Would you support Rainbow on Hockey Unis for Sochi?

[photon]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

the Bishop is right.

So equality for LGBT people ISN'T a civil rights issue??

It's perfectly ok for governments and to discriminate and/or repress LGBT individuals because they are such?

So which is it? You said earlier they should't be treated the same as everyone else, but here you are saying it's fine if they are treated different than everyone else.

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

All sexual activity is a choice. Sexual preference may not be, but actually participating in (consenting) sexual activity is most definitely a choice.

Right, and the reason people like him bring it up is so they have a hole to hide in to avoid their cognitive dissonance. They HAVE to believe it is a choice in order for it to be a sin. They have to believe it is a choice otherwise they can't explain why their god would create (or allow) homosexual people in the first place and the whole belief system would collapse.

So what relevance does sexual activity being a choice have with respect to it being a civil rights issue?

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

That is a significant difference.

So what? You keep pointing out that things are different, but of what relevance is that? Just because a degree is different, if the comparison to the progress of women's rights is a closer fit, that doesn't make the ultimate point that gay rights aren't a civil rights issue. Why raise it at all? It's a red herring, the bishop you are quoting didn't raise the issue in that way, why are you?

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

Comparing the 2 fights is insulting to those who fought for black liberation.

Oh please, the only person who fought for black liberation that wouldn't fully support equality for homosexuals and say it's just a continuation of the fight for equality for everyone is one bigoted against gay people. EDIT: And again this is an emotional track being used as a red herring, it isn't relevant to anything.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Ok Alberta Beef, let's move beyond the comparison of LGBT rights to black freedom. Will you at least concede that LGBT face systemic discrimination? What do you believe should be done to address this issue?

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by photon

So equality for LGBT people ISN'T a civil rights issue??

It's perfectly ok for governments and to discriminate and/or repress LGBT individuals because they are such?

So which is it? You said earlier they should't be treated the same as everyone else, but here you are saying it's fine if they are treated different than everyone else.



Right, and the reason people like him bring it up is so they have a hole to hide in to avoid their cognitive dissonance. They HAVE to believe it is a choice in order for it to be a sin. They have to believe it is a choice otherwise they can't explain why their god would create (or allow) homosexual people in the first place and the whole belief system would collapse.

So what relevance does sexual activity being a choice have with respect to it being a civil rights issue?



So what? You keep pointing out that things are different, but of what relevance is that? Just because a degree is different, if the comparison to the progress of women's rights is a closer fit, that doesn't make the ultimate point that gay rights aren't a civil rights issue. Why raise it at all? It's a red herring, the bishop you are quoting didn't raise the issue in that way, why are you?



Oh please, the only person who fought for black liberation that wouldn't fully support equality for homosexuals and say it's just a continuation of the fight for equality for everyone is one bigoted against gay people. EDIT: And again this is an emotional track being used as a red herring, it isn't relevant to anything.

Except I have seen other people make the comparisons before and quite frankly it disgusts me.

We have had posters compare gay rights to the Holocaust, I know people that compare it to blacks that fight for their freedom. And while the fight for gay equality is important, it is not nearly at the same level and comparing them makes the real fights for HUMAN RIGHTS.

I really don't care what some bible thumper thinks to be quite honest, I am just tired of people comparing fighting for the right to be married and not be bullied to people that were murdered en masse or sold like farm animals. It is not comparable.

It is not comparable and anyone that compares them should be embarrassed.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

Ok Alberta Beef, let's move beyond the comparison of LGBT rights to black freedom. Will you at least concede that LGBT face systemic discrimination? What do you believe should be done to address this issue?

Yes they are discriminated against, I have never said they weren't. What should be done, I have said it many times in this thread. We need to change the way people think, hate is learned behaviour. No one is born a bigot, they become it.

[photon]

Bishop Paprocki seems to refer to homosexuality as an "intrinsic evil". Voice of reason!

[polak]

In places like Eastern Europe and for example Uganda, it's 100% as important as the civil rights movement.

Gays are being imprisoned and beat around the world just for being Gay. What don't you understand?

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by photon

Bishop Paprocki seems to refer to homosexuality as an "intrinsic evil". Voice of reason!

I never said I agree with everything he said. I said he was right by saying sexual activity is a choice, because it is. Even the biggest ass clown can be right by accident.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by polak

In places like Eastern Europe and for example Uganda, it's 100% as important as the civil rights movement.

Gays are being imprisoned and beat around the world just for being Gay. What don't you understand?

I was speaking about in North America.

I don't worry too much about the problems in other places because we have too many of our own.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I am just tired of people comparing fighting for the right to be married and not be bullied to people that were murdered en masse or sold like farm animals. It is not comparable.

It is not comparable and anyone that compares them should be embarrassed.

Well many people would disagree, and if you want your idea that it isn't comparable to be taken seriously and want people to understand why you think that, you have to be willing to accept why people might disagree.

You haven't answered the real important question though.

Is equality for LGBT people a civil rights issue?

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by photon

Well many people would disagree, and if you want your idea that it isn't comparable to be taken seriously and want people to understand why you think that, you have to be willing to accept why people might disagree.

