Is this heaven? No, it's Iowa!

[MrFun]

Then you ought to be condemning the violent protests which the gay rights movement employed in California. All I see is that you really don't believe it either happened, or that it was very serious. That is the tone I get from what you wrote.

As I said I have nothing against peaceful protests, but please, when you are happy with violent protests, do not mention how Dr. King would support your movement.

Violent protests that deny other people their property rights or right to life are condemnable, yes. You and I agree on something!

Dr. King would be supportive of PEACEFUL means of protests, as they are the same kind of tactics that he had used. Not vandalism, or other violent means of protesting.

Oh and one more thing. You're reasoning that all gay protestors are analogous to violent protestors while all Christian protestors are analogous to peaceful protestors is completely stupid. You have both, violent and non-violent protestors among BOTH, gays and Christians. Another reason why your analogy is stupid is the fact that your analogy does not take into consideration gay Christians or straight, homophobic atheists or agnostics when talking about protestors.

[Theben]

Doesn't justify their conduct.

Never said it did.

You expect me to believe it's exactly the same?

No, I expect you to lie and say one is a choice and the other is not. Even though they are both not choices, that hardly makes them identical. Which of course you know, just chose to sidestep.

Would you like to live in my shoes for awhile? Really?

I would not care to live in your or a gay person's shoes. I have enough crap of my own to deal with w/o adding extra burdens.

You don't believe it? It's all true, every word of it.

It might be, but considering your past record, your word is suspect.

Now, what about these gay people. Are they denied access to education? No. The entire curriculum is being revised so that the poor little gay people never have to encounter a contrary opinion.

They are being denied equal access to rights that marriage has afforded straight couples in the past. Stop propping up strawmen.

I get the privilege of being assigned to read hate literature like Darwin who says disabled people are a drain to society, and that society would be better off if they were dead. All in the name of progressive scientific inquiry.

Oh noes! You have to read something about someone who said something a long time ago you don't like! Que Horror! It makes me wonder how black people can read Huck Finn without being truamatized. Quick, we need to burn some books now!!

I don't have any sympathy for their perceived intolerance because I was spoonfed crap for 4 years of university to the contrary...

So your justification is that since you were treated poorly, other people should accept being treated poorly?

Well I'm sorry for my rather strident tone, but when you get forcefed propaganda, it changes your perceptions.

Hmm, just like how gay people react when the church forcefeeds propaganda to them. Maybe you DO have something in common after all.

But it doesn't justify your conduct.

[chequita guevara]

The correct analogy is:

Christian protestors = Dr. King

Gay protestors = Malcolm X.

Very different philosophies.

No, the correct analogy is: you = Goebbels

First off, Malcolm X never engaged in "violent" protest. He simply defended the right of Black people to use violence in self-defense.

Second, the protests in California were all peaceful.

So you are a liar twice over here. You claim you worship god, but it's clear that Beelzebub, the Lord of Lies is your true master.

[Ben Kenobi]

No, the correct analogy is: you = Goebbels

First off, Malcolm X never engaged in "violent" protest. He simply defended the right of Black people to use violence in self-defense.

Second, the protests in California were all peaceful.

So you are a liar twice over here. You claim you worship god, but it's clear that Beelzebub, the Lord of Lies is your true master.

Wow, I take that very seriously from someone who worships Marx. Man, that really hurt Che.

First off, he supported and condoned violence as a means to acheive social justice.

Secondly, vandalism is violence. There was vandalism in California, ergo the protests themselves were violent. End of story.

[Ben Kenobi]

Violent protests that deny other people their property rights or right to life are condemnable, yes. You and I agree on something!

So you are ok with protests that damage property in the name of a greater cause? You are ok with violence so long as it does not deny people their life?

Dr. King would be supportive of PEACEFUL means of protests, as they are the same kind of tactics that he had used. Not vandalism, or other violent means of protesting.

Exactly, which is why he would condemn these recent protests. There's no excuse for violence.

Oh and one more thing. You're reasoning that all gay protestors are analogous to violent protestors while all Christian protestors are analogous to peaceful protestors is completely stupid.

How so? So far, all I've seen are the Christians arguing that violent protests are wrong, while those who are not Christians are in no way constrained.

You have both, violent and non-violent protestors among BOTH, gays and Christians.

Oh really? And you call yourself a Christian? I gave you the benefit of the doubt, and in fact, I labelled you a Christian by saying that you have opposed violent acts. Now you are willing to sell your brothers and sisters for 50 coins of silver?

Another reason why your analogy is stupid is the fact that your analogy does not take into consideration gay Christians or straight, homophobic atheists or agnostics when talking about protestors.

Why should I, when you've made the argument that Christians can and do commit violent protests? Or is it only the straight ones while the gay ones are pure as the driven snow?

[Theben]

There was vandalism in California, ergo the protests themselves were violent

By that description, I could say that all Californians are violent.

[Ben Kenobi]

No, I expect you to lie and say one is a choice and the other is not. Even though they are both not choices, that hardly makes them identical. Which of course you know, just chose to sidestep.

How then do you explain the very different approach? Gay people see it as essential to who they are because they chose to be gay, whereas deaf people it doesn't matter whatsoever, because it's something they have always had. Why do gay people resent those who try to give them therapy, while hearing impaired people seek whatever means they can to improve their hearing?

It's crystal clear to me. How can you be proud of something that you haven't chosen? It's no different from white pride.

They are being denied equal access to rights that marriage has afforded straight couples in the past. Stop propping up strawmen.

So you deny that the curriculum up here is being revised by gay people for gay people?

Oh noes! You have to read something about someone who said something a long time ago you don't like! Que Horror! It makes me wonder how black people can read Huck Finn without being truamatized. Quick, we need to burn some books now!!

