Prop 8?

You really don't know how to use the English Language, Aidan. You fall into the same trap as other left wing liberals. You think that if you label something PROGRESSIVE, that automatically makes the other side of the argument, Retrogressive, But, if you have read any History, you will find that Stalin thought his movement was PROGRESSIVE. Hitler labelled his Nazi thrusts as PROGRESSIVE.

The fact of the matter, despite your statistics, is that the majority of states in the USA do not accept the idea of gay marriage--they have either encapsulated this concept in their state constitutions or have passed legislation in that regard.

If you really want a suggestion as to how to get more backing from the American populace, Aidan, I would suggest fewer street parades where the Queens are thrusting their uncovered genitals at the populace. Some people are really turned off by such tactics. It is even more insulting to general mores than the parades held by the scumbag Black Panthers.

Aidan wrote:

Yes, as would be expected in a world where ninety percent of the population is (or claims to be) heterosexual.

Oh, come on. Don't give us that tired old Kinsey Bullshit again. We know how he completed his studies.

Try 1.51%, Aidan-

I know I know there are Millions who are still in the closet.....and I say there are also millions who hare too timid to give their strong opposition to gay marriage.

1.51%---There are more followers of Wiccan than homosexuals!!!!


Note:


Introduction
This table lists some major demographic groupings in the United States. Race, gender, ethnicity, religion, and other factors are factors in personal and group identity. This table is unusual in that it presents a merged list of these factors. This more accurately reflects actual American society, in which most people belong to more than one group. All individuals can be classified into multiple groupings below. This list is not comprehensive. Please write to suggest additional groups.

Group Number Percent of
U.S. population
Total 1 284,800,000 100.0 %
English-at-home speakers 6 245,497,600 86.2 %
Christian 2 217,872,000 76.5 %
White 1 211,460,626 75.1 %
Protestant 18 150,944,000 53 %
Female 1 145,532,800 51.1 %
Male 1 139,267,200 48.9 %
"born-again" or "evangelical" 9 125,312,000 44 %
Republican 8 90,950,000 33 %
Democrat 8 85,440,000 31 %
Catholic 2 69,776,000 24.5 %
Non-English speakers 6 38,087,127 13.8 %
Nonreligious 2 37,593,600 13.2 %
Hispanic/Latino 1 35,305,818 12.5 %
Black 1 34,658,190 12.3 %
Baptist 18 34,176,000 12 %
Evangelical (theologically) 16 22,049,360 8.0 %
Methodist 2 19,366,400 6.8 %
Spanish speakers 6 20,744,986 7.5 %
Southern Baptist 3 15,800,000 5.6 %
Lutheran 2 13,100,800 4.6 %
vegetarian 19 12,000,000 4.2 %
Asian 1 10,242,998 3.6 %
United Methodist Church 20 8,251,042 2.9 %
Presbyterian 2 7,689,600 2.7 %
Multiracial 1 6,826,228 2.4 %
Pentecostal 2 5,980,800 2.1 %
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) 15 5,503,192 1.93 %
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 3, 20 5,038,066 1.8 %
Episcopalian 2 4,841,600 1.7 %
GLBT (gay, lesbian or bisexual)5 4,300,000 1.51 %
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) 3, 20 3,595,259 1.3 %
Judaism 2, 21 3,702,400 1.3 %
Eastern Orthodox 9 2,756,170 1 %
Assemblies of God 11 2,575,000 0.93 %
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod 3, 20 2,512,714 0.9 %
Native American 1 2,475,956 0.9 %
Buddhist 13 2,400,000 0.87 %
Episcopal Church 20 2,333,628 0.82 %
French speakers 6 2,308,795 0.8 %
gay men5 2,000,000 0.70 %
Non-denominational 11 2,000,000 0.7 %
prison population 2,000,000 0.7 %
German speakers 6 1,851,418 0.7 %
Megachurch attendance 14 1,800,000 0.64 %
Jehovah's Witnesses 2 1,708,800 0.6 %
Chinese speakers 6 1,578,099 0.6 %
Italian speakers 6 1,565,165 0.6 %
Churches of Christ (non-instrumental / Corsicana, TX) 20 1,500,000 0.53 %
American Baptist Church in the U.S.A. 20 1,484,291 0.52 %
African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church 20 1,430,795 0.50 %
Muslim 2 1,424,000 0.5 %
agnostic 2 1,424,000 0.5 %
bisexual5 1,400,000 0.49 %
United Church of Christ 20 1,330,985 0.47 %
Baptist Bible Fellowship International 20 1,200,000 0.42 %
atheists 2, 10 1,139,200 0.4 %
Tagolog speakers 6 1,008,542 0.4 %
Independent Christian Church, Churches of Christ
(instrumental / Joplin, MO) 20 1,071,616 0.39 %
Hindu 13 1,000,000 0.36 %
Church of God (Cleveland, TN) 20 944,857 0.33 %
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) 11 910,000 0.33 %
lesbians5 900,000 0.32 %
Polish speakers 6 865,298 0.3 %
Unitarian Universalist 2 854,400 0.3 %
Seventh-day Adventists 11 809,000 0.29 %
Neo-pagan (incl. Wiccans) 12 768,400 0.28 %
Korean speakers 6 749,278 0.3 %
Church of the Nazarene 11 608,000 0.2 %
Vietnamese speakers 6 606,463 0.2 %
vegans 22 591,468 0.2 %
Portuguese speakers 6 515,017 0.2 %
Japanese speakers 6 511,485 0.2 %
Pacific Islander 1 398,835 0.1 %
Reformed Church in America (RCA) 11 304,000 0.11 %
Libertarian party members 7 200,000 0.07 %
Baha'i 11 142,000 0.05 %
Native American Religionist 2 120,735 0.04 %
Mennonite Church USA 23 110,000 .036 %






