From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: God is intolerant of sin!
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:14:48 GMT

In article <106717@bu.edu> kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
><I told you not to mention his relationship with the Beloved Disciple!>  :^)
>
>Robert---for an atheist you seem incredibly anti-homosexual. Would you say
>you are still suffering from post-traumatic Christian syndrome?


	Don't see how I could as I've never been a Christian.  If anything,
	I have to fight a knee-jerk reaction to spit on any stance that
	is associated with xtianity.  Growing up the only non-religious
	kid in a primarily catholic community will do that to you, but
	its been fun (hell, I've done more _active_ bible reading than
	most of the thumpers around me, so it's quite easy to lead them
	in circles--I _enjoy_ it.)

	Ugh ugh ugh what a mess.  It's not me, it's the codeine.  

	Anyway, to continue:  Nor am I anti-homosexual in any way, shape
	or form.  I do not see how --

		1.  Considering pride day marches that deliberately present
		 the gay community as some sort of freak show to be 
		 counter productive
Di
		If anything, these marches which attract the more
		radical segments (leather fetishes, S&M fetishes,
		transvestites, lesbian anarchists) and non-segments
		(NAMBLA and their lot) tend to _reinforce_ the negative
		stereotypes that people hold.  

		If that's the goal, fine, but they should stop pretending
		the old "We'rejust like you, only we like men!" slogan
		is anything but a fantasy.  (Which is too bad--the single most
		effective argument against bigotry is that homosexuals are
		NOT freaks, but are just _people_.. But obviously, the
		march organizers aren't interested in rationality
		or accomplishing anything)..

	and

		2.  Being aware that there's a lot more of THEM (that is,
		 unadulterated anti-homosexual bigots who haven't
	 	 considered their views whatsoever) than there are of ME,
		 so basing my arguments on my own philosophy (which, 
		 incidentally, disagrees with my premise #2 [help the
		 people who need help], since I go with the "leave the
		 bastard alone" path) is _completely) useless and 
		 unproductive.  It's not going to accomplish anything
		 to attack their views.  The only thing that will 
		 help is to hit them below the belt--their own philosophy.
		 The Bible itself speaks out against hypocrites 
		 (forgive me if I get it wrong, but I would guess 
		 Job or Jeremiah--I'm not going to look it up right now) 
		 which is useful.  

		 There are also a lot of people who are anti-homosexual
		 who _HAVE_ considered their views a great deal, who
		 are completely self-consistent and have a right to hold
		 the opinions they hold.  they have just as much right as
		 anyone else to be offended by attemtps (like COTR) 
		 to brainwash people.

		My own views are no more valid than theirs.  I do not have
		the moral _right_  on my side if I make some attempt to
		legally force them to be nice (what next, a homosexual history
		month?) or anything of the sort.  You can't leislate anything
		more than _very_ rough morality.  Laws against crimes are
		fine, but the politicking minions are so powercrazed that
		they're out to make anything and everything a _crime_
		(and yes, I hold this view about the flag burning
		nonsense as well).  Each person has the right to a vote
		as to what is right, andwhat is wrong.  This may be unpleasant
		(i.e., it means homosexuality, for example, is going to be
		ruled "wrong" by a majority), but it doesn't have to be 
		(that same majority will also vote that jumping and beating
		people is wrong).  I can't think of any system that is
		more fair.  You can't have some tiny group controlling morality
		(as dictated by wrongheaded law--likethe Americans with
		disabilities act)  because that is facism.


	and

		3.  Being entirely against quotas and affirmative 
		 action.

	and 	
	
		4.  Considering the pathetic brainwashing attempt that
		 was "Childen of the Rainbow" to be a sick attempt 
		 at social engineering.

		See my post to Greg about Diversity for that one.


	Can be construed as anti-gay.  Not at all.  I have tried,
	repeatedly, to point out that the views I am arguing are not my own,
	but are expressed to point out how foolish the people who voice
	equally silly pro-gay setiments are.  How many people are now
	*convinced* without a shadow of a doubt that being gay is genetic?
	Even ignoring the fact that it's stupid and as yet unfounded
	(they may have been studies, but they werehardly scientific)
	to make such claims, I wouldn't be so eager to voice them.

	It rather worries me.  Consider.  These people who are apparently
	actually selling bumper stickers (somewhere else on this 
	group) that say, "Kill a queer for Jesus" obviously do not
	consider that to be murder (which, incidentally, is what
	Mark 1?  "know the commandments [...] Do not kill," is supposed
	to be a prohibition of--it's a mistranslation that they didn't
	bother to fix even in the non-KJ versions).  How soon before
	the prolifers adopt a stance of "no abortions of gods children,
	but these are not gods children but the children of satan and 
	shall be put to fire" and *encourage* testing and abortion of 
	homosexual children?  Or worse, suppose they are not that hypocritical
	(I wouldn't put it past them, tho) and instead decide to 
	have the children but (knowing that the child is gay).  consider
	what a new kind of hell that would be for the kid.  His father,
	knowing that he's going to have gay inclinations, holdsds that
	over the kids head for years, is overly rough and/or suspicious.
	The kids life is hell.  Fanatics already set fire to their kids
	for other reasons (possessed by the devil, etc)--am I the only
	one who thinks that we'd start to see a pretty good corrolation
	if such a test became available?

	Probably see some "Camps for young men" (ostensibly, to "build
	manliness") aimed at teaching young men to be good christians
	(read: good heterosexuals)... Of course, everyone would know
	what these really are.
 
	Me, I hope it _isn't_ genetic, but is biological (and prenatal).

	But it goes beyond that.  The other reason I'm arguing this side 
	is that there are a lot of people screaming for the throats of
	the Coloradans (...) who voted for Amendment 2 when it really isn't
	anything more than inappropriate legislation.  The whole idea of
	special status for a minority group is wrong--the duty of the 
	government is to protect individuals from society (that is, 
	the masses) and _NOT_ protect _groups_ from the masses.  There
	is a _big_ difference.  

	And the politicking pisses me off.  From a production standpoint,
	all these meatheads are really managing to do is give more ammo
	to the other side.  (Anti-hate-speech laws, not-called-quotas
	-but-are-quotas).  Plus, they're _routinely_ dishonest and 
	intellectually inconsistent. 

	Nevermind.  End of rant.  
  
	Heck my .plan is pretty clear.  

-- 
      Blaming "society" for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
 ---  boycott == coercion == censorship == closed mindedness == cowardice  ---
	      "Psalms 23:1  The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want."  
		Shepherds are for sheep.   -----      Pain teaches.