Politics: Onward from New Hampshire

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
At what point is it fair to dismiss such views as bigotry? I have yet to hear a credible explanation of how a gay marriage harms anyone else -- or harms anyone more than, e.g., Britney's Vegas marriage did? Just repeating that it debases marriage isn't very convincing in a society where a whole lot of people debase marriage without a peep from the sorts of people shrieking about SF and Massachusetts.

In case I wasn't clear, I agree with you. Unfortunately, the majority of the country does not want to see gays "marry" but seem open to the idea of civil unions.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

The public is coming around to what I've been saying for months

[A]ll in all, considering the costs to the United States versus the benefits to the United States, do you think the war with Iraq was worth fighting, or not?

Worth fighting 48
Not worth fighting 50
No opinion 2


Before the war began, do you think the Bush administration did or did not intentionally exaggerate its evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?

Did 54
Did not 42
No opinion 5


(Asked of those who said 'did intentionally exaggerate' in Q12) Do you think the Bush administration lied about its evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, or exaggerated without lying?

Lied 39
Exaggerated without lying 57
No opinion 3


Regardless of whether or not it exaggerated the evidence do you think the Bush administration honestly believed that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, or not?

Honestly believed 68
Did not honestly believe 27
No opinion 4


Which of these do you think is a more important issue: The accuracy of the intelligence about Iraq that the administration received from the CIA and other sources, or the way the administration used that intelligence?

Accuracy of the intelligence 35
Way intelligence was used 53
Both (vol.) 7
Not imp. (vol.) 1
No opinion 4

linky

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
In case I wasn't clear, I agree with you. Unfortunately, the majority of the country does not want to see gays "marry" but seem open to the idea of civil unions.

I guess I think it's pretty important to respect the viewpoint of people on the other side of an issue, but at some point if people can't explain their views in any logical way, you have to start dismissing it as prejudice.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
[A]ll in all, considering the costs to the United States versus the benefits to the United States, do you think the war with Iraq was worth fighting, or not?

Worth fighting 48
Not worth fighting 50
No opinion 2

To put this one differently, more than 500 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq to date. Is there any plausible situation in which Hussein would have done anything to kill that many Americans? No. (Which is not to say that we should ignore others he might have killed.)

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I guess I think it's pretty important to respect the viewpoint of people on the other side of an issue, but at some point if people can't explain their views in any logical way, you have to start dismissing it as prejudice.

This is a very dangeous viewpoint. I advocate its immediate and brutal suppression.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
This is a very dangeous viewpoint. I advocate its immediate and brutal suppression.

I recognize that opposing viewpoints are rare in Northern California, and that this may make them scary. I suggest that you drive to a mall in Livermore and just watch people coming and going. Many of them are Republicans! See, not so scary.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I guess I think it's pretty important to respect the viewpoint of people on the other side of an issue, but at some point if people can't explain their views in any logical way, you have to start dismissing it as prejudice.

Softball season already?

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I guess I think it's pretty important to respect the viewpoint of people on the other side of an issue, but at some point if people can't explain their views in any logical way, you have to start dismissing it as prejudice.

I do think that some people are prejudiced against gays and that forms the basis for their objections to gay marriage.

However, you can say the same thing about people who cannot explain their objections to polygamy. I know your position is that most polygamous unions are abusive toward women. But so are some heterosexual marriages and some homosexual unions. The polygamists don't agree that their unions are abusive. And the sad fact is that up until recent times, many heterosexual marriages kept women subjugated and powerless and even physically abused.

You have to articulate a sound basis in the law for allowing one and not allowing the other or the same thing you are saying about those opposing gay marriage can be said about you regarding polygamy - you are just prejudiced against the religions that practice it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
I do think that some people are prejudiced against gays and that forms the basis for their objections to gay marriage.

However, you can say the same thing about people who cannot explain their objections to polygamy. I know your position is that most polygamous unions are abusive toward women. But so are some heterosexual marriages and some homosexual unions. The polygamists don't agree that their unions are abusive. And the sad fact is that up until recent times, many heterosexual marriages kept women subjugated and powerless and even physically abused.

