Powered by TypePad

« Still Taking On Water | Main | Iroquois Nation »

July 13, 2010

Comments

boris

How does allowing gay marriage "eliminate" the "traditional form?"

The traditional definition, 1 man 1 woman, has to be replaced with one "allowing gay marriage".

In states where there has been the traditional form and an inclusive form, those couples who can choose between them overwhelmingly opt for the traditional form.

Removing that choice so all who marry must use the less favored contrivance, is what I accurately term "eliminate".

As noted earlier, judges ruling to eliminate that choice cited the value difference as a reason to do so. Kinda hard to try and maintain that value difference is something I made up ... but you will probably try.

MayBee

I stand by my claim that people who didn't condemn Reagan's approach to King MIGHT be racists.

Again, I am going to ask you about the people who actually did the work of wiretapping Martin Luther King.
Who did that?
Why?

bunkerbuster

Threadkiller ponders: ``So they can go to church with "bigots", vote with "bigots" and not be "bigots"?
My view is that people who voted for Prop. 8 are very likely to be bigoted against gays. Their skin color would never be an issue for me, though it clearly is for Threadkiller. It's kind of funny, and telling, that he really seems to think that should matter...

bunkerbuster

Ignatz: ``His approach was nothing like what you described.''
Reagan had a long record of playing the "Southern Strategy" and famously launched his presidential campaign with a speech in Mississippi in which he proclaimed support for state's rights. Moreover, he opposed sanctions against South Africa's apartheid regime. He also opposed the Martin Luther King holiday. Those are facts, Ignatz, whether you like them are not, and they help define Reagan's approach to race relations. He was also opposed to affirmative action. There is a reason almost no black people ever voted for Reagan. Whether or not Reagan himself was a bigot, he demonstrated an untoward tolerance of bigots in his party and around the world...

bunkerbuster

Boris spins (desperately): ``Removing that choice so all who marry must use the less-favored contrivance, is what I accurately term "eliminate".
You'll have to explain how allowing two men or two women to marry "removes" someone else's choice for anything. That's like saying the legalizing divorce "removed" everyone's choice to have have a traditional Christian, ie forever, marriage.

MayBee

Whether or not Reagan himself was a bigot, he demonstrated an untoward tolerance of bigots in his party and around the world...

Well, it's a good thing the Somalis and the Hutus weren't and aren't and weren't tolerated because of their bigotry.

bunkerbuster

Maybee: maybe you were out smoking PCP during history class, or asleep. But if you've come down now and are well-rested enough at last, check the record: You'll find that JFK was an unreconstructed chauvinist on the Cold War, not one bit less anti-communist than Reagan was. Not only did JFK try to match Nixon witch-hunt for witch-hunt in chasing communists and "fellow travelers'' he also happens to have basically started the Vietnam war, and to have used the phoney "missile gap'' to get elected. True, some historians claim that JFK was considering pulling out of Vietnam, having envisioned the deepening quagmire, but that's somewhat speculative. The fact is, he started the war and did so for nakedly political reasons, ie demagoguing the threat of communism to win votes. Bobby Kennedy as well started his career as Joe McCarthy's right-hand man in the sleaziest witch hunts since Salem. The fact that JFK tolerated Hoover's attempts to frame MLK as a communist because anti-communist witch hunts were part and parcel of JFK's political formula. In fact, when Hoover issued his report on MLK -- replete with innuendo and allegations that MLK was sleeping around and all manner of third-hand hearsay -- JFK demanded it be withdrawn. JFK's tolerance of Hoover, a famously paranoid homophobe/anti-communist, was more a matter of political convenience and necessity (Hoover was a very scary guy), and had zero to do with his views on race…

boris

"You'll have to explain how allowing ..."

Allowing has nothing to do with it. Of course any competent adult is allowed to marry a member of the opposite sex because the definition of marriage is 1 man 1 woman.

The identical institution that allows 2 men or 2 women or 1 of each is called (variously) domestic partmership or civil union.

Apparently people want the first one and not so much the second. Since that is an observable fact it's up to you to explain to THEM how what they want is bad and what you want and they don't is for their own good.

BTW in case you didn't know JFK also assisted the filibuster of the Eisenhower 1957 civil rights bill and voted against it.

narciso the harpoon

You know I did not know that Boris, what a cynical SOB, he turned out to be

Ignatz

--Reagan had a long record of playing the "Southern Strategy" and famously launched his presidential campaign with a speech in Mississippi in which he proclaimed support for state's rights. Moreover, he opposed sanctions against South Africa's apartheid regime. He also opposed the Martin Luther King holiday. Those are facts, Ignatz, whether you like them are not, and they help define Reagan's approach to race relations. He was also opposed to affirmative action.--

What is not a fact is your characterization of any of those things as either bigotry or tolerance of bigotry. It is quite possible to take a principled stand on every single one of those items without the slightest racial animus. In fact the only illegitmate bias demonstrated in your claim is your own knee jerk inclination to smear any disagreement with your positiion as motivated by bigotry so that you can avoid discussing the issues on a level playing field where you lose and so you can affect a moral superiority you don't possess.

