Slog
News & ArtsFriday, September 7, 2012
Sports / LGBTQITSLFA If You Read Nothing Else Today...
Posted by Dan Savage on Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:27 PM
...read this:
This is more a personal quibble of mine, but why do you hate freedom? Why do you hate the fact that other people want a chance to live their lives and be happy, even though they may believe in something different than you, or act different than you? How does gay marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? If gay marriage becomes legal, are you worried that all of a sudden you'll start thinking about penis? ... I can assure you that gay people getting married will have zero effect on your life. They won't come into your house and steal your children. They won't magically turn you into a lustful cockmonster. They won't even overthrow the government in an orgy of hedonistic debauchery because all of a sudden they have the same legal rights as the other 90 percent of our population—rights like Social Security benefits, child care tax credits, Family and Medical Leave to take care of loved ones, and COBRA healthcare for spouses and children. You know what having these rights will make gays? Full-fledged American citizens just like everyone else, with the freedom to pursue happiness and all that entails.
To read the rest of Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe's completely amazing letter to Maryland state delegate Emmett C. Burns Jr., head on over to Deadspin.
3
Wow!
not only are you clearly violating the First Amendment, you also come across as a narcissistic fromunda stain
(I've never heard that term, by the way.)
not only are you clearly violating the First Amendment, you also come across as a narcissistic fromunda stain
(I've never heard that term, by the way.)
5
The difference between Conservatives and Libertarians. The Libertarians are loons, but at least they have the courage of their convictions. In the words of Bernie Sanders this morning, "The Republican party has turned into a party for millionaires and billionaires with an extreme right-wing element."
6
If we recognize homosexual pairings as "marriage" we would be sending the message to kids that homosexuality is Just As Good as heterosexuality and that homosexual pairings are Just As Good as Real Marriages and it just isn't so.
We should not lie to children.
We should not lie to children.
9
@6 - I agree that we should not lie to children, so please stop lying to them that they are not Just As Good if they are gay, stop being a hater.
10
Read that on Facebook today. Great letter. Of course it will have no effect on Burns I'm sure, but at least lots of other people are getting to read it.
The attitudes of many pro sports folks would seem amazing if you believed the media. The media makes sports figures, and particularly football players, out to be a bunch of gay hating, uneducated Neanderthals. But listen to these guys and it is clear that is just an idea from the past that some commentators just can't seem to let go of. I'm sure there is still a fair bit of homophobia in pro sports, but things have changed and many sports figures have made it clear that they support gay rights and would welcome anyone on their team who can play regardless of sexual orientation.
The attitudes of many pro sports folks would seem amazing if you believed the media. The media makes sports figures, and particularly football players, out to be a bunch of gay hating, uneducated Neanderthals. But listen to these guys and it is clear that is just an idea from the past that some commentators just can't seem to let go of. I'm sure there is still a fair bit of homophobia in pro sports, but things have changed and many sports figures have made it clear that they support gay rights and would welcome anyone on their team who can play regardless of sexual orientation.
11
Regarding the point about "no other NFL player," it's not the same as supporting marriage equality, but a few weeks ago, the SF 49ers released an It Gets Better video featuring a number of defensive players.
13
@10:
Well, FWIW, punters as a general rule don't get their brains scrambled over the course of their careers anywhere near the extent as most other players, so, you know, there's that. But, regardless, this was a terrific, funny and insightful letter - as much because of his carefully chosen use of colorful expletives.
Well, FWIW, punters as a general rule don't get their brains scrambled over the course of their careers anywhere near the extent as most other players, so, you know, there's that. But, regardless, this was a terrific, funny and insightful letter - as much because of his carefully chosen use of colorful expletives.
14
If we recognize homosexual pairings as marriage we would be sending the message to kids that homosexuality is Just As Good as heterosexuality and that homosexual pairings are Marriages and it is so.
There, fixed that for you Troll.
There, fixed that for you Troll.
19
I think my favorite part is that he actually used the phrase "Holy fucking shitballs". And what could be a more appropriate response to someone suggesting that an athlete should never speak out in favor of civil rights?
20
"To call that hypocritical would be to do a disservice to the word. Mindfucking obscenely hypocritical starts to approach it a little bit."
I. Love. This.
I. Love. This.
21
That's the irony of the whole conservative "freedom loving" posture. They love your freedom only as long as you choose to conform to their own narrow worldview. As soon as you choose to marry your lover, or dye your hair, or ride a bike, or smoke a joint, your freedom isn't so lovable anymore.
22
@6 And the reason(s) why you believe that it "just isn't so" is nearly guaranteed to be one or more of the following:
1. "Eww, icky buttsex."
2. Myopic and selective reading of a given translation of the Holy Bible.
3. Some sort of vicious personal rejection of the "other" - that is to say, those who are not like you must be categorically inferior to you.
We've heard it all before. You aren't saying anything new. Go stew in your hate in private and leave the rest of us alone to live happy, open-minded lives.
1. "Eww, icky buttsex."
