User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 91

  1. #51
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Giggly View Post
    No, I'd really like to discuss Si doms being misunderstood. I just did't want you to ban me for get off topic.
    Oh... heh.

    (No, I wouldn't do that.)
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #52
    No moss growing on me Giggly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    iSFj
    Enneagram
    2 sx/so
    Posts
    9,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Oh... heh.

    (No, I wouldn't do that.)
    I edited my post just in case.

  3. #53
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Giggly View Post
    There's something about it, Jennifer. I listen to what people are saying (the people who speak up the loudest, what the media says, etc) and if we're judging by that, gay marriage should be legal in most states. It really should, but it is not. Why? I'm questioning, not making a statement. Something is amiss.
    I think my point above is based on, if you check polls on the matter, each generation gets predominately closer and closer to accepting it. The millenialists, only 25% think it's okay. The Boomers, 35%. The Gen X, somewhere in the 40's or close to 50%. The Gen Y's, higher.

    To me, this is evidence of the erosion of the traditional cultural view in this country. And it seems pretty clear to me that as the older traditionalists die off, leaving more and more Gen Y and younger kids with an impact on the vote -- people who naturally accept diversity, tend not attach moral stigma, and are used to the diverse and accepting view -- you're going to start seeing things swing. Even all the Si-doms in the Gen Y crowd and younger will start reflecting the views of their peers, it was what they know as "normal" and will become the baseline.

    When you publish these binary maps, you can have a red state and it makes it look like the entire population of the state is against gay marriage. But that is not the case, the split could be 40/60, or 45/55, or 49/51, or even a majority FOR gay marriage but they just didn't happen to vote or realize what the conservatives were pushing through until it was too late.

    That is why I think this sort of map can be misleading if read in the way you seem to be reading it. Just because a state happens to have a law on the books against gay marriage does not mean the vote wasn't tight or the law only made it because of some technicality. (And strategically, the basic reason the states are pushing so hard to ban gay marriage now is because they realize that if they waited another 15 years, they wouldn't have the votes to do it.)

    I do feel for gays and lesbians who want to get married but can't. That must make them feel like second-class citizens. My sister who I am the closest to is a married lesbian.
    So she actually is officially "married," with all the rights thereof? What state does she live in?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #54
    No moss growing on me Giggly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    iSFj
    Enneagram
    2 sx/so
    Posts
    9,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    So she actually is officially "married," with all the rights thereof? What state does she live in?
    No, California. It's a Union. They call each other "My Wife", though. Heeeeee!

    I will answer the rest later when I can focus more.

  5. #55
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I think my point above is based on, if you check polls on the matter, each generation gets predominately closer and closer to accepting it. The millenialists, only 25% think it's okay. The Boomers, 35%. The Gen X, somewhere in the 40's or close to 50%. The Gen Y's, higher.

    To me, this is evidence of the erosion of the traditional cultural view in this country. And it seems pretty clear to me that as the older traditionalists die off, leaving more and more Gen Y and younger kids with an impact on the vote -- people who naturally accept diversity, tend not attach moral stigma, and are used to the diverse and accepting view -- you're going to start seeing things swing. Even all the Si-doms in the Gen Y crowd and younger will start reflecting the views of their peers, it was what they know as "normal" and will become the baseline.
    I know, I'm so excited! (not that I wish death on any of them, but...you know what I mean). It's also exciting that every year, more young people are able to vote. The crazy is disappearing, slowly!

    I mean, in real life, people close to my age are sane, and even here on the forum, most people are reasonable. You don't see much of the "that's wrong because it's just wrong and I'll argue to the death to keep it wrong" that is more common in the older population (though by no means all of them). Society seems to be moving in a great direction in most ways (imo).

    I suppose I'll be horrified by the same idea when I'm old, though.
    -end of thread-

  6. #56
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    The crazy is disappearing, slowly!
    Every generation thinks this. What is actually happening is that the crazy is changing to a new kind of crazy.

  7. #57
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    That maps is very misleading. It makes Iowa look like an island of gayness when most of the citizens of Iowa were against it -- the court decided banning gay marriage was unconstitutional after a referendum had passed, and so, Iowa allows gay marriages.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  8. #58
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    That maps is very misleading. It makes Iowa look like an island of gayness when most of the citizens of Iowa were against it -- the court decided banning gay marriage was unconstitutional after a referendum had passed, and so, Iowa allows gay marriages.
    That too. (In that case, it went the other way in terms of what was misrepresented.)

    The thing, though, is that the map itself speaks accurately, if you look at the labels/headers. It is only describing the laws governing the state in regards to same sex marriage.

    What is misleading is:

    1. Coloring a state completely one color -- the exact same colors used on political maps of Democrats and Republicans, with the same colors assigned to the typical party against or for such rights!

    2. People using it in their arguments are a representation of the actual opinions of the people in that state.

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    Every generation thinks this. What is actually happening is that the crazy is changing to a new kind of crazy.
    mua ha ha! But my kinda crazeee is better than your kinda crazeee!!!
    (Or am I crazee??)

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    I suppose I'll be horrified by the same idea when I'm old, though.
    "Groan, what are those darn whippersnappers up to THIS time???"
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  9. #59
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    Continuing along and addressing from a more political perspective is Roger Scruton, a noted British conservative thinker and writer who has also written on the issue. Scruton I should mention is an atheist, or at the very least not very religious, which adds to the non-religious strands of conservative thinking.



