McCain: Racist, Bigot & Homophobe

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
reply to post by RRconservative

 

How is allowing gay marriage a "special right"

Because gay marriage is still opposed by more than 50% of the people in this nation and I can back that statement up with official data.

Gallup poll - CA ruling on same sex marriage bucks majority view (56% opposed, May 2008)
www.gallup.com...

Read on in the article and you find this bit of info:

The critical issue for the gay rights movement today is same-sex marriage. The latest poll shows there is still considerable public resistance to giving the same legal sanction to same-sex couples as the law does to traditional marriages. As Gallup reported on May 15, 2008, only 40% of Americans say such marriages should be legally valid -- as they now are in Massachusetts and California -- while 56% disagree.

Based on that, a majority of Americans are not yet willing to compormise their moral integrity in favor of allowing "gay marriages". Therefore, it should and must be considered a "special right".

[edit on 7-8-2008 by sos37]

Reply to Andrew:

If a gay man wants to marry a gay woman...no one is stopping them. That is equal rights.

However if a man wants to marry a man, or a woman marrying a woman...that is a special right.

I'm not up on the homosexual agenda, so unfortunately I'm not sure what term is appropriate or not. Homo, queer, queen, fag, gay....I have no idea what is acceptable because these are term used by homosexuals to describe themselves, one day it is acceptable, one day it is not. I'm confused? Homo is a short version of homosexual, nothing more.

BTW the term "gay" had a totally different meaning at one time. It was the Homosexual that hijacked the term. Why give them the satisfaction of them distorting the English language?

[edit on 7-8-2008 by RRconservative]

reply to post by sos37


Wow. I never thought i'd see you using polls to back up your claim...sos..



So if the majority of Americans (based on polls) think bush is bad, the iraq war is bad, and global warming is real - should they all be true?

Lets impeach bush, -pull out of iraq, and drive in horse powered buggies from now on!


The constitution decides the rights of the people in this country.

not the people of this country!



"special rights" is a right given to someone based solely on that persons skin color or gender.

Affirmative action is a special right. White males have no access to it.

"gay marriage" is not a special right.

Because its the exact same thing as "straight marriage"

It would only be a special right if gay marriage allowed for something better than what straight marrige gives.

Example: If gay marriage allowed a larger tax cut, then it'd be a special right.

In any event, anyone who says gay's dont have the right to be married is a homophobe.

Sorry if it hurts your feelings. But if the shoe fits...

[edit on 8/7/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

Originally posted by RRconservative
Homo, queer, queen, fag, gay....I have no idea what is acceptable because these are term used by homosexuals to describe themselves, one day it is acceptable, one day it is not. I'm confused?

A corrolation. You hear some black people call each other 'n-word', you use it and you're in deep. I see it the same way with gay folks. If some want to use those terms, fine.

Way back in the day the majority of people opposed women the right to vote.Does that make it a special right?In the 50's and 60's the majority of the residents in the deep south didn't like the fact that blacks had the right to vote.Did that make them right?

Originally posted by Level X


McCain can't sleep at night because he understands his wife will never have sex with him again if he allows a black man to beat him.

"We McCains may tolerate loosers outside our household... but hon... you sure as hell can kiss this goodbye in our bedroom."

[edit on 6-8-2008 by Level X]

I am no McCain supporter but this has to be the most ignorant thing ever posted on ATS. Were you hiding in the bedroom closet?

Originally posted by RRconservative
Reply to Andrew:

If a gay man wants to marry a gay woman...no one is stopping them. That is equal rights.

However if a man wants to marry a man, or a woman marrying a woman...that is a special right.

Are you serious? Why would a gay man marry a gay woman? Party of marriage is physical attraction and mental stimulation. If you can't have that with your partner, what is the point?

I'm not up on the homosexual agenda, so unfortunately I'm not sure what term is appropriate or not. Homo, queer, queen, fag, gay....I have no idea what is acceptable because these are term used by homosexuals to describe themselves, one day it is acceptable, one day it is not. I'm confused? Homo is a short version of homosexual, nothing more.