2. Myopic and selective reading of a given translation of the Holy Bible.
3. Some sort of vicious personal rejection of the "other" - that is to say, those who are not like you must be categorically inferior to you.
We've heard it all before. You aren't saying anything new. Go stew in your hate in private and leave the rest of us alone to live happy, open-minded lives.
23
@6, you are right: don't lie to your children and tell them that you want to deny other people their human rights because you love God. God didn't tell you to hate others and dictate who they can love and marry. You're a fucking liar if you tell your children otherwise.
24
@6: It isn't so? Why not? What's your evidence and reasoning for saying that gay people are not as good as straight people?
25
My philosophy with respect to the NFL has always been just to cheer for the team with the hottest QB. But I think I just became a Vikings fan.
26
Crap, not realizing Dan had already posted, I recently sent this link as a slogtip, hoping to see my name in lights. Oh well -- in looking into it even further, I did find this link to an out former player. I'm a dorky sports fan and wasn't aware of him or his plight. Former Seahawk at that...
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdo…
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdo…
27
@5 In the words of Bernie Sanders this morning, "The Republican party has turned into a party for millionaires and billionaires with an extreme right-wing element."
Burns is a Democrat.
Burns is a Democrat.
28
That was the Best. Letter. Ever. How awesome that both players did what they did. It even gets better in football.
29
Delegate Emmett C. Burns Jr. from Maryland, the gentleman who wrote the letter seeking to censor Brendon Ayanbadejo, is a Democrat.
Mr. Burns is also pastor and founder of the Rising Sun First Baptist Church.
So, just to be clear 5 and 21, this ain't a Republican/Democrat or even a liberal/consevative controversy.
This is an asshole/non-asshole controversy.
Mr. Burns is also pastor and founder of the Rising Sun First Baptist Church.
So, just to be clear 5 and 21, this ain't a Republican/Democrat or even a liberal/consevative controversy.
This is an asshole/non-asshole controversy.
30
@9 'Coward who won't register' will never stop being a hater. The problem is he's such an repellent person that he will never know the love of another human being. He knows this and in order to cope with that pain he projects it outwards onto others anonymously, too much of a wimp to put even a regular pseudonym to his dribblings. Don't get angry that he flails incoherently at gay people, just pity him because he so much less than we are.
31
Yep, that's my team's punter. He has appeared in ads in support of marriage equality in Minnesota. He is famous for such internet-savvy screeds. He plays bass in a band. His twitter handle is @chriswarcraft.
32
LOL @ troll. He knows gaysex is sinful because it's the only thing that makes him hard anymore. He can do a hands-free spooge in his Underoos while typing a #1-9 comment to Slog because Pastor Pete told him wet dreams are OK and don't mean you're a sick puppy even if you remember the fantasy that got you to Big O City.
Here's a clue, troll, free of charge—no need to register or enter your VISA number: normal, well-adjusted heterosexuals don't monitor gay-friendly blogs or stalk equality advocates. They're too busy having straight sex and just living life in general.
Here's a clue, troll, free of charge—no need to register or enter your VISA number: normal, well-adjusted heterosexuals don't monitor gay-friendly blogs or stalk equality advocates. They're too busy having straight sex and just living life in general.
34
Interesting mix of comments over on deadspin. Always sad to see the hater comments, but the other ones give me a little hope for the future of humanity.
35
A Google search for "lustful cockmonster" helpfully returns a selection of "Images for lustful cockmonster". On my search, all the images were of Chris Kluwe. UNFORESEEN CONSEQUENCES?! Heheh.
36
Maybe "fromunda" is a Minnesota thing. I first heard it in the early '90s as the name of my Duluth friend's band.
39
@24 Maggie Gallahger says that legally designating gay relationships marriages will undermine the connection between sex and babies. I would argue that in the 21st century sex is less connected to babies and our laws need to adjust to that reality, but that's just what I think.
40
@ 34. I was encouraged by the responses to the commenter that started out saying he just wanted to have a "healthy discussion" about why he thinks it shouldn't be called marriage. He of course proceeded to bring up the same tired points about it not being "natural" & even went so far as to bring up incest & polygamy. The many replies rank as some of the most well-put arguments for equality I've read. From anybody, much less on a sports/humor site.
45
Nothing against Kluwe, but I'd like to point out that this started with Brendon Ayanbadejo, linebacker for the Baltimore Ravens, making for Equality Maryland. When Delegate Burns wrote to the Ravens to complain about this, the Ravens told him to shove it. Football is more gay friendly than it gets credit for.
47
Reading that letter made getting out of bed this morning totally worthwhile.......
Hey Rep Burns! That sound you hear? That's the sound of the tide turning....
Hey Rep Burns! That sound you hear? That's the sound of the tide turning....
