Comment

Comment by Chrys Stevenson on February 7, 2009 at 10:50pm

Once again, I suggest you reread the first sentence of my first post.

Comment by DUBsays®... on February 7, 2009 at 9:31pm

If I underestimate "our" membership then I underestimate myself.

It appears I overestimated our membership. And for that I am greatly disheartened.

The simple fact here is that the Religious Right is boycotting a legal function based solely on their intolerance. We know it is legal because it is being held at a legal establishment that must abide by numerous laws. We know they're intolerant because, well, aside from being the Religious Right, the group's name is rather revealing. These are the facts as I presented them, and the method I chose was purposely one of terseness. One need not send forth a deluge of information because people tend to shy away from lengthy reads. You put the facts. Sorry I assumed people could deduce the rest...or research themselves, as you did.

The mere fact that you consistently allege shame or discretion hints more toward your opinion on the issue than anything about me. Read: you think I hid something because YOU think there's something to hide. Dare I ask if you chimed in for the voice of reason and tolerance? I have a sneaking suspicion you didn't, and all you can dwell on is the fact that the group wasn't merely about homosexuality, but had opened its arms a bit wider. So, would it be completely uncalled for if I suspect you personally feel that fundamental extremist theists aren't as bad as people who look for a little more adventure in their sexual relations and are tired of having to live in shame? That people who mind their business and harm no one are worse than people who harass and condemn?

Perhaps I shouldn't support Michael Newdow in his pursuits toward greater justice because I don't know how he gets his rocks off. Or what he ate this morning. How deep does full disclosure go, after all?

I specifically noted the request was for those who are open-minded and concerned with issues of equality. My mistake was apparently assuming that we had a stake in it as it involved a common foe. I suspect the pervs will support me when my being discriminated against is brought to the forefront.

Comment by Chrys Stevenson on February 7, 2009 at 6:24pm

Your outrage is misplaced. Please re-read the first sentence of my comment.

As a rationalist, I believe that protest should only be made after one is fully informed about the subject. Many a protest or petition has been discredited by the fact that supporters were found to be ill-informed about their cause. Protests are strengthened by information and full disclosure, not weakened by it.

Despite this, for reasons best known to you, you chose to withhold information about the nature of this event.

The fact that you are so upset that I simply offered up factual information about the event suggests to me that it was you who was concerned that full disclosure may deter our members from joining your campaign.

I think you underestimate our membership.

Comment by DUBsays®... on February 7, 2009 at 1:56pm

Apparently human rights allow consensual, adult homosexual sex acts, but not consensual, adult bdsm sex acts. Perhaps that's what you're saying.

Dick in the ass? If you're the same sex, great!! Dick in the ass? If you have a vagina, hell no!! If you're wearing leather chaps, no way!!

Religious nutjobs forcing their opinions on everybody and telling the whole world they are correct is of no issue if somebody involved has a cat o' nine tails.

Comment by DUBsays®... on February 7, 2009 at 1:52pm

Ms. Vensson, I fail to see much practical difference. The main group that is urging protest is an Christian anti-homosexuality group. Part of the "kink" is pansexuality. What exactly is the reason behind your response? Are you saying discrimination and intolerance and the religious right flexing their muscle is okay in certain situations?

But the point here is that the far right religious nutjobs are letting their voices be heard and are, quite frankly, winning. How much reinforcement do they need? How many times do we need to sit back and let them know they're right?

I am neither homosexual nor into any of the "kink" these individuals are into. But I do not support injustice or intolerance and discrimination in any form. Being that this particular case deals directly with the fundamental, evangelical bigots that are trying continue the current theocracy-lite we have going, and this being a website for individuals I would assume to have a vested interest in such things, I posted it.

I apologize if I'm the one who brings you this horrible news, but these fundies hate you just as much as the "faggots" and perverts. They hate pretty much everyone, but apparently some people think it's okay to let the hated groups each fight it out individually and only when they are directly affected. This was pretty much the same state of mind when the religious fanatics faced abolitionists against those who stood for women's suffrage.

Comment by Chrys Stevenson on February 6, 2009 at 5:18pm

DUB, I agree with your cause and your right to seek support for it here. But I do think that you should have mentioned the nature of the event. It is not a 'gay rights' meeting, but a Kink/S&M gathering - Winter Wickedness 2009.