Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Little Joe who wrote (133592)	3/27/2001 10:38:48 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

I have posted on the health hazards of the male gay life style. Yet, have you ever seen article in the mainstream press that discusses these problems? I haven't seen one in a very long time. There used to be lots and lots of them. The press was saturated with this issue in the early days of AIDS. It doesn't seem to be a hot issue any longer. You suggest that's because the gay lobby is controlling the debate. Perhaps, but I think it's mainly because gays, on average, have indeed become more conventional, those that survived the flamboyant days. I have seen one debate in the mainstream media where the Anti-Gay side was represented by an intelligent and thoughtful person. Normally any person who opposes the so-called gay rights bills is a jerk from the religious right, not even a thoughtful religious person. I agree with you that gays have been pretty smart about choosing their representatives while the front men for the the religious right doesn't seem to get it. An effective movement keeps its screwballs under control and in the background. If this is your point about the left being more effective than the right, I agree, but I don't see any movement on the left other than the gays being good at it. Blacks are even worse at it than the religious right. Jackson, Sharpton, Farakhan, Waters. Mercy. The examples you give of rewritten textbooks and the homeless are two more examples of old news, IMO. You said yourself that the homeless don't get press any more and the textbooks were rewritten a long time ago. My data is strictly anecdotal, but I don't hear speeches about "dead white men" any more. I think we're over that and that the teaching history is starting to normalize. Regarding the environmental movement, I'll pass on that one. It's too complicated an issue to attribute to left vs. right. It's been my observation, though, that the extreme environmentalists--the ones that spike trees--have totally lost credence within the environmental movement. I know that the religious right has goofy ideas also. However, they are totally ineffective in promoting them. This is because they mostly rely on their interpretation of the Bible and they assume the Bible is the ultimate authority on everything. Most Americans see right through this and mostly ignore what they say. I agree that most Americans see right through it, but it's still not acceptable to not give lip service to it in public. When people can say what you just said and still get elected, then I'll agree with you that the religious right is not a threat. Karen