U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Monterey County, CA
3,533 posts, read 6,101,526 times
Reputation: 2979
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
What's "my way or the highway" got to do with this? Honestly, I don't care if we disagree, but if you wanna discuss it, all I ask is that you at least show some semblance of honesty or integrity about your positions (or even make sense!).

For example, "I'm not a bigot... but I think they shouldn't have the same rights, and that being gay is morally wrong!" Huh!??

bigot n. "One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."
Well, as I said these are all hot button issues and have had many past threads of their own, most of which belong in the political forum. But some do directly effect California so they end up being discussed here as well. I really don't have time to get into the the whole gay marriage debate right now. But I'll just make one point since you asked and leave it at that. Not supporting gay marriage is not the same thing as not supporting gay rights such as the same rights under civil unions. For many it seems rediculous or simply semantics. But for those whose beliefs are tied to the sacred nature of the marriage covenant including Jews and Muslins, not just your bible thumping Christains, it is important. There are many political, religious and other factors which go into forming one's view of this particular hot button issue. So its not as simple as vote for gay marriage or you are a bigot as you see it. You cannot tread on what is sacred to some just to have your way. But that doesn't mean there can't be a middle ground reached. In discussing this with a gay forum member in the past I agreed to giving civil unions or whatever you want to call it (humpty dumpty) equal rights. But many gay activists won't settle for that. Its all or nothing. Why not work something out that both sides can agree upon. Something which affords gay's the same rights as under marriage. While not perfect for any one particular group at least its a step in the right direction. Or is it more than just rights you are really after? Because sometimes you need to tread lightly on things which other groups deem sacred whether it is foolishness to you or not.

Thats all,

Derek
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Unread 05-12-2010, 12:35 PM
 
Location: West Coast Wanderer
11,437 posts, read 8,681,691 times
Reputation: 5244
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnSurfer View Post
Well, as I said these are all hot button issues and have had many past threads of their own, most of which belong in the political forum. But some do directly effect California so they end up being discussed here as well. I really don't have time to get into the the whole gay marriage debate right now. But I'll just make one point since you asked and leave it at that. Not supporting gay marriage is not the same thing as not supporting gay rights such as the same rights under civil unions. For many it seems rediculous or simply semantics. But for those whose beliefs are tied to the sacred nature of the marriage covenant including Jews and Muslins, not just your bible thumping Christains, it is important. There are many political, religious and other factors which go into forming one's view of this particular hot button issue. So its not as simple as vote for gay marriage or you are a bigot as you see it. You cannot tread on what is sacred to some just to have your way. But that doesn't mean there can't be a middle ground reached. In discussing this with a gay forum member in the past I agreed to giving civil unions or whatever you want to call it (humpty dumpty) equal rights. But many gay activists won't settle for that. Its all or nothing. Why not work something out that both sides can agree upon. Something which affords gay's the same rights as under marriage. While not perfect for any one particular group at least its a step in the right direction. Or is it more than just rights you are really after? Because sometimes you need to tread lightly on things which other groups deem sacred whether it is foolishness to you or not.

Thats all,

Derek
I could stand to be more informed on this. While I have no issue with gay marriage personally, I would have to ask why the gay community is not willing to accept civil unions? They must believe that in some way their not equal. Is this the case?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 01:23 PM
 
214 posts, read 275,431 times
Reputation: 204
In the painting analogy, anyone can with almost no effort take a big fat brush and paint on a canvas. But very few of us can carefully paint a complex picture with the textures and colors that evoke the reality we see around us. It takes a lot of work and disciplined training.

So the same goes with thinking. It is infinitely easier to simply say, "He wants to stop illegal immigration. He's a racist!" and be done with it, arms crossed. Debate is over.

We kill with our words and exclude people from the necessary debate. Is there any stronger a kill word today than "racist"? It's essentially telling someone, "You're the vilest scum of the earth and nothing you say matters." It only serves to isolate and anger. It is name-calling. It's the sort of stuff humans do before they move on to fisticuffs, or if the divisions are large and hostile enough, wars.

I think the central problem is that most people care less about what is true than about feeling right, or feeling comfortable being on the side we perceive as right. We all feel these strong feelings of rightness, that our convictions are true and if the other side can't see it, then they must be fatally flawed. This leads to ridicule and disrespect that only hurts everyone.

Since most people are like this it's very unnerving to run into someone who has obviously thought out the issues far more than we have. It puts us on the defensive and we have to quickly kill them with our labels before we are forced to enter the uncomfortable territory of questioning our instincts and convictions.

