Sen.Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on the Democratic Platform

[Annihilus]

Did anyone see the Daily Show with Jon Stewart last night?

Senator Charles Schumer was his guest and they talked about the election results and what it meant to the Democrats and their platform. Schumer and Stewart (a known Democrat) both agreed that maybe Democrats mis-judged what many Americans perceived to be important issues in this election.

Schumer said that they would have to look hard at their platform and figure out how to proceed from here. They were both surprised at the election results (as many people were).

What do you guys think? I'm curious to hear what people's reactions to their conversation are, and am truly curious as to what all of your thoughts are (try to keep it civil.....)

[bideau]

I think there were three factors at play here.

First, a very large number of voters did not like either candidate. Ultimately, though, alot of them decided to go with "the devil you know" as opposed to the "devil you don't know".

The other factor was the mobilization of christian fundamentalists due to the number of states that had anti-gay initiatives on their ballot. This was particularly true in Ohio. Those whose main purpose for voting was the initiative voted for Bush overwhelmingly. Whether many of those would have been as motivated if the initiative was not there is debatable.

Finally, the youth turnout was lower than expected. This is traditionally a demographic that would have voted for Kerry. This is obviously true in a state such as Ohio which has several major universities. I haven't seen any hard analysis that would show if a larger youth turnout would have made a difference.

In this election, I'm not sure a centrist candidate would have been more successful. It would be difficult to unseat an incumbent if the opponent agreed with him on many issues. That's one of the greatest advantages of incumbency. Four years from now will be interesting to see if both parties make an attempt to capture the middle ground.

[Spinal Tap]

The Democrats definately misjudged what the important issues would be in this election. Hell, I misjudged them as well. Here is my view on the democratic party in general at this point.

For me, I truly despise the "hollywood"/ "muscian"/ "Michael Moore" wing of the democratic party. For every actor, musician, and fat socialist slob that comes out and endorses a democrat, the more I want to vote republican. People like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and others of their ilk are another form of scum that the democrats need to distance themselves from. The leaders of the democratic party need to realize that the majority of the country are NOT left wing progressive thinkers. Democrats are going to need to move more towards the middle if they want any hope of winning any election in the near future.

Another thing, I think the "rock the vote" push to get out the young voters also mobilized the republicans and got them to the polls. I think that most level headed folks saw this big push to get teenagers into the booths in order to swing the election towards Kerry.........and they said "not on my watch". I'm certainly not going to allow some pimply faced teen who's still sucking off of daddy's checking account to choose who my president is going to be. Let's face it, most kids ages 18-24 don't know a damn thing about the real world. Hell, most of them have never even had a full time job. They are SOOOO misinformed when it comes to political issues. Most people know that these kids are just that.........kids. The "no blood for oil" crew is a prime example of just how naive people can be. Anyone who aligns themselves with these hippies is going to lose and lose badly.

Apparently the people of America still believe in God and still believe in traditional family values. Democrats will spin that somehow and try to convince you that it is a bad thing. I'm not quite so sure it is such a bad thing.

[Annihilus]

Originally posted by Spinal Tap
For me, I truly despise the "hollywood"/ "muscian"/ "Michael Moore" wing of the democratic party. For every actor, musician, and fat socialist slob that comes out and endorses a democrat, the more I want to vote republican. People like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and others of their ilk are another form of scum that the democrats need to distance themselves from. The leaders of the democratic party need to realize that the majority of the country are NOT left wing progressive thinkers. Democrats are going to need to move more towards the middle if they want any hope of winning any election in the near future.



I'm with you here. I despise that these people who think they are so self important and completely dismiss those who may have ideas different from their own. Dismissiveness will only do one thing to people that do not agree with their views: It will piss them off. You don't want to piss off the electorate. These are the kinds of people that have moved my Mom (a lifelong Democrat) to vote Repulican this year.

It seems to me that if the Democrats could rid themselves of this pseudo-hippy element of the party, they'd get a hell of a lot more votes.

It's completely wrong for me to think and say this, but I am very happy that Michael Moore has just wasted his time and money on this election. What a jackass.

[bideau]

Originally posted by Spinal Tap
The Democrats definately misjudged what the important issues would be in this election. Hell, I misjudged them as well. Here is my view on the democratic party in general at this point.

For me, I truly despise the "hollywood"/ "muscian"/ "Michael Moore" wing of the democratic party. For every actor, musician, and fat socialist slob that comes out and endorses a democrat, the more I want to vote republican. People like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and others of their ilk are another form of scum that the democrats need to distance themselves from. The leaders of the democratic party need to realize that the majority of the country are NOT left wing progressive thinkers. Democrats are going to need to move more towards the middle if they want any hope of winning any election in the near future.

Another thing, I think the "rock the vote" push to get out the young voters also mobilized the republicans and got them to the polls. I think that most level headed folks saw this big push to get teenagers into the booths in order to swing the election towards Kerry.........and they said "not on my watch". I'm certainly not going to allow some pimply faced teen who's still sucking off of daddy's checking account to choose who my president is going to be. Let's face it, most kids ages 18-24 don't know a damn thing about the real world. Hell, most of them have never even had a full time job. They are SOOOO misinformed when it comes to political issues. Most people know that these kids are just that.........kids. The "no blood for oil" crew is a prime example of just how naive people can be. Anyone who aligns themselves with these hippies is going to lose and lose badly.

Apparently the people of America still believe in God and still believe in traditional family values. Democrats will spin that somehow and try to convince you that it is a bad thing. I'm not quite so sure it is such a bad thing.

There is so much wrong with this post its difficult to respond. There's alot of hostility there. The same hostility you've gotten angry at Kerry supporters for. You repeatedly use adjectives like scum and fat slob.

"Hollywood" types are against the social conservatives because they fear censorship of their films, books and artwork. Whether you agree with what they produce, its their right as Americans to express themselves. there have been numerous attempts to try to tell people what they can create and what they can't.

The youth have a right to vote whether you like it or not. You're more upset by the fact that many youth's tend to be liberal. If the youth trend was conservative, I'm sure you'd be all for it.

If traditional family values means discriminating against an entire group of people, then you can have them. I'll choose respect, tolerance and decency every time. If "values" means treating others with respect, obeying the laws of this nation and being a productive citizen, then I'm all for it. But the republicans do not have a monopoly on those.

[Spinal Tap]

I think you are a complete hypocrite just for stating my post is "wrong". I'm not angry about anything! My candidate won, what's there to be angry about? You're the angry one. You need to turn that mirror around and take a good, hard, long look into it.

How's this: I think YOUR opinion is completely WRONG. Am I hateful enough for you yet?

It is true, most kids 18-24 don't have a f**king clue! How can you try to discredit that??? The shear fact that they are dominated by a liberal, left wing view is evidence enough. You say that if they were all repulicans I wouldn't care. Of course I wouldn't, but that would never happen..................because they are stupid f**king kids!!! Jesus Christ man, get a clue!

Okay, now I'm a bit angry.

As for the "tolerance" of everything and everyone. People are entitled to believe that marriage between homosexuals is NOT what God intended. That doesn't make them bigots, contrary to what you may think. I don't recall seeing this question on the ballot: "should we round up all the **** and stick em on an island?" (please notice the sarcasm used in this phrase before you start spewing your venom towards me). NO............I didn't see that question on the ballot. Most people believe that gay marriage is not right!!! Just because your view in the minority doesn't make their view "wrong".

[Spinal Tap]

You know what, I got angry and flew off the handle a bit. I apologize for that. I'm just sick and tired of people trying to tell me that my opinion is WRONG. It's so God damn self-righteous. That's it, I'm done.

[bideau]

Originally posted by Spinal Tap
I think you are a complete hypocrite just for stating my post is "wrong". I'm not angry about anything! My candidate won, what's there to be angry about? You're the angry one. You need to turn that mirror around and take a good, hard, long look into it.

How's this: I think YOUR opinion is completely WRONG. Am I hateful enough for you yet?

It is true, most kids 18-24 don't have a f**king clue! How can you try to discredit that??? The shear fact that they are dominated by a liberal, left wing view is evidence enough. You say that if they were all repulicans I wouldn't care. Of course I wouldn't, but that would never happen..................because they are stupid f**king kids!!! Jesus Christ man, get a clue!

Okay, now I'm a bit angry.