    This in my view gets down to the real chase here. It's not enough to simply tolerate homosexuality, but one has to accept it as perfectly normal - or else you're a "bigot". I've noticed this kind of argumentation thrown at me a few times here, even trying to imply I cause homosexuals psychological damage simply for expressing my perspective.

    Yet refusing to see homosexuality as normal or seeing homosexual acts as immoral does not necessarily imply one has bigotry against homosexuals. As Lakhani argued above, one can even agree to many grievances that homosexuals have about social discrimination and still on principle be opposed to both gay marriage and homosexuality. It's not all or nothing here.
    I think this is a very important point. Too frequently, the personality of a discussion is unfairly marred by the intensity of the issue - in this case, homosexuality and its appropriate place in the character of our shared cultural mind.

    To renounce homosexuality, as an ideal, is not to necessarily be a 'bigot'. Likewise, the renunciation of interracial coupling is semantically within the same context.

    Attacking the byproduct of a behavior - moral or otherwise - is utterly different from attacking the individual.

    Not that the final output of the attack is necessarily any less offensive; it's simply crucial to better define the terminology of the argument if any real progress is to be made on the subject.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post

    [From your excerpt:]

    Again, the point is made that the issue here from a conservative POV is not dissing homosexuals but protecting an institution that's vital to the long-term survival of any society, which involves the rearing and upbringing of children. A society that doesn't sanction this literally has no future.
    I think this is probably where many people fundamentally disagree most on the topic of the influence of homosexuality on broad cultural values. As an institution, cooperative parenting of children (whether by marriage or some other social contract) is paramount to the ultimate success of the culture itself. It's within the household that many social views mature and are offered to the world at large.

    How do social views begin? Likely, through things like mass media, word of mouth, reformation of tradition and legal jurisdiction. This so-called "moral zeitgeist", as Richard Dawkins put it, is transformative in its governing influence on popular cultural opinion. While personal opinion matures in places like school and in the home, it owes its starting point to the fusion of interdependent norms of the predominant culture.

    So, it's therefore probably unfair to presume that the 'normalization' of something like homosexuality will provide as significant an erosive effect on the institution of marriage (nevermind the permanence of society itself) as to completely distort it beyond initial traditional recognition.

    As 'culture' relies on a multiplicity of social variables as a means to birth new ideas on how to live, it seems improbable that a single ideological event will seriously threaten the final continuity of the culture itself.


    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    And just as I pointed out previously, Scruton notes how the value of marriage has basically been undermined over the past few generations, and gay marriage would amount to another nail in the coffin - hence the common argument that gay marriage is an attack on the family. I also noted the irony of gays claiming a right to an institution that continually losing its value, and which would lose greater value if they get their way.

    Hopefully this will suffice as a general summary of a conservative argument on the issue. I really don't have much intention of discussing this to any great extent - at least not here. Feel free to PM me if you want further clarification.
    These are very strong, emotional conclusions. I think you are overstating your premise. (Actually, on second thought, it looks as if your offered author is overstating his premise.)

    While the institution of marriage will doubtlessly change as more people are allowed to marry (what this means as an ideal is of secondary importance), suffice it to say that the overriding culture is in no real peril.

  10. #60
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    These are very strong, emotionally controversial conclusions. I suspect you are overstating your premise.
    I suspect that's just how you're interpreting my remarks, which basically was a commentary on what Scruton wrote and how it relates to the wider conservative argument.[note:I noticed you edited your post.] I just remarked that overall I don't care that much about homosexuality and that discussions about it are distractions from larger issues. It's only out of a sense of duty that I even engage in these discussions.

    I do find it odd(if not irritating) when I have people attribute to me an argument I did not make, namely that homosexuality is somehow the major factor leading to the destruction of society. Homosexuals are not even that numerous to do that even if they wanted to. As I continously keep pointing out, this is all but a small piece of a much larger puzzle.

    Concerning the origins of social views, that's an entire discussion in of itself. Which I guess brings me to another point about why I often hate engaging in discussions on this matter is because I often have to address several major issues at once, whether it be origins of social views, historical developments in Western(or more specifically American) law, theology and Biblical criticism, the nature of the Classical heritage, anthropological studies on tribal life, etc. etc. all just to prove a few points on a particular issue, when each of these themes are entire discussions in themselves. Of course on top of that, having to deal with people trying to nitpick your argument for any little flaw or supposed signs of bigotry, or trying to compare you to Sarah Palin or whoever, and other related nonsense. That's a major reason why I suffer from mental collaspes from these talks.

    Sorry if it seems I'm evading your arguments, it's not intentional. I just can't take anymore of this; and why I was relutant to even comment on this to begin with.

Similar Threads

  1. Make the Case for Your God(s)
    By Passacaglia in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-27-2016, 07:27 PM
  2. The Case for Reparations
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-09-2014, 09:58 PM
  3. The Case for Gamma
    By Kierva in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-15-2014, 10:14 AM
  4. The issue of gay marriage
    By Torai in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 318
    Last Post: 04-19-2011, 10:45 PM
  5. So what's really the big deal about Gay marriage?
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 222
    Last Post: 12-19-2008, 12:06 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO