Alan Keyes, the only true conservative in the race

[(poco) Sforzando]

What cracks me up is he's the one with the avatar of the cute young man with red hair.

Does your monitor need adjusting? his hair looks light brown to me. 

It was like that when I was a "bridge and tunnel moron," before I lived in the Village myself.

I am still a "bridge and tunnel moron," though I consider myself a moron only if I take the bridge when I should have taken the tunnel, or the tunnel when I should have taken the bridge.

[Florestan]

The republicans include fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, libertarians, southern racists, religious right idiots, and neo-fascists such as we see on this thread. 

Would you be so kind to tell us who are the neo-fascists on this thread ?

[adamdavid80]

      I didn't make a scene or anything, except maybe laughing too loud in the Second Avenue Deli at 2:00 AM.

Oh.  I remember you.   

[(poco) Sforzando]

Would you be so kind to tell us who are the neo-fascists on this thread ?

What fun would be in that?

[Todd]

I already made the point of people who disagree with homosexuality. The comparison was made to try and indicate that it is possible to actually like what someone does while still liking them, which, if you remember, was in response  to your comment about people 'hating gays'. I can't see how you missed that. You could substitute "good friend" or "loved one" for child, if it helps.

First, please explain in greater detail what is meant by "agreeing" or "disagreeing" with homosexuality.  I'm still fuzzy on what that even means.  What is there to agree or disagree with?  The fact that some people are homosexual? 

Second, you missed my point entirely; your statements have an innately, and foolishly, condescending element to them.  Comparing homosexual adults to children in your poorly worded example belies a certain disdain for adult homosexuals.  They're like children.  Segregationists used similar arguments in decades past.  Trying to change your "argument" to use "good friend" or "loved one" is disingenuous.

Third, you didn't answer my specific question regarding how many children you have. 

[Joe Barron]

I'm an atheist. Alan Keyes would put me in camp. With something like Glaube macht frei over the wrought iron fence.

[drogulus]

     It's actually hard to pinpoint what moral disapproval means in the gay context. For the fundis it's a Biblical issue. For modern people you need a consequentialist reason. Murder is bad because it's bad in itself, the unlawful taking of a life which endangers everyone, so we don't even need to explore consequences beyond that. The same is true for many other laws and prohibitions. The consequences are plain, and the desire to avoid them is entirely transparent to anyone who might want to understand.

     I think the gay issue is different. But all the differences are not easy to understand. If the Biblical prohibition is not your reason for disapproval then you're a consequentialist, and what you must do is complete the sentence "homosexuality is wrong and should be prohibited because...." without reference to the Biblical injunction. You would have to make a claim that there is harm to others so great that it justifies cancelling the rights of homosexuals radically. In essence you are justifying the destruction by law and social sanction of any hopes for a somewhat normal existence, and to do that you must have a very good reason. To those who "disagree with homosexuality", I say, do you have it?

   

[bwv 1080]

Isn't Keyes somewhat of a theonomist?  Hardly makes him conservative.

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them." - Barry Goldwater, November 1994.

[Joe Barron]

Keyes has said that homosexuality is wrong because gays are "selfish hedonists." By this I assume he means that because they cannot reproduce biologically, sex for them is becomes only about pleasure. From the start my answer to this argument has been "So what?" Even if the accusation is true (and it's questionable, given such a narrow focus of the term "selfish"), there are no legal strictures on against selfish hedononism, and I would think the culture is strong enough to keep functioning with selfish hedonists among us, just as it keeps functioning with millions of other people whose character Mr. Keyes disapproves. One could make the same case about childless heterosexual couples, and no one is suggesting that straights who do not intend to have children should be forbidden to marry --- at least, no one who is being taken seriously.

In any event, homophobia is a stupid campaign issue.

[drogulus]

Keyes has said that homosexuality is wrong because gays are "selfish hedonists." By this I assume he means that because they cannot reproduce biologically, sex for them is becomes only about pleasure. From the start my answer to this argument has been "So what?" Even if the accusation is true (and it's questionable, given such a narrow focus of the term "selfish"), there are no legal strictures on against selfish hedononism, and I would think the culture is strong enough to keep functioning with selfish hedonists among us, just as it keeps functioning with millions of other people whose character Mr. Keyes disapproves. One could make the same case about childless heterosexual couples, and no one is suggesting that straights who do not intend to have children should be forbidden to marry --- at least, no one who is being taken seriously.

