DADT. R.I.P 9/20/2011

[DarkSnowyNight]

Where I stand is on the side of Freedom and Liberty.

Sure you do, as long as it's for hetero christian males only.

As you said earlier there really is no way to know. Most gays will not admit it. I think the 10% number could be just as easily be false as it could be true. I think the reality is pretty close to the number personally.

Last I read it was right around 9 - 12%. But that was only for those folks out of the closet. I do not know if those in the closet count for "most" (can anyone?), but it really wouldn't surprise me if this world turned out a lot "gayer" than people realize.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Sure you do, as long as it's for hetero christian males only.

How nice! You think you know me, you know NOTHING about me. If you did you'd know that I draw a line between my personal morality which is most assuredly Christian. If you're a Christian and take the Bible as the inspired word of God then your view pretty much has to be that homosexuality is a sin. Last time I looked however the US is not a Theocracy, It's a Republic with no official state sponsored religion. So in many ways my views are meaningless in terms of the COTUS.

Last I read it was right around 9 - 12%. But that was only for those folks out of the closet. I do not know if those in the closet count for "most" (can anyone?), but it really wouldn't surprise me if this world turned out a lot "gayer" than people realize.

The problem with your numbers (Or Anyone's) is how you define gay. If it means ONE homosexual encounter then the number could be as high as 30 to 40 percent. Conversely if you only count those who are openly gay then I think the number drops below 5%. One thing everyone needs to remember is that if you live in the NE of West Coast the percentage is way higher by any measurement. I'm out here in the upper midwest and you just don't see the openly gay couples like back east. Now are they all in the closet? I suspect not. It's like trying to answer the question "How High is Up"

 

[Ms Tree]

The problem with your numbers (Or Anyone's) is how you define gay. If it means ONE homosexual encounter then the number could be as high as 30 to 40 percent. Conversely if you only count those who are openly gay then I think the number drops below 5%. One thing everyone needs to remember is that if you live in the NE of West Coast the percentage is way higher by any measurement. I'm out here in the upper midwest and you just don't see the openly gay couples like back east. Now are they all in the closet? I suspect not. It's like trying to answer the question "How High is Up"

Huh?

Not sure how you define gay but in my book if you like sax with a person of the same sex you are gay. Whether it was one sexual encounter or 1,000 it does not matter. Whether you are in the closet or out in full day light does not matter either other than it is easier to count those who are open than in the closet.

Most of the studies I have read bases their numbers on the number of 'openly' gay folks and then extrapolate out from that since the number of closeted gays is going to be higher than those out in the open. One can definitely argue about the methodology used for extrapolating but gay is gay. Being gay is like being pregnant. You are or you're not. The one exception is being Bi but that's a different thread.

 

[tech2101]

It was used as an example to illustrate that as a society we have no way of knowing what percentage of the populace is actually gay.

So you use the extermination of Jews as a comparison?

You need assistance.

 

[SparrowHawk]

So you use the extermination of Jews as a comparison?

You need assistance.

I'll use whatever comparison I choose, when I choose, where I chose. At least until Politically Correct Arseholes like you succeed in getting the COTUS suspended.

When YOUR relatives run onto a beach under withering gunfire and fight in the Battle of the Ardenne and go on to liberate several camps then and only then will I consider your opinion to be valid. When I went to the Anne Frank Haus in AMS it hit me hard when I realized that my uncle had gotten to the camp she died in two weeks to late. It left a hole in my heart.

most of that generation is gone now and we must NEVER forget. So I use those over the top analogies and comparisons lest we forget. The single greatest accomplishment of a man who would go one to be President was the decision to rotate nearly 300,000 troops through the camps and ordered German civilians to clean up the mess. When asked Why, General Dwight D Eisenhower stated "Because 50 years from now people will deny it ever happened"

Also keep in mind Jews weren't the only ones exterminated. An equal number of assorted groups met their demise under Hitler's barbarism
. So now I'm off to not cite something I post while clinging to my guns and religion.

 

[tech2101]

I'll use whatever comparison I choose, when I choose, where I chose. At least until Politically Correct Arseholes like you succeed in getting the COTUS suspended.

