As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

LGBTT: It's Raining DOMA Rulings! (It's for Thread)

18586889091100

Posts

  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    Well, if you're straight and plan on having kids, you may be the parent of someone who is LGBT, so I'd say it's pretty much a concern for everyone who isn't a horrible person.

    It's always nice to be on the right side of history before circumstance forces decision upon you.

  • Twenty SidedTwenty Sided Registered User regular
    edited April 2013
    You know, finding a political cartoon featuring a Tsunami destroying America with a wave of gay is much harder than you'd expect.
    Regardless, I made it a personal game to go find one to make a complete set involving tidal waves.

    tidalwave_zps9c7cf108.jpg
    samesexmarriagetide_custom-f7fe22a9292afe04a6a56b8925ba9e81f96a0c92-s40_zpse247f7cb.jpg

    I only regret having to settle with a more unprofessional-looking cartoon. Oh well.

    Twenty Sided on
  • EmperorSethEmperorSeth Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Elldren wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Except at no point did she call them lesser people.

    Not approving of a person doing X thing does not mean you think they're horrific abominations who must be stoned. People are attributing a shit ton more hyperbole to a statement than it has. Which is pretty much none. Unless anyone in here thinks anyone who does something they personally don't approve of is subhuman garbage.

    She is essentially saying "Yall gon burn in hell, but that's okay"

    Or she's saying nothing

    In no case is what she's saying supportive

    Only in this thread could "Don't hate gay people" be considered not supportive.

    It's a comment in the same vein as "Bless your heart."

    Or better yet, "I'll pray for you."

    You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Western coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderator mod
    Kana wrote: »
    I find the phrase "straight ally" super weird. I don't think anyone's ever called me that before, and I certainly don't define myself an "ally" of the gay rights movement. That word just makes me think of like supply trains and strategic geopolitical alliances. Like, allies eventually stop being allies, they're working together but are by definition fundamentally separate. I'm not "pro-gay", I'm pro equality and pro treating all people with respect. And I don't consider my support for equal treatment under the law to be some sort of magnanimous gesture because of how kind I am. I support good schools in my community even though I don't have kids because I don't want to live in a community of stupid people, and I support gay rights and minority rights because I want to live in a free and fair democracy, and I don't want to live in a shitty-ass 18th century theocracy.

    I dunno, I guess it's not really that simple either, but I just find it weird when people act like if you're straight you can just pick up and walk away from gay rights at no cost. The stakes are obviously not the same, but I still feel like I have a personal stake in gay rights succeeding, just like I have an interest in women being treated equally and fairly despite me not being female. I want people to be treated right, because I'm also a person, and that's a far more important bond than skin color or who you want to have sex with, at least to me.

    Uh that might've turned a little heavier than I was intending, but yeah.

    I think the difference between someone who'd consider themselves a feminist and queer ally and you is their self identification as an ally (and feminist, if you don't identify as one).

    I think for the most part it's the most concise way to say "I support gay rights and gay people."

    Or another way of looking at it is that a lot of allies base their.. ally..ness.. in believing in free rights and stuff.

    It's complex. Identification and politics always are.

  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    I consider myself a feminist and a LGBT advocate.

    I've never felt particularly smug about either of those things, but that's because it's hard to make a case for NOT being those things that doesn't end up arguing that you're a giant asshole.

  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Western coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderator mod
    Yeah I'm a feminist.

    I don't feel smug about that at all since it's so mundane and something I think people should be anyway.

    It's so woven into my life that I don't even think about it anymore.

  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Yeah I'm a feminist.

    I don't feel smug about that at all since it's so mundane and something I think people should be anyway.

    It's so woven into my life that I don't even think about it anymore.

    Agreed, to the point where when suddenly someone utters "feminist" as an epithet, I get confused and worried.

    Much the same as using "elitist" or "intellectual" in the same capacity.


    "What you're think you're so smart and treat people like equals or something? Like some kind of jerk?"

  • KupiKupi Registered User regular
    I realize that I'm on the tail end of the conversation and at least one of the interested parties has backed out, but I'd like to add my voice to the chorus.

    The thing about that girl's facebook post is that, to individuals who have previously been a part of the anti-gay, evangelical Christian crowd in the past, the phrasing and sentiment of the post are clearly recognizable from personal experience as how people in that group express that sentiment to the outside world. It is the way they say "I do not believe gays should be allowed to marry" in a way that does not make reference to the Bible, which they realize their audience does not accept as authoritative source. So, admittedly, there is not much in the text itself that explicitly translates to "Gays will burn in Hell and I will not have my country turn into the Sodom Below." But if an evangelical is going to tell you that they think gays shouldn't be allowed to marry and they're trying to be polite about it, that's how it's going to come out. I (and the others in this thread of a similar opinion) have heard it coming out of evangelicals enough times to feel confident that darker thoughts lurk beneath the pleasant veneer.

    More to the point, I've never heard someone who does support the right of gays to marry say something like that. The mildest support I've heard for the idea is "Makes no difference to me."

    And with that, my apologies for opening old wounds.

