or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Country afraid of Gays,,, Bush Wins
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Country afraid of Gays,,, Bush Wins - Page 2  

post #41 of 335
The PEOPLE have spoken. Marriage is one man and one woman.

It was not even close. Two to one, folks. Across the nation.

It's not "HATE" - Christians have a thing about the word "marriage"
Civil Unions are good policy. Just stay away from that "m" word and things will be fine. I promise.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #42 of 335
Fellowship, you need to handle the election loss with more grace.

The problem with gay marriage isn't a sudden event. It's simply that a large plurality of Americans don't want 1-3% of the population dictating what constitutes marriage. More importantly, it has become clear that the left wishes to dominate the "intolerance" of Christians by setting up "higher" standards by which religious principles are allowed and disallowed in public life.

Thinking Christians beg to differ.

When the evil that is the homosexual movement lost its last bits of political control -- to the point ot breaking the law in the name of advocacy (the illegal marraiges in SF and elsewhere) -- they showed thinking Christians that there is no middle, or safe zone, in public life, that the homosexual lobby would never stop pushing until Christian's could be defined as intolerant in terms of the laws of the land.


Quote:
Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor {the} covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #43 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Merovingian
Here in Australia, it is compulsory for everyone 18 or over to vote. m.

How does that work? Is there a penalty for not voting?
post #44 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Jubelum
It's not "HATE" - Christians have a thing about the word "marriage"
Civil Unions are good policy. Just stay away from that "m" word and things will be fine. I promise.

Except that in many of the states that banned gay marriage, they also banned civil unions.
post #45 of 335
Americans are a conservative bunch now. We, as a nation, see ourselves as being at the apex of our culture and any challenges to that are challenges to our perceived superiority in the world. Americans don't want to lose that position, so they will try their damndest to freeze this moment.
post #46 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by THT
I wouldn't bet that. Maybe it is because I live in Texas, but I think the slackers and the 18 to 24 years are trending Republican.

Remember, rightness and wrongness at the level of Republican and Democratic "values" are not inherent human traits. The slackers and the young are trained it. The Republican game is much better than the Democratic one in doing that. It's talk radio. It's money. It's religious upbringing.

So, I wouldn't count on GOTV anymore. The Democratic party has to be reformed and reconstituted from the bottom up.

Here are the exit polls. Kerry has 18-24 year olds, and loses every single other age demographic (though the others are close).

I'd like to see a poll of Americans, rather than registered voters. I don't think I've ever seen one like that. It just seems to me that the Democratic voters are more likely to be poor, single, minority, younger, less educated (except for those with graduate education, who vote Democratic), non-religious, etc. The Republicans are whiter, wealthier, and just have their act together better, and are thus more likely to vote.
post #47 of 335
Quote:
Forget the war: Thousands dead in a wrong war

Forget international integrity: Rename French Fries "Freedom Fries" Ignore international law and leave people hostage in Cuba. Thousands dead in a wrong war.

Forget domestic integrity: Make the public afraid of Terror, bankrupt the country with all this money spent on killing to secure oil.

Forget it all.

Get a cultural conservative Christian to vote against Gays and you win.

Welcome to America...

I am not proud to be an American during this time.

Fellowship

Fellowship,

I generally respect you, but I am really having a hard time seeing how you can make the connection?

Gay Marriage Ammendment proposals were on ballots in 11 states: Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon and Utah.

These states represent 99 electoral votes. Interestingly, not a single one went any differently than it did in 2000, so the gay marriage amendments had absolutely no significant impact on the outcome of these elections. Not a single Gore state went to Bush... how can you then argue that these amendments effected the election? I don't buy it.

For what's it worth, the democrats did net 2 less electoral votes as a result of Michigan and Oregon both losing 1 vote each, but the republican states balanced out.

It also should be mentioned that it passed overwhelmingly in every state it was on the ballot, including in the two that overall went to Kerry

Care to elaborate on your theory?
post #48 of 335
Fellowship, I have always appreciated your even-handedness in these forums, even when I completely disagree with you.

I think there needs to be a little discussion about three ideas:

1. Phobia- fear- of gays
2. Hatred of gays
3. Political Disagreement with the gay agenda.

There is a difference among these three. I'm not sure equating number three with number one is wise...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #49 of 335
What do people consider the so-called gay agenda anyway? Equality? Something more nefarious?
post #50 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Jubelum
Fellowship, I have always appreciated your even-handedness in these forums, even when I completely disagree with you.

I think there needs to be a little discussion about three ideas:

1. Phobia- fear- of gays
2. Hatred of gays
3. Political Disagreement with the gay agenda.

There is a difference among these three. I'm not sure equating number three with number one is wise...

The difference is that they follow each other sequentially. One leads to the next and 1 is the root cause.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #51 of 335
What is the "gay agenda"?
proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #52 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
What is the "gay agenda"?

1. Same-sex marriage
2. Pro-homosexual pandering to children in public schools.
3. "Hate crime legislation" - making certain acts worse because of thought crime... creating unequal protected classes.
4. Gays in the military
5. Gay adoption
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #53 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Jubelum
1. Same-sex marriage

So?

Quote:
2. Pro-homosexual pandering to children in public schools.

Explain.

Quote:
3. "Hate crime legislation" - making certain acts worse because of thought crime... creating unequal protected classes.

Motivation has been a factor in punishment deliberation since the beginning of law.

Quote:
4. Gays in the military

So?

Quote:
5. Gay adoption

So?
proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #54 of 335
Ya asked, I told ya. So?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #55 of 335
I would like to know why it is so nefarious. Can you answer the questions? Can you explain what you meant by #2 in more detail?
proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #56 of 335
ABC News poll had "moral values" as the number one issue for voters nationwide, higher than Iraq or the economy. Of course 79% of those voters went for Bush. You have a full sweep for the Gay Marriage Prohibitions even in liberal/libertarian states like Oregon where it was not expected to win.

While this may not have directly helped Bush in terms of winning states that Gore won, I htink it counter-balanced some of Kerry's gains in moderates in moderate states due to restlessness about the economy and Iraq. Then in safe traditional conservative states you also see Bush getting even better numbers than in 2000 as he turned out his people to get a better percentage of hte popular. I think it is pretty clear that the Republicans did a much better job of getting out their base of Christians while the Democrats were not able to turn either Iraq or the economy or the horrendous federal budget into any sort of widespead energizing issue.
post #57 of 335
How are gays a threat to the country? Do you they have two d*cks or something?
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
post #58 of 335
I'm not making a case that the agenda is wrong or "nefarious"... the majority of this list is directly from PlanetOut.com. These are the goals. Good, bad, or indifferent.

Don't look to me to make a case against this agenda. I'm not the one.

My point is the difference between hatred and political disagreement... A distinction lost in our current political climate.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #59 of 335
Thread Starter 
Some of you have asked me some questions which need answers.

Why have I come to this theory etc. some of you have asked.

I will admit I could very well be wrong to "suspect" that the "gay" issue turned this election to Bush. To be honest it could have been any issue which "turned people out to the polls". It is a fact that the conservative base was more energized this election hence the victory for Bush. I had to ask myself alongside considering the exit poll data which aspect of the "plate of issues" energized the conservative base. According to the exit polling data which was being poured over by all the networks it seemed that the married female demographic and their overwhelming indication that "moral" issues directed their vote over the war, and over the economy.

"moral" issues. Now to be fair as I like to be this could include the abortion topic as well as others. I framed this thread as the "gay" issue determining this election I could very well be wrong on this and I ask for your understanding that I goofed up.

I admit my mistake.

One of the reasons I jumped to this conclusion is a personal reason which I allowed to skew my judgement irrationally. The reason is:

My younger sister and I had a conversation the morning of Nov. 2 on the phone. She informed me that she was going to indeed vote for Bush. Why? She explained she felt Kerry was softer towards the gay community and that she does not want "her kids" to be subjected to gay lifestyle as being normal. She felt that Bush by raising the ammendment issue was taking a stand in a way she supported.


There you have it... I and my family do hold different views it seems..

I hope I have explained myself better for my thread. I hope you will have understanding as to why I said what I said.

I goofed up by making a generalization and I take responsibility for that.

With respect,

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
post #60 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Jubelum
I'm not making a case that the agenda is wrong or "nefarious"...

In other words, just because!