Homo, queer, fag, gay. Whats wrong with homosexual? Whats wrong with gay person. Why does it have to be homo, queer, and fag? All of which are "socially agreed upon" derogatory references for a gay person. Just because they dont offend you, doesnt mean they don't offend others.

BTW the term "gay" had a totally different meaning at one time. It was the Homosexual that hijacked the term. Why give them the satisfaction of them distorting the English language?

By the way. The term "web" used to refer solely to the thing a spider creates. By the internet hijacked that term.

"Mouse" used to be only associated with a small varmint that infests houses in every nook and cranny on this planet.

But Apple and Microsoft helped hijack that term too.


You are the true embodiment of the conservative belief, RR.

Conservatives stick to tradition, IE: Refuse to let go of the past.

As society advances (chronologically) so does the ideological traditions of that society.
Decades and centuries ago, there were special laws that said eating meat was hell worthy. Witches were identified if the person accused DIDNT drown in a river, and black people were "inferior" to whites in all regards. Or so said the ideologically norm at the time.

Our society has evolved past that point, and is blossoming into an era of equality.

Making the argument that gay marraige allows "special rights" to gay people is the worst thought out argument in the history of the issue.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by RRconservative
Homo, queer, queen, fag, gay....I have no idea what is acceptable because these are term used by homosexuals to describe themselves, one day it is acceptable, one day it is not. I'm confused?

A corrolation. You hear some black people call each other 'n-word', you use it and you're in deep. I see it the same way with gay folks. If some want to use those terms, fine.

Let me speak to you as an African-American on that issue. The "N" word is a vile fracked up word no matter who use it.Believe it or not it hurts me more to hear other African-Americans use that vile word than it is for non African-Americans.When I hear others of my race using that word I correct them real fast. Not all of us use it. This garbage about using it in different terms or spelling it different is just that garbage. The same with gays that call each other the "F" word or women calling each other the"B" word.Its wrong wrong wrong no matter who says it. Nothing justifies it. NOTHING.This garbage about making the "word" our own therefore taking away its power is just that garbage. If its not cool for others to use those words then its not cool for anyone. Now back to the topic at hand.........

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

By the way. The term "web" used to refer solely to the thing a spider creates. By the internet hijacked that term.

"Mouse" used to be only associated with a small varmint that infests houses in every nook and cranny on this planet.

But Apple and Microsoft helped hijack that term too.

When someone uses the term "web" in it's proper context, people will know what you are talking about. The same thing with "mouse."

But if I was in a really joyous mood, and I proclaimed, "I'm so gay!" people would look at me in a weird way. (The term "gay" used to mean happy.) So your logic does not fly in this case.

reply to post by RRconservative


The only people who would look at you in a weird way are people like McCain.

I dont care if you're gay in a sexual way

Or gay in a mood kind of way

People don't say "keen" or "tre-awesome" anymore either.

Does that mean anything?

lots of words have multiple meanings. You choosing "gay" and saying "dem dere homo's, they hijacked the damn werd, dontcha know it!" only shows what kind of person you are, and does nothing to help mccain.

McCain is a bigot and a homophobe.

You're only helping prove the OP.

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
reply to post by sos37

 

The constitution decides the rights of the people in this country.

not the people of this country!

Disagreed! People elect the members of Congress, both houses, into office who then are able to make amendments to the constitution where further clarification of the written document is called for. The legislators can be greatly influenced by pressure from voters as we recently saw when the illegal immigration issue flared.

Legislators who try to pass off laws that the public doesn't agree with can be voted out of office by the people. Therefore, while average people aren't the entire process, the people certainly play a great hand in making constitutional law happen.

"special rights" is a right given to someone based solely on that persons skin color or gender.

Affirmative action is a special right. White males have no access to it.

"gay marriage" is not a special right.

