>Riemer said:
. Exactly
>the same goes
>> for two people of the same sex who want to get married. Who am
>i, who are
>> you and who is anybody to judge this?
>
>In an ideal world, Riemer, that's fine and good, but we don't
>live in an ideal world where we can afford not to think about
>issues of social import.
I agree. One should form an opinion about the issues and not about the people.
>Right here in my city, a lesbian mother, Sharon Bottoms, has been
>judged unfit to raise her own daughter for one main reason--she's
>a lesbian.
snip
Brrr, in your country you can carry a gun but you can not carry a baby (and
legally keep it).
>> Since you mention in your mail you are gay, i mention i am not.
>Could you
>> please tell me why you mention this? Would it make a difference
>for other
>> people knowing you are gay or not? I hope not! If someone says
>that he/she
>> is not gay, this sounds pretty stupid (see above). Vice versa,
>imho and
>> fwiw, this is also true.
>
>I don't think it's stupid at all--Kevin merely provided a context
>for why the question had personal significance to him. Likewise,
>knowing you are not gay helps explain why you take such a
>cavalier "why think about it" attitude to the issue--it doesn't
>directly affect your life. Of course, there are many straights
>who do NOT take that kind of cavalier attitude, and probably some
>gays who could care less whether gay marriage is legalized.
Although i can understand your arguments i do not agree to them. Earlier i
said that the issues matter, not the people. Why is it necessairy to know
the background of people involved in a discussion? Let the arguments speak
for themselves. I am afraid the next step would be that someone would say
"oh, you're a hetero. Stay out of the discussion for you don't know what
you're talking about". Likewise, another somebody could keep gays out of
other discussions since they are gay.
Appearantly, the knowledge of me being hetero does not really add value
since you say there are straights who do and straights who do not take a
cavalier attitude. What sort of straight am i? All i am trying to say is
that it should not matter if you are gay or not. Logically then, the
knowledge of the sexual preferences of people adds no values. It might help
explain my or Kevins positions as you wrote, but whose explanation is this?
It's probably just your own thoughts on how gays and heteros think and act.
The use of the term 'stupid' does not imply i think Kevins remark is
stupid. The situation in which you first have to say 'i am gay/hetero', is
stupid. To add another complicating factor, as an 'foreigner' to the
english langauge it is sometimes difficult to weigh the different emotions
connected to words and their alternatives. Therefore, choosing between
appearantly equal words according to the dictionairy is sometimes
difficult. I am sure there are better words than 'stupid' to describe what
i wanted to say, it is just that i did not find them.
>> Coming to your last question: will the societal acceptance of
>gays improve
>> and will it continue
>> to improve? I hope so too. If not, well, i would say do not
>depend your
>> happiness on people who do not accept you!
>
>Shyeah, right. Tell that to every group that suffers from
>discrimination. How can you just tell people who are being
>oppressed and discriminated against "Don't worry, be happy" ?!?
In my country you can simply walk away from people who do not accept you
for who you are. Of course, not all people here will fully accept you and
you might have to overcome some prejudgements. But on the whole, most
people will accept you. So, you do not have to depend on people who do not
accept you. With accepting i mean that people here are not really
interested in whether you are gay or hetero.
I did not think of the fact that in a lot of countries the majority is anti
gay. In such a location it is indeed difficult to simply walk away until
you find people who accept you. Even though i may have sounded like it, I
never meant to say "don't worry, be happy".
BTW Greg, it is a strange feeling talking to you since you are (temporarily
i hope) not connected to this list. As Fran has expressed, you can always
look it up in the archives.
Perhaps this is what discussion lists are all about: seperating the points
of view from the persons. Basically, the messages matter, not the senders.
That should reduces the occasional outburst of almost personal hatred.
Still..it feels strange responding to someone who is not here:-)!
Riemer Brouwer
riebro@eh1.mey.nl