”sgtdraino”]Come on. What of the continuing quests of NAMBLA, the KKK, and neo-nazi groups to be viewed as “legitimate” by the public? You could say that, in broad terms, they have the same agenda as African-Americans, women, and gays, to be viewed as equals in society. It still doesn’t lend any credibility to them. Just because I’m for or against one, doesn’t mean I have to be for or against another.[/quote]

NAMBLA, the KKK and neo-nazis are hardly in the same category, unless you’re basing your comparison on the tired old cliche that homosexuality is a choice at best or a psychological abnormality that can (and possibly should) be “cured” at worst.

[quote]But… I’m not talking about discrimination, or being accepted as equals in society. I’m talking about forcing society to view a certain activity as “normal.” I enforce the law as fairly as I can, regardless of a citizen’s race, gender, or sexual orientation. Just because a citizen should have the same basic rights as as everyone else, does not mean the rest of society should be forced to approve of their behavior. THAT is thought police. Those in power telling the citizens what opinions they are allowed to have.[/quote]

Where has it been said that there is a “homosexual agenda” in place that aims to control the individual opinions of every man, woman and child on the planet? I don’t think that anyone realistically thinks that this is an ultimate end goal, outside of the extremes of conservative conspiracy-mongering. If it can be said that there is *any* agenda in place, it is to have the same anti-discrimination protection that any other minority can lay claim to, and to have their unions legally recognized. To use an apt comparison, there are bigoted folks among us who surely find interracial marriages personally and morally offensive, and I don’t think anyone realistically believes that this line of thinking can be eliminated. But interracial marriages are legally recognized by the government, bigots be damned.

[quote]Discrimination against peoples’ rights should be rooted out and destroyed wherever it exists. The thing is, this has largely already been codified into law. Discrimination still exists, and always will. But victims now have a recourse through the legal system. It is ultimately just my own opinion, but I believe gay activists have set their goals beyond simple equal protection under the law. They would like to change the way the world thinks. You wouldn’t like me telling you how to think, would you?[/quote]

Then are civil rights organizations amiss in their attempts to counter racist thought, speech and actions? Isn’t that the same thing? Aren’t they telling people exactly how to think? Of course, I’d argue that they are simply providing a counter argument to the millenia-old “immoral degenerate” line that has been trotted out for so long. Providing someone with an opposing viewpoint isn’t exactly forcing someone to think a certain way. By sending out a message that homosexuals should not be treated any differently than any other citizen, and that by extension they believe that who they are by definition is not something that should be treated as “wrong,” how are they forcing you to do anything in particular? And, let’s just say that acceptance of homosexuality does increase…how is that negatively affecting anyone? Look, as far as I know, nobody is attempting to take anyone’s freedom of thought away. Racists are still free to hold racist views, as idiotic as they are. I think everyone is on the same page that racism will never completely go away as long as there is some form of xenophbia present in society. It may shrink in influence, but it won’t ever leave us. And I don’t think that anyone believes that homosexuality will ever be accepted by 100% of the population. It just won’t happen. But legal protections and recognition can and should, IMO, be in place. That won’t stop anyone from holding the opinion that homosexuality is inherently “wrong” (just as there are those who feel that African-Americans are inherently inferior brutes, who feel that women should be subservient, and so on). People will always be free to be morons, and many are happy to oblige.

(BTW, isn’t it a blatant contradiction to state that one isn’t a fan of “slippery slope” arguments such as those posited by Scalia, and then turn around and state that legal recognition of gay marriage would lead to the legal recognition of polygamy? How is that statement any different from that of Scalia’s?)