Its 'understandable' that someone might hold these opinions under feelings of contempt and wishe for long overdue revenge.
Just as this pastor is led to make such a statement from undestandable reasons.
Both cases are not excusable.
Printable View
Its 'understandable' that someone might hold these opinions under feelings of contempt and wishe for long overdue revenge.
Just as this pastor is led to make such a statement from undestandable reasons.
Both cases are not excusable.
As was stated above, haters gonna hate. All we can do is move on from words intended to demean and shame us, shake off the stinging pain, and prove ourselves resistant to such petty, feeble attempts to undermine the cause of freedom in love.
Live on, friends.
Love.
Love well, and prosper.
THAT IS NOT MY PROBLEM. My problem is the left-wing response to his bigotry. I have no problem moving on from his words, they're just a load of hot air. But we really shouldn't just "shake off" the fact that our team is calling for the horrific, excruciating death of a man for the crime of disagreeing with us.
This. This is why I don't even bother associating myself with "our team" anymore. Because we're far too willing to let this sort of thing slide because it's us slinging the hate around. No, it is not okay when we do it. That is hypocrisy of the highest caliber.
If you are the subject of a campaign of hate, yes, extreme bitterness as reaction is understandable. We are not all Ghandi. But again, there's a Whole world of difference between understandable and justifiable. Only time will erase this kind of bad reactions.
Given that the argument is a sensible one, forgive me but probably I'll abstain from further comments.
Tamsin, I was not directing my remark at you, or as a response to what you said.
But I think that every 'side' should take a good hard look at what they are doing to everyone simply by having 'sides' to begin with.
I am not calling for anyone's death, nor would I, unless the crimes committed truly warrant it.
But by dividing into us and them, by dividing to you and me, by making ourselves separate by words, we undermine the words that speak for peace. We lose ourselves to the division, and open ourselves to divide by more words. And when we divide far enough, all we have left are the words that cut and maim. And then all we do is hurt each other. And ourselves.
If the words they say hurt, or offend, or destroy them speak against them. Question their words. Set yourself free from the dissent.
Uh, no, holding bigoted opinions is wrong. This is stuff that negatively impacts people's lives, it's not harmless.
*offers hugs* Misgendering sucks, I'm sorry you have to deal with that on top of everything. :smallfrown: And I know that it's hard to not get discouraged, but how you look is not determining how valid your identity is. And trying is never pointless - hormones can keep changing your appearance for several years as far as I know, and maybe you'll be able find more clothes (and maybe makeup, assecories etc) to make you look more like you want to. Also tbh, from the pictures I've seen of you (though it's been a while) you looked pretty cute. :smallsmile:
Relapsing happens - it's not good, yes, but it doesn't make you a worse person and any less deserving of good things.
There is no reason to feel guilty. Emotions are human and being confused, upset or unsure is okay and understandable. You'll be fine. :smallsmile: And while it sucks that many women don't get this opportunity, you don't deserve it any less just because you're unsure.
I'm with Lena on this one. Having different opinions isn't wrong in itself, but bigoted opinions are actively hurting people. Nobody lives in a vacuum. One persons "empty" hate speech can make someone else commit suicide. What do you think those pastor's "silly" words would do to a gay relative of him? It might seem silly to us who aren't directly affected by it, but if you're hearing these things every day, if you have to live with the knowledge that your relative would rather burn (however that was meant specifically) than grant you human rights, don't you think that would eat away at you? And hurting others in that way is definitely morally wrong IMO.
That doesn't makes the people calling for his death on Tamsin's facebook feed any better. That's unacceptable no matter what he said before.
In happier news, this is amazing. (Warning for bad language)
If it makes you feel better, this is from the FB of a close friend of mine. "Any of those conservative pastors setting themselves on fire??? Let's be there, embrace them and prevent them doing harm to themselves ... share the love ... help them heal! If they do self immolate ... you can be sure that LGBT doctors, nurses, EMTs will be there to help!"
You (and a few others) seems to be under the impression that writing "bring the s'mores!" means that person would actually let someone burn to death if the situation arose. Sure, I'm amused by the idea of certain idiots setting themselves on fire - because I know they will never do it. If that same idiot actually did set him/herself on fire in front of me, I'd be there, trying to put them out. (Similar to the quote I posted above.)
^This.
I don't know about this specific guy, but a lot of people dit say "If this passes I'll set fire to myself" and a lot of people did say "If this happens I'm getting a divorce as marriage will have become meaningless" and other similar "threats". The threats were silly to begin with. Setting fire to yourself is blackmail and throwing a tantrum, and I've found it a ridiculous tactic even when people I agreed with did it (in obviously very different circumstances). Divorcing isn't something that anyone other than your spouse cares about so it's a ridiculous threat.
After it did pass, a bunch of people pointed out how those thread were just that, threats. The guys aren't going to set fire to themselves. The point isn't to tell them to do it, it's to show how immature they were in the first place for saying they would. The problem is that some people actually mean those things. I think the people who tease them would stop if they realised that yes, some people might do it.
No if comments were targetted directly to this guy who never said "I'll set fire to myself", I guess he was lumped in with the other people because his sentence seemed similar (and we have to see it in context. When so many people say "I'll set fire to myself", saying "we will burn" can definitely be seen as an encouragement to them or a threat on their behalf.)
