Obama vs. Beantown
- Thread starter Beantown
- Start date
NAOS
Well-Known Member
this is just a message board, foo
btw, there has been plenty of close-minded BS on jazzfanz, so stop feeling sooooooo singled out. You could achieve this feeling by working on yourself -- i.e. a little introspection -- or just shutting the hell up a little more often. you choose.
btw, there has been plenty of close-minded BS on jazzfanz, so stop feeling sooooooo singled out. You could achieve this feeling by working on yourself -- i.e. a little introspection -- or just shutting the hell up a little more often. you choose.
C l u t c H 385
Banned
Post reported. General douche-baggery.
chemdude1232
Active Member
Bean, the intent of hammering you in the fashion I did was mainly spurred by what I perceived to be your dance around the topic. You made it clear that you don't approve of gay marriage - hell...it's your opinion, that's fine - but your reasoning just didn't sit well. I mean, you say we should respect the institution of heterosexual consummation of relationships, which is one thing, but then you somewhat sweepingly denounced the role that homosexuals have had throughout the course of time.
Really this topic changed from a stance of "gay marriage: yes or no?" to one of "homosexuals: evolutionarily created or products of abuse/environment?" We tried confronting you (admittedly harshly) with some (what I took to be) sound, reasoned, scientific thought/background/evidence, but by claiming that it was false without having fully absorbed the material, I took your comments as an affront to those who want nothing more than to borrow one meager word. Whether or not homosexuals are made from environment or evolution, they cannot help being homosexuals and we should not punish them for it by disallowing their marriages.
And no, I didn't vote for Mr. Obama. This just happens to be a subject that I lean toward the left on.
Frankly I am surprised that Obama doesn't care for usage of the word "marriage" and it's application to homosexuals: (A) As a democrat I would expect him to endorse homosexual marriage, and (B) being African American, I would think he would be more sensitive to the plight of minorities trying to claw their way up. But that's neither here nor there.
Officially I want to apologize for having gone so hard on you. I think we all suffered a bit of a case of elevated emotions.
Really this topic changed from a stance of "gay marriage: yes or no?" to one of "homosexuals: evolutionarily created or products of abuse/environment?" We tried confronting you (admittedly harshly) with some (what I took to be) sound, reasoned, scientific thought/background/evidence, but by claiming that it was false without having fully absorbed the material, I took your comments as an affront to those who want nothing more than to borrow one meager word. Whether or not homosexuals are made from environment or evolution, they cannot help being homosexuals and we should not punish them for it by disallowing their marriages.
And no, I didn't vote for Mr. Obama. This just happens to be a subject that I lean toward the left on.
Frankly I am surprised that Obama doesn't care for usage of the word "marriage" and it's application to homosexuals: (A) As a democrat I would expect him to endorse homosexual marriage, and (B) being African American, I would think he would be more sensitive to the plight of minorities trying to claw their way up. But that's neither here nor there.
Officially I want to apologize for having gone so hard on you. I think we all suffered a bit of a case of elevated emotions.
Beantown
Well-Known Member
I just find it odd that I have been getting slaughtered by assuming "left leaning" folks for an opinion that parallels one of the most liberal President we have ever had.
Hopper
Banned
Well, Chem, I think you might be overlookin one of the most attractive aspects of neo-darwinian (modern synthetic) evolutionary theory, eh? This here, I mean:
Ya can just haul off and make up any kinda "just so" story that suits your fancy, and aint nobuddy never gunna prove you're wrong.
It parallels it only in conclusion. You get uniquely slaughtered for your rationale rather than your conclusion.
I also suspect you differ markedly on some other specifics. For example, he supports the repeal of DOMA. I don't believe you've taken a stand on that issue publicly, but I'd be surprised if you felt the same way.
As to the crackpot label: the shoe fits, so it gets used.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
I think your opinion and Obama's opinion are probably only superficially similar. Stop clinging to words and feeling like they vindicate you, it's very unbecoming.
Also, Obama often governs to the right.... your definition of "liberal" has "lack of historical knowledge" plastered all over it. Obama and Clinton, two guys that your cronies at Fox love to portray as liberal socialists, are, when compared to FDR, very right leaning. Turn off that network, amigo. If you want to know where the true left is you are, uNfoRtuNatEly, going to have to R-E-A-D.
Lastly, I think most of Obama's base disagrees with him on this, so quit conflating leadership, opinions, and rhetoric into one super-insane ball of ****.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
I would ABSOLUTELY LOVE to hear your definition of "biological importance." PRETTY PLEASE?!?!