|
|
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,406
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,406 |
Yes... it is on tonight 7/24/20003... NBC... prime time... and non-cable. ...and as I said in my earlier post ...gay marriages discussion...(created just days ago.... and since locked... so I didn't/couldn't change it)... ...about this TV show Queer Eye {for the Straight Guy}... My words... in my reply... </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> The time is coming... and is already here on the cable (Bravo)...
...in due time... on public TV as well... (albeit... small bits at a time)...
!!!</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Can you really argue the dishonesty of 'slippery slope'??? As Chris said... as long as it's not pushed into our faces.?.?.? Could this be one more... small step to fuel support... U.S. awaiting court ruling on gay marriage in Mass.? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Jim/NSR <small>[ July 24, 2003, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: NSR ]</small>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 656
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 656 |
I realize that this post may in some way be directed at me, since I argued against the "slippery slope" in the locked and edited thread regarding this subject. After reviewing that thread, and taking into consideration the majority opinion and the thrust of that opinion, I've come to the realization that I no longer belong at MB. In that thread, "queers," toleration for homosexuality and secular humanism were singled out as evil. Hatred of gays seems to be perfectly okay with the moderators of these forums. As a secular humanist and a person who has no problem with gays, I simply do not fit here. Goodbye Marriage Builders. <img border="0" alt="[Teary]" title="" src="graemlins/teary.gif" />
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,091
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,091 |
I didn't get to post on the "other" thread, and I don't post very often anymore.....but really I don't see the "problem".
Doesn't everyone deserve to be with a person that they love and a person that returns that love....no matter your color, religion....and your sex?
I myself see nothing wrong with people of the same sex being together, or being married for that matter.
Now...some will say it's a sin and that's just enough for them to think it unforgivable for 2 people of the same sex to be together......but please.......almost ALL of us are here because our significant other committed a sin....and yet we have forgiven or are in the process of trying to forgive that person.
Now....I'm not a religious person.....but why is forgiving your WW or WH for having an A ok.....but at the same time some can't even fathom someone being a homosexual and consider it the most hanous of sins?
Heck.....one of my daughters could grow up and realize that she is a homosexual. That would be okay with me.....why....because I love my children unconditionally.
It is NOT my place to judge anyone for what they have done...will do.....or what preference they choose with their sexuality.....I do believe that job only falls on ONE person.
I once felt that being a homosexual was "nasty"....something I didn't want my children to grow up seeing and all that. Until I met a homosexual couple. My H happens to be their boss. 2 women living together, raising a daughter together.
They do not hide the fact that they are a lesbian couple....but they also don't shove it in your face. They respect the fact that some people are uncomfortable with it and act accordingly.
All of my daughters know about homosexuality because of these 2 women. They understand it...and they don't judge them for it.
I think we should focus more on our own lives rather than what the "Jonse's" are doing.
If it's not affecting you directly then why are people so worried about it? What's really even to be worried about?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,553
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,553 |
Cjack, don't go away! I believe in tolerance too -- but I just don't like to get into fistfights anymore. They don't change anybody's mind.
We have other issues that, I think, unite us. Why focus on what divides us?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 416
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 416 |
Cjack,
While I respect your conviction and departure from this board it may also be important to your conviction that you stay.
The thread discussed gay marriage and the opinions expressed are the reality homosexuals must occasionally endure. These were just opinions and you disagree with some of them. Surely that has happened to you before at MB. Most certainly, some of what was expressed is disturbing, ugly and cruel. But, none of it was specifically directed at someone who identified as homosexual and was here asking for help.
The time to depart the board is when people identify themselves as homosexual, black, Jewish, Hindu, Catholic, whatever, and do not get respectful, helpful replies but are lambasted with homophobic, racist, anti-religious, remarks and the moderators don’t act.
With PRIDE,
IS
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,508
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,508 |
miss priss...Doesn't everyone deserve to be with a person that they love and a person that returns that love....no matter your color, religion....and your sex?
sufdb...Why?
I can appreciate your sentiment, but no one deserves anything near as I can tell. We all get what we work for, fight for, beg for, etc.
In this case the issue was homosexuals wanting benefits now reserved for monogamous heterosexuals.... deserveing these benefits just "because" doesn't work. And they (all of us) already have the right to live with who we want, and love who we want, that wasn't the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,406
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,406 |
My point was not to chase anyone away... ...especially you cjack! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" /> My point was the method of arguing points of discussion, such as the 'slippery slope' arguement is not "in all cases" a dishonest form of argumentation. Those who have suffered with a WS falling down a 'slippery slope' (into the 'fog') know well, at a personal level, how detrimental this is. Other views/opinions/methods of arguements have always been welcomed on all these forums... ...but it doesn't mean they are valid/invalid are honest/dishonest. </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">...toleration for homosexuality and secular humanism were singled out as evil...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think the thrust of the thread was not about what is evil or not. There was just an emphasis on protecting the definition of marriage. </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hatred of gays seems to be perfectly okay with the moderators of these forums.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">If you look at the entirety of almost every reply on the thread... there is no hatred of people of different lifestyles... just the behavior itself when juxtaposed with marriage/family. </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">...I simply do not fit here.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">...you fit in here if you love your fellow man... cjack... I know you do! Debating issues... doesn't diminish that love. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Jim/NSR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
Well said, Jim. The thing I find interesting about some of these responses to your post is that the folks who lodge these complaints about your lack of "tolerance" offer none to you. I guess tolerance only cuts ONE WAY. I think you have showed great tolerance in your viewpoints, Jim, and always appreciate reading your take.
