 |
| |
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
Molly - quote:
Ah, yes, it was probably a lesbian brick, thrown by a gay man. |
Ooh, an attempt at humor?
quote:
Is a homosexual riot different from a heterosexual riot? |
It is in San Francisco, I doubt the cops would have been told to stand there and take abuse in a heterosexual riot.
quote:
Was it a black gay riot, or a white gay riot, or kind of mixed? |
Mixed I imagine, did you have a point other than to make light of assault with a deadly weapon?
quote:
This gay 'lobby' in San Francisco- could it possibly have been made up of gay and lesbian residents and voters in San Francisco? |
Yes, including rioters.
quote:
Apparently the editor of 'Weekly World News' has died- I sense a job opening for you. |
I saw the injury, I knew the victim, and I lived there when it happened. Are you an a$$hole all the time or do you just play one at Poly?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
mindseye
|
 |
A Yankee living in Shanghai
Apr 1999
time: 13:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
quote:
The fact that you cannot fight the gay lobby of Apolyton |
 But you can out think them...  |
That's pretty funny after the clock-cleaning you've taken in this thread! Let us know when you are ready to start thinking, the racket from all these heads pounding the wall is generating complaints from the neighboring forums. 
quote:
Since you've just echoed what I said |
Echoed you? I corrected you. Perhaps you forgot saying:
quote:
You mean homosexuality isn't determined until puberty? But homosexuals tell us they knew they were "different" earlier than that |
I pointed out that gay people may know they are "different", but that does not mean that they know they are gay. Big difference. That is why you are absurd to talk about "gay children". Although homosexuality is probably determined by the time of birth, there is no way to know until a child reaches the age of sexual awareness.
quote:
So you don't think it matters if a homosexual child is adopted by heterosexuals or homosexuals? |
Yes, that's right. I don't think it matters, at least not very much. What is far more important is that the parents are loving and supportive. You see, it is bigoted people like you who think that being gay is such a big deal. Really, it's not, it's a pretty minor difference. Gay people suffer social problems not from being gay, but from the oppression of bigots. Remove the oppression, and and you're down to something like being left-handed. As I said before, a gay boy's Mom can advise him on dating guys just as well as a gay Dad can. Maybe you ought to read this paragraph again, it seems to be something you have a very difficult time grasping.
quote:
The fact that a child shares an additional bond to the homosexual couple is irrelevant in your mind? |
I think you are over-estimating the importance of this "bond" you are talking about. I dig guys, so does my straight Mom. Can't I have that "bond" with her? What about a gay boy with two lesbian mothers? Will his "bond" be stronger because his mothers are gay, or less because they are sexually attracted to women? Gender and orientation of parents is a minor matter at best. Love and support are far, FAR more important.
quote:
You dodged my question, I wasn't asking if it would better for a black child to remain in an institution. |
The reason I didn't answer your question wasn't because I wanted to dodge it, it was because I thought your question was irrelevant. We aren't talking about race except as an analogy, and as an analogy it doesn’t cut it in this particular situation, primarily because there are no "gay kids".
Look, the state of Florida is not being asked to choose between straight and gay parents. There is a shortage of suitable parents, while qualified would-be parents are left standing on the sidelines because of the utterly irrelevant matter of their sexual orientation. So in fact, for many children in Florida, the question really is a choice between institutions or gay parents, which is why I answered the way I did (i.e., better white parents than an institution).
On this issue, the problem with comparing orientation to race is that race is connected with culture in a way that sexual orientation is not. Remember, there are, for practical purposes, no "gay children" to teach gay culture to. Gay culture is something post-pubescent gays seek out themselves if they are interested. That's different from the situation of black kids.
While I do see advantages for same-race parents, I don't believe that they are necessarily crucial ones. My lily-white sister is raising her two mixed-race kids and and an unofficially adopted black child, and she is doing an outstanding job in all respects. Watching her raise her family leads me to believe that the advantages of same-race parents may not be critically important as long as the parent is well plugged-in to the child's culture (as my sister is to black culture). And again, my sister is a loving, supportive mother - which is much more important. Perhaps my sister is exceptional. I think parental race should be considered on a case-by-case basis. It's a factor to consider, but not the deciding factor. Thus, it's a different situation than that of gays and the gender/orientation of their parents.
quote:
Explain that to Imran and Boris, because they agree that it would be better for that (homosexual) child to be adopted by a homosexual couple. |
It's probably the case that we agree there are advantages, but perhaps disagree over their degree. What's more important is that I'm sure Boris, Imran and I would agree that, as Imran stated in his post, this question is utterly moot since, in practical terms, there are no "gay children".
quote:
I was quoting an article and the point being made by the author, the numbers are irrelevant as long as the actual numbers make the same point. |
That's wonderful! But ... Williams cited no "actual numbers". Unless I missed something, he only cited the publicly discredited crap statistics of a known homophobe extremist, pulled from a pay-for-publish vanity rag. And you trust this guy?
