Gay Marriage

Quote: Beethoven

As usual, AZ is right on the money.

Beethoven & AZDuffman-- Do either of you two have any thoughts on the 12 states that still criminalize fellatio in 2014?

Most conservatives abhor big government intruding into our private lives. Are these anti-sodomy statutes less appalling than NYC Mayor Bloomberg's regulation of soda pop consumption?

On paper, the anti-sodomy laws are written to apply to all citizens, (hetero & homo) but in the real world, they are selectively enforced: of the 10 arrests in the past 2 years in East Baton Rouge, all 10 "criminals" were gay. (There's no heterosexual blowjobs in all of Baton Rouge?) If Bloomberg's soda pop law only targeted a specific demographic of New Yorkers, would that be more or less appalling than a soda pop law that applied to all New Yorkers?

Quote: AZDuffman

Now, the law might have been behind the times and needed to be changed in 1967, but the statement that life will be hard on the kids was correct and probably well-intentioned.

"Well-intentioned?" These pre-date the Jim Crow era by a couple hundred years. This is slave era stuff. In Virginia, Maryland, & Louisiana these laws were enacted in the 1660s, and spread to the rest of the colonies shortly thereafter. And it was a serious crime: a felony, not a misdemeanor.

From Wikipedia: "The ban on interracial marriage was issued to split up the racially mixed, increasingly mixed-race labor force into whites, who were given their freedom, and blacks, who were later treated as slaves rather than as indentured servants. By outlawing interracial marriage, it became possible to keep these two new groups separated and prevent a new rebellion."

Quote: reno

Quote: AZDuffman

Now, the law might have been behind the times and needed to be changed in 1967, but the statement that life will be hard on the kids was correct and probably well-intentioned.

"Well-intentioned?" These pre-date the Jim Crow era by a couple hundred years. This is slave era stuff. In Virginia, Maryland, & Louisiana these laws were enacted in the 1660s, and spread to the rest of the colonies shortly thereafter. And it was a serious crime: a felony, not a misdemeanor.

From Wikipedia: "The ban on interracial marriage was issued to split up the racially mixed, increasingly mixed-race labor force into whites, who were given their freedom, and blacks, who were later treated as slaves rather than as indentured servants. By outlawing interracial marriage, it became possible to keep these two new groups separated and prevent a new rebellion."

Please re-read my post. I dd not comment on the intentions of the laws. I stated that the statement that interracial kids will have it tough was correct and probably well intentioned even if not PC. Interracial kids historically get disowned by both of heir races.

Having a daughter who claimed bi-sexuality last year and a lesbian this year and is now dating a woman, I can attest that it is not a choice, in the way that she explained it to me. She tried to date guys, and found that she wasn't sexually attracted to them, whereas she feels the attraction with women. Now, of course, that was difficult for me to take.

So, from my point of view, her feelings towards her girlfriend are exactly the same as my feelings towards women. So, rationally thinking, if my kid decides to marry a woman (perfectly legal here), why should the government deny her the right to not claim her as a dependent on the tax return? Why should the hospital deny her power of attorney? The love and the relationship is the same, as far as I am concerned, and the legal rights afforded to married men and women should also apply to them as well.

The gay movement has succeeded in moving the public to believe this. I am waiting for a valid counter-argument.

Quote: Beethoven

First, the only reason I keep talking about "word games" is because I'm being engaged by people who keep asking about it.

But I don't get it, this thread was moving along just fine, and there was no "sniping" at all until one guy chimed in with an unsolicited post & started using words like "troll". How come you didn't mention that??? He's the same guy that you said I was "right back at" when I had returned to WoV, yet you hadn't mentioned that he did the same thing back then as he's doing now. He initiates a conversation, throws in provocative words like "troll".......yet I get blamed?? Very annoying. Like I said before, everything was going along just fine here until the chimer chimed in.

*For the record, I have no problem with unsolicited posts, and I don't even have a problem with people who continually whine about others instead of simply blocking them. But I do have a problem when people start blaming the guy's target while ignoring his initial post.

I didn't mention you explicitly. It takes two to tango.

Quote: reno

Beethoven & AZDuffman...

On paper, the anti-sodomy laws are written to apply to all citizens, (hetero & homo) but in the real world, they are selectively enforced: of the 10 arrests in the past 2 years in East Baton Rouge, all 10 "criminals" were gay.

Ah, fair enough & good point.

Technically, it takes a lot of time and money to officially repeal a law, so I'm against doing that unless there's an incredibly compelling reason to do so. Also, the DA didn't prosecute any of the guys in those cases, so the right course of action did ultimately take place. BUT with that said AND assuming that all of the guys were in their own private residences and not in public...I'm going to surprise you: I AGREE with you that they should not have been arrested.

Believe it or not, I'm actually closer to the libertarian wing of the conservative movement (see my survey). The only 2 social issues I strongly oppose are abortion (because it's immoral) and gay marriage (because it's illogical).

Quote: boymimbo

I didn't mention you explicitly. It takes two to tango.

