-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
I met the perfect girl.... or so I thought!!
- Thread starter Baron Aloha
- Start date
- Status
Oh come on man, there is no 'perfect' girl, there's just the right one. She sounds like an otherwise wonderful specimen of the opposite sex, and yet you'd let some ideological crap get in the way? Its differences like that which make relationships interesting! Would you honestly want to be with somebody perfectly in sync with you all the time? That's kind of destructive towards one's individualism. I say if she's one that's up for debates, take this thing and see where it goes, it could be quite interesting...
Willco said:
This isn't a "political difference," this is "I think homosexuals should have the same, basic rights as everyone else and you apparently don't." If I met a girl like that, I'd find the issue insurmountable. There are certain beliefs we hold that may be political in nature, but not necessarily political by definition. This particular one is cultural, nothing more, nothing less.
xsarien said:
Since we don't know the full context of the situation, that is a bold generalization. She was speaking about the marriage issue, which is a big one for most of America and that is a political belief since we're dealing with politics. If you want to say it's religion meddling into politics, so be it, but that's a discussion for another topic.
Eh, maybe. Some people can't handle their beliefs being challenged, and that's unfortunate, because discussion and debate is a good thing.
DeEJaYMiND
Member
Go for it and don't look back...
What you should do is while you're hitting it make her say stuff that goes against her political beliefs if she wants you to continue... so scenario is:
you're getting her worked up... she's hot... moaning... then you go:
You: you like it?
Her: yeah
You: You really like it?
Her: Yeah
You: Say you like
Her: I like it
You: Say you love it
Her: I love it
You: SAY HOMOSEXUALS DESERVE EQUAL RIGHTS AND MARRIAGE OPPORTUNITIES B*TCH!!!
<ahem> or something like that.
you're getting her worked up... she's hot... moaning... then you go:
You: you like it?
Her: yeah
You: You really like it?
Her: Yeah
You: Say you like
Her: I like it
You: Say you love it
Her: I love it
You: SAY HOMOSEXUALS DESERVE EQUAL RIGHTS AND MARRIAGE OPPORTUNITIES B*TCH!!!
<ahem> or something like that.
Willco said:
I can handle them being challenged just fine, this was made perfectly clear in damn near every political thread I jumped into, and with my devoutly Republican friends (you'll just have to take my word on it). But this isn't about beliefs, it's about someone not having a problem with reaching into the sewer, dusting off "Seperate, But Equal," and applying it to gays and lesbians instead of blacks.
There is nothing to discuss on this particular issue, because it's so patently offensive to me on multiple levels (religious institutions trying to dictate government direction; denying people rights based on something they have no control over; rather ignorant beliefs that homosexuality is a "choice," as if people *choose* to be a pariah in a society where people are more comfortable conforming...)
I won't dump a girl because she believs in a flat tax. Hell, if she thinks social security's a bad idea, you know, whatever. But if she truly thinks that gay marriage is "demoralizing" this country, that's red flag #1 that she holds deeper, more troubling stances that have no basis in reality.
Lathentar said:
No. And intolerance of intolernance isn't "intolerance," it's called progress.
norinrad21
Banned
LMAO..... :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
Willco said:
Who should and should not have rights in a country where they're supposed to be guaranteed is one of those rare exceptions, unless you'd like to put forward an argument as to why women shouldn't have been given the right to vote or join the military, or, perhaps, why slavery should've just been left alone.
xsarien said:
We're not talking about rounding up homosexuals and having them shot in a line. We're talking about the right to marriage, something that a lot of people contend is something reserved for heterosexuals. I'm not saying they're right, but to ignore them because you flat out disagree with them is pretty ignorant yourself.
I'm not going to go too much farther into this, because it's obvious that this might spiral into a separate anti-gay marriage debate if a conservative enters the fray.
Willco said:
I ignore them because their arguments are 100% pure, not-from-concentrate ad hominem bullshit. No logical, realistic argument has ever been put forward as to why gay marriage is harmful to society, to others, or to, well, anyone.
The religious argument, at best is that the Bible says it's wrong. To which the only reply short of "...Okaaaay" is "That's fine, but the United States is government by that slip of paper called the Constitution, not the Latin to English translation of a 2000 year-old-book that not everyone follows.
The non-religious argument is even more nebulous. Simply stating "it's wrong, marriage is between a man and a woman" isn't any kind of informed reply to a challenge to your beliefs, it just reaffirms your stance without anything to back it up.
xsarien said:
No, I did not. Right now you're tring to bait me into an argument I have no rhyme, reason or want to go into. I'm not going to get into an argument with you about the prospect of gay marriage being right or wrong, but I will contend that your ignorance of other people's opinions is just as wrong as their so-called "ignorance".
Willco said:
xsarien said:
Why should people who are making no claims beyond religious ones dictate what's right and wrong with society? That doesn't strike you as the least bit myopic? This isn't about me baiting you, nor you baiting me. It's about your failure to understand that there are certain aspects of a modern society that are right and wrong; that we are granted a set of rights that are - or at least should - be applied equally with no question.
xsarien said:
I never said they dictate what's right and wrong with society. In all honesty, finding someone not caught up in all the religious fervor to have a civilized discussion about gay marriage rights is probably not very likely. That said, many people exist who oppose gay marriage due to certain beliefs and are completely reasonable people. You can sit down and talk to them.
