LBGT TerrorismFollow

Nope. It was to enhance the sarcasm in the previous statement.



A year? I'm referencing to the same person. You might have been someone totally different in a year, but it can be as little as 24 hours apart. Your 18th birthday is tomorrow. Today you're too "immature", but tomorrow you aren't? Surely you didn't mature that quickly?

I would argue that the average person changes gradually each year and not dramatically EVERY year. Out of curiosity, what happened on your 18th birthday that made you so different than 24 hours prior?



It's still discrimination. Thank you for pointing that out. That's no different than saying that it's not discrimination or unfair to ban SSM, because a homosexual man can still marry an eligible woman. We make these laws, so you can't hide behind something being "illegal", especially if you're fighting to change the law.



'Tis true, but it doesn't change the fact of the matter that a line is made.



I'm not being smart, but I define "wrong" as "not right". The belief that a man should be with a woman. You're intentionally trying to add other beliefs that aren't present. "yucky" or "silly" are just childish ways of saying "wrong". I'll ask again. Do you consider a person who thinks homosexuality is wrong but is indifferent to homosexuality in society a bigot?

Well, I never intended to excuse their behavior if that's what you thought I meant. However, the idea that there is some universal morality which everyone is aware of deep down in their cardiac muscle is a fantasy. You try to draw a distinction between knowing and admitting/accepting, but I'm not seeing it.

Let me try to give you another example of what I'm talking about. Take an orthodox Muslim, one who believes women should wear a burka or other full-covering garb. Do you think he believes he is oppressing women, but it's just too much fun to stop? Or do you think he believes he's enforcing god's will on earth and that this is the right thing to do?

People who you and I would say do bad things, tend to think of themselves as good people. People go through enormous contortions of reasoning to let themselves believe their actions are acceptable. IF I'm stealing pencils off your desk everyday, maybe I think everyone does the same thing and therefore it's fine, maybe I think pencils are community property and everyone gets to use them, maybe I think that I'd let you do the same thing to me so it's ok. I'll tell you I probably don't think of myself as a thief.

When two people disagree, it might be comforting to think the other person knows he is wrong but just doesn't want to admit it because he's jealous/doesn't want to lose the argument/wants to save face/whatever. However more often than not, the other party genuinely believes he is right. That perspective makes a world of difference in how you interact with people.

Of course. Didn't you know that "homosexual relationships are just “one man violently cramming his ***** into another man’s lower intestine and calling it ‘love.’” Or two women awkwardly mimicking natural procreative relations"?

I'm okay with you telling yourself that

There are fundamentally universal actions that all society considers as bad or good.



Is that what the women want? If that's what the women believe and want to do, then it's not oppression. Just because in our culture, we see that as negative, doesn't mean it's negative. When I went to college, I saw a variety of Muslim women who clothes varied from fully clothed to tank-top and mini shorts. We can't project our beliefs onto other people and say that they are being oppressed.

That's like when people claim that women who want to stay at home are "holding women back" or some other nonsense. Each person has the right to decide how they want to live their life. If a woman decides to be a domestic engineer then she has that right. That doesn't make her any less of a woman in comparison to a woman who decides to be a CEO of her business.



As I said, there are universal fundamental actions that are considered as bad or good, and stealing is one of them. The fact that you, as a person, have certain attachments to things that are yours, by default, instills the concept of stealing to your brain. If your thought is communal, then it isn't a thought of stealing, it's sharing. If you're sneaking to get the pencil or have no intention of giving it back, then it's wrong and you know that. Bottom line.



You are conjecturing two different concepts. The original concept is specifically in reference to being a bigot and not knowing it. That is impossible. The second concept is simply being "wrong" in a discussion and not knowing it. In that sense, most people would believe that they are right, else they wouldn't argue with you in the first place. You can't use the latter to abet the former.

Belkira, quit being a terrorist.

I can't help it. It's my lifestyle.

You know, I'm not new to this rodeo. I've been hearing just these kinds of arguments to minimize the hateful things people say and do for decades now. "Oh, they're not a bigot, they just don't agree with this lifestyle choice." "Oh, they don't hate gay people, they just want to protect the sanctity of marriage." "They love the gays! They just don't agree with the homosexual lifestyle so they're spending money trying to prevent gays from getting married." "Them? They're not a hate group, they're just donating money to have gays put to death in Uganda because their faith is so important to them." "They love the gays so much they're donating money to Exodus international to attempt to cure them of their homosexual lifestyle."

So, if someone says they're against the "homosexual lifestyle" are they a bigot? Well, maybe, maybe not. I'm certainly not going to allow them to get away with what they're saying and doing without challenging it. So sure, they can think it's wrong all they want. But if they're attempting to interfere with my civil rights--as the Family Research Council has done numerous times--then I'm going to call em as I see em. Like when a senior fellow at FRC said that homosexuality should be a crime back in 2009, or Robert Knight and his statements about gays attempting to entice young children to the cause. See the Bloomberg article discussing why FRC deserves to be called a hate group: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-16/why-not-call-the-family-research-council-a-hate-group-.html

Or back in March when FRC was asking members to "pray" to reverse laws (see: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/family-research-council-prays-against-homosexual-tyranny

Did you know FRC was attempting to drum up interest in boycotting Girl Scout cookies? http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/family-research-council-prays-against-girl-scout-cookies

I mean, come on, if these are the kinds of arguments certain people are going to put forth then we'd be stupid to sit back and be silent.

I'm all for a war against those filthy little drug pushers.

Be prepared for a furry blue nemesis.