Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Frosstbyte
The real world bottom line is anyone arguing for or against gay marriage isn't trying to decide "Is gay marriage a bad thing?" They're for or against gay rights because they either have no problem with gays or they think gays are an aberrant abomination which should be ostracized and prevented from being who they are. The underlying agenda for people who dislike gay marriage is "Gays are bad" not "Gay marriage is objectively harmful to society." The second is a rationalization of the first. And because the first is a subjective, learned dislike, any rationalizations or arguments stemming from it are bigoted.
|
You assert that my analysis is theoretical and that this is how it actually is in the real world - but all I'm seeing is more theory. Theory which my own experience fails to confirm. It's quite possible - scratch that, I've seen your theory come true in real life. But I've also seen behavior consistent with my own alternate theory. And sure, they could just be hiding their bigotry, but the same goes for every human being on the planet.
It's irresponsible to assume bigotry without evidence that rules out the alternatives. People deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by filtherton
It's axiomatic. There is no process. It's no different than if someone were to try to explain to me why interracial marriage is wrong. I might listen to their argument, but my first assumption would be "this person is a bigot". Whether you think that is justified doesn't matter at all to me.
|
I don't see much point in posting an assertion in a discussion board that you aren't interested in discussing.
It's not axiomatic. Your personal experience does not equal the world.
Quote:
|
Intellectual caution is one thing. Throwing out random, flailing, "oh yeah, but what about pedophiles" type arguements is intellectual dishonesty. See most of post #84
|
Eh, not everyone took a class in logic. Not everyone realizes that the slippery slope is always a fallacy (whether it's false or irrelevant). What's random and flailing to you could look convincing to someone less experienced in debate.
Quote:
|
True, though in my opinion it most often does in the context of the homosexuality debate. Frankly i don't see why you care so much.
|
You don't see why I care so much about unsubstantiated blanket accusations? Must be because you're a liberal. You see, 99.99999999% of liberals don't care about the truth. At least not the ones I've met.
Quote:
|
Well, apparently just being "mistaken" is okay even if your mistake comes in the form of support for systematic discrimination.
|
I don't recall making the argument that opposition to gay marriage is okay. Let me clarify: it's wrong.
But it's a strange kind of bigotry, the kind which doesn't actually treat those who differ with any less respect, which doesn't lend itself to any feelings of superiority or preachiness. Which may not even favor any difference in legal rights. (See: civil unions.)
I guess I have less respect for your mistake because it's been my experience that your mistake is more of a roadblock to civility/friendship than their alleged yet invisible bigotry.