As for the "tolerance" of everything and everyone. People are entitled to believe that marriage between homosexuals is NOT what God intended. That doesn't make them bigots, contrary to what you may think. I don't recall seeing this question on the ballot: "should we round up all the **** and stick em on an island?" (please notice the sarcasm used in this phrase before you start spewing your venom towards me). NO............I didn't see that question on the ballot. Most people believe that gay marriage is not right!!! Just because your view in the minority doesn't make their view "wrong".

Thank you, you've finally exposed yourself for what you are.

You are entitled to believe what you want about gay marriage. But when you try to impose that belief on a group of people who have done you no harm, then that's wrong.

Disclosure time....my son is gay. He's one of the most remarkable, intelligent, gentle, law abiding, hard working people I have ever known. And that's not just a father talking. We've heard that from many friends. For someone to be able to look him in the eye and relegate him to 2nd class citizen is something I have a difficult time comprehending. There is nothing that anyone could show me that would convince me that allowing him to marry would negatively impact their lives. All they're asking for is the same rights in the eyes of the government. If you or your religion don't want to personally recognize it, then fine. This animosity toward gay marriage is rooted in fear and hatred.

So go ahead and be angry. You got what you wanted. My family and I will just continue to struggle through the bigotry and discrimination.

It's too bad about this thread. Anni asked for a civil discussion and you threw out the insults and labels.

[Ballbustah]

Apparently if you have another opinion you are a hypocrite.
You use that description much too often.
If you have a difference in opinion that does not automatically mean you are a hypocrite. That means you have a difference in opinion.




Originally posted by Spinal Tap
I think you are a complete hypocrite just for stating my post is "wrong". I'm not angry about anything! My candidate won, what's there to be angry about? You're the angry one. You need to turn that mirror around and take a good, hard, long look into it.

How's this: I think YOUR opinion is completely WRONG. Am I hateful enough for you yet?

It is true, most kids 18-24 don't have a f**king clue! How can you try to discredit that??? The shear fact that they are dominated by a liberal, left wing view is evidence enough. You say that if they were all repulicans I wouldn't care. Of course I wouldn't, but that would never happen..................because they are stupid f**king kids!!! Jesus Christ man, get a clue!

Okay, now I'm a bit angry.

As for the "tolerance" of everything and everyone. People are entitled to believe that marriage between homosexuals is NOT what God intended. That doesn't make them bigots, contrary to what you may think. I don't recall seeing this question on the ballot: "should we round up all the **** and stick em on an island?" (please notice the sarcasm used in this phrase before you start spewing your venom towards me). NO............I didn't see that question on the ballot. Most people believe that gay marriage is not right!!! Just because your view in the minority doesn't make their view "wrong".

[Spinal Tap]

nope bideau, that would be you who initially insulted me. i called Michael Moore a fat slob. i insulted Michael Moore, big deal. you insulted me by disregarding my opinion and calling it "wrong". now you have exposed YOURSELF to all of us here. good job.

i guess i wasn't done after all.

[Spinal Tap]

bustah, i think you TOTALLY missed the point on that one. that was the EXACT thing i was accusing bideau of, being intolerant of other people's opinions. i didn't call him a hypocrite for having a different opinion. i called him a hypocrite for preaching tolerance of other people, then turning around and being intolerant of me and my opinion.........calling it WRONG. do you understand now?

[Annihilus]

Originally posted by bideau
So go ahead and be angry. You got what you wanted. My family and I will just continue to struggle through the bigotry and discrimination.

It's too bad about this thread. Anni asked for a civil discussion and you threw out the insults and labels.

I hear ya Bideau, and probably cannot comprehend what you are feeling as I only have an uncle and some good friends who are gay, so it doesn't impact me as closely as it does you. And no matter what people may say, you cannot understand an issue totally unless it impacts you directly (such as men commenting on abortion).

This is an issue that I firmly believe will change with time, but will continue to be painful for those directly impacted in the short term. This is one issue I disagree with the both parties on, and I guess it just isn't time for it to be dealt with in a manner that some of us would like. I see nothing wrong with gay marriage. Marriage promotes family, and America is all about families (or should be).

I think it will happen though. I hope so, for your son's sake and others. Prejudice sucks. I hope that people can understand that not all people on the particular side of the fence that I am currently on are 'haters'.