You carry on as if Cameron's research was generally correct, but a little off the mark. Get with it, that is simply not the case. Cameron's methods were ludicrously unsound. The notorious sh*t-eating statistic, for instance, was generalized to the entire gay population from exactly three responses to a survey! THREE! I suppose that makes his margin of error something like +/- 99%. Another time he surveyed gay men at an STD clinic (guess what, many of them had STDs), and then generalized those figures to the entire gay community. Gee, 8 out of 10 guys at this STD clinic have STDs, so that means 80% of gays have STDs. Got it.
The sorry fact that Cameron's sensationalized and extremist propoganda is still being quoted around "family values" forums ought to give you pause about those forums ... but I'm sure it never will.
quote:
Are you suggesting homosexuals have a greater or equal life expectancy to heterosexuals? If not, what is your problem? |
No, I'm not, my "problem" is that you continue to stand by a point even after all of your evidence has been shown to be phoney. You claim William's "point remains" even after it has been shown that he has no evidence at all! This clearly shows that you are basing your beliefs on something other than actual data, not that that will surprise anyone around here. As I said, revealing.
I wouldn’t be surprised if gays had shorter average lifespans than straights but I suspect the difference is months, not decades. And I bet that difference can be attributed to (1) AIDS, and (2) the effects of bigotry (i.e. higher rates of alcoholism, suicide, etc).
By the way, do you think the devious Left-handed Lobby is responsible for the fact that life insurance companies don't make southpaws pay higher premiums? Some research says lefties have shorter average lifespans, you know.
quote:
Because I've seen the homosexual community and the pressure it puts on people? My friend's dad was a cop in SF and during one of those homosexual riots he was struck in the arm by a brick, a very serious wound (attempted murder). And the "gay" lobby in that city was so strong the cops were told to let them riot and inflict wounds on the cops. They weren't even allowed to defend themselves, they had to stand their and take the abuse; so yes, I'm quite familiar with "homosexual politics". |
"One of those homosexual riots"? You must be talking about the White Night Riots. It's the only "gay riot" I can think of. This is such a pile of bullocks that I will address it in a separate post.
quote:
but I figured that number would be out of whack if not for AIDS. |
Then you clearly have a distorted view of the impact of AIDS on the gay community. It's certainly a horrific blight that has taken a terrible toll, but far from the level required to knock down average life spans for the entire gay population by DECADES!
quote:
The second study I cited posited 8-20 years so the first set of numbers are not that far off. |
I already showed that the second study is also irrelevant due to the unusual profile of the unidentified "Canadian urban center" (i.e. 95% of AIDS cases there were attributed to homosexuals). The first set of numbers (Cameron's) were basically fiction, so a comparison is meaningless.
quote:
quote:
Imagine you were a black man having a long conversation about civil rights with someone named "Crazed". Suppose "Crazed" trundled out a long parade of ridiculous objections to civil equality, and supported it by quoting the highly sensationalized, utterly discredited research of a famous white supremacist. Imagine that everytime "Crazed" referred to blacks during the conversation, he used the term "negros".
Do you think the you'd be seeing much humor in that? |
First, you don't even know what we were discussing (...) |
Berzerker misses point. Dog bites man. Sun rises in the east.
I know you have some sort of problem understanding analogies, so I'll try to explain it to you (make room at the wall, boys). Go back and read my paragraph again. It's an analogy to your postings in this thread. That's why the paragraph it started with the word "Imagine". See it there, at the beginning of the paragraph? It's the very first word. Okay, now adjust your bifocals and read the following c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y. Here is what I was trying to say:
If you carry on with Molly Bloom as my imaginary "Crazed" did with a black man, you can expect MB to find little humor in your post. For example, if you repeatedly call a gay man "homosexual", don't be surprised if you get the same response to your "humor" that a black man would give you if you repeatedly called him "negro". If you support your points with the utterly discredited data of an infamous homophobe extremist, you may get the same reaction to your "humor" that a black would give you if you supported your arguments with phoney data created by a notorious white supremicist.
Did you understand that?
quote:
quote:
Do you think that you'd be seeing much humor in that? |
Saturday Night Live did |
Yeah, well Saturday Night Live hasn’t spent years at Apolyton obsessively penning paranoid anti-gay screeds, has it?
We all understood Saturday Night Live to be a satire. Sadly, that has not been the case with you.
quote:
Of course, AIDS worldwide has hit heterosexuals much more (there's more of them too), but a large Canadian urban center has more in common with large US urban centers and that has more relevance to this debate than Africa. |
That's swell, but it was different in one crucial aspect, that 95% of it's AIDs cases were attributed to homosexuals. That simply has not been the case with the USA (nor, I suspect, Canada as a nation). That's why it was irrelevant. Maybe you ought to examine your data before posting it. Anyway, if you still don't get this, someone else will have to try to explain it to you.
quote:
Btw, where is this data from the CDC? |
I got it at www.cdc.gov. I didn’t perform any exhaustive research, but I did quickly find a study from the same time period as the one you cited, which showed the percentage of US national rates of AIDS attributed to homosexuals to be about half of what your study indicated.
quote:
And Mindseye says it doesn't matter even though he acknowledges homosexual children are inclined to feel anxiety over "coming out" to heterosexual parents, anxiety they probably won't or shouldn't have with homosexual parents. |
Please don’t mischaracterize what I post.
Sure, gay kids feel anxiety over coming out. Why? Maybe you should take a look in the mirror to find an answer to that one. But it's far more important that the parents are loving and supportive than whether or not they are gay or straight (or male or female, for that matter). Loving, supportive parents of any orientation/gender are the best possible thing a teen discovering their homosexuality can have. But people like you want to cut those chances by limiting the potential parent pool. In my book, that's plain mean-spirited.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
I defined the difference, the cops were told to stand there and take the abuse. A result of SF politics and the strength of the homosexual lobby (and that happened ~25 years ago). How do I know it was a riot by homosexuals? It was in the papers at the time and my friend's father (a sargent who was at "ground zero") had even more information about what happened and why than the papers. And the riot occured in the Castro Street community (Mindseye can testify to the significance of that area).
|
Sorry must have missed your ‘exhaustive’ definition in the tabloid thickets of your prose.
Imagine, police being told to take abuse- so who told them to take this abuse and why? Could it be politicians perhaps? Heterosexual politicians, courting votes? You know, like politicians courting votes in Boston by pandering to the Irish community, or in Detroit by pandering to the African American community, or in fact in any number of cities or states where there are assumed to be readily identified voting blocs? Of course, when it’s the infamous gay lobby, then it’s really beyond the pale....
Gosh, must be to do with all those homosexuals living in San Francisco, then.
By the way, I do know where and what the Castro is, thanks. Sometimes news from America reaches even Europe and Australia. Why, I’ve even heard tell of Harvey Milk, and Mayor Moscone! Gosh, they can’t be the riots you’re referring to can they? The ones that occurred when a jury believed some crappy old sob story about eating too many Twinkies, and let off the (heterosexual) murderer of two San Francisco politicians?
So, if you have information about the why and wherefore of this ‘homosexual’ riot from your well informed sources I suggest you share it with us. Or do we assume that perhaps these people were rioting because Neiman Marcus or Nordstroms declined their charge cards?
I love the way you talk about this- you sound like a cross between an outraged old lady from Pasadena and Elmer Fudd- ‘Hermione, darling, it was an ‘homosexual riot’ – near gave me the vapours!’
As I said- there’s that job vacancy in ‘Weekly World News’, although I’m beginning to think the Murdoch press may be more your line.
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
Oh, a fan of diversions? That explains why you keep ignoring those 2 questions. I understand why, they do shoot holes in the arguments offered by your side. |
Am I a fan of diversions? - well life is short (apparently according to one of your quoted medical experts especially if you’re homosexual) and then you die, so one takes pleasure where one finds it.
Why do I keep ignoring your two questions? Well, let’s see- how easy is it to frame two questions so that you can reasonably assume you’ll get the desired response from people, and then be able to go, nyah, nyah told you so!
Not hard at all, really.- you know, the old legal schtick-
‘when did you stop beating your wife?’
Of course, being possessed of free will I can simply say I choose not to answer your questions because I’m unaware of there being any obligation on me to do so.
As to your self-deceiving notion that somehow they shoot holes in the arguments of ‘my side’- well, I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware I had a side- I mean it can’t be the ‘gay lobby’ because Imran and chegitz and Agathon (none of them notably gay) seem to think you’re flying to nowhere too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mindseye
|
|
A Yankee living in Shanghai
Apr 1999
time: 13:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
Because I've seen the homosexual community and the pressure it puts on people? My friend's dad was a cop in SF and during one of those homosexual riots he was struck in the arm by a brick, a very serious wound (attempted murder). And the "gay" lobby in that city was so strong the cops were told to let them riot and inflict wounds on the cops. They weren't even allowed to defend themselves, they had to stand their and take the abuse; so yes, I'm quite familiar with "homosexual politics". |
Your friend's father was present at the White Night Riots? If that is what you are referring to, your post is a grotesque misrepresentation of the facts. What a surprise.
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
quote:
Originally posted by Molly Bloom
Nor indeed do we have information on what the riot was about. |
Does it matter? No, it doesn't. |
I can very well understand why you think the context doesn’t matter, it's not very flattering to your friend's father, and pretty much takes the wind out of your cramped, paranoid sails.
Allow me to provide a little context for our forum-mates who may not know about one of the darkest episodes in the history of the SF police force, a force at that time notorious for it's "cowboy" antics and violent tactics.
In 1978 Dan White, a conservative San Francisco city councilman, entered the SF City Hall and shot to death Mayor George Moscone and gay city councilman Harvey Milk, who he felt were responsible for frustrating his conservative political ambitions. White was a former SF cop, and was openly supported by the SF police force, some of whom even wore t-shirts supporting White while he was in jail awaiting trial.
The DA pathetically bungled the case, and to the utter astonishment of San Franciscans, White was found guilty only of manslaughter, despite the fact that he hard carefully planned his attack, breaking into City Hall through a basement window to avoid metal detectors, packing spare ammo, and carefully re-loading between assassinations. For a double murder, he got off with a hand-slap sentence of less than 8 years (after about four, he was paroled). The police were jubilant. "Danny-boy" beat the rap. Later, after being released from prison, White admitted to the detective who had arrested him that it was, in fact, premeditated murder, and that he had planned to kill two more liberal city officials (one was a woman).
On the day the stunning verdict was announced, the city reacted in a spasm of outrage. A large crowd of gay people spontaneously gathered in the Castro, the center of SF's gay community. They began marching down Market Street, toward downtown and City Hall. As the crowd moved it gathered in size. By the time it reached City Hall, it was no longer a crowd of gays, it was a mob of thousands of citizens.
At City Hall, frustration and anger over the injustice reached the explosive point. City Hall was stormed. Windows were broken and doors were battered down with parking meters torn from the ground. Someone started a fire inside. Twelve police cars were torched. As the riot wore on, many blacks and latinos joined in. They, too were outraged by the White verdict (Mayor Moscone was a popular progressive leader). In fact, of the people arrested that night, gays were a minority. One anonymous witness wrote:quote:
Queers started it, alright. There's no mistaking that. But let's not forget the most significant part of the evening: everybody piled on. Everybody! I saw people who looked like they had just left the opera, dressed to the nines, fight the cops alongside teenage Tenderloin homeboys. The cops had clubbed them by "mistake," and they were mega-pissed. I saw an old woman, gray as a tombstone, and kids who couldn't have been twelve. |
The cops were ordered by the Chief of Police not to interfere. I believe this decision was a wise one. Had the police intervened at that point, I think things would have been far worse. It was as the crowds thinned, that the cops were unleashed.
The police were furious. In their eyes, they had just been humiliated. A bunch of fairies had toasted 12 black-and-whites and trashed City Hall. Vengeance would be meted out.
Police cars from all over the city now converged on the Castro. Cops swarmed into the streets and bars of the Castro, truncheons swinging. Many of them had removed their badges and name tags. They smashed news cameras filming the battle (a favorite SF police tactic). The cops shattered bar windows and smashed down doors. Many pedestrians and bar patrons were clubbed to the ground, often from behind as they fled. Large numbers fought back, the cops took as many casualties as they gave. The streets and bars of the Castro were left littered with bleeding bodies. Over 160 were hospitalized.
The residents of the city were shocked that the police could just run wild like this. Scores of lawsuits and an FBI investigation followed.
If you knew anything at all about San Francisco gay politics, you would know that idea of a powerful "gay lobby" in San Francisco in 1979 is ludicrous. The gay community at that time was not very well organized. The actions of gays that night were clearly spontaneous, you can easily see that in newspaper accounts from the time. The initial gathering in the Castro was not organized or planned, neither was the subsequent march downtown, nor was the destruction at City Hall, the burning of police cars - none of it. It was the spontaneous eruption of anger at an outrageous verdict.
The order for the cops to stand by at City Hall came from Police Chief Charles Gain. To suggest that the San Francisco police chief was somehow taking orders from a "gay lobby" is laughably absurd. Gays were not much of an organized political force in the city, and the cowboys in the police department were probably the last organization on earth that would by sympathetic to them, much less take orders from them. Chris Carlsson, another witness wrote:quote:
There was no community, gay or otherwise, that would stand in support of the people arrested that night, mostly because only a few of them were gay. |
This all happened about four years before I moved to SF, so I did not personally witness it, although I met people who were in the Castro when the police attacked.
Berzerker, I'm really curious how your friend's father knew that a gay man had thrown the brick. Gays initially led the march on City Hall, but they were soon outnumbered by others as the situation turned violent. I assume that this is where your friend's father was struck, as the police certainly were not "standing there" when they attacked the Castro. As for the police "not being allowed to defend themselves" and being asked to "accept wounds", these were organized riot cops in full gear with shields.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
Mindseye - quote:
That's pretty funny after the clock-cleaning you've taken in this thread! Let us know when you are ready to start thinking, the racket from all these heads pounding the wall is generating complaints from the neighboring forums. |
In case you haven't noticed, even some of your allies are supporting my point. And after reading your posts, this will come as a shock, but even you are agreeing with me more than you'd like to admit. Now that you've agreed orientation is a factor, all we need from you is an admission that it should be the determining factor if the couples in question are otherwise equally qualified. Go ahead, take the leap into Logicland... 
quote:
Echoed you? I corrected you. Perhaps you forgot saying: |
I said they knew they were "different" and you repeated that, so yes, you just echoed what I've been saying. And even if the children don't know they are "gay", their parents have a better understanding of what is going on. And when that child does know the difference, they will face the anxiety of being "different" from their heterosexual parents even if the parents don't let the kid's orientation effect how they treat the child before puberty.
quote:
Yes, that's right. I don't think it matters, at least not very much. |
I hope it didn't hurt too much having that tooth pulled. So which is it?
quote:
What is far more important is that the parents are loving and supportive. You see, it is bigoted people like you who think that being gay is such a big deal. Really, it's not, it's a pretty minor difference. Gay people suffer social problems not from being gay, but from the oppression of bigots. Remove the oppression, and and you're down to something like being left-handed. As I said before, a gay boy's Mom can advise him on dating guys just as well as a gay Dad can. Maybe you ought to read this paragraph again, it seems to be something you have a very difficult time grasping. |
So speaking the truth is bigotry now? What you consider "not much of a difference" can be a big difference depending on the child. But at least you've admitted there might be a small difference. And you're still missing the point, bigotry exists so homosexual children may/will face less potential bigotry with homosexual parents than with heterosexual parents. And on top of that, even if there was no bigotry in the community at large, they will still feel "different" than their heterosexual parents and no amount of compassion from those parents can eliminate that feeling.