Because its the exact same thing as "straight marriage"

It would only be a special right if gay marriage allowed for something better than what straight marrige gives.

Disagreed, once again! Let's use your own example. You say affirmative action is a right given to someone solely based on someone's skin color or gender. In other words, something someone is born with.

So either you must conclude that homosexuality isn't something that someone is born with or a special right equivalent to affirmative action must apply. Straight men and women would have no access to it.

Also, using your example of affirmative action - the goal of affirmative action is equality, not aquisition of rights above and beyond what everyone else has. Likewise, gays seek equality in marriage, not something above or beyond what everyone else has.

The term affirmative actiondescribes policies aimed at a historically socio-politically non-dominant group (typically, minority men or women of all racial groups) intended to promote its access to education or employment. Motivation for affirmative action is a desire to redress effects of actual or perceived, past or current discrimination that is regarded as unfair

en.wikipedia.org...

So if affirmative action is a special right, gay marriage must also be considered a special right.

The hateful "gook" remarks from McCain are susprising to me.

I've known a few Russians who fought Nazis in WWII and actually made it (most of 20 year old Russians of that generation were killed). One of them was my grandfather. I lost another relative in WWII (obviously before I was born).

Now, Nazi's were not the kind to invite a Russian over, for some tea and crumpets when the battle is done at 5pm. They were ferocious soldiers and brutal oppressors. People who fought them had no illussions about that and saw themselves what sort of things the Nazis were capable of.

And yet, some years after the war, I didn't find any lasting hate of Germans in the Russian populace, including those who survived unimaginable odds and had to persevere through things we can't possibly even start to comprehend.

What makes McCain so different?

Why don't we allow George Carlin (the late and great) to summarize the use of words like "homo" and "n-word"

Can't say Nigger, Boogie, Jig, Jigaboo, Skinhead, Moolimoolinyon, Schvatzit, Junglebunny. Greaser, Greaseball, Dago, Guinea, Whop, Ginzo, Kike, Zebe, Heed, Yid, Mocky, Himie, Mick, Donkey, Turkey, Limey, Frog. Zip, Zipperhead, Squarehead, Crout, Hiney, Jerry, Hun, Slope, Slopehead, Chink, Gook.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with any of those words in and of themselves. Their only words. It's the context that counts. It's the user. It's the intention behind the words that makes them good or bad. The words are completely neutral.
The words are innocent. I get tired of people talking about bad words and bad language. Bull#! It's the context that makes them good or bad. The context.
That makes them good or bad. For instance, you take the word "Nigger." There is absolutely nothing wrong with the word "Nigger" in and of itself. It's the racist asshole who's using it that you ought to be concerned about. We don't mind when Richard Pryer or Eddie Murphy say it. Why? Because we know their not racist.
Their Niggers! Context. Context. We don't mind their context because we know their black. Hey, I know I'm whitey, the blue-eyed devil, paddy-o, fay gray boy, honkey, mother-#er myself.
Don't bother my ass. Their only words. You can't be afraid of words that speak the truth, even if it's an unpleasant truth, like the fact that there's a bigot and a racist in every living room on every street corner in this country.

and most fittingly

because we do think in language and so the quality of our thoughts and ideas could only be as good as the quality of our language

Source



[edit on 8/7/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

reply to post by sos37


Why does it scare you so much to just allow gay people the same rights we have?

Marriage, adoption, etc.

Seriously - you seem to share mccains fear - let us know why it scares you.

The only difference between me and a gay person is sexual preference.

Thats it.

Does that make them less human?

By my standards - no. They're equal

By your standards - yes. They can't marry and/or adopt if they want to.

Sickening....really

[edit on 8/7/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

reply to post by buddhasystem


I imagine there are quite a few Jewish folk out there who would respectfully disagree to that comment. I don't know - I guess it all depends on the amount of suffering someone goes through at the hands of another.

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
reply to post by RRconservative

 

How is allowing gay marriage a "special right"

Because gay marriage is still opposed by more than 50% of the people in this nation and I can back that statement up with official data.

