What religion/faith are you?

[Amaris]

If they are married it's fine.
I don't want to see anyone standing on the podium with their Flavor Of The Week.
It cheapens the position of Elected Official.

It’s unfortunate that you see such a relationship as cheap.

 

[Discofan]

If they are married it's fine.
I don't want to see anyone standing on the podium with their Flavor Of The Week.
It cheapens the position of Elected Official.

Some people live with the same person for decades without being married. Why this obsession with marriage? It's not even a guaranty of faithfulness!!

 

[Nakita Akita]

I never had any doubt.

My best friend is a lesbian. I've had numerous gay and lesbian friends.
I've had numerous straight friends.
There are certain things
I DON'T want to Hear about, hear in reality, or see.
Period.
Straight, gay, etc.
it's not about religion, I felt the same when I was Wiccan.
But I want to thank everyone for ASSuming that they know me oh and labeling me would be a good thing now also.
So please, feel free.

 

[Nakita Akita]

Some people live with the same person for decades without being married. Why this obsession with marriage? It's not even a guaranty of faithfulness!!

It's a level of commitment.
If an elected official csnt make a commitment to another human, what can be his/her commitment to the elected office?

 

[PSGarak]

Sorry, you don't get to phrase things in very specific ways that imply very specific things and then cry victim when people take your phrasing exactly as it sounds. You could have said, "No, it's not an LGBT thing at all, it's that I hate PDAs and don't think people who aren't married can have serious relationships." If you don't want people making assumptions after you "clarify," be clearer. It's as simple as that.

 

[Nakita Akita]

It comes down to perspective. You consider it too much information because you're not looking for that kind of detail about someone's life, but if you were gay, and you saw a politician bring his/her same sex partner up to the podium, you might start hoping that person understands what it's like to be in the minority, might understand what representation really means for people who have been marginalized in the past.

I would rather know their position on tax policy, gun control, abortion, school tax levy,
Getting rid of the electoral college, you know actual issues rather than "golly, she's into dating really heavy black men with beards! Just like Me!!!"
It isn't all about me. It's what good for the country as a whole.

 

[Discofan]

It's a level of commitment.
If an elected official csnt make a commitment to another human, what can be his/her commitment to the elected office?

That's excluding people based on details that are irrelevant to their skills as politicians (assuming that requires any skills at all but that's another debate).
Someone can have a wife and kids and be a thief while someone else will be single and childless and be honesty personified.

 

[Amaris]

I would rather know their position on tax policy, gun control, abortion, school tax levy,
Getting rid of the electoral college, you know actual issues rather than "golly, she's into dating really heavy black men with beards! Just like Me!!!"
It isn't all about me. It's what good for the country as a whole.

Are you certain that’s what it’s about?

 

[PSGarak]

I would rather know their position on tax policy, gun control, abortion, school tax levy,
Getting rid of the electoral college, you know actual issues rather than "golly, she's into dating really heavy black men with beards! Just like Me!!!"
It isn't all about me. It's what good for the country as a whole.

The very fact that you equate someone's sexual orientation with a preference for dating a type says volumes. There is a huge difference between, "This candidate is openly gay," and "This candidate likes to date people with beards." A mixed race relationship might actually imply the person will be more concerned with human rights for minorities. If I were a minority, that would be very relevant to me. Just because you don't care to hear it doesn't make it irrelevant. You are, in fact, making it all about you.

 

[Nakita Akita]

The very fact that you equate someone's sexual orientation with a preference for dating a type says volumes. There is a huge difference between, "This candidate is openly gay," and "This candidate likes to date people with beards." A mixed race relationship might actually imply the person will be more concerned with human rights for minorities. If I were a minority, that would be very relevant to me. Just because you don't care to hear it doesn't make it irrelevant. You are, in fact, making it all about you.

I didn't say anything about mixed race relationships. Beards yes, mixed race no.
So don't add other issues into the mix because you perceive incorrectly my race or whatever you are trying to do.

 

[Timewalker]

Really??????!!!
I've heard of frogs "changing sex"
But there is proof of two male penguins producing offspring?????
Fascinating!