There's a great essay writtten by Paul Fussell called Thank God for the Atom Bomb. He opens up a hot topic most people don't touch beyond their gut feelings they likely learned from the herd. He dives into the historical complexities and if you are willing to follow him, you learn how the issue at hand is never neat and easy. On the way you learn a lot you didn't know, and you learn to appreciate different viewpoints, and you probably come out with a more open and reasonable mind than the cocky and trigger-happy one you had before. That sort of mind used to be goal of school and college.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Hills & Hollers of SW MO
17,760 posts, read 13,425,243 times
Reputation: 15090
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
Perhaps we differ, but to me, "disagreement" is just my opinion, while "intolerance" is when I actually try to enforce it.

For example, presumably you support Prop. 8, the anti-gay marriage proposition. If so, how do you reconcile putting your moral "disagreement" into law and actually enforcing your "prejudices"?

I hope you can explain it to us, and hopefully with the same respect (and honesty) you wish to receive.
Don't presume! I neither voted for nor against it. My belief system was canted towards the latter. My family (lesbian daughter) and gay/lesbian friends canted away from it. I took the mugwump stance which was neither.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 01:35 PM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
6,998 posts, read 3,241,079 times
Reputation: 3972
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnSurfer View Post
Well, as I said these are all hot button issues and have had many past threads of their own, most of which belong in the political forum. But some do directly effect California so they end up being discussed here as well. I really don't have time to get into the the whole gay marriage debate right now. But I'll just make one point since you asked and leave it at that. Not supporting gay marriage is not the same thing as not supporting gay rights such as the same rights under civil unions. For many it seems rediculous or simply semantics. But for those whose beliefs are tied to the sacred nature of the marriage covenant including Jews and Muslins, not just your bible thumping Christains, it is important. There are many political, religious and other factors which go into forming one's view of this particular hot button issue. So its not as simple as vote for gay marriage or you are a bigot as you see it. You cannot tread on what is sacred to some just to have your way. But that doesn't mean there can't be a middle ground reached. In discussing this with a gay forum member in the past I agreed to giving civil unions or whatever you want to call it (humpty dumpty) equal rights. But many gay activists won't settle for that. Its all or nothing. Why not work something out that both sides can agree upon. Something which affords gay's the same rights as under marriage. While not perfect for any one particular group at least its a step in the right direction. Or is it more than just rights you are really after? Because sometimes you need to tread lightly on things which other groups deem sacred whether it is foolishness to you or not.

Thats all,

Derek
This precisely what I'm talking about. Regardless the issue, whether we disagree (or why)... no matter. But you start "splitting hairs" on your "position" to begin with, weaving and dodging on the semantics, and generally just trying to have it both ways.

equal adj. Having the same quantity, measure, or value as another.

So either you believe in "equality" (i.e. having the same rights, and all of 'em), or you don't (i.e. we should deny "some" rights, for whatever reason). Which is it? And if you're not ashamed or defensive about your position, why all the obfuscation?

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" - Animal Farm, by George Orwell
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 01:44 PM
 
Location: Hills & Hollers of SW MO
17,760 posts, read 13,425,243 times
Reputation: 15090
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
This precisely what I'm talking about. Regardless the issue, whether we disagree (or why)... no matter. But you start "splitting hairs" on your "position" to begin with, weaving and dodging on the semantics, and generally just trying to have it both ways.

equal adj. Having the same quantity, measure, or value as another.

So either you believe in "equality" (i.e. having the same rights, and all of 'em), or you don't (i.e. we should deny "some" rights, for whatever reason). Which is it? And if you're not ashamed or defensive about your position, why all the obfuscation?

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" - Animal Farm, by George Orwell
Enough! Why are you trying to pick points? Some believe one thing and others believe something else. Neither makes either one more worthy. Nor are all situations win-lin or lose-lose. Life is like a divorce. There are three sides to every story; his, hers and the truth which likely is found somewhere in the middle.

You used the word semantics. I suggest you look it up and learn what a paper tiger it can be. Arguing a point just because you can is, I submit, an approach more applicable to and usually found on a school yard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 01:47 PM
 
Location: IE
2,504 posts, read 2,850,078 times
Reputation: 1558
To the OP, people do that because in all honesty the two parties aren't very different. Yes, they differ on some social issues but overall they agree on alot. Because of this, people need to distinguish the differences between the two so they can isolate themselves to create an identity for each party. There is a reason why pro teams where different colors and you don't see the same color pattern very often in the same sport (Pittsburg Penguins copying Boston Bruins, cough cough).