In any event, homophobia is a stupid campaign issue.

     Joe, I don't think this line of reasoning (not yours, I mean this antigay line) can take you very far because it's doubtful that hedonism can be isolated to gays in such a way that a prohibition against them specifically could ever be justified, and that's not considering that the impulse for normalization behind the marriage movement reflects anti-hedonism more than the opposite. There are other problems, too. How much hedonism is bad (we need some just to reproduce )? The life energy of hedonism is also behind art and science as well. We should be very cautious about interfering with it. We really do need a damn good reason to destroy people for some good like antihedonism, a very doubtful good IMO. No, that won't fly for me.

[orbital]

Keyes has said that homosexuality is wrong because gays are "selfish hedonists." By this I assume he means that because they cannot reproduce biologically, sex for them is becomes only about pleasure.

That always puzzles me. It is as if close to every sexual act couples practice does not have to do with pleasure alone.

[Joe Barron]

     Joe, I don't think this line of reasoning (not yours, I mean this antigay line) can take you very far because it's doubtful that hedonism can be isolated to gays in such a way that a prohibition against them specifically could ever be justified, and that's not considering that the impulse for normalization behind the marriage movement reflects anti-hedonism more than the opposite. There are other problems, too. How much hedonism is bad (we need some just to reproduce )? The life energy of hedonism is also behind art and science as well. We should be very cautious about interfering with it. We really do need a damn good reason to destroy people for some good like antihedonism, a very doubtful good IMO. No, that won't fly for me.

I agree completely. You've made essentially the same counterargument I did, though I hadn't thought of the example of art, which I think raises a very good point. And sex is about pleasure. Among animals, which do not make the connection between sex and offspring (the same used to be true of humans), pleasure, or the sex drive, is the only real motivator toward copulation. A horse put out to stud is not thinking about foals, after all. He's just having a good time. The success or failure of the resulting pregnancy is not his concern. Should humans be denied their own drives simply because we have recognized the connection?

[Florestan]

How I like it when people pontificate about whatever enters their mind (the decay of Western civilization, or the dangerous rise of neo-fascism on GMG, for instance) but when asked specifical questions they just hit the road. Speaks volumes...

[Hector]

I don't have a problem with that, since i'm an hopeless right-winger myself, but i think this is part of the problem with conservatism today. Everybody is afraid of standing up to what they believe for fear of being labeled as an "extremist".

Hopeless right-winger!!!??

You are a totally regurgitated neo-fascist.

Your views are not worth a damn.

[adamdavid80]

Hopeless right-winger!!!??

You are a totally regurgitated neo-fascist.

Your views are not worth a damn.

Yikes.  Uhm...I guess that was direct enough...

[knight66]

Hopeless right-winger!!!??

You are a totally regurgitated neo-fascist.
Your views are not worth a damn.

I am trying to decide whether this is a personal insult. However, it might be that the target of the comment may own the badge with pride, in which case it is merely an accurate comment. However, should Josquin take exception to it, I will delete it.

Mike

[adamdavid80]

I am trying to decide whether this is a personal insult. However, it might be that the target of the comment may own the badge with pride, in which case it is merely an accurate comment. However, should Josquin take exception to it, I will delete it.

Mike

I'd be...impressed...with anyone who would wear the term "fascist", much less "neo-fascist", with pride...but "regurgitated"?  That would be quite exceptional for someone to be thrilled with.

Then again, fascists never cease to surprise me...

[scarpia]

Regurgitated, I'm not sure what that means, but certainly a fascist, or worse. 

[knight66]

Well, he has been on the site and I have not heard from him. But I will stress, it is not open season on him, so I don't expect a rash of such comments. And, if he does complain, I will delete.

How about that, I started one sentence with 'And', the next one with 'But'. My English language teacher would be spinning in her grave.

Thank you one and all.

Mike

[adamdavid80]

Well, he has been on the site and I have not heard from him. But I will stress, it is not open season on him, so I don't expect a rash of such comments. And, if he does complain, I will delete.

How about that, I started one sentence with 'And', the next one with 'But'. My English language teacher would be spinning in her grave.

Thank you one and all.

Mike

With grammar like that, and you're calling Sarah Palin a bimbo? 

That is doggone crazy!