Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: All Politics is Local, Ctd.

электрошокер

2010-03-02T15:33:49.497-05:00

Nor are we underpopulated. Many parts of the worl...

2009-11-06T12:47:15.376-05:00

Nor are we underpopulated. Many parts of the world such as Nigeria, Bangladesh, etc are indeed very very overpopulated.

Of course whether or not gays can get married or just live unmarried has nothing to do with overpopulation.

What was it that's so great about heterosexual disease again Charles? About diseases like AIDS that are no longer predominantly among gay men and are extremely rare among lesbians?

We are not in gross overpopulation mode here in th...

2009-11-06T12:37:48.656-05:00

We are not in gross overpopulation mode here in the U.S. (I would argue anywhere) so it is relevant to my argument. Why not just proceed forward with how wonderful homosexual disease is?

@Charles I'll reiterate my statement for a third t...

2009-11-06T12:20:55.542-05:00

@Charles
I'll reiterate my statement for a third time now.

Until we are not in a gross overpopulation crisis on planet earth, procreation is NOT A GOOD OR LOGICAL ARGUMENT for anything.

But by that logic, Chucky, marriage equality only ...

2009-11-06T12:05:21.630-05:00

But by that logic, Chucky, marriage equality only needs better reasons for it than there are against it. And since we've presented many logical reasons for and you've presented none against it (I know, you've presented why you don't like gay people EXISTING but that's a different and even more bigoted question), then the only logical conclusion is that we should have marriage equality now!

WV: dewayst--Arguing with de homophobes is dewayst of de thyme.

If anyone else wants to discuss why normal women h...

2009-11-06T11:48:57.318-05:00

If anyone else wants to discuss why normal women having sex is necessary for the continuation of the human species -- assuming that your parents haven't already had this talk with you -- let me know right away.

Here's a question I have on Chucky's "disease" str...

2009-11-06T11:19:08.393-05:00

Here's a question I have on Chucky's "disease" strawman (ignoring everything else that's wrong with it):

Since lesbians are the lowest risk group for HIV/AIDS and straight women are the highest risk group (yes, more so than gay men), by your twisted logic, doesn't that mean we should only allow women to marry other women?

I mean, why should society encourage marriages that are statistically far more likely to result in HIV/AIDS?

sorry, by falling in love with a woman I meant fal...

2009-11-06T10:51:05.662-05:00

sorry, by falling in love with a woman I meant falling in love with someone of the opposite sex.

Not yet.

2009-11-06T10:24:46.831-05:00

Not yet.

@Charles There are plenty of heterosexual couples ...

2009-11-06T10:11:13.138-05:00

@Charles
There are plenty of heterosexual couples and marriages that NEVER PRODUCE OFFSPRING.

should we annul their marriage because they are not procreating?

Overpopulation is a REAL PROBLEM, RIGHT NOW.

So any argument that stops things from happening because those things can not procreate makes NO SENSE on ANY LEVEL.

IF, and this is a HUGE if, we actually are in a problem with our human species in a desperate need to procreate, yes, then we can talk.

But guess where the problem is RIGHT NOW. OVERPOPULATION.

so again, procreation as a necessity for anything is not a viable argument.

Now here's the REAL kicker. If you do not allow a gay person to get married, are they going to have kids anyway? Just because it is not acceptable to you, does NOT mean they are going to somehow fall in love with a woman and have kids with them.

The ONLY thing you are doing by not allowing same sex marriages is not allowing the term marriage and the legal securities for a family that it allows.
This one little thing does not at all affect who they sleep with, or if they have kids.

Higher rates of disease is also a "biologically" l...

2009-11-06T09:50:05.999-05:00

Higher rates of disease is also a "biologically" limiting factor. That is happening NOW. Why no discussion of that?

20 years from now, when the U.S. population is in ...

2009-11-06T09:47:11.791-05:00

20 years from now, when the U.S. population is in decline because of widespread same-sex "marriage" only then will you talk about it and. what, promise to annul all of those marriages? It will be too late to discuss anything once we jump off the cliff.

@Charles For the second time, I say this: In a wor...

2009-11-06T09:37:08.201-05:00

@Charles
For the second time, I say this: In a world where OVERPOPULATION is a HUGE problem, I fail to take procreation as a serious argument.