quote:
I think you are over-estimating the importance of this "bond" you are talking about. I dig guys, so does my straight Mom. Can't I have that "bond" with her? |
Not if she's a lesbian. You won't have that bond with your father, and that's where that particular bond naturally exists in a largely heterosexual world.
quote:
What about a gay boy with two lesbian mothers? Will his "bond" be stronger because his mothers are gay, or less because they are sexually attracted to women? |
Stronger because they share an orientation, weaker because thay have no father figure for the child. If we had to calculate the pros and cons, I'd say the orientation bond outweighs the cons. That's why I think it better for a homosexual child to be adopted by a homosexual couple. So I don't consider this bond insignificant, I consider it so important as to outweigh having a father.
quote:
Gender and orientation of parents is a minor matter at best. Love and support are far, FAR more important. |
Is it a "minor" matter in the mind of the child? And I'm not asking if a loving and supporting homosexual couple is more qualified than a hating and derelict heterosexual couple, I'm assuming for the sake of argument that the couples are equally qualified. You keep trying to create that strawman and it doesn't work.
quote:
The reason I didn't answer your question wasn't because I wanted to dodge it, it was because I thought your question was irrelevant. We aren't talking about race except as an analogy, and as an analogy it doesn’t cut it in this particular situation, primarily because there are no "gay kids". |
If it wasn't relevant and had no impact on your position, you'd have no problem answering it. But you know it is relevant... That's why you changed my question to "better adopted by a white couple than an institution". It doesn't matter if no "gay" kids are involved, the same principle is in play - a black child will feel a greater bond with a black couple than with a white couple. And a homosexual child will feel a greater bond with a homosexual couple than with a heterosexual couple; and a heterosexual child will feel a greater bond with a heterosexual couple. This is so obvious...
quote:
Look, the state of Florida is not being asked to choose between straight and gay parents. There is a shortage of suitable parents, while qualified would-be parents are left standing on the sidelines because of the utterly irrelevant matter of their sexual orientation. So in fact, for many children in Florida, the question really is a choice between institutions or gay parents, which is why I answered the way I did (i.e., better white parents than an institution). |
I'm not defending the Florida law, I'm making a different point and we've been debating that point, not the Florida law. Now, if Florida has a shortage of couples wanting to adopt, then the law will hurt their situation. If they don't have a shortage, then it won't.
quote:
On this issue, the problem with comparing orientation to race is that race is connected with culture in a way that sexual orientation is not. Remember, there are, for practical purposes, no "gay children" to teach gay culture to. Gay culture is something post-pubescent gays seek out themselves if they are interested. That's different from the situation of black kids. |
I'm not comparing orientation to race, I'm pointing out that the goal of adoption should be about maximising connections between children and prospective parents. The question about a black child up for adoption merely illustrates one connection we should strive for. Orientation is another...
quote:
While I do see advantages for same-race parents, I don't believe that they are necessarily crucial ones. My lily-white sister is raising her two mixed-race kids and and an unofficially adopted black child, and she is doing an outstanding job in all respects. Watching her raise her family leads me to believe that the advantages of same-race parents may not be critically important as long as the parent is well plugged-in to the child's culture (as my sister is to black culture). |
That requires a big "if" depending on the white parent, but all other things being equal, while you may not view it as "critical", it is still a bond that should be the determining factor given equally qualified couples.
quote:
And again, my sister is a loving, supportive mother - which is much more important. Perhaps my sister is exceptional. I think parental race should be considered on a case-by-case basis. It's a factor to consider, but not the deciding factor. Thus, it's a different situation than that of gays and the gender/orientation of their parents. |
Does that mean you'd rather see a black child adopted by a white couple than an equally qualified black couple? A second tooth may be loosening up...
quote:
It's probably the case that we agree there are advantages, but perhaps disagree over their degree. What's more important is that I'm sure Boris, Imran and I would agree that, as Imran stated in his post, this question is utterly moot since, in practical terms, there are no "gay children". |
I adressed that and showed why it is relevant even if the child is not sexually active, they will be active one day. Even if they don't feel anxiety before puberty, they will when puberty arrives.
quote:
That's wonderful! But ... Williams cited no "actual numbers". Unless I missed something, he only cited the publicly discredited crap statistics of a known homophobe extremist, pulled from a pay-for-publish vanity rag. And you trust this guy? |
He cited numbers, what are you talking about now? Yes, I trust Williams, making a mistake is not an indictment of integrity. But given how difficult it has been getting answers from you, take care not to cast aspersions on others.
