[extropy-chat] Re:

Fri Nov 5 04:07:45 UTC 2004

Well as I said, I can;t speak for Mike. I have custody of two children from
a previous marriage and have a girlfriend that I have lived with for several
years. They are both girls and they are being brought up in the most
untraditional way. They are taught to respect everyone, but to question
everything. They are taught that the very worst thing a person could be is a
non-thinking hater and a hypocrite. I don't personally see how one's sexual
orientation has any bearing on family except for in a few cases. One such
case is mine. I have two girls and I have custody. I would have a very tough
time teaching them all that girl stuff myself. A male mate wouldn;t be much
of a help either. BUT, all that means is that I would have to find a way to
make sure a woman was in their lives. That woman could be my mother, sister,
a friend, or someone I hired to be their "woman tutor".

I will say that I think it is important that children be brought up to know
how to function  in a hetero society. Hetero must be the norm, or the
population would crash and our species would become extinct. Since the
majority then must be hetero, they need to learn to live in a hetero
society. They need to understand gender roles. They do not, however, need to
be brainwashed into those roles. In fact, I think their awareness of these
roles will make them always conscious of what they are doing rather than
reacting with the masses. They need to understand all of the options
available to them, then be treated with respect regardless of what they
choose....

So what of the traditional family? There is nothing wrong with it. It is a
good thing. It only becomes a problem when people become narrow minded and
think that their way is right. It becomes a problem when parents teach their
children to hate. It is not a bad thing and Mike is right to protect it. But
I don;t see how he could perceive gay marriage as a threat to that. It has
no bearing on his family.
People who are closed minded come from all different ways of life. There are
close minded gays who want to rub homosexuality in people's faces. There are
Christians who do the same with their religion. There are blacks who rub
their blackness in people's faces. I could go on and on. None of these
people are being productive.

I think Mike has a difefrent agenda. He wants to protect your rights..but
not at the expense of everyone elses. To him, and to me, an American isn;t a
Gay American, or African American, or Islamic American. Everyone is just a
plain old boring American...and if you are on the public dole, he is after
you.

In short, Mike is an equal-opportunity hater.

Gay families are not a threat to hetero families. It is either the excuse
that anti-gay people use to justify their behavior, or

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Al Brooks" <kerry_prez at yahoo.com>
To: "Kevin Freels" <cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:16 PM

> Okay, nevertheless we're not objective in these
> matters, perhaps it's me projecting on you, yet as far
> as I know from everything I've observed, most everyone
> is grinding an axe concerning the family institution:
> "my family right or wrong".
> Now of course the things have to be done slowly, if
> straights dominate until, say, the 2070s or '80s
> that's fine w/ me, but to change you've got to have
> those who push to get the ball rolling. If we listened
> to Mike heteros would rule until after 2100.
>
>
> --- Kevin Freels <cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > Not anarchists. Government has many necessary
> > functions. Handing out other
> > people's money isn;t one of them. It doesn;t matter
> > if you give it to a str8
> > guy or a gay woman; it is still wrong.
> >
> > You said, "For me there's no reason to think those
> > who say they want
> > government out of marriage actually do,"
> > Don;t be so paranoid. There are a lot of bad people
> > out there, but that is
> > no way to live. We're not all bad. Any time you push
> > against the norm, you
> > get a lot of resistance. Most of us here push those
> > envelopes regularly.
> > Being gay is no different. I didn;t choose to be an
> > atheist....God made me
> > that way. :-)
> >
> > The only reason gays have gotten so much resistance
> > is because they are
> > normalizing homosexuality. Us cryo, AI, MNT,
> > transhumanism people simply
> > haven;t become a large enough target yet. Give it
> > time. Eventually there
> > will be a group out there called "Gays Against
> > Artificial Intelligrnce" and
> > they will be working right alongside the church.
> >
> > Parity is a worthy goal. Personally I would be happy
> > if all people were
> > treated equally by the state. That is what I am
> > after. I want to see the
> > government put back to something that makes sense
> > and is consistent.
> >
> > Cheers!
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Al Brooks" <kerry_prez at yahoo.com>
> > To: "Kevin Freels" <cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net>; "ExI
> > chat list"
> > <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 8:42 PM
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage
> >
> >
> > > Right-- as far as you are concerned. For me
> > there's no
> > > reason to think those who say they want government
> > out
> > > of marriage actually do, so I reject religious
> > > ceremony contract marriage.
> > > I want parity for any alternatives to hetero
> > marriage
> > > based on what the benefits are for heteros at the
> > > time. If on January 1st 2015 straights have x,
> > then I
> > > want gays and polys to be granted x as well.
> > >
> > > > As far as I am concerned, marriage should be an
> > > > entirely religious ceremony.
> > > > It should have nothing to do with government. It
> > > > should not be regulated by
> > > > the state. If a certain church wants to keep a
> > > > certain type of people out of
> > > > their group, then so be it. Groups with like
> > beliefs
> > > > should be allowed to
> > > > congregate with like minded people. I don't
> > think I
> > > > would be accepted too
> > > > well with a bunch of bikers...and that is fine.
> > I
> > > > wouldn;t want to be with a
> > > > bunch of bikers who didn;t want me to be around!
> > > >
> > > > Gays in church are the same way. People who are
> > > > anti-gay should have just as
> > > > much a right to congregate as the KKK, atheists,
> > > > pagans, or a bunch of
> > > > anti-Bush supporters. Boy Scouts should be for
> > boys,
> > > > girl scouts for girls.
> > > > Why would a girls want to be a boy scout
> > anyways?
> > > >
> > > > The solution is not to force a group to accept
> > > > people who don;t fit the
> > > > group. The solution is to form more groups. I
> > don;t
> > > > see the members here
> > > > complaining that they don;t get a Catholic
> > > > newsletter!
> > > >
> > > > So if the issue is whether or not gays are
> > allowed
> > > > church marriages, that is
> > > > up to the church. And I am sure that there are
> > > > Christian denominations that
> > > > recognize gay marriages. I know of such a church
> > > > right here in Evansville,
> > > > IN.
> > > >
> > > > But I don;t think that is a problem on this
> > list.
> > > > The people here seem to
> > > > think about matters in more of a logical sense
> > > > rather than caring what the
> > > > church thinks. I am sure the church would
> > condemn my
> > > > decisions of
> > > > cryo-preservation, atheism,  cloning, etc just
> > as
> > > > much as they condemn gays.
> > > > Homosexuality is only one sin. I commit many!
> > lol
> > > >
> > > > So I can only assume the matter has to do with
> > > > either contract law, or
> > > > benefits.
> > > >
> > > > As a matter of contract, eliminating marriage
> > puts
> > > > everyone on an equal
> > > > footing. my girlfried and I can have a contract,
> > and
> > > > so can two roommates in
> > > > college that buy a frat house together.
> > > > All matters of contract, property, and those
> > evil
> > > > government benefits that
> > > > keep people as slaves to the state should stand
> > on
> > > > their own. They should
> > > > not have anything to do with race, religion.
> > color,
> > > > creed, sex, sexual
> > > > orientation, or what kind of ice cream a person
> > > > likes.
> > > >
> > > > I am not completely sure what Mike thinks here,
> > but
> > > > I would like his
> > > > opinion. I don;t even care for the civil union
> > idea.
> > > > It is just another name
> > > > for marriage. I want the state out of the
> > > > relationship regulation business
> > > > altogether. People can make contracts with one
> > > > another as they wish. We
> > > > would need a lot more attorneys, but they should
> > get
> > > > less expensive too. :-)
> > > >
> > > > Finally, regarding benefits....We are talking
> > about
> > > > benefits that both Mike
> > > > and I think should not be there to begin with.
> > It is
> > > > silly to imply that
> > > > Mike is singling out gays when getting rid of
> > > > marriage. That is paranoia. A
> > > > lot of people would lose government benefits by
> > > > getting rid of marriage. But
> > > > the reduction in tax expenditures would be
> > offset by
> > > > a reduction in taxes.
> > > > Why people think it is OK for the government to
> > take
> > > > our money and give it
> > > > back to those who "earn" it by following certain
> > > > behaviors is beyond me.
> > > >
> > > > Kevin Freels
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > > From: "Bryan Moss" <bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com>
> > > > To: "ExI chat list"
> > <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 5:06 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Brian Lee wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I favor someone else on this list who
> > suggested
> > > > that the gov't get out
> > > > > > of the marriage business altogether and only
> > > > allow civil unions. Then
> > > > > > any marriage is purely non-legal and
> > ceremonial.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't understand this position at all.
> > You'd be
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
> =====
> Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com