<< FACTS, SPELLING CHECKED ~ MAIN ~ GREENPEACE PROBED >>
RELIGION SELECTIVELY MOCKED
Isn’t it the most tremendous fun to see Kaz Cooke back in The Age, still attempting ‘80s fashion jokes?
Isn’t it the most tremendous fun to see Fred Nile back in the news? Fred Nile commenting on events in the 21st century is like hearing there’s still a shop somewhere where you can get unflattering pants made of parachute material ...
Nile and other frightfully concerned Christians say they are worried that families will go to see Brokeback Mountain without knowing there are gay people in it (Lord only knows what will happen when they find out some actual families have gay people in them).
Lord only knows what will happen when Cooke finds out about the likes of Sheik Khalid Yasin, a visitor to Australia who has sought to establish a television network here. Yasin has a far more enthusiastic following than old Fred, which might worry Cooke were she ever to learn of his colourful views:
If you prefer the clothing of the kafirs over the clothing of the Muslims, most of those names that’s on most of those clothings is faggots, homosexuals and lesbians.
And how would Yasin ultimately deal with these “faggots, homosexuals and lesbians”? Unlike Fred, he wouldn’t simply offer a quote to a lazy ABC presenter chasing some retro-hilarity. Given the chance, he’d take things a few steps further:
The sharia is very clear about it, the punishment for homosexuality, bestiality or anything like that is death. We don’t make any excuses about that, it’s not our law — it’s the Koran.
But let’s not interrupt Cooke’s concern over 71-year-old Fred Nile and his movie issues, for which Kaz proposes a solution:
Here’s what should happen. There should be precisely one Beta video copy of Brokeback Mountain in this country, and it should be available only at Fred’s house. If you are a gay horse-wrangler who wishes to see it, you should have to go to Fred’s house, prove in some way that you are an utter homosexual with a working knowledge of fetlocks, and then sit down on the couch (which I imagine is covered in clear plastic for hygiene purposes) and watch the movie.
Get your gay horse-wrangler to try that with Sheik Yasin the next time he’s in town, Kaz. I’m guessing he’d be a little annoyed to have an utter homosexual turn up to watch a movie worthy of the death penalty:
Dichotomy of church and State and civil law and religious law doesn’t exist in Islam. Because the source of law has never been the human being. In Christianity the source of law, human beings have always had something to do with the evolution of the law, but in Islam it is not the case.
When clowns like Kaz Cooke still use Fred Nile as their prime source of comical prehistoric homophobia—during an era when representatives of Another Prominent Religion are openly calling for “faggots” to be killed—they end up appearing more old-fashioned than Fred himself. There’s an elephant in the room, Kaz. And it’s not wearing parachute pants.
Sheep herding according to Wikipedia’s article.
The ads for Brokeback show the guys with women and children, and tout it as a
Titanic-styled romance.” I was talking with a coworker and mentioned it was about gay sheepherders who forsake their families for one another. She was aghast—she’d been thinking it would be a romantic movie for date-night…I thought Cronkite was dead, or was that wishful on my part?
Kaz Cooke: yet another leftie with selective memory. It must be wonderful to go through life willfully stupid. If it were painful, less people would do it.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 16 at 01:36 PM • permalink6: As one wag put it, he’s dead but they haven’t gotten around to burying him yet. A mere ambulatory clod of unthinking clay.
I’ll never forget a “think-piece” documentary Cronkite once did on the theme of 1984 (we were approaching that year of dread), and while mentioning Orwell, and the Evil Nixon, of course, he never once mentioned communism or the Soviet Union. As talking heads go, Cronkite’s was always one of the emptiest.
Then again, the Brokeback Mountain “phenomenon” proves we’re all repressed gays!
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 01 16 at 01:44 PM • permalink“maybe it’s because Jews don’t issue fatwas.”
Damian nails it. Mocking someone like Fred Nile is safe; publicly criticizing the screaming head-hackers might have painful consequences.
Posted by Sonetka's Mom on 2006 01 16 at 01:44 PM • permalinkSonetka’s Mom,
No they are not danger to society - you dont play with our religion and thats the bottom line - people need to learn that -
Does any1 remember what happened to the director in Holland after he made a similar film - A Semi Naked woman got Quranic Verses on her body - The director was shot - May Allah guide us all on the right Path -
That director was gay and ugly! He must be burning in hell!
What about Ayan Hirsi?