Sources
1. U.S. Census Bureau. Year 2000 Census. URL: http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-1.pdf

Population of the United States by Race and Hispanic Origin, 2000 Census Results
Current total U.S. population (284,800,000) is from the U.S. Census Bureau, and is based on current growth rates applied to the 2000 Census figures.

Okay now genoves - this feels like deja vu- haven't we already been over this?
Yes, I remember, we definitely have, because I really liked that word you used - retrogressive- I'd forgotten about it until you used it the first time and here it is again.

No need for insults though.

Oh my Aidan-no insult--When a coach tells a player that he does not know how to line up properly, that is no insult if true. It is a fact! It is up to you to show that you indeed know..etc.etc. etc.

Links genoves - I want links for these 'facts'! Where are your statistics?!
(show me what kind of researcher you are)...

Ok. There are not millions who are still in the closet! I'll go along with the data given in my post from the census bureau!

vegetarian 19 12,000,000 4.2 %
Asian 1 10,242,998 3.6 %
United Methodist Church 20 8,251,042 2.9 %
Presbyterian 2 7,689,600 2.7 %
Multiracial 1 6,826,228 2.4 %
Pentecostal 2 5,980,800 2.1 %
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) 15 5,503,192 1.93 %
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 3, 20 5,038,066 1.8 %
Episcopalian 2 4,841,600 1.7 %
GLBT (gay, lesbian or bisexual)5 4,300,000 1.51 %
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) 3, 20 3,595,259 1.3 %
Judaism 2, 21 3,702,400 1.3 %
Eastern Orthodox 9 2,756,170 1 %
****************************************************************

note--GLBT-4,300,000_That's about right-Only 1.15% of the population.

that's actually a very interesting piece of information there genoves. I suppose those are the numbers for the US only though, right?
Do you think the climate of disapproval may have skewed the number of people who were willing to self-report honestly though?

Possibly! But then, who really knows. The real % could be 10% as Kinsey said, but according to most researchers, that is highly doubtful! I do know that the numbers in the Arabic countries are not high. That is because the fanatics in those countries think nothing of mutilating innocent human beings.

and by 'innocent human beings' are you making reference to men and women who happen to be homosexual and so are subject to persecution, mutilation, abuse and discrimination in those Arabic countries?

And I had Becksie "thinking and thinking".

Now she's back on dry land.

It doesn't make the slightest difference to the theology how many homosexuals there are.

If 99% of the population are nuts it doesn't make being nuts right. It might mean that it is necessary to pretend they are not nuts for logistical reasons but that's just pragmatism and that's a right no-no. It would involve involuntary euthanasia for the over 60s I think. Amongst other things.

What theology? And no I'm not stupid and I could make an educated guess about what you MIGHT be referring to. But I don't want to leave it at that.
Is this an issue that you can't reconcile with biblical teachings, your specific church's particular stance on it, or your own personal theology of what's moral and ethically correct?