P.S. for those who don't realize it, "tolerance" is only needed for opposing viewpoints, NOT for viewpoints of which you already approve. I think Jim deserves the same TOLERANCE for his viewpoint even though you don't agree. THAT is what tolerance really is.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,069
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,069 |
Gosh ... some thread.
I think I'd like to say that "I believe" if Jesus Christ were here on earth right now in this day and age, He certainly wouldn't be hanging out with the people that weren't in need or that judged others void of empathy.
I believe He'd be hanging with the poor, the destitute, the people that are misguided (whatever that may imply to you). Just like He did when He was here thousands of years ago.
Isn't that what Christianity is all about???
Jo
<small>[ July 25, 2003, 09:58 AM: Message edited by: Resilient ]</small>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 100
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 100 |
I hope that one day gay marriages become a reality.
I hope that one day gays can walk down the street holding hands without getting stared out.
I hope that one day gays won't be attacked with baseball bats just because a group of thugs didn't like the way they were walking.
Why? Because gays are just like straights except that they are attracted to members of their own sex. They're not trying to seduce your straight sons and daughters. They're not trying to kidnap children. They're not destroying society. They just want to live a normal life just like you do.
There's no reason gays should be forced to live a celebate lifestyle. They are born with those desires. Why shouldn't two gay people be able to experience love together? They love each other and they are not hurting anyone. Perhaps you might not like the fact that they are together, but that is your problem to work out.
If my child turned out to be gay, I would be sad, but not because he was gay. I would be sad because I know he would have a life filled with discrimination and harassment. He would have to keep a part of his life secret. I don't want that for my son or anyone's child. I want the world to love my child whether he's gay or straight.
Gay children commit suicide 100-200% more than straight children. There's no reason for that. A child, or adult, should feel loved and accepted no matter their sexual orientation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Resilient:
<strong>Gosh ... some thread.
I think I'd like to say that "I believe" if Jesus Christ were here on earth right now in this day and age, He certainly wouldn't be hanging out with the people that weren't in need or that judged others void of empathy.
I believe He'd be hanging with the poor, the destitute, the people that are misguided (whatever that may imply to you). Just like He did when He was here thousands of years ago.
Isn't that what Christianity is all about???
Jo</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think he would be doing just what he did when he was on earth, calling sin sin and telling people "GO AND SIN NO MORE!" He didn't hang with sinners or condone sin, he railed at them and told them to knock it off. He wasn't nearly as "tolerant" as society is today and was known for saying some pretty harsh things to people. I doubt that Jesus Christ would live up to society's standards today and would be shipped off for "reeducation" at diversity training.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 295
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 295 |
Cjack, </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hatred of gays seems to be perfectly okay with the moderators of these forums. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Lack of presence or action on a thread by a moderator does not evidence support for a topic. MB TOS states: "We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message." Nearly every time a moderator acts to edit or delete or move a thread, that moderator will receive feedback in these forms: #1 complaint about infringment of free speech (not applicable because this is a privately owned forum) #2 shouldn't have let it go on so long #3 a thank you #4 unfair/why me or my personal favorite : #5 Barney's got his bullet out. Best regards
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 5,906
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 5,906 |
I am soooooooo confused... what on earth does the show queer eye for the straight guy have to do with the marriage issue of homosexuals or even anything offensive... While shows from Soaps, friends to ER...lets see eliminadate....(cable)....WWF or what ever world wrestling blech is out there....and the reality shows.... oooze and seep...immorality and blatant blurring of healthy sexuality AND the sanctity of marraige... this show has NOTHING to do with any of those things.... So I am having a way hard time drawing the correlation of this show in to a slippy slope...(that's how we say slippery around here... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> ) As Chris said... as long as it's not pushed into our faces.?.?.? And no tv show is ever pushed in to anyones face as long as one has the the POWER OF THE CLICKER!!!!!!! Could this be one more... small step to fuel support that too doesn't make sense...I will bet any amount of money this show will take GREAT pains to remain apolitical...that it would view that as tv suicide...this show will stick to subject.. hair, clothes, cooking, and decorating with a vengance....the last thing it wants to do is become political and alienate... and making a connection that this show is an attempt to have some affect of the political agenda of any group in my opinion is the slippy slope... even these forums, certain posters and topics are a choice.... this show has NOTHING to do with the marriage debate...nothing..and attempting to tie the to together is what I don't understand... other mentioned shows above do way more blatant damage to the sancitity of marriage...way way more...as noted in societies acceptance of affairs....note ben aflack jennifer lopez, clinton and many others.... And disagreeing with someones opinions as I do with with NSR on THIS topic and the way he posted it...does not lead to intolerance by anymeans... If you want to protect the definition of marriage...you would be better served attacking all soaps starting about 1:00pm I think,...and just follow all the way through to prime time... and you probably won't have to touch the clicker once....to show example after example of shows that undermine marriage.... atleast on queer eye for the straight guy I did learn to exfoliate BEFORE applying instant tanning gel!!!!!!!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> ARK
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ark^^:
<strong>
And disagreeing with someones opinions as I do with with NSR on THIS topic and the way he posted it...does not lead to intolerance by anymeans...