quote:
You carry on as if Cameron's research was generally correct, but a little off the mark. Get with it, that is simply not the case. Cameron's methods were ludicrously unsound. The notorious sh*t-eating statistic, for instance, was generalized to the entire gay population from exactly three responses to a survey! THREE! I suppose that makes his margin of error something like +/- 99%. Another time he surveyed gay men at an STD clinic (guess what, many of them had STDs), and then generalized those figures to the entire gay community. Gee, 8 out of 10 guys at this STD clinic have STDs, so that means 80% of gays have STDs. Got it. |
Williams' article made no mention of anything about sh*t eating or Cameron, got it? And the numbers from the Canadian study are not that far off from Cameron's, but you tried to dismiss that study by pointing at world HIV stats. So you aren't exactly a stickler for the scientific method either.
quote:
The sorry fact that Cameron's sensationalized and extremist propoganda is still being quoted around "family values" forums ought to give you pause about those forums ... but I'm sure it never will. |
I see you've become fixated on Cameron even after I acknowledged posting his numbers was a mistake, but the Canadian study supports Williams' point. Hell, even these alleged stats from the CDC support his point.
quote:
No, I'm not, my "problem" is that you continue to stand by a point even after all of your evidence has been shown to be phoney. You claim William's "point remains" even after it has been shown that he has no evidence at all! This clearly shows that you are basing your beliefs on something other than actual data, not that that will surprise anyone around here. As I said, revealing. |
I cited a second study from Canada that supports Williams' point. Does that mean you agree homosexuality life epectancy is lower? If so, that was Williams' point.
quote:
I wouldn’t be surprised if gays had shorter average lifespans than straights but I suspect the difference is months, not decades. And I bet that difference can be attributed to (1) AIDS, and (2) the effects of bigotry (i.e. higher rates of alcoholism, suicide, etc). |
How about 6-8 years? Maybe 8-20? Comparable to the difference between smokers and non-smokers? Remember, that was Williams' point... And it doesn't matter why they have a lower life expectancy, life insurance companies deal with reality, not the perfect society.
quote:
By the way, do you think the devious Left-handed Lobby is responsible for the fact that life insurance companies don't make southpaws pay higher premiums? Some research says lefties have shorter average lifespans, you know. |
I saw some study showing homosexuals are disproportionally left handed. Strange you'd ask that question. How much shorter? If it was enough you'd think insurance companies would have higher premiums for lefties. They do for smokers and drug users (oh yeah, but not homosexuals who are more inclined to drug abuse).
quote:
"One of those homosexual riots"? You must be talking about the White Night Riots. It's the only "gay riot" I can think of. This is such a pile of bullocks that I will address it in a separate post. |
I don't recall any name for the riot, but don't let that stop your strawman.
quote:
Then you clearly have a distorted view of the impact of AIDS on the gay community. It's certainly a horrific blight that has taken a terrible toll, but far from the level required to knock down average life spans for the entire gay population by DECADES! |
The Canadian study said 8-20 years, Cameron's obit study said 20-30 years. Mindseye says a few months. And who was putting pressure on the Red Cross to continue accepting blood from homosexuals even after AIDS was known resulting in a partially tainted blood supply? Oh yeah, it was the southpaw lobby.
quote:
I already showed that the second study is also irrelevant due to the unusual profile of the unidentified "Canadian urban center" (i.e. 95% of AIDS cases there were attributed to homosexuals). The first set of numbers (Cameron's) were basically fiction, so a comparison is meaningless. |
You never showed the Canadian study was irrelevant, you tried to dismiss it by pointing to AIDS rates in the 3rd world as if Africa is more analogous to the USA than a Canadian city.
quote:
Berzerker misses point. Dog bites man. Sun rises in the east.
I know you have some sort of problem understanding analogies, so I'll try to explain it to you (make room at the wall, boys). Go back and read my paragraph again. It's an analogy to your postings in this thread. That's why the paragraph it started with the word "Imagine". See it there, at the beginning of the paragraph? It's the very first word. Okay, now adjust your bifocals and read the following c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y. Here is what I was trying to say:
If you carry on with Molly Bloom as my imaginary "Crazed" did with a black man, you can expect MB to find little humor in your post. For example, if you repeatedly call a gay man "homosexual", don't be surprised if you get the same response to your "humor" that a black man would give you if you repeatedly called him "negro". If you support your points with the utterly discredited data of an infamous homophobe extremist, you may get the same reaction to your "humor" that a black would give you if you supported your arguments with phoney data created by a notorious white supremicist.
Did you understand that? |
Molly said he didn't see the humor of my joke about little Johnny dressing up in his mommy's clothes - a joke I made about pre-pubescent indicators of homosexuality. You jumped in with a bunch of nonsense about racism and justifying civil rights violations without even knowing what Molly and I were discussing. In other words, you've been banging your head against that wall so long it has become a permanment fixture.
I wonder if the wall got any smarter. Go back and read the thread instead of presuming to speak for Molly...
quote:
Yeah, well Saturday Night Live hasn’t spent years at Apolyton obsessively penning paranoid anti-gay screeds, has it?
