Posted on 07/07/2003 7:37:43 AM PDT by kattracks
Wow. That's SO horrible.
I need to check outside and see if it's raining frogs. /sarcasm
What's your definition of "sexual orientation"?
Everyone has a sexual orientation (some have more than one). So, since it's left undefined, in one sense it means nothing because it applies to everyone. But the gay community has co-opted this term as a code phrase for their bandwagon. And now, seeing the success of such a bandwagon, guess who's tailing along? Pedophiles and anybody who wants to be deemed as a "sexual minority" group.
Bzzzt. Automatic disqualification. Anyone who can't make their case without alluding to Nazism doesn't have a case to make. They're peddling hysteria.
Translation: I, Grand Wizard of All Rhetoric (GWAR), Past & Future, hereby decree that ALL allusions, references, parallels, history lessons, character lessons, to Nazism are banned from public discourse (apriori), lest you incur my hype that you are a hypester.
But oh great GWAR One, isn't that a form of censorship--a form of encouraging prior restraint of certain expressions?
So be it. Let it be written. Let it be.
But oh great GWAR One, what if one said, "Anyone who can't make their case without alluding to 'peddling hysteria' doesn't have a case to make? They're peddling safism."
"Safism?" What is that oh noble one?
"Safism" is attempting to make the world safe for whatever protected class status you seek to shrink wrap. For some, it's homosexuals. For some it's atheists. For others, it's perpetrating the myth that there's no absolute evil. Therefore, they knee-jerk at comments like Reagan's reference to communism as "evil" and they strife at any linkages being made to the pathways of Nazism.
Sounds like these folks have been taking lessons from Je$$e Jacka$$ and his Rainbow Coalition. Can you spell s-h-a-k-e-d-o-w-n?
Hmm...If so many folks are hysteria-mongers as you claim, what does one do with one who is hyper about seeing hysterics behind every bush?
Most sane people see it for the hysteria that it is.
If you like to reduce all arguments by "automatic" judgments as to whether they're being made by sane folks or a hysteric, then I suppose all posters should be officially welcomed into your psychiatric couch.
Once again, we have folks who instead of preferring to deal with the issues, like to hit their automatic buzz button & root out some folks' comments with stereotypical labels.
It becomes an easier black & white world that way for them...instead of dealing with the comment, they can write off the messenger as being merely insane.
Wasn't it THE CRASH that had a song lyric, "Wrong-o, boy-o"?
All pedophelia means is a sexual attraction to children. Since when is an inward attraction a crime? Or, are you a member of the liberal thought police?
Even when homosexuality has been held as criminally culpable in any given culture within history, homosexuals weren't arrested for being inwardly attracted to men.
Homosexuality = not a crime
Only a recent conclusion. Until SCOTUS ruled on sodomy case, technically homosexuality was a crime in well over a dozen states. Sodomy statutes were still on the books in almost 20 states through most of the 90s.
Okay, wise one. I'm a Wal-Mart manager (let's say). How do I know about what a person does in the privacy of their home and how do I keep from "discriminating" against what is not as plain as someone's skin color? Do I now have to listen is to any village gossip lines in order to be such a savvy manager?
What about in urban areas where such gossip lines emit mere trickles? Do I "judge" someone's sexual orientation based upon the ankle bracelet they where? A tatoo? An ear ring in an certain ear? Do we do an employee "group hug" and I watch for certain folks who might be a little more "touchy feely" with members of the same sex?
Please clue us clueless ones in here.
Aren't folks assuming something here...something akin that someone's "sexual orientation" (whatever that is) is somehow broadcast up & down the county they live in!
In other words, what does one person's closet have anything to do with the workplace anyway and why are folks making their private issues into a public whipping boy?
Some folks should keep their right to privacy about what they do in the bedroom out of the lives of others who don't want to know...forcing them to be subjected to workplace-imposed re-education lessons about religion, gender, character, relationships, and marriage.
The "sensitivity training" in some companies is indeed cut out of new cloth...especially companies with gay activists within the human resources departments of those companies.
AT&T, for example, being a corporate leader in this regard in the 80s and 90s, would once upon a time bring in Brian McNaught or his video ON BEING GAY...which included excerpts like the following: "According to Dr. John Boswell from Yale University, the book of Levi (Leviticus) was probably the only source in both Old and New Testament that clearly talks about men having sex with men. Boswell doesn't believe (as do most Scripture scholars) that Genesis had anything to do with sexuality, nor does he believe that St. Paul in writing to Romans and Corinthians and Timothy (the letter of Timothy) really talk about homosexual sex."
There ya have it. Corporations like AT&T now teaching theology (re-ed version) under the umbrella of "diversity training."
When folks @ these sessions claim that being gay is just like being left-handed, you've got a worldview training session going on...not some mere harmless managerial review process about hiring and firing decisions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.