So, if the ruling isn't stayed for appeal, March 9th is the date you can get marriage licenses in NE, no matter your preference of (consenting adult human) mate.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I can see him equating activist meaning "bypassing the will of the people", but in this case, the will of the people is unconstitutional, AND IT'S HIS JOB.
These people seem to forget that democracy was the problem to which the Constitution was designed as a solution.
Guy on the radio was saying that it's not discrimination because "I can't marry a dude either, so it's even."
Oh, well what fools are we, then. Ridiculous.
Guy on the radio was saying that it's not discrimination because "I can't marry a dude either, so it's even."
Oh, well what fools are we, then. Ridiculous.
I thought that utterly dumb pseudo-excuse was completely refuted already...
Well, if it hasn't it should be, because it has absolutely nothing to do with the issue.
California man files ballot measure to execute all homosexuals by firing squad.
This has so little chance of ever coming even remotely close to a law that I fell quite secure in laughing my head off.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I thought that utterly dumb pseudo-excuse was completely refuted already...Guy on the radio was saying that it's not discrimination because "I can't marry a dude either, so it's even."
Oh, well what fools are we, then. Ridiculous.
It's the argument used in Loving v. Virginia too. Just in case anybody missed what happened to the segregationists.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
California man files ballot measure to execute all homosexuals by firing squad.
This has so little chance of ever coming even remotely close to a law that I fell quite secure in laughing my head off.
that someone even has the gall to present this as a ballot measure has literally made me lose my appetite.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know you're a bad seed when you suggest things the nazis felt they had to do in secret.
That's certainly crazy, all right, but as soon you state that the First Amendment is yours to ignore if God commands it, I don't think you need to worry about the comparative technicality of future jurisdictions somehow being bound by a sitting jurisdiction.
I want to add something to this thread (since I am a gay gamer) but I am SO weirded out by that firing squad thing I don't know how to react appropriately...
I'm lucky enough to live in a country that isn't _as_ deeply homophobic as the US, so that's probably why it doesn't get to me that much, but I just think, like, I've seen and heard hundreds if not thousands of comments to that extent (or sometimes worse). Granted it's probably a few people on a lot of sites saying stuff like that, but still, I see it perhaps a half-dozen times a day when visiting less savory pages.
This was just one of those guys who had 200 bucks to waste.
If he gets more than a hundred signatures, that's a different thing.
Granted, if he happened to get a bullet in the head himself, I wouldn't cry myself to sleep over it. I'd probably go get a nice whisky :P
Honestly, I'd be shocked if he got less than a few thousand signatures - assuming he makes any effort. Some people will sign anything without reading it. Some really do agree, or will agree with the general concept of banning homosexuals without realizing the shooting part is involved.
Those are fair points.
Yea. I'm just not worried about this. It's funny, if anything.
Mocking and derision works well.
Oh, then I TOTALLY know how to react to this. Whew!
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
California man files ballot measure to execute all homosexuals by firing squad.
Huh. That was an interesting read.
I seem to recall someone important once saying, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone..."
And something else about "Judge not others lest you be judged yourself..."
And another suggestion to "Remove the log from your own eye before you remove the speck from someone else's..."
And that the greatest commandment is to love your neighbor.
And something else about putting away weapons drawn in his defense.
The fact that Mr. McLaughlin is advocating murder in the name of Christ indicates that he hasn't actually read this book he purports to be defending.
I think the guy needs to see a shrink.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nor is not even having opened the bible uncommon for the real loonies.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Friendly reminder that homophobia, Christianity, and mental illness don't usually have any causal relation.
Advocating for violence against homosexuality as a Christian cause (and the characterization of homosexuality as a form of violence) is neither new nor related to being "crazy." If anything, this is a (currently more extreme) reflection of the dominant view in the west since, let's say, Dante Alighieri.
My roommate is kinda hilarious. He was very bright and happy today, and this conversation took place:
He: Oh you'll never guess what me and John (his lover, made up name) did today!
Me: What did you do?
He: We had sex at the police station!
Me: Uhh okay, glad you're enjoying yourself.
He: Yeah and I spit his sperm on the floor in disgust
Me: Huh? I thought you liked sperm?
He: Yeah it was disgust of the cops
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Friendly reminder that homophobia, Christianity, and mental illness don't usually have any causal relation.