[bideau]

Originally posted by Spinal Tap
bustah, i think you TOTALLY missed the point on that one. that was the EXACT thing i was accusing bideau of, being intolerant of other people's opinions. i didn't call him a hypocrite for having a different opinion. i called him a hypocrite for preaching tolerance of other people, then turning around and being intolerant of me and my opinion.........calling it WRONG. do you understand now?

Sorry, but you still have it wrong. You are entitled to your beliefs on gay marriage. But when laws are enacted to specifically deby a group of people basic rights enjoyed by most Americans, that's when it crosses the line. You can exclude gays within your home and your church. I don't really care. I'm talking about rights under civil law. Why don't you tell me how gay marriage affects your everyday life. How would gay marriage diminish your rights?

[dchester]

Originally posted by Annihilus
It's completely wrong for me to think and say this, but I am very happy that Michael Moore has just wasted his time and money on this election. What a jackass. I have to admit, I'm getting a lot of enjoyment out of that myself.
:D

I don't know why anyone thinks that people would vote for someboby because an out of touch celebrity says so. I hope the democrats take time to examine what they are doing, and try to moderate the influence of "the so-called elite" on them. There's a lot of people that don't think entertainers have any concept of what the rest of us go through.
________
RX-7 (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Mazda_RX-7)

[bideau]

Originally posted by Annihilus
I hear ya Bideau, and probably cannot comprehend what you are feeling as I only have an uncle and some good friends who are gay, so it doesn't impact me as closely as it does you. And no matter what people may say, you cannot understand an issue totally unless it impacts you directly (such as men commenting on abortion).

This is an issue that I firmly believe will change with time, but will continue to be painful for those directly impacted in the short term. This is one issue I disagree with the both parties on, and I guess it just isn't time for it to be dealt with in a manner that some of us would like. I see nothing wrong with gay marriage. Marriage promotes family, and America is all about families (or should be).

I think it will happen though. I hope so, for your son's sake and others. Prejudice sucks. I hope that people can understand that not all people on the particular side of the fence that I am currently on are 'haters'.

Thank you Anni. You can never truly know how much those words mean to me.

My mother has always been a religious conservative. She is now a strong supporter of gay rights. Why? Because she looked into the eyes of her grandson and understood that the true love goes beyond sexual orientation. The quality of a person is measured by what's in their heart, not who they love.

[Spinal Tap]

Originally posted by bideau
Sorry, but you still have it wrong. You are entitled to your beliefs on gay marriage. But when laws are enacted to specifically deby a group of people basic rights enjoyed by most Americans, that's when it crosses the line. You can exclude gays within your home and your church. I don't really care. I'm talking about rights under civil law. Why don't you tell me how gay marriage affects your everyday life. How would gay marriage diminish your rights?

bideau, how do you know i'm against gay marriage? i have never stated that i was against gay marriage, so how do you know that i am? gay marriage would not diminish my rights whatsoever. i don't exclude gay people from anything. i'm not really sure what my final stance is on gay marriage. you might say i'm "undecided". the fact is, i don't have anything wrong.............you don't have anything wrong either. it's your self righteous, all knowing attitude that does anything BUT endear me to the democratic way of thinking. i could care less if your son gets married. it doesn't affect me at all. but there are people out there that believe in God and believe that God's idea of marriage was between a man and a woman. does that make them wrong? if it's true, does that make God wrong, just because your son is gay? hell, you may not even believe in God, i could care less. if i believe in God and you don't, does that give me the right to tell you that i've got it right and youv'e got it wrong? nope.

[bideau]

Originally posted by Spinal Tap
bideau, how do you know i'm against gay marriage? i have never stated that i was against gay marriage, so how do you know that i am? gay marriage would not diminish my rights whatsoever. i don't exclude gay people from anything. i'm not really sure what my final stance is on gay marriage. you might say i'm "undecided". the fact is, i don't have anything wrong.............you don't have anything wrong either. it's your self righteous, all knowing attitude that does anything BUT endear me to the democratic way of thinking. i could care less if your son gets married. it doesn't affect me at all. but there are people out there that believe in God and believe that God's idea of marriage was between a man and a woman. does that make them wrong? if it's true, does that make God wrong, just because your son is gay? hell, you may not even believe in God, i could care less. if i believe in God and you don't, does that give me the right to tell you that i've got it right and youv'e got it wrong? nope.

