Let's just get down to the basics - according to Maslow.

[last1standing]

Many of our 'friends' at DU seem to be having trouble understanding why we silly GLBTers won't 'get over' the Warren insult and trust Obama to do the right thing (even though he's never said he'd do the right thing by us), so I'm introducing Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs to maybe help explain why we're so pissed off over this 'little slight'.

Maslow stated that there is a hierarchy of needs that must be met with the basest needs coming first, followed by more intangible needs after. Without the needs of the previous tier being satisfied, it is impossible to fully achieve the next one. Pretty simple theory, really, but also very accurate.

Now that everyone should understand the concept, look at where "SEX" comes in. That's right, its in the first tier. Our need for sex is one of the basic necessities for moving forward toward self-actualization. Rick Warren and his circle of hate mongers is trying to stop us from experiencing a need that in many ways in on level with breathing and eating.

Of course, most of us ignore Warren and do have sex - for now that's not quite illegal for us (anymore), so we get to move to level two. But what do we find there? Ah yes, a need to be free from the fear of physical attack. I understand that most straight people don't think much about the fact that GLBTers ALWAYS have to worry about showing too much affection in public. They don't realize that all it takes is one ignorant thug in a crowd of thousands seeing a simple kiss or a held hand to create a violent scene in some darkened street. Then there is the security inherent in marriage, a right forcefully ripped from us by proposal 8, legislation spearheaded by Rick Warren.

Still many of us learn to live with the possibility of stalkers and gay-bashers to move onto tier three - Social needs. Once again, Warren and his hateful ilk work tirelessly to keep us from being part of the social fabric of this country. We are called perverts - no better than child rapists and animal molesters. They say we're not to be trusted with our nieces and nephews because of our 'predilections'. They work to make you fear us, or at least have doubts.

Some, but not nearly many as should, can find a home with family and friends who have resisted Warren's hate filled message so they get to move to tier four. Self esteem and reputation are tricky for any teenager but for a GLBT teen who hears constant reinforcement of the fundamentalists' beliefs when their called fags and dykes is incredible. When they are threatened for being too effeminate or for 'looking at me funny' they lose their self esteem and often their public reputation is taken with it. This works the exact same way at work in adulthood. Homophobic co-workers and bosses who can't promote you because of the 'sensitive' work environment effectively pushes us into the closet destroying our self esteem.

Very few are ever allowed past tier four to experience the benefits of the other levels because people like Rick Warren work night and day to ensure that our lives are kept as basic and primitive as possible. They want us to suffer, they want us to live in fear. We are an example of their power over others and they want everyone to see the public face of their hatred. They want everyone to view our humiliation and helplessness and shining a spotlight on Warren at the inauguration has shone a spotlight on his power over the GLBT community.

Barack Obama has honored a man who just worked to successfully take a basic human right - a tier two need - from us. He will begin his administration with words from a man who wants to take away, by force, our most basic needs. That is so unacceptable to us that we must speak out - loudly. It is our very survival.

Now, I know many of our 'friends' here will come in with the usual talking points - "It's just two bloody minutes"..."You're being intolerant of other people's beliefs"..."You need to trust Obama to do the right thing"..."It's a plan by Obama to prove he's not a Muslim"... - but I hope there are at least a few who can look at this chart and see what people like Warren are trying to take from us, where they're trying to keep us, and how Obama's invitation plays into their hands. I know I'll be subject to the usual flames, but perhaps a little understanding will happen as well.

[Dennis Donovan]

1. While I agree on almost all points, the only thing I disagree with is...

...whether or not Obama will ultimately do the right thing in regards to equal rights for ALL Americans (i.e. the right of marriage for same-sex couples). I tend to view him as a dynamic thinker who MIGHT grow to understand that the bigotry and hypocrisy behind the idea that same-sex couples cannot marry is exactly that - bigotry and hypocrisy. If he does not, I will have to rethink my support for him should he run for re-election in 2012.

[last1standing]

3. I very much hope you are right.

But it is hard to trust someone after they do something like this. As I've said before, my trust in him is shattered but I will support as fully as he supports me - at any given moment. Right now, that is not at all.

[KittyWampus]

2. VERY few people on DU say "just get over it". But the fact is, if you want to be a reptile

you won't make much progress and sure as heck have no business invoking Martin Luther King or Ghandi.

You want to live in a black and white world that focuses on differences and uses violence to answer problems you are part of the problem.

Sadly, in many ways, you are not a Progressive.

[Dennis Donovan]

4. You just said get over it...

...not in those words, though.:thumbsdown:

[KittyWampus]

11. No, actually. But when you can't move beyond anger everything you hear will be an insult

Yesterday, the opening poster repeatedly advocated violence and denigrated nonviolence in solving problems.