But spendius - is being nuts wrong? Isn't being nuts just something that happens to people?
Maybe it's not the preferable state of being (for most people who are not nuts), but seriously, think about it - do most people choose to be nuts (if they are)?
How can you say they have done or are doing anything wrong- or that their very being or existence is 'not right'?


But that's what we as a society force homosexuals to do all the time- and if they don't, we call them nuts..

Re: genoves (Post 3674475)
Quote:
I do know that the numbers in the Arabic countries are not high. That is because the fanatics in those countries think nothing of mutilating innocent human beings.

Aidan responded:
and by 'innocent human beings' are you making reference to men and women who happen to be homosexual and so are subject to persecution, mutilation, abuse and discrimination in those Arabic countries>

********************************************************************

I mean all of the people killed by Muslim fanatics. That includes Homosexuals.
They have a twisted idea that certain things are wrong. They kill homosexuals. They stone adulterers to death. They beat women in the streets who are not completely covered up. They close schools if they are teaching females. They prohibit alcohol. THEY HAVE A RELIGION THAT IS VERY STRICT. YET OBAMA SAYS THAT WE MUST TRY TO UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER AND RESPECT EACH OTHER EVEN THOUGH WE ARE NOT ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.

My advice to you, Aidan, filtered through the wisest president we have ever had---TRY TO RESPECT SPENDIUS. I RESPECT HIM. RESPECT HIS BELIEFS.

That's the message our president has given us. I don't really want to try to understand Muslim beliefs, but, according to Obama, I must respect them!

I don't need any president to tell me that - I do respect spendius. I do respect his right to his beliefs. I'm just trying to understand how he arrived at them.
Same with you.
If you believe that homosexuals are human beings who are innocent of any wrong doing, why are you able to then be willing to treat them in a discriminatory manner?

I don't treat anyone in a discriminatory manner. As far as I am aware, there are over 40 states which have laws or constitutions which bar gay marriage. I did not write those laws. I also am not a special pleader for homosexual rights.

However, Ihave, in certain situations, have been the victim of discrimination.
I understand why that happened. I just do not place myself in situations where the discrmination can recur. That is a great course to follow.

Come on Becksie. It is far too complex to explain. It has to dawn on you with experience and wide reading of the works of men and women of experience.



None of those. It is an issue relating to the undermining of language. With PC itself. I can't actually understand the arguments. The idea of two chaps getting "married" is simply ridiculous to me. Which leads me to think that a state which grants such a thing is itself ridiculous. Why can't they use another word. The rights of marrieds are not all there is to marriage.

The "Sanctity of Marriage" and all the ritual and ceremony which goes into giving it integrity is a magical illusion designed to make the business of the reproduction and socialisation of the species look a little less sordid that the similar arrangements to be seen in a troupe of monkeys. What is proposed by opponents of Prop 8 seems to me to weaken, at the least, the power of that illusion. As does the recourse to birth control, abortion and divorce.

It is noticeable that being in favour of these four important matters are often to be found together in the same person or political ideology. And they all go to undermine the sanctity of marriage. Hence, one might conclude, that there is an ideology that attacks marriage and the family. A Marxist ideology. It is linked also to removing religion from education and thus society. It is an urban language and I'm a country boy.

But it can make a good case for the destruction of the family by drawing attention to dramatic cases of individual failures and ignoring the millions of successes, which are by definition boring and unsuitable for selling media, and the fiendish difficulty of the mission, which it cannot comprehend although it wallows in flattering itself that it does so.

So I see this as one flank of a general attack on a number of fronts. I choose to be in the army which resists because it just does not feel right to be on the other side. It speaks a language I do not understand. It is the language of the pure Will. Which closes off the language of Idea.

The country boy, by his proximity to nature, becomes almost will-less.

You need Thomas Mann's recipe using Schopenhaeur and Nietzsche. The Ironic German by Prof. Erich Heller is a fine introduction.



Up to a point. But we are talking about a State. Is a State being nuts just something that happens. That would mean it had lost control of its destiny.

Although a pal of mine, a telecom exec, spent 8 weeks in Cal and he said they were all nuts. Geoffrey Gorer said, in the 30s, that California was in the process of inventing a new form of humanity. In which, according to Evelyn Waugh, expressions of the self were the only things of importance and there was no requirement for anybody to listen to them. Whether that has come here through American movies I don't know but pub conversations now, compared to what they used to be, show that characteristic quite strongly.