There was a very strong implication in your post. This is a very emotional issue for me and I'm in a state of mind to read between the lines.

My family's view has always been consistent. I stated it above. But there are alot of people who want to impose their religous beliefs in civil law and that's just wrong. I don't believe any church should be forced to recognize a marriage they believe is wrong. But outside those church doors, everyone should be afforded the same rights.

I personally think the civil cases barring Christmas displays is ludicrous. As long as all faiths are granted equal opportunity to display their beliefs, then go for it.

This is a good time for em to take a break since I have a doctor's appointment. I will try to reset my emotional level and come back later.

[Flagg the Wanderer]

Originally posted by Annihilus
[B]And no matter what people may say, you cannot understand an issue totally unless it impacts you directly (such as men commenting on abortion).AAAAIIYYEEE! My eyes! I did not just read that! Holy f*cking Sh!t, are you SERIOUS?!?!

[Flagg the Wanderer]

My eyes are better now. I can't even fathom the thought process that went into that line, though.

Anyway, on the gay marriage issue, I'm the youngest of a family of 7, with 5 sisters. 2 of my sisters are gay. One of them had her marriage invalided with the legal flip flop in SF.

I'm against gay marriage, but for civil unions. And civil unions should be between any people, and any number of people, who want to be legally recognized as a single entity for any and all of the social and economic reasons a married couple are so recognized. Everyone should have access to the social and economic benefits that marriage can bring.

I feel that homosexuality is immoral, but I'm pro gay-rights (insofar as their rights are infringed). I'm against hate-crime laws, because the deviation in penalty is far too severe for a determination of motivation which can never be accurately determined beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard of proof required.

I've looked into my sisters eyes and told them that I believe their actions are immoral. They don't gross me out, and I'm not homophobic. I just happen to believe that sex outside of marriage is immoral under normal circumstances. I don't think that homosexuals are bad people, I don't think that in general homosexuality is a choice (though I do think that many people could be either gay, bisexual, or straight, and unconsciously choose through effects of environment and influence).

I also don't think that homosexuals are bad people. They undertake certain actions which I consider immoral, same as myself and everyone else in the world. Unfortunately, our society dictates that they define themselves by this behavior, rather than as whole beings. For instance, I don't know anyone besides homosexuals that define who they are by a sexual inclination or behavior. People define themselves by their lineage, race, nationality, even employment or career choice. But by sexual preference? Bizarre.

[bideau]

Originally posted by Flagg Wanderer
My eyes are better now. I can't even fathom the thought process that went into that line, though.

Anyway, on the gay marriage issue, I'm the youngest of a family of 7, with 5 sisters. 2 of my sisters are gay. One of them had her marriage invalided with the legal flip flop in SF.

I'm against gay marriage, but for civil unions. And civil unions should be between any people, and any number of people, who want to be legally recognized as a single entity for any and all of the social and economic reasons a married couple are so recognized. Everyone should have access to the social and economic benefits that marriage can bring.

I feel that homosexuality is immoral, but I'm pro gay-rights (insofar as their rights are infringed). I'm against hate-crime laws, because the deviation in penalty is far too severe for a determination of motivation which can never be accurately determined beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard of proof required.

I've looked into my sisters eyes and told them that I believe their actions are immoral. They don't gross me out, and I'm not homophobic. I just happen to believe that sex outside of marriage is immoral under normal circumstances. I don't think that homosexuals are bad people, I don't think that in general homosexuality is a choice (though I do think that many people could be either gay, bisexual, or straight, and unconsciously choose through effects of environment and influence).

I also don't think that homosexuals are bad people. They undertake certain actions which I consider immoral, same as myself and everyone else in the world. Unfortunately, our society dictates that they define themselves by this behavior, rather than as whole beings. For instance, I don't know anyone besides homosexuals that define who they are by a sexual inclination or behavior. People define themselves by their lineage, race, nationality, even employment or career choice. But by sexual preference? Bizarre.

I believe that the government should be in the business of recognizing civil unions for everyone. I have no problem leaving the issue of Holy Matrimony to the churches. I have no problem with a church not welcoming a gay couple into their house. That's their right as a religion to set the rules within their doors. My only argument is that everyone should be treated equally in the eyes of the law.