Anyway, I haven't seen the comments on your facebook page. The only comment I personnaly saw on mine was "Shouldn't a bunch of people be moving to Canada, getting a divorce or setting fire to themselves right about now?" which again, is not asking them to do it, but pointing out that those were empty, disproportionate threats to begin with.
Now, I do agree with you about people of all kinds being horrible. There was a story way back about a woman who tracked a man who had raped her and then set fire to him. And my facebook wall was full of people cheering her. That's horrible. I hate knowing that my friends can cheer for such a horrible death. So if the comments on your wall were similar to that, then yes, I understand being disgusted by it.
Mostly I've seen people mocking him for being, well, who and what he is and saying what he did.
But, y'know, sometimes people need to get their Two Minutes Hate in, and he's a good contemptible figure since Fred Phelps apparently kicked the bucket at some point.
Oh, hello Tone Policing. :smalltongue:
But seriously, it's far better for them to reveal to you now that you'd never want to have a pint with them rather than once you're at the pub together.
Wait, wait, no. I'm sorry, you just don't get it at all then if that's all you think is represented by this context and what this man's beliefs and rhetoric have been and are.
A bigot who tries to organize other bigots is doing far more than merely "disagreeing." To the point where you're factually incorrect to the point where it's confusing how you came to such a mistaken conclusion. :smallconfused:
Your belief that holding an opinion or belief can't be wrong is factually incorrect and thus wrong. :smalltongue:
I mean, just look at anti-vaxxers and people who believe all kinds of incorrect and malicious slurs against people with autism.
Hate is hate and I wish those on both sides spouting it would shut up. Congrats to Marriage for all.
edit- I didnt need that last part in there. My party affiliation should have no bearing on this.
Guys, talking about, hell, even mentioning parties and wings may not be the best way to use this particular platform to talk about developments, unless we're talking about parties where we celebrate some of the good news, and the chicken wings that we serve there...
Also, y'know, false and in many cases slanderous or libelous. :smalltongue:
No one's saying throw the guy in jail, they're just calling a bluff which he didn't actually make himself but a combination of his followers, his opponents, and the media created through the magic of social media sharing and inflation of the extremity of rhetoric. :smalltongue: Bigots are bigots though, and recognizing them as bigots is not declaring thoughtcrime.
It's a bit hypocritical of you to believe that they're allowed to believe that others are wrong in their beliefs but we're not allowed to believe that their beliefs are wrong right back at them. :smalltongue:
If we're wrong to believe they're wrong then they were wrong in the first place for starting this fractal loop of wrongness. XD
Legal action and ridicule are a step beyond the fact that they believe outright false information and spread false information and believe things that are literally untrue.
On a far less pleasant note that my previous link, this is quite spetacular.
On an amusing note, I found out this happened at the announcement.
The Winged Mod:Thread closed for review.
Thread re-opened upon review.
Folks, we're all very happy and very excited about the recent news.
However, as a general reminder, please remember that politics and religion are both inappropriate topics on these boards, and this event will not be an exception to it. Feel free to celebrate and congratulate each other or share any personal updates* related to the news, but avoid discussing or referencing, among other things:
- The actual legal workings of the ruling, what it means, or previous rulings about it
- What politicians, organizations, people, ideologies or political parties have stated regarding their position
- How religion ties into this at all
- Present, Past, or Future political movements in favor or against
- Any kind of government procedure, policy, or concept.
- Etc.
Also needless to say, please be respectful to each other. Remember to adhere to the Forum Rules.
Thanks, everyone! Happy posting!
*Congrats, Jor.
So I just watched Boy Meets Girl (a.k.a. possibly the most important LGBT+ film of 2014). It was absolutely beautiful. I'm tearing up a bit here.
Aaaaand I went ahead and added it to my netflix queue... I love rom-coms, and also always wish for more queer friendly media that isn't... Just queer.
Oh for a blockbuster movie where the romantic b-plot is between a same sex couple without that being the only thing.
Rom-coms get a pass on some of it because the whole point is a relationship loaded with wacky misunderstanding. But most of the LGBT movies I've looked at have been basically the LGBT equivalent of Blaxploitation films of the 70s, or feel the need to reinforce how oppressed queer folk are... And I don't like feeling exploited, and I also very much like the majority of my media to be escapist fun rather than something that makes me depressed. Art doesn't have to be angsty, dammit!
So, but... I'm a demon (of sorts), and I'm frequently wrathful here...
Has anyone else been watching Sense8? My guy and I just started it on a date night, and while it has a very Wachowski/Cloud Atlas habit of confusingly lurching between main character perspectives, both the sci-fi premise and LGBT-friendliness of it are exceedingly cool.
I'm only two episodes in so please no spoilers!
Honestly Lucy didn't bother me that much. Yeah the entire premise was based on a science meme that was thoroughly debunked years prior, but I've seen better hollywood flicks kicked off with less. The first Matrix had one of the biggest plot holes in sci-fi history but it didn't get in the way of a genuinely enjoyable and thought-provoking romp, at least not until the sequels showed up and piddled all over everything the original had built. Though I guess I'm not exactly making myself feel any better since the Wachowskis were behind those too :smallbiggrin: