Black Preacher destroys the "Gay is the New Black" argument
- Thread starter blackslash
- Start date
Nah its not...
What is my issue with the constant push of the idea that the issue of marriage between two homosexuals being a civil rights issue and being compared to black struggle?
Simply put, they are trying to push the idea that gays cant get married when in fact they can..but because the definition of marriage doesnt institute the union they desire they call it civil rights issue when no, it is not.
As for the act...well...within the constructs of my worldview homosexuality is another form of sexual perversion that is being promoted as a virtue in the states
Now ofc within the constructs of ur nihilistic "all is permitted" worldview this sounds
but as I said..ofc it will ur worldview is a nihilistic one
The pastor conflates a number of important issues and makes some pretty bad arguments. Unfortunately for him, his opinion is becoming increasingly irrelevant in the Black community, including the more religious demographic.
examples bro?
examples bro?
Examples of what?
of bad arguments
FALSE.
Until EARLY this year, this was NOT the case.
Don't minimize this shyt as if it was never a big fukking deal
Marriage is a legal term defined by societies that limit it.
In mexico "marriage" is signified by two-year term limits in which people can resign contracts.
There are different rules to it everywhere...and rules can change.
So are blowjobs.
None of which matters.Now ofc within the constructs of ur nihilistic "all is permitted" worldview this sounds
Co-sign on the self-identification vs. visual identification.
That alone should show that they're not in the same league
That alone should show that they're not in the same league
1. I don't think the issues are the same or the struggles are similar...in fact NO MOVEMENT IS SIMILAR INHERENTLY TO ANY OTHER MOVEMENT...there can only be comparisons
2. Gays deserve their autonomy in my view
3. Until LITERALLY weeks ago, there was a civil rights issue gays faced that shouldn't be minimized.
The issue isn't about identification, its about legal access to the law.
Being racist isn't illegal, but PREVENTING ACCESS TO EQUALITY is.
Thats the similarity.
Anti-gay folks reframe the argument to make themselves the victim, and thats not the issue.
The ONLY reason I disagree with the gay propaganda is because they don't do enough to say that they don't mean the issues are the same, but that what they're SEEKING is the same.
Racial minorities sought THE SAME legal recognition and autonomy that gays are seeking.
The context is different, but the END GOALS ARE THE SAME
Removing govt. from marriage altogether is the answer.
Civil unions should be all that is offered, and property disputes should be the extent of their function. IMHO
Pipe dream
See this is why I answered ur questions with questions earlier...ur retort is one that stands ont he ground of ur nihilist worldview
You asked for my beef with it and I told u my beef with it on the acct of my worldview but you take that adopt my answer and interpret it with ur nihilistic worldview and then retort as if the answer was meant to be interpreted as such....
So as I said ur question for me was alrdy useless to begin with but lets discuss what we were discussing earlier which is the article
P.S Gays can get married and were always able to..what gays are asking for is a redefinition of marriage and calling it a civil rights issue which is false..the article touches on this in more depth
Ok. The very first argument in the block of quoted text is a straw man.
The preacher mentions conflating race and sexuality, but no one is doing that. Not even the majority of homosexuals themselves believe that they're the same, or that Black people and gay people have suffered the same. The argument is specifically that race and homosexuality are both identity traits that people can't control and that don't inherently hurt anyone, and so shouldn't be grounds for unequal treatment in terms of access to legal institutions like marriage. So he hasn't actually addressed the argument for gay marriage, but put up a straw man.
That's one example.
Probably.
... but there shouldnt be any rights or tax credits attached to loving some one. IMO