Gays do not define themselves by sexual orientation, society does that for them. Gays would like nothing better than to just blend into society and be free to have the same rights as everyone else. But because those rights are not afforded them, they need to make their case. My son does not want to be known as the gay guy. He does not belong to any gay rights organizations. He does not walk around and say "Hi, I'm gay". He just wants to be looked at as another member of this society.

I respect the fact that you are upfront with your beliefs. It's personally difficult to read, but at least I know where you stand. I hope you still have a good relationship with your sisters. I freely admit that I could not be as gracious. And maybe that would be my loss.

[Annihilus]

Originally posted by Flagg Wanderer
AAAAIIYYEEE! My eyes! I did not just read that! Holy f*cking Sh!t, are you SERIOUS?!?!

Sorry man, I didn't mean to hurt your eyes.

And yes - I'm serious...what's wrong with that?

It doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion about what you think is right about any issue. I'm just saying that if you have a direct stake in whatever it is you are talking about, your viewpoint is not ever going to be the same as if you didn't have a stake in the issue. If nothing else, you'll most likely be coming from a different place.

Does that make more sense?

[Flagg the Wanderer]

Originally posted by bideau
I believe that the government should be in the business of recognizing civil unions for everyone. I have no problem leaving the issue of Holy Matrimony to the churches. I have no problem with a church not welcoming a gay couple into their house. That's their right as a religion to set the rules within their doors. My only argument is that everyone should be treated equally in the eyes of the law.I'm not sure many, if any, religions do not allow homosexuals to participate. My faith, Roman Catholicism, believes it to be a sin, but views it as any other sin - and we're all sinners.

Gays do not define themselves by sexual orientation, society does that for them. Gays would like nothing better than to just blend into society and be free to have the same rights as everyone else. But because those rights are not afforded them, they need to make their case. My son does not want to be known as the gay guy. He does not belong to any gay rights organizations. He does not walk around and say "Hi, I'm gay". He just wants to be looked at as another member of this society.That's good for your son. Unfortunately, I do not find that to commonly be the case. Not that people walk around and say: Hi, I'm gay. But both my sisters have extremely high percentages of friends who are gay. Both often bring it up in conversation. Both often bring it up in terms of oppressed minorities, etc. And both do define themselves that way. And of the other homosexuals I know, many of them (not all) are the same way.

As to the point you stuck in the middle...other than the marriage thing, what rights are not being afforded them? To have the word marriage attached to their relationship...and? Adopting children is okay (albeit harder, but it's harder for a lot of people who live their lives outside the "mainstream")

I respect the fact that you are upfront with your beliefs. It's personally difficult to read, but at least I know where you stand. I hope you still have a good relationship with your sisters. I freely admit that I could not be as gracious. And maybe that would be my loss. I have a good relationship with one of them, and a pretty lousy one with the other (but that's for other reasons.) Both of them have a hard time with the fact that I think their behavior is immoral, but I enjoy being around 1 of them (the other one I just find very tiresome.) And they, like you, respect that I'm not going to beat around the bush about it. I'll freely admit that their love for their SO's is very much geniune. It isn't about belittling the relationship - all love is incredibly precious.

I don't understand why you don't think you could be as gracious. Would it be different if, say, you were an avid hunter and I was an animal rights activist? It would just be something we tended to avoid discussing. And I'm talking strictly about the sex life here, not the SO or family life in general. Of course, in this situation, most people I know who are strait, including my family, don't talk to me about their sex lives anyway, so I'm not sure what the loss is.

They know that they are welcome in my home, and they know that they are welcome to stay in my home, but not share a bed. They don't do more than peck on the cheek in front of me. Of course, none of the strait folks I know do that, either. And they don't talk about their relationship in front of my kids - they respect my role as a parent to explain as I see fit.

I have no problem staying with them (I stayed overnight with my sister and her SO when I went to adopt my son) as I respect their rights to do what they want. I don't see staying at their house as some condonation of their behavior, nor any reason to avoid it.

[bideau]

Originally posted by Annihilus
Sorry man, I didn't mean to hurt your eyes.

And yes - I'm serious...what's wrong with that?

It doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion about what you think is right about any issue. I'm just saying that if you have a direct stake in whatever it is you are talking about, your viewpoint is not ever going to be the same as if you didn't have a stake in the issue. If nothing else, you'll most likely be coming from a different place.