Feel free to talk to me again in a time period where humans have a pressing need to forward our species, because of a lack of births; and I'll gladly hear arguments about the need for everyone to procreate.

Once OVERPOPULATION is NOT an issue on the world playing field, let alone a local one...we can talk about that seriously.

Inability to procreate and higher rates of disease...

2009-11-05T17:59:44.939-05:00

Inability to procreate and higher rates of disease from HIV/AIDS to many types of cancer. Ask "shrinkers" about all of the previous statistics and cites to peer-reviewed studies already provided.

@Charles I forgot to respond to your biological re...

2009-11-05T16:58:53.144-05:00

@Charles
I forgot to respond to your biological reason...

Can you tell me what exactly is the biological reason that same sex marriages should not be allowed?
I don't want to assume what argument you are making before I respond.

@Charles First off, i would ask that you cite such...

2009-11-05T16:46:06.181-05:00

@Charles
First off, i would ask that you cite such statistics,
and second, do you have any idea WHY homosexual males are more likely to commit suicide? Do you know the psychology behind it?

If you want to provide a cost savings for society, you should look at the underlying reason WHY this happens, and fix THAT - since you obviously can not stop someone from being homosexual (you agreed earlier that it IS something you are born with).

Let me explain something to you.

If your nature is something that your society REJECTS, something that no one wants to give you equal membership as a part of that society, guess how much more you will hate yourself.
If by telling the truth about a fundamental fact of your life to your employer endangers your being employed, tell me how much you are going to hate yourself.

Tell me how, by continuing a stance of NO EQUAL RIGHTS to homosexuals, you will STOP homosexual males from being more likely to commit suicide, and having a drain on our society (mentally and economically).

I can tell you how, by having a stance of EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL HUMAN BEINGS, we can lower that number. As soon as someone does not have to hide who they are in order to be accepted in society, they like themselves better. As soon as they are accepted for who they are, suicidal tendencies will go away.
Of course its not as simple as give rights, and suicide rate will go down. Just because you enact legislation that enforces equal rights, this does not change some peoples outlook (people still look at interracial marriages as bad things in certain places). But, overtime, it will allow people to view it as NORMAL. After they realize that it in fact has NO HARMFUL EFFECT ON HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGE or couples, they will even come to accept it as a natural way some people are made.

There are biological reasons why same-sex marriage...

2009-11-05T16:01:03.750-05:00

There are biological reasons why same-sex marriage should not be allowed too. Putting aside the facts that homosexual males are SIX TIMES more likely to attempt suicide, that could actually be a cost "savings" but even I am not going to advocate for that "benefit.". Take a look at the higher rates of disease from HIV/AIDS to many types of cancer. That all takes a financial toll on society too.

@Charles Can you give me any examples of your arg...

2009-11-05T15:24:11.564-05:00

@Charles

Can you give me any examples of your arguments? One? But here's my response anyway

in a world where we are already overburdened with human population, I fail to see procreation as a logical reason for making homosexuals feel like less of a person.

what are the higher physical costs associated with homosexual males?
The higher mental costs to themselves stem from the idea that they are not accepted, so they feel the need to hate themselves AND hide from the population at large.

If you want to destroy the 'higher mental cost to themselves' argument...you make them feel NOT ASHAMED TO BE WHO THEY ARE. and tada...done.

mental cost to society? give me an example. Other than those who for some reason or another do not accept homosexuals, how does being homosexual have any sort of mental cost to society.

If you are talking about things like them being kicked out of the military, that's an EASY fix. get rid of that rule.

If you are talking about effectiveness in society, i again, do not see your argument. Usually the ONLY reason people get kicked out of their jobs when they come out is because they are gay, not because they were doing their job poorly.

now, onto your strawman argument - which i hesitate to respond to;

There are biological reasons that this is illegal.
It is scientifically proven that inbreeding, that is procreation between people that are too close in relation to eachother, breed all sorts of genetic disorders.
Now, people who have genetic disorders are not bad people, BUT if there are easy steps to minimize this, we should.
If I knew i had a recessive trait for a genetic disorder, I would NOT procreate with someone who also had that gene - this applies to non family members.

Now, if people believe they are unjustly unable to marry someone they truly love because of this, guess what. I will gladly listen to their arguments, see if we can come up with a way to allow this and not hurt future generations. Legal documents not allowing them to bear children sounds like an example of where the compromise talking points may start.