That is NOT what I said.

In addition there are hundreds of species where the male takes care of the young.
Even in species like wolves, a male may stay with the offspring while the mother goes and hunts, for various reasons.
I'm not sure why makes taking care of the young was even mentioned.
Not sure what it has to do with religion.

The question was not if a male could take care of an offspring, it's that a pair of males could adopt a young or an egg in the case of the Penguins once it's been abandoned by the female that laid it. As for the relevance with this thread, it's pretty obvious. It's the religious right that keeps objecting to two men or two women raising a child together.

Exactly. Some people flipped out when they read about two male penguins bonding in a monogamous relationship, and were insistent that the zoo should not allow this. They were concerned that the children coming to the zoo to see the penguins would have their precious morals corrupted. And heaven forbid that the penguins should teach the chick they adopted about their "immoral lifestyle." (yes, I'm serious - these were some of the comments made about the article)

There are lots of species where the male raises or takes care of the young.
Those are various animal species.
Penguins are animals.
There seems to be no information where one of the male penguins became pregnant and then laid the egg.

Oh, come on. This has to be willful confusion, because nobody who knows anything about biology could honestly think that a male penguin could lay an egg. The male provides fertilization, and after the egg is laid the male is perfectly capable of caring for both the egg and the resulting chick - he has to if the female should die or be killed, or if she decides to abandon her offspring.

And I don't think anyone objects to two males or two females raising human children. Surely there are millions of children raised in that situation.

Do you never watch or read the news? There are many bigoted people who object to same-sex parents.

The objection comes in when the two males or two females act in a sexual nature towards one another.

Why is that yours or anyone else's business? Back in the late 1960s, Pierre Trudeau (when he was Minister of Justice, before he became Prime Minister; he's the father of our current PM, Justin Trudeau) made a famous statement: "There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation." He was referring to homosexual relationships, when he decriminalized them, but this is every bit as relevant now.

Really, people just can't keep their private lives private.

Far too many candidates seem to think that listing their church activities will make me want to vote for them. Instead, it tells me that these are people I don't want to have political power, since some of them can't keep their beliefs out of the legislation they're involved in drafting.

It's a level of commitment.
If an elected official csnt make a commitment to another human, what can be his/her commitment to the elected office?

Some divorces are actually for the best, and free the politician to focus on their constituents, rather than his/her failed marriage.

 

[PSGarak]

I didn't say anything about mixed race relationships. Beards yes, mixed race no.
So don't add other issues into the mix because you perceive incorrectly my race or whatever you are trying to do.

You specifically brought up race as part of a preferred dating type. I provided an example where knowing someone's dating type *might* inform you as to their position on civil rights, such as in a situation where it is a mixed race couple. The rest of what you mentioned, beards and whatnot, has no bearing on anything.

As for, "my best friend is a lesbian," you can still be friends with someone and hold bias. The fact that you are sitting here willfully ignoring multiple people telling you how knowing someone's sexual orientation can be illustrative not only of their politics but of their being able to empathize with being marginalized in society says that maybe you need to take a closer look at your biases, because they are quite evident in everything you've said on this topic. The fact that it doesn't apply to you personally does not make something irrelevant or something people should keep to themselves. I don't have kids and don't particularly have an interest in a lot of issues involving them. That doesn't mean it's irrelevant that a candidate is a parent. That could say a lot about their position on childcare, parental leave, all sorts of things. Not relevant to me personally =/= not relevant.

 

[Nakita Akita]

You specifically brought up race as part of a preferred dating type. I provided an example where knowing someone's dating type *might* inform you as to their position on civil rights, such as in a situation where it is a mixed race couple. The rest of what you mentioned, beards and whatnot, has no bearing on anything.

As for, "my best friend is a lesbian," you can still be friends with someone and hold bias. The fact that you are sitting here willfully ignoring multiple people telling you how knowing someone's sexual orientation can be illustrative not only of their politics but of their being able to empathize with being marginalized in society says that maybe you need to take a closer look at your biases, because they are quite evident in everything you've said on this topic. The fact that it doesn't apply to you personally does not make something irrelevant or something people should keep to themselves. I don't have kids and don't particularly have an interest in a lot of issues involving them. That doesn't mean it's irrelevant that a candidate is a parent. That could say a lot about their position on childcare, parental leave, all sorts of things. Not relevant to me personally =/= not relevant.

Okay thanks

 

[PSGarak]

Okay thanks

Sure thing.

 

[Avro Arrow]

@Nakita Akita , I do not want to see another thread get derailed by your intolerance. Please stop.

Everyone, back to the topic, please.

 

[Doom Shepherd]

The previous has been an adequate demonstration of my point about religious and quasi-religious enthusiasm. Negative enthusiasm, (when you hate a thing, be it DSC, PDA, or minority representation in film, or pineapple on pizza) especially makes one susceptible to the crazy.

 

[Discofan]

The previous has been an adequate demonstration of my point about religious and quasi-religious enthusiasm. Negative enthusiasm, (when you hate a thing, be it DSC, PDA, or minority representation in film, or pineapple on pizza) especially makes one susceptible to the crazy.

I don't think you have much of a point here. A life without passions, e.g love, hate, joy, anger, enthusiasm... what's negative enthusiasm btw? I don't get it. Anyway, a life without a little of all these plus others is not worth living... I mean there many ways to die but one of the worst has to be dying of boredom. Plus total apathy is also a form of craziness so... You don't even avoid being crazy which seems to be your main point.

 

[Doom Shepherd]

I don't think you have much of a point here. A life without passions, e.g love, hate, joy, anger, enthusiasm... what's negative enthusiasm btw? I don't get it. Anyway, a life without a little of all these plus others is not worth living... I mean there many ways to die but one of the worst has to be dying of boredom. Plus total apathy is also a form of craziness so... You don't even avoid being crazy which seems to be your main point.

Well, you have to take what I say here with the caveat that I've acknowledged that my way of dealing with having had no middle settings as a youngling is not for everyone, very possibly including me. I borked my emotions at an early point and am still trying to undo the damage. My feelings on feelings are those seen through a cracked and dirty lens.

Also, you're literally talking about what I would consider moderate levels of enthusiasm, (yes, it's perfectly okay to enjoy stuff) while I'm talking - or trying to - about irrational extremes.

It's an extreme when you love something so much that you have to tell everybody else how wrong and bad they are for not loving it at your level. Or when you hate something so much that you have to let everybody else know how wrong and bad they are for not hating it at your level.

It's like, have you ever read a FB post about something a bit fannish, or a sponsored post with a bit of celebrity gossip/information that pops up on your feed, and people respond, discuss the topic, displaying normal, healthy levels of enthusiasm? "Aw man, they broke up?" "Sucks for them." "Hey, Popeye's just tweeted that their viral promotion has been so successful that they actually ran out of chicken sandwiches!" "Really? Damn, I wanted to get me some."

Then there're the people who just LOSE THEIR SHIT over the same post/event (these are the people my local morning radio show make fun of). You know, "Josh and Susan BROKE UP??? MY CHILDHOOD IS RUINED FOREVER! EVERYTHING SUCKS NOW!! I went to Popeye's two weeks late for the chicken sandwich promotion and they were out of chicken sandwiches! I AM NEVER GOING TO POPEYE'S AGAIN!!! YOU SUCK if you don't #BoycottPopeyes!"

Even better, there's always that ONE person who just HAS to post "Who cares? I don't care!" Because that person has no NEED to post that they don't care, they could just have scrolled past the post and gotten on with their lives. But they VERY MUCH NEED everyone to know JUST HOW MUCH they DON'T CARE. And they need YOU to know just how much YOU SUCK for having any interest in the topic whatsoever.

It's those people.

 

[Discofan]

Well, that's different then. I thought you had banned all emotions, sort of like a Vulcan.

 

[Gov Kodos]

Well, that's different then. I thought you had banned all emotions, sort of like a Vulcan.

I can't imagine why anyone but a dreary pedant would have thought so.