She is the one who started the mess, may Allah destroy her.amen
she is wicked.
idiotAnd i wont feel sorry not even one bit - if the same thing happens to her - she asked for it!
Remember, Islam is all about peace and tolerance.
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 01 16 at 01:50 PM • permalinkKaz Cooke: yet another leftie with selective memory. It must be wonderful to go through life willfully stupid. If it were painful, less people would do it.
I’m not so sure if it’s selective memory with these people, or if they simply stopped paying attention to the world when they were around 15 years old and started sleepwalking towards the lefty utopia. It’s hard to explain otherweise why people like Kaz don’t just come across as willfully stupid (as you state), but also as petulantly juvenile.
Of course in years past, the highlight of the Sydney Mardi Gras was a float parading a giant effigy of Fred Niles head up Oxford Street.
Imagine if the Christians did the something similar to a well known homosexual at a religious festival ? Wouldn’t happen right ? Not by Christians but Islamics regularly hang homosexuals from lamposts.
Sadly this doesn’t appear to faze the Left. Fascist and tyrants are cool - the enemy of my enemy and all that - until they appear on Celebrity Big Brother.
I’m not so sure if it’s selective memory with these people, or if they simply stopped paying attention to the world when they were around 15 years old and started sleepwalking towards the lefty utopia. It’s hard to explain otherweise why people like Kaz don’t just come across as willfully stupid (as you state), but also as petulantly juvenile.
Probably so, PW, but I do recall being sorta kinda stupid at that age, in addition to being immature. I like to think that I grew out of it! 8^D
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 16 at 04:26 PM • permalink“And it’s not wearing parachute pants.”
No, it’s not—it’s festooned with the entrails of its sacrificial victims, dripping with gore, and wearing a robe stitched together from human scalps.
But if you pretend hard enough, it’s almost like it’s not there!
Posted by stuartfullerton on 2006 01 16 at 04:33 PM • permalinkbut isn’t Bareback Mountain a movie about two gay sheep-wranglers?
Hey, I don’t care what they get up to on brokeback Mountain - whatever keeps them off the sheep is good.
Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2006 01 16 at 04:39 PM • permalinkSorry, folks, no disrepect intended to Van Halen, but by the ‘80’s I had completely lost my interest in rock and reverted to my true love: big band swing and post-war R&B. I wouldn’t cross the street to see a rock concert these days, but if Erskine Hawkins were still alive, I’d go just about anywhere to hear his band play “Holiday for Swing”.In fact, I got Dinah Washington backed by Lionel Hampton and his orchestra doin’ “Evil Gal Blues” on the cd player right now. So, later gates.
Kaz should find a real issue to confront rather than mock somebody with decent values.
Interesting how multiculturism handles the way the MSM treat offensive comments about Homosexuals depending where they come from.
Igbal sacranie by the Beeb
Sir Iqbal Sacranie, is being investigated by police for saying that homosexuality was “harmful”. note the toning down and the scare quotes.
and the apologies
However, he went on to say that everyone in society should be tolerant.Then again, the Brokeback Mountain “phenomenon” proves we’re all repressed gays!
Or so the man-ho who wrote that article would like to think.
I have nothing against gays. Some of them are religious, and some of them are not, and that’s okay in a society with freedom of religion. But I’m extremely irritated at the vocal minority who condemn one religion because it “disrespects” them, and yet make excuses for another religion that states very clearly they should all be murdered and burn in hell. How stupid do you have to be to realize you’re shooting yourself in the foot?
Spot on about the elephant…here’s a question for everyone:
Fast forward 10 years or so - will the gay activists/left still be in denial ?
What will it take to wrench them, collectively, out of denial ?
By what year will gay activists be agitating against the religion which currently poses the greatest threat to their livelihood and safety ?
Posted by closeapproximation on 2006 01 16 at 06:39 PM • permalinkBut so often (so very often) these islamic fundamentalists are quoted out of context, poor buggers.
see:
Because Qur’an also says in Surah 2, verse 191:
*{And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for persecution and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they [first] fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.}*And in Surah 9, verse 5:
*{But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem [of war].}*or perhaps they aren’t taken out of context after all?
Posted by WeekByWeek on 2006 01 16 at 06:44 PM • permalink#13 ‘...15 years old and started sleepwalking towards the lefty utopia.’
Good image PW. They had two options. One, to walk headlong into the Berlin Wall and wake up very bruised.
