Violence Against the LGBT Community

[hey]

Giving people more money to donate to groups that advocate outlawing homosexuality definitely isn't supporting gay rights lol.

No, obviously. But it's still possible to care about their chicken more than you care about the few cents you are indirectly giving to anti-gay groups, while still caring about gay rights.

Life isn't black and white, or all or nothing.

[Ksandra]

The news just put in a little bit about this. Apparently PETA showed up to also protest. Now here's the real question: Does your want of gay rights out weigh your hate of PETA? I don't know, I just don't know.

[Demosthenes11]

he's putting in the clause because people here still drive cars and pay for fuel and support other big fucked up industries that people pointed out.. but those are totally different!

Serious? Buying fries = buying gas for your car?

[Salodin]

No, obviously. But it's still possible to care about their chicken more than you care about the few cents you are indirectly giving to anti-gay groups, while still caring about gay rights.

Life isn't black and white, or all or nothing.

This is /thread.

[Kuya]

Well regardless of what we want to call people, the gay community is probably best served by accommodating straight people who want to eat at chickfila and simultaneously claim they support/help the gay community. It is actually a detriment to gay rights if you eat at chickfila as that money goes to their donations, but i don't believe we have the power to punish chickfila and its supporters yet, so it's probably a good strategy to simply tell straight people the facts, and not accuse straight people of being homophobes and bigots, etc. So far that seems to be what major gay groups are doing. It's undignified, but you gotta deal with the cards you're given.

[Demosthenes11]

Well regardless of what we want to call people, the gay community is probably best served by accommodating straight people who want to eat at chickfila and simultaneously claim they support/help the gay community. It is actually a detriment to gay rights if you eat at chickfila as that money goes to their donations, but i don't believe we have the power to punish chickfila and its supporters yet, so it's probably a good strategy to simply tell straight people the facts, and not accuse straight people of being homophobes and bigots, etc. So far that seems to be what major gay groups are doing.

Of course that's the best strategy. The best strategy almost always requires things to be ignored, though. Or else people will have to choose between gay rights and some tiny little joy they have every few weeks. And we both know Americans will take that joy almost every time

[Tweek]

Serious? Buying fries = buying gas for your car?

You're being naive if you think gasoline is the only industry your money goes towards with agendas that don't align with your own beliefs, gas was just one example someone used earlier.

[Salodin]

Fair enough. I give .0001 pennies to a hate organization, get my chicken, and you guys get to smile while calling me bigot, but behind my back. I can live with that.

[Tweek]

Life isn't black and white, or all or nothing.

hey look we agree on something. finally.

[Kuya]

Of course that's the best strategy. The best strategy almost always requires things to be ignored, though. Or else people will have to choose between gay rights and some tiny little joy they have every few weeks. And we both know Americans will take that joy almost every time

Unfortunately. One of the aspirations of the gay community should be to reach a point where even conservative politicians run for the hills when an establishment comes out as anti-gay for fear of being marked as a homophobes. For the word homophobe to have an even greater ostracizing effect than racist. That is a great cultural victory and an astounding milestone. While that might be one goal we can aspire to, it's certainly not now. For now, being accommodating and passive is the best strategy.

[Demosthenes11]

You're being naive if you think gasoline is the only industry your money goes towards with agendas that don't align with your own beliefs, gas was just one example someone used earlier.

Yep. totally said gas is the only industry.

keep tweeking you idiot

[Ashmada]

Shits and giggles, let's examine the arguments from Tweek's links:

Homosexual relationships do nothing to serve the state interest of propagating society, so there is no reason for the state to grant them the costly benefits of marriage, unless they serve some other state interest. The burden of proof, therefore, is on the advocates of gay marriage to show what state interest these marriages serve. Thus far, this burden has not been met.

Guess sterile couples should be prevented from marrying as well.

If we take the utilitarian stance of reproduction (or benefit to society as a whole) as the sole (or even chief) motivator of legislation, then a whole host of other measures need be introduced, some of them deeply unpleasant* for the less productive members of society.

*british understatement.

Even so, one could aruge an equalitarian society is beneficial in the long run.

However, there is ample evidence (see, for example, David Popenoe’s Life Without Father) that children need both a male and female parent for proper development. Unfortunately, small sample sizes and other methodological problems make it impossible to draw conclusions from studies that directly examine the effects of gay parenting. However, the empirically verified common wisdom about the importance of a mother and father in a child’s development should give advocates of gay adoption pause. The differences between men and women extend beyond anatomy, so it is essential for a child to be nurtured by parents of both sexes if a child is to learn to function in a society made up of both sexes. Is it wise to have a social policy that encourages family arrangements that deny children such essentials? Gays are not necessarily bad parents, nor will they necessarily make their children gay, but they cannot provide a set of parents that includes both a male and a female.

How about single-parent or no-parent situations, then? The benefits of having both a mother and a father are also absent in those cases, yet the children aren't necessarily negatively impacted.

Or non-married gay adopters?

The only benefits of marriage from which homosexual couples are restricted are those that are costly to the state and society.

"Costly to the state and society"="fiscally advantageous."
I bet some don't see the simple converse, so I can't fault the author for attempting it.

The biggest danger homosexual civil marriage presents is the enshrining into law the notion that sexual love, regardless of its fecundity, is the sole criterion for marriage.

Sure beginning to smell of incense over here.

If the state must recognize a marriage of two men simply because they love one another, upon what basis can it deny marital recognition to a group of two men and three women, for example, or a sterile brother and sister who claim to love each other?
Homosexual activists protest that they only want all couples treated equally. But why is sexual love between two people more worthy of state sanction than love between three, or five?

Careful, burning incense so close to those strawmen.

[Demosthenes11]

Unfortunately. One of the aspirations of the gay community should be to reach a point where even conservative politicians run for the hills when an establishment comes out as anti-gay for fear of being marked as a homophobes. For the word homophobe to have an even greater ostracizing effect than racist. That is a great cultural victory and an astounding milestone. While that might be one goal we can aspire to, it's certainly not now. For now, being accommodating and passive is the best strategy.

Oh no I completely agree. It's just infuriating lol.

I think about all of the money that I personally raised for the No on 8 campaign in CA ($10,000). And then I think of how quickly this chicken place is able to donate that same amount because people don't care, and it's very sad.

[Tagus]

Hasn't anybody told gays that marriage actually sucks? jfc

[Ashmada]

Plenty of mediocre comedians have.

[Kuya]

Oh no I completely agree. It's just infuriating lol.

I think about all of the money that I personally raised for the No on 8 campaign in CA ($10,000). And then I think of how quickly this chicken place is able to donate that same amount because people don't care, and it's very sad.

Well, we've been told that they do care. I don't really understand the logistics of it though. Maybe they don't really care specifically when they're eating the chicken, or maybe they think that it's not a big deal, i dunno. I do prefer the people who just say that they don't care up front though, because then you know what you're dealing with. With people who say they care but eat there anyway, you're not sure whether they're lying or not. It's pretty much up in the air.

In the end, like we already agreed, the best we can do is bring people the facts about chickfila and then let them make the choice, because wondering about their intentions is too hard.

[Demosthenes11]

Plenty of mediocre comedians have.

next up in this thread: "I don't believe anyone should be able to get married. I'm so unique in this view LOL"

[Salodin]

Couldn't it be said that all this negative publicity would cause chik fil a to not donate to said organizations again, meaning it's ok for a person to eat there and not be labeled a bigot?

Of course, assuming we knew they wouldn't donate to said organizations again.

[Tagus]

Maybe the mediocre comics have it right. I grew up in a traditional, conservative german-lutheran family... whenever anybody from that background (from the family, church, etc) asks me what I believe about gay marriage, all the while knowing that I'm more liberal than most of the clan and probably won't give them a traditional response, my response is "why can't they suffer through a marriage like the rest of us?" They laugh for a second, and shut the fuck up. It's a perfect response, really... cause them fools ain't gonna change their minds.

[Demosthenes11]

Maybe the mediocre comics have it right. I grew up in a traditional, conservative german-lutheran family... whenever anybody from that background (from the family, church, etc) asks me what I believe about gay marriage, all the while knowing that I'm more liberal than most of the clan and probably won't give them a traditional response, my response is "why can't they suffer through a marriage like the rest of us?" They laugh for a second, and shut the fuck up. It's a perfect response, really... cause them fools ain't gonna change their minds.

10/10 originality