You have to articulate a sound basis in the law for allowing one and not allowing the other or the same thing you are saying about those opposing gay marriage can be said about you regarding polygamy - you are just prejudiced against the religions that practice it. I have nothing new to say and I am saying it over and over and over again.

On behalf of every other person who ever glances at this board, I hereby stipulate that we are all prejudiced against polygamists. You needn't ever point it out again. We will all just remember that you have established this whenever we read one of your posts.

My question, though, is whether the argument that gay marriage somehow "debases" the institution can be dismissed as prejudice. I am coming to that conclusion.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
To put this one differently, more than 500 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq to date.

Not to mention a few Canadians, Brits, etc., too. My heart goes out to the families of these brave men and women.

Does anyone know the number of seriously injured? That has to be a couple of thousand by now.

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Is there any plausible situation in which Hussein would have done anything to kill that many Americans? No. (Which is not to say that we should ignore others he might have killed.)

If SH was helping Al Queda and Al Queda killed Americans, would that count in your opinion? I think one of the reasons that there have not been any attacks on US soil is because the terroists are focused on Iraq right now.

Anyhow, the WMD was just one reason for regime change in Iraq. As a bonus, because they saw we were serious with Iraq, Libya is dismantling its nuclear program. Perhaps N. Korea is next.

Regime change will bring more stability to the middle east and that is another reason to have invaded.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
My question, though, is whether the argument that gay marriage somehow "debases" the institution can be dismissed as prejudice. I am coming to that conclusion.

I think those people who feel marriage as an institution is debased by gay marriage are basing that on their religious beliefs. And I do think that their religions teach them that. They believe that marriage is a union before god and that god is anti-homosexuality. There is plenty of anti-homosexual stuff in the bible and the koran. I don't follow the teachings of those religions but plenty of people do.

What about those who think marriage is a religious institution, too, and that homosexuality is wrong? Do you tell them the bible is wrong and they are idiots for believing it? I do.

Do you tell them that they are interpreting the bible too literally? Their religious leaders tell them that is the way god wants it to be interpreted.

These aren't fringe religions, either. These are religions with large masses of followers.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I guess I think it's pretty important to respect the viewpoint of people on the other side of an issue, but at some point if people can't explain their views in any logical way, you have to start dismissing it as prejudice.

There is no reason to respect bigotry.

[Dave]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
To put this one differently, more than 500 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq to date. Is there any plausible situation in which Hussein would have done anything to kill that many Americans? No. (Which is not to say that we should ignore others he might have killed.)

Dissent.

All it would have taken was Saddam sponsoring one lousy terrorist with pilot training. Or wearing a jacket by Dupont in any major city. Or one capable of buying a vehicle and some fertilizer. WMDs not even necessary.

I'm not saying Hussein DID sponsor Al Qaeda, or any other outfit that targeted Americans, because that link hasn't been established, whatever the administration might say.

But that's not to say that Saddam wasn't fully capable of arranging for the killing of Americans, and after Gulf War I, he always had motive as well. If he would have scored more points among his people by doing so, I believe he would have happily given up sponsoring suicide bombers targeting Israel in favor of those targeting the U.S.

So I would think it quite plausible.

Speaking of Iraq, NBC fucking News was trying so hard to tie all its themes together tonight. Bush! Kerry! Vietnam! Hippies! Iraq! A generation divided all over again! Except they carried their analogies too far. Iraq, 500 dead. Vietnam was what, 50,000?

[Not Me]

Originally posted by sgtclub
There is no reason to respect bigotry.

What do you mean by bigotry? I am asking this in all seriousness because if you look the word up in the dictionary, the definition means something broad like intolerance of other's beliefs. It seems to me that it is OK and quite well-respected to be intolerant of certain beliefs.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
On behalf of every other person who ever glances at this board, I hereby stipulate that we are all prejudiced against polygamists. You needn't ever point it out again. We will all just remember that you have established this whenever we read one of your posts.

Speak for yourself. I live vicariously just imagining that all of us wealthy unsexy (sunburnt, bearded, pot-bellied) white guys can keep a harem depending on the amount of our wealth. Does your wife read this board? Is that why you said this?