The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Bob, I am disappointed that you are unwilling to answer. The wahoos are beside the point. As you won't respond is there anyone else tha knows what the real objection is. I haven't really heard an intelligent reasoned argument and I am curious if it is a kneejerk reaction or there is a reason that makes me get it.

Here's the least unintelligent reasoning I've heard, though it's more of a technical legal one than a moral/ethical/philisophical one. Also, there are plenty of holes to be shot through it.

Sexual orientation is not yet a protected class afforded strict scrutiny (like race/ethnicity are) under the equal protection clause, so the government need only provide a legitimate interest in order to discriminate. Essentially, the government's interest in marriage is the promotion of a family unit and the perpetuation of the species. It can regulate it in order to ensure the health of the child (no incest), to greatly reduce the liklihood of subordination or de facto slavery (polygamy), and so forth. Since gay people biologically cannot have kids together, the government can preclude such marriages since they cannot, by definition, start families.

Now, as I said, there's all sorts of holes to shoot in that. Some states, like Arizona, allow 1st cousins to marry so long as they cannot have kids (which essentially means that the women must be at least 60), so there goes the argument that it's entirely about procreation. Likewise, between adoption and in vitro fertilization, gay couples can have kids these day, so there's another strike.

Other than that, pretty much every argument against it that I've heard is based on either A)religion, B)tradition, C)bigotry, D)all of the above.

[Handyman]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Or you could answer les' question. Maybe I'm mocking you because you pretend to be above all that you're against, yet, in the end (just like everyone else) you really are what you don't want to be. We're all narrow minded people who don't want our opinions changed. Sometimes you get mocked for them and sometimes you get to mock others.

Kepler's the smart aleckiest of them all who'd condescend anyone just to make himself feel more important (just like Old Pio), so I find it hilarious that you think he knows how to discuss things. You have to dig through 15 layers of grandeur and self importance to get to the crux of what he's saying (which is almost always calling someone an idiot using various latin phrases). And I agree with him more often than not!

This post wins the thread

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Kepler's the smart aleckiest of them all who'd condescend anyone just to make himself feel more important

I actually practice condescending in the mirror every morning before work, just to keep sharp.

Wait, was I just condescending to you there?

Or there?

[Rimbaud]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Rubbish. You have come into multiple threads with very mocking comments towards me. You can't flip a switch and expect me to take you for one who wants serious discussion right after mocking me. Give me a break.

And Foxton chimes in as always. What took you so long?

Now by comparison, Kepler I more often than not disagree with, but he knows how to discuss things with someone who he doesn't agree with. Take note.

Or you could answer les' question. Maybe I'm mocking you because you pretend to be above all that you're against, yet, in the end (just like everyone else) you really are what you don't want to be. We're all narrow minded people who don't want our opinions changed. Sometimes you get mocked for them and sometimes you get to mock others.

Kepler's the smart aleckiest of them all who'd condescend anyone just to make himself feel more important (just like Old Pio), so I find it hilarious that you think he knows how to discuss things. You have to dig through 15 layers of grandeur and self importance to get to the crux of what he's saying (which is almost always calling someone an idiot using various latin phrases). And I agree with him more often than not!

[leswp1]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Bob, I am disappointed that you are unwilling to answer. The wahoos are beside the point. As you won't respond is there anyone else tha knows what the real objection is. I haven't really heard an intelligent reasoned argument and I am curious if it is a kneejerk reaction or there is a reason that makes me get it.

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

And Foxton chimes in as always. What took you so long?

I've been enjoying the new patch Blizzard just put out for WoW, I don't spend every waking minute waiting to pounce on your falsehoods.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Bah, all that crap is besides the point. The point is your unwillingness to help people do what you want them to do (which is....and I quote from you...."if you find yourself on one side of an issue, at least understand where the other side is coming from"). I tried to show you "my" side of things with the evolution of complex organ systems in animals and les wants you to show her your side of the gay marriage debate, but both times there was someone preventing that from happening.

I'll give you a dollar if you figure out who! (note, this in not a binding legal contract and no money will exchange hands if the proper answer is produced)

Rubbish. You have come into multiple threads with very mocking comments towards me. You can't flip a switch and expect me to take you for one who wants serious discussion right after mocking me. Give me a break.

And Foxton chimes in as always. What took you so long?

Now by comparison, Kepler I more often than not disagree with, but he knows how to discuss things with someone who he doesn't agree with. Take note.

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Bob, why do you do this?

Because if he doesn't back up anything then no one can fact check him.

[Rimbaud]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

You know full well I'm speaking about a number of times in recent months where I've put out a view on an issue and you and your ilk have attacked me, without trying to engage the issue substantively. I used to take you more seriously before you joined in on some of those attacks.

Bah, all that crap is besides the point. The point is your unwillingness to help people do what you want them to do (which is....and I quote from you...."if you find yourself on one side of an issue, at least understand where the other side is coming from"). I tried to show you "my" side of things with the evolution of complex organ systems in animals and les wants you to show her your side of the gay marriage debate, but both times there was someone preventing that from happening.