48
24
oh junior,
were you organizing your Pokemon decks during English class again?
see @16
spoiler alert- 'homosexuality'≠'gay people'
now, try to come up with an intelligent comment and get back
(ps- did you find how many new jobs the economy has to create each month just to keep up with population growth?)
oh junior,
were you organizing your Pokemon decks during English class again?
see @16
spoiler alert- 'homosexuality'≠'gay people'
now, try to come up with an intelligent comment and get back
(ps- did you find how many new jobs the economy has to create each month just to keep up with population growth?)
49
22
nearly?
near misses don't count except in nuclear warfare.
but like Meatloaf says, zero out of three ain't bad.
(we bet you've heard that before....)
our positions are based on reproductive biology and sociology.
thanks for asking.
nearly?
near misses don't count except in nuclear warfare.
but like Meatloaf says, zero out of three ain't bad.
(we bet you've heard that before....)
our positions are based on reproductive biology and sociology.
thanks for asking.
52
@16 - Sorry, but I'm educated, so I don't need to read s-l-o-w-l-y like you and the rest of your backwards, hateful, hypocritical type. Gay kids are Just As Good as straight kids. Period. End of statement.
54
@45 says the Ravens told the legislator to shove it. Here's a link for that:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/07/nf…
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/07/nf…
58
@53 Banning abortion, criminalizing gay sex, restricting access to contraception, and doing away w/ no-fault divorce will push people in the direction of hetero-marriage and parenthood. Marriage equality signals society's approval of non-reproductive sex and takes us one step farther away from the way Rick Santorum thinks things ought to be.
60
@6 - Don't worry: anonymous troll; I'm sure you'll make plenty sure that your own kids know how much worse homosexual marriage is. (Be sure to hide your gay porn, though, as that might confuse your message.)
And since you can teach your own kids to hate gay people (oh - I'm sorry - hate homosexuality) as much as you do, how does the existence of gay marriage affect your children at all? Sounds like you want some anti-homosexuality nanny state to do the job of educating your kids for you.
What puzzles me most is this: since you can teach your own kids your version of right and wrong, why do you care what OTHER people's kids believe? Or do you believe parents shouldn't be allowed to educate their own kids as they see fit?
And since you can teach your own kids to hate gay people (oh - I'm sorry - hate homosexuality) as much as you do, how does the existence of gay marriage affect your children at all? Sounds like you want some anti-homosexuality nanny state to do the job of educating your kids for you.
What puzzles me most is this: since you can teach your own kids your version of right and wrong, why do you care what OTHER people's kids believe? Or do you believe parents shouldn't be allowed to educate their own kids as they see fit?
61
@57
You know how in the Simpsons when Helen Lovejoy starts shrieking "Why won't somebody think of the children?!" over no big deal? That's the children's interest fallacy. It's you, basically. You're the butt of a joke.
You know how in the Simpsons when Helen Lovejoy starts shrieking "Why won't somebody think of the children?!" over no big deal? That's the children's interest fallacy. It's you, basically. You're the butt of a joke.
62
I'm a Packer fan, and I've thought Chris Kluwe was the shit for some time now. This only makes me more sure that he's awesome. Off the field, of course. In purple, he's still kind of an asshole.
63
Welp. I will never look down on jocks again. That definitely taught my liberal arts ass a lesson.
64
LOL. As a MN-born Vikings fan I'd like to think my emailing Dan got this posted but the reality is that Kluwe's epicness was widely reported and I was a drop in the bucket.
Well done Kluwe. Skoll Vikings! (that's a MN football thing).
Well done Kluwe. Skoll Vikings! (that's a MN football thing).
65
That letter was fantastic.
Hopefully, any time now, we'll have some active pro NFL, MLB, and NBA players come out of the closet. We know you exist, guys! Please come on out!
Hopefully, any time now, we'll have some active pro NFL, MLB, and NBA players come out of the closet. We know you exist, guys! Please come on out!
66
@55 Amen!
Another Viking fan here. Join the fold everybody!!! I have to admit, though, this is probably as good as being a Vikings fan gets..... :)
I'm getting myself a Kluwe jersey this year. SKOLL
Another Viking fan here. Join the fold everybody!!! I have to admit, though, this is probably as good as being a Vikings fan gets..... :)
I'm getting myself a Kluwe jersey this year. SKOLL
67
@40 Thanks for making me go find that comment and all the replies to it. You're right, some excellent responses, literate, detailed, and heartfelt. For some reason, though, I'm still giggling over this one:
"It is one thing to teach your future children that being gay is wrong but why punish them further by making them root for the Lions? Oh also, I hope you get hit by a bus."
(The self-described Catholic Republican ended his anti-SSM screed, "Go, Lions!" For a few years in the not-too-distant past, the Detroit Lions were the most spectacularly awful team in the NFL.)
"It is one thing to teach your future children that being gay is wrong but why punish them further by making them root for the Lions? Oh also, I hope you get hit by a bus."
(The self-described Catholic Republican ended his anti-SSM screed, "Go, Lions!" For a few years in the not-too-distant past, the Detroit Lions were the most spectacularly awful team in the NFL.)
