5/14/2013 2:21 PM
The right thing to do was to say, "**** the racists, blacks deserve equal rights."
5/14/2013 2:21 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/14/2013 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd argue that the good for the homosexual community vastly outweighs the concerns you have.  Allowing gay marriage and encouraging the "gay is ok" environment on our society does much more good than bad.  And by encouraging "gay is ok" you'll ultimately have less of those locker room experiences you're describing.
Maybe, maybe not.   Right now, in today, I think "maybe not".   I'll admit that I'm 50 and not around the gay enviroment.   But I probably know as many in the 20-30 age group as I do the 50ish.   And, for the most part, many are "Meh.  Whatever.  Just don't tell me about the great time Joe and George had on the couch last week."   But some are "******* freaks.  Try a woman, why dontcha?"
True. When they were considering equal rights for blacks, it definitely mattered that there were a bunch of racists that were going to hate blacks no matter what. We definitely should have catered to the racists.
You seem OK in catering to the gays(which is a much smaller percentage of society than the racists in the 60s).   

Do you get to choose who we cater to?
5/14/2013 2:23 PM
And I'll say again that you show your ignorance when compaing the gays fight for marriage in 2013 to the blacks fight for equal rights in the 60s.  

Stop being stupid like that. 
5/14/2013 2:25 PM
Malcolm X should rise from the grave and shove those stupid posts up your ***.

5/14/2013 2:26 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/14/2013 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd argue that the good for the homosexual community vastly outweighs the concerns you have.  Allowing gay marriage and encouraging the "gay is ok" environment on our society does much more good than bad.  And by encouraging "gay is ok" you'll ultimately have less of those locker room experiences you're describing.
Maybe, maybe not.   Right now, in today, I think "maybe not".   I'll admit that I'm 50 and not around the gay enviroment.   But I probably know as many in the 20-30 age group as I do the 50ish.   And, for the most part, many are "Meh.  Whatever.  Just don't tell me about the great time Joe and George had on the couch last week."   But some are "******* freaks.  Try a woman, why dontcha?"
True. When they were considering equal rights for blacks, it definitely mattered that there were a bunch of racists that were going to hate blacks no matter what. We definitely should have catered to the racists.
You seem OK in catering to the gays(which is a much smaller percentage of society than the racists in the 60s).   

Do you get to choose who we cater to?
Size of the group is irrelevant. Gay people want equal rights. Catering to the people that don't like gays because they don't like gays is wrong. Just as wrong as catering to racists during the civil rights movement.
5/14/2013 2:26 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/14/2013 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd argue that the good for the homosexual community vastly outweighs the concerns you have.  Allowing gay marriage and encouraging the "gay is ok" environment on our society does much more good than bad.  And by encouraging "gay is ok" you'll ultimately have less of those locker room experiences you're describing.
Maybe, maybe not.   Right now, in today, I think "maybe not".   I'll admit that I'm 50 and not around the gay enviroment.   But I probably know as many in the 20-30 age group as I do the 50ish.   And, for the most part, many are "Meh.  Whatever.  Just don't tell me about the great time Joe and George had on the couch last week."   But some are "******* freaks.  Try a woman, why dontcha?"
If wouldn't be a simultaneous change, it would be gradual.  Just like anything that's similar to this.  I don't love comparing this to the Civil Rights movement, but I'm confident that society viewed blacks, overall, more negatively in 1970 than they do in 2013.  When change occurs, people against the change will react negatively to it.  But if it's ultimately the right thing to do, people will ultimately come around to it.  People in 2013, as a whole, don't view homosexuals as "equals" to heterosexuals.  Allow gay marriage, insist that being homosexual is not a bad thing.  In 2053, we'll be better off as a whole because of it.  

Note: I put quotes around "equals" because I'm uncomfortable using the word when describing the Civil Rights movement in the same paragraph.  Again, I know it isn't the same thing.
5/14/2013 2:27 PM
**** the people that have a problem with gays, gays still deserve equal rights.
5/14/2013 2:27 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/14/2013 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd argue that the good for the homosexual community vastly outweighs the concerns you have.  Allowing gay marriage and encouraging the "gay is ok" environment on our society does much more good than bad.  And by encouraging "gay is ok" you'll ultimately have less of those locker room experiences you're describing.
Maybe, maybe not.   Right now, in today, I think "maybe not".   I'll admit that I'm 50 and not around the gay enviroment.   But I probably know as many in the 20-30 age group as I do the 50ish.   And, for the most part, many are "Meh.  Whatever.  Just don't tell me about the great time Joe and George had on the couch last week."   But some are "******* freaks.  Try a woman, why dontcha?"
True. When they were considering equal rights for blacks, it definitely mattered that there were a bunch of racists that were going to hate blacks no matter what. We definitely should have catered to the racists.
You seem OK in catering to the gays(which is a much smaller percentage of society than the racists in the 60s).   