I appreciate that, but dealing with reality, males...

2009-11-05T15:05:15.761-05:00

I appreciate that, but dealing with reality, males homosexual couples cannot procreate naturally and (all other things being equal) have higher physical and metal health costs to themselves and society in general. Is that "legitimate" enough for you? BTW if an adult father wants to marry his adult daughter, how do those two people loving each other hurt anyone?

@Charles If that is your point, than I must say, ...

2009-11-05T14:48:06.200-05:00

@Charles

If that is your point, than I must say, I do not understand what you are trying to say.

Yes, some people are born with a tendancy to violent action, and they need help - because that violent action HURTS OTHERS who DO NOT WANT TO BE HURT

some people are born with a tendency to like younger boys...and they need help to curtail that desire because it hurts people who do not want to be involved.

There are reasons why those two things are against laws in most (if not all) countries.

But people who are gay? How does two people loving eachother hurt anyone?

Is one person in the relationship unwillingly?

Does this relationship between two people of same sex hurt people around them?
and if so, give me a concrete example of how a same sex couple hurts those around them.
THEN tell me how heterosexual couples avoid the SAME hurt/problems.

Does a relationship between two people of the same sex at all hurt YOU? In what way does it affect who you are and what you are doing?

If marriage is a principle that needs to be adhered to...why is the divorce rate so high? Kids can come out of heterosexual parental relationships with problems just as easily as they can with homosexual relationships.

Why, with the amount of orphaned kids we have, would we not want to allow a loving family of ANY TYPE to adopt them?
Sure, check and make sure there is no violence, make sure the children will be protected, and have a standard of living.
But tell me how this is any different then with heterosexual couples.

Tell me why Britney Spears deserves to rear children, but my enthusiastic, intelligent, kind hearted music professor and his partner can not.

Explain to me how letting two people who love each other use the term Marriage to describe their relationship any way changes the meaning of that word when it comes to any heterosexual couples' marriage? When it comes to Your Own Marriage (if you are indeed married).

Explain to me, why in the 21st century, we have people who want to take a section of our society and make them NOT AS EQUAL as another section - not because they want to hurt others, not because their way of life breaks laws, but because their way of life is DIFFERENT than what you are USED to?

Why should people HATE themselves for a condition that a) does not hurt ANYONE and b) is something that they are inside and out because someone else tells them it is not natural?

And I promise you, if we lived in a homosexual run country that outlawed heterosexual marriage, I would fight just as adamantly for your cause; because everyone deserves to have the same rights and responsibilities as everyone else.

Thanks, JamesY, that was my original point. I hav...

2009-11-05T13:51:22.193-05:00

Thanks, JamesY, that was my original point. I have some of the cites to medical and scientific journals on that point if anyone actually wants to participate in some intelligent discourse and debate, rather than simple ad hominem personal attacks.

@Charles said... "filistro: Are murderer...

2009-11-05T13:04:19.176-05:00

@Charles said...

"filistro:

Are murderers "born" that way?"

Actually, Charles, there is some recent scientific evidence from gene scans and brain scans that point to some murderer's in fact ARE born that way (more so when it comes to serial killers than the casual murderer). It is in there genes.

I'm having trouble finding the link to this story again, but rest assured, I'll find it and post it for you.

Ah... somebody with rational intelligence has retu...

2009-11-05T11:19:43.840-05:00

Ah... somebody with rational intelligence has returned to the conversation.

I'm looking for an excuse to postpone work for a while and ask a question that's been bugging me ever since the Maine results came in.

What, exactly, IS bigotry? And where does it come from? Is it rooted primarily in fear, or ignorance, or an insecure need for self-validation that involves violent rejection of the "other?"

And why does bigotry seem to occur in clusters of people as opposed to being evenly spread throughout society?

WV.. yobsixi... what all the boys keep saying to Charles

Charles no one here knows or cares if you are gay,...

2009-11-05T11:09:36.181-05:00

Charles no one here knows or cares if you are gay, but you are demonstrably a bigot. All of your "arguments," or non-sequiturs, strawmen, false premises, etc (as we call them in the real world), have been rooted in bigotry.

WV: dement--just too apropos for this discussion

Like I care whether I am "attractive" to you (or, ...

2009-11-05T11:03:50.624-05:00

Like I care whether I am "attractive" to you (or, do I?).