But what do I know? It passes the time pleasantly enough.

Spendius- You are the first person that I know about who has that fine book--"The Ironic German". I wish Mann was still alive. Here is a note on the man who wrote what was called by some the best novel of the Twentieth Century--"The Magic Mountain"

Note:

In the letter to his friend Count Hermann Keyserling, published as "Über die Ehe" ("About Marriage," 1925), Mann tries to separate the creative and enduring institution of marriage, which creates families and, ultimately, states, from the artistically necessary, but eventually destructive force of homoeroticism. "There is no blessing in it save that of beauty, and that is the blessing of death," he wrote about same-sex desire.

The essay is a defense against the author's own homoerotic feelings. Mann was the solid burgher of his generation, celebrated author, and family father. He admits, if one reads carefully, that homosexual desire may have inspired his art, but homosexual identity had to be rejected since it threatened not only "society" but his own preeminent status.

*************************************************

THE CREATIVE AND ENDURING INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE.

This makes your reasoning more clear to me.



I think the rhythm of conversation is very different here than in the states-due to how differently people listen here than there.
There, there are many more interruptions - even when it's only two people talking. While one person is talking, the other one is constantly interjecting little, 'uh-huhs', 'yeahs', or 'rights' to indicate they're listening- and I think a lot of people are also thinking about what they're planning to say next instead of purely listening, so they're constantly trying to create pauses in the conversation in which they can jump in and insert their own thoughts.
Here that's not as common. One person talks and one listens and when the other person finishes, the other person talks.
It was funny when I first spoke on the phone with people from England to make arrangements from America, I'd interject my 'mm-hmms' and 'rights' and the English person would immediately stop talking - as if it were my turn- and I'd realize they were waiting for me to say something else and I'd say, 'No, no...you go ahead...' - it took a few conversations for me to realize what the different conversational expectation was.
I've become a much quieter listener since living here to the point that when I'm on the phone with people in America, they ask, 'Are you still there?' because I've been quietly listening without constantly interjecting these useless little comments- and I say, 'Yes, I'm still here - I'm listening.'

I like Thomas Mann- I'll read that Heller.

And genoves- you've inspired me to reread Magic Mountain.

From SFGate:

Brown now fights Prop. 8 in federal court

Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer


(06-12) 21:01 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- Attorney General Jerry Brown, who tried to persuade the state Supreme Court to overturn California's ban on same-sex marriage, took the same position in federal court Friday, saying Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equality.
More Bay Area News

The initiative approved by the voters in November "denies gay and lesbian couples and their families the same dignity, respect and stature afforded families headed by a married couple," Brown's office said in a filing in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.

Two same-sex couples, represented by attorneys Theodore Olson and David Boies - the courtroom adversaries in the Bush vs. Gore case that decided the 2000 presidential election - challenged Prop. 8 in federal court on May 22, four days before the state's high court upheld it.

The suit argued that Prop. 8 denies equal protection of the law to same-sex couples by relegating them to domestic partnerships while opposite-sex couples are allowed to marry. The state's high court used a similar rationale in a May 2008 ruling that allowed gay and lesbian couples to wed, but based its decision on the state Constitution, which was then amended by Prop. 8.

Gay-rights groups have avoided bringing up federal constitutional issues in the marriage cases, fearful of a U.S. Supreme Court defeat that would set their cause back for years. Brown's refusal to support Prop. 8 means that the conservative Christian groups who sponsored Prop. 8 will defend it in federal court, as they did in the state Supreme Court.

The attorney general, a likely candidate for the Democratic nomination for governor next year, defended the same-sex marriage ban in the May 2008 California case but switched sides after Prop. 8 passed. He argued that the power to pass a constitutional amendment by majority vote did not extend to measures depriving a vulnerable minority group of "inalienable rights."

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker has scheduled a July 2 hearing in the case.

To take nothing away from Thomas Mann, he could not help his urges, I think Tropic of Cancer is the best novel of the Twentieth Century. It is in that line of art which goes back to the Willendorf Venus, through Homer, Ovid, Rabelais, Stendhal, Frank Harris and the author of Confessions of a Window Cleaner and which never even nod in the direction of homoeroticism. Not even to deny it.

Spendius--If you don't read French, there will be a section of the Magic Mountain which will frustrate you. After a long while, Castorp, the hero finally meets and talks to Clavdia--The problem is that the conversation between him and the woman he desires is all in French.