We're not quite sure what all was said with JC's prospective girlfriend. She doesn't sound like the kind of woman who is burning crosses in people's front yard.
Willco said:
And my point is that their arguments are not based on anything but personal opinions, and have no regard to what, as American citizens, we're allowed. It's discrimination.
And no, maybe MIMIC's prospective girl won't be burning crosses anytime soon, but if she so easily pegs "liberals" and "gay marriage" as the one-stop-shop cause of this country's problems, she's probably a little bit psycho anyway.
I think you're being a bit hypocritical here for slamming other people for assuming what she said was worse than his initial post said, while you are constantly playing it down. You can't have it both ways, suggesting others don't make assumptions and making them yourself.
That we don't know what she said exactly does not make an assumption that HE is the one acting unreasonably (your assumption) more valid than the assumption that SHE was the one acting unreasonably (their assumption).
And the fact that he clarified that she used much stronger language than he initially used in his quote does not exactly strengthen your position.
That we don't know what she said exactly does not make an assumption that HE is the one acting unreasonably (your assumption) more valid than the assumption that SHE was the one acting unreasonably (their assumption).
And the fact that he clarified that she used much stronger language than he initially used in his quote does not exactly strengthen your position.
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
I'd have to say that would have bummed me out, but I would have just teased her, or done the opposite and reinforced her views to the point of ridiculousness. "I'll say! we should put them all in camps!" find out how stupid she really is.
I had a pretty disappointing occurance of this type of thing, I was talking to my step father and his new wife a while ago, hadn't seen them for ages but the conversation went like this.
Me: I can't believe George Bush got elected again, that's pretty nutty huh?
(the common response in NZ is "FUCK YEAH")
Them: Oh, we like him, he's better than that other guy.
Me: Really, you think that whole war business was a good honest thing to do then?
Them: Well, at least he is not going to be pushing through all sorts of morally wrong policies.
Me: *warning bells, knows this is about the gays due to fierce christianity of these people*, so you don't think gays should have equal rights? I think the whole ridiculous business will be looked back on with shame, much like slavery and other terrible ideas.
Them: Oh, well you will see, in new zealand when the civil union gets passed, a few years down the track, we will have brothers marrying their sisters and all sorts.
Err, what. I attempted to explain that homosexuals are clearly a natural occurance and wanting to marry your brother is not remotely similar, but then they started arguing that there is no proof that people being gay are born that way and usually its because of an absent or overbearing father.....
I had a pretty disappointing occurance of this type of thing, I was talking to my step father and his new wife a while ago, hadn't seen them for ages but the conversation went like this.
Me: I can't believe George Bush got elected again, that's pretty nutty huh?
(the common response in NZ is "FUCK YEAH")
Them: Oh, we like him, he's better than that other guy.
Me: Really, you think that whole war business was a good honest thing to do then?
Them: Well, at least he is not going to be pushing through all sorts of morally wrong policies.
Me: *warning bells, knows this is about the gays due to fierce christianity of these people*, so you don't think gays should have equal rights? I think the whole ridiculous business will be looked back on with shame, much like slavery and other terrible ideas.
Them: Oh, well you will see, in new zealand when the civil union gets passed, a few years down the track, we will have brothers marrying their sisters and all sorts.
Err, what. I attempted to explain that homosexuals are clearly a natural occurance and wanting to marry your brother is not remotely similar, but then they started arguing that there is no proof that people being gay are born that way and usually its because of an absent or overbearing father.....
Well, if I was that extreme in my actions then I would have to divorce my entire family, hell, probably my entire county. I am not in any means anti-homosexual but I sure as hell wouldn't give up the perfect girl because she said one thing about it. Maybe if she repeatedly did it, but from what I comprehended it was one time.
brooklyngooner
Member
I'm 100% with xsarien on this one and Wilco, you're being annoyingly self-righteous.
The debate over gay marriage isn't one of simple "policy" in the way that fiscal restraint vs. higher federal spending on social programs is, nor does it take the form of a "who's better, Joe D or Teddy Ballgame?" argument. Being against homosexual marriage means denying rights to a minority group, rights equal to your own, based PURELY on an opinion that homosexuality itself is wrong, deviant, or morally reprehensible. In addition, those who side against it aren't paying any penalty themselves for this so-called 'conviction', only others; like being for the war in Iraq, it's easy enough when you ain't on the frontlines.
To me, it says a great deal about someone who feels she has the right to deny someone equal rights based on her blind prejudice, and as much that she felt comfortable vocalizing it in the way that she did.
The debate over gay marriage isn't one of simple "policy" in the way that fiscal restraint vs. higher federal spending on social programs is, nor does it take the form of a "who's better, Joe D or Teddy Ballgame?" argument. Being against homosexual marriage means denying rights to a minority group, rights equal to your own, based PURELY on an opinion that homosexuality itself is wrong, deviant, or morally reprehensible. In addition, those who side against it aren't paying any penalty themselves for this so-called 'conviction', only others; like being for the war in Iraq, it's easy enough when you ain't on the frontlines.
To me, it says a great deal about someone who feels she has the right to deny someone equal rights based on her blind prejudice, and as much that she felt comfortable vocalizing it in the way that she did.
FortNinety
Member
I have to say, something xsarien said did strike a nerve, so I guess I'll have to back peddle a bit. Bare in mind, I've never been in a relationship with a girl where I disagreed over homosexual rights. I've dated conservative chicks, but the issue was never brought up.
That being said, I really choose not to talk about politics at all in real life. It's easy to do so on an internet forum where no one can see each other's faces and the such, but in real life, I tend to stay away from debates, even with those that I generally agree with. It's like abortion... if I meet someone with a differing view, almost nothing is going to change the mind of the other side, so I just don't bother. And on that note, I don't like to argue about it with certain friends because I don't want to mortally offend the other person. Perhaps this is defeatist, and it is, but I'm just being honest.
That being said, I really choose not to talk about politics at all in real life. It's easy to do so on an internet forum where no one can see each other's faces and the such, but in real life, I tend to stay away from debates, even with those that I generally agree with. It's like abortion... if I meet someone with a differing view, almost nothing is going to change the mind of the other side, so I just don't bother. And on that note, I don't like to argue about it with certain friends because I don't want to mortally offend the other person. Perhaps this is defeatist, and it is, but I'm just being honest.
brooklyngooner
Member
Overseer said:
My point is that being against gay marriage isn't "simple."
Nameless said:
Yep, this says what I think nicely. Also, what is the deal with saying you were not feeling well and leaving early over that statement (unless it was a lot worse than what you wrote). You can have strong beliefs (political or otherwise), and yet not get all uptight when someone says something that disagrees with your beliefs. I mean you were already worried about meeting her family, and how their beliefs would make you sick.
Fortninety also makes a good point.
some beliefs can't be overlooked. i know plenty of pro-choice women that wouldn't date men who are anti-abortion. this isnt something that people in general just "agree to disagree" about.
this situation is similar.
long ago, i was talking to this girl in AOL and she nonchalantly mentioned that homosexuals should be put in a room and burned. may be she was letting out her frustration from something totally unrelated, but i'd never date someone who said something like that.
political disagreements are one thing, but if someone's fundamental beliefs are very narrow minded and prejudiced, then i couldnt be bothered to deal with it. why should i?
i have plenty of political disagreements with mots of my friends, many are socialists whereas i'm a capitalist. and we get into heated arguements all the time, and afterwards we take shots of rum and forget all about it.
this situation is similar.
long ago, i was talking to this girl in AOL and she nonchalantly mentioned that homosexuals should be put in a room and burned. may be she was letting out her frustration from something totally unrelated, but i'd never date someone who said something like that.
political disagreements are one thing, but if someone's fundamental beliefs are very narrow minded and prejudiced, then i couldnt be bothered to deal with it. why should i?
i have plenty of political disagreements with mots of my friends, many are socialists whereas i'm a capitalist. and we get into heated arguements all the time, and afterwards we take shots of rum and forget all about it.
brooklyngooner
Member
Overseer said:
Calm down a little bit.
What you're writing is essentially that what she said wasn't a big deal because all it was was being against gay marriage and not threatening to kill them (sic), that had she said the latter then he'd have a gripe. My point is that being against gay marriage is, in itself, a big deal and he has every right to feel that's too much for him to deal with, no matter how softly or vehemently she vocializes it. The trouble is in the content, not the delivery. What I meant by it not being simple is that it isn't the sort of opinion that's along the lines of 'chocolate is better than vanilla.'
There is a huge difference between stating one's religious or political belief and physically threatening or using deragatory language against people due to personal belief.
Right now, this topic is teetering on the edge on being completely off topic, and I think I would prefer it to go back to JC's prospective girlfriend and how people deal with relationships where one has different opinions and/or beliefs.
Right now, this topic is teetering on the edge on being completely off topic, and I think I would prefer it to go back to JC's prospective girlfriend and how people deal with relationships where one has different opinions and/or beliefs.
I am entirely against Willco on this one, too. I do think that political views are an extremely important part of whether I can get along with a woman, but some things I'd be able to deal with. If you are economically conservative, I can generally overlook it. If you're a bigot though, you're out of consideration. That's the case here, and there's no dancing around it. I don't give a good damn what the many or even the majority believe.
This isn't a political opinion. It's an opinion that some people are inherently less deserving than you are.
This isn't a political opinion. It's an opinion that some people are inherently less deserving than you are.
Archaix said:
My grandma is against gay marriage. She has a gay son. Loves him. Loves him to death. Has no qualms with gay people. She's a bigot now?
Again, until JC says this prospective girlfriend actually came out and said, "Damn those liberal fags, I hope they rot in hell!", I think it's quite unfair for people to call her a bigot.
If she feels need to use deragotory comments in that context, I'd have no problem with the label.
Completely wrong. This is political. She was talking about politics. As I said before, if you want to argue that this is religion meddling politics, that is time for a separate thread where I'd promptly say, "Welcome to 1787".
- Status