Liberal Logic 101

[Seahawks08]

The real question I want to know is why? Why do people not "approve" of gays like someone said in this thread? Why does one care what they do with their lives? And why does it matter that gays are not "normal" as JSO has stated?

Just let gays marry and be done with this religious issue.

[JohnStOnge]

Either way, this whole fiasco has proven to me that corporations are the moral equivalent of politicians, saying **** they don't necessarily agree with to sway you over for your support, financial or otherwise. It's just a big power grab. It's not just Chic-fil-a, it's other places like Target or JC Penny pandering to gays in advertising, just to name a couple.

I think that the Chik Fil A guy just said what he believes. Remember, this is a guy who keeps his restaurants closed on Sunday because of his religious beliefs. I guess one could say that's a clever ploy to gain more business. But I don't see how you'd gain enough in business on the other 6 days of the week by doing that than you'd lose by giving up all potential Sunday sales. Looks to me like he's willing to give up a lot of potential profit in order to honor his belief that people should not work on Sunday.

And he believes marriage should be between one man and one woman. To me he's already shown that he's willing to give up potential profit to honor his beliefs, so I don't expect him to change in response to a boycott or grandstanding by certain politicians. It's privately held company so he doesn't have to worry about keeping stockholders happy.

[JohnStOnge]

And why does it matter that gays are not "normal" as JSO has stated?

I've written this before but you probably haven't seen it. What bothers me isn't that homosexuals are not normal per se, it's the status of this situation as a classic example of the way in which egalitarian propaganda succeeds in program a population to adopt certain outlooks that are obviously fallacious. It started with the American Psychiatric Association sacrificing science on the alter of egalitarianism and establishing a definition of psychiatric disorder specifically crafted to exclude homosexuality as a disorder.

Once that cornerstone was established the "homosexuality is normal" movement set about programing the population. You can see the strategy outlined by Googling "The Overhauling of Straight America." And you can, in thinking about what's been happening, see how the strategy has unfolded.

This current situation with the Chick Fil A guy is an example. It fits into Step 5, Make the Victimizers Look Bad."

At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights-long after other gay ads have become commonplace-it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified.

Fits very nicely with what I've seen in this thread. Assaults on the guy's motiviation and character. Calling his position "hate." So on and so forth.

Even the nearly universal use of the word "gay" rather than the word "homosexual" is the result of a conscious step. It is no accident. There was a stated strategy to get the word "homosexual" replaced by the word "gay," even in scientific literature, because it is believed that the word "gay" evokes a more favorable psychological response.

It's like watching the story of the Emperor's New Clothes unfold. You have all these people running around thinking that they're showing how enlightened they are when in reality they've showing that they've been programed to say black is white and up is down.

[kalm]

CFA is an affiliate of Family First who's designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law center and who, among other things, protested Disney for extending benefits to partners of gay employees. CFA also gives money to Focus on the Family who shouldn't need an introduction.

That was just a quick google search and I'm sure your friends are aware of these associations. Or perhaps they are distracted by the word "family" in a group's name.

Again, I'm not sure I concede to your definitions of those of the infamous SPLC without checking them out for myself. Your unwarranted slap at my friends with the family crack is typical.

If these groups are promoting violence against gays, looking at prohibiting them from living together, going out in public together, slurring them verbally or in written form, or prohibiting them from practicing their sexual preference in the privacy I will bring it up.

If it is an economic argument about forcing employers to grant benefits to gay couples or simply one of changing the definition of marriage from the long term societal norm for their self esteem I will not.

At a time when many on the left are claiming hetro-sexual marriage is an unnecessary hold over of religious tradition and an unneeded piece of paper, it is interesting they insist on going beyond civil unions of gays to calling it marriage.

Yeah, that was a bit of a dick move calling out your friends. Apologies.

But bottom line is the company they work affiliates itself with some highly questionable groups.

[LeadBolt]

Again, I'm not sure I concede to your definitions of those of the infamous SPLC without checking them out for myself. Your unwarranted slap at my friends with the family crack is typical.

If these groups are promoting violence against gays, looking at prohibiting them from living together, going out in public together, slurring them verbally or in written form, or prohibiting them from practicing their sexual preference in the privacy I will bring it up.

If it is an economic argument about forcing employers to grant benefits to gay couples or simply one of changing the definition of marriage from the long term societal norm for their self esteem I will not.

At a time when many on the left are claiming hetro-sexual marriage is an unnecessary hold over of religious tradition and an unneeded piece of paper, it is interesting they insist on going beyond civil unions of gays to calling it marriage.

Yeah, that was a bit of a dick move calling out your friends. Apologies.

But bottom line is the company they work affiliates itself with some highly questionable groups.

Apology accepted. I have a tendency to do the same thing and apologize for any similar cracks i have made toward you and yours.

In your opinion the groups are questionable. I am going to look into to it to see if I agree or not.

[death dealer]

Nope. You are wrong. These guys are true believers. JSO is spot on.

