Fox wrote:All human efforts at positive loving relationships should be sanctified and protected by law, equally.
Careful, you'll be branded an idiotic, trash talking homophobe before long.
My only point is that if gay people be extended the right to same sex marriage and the rights that that entails then straight people should be able to do the same thing. That's IT. If you can agree to that we are in agreement, if you can't you are (god I hate to use the phrase) a heterophobe, I guess.
The only critic of what I am saying that had anything even remotley substantive was Poagao asking me about the special rights thing. There are special rights, scholarships granted to only gay people etc. but they aren't numerous or large enough to be taken that seriously. I mispoke there. Somehow he picked up an anti-gay tone or something in there. Maybe it was the use of quotes. Maybe "gay" sounds homophobic. I dunno. What I meant by it was "gay" as opposed to "straight" or "asexual" or whatever else.
Not that I care all that much but being called a homophobe is a bit weird. I have been around gay people my entire life. Most of my favorite people are gay. Would I agree though that they be given economic priveledges based on their gayness that are not extended to me? Not on your life. Why the fuck would I?
White guys my age lived through what you could call "the age of special rights and priveledges extended to everyone except your demographic." It was a curious age to live through and one that left many of us with resentments. I could go on to talk about how there are still scholarship programs intended to balance the male/female ratio in universities still in place loooong after the number of women both entering university and graduation surpassed men, or the aborigineee friends I had that enjoyed all manner of priveledges not available to me or any other of a number other examples of special treatment handed out but it's like talking to a wall. If you don't go for the liberal agenda hook line and sinker you are labeled ignorant or bigoted or sexist. People are so stupid they think that by naming something they have undersoood it and that's the end of the conversation.
Next time you are in a big Canadian city go down to the soup kitchen and see how many middle aged white guys you see standing in line. See if they don't form a majority. When you are done with that come back and talk. Till then, meh...
You either agree that straight people be granted the sme rights as gay people or you are, what's the word, do we have to use "heterophobic?" It doesn't seem accurate. We need to invent a word to describe a person who discrimintaes against heterosexuals. People who have faced a great deal of dicrimination "as" homosexuals have a difficult time imagining that such a contrary state of affairs could exist, or rather do know exactly but have a hard time believing that someone would talk about it since nobody else does, for whatever reason. There is absolutley no question that the number of openly gay people assuming positions of power and influence is on the increase. Is it that hard to imagine that they might themselves be capable of the same sort of disciminatory behaviour that they were once victims of?
It is the blindness of it that fascinates me. The hypocrisy. A good many zionists I imagine had experience with ww2.