68
@36, I first heard the term in California, talking to a chef from Boston, who related that her kitchen crew would often sing, "dirty jeans and fromunda cheese" to AC/DC's Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap. And now that song is stuck in my head.
69
@65
There are quite a few former NBA, MLB, NFL, and MLS players who are out of the closet.
Curiously, there are no former (or, of course, current) openly gay NHL players.
I guess we can chalk one up for America, there, in the liberalism contest with Canada?
And then there's that odd possibility that professional sports players, like prison inmates, might be engaging in what The Dominant Culture (by which I mean you) would regard as "gay stuff," but without self-identifying as Gay...
There are quite a few former NBA, MLB, NFL, and MLS players who are out of the closet.
Curiously, there are no former (or, of course, current) openly gay NHL players.
I guess we can chalk one up for America, there, in the liberalism contest with Canada?
And then there's that odd possibility that professional sports players, like prison inmates, might be engaging in what The Dominant Culture (by which I mean you) would regard as "gay stuff," but without self-identifying as Gay...
70
@51 With a well constructed IVF policy? Forever. Oh and well done for being unable to counter the truth of my comment and so resorting to confusing David Tennant looking angry with anal sex. Seems to be an obsession of your for some reason. Can't imagine why...
71
His dad and others noted the profanity...he went and made another version, also well done:
http://blogs.twincities.com/outofbounds/…
http://blogs.twincities.com/outofbounds/…
73
I don't usually listen to rants by people who make a million bucks kicking a football around. But I think I could learn to like it now.
Ravens!!!!!
Isn't that where Trent Dilfer was QB when they won the Super? Yeah. It was. Dilfer has the some problem Burns has. As a freshman at Fresno State, Dilfer was already, like, "God chose me! God told me... , God rained his blessing on me." "God spoke to me last night and told me..." Dilfer was just a dumber version of Tebow. Nice to see sanity coming to the Ravens.
Ravens!!!!!
Isn't that where Trent Dilfer was QB when they won the Super? Yeah. It was. Dilfer has the some problem Burns has. As a freshman at Fresno State, Dilfer was already, like, "God chose me! God told me... , God rained his blessing on me." "God spoke to me last night and told me..." Dilfer was just a dumber version of Tebow. Nice to see sanity coming to the Ravens.
74
60
oh, you poor dear.
one can recognize that something is not Just As Good as something else without hating either.
help us out here;
in the enlightened Qunited States of Gaymerica
what will children be taught in public school;
that homosexual pairings are Just As Good
or NotQuite
Real Marriage?
Sounds like you want some pro-homosexuality nanny state to do the job of indoctrinating everyone's kids to believe just like you.....
oh, you poor dear.
one can recognize that something is not Just As Good as something else without hating either.
help us out here;
in the enlightened Qunited States of Gaymerica
what will children be taught in public school;
that homosexual pairings are Just As Good
or NotQuite
Real Marriage?
Sounds like you want some pro-homosexuality nanny state to do the job of indoctrinating everyone's kids to believe just like you.....
75
70
you seem very tense.
and angry.
personally The Troll finds dishing The Truth to be relaxing.
you REALLY should try lube.....
So,
a society of gentle gay folk,
in their natural state,
the way 'god' made them
(but please don't tell the democraps, they have real issues there....)
would go extinct in short order.
right?
but heroic high tech intervention,
like,
say,
what they use to breed Pandas,
might keep them from extinction?
is that it?
perhaps god has played a cruel joke on the gentle folk?
perhaps the
bitter
vicious
snarling
angry
rank and file Democraps
at the DNC
are really on to something?
you seem very tense.
and angry.
personally The Troll finds dishing The Truth to be relaxing.
you REALLY should try lube.....
So,
a society of gentle gay folk,
in their natural state,
the way 'god' made them
(but please don't tell the democraps, they have real issues there....)
would go extinct in short order.
right?
but heroic high tech intervention,
like,
say,
what they use to breed Pandas,
might keep them from extinction?
is that it?
perhaps god has played a cruel joke on the gentle folk?
perhaps the
bitter
vicious
snarling
angry
rank and file Democraps
at the DNC
are really on to something?
76
70
However
your comments about lube and extinction call to mind the good cardinal's benediction at the DNC.
the part about 'respecting the laws of nature'.
Danny would scold you for doing anal without lube.
lots and lots of lube.....
but did you know that when a man loves a woman and she loves him back no lube is required?
nature takes care of it.
somehow,
it seems,
a vagina is a better place to stick a penis than a rectum.
at least, according to the laws of nature it is.
when you disrespect and ignore the laws of nature she usually bites your ass.
disease.
extinction.
did you know that a society of heterosexual folk would not need a well constructed IVF policy to survive?
However
your comments about lube and extinction call to mind the good cardinal's benediction at the DNC.
the part about 'respecting the laws of nature'.
Danny would scold you for doing anal without lube.
lots and lots of lube.....
but did you know that when a man loves a woman and she loves him back no lube is required?
nature takes care of it.
somehow,
it seems,
a vagina is a better place to stick a penis than a rectum.
at least, according to the laws of nature it is.
when you disrespect and ignore the laws of nature she usually bites your ass.
disease.
extinction.
did you know that a society of heterosexual folk would not need a well constructed IVF policy to survive?
78
77
good idea.
the experts at the CDC recommend abstinence followed by monogamy.
has Danny gotten the word?
good idea.
the experts at the CDC recommend abstinence followed by monogamy.
has Danny gotten the word?
79
@78: Give me a citation, candy-ass. That's what scientists do; we don't just take people's word for it, but prefer to be shown the evidence. So, where do the CDC experts recommend "abstinence followed by monogamy"?
I'll give you an example. The CDC suggests that schools include STD prevention programs in health education, and notes that such programs encouraging condom use did NOT make adolescents more likely to start having sex. (source)
I'll give you an example. The CDC suggests that schools include STD prevention programs in health education, and notes that such programs encouraging condom use did NOT make adolescents more likely to start having sex. (source)
80
@76 Of course, we should ignore all technological advancements and do only what 'nature' shows. Have fun squatting naked in a dark cave eating raw meat while I'm in my warm bright house playing xbox and snuggling with my boyfriend. Oh and don't worry your tiny mind, I do indeed know to use lube. Your inflatable love sheep wishes you did...
81
I think the biggest difference between modern times and most of human history is that nowadays most children survive to adulthood. Historically this has not generally been the case. This means far less hetero-fucking is needed for the continuation of the species. In fact birth control becomes a necessity because without it straight people make more babies than they can support and mass starvation ensues. Gay sex is similar to the pill in that it is a way for people to get laid w/o making more people.
82
how long would a society composed entirely of good homo folk last?How long would a society composed entirely of doctors last? Who would grow the food?
There's no value whatsoever in the "what if everybody did it" test; our species thrives on specialization of function. Moreover, homosexuality occurs at nigh identical per capita rates not only from culture to culture (no more gays in the Netherlands than in Iran), but from mammalian species from mammalian species (it's a persistent variation).
83
you silly goose.
occupations and vocations are not innate biological traits.
doctors can grow food.
and build houses.
A society composed entirely of doctors would do just fine, thanks. (assuming they were hetero....)
btw we've never heard what you claim about rates of homosexuality, could you please share where one could find that information?
(no dingleberries, please)
(spoiler alert- genetic defects often occur as a consistent percentage of healthy members of a species....)
occupations and vocations are not innate biological traits.
doctors can grow food.
and build houses.
A society composed entirely of doctors would do just fine, thanks. (assuming they were hetero....)
btw we've never heard what you claim about rates of homosexuality, could you please share where one could find that information?
(no dingleberries, please)
(spoiler alert- genetic defects often occur as a consistent percentage of healthy members of a species....)
84
@83 Most gay men are perfectly capable of marrying women and making them pregnant. However, such an arrangement is not generally conducive to nuptial bliss. I'm a gay man, but if I'd lived a 100 years ago I would not have sucked any dicks. Instead I would have gotten hetero-married and dealt with my sexual frustration by drinking to much and beating my poor wife black and blue. Would you want your sister or daughter to marry to early the 1900s version of me?
85
84
Exactly.
But many hetero men are similarly crummy husbands, or worse, because of their own particular demons.
Danny tries to pretend (and convince himself) that homosexuality is this stark innate unalterable trait.
It is not so.
It is a tendency but tendencies can be channeled and corralled.
Exactly.
But many hetero men are similarly crummy husbands, or worse, because of their own particular demons.
Danny tries to pretend (and convince himself) that homosexuality is this stark innate unalterable trait.
It is not so.
It is a tendency but tendencies can be channeled and corralled.
87
@85 And the point of all of your posts is essentially "Ewww, gay sex is yucky!"
I'm sorry you think so. Now go find something useful to do.
I'm sorry you think so. Now go find something useful to do.
88
@85 "many hetero men are similarly crummy husbands,"
I suspect that a man who marries a women despite the fact that he isn't attracted to girls is a bit more likely to be unfaithful and/or abusive than a guy who likes pussy.
I suspect that a man who marries a women despite the fact that he isn't attracted to girls is a bit more likely to be unfaithful and/or abusive than a guy who likes pussy.
89
@85: Um...sexual orientation IS innate. Do you want me to trot out the cavalcade of studies showing definite physiological differences between gays and straights at certain loci known to be involved in sexual desire? Or are you going to shut your uneducated mouth for once?
90
86
In an enlightened orderly society all sexual impulses will be channeled and corralled.
Extramarital sex carries a huge negative social cost.
87
That isn't anywhere in there.
Are you trying to be funny?
We can't tell...
88
We suspect not.
Heterosexuals are capable of being very unfaithful and abusive.
89
Knock yourself out.
Remember; correlation does not imply causation.....
In an enlightened orderly society all sexual impulses will be channeled and corralled.
Extramarital sex carries a huge negative social cost.
87
That isn't anywhere in there.
