He said something offensive and trivializing. I don't have to tolerate that.
Ashley Wagner decries Russian anti-gay law
- Thread starter Taan
- Start date
He said something offensive and trivializing. I don't have to tolerate that.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
Seems to me that you have chosen to believe this way about the Russian culture and the Russian people.
I did not say that Duma will 100% represent the wills of the Russian people all the time, just like Canadian parliament does not represent Canadian people all the time, or US congress does not represent US people all the time. However, in this particular case, the duma has represented the Russian people. Well, you don't have to believe it. I'm STILL WAITING for your links about those outrageous low ratings on the law that you have thrown here earlier in this thread. Where is the proof?!
Here I have found one:
Russia’s anti-gay laws in line with public’s views on homosexuality
Astonishingly to learn that only 60% of Americans accepted homosexuality:
The funny thing about this survey result is that it is called global survey, but it has chosen not to show at all or has not even done the survey in Asian countries, South American countries, and African countries.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
Actually 60% is pretty good (that's 3 out of every 5 people) for the States considering the red states who will hate gay people, black people, non-Christians until the cows come home.
"About three-quarters (74%) of Russians said homosexuality should not be accepted by society"
74% doesn't equal 90%, last time I checked. And no worries, the fossilized 50 y/o+ bigots will eventually die and that number will drop.
"About three-quarters (74%) of Russians said homosexuality should not be accepted by society"
74% doesn't equal 90%, last time I checked. And no worries, the fossilized 50 y/o+ bigots will eventually die and that number will drop.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
I'd say that you are intentionally sharpening and creating conflicts if you say that the red states people "hate gay people, black people, non-Christians".
I have already said where 90% came from in my previous posts. Where do your 42%, 25% come from? Made up on the spot?
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
I told you, my best friend's next door neighbour's relatives in Russia swear that it's 20-29%. And they live in Russia, so it must be accurate. What further proof do you need?
Also, my massage therapist's name is Svetlana - which is totally a Russian name - if that helps legitimize her corresponding 35% suggestion.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
You said some article said 42%. Some newscast said 25%. Links?!
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
You're right... they're bastions of tolerance and non-discrimination. :sarcasm:
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
They come from the same source where that 90%+ stat comes from.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
Thanks for making this thread a bit humorous!
It's the least I can do, considering your posts make me laugh all the time.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
However, even though 74% of Russians do not accept homosexuality, when it comes to children, I have reason to believe that that number will be a lot higher. That's where the difference between 74% and 90%+ comes from.
Look at those chilling videos and articles about gay propaganda among Kindergarteners and elementary school kids in the east states of US! I wish US has such a law to prevent it from infringing upon the young minds. The public schools have forbidden teaching religions, and such take has been accepted by everyone, religous people and non-religous people. Why do they allow such radical way of thinking into their school curriculum?!
Look at those chilling videos and articles about gay propaganda among Kindergarteners and elementary school kids in the east states of US! I wish US has such a law to prevent it from infringing upon the young minds. The public schools have forbidden teaching religions, and such take has been accepted by everyone, religous people and non-religous people. Why do they allow such radical way of thinking into their school curriculum?!
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
I'm not following... is this 90% your (and sky_fly's) speculative belief or is it actually supported by a reliable source? You seem to be getting less and less sure of this stat...
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
Bluebonnet, what is "gay propaganda"? Is it anything that tell kids that gay people aren't evil and that they should be treated the same way as everyone else? Ooooh, how chilling. Do you know how many gay parents there are? There is no indication that their children are suffering. I have read, however, that children of lesbian parents tend to have more empathy compared to those who grow up in other homes. The horror! There are no indications that the children who grow up with LGBT parents are likelier to be gay. Put it this way: Dan Savage, who is an outspoken gay activist, has a straight son. What gay indoctrination? What damaging message are children getting? This is not comparable to not teaching religion, it is comparable to teaching kids that racism and bigotry are wrong. Which they are. And you're condoning bias and discrimination against LGBT people, basically because you're squicked out by them. That is not a good reason to deny people their rights and treat them like pariahs.
Also, you keep linking homosexuality with pedophilia, which is gross. Same-sex attraction is not the same thing, by any stretch of the imagination, as attraction toward children. If Russian people believe this, well, Russian people are wrong. Ignorance, bigotry and bias are not things to be proud of.
Kudos to Ashley Wagner for having the guts to say something about the situation in Russia rather than waiting for others to do so.
Also, you keep linking homosexuality with pedophilia, which is gross. Same-sex attraction is not the same thing, by any stretch of the imagination, as attraction toward children. If Russian people believe this, well, Russian people are wrong. Ignorance, bigotry and bias are not things to be proud of.
Kudos to Ashley Wagner for having the guts to say something about the situation in Russia rather than waiting for others to do so.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
The 90%+ is just what I have said, "I have reason to believe". I did not claim that it was from some articles or from some newscast but no links like you did.
What is "squick"? I honestly don't know what you are talking about?
My objection is on opening a new perspective, a new life, and a new way of living to innocent young children who do not know what to follow. It confuses them. It will lead them to experimenting. Go search. You will find that children who grow up in homosexual families have much higher rate in becoming homosexuals themselves. Although, it is much too little on such researches. Wait for another 50 years. There will be a lot more clearer pictures.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
You know, heterosexual "propaganda" is extremely prevalent in society, and heterosexual relationships are far more common than gay ones, and in many cases are the only normatively sanctioned ones. Yet incredibly, gay kids remain gay, even in the face of all this propaganda! Do you know why that is? Because they are gay. They can't change that. The same is true for straight kids: they can't change that even if they wanted. But if they want to experiment with their sexuality once they are past the age of consent, well, how exactly is that your business?
There is nothing wrong with being gay. There is something wrong with expressing bigotry towards gays. BTW, you do realize that you interact with LGBT people and their freinds and family all the time, both at GS and in real life? How would you feel if people were to describe whatever group you belong to the way you discuss LGBT folks?
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
Who cares if you are gay! Did I say it was my business to mind what they are experimenting when they grow up?!!! I was talking about the five to ten year old kids! The kids of other people! Not the homosexual parent's kids! You are distracting the issue! I said chilling. Yes, Chilling! If you dare, go to read my post #47 in "Sasha Cohen on Gay Rights in Russia and the Olympics" thread in politics folder. That's the reason that we should have a law like the Russians have and put a Stop on such radical movement!
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
Well, clearly you do mind gay relationships, or you wouldn't insist that hearing about them is so damaging to kids. Also, I am not "distracting" the issue. I am pointing out the ridiculousness of your statements - which, of course, you cannot back up with any scientifically rigorous research.
So basically you are claiming that kids with gay parents, who are exposed to healthy gay relationships every day, will not seek to emulate them by "experimenting" at a young age, but kids with straight parents who might hear about homosexuality (say, in school) will? That doesn't even make any sense. Do many kids experiment with heterosexual sex at the age of 5-10? And I don't mean by playing doctor or playing with themselves.
You really need to inform yourself on these issues, Bluebonnet. At the moment you are making a lot of uninformed and frankly offensive arguments.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
New Study On Homosexual Parents Tops All Previous Research
You confuse the young children. You plant a seed for identity confusion and crisis later when they are teens. They will experiment at that time which otherwise they won't. That is my take. You really need to inform yourself about children I should say.
http://www.forthechildreninc.com/issues/homosexuality/BadForChildren.html
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
Stop sourcing biased websites like the Family Research Council and ForTheChildren (which is tied to the FRC). These are the same people who would rather that a mother gives birth to a baby, even if the mother can't afford to raise it, the baby stemmed from rape, or if the childbirth would kill the mother. They're so outrageously backwards thinking and bigoted in their religious fundamentalism that using them as a reference nullifies any legitimate argument you might ever attempt to make.
If you want to inform yourself or use links to support your points, use a legitimate source like a credible news source (Fox doesn't count) or a reputable scientific journal. Not stats reported by people who are paid to publish "findings" that support the FRC's agenda.
If you want to inform yourself or use links to support your points, use a legitimate source like a credible news source (Fox doesn't count) or a reputable scientific journal. Not stats reported by people who are paid to publish "findings" that support the FRC's agenda.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
I had every possible "seed" for heterosexuality planted in me growing up and yet here I am, a gay man. So much for that assertion.
Your first study (eg New Study on Homosexual Parents...) has been the subject of much debate, particularly because of flawed methodology, a problem acknowledged even by its own author:
In “The New Family Structure Study,” Regnerus asked 3,000 adults ages 18-39 (including 248 with parents in a gay relationship) questions about their income levels, mental and physical health, romantic relationships and other markers.
Social scientists and LGBT activists raised red flags from the get-go: Regnerus, whose work was published in the journal Social Science Research, only examined people who had a parent in a gay relationship at some point—not necessarily while they were children. And he didn’t ask subjects to specify if the gay parent was in a stable relationship through their childhood.
But now even he admits there are flaws in his research. ThinkProgress pulled up an interview Regnerus did with anti-gay group Focus on the Family, where he explained:
I’d be more careful about the language I used to describe people whose parents had same-sex relationships. I said ‘lesbian mothers’ and ‘gay fathers,’ when in fact, I don’t know about their sexual orientation—I do know about their same-sex relationship behavior. But as far as the findings themselves, I stand behind them.
Regnerus also confesses he didn’t try to dissect the children’s concept of their parent’s sexuality because, “self-identity is a different kind of thing than behavior, and lot of people weren’t out in that era.”
Full story here: http://www.queerty.com/regnurus-adm...ed-by-fundamentalists-20121030/#ixzz2gblPzpXT
As far as your second, released by For the Children Inc. oy veh. The study they cite was conducted by Dr Paul Cameron. From wikipedia:
For the most part, official scientific organisations have paid very little attention to Cameron's studies, and thus extensive scientific analysis of his claims have not been widely available. However Cameron's research, public statements and legal testimony have received criticism from researchers and organizations over methodologies they view as academically dishonest and misleading.
From professional organizations
The American Psychological Association (APA) launched an investigation into Cameron after receiving complaints about his work from members.[3][4] The APA President Max Seigel sent Cameron a letter on December 2, 1983 stating that the Board of Directors had decided to drop him from membership for failure to cooperate with their investigation.[22] FRI has contended that Cameron had already resigned from the organization in November 1982, citing correspondence from before his formal expulsion.[23] In a letter published in the March 1983 edition of the APA Monitor, Cameron stated that his reasons for leaving included his opinion that the organization was becoming more of a "liberal PAC" than a professional society.[24] The APA, however, does not allow the resignation of a member who is the subject of an ethics investigation.[25] An APA spokesperson told The Boston Globe in 2005, "We are concerned about Dr. Cameron because we do believe that his methodology is weak."[4]
In 1984 the Nebraska Psychological Association issued a statement disassociating itself "from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron".[4] In 1986 the American Sociological Association passed a resolution stating, “The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research.”[26] This was based on a report from the ASA's Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, which summarised Cameron's inflammatory statements and commented, "It does not take great analytical abilities to suspect from even a cursory review of Cameron's writings that his claims have almost nothing to do with social science and that social science is used only to cover over another agenda. Very little of his work could find support from even a bad misreading of genuine social science investigation on the subject and some sociologists, such as Alan Bell, have been 'appalled' at the abuse of their work."[27] In 1996, the Board of Directors of the Canadian Psychological Association approved a position statement disassociating the organisation from Cameron's work on sexuality, stating that he had "consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism".[28]
In both cases, you are citing "research"--a term I use loosely here--that violates normative practices such as letting the findings shape any conclusions reached. Instead it is polemical. Its authors have predetermined the findings they wish to see, and have shaped the "research" accordingly.
Full story here: http://www.queerty.com/regnurus-adm...ed-by-fundamentalists-20121030/#ixzz2gblPzpXT
Similar threads
- Locked
