1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

You guys remember this discussion?

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout' started by BrianKagy, Apr 26, 2000.

  1. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    Hint: presidential prospects, Gary Bauer, gay-rights activist posing as a campaign volunteer (and as a reporter)...?

    "You're Under Arrest for Illegal Doorknob Licking!

    Slate, not Salon! [​IMG]



    ------------------
    Anyone who advocates the use of violence should be beaten, tortured, and killed (painfully if possible).
     
  2. Rocketman95

    Rocketman95 Hangout Boy

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    48,946
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    The correct outcome for a sick individual, I hope he gets the book thrown at him. I'm pretty sure I'm correct when I believe that this idividual does not represent the gay rights activists in any way.

    Despite how I may feel about the person he was trying to get sick, that is just wholly inappropriate.

    There's a fine line between protest and idiocy.

    ------------------
    Get your proper swirve on...visit www.swirve.com (coming in late May, for now visit www.eesite.com)

    [This message has been edited by Rocketman95 (edited April 26, 2000).]
     
  3. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    I don't know, RM95, a lot of the gay rights activists out there have long since passed from reasonable lobbying to complete radicalism.

    Some of that is thanks to our media, which covers the dog that barks the loudest, but a lot of that is also caused by the leadership of groups like ACT-UP.

    ------------------
    Anyone who advocates the use of violence should be beaten, tortured, and killed (painfully if possible).
     
  4. TheFreak

    TheFreak Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 1999
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    3,194
    I hear Axl Rose is a big fan of Act-Up.

    ------------------
    "Okay KG, next time down, you give Cousin Billy his turn, then he'll give Uncle Joe his turn, then we'll give Shaq a turn."

    -Rudy T, in the Dream Team 2000 huddle
     
  5. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,383
    Likes Received:
    15,808
    I don't know, RM95, a lot of the gay rights activists out there have long since passed from reasonable lobbying to complete
    radicalism.


    Sure, but that's the case with most groups with causes. Anti-Abortion groups have the same problem. People who believe in that cause have to deal with the extremist bombers the same way. Some environmental groups have similar issues. In all cases, I would say the average activist-supporter would agree that these kinds of things hurt their cause more than help.


    ------------------
    Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

    I didnt think so!!!!

    [This message has been edited by shanna (edited April 26, 2000).]
     
  6. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    No. Wrong, wrong, wrong. That is the case with only a very, very few political advocacy groups in America. The vast majority are not defined by the actions of their fringe membership or by radical leadership, as ACT-UP or PETA are.

    The AARP is the largest lobbying group in America. Would you like to point out to me how they are similarly "completely radical"...?

    Or FairTax.org-- I suppose you can point out to me as incident where they occupied the IRS' offices or splashed IRS employees with red paint?

    Labor unions. The NAACP. Planned Parenthood. "Completely radical"?

    I am not talking about three college students in a dorm room forming "SPITT: Students Protesting International Table Tennis". I am talking about established PACs that are treated as mainstream entities but whose agendas are so radical that they leave most Americans scratching their heads in wonder.

    (PS: Today is April 26th, 2000 where I am. My favorite dog's name was Bucky. I am wearing a white linen shirt with a Kenneth Cole tie. This concludes the section of my post that shanna cannot disagree with. Thank you.)

    ------------------
    Anyone who advocates the use of violence should be beaten, tortured, and killed (painfully if possible).
     
  7. Achebe

    Achebe Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 1999
    Messages:
    6,237
    Likes Received:
    2
    BK:
    I think that's all the qualification that Shanna needs. [​IMG]

    For those of us that have some semblance of respect for William F. (but ardently disagree with him) and still need [​IMG] to categorize their conservative (what a ridiculous word, ehhh?) opponents:

    Q: do you see any effectiveness in radicalism in today's movements in making the moderate side more attractive?

    (i.e. would the Sierra Club have had an upswing in membership were it not for Greenpeace?)

    I just like to separate those that I disagree with (you know the kind, they think that pbs and npr are 'liberal') from those that can maintain a coherent conversation.

    [This message has been edited by Achebe (edited April 26, 2000).]
     