Don't flatter yourself, I wasn't even talking about you...lol ;)

Quote: Beethoven

But I don't get it, this thread was moving along just fine, and there was no "sniping" at all until one guy chimed in with an unsolicited post & started using words like "troll".

Beethoven, prior to rxwine (who I assume you are referring to) asked if you were trolling, you made several references to previous debates that were rife with personal attacks...

Quote: Beethoven

Geez, you're getting just as bad as those other guys who like to shift their arguments. Guess that means I'm winning. :)

Quote: Beethoven

I see that those other guys taught you well on how to shift. ;)

Quote: Beethoven

...but not like "tangent". lol

"Shifty". "Mr. Tangent". We've gone over this before, and I had the same reaction: Here we go again.

Quote: Beethoven

How come you didn't mention that??? He's the same guy that you said I was "right back at" when I had returned to WoV, yet you hadn't mentioned that he did the same thing back then as he's doing now. He initiates a conversation, throws in provocative words like "troll".......yet I get blamed?? Very annoying. Like I said before, everything was going along just fine here until the chimer chimed in.

Partly it's difficulty in addressing such a grand scale issue with one post. Mostly it's because I'm not perfect.

I don't want members annoyed or otherwise felt to be treated unfairly. At the risk of breaching confidentiality and incurring more pushup penalties, or even the loss of my green status, I'll advise you that concerning the rift between you and rxwine, I have spoken to him. Regarding the rift between you and BBB, I have spoken to her. Regarding the recent dust up with you and TheCessPit, I have spoken to him. I'm not singling you out in the least. However, since this last post was directed at you and about you, I felt it necessary to address only you.

I have a job here, and it's only one job - protect Wiz's investments. It is neither my responsibility nor my desire to change opinions, lines of thinking, beliefs, or values. It is only to protect Wiz's property. The only way for me to do that is to combat the things that ruin fora - flaming, trolling, and spam.

In all cases, I try to be as diplomatic and free of judgement as possible. I attempt to simply state a few facts and rely on a member's own compunction to recognize what may have been disrespectful or inciting, and hope they adjust of their own accord. We're all adults, that's all it should take. The last thing I want to do is talk down to a grown man or woman. So that's what I do. That's what I did and continue to do with every single person that PMs me with some offense, and what I do to address the offender. I did it with you in my very long post to you regarding your suspension. And it appeared that after all that, we maintained our mutual respect and there was understanding.

But upon your return, your first order of business was coming here and making a sig disrespecting BBB. You returned to WoV to change a disrespectful sig against rxwine to another, more convoluted jab at him. Your direct references to "shifty" and "tangent" are exactly things we discussed at WoV; can you say you didn't do that to get a rise out of members here?

I look at this scenario, and my options are limited. This isn't an issue of age. EB is probably the oldest at 60something, I'm probably the youngest at 33, and everyone else falls in the middle. Since October when this place came to be, there's been no issues. The problem isn't generational. Culture? I'm a halfbreed Native from the northeast, AZD is a MAWG from the northeast, boymimbo is an American turned Canadian, TheCessPit is a rosbif turned west coaster. All the same, all still different. And there's been no issues. Money? Some here make 6 figures. Some make less than half that. Still no issues. Partisanship? We got ultra lefties and ultra righties and a few smack bang in the middle. Still no issues. Pro gay and anti gay, pro life and pro choice, pro gun and anti gun, every side is present and accounted for, and still, there hasn't been a single issue in the history of this place.

Try as I might, I cannot find a single environmental cause of the rift. The only common thread I can find in this is you. And it's that lack of any other ideas that is causing me to address you directly. It is not my intention to shame you and put you on blast, but with my limited life experience, I know of no other option than to address you directly and straightforward, and hope we can come to some sort of understanding.

I guess I'm looking for clarification. I want to know who I'm dealing with. Because you and I, we don't agree on things. Not the gay thing, not the Redskins name thing, not the legality of drugs. But never have you and I played the childish games with each other. Never have we responded to each other with snark, sarcasm, or veiled insults. This is who I know Beethoven to be. But the more these issues keep popping up, the more it makes me question which version is real.

I'll give you a chance to respond, but going forward, I would hope that not just you but everyone can put aside their differences and past issues and come back to the table correctly. Since the timid advice didn't work, I'll just say it straight - just stop it. No more jabs, no more sniping. Squash the sigs, stop addressing personal traits, and focus on the topic at hand. Destroy an argument and defend your opinion vehemently, but do so as gentlemen and women. There's no reason for anyone to engage in the childishness that ruins places like these, not considering who the members are here, and what we have so far made this place to be.

Quote: Face

EB is probably the oldest at 60something,

HEY! You have no proof of that. And besides, Buzz
posts here sometimes and he's at least 78. He might
be in his 80's by now. He makes me look and feel
like a teenager..

Quote: boymimbo

So, from my point of view, her feelings towards her girlfriend are exactly the same as my feelings towards women. So, rationally thinking, if my kid decides to marry a woman (perfectly legal here), why should the government deny her the right to not claim her as a dependent on the tax return? Why should the hospital deny her power of attorney? The love and the relationship is the same, as far as I am concerned, and the legal rights afforded to married men and women should also apply to them as well.