Here's a quote from the Opening Poster from yesterday:

"When I am shown hatred and violence, I respond in kind."

[Dennis Donovan]

13. This has gone far beyond anger...

Fact: Rick Warren equates homosexuality with pedophilia and polygamy.

Fact: Rick Warren has been invited to perform the invocation at the Inauguration of President-Elect Obama.

As a Progressive person, how can this be acceptable to you?:shrug:

[KittyWampus]

19. Acceptable? There's no choice but "accept" it cause it's not changing. Doesn't mean I like it

or am happy about it or support it or celebrate it.

Warren is going to do a 2 minute Invocation regardless.

I don't like it.
I'm not happy about it.
I'm not supporting it.
I'm not celebrating it.

But I understand WHY Obama choose to go ahead with it.

[last1standing]

21. In other words "just get over it". Right?

:eyes:

[KittyWampus]

24. Um, no. Because "just get over it" means FORGET ABOUT IT. Did I come close to invalidating

anyone's emotions?

No.

Did I imply it should be forgotten?

No.

[last1standing]

27. Really? You seem to have no trouble invalidating them from what I'm seeing.

But as long as you stalk me and my thread at least you're keeping it kicked so that others will read it. I suppose I should thank you for that.

[Dennis Donovan]

35. Well, I choose not to accept it. I choose to empathize with those who are upset about it

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

[last1standing]

40. I don't think you're going to see her again in this thread. She's humiliated herself.

And she's not big enough to admit her mistake.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

101. Did you see this post of hers?

Astounding -- equating shunning Warren as committing violence against him on par with Matthew Shepard.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7999325#7999370

[last1standing]

104. That is seriously deranged.

What a sick, cruel mind she has. And she's a coward to boot.

[QC]

143. Seriously deranged and yet typical. n/t

[No Elephants]

17. I read that as self-defense.

[KittyWampus]

22. That's because the Opening Poster didn't go on to declare how they advocate using violence

and reject non-violence. Which is rather dishonest, ultimately. Because yesterday that's EXACTLY what the Opening Poster did. Repeatedly.

[last1standing]

25. Still no link, there?

Just tell me where I suggested INSTIGATING violence and you may have a point. Until then, you're just talking out your ass.

[KittyWampus]

29. Here's a link to your multiple posts. You don't fully express your views on using violence

in the Opening Post.

Here's that link, btw

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8014533#8014589

[last1standing]

32. And do you realize that isn't me? Do you have trouble reading my user name?

That's IWantAnyDem, not me. I agree with the concept of protecting myself but you're stalking my thread and attacking me for someone else's words.

A true adult would apologize, but I expect to be waiting on that for some time. :eyes:

[last1standing]

38. You're real quiet all of a sudden, Cryingshame. Why is that?

You were on this thread heavy when you thought you had some out of context comment to hit me with. Now that you've shown that your insults and snide remarks were based on someone else's comments you seem to have slunk away like some dirty wet rat.

I know it's hard on you when you have no good venom to spit so don't worry about it.

I'd still like that apology, though. :rofl:

[last1standing]

43. Over half an hour and still no apology? And you were so quick to attack.

Funny how that works, but don't worry. I'll keep kicking this today to see if you ever have the guts to admit your mistake like an adult or if you're nothing but a silly troll who ran off to hide under her bridge.

I think most of us are coming to a conclusion, already, on that.

[last1standing]

65. An hour and a half but still you're too cowardly to admit your mistake.

n/t

[last1standing]

140. Three hours since you first slandered me with lies, cryingshame. No apology?

That kind of makes you the reptile instead of me, doesn't it? You just slithered away when you were proved to be full of shit and venom, but little fact.

But don't worry, I'll keep checking up to see if you've become adult enough to apologize. We can all dream, can't we?

[last1standing]

146. Four hours and you're still hiding.

What a pathetic loser. You have no honor or dignity, only venom and bile. Whatever is eating at you from the inside must be powerful to create such a disgusting imprint.

[yardwork]

54. Do you have a link for that accusation?

I would think that a post advocating violence would be deleted here on DU. I'm surprised to hear this. Please link the post in question.

This is a very serious accusation to make against another DUer, especially since you also called them a reptile. I hope that you can back up your accusation.

[Donnachaidh]

49. move beyond anger = get over it.

Some of these cristophiles are thick as a brick. :eyes:

[last1standing]

5. Flame #1.

And yes, many have said 'just get over it'. There are dozens of threads to that effect right now.

But thanks for the vapid insults. They say much more about you than me.

[KittyWampus]

10. There's not one insult in my post. You are the one who focuses on the reptilian brain function

and allows others to define their reality.