Does that make more sense?

Actually, I think a perfect example of that is Dick Cheney and his daughter. I know I'm making some assumptions here, but I'm coming at it from his point of view and with his experience.

When I saw him in the debate, I saw a man who truly loves his daughter. I also saw a man who was very uncomfortable with the gay marriage issue. Not because he doesn't support it. But because he knows that the same people who are getting him elected will try to prevent his daughter from gaining those rights. It's extremely painful to know that someone can look at your child and not see them as an equal.

[bideau]

Flagg, I know most churches would accept gays, but they would not accept their relationship. That's what I meant.

As far as identifying themselves as gay, you and I have had different experiences. In all my encounters with my son's friends and other gay friends, gay has never been brought up in discussion. There will always be members of any group who will make it a point that everyone knows.

As far as rights, I was just referring to marriage. Its a very big hurdle to cross. Many barriers have been broken down. But marriage affords so many rights and privileges that allow gay couples to live normal lives. Many of those issues have been discussed ad nauseum, so we know some of the prime examples.

I'm not sure your analogy to hunting hits the mark. I have no personal stake in whether an animal lives or dies. I do have a personal stake in how people perceive my son. I would find it very difficult to sit with someone who can look at my son and see a sinner. I can rationalize that its their religious belief. But they are still seeing my son in an unflattering light. And I would have a difficult time getting beyond that. Its a fatherly instinct that's hard, if onot impossible, to overcome.

[Flagg the Wanderer]

Originally posted by Annihilus
Sorry man, I didn't mean to hurt your eyes.

And yes - I'm serious...what's wrong with that?

It doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion about what you think is right about any issue. I'm just saying that if you have a direct stake in whatever it is you are talking about, your viewpoint is not ever going to be the same as if you didn't have a stake in the issue. If nothing else, you'll most likely be coming from a different place.

Does that make more sense? I do understand what you're talking about, now. I thought you were saying that an opinion of someone who is not directly involved with a topic is less valid somehow.

Let me rebut as to why my eyes hurt:

Let's say, hypothetically, that a man got his fiancee pregnant. She tells him, they discuss it, and she aborts over his objections that he wants to start a family. Can he talk about abortion? Is he allowed to talk about the loss and pain that he feels/felt from the connectedness to his child? The bitterness that he feels towards his spouse-to-be? Or can he not have a say because he's a man?

Let's say, hypothetically, that I'm someone who has never done drugs. (Sheesh, that would be nice.) I can't try to get someone else to break their addiction? I can't point out that destroying your body is a bad way to live?

Let's say, hypothetically, that you are a Christian living in Australia in 1940. You're not involved in WWII. It's not about you. It doesn't effect you directly. Shouldn't you be able to stand up and say that what the Nazi's are doing 6000 miles away from you is wrong?

Let's say, NOT hypothetically, that I believe that life begins at conception. And that this belief is not based on faith, or morals, but upon science: an embryo has its own DNA, seperate and distinct from the mother and the father, and it is HUMAN DNA. It is, by any definition, life. It is also NOT, by any definition, anything OTHER than human. And I see millions of human lifes discarded for convenience's sake (with the exception of the life of the mother - as seperate from "the health of the mother") every year. Roughly 1/3 of the post-Roe American population was aborted. I shouldn't talk about it? I shouldn't call a spade a spade?
I shouldn't point out the correlation between abortion and clinical depression?
I shouldn't point out that abortion clinics are placed in much higher density areas populated by poor and minorities, even considering urban vs. rural considerations?
I shouldn't point out the foundational roots of Planned Parenthood in the eugenics movement?
My sisters have had abortions, one of them has had multiple abortions. 4 out of 5 of them are pro-choice. Is that close enough for me to talk about it, or not? What about if it was (hypothetically) my wife? That close enough?

Alright, I'm going to breathe now.

[Annihilus]

Yeah Flagg, I don't disagree with any of that - I think I just worded my initial comments poorly.

It's not the first time.....then again, I'm not all practiced up like some slick lawyer. :D

I'm definately not saying that the opinions are invalid in any way - but they are definately coming from two different places. I guess a proper analogy would be the one saying 'Never judge a man unless you've walked a mile in his (or her) shoes'.

I think you get the jist of what I'm saying - I know where you're coming from.