So the likes of Al Queda aren't homicidal? Look, I'm all for giving people the "excuse" of believing things because their religion says so, but that doesn't mean that said beliefs aren't what they are.

If someone endorses the concept of genocide on religious principles, they're still a genocidal maniac, despite their epistemology.

What the fuck are you talking about? Is this guy advocating genocide against homos? BH's post implied that this guy was playing off his hatred as religious and that he wasn't genuine. I was saying that he's incorrect in his assumption, and that these goof balls actually are very sincere in their religious convictions. That's all. How the hell does that warrant bringing a bunch of nutty Muslims into the mix. I see what you are trying to do, but you went a little off the reservation to grab that one. Way to go Captain Hyperbole!

[youngterrier]

So the likes of Al Queda aren't homicidal? Look, I'm all for giving people the "excuse" of believing things because their religion says so, but that doesn't mean that said beliefs aren't what they are.

If someone endorses the concept of genocide on religious principles, they're still a genocidal maniac, despite their epistemology.

What the fuck are you talking about? Is this guy advocating genocide against homos? BH's post implied that this guy was playing off his hatred as religious and that he wasn't genuine. I was saying that he's incorrect in his assumption, and that these goof balls actually are very sincere in their religious convictions. That's all. How the hell does that warrant bringing a bunch of nutty Muslims into the mix. I see what you are trying to do, but you went a little off the reservation to grab that one. Way to go Captain Hyperbole!

I thought your OP was basically that they weren't homophobic just because it was a religious belief. I was saying that reasoning was bullshit, but apparently that wasn't your point so forget about it.

[GSUhooligan]

I'm a Christian, but don't understand why Christians are against gays getting married. For argument's sake, lets say it is a "sin", then why is it ok for non-virgins to get married? Where is the riot in the streets for a constitutional amendment banning thieves from marrying. Not being Christian is a sin, why no constitutional amendment banning non-Christians from getting married? It is pure bigotry and ignorance and little to do with "spirituality."

[death dealer]

I thought your OP was basically that they weren't homophobic just because it was a religious belief. I was saying that reasoning was bullshit, but apparently that wasn't your point so forget about it.

Oh, and what the hell with the overused and abused term homophobic? A phobia is an irrational fear of something that is otherwise harmless. While most of the gay and lesbian folks I know are pretty harmless, and it would be very irrational to fear them, I'm not seeing a tremendous amout of fear among my hetero aquaintances. Their are a few that just don't like gay people, although they are just assholes in general. And I do know this lesbian couple that hangs out at a bar we frequent that refers to all heteros as "breeders". Does that make her a heterophobic? As hilarious as it might be, I don't know of anyone sitting in the corner in their living room, with the lights out, and a loaded shotgun, freaking out because they homos are coming to get them.

[death dealer]

Although, now that I think about it, there are probably lots of places in the world where being heterophobic might be a good survival strategy for my LGBT's. There are some mean motherfuckers in this world. Sticks and stones will break bones after all.

[kalm]

So the likes of Al Queda aren't homicidal? Look, I'm all for giving people the "excuse" of believing things because their religion says so, but that doesn't mean that said beliefs aren't what they are.

If someone endorses the concept of genocide on religious principles, they're still a genocidal maniac, despite their epistemology.

What the fuck are you talking about? Is this guy advocating genocide against homos? BH's post implied that this guy was playing off his hatred as religious and that he wasn't genuine. I was saying that he's incorrect in his assumption, and that these goof balls actually are very sincere in their religious convictions. That's all. How the hell does that warrant bringing a bunch of nutty Muslims into the mix. I see what you are trying to do, but you went a little off the reservation to grab that one. Way to go Captain Hyperbole!

I think YT's point is that sincerity shouldn't let them off the hook.

[youngterrier]

What the fuck are you talking about? Is this guy advocating genocide against homos? BH's post implied that this guy was playing off his hatred as religious and that he wasn't genuine. I was saying that he's incorrect in his assumption, and that these goof balls actually are very sincere in their religious convictions. That's all. How the hell does that warrant bringing a bunch of nutty Muslims into the mix. I see what you are trying to do, but you went a little off the reservation to grab that one. Way to go Captain Hyperbole!

I think YT's point is that sincerity shouldn't let them off the hook.

ding ding ding.

[death dealer]

What the fuck are you talking about? Is this guy advocating genocide against homos? BH's post implied that this guy was playing off his hatred as religious and that he wasn't genuine. I was saying that he's incorrect in his assumption, and that these goof balls actually are very sincere in their religious convictions. That's all. How the hell does that warrant bringing a bunch of nutty Muslims into the mix. I see what you are trying to do, but you went a little off the reservation to grab that one. Way to go Captain Hyperbole!

I think YT's point is that sincerity shouldn't let them off the hook.