Are you trying to be funny?
We can't tell...
88
We suspect not.
Heterosexuals are capable of being very unfaithful and abusive.
89
Knock yourself out.
Remember; correlation does not imply causation.....
91
@90 Let me tell you the story of my sad attempt at hetero-marriage. The physical part of my relationship with my wife was never very exciting for either of us because I'm not particularly attracted to women (because I'm gay and no amount of pussy pounding or self-hatred will change that). Also, she likes to smoke marijuana, which I don't think is a big deal, but I couldn't allow her to do that around me or keep any in our house because of my job. I never cheated on her or hit her but after four miserable years of lousy sex and no weed she couldn't stand it anymore and left me. What do you think, troll, was she an immoral slut for leaving me or was it my fault for marrying her to begin with.
94
Wait, so @75, you actually believe that making gay people full citizens with equal rights will turn everybody gay? It's what you seem to be implying. But it's like saying that giving black people equal rights will turn everyone black. You see how that doesn't make sense?
What we're talking about here is equal rights for the 5-10 percent of the population that doesn't currently have them. We're not talking about forcing anyone to be gay (as if that were possible) or prohibiting anyone from procreating (though there are plenty of population control activists out there who are - maybe you need to talk to them). Still, I think your oversight is telling. Don't assume that your own position represents that of the majority.
What we're talking about here is equal rights for the 5-10 percent of the population that doesn't currently have them. We're not talking about forcing anyone to be gay (as if that were possible) or prohibiting anyone from procreating (though there are plenty of population control activists out there who are - maybe you need to talk to them). Still, I think your oversight is telling. Don't assume that your own position represents that of the majority.
95
94
Hi Kristen.
That's a pretty name.
What's a nice girl like you doing in a dump like this?
Not understanding what she reads, evidently.
Are you blonde?
@75 refers to @70, which goes back to @51, then to @41, then to @6. And, as you would infer from those posts, it refers to a little game we play on Slog called "What If Everyone In The World Did What I Do?"
The game is a handy illuminating way to judge how socially responsible a behavior or lifestyle choice is.
Danny asserts, and tries to desperately to convince himself, that homosexual pairings are "Just As Good"™ as Real Marriage.
Now, if the deception only involved Danny and his credulous adult fanboy/faghag jerkoff circle here on Slog it might not such a big deal.
But he also tries to convince kids that it is so.
And that is where Real Adults have to step in to chaperone.
(unfortunately our Danny has a history of giving dangerous erroneous malicious advice to kids.
just a few days ago he reposted a 'golden oldie' he is particularly proud of in which he advocates that teens who do not want to use condoms should engage in anal, oral, "GAY SEX" (whatever that means...) and other sexual activities; WITHOUT CONDOMS (or even lube?!...)
He assures the kids that this behavior is FOOLPROOF.
Is our little Danny unaware that that is how 22% of sexually active homosexual men get (and give) HIV (according to the CDC)?
Is he Ignorant?
Or is he a vicious Pied Piper who hopes to lead America's kids down a path of disease, misery, death and destruction?
Enquiring minds want to know....
But we digress.
The 'game'.
If, in fact, homosexual pairings were Just As Good™ as Real Marriage, as Danny asserts, then we could substitute a homosexual pairing for each and every heterosexual marriage and Society would be just as well off, and show no ill effect.
Because that is what Just As Good™ means.
So the game is to imagine a Society in which Everyone is in a homosexual 'marriage'.
How would that work?
We've played before here on Slog so we can jump to the end and tell you that it wouldn't.
Work, that is.
That Society would go extinct in a few score years.
Scary.....
So if the Answer to "What If Everyone In The World Did What I Do?" is "The Population Would Soon Go Extinct!" then you probably would conclude that the behavior you are advocating is not A Good Thing (sorry Martha...)
So, Danny should not be allowed to brainwash America's kids that homosexual pairings are Just As Good™
(nor, for that matter, should he be able to try to convince them that condomless anal and oral sex are FOOLPROOF:
guaranteed ways to get STDs is actually the fact)
Does this clear it up?
(BTW- We "Don't assume that (our) own position represents that of the majority."
We KNOW
that Each and Every State
(more than 30 so far; liberal California twice!)
in which the people
have been allowed to vote
has OUTLAWED homosexual 'marriage'
(sometimes by majorities as large as 80% - EIGHTY - 8 0 - Eight Oh -....);
and while they were at it
they often OUTLAW homosexual civil union
and,
just for good measure,
forbid their state to recognize those abominations
hatched in other states.),
and
they don't just change the law,
they amend their state constitutions
to OUTLAW homosexual 'marriage'.
So, no, no assumptions here.....)
More...
Hi Kristen.
That's a pretty name.
What's a nice girl like you doing in a dump like this?
Not understanding what she reads, evidently.
Are you blonde?
@75 refers to @70, which goes back to @51, then to @41, then to @6. And, as you would infer from those posts, it refers to a little game we play on Slog called "What If Everyone In The World Did What I Do?"
