Republican politician's moving speech in favor of gay marriage.

[Jon Miller]

Depends on their reasoning.

Demonizing ends dialogue, it stops you from being able to relate, and by tarring all opponents by the same brush it makes enemies out of those who might not be.

Racism is just a frequent tool of demonization, which is too frequently used by the more 'liberal'.

JM
(And I am actually of the opinion that everyone is 'just a bit racist' so would definitely be more 'liberal'.)

[Aeson]

No, even in the best case it qualifies as racist. Claiming stupidity doesn't change it.

[edit]just noticed the DanS, I was responding only to the first sentence which was all that was there when I replied[/edit]

[Jon Miller]

Is everyone who is wrong, stupid or 'evil'?

I am sort of inclined to start a thread about this. I try (not always) to see the other side's point of view. Generally I assume that they aren't 'stupid' or 'evil' (although sometimes I have to try pretty hard to see that).

I see many people today, both people who 'I Agree' with and people who I don't, who seem to lack the ability to see those who think differently (or even those who are wrong) as other than 'stupid' or 'evil'.

JM

[notyoueither]

There's an important distinction. Interracial marriage didn't conflict with the basic definition of marriage that has existed for thousands of years. The opposition is based entirely in racism. Gay marriage, on the other hand, while largely opposed due to homophobia, has a completely understandable, non-homophobic opposition because it is actually changing an incredibly old tradition.

You make such a cute paleoconservative.

A lot about our lives is different from how it has always been up til 50, 100, or 200 years ago. Tradition is good, but should not be treated as divinely inscribed stone tablets.

[MrFun]

Just in case my question was missed.

If I had a religious belief that Jews are inferior because they do not believe in Jesus Christ, does this mean that I am not necessarily anti-Semitic, and that for me, it's more of a matter of faith?

[Aeson]

Is everyone who is wrong, stupid or 'evil'?

Of course not. They are stupid if they are stupid. They are "evil" if they are "evil". (Whatever you are referring to with "evil" it holds true ) Wrong may or may not qualify for one or the other.

[Aeson]

I see many people today, both people who 'I Agree' with and people who I don't, who seem to lack the ability to see those who think differently (or even those who are wrong) as other than 'stupid' or 'evil'.

You are falling into the pit you are digging. Instead of speaking directly to what I have said and addressing it, you are misconstruing it into something I certainly have not said and inventing a fault which I do not possess. If I or anyone in this thread who disagrees with you were displaying the propensity you are trying to pretend is related to the discussion here, we would be calling you stupid or racist (I'm assuming that's what you're translating 'evil' to) simply for disagreeing with us.

I have specifically pointed out the type of reasoning I think is stupid. I have specifically pointed out the type of reasoning and support I think is racist. If you wish to argue with me about whether they are or not, feel free to provide your reasoning. Pretending that because I disagree with you about those specific issues my arguments have some sort of link to "lack the ability to see [disagreement] as other than 'stupid' or 'evil'" is hypocritical.

[Aeson]

Demonizing ends dialogue, it stops you from being able to relate, and by tarring all opponents by the same brush it makes enemies out of those who might not be.

Racism is just a frequent tool of demonization, which is too frequently used by the more 'liberal'.

I agree calling someone racist, or an idea racist, tends to end any chance for useful dialogue. However, as far as I can tell there are no people who actually hold that view present, and (outside a close friend or family member) I would put my ability to achieve anything useful in even polite dialogue about racial discrimination in regards to marriage at ~0.

So I have no qualms about calling specific logic presented here for the case against interracial marriage as stupid. I have spoken about why that is. If you wish to argue that it's not stupid, feel free to address that point specifically.

I also have no qualms about calling the overall position against interracial marriage racist, the specific argument you presented as a possibility as stupid and supporting racial discrimination (and thus racist), and people who are against interracial marriage in any regard as racists.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Except for the part where Obama supports it in practice by nominating federal judges who want to "constitutionalise" a right to gay marriage and by openly refusing to enforce laws like DOMA. Obama's opposition to gay marriage is a cynical and "necessary" lie. His refusal to enforce the law on the ground that it is unconstitutional by reason of its discriminatory character is a constitutionally groundless, if politically convenient, position. And opting for political convenience in favour of the rule of law is hypocrisy, nothing more.

He must be the worst pro-gay marriage supporter ever then. I always like when people ascribe all these nefarious ends to President Obama. If he was really for certain things, he would have gone ahead and done them. After all, Obama's Justice Deptartment notoriously defended Don't Ask, Don't Tell by using the "slippery slope" argument.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

This.

Obama has found a means to appeal to gay marriage advocates all the while betraying their cause. Mind boggling.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, to be honest, I think it is more because it isn't like the Republicans are even going to come close to how friendly Obama is with gay rights advocates.

[MrFun]

I thought Obama stood up for gay and lesbian veterans. I remember one speech he made, where he made a scathing remark about the Republican candidates who want to be commander-in-chief, but were silent when a gay veteran appeared on video, asking a question about DADT during one of the debates. Obama said something along the line of, "You want to be commander-in-chief, then you need to respect ALL of our veterans."

[Imran Siddiqui]

Far cry from endorsing gay marriage.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Well, to be honest, I think it is more because it isn't like the Republicans are even going to come close to how friendly Obama is with gay rights advocates.

Given the front runner is Santorum, tru dat.

[Jon Miller]

Democrats have not supported gay rights very vigorously just like Republicans have not supported right to life very vigorously.

Both parties know that as long as they do this, they have a politically active component of the electorate captured.

JM