Never said it did, and he knows that. It does not, however, make their statements of religious belief lies to cover some hidden hate agenda. I know it seems that I am beating a dead horse or splitting hairs here, but I am not. To truly understand a person you have to understand their motivations. You need to know your enemy. These aren't a bunch of knuckle dragging rednecks looking to kill them a few fags. And they aren't some political operative trying to pander to a group of voters in order to tie down their votes, or in this case a corporate schill trying to get them to buy more chicken. They are died in the wool, honest to god believers who are more than willing to sacrifice profit rather than compromise their prinicples. They are much harder to kill. You can't buy them off, or scare them away. Be afraid! Be very afraid!!

[JohnStOnge]

'm a Christian, but don't understand why Christians are against gays getting married. For argument's sake, lets say it is a "sin", then why is it ok for non-virgins to get married? Where is the riot in the streets for a constitutional amendment banning thieves from marrying.

Ok I'll bite. What is your argument...considering the idea of the dichotomy between the Old Testament and the New Testament...for saying that the Bible indicates that it is wrong for someone who is not a virgin to get married? Also address thieves.

I'm not saying it's not there. I'm sure you must have some basis for saying that. But I'm curious.

BTW, nobody is rioting in the streets. People on both sides of the issue are simply exercising their right to influence policy through the political process. And in some cases they're trying to use the Judiciary to influence things when they don't get their way through the political process. I don't like that Judiciary thing. But it's not rioting in the streets.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW, use of the term "homophobic" is another indication that someone has been brainwashed. It is a contrived term developed for a specific purpose. Of course they'll never admit they've been brainwashed because they don't realize it. And they're insulted by the idea that someone could say they've been programed.

But they've been programed.

[BlueHen86]

So the likes of Al Queda aren't homicidal? Look, I'm all for giving people the "excuse" of believing things because their religion says so, but that doesn't mean that said beliefs aren't what they are.

If someone endorses the concept of genocide on religious principles, they're still a genocidal maniac, despite their epistemology.

What the fuck are you talking about? Is this guy advocating genocide against homos? BH's post implied that this guy was playing off his hatred as religious and that he wasn't genuine. I was saying that he's incorrect in his assumption, and that these goof balls actually are very sincere in their religious convictions. That's all. How the hell does that warrant bringing a bunch of nutty Muslims into the mix. I see what you are trying to do, but you went a little off the reservation to grab that one. Way to go Captain Hyperbole!

I never called out Dan Cathy specifically. As I said elsewhere, I'm sure there are some "true believers", for all I know Mr. Cathy is one of them. My opinion, however, is that most anti-gay people are motivated by hate. Perhaps I should have said ignorance, but either way, they use religion to hide their true motivation.

[JohnStOnge]

Perhaps I should have said ignorance

Ignorance with respect to what? That "ignorance" thing is a common assertion associated with "progression/liberal" positions. It implies the attitude that," if only people understood things and knew as much about things as us enlightened progressives/liberals do, they would agree with our position."

What is it that you think opponents of homosexual marriage in general don't know? Do you not think they know that the "establishment" as represented by groups such as the American Psychiatric Association have decreed that homosexuality is not a psychiatric disorder by virtue of the way in which they have defined psychiatric disorders? Do you think that they do not know about the "homosexuality is normal in nature" arguments proffered by people such as Bruce Bagemihl in his book "Biological Exhuberance?"

Just exactly what is it that you thing they are "ignorant" about in terms of not knowing about it?

[youngterrier]

John, you aren't convincing anyone. Just go home. You're bad at things.

[AZGrizFan]

Jon, you aren't convincing anyone. Just go home. You're bad at things.

Solid argument, YT.

[BlueHen86]

Perhaps I should have said ignorance

Ignorance with respect to what? That "ignorance" thing is a common assertion associated with "progression/liberal" positions. It implies the attitude that," if only people understood things and knew as much about things as us enlightened progressives/liberals do, they would agree with our position."

What is it that you think opponents of homosexual marriage in general don't know? Do you not think they know that the "establishment" as represented by groups such as the American Psychiatric Association have decreed that homosexuality is not a psychiatric disorder by virtue of the way in which they have defined psychiatric disorders? Do you think that they do not know about the "homosexuality is normal in nature" arguments proffered by people such as Bruce Bagemihl in his book "Biological Exhuberance?"

Just exactly what is it that you thing they are "ignorant" about in terms of not knowing about it?

Just keep posting, you're doing a great job.

[BlueHen86]

Jon, you aren't convincing anyone. Just go home. You're bad at things.

Solid argument, YT.

Well, he isn't convincing anyone, and he is bad at things. He may already be at home, but sometimes I think he belongs in a home.

[AZGrizFan]

Solid argument, YT.

Well, he isn't convincing anyone, and he is bad at things. He may already be at home, but sometimes I think he belongs in a home.

I just love the logic: "you're bad at things".

[youngterrier]

Well, he isn't convincing anyone, and he is bad at things. He may already be at home, but sometimes I think he belongs in a home.

I just love the logic: "you're bad at things".

It's one of my finer arguments

[AZGrizFan]

I just love the logic: "you're bad at things".

It's one of my finer arguments

[JohnStOnge]

Just keep posting, you're doing a great job.

In other words, you can't answer the question.