The game is a handy illuminating way to judge how socially responsible a behavior or lifestyle choice is.
Danny asserts, and tries to desperately to convince himself, that homosexual pairings are "Just As Good"™ as Real Marriage.
Now, if the deception only involved Danny and his credulous adult fanboy/faghag jerkoff circle here on Slog it might not such a big deal.
But he also tries to convince kids that it is so.
And that is where Real Adults have to step in to chaperone.
(unfortunately our Danny has a history of giving dangerous erroneous malicious advice to kids.
just a few days ago he reposted a 'golden oldie' he is particularly proud of in which he advocates that teens who do not want to use condoms should engage in anal, oral, "GAY SEX" (whatever that means...) and other sexual activities; WITHOUT CONDOMS (or even lube?!...)
He assures the kids that this behavior is FOOLPROOF.
Is our little Danny unaware that that is how 22% of sexually active homosexual men get (and give) HIV (according to the CDC)?
Is he Ignorant?
Or is he a vicious Pied Piper who hopes to lead America's kids down a path of disease, misery, death and destruction?
Enquiring minds want to know....
But we digress.
The 'game'.
If, in fact, homosexual pairings were Just As Good™ as Real Marriage, as Danny asserts, then we could substitute a homosexual pairing for each and every heterosexual marriage and Society would be just as well off, and show no ill effect.
Because that is what Just As Good™ means.
So the game is to imagine a Society in which Everyone is in a homosexual 'marriage'.
How would that work?
We've played before here on Slog so we can jump to the end and tell you that it wouldn't.
Work, that is.
That Society would go extinct in a few score years.
Scary.....
So if the Answer to "What If Everyone In The World Did What I Do?" is "The Population Would Soon Go Extinct!" then you probably would conclude that the behavior you are advocating is not A Good Thing (sorry Martha...)
So, Danny should not be allowed to brainwash America's kids that homosexual pairings are Just As Good™
(nor, for that matter, should he be able to try to convince them that condomless anal and oral sex are FOOLPROOF:
guaranteed ways to get STDs is actually the fact)
Does this clear it up?
(BTW- We "Don't assume that (our) own position represents that of the majority."
We KNOW
that Each and Every State
(more than 30 so far; liberal California twice!)
in which the people
have been allowed to vote
has OUTLAWED homosexual 'marriage'
(sometimes by majorities as large as 80% - EIGHTY - 8 0 - Eight Oh -....);
and while they were at it
they often OUTLAW homosexual civil union
and,
just for good measure,
forbid their state to recognize those abominations
hatched in other states.),
and
they don't just change the law,
they amend their state constitutions
to OUTLAW homosexual 'marriage'.
So, no, no assumptions here.....)
96
@95 The more society stigmatizes homosexual behavior, the more gay people will stay in the closet. Closeted homos often enter into heterosexual marriages in order to fit in. Do you really want to see more women saddled w/ husbands who regularly sneak off to have crystal meth fueled gay sex with male escorts? That's what would happen in the kind of world your advocating.
97
that's a mighty long post for troll. i 'spects he's building up to a whoppin' big climax. you're gonna a bigger box of kleenex.
98
@90: Correlation alone does not imply causation. To reasonably infer causation, you need two of the following three:
-Correlation: two things tend to occur together.
-Control: changing the purported "cause" causes predictable change in the purported "effect".
-Mechanism: a plausible model exists explaining the means by which the "cause" regulates the "effect".
Luckily, we have two of those three. We have the correlation you were bitching about, but we also have control. Researchers working with rats (which are a damn good model for human biochemistry) hormonally altered the homologous loci in rat fetuses to a state similar to that of male homosexual humans, causing them to behave in a bisexual manner in adulthood, as expected by the researchers (source). This conclusively demonstrates that sexual orientation is caused by brain structure at certain loci.
-Correlation: two things tend to occur together.
-Control: changing the purported "cause" causes predictable change in the purported "effect".
-Mechanism: a plausible model exists explaining the means by which the "cause" regulates the "effect".
Luckily, we have two of those three. We have the correlation you were bitching about, but we also have control. Researchers working with rats (which are a damn good model for human biochemistry) hormonally altered the homologous loci in rat fetuses to a state similar to that of male homosexual humans, causing them to behave in a bisexual manner in adulthood, as expected by the researchers (source). This conclusively demonstrates that sexual orientation is caused by brain structure at certain loci.
99
There's nothing wrong with homosexuality, or gay marriage. Just like behaviors of interracial sex and marriage, it won't harm children or anyone else.
100
I hate to respond to the troll, but... If Everybody Got Gay Married, it's pretty likely the same amount of straight and gay fucking would eventually probably happen. Babies would totally still be born.
The problem with universalization is two fold (this is what I wrote my thesis on!!): first, determining the standard of universals. Claiming a singular moral or epistemic position requires more than an appeal to common sense, but actually a pretty robust metaphysic (which gets a little over complicated and ends up being rather context free, a MAJOR issue).
