LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends

Information

LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends

Nontheist lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex people & friends.

Members: 18
Latest Activity: Jan 29

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends to add comments!

Comment by Darren Taggart on December 2, 2011 at 6:03am
Bachman and her high school debating club arguments are pure common denominator; as if it was the questioner's fault for forgetting to add the qualifier of 'to each other'. It's the same as when they winge on about the definition of marriage in the dictionary being sufficient reason to deny gay marriage, as though it's impossible to edit a dictionary. Childish reasoning of an idiot. Next she'll be saying that freedom of religion means that she's free to impose her christian beliefs on everyone.

If you US lot elect her I shall be very disappointed with you and may even use my iPad slightly less in protest! (joking, ovvers;-))
Comment by Tenken on December 1, 2011 at 9:32pm

@Dallas
Lol the comments have really blown up on your video, huh?  And as for the other video, Bachman worded her answer to the gay marriage question SO well.  She has received guidance from intelligent people.  Gays DO have the right to marry.  Gay marriage is not a gay right; it's a right for straights too.  It puts things in a little different perspective for me.

Her rant about religion in schools was also very well-worded.  I can see how a like-minded crowd would rally around her.  She also puts this issue in a different perspective for me.  I realize how important the Department of Education is after seeing this.  Sorry, but public schools are not churches.  That's what private schools are for.

Finally, WHY is everyone posting in the comments section?  I feel like most of what gets said down here deserves a discussion.

Comment by Dominic Florio on December 1, 2011 at 8:03pm
A friend of mine had a good idea.  Carry slips of paper with you to drop into Salvation Army Kettles, which explain why you are not donating.
I thought of these four as a sample of what you could write.  Use one or all four, or one of your own.
Why I Will Not Donate to the Salvation Army:
1. When my dad was on the docks loading up to board a ship to to fight a war in Korea, Goodwill was out there giving soldiers cups of coffee. The Salvation Army was out there SELLING cups of coffee to the service men.
2. Like other profit making religious organizations, you file for tax exemption under religion, and therefore do not file a 990 form which would declare your income and what you do with your money.
3. You charge a price for feeding the needy.  That price is obedience to your religion, forcing those who are down and out to pray for their supper, despite individual personal beliefs.
4. You blatantly ignore your position statement of helping all who are in need and deny LGBT people services unless they renounce their sexuality, end same-sex relationships, or, in some cases, attend services "open to all who confess Christ as Savior and who accept and abide by The Salvation Army's doctrine and discipline." In other words, if you're gay or lesbian, you don't qualify.

http://www.bilerico.com/2011/11/why_you_shouldnt_donate_to_the_salv...

Comment by Darren Taggart on November 26, 2011 at 3:55pm
I'm going to believe that your friend's grandparents were ballroom dancing, Sentient.
Comment by Darren Taggart on November 26, 2011 at 3:51pm
I have tattoos and i'm just awful ;-)
Comment by Dominic Florio on November 26, 2011 at 3:20pm

Sure, there are many biggoted gay people, but the danger is that preference can be mistaken for some ism.  I am heavy set and I know that there are many who are not going to be attracted to me, but I do fine in the sex department.  It is hurtfull, not when somone is not attracted to you, but when people, gay or straight, feel that it is ok to comment on the appearance of someone else. 

I think Cory is an attractive guy, but I am not usually attracted to asians or black men.  I like whites and hispanics, but I'm also not generally attracted to people with red hair, but I don't have an actual rule.  It depends on the person.

When any group experiences a lot of prejudice and/or discrimination, it is sometimes difficult to separate those experiences from preference.  Years ago, a black man was trying to pick me up in a bar and I was very polite and told him that I was with friends.  He stated that it was because he was black.  Well it was, but not based on racism, it was based on the fact that I don't have a strong sexual response to black men.

It would never occur to me to judge his appearance or comment in a negative way about him, because of the color of his skin.  But, I am amazed over the insensitivity and lack of manners which some people exhibited when dealing with anyone who does not fit the "normal" standard of beauty.

Being a 52 yr old "bear" type, I often feel as if I'm treated as a fetish because I'm not 20, blonde, smooth, and a gym rat. All I can say is that we older more experienced men know things that those twinks haven't learned yet.  So there! 

 

 

Comment by Darren Taggart on November 26, 2011 at 3:07pm
Racism is the theory that the colour of someone's skin allows you to infer some behavioural trait or propensity. Not finding a white person or whatever unattractive isn't racist, any more than being gay is sexist; it's just a function of taste. That said it might seem a bit shallow for appearance to be a deal breaker. That said my grandparents kissing is gross...
Comment by Tenken on November 26, 2011 at 12:34am

@Sentient
Thanks for the video.  I didn't realize there was discrimination like that against "Asians."  To be completely honest, I never thought of them as people "of color," as the guy in the video referred to himself.  It's hard for me to blame people for not being attracted to people of color, as my attraction definitely has limits too.  Is it conditioned?  Probably.  Could it be overcome?  Perhaps, but I have no real desire to change even if it could.

Comment by Tenken on November 26, 2011 at 12:00am

Sentient, you can read into it what you want, but his words are exactly how I feel.  He doesn't just think "sexuality is diverse"; he thinks sexuality is so diverse that it can't be "reduced to binary terms."  Even in the time of our discussion on here, I have included links that attack the construct validity of dichotomous sexual orientation, which is exactly what Vidal has done.  It's kind of like pointing out the absurdity that anyone would be biologically exclusively attracted to one sex when sexuality is so complex.

For the record, I do see how a man of your faith could interpret it differently, as if sexuality is so complex that it cannot be accurately defined by singling out one attribute like sex.  Doing so might even be deceptive, but not necessarily untrue.

Comment by Gary F. Lord on November 25, 2011 at 11:48pm

Thank you The Nerd.  Just asked to be a member. 

 

Members (17)

 
 
 

About

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service