Advocating for violence against homosexuality as a Christian cause (and the characterization of homosexuality as a form of violence) is neither new nor related to being "crazy." If anything, this is a (currently more extreme) reflection of the dominant view in the west since, let's say, Dante Alighieri.
To me, being a loonie is about having completely absurd views than any sort of mental health issues. I take mental illness very seriously, but there are honest opinions that make you go "bluh... Ummm... Guh...." when you hear them, and having some word for those people is useful. I also think you are wrong about Dante. It is probably a few thousand years older than him, and certainly did not start as a christian concept. Leviticus is just FULL of sweetness, sunshine and joy toward other people.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me, being a loonie is about having completely absurd views than any sort of mental health issues. I take mental illness very seriously, but there are honest opinions that make you go "bluh... Ummm... Guh...." when you hear them, and having some word for those people is useful. I also think you are wrong about Dante. It is probably a few thousand years older than him, and certainly did not start as a christian concept. Leviticus is just FULL of sweetness, sunshine and joy toward other people.Friendly reminder that homophobia, Christianity, and mental illness don't usually have any causal relation.
Advocating for violence against homosexuality as a Christian cause (and the characterization of homosexuality as a form of violence) is neither new nor related to being "crazy." If anything, this is a (currently more extreme) reflection of the dominant view in the west since, let's say, Dante Alighieri.
Yeah, I think I accidentally omitted an "at least" in there. But then, Leviticus wasn't exactly written in what is known as "the West."
But anyway, "loonie" reads to me as a word in the same vein as "crazy" or "mad" that acts as a shorthand for the absurdity you're describing. However, it gets there by way of misrepresenting, stigmatizing, and generalizing mental illness. But maybe I'm misreading that word? It has connotation of "the loonie bin" to me.
I do not doubt that you take mental illness seriously, but I think your language makes a dangerous comparison (for those who aren't heterosexual and neurotypical).
Ben Carson says that being gay is a choice.
In my opinion, he said lots of offensive things, lots of slightly unoffensive things, and a lot of uninformed things. But then again, I'm new to this community, so... yeah.
Anyways, nice to see you all again! :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's nice to see candidates eliminated this early in the race.
Personally, I wouldn't use "loonie", shorthand for lunatic, to refer to someone who is mentally ill. Delirious, psychotic, manic, mentally ill, and so on, but never loonie. I guess there is something to be said for using the common parlance, though. However, as soon as someone holds a complete bizarrely stupid opinion, they are quickly called insane, probably because people get comfort in the thought that the idiot opinion people are Something Else. Thus, any word used for them is quickly used as a synonym for mentally ill people, making it not-trivial to refer to them.
People with moronic ideas are most often perfectly sane. The error is not there.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a culture, we need to agree on a word that is recognized to mean "A person who holds ideas and advocates positions that are utterly divorced from reality, but is not necessarily mentally ill per se" that doesn't have the baggage, or can be separated from any remaining baggage, related to the oppression of mentally ill and neuro-atypical people.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, on a more "gaming" note:
I recently bought the D&D 5e Player's Handbook, and in the beginning of the Character Generation section, it contains a special shout-out to the LGBT community. Although it never actually mentions the word "transgender," it describes quite that in the "Visualizing Your Character" section, and even flat out says "Your character's sexual orientation is for you to decide."
This made me very happy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's nice to see candidates eliminated this early in the race.Saying bad things about gay people doesn't eliminate you from the Republican primaries. It's practically required.
Seeing as how I'm a Republican voter, it will matter for my vote.
Actually, speaking of gender and sexuality choice, I read another interesting article recently on the matter:
Wow. That was a good read.
Good luck.Seeing as how I'm a Republican voter, it will matter for my vote.It's nice to see candidates eliminated this early in the race.Saying bad things about gay people doesn't eliminate you from the Republican primaries. It's practically required.
Good luck not voting for Ben Carson? Or remaining Republican with my point of view?
I will not try to excuse that man as being 'crazy', because insanity likely has little to do with his decision and more to his gross intolerance for opposing views, as well as an appalling lack of Biblical doctrine.
It is people like that man that have held back society for thousands of years, because they just cannot accept that their religion tells them to love others, as opposed to the popular 'love others if they aren't this or this'. As a Christian myself, it is appalling that some people use religion as an excuse to act out their own hatreds, clearly ignoring passages that preach peace, love, and acceptance.