The one really big question mark over this whole gay issue thing is why social equality of gays is so bad for our culture. I hear all about how the gay "lifestyle" threatens our "way of life," but I cannot conceive of how it makes any such impact. I don't even know what that means. I just can't formulate a real logic behind that statement, how exactly homosexuality will bring down the pillars of the nuclear family and heterosexual relationships. Do people think that there's this huge homosexual population where allowing homosexual unions would open up this pandora's box of man-on-man action in the streets? Do people see homosexuals as pedophilic sickos that want to -- what? -- whips out their wangs on little kids and make boys kiss each other? What's the logic of this?
post #61 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by BuonRotto
this pandora's box of man-on-man action in the streets?

LOL! Watch out for that man-hole!

Love ya, Buon...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #62 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Fellowship
Some of you have asked me some questions which need answers.

Why have I come to this theory etc. some of you have asked.

I will admit I could very well be wrong to "suspect" that the "gay" issue turned this election to Bush. To be honest it could have been any issue which "turned people out to the polls". It is a fact that the conservative base was more energized this election hence the victory for Bush. I had to ask myself alongside considering the exit poll data which aspect of the "plate of issues" energized the conservative base. According to the exit polling data which was being poured over by all the networks it seemed that the married female demographic and their overwhelming indication that "moral" issues directed their vote over the war, and over the economy.

"moral" issues. Now to be fair as I like to be this could include the abortion topic as well as others. I framed this thread as the "gay" issue determining this election I could very well be wrong on this and I ask for your understanding that I goofed up.

I admit my mistake.

One of the reasons I jumped to this conclusion is a personal reason which I allowed to skew my judgement irrationally. The reason is:

My younger sister and I had a conversation the morning of Nov. 2 on the phone. She informed me that she was going to indeed vote for Bush. Why? She explained she felt Kerry was softer towards the gay community and that she does not want "her kids" to be subjected to gay lifestyle as being normal. She felt that Bush by raising the ammendment issue was taking a stand in a way she supported.


There you have it... I and my family do hold different views it seems..

I hope I have explained myself better for my thread. I hope you will have understanding as to why I said what I said.

I goofed up by making a generalization and I take responsibility for that.

With respect,

Fellows

I just heard in a perfect french an interview on France Info radio of Cohen (wrong spelling) editorialist of the New York Time (and one other important newspaper) he said that Bush win for two main reason :

- People do not want to change of chief in the middle of a war, especially if no attack occured in US soil since 2001 (people feel secured with Bush)

- the morale as you emphasized.
post #63 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Fellowship
My younger sister......




Sooooooo, you have a siiisssssssster......If you will not be turned to the dark side Perhaps SHE WILL!!!

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #64 of 335
Quote:
My point is the difference between hatred and political disagreement... A distinction lost in our current political climate.

You can maybe make a case for #2, whatever that means since it seems extraordinarily vague anyway and for #3 as an unequal attribution of extra rights or favoritism. #1, #4, and #5 are rights already enjoyed by others across a broad spectrum. What motivation is there for any political disagreement that strives to limit someone else's rights? AFAICT its rooted in either Hate or its fraternal twin Fear. What Fellowship mentions is right on. People don't want gays to have equal rights because they are afraid that gays will make their children gay somehow or look at them funny in a lockerroom or molest children or change their nice homogenous community into something different than them.
post #65 of 335
I think Fellowship's assessment is spot on...somehow 'moral issues' became a key concern for a huge number of voters, allowing them to downplay or outright ignore the extent to which the Bush administration has fucked up over the last four years. The thousands of lives, millions of jobs and billions of dollars lost and wasted apparently pale in comparison to the threat of same-sex marriage.
post #66 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath
People don't want gays to have equal rights because they are afraid that gays will make their children gay somehow or look at them funny in a lockerroom or molest children or change their nice homogenous community into something different than them.

Um, no... but style points for the nice projection.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #67 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Yevgeny
Don't forget Alec Baldwin, Barbra Streisand, and Sean Penn. One of these three will be missed for their acting abilities. The other two won't be missed.

George Soros
post #68 of 335
I'm not sure what so many on the left are worried about. In typical liberal fashion, some leftist Federal judge will soon disregard the overwhelming will of the people. It's the usual MO. These same sex bans will be overturned, and to hell with what the people want- "we're liberal, we're smarter, and we're right."