When YOUR relatives run onto a beach under withering gunfire and fight in the Battle of the Ardenne and go on to liberate several camps then and only then will I consider your opinion to be valid. When I went to the Anne Frank Haus in AMS it hit me hard when I realized that my uncle had gotten to the camp she died in two weeks to late. It left a hole in my heart.

most of that generation is gone now and we must NEVER forget. So I use those over the top analogies and comparisons lest we forget. The single greatest accomplishment of a man who would go one to be President was the decision to rotate nearly 300,000 troops through the camps and ordered German civilians to clean up the mess. When asked Why, General Dwight D Eisenhower stated "Because 50 years from now people will deny it ever happened"

Also keep in mind Jews weren't the only ones exterminated. An equal number of assorted groups met their demise under Hitler's barbarism
. So now I'm off to not cite something I post while clinging to my guns and religion.

Thank you for confirming your need for assistance.

 

[DarkSnowyNight]

How nice! You think you know me, you know NOTHING about me.

I don't think I need to know what your favorite color is or if you like long walks on the beach. You regularly accuse atheists & gays of being boogeymen, and you can't even admit that a black man is your President. You've made your points of view clear enough.

So in many ways my views are meaningless in terms of the COTUS.

Good.

The problem with your numbers (Or Anyone's) is how you define gay. If it means ONE homosexual encounter then the number could be as high as 30 to 40 percent. Conversely if you only count those who are openly gay then I think the number drops below 5%. One thing everyone needs to remember is that if you live in the NE of West Coast the percentage is way higher by any measurement. I'm out here in the upper midwest and you just don't see the openly gay couples like back east. Now are they all in the closet? I suspect not. It's like trying to answer the question "How High is Up"

Humoring you here, I would think that for purposes of this discussion "gay" is very definable. Simply use the same definition that the DOD uses (used rather) to boot servicemen dishonorably for simply being who they were. If they were, for example, to consider bi-sexual to be gay, the so we do here, since that is what we are talking about WRT DADT. Clear?

When YOUR relatives run onto a beach under withering gunfire and fight in the Battle of the Ardenne and go...

So we've gone from playing around with holocaust numbers to taking credit for things your relatives may have done. You sound like a real stand-up guy there, sport...

 

[SparrowHawk]

I don't think I need to know what your favorite color is or if you like long walks on the beach. You regularly accuse atheists & gays of being boogeymen, and you can't even admit that a black man is your President. You've made your points of view clear enough.

Half Black. I don't address him as a Black President as frankly his race is of no consequence to me. His policies are what matter and I think he has demonstrated that a man of any race has the opportunity to become President. What's sad is he has chosen to attack Mitt Romney over his being Mormon in some advertisements (Which I haven't seen) in Iowa I think. Now you'd think that being of mixed ancestry he would be especially sensitive to being a minority even a religious minority like Mitt Romney. Clearly that's not the case and it seems that President Obama has been judged not by his color but by the content of his character and has been found wanting by a great many Americans. IMO he is a pure unapologetic anti white bigot as surely as the KKK burns a cross.

Good.

There is a fine line between what is religious freedom and state sponsored religion and as a country we must be vigilant. I get quite upset with many of my Conservative Christian friends when they rant about abortion and homosexuality. Let's agree with their position that both are sins for a minute. I must have gone to a different Sunday School or something because I was taught that my God was a loving, forgiving and merciful God and that his greatest gift was redemption. Christ taught us that Sin was Sin no matter what the particular sin was one was not worse than another. Jesus also taught us to hate the sin but love the sinner. If you actually read the book and read just the parts where Jesus is quoted he rails against hypocrisy NOT sin. That's why he threw the money lenders out of the temple and wasn't all that interested in stoning prostitutes. So if we are as professed a "Christian Nation" doesn't logic dictate that we would treat those who are different with great love and compassion so they might seek the kingdom of God? Told you I must have missed the few days where the bigotry & Hatred got introduced.

Humoring you here, I would think that for purposes of this discussion "gay" is very definable. Simply use the same definition that the DOD uses (used rather) to boot servicemen dishonorably for simply being who they were. If they were, for example, to consider bi-sexual to be gay, the so we do here, since that is what we are talking about WRT DADT. Clear?

That would be one way to define it. However the surveys out there apparently don't adhere to your criteria thus the question.

So we've gone from playing around with holocaust numbers to taking credit for things your relatives may have done. You sound like a real stand-up guy there, sport...