We all understood Saturday Night Live to be a satire. Sadly, that has not been the case with you. |
I've been penning anti-gay screeds for years now? Even obsessively? Satire is satire, but apparently only the left is allowed to be satirical, it's just "hate speech" when anyone else does it...
quote:
That's swell, but it was different in one crucial aspect, that 95% of it's AIDs cases were attributed to homosexuals. That simply has not been the case with the USA (nor, I suspect, Canada as a nation). That's why it was irrelevant. Maybe you ought to examine your data before posting it. Anyway, if you still don't get this, someone else will have to try to explain it to you. |
Is it the case in large US urban centers?
quote:
I got it at www.cdc.gov. I didn’t perform any exhaustive research, but I did quickly find a study from the same time period as the one you cited, which showed the percentage of US national rates of AIDS attributed to homosexuals to be about half of what your study indicated. |
Oh, it wasn't difficult to find the stats but too difficult to post the link to those stats? Okay, so it's half for the US overall (not large US urban centers), does that mean the life expectancy for homosexuals in the US is 4-10 years less, not a few months?
quote:
Please don’t mischaracterize what I post. |
That's coming from you.
quote:
Sure gay kids feel anxiety over coming out. Why? Maybe you should take a look in the mirror to find an answer to that one. |
Then how did I mis-characterise your post when you just repeated what I said? Oh, and I should look in the mirror now?
Have I been telling parents they should mis-treat their homosexual children? Have I been telling homosexual children they should be ashamed? It would be nice if you could back up your BS.
quote:
But it's far more important that the parents are loving and supportive than whether or not they are gay or straight (or male or female, for that matter). Loving, supportive parents of any orientation/gender are the best possible thing a teen discovering their homosexuality can have. But people like you want to cut those chances by limiting the potential parent pool. In my book, that's plain mean-spirited. |
Back to the strawman about loving parents. And sure I want to limit the potential parent pool, I want adoption to be based on finding environments most conducive to the child's needs, not anyone elses. And based on this criterion I've repeatedly argued that my position requires giving homosexuals priority when it comes to homosexual children, blacks when it comes to black children, and heterosexuals when it comes to heterosexual children.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
Mindseye - quote:
Your friend's father was present at the White Night Riots? If that is what you are referring to, your post is a grotesque misrepresentation of the facts. What a surprise. |
I don't know the name of the riots, but whichever riot it was, my description only involves what happened to my friend's father and why the police were told to stand their ground and take the abuse of the rioters and not defend themselves.
quote:
I can very well understand why you think the context doesn’t matter, it's not very flattering to your friend's father, and pretty much takes the wind out of your cramped, paranoid sails. |
Here was the context, homosexuals were angry (doesn't take much if this thread is any indicator ) so they held a riot. During that riot my friend's father was hit in the upper arm by a brick causing massive bleeding. He explained that because of SF politics and the homosexual lobby, the cops were told to stand there and not suppress the rioters.
quote:
Allow me to provide a little context for our forum-mates who may not know about one of the darkest episodes in the history of the SF police force, a force at that time notorious for it's "cowboy" antics and violent tactics. |
Yeah, it was the cops fault they were ordered to stand there and take the abuse. You don't even know which riot I'm talking about (nor do I wrt a name) but you're going to provide everyone with "context"?
quote:
In 1978 Dan White, a conservative San Francisco city councilman, entered the SF City Hall and shot to death Mayor George Moscone and gay city councilman Harvey Milk, who he felt were responsible for frustrating his conservative political ambitions. |
I was Moscone's paperboy.
quote:
White was a former SF cop, and was openly supported by the SF police force, some of whom even wore t-shirts supporting White while he was in jail awaiting trial.
The DA pathetically bungled the case, and to the utter astonishment of San Franciscans, White was found guilty only of manslaughter, despite the fact that he hard carefully planned his attack, breaking into City Hall through a basement window to avoid metal detectors, packing spare ammo, and carefully re-loading between assassinations. For a double murder, he got off with a hand-slap sentence of less than 8 years (after about four, he was paroled). |
It was the twinkies. Isn't that what we've come to expect thanks to liberals and their "it's society's fault" BS?
quote:
The police were jubilant. "Danny-boy" beat the rap. Later, after being released from prison, White admitted to the detective who had arrested him that it was, in fact, premeditated murder, and that he had planned to kill two more liberal city officials (one was a woman). |
Where do yo get this stuff? Yeah, the cops were elated. 
quote:
On the day the stunning verdict was announced, the city reacted in a spasm of outrage. A large crowd of gay people spontaneously gathered in the Castro, the center of SF's gay community. They began marching down Market Street, toward downtown and City Hall. As the crowd moved it gathered in size. By the time it reached City Hall, it was no longer a crowd of gays, it was a mob of thousands of citizens. |
Sorry, but the riot I'm talking about occured when I was still in high school, 75-77.
quote:
This all happened about four years before I moved to SF, so I did not personally witness it, although I met people who were in the Castro when the police attacked. |
I was living there at the time of both riots.
quote:
Berzerker, I'm really curious how your friend's father knew that a gay man had thrown the brick. |
Because this was a gay riot in the Castro district. And I suspect the reason some cops weren't all too happy with Moscone was that he may have been mayor at the time of this riot when the cops were told to stand there and take the abuse.
