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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (154196)	12/16/2004 2:08:51 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Plenty of conservatives are fine with civil unions, which will afford all the legal rights that are required. The controversy over gay marriage has to do with "social ecology", that is, the reluctance to take such a big step as the redefinition of marriage, without the formation of a societal consensus on the issue.

To: epicure who wrote (154196)	12/16/2004 2:11:04 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Good post ionesco Where I grew up, a white government had a racial law that allowed blacks to have multiple wives, but whites could not. What is US law on either visitors or immigrants from countries that sanction polygamy? Anyone know?

To: epicure who wrote (154196)	12/16/2004 3:52:59 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Not surprisingly, I see it a bit differently from how you do. While the attack on Christianity is cloaked in religious terms, in point of fact, as your subsequent discussion with neocon and others has shown, the attack is not on Christianity but on conventional morality and values. Those who defend these values I suppose find it worthwhile to define the debate in religious terms. But it isn't necessarily about religion at all. I'm sure there are lots of atheists and agnostics as well as any number of non-Christians who agree that there is in fact an attack on conventional values and morality. And it is not just about homosexuals. It's primarily about the moral and aesthetic offensiveness of mass popular culture. <rant/on>Despite being a fairly tolerant individual, I find that most current popular music is ugly, movies are ugly, athletes are often stupid and amoral, actors are arrogant, amoral and stupid, architecture, with few exceptions is grotesque, the media is often dishonest and purposefully stupid, fashions are ugly, most modern art sucks, many books are stupid [as proven by the ____ For Dummies line], mass television is incredibly ugly and stupid, and mass fast food is an abomination. In other words, we have unconsciously adopted stupid, ugly and amoral as the paradigms to rule our current popular culture and, indeed, a goodly portion of our way of life. The poor gay folks are unfortunately a lightning rod for other, more valid, objections which are on the whole unrecognized because they have come upon us so slowly yet so pervasively.<rant/off>