Not sure what the law is where you are at, but in the USA there need not be any familial relationship to claim someone as a dependent, you merely have to provide for that person. I forget the exact definition, but being related is NOT a part of it. Ditto POAs. You can make any person your attorney-in-fact. None of this requires changing a law.

Quote:

The gay movement has succeeded in moving the public to believe this. I am waiting for a valid counter-argument.

I am still not conceding that it is anything but a choice until we find physiological and not merely "that is how I feel" evidence. I still feel most gays are seduced into it because they had a bad relationship, have a lower sex drive, or just can't find the "right person" so they decide to experiment. Sorry, but just because the public buys into something doesn't mean I am going to follow the crowd. The public seems to be wrong far more than it is right on things.

Quote: Face

"Shifty". "Mr. Tangent". We've gone over this before, and I had the same reaction: Here we go again.

Face, since you've made this part of the public record, I might as well respond publicly:

Yes, here we go again. (And please don't conflate the use of "shift" & "tangent" with "Shifty" & "Mr. Tangent". They are completely different terms. Banning "Shifty" & "Mr. Tangent" is reasonable. Banning "shift" & "tangent" is Orwellian.)

I'm not going to rehash the same thing I said to you over on WoV. You (or anyone else, for that matter) can go back and read/reread those posts. What I will say is that, within a thread, when somebody completely ignores a person's argument and repeatedly chimes in with unrelated, unsolicited gobbledygook, my response is to use humor. (And I strongly disagree that I used "personal attacks" unless you believe that words like "Einstein" are also personal attacks. The "personal attack" label gets thrown around a lot for whatever reason, although you never did apply it to the "How to Spot a Troll" sig, which has been active the whole time you've been an administrator on WoV. In fact, it has been around for over 6 months. Is it not "disrespectful"?)

In any case, you never did address why you publicly stated on WoV that I was right "back at rxwine" after I got reinstated:

Quote: Face

Within the day, he was back at rxwine. Not arguing a point of view, but repeatedly targeting him personally

Sorry, but the above quote simply wasn't/isn't true. The following quote is the unsolicited post which was initially written to me after I had gotten reinstated and was addressing somebody else:

Quote: rxwine

You should have looked up "slur" first before you posted.

http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/3853-discussion-about-the-suspension-list/278/#post344197

Tell me, Face, how was I "back at rxwine" and "targeting him personally" when he was the one who posted to me first and who continued to write me multiple times? I'm still trying to figure that one out. And it's not like I'm the only one who noticed this. About 4-5 other members on WoV noticed the same thing.

Quote: Face

I have a job here, and it's only one job - protect Wiz's investments...It is only to protect Wiz's property. The only way for me to do that is to combat the things that ruin fora

Exactly, which is why I was genuinely surprised that you never commented on the racial slur that was used on WoV. How come you didn't protect the forum from racial slurs? If you're so concerned about "shift" and "tangent" affecting the Wiz's investments, then shouldn't you at least be a little concerned about racial slurs on his forum? Even though I'm not Asian, I can say with authority that some Asians do find the C-word to be just as offensive as you find the R-word.

Quote: Face

Try as I might, I cannot find a single environmental cause of the rift. The only common thread I can find in this is you.

Good grief, then you're not looking hard enough. Let me try again: Who was the guy on WoV who chimed in out of the blue in the "Discussion" thread telling me to look up "slur" and who continued to engage me? Who chimed in this thread with an unsolicited post and started throwing around words like "troll"? Do you not see a "common thread"???? (I can cite many other examples, too)

Quote: Face

Never have we responded to each other with snark, sarcasm, or veiled insults.

EXACTLY!!! That's because you don't shift your arguments to avoid admitting when you're wrong, nor do you go off on tangents to avoid the topic at hand. If the complainers would do the same, there would be no issue !!

Quote: Face

No more jabs, no more sniping. Squash the sigs, stop addressing personal traits, and focus on the topic at hand.

Gadzooks...you're telling this to the wrong guy. Focusing on the topic at hand is exactly what I do. It's exactly what you and I have done in debates, which is why we have "never responded to each other with snark, sarcasm, or veiled insults" !!!

Here's a solution. It's a little childish, but since people are continually whining, how about instituting some sort of truce where [name(s) withheld] and I cease writing or referring to each other on these forums? I, for one, would have no problem with such an arrangement since I rarely write to those guys anyway.

OTOH, I bet they'd never agree to that because it would take away their "fun". They would no longer be able to play the "Let's-get-Beethoven-and-the-mods-arguing-on-the-forum" game. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they're laughing it up right now reading our exchange. (If anyone out there doubts me, ask yourself why these guys refuse to use the 'Block' feature??)

Anyway, I'm very sorry to everyone that this message had to be public. I would have preferred this entire discussion to take place privately, but since I was publicly admonished in front of the whole freakin' forum, I felt it was necessary to respond publicly.