But that's how human society works, I suppose. Being a 'semi-bi guy', as I call myself since I am a male attracted to both females and MtFs, with lots of 'alternate orientation' friends living in the South, it is unfortunately quite commonplace to see this sort of attitude.
It amazes me that with all the legitimate evil going on in the world, people can take the time to target others who have alternate sexual orientations. People often ignore things like forced sex trafficking, rape, and murder and then turn around and say "Look, a homosexual/bisexual/ect! Where's my torch and pitchfork?!".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ehhh... How would someone who's attracted exclusively to women be bi?
Not to dictate what others call their sexuality, but it sounds really weird.
Actually, speaking of gender and sexuality choice, I read another interesting article recently on the matter:
That article's grasp of the current scientific consensus is laughable. Study after study supports it being innate and fixed at or prior to birth.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, speaking of gender and sexuality choice, I read another interesting article recently on the matter:
This makes no attempt to actually support the thesis presented in the title. It attempts to critique the "born gay" position by accusing it of being a political rather than scientific position, and does not even address the studies that statistically link being gay with certain gene loci, birth order, and so forth.
It has two separate 'reasons' both labeled 'the science is wrong' but doesn't actually demonstrate that. It talks about a few studies with questionable methodology, and ignores the existence of many others. It mentions Simon LeVay, one of the preeminent researchers of the biological basis for sexual orientation, only in the context of a 1991 study finding a correlation between homosexual orientation and the size of the hypothalamus. Any writing that attempts to address this issue yet ignores his 2011 book Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation is not credible, in my opinion.
This writer seems to hold the social constructionist view of science: i.e. that whatever results science seems to produce are just reflecting the current social biases about gender, sex, and so forth. While social bias is a factor, you can't just assert this about all research because correcting for social bias is a thing that researchers specifically try to do, so you have to critique individual studies and explain why they failed to sufficiently correct for social bias. If no sexual orientation research recognized the potential for bias, then you could make a sweeping critique, but that's not the case. Scientists know bias exists, and have ways that we think help prevent bias from skewing the results.
There's also a fallacy whose name I can't remember, so I'll call it the "You know who else did X? HITLER!" fallacy.
This research will report that women are innately more sexually fluid than men, capable of being turned-on by almost anything and everything (hmmm…. other than in Lisa Diamond’s research, where have I seen that idea before? Ah yes, heterosexual pornography.)
I think the fallacy should be pretty obvious here. Tainting an idea with association with pornography doesn't actually serve to provide evidence against the idea.
I don't have time or energy to go through this point-by-point, but really -- there is a lot of evidence to indicate that we do NOT choose our orientations, and special pleading, handwaving, cherry-picking problematic research, and a golf-bag's worth of logical fallacies doesn't do anything to demonstrate otherwise.
That article's grasp of the current scientific consensus is laughable. Study after study supports it being innate and fixed at or prior to birth.Actually, speaking of gender and sexuality choice, I read another interesting article recently on the matter:
"But science is wrong!" is a common cry from some sectors.
"But science is wrong!" is a common cry from some sectors.That article's grasp of the current scientific consensus is laughable. Study after study supports it being innate and fixed at or prior to birth.Actually, speaking of gender and sexuality choice, I read another interesting article recently on the matter:
The same clique of thought of social influence is everything that allowed for Lysenko to flourish. It must gall them to find that empirical data shows for biological influence or outright determination in higher behavior across the animal kingdom. When an ideology runs up against falsifying evidence it dies, but in the meantime it draws out the most stubborn, ignorant defenders be it this, anti-vaxers, segregationists, misogynists, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True enough, Gaberlunzie! That's what I say, but some people, even those who are trans, suggest that I am bisexual. It's rather bizarre, but I suppose it has a lot to do with the attitudes around where I live, I suppose. Even those who are MtFs seem to view those attracted to them as bi, whether male or female. It's probably just a 'Sawnthern thang' lol.
The same clique of thought of social influence is everything that allowed for Lysenko to flourish. It must gall them to find that empirical data shows for biological influence or outright determination in higher behavior across the animal kingdom. When an ideology runs up against falsifying evidence it dies, but in the meantime it draws out the most stubborn, ignorant defenders be it this, anti-vaxers, segregationists, misogynists, etc.True, but some good can come out of even the most bugshit anti-scince like Lysenko.
Belyaev and Trut did some fantastic genetics work on domestication and neotony. Belyaev was also seriously opposed to lysenkoism, which was a genuine risk to his career and life in the Stalinist era.