--There is a reason almost no black people ever voted for Reagan.--

Indeed there is. And between the success of the left reestablshing the plantation through government dependence and the kind of incessant smears and lies you've promulgated on this thread regarding anyone who might think government dependence and preferential treatment are counterproductive for those ensnared in them, we can see the two most prominent reasons why.

Threadkiller

"Their skin color would never be an issue for me..."

and

”the employers are typically respected middle-class whites with legal power to defend themselves and make life difficult for their harrassers, while the illegally workers are poor, defenseless Mexicans or Latin Americans.”

Liar. Skin color is the basis for your arguments. The fact that you are blind to your own hypocrisy doesn't make you "color-blind."

bunkerbuster

``It is quite possible to take a principled stand on every single one of those items.''
Sure it is. So you opposed the MLK holiday. Maybe you're not a racist. You tolerated apartheid -- maybe you're not a racist. You dog-whistled "states rights" to start your presidential campaign in Mississipi -- maybe you're not a racist. You chose not join others in your party who condemned smears on MLK -- maybe your not racist. You oppose affirmative action -- maybe your not racist. But do the math. Maybe you are... This is the math Afro-Americans have been doing for decades. And the sum they reach is voting Democratic. As I've explained her before, my view is that everyone is racist in one way or another. It's the human condition and it's virtually biological. The question is, how are you racist and to what degree and what kind of suffering does your racism cause. As far as I can tell, most Republicans and most conservatives aren't racist. But they are more willing to tolerate racism than are liberals and Democrats. That's why real racists are almost sure to vote Republican...

bunkerbuster

``the plantation through government dependence.''
Welfare slaves? That's priceless....

boris

You tolerated genocide -- maybe you're evil.

bunkerbuster

Boris: Where are you getting that people are suggesting marriage is bad? The idea is that some gay couples WANT TO MARRY. They think marriage is good. They CHOOSE MARRIAGE. Where are you getting the idea that gays don't want to marry? You seem very, very confused on this issue. Ok, granted, you may not be confused, just stupid, ie dumb enough and dishonest enough to think that anyone above the age of 5 would buy into your junior-high semantic game playing with the definition of marriage.

Threadkill: I don't suggest that employers of illegal workers should be targeted for enforcement of immigration laws because they are white. I suggest it because it is a much more efficient, effective use of public resources. It's clear that you are unable to fathom any political view that isn't binary.

JM Hanes

bunkerbuster:

"Maybee: maybe you were out smoking PCP during history class, or asleep."

You have no idea how much that explains. Really, no idea. Most of the folks you're haranguing actually lived with all those "historical" figures and events that you think you know something about because you took a history class -- and have managed to suck up every superficial stereotype in the book since then. I really suspect you know almost as little about liberals as you do about conservatives.

Ignatz

--As I've explained her before, my view is that everyone is racist in one way or another. It's the human condition and it's virtually biological. The question is, how are you racist and to what degree and what kind of suffering does your racism cause. As far as I can tell, most Republicans and most conservatives aren't racist.--

Not only are you idealogically rigid and the most tedious of pedagogues, you seem almost utterly incapable of sustaining a coherent thought, so I'm afraid it's largely pointless trying to converse with you.

MayBee

JFK's tolerance of Hoover, a famously paranoid homophobe/anti-communist, was more a matter of political convenience and necessity (Hoover was a very scary guy), and had zero to do with his views on race…

Ah. I see.
I guess he was probably really friendly with Sammy Davis Jr. or something and that's how you know.

Threadkiller

"I don't suggest that employers of illegal workers should be targeted for enforcement of immigration laws because they are white."

You just suggest illegal workers are targeted by whites.

”It's all about white people who feel put upon and it's especially essential to the GOP formula because, while they want to project the idea that they favor the powerful over the weak, they also know need the votes of weak, vulnerable white people. So having someone even weaker and more vulnerable than your working-poor white person is essential to the GOP's political formula....”

I try to stay binary with you because I believe that when you can truthfully master answering a yes/no question without suggesting that the President can be from Mars, we could have a serious dialog.

boris

"playing with the definition of marriage"

Since the subject is prop 8, against changing the definition of marriage, seems to be more than just my game. But that is the bubu fallback ... losing on facts and logic resort to blah blah stupid yadda dumb yadda ...

As long as marriage is defined as 1 man 1 woman it seems unlikely that gays want to "marry".

Clarice

You guys ought to charge bubu tuition and help him sue the thieves he paid tuition to.

MayBee

To be fair, I learned something from bubu today. I did not know one smoked PCP. I'm always happy to be schooled on drug delivery methods.

cathyf

I've identified your error, TK:

I believe that ... we could have a serious dialog.
Thinking you can have any meaningful dialog with bb is your mistake...

narciso the harpoon

You can't have a dialog with "Otto" it's a waste of time

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame