Support NeoGAF

[Siegcram]

Land of the free.

And Ben Carson is a fuckwit of epic proportions, but everyone already knew that.

 

[Dishwalla]

Glad to know that beards are allowed. It's something I always wonder before going into an establishment.

What's the John 3:16 sign supposed to mean though?

The carriage of Bibles in the store is more than just permitted, it is encouraged.

Hell, you flash more than two Bibles at checkout, you get a 20% discount on your purchase!

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

It is equal though, I don't know many gays that would want the marriage ceremony considering religion is so against us. If you separate the legal contract from the ceremony it levels the playing field. The only reason people push for marriage is because that's the only thing on offer.

I'm sure that's true for a lot of LGBT people but I know a lot of Christian gay people and the only married gay couple I know had a religious ceremony.

The legal contract already is separate from the religious ceremony in most (if not all) states. You just have to have the licensed signed by someone with that authority, which is granted to religious figures in most states, but also includes judges, justices of the peace, ship captains, notaries public, and lawyers, depending on the state.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

He's not wrong.

He is wrong. Gay rights are a civil rights issue just like African American rights were a civil rights issue. If you're also going to go into the whole "Gays aren't lynched", please don't bother, as I think I explained quite well in my previous post why that's not relevant here.

 

[SkeptiMism]

Carson told Fox News, "I would love for the gay community to answer this question for me: What position can a person take who has absolutely no animosity toward gay people, but believes in traditional marriage, that would be satisfactory to them?," he asked.

Carson says he's "very happy to compromise" on the issue, but he hasn't "heard an answer" yet.

"Gay people, can't we just compromise? We both make concessions: you don't get married, and I don't get called a homophobe. So simple!"

Well, there' is a compromise. He can believe in his traditional marriage and be in such. Then, other people can believe in a marriage that is different from his and be in their marriage.

But he has probably heard that one and it just doesn't do for him for some reason..

He's not wrong.

Not to jump on you, but that doesn't offer much to the thread. Why is he right then in your opinion?

Obviously, as has been pointed out, gays don't have to suffer nearly as bad as what black people did, but as Opiate pointed out, comparing two things doesn't mean they're exactly the same.

 

[LosDaddie]

The point of comparisons and analogies is never to say "these things are exactly the same in all respects," but to make a particular point of comparison.

Both gays and blacks suffer discrimination as a minority. Both groups faced conservative opposition to their attempts at equality, with both being compared (negatively) to socialism. In both cases, opponents argued that this would destroy traditional values. Just as interracial couples were not allowed to be married, so too are gay couples not allowed.

There are lots of similarities, but people who find the comparison inconvenient for their argument will point out that there are differences, too. My response to that is "Well, of course, different things are never perfectly alike. That doesn't mean that there aren't specific points of similarity."

When you say a boat is like a car except for the ocean, someone could say "No! A boat doesn't have wheels. A boat doesn't even need an engine in many cases. These are huge differences!" Obviously, this misses the entire point of analogies.

Agreed. You worded it better than I did.

Like I said, it's a tough comparison. There are a lot of people who are quick to compare the 2 movements, while others who don't like it because they feel it reduces the struggles minorities spent through.

 

[CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls]

WOAT neurosurgeon. How can a man so brilliant continue to be so thick-headed?

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

WOAT neurosurgeon. How can a man so brilliant continue to be so thick-headed?

Unrelated but to illustrate, the Food Babe shilled an expensive showerhead that was supposed to filter "various impurities" from your shower water. Any reasonable person knows that American shower water doesn't really need to have any harmful impurities removed, it's just for people that are paranoid about fluoride and chlorine.

A reviewer of the product on Food Babe's site said that she had tested her tap water before and after using the showerhead, and found no reduction in chlorine content. Therefore she would have to search for another showerhead filter. So, someone with the chemistry knowledge to measure the amount of chlorine in tap water was afraid of chlorine in her shower water.

Intelligent has nothing to do with wise.

 

[A Link to the Past]

OP has it right. Gay rights would be as bad as Civil Rights if given the opportunity.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

WOAT neurosurgeon. How can a man so brilliant continue to be so thick-headed?

Greed, fundamentalist beliefs, power.
http://www.vox.com/2015/2/20/8069151/ben-carson-dr

 

[Interframe]

It is ridiculous to equate what homosexuals go through today with what black people had to go through... The lynchings, the KKK, the fire hoses, the public beatings, the segregation, NOT legally counted as a full human being. How could you argue against that?

we are taking about laws, too, not just public persecution. A black person wasnt legally counted as a full human being.

I Know this is a mostly US based form and the guy in the op who made those comments are in the US, but worldwide, and even today, gay people are executed and killed for who they are, I mean you have horrible things like gay people being thrown off buildings by ISIS and terrible violent things happening to LGBT people in Russia

 

[Corronchilejano]

He's not wrong.

Reading threads is hard

And yes, gays have been lynched before in the US. If it's not as widespread and in your face as it was, I dunno, two hundred years ago... well damn, do you expect things to go to hell before fixing them?

 

[Goodstyle]

Carson rests easy with the confidence that those persecutted usually have it coming, as he said in Baltimore:



Dude's got the black vote on lock.

Black Republicans always say the most depressing shit. Seriously, I'm black and I like to think of myself as socially conscious, and when I see shit like that being said by other black people, it just makes me feel sad for them.

 

[soco]

Lots of people like to make this claim, but let's be honest, it's silly. Sure some of the comparisons are completely overdrawn, but there's plenty enough parallels (considering our cultural advancements and such) to warrant the comparison in the general sense. It's also similar to women's suffrage in some ways. It all involves a majority of people trying to prevent some minority from having rights and equal protections, and it's an uphill battle all the way.

 

[tokkun]

I recall this argument coming up a lot back in 2008 when black people in California supported Prop 8 by a 40 point margin.

 

[Furyous]

He's not completely wrong but... THE FIGHT IS OVER AND THEY LOST.

Gay marriage is legal and not ruled unconstitutional in most of the US. The fight against equality is over. Yes, there are going to be issues moving forward but as far as absolute flat out denial of rights goes the fight is over.

 

[Paskil]

Greed, fundamentalist beliefs, power.
http://www.vox.com/2015/2/20/8069151/ben-carson-dr

"He would be a wonderful role model for everyone, especially for the black people," Peggy Kemmerly said. "You know, to get them off entitlements. He could open doors. Well, doors have been opened for them, but unfortunately they haven't accessed them."

I love it.

 

[AnotherNils]

I might change the analogy – equal marriage is like the 14th, and all this religious discrimination legislation suddenly appearing is Jim Crow.

 

[BowieZ]

How do smart people not figure out that the land of the free means that one should be free and safe to do what one wants as long as it doesn't impinge on the freedom and safety of others?

Just let the gays be gay and you can be straight. Move on from the issue, indeed.

 

[HylianTom]

I might change the analogy – equal marriage is like the 14th, and all this religious discrimination legislation suddenly appearing is Jim Crow.

There was a really great article at Slate recently that went over how the text of the 14th Amendment was deliberately chosen by its authors to be open to all citizens, and not just specific to the context of newly-freed slaves. A lot of conservatives like to point to "original intent" of the Constitutiton's authors, and this history blasts a huge hole in the side of this type of argument.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/...amendment_paved_the_way_for_gay_marriage.html

How One of the Most Important Edits in U.S. History Paved the Way for Marriage Equality

A few days earlier, the committee had agreed on language for the proposed amendment that focused exclusively on the evils of racial discrimination, reading, “No discrimination shall be made by any State, or by the United States, as to the civil rights of persons because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” However, Bingham convinced his fellow committee members to broaden this language.

Bingham’s key move was to craft a new provision that promised “equal protection of the laws” for all persons, not just African Americans. In one of the most important edits in American history, Bingham added text that was, as he later explained, “a simple, strong, plain declaration that equal laws and equal and exact justice shall hereafter be secured within every State of the Union,” guaranteeing “equal protection” for “any person, no matter whence he comes, or how poor, how weak, how simple—no matter how friendless.”

Without Bingham’s revisions to Section 1, it’s entirely possible that the equal protection clause would have outlawed only racial discrimination—a major addition to our Constitution, to be sure, but a long way from the provision that we have today. Instead, Bingham incorporated into our Constitution the broad promise of the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal.” Better still, he perfected and universalized it by substituting the word “person” for Jefferson’s “men.”

I now keep the article bookmarked for whenever this "the 14th was never intended for gays!" argument arises.

We know that the two struggles aren't the same. History doesn't always repeat, but it sure as hell likes to rhyme.

 

[Dryk]

Yeah, gay people have never had to deal with being told they can do the same things as everyone else as long as they do it somewhere else. Nope... never happened.

 

[Henchmen21]

He's not wrong.

Yes he is. The problem he and some in this thread (even supporters) seem to forget or fall into is that it assumes that all LGBT people are white. So when someone automatically separates the two it demeans all the black LGBT people out there (along with all the LGBT people of other ethnicities).

Well, there' is a compromise. He can believe in his traditional marriage and be in such. Then, other people can believe in a marriage that is different from his and be in their marriage.

But he has probably heard that one and it just doesn't do for him for some reason..

Not to jump on you, but that doesn't offer much to the thread. Why is he right then in your opinion?

Obviously, as has been pointed out, gays don't have to suffer nearly as bad as what black people did, but as Opiate pointed out, comparing two things doesn't mean they're exactly the same.

Actually they did as pointed out in my comment to joedan