Rightwing Idolatry is an Abomination

  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 15, 2010 11:18 AM GMT
    Just a few more reasons why as a gay man
    you can Never justify voting republican

    <object width=">
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 1:33 PM GMT
    Eh?
    Not all republicans are religious. I know a few people who are republican simply because they believe in smaller government.
    As that applies to the gay community, they would just say that government shouldn't have any say in who gets marriered, and by that logic gay marriage would be 'legal.'
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 1:43 PM GMT
    Muninn saidEh?
    Not all republicans are religious. I know a few people who are republican simply because they believe in smaller government.
    As that applies to the gay community, they would just say that government shouldn't have any say in who gets marriered, and by that logic gay marriage would be 'legal.'

    Once again the argument that because not ALL Republicans are a certain way, then all the rest get a pass for those actions. The reality is that the Republican Party and its leadership made a very clear & open alliance with religious groups, including extreme fundamentalist groups, in order to gain political power.

    True, not all Republicans are religious, just those that matter on the US political scene. And since Republican elected office holders have a reputation for all voting as a group, regardless of what they may say to their voter constituents when campaigning, it becomes a fact that when you vote for one Republican you vote for them all, and for all the anti-gay hate their party officially endorses.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Feb 15, 2010 3:57 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]southbeach1500 said.....Generalizing about a complete group of people is dangerous. And usually produces incorrect conclusions.[/quote]

    how true! the GOP proved southbeach's statement correct in the last Presidential election! icon_lol.gif
  • Hunter9

    Posts: 1039

    Feb 15, 2010 4:00 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Red_Vespa saidOnce again the argument that because not ALL Republicans are a certain way, then all the rest get a pass for those actions.

    Generalizing about a complete group of people is dangerous. And usually produces incorrect conclusions.


    your post basically says:

    generalizing = dangerous

    generalizing = incorrect conclusions.


    what kind of fucking logic is that? oh, the type of logic that works on brainwashed conservatives
  • Nodak

    Posts: 72

    Feb 15, 2010 4:18 PM GMT
    Lumping all Republicans in with the religious fundamentalists is just silly. Please deal with individuals, not groups. The argument being used is the same one that says that all white people living today are in some way responsible for slavery that existed 200 years ago. My ancestors were peasants living around the Black Sea at the time. There is no way in hell I am going to accept any responsibility for slavery. If you are going to accept that group guilt idea then all African Americans are also responsible for slavery since a great many people were captured and sold to European slave traders by other Africans. The whole idea of group responsibility for the actions of individuals is, as far as I'm concerned, despicable.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 4:23 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidGeneralizing about a complete group of people is dangerous. And usually produces incorrect conclusions.


    This coming from you? Now that's rich!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 4:25 PM GMT
    Another favorite tactic of the right wing is to change the subject, and confuse with inaccurate statements and misuse of terms. The word "generalize" means to use specific cases to infer general principles. Such an inference may be erroneous when "scaling up" from the few to the many.

    But when I say that most Republicans vote a certain way, and a majority endorse their anti-gay party platform, all of it based on observation and polling of the many, that is not a generalization. A generalization would be if I observed and polled only a few Republicans, and then concluded from those results that all Republicans were the same as those few I sampled.

    So throwing the "generalization" term out there is just a red herring to distract from the actual discussion at hand. But as I said, quite typical of some of the posters here. And that's not a generalization, either.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Feb 15, 2010 4:27 PM GMT
    reppaT said
    southbeach1500 saidGeneralizing about a complete group of people is dangerous. And usually produces incorrect conclusions.


    This coming from you? Now that's rich!
    yeh-u-rite! icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 5:41 PM GMT
    Apparently, some conservatives who vote lock-step with their Brown Shirt party are not familiar with the term "enabling."

    And if you're so sure that your party is the right way to go, don't be surprised when they force you into programs to cure you.

