|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
 Posted - 09/21/2010 : 09:33:20 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Ricky
I'd much rather argue over this (my original contention to your post) than whether or not the homosexuality-flamboyancy association is offensive. |
I'm sure you would. A simple apology would go a long way toward moving forward.
| You assume the questionnaire is making that supposition. I have posted a contrary possibility, the that questionnaire is meant to gauge reactions to homosexuals rather than homosexuals themselves. I'm curious to hear what you think about this possibility. |
What possibility, Ricky? Because the survey bases questions on derogatory and insulting assumptions, they are guaranteed to end up with derogatory and insulting answers. That isn't just "gauging reactions to homosexuals," that's skewing reactions to homosexuals. And all indications are that it's intentional. When a survey is designed to reach a specific conclusion, you have to ask yourself why, and your explanation doesn't do that.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 09/21/2010 09:41:00 |
 |
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2010 : 13:53:46 [Permalink]
|
Well, looks like this study won't be needed to kill the repeal of DADT anymore. The repeal already failed the vote in the Senate today.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2010 : 15:04:13 [Permalink]
|
fuck...
And that's all I've got to say about that. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2010 : 15:06:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Well, looks like this study won't be needed to kill the repeal of DADT anymore. The repeal already failed the vote in the Senate today.
|
That was the vote to allow a vote. Fucking useless senate, and spineless useless piece of shit democrats, and bigoted asshat republicans.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2010 : 16:50:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
That was the vote to allow a vote. |
It's worse than that: that was the vote to allow debate, so the take-home message isn't, "this is the wrong time to repeal DADT," which I heard some politician saying on NPR tonight, but is instead, "this is the wrong time to even talk about DADT in any sort of official way."
Of course, the Senate vote fell along nearly the same percentages as the latest polls about gay marriage. For (apparently) the first time ever, in August, two polls found a majority of the U.S. in support of marriage rights for everyone. I'd bet, the 46 Senators voting against debate are from districts where the (about) 46% of Americans who are against gay marriage are a large majority of voters, and need to stay away from the icky gay stuff in order to get themselves and/or their colleagues in the House re-elected. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2010 : 03:59:33 [Permalink]
|
Here is an interesting development from the Federal courts on DADT issue,that happened yesterday.
'Don't ask, don't tell' injunction now up to judge
By JULIE WATSON, Associated Press Writer Julie Watson, Associated Press Writer
SAN DIEGO – U.S. government lawyers are trying to stop a federal judge from issuing an injunction that would immediately do what President Obama has yet to accomplish so far in his first term: Halt the military's ban on openly gay troops. |
Why would the Prez' be fighting this if he really wants to bring this to an end. Election fears no doubt. SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
| Edited by - sailingsoul on 09/24/2010 04:03:20 |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2010 : 06:36:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by sailingsoul
Here is an interesting development from the Federal courts on DADT issue,that happened yesterday.
'Don't ask, don't tell' injunction now up to judge
By JULIE WATSON, Associated Press Writer Julie Watson, Associated Press Writer
SAN DIEGO – U.S. government lawyers are trying to stop a federal judge from issuing an injunction that would immediately do what President Obama has yet to accomplish so far in his first term: Halt the military's ban on openly gay troops. |
Why would the Prez' be fighting this if he really wants to bring this to an end. Election fears no doubt. SS
|
I'm not sure about how your system works, but does he really have a choice? I mean, DADT is the law as currently decided by the US government. If he doesn't fight the repeal through court, it would basically mean that he already changed that law, bypassing congress. I'm not sure that is something you want to have as a country. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2010 : 08:16:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tomk80
I'm not sure about how your system works, but does he really have a choice? I mean, DADT is the law as currently decided by the US government. |
The Justice Department only has so much money and so many lawyers, so which cases against the government should be defended and which should not is a matter of time and resources. They can't offer a defense in every case.| If he doesn't fight the repeal through court, it would basically mean that he already changed that law, bypassing congress. I'm not sure that is something you want to have as a country. |
It's not. The last few decades have seen an insane increase in Presidents simply ignoring laws they find inconvenient. In this case, however, something ain't right. The Prez wants the law repealed, but is fighting against a court overturning it. I've heard people claiming that it's Congress' job to repeal it, but the courts do a fine job of tossing out unconstitutional garbage.
Oh, right! Almost forgot: The government has to defend the law until it gets to the Supreme Court, because if they overturn it, the precedent is nation-wide (and would include soldiers overseas). Right now, the California court can only set a precedent for its locality. Other courts might honor the California precedent, but they wouldn't have to, resulting (maybe) in a scenario in which gay Californians can serve openly, but gay Alabamans would have to remain closeted. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2010 : 06:13:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tomk80
I'm not sure about how your system works, but does he really have a choice? I mean, DADT is the law as currently decided by the US government. If he doesn't fight the repeal through court, it would basically mean that he already changed that law, bypassing congress. I'm not sure that is something you want to have as a country.
|
I believe (maybe not) the "Justice Department" is given direction by any present admin' and that brings politics into it. Which change over time. Meaning that the 'JD' can or cannot act, as directed. As with any case an appeal must be filed and no explanation is necessary if one is not filed.....
This is getting interesting,,,,
From MSNBC site, Federal judge orders lesbian reinstated to Air Force
| TACOMA, Wash. — A decorated lesbian Air Force flight nurse says she can't wait to get back to her unit after a federal judge Friday ruled that she should get her job back as soon as possible in the latest legal setback to the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. |
. SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2010 : 11:37:48 [Permalink]
|
Is it offensive to make prejudicial assumptions when you could completely care less about the answer?
Meaning: If I make assumptions about someones sexual preferences based upon their general behaviors.....BUT, I could really care less whether they are straight, gay, bi or asexual is it still offensive? I've assumed that certain men I've met are gay due to their overly effeminate behaviors....and I've done the same with some overtly "butch" women. However I've never asked them I and I really don't care one way or the other and it does not affect my interactions with them.......offensive? |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2010 : 16:55:13 [Permalink]
|
I'm not sure what you're asking. If you're asking whether offensive prejudices can offend if you don't actually voice them to anyone, then I guess not. If you're asking whether making assumptions about a person's sexual identity without regard for the truth of your assumptions is offensive, then yes.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 10/12/2010 15:45:23 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2010 : 15:44:32 [Permalink]
|
Judge orders injunction against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
[cue conservatives whining about liberal activist judges legislating from the bench]
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 10/12/2010 15:45:43 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
 Posted - 10/12/2010 : 16:02:44 [Permalink]
|
| Yeah. Looks like a done deal!!! |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2010 : 06:14:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Yeah. Looks like a done deal!!!
|
As an ex navy guy I can support this. I think there is no secular reason to ban gays from the military. They will have to follow the same rules as everybody else.
It will be interesting what the military does now. It is entrenched in the military that gay people are not welcome and they are somehow open to ridicule. I knew people when I was in that would have beat them up if they thought they could get a way with it. It will cause problems for awhile. But I figure in 10-20 years it won't even be an issue. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2010 : 10:28:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Robb
Originally posted by Kil
Yeah. Looks like a done deal!!!
|
As an ex navy guy I can support this. I think there is no secular reason to ban gays from the military. They will have to follow the same rules as everybody else.
It will be interesting what the military does now. It is entrenched in the military that gay people are not welcome and they are somehow open to ridicule. I knew people when I was in that would have beat them up if they thought they could get a way with it. It will cause problems for awhile. But I figure in 10-20 years it won't even be an issue.
|
Well, the good news is I have two sons in the navy. One of them started this thread. Both of them were for the repeal of DADT. It's a start... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
DADT Survey