  8. sir scarvajal

    sir scarvajal Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 1999
    Messages:
    679
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think Shanna's basic point that there are radicals (or "reactionaries" if you want to use a more specific term for radical conservatives) throughout the political spectrum is right on. Some are more associated with the left (Earth First! is a better example than Greenpeace, PETA) some are associated with the right (Operation Rescue, Republic of Texas).

    Further, I think saying the Gay-rights movements are lead by in-your-face "radicals" is about as big of a sweeping generalization as saying all NRA members are a bunch of trigger happy "gun nuts". Neither stereotype serves much good in terms of contributing to public discourse.

    BTW-I was just surfing a bit, who would have thought these groups existed--"Libertarians for Life" or "Pro Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians". Politics and sets of personal views come in many colors.

    ------------------
     
  9. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    I still disagree on that point, sir scaraval.

    I said:
    shanna said:
    The issue is not whether there are nuts on both the left and right. It's whether, as shanna's statement implies, most political causes are most visibly represented by leadership or groups that are far outside what most Americans consider mainstream.

    That's why I cited those groups. Think about all the political advocacy groups out there.

    Now how many of them can you honestly say are engaged in (or, as my 2nd post indicated, portrayed as engaged in) truly radical behavior of the sort that ACT UP embraces?

    Are you really willing to say, as shanna so casually did, it's "most" of them?

    Hardly.

    ------------------
    Anyone who advocates the use of violence should be beaten, tortured, and killed (painfully if possible).
     
  10. Rocketman95

    Rocketman95 Hangout Boy

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    48,946
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    I really don't think shanna meant most groups with causes meaning the NAACP or Planned Parenthood and the like. I think he/she meant to say that most causes have radical groups.

    Just a guess, shanna can correct me if I'm wrong.

    I do agree however that a vocal minority has more influence than the silent majority. While there are a few gay rights activists who are like this sick individual, most are not. Just like some of the pro-life activists like to kill doctors, the vast majority do not.

    ------------------
    Get your proper swirve on...visit www.swirve.com (coming in late May, for now visit www.eesite.com)
     
  11. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    It wouldn't surprise me if you are right, RM95.

    I mean, shanna said that "most groups with causes" have the problem of being defined publicly by radical leadership. That's obviously wrong, so it wouldn't surprise me if she suddenly decided that she didn't mean "most groups with causes"; instead, she meant only that the gay-rights lobby's not alone in its portrayal.

    Which I implied, in my 2nd post, anyway.

    ------------------
    Anyone who advocates the use of violence should be beaten, tortured, and killed (painfully if possible).
     
  12. sir scarvajal

    sir scarvajal Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 1999
    Messages:
    679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oops, I wrote out a fairly long post and you (Brian) pretty much took care of many of my points between posts, but anyway--

    BK, as you do, I would also disagree with the statement that most political groups or movements for causes express their views in extreme ways. Similarly, in the vein of one of your point, probably most policatical groups have very focused and specific policy objectives (e.g., this tax incentive if it related to ones interest, that tax penalty if it isn't).

    My main attempted contribution to the thread was that there are extremists throughout the political landscape, especially regarding "social issues" or "human rights issues" to use such a broad brush. I think this is what Shanna was getting at, but I could be wrong about that (she can clarify her position if she wishes). If this isn't what she meant, this is where I would have liked to take the thread anyway.

    Further, there are some groups of social issues that emphasize a style of discourse to advance their issues that most people find acceptable. Some of these groups are pro-life (e.g., Catholics for Life), some are for gay-rights (e.g., Log Cabin Republicans--as someone pointed out, PFLAG-Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), some are for vitually any other issue. Not that I am personally active in the before mentioned groups (though I do have friends and family involved--both some more conservative, and others more liberal in orientation), but I would certainly not characterize the gay-rights movement as any more radical than the pro-life or gun rights movements are reactionary--which seemed to be some underlying currents reflected in the thread. I think if someone says something to the contrary in terms of these movements methods of persuation or strategies to create discourse they haven't had much exposure to people in the movements they are making--and stating--their generalizations about. I would not have started posting about this stuff except for the latter part (the stating part) because that could misinform others.



    [This message has been edited by sir scarvajal (edited April 26, 2000).]
     
  13. MoonBus

    MoonBus Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 1999
    Messages:
    1,102
    Likes Received:
    55
    Maybe in fear of being audited?
     
  14. grummett

    grummett Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    1,053
    Likes Received:
    38
    While I agree that ACT-UP and GLAAD have been the predominant "spokesgroups" for gay issues in the past, the Log Cabin Republicans are being seen more often lately as an alternative voice. This is a very welcome change.

    ------------------
     
  15. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,383
    Likes Received:
    15,808
    No. Wrong, wrong, wrong. That is the case with only a very, very few political advocacy groups in America. The vast majority are not defined by the actions of their fringe membership or by radical leadership, as ACT-UP or PETA are.

    Ummm, you *completely* missed my point. All *CAUSES* have radicals, and activist groups have to deal with the negatives associated with that. Whether left or right, every cause that evokes strong emotions has to deal with a small group of individuals that is going to go to the extreme for that cause.

    Characterizing the radical gay activists as representing a substantial part of the gay activist community is as ignorant as claiming that abortion bombers represent a substantial part of the anti-abortion community.


    ------------------
    Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

    I didnt think so!!!!

    [This message has been edited by shanna (edited April 28, 2000).]
     
  16. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,383
    Likes Received:
    15,808
    I mean, shanna said that "most groups with causes" have the problem of being defined publicly by radical leadership. That's obviously wrong,

    If you'd actually read for content instead of semantics, you would have understood the rest of the post that explained that sentence. You know, the part about how anti-abortion groups have to deal with extremists in their cause. And how that HURTS THE CAUSE. Just as there are extremist gay rights activists, there are extremist activists in MOST GROUPS WITH CAUSES.

    But of course, it's much easier to try to discredit an argument when you focus on one sentence out of context instead of actually trying to read and understand the post. Everyone else understood this just fine.


    ------------------
    Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

    I didnt think so!!!!

    [This message has been edited by shanna (edited April 28, 2000).]
     
  17. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    Of course I missed the point. We have been over this ground before. When we disagree, it is obviously because I lack your intellect and subject matter expertise.

    You know, I had written a nice long rebuttal to your post when the thought hit me: it isn't going to matter what I say.

    You were wrong.

    It was obvious.

    And you especially don't like having me of all people point it out.

    Look, without the benefit of being either a) a ****ing mind-reader, or b) you, let me tell you exactly how your opinion read:

    Most political action groups experience the problems of radical action by their membership just like gay-rights groups.

    That is asinine. As the examples I cited show, the majority of political lobbying groups don't engage in the sort of behavior that ACT UP has made so identifiable with gay rights activism.

    If anyone is indulging in semantics, it is you. You're the one who, in response to my statement that "Golly, gay rights activism is increasingly marred by radical behavior/leadership", you chose to interject, "So are most of the groups out there".

    Now, after I've pointed out how ridiculous that is, you're saying, "Oh come on, everyone can tell I didn't mean what I said, I meant something almost entirely different. Let me try some specious word-parsing to convince you".

    The issue is not whether that kind of conduct hurts a group. NO KIDDING. I am well aware that is does. The issue is your flippant and poorly thought-out claim that most groups deal with the same problems. That's what I took issue with. Pointing out how right the rest of your post was doesn't change the fact that you were wrong.

    ------------------
    Anyone who advocates the use of violence should be beaten, tortured, and killed (painfully if possible).
     
  18. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,383
    Likes Received:
    15,808
    Look, without the benefit of being either a) a ****ing mind-reader, or b) you, let me tell you exactly how your opinion read:

    Odd, don't you think, how everyone else except you seemed to understand it?

    The issue is your flippant and poorly thought-out claim that most groups deal with the same problems.


    Most *CAUSES* (see, the word CAUSES, not GROUPS... as I've already clarified) have this issue to deal with. Notice that in my anti-abortion example (the content of the first post...) I mentioned a CAUSE (anti-abortion), not a GROUP. Is this really that difficult to understand? Apparently not for anyone else..



    ------------------
    Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

    I didnt think so!!!!
     
  19. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    Groups, shanna. Not causes.

    Groups again, in your own words.

    Groups again.

    Here I mention causes and again point out your error. Wow, it's almost like I understand your brilliance.

    Please, continue with your semantics and word-parsing. I don't usually get to laugh this much in the morning.



    ------------------
    Anyone who advocates the use of violence should be beaten, tortured, and killed (painfully if possible).
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now