In the thread I started yesterday, you REPEATEDLY advocate and defend using overt violence. You REPEATEDLY reject non-violence.

Here is what you said yesterday (repeatedly) and what you are trying to justify:

"When I am shown hatred and violence, I respond in kind."

[last1standing]

12. And if you show me violence I WILL respond in kind. That is self protection.

If you have a problem with that, I really don't care.

[yardwork]

56. Do you have a link for that accusation? That's a very serious accusation to make against someone.

Also, how do you figure that calling somebody a reptile isn't an insult?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8018188&mesg_id=8018210

[No Elephants]

14. Plenty of people on DU say either "Just get over it," or "Sit down and shut up," or "This is

not the time." That is what I said before the election. But this IS the time.

[mondo joe]

30. It's very Freepery of them. NT

[yardwork]

52. I "want to be a reptile?"

Um, are you saying that "I want to be a reptile" because I have a need for personal security? And when did anyone say here that they want to "use violence to answer problems?"

Whoa.

[Peacetrain]

132. Callling someone a reptile because they have a different view is wrong

WRONG WRONG.. and you owe people an apology, seriously you owe people an apology

[yardwork]

134. We're being called reptiles because we're gay.

[HamdenRice]

6. Well, then, the ability to get married will definitely frustrate the SEX satisfaction part!

I remember reading an article in Harper's about how marriage was all about unconditional love. A guy wrote in and said that in his marriage, he didn't even get unconditional like.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Jennicut]

9. LOL...marriage is not always that fulfilling

But all should have access to it.

Maslow....brings back the days of psych classes. I have a degree in psych. I fell asleep in many a lecture hall, hey I was only 19 or 20. But Maslow stuck with me.

[No Elephants]

20. Yes, all should have access to marriage, as long as all also get acess to divorce. Otherwise, it's

just mean.

[Jennicut]

26. Yes it is.

My mother in law and my grandmother have both been married 4 and 3 times. Sometimes it takes a long time to get it right.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[xchrom]

7. recommend

[KittyWampus]

15. Really? This is about the Opening Poster advocating the use of violence to solve problems

Do you agree with this statement?

"When I am shown hatred and violence, I respond in kind."

[last1standing]

16. I notice you never provide a link to that comment.

But that's okay, I think most of us are used to your little games.

[KittyWampus]

31. Apparently you have a short memory. I quoted you directly.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8014533#8014589

[last1standing]

33. THATS IWANTANYDEM, NOT ME! Can't you even read a user name?

n/t

[yardwork]

58. Are you drunk? That's another poster.

I've decided that I want an apology for being called a reptile.

[Midlodemocrat]

144. What is wrong with you? That is a completely different poster.

[last1standing]

155. Hatred has blurred more than just her judgment.

n/t

[racaulk]

148. You dumb ass! You're quoting a completely different user.

Reading comprehension. It's your friend.

:eyes:

[Zuiderelle]

156. WTF? LOL

:rofl:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

169. FAIIIIIIIIIIL!

:rofl: :rofl:

[No Elephants]

28. Recommend. Even if you are right about the quote, ti is not from this thread and it sounds like

nothing but self defense anyway.

[last1standing]

34. Her link leads to a different poster. She couldn't even get that right.

But that's the nature of hatred. We all look alike to her.

[yardwork]

59. Meanwhile, all gays are reptiles. Who knew?

[No Elephants]

8. The species cannot survive without sex. Individual members of the species,

however, can and do survive without sex. Others survive without involving any other person in sex. However, I don't believe that people survive sane without love of some kind.

That aside, Obama should not have honored Warren or anyone like him. However, voting for a third party candidate or staying home only helps elect a Republican. That, however, unfortunate and frustrating, is the practical reality. Just ask the Chicago 10 (or 8 or 7 or however you want to count them).

[Mira]

18. K&R Phenomenal Post Yes !

[last1standing]

23. Thanks. I was hoping it would lead to some understanding.

Unfortunately, there is a stalker who has decided to turn it into a flamewar at all costs.

[patrice]

36. I agree that Sexuality is absolutely fundamental to a functional concept of Self

The question is WHAT to do about our situation.

As long as RW/Evangelicals/Fundamentalists do no harm from their Sexual perspective I cannot demand that they agree with mine. Personally, I believe that Maslow clearly shows that they ARE doing Harm. So, HOW do we do anything about that?

If RW et al remain within the boundaries of their own faith-communities, what opportunity do I have to shine a light on the Harm that they do? The whole point of their group-ness is that they are the SAME. People CHOOSE to go to their churches; people choose to buy their books and tapes; people choose to invite them here or there to spread the ideas that they agree with them about. How can any of us speak against any of that?

Now, imagine RW et al OUTSIDE of their HOMO-genous (pardon the reference if you find it distasteful, but I'm trying to make a cognitive point there) environments. Imagine RW et al invited somewhere, the whole point of which is that this

IS ALL OF US

. "You're not in your own exclusive environment now." NOW, what is appropriate/Just rhetoric in such a context? And

WHO

can best deliver the Alternative message that is now made legitimate? If PE Obama does it, RW et al will accuse him of being an OPPRESSOR. But, what if millions and millions and millions of Ordinary People find their Voice in this context and make their Just claims of Harm done to them clear to

EVERYONE

since everyone just happens to be listening/watching at this point?

What's the best Alternative message: "Rick Warren is a putrid Whited Sepluchre" ? Where does that get us? It gets us: "Homosexuals want to fuck our Children" and "President Obama is a Muslim" etc. etc. etc.

Although I feel a Great Deal is at Risk here, I am happy that PE Obama is good on his word: This is about us, not him. It is about what WE do and say about RW et al. The message that WE choose. It's about how WE make the Case for redress of Wrongs done to Innocent DECENT people who are only trying to learn HOW to Love one another and any mistakes that they make in that process are Worth the effort or, at minimum, are no worse than the "mistakes" or mistakes of others (killing a few million Innocent Iraqis, for example).

I was quite hurt when I first saw the news about RW and I still am in some ways(!!!) Now, I believe this IS an opportunity for Us to take the Lead in making what happens about who WE are and what WE do. This may be an Inauguration, but oddly enough, it isn't about Barack Obama. It IS about Us.

[last1standing]

41. If this event leads to a crystallization of the GLBT community to fight, then you're right.

It doesn't mean that Obama has done a good thing, it just means we have taken this attack and used it to focus our energies, which seems to be the case - so far.

As for the message, I think it's been pretty clear. DO NOT DENY US OUR HUMAN RIGHTS!.

[patrice]

44. Do we agree that there is fighting and then there is "fighting"?

I think the internet is a perfect model of the differences between appearances and intent.

[last1standing]

46. It depends on what you see as useful.

The fight for civil rights in the 60's was useful, if inconvenient for some. The Stonewall riots were useful. The Boston Tea Party was useful. The French Revolution was useful. These fights all had a mob mentality but they ended up galvanizing the people into a focused group determined to fight for their rights.

This unorganized outrage just may be the first salvo in what becomes an organized effort. We'll just have to see.

[patrice]

50. I am very happy to consider things in terms of their uses, especially as that relates to Development

I am against things that Harm the Freedom to Grow.

What do you think of my allusion to the cognitive self-loving (not necessarily a bad thing) homogeneity of the Heterosexual Community?

And, just for fun, if Maslow's model were 4 dimensional, what would it look like?

[last1standing]

69. LOL! I appreciate your interst but I don't want to get off topic here.

If you'd like to discuss psychology send me a PM and I'd love to prove my ignorance on the subject. :)

[patrice]

75. okay, then . . . Merry Christmas!

:hi:

[last1standing]

81. And Happy Holidays to you.

:hi:

[yardwork]

77. It's a lot more than sex, of course. There's personal security, social acceptance...

There are quite a few levels on that pyramid.

[LWolf]

37. That chart is upside down.

I remember it with the primary needs, the foundation, on the bottom. ;)

I agree with you.

Thinking about Maslow also got me pondering this:

Is this why so many Democrats enthusiastically nominated and elected a center-right Democrat, instead of a good liberal? Because, after 2 terms of GWB, the lowest need, the need to get republicans out, overcame any higher needs to move the nation left on issues?

If so, what next? Now that the bottom tier of needs is fulfilled with an actual Democrat who will give some lip service, if nothing else, to the left, how do we begin the climb up to actually change on issues, to moving the nation leftward again?

[last1standing]

39. A lot of people use the inverted chart nowadays.

I guess it holds the same meaning but I liked the pyramid design, myself. :)

And you're probably on to something about electing a center-right candidate. So many were afraid of something more substantial.

[TBF]

42. Moving left -

1. Stop shopping, purchase only essentials, part of our power is in shutting down their game.

2. In the streets. Peaceful demonstrations, strikes. The workers in Chicago illustrated how it is done. We need that times a million. That is the other part of our power, we outnumber them.

3. Remember that we are workers, whether our income is $15K a year or $215K a year. We get up and go to work for a living. The owners, those at the very top pulling the strings, are getting rich off our labor. Stop identifying with them, stop making excuses for them, and stop placating them. "Everyone at the table" only works if we bring the homeless too.

We can do this.

[LWolf]

145. Agreed.

I've been doing #1 for several years now.

#2? I did, when I lived anywhere there were demonstrations happening. I walked with the grocery workers' strike in '04, (?) for example. And I spent a great deal of time at peace gatherings.

Until I moved to this rural area, where nobody meets or demonstrates about anything. It's a long way over the mountains to where they happen in this state. I couldn't afford the gas last summer, and I can't get over the mountains in winter conditions.

#3: ABSOLUTELY.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[patrice]

48. I like the chart "upside down". I also like your application of the concept to "Democrats". nt

:hi:

[Umbram]

45. We need to stop him from speaking or gay people will die! (nt)

[last1standing]

47. How does it feel to be a fully fledge human being with all your rights intact?

Kinda comfy, I bet. You're just another member of the I GOT MINE brigade.

[Umbram]

57. Naaw.

When people are starving to death in the third world and being literally executed for political beliefs and you claim that your first level of the hierarchy of needs are being denied because some wingnut is going to speak at a podium for a few minutes, I just can't help but think that you must be desperate for a cross to nail yourself to.

Put "Should every human be entitled to get married to whomever they chose" on a ballot, I'll vote for it. Claim that you are at personal risk of loss of life because a crazy religious nut is going to give a prayer on TV, I'll tell you that you are desperate for the feeling of self-righteous persecution.

[last1standing]

60. What a shame our rights don't rise to the level you require to support us.

I guess we'll just have to disagree because I see you as less of a human for your beliefs just as you are willing to see me as less of one for my sexuality. So go ahead and have the last word. I won't be able to see it.

[Umbram]

61. Of course.

Yes, I'm a bigot because I don't think you are going to die during the inauguration.

Everyone around you is Judas. Enjoy your cross.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

124. You poor thing

:hug:

[yardwork]

110. You're missing a fascinating example of sado-religious porn.

It's not often that it is this explicit on DU.

[Umbram]

136. What is always this explicit on DU

is an attempt to prevent any sort of discussion whatsoever by demonizing people that disagree with you.

Childish, but effective.

[yardwork]

62. Gay people are being "literally executed" in many countries, including the U.S.

Maybe you didn't know that.

[last1standing]

64. Maybe he doesn't care.

He got his, you see.

[yardwork]

66. Maybe he likes it.

[last1standing]

71. That is the most likely scenario.

I'd bet he's one of those who gets a little tingly 'down-there' whenever he hears of a good fag-bashing.

[yardwork]

74. I would bet on it. It's fairly easy to spot the sadists who enjoy sexual violence.

They often make references to Christ's suffering on the cross. They're the ones we see in museums studying the details. They really get into it.

I know the type.

[Umbram]

83. *rolls eyes*

Cute.

[mondo joe]

70. Obviously. Gay kids dying is treated like a minor shame by those who enjoy their

snark more than they care about real people.

[Umbram]

67. Lets try being honest.

In many countries gay people are executed (capital punishment.)
In the United States gay people are executed (murder.)

How will the inauguration increase the execution (by either definition) of gay people?

[mondo joe]

72. By legitimizing people who equate gays with child molestors, increasing their

national audience and national exposure.

[yardwork]

73. I have a feeling that you know and are very pleased with it.

I think you are well aware of the level of violence directed against gay people. You may have participated in some incidents yourself. You certainly seem to like the fact that it exists.

[Umbram]

78. Fascinating.

So, you believe that I want gay people to be hurt and killed and may have actually hurt or killed some myself based on the above?

[yardwork]

80. Yes, I think that might be true.

[mondo joe]

84. I think you find it satisfactory. You plainly view GLBT people as privileged and

therefore worthy of being taken down a few notches.

[mondo joe]

63. It may be easy for you to ignore that gay teens are driven to suicide and homelessness

precisely because of people like Warren, but it's less easy for others.

[Umbram]

76. You should not presuppose what I ignore and what I acknowledge.

I would like you to paint the chain of causation from the inauguration to the increase in "ex-gay" hoccus poccus.

I absolutely believe that trying to convince people that being gay can be cured or is in some way unnatural will lead to suicide and homelessness.

I want to hear how some random prayer about whatever is going to legitimize the hoccus pocus? Are people all going to wikipedia him and say, "Oh no! Obama things I need to find a 'cure' so ...."

Again, the only think I'm disputing is that gay people will die (lack of tier 1 needs) as a result of the inauguration.

[yardwork]

79. Red herring. It's not just Tier 1 needs that are at issue here.

Besides, I'm certain that you know that more people will suffer as a result of elevating a gay-hater at our inauguration. I think that you like that, in fact.

I think you like thinking about gay people being beat up.

[mondo joe]

82. I'm not presupposing anything. I'm concluding based on the evidence of your posts.

Being chosen by the president for a special honor bestows cachet and approval on the person, legitimizing them.

The person has increased influence, increased air time, increased connections to decision makers.

It increases the burden gay kids live under.

Even if you don't believe it will result in one death, it wouldn't cost you a damn thing to admit it's quite terrible and shouldn't happen.

But your posts have made you plain: You don't really give a shit about gay kids, or GLBT people in general, and consider their safety and equality negligible matters.

[yardwork]

85. He does care. He fantasizes that we're all on crosses surrounded by Judases.

That's some heavy sex thing he's got going.

[Umbram]

90. I assume libelous attacks are more interesting to you that a discussion? (nt)

[yardwork]

91. Your libelous attacks are interesting to me.

Yes, I'm a bigot because I don't think you are going to die during the inauguration.

Everyone around you is Judas. Enjoy your cross.

[Umbram]

98. There is no libel there.

Sarcasm, yes. Need a definition of libel?

[Umbram]

87. Please, a favor.

I know that you don't feel that there's anything to discuss. Obviously you've concluded that I hate gay people so this conversation is going to be short lived and you are yardwork are just interested in moving on having declared me to be a committer of and rejoicer in hate crimes.

But I would appreciate your supplying me with whatever I said that allowed you to conclude that I "don't really give a shit about gay kids, or GLBT people in general, and consider their safety and equality negligible matters."

It will provide me with an opportunity for self-reflection. Thanks.

[yardwork]

89. First, I didn't say anything like that, so your quote marks are dishonest.

This is the post that helped me conclude that you have some issues:

Yes, I'm a bigot because I don't think you are going to die during the inauguration.

Everyone around you is Judas. Enjoy your cross.

Imagine saying that to a member of any other minority group and imagine how it would go over.

Along with your many other posts in this thread, I conclude that you enjoy images of violence directed against gay people.

[Umbram]

93. Sorry.

My response was to Modoe (sp?)

I would say that to ANY person who claimed that a wingnut giving a prayer was going to cause them to die. Anyone.

Suggesting that someone is self-martyrizing in a purely rhetorical fashion is hardly indicitave of the speaker getting some sort of thrill off of the image of someone actually being nailed to a cross. That's...just odd.

[yardwork]

94. Your words speak for themselves.

[mondo joe]

92. Stop with the falsehoods about things I did NOT say.

I didn't say you hate gay people.

If you want to discuss what I said I will be GLAD to do so and will answer ANY question you put forth.

Look to your dismissive attitude toward the impact on gay people of equal civil rights, and legitimizing a man who equates them with child molesters.

[Umbram]

96. Sorry

I actually thought you were engaged in the "Umbram thinks gay people being hurt is sexy" discussion above. My mistake. I believe I quoted the lines of yours I took issue with.

I think if you read my posts you'll find there is only ONE point. It is pure drama to say that anyone's tier 1 needs are going to be eroded as a result of the inauguration. This was a horrible choice for a speaker, I would love to see it rescinded. You will not find me "legitimizing a man who equates them with child molesters," in fact I've never said ANYTHING positive about him.

[yardwork]

97. Who said it was just tier 1?

[Umbram]

102. Tier 1 is what I took issue with

with EVERY single post I've made. Gay people are absolutely negatively impacted by the "ex-gay" bullshit. My ONLY dispute was that the inauguration will NOT cause anyone to die.

[yardwork]

105. As I said upthread, that's a red herring. The OP didn't say anything about tier 1 exclusively.

Again, you're very preoccupied with the death of gay people.

I'm trudging along trying to work my way a little higher up the pyramid.

[Umbram]

108. Oh my.

Are you are completely unwilling to have a discussion where someone you disagree with isn't a sadist?

The OP addressed several points. I am not allowed to disagree with one and agree with the rest? Is that not an option?

[mondo joe]

99. Your dismisiveness of the rights and lives of GLBT people is on the record.

Nothing you've said since changes it.

[Umbram]

100. Actually, I recant my appology.

In post #87 you made your thoughts pretty clear.

[yardwork]

106. What apology?

[Umbram]

109. Hrm.

Why every time I post something to Mondoe you answer? I get confused enough as it is :(

[yardwork]

113. We're sock puppets.

[Umbram]

116. Well, one puppet at a time maybe?

Us psychopathic sadists have a hard time following along.

[mondo joe]

114. I stand by whatever I said, and you can keep your faux apology. NT

[Umbram]

125. I stand by "whatever I said" as well.

Nobody will die as a result of this horrible choice for an inaugural speaker.

Be well.

[Umbram]

103. After reading post 87

you think I'm a sadistic fuck. No sense continuing to converse with me.

[yardwork]

107. I think that might be me you're talking about. I know that all queers look alike to you...

[Umbram]

112. You didn't post #87...now did you, but hey, any chance to personally attack me...(nt)

[Donnachaidh]

51. the "Fuck You, I've Got Mine" circle of jackals always show up. n/t

[mondo joe]

86. I think it's more a belief that GLBT people are priviliged and need to be taken down a few notches.

It's very similar to anti Jewish hate.

[yardwork]

95. With the addition of the sex thing.

[Zuiderelle]

150. It really is. I never looked at it that way before, but it really does seem to be like that.

They think we're all comfortable and that having equality is not important since we make up for it with our boatloads full of disposable income. I'm shocked that so much ignorance could thrive on a democratic website.

[mondo joe]

158. Actual gay bashers - violent ones - almost uniformly express resentment for gays for

some perceived upper hand in wealth and privilege.

I'm increasingly confident it plays a role here as well, though obviously to a different outcome.

[mondo joe]

55. In fact, gay people will and do die as a result of his sort of homophobia. Enjoy

being snarky about kids dying?

[Jamastiene]

88. Hate speech does lead to gay people being murdered.

Where the hell have you been?

[Umbram]

117. Do you expect this to occur at

or be proximity caused by the inauguration?

[Zuiderelle]

151. Yes. Legitimizing Warren's belief that gays are pedophiles and criminals does put us at risk.

And I sincerely believe that having him do the invocation at the inauguration could very well precipitate hate crimes that will cause physical harm and possible murder of gay Americans.

[Zuiderelle]

149. Fuck you.

[slackmaster]

111. Warren is opposed to unmarried heterosexuals having sex too

:shrug:

[yardwork]

115. It's not just sex. I know it's hard to remember, but gay people care about other things too.

The pyramid involves a number of other issues, like security, social acceptance, etc.

Some folks on this thread are preoccupied with issues of sex and even death. Gay people care about more than just those things. We're humans just like everyone else.

[No Elephants]

119. No one here said otherwise. But Warren says he loves gays. He is fine with gays, so long

as they never have a same gender romance or sexual encounter.

[yardwork]

128. Actually, some folks on this thread have said otherwise, but not you.

Sex is not what defines me as lesbian. It's about so much more than sex. Straight people have sex with people of the same gender, but they don't consider themselves to be gay, and they're right. "Gay" is more than sex and sexual acts.

Anyway, I know I'm preaching to the choir. You are always supportive!

[slackmaster]

122. I hear you, and I reject ALL of Warren's goofy package of religious crapola

As long as he isn't given any real power, he doesn't have to be a major problem.

[Zuiderelle]

154. He doesn't have to have "real power" to have power. Having a world stage that legitimizes him

and his beliefs and understandably leads people to believe that OBAMA believes in the same things, is a MAJOR PROBLEM.

But I've seen your posts in the past few days, and it's clear that you don't want to admit that Warren is a problem. It doesn't matter what anyone says to you, you keep claiming that it's no big deal.

[slackmaster]

166. I would be willing to bet a substantial sum of money that he won't use that stage to promote bigotry

:hi:

[last1standing]

118. Is he against them marrying at all?

If not, the point of your post is moot. Warren works to deny us our basic needs.

[slackmaster]

121. He has all kinds of wacky religious beliefs that if given force of law would deny people rights

That's why it's good that he doesn't have any real power over any of us.

[last1standing]

126. Correction: He has no power over you. His "wacky religious beliefs" are the law for the GLBTers.

Kind of makes a difference to us, you see.

[slackmaster]

129. He's only one among millions of people who wrongly believe that being gay is a choice

We need to educate lots of them.

[last1standing]

130. He is a megaphone for spreading the lies.

And he has rejected education.

[slackmaster]

135. So did George C. Wallace for most of his political career

He did get better.

[last1standing]

137. And the day Warren changes his tune, I'll stop attacking him.

Until that day he must be resisted by any legal means possible. You can either agree with that or be an apologist for his hatred. I won't play this semantic game any longer.

[slackmaster]

139. Here we have a fine example of a false dilemma and poisoning the well

...he must be resisted by any legal means possible. You can either agree with that or be an apologist for his hatred.

Nice.

[last1standing]

142. I'm just not willing to continue debating whether we should work to stop him or not.

That's wasted energy. He must be stopped and I'm going to work to do so. If you are going to try to stop me from that, you become an apologist for his cause. Think what you will of me, I just don't care at this point. You are not going to help us so at least get out of my way.

[slackmaster]

165. I haven't tried to stop you from doing anything

Please don't be silly.

[Zuiderelle]

152. Huge difference. Heterosexuals can get married. And unmarried heterosexuals having sex are also

welcome in his church. Whereas gays, whether married or not, whether having sex or not, are not welcome at all.