Or if past 1990, walk right on through and open their eyes to the dystopia they wanted for the West.They did neither, and so we still have to listen to them snoring in the echoey halls of academia we pay for.
I dont give a rats fat whos gay or not.
But i dont like the premise of the 2 cowboys having families as well. Maybe if theyd introduced a transmission of aids from them to their wives to add a “philladelphia” moment???
My views on the whole gay thing “If its not compulsory I dont care”Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 01 16 at 07:30 PM • permalinkI wish I was really rich and could airdrop lefties like Kaz and dump them in places like Iran, North Korea, or Cuba- then when they try and get back to Australia- I get the govt leaders to refer the matter to the UN- then bribe the UN officials to interview her in the same way they deal with disasters in Somalia- ie. “is there really Kaz”? “we should discuss the matter further” (ie forget about it in 5 minutes).
Posted by Wylie Wilde on 2006 01 16 at 07:43 PM • permalinkSeems to me there’s a wonderful display of bias and predisposition in both your article, Tim, and in many of the comments that follow. Perhaps Kaz Cooke’s article should be judged on its merits, as should your comments about the odious Yasin. For mine, Cook’s comments on Nile, whilst satirical in tone, are spot on. Your comments of Yasin are spot on. Connecting Cooke’s comments on Nile to your views on Yasin is just a little mischievous though.
I notice Bob Kater has also weighed into “Brokeback Mountain” in his usual pin-headed fashion. From Kater’s comments it seems as if, in Qld, the men are men and the cows are nervous!!
Proulx’s fictional story and Lee’s fictional movie is designed to inflame opinion about gay men who are also part of that staunchly heterosexual group: the cowboy.
YAWN…its all been done before, and better.
Whether the characters are gay or not is irrelevant.
More to the point no-one gives a shit about anyone being gay anymore.
Care Factor Zero.
Posted by Jay Santos on 2006 01 16 at 08:15 PM • permalinkThe gay mardi-gras organisers most likely paid Fred to come out of virtual retirement. Ever since he stopped actively campaigning against their annual parade it’s been diminishing in profile. It seems Fred was about the only one who cared.
#33: The thing is, Fred Nile is essentially harmless and unimportant. It’s easy pickings.
#33
Easy to pick on a soft a target like Fred Nile.
Did Cooke have a go at Yasin? No.
I’m surprised Pell didn’t come in for a thumping or more whining about the ‘dominance of the (mythical) Religious Right in Australia.
Will the Smage allow anyone to pen a response pointing out this anomaly in Cooke’s argument: extremely doubtful.
Mischevious yes?
Posted by Jay Santos on 2006 01 16 at 08:20 PM • permalinkBrokeback actor Heath Ledger has a similarly amused view about Christian concern about the content of the movie.
I’ve got to giggle about all the luvvies carrying on about how daring the film is- gay cowboys being a very scarce commodity in Hollywood- I suggest they peruse a few bars on Sunset strip, were they’ll find plenty of chaps in chaps.
Bloody hell- Kenneth Anger (Hollywood Babylon) made a low-budget movie in the early ‘60s about agressively homosexual bikers called Scorpio Rising; this movie is about as risque’ and challenging to the dominany paradigm as a Village People tribute show.
You win the prize kywong73. Tim feels that writers such as Kaz and the rags they represent are hyprocrites for condemning soft targets that are critical of their causes but avoid mention of much more hard line foes. I don’t think Tim was trying to hide his ‘bias’ as you put it. And he was not attempting to judge the article on it’s merits, he judged it on a wider context which he is free to do as it’s his blog. I think if you pause to consider the usual subject matter of the blog you’ll see that the latter makes more sense here.
Of course in years past, the highlight of the Sydney Mardi Gras was a float parading a giant effigy of Fred Niles head up Oxford Street.
In past years? Please! Every year…
However, I bet you’ll never see a “queers for Allah” float…
Phillip Adams is trying to selectively harrass religions: Time for a Goy
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17842002-2,00.htmlI don’t think that Tim’s aim was for the thread to be about Homosexuals as such but rather the selectivity of the left.
Its true, Nile is a target in many respects but an easy one. If he is to be derided for his anti-homosexual views, then what of others who say far worse things? Silence. The reason being is that objectivity has never been a leftist trait. To question or even mock Yasin would make Miz Cooke ‘intollerant’ or worse ‘racist’.
Its the same conumdrum with Aboriginal society. Feminism = good, Aboriginals = good, Aboriginal treatment of women = silence.
Cooke is like a canary in the coal mine. So long as she chirps the familiar progressivist tunes, our ersatz intellectuals think everything is as it should be and they are safe to go on (under)mining society. But she sings the tunes because the ersatz intellectuals are (under)mining society, as usual, and therefore everything is as it should be and its safe to go singing.
Hey, guys, go easy on Kaz. She’s what, 50, 60 years old? You can’t expect her to keep up with the latest political developments.
Posted by blandwagon on 2006 01 16 at 09:29 PM • permalinkBut don’t you know that the Western politicians support Israel because they are all gay
“Sorry, folks, no disrepect intended to Van Halen, but by the ‘80’s I had completely lost my interest in rock and reverted to my true love: big band swing and post-war R&B.”
I’m a man of the 1970’s. In my teens, I searched for the best music to listen to in an 8 track tape deck while driving my date to the drive in theatre. And then to a nice remote place in the country. And then to her home. And the nice long drive back home at 2 am on a warm summer night. Bread worked well for me then.
But five years ago while driving on a business trip, I happened upon a small town festival quite unexpectantly. I think there’s a good word for when that happens. I can’t think of it now.
Anyway, while I was walking among the arts and crafts booths, people started inflating hot air balloons. So I just sat down on a hillside and watched them. Very nice, very tranquilizing.
Then, all of a sudden, a swing band started playing at the band stand. Beautiful melodies, soul edifying. A wonderful experience.
Paco, two suggestions if I may:
1. Stardust
2. SolitudeGems.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 01 16 at 10:37 PM • permalinkthat’s one hell of a pachyderm in the corner
loved this in a comment on ummah.com
“Become Muslim and be saved. If not, accept protection from us and pay the Jizya. If not, I shall come against you with men who love death as you love to drink wine” - Khalid ibn al-Walid (ra), Muslim General addressing the persian rulers 633 CE.said in 633AD & still being quoted with pride. religion of peace? sounds more like the mafia
51: Ok, wiseguy! Come a little closer so I can bean you with my walker.
Wronwright is quite wright - er, right. I liked hard rock when I was a teenager during the 70’s; I’ve seen The Who, Eric Clapton , Frank Zappa and Led Zeppelin in concert (Zeppelin twice). But someone once said that swing was popular music written for adults, and I think he was right. “Stardust” and “Solitude” are both melodic gems, and I defy anyone to listen to something hot like Erskine Hawkins’ “Caledonia”, or Cecil Gant’s, “Hogan’s Alley”, or Lionel Hampton’s, “Flying Home”, and not want to get up and cut the proverbial rug (besides, Karl wears a zoot suit on occasion, so I know where his musical sympathies lie).
I’ve got a great cover of “Caledonia” by a pommy ska outfit called Bad Manners, whose lead singer is called Buster Bloodvessel.*
Get with it, hepcats.
*The fat bastard ran for mayor of London last year, on a platform of free tampons for the unemployed among other batty socialist ideas; he did however want to extend pub hours.
Why is one of the most wealthy cities on earth exclusively administered by frothing marxists?Speaking of ROP’s, NSW Opposition Leader Debnam is on A Current Affair. Interesting stuff.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 01 17 at 03:43 AM • permalinkheh. Of course, the interviewer (don’t know her name) tried to go down the racism track because Debnam specified that the government had been soft of ethnic crime in particular for years.
He replied that he didn’t care if they were white, middle-eastern or whatever - if they participated in violence and intimidation they should be locked up. It was pointed out that there might be 21 in jail, but they were all from the white side on dec 11 and none from the retaliation by the lebs (my words) the next day.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 01 17 at 03:49 AM • permalink49 W
I’m a man of the 1970’s. {/quote]
Obviously not.
Bread worked well for me then.
I wrest my case.
54 P
Wronwright is quite wright - er, right. I liked hard rock when I was a teenager
Then you’re not agreeing with David-Gates-and-BREAD fan Wronwright. Snort! Ask him if he wore a fake turtleneck under his paisley shirt while he listened to that ... that material. Ask him if he liked the Raspberries, or if they were too intense for him.
Ach, I should have seen this coming! The way he fingers his curls in that wiggly manner ... it’s ... all ... so ... GAY!Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 17 at 09:52 AM • permalinkIn my teens, I searched for the best music to listen to in an 8 track tape deck while driving my date to the drive in theatre. And then to a nice remote place in the country. And then to her home. And the nice long drive back home at 2 am on a warm summer night.
Thanks for the flashback, wron.
Good times, good times . . .
Tim, you’ve summed it up perfectly!
It’s amazing to me (highly INSULTING actually) that Kaz Cooke types still can only find appropriate Christian conservatives, either here or in the U.S., to mock when it comes homophobia. Just as we saw the other night on the 7:30 Report, only AMERICAN Christian conservatives have a problem with the film Brokeback Mountain, conservative Christians in other countries apparently don’t, and of course MOSLEMS are totally fine with it!I dont give a rats fat whos gay or not.
But i dont like the premise of the 2 cowboys having families as well.Very disturbing. This is what really happens. This is what so many well meaning conservative people forget when they argue so strongly against gay marriage. Not having it makes a lot of gay people enter into traditional heterosexual relationships. The end result being that not just the gay person has a miserable life, but so do the spouse and any children.
This is real life people. If you don’t like the idea of gay men having wives and children and then cheating on them with other men then stop discriminating against their relationships with each other. Let them know it’s OK not to have a wife.
In reply to what a lot of you are saying about ‘gay activists’ condoning Islam. I do agree, I am disturbed by how many gays who are political join the causes of so many who hate them. Just because those are the causes of the left and the left more readily embraces gay politics. So political gays have to work much harder to be accepted and heard outside a lefty circle.
However, I would consider myself somewhat of a ‘gay activist’ as I write regularly to major newspapers promoting a ‘gay agenda’ of human rights, equality & dignity (shocking huh?). But you’ll also note letters from me in the same publications condemning the behaviour and ideals of Muslims and the extra special treatment they are given in our society and our media since 2001.
So just be careful when you paint all people with the one brush. There are plenty of gays who are agitating for their rights and who know whom their real friends are.
Who is this “you” you are addressing? I don’t know anyone here who “discriminates” against gays. I doubt anyone here is against grown adults living together in any arrangement they please, as long as they don’t do whatever they do in the bedroom in the street as well. Tim even said he was all for gay marriage.
Personally, I’m suspicious about it. I’ve nothing against gay people living together, going to a lawyer and writing up powers-of-attorney and what-have-you, and having their own ceremonies and parties for their pairings. I certainly don’t think they should have to go back to slinking around pretending to be something they’re not. But I know the way these things play out in the activist agenda: first tolerance, then acceptance, then celebration, then exaltation to a level where you can’t question anything. Expressing the notion that the thought of seeing gay sex in a movie makes you uncomfortable didn’t used to be as bad as saying you didn’t like black people, but those days are over now.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 01 17 at 10:03 PM • permalinkIt’s OK not to have a wife, Ben, and has been for many years. Nobody is forcing hmosexuals to marry women and have children. Generally the people who disapprove of a movie showing homosexuals cheating on their wives with each other would also disapprove of a movie extolling heterosexuals cheating on their wives and husbands, then the objectors would be mocked by the trendy people for their old-fashioned notions of marital fidelity.
In Western countries where is any persecution of homosexuals for shacking up together? Nowhere. Where are the laws prohibiting them from voting, from driving cars, from having bank accounts and owning property? There are none. Are they forbidden by law from living in certain neighborhoods, as black people used to be in much of America? No. Need they disguise their preactices? Hardly, they are quite openly visible.
You mention “a ‘gay agenda’ of human rights, equality & dignity “. I suppose that means the currently trendy issue of the zeitgeist of “gay marriage”, and perhaps a gripe that the government, of whichever country, isn’t extolling homosexuality enough for your taste in the schools and elsewhere. It used to be that homosexuals disdained such bourgeois practices as marriage. As for extolling homosexuality by public bodies, most people object to governments sabotaging the moral teachings they try to inculcate into their children.
“Gay marriage” is designed to drive a final nail in the coffin of marriage and the family, the bedrock institutions of our culture and societies. If you want an example of what the world looks like when marriage and the family have ceased to count or sometimes even to exist, look no further than the underclass, both in the USA and in Britain (Theodore Dalrymple’s essays are good sources for a view of the latter underclass, in Life At the Bottom and Our Culture, What’s Left Of It). This is not a racial matter, by the way, for Dalrymple’s work mainly was among white Britons and Pakistanis. Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short pretty much sums it up. Without a stable, well-ordered society homosexuals are going to find their position parlous. Destroying that society for the egoism of a tiny number is a bad mistake.
Homosexuals should be content with the position of tolerance they have achieved in our culture today. What actual rights do they lack? Nothing, but pushing beyond this point will rebound to their detriment. I do not speak here of some “backlash” or persecution of homosexuals by the dreaded Religious Right. It is the contribution to cultural breakdown, demanded by the advocates of the currently trendy fads of the shallow zeitgeist, of which I speak.
Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 01 17 at 10:54 PM • permalinkBen, I just checked out posts 26, 14, and 10. I don’t see anything in them that discriminates against gays. Specifically:
#10:
“maybe it’s because Jews don’t issue fatwas.”
Damian nails it. Mocking someone like Fred Nile is safe; publicly criticizing the screaming head-hackers might have painful consequences.
Gay discrimination? Huh?
#14:
Of course in years past, the highlight of the Sydney Mardi Gras was a float parading a giant effigy of Fred Niles head up Oxford Street.
Imagine if the Christians did the something similar to a well known homosexual at a religious festival ? Wouldn’t happen right ? Not by Christians but Islamics regularly hang homosexuals from lamposts.
Sadly this doesn’t appear to faze the Left. Fascist and tyrants are cool - the enemy of my enemy and all that - until they appear on Celebrity Big Brother.
OK, this complains about the lopsided views of the left of the West versus Islam. Where do you have a problem here?
#26:
Then again, the Brokeback Mountain “phenomenon” proves we’re all repressed gays!
Or so the man-ho who wrote that article would like to think.
I have nothing against gays. Some of them are religious, and some of them are not, and that’s okay in a society with freedom of religion. But I’m extremely irritated at the vocal minority who condemn one religion because it “disrespects” them, and yet make excuses for another religion that states very clearly they should all be murdered and burn in hell. How stupid do you have to be to realize you’re shooting yourself in the foot?
Nothing here against gays. Your problem is….?
What they do say are pretty much in line with Andrea’s comment of:
But I know the way these things play out in the activist agenda: first tolerance, then acceptance, then celebration, then exaltation to a level where you can’t question anything.
Specifically, “...then exaltation to a level where you can’t question anything.” People can’t question anything remotely related to homosexuality? Even they are not against it specifically?
Just what were you saying about not painting people with one brush?
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 18 at 12:19 AM • permalink[Hi again Michael,
Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short pretty much sums it up. Without a stable, well-ordered society homosexuals are going to find their position parlous. Destroying that society for the egoism of a tiny number is a bad mistake.
Sorry you think wanting to spend the dying hours with your partner is egoism. Or that wanting your partner to inherit your super before your dead brother’s bitchy homophobic widow grabs it is egoism.
What I read from your post is that you think excluding some people from loving marriages - encouraging them instead to live in promiscuous loneliness or miserable loneliness in a traditional marriage - is the only way to preserve the integrity of marriage.
I always find this argument ludicrous in the extreme. Gay people marrying is the least of your worries in preserving old fashioned lifestyles. We have condoned infidelity, easy divorce, glamourisation of sex and promiscuity, “shared-parenting” and so on. All of these things are engaged in far more broadly in the community and are much more damaging.
Destroying that society for the egoism of a tiny number is a bad mistake.
Ridiculous as the concept is, your leftist/socialist view that it is worth sacrificing the health and well-being of a few for the success of the many repulses me. That should never be an argument in a pluralist democracy that values individual rights and success.
Hi Jeff,
Sorry, maybe I misunderstood Andrea. She asked, “who is this ‘you?’”
I thought that meant the “you” in this sentence and those that follow.
In reply to what a lot of you are saying about ‘gay activists’ condoning Islam.
So I was referring to those comments mentioning that the same people who supported gay rights also supported radical Islamic agendas.
I now see the paragraph above must be the one in question. The “you” there is not about people discriminating against gays either. Andrea has changed that intent to make it easier to dismiss me. What I said was ‘discriminate against their relationships.’
If you don’t like the idea of gay men having wives and children and then cheating on them with other men then stop discriminating against their relationships with each other. See?
Andrea says no-one here discriminates against gays. Well if she meant gay relationships then i direct you back to the post I quoted. It expands to say:
dont give a rats fat whos gay or not.
But i dont like the premise of the 2 cowboys having families as well.Maybe if theyd introduced a transmission of aids from them to their wives to add a “philladelphia” moment???
Oh right, you don’t give “a rats fat.” But you don’t mind labelling any gay relationship as aids infested and gay men as the kind who would knowingly infect the mother’s of their children. Not to mention the insensitivity of realising the cowboys have married women because society compelled them to, they never wanted to be in the marriage. This story, therefore, is not like another story of husbands cheating on their wives with women and it is insensitive and hurtful to say so.
Michael Lonie, then tells me that gay relationships will ‘destroy society!’
If there is not discrimination and bigotry toward gay relationships here then we are all blind.
wanting your partner to inherit your super before your dead brother’s bitchy homophobic widow............never heard of getting a will drawn up?
I’ve also never heard of anyone being turfed out of a bedside vigil for anyone who’s karking it, unless the karker has requested it or there’s a risk of infection.
What the fuck are you on about?
If there is not discrimination and bigotry toward gay relationships here then we are all blind.
Not yet, but I plan to be by closing time. I don’t think the vast majority of readers and contributors to this site give a fart in a hurricane who or what anyone shags, as long as it’s consensual (how do you get a goat to say OK?) and legal- we (or at least I) get the shits when something costs me money- heterosexual marriage already costs a poultice in the family court and centrelink when it almost inevitably goes tits up- I don’t think we need more litigation.
I’d like to see all marriage disbanded, and replaced by contractual obligation- with a clause that both parties are liable for ongoing costs and maintenance of rugmonkeys when the contract folds.
What Ben is on about, I think, is some oft-repeated and now apparently lifted to gay mythos sad tale of some dying gay man’s mean Baptist (Lutheran/Seventh Day Adventist/Pentecostal—it changes depending on the childhood bete noir of the person telling the story) parents not letting the dying man’s boyfriend visit his lover’s bedside, not letting him go to the funeral, etc., etc. As for the homophobic-inheritance-stealer—I guess Ben didn’t read what I said about visiting lawyers and drawing up papers; that’s what serious married or soon-to-be-married couples do, so scenarios such as Ben so dramatically outlined above are less likely to happen. Which brings me back to my premise: gay marriage “supporters” like Ben are not serious, they are in this for the drama, the excitement, the thrill of imagining themselves victims of awful monstrous homophobes, so they won’t have to grow up and deal with people not like them. Instead of doing something useful—like perhaps going into law and setting up a consultation service for gay couples willing to actually do something concrete about settling their future beyond simply buying a darling loft and furnishing it with retro knicknacks they’d rather issue tear-dripping proclamations illustrated by urban legends, or indulge themselves in imaginary political sparring with a “society” that “won’t let them” get “married”—much like the young gay couple on a show I just turned off on Bravo over here: they’re getting “married” in South Florida, where “it isn’t legal—yet”—and it’s all about being “in your face, homophobic Florida!” which is very brave since that area is the fucking gay Mecca of the American South.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 01 18 at 01:49 AM • permalinkHey Ben,grow up a little bit mate.
Life is unfair.For gay people it is 100% less unfair than it used to be.
If I don’t happen to have business class clothes and I go to the stores (or am in work clothes),I get discriminated against.
If I don’t have a job (once I didn’t for a few weeks) I get discriminated against.
If I’m covered in piercings I get discriminated against.If I am unattractive or ugly,ride a bike and don’t drive,am overweight,have no taste in furnishings,have AIDS or Hep C,have bad breath,have lost a limb,have been badly disfigured,have a mental illness,have a funny walk,am covered in tatts,have a family member who is a serial killer -I would be discriminated against.Count your blessings,be grateful for what you’ve got and don’t relate everything in life to your own particular circumstance.Ben
Consider the time the movie is set in. Read the book “And the band played on”.
I dont consider all gays to be riddled with aids, I consider their chances are (outside a certain other minority groups such as injecting drug users) massively higher than the vast majority of the population.
I also consider the betrayal of the affair somewhat compounded by the fact that the innocent party is AT RISK.Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 01 18 at 05:08 AM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Not that I would want to suggest that Kaz Cooke has his, her or their head up his, her or their ass (which for all I know is a trendy amusement in his, her or their circle), but isn’t Bareback Mountain a movie about two gay sheep-wranglers? Which, again, could be a trendy amusement in his, her or their circle…?