Based on that, a majority of Americans are not yet willing to compormise their moral integrity in favor of allowing "gay marriages". Therefore, it should and must be considered a "special right".

[edit on 7-8-2008 by sos37]

Hey sos, I haven't delved into the stats or accuracy/margin of error or potential bias of the polls you cited yet, but even if correct...it doesn't make it right or true. I remember reading at the time of the civil war, the majority or americans (excluding blacks of course) were for letting the institution of slavery stand. Polls can't be considered a moral standard...the moral position should be able to stand on it's own.

And attributing the numbers to an unwillingness to "compromise their moral integrity" is attributing the numbers to something that we plain don't know. It's a reach. Many of those polled could be flat out homophobic idiots. Again assuming the data holds up to scrutiny.

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
reply to post by sos37

 

Why does it scare you so much to just allow gay people the same rights we have?

Marriage, adoption, etc.

Seriously - you seem to share mccains fear - let us know why it scares you.

This isn't about fear. I was debating your points.

But to answer your question about my personal beliefs, it's a decision of morality. I personally believe that marriage is reserved for a man and a woman. I also believe in the Bible and that the Bible condemns homosexuality. I'm not opposed to "same sex unions" for gays as long as they aren't performed under the guise of being blessed by God.

If my daughter grows up and one day realizes she's a lesbian (which I doubt will happen) then I'll still love her as much as I do now. But I will stress to her that her sexual orientation is an issue that she must address with God personally, however she wants to handle it.

I also believe that the gay marriage be left up to the states to decide individually, not Congress.

i have given this much thought, whilst some may condemn me for what i am about to say, i hope that some of you may understand and learn from this.
have you ever wondered to yourself why is it so bad to be a racist? most people are by the medias standards, as a white person you are more inclined to move to a neighbourhood that is white, and as a coloured person you are more inclined to move to a neighbourhood that is coloured, castes stick together!!, black comedians slur the white man and vice versa, whilst as a white man i must respect a coloured mans history and ethnicity i must not single him out because of his colour or creed, i have no hatred of ethnic people, i treat each person as an individual. why is it so wrong to disagree with homosexuality?, we do not have hetrosexual march's, once again i treat everyone as an individual, it is however all of these groups who wish to be treated as a whole, but we are not allowed to do this or we are accused of generalising, it confuses a lot of people, and unfortunately this results in despair and eventually hate, but it is their own free choice what they think and should not be critisised for what they choose to think, would you rather vote for a man who thinks gook or 'n-word' (a hateful and disrespectful word) or honky but does not let you know this or would you rather they were honest. i am a bastard (in the true essence of the word), when i hear people complaining about how their religon or race or whatever has been slandered i often hear people use this word, with no thought as to its meaning or how it may offend people born out of wedlock that their position may be used as an insult, you should all think about these things and truly ask yourself, is it so bad to be a bigot, its whether you act on it is what makes you a bad person

reply to post by sos37


And your religious and moral beliefs are fine. Nobody is disputing that.

What we're disputing is that government can't discriminate on religious basis.

They cant' say "gay marriage isnt allowed because OUR bible says so"

That goes against why this country was created in the first place.

Originally posted by sos37
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

I imagine there are quite a few Jewish folk out there who would respectfully disagree to that comment. I don't know - I guess it all depends on the amount of suffering someone goes through at the hands of another.

I am not sure it depends on the level of suffering. It depends on the individual that has been oppressed or tortured. To take the resultant rage that justifiably should be directed toward your opressors (Nazi's vs Germans) or in McCain's case (North Vietnamese Communists vs. Asians or "Gooks") ...well it takes a special potential for hate and anger to extrapolate and direct your anger toward a billion plus people that had nothing to do with it decades later.

Again my sense is that McCain is more idiot than racist...but approaches his racism with the good old boy demeanor seeking approval and acting particularly pleased with himself. Idiot and racist...but more idiot.