[slackmaster]

167. I'm not sure that's entirely correct

I believe he has stated that his church is open to repentant homosexuals.

But so what? Why would any gay person want to go to his silly church anyway?

BTW as a veteran of marriage I have to say it isn't all it's cracked up to be. There is a small but very real component of "sour grapes" in the outrage over bans on same-sex marriage.

[EFerrari]

120. Great way to lay out the issue. K&R

[Taverner]

123. "get over it" vs "baby, bathwater, who needs 'em??"

There is a middle, and it involves being upset, but not OBSESSED with the Warren speech

Granted, if I were a GLBT Christian, I would be more pissed - but I am a Straight Atheist. To me, his choice of spiritual magician makes no difference, since I think no state institution should even give lip service to faith.

To me, faith is the problem

It is why we are fighting

Jettison faith, and you jettison the problem

[last1standing]

127. It might be slightly easier to end GLBT legal discrimination than to outlaw religion.

I think we've made the right decision on where to focus our energy.

[Taverner]

131. Well yeah

But I'm a root causes kinda guy

People say homophobia exists without religion - if that's so show me one group of Chimps that ostracizes homosexual chimps. They don't, because being gay is as natural as being blonde. But we do, because we have religion. It was a system of arcane laws, written in the bronze age by most likely schizophrenics ("take your only son and kill him...just kidding!" do you think a sane person would come up with that shit???)

[last1standing]

133. In that case, the root cause isn't religion.

The root cause is people who pervert religion to serve their own ambitions. Jesus never said a word against homosexuality, it was Paul who revived that old testament philosophy in order to gain support at the expense of a fringe group. If he could have used the passages against shellfish to his advantage we'd be fighting over the lobster eaters right now.

There have been GLBT friendly religions (Greek and Roman, specifically) but they were forced out by the haters.

[Taverner]

138. Well religion is all about control of the people

Confucius doesn't even mention gods, yet it is as deterministic a force - so I would argue by Religions very definition, it is the root cause

[last1standing]

141. As Obama would say, "That's above my paygrade".

I've seen religion work as a force for good and bad. In this case, its obviously bad. On the other hand, I wouldn't be upset at all if everyone realized tomorrow that their favorite mythology was just that. I think it would to more good than harm.

[Zuiderelle]

157. Oh please. Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. No, let's just throw out gays.

You can't just get rid of faith. Your recommendation does nothing for the immediate problem. There will be an invocation, there will be swearing in on the bible, there will be a benediction. I agree that religion shouldn't be any part of the inauguration, but it is. And since it is, we can at least object to who is chosen to perform it.

[amborin]

147. Warren is the wrong choice, for so many reasons

[varelse]

153. K&R

Human rights don't have a sexual orientation or a gender preference. Human rights are for humans - ALL of us - they are inclusive, not exclusive.

If all of us do not have the right to choose our partners in marriage freely and without government interference, then government-sanctioned marriage is no longer a right, but a privilege.

When our government does not support equal protection under the law, and instead chooses to secure privileges for the "religiously correct" rather than protecting civil rights for all, that is a rejection of the principles on which this nation's democracy was founded: separation of church and state, and equal rights for all citizens.

Rick Warren should never have been invited to the inauguration. Some of us aren't going to "get over it" because it's quite frankly appalling. Wrongheaded. A slap in the face not to "the gays" but to anyone who believes that we are all created equal and we all deserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - equally.

[last1standing]

159. Excellent post. Thank you, varelse.

n/t

[glitch]

168. Very well said, deserves its own thread. Please consider making it an OP. nt

[LeftCoast]

160. Wow...wonderfully written!

Excellent!

[AntiFascist]

161. K&R, excellent...

I've always felt Maslow trumped Freud.

[Fovea]

162. I said this too.

You are spot on.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8014533&mesg_id=8014868

[NJmaverick]

163. How odd, the poster "mistakenly" claims one can only have sex after marriage

I wonder how that mistake was overlooked.:eyes:

Although if one were to take a rational and thoughtful look at the needs scale, one could understand why keeping our troops alive (by pulling out of Iraq) and making sure people have jobs so they can have homes and food to eat, might be a bit more important than the marriage ceremony issue issue.

[Laelth]

164. Nice useful graphic. Excellent argument.

Puritans and repressed individuals like to believe that sex matters little in the grand scheme of things. They're wrong, of course.

:dem:

-Laelth

[treestar]

170. He must have meant it in the overall continuation of the species sense

Since the individual can survive without it.

Warren giving the invocation will have zero results. It won't stop gay marriage from becoming legal. It won't result in gay sex becoming illegal. The ado on DU is about nothing.