RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 10:47:04 AM

SpinnerofTales

Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

Not in any particular order.....the economy, education, enviroment and welfare reform, just to name a few. The fact that I see these things as important, does not make them more important than civil liberties. It just means I look at the whole picture and not one or two issues.

Ok....since my initial question was not intended to seek agreement but understanding, I can see your point of why you can be conservative if those are your core beliefs. My next questions are: Should anything be done to separate the conservative agenda in which you believe from the civil liberties agenda in which you do ot believe? And CAN anything be done to separate them?

(in reply to thishereboi)

Post #: 161

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 10:47:07 AM

thishereboi

Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales
Again, allowing two people of the same gender the same rights and choices as two people of different gender is not favoritism. It is equality.

Yes, but the majority of LIBERALS in California don't agree. They had a vote and said no to gay marriage. Does this mean all liberals are against it? Why would I want to belong to a party like that?

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert

This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

Post #: 162

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 10:48:19 AM

thishereboi

Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

Why you don't post a copy of the conservative agenda and the civil liberties agenda, then I will read them and get back to you.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert

This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

Post #: 163

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 10:55:10 AM

RCdc

Posts: 8674
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales
I say that no one should be discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, political affiliation, gender or sexual orientation. I stand with those who believe that no one should be discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, political affiliation, gender or sexual orientation. Could you kindly tell me where the hypocrisy is in this belief?

That is cool, but you have already in the above posts added the caveat that its all cool as long as they are 'people of good will'. My question, which you have not answered (which is your choice) was who choses the people who are of good will? What makes you better at choosing than a conservative? If it is you, then what about the minorities you then exclude? Those that you believe are not of 'good will'? Where does the line become drawn and when people start asking the exact same question of yourself? Your basic premise is you question why conservatives are in Ds communities based on their choice of political/religious/moral affiliation. What makes you believe you are so much better than them that the question cannot be asked of you as to what you define as being of good will?

Define good will and agree on it. As Merc suggested, define community that is universally agreed to also. But simply, that is an impossible task, when you cannot even define a Ds relationship that can be agreed upon by a section of people who practice it, because I sure have never heard of or perceived that a Ds relationship must (as an absolute) include some sort of BDSM activity. And even above all this, define conservative, because I am pretty sure that isn't even universally understood either.

the.dark.

_____________________________

RC&dc

love isnt gazing into each others eyes - it's looking forward in the same direction

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

Post #: 164

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:01:27 AM

TheHeretic

Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
it was mentioned earlier in the thread

I must have missed that.

Which laws are those?

      Maybe go back and look?

     Honestly, anyone who engages in the physical aspects of WIITWD ought to already have some sort of understanding of the local laws that could directly impact them, and perhaps even discuss with partners what should happen if the police ever knock on the door in the middle of play time.

     Local statutes vary, but I would strongly encourage you to educate yourself on this subject, RML.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.

(in reply to rulemylife)

Post #: 165

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:09:18 AM

SpinnerofTales

Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Prop 8 in CA was a misplaced law. Once again it provided a 'more equal' status to one group of people. Currently every person has the same ability to marry the same gendar. Pity that they love a gendar same as their own and that 'marriage' isn't 'legal'; but then again, neither is marring 2 or more people. Neither is marrying your sister, daughter, son, or bother. You can't get married at all prior to a certain age and you can't marry anything not legally defined as 'human'. I voted for Prop 8 because, if you want to eliminate one aspect of the law of marriage eliminate them all. Meanwhile, lets look at some of the same sex perks presently enjoyed. While in Vegas, beth and I were required to use separate steam and spa facilities after our 'couples massage'. Same sex partners had the ability to enjoy the facility together, we were separated - unfair! There are plenty of 'un-fair' statutes on the books; exposing nipples in public is gendar biased. Get rid of them all, or create more hypocrisy by selectively getting rid of some, based upon personal agenda.

Your post was well written and well considered. I must, however, take issue with your points on marriage. The problem I have with it is that you are mistaking a change in the nature of the civil contract of marriage with a change in the nature of marriage.