I'll give you a dollar if you figure out who! (note, this in not a binding legal contract and no money will exchange hands if the proper answer is produced)

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

You could point out where in my statement I am characterizing you incorrectly, or you could answer les' question (instead of telling her to google your beliefs since that doesn't turn up anything). Or you can continue to do what everyone on here does...complain about the lack of adult conversation while ridiculing others and acting all smarmy and holier than thou (which, I fully admit, is darn fun to do).

You know full well I'm speaking about a number of times in recent months where I've put out a view on an issue and you and your ilk have attacked me, without trying to engage the issue substantively. I used to take you more seriously before you joined in on some of those attacks.

[Rimbaud]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Coming from one who attacks me whenever this stuff comes up, this is rich.

You could point out where in my statement I am characterizing you incorrectly, or you could answer les' question (instead of telling her to google your beliefs since that doesn't turn up anything). Or you can continue to do what everyone on here does...complain about the lack of adult conversation while ridiculing others and acting all smarmy and holier than thou (which, I fully admit, is darn fun to do).

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Meh. There's not enough time in the day to be interested in or active in every issue. While I have my general political principles and philosophies, sorry to say I put a greater emphasis on some issues over others. Some I honestly couldn't give a rip about (politicians wearing american flag lapel pins? BFD).

I generally prefer the status quo absent a valid reason for changing things (why fix what isn't broken), but I also prefer personal liberty over government intrusion.

In this context:
I wouldn't actively push for gay marriage where it's not already available since I simply don't give a **** and don't have enough interest to overcome the inertia of the status quo.
If other people push for it and it's put on a ballot before me, I'd vote for it simply because there's no valid reason for the government to deny it.
In places where it's already there (and hence, the status quo), I'd vote to keep it for both reasons.

Honestly though, it's way down on the list of things I look for when voting for politicians. I happen to think it's the right call, but it's about the political equivalent of an offsides penalty in the first quarter of a mid-season football game.

Of course we can't take an interest in everything or nearly everything and have to pick and choose, and some things are a lot more important than others. It is important though to have broader interest in issues than just those who are most directly impacted and/or those who have a financial or emotional stake in something. Otherwise those interest groups tend to drive policies in all sorts of directions that aren't necessarily in the broader public interest. I believe that this happens far too much already, as most of the public is some combination of lazy, disinterested, jaded, cynical, etc. and don't pay much attention to hardly anything that goes on, or if they do pay attention, they don't make much effort to delve into and understand issues, and even if you find yourself on one side of an issue, at least understand where the other side is coming from.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Bob, why do you do this? When someone asks you a legitimate question, you dodge it and say you don't want to wade through all the wahoos responses so it's pointless to state your ideas. Usually you say this in the midst of chatting it up with the wahoos, while occasionally disparaging the fact that people can't have normal civil conversations on the board. If you wanted to start a calm, rational dialogue, you can. It's pretty easy to ignore people on here, all you do is not hit the 'reply' button near their posts.

By the way, I can still send you that evolution paper on how complex organ systems may have arisen throughout time.

Coming from one who attacks me whenever this stuff comes up, this is rich.

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

We take an interest, or should, in all sorts of issues that we don't directly engage in or aren't directly impacted by. To only engage those issues directly related to things we directly do makes no sense if you have any sense of civic or national interest or pride.

Meh. There's not enough time in the day to be interested in or active in every issue. While I have my general political principles and philosophies, sorry to say I put a greater emphasis on some issues over others. Some I honestly couldn't give a rip about (politicians wearing american flag lapel pins? BFD).

I generally prefer the status quo absent a valid reason for changing things (why fix what isn't broken), but I also prefer personal liberty over government intrusion.

In this context:
I wouldn't actively push for gay marriage where it's not already available since I simply don't give a **** and don't have enough interest to overcome the inertia of the status quo.
If other people push for it and it's put on a ballot before me, I'd vote for it simply because there's no valid reason for the government to deny it.
In places where it's already there (and hence, the status quo), I'd vote to keep it for both reasons.

Honestly though, it's way down on the list of things I look for when voting for politicians. I happen to think it's the right call, but it's about the political equivalent of an offsides penalty in the first quarter of a mid-season football game.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Correct. And correct.

The last age group where otherwise sensible people are still hanging on to fears and hatreds about gays is mine -- people in their 40's. There are plenty of "I hate fags" types who are under 40, but they are in the same toxic waste dump with the racists -- that creepy 10% who will always be with us. After all, there is still the occasional swastika or N word scrawled in public rest rooms.

The death of a bigotry is always accompanied by desperate, intellectualized efforts to somehow justify their "peculiar institution." And people can watch "In the Heat of the Night" all they want, but the only cure for bigotry has ever been the bigots getting old and dying off, and their grandchildren either laughing about them or decorously changing the subject.

*****http://amptoons.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/gentlemansagreement.jpg******

That scenario assumes that things always get better with the grandchildren in comparison to previous generations. That of course isn't true. Interesting that this would come from someone who I believe has advocated many times that people really don't change from generation to generation (I'm not saying it well, but I think you know what I'm talking about).