Steve Martin Live

Okay 20% say it shouldn't be legal. I and most Republicans I know disagree.

"Evil" is definitely not the same as "not legal" and frankly I don't think is a fringe view, particularly if rooted in religious views. You can view homosexuality as "evil" and still think it's a free country and it's not your place to force homosexual people back in the closet.

I probably wouldn't use the word "evil," "sinful" is probably more sensitive, but some would call "sinful" and "evil" interchangeable. And I don't think people who find homosexuality "sinful" should be compelled by this social mob to explain themselves.

 

No one could have seen this one coming...

 

Like most policy issues, there are all sorts of places people can "draw the line" when it comes to gay marriage.

You can favor:
1. Legally ban sodomy, homosexual acts, and obviously gay marriage.
2. Legally ban gay marriage, but not homosexual acts or sodomy.
3. Be legally silent or ambiguous regarding homosexuality in marriage (kind of a cop out, but I guess it's an option).
4. Remove all government involvement in marriage including tax breaks or penalties.
5. Consider marriage to be between a man and a woman, but entitle gay couples to similar rights and privileges as married heterosexual couples under a different name such as visitation rights in hospitals, right to adopt, property ownership rights, etc.
6. Consider marriage to be available to any two monogamous consenting adults.
7. Consider marriage to be available to any consenting adults.
8. Consider enforcement and recognition of marriage to be compellable at the religious level.

This is anecdotal, but most conservatives I know tend to be in the range between 4 and 6 and I don't think any of those positions should be taboo. I would say 1 and 2 on the traditional end are the only positions that are "too much" on an American policy level. And even people with those positions I don't think should be ostracized from society and people shouldn't take steps to ruin their life. Just convince them why they're wrong on the merits on the grounds that we live in a free country.

And that's without even getting into Constitutional issues, federalism, or cultural issues.

On cultural issues:
1. Gay marriage is wrong and should be publicly ostracized.
2. Gay marriage is wrong, but it's a free country and you should be able to do what you want in a free country.
3. Gay marriage is equally good to heterosexual marriage, but people are entitled to hold the traditional view.
4. Gay marriage is equally good to heterosexual marriage, and people who disagree should be ostracized.

Most conservatives I know on culture here are either 2 or 3, and both of which are completely reasonable. The only ones I don't think are reasonable are 1 and 4.

 

Mulvaney is a bully posing as a victim.

A clown who threatens people who point out he's a clown.

 

Change the word?! I think that's a bit exaggerated. However, I console myself from my readings of history that all change occurs incrementally, that it's after arguments/discussions such as take place on TH, and that it's usually for the better. The extreme rarely prevails, at least not ultimately.

 

Thank you for that. Even if I disagree with the main thrust, I enjoyed the post.
BTW, I'm not "hard left". I'm a left-leaning moderate who tries to avoid the extremes on both sides. Ironically they're the same in a crucial respect: they don't want to acknowledge your point of view and want to impose theirs on you. The right's obsession with DEI is as every bit over the top as the left's. "Grab corporations by the balls", "bully tactics", a move by the left toward some dystopian future? Come on man! Diversity, equality and inclusion are dystopian?

I suppose they'd seem that way to those who don't believe in them.

 

Odd you should say that. By"them" do you mean the hard right, which has opposed everything from integration to same sex marriage? How does this "free" you mention come into play when opposing integration and same sex marriage?

 

The "E" in DEI acronym is actually for equity, not equality - a small, but significant, difference.

 

Are you sure about that?? What the heck does equity mean?

 

Not sure if others would agree, but here's the first result I got. I think affirmative action programs and Title IX would be examples of striving for equity as opposed to equality. MLK once used a metaphor about runners who having a head start in a race.

https://www.marinhhs.org/sites/default/files/boards/general/equality_v._equity_04_05_2021.pdf

While the terms equity and equality may sound similar, the implementation of one versus the other can lead to dramatically different outcomes for marginalized people.

Equality means each individual or group of people is given the same resources or opportunities. Equity recognizes that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome.

 

So, this started out as a Steve Martin Live thread and ended up some kind of culture war thread.
Thank you for reminding me why I don't come to "Too Hot", which, by its title, should actually feature fishing pics.
Back to the pay site.....
.

 

No, it started out as a culture war thread. Read the OP.

 

I read through a bunch of posts trying to see if the Steep Canyon Rangers out of Brevard, NC played with Martin and Short. Still don't have the answer.

 

When they're at the expense of merit and justice, which I would say is how they're often-applied these days, yes.

There's nothing inherently wrong with diversity, equity, or inclusion provided that they are properly prioritized. When it's at the expense of merit, justice, and/or diversity of opinion they become a problem.

 

Nationwide, there are about 351 anti-LGBTQ bills in state legislatures right now, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. The proposed measures, which are all sponsored by Republicans and come at a time when the GOP has been consumed by anti-LGBTQ hysteria, attempt to criminalize drag performances, bar trans youth from playing sports at school, and ban health care for transgender children and adults.

The Republican War On LGBTQ People Has Gone Even Further

 

I'm saying we live in a free country, so we should have freedom of association. That should be a pretty compelling point to most Americans.

 

There's an awful lot of lies and deceit by omission in this post.

Criminalize ALL drag performances? If not all, which ones and why?

Bar trans youth from playing any sport? ANY sport? ALL trans youth? Not true. If they're taking hormones or drugs that are otherwise prohibited for anyone else, maybe.

Ban all healthcare or ban transgender procedures for minors?