    Or, of course, you could try to change the party from the inside out...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 8:37 PM GMT
    Muninn - you support the Republican party because you believe in smaller government?
    Excuse me while I laugh my f*ckin *ss off.
    Were you not paying attention all through the last decade of Republican rule while a Republican Congress passed bloated budgets laden with Republican pork that were signed into law by a Republican president?
    While they ran up the huge budget deficits year after year?
    The Republican record in recent decades is most definitely NOT a record of smaller government or fiscal discipline.
    Maybe if you stayed away from the spin machines of Fox and right-wing talk radio you'd be more well informed, instead of 100% brainwashed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 8:43 PM GMT
    It's not small gov't they're after, it's small-minded gov't.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 8:51 PM GMT
    rickrick91 saidMuninn - you support the Republican party because you believe in smaller government?
    Excuse me while I laugh my f*ckin *ss off.
    [...]
    Maybe if you stayed away from the spin machines of Fox and right-wing talk radio you'd be more well informed, instead of 100% brainwashed.

    I said I was Republican?

    Read what was written rather than jumping to conclusions.

    Red_Vespa saidOnce again the argument that because not ALL Republicans are a certain way, then all the rest get a pass for those actions.


    Where did I say that was an excuse for ALL republicans? A jackass/bigott should not be excused NO MATTER WHAT PARTY THEY BELONG TO.

    Geeze you people are powder kegs! Calm down a bit icon_biggrin.gif
  • denverdev

    Posts: 82

    Feb 15, 2010 8:59 PM GMT
    rickrick91 saidMuninn - you support the Republican party because you believe in smaller government?
    Excuse me while I laugh my f*ckin *ss off.
    Were you not paying attention all through the last decade of Republican rule while a Republican Congress passed bloated budgets laden with Republican pork that were signed into law by a Republican president?
    While they ran up the huge budget deficits year after year?
    The Republican record in recent decades is most definitely NOT a record of smaller government or fiscal discipline.
    Maybe if you stayed away from the spin machines of Fox and right-wing talk radio you'd be more well informed, instead of 100% brainwashed.


    And congressional seizure of GM, AIG, and hundreds of banks is in no way the spread of government control, not to mention the uprooting of private health insurance for a government-run plan.
    Both parties have their hands in the business of expanding their spheres of influence. Don't kid yourself into thinking one of them is "worse" at it and instead start being the one to do something about it.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 15, 2010 11:53 PM GMT
    If there is ANY party this less more HOMO - geneous icon_wink.gif get it?

    .... than the republican party
    A party who votes and speaks in lock step with every single person presented on that video I'd like you to tell me

    Because there is not ONE not one republican who will endorse anything that has to do with gay civil rights

    ..... should I start holding my breath now? icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2010 11:58 PM GMT
    GQjock saidIf there is ANY party this less more HOMO - geneous icon_wink.gif get it?

    .... than the republican party
    A party who votes and speaks in lock step with every single person presented on that video I'd like you to tell me

    Because there is not ONE not one republican who will endorse anything that has to do with gay civil rights

    ..... should I start holding my breath now? icon_neutral.gif

    But GQ, to use the arguments of the Republicans here, you're generalizing! Because one of them once knew a Republican who wasn't adamantly opposed to gay rights.

    And even if that Republican was just a next-door neighbor, with all the influence in his party of a weak breeze, that single Republican PROVES that Republicans do NOT oppose gay rights! Otherwise you're being guilty of unfair generalizing, I hope you know this. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Feb 16, 2010 12:05 AM GMT
    Oh yippy!!!! Yet another thread in which we can watch the "open-minded" and "accepting" be utterly close-minded and unaccepting icon_cool.gif
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 16, 2010 12:11 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidOh yippy!!!! Yet another thread in which we can watch the "open-minded" and "accepting" be utterly close-minded and unaccepting icon_cool.gif


    No Yippies about it .... it's quite sad actually
    That we have a whole political party machine that bases part of its power on the discrimination of a specific minority .... Namely US icon_confused.gif
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Feb 16, 2010 12:29 AM GMT
    GQjock saidit's quite sad actually
    That we have a whole political party machine that bases part of its power on the discrimination of a specific minority .... Namely US icon_confused.gif


    How many "victims" does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2010 12:31 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Muninn saidGeeze you people are powder kegs! Calm down a bit icon_biggrin.gif

    They are kind of Pavlovian... or more like trained monkees actually.