Then why do we have to make sure we use inclusive language in classes? Why is it offensive to refer to mothers and fathers, husbands and wives? Why do we have to have a 'month for gay people'? Why do we have to ask whether or not every single historical figure we encounter was actually light in his loafers despite having 12 children of his own?

I agree with you Theben, and I think everyone should be confronted by ideas they do not like. That includes gay people. We shouldn't have a special protected class that gets coddled and protected.

So your justification is that since you were treated poorly, other people should accept being treated poorly?

No, I want everyone to have the truth rather then being spoonfed propaganda. That's all. Let us challenge the assumptions of the politically correct establishment. Show us the evidence. Show us the figures that tell us that maybe several percent of the entire population is exclusively homosexual. Show us the testimonies of those who have left their lifestyle behind, got married, had children. Show us the consequences, the illnesses associated with HIV, and promiscuity of all kinds. Show us the dire epidemiological studies.

That is all.

Hmm, just like how gay people react when the church forcefeeds propaganda to them. Maybe you DO have something in common after all.

But it doesn't justify your conduct.

No one is required to sit in a church for 2000 class hours to get a degree. Until then, I don't want to hear the complaints about discrimination.

[chequita guevara]

Wow, I take that very seriously from someone who worships Marx. Man, that really hurt Che.

First off, he supported and condoned violence as a means to acheive social justice.

Secondly, vandalism is violence. There was vandalism in California, ergo the protests themselves were violent. End of story.

Worships Marx? God you're an idiot.

The fact that X supported violence as a means to achieve social justice doesn't mean he ever engaged in it. There is a difference.

Vandalism is not violence. You can only be violent against living things.

[chequita guevara]

God, Ben, you are such a hate filled, evil little man.

[Ben Kenobi]

By that description, I could say that all Californians are violent.

By the protestors at the Mormon temple?

Where do you live Theban?

I daresay you'd respond differently if it were your own property. Vandalism is never justified. Vandalism is a form of violence and intimidation.

[Ben Kenobi]

Worships Marx? God you're an idiot.

Religion is the opiate of the masses, and communism of the proletariat.

The fact that X supported violence as a means to achieve social justice doesn't mean he ever engaged in it. There is a difference.

Then how did I lie? I simply said that he condoned and justified violence. I don't hold a difference between the man who says the spark must be lit, and the man who lights the spark. You cannot, cannot call out for violence, and then wash your hands of it when other people carry it out.

Vandalism is not violence. You can only be violent against living things.

Well of course not. You believe that all property should be held in common, so why shouldn't you be able to spraypaint your neighbours house? It's just as much his as yours, just as yours is his.

[MrFun]

So you are ok with protests that damage property in the name of a greater cause? You are ok with violence so long as it does not deny people their life?


Why should I, when you've made the argument that Christians can and do commit violent protests? Or is it only the straight ones while the gay ones are pure as the driven snow?

You need to learn how to read. In my post, I included PROPERTY RIGHTS along wth right to life. Hence, vandalism as a means of protest is an unjust, violent act against property.

Second, where do you get the dumb idea that I believe all gay protestors are pure as snow when I have said that violent protestors are among both groups, including gay protestors??

[MrFun]

How then do you explain the very different approach? Gay people see it as essential to who they are because they chose to be gay, whereas deaf people it doesn't matter whatsoever, because it's something they have always had. Why do gay people resent those who try to give them therapy, while hearing impaired people seek whatever means they can to improve their hearing?

Are you serious?? The reason why so many gay people are resentful about the offers to provide "therapy" is because they have known for a long time what pyschologists and psyciatrists (spelling laziness) have generally agreed on since 1970s - that homosexuality is NOT a disorder or illness of any kind. The so-called "therapy" being offered is nothing but cruel-minded quackery based on lies. There is nothing to cure, because there is nothing inherently wrong with homosexuality. The same pyschologists and psychiatrists have also stated repeatedly that they have found no compelling evidence that sexual orientation is a choice.

[Ben Kenobi]

Second, where do you get the dumb idea that I believe all gay protestors are pure as snow when I have said that violent protestors are among both groups, including gay protestors??

You said it was important to distinguish between the Christian and athiests, the gay people and the straight. I have no problem with that argument.

However, when combined with your statement that Christians can and do commit violence, I wonder what you meant by that? You explictly said gay and straight, hence my statement to you. If they are all prone to violence, then it really doesn't matter what their background is. All I'm saying is that Christians have been very consistant in condemning violent protests, whereas atheists are in no way constrained.

[Ben Kenobi]

Are you serious?? The reason why so many gay people are resentful about the offers to provide "therapy" is because they have known for a long time what pyschologists and psyciatrists (spelling laziness) have generally agreed on since 1970s - that homosexuality is NOT a disorder or illness of any kind. The so-called "therapy" being offered is nothing but cruel-minded quackery based on lies.

The point is the comparison between the two, and thanks for confirming that it is a choice. You don't want therapy, because you want to be gay. Great. Hearing impaired people who don't have a choice, see it differently. Therapy, even if it's not helpful is understood to be in our best interests simply because it opens up possibilities that we may eventually be able to hear properly.

This is why I don't believe that gay people should be treated the way people with disabilities are treated. They should be treated the same way as a religion, say buddhists or any other philosophy. They should be putting out classes in the universities teaching people about the gay rights movement, about where their arguments lie, their concept of personhood and gender theory, etc.

It all makes for fascinating study, especially in the anthropology classes, where we look at cultures and how they form themselves. We should also be able to critique them, as they do in anthropology in saying that there are problems with the overall philosophy which manifest themselves in everyday life. Maybe we should call it Queer theory or something eyecatching.