And the band played on

[fatman]

Before I post this, let me state that there are some opinions and statements in the article that I don't necessarily agree with.  Knowing that someone is gay at age 6, even if he is your child, is one.  That said, I felt that this was an appropriate topic for discussion





Two gay teens killed in just two weeks
Attacks in Calif., Fla. prove young gays remain vulnerable

 
By RYAN LEE
MAR. 7, 2008
 
The defining setting for anti-gay violence for the last decade was a rickety fence in a desolate Wyoming field.

But a string of anti-gay beatings, shootings and killings in recent months shows that homophobic hatred didn?t disappear when Matthew Shepard was killed 10 years ago this October, nor is it confined to rural pockets of America?s heartland.

In the last year alone, young gay people have died at the hands of straight friends in central Florida, been beaten to death after leaving a bar in Greenville, S.C., and assassinated in an eighth grade classroom in California. Last weekend in Athens, Ga., a 17-year old gay man carrying a purse was beaten and verbally gay-bashed by three boys he knew, according to a March 4 report in the Athens Banner-Herald.

?I think if you ask the average American, they think Matthew Shepard was the last person killed in this country for being gay,? said Kevin Jennings, executive director of the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, a national group that focuses on gay issues in schools. ?Unfortunately, that?s not the case.?

Elke Kennedy knew her son Sean was gay by the time he was six years old, but slight pangs of fear rushed through her when Sean came out to her in 2004 at age 17.

?I was really more worried about him being harassed and people not liking him for who he was,? Kennedy said Tuesday. ?It?s a common concern, and I think it?s getting worse now.?

At about 4:30 a.m. on May 16, 2007, Kennedy received a call from a hospital that many mothers of gay children dread. She asked if her son was seriously hurt, and was told only that she needed to arrive at the hospital as soon as she could.

As her 20-year-old son lay brain dead in South Carolina?s Greenville Memorial Hospital, Kennedy learned that Sean was leaving a bar when he was attacked by a young man who called him a ?faggot.? The beating caused Sean?s brain to separate from his brain stem and ricochet inside his skull. He was taken off life support later that night.

Although South Carolina police investigated Sean?s death as a hate crime, prosecutors said there was no evidence of ?malicious intent? to kill, and charged Stephen Moller, 18 at the time of the murder, with involuntary manslaughter in October. The manslaughter charge carries a maximum of five years in prison.

?It?s bad enough that you have to lose a child and deal with all of that, but then on top of that you have to deal with the fact that they?re saying your son deserved to die, or that [Moller] really didn?t mean to do it, so we?re just going to give him a slap on the wrist,? Kennedy said.

Kennedy said she was also stung by her community?s apparent apathetic response.

?People, they?re sorry that I lost my son, but they don?t want to talk about why he was murdered,? she said. ?They?d rather ignore that fact and pretend it didn?t happen.?

Gay people in Greenville have also had a muted reaction to Sean?s murder, Kennedy said.

?Most of them, they?re afraid,? Kennedy said. ?For them to give up their life, their job, because they could lose their job, give up their safety ? why would people want to stand out there and put themselves in that danger??

But even in cities with booming gay populations like Atlanta, people are often unaware of or ignore anti-gay violence like the recent killings of gay teenagers Lawrence King in a California middle school, and Simmie Williams in Ft. Lauderdale.

?I?m kind of frustrated because I think a lot of people are blind to events and activism,? said Thomas Byrd, a gay teen who attends high school in Cobb County. ?This could?ve been me or any of us.?

From Washington, D.C., to Florida to YouTube, gay people have recently paid tribute to Williams, who was found dead while wearing women?s clothes, and King, who was shot in the head at point-blank range by a classmate.

?I think it?s amazing that gay and lesbian centers all over the U.S. have done vigils,? said Jay Smith, executive director of the Ventura County Rainbow Alliance, where King participated in events.

?It?s been a sad three weeks for us,? Smith said. ?We tell [youth] to be out, be proud and be safe, and Larry seemed to be doing that and got killed for it.?

Gay people in Ft. Lauderdale are experiencing ?a heightened sense of urgency and concern? after Williams?s death, which was followed days later by another local anti-gay attack, said Paul Hyman, executive director of the Gay & Lesbian Community Center of South Florida.

Lawrence King?s murder marks the first time in 10 years that an anti-gay killing has come close to becoming a national news story.

?The Matthew Shepard case captured the nation?s attention in a way we have not seen since then,? said Neil Giuliano, president of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

?All incidents that involve violence and brutality against LGBT people deserve the same kind of public outcry and community response in order to shift the cultural climate about LGBT issues,? Giuliano added.

News of King?s death took weeks to spread from local coverage, despite it being a ?uniquely horrifying? school shooting, said Jennings from GLSEN.

Scott Hall, a heterosexual who was attacked during an anti-gay hate crime in 1984, tracks anti-gay violence for a memorial project known as Gay American Heroes.

?It?s only the ones that are most horrific and most unusual that get national media play,? Hall said.

Media coverage of anti-gay attacks helps galvanize opposition to homophobia, and can transcend ideological lines. During her Feb. 29 show, Ellen DeGeneres delivered an emotional tribute to King and said his death ?is not political.?

?A little boy has been killed, and a number of lives have been ruined,? DeGeneres said. ?When the message out there is so horrible, that to be gay, you can get killed for it, we need to change the message? We must change our country.?

In Georgia, the statewide gay rights group Georgia Equality created a YouTube tribute to King that urges state lawmakers to adopt a gay-inclusive hate crimes law and stronger anti-bullying measures. The bullying bill has cleared a state senate committee, but must pass the full Senate by March 11 to remain alive for the session, according to the group, which urges supporters to contact legislators.

But Elke Kennedy cautions that the response to crimes like her son?s murder can?t end with enacting gay-friendly laws.

?California has hate crimes laws, but that?s still not going to prevent this from happening because people are still taught to hate and that it?s OK,? Kennedy said. ?I want parents to know that they?re the ones that are responsible for teaching their children to hate. I believe it starts at home.?

Tragic as they are, anti-gay killings have the potential to bring people together, like at a vigil for Simmie Williams last week, Hyman of South Florida said.

?It was a really amazing presence of [the Williams family?s] religious community and the LGBT community, particularly African-American transgender people having a strong presence,? Hyman said.
 
Link:  http://www.sovo.com/2008/3-7/news/national/8231.cfm

[Universe Prince]

Beyond commenting that the people doing the beating are morons who need to swift boot to the head, I don't know what to say, Fatman. This kind of behavior, beating up people who are different, makes me angry. I don't really understand it. I know that it happens. I know that sort of bigotry is taught to people. But I really don't understand why it happens. I can understand, to a degree, why some people choose to be socialists, eat broccoli, pierce their tongues, embrace fundamentalist Christianity, agree to be on "reality television" shows or voluntarily jump out of perfectly good airplanes. Violently beating the crap out of people because they're different, that I just don't get. Not even a little.

[fatman]

I posted it more as an awareness piece than anything else Prince.  I'm not sure how many people realize that this stuff occurs on a daily basis, even in cities with a large gay community, such as Seattle, it happens regularly.  I know, I've witnessed it personally and been a near victim of it.  Fortunately, a concealed carry permit not only saved me a beating, but allowed me to hold the perpetrators until the police could arrive.  I no longer frequent the clubs, it was a rare thing even then for me to go out to a club, nor do I carry a gun anymore.  But like I said, I just wanted people to have an idea about the frequency of it, and that true homophobia (by which I mean not just disagreeing with homosexuality, but physically or verbally attacking gays) is still going on.

[Stray Pooch]

true homophobia (by which I mean not just disagreeing with homosexuality, but physically or verbally attacking gays) is still going on.

I appreciate the clarification of true homophobia, because there is a huge difference between having a moral belief about a particular behavior and believing you have a right to enforce that belief. 

But this goes to a theory that continues to grow in my mind.  I think we may look at the wrong thing when we ascribe this kind of behavior to homophobia.  To be sure, some people suffer from that particular affliction and are likely to act on it.  The talk show guest that murdered the guy who revealed his gay crush on him on the show comes to mind.  But I think it is a different cause that motivates these kinds of crimes.  I think the people that perpetrate these crimes are sociopaths without a cause, and they view gays as targets of opportunity.  I think they are no more driven by ga-hatred than rapists are driven by sexual desire.  I think they are driven by anger and a need to control.  I'm betting these people are guilty of other such crimes, though perhaps not as violent, against non-gays.  I'll bet they kick puppies and beat their children or wives.  I think that homosexuality, especially when openly expressed like the crossdresser described in the article, is just an excuse to take the sociopathic behavior to a higher level. 

The theory I mean to describe, however, is a little broader in scope.  I think that we too often ascribe political, religious or cultural motivations to bad behavior when we really should be looking at the underlying problem.  There is no difference to me between a crazy fundamentalist and a rabid atheist.   The Limbaugh quoting rightwinger has the same problem as the screeching liberal comparing Bush to Hitler.  The man-hating feminist is no different from the black-hating klansman.  While I don't rule out homophobia as a factor in many of these cases, I also think a large portion of them (probably most) are cases of unstable, violent people finding an excuse to rationalize their violent behavior.  The person who shoots a man coming out of a gay bar might have chosen instead to shoot a Muslim coming out of a mosque or a homeless man.  The issue is not one of morality gone insane, its a case of insanity gone moral.   One cannot kill a perfectly innocent person and still remain in denial about his own evil; but one can kill a faggot/terrorist/bum and be ridding society of evil.  Oughta get a medal for it.  Its the same way with fanatical right or lefties, fundies or atheists, etc.  It's the same mindset, just expressed from a different perspective.

To this issue, the reason why people think they can beat up folks different from them is because they think they can beat up folks, period, but need to feel like they have a good reason.  Difference is just the excuse.

[BT]

true homophobia (by which I mean not just disagreeing with homosexuality, but physically or verbally attacking gays) is still going on.

I appreciate the clarification of true homophobia, because there is a huge difference between having a moral belief about a particular behavior and believing you have a right to enforce that belief. 

But this goes to a theory that continues to grow in my mind.  I think we may look at the wrong thing when we ascribe this kind of behavior to homophobia.  To be sure, some people suffer from that particular affliction and are likely to act on it.  The talk show guest that murdered the guy who revealed his gay crush on him on the show comes to mind.  But I think it is a different cause that motivates these kinds of crimes.  I think the people that perpetrate these crimes are sociopaths without a cause, and they view gays as targets of opportunity.  I think they are no more driven by ga-hatred than rapists are driven by sexual desire.  I think they are driven by anger and a need to control.  I'm betting these people are guilty of other such crimes, though perhaps not as violent, against non-gays.  I'll bet they kick puppies and beat their children or wives.  I think that homosexuality, especially when openly expressed like the crossdresser described in the article, is just an excuse to take the sociopathic behavior to a higher level. 

The theory I mean to describe, however, is a little broader in scope.  I think that we too often ascribe political, religious or cultural motivations to bad behavior when we really should be looking at the underlying problem.  There is no difference to me between a crazy fundamentalist and a rabid atheist.   The Limbaugh quoting rightwinger has the same problem as the screeching liberal comparing Bush to Hitler.  The man-hating feminist is no different from the black-hating klansman.  While I don't rule out homophobia as a factor in many of these cases, I also think a large portion of them (probably most) are cases of unstable, violent people finding an excuse to rationalize their violent behavior.  The person who shoots a man coming out of a gay bar might have chosen instead to shoot a Muslim coming out of a mosque or a homeless man.  The issue is not one of morality gone insane, its a case of insanity gone moral.   One cannot kill a perfectly innocent person and still remain in denial about his own evil; but one can kill a faggot/terrorist/bum and be ridding society of evil.  Oughta get a medal for it.  Its the same way with fanatical right or lefties, fundies or atheists, etc.  It's the same mindset, just expressed from a different perspective.

To this issue, the reason why people think they can beat up folks different from them is because they think they can beat up folks, period, but need to feel like they have a good reason.  Difference is just the excuse.

Interesting analysis. Seems quite plausible.

[fatman]

Wow Pooch, that's a whole other way of looking at things, and a perspective that I'll admit that I hadn't considered.  I also agree with BT that it's quite plausible, and your example of the talk show guy was dead on.  I do think that the term homophobic is thrown out way too much by some in my community, and that's why I make an effort to differentiate between someone opposed on moral grounds as opposed to blind/ignorant hatred.  I know a lot of people who disagree with homosexuality, but accept me as me.  The one that truly makes me angry are parents, who once their kids "come out", disown them, berate them, beat them, etc.  That you could do that to your own flesh and blood pisses me off to no end, and yet when I worked as an outreach counselor to GLBT youth it happened more than a lot of people think.  Anyhow, I'm rambling off topic but I did want to tell you that I felt that this was a thoughtful, intelligent analysis of the situation, and one that I'll bear in mind when I hear similar stories.

BTW, I did absolutely love this line:  The issue is not one of morality gone insane, its a case of insanity gone moral.  It could be applied to topics far outside of this one.

[Stray Pooch]

The one that truly makes me angry are parents, who once their kids "come out", disown them, berate them, beat them, etc.  That you could do that to your own flesh and blood pisses me off to no end, and yet when I worked as an outreach counselor to GLBT youth it happened more than a lot of people think. 

As a parent of gay children, I completely agree.  I can't say I was happy when my son came out, but my first reaction was that he couldn't do anything that could make me stop loving him.  Further, it gives you a better perspective on the issue.  I immediately thought I could deal with my son, but I wouldn't allow his partner in  my home.  After I met the young man, I instantly realized how foolish and pointless that was.  He was a nice young man who I wouldn't have had the slightest problem with under any other circumstances.  So accepting a person irrespective of orientationi wasn't a hard issue, even though I thought it would be.  In the end, I surrender nothing of my own morality or standards simply by refusing to hold someone else to them.  But by rejecting my own child, or even someone else's, just because they have a different set of beliefs, values or standards than I do WOULD be surrendering something.

An interesting thing, though.  For a reason I have never been able to ascertain, my son went on stage at a GSA rally in school to tell the world that my wife and I had disowned him and called him names (including the infamous "F" word) when he came out to us.  This would have been bad enough if he had done it AFTER he came out to us.  But when he made those claims he had not even done so yet.  He has never really discussed this with us, as we found it out a little after he came out to us from someone else and he refused to discuss it.  It did explain why many of his teachers seemed very cold too us for a few months before we found out.  It was very weird.  A counselor suggested he might have wanted to fit in with the other kids and felt that a "victim" story was in order.  Who knows?

BTW, I did absolutely love this line:  The issue is not one of morality gone insane, its a case of insanity gone moral.  It could be applied to topics far outside of this one.

I appreciate the comment.  I tend to think poetically sometimes and that device seemed appropriate as I was thinking it out.  I wish I knew who it was that said "We don't write to be understood; we write to understand."

[Stray Pooch]

I do think that the term homophobic is thrown out way too much by some in my community, and that's why I make an effort to differentiate between someone opposed on moral grounds as opposed to blind/ignorant hatred.  I know a lot of people who disagree with homosexuality, but accept me as me. 

This, fatman, is why I have so much respect for you.  It is exactly that type of open-minded analysis and willingness to accept differences that defines the true meaning of another oft-misused word, tolerance.  We need a lot more people with that kind of moral courage in the world.

[Universe Prince]

I posted it more as an awareness piece than anything else Prince.  I'm not sure how many people realize that this stuff occurs on a daily basis, even in cities with a large gay community, such as Seattle, it happens regularly.

I was not aware of it. If the stories make the news, I've missed it. But then I miss a lot of local news. (I can hear about the supposedly vast array of meth labs and supposedly widespread gang activity [can you tell I'm skeptical?] for only so long before I start ignoring the local news. At least in Louisiana the politics was always fun and interesting.) I did hear today that someplace in Georgia (I think) started cracking down on "aggressive driving", whatever that means. Anyway, my point being that I might be partly at fault here.

I know, I've witnessed it personally and been a near victim of it.  Fortunately, a concealed carry permit not only saved me a beating, but allowed me to hold the perpetrators until the police could arrive.

Good. Reason #7,896,432 why concealed carry is a good idea.

But like I said, I just wanted people to have an idea about the frequency of it, and that true homophobia (by which I mean not just disagreeing with homosexuality, but physically or verbally attacking gays) is still going on.

I'm sure it is. This stuff never seems to ever really go away. Unfortunately, short of policing what people think, I doubt it ever will.

[Universe Prince]

While I don't rule out homophobia as a factor in many of these cases, I also think a large portion of them (probably most) are cases of unstable, violent people finding an excuse to rationalize their violent behavior.  The person who shoots a man coming out of a gay bar might have chosen instead to shoot a Muslim coming out of a mosque or a homeless man.  The issue is not one of morality gone insane, its a case of insanity gone moral.   One cannot kill a perfectly innocent person and still remain in denial about his own evil; but one can kill a faggot/terrorist/bum and be ridding society of evil.  Oughta get a medal for it.  Its the same way with fanatical right or lefties, fundies or atheists, etc.  It's the same mindset, just expressed from a different perspective.

To this issue, the reason why people think they can beat up folks different from them is because they think they can beat up folks, period, but need to feel like they have a good reason.  Difference is just the excuse.

Huh. I had not thought of the matter in those terms. Still not sure I really understand the beating up on people any better, but it's different perspective to consider. Thanks, Pooch.

[fatman]

As a parent of gay children, I completely agree.  I can't say I was happy when my son came out, but my first reaction was that he couldn't do anything that could make me stop loving him.  Further, it gives you a better perspective on the issue.  I immediately thought I could deal with my son, but I wouldn't allow his partner in  my home.  After I met the young man, I instantly realized how foolish and pointless that was.  He was a nice young man who I wouldn't have had the slightest problem with under any other circumstances.  So accepting a person irrespective of orientationi wasn't a hard issue, even though I thought it would be.  In the end, I surrender nothing of my own morality or standards simply by refusing to hold someone else to them.  But by rejecting my own child, or even someone else's, just because they have a different set of beliefs, values or standards than I do WOULD be surrendering something.

I remembered that you had a gay son and a (formerly?) lesbian daughter from a recent post, but I wasn't comfortable bringing that up.  Your position is a good one, you retain your values but still love and support your son, and it seems to me that you realize that there are a lot of grey areas, that it isn't all black and white.  I wish that there were a lot more people who think like you, the world would be a much better place for it.  I've always thought that parents who treat their children harshly after "coming out" are more interested in control and their own personal feelings than what is best for their kids, and that's a poor example of parenting in my book.

An interesting thing, though.  For a reason I have never been able to ascertain, my son went on stage at a GSA rally in school to tell the world that my wife and I had disowned him and called him names (including the infamous "F" word) when he came out to us.  This would have been bad enough if he had done it AFTER he came out to us.  But when he made those claims he had not even done so yet.  He has never really discussed this with us, as we found it out a little after he came out to us from someone else and he refused to discuss it.  It did explain why many of his teachers seemed very cold too us for a few months before we found out.  It was very weird.  A counselor suggested he might have wanted to fit in with the other kids and felt that a "victim" story was in order.  Who knows?

I'm not sure what happened here.  I do know that the teenage years are difficult for anyone (whoever came up with that line that those are the best years of your life was full of baloney), and most times they're exceptionally difficult for someone struggling with being gay.  Depending on the environment, it can be dangerous.  My thought, and it's only a thought, is that your son was worried about either an overreaction on your part, and moved to counter that with his own overreaction, or that he was seeking sympathy from peers who might otherwise humiliate or ostracize him.  Conformity is important to a lot of people in high school, he may have been trying to stay in the group even as he was moving out of it.  Your best bet would be to ask him, obviously I have no idea of your family dynamics, but I'd recommend saying what you said to me in this post, about how you adapted without compromising your values, then ask, don't demand, why he did this.  I would think that it caused you a lot of hurt and stress, and you deserve a legitimate answer.  But like I said, I don't know your dynamic, you would know whether or not to pursue it far better than I.

I appreciate the comment.  I tend to think poetically sometimes and that device seemed appropriate as I was thinking it out.  I wish I knew who it was that said "We don't write to be understood; we write to understand."

It's a good line.  I thought about using it as a signature but decided to retain the Kirkegaard quote.  Your ability to cut to the heart of the argument, always eloquently and almost always without rancor, is one of the reasons that I make it a point to read your posts.  The same could be said for UP and a few others in here as well.  I don't have a problem giving  a compliment when it's deserved.

This, fatman, is why I have so much respect for you.  It is exactly that type of open-minded analysis and willingness to accept differences that defines the true meaning of another oft-misused word, tolerance.  We need a lot more people with that kind of moral courage in the world.

I tend to see it this way:  if I start out by calling anyone who disagrees with me or especially my positions on gay rights homophobic, I not only alienate them away from my point of view, but I might well not learn what they think or how they view the matter.  A good example is a fairly recent discussion that I had with sirs, if I'd started out by calling sirs homophobic and intolerant because he disagrees with gay marriage, I might not have learned that he is willing to compromise on the rights but not on the name, a compromise that I would be more than happy to accept.  An added plus to this line of thinking is that it makes people more willing to view things from my perspective, just as a respectful and thought out discussion on their part makes me willing to see things from their vantage point.  And that's the heart of an intelligent discussion.  A rant on people who disagree with homosexuality might be appropriate in a gay forum (I'm not convinced that it's even appropriate there) but certainly isn't appropriate here.  It's one thing to try and convince people of like minds (that's why Limbaugh, Colter, Franken, et al are so popular), but for constructive dialogue it just doesn't work.  There are some in this forum that haven't learned that lesson and only want to hold discussions with people who agree with them.  That's fine, but a person learns little that way.  As for tolerance, the tolerance that you're given only reaches as far as the tolerance that you give the other person.  I try hard to be a tolerant person, especially in here where there are a lot of viewpoints contradictory to my own, but I'm not always successful, and when that happens I tend to think that it's a poor reflection on myself and the person that I try to be.  I have a difficult time trying to have a discussion with someone who makes every effort to be willfully ignorant.

Much of my personality is an extension of my grandfather's, whom I was closest to.  He emigrated from Sweden after WWII, and was a Mormon.  As a result, I tend to be conservative and old fashioned on some issues, but on others I'm liberal and progressive.  The world isn't black and white, and I believe that my thinking should reflect that.

[fatman]

I was not aware of it. If the stories make the news, I've missed it. But then I miss a lot of local news. (I can hear about the supposedly vast array of meth labs and supposedly widespread gang activity [can you tell I'm skeptical?] for only so long before I start ignoring the local news. At least in Louisiana the politics was always fun and interesting.) I did hear today that someplace in Georgia (I think) started cracking down on "aggressive driving", whatever that means. Anyway, my point being that I might be partly at fault here.

I don't necessarily fault you or anyone else, a lot of people have little time these days to research the news that they see.  Most of the news these days is either almost purely entertainment, or skewed and twisted so far one way or the other that it's difficult to distinguish fact, opinion, and fiction.  The story came to me in an email from a friend, when I got it I went to the link, read the story, decided that it wasn't twisted or skewed too far, and felt it worthy to post.  As a general rule, I'm up to date a lot more on local and regional news than I am on national news, for the simple reason that it has the most direct effect on me.  I don't think that there's any kind of major conspiracy to cover up gay bashing stories, I think that it's an issue of people either want to be entertained or hear what they want to hear, and a gay bashing story, with the exception of a few sick people, doesn't fall into that category.  To make a ramble even shorter, I don't fault you for not knowing because the quality of "news" these days is very poor.

Good. Reason #7,896,432 why concealed carry is a good idea.

That's a long story that I might tell another time.  I will say two things about the incident though:  First, even with the gun in my hand pointed at the two ***holes, I've never been so scared or adrenalized in my life.  It took a half hour for my knees to quit shaking after the incident, but my hand and my voice never wavered, and I think that they were more concentrated at the gun being pointed at them than on whether or not my knees were shaking.  Secondly, only about two hours before the person that I was with was chewing me out for packing, using the typical "guns don't solve problems" argument.  Needless to say, he reversed his position on guns in general and actually bought a pistol a week later and asked me to teach him firearm fundamentals, which I was happy to do.  Guns might not solve problems, but they can stop a situation before it becomes one.

I'm sure it is. This stuff never seems to ever really go away. Unfortunately, short of policing what people think, I doubt it ever will.

It will always be around, for the same reason that racism will be:  people are either afraid of people who are different, or as Pooch pointed out, they use it for an excuse to justify their violence or pathology.  I'm too much of a realist to think that either racism or homophobia or a list of other injustices will ever be stamped out.  I do think that it's important to share and educate people about the issue though, this can be done without indoctrination if it's done carefully.  With that method, people who might be averse can at least see the other perspective and know that while they might feel the activity is wrong, it isn't on them to enforce that belief.  I'd like to see less militancy from both sides and more compromise, but that's just me.

[Universe Prince]

First, even with the gun in my hand pointed at the two ***holes, I've never been so scared or adrenalized in my life.

That is probably as it should be. The guys who think waving a firearm around is entertaining are the ones you have to worry about.

Secondly, only about two hours before the person that I was with was chewing me out for packing, using the typical "guns don't solve problems" argument.  Needless to say, he reversed his position on guns in general and actually bought a pistol a week later and asked me to teach him firearm fundamentals, which I was happy to do.  Guns might not solve problems, but they can stop a situation before it becomes one.

Converting the faithless. Cool.

[Plane]

This is all very thought provokeing , especially Stray Pooches insight , which seems new to me.

I think homosexuality is a bad idea , but not so bad that it serves as justifacation of violence , not even nearly.


Is it possible to apply opprobrium mildly? Can a person express disapproval without exciteing idiots to inappropriate violence?


Kudos Fatman for provoking my thinking.

[fatman]

Is it possible to apply opprobrium mildly? Can a person express disapproval without exciteing idiots to inappropriate violence?

Yes.  There is militancy on both sides of this issue, but civil and constructive discussion can yield dividends for both sides.  The key is to keep it civil and to not let the fringe define the whole, the fringe on either side seems to get the most press and that's what the opposing viewpoint sees when they hear about the opposing side.  I'm not a member of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, and you don't believe (or at least I'm pretty sure you don't) that 9/11 and the Iraq War are God's retribution for homosexuality.  We're both adult enough to understand that and to at least tolerate the other's view, even if we don't agree with it.  That's how the discussion should be framed.  The idiots will be violent, as Pooch pointed out, they're just looking for a reason.  I don't hold that against every person against homosexuality, nor should any intelligent person.  But I do believe that you can express your dislike of it, and should be able to, without fear of inciting the fringe.

Kudos Fatman for provoking my thinking.

I certainly appreciate your commentary Plane, and you taking the time to make it.