You haven't answered the real important question though.

Is equality for LGBT people a civil rights issue?

In North America. Civil Rights, yes. Human Rights, No.

I think the problem with that Bishops quote is the same as I have been saying. One is a fight for equality, the other a fight for freedom, they should not be compared.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

In North America. Civil Rights, yes. Human Rights, No.

I don't see the distinction as being a clear line, and that we happen to not have gay people being imprisoned or being threatened with death is just where we happen to be socially, not a commentary on the rights issues themselves.

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I think the problem with that Bishops quote is the same as I have been saying. One is a fight for equality, the other a fight for freedom, they should not be compared.

There's no "problem" with the Bishop quote, he's quite clear that to him it's about choice. Black civil rights issues are ok because people don't choose to be black, but homosexual civil rights issues aren't valid because they choose to do homosexual activities.

When it shouldn't be about choice at all, if there was zero evidence of any genetic or environmental impact on sexual preference, it shouldn't have any relevance on the discussion about rights and how people are treated.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by photon

There's no "problem" with the Bishop quote, he's quite clear that to him it's about choice. Black civil rights issues are ok because people don't choose to be black, but homosexual civil rights issues aren't valid because they choose to do homosexual activities.

When it shouldn't be about choice at all, if there was zero evidence of any genetic or environmental impact on sexual preference, it shouldn't have any relevance on the discussion about rights and how people are treated.

First - You have no business tell me what I can have a problem with. I took issue with his comparison of the 2 and it's a very strong opinion I have as I am sure you figured out.

Second - To the bolded. I very much disagree, that is a slippery slope there as straight and gay aren't the only options for sexual preference. I think some sexual preference are 100% wrong, whether they are born that way or not.

[MarchHare]

What does it even matter if blacks were once treated worse in America than gays are treated now? It's irrefutable that LGBT people face discrimination and injustice. It makes no difference whatsoever if another minority group, at another time in history, suffered a greater injustice. By that logic, nobody should have cared about the American civil rights movement in the 1960s because European Jews had it worse 20 years earlier. That's just a facile and stupid argument.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

Second - To the bolded. I very much disagree, that is a slippery slope there as straight and gay aren't the only options for sexual preference. I think some sexual preference are 100% wrong, whether they are born that way or not.

And that is why you're a bad human being.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

First - You have no business tell me what I can have a problem with.

Good thing I did no such thing. You were talking about the problem with the Bishop's quote, not what about the quote you had a problem with, at least that's the way I read it based on what you wrote.

You seemed to be saying that there was a problem with the bishop's quote, meaning that the quote wasn't clear enough about the Bishop's position. I am thinking this because you were using the quote as a basis for a point.

If your point is that you disagree with the Bishop, that's different than what I read in your statement.

And even that is confusing, since the Bishop's point was never to compare/contrast blacks gaining rights and gays gaining rights, he just says the equality of gays should not be a civil rights issue, which you and I agree it should be.

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I took issue with his comparison of the 2 and it's a very strong opinion I have as I am sure you figured out.

But you agreed that how gays are treated is a civil rights issue.

He never compared them in the way you have a strong opinion about, his quote is specifically about civil rights.

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

Second - To the bolded. I very much disagree, that is a slippery slope there as straight and gay aren't the only options for sexual preference. I think some sexual preference are 100% wrong, whether they are born that way or not.

Because the previous sentence talks about homosexuality, and that the whole discussion has been about LGBT rights, I think it's pretty obvious that I wasn't all of a sudden trying to say that a bunch of sexual activities that are currently not ok and harmful were now ok.

The point was that the Bishop's whole basis for his different view isn't relevant at all, if people chose to be gay it still would not be ok for the government to discriminate or repress those people.

[photon]

Originally Posted by polak

And that is why you're a bad human being.

You might want to clarify what he means before saying such things, I'm sure there are some sexual preferences (ones involving children for example) that you would say are 100% wrong as well.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by polak

And that is why you're a bad human being.

I am a bad human being for hating rapists and paedophiles?

If that makes me a bad human being then I hope I am the worst.

[polak]

Originally Posted by photon

You might want to clarify what he means before saying such things, I'm sure there are some sexual preferences (ones involving children for example) that you would say are 100% wrong as well.

Oh yeah. Grouping those together into this conversation is wrong on it's own. Can't really compare pedophilia to LGBT.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by polak

Oh yeah. Grouping those together into this conversation is wrong on it's own. Can't really compare pedophilia to LGBT.

I never grouped them together, I am fine with homosexuals and despise the others. But they are connected as they are each sexual preferences.

[photon]

Originally Posted by polak

Oh yeah. Grouping those together into this conversation is wrong on it's own. Can't really compare pedophilia to LGBT.

He wasn't grouping them for the purposes of the conversation (i.e. to draw any parallel or conclusion based on a similarity), he was trying to make the same distinction that you are; that attraction to children isn't the same as attraction to adults of the same sex.

The two are grouped only by definitions of what they mean, not by an attempt to equate them.