Second, you can't universalize just fucking any behaviour you want. I'm going to eat some ice cream after I hit send. If my sweetie did that, he'd get sick as a dog. If my friend did that after eating six bowls of ice cream, she'd probably lose her cookies. Eating ice cream simply isn't the type of thing we can universalize, because it isn't a moral issue. "But wait!" you might say, in the vein of a philosophy 101 student, "What if someone is starving! Ice cream sure is important then! You're saying that you have special creamy privilege and you're ruining their day!" Of course, you see the false equvalince here.
Some things look like moral issues: perpetuating the species, for example. But that's simply not a universal that can be applied, for clear contextual reasons. Some people simply biologically cannot have children. Some people biologically choose not to. Some people are enculturated to be bad parents. Some people will die before they get a chance to breed...etc. When we attempt to universalize this maxim, we end up with nonsense. This is why Kant narrowed it down so fucking much: treat persons as ends in themselves, act only to universalize moral laws, act according to the Kingdom of Ends which basically is the spread of the personhood stuff. Any other attempt to universalize ends up in garbage like telling the Nazis where the people you hid in your attic are.
More...
The problem with universalization is two fold (this is what I wrote my thesis on!!): first, determining the standard of universals. Claiming a singular moral or epistemic position requires more than an appeal to common sense, but actually a pretty robust metaphysic (which gets a little over complicated and ends up being rather context free, a MAJOR issue).
Second, you can't universalize just fucking any behaviour you want. I'm going to eat some ice cream after I hit send. If my sweetie did that, he'd get sick as a dog. If my friend did that after eating six bowls of ice cream, she'd probably lose her cookies. Eating ice cream simply isn't the type of thing we can universalize, because it isn't a moral issue. "But wait!" you might say, in the vein of a philosophy 101 student, "What if someone is starving! Ice cream sure is important then! You're saying that you have special creamy privilege and you're ruining their day!" Of course, you see the false equvalince here.
Some things look like moral issues: perpetuating the species, for example. But that's simply not a universal that can be applied, for clear contextual reasons. Some people simply biologically cannot have children. Some people biologically choose not to. Some people are enculturated to be bad parents. Some people will die before they get a chance to breed...etc. When we attempt to universalize this maxim, we end up with nonsense. This is why Kant narrowed it down so fucking much: treat persons as ends in themselves, act only to universalize moral laws, act according to the Kingdom of Ends which basically is the spread of the personhood stuff. Any other attempt to universalize ends up in garbage like telling the Nazis where the people you hid in your attic are.
101
Sorry, that was a novel. Don't fuck with universalization if you don't know what you're talking about.
102
@99 But Rob, Maggie Gallagher's baby daddy didn't marry her and it's all your great big gay fault.
103
occupations and vocations are not innate biological traits.Yes and no (or perhaps a general "maybe"). Proclivities and aptitudes have bases intrinsic (i.e., genetic), environmental or learned, and, last of all, volitional. The reasons our doctors can do what they can do in our current civilization is that they can specialize in medicine.
(spoiler alert- genetic defects often occur as a consistent percentage of healthy members of a species....)Sure. As to any other genetic variations. Indeed, one might suggest that we label certain variations "defect" only to the degree that they inhibit the individual or populations that exhibit those variations. Is left-handedness a defect? Depends on the left-handers ability to adapt, or the societies willingness to accommodate the left-handed individual.
104
But many hetero men are similarly crummy husbands, or worse, because of their own particular demons.Perhaps. But how many of those men's demons could be subdued by simply allowing them to marry an individual to whom they are biologically capable of being erotically attracted, with whom they could experience eros?
Danny tries to pretend (and convince himself) that homosexuality is this stark innate unalterable trait.We've been over this; we seem to be operating under the mistaken assumption that you can be taught. Homosexuality, as a trait, cannot be altered, but homosexual behavior can be suppressed. I can write--if not very legibly--with my right hand; it does not alter my left-handedness to do so.
It is a tendency but tendencies can be channeled and corralled.To what end, so far as homosexuality is concerned? We channel, corral, or outright suppress the impulse to murder because the protection of extant human life is a foundational value without which one cannot be secure or at liberty to live one's own life. Given current population levels, I see neither a compelling foundational value nor any intrinsic value (indeed, I doubt there's such a thing) in making more man-cubs. We seem to make plenty without any encouragement.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Portland Voters Are Stoopid by Goldy
-
An I-5 Bridge Over the Skagit River Has Collapsed by Paul Constant
-
Rightwing Anti-Gay French Activist Commits Suicide at Notre Dame Cathedral by Dan Savage
-
Why They Break Windows by Unpaid Intern
-
Spoiled Rotten: Star Trek Into Darkness by Paul Constant
-
Usually When I'm Sent a Photoshopped Image of a Gun Pointed At Me... by Dan Savage
-
There Are No Atheists In Foxholes by Dan Savage
-
Tornado Truthers by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Have You Ever Heard of...? by Dan Savage
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (105) RSS