Take credit? I think not! Proud of my uncle? Damn right I am, it's different when you have family at the pointy end of the spear. Those brave, selfless men saved the world and my respect for every one of them is a very deep river that runs through my soul. We must never forget that the price of freedom is never free. Often it needs to be defended at the end of a gun. He was called, He Answered end of story. For the record I know more about standing and delivering under emotional fire than you'll ever know. A clear conscience is a very soft pillow indeed

Hey certain people on here I'm done with. The days of absorbing condescending liberal arrogance are gone.

 

[Ms Tree]

When YOUR relatives run onto a beach under withering gunfire and fight in the Battle of the Ardenne and go on to liberate several camps then and only then will I consider your opinion to be valid.

All due respect to your uncle (and I mean that sincerely) his actions to not amount to a bucket of warm spit when it come to you and or what ever you deem to be valid any more than my family surviving the holocaust or my grand father fighting in WWI. Your actions and opinions are your own as are mine. We may have been influenced by the actions of our family members but their actions do not give us any more validity than anyone else. They may give us some incite or perspective that others do not have but I do not believe it makes them any more valid.

Whether Tech has a family member that won the Battle of the Bulge, cured cancer or any other such feat does not transfer to him and his opinions. Our opinions are our own and based on our experiences, not those of our families.

 

[Ms Tree]

What's sad is he has chosen to attack Mitt Romney over his being Mormon in some advertisements (Which I haven't seen) in Iowa I think.

Post it when you find it. I've been looking for 20 min and have not found anything even mentioning Mormonism. I call BS. That would be the dumbest thing a campaign could and regardless of what one thinks of the candidates, their campaigns are not run by idiots.

Hey certain people on here I'm done with. The days of absorbing condescending liberal arrogance are gone.

As opposed to the condescending conservative arrogance? Man up sweetheart and put on your big boy pants.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Post it when you find it. I've been looking for 20 min and have not found anything even mentioning Mormonism. I call BS. That would be the dumbest thing a campaign could and regardless of what one thinks of the candidates, their campaigns are not run by idiots.

It was mentioned in an article in Newsmax and I think it's gone let me look again. Not a huge fan of Newsmax, (Think right wing Hufington Post) both are god to OK sources but not great ones.

I put both on my "Read & Delete" list

 

[Ms Tree]

Half Black.

Pretty sure the KKK, lunch counters, bus services, water fountains ... of the 50's and earlier would not have been so gracious.

 

[delldude]

Post it when you find it. I've been looking for 20 min and have not found anything even mentioning Mormonism. I call BS. That would be the dumbest thing a campaign could and regardless of what one thinks of the candidates, their campaigns are not run by idiots.

From Huffpo:

Last month, evangelical pastor Robert Jeffress' disparaging comments about the Mormon faith generated heated debate about whether Mitt Romney would, or should, be dogged by a "Mormon problem" among Republican primary voters. The recently released American Values Survey, conducted by Public Religion Research Institute, reveals that there is serious ambivalence about his Mormon faith among white evangelical Protestants, a critical constituency in the Republican primaries. Nearly half (47 percent) of white evangelical Protestant voters say they would be at least somewhat uncomfortable with a Mormon becoming president.
But PRRI's recent survey also reveals that if Romney becomes the Republican nominee for president, he will be confronted by another, perhaps even more challenging, "M" problem: A majority of Millennial voters (ages 18-29) report being uncomfortable with the idea of a Mormon president.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Pretty sure the KKK, lunch counters, bus services, water fountains ... of the 50's and earlier would not have been so gracious.

I'm having no luck finding what I'd mentioned.

None the less when we get around to the General Election whomever the Republican is had best be ready for a billion dollars of attack ads and overt playing of the race card. The current occupant of 1600 Penna Ave. is a say anything, do anything hack in the Chicago tradition. Maybe thie is the year that the public says enough is enough and it back fires but I doubt it!

This man is a scar upon the land of Freedom & Liberty.

 

[Ms Tree]

Attack adds, yes ther will be attack adds and they will be launched from both sides as they have every election because regardless of how often the candidates say they don't like them the people do like them because they respond to them. I do not recall any race adds from Obama in 2008 but by all means please show them to me if you find them also.

I do not think you will have any luck finding the religion add because I seriously doubt that one exists.

Edit: I know race was talked about by pundits, news and the like but I do not recall any ads from Obama or McCain regarding race.