U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-22-2019, 02:04 PM
 
4,678 posts, read 3,607,316 times
Reputation: 7380

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by citidata18 View Post
Because they remind him of Obama and Clinton, smooth talking and charismatic. He has the ability to make people feel warm and fuzzy inside without actually taking a stance on any issues. And given he doesn't actually have any principles to run on, he'll be easy to manipulate for their special interests if he's elected (unlike some of the other candidates).

As Rush Limbaugh succinctly put it: "He's articulate saying nothing."

Too bad for them this isn't 2008 or 1992 and that BS won't work as easily. And it has nothing to do with stereotyping an entire race of being homophobic.
So he’s bad because he doesn’t strand for anything. So why did you folks vote for trump? Did he stand for anything besides bring good at grabbing women’s privates? Lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-22-2019, 10:44 PM
 
Location: Chicago metro
3,506 posts, read 7,310,925 times
Reputation: 2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
I've heard people say that.

But I've also seen overt male homosexuals tolerated in black communities since the early 60s, even in church congregations, and black lesbians pretty much go where they want and do what they want.

I can only give a positive witness that black men who are not gay vigorously dissent to being thought gay.
That's the dirty little secret about homophobia in black communities. There's is a bit of a gender bias in favor of lesbians. Growing up in a predominately black community myself, I can't even recall an instance when a gay female was physically assaulted by a straight black male or black female. The most they'll get is being called a dyke, and a lot of times its behind their backs. When it came to gay males, having popular female friends lessens the risk of getting jumped, assaulted. The overt gay dudes at my high schools were not the loner types and were the ones hanging around some of the girls that the straight guys like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2019, 08:16 AM
 
15,402 posts, read 7,871,041 times
Reputation: 7988
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
Ultimately the problem here for most is the influence of religion...

I have a brother-in-law who is black and very religious. I remember him explaining to me not too long ago that he accepts gays, because he too has sinned. Hello?

Was everything I could do to explain to him that to be gay is not to be a "sinner" far as a whole lot of people are concerned. Accepting or not, to put that on gay people is just wrong!

Maybe I should have told him I accept him too, even though he is black...

The bold is a common comment in black America. I'll note, that I am an atheist and secular humanist. In my family, when I initially "came out" as such (when I was about 23, I'm 40 now) it was a HUGE deal but I've never been a person who is all that invested in what people think of me, not even my family. IMO family are supposed to be loving and accepting of the family member no matter what (unless they are murderers - in specific sorts of cases; rapists; or child molesters - I can accept and love practically anyone in my family who are not these types of people and I expect everyone in my family to be the same way - primarily because that is a mantra of sorts that I was raised with - that we will always be loved). So when I caught a lot of flack for my lack of religion, I countered it by stating I didn't want to hear their "mess" as I call it and if they want to be a part of my life (cause they know I'm one of those people who will cut you off in a second if you continue to say/do something I find reprehensible) they will not try to argue with me about my beliefs or lack thereof. I also am VERY learned in Biblical scripture unlike a lot of atheists IMO. I became an atheist by reading the Bible in its entirety multiple times, so I know why I am not a Christian.

That said, I can easily accept the "everyone is a sinner" comment. I believe it is a truthful statement. Just like in the Buddhist tradition "life is suffering" in Christianity and all other "sin" focused sorts of religions - everyone actually is a sinner. Therefore, IMO Christians should not be overly judgmental or rude/nasty to people who are gay. They have their sins to reckon with. Let gay people have theirs. I don't view being a sinner as being as bad thing I guess, probably because I know that from the Christian perspective being a sinner is an equalizer. So your BIL is being a rational Christian and it would have been better IMO to just see that he sees himself as "equal" to gay people IMO. Honestly, the way I press tolerance to my black friends and family is to remind them of the same thing that your BIL knows - that everyone is a sinner. Being a sinner is not "bad" in Christianity. It is being a regular, normal person who is alive. The only person who wasn't a sinner in the Christian tradition was/is Jesus. No one can be Jesus. So there was no argument necessary IMO for your BIL. Don't mean to be argumentative with my comment either, but just wanted to let you know that his view is similar to that of many Christians who accept that gay people are regular people who are sinners. I remember my mother telling someone who was speaking ill about a gay friend of hers - this "someone" was a Christian friend speaking ill of the gay friend, that my mother considered her former fornication to be the same thing as homosexuality in regards to "sin." That she was a sinner the same as the gay friend and that if the Christian friend was going to be mean/nasty about the gay friend, then the Christian should be just as mean/nasty to my mother. The Christian friend shut up with the negative talk. Nearly all Christians today are fornicators and adulterers, which are sexual sins in a say - same as homosexuals. They are often, also continuous sinners in this regard, same as homosexuals. So showing them they are the same, often softens their prejudice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2019, 08:26 AM
Status: ""a mind that understands science"" (set 28 days ago)
 
18,980 posts, read 12,192,035 times
Reputation: 10393
Quote:
Originally Posted by citidata18 View Post
It's amazing to me that talking head who not only doesn't have a degree in Journalism but never even graduated college doesn't see the irony in his line of questioning (stereotyping an entire race).

That would be like asking someone if wealthy people are anti-semitic because they won't elect a Jewish president (which of course they'll never do).

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/chuck-to...-vote-for-him/


Did you expect otherwise?


When Obama was running, you were a "racist" if you didn't vote for him. Further, when he was POTUS, you were a "racist" if you disagreed with any of his policies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2019, 08:41 AM
 
15,402 posts, read 7,871,041 times
Reputation: 7988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoland60426 View Post
That's the dirty little secret about homophobia in black communities. There's is a bit of a gender bias in favor of lesbians. Growing up in a predominately black community myself, I can't even recall an instance when a gay female was physically assaulted by a straight black male or black female. The most they'll get is being called a dyke, and a lot of times its behind their backs. When it came to gay males, having popular female friends lessens the risk of getting jumped, assaulted. The overt gay dudes at my high schools were not the loner types and were the ones hanging around some of the girls that the straight guys like.

I agree with the bold to an extent, but will add that today I see a lot of vitriol online about lesbian black women. All the "stud" comments....and I have been witness to a black male attacking a "stud" because she "thought she was a man so she was going to get beat like a man." More than once actually.

But I do think it is different when the gay person is a black male, mostly because for some odd reason, straight black men see a gay black man as a threat to their own safety. I've had many black men tell me this - that a gay black man "weakens" the image of the black male in America and at large. That it portrays them as soft or not "masculine." They also blame black women like those popular girls for "accepting" or "promoting" homosexuality. I've gotten plenty of these comments myself from black men due to my friendships with gay black men (and I've never been popular lol).

I do feel that today there is less violence enacted toward gay black people and that black people actually have become more accepting of LGBTQ persons. There were only 2 openly gay black teens at my high school. One of them got jumped/beat up a lot - he was friends with some popular girls, both black and white (I went to a pretty integrated high school). He left our school though when he was a sophomore after he got beat up so bad that he got a concussion and was hospitalized. That was a scary situation for me as I helped to break that fight up on my walk home from school. His mother switched him to another school and I never talked to him again. The other is still a friend. He grew up near my neighborhood and had been known as "soft" really since the 2nd grade. But he could fight - IMO most gay boys can fight because they are often picked on/attacked. This friend could REALLY fight so that by junior high/middle school - he was not typically "messed with" by the black boys (it was a horrible thing back then to be beat up by the "soft" "gay" boy and none of them wanted to chance it after really the 5th grade when he beat up at least 4 boys that I remember really bad).

Ironically he was "messed with" by the white boys in high school. He won our homecoming king vote in 11th grade (no other boy ran that year lol) and some white boys were mad about having a "gay queen as king" and they knocked his crown off his head at the homecoming game and he beat the sh** out of them at the game lol! All the black guys got a kick out of that because they knew he could fight and didn't take any mess. Even though our school was integrated, most of the white kids didn't live near the neighborhood my friend grew up in so they didn't know him until we all came to high school. And I remember him mentioning how they were "going to learn how to get their a$$ beat by this gay queen as a king" lol. Sadly though, he and the white boys got suspended. I felt he should not have because they were harassing and then put their hands on him. He was used to words, that didn't bother him, but once they touched him, he went off. In today's day and age, I don't think he would have been suspended. The whole thing was on video tape too. The white guys got picked on for the rest of the school year for getting both of their butts beat by a gay dude at the same time. He is still a friend of mine and none of the girls who were his friends in high school were all that popular. We were the band geek, nerdy kids actually as he was in Honors and AP classes with me throughout high school. Back then being nerdy and a band geek was not popular lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2019, 10:12 AM
 
12,607 posts, read 3,205,603 times
Reputation: 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007 View Post
The bold is a common comment in black America. I'll note, that I am an atheist and secular humanist. In my family, when I initially "came out" as such (when I was about 23, I'm 40 now) it was a HUGE deal but I've never been a person who is all that invested in what people think of me, not even my family. IMO family are supposed to be loving and accepting of the family member no matter what (unless they are murderers - in specific sorts of cases; rapists; or child molesters - I can accept and love practically anyone in my family who are not these types of people and I expect everyone in my family to be the same way - primarily because that is a mantra of sorts that I was raised with - that we will always be loved). So when I caught a lot of flack for my lack of religion, I countered it by stating I didn't want to hear their "mess" as I call it and if they want to be a part of my life (cause they know I'm one of those people who will cut you off in a second if you continue to say/do something I find reprehensible) they will not try to argue with me about my beliefs or lack thereof. I also am VERY learned in Biblical scripture unlike a lot of atheists IMO. I became an atheist by reading the Bible in its entirety multiple times, so I know why I am not a Christian.