As it stands, marriage is a civil contract, recognized by the government, between two consenting adults to become a partnership. There are benefits given to the parties of this civil contract among which are inheritance rights, social security benefits, and tax benefits. It is also a contract that, by statute, can only be entered into by a heterosexual pair of consenting adults.

The only difference in expanding the protection of marriage to gay partners is eliminating the requirement of the gender of the partners who are not related by blood (save for places where cousins can marry). This does not alter the nature of the contract, the rules under which it is administered or the legal issues that arise from it.

The other matters you mention alter the very nature of the marriage contract.

To allow children to marry or adults to marry children changes the requirement that both parties who enter into this contract be consenting adults. It is a general societal principal that there are things that adults can do that children cannot. A child cannot drink, below a certain age they cannot drive a car. They also cannot enter into binding contracts. So the idea that if gay's can marry, children should be allowed to marry is unsound.

To allow a person to marry an animal would again alter the idea that marriage is contract entered into by consenting adults. Animals have no capacity to consent. They cannot enter into any contract. Again, this would be a basic alteration of what marriage is as opposed to merely extending the option to an excluded class.

As for polygamy, I have no problem with it under moral grounds. The legal ramifications of it would be a basic alteration of the idea of two consenting adults entering a partnership. Further it would open a legal can of worms that would be mind boggling. One of the big legal concerns of a marriage currently is it's dissolution. Since there is a 50% divorce rate in this country, this is no small matter. As of now, there are a well defined series of rules and criteria for the dissolution of this contract. Polygamy would require a completely new set of questions to be answered. For example: How should property be distributed? Should it be equally divided between all parties or given out on a seniority bases according to the length of time the spouse was polygamously married? What are the visitation/custody rights of a party to such a marriage in relation to a child that they may have raised but with whom they have no biological connection? If one party in a polygamous marriage decides to leave the marriage, does the entire marriage dissolve or does it continue with those who remain? In short, the entire rulebook of what marriage is would have to be rewritten.

Gay marriage, on the other hand, requires only that the requirement of the gender of the participants be abloished. Rights would be the same for a gay couple as a straight couple. Divorce would be the same for a gay couple as a straight couple. The apparatus of marriage could continue exactly as it is now. Only more people would be allowed to take that option as opposed to being denied it.

It would seem to me to be a pretty fundamental difference between the issue of gay marriage and the relationships you cited.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 166

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:17:34 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi
Yes, but the majority of LIBERALS in California don't agree. They had a vote and said no to gay marriage. Does this mean all liberals are against it? Why would I want to belong to a party like that?

Excuse me? How did you arrive at this claim? I've seen the demographic breakdown for that vote and no where near a majority of self identified liberals voted for it. As a matter of fact according to the CNN exit polling only 22% of liberals voted for prop 8.

Go ahead and be politically conservative but don't make things up about liberals.

(in reply to thishereboi)

Post #: 167

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:18:57 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

Again, allowing two people of the same gender the same rights and choices as two people of different gender is not favoritism. It is equality

Currently that is the exact situation we have in place. They have the same "rights" and "choices". You are adding emotions, personal preferences, and desires into the equation. Why limit it to sex? Smoking, arbitrary distinctions of 'legal' v. 'illegal' drugs, walking around topless, arbitrary age when you can be on the streets of cities legally, 'age of consent'; add a dash of rationalization (your side) or hypocrisy (their side) and its the same.

Love? Not required on the hetero or homosexual relationship.

If there's a pragmatic reason it would be money. Everything would be affected from estate planning, to 1040 reporting. The already bankrupt Social Security fund would be further in trouble. There'd be the unscrupulous people like me who, under the circumstances, would take in and 'marry' a friend just so he could have access to my health coverage.

Selective prejudice still smacks of prejudice; you just added selectivity.

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

Post #: 168

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:24:10 AM

thishereboi

Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi
Yes, but the majority of LIBERALS in California don't agree. They had a vote and said no to gay marriage. Does this mean all liberals are against it? Why would I want to belong to a party like that?