    Not fair, nor accurate!...you are stereotyping and generalizing! LOL!!
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 16, 2010 12:31 AM GMT
    Gays have to ride in the back of the bus.

    Gays have to use the water fountain marked "Gays"

    Gays that vote only have their vote count 50%

    Gays can be owned by straights and sold to other straights

    Gays have to live in specific ghetto enclaves (i.e. Wilton Manors in FL, Chelsea in NYC, West Hollywood, etc.)

    There is a systemic policy of extermination of the gays by the government

    Gays may attend university, but only universities specially set up for gays - under no circumstances can a gay attend a university that a straight person attends

    Yep.... major discrimination here in the USA against gays...


    Ooh Lordy .... I's jus so happy to hear all that good News
    I's figured I needed to run back into my closet for good keepin'

    icon_rolleyes.gif So right where we are right now is just peachy keen for you Huh?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2010 12:32 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidGays have to ride in the back of the bus.

    Gays have to use the water fountain marked "Gays"

    Gays that vote only have their vote count 50%

    Gays can be owned by straights and sold to other straights

    Gays have to live in specific ghetto enclaves (i.e. Wilton Manors in FL, Chelsea in NYC, West Hollywood, etc.)

    There is a systemic policy of extermination of the gays by the government

    Gays may attend university, but only universities specially set up for gays - under no circumstances can a gay attend a university that a straight person attends

    Yep.... major discrimination here in the USA against gays... icon_rolleyes.gif

    Repeat that argument to Matthew Shepard's mother, if you dare. Or to any gays, some here on RJ, who have been fired, or evicted, harrassed or beaten, denied promotion and otherwise suffered because they are gay. You are beyond low, and as a gay man, perhaps beyond redemption, certainly beneath our contempt.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2010 12:39 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Red_Vespa saidRepeat that argument to Matthew Shepard's mother, if you dare. Or to any gays, some here on RJ, who have been fired, or evicted, harrassed or beaten, denied promotion and otherwise suffered because they are gay. You are beyond low, and as a gay man, perhaps beyond redemption, certainly beneath our consideration.

    There are laws on the books to deal with all of those items you just listed.

    Problem is, the gays want "special" laws....

    Now, go back into your little liberal bunker and stop reading my posts.

    I have concluded from this that you are not gay at all, but rather a "plant" on this site, an agent for anti-gay elements. You wish to disrupt and upset us, and cause us to argue among ourselves, which benefits our opponents.

    No gay man could argue that what we want are "special rights" versus the same rights all Americans enjoy. That is a page right out of the straight talking points used to oppose gays. I think you've been unmasked, because you overreached here.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Feb 16, 2010 12:42 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock saidOoh Lordy .... I's jus so happy to hear all that good News
    I's figured I needed to run back into my closet for good keepin'

    icon_rolleyes.gif So right where we are right now is just peachy keen for you Huh?

    Yup. I would like to have the same recognition for gay civil unions as straight people get for marriage, however I don't believe the militant gays are doing the cause any good by going with their all or nothing strategy, e.g. it MUST be called "marriage" or we don't accept it.

    So, according to you, where exactly are "we?"



    More importantly WHO are "WE"? icon_eek.gif
  • Hunter9

    Posts: 1039

    Feb 16, 2010 12:44 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Hunter9 saidyour post basically says:

    generalizing = dangerous

    generalizing = incorrect conclusions.


    what kind of fucking logic is that? oh, the type of logic that works on brainwashed conservatives

    It is truly disappointing to see how this gay liberal mindset is polluting the minds of the young.

    Why don't you try some independent thought? Of course you risk being ostracized from the gay herd, but really, you sound like another one of the liberal parrots on here.


    your habit of never addressing the content of those who rebut your thinking would be comical if it weren't so common among other similarly demented conservatives who do actually have power in this country