That said, I can easily accept the "everyone is a sinner" comment. I believe it is a truthful statement. Just like in the Buddhist tradition "life is suffering" in Christianity and all other "sin" focused sorts of religions - everyone actually is a sinner. Therefore, IMO Christians should not be overly judgmental or rude/nasty to people who are gay. They have their sins to reckon with. Let gay people have theirs. I don't view being a sinner as being as bad thing I guess, probably because I know that from the Christian perspective being a sinner is an equalizer. So your BIL is being a rational Christian and it would have been better IMO to just see that he sees himself as "equal" to gay people IMO. Honestly, the way I press tolerance to my black friends and family is to remind them of the same thing that your BIL knows - that everyone is a sinner. Being a sinner is not "bad" in Christianity. It is being a regular, normal person who is alive. The only person who wasn't a sinner in the Christian tradition was/is Jesus. No one can be Jesus. So there was no argument necessary IMO for your BIL. Don't mean to be argumentative with my comment either, but just wanted to let you know that his view is similar to that of many Christians who accept that gay people are regular people who are sinners. I remember my mother telling someone who was speaking ill about a gay friend of hers - this "someone" was a Christian friend speaking ill of the gay friend, that my mother considered her former fornication to be the same thing as homosexuality in regards to "sin." That she was a sinner the same as the gay friend and that if the Christian friend was going to be mean/nasty about the gay friend, then the Christian should be just as mean/nasty to my mother. The Christian friend shut up with the negative talk. Nearly all Christians today are fornicators and adulterers, which are sexual sins in a say - same as homosexuals. They are often, also continuous sinners in this regard, same as homosexuals. So showing them they are the same, often softens their prejudice.
If I were more like you, I would immediately cut you off with all this reference to what Christian tradition dictates, but I'm always more inclined to "compare notes" to whatever extent others are inclined when we disagree...

For me anyway, it's all simply a matter of how people act, some simply better than others with respect to whatever our criteria of judgement might be. I'm not fond of how religion tends to influence that judgement about too many things, like gays for example, on many levels. Their "mess." Not mine. To "sin" is really not part of my vocabulary to put it more simply.

Might also encourage you to understand Buddhism a little more like you have devoted yourself to understanding the Bible, because it really isn't simply "life is suffering." There's a good deal more to Buddhist tradition and what life and suffering is all about than just suffering. Far more worthy of further consideration and understanding over Christian tradition far as I'm concerned anyway...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2019, 10:21 AM
 
12,607 posts, read 3,205,603 times
Reputation: 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Did you expect otherwise?

When Obama was running, you were a "racist" if you didn't vote for him. Further, when he was POTUS, you were a "racist" if you disagreed with any of his policies.
Perhaps according to some. Not the case with others. Needless to say, exchange of opinion is all a function of who you exchange opinion with...

Much like is said about a computer. "Garbage in means garbage out," but it's also garbage to dismiss all counter opinion by selectively choosing to focus on ridiculous counter opinion and suggesting it represents all counter opinion. Right? Not everyone who supported Obama thought everyone who didn't was racist.

Problem for anti-Obama people is certainly the number of anti-Obama people who are actually racist. Trump didn't help that problem with all his birther nonsense, but to suggest all anti-Obama people are racist just because there are racists among them is no more intelligent than to suggest all who supported Obama think everyone who doesn't is racist.

If you get my drift...

Perhaps simply to say, we've all got to consider the more reasonable and intelligent opinion contrary to ours if better understanding about contrary INTELLIGENT opinion is the goal. Not the most ridiculous and unreasonable opinions expressed by some on the other side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2019, 10:34 AM
 
2,455 posts, read 860,079 times
Reputation: 1714
Quote:
Originally Posted by citidata18 View Post
It's amazing to me that talking head who not only doesn't have a degree in Journalism but never even graduated college doesn't see the irony in his line of questioning (stereotyping an entire race).

That would be like asking someone if wealthy people are anti-semitic because they won't elect a Jewish president (which of course they'll never do).

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/chuck-to...-vote-for-him/
I'm not really getting the point of this thread. If someone, black or white, refuses to vote for someone solely on the basis of their sexual preference, then yes they are homophobic. If someone, wealthy or not, refuses to vote for any Jewish person then they are anti-semitic. And I don't see what Chuck Todd's educational history has to do with any of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2019, 11:52 AM
 
15,402 posts, read 7,871,041 times
Reputation: 7988
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
If I were more like you, I would immediately cut you off with all this reference to what Christian tradition dictates, but I'm always more inclined to "compare notes" to whatever extent others are inclined when we disagree...