Do you get to choose who we cater to?
Size of the group is irrelevant. Gay people want equal rights. Catering to the people that don't like gays because they don't like gays is wrong. Just as wrong as catering to racists during the civil rights movement.
Maybe we just don't cater to anyone?
5/14/2013 2:29 PM
Ok. We can start by ensuring that everyone has equal rights.
5/14/2013 2:30 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/14/2013 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/14/2013 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd argue that the good for the homosexual community vastly outweighs the concerns you have.  Allowing gay marriage and encouraging the "gay is ok" environment on our society does much more good than bad.  And by encouraging "gay is ok" you'll ultimately have less of those locker room experiences you're describing.
Maybe, maybe not.   Right now, in today, I think "maybe not".   I'll admit that I'm 50 and not around the gay enviroment.   But I probably know as many in the 20-30 age group as I do the 50ish.   And, for the most part, many are "Meh.  Whatever.  Just don't tell me about the great time Joe and George had on the couch last week."   But some are "******* freaks.  Try a woman, why dontcha?"
If wouldn't be a simultaneous change, it would be gradual.  Just like anything that's similar to this.  I don't love comparing this to the Civil Rights movement, but I'm confident that society viewed blacks, overall, more negatively in 1970 than they do in 2013.  When change occurs, people against the change will react negatively to it.  But if it's ultimately the right thing to do, people will ultimately come around to it.  People in 2013, as a whole, don't view homosexuals as "equals" to heterosexuals.  Allow gay marriage, insist that being homosexual is not a bad thing.  In 2053, we'll be better off as a whole because of it.  

Note: I put quotes around "equals" because I'm uncomfortable using the word when describing the Civil Rights movement in the same paragraph.  Again, I know it isn't the same thing.
I think most of us, I'll exclude BL because he's a raging dumbass with his blacks/gays comparison, are having trouble with the "right thing" part.  

As I said before, I think there's a lot less objection to "equal rights with civil union" than there is with "No, we want to call it marriage".
5/14/2013 2:31 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:29:00 PM (view original):
Ok. We can start by ensuring that everyone has equal rights.
Sure.  SSM is called a "civil union" and comes with all the benefits and rights of marriage.

Glad we could come to an agreement.  Look forward to seeing you in the next 160 page thread where you and biz repeat yourselves for 150 pages of it.
5/14/2013 2:33 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/14/2013 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd argue that the good for the homosexual community vastly outweighs the concerns you have.  Allowing gay marriage and encouraging the "gay is ok" environment on our society does much more good than bad.  And by encouraging "gay is ok" you'll ultimately have less of those locker room experiences you're describing.
Maybe, maybe not.   Right now, in today, I think "maybe not".   I'll admit that I'm 50 and not around the gay enviroment.   But I probably know as many in the 20-30 age group as I do the 50ish.   And, for the most part, many are "Meh.  Whatever.  Just don't tell me about the great time Joe and George had on the couch last week."   But some are "******* freaks.  Try a woman, why dontcha?"
True. When they were considering equal rights for blacks, it definitely mattered that there were a bunch of racists that were going to hate blacks no matter what. We definitely should have catered to the racists.
You seem OK in catering to the gays(which is a much smaller percentage of society than the racists in the 60s).   

Do you get to choose who we cater to?
Size of the group is irrelevant. Gay people want equal rights. Catering to the people that don't like gays because they don't like gays is wrong. Just as wrong as catering to racists during the civil rights movement.
"Gay people want equal rights."

Why do you consider marriage a "right"?

5/14/2013 2:34 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:31:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:29:00 PM (view original):
Ok. We can start by ensuring that everyone has equal rights.
Sure.  SSM is called a "civil union" and comes with all the benefits and rights of marriage.

Glad we could come to an agreement.  Look forward to seeing you in the next 160 page thread where you and biz repeat yourselves for 150 pages of it.
Ok. But right now, civil unions/DPs aren't legally equal to marriage.
5/14/2013 2:35 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/14/2013 2:31:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/14/2013 2:29:00 PM (view original):
Ok. We can start by ensuring that everyone has equal rights.
Sure.  SSM is called a "civil union" and comes with all the benefits and rights of marriage.

Glad we could come to an agreement.  Look forward to seeing you in the next 160 page thread where you and biz repeat yourselves for 150 pages of it.
Ok. But right now, civil unions/DPs aren't legally equal to marriage.
Well, they should be. 
5/14/2013 2:36 PM
Hasn't bad_luck already said that if civil unions had all the same rights as marriage, that still wouldn't be enough?
of 358

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.