Subject:
|
Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:15:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2375 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
<snip>
>
> I never said our culture was perfect. We must always try and strive for
> perfection; to attain the ideal, rather than explore perversion and deviancy.
"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and prepare to be assimilated. Resistance
is futile."
One person's 'perversion'(1) is another person's societal norm. What makes
something a perversion? A line in a book that states -- "This was a perversion
onto God"?
For me, my bottom line is harmony, not monotony. I mentioned it
before--multiculturalism vs melting pot. As others have stated quite clearly
and concicely, willing parties should be able to do anything they 'will', as
long as that does not infringe or impact negatively on *anyone* else. It don't
get much more basic than that.
If two people of the same sex 'fall in love' with each other and want to spend
their lives together, and they wish to avail themselves of a current societal
institution that heterosexual people are not only allowed to use, but are
technically *suppose* to use for such unions (2), who am I to say 'no'? To
exclude willing, consenting participants from societal institutions because some
people "don't like it" is the height of arrogant presumption. You may not like
the comparison, and you can point out that there are people who don't like the
comparison, but, again, you liking it is irrelevant--a while back there was
segregation (and there are still issues today regarding that one) and equal
rights for women (same work/same pay)--the comparison isn't between black people
and homosexuals, or comparing womens rights to the trials of homosexuals--no,
the comparison is on the other side of the equation--the folks who had the
difficulty considering black people being equal to themselves, that had issues
thinking that women are equal to men--these folks had to undergo the same
'learning process' as people today who have difficulty understanding that
homosexuals deserve the same treatment, the same access to societal
institutions, as any other member of society.
To deny that to *any* group of individuals based on sex, race, religion, or
sexual preference is fundamentally wrong--it's a denial of freedom to those
individuals, and, inherently, makes them second class citizens.
<snip>
> [JOHN]
Dave K
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Thank you for that clarification. I meant that I choose lines that I believe are absolutely drawn out. My point was that I am not the only one who adheres to drawn lines. We all do. (...) Eh, when the perspective is from the Creator of the (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
218 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