Excuse me? How did you arrive at this claim? I've seen the demographic breakdown for that vote and no where near a majority of self identified liberals voted for it. As a matter of fact according to the CNN exit polling only 22% of liberals voted for prop 8.

Go ahead and be politically conservative but don't make things up about liberals.

Exit polls don't mean squat, believe it or not, people don't always tell the truth at those things. So how do they know the percentage that voted for it? But lets say for a moment your right and none of the liberals bothered to vote for this issue. What does that tell me about the party? They obviously voted because Obama won the state. Are you saying liberals don't care about civil liberties?

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert

This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 169

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:25:14 AM

thishereboi

Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

I need health care....will you marry me?

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert

This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 170

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:31:31 AM

SpinnerofTales

Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Currently that is the exact situation we have in place. They have the same "rights" and "choices". You are adding emotions, personal preferences, and desires into the equation. Why limit it to sex? Smoking, arbitrary distinctions of 'legal' v. 'illegal' drugs, walking around topless, arbitrary age when you can be on the streets of cities legally, 'age of consent'; add a dash of rationalization (your side) or hypocrisy (their side) and its the same.

How does the fact that two people of different genders enter into marriage and two people of different gender cannot equate to equality?

As for the idea that the addition of more people in the contract of marriage would be harmful in and of itself, why not winnow the field further. Why not make anyone who cannot or does not desire children ineligible to marry?

Equality, in this case, means that not being told what you can or cannot do under law based solely on your gender or the gender of your partner. And that is a clear distinction.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 171

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:33:00 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi
Yes, but the majority of LIBERALS in California don't agree. They had a vote and said no to gay marriage. Does this mean all liberals are against it? Why would I want to belong to a party like that?

Excuse me? How did you arrive at this claim? I've seen the demographic breakdown for that vote and no where near a majority of self identified liberals voted for it. As a matter of fact according to the CNN exit polling only 22% of liberals voted for prop 8.

Go ahead and be politically conservative but don't make things up about liberals.

Exit polls don't mean squat, believe it or not, people don't always tell the truth at those things. So how do they know the percentage that voted for it? But lets say for a moment your right and none of the liberals bothered to vote for this issue. What does that tell me about the party? They obviously voted because Obama won the state. Are you saying liberals don't care about civil liberties?

The exit poll was just a simple way to show the data. A similiar way is to see how various precincts voted. Liberals precincts all over CA voted against prop 8 by a huge majority.

This study includes a precinct level analysis of the outcome that shows that less than 30% of liberals voted for prop 8.
http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/issues/egan_sherrill_prop8_1_6_09.pdf

(in reply to thishereboi)

Post #: 172

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 11:54:51 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

How does the fact that two people of different genders enter into marriage and two people of different gender cannot equate to equality?

All people, regardless of gendar, can do exactly the same thing right now - that defines equality, doesn't it?

quote:

As for the idea that the addition of more people in the contract of marriage would be harmful in and of itself, why not winnow the field further. Why not make anyone who cannot or does not desire children ineligible to marry?

You make my point regarding the arbitrary nature of the existing laws, why would you want to make another?

Liberalism should want to permit everything applied equally across the board allowing for every preference. It would be Conservative to the extreme right wing, to want equality defined giving one way special treatment based upon preference.

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

Post #: 173

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 12:05:57 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

Merc,

Your argument appears to be that marriage is an civil contract between 2 adults of differing genders and therefore it is fair since any two people can get married as long as their genders differ. While this may be technically accurate the fact is marriage is also about love, long term commitment and brings with a host of legal privileges which has been used as a shortcut to define "desirable family unit." Expanding marriage to allow persons of the same gender to marry is then about society allowing those relationships to have equal standing before the law and in the eyes of the rest of society as similiar heterosexual relationships. Can you really oppose that?

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 174

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 12:15:37 PM

MichiganHeadmast

Posts: 726
Joined: 8/13/2006
Status: offline

There are "liberals" who support decriminalization of marijuana while supporting the outlawing of tobacco. Go figure.