FSCK judicial activism.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #69 of 335
Election 2004: Fear and Ignorance Rule
eye
bee
BEE
eye
bee
BEE
post #70 of 335
Election 2004: The People have spoken. Deal with it. 8)
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #71 of 335
Quote:
Um, no... but style points for the nice projection.



Yeah, I pretty much figured you wouldn't be able to able to come up with any sort of reasoned response. Not really your strong suit.
post #72 of 335
Making gay marriage legal then makes it an option and a normal one at that.

I have no fear or hate for gay people, as long as they don't encroach on my sensibilities. I treat anyone I meet with the same respect so I am only expect what i dish out.

In my world, my upbringing, my own conclusions, being gay is morally wrong and going against natural law. Being gay adds nothing to humankind other that variety in sexual preference. These are my educated and informed opinions on the subject.

But I realize that my beliefs may be different than that of others, so I respect those beliefs while not adopting them. This is the approach that should be taken, IMO.

Gay marriage would effect many things in our society. That is what I think is at issue here. Look at the educational system - sex ed is already taught in schools, even gay sex ed in some districts - even in the lower grades. Do we really want to be introducing kids to anal sex and male on male blowjobs on top of that? I would pull my kids out of school in a flash.

Maybe it's just me, but I hope that never happens.
post #73 of 335
I'd agree with you Naples, the difference I have no problems with gays on a personal or moral level. I believe that consential personal relationships are between 2 people (or more) and what they chose to do is entirely up to them and I need not pass judgement on it. I do not view it as a threat, an evil or a sin. I also think that if they are prepared to accept the consequences of a legally binding agreement, then it should be their choice.

And I do not believe that homosexuality needs to be taught to 12 year olds, or that gays should be free to advocate or promote their personal choice to minors.

But legislating a personal faith that discriminates against the choices of consenting adults as a constitutional amendment is by far a bigger crime IMO.
post #74 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
in my world, my upbringing, being gay is morally wrong

Growing up, I thought the same thing. I thought it was wrong and frankly disgusting. Then I actually got to know gay people and I realized that it wasn't their choice at all. It's not like people adopt the gay lifestyle just for fun. It's simply part of who they are, just like the color of your hair, your eyes, or your skin. They're people, you know, not freaks.
post #75 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Anna Mated

And I do not believe that homosexuality needs to be taught to 12 year olds, or that gays should be free to advocate or promote their personal choice to minors.

Sigh.

Is the color of your skin a choice?

Are we really afraid that young kids are going to suddenly "become gay"?
post #76 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by bborofka
Sigh.

Is the color of your skin a choice?

Are we really afraid that young kids are going to suddenly "become gay"?

Sigh too.

Im not afraid of that, the color of my skin is not a choice, and homosexuality is not a choice in most circumstances,

For the record, I do not think homosexuality needs to be taught to 12 year olds, not because I think they could become 'Gay', but because you should be enjoying your childhood as a child. Kids grow up too fast and have too much to worry about these days. Anal sex, blow jobs, fisting, rectums, lubrication is not something you need to spend your time worrying about when you're a kid.
post #77 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by Anna Mated


For the record, I do not think homosexuality needs to be taught to 12 year olds, not because I think they could become 'Gay', but because you should be enjoying your childhood as a child. Kids grow up too fast and have too much to worry about these days. Anal sex, blow jobs, fisting, rectums, lubrication is not something you need to spend your time worrying about when you're a kid.

Right, my elder daughter who is 9 would be horrified by anything about sex. These things should wait that she become a teen. No need to worry her with this now.
post #78 of 335
What are you folks talking about? Is there really a danger of schools teaching "fisting" to 2nd graders?
post #79 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
What are you folks talking about? Is there really a danger of schools teaching "fisting" to 2nd graders?

I think that it's not very wise to teach fist to beginners ...
post #80 of 335
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
What are you folks talking about? Is there really a danger of schools teaching "fisting" to 2nd graders?

Were talking about young kids being taught about gay sex. Schools, adults, older kids, gays, etc. Kids are inquisitive, they ask questions of others.

That you choose 1 word out of a very logical rational statement to highlight is telling.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Country afraid of Gays,,, Bush Wins