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You are right, disagreeing with someone's opinion is NOT intolerance, that is what tolerance is FOR, opinions in which you DON'T agree as I explained above. Intolerance is trying to shut someone down or object to their right to even express their opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 627
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 627 |
cjack, add me to those who have already urged that you stay. your calm voice is needed here.
this is a PUBLIC forum. it doesn't matter if it's privately owned. if it encourages public participation then and all opinions have their place. in fact, it's the minority opinion that is often the most important. it's that quiet voice that often tempers the louder sounds of intolerance.
and while i'm on the subject of tolerance, i think it's important that we all learn to debate issues without demanding that all see things only one way. either on the marriage issue or other matters that tend to cause our blood to rise. after all, isn't through discussing our differnces that we all learn more about something then we knew before?
coach
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 6,107
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 6,107 |
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by cjack:
<strong>I realize that this post may in some way be directed at me, since I argued against the "slippery slope" in the locked and edited thread regarding this subject.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Actually cjack, there were a few of us "sappy liberals" who discussed this issue, both on the locked thread in GQ and the much longer thread about gay marriage in EN's. You are certainly far from alone on this one.
I have not 'belonged' at MB for at least a year and still can't seem to break away totally, though I visit and post much less. The thing is, there is *something* that draws me back, and sometimes it's just as simple as a debate on a topic I feel strongly about... and I am usually a descenting voice. But that's okay... I like to learn about other's viewpoints, and actually, I like to argue, as long as it's respectful.
The one thing that's true, both on the internet and on the television, is that we have the power to turn the darned thing off if we don't like what we read, see, hear or feel. So, when things feel icky to me, for whatever reason, I turn it off... and maybe I come back later, maybe not, but I do have the power in this blessed free country of ours.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 816
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 816 |
what appears on television is a weak example to support a "rubbing our noses in it" argument. one, it's a flavor of entertainment, like jazz, heavy metal or new age music. two, change the channel to find something else that's right for you. i'm guessing that something like "queer eye ..." isn't going to be on the history channel or food network or pax or espn or all four broadcast networks anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,406
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,406 |
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">...isn't going to be on the history channel or food network or pax or espn or all four broadcast networks anytime soon...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">... that was the reason for the post.....it was aired on NBC... (one of the ...four broadcast networks)... ...pointing out... the small (relatively)... step by step... influence in society any group can have. ...to claim there is no agenda... ...is to claim President Bush has no agenda... of course he does!... we all do! ...we wish to present our point of view ...we wish to... in the process... persuade... and bring though/review to a subject matter. The main point I was making... is there is merit to the 'slippery slope' method of debating issues/agendas/etc. Progression (often in very small steps - sometime in large steps)... of persuing a PC viewpoint, or moral philosophy, or social worldview is part of the 'slippery slope' method of argument when the issue at hand is 'controversial'. That was my point! yes... it was in the context with the issue of gay marriages... yes... I can (and do) turn off the TV, radio, whatever when/if I am offended... ...but the point is... children... can and will be influenced by this and other such programming... ...especially as it progresses... ...since no parent can be around them (to present an alternate view) 100% of the time... nor can we block all channels with the clicker. Can anyone argue that there has not been a push to include 'tolerance' of homosexuality in the public schools?... ...yes?... is it an agenda?... ...not to mention a whole host of other agendas?... ...to claim that this TV show... is harmless... just frivolity... it's entertainment... no problem... is to deny that there is an underlying agenda... (call it 'tolerance') and it is to deny that there will be a next step on the 'slippery slope'. Respectfully, <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Jim/NSR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 8,016
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 8,016 |
In that thread, "queers," toleration for homosexuality and secular humanism were singled out as evil. Hatred of gays seems to be perfectly okay with the moderators of these forums.
Wow! You sure did get a lot more out of that thread than was actually posted in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 255
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 255 |
Yeah there is an agenda behind TV shows IT'S ABOUT MAKING MONEY! Really people get real: I thought everyone knew this but TV IS A BUSINESS! Their agenda is to minimize expenses maximize profits if possible. Thus the influx of these cheap to make reality shows that bring in huge ratings. TV executives are not above doing anything if they think it will bring in ratings and thus big profits.
So what's the agenda behind a show like "Everybody Loves Raymond" LOL To show how stupid men are?
And why is "tolerance" suddenly something evil?
<small>[ July 25, 2003, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: TMD ]</small>
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
612
guests, and
61
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