    ---

    As for "WTF is a 'straight ally'", I'd say it's a matter of degree. Are you protesting? Is it a hot topic with you? Do you call yourself a Straight Ally? Then it's more likely you are than, say, a straight person who, at voting time, takes gay rights into consideration.

    My favorite musical instrument is the air-raid siren.
  • LadyMLadyM Registered User regular
    What does the pink shark with the piercing represent in the first cartoon, I wonder!

    I think "straight ally" became a "thing" when it was much harder to find ANY straight people who believed in gay rights.

  • TheBlackWindTheBlackWind Registered User regular
    Exactly. It was when it was odd for a not-gay person to stand up for gay rights.

    It sounds outdated because it is.

    PAD ID - 328,762,218
  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    I'm a straight ally...of justice!

    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • Magus`Magus` The fun has been DOUBLED! Registered User regular
    Seems you're done talking about it, but that lady isn't supportive, she's tolerant. I'm too tired to think of a witty analogy.

  • emp123emp123 Registered User regular
    What the shit happened today? Ross grew hair, Preacher lost his face, and you guys spent four pages arguing about a facebook post.

    GJ Uraguay though, overcoming its homophobic name calling and legalizing gay marriage.

  • Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    .
    If you've got a tumour, isn't it at least better that it's benign than malignant?

    Making it socially unacceptable and in some cases illegal to be openly homophobic is the first step to getting rid of the problem.

    Can't make it illegal; that's not how this country works. As for making it socially unacceptable, that is pretty much the case in mainstream society already. The problem is that there is an exceptionally large fringe society that, much like with racists, have very few fucks to give about our opinion of them.

    Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.

    - John Stuart Mill
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    .
    If you've got a tumour, isn't it at least better that it's benign than malignant?

    Making it socially unacceptable and in some cases illegal to be openly homophobic is the first step to getting rid of the problem.

    Can't make it illegal; that's not how this country works. As for making it socially unacceptable, that is pretty much the case in mainstream society already. The problem is that there is an exceptionally large fringe society that, much like with racists, have very few fucks to give about our opinion of them.

    For people who give so few fucks, they sure do make a big whiney fuss about being "persecuted" and "anti-christian discrimination" when they're told that no, extending their homophobia past certain limits is against the law.

  • InfidelInfidel Heretic Registered User regular
    Don't you know? It is hypocritical to be intolerant of intolerance.

    You're a terrible person for not letting them be terrible people, or something.

    OrokosPA.png
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    Infidel wrote: »
    Don't you know? It is hypocritical to be intolerant of intolerance.

    You're a terrible person for not letting them be terrible people, or something.

    It's the War on Christmas in a nutshell.

  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Bill O'Reilly, attacking Laura Ingraham defending his claim that if you're trying to attack same-sex marriage by "thumping the bible" you'll lose, because you have no argument.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COLjgln-70s&feature=player_embedded

    Bill O'Reilly, telling her that she's a fool for buying into the garbage that private beliefs should affect public policy.

  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    amazing

  • Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    V1m wrote: »
    .
    If you've got a tumour, isn't it at least better that it's benign than malignant?

    Making it socially unacceptable and in some cases illegal to be openly homophobic is the first step to getting rid of the problem.

    Can't make it illegal; that's not how this country works. As for making it socially unacceptable, that is pretty much the case in mainstream society already. The problem is that there is an exceptionally large fringe society that, much like with racists, have very few fucks to give about our opinion of them.

    For people who give so few fucks, they sure do make a big whiney fuss about being "persecuted" and "anti-christian discrimination" when they're told that no, extending their homophobia past certain limits is against the law.

    Alright, might have been more accurate to say I have absolutely no fucks to give about what they think of my opinion of them.

    Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.

    - John Stuart Mill
  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Bill O'Reilly, attacking Laura Ingraham defending his claim that if you're trying to attack same-sex marriage by "thumping the bible" you'll lose, because you have no argument.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COLjgln-70s&feature=player_embedded

    Bill O'Reilly, telling her that she's a fool for buying into the garbage that private beliefs should affect public policy.

    Broken clock, etc.

  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    The worst of it is, he's not even disagreeing with her that gays shouldn't get married, just saying "look, dumbass, this is a bad tactic"

    Y U INSULT, BILL?

    "I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm just saying if we try to win this on bible thumping we got nothing"

    Y U INSULT BELIEFS BILL?

    "You're retarded"

  • BlackjackBlackjack Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Bill O'Reilly, attacking Laura Ingraham defending his claim that if you're trying to attack same-sex marriage by "thumping the bible" you'll lose, because you have no argument.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COLjgln-70s&feature=player_embedded

    Bill O'Reilly, telling her that she's a fool for buying into the garbage that private beliefs should affect public policy.