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

Post #: 175

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 12:15:39 PM

maybemaybenot

Posts: 2817
Joined: 9/22/2005
Status: offline

Please show me where I said the government should not be concerned with religious antipathy ? I pointed out that many religions have the basic tenant that homosexuality is unacceptable. I said you cannot legislate thought. I said * I * am not willing to change the tenants of anyone's religion. I believe there is an ammendment or something that prohibits the government from doing that.
Interestingly enough, from the same document you are using to exemplify equality for all.
I said you can educate the masses and it isn't going to change how some people think and behave. I said you can make laws providing punishment for those who chose to disobey, but you cannot change the fact that there are people out there who just have a mind set that is in direct conflict with yours, mine or anyone elses.

I am well aware that not all employers offer benefits to unmarried same sex couple. I used my company and previous company as examples of companies who do. And how they have missed the mark on excluding a huge portion of the population. However... the fact that these two companies and many others are offering benefits is a step in the right direction, no ?

Where did I say offering same sex couples the same rights and privilges as heterosexual couples is favourtism ?

I said I want the same benefits, that my homosexual UNMARRIED
co-workers have. The ones who CHOSE not to marry, but get the benefits. I think that is a more accurate definition of equality than the one you cited.

And just as a side note : I work with and have tons of gay friends. Very few of them are married, despite it being legal here. Most of them are in long term very commited relationships, some with kids, some without and for whatever reason, have chosen not to marry. Why, I don't know, I don't ask because I did not like being asked why we weren't married. So from my own limited personal experience, marriage is not a top priority for them, any more than it is for me.

Ohh, and they don't have an issue with my very, very, Libertarian views, nor my practicing my Christain religion, or having opposing views than them. They actually like me and some are conservatives and Libertarians themselves. It's a funny funny world out there.

mbmbn

_____________________________

Tolerance of evil is suicide.- NYC Firefighter

When tolerance is not reciprocated, tolerance becomes surrender.

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

Post #: 176

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 12:23:32 PM

TheHeretic

Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

Again, I ask what issues conservative d/s community members consider more important than their civil liberties that cause them to overlook the part of the agenda that would be just as glad to see them disappear from the face of the earth?

Maybe the ones you so casually dismissed and set aside in your OP?

And you have been answered.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

Post #: 177

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 12:54:22 PM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

While this may be technically accurate the fact is marriage is also about love, long term commitment and brings with a host of legal privileges which has been used as a shortcut to define "desirable family unit."

That is absolutely correct DK. If there has to be one, I prefer a "technically accurate" law versus one which needs inclusion of arbitrary definitions of what is a "desirable family unit". I think the marriage issue is a wonderful one to use to get rid of all these arbitrary and attempts to enforce 'morality' through conservative laws of any kind.

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 178

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 1:20:53 PM

rulemylife

Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

     Maybe go back and look?

    Honestly, anyone who engages in the physical aspects of WIITWD ought to already have some sort of understanding of the local laws that could directly impact them, and perhaps even discuss with partners what should happen if the police ever knock on the door in the middle of play time.

    Local statutes vary, but I would strongly encourage you to educate yourself on this subject, RML.

I'm well aware of the law.

I'm also well aware of the fact consentual BDSM activity can be prosecuted as a crime because the law considers physical assault to be something that cannot be consented to.

I've even posted on it here, only to be told I didn't know what I was talking about by ill-informed people.

Which still doesn't answer my question of how these are "liberal" laws as you claim.

(in reply to TheHeretic)

Post #: 179

RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community - 2/22/2009 2:16:17 PM

SpinnerofTales

Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot

I said I want the same benefits, that my homosexual UNMARRIED
co-workers have. The ones who CHOSE not to marry, but get the benefits. I think that is a more accurate definition of equality than the one you cited.

Tell you what, m, when gays have the option to marry, I will support with a whole heart the idea that an unmarried heterosexual couple should have exactly the same rights and privileges as unmarried couples. Until then, the situation stands. Straight people have a powerful legal option that is not available to gay people. That is discrimination and it is just plain wrong.

(in reply to maybemaybenot)

Post #: 180

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Conservatives in the D/s Community

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.098