quote:
I assume that this is where your friend's father was struck, as the police certainly were not "standing there" when they attacked the Castro. As for the police "not being allowed to defend themselves" and being asked to "accept wounds", these were organized riot cops in full gear with shields. |
Not my friend's father, and he was a seargent at the time and one of the nicest people you'd ever meet. You're obviously confusing the riot over Moscone's death with the one I'm talking about. And telling me you only recall one riot when you just said you didn't even move there until 4 years after the fact doesn't speak well for your knowledge on this matter.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
Molly - quote:
Sorry must have missed your ‘exhaustive’ definition in the tabloid thickets of your prose. |
Such a graceful admission of your mistake.
quote:
Imagine, police being told to take abuse- so who told them to take this abuse and why? Could it be politicians perhaps? |
Yup, the politicians give the orders.
quote:
Heterosexual politicians, courting votes? |
Probably, although many pols and voters were homosexual.
quote:
You know, like politicians courting votes in Boston by pandering to the Irish community, or in Detroit by pandering to the African American community, or in fact in any number of cities or states where there are assumed to be readily identified voting blocs? Of course, when it’s the infamous gay lobby, then it’s really beyond the pale.... |
Thanks for making my point...again... You seem to be acknowledging my point about the power of the homosexual lobby. But you also seem to think that pointing to other lobby's means there is no homosexual lobby now. Otherwise, you could save us all the time and just admit that the homosexual lobby exists and does exert pressure on many state and local jurisdictions. Your above inquiry only served to show that the pols who told the cops to stand and take the abuse were pandering to someone (the homosexual lobby). Gee, that was my point...
quote:
Gosh, must be to do with all those homosexuals living in San Francisco, then. |
Yup.
quote:
By the way, I do know where and what the Castro is, thanks. Sometimes news from America reaches even Europe and Australia. Why, I’ve even heard tell of Harvey Milk, and Mayor Moscone! Gosh, they can’t be the riots you’re referring to can they? The ones that occurred when a jury believed some crappy old sob story about eating too many Twinkies, and let off the (heterosexual) murderer of two San Francisco politicians? |
Nope.
quote:
So, if you have information about the why and wherefore of this ‘homosexual’ riot from your well informed sources I suggest you share it with us. |
I did, from the cop who was hit in the arm by a brick and from the cop who had knowledge of why the cops were told to stand there and take it.
quote:
Or do we assume that perhaps these people were rioting because Neiman Marcus or Nordstroms declined their charge cards? |
Could be, it sure doesn't take much to rattle y'all. Sorry, another anti-gay screed.
quote:
I love the way you talk about this- you sound like a cross between an outraged old lady from Pasadena and Elmer Fudd- ‘Hermione, darling, it was an ‘homosexual riot’ – near gave me the vapours!’ |
And I didn't even need a smilie to recognise your attempt at humor.
quote:
As I said- there’s that job vacancy in ‘Weekly World News’, although I’m beginning to think the Murdoch press may be more your line. |
Oops, back to repeating "jokes", oh darn, the well ran dry.
quote:
Am I a fan of diversions? - well life is short (apparently according to one of your quoted medical experts especially if you’re homosexual) and then you die, so one takes pleasure where one finds it. |
Not that it matters to you, but I didn't quote a medical expert. I quoted an economist who offered some numbers from an unnamed source. But I did quote a Canadian study that you are avoiding...
quote:
Why do I keep ignoring your two questions? Well, let’s see- how easy is it to frame two questions so that you can reasonably assume you’ll get the desired response from people, and then be able to go, nyah, nyah told you so! |
Are you admitting that race and orientation are valid factors when it comes to adoption? Should they be determining factors when the prospective couples are otherwise equally qualified?
quote:
Of course, being possessed of free will I can simply say I choose not to answer your questions because I’m unaware of there being any obligation on me to do so. |
Sure, but that would appear quite weak in a debate.
quote:
As to your self-deceiving notion that somehow they shoot holes in the arguments of ‘my side’- well, I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware I had a side- I mean it can’t be the ‘gay lobby’ because Imran and chegitz and Agathon (none of them notably gay) seem to think you’re flying to nowhere too. |
Your side - the side that wants homosexuals to have the same standing wrt adoption as heterosexuals regardless of the needs of the children being adopted.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
Not every 2 parent household is conducive to the needs of children in need of adoption. I believe it was Ramo (or was it Boris or chegitz) who said many/most children have a closer bond to their mothers, there is no mother with 2 fathers. And 2 mothers, while probably better for a homosexual child, lacks the father figure. Furthermore, there are relatively few communities where you won't find bigotry toward homosexuals within the larger community and even though the child is heterosexual, they will still have to deal with the bigotry targeting their parents and indirectly targeting them for having homosexual parents. For example, upon finding out the child's folks are homosexual, many parents will tell their children to dis-associate with that child. And then there is still the dis-connect a heterosexual child may feel with their homosexual parents. All these problems disappear except for the homosexual child adopted by heterosexuals. But thanks for responding without a pro-gay screed...
Btw, I'm using "bigotry" as used by many homosexuals, not as it is defined in the dictionary:
- a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
Some people here qualify as bigots  , but not me 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-02-2004 07:41
|