    There are no winners here.

    camo_sig2.png

    3DS: 1607-3034-6970
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Bill O'Reilly, attacking Laura Ingraham defending his claim that if you're trying to attack same-sex marriage by "thumping the bible" you'll lose, because you have no argument.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COLjgln-70s&feature=player_embedded

    Bill O'Reilly, telling her that she's a fool for buying into the garbage that private beliefs should affect public policy.
    WTF, O'Reilly asking her if she understands the difference between private belief and public policy, her response is "I guess I'm not well educated"? When the hell did that become an acceptable defence for your positions that she's proud to use like some ace up her sleeve?

    sig.gif
  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    I think she was being sarcastic.

  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    a5ehren wrote: »
    Viskod wrote: »
    Bill O'Reilly, attacking Laura Ingraham defending his claim that if you're trying to attack same-sex marriage by "thumping the bible" you'll lose, because you have no argument.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COLjgln-70s&feature=player_embedded

    Bill O'Reilly, telling her that she's a fool for buying into the garbage that private beliefs should affect public policy.

    Broken clock, etc.

    Eh

    He's no Shephard Smith but Bill O has long been more reasonable than most of Fox

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    So It Goes wrote: »
    I think she was being sarcastic.
    I think she was being accidentally honest.

    sig.gif
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    He's no Shephard Smith but Bill O has long been more reasonable than most of Fox

    That's like saying Mussolini was more reasonable than most dictators.

  • Professor PhobosProfessor Phobos Registered User regular
    True Story: Laura Ingraham was mean to me in an elevator once.

  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    edited April 2013
    Richy wrote: »
    WTF, O'Reilly asking her if she understands the difference between private belief and public policy, her response is "I guess I'm not well educated"? When the hell did that become an acceptable defence for your positions that she's proud to use like some ace up her sleeve?

    It's part of the Ivory Tower thing. Well educated people are branded the enemy. But she was probably just being sarcastic in that instance, however the audience she wants to play to, would be proud to say it as well, because they just know simple plain truths, not none of all that higher level liberal jibber jabber what dont make no sense a'tall

    Viskod on
  • Sweeney TomSweeney Tom Registered User regular
    edited April 2013
    More good news! Bisbee's city council voted, 5-2, to pass a measure allowing civil ceremonies, becoming the first city in Arizona to officially allow same-sex civil unions.

    Sweeney Tom on
  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    Wait... city?

    There's no plan, there's no race to be run
    The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    It's a tiny copper mining town turned artist enclave.

  • ArcherArcher Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Yeah I'm a feminist.

    I don't feel smug about that at all since it's so mundane and something I think people should be anyway.

    It's so woven into my life that I don't even think about it anymore.

    Agreed, to the point where when suddenly someone utters "feminist" as an epithet, I get confused and worried.

    Much the same as using "elitist" or "intellectual" in the same capacity.


    "What you're think you're so smart and treat people like equals or something? Like some kind of jerk?"

    I've found that, in practice, the affiliation is a lot like "conservative." Members of the group will tell you that it's anyone who believes in freedom, but anyone paying attention can see that anyone who doesn't believe that making sure the poor don't starve is socialism is not a true member.

  • Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    Archer wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Yeah I'm a feminist.

    I don't feel smug about that at all since it's so mundane and something I think people should be anyway.

    It's so woven into my life that I don't even think about it anymore.

    Agreed, to the point where when suddenly someone utters "feminist" as an epithet, I get confused and worried.

    Much the same as using "elitist" or "intellectual" in the same capacity.


    "What you're think you're so smart and treat people like equals or something? Like some kind of jerk?"

    I've found that, in practice, the affiliation is a lot like "conservative." Members of the group will tell you that it's anyone who believes in freedom, but anyone paying attention can see that anyone who doesn't believe that making sure the poor don't starve is socialism is not a true member.
    It is Socialism. The problem is the conflation between Socialism and Communism, and the idea that all socialism is bad.

    Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.

    - John Stuart Mill
  • ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited April 2013
    Regarding being an ally, that is how I identify myself. It never really occurred to me to need to add "Straight" in front of it.

    ... I sometimes also identify myself as "One of the oppressors" (being a tall hetero Caucasian male in his early 30's, I could easily be one based on raw privilege alone, like woah), but that's mainly because it makes one of my best friends (who happens to be a lesbian) laugh.

    She'd also often counter that while I wasn't 'a villager' per se, I did live in 'the village' (until recently I'd happened to live on the edge of Toronto's gayborhood), which I thought was a nice way of putting it.
    Quid wrote: »
    Hey in a thread where someone saying you should love people regardless of your religious beliefs is akin to calling those people an abomination why hold back?

    I think we can all agree that the real abomination here is Facebook.

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
  • GodfatherGodfather Registered User regular
    I'm actually really surprised this issue has such an even divide between the Supreme Court, what with all these recent starch Conservatives eventually giving in to supporting Gay Marriage. I thought it would be a shoe-in for overturning Prop 8 at least, and the long, drawn-out battle was going to focus on actual Marriage Equality for the country.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    There's been one staunch conservative, some media personalities, and a semi-moderate from Illinois.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • GodfatherGodfather Registered User regular
    Well when the Supreme Court brings up how 'Politicians are falling over themselves to support Gay Marriage' during their own hearing, you'd think they'd factor it into their decision!

Sign In or Register to comment.