For me anyway, it's all simply a matter of how people act, some simply better than others with respect to whatever our criteria of judgement might be. I'm not fond of how religion tends to influence that judgement about too many things, like gays for example, on many levels. Their "mess." Not mine. To "sin" is really not part of my vocabulary to put it more simply.

Might also encourage you to understand Buddhism a little more like you have devoted yourself to understanding the Bible, because it really isn't simply "life is suffering." There's a good deal more to Buddhist tradition and what life and suffering is all about than just suffering. Far more worthy of further consideration and understanding over Christian tradition far as I'm concerned anyway...

I was being simple in regards to Buddhism on purpose just to make a comparison between the religions in that they have universal truths.

I think the bold is more on you. As someone who does not follow any religion (and I've studied in depth the major religions of the world, including reading their scripture/sacred texts multiple times, similar to the Bible), I think it is important to respect the fact that other people choose to follow a particular belief system. And when interacting with people and you know of their religious beliefs, try to find common ground with them based on their faith's teachings.

For me, all people are basically the same. We have the same needs/wants; yet how we think of the world and each other is built upon our environment and social conditioning, which includes religion.

In many ways IMO Christianity can be used as a tool to decrease homophobia, xenophobia, and general fear/anxiety of "others" when one understands the tenets of the religion. Islam has a similar belief system and its holy text can be used in the same way. I try not to judge people based on their religion and do my best not to insert my own philosophical beliefs on people who are religious. You doing as such with your BIL IMO is no better than him thinking all people are sinners. What makes your view of what a sinner is, better or worse than his?

Note, one of the main reasons why I decided as a young child that religion may not be "for me" is because often it does not encourage critical thinking, questioning, and tolerance of other people's POV. I've noticed that many atheists and so-called "spiritual" but "not religious" people are just as dogmatic about their beliefs or lack thereof than Christians and Muslims who I believe are the most "into" their religions from a prejudice/intolerance perspective. Not all of them are prejudice and intolerant though and the idea that many Christians in America have that "everyone sins" is nothing bad IMO. It is something that shows the common ground of humanity (which is central to secular humanism BTW) and it is interesting to me that you'd have a problem with this only because it doesn't fit your personal view of what a "sin" is. Seems you are more "into" a negative belief of that particular Christian man, or maybe Christians in particular (as this is a commonly held belief of Christians) than they are of gay people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2019, 12:03 PM
 
15,402 posts, read 7,871,041 times
Reputation: 7988
I'll also note, I only cut people out of my life when they continue to demean and disparage my loved ones or other people or myself based on something that they have no control over (such as my lack of adherence to religion) or someone's personal life where they are not hurting anyone (such as someone being LGBTQ).

If someone tries to "make" me be what they want just because they want me that way - I will cut them off. If someone tries to force me to believe negative things or endure their negative words about others and I've asked them not to do that - that it is fine they have whatever beliefs they have but that I want no part in those beliefs - then I will cut them off.

So our conversation is not applicable to those situations. I never cut people out of my life who "love the sinner but not the sin" or who extremely faithful to their religion. Being religious in and of itself doesn't mean someone is hateful. And using religion as a way to understand the world and one's place in it is a common, typical part of the human experience. As a secular humanist, I understand, acknowledge and accept that all humans have certain needs and we all experience the world in a way that is unique to us as people in our communities. I don't seek to change people's minds about their worldview to reflect my own. However, I do seek to decrease prejudice in my interactions with others and oftentimes, I do this by speaking to Christians from a Christian perspective or speaking to Muslims from a Muslim/Islamic perspective and in speaking to atheist/agnostics from a critical thinking perspective. I meet people on their level and that is the best way to decrease "hate" IMO. It just makes no sense to me to argue with a Christian about their beliefs. I'm not going to make them not be a Christian in a single or even multiple interactions. I am not threatened by religious people and I've been told that they like conversing with me as an atheist as I "go against" the atheist norm in regards to me being very tolerant and knowledgeable about certain religions.

I'd wonder if you are an atheist or some sort of "spiritual/not religious" person since you are seemingly not in line with the Christian idea of "sin." American is a predominantly Christian nation so this idea of "sin" is not uncommon. You having a problem with it would make me inclined to believe you don't like Christianity. In your conversation with your BIL, he probably got that impression as well and didn't take you very seriously and found you argumentative for no reason so whatever point you were trying to make, more than likely didn't get through to him. If I'd spoken to him, because I respect and know about his belief system and the idea about what a "sin" is from a Christian perspective, I'd probably be more likely to get him to be more tolerant and caring towards gay people and how certain words can be offensive to them even though they are not viewed as offensive to him due to his Christian perspective. I've had this same conversations many times with Christians and they often "get it" when you don't come at them from a vain, argumentative perspective.
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

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top