IMO, both parties are broken. Finally, more and more people are starting to realize this as Obama has become a polarizing president. I dare say even more so than W. Bush which is a feat in itself.

Myself, I am a Libertarian but tend to follow more Republican ideas than Democrats. Even though I fall into the right more, I can't stand both parties equally. [SIZE=3][/SIZE]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,413 posts, read 2,749,207 times
Reputation: 1802
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
In your 18 years of life so far you rely far too much on what you read or consume from the mass media.

If you actually met and spoke to many conservates you would find that they don't all conform to what you just wrote.

Many conservatives adhere to a more pure view of "small goverment" - and that extends to social issues too. They want the government to have the smallest reasonable role in people's lives. That means no interference in marriage, religion, etc.

Ann Coulter has a big mouth but is otherwise relatively powerless. Bill Maher is an example of another media idiot. Howard Dean is close to that status. The liberal closest to Ann Coutler could be Keith Olberman. I though Al Franken was too - but somehow he got elected to office.
I tend to agree about the fanatics on the left also & why I don't watch MSNBC or Fox. They all seem more interested in their petty personal fights with each other [ie.Olberman vs O'Reiley]. The NBA playoffs is a great diversion.

The moralist\ Bible-belt is a huge turn-off to most people, young especially. The issue of gay marriage has already been decided. The GOP look ridiculously hypocritical regularly. Like the recent case of the Family Research wing of the GOP where their top "researcher" was caught traveling Europe with a gay prostitute. And last month's revelation that national GOP operatives spent money watching lesbians dance in a West Hollywood night club. The sad thing about it is that watching lesbians dance is a major turn-on for most men yet the GOP can't admit it. Like many Americans, I so wish the GOP would go back to its Libertarian roots and get out of the gutter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Monterey County, CA
3,533 posts, read 6,101,526 times
Reputation: 2979
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
This precisely what I'm talking about. Regardless the issue, whether we disagree (or why)... no matter. But you start "splitting hairs" on your "position" to begin with, weaving and dodging on the semantics, and generally just trying to have it both ways.

equal adj. Having the same quantity, measure, or value as another.

So either you believe in "equality" (i.e. having the same rights, and all of 'em), or you don't (i.e. we should deny "some" rights, for whatever reason). Which is it? And if you're not ashamed or defensive about your position, why all the obfuscation?

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" - Animal Farm, by George Orwell
Either you didn't understand anything I wrote or you just plain disagree. And if you do thats fine. Of course you are entitled to your opinion. And I'm ok with that really.

But there is a significant difference and it is not simply splitting hairs to many Californians and Americans. Why are you choosing to ignore what is important to so many? Simply because you disagree? When you completely ingore others these issues don't get resolved. Sure it is simple in your mind. You don't hold to the same beliefs, ideals, etc... as these others do. Try just for a moment to take those into account and then come back to the table.

I tried to give you a compromise, possibly something workable, which could appease both sides. Give gays all the rights they want under a civil union or whatever you want to call it. Wouldn't that at least be a step in the right direction? The problem is if that happens many gay activists would lose much of their political outrage and steam. So that is one reason they want more than their rights in the bill. I'm all for finding a workable solution to the problem. Unfortunately many are unwilling to look at making a better overall solution taking both sides/interests into account.

Derek
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 05-12-2010, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,413 posts, read 2,749,207 times
Reputation: 1802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo View Post
It can. However asking me that question is going to get you a bias answer I suppose. I see a lot more liberal bashing than the other way around. I do see what you're saying though nita and I know when I've said things like this myself, it was more in reaction to what I had been reading. For example this thread was in reaction to the other one about Ca. liberals...like really? They needed to start a whole thread about California liberals? That's like me going into the Oklahoma forum and talking about how ass backward I think they are for being conservative or something. I'll take it one step further and say that I think this liberal bashing plays a large part in the trolling in certain city forums as it seems to be predominantly the liberal cities that get this the most, (Seattle, San Francisco, Oakland and Los Angeles). Correct me if I'm wrong about that.
Totally right on! I get so tired dealing with rabid anti-California attackers from other states. They drop their little bomb of hate like a turd and then scatter. These issues for the most part should not be allowed on the California forum since they are more appropriate on the Politics forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $74,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:37 AM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top