The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: BannedFromDU on April 08, 2009, 11:41:57 PM
-
ryderi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr-09-09 02:06 AM
Original message
Poll question: Should Gay Marriage Be Legal?
Poll result (106 votes)
Yes (102 votes, 96%) Vote
No (4 votes, 4%) Vote
Time to flush out the "freepers" (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5418724&mesg_id=5418724)
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr-09-09 02:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. Failure to vote "yes" is failure to follow the DU rules. nt
cboy4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr-09-09 03:16 AM
Response to Original message
18. I have confidence Skinner will be banning the "no" voters
since all he has to do is look who voted that way.
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr-09-09 04:17 AM
Response to Original message
30. The answer MUST be yes if you are a member here.
....The purpose of this post is to remind everyone that Democratic Underground has rules regarding anti-gay bigotry. We expect *all* of our members to support equal rights for all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation.
We have very few litmus test issues on DU. We permit members to be pro-life or pro-gun or whatever, provided that they are generally on our side.
But this is a litmus test issue, because we are talking about REAL PEOPLE, our fellow members of this community. I simply will not tolerate the idea of some DU members arguing that other DU members are not deserving of full and equal rights. This is a moral issue. If DU had existed back during the civil rights movement, I hope that we would all agree that this was not the place to discuss whether blacks deserve civil rights.
But I also need to make something else clear: Democratic Underground is a message board dedicated to the discussion of political issues, including how political issues affect the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party. It is not homophobic to discuss whether the issue of Gay rights cost us votes, provided that you are not discussing the issue in a homophobic way. But it is homophobic to scapegoat gays and lesbians in an effort to answer an extremely complex question like "why did we lose?"
So, where is the line drawn here? What is acceptable discourse and what is not? I wish there were easy answers. I would prefer not to have to make calls like this, because invariably someone gets pissed off, but it comes with the job description.
Keep the following guidelines in mind:
1. We expect all of our members to support equal rights for all people, regardless of sexual orientation. That includes the right to marry.
2. If you want to discuss this issue, you need to do so in a manner that is sensitive to the values of this diverse community. Be as clear and as non-inflammatory as possible in everything you say.
3. If you are opposed to gay rights, you are a homophobe. Don't share that particular point of view here or else you're going to get banned. You've been warned.
4. If your explanation for why we lost is based entirely (or almost entirely) on gay rights, then you are scapegoating and you're probably a homophobe. You might get banned.
5. If you are arguing that the party needs to abandon support for gay rights entirely, then you might not be an outright homophobe, but in my opinion you are not sufficiently supportive of equal rights.
6. It is not homophobic to point out the obvious truth that there are large numbers of people in large regions of the country who are opposed to gay rights. ON EDIT: It also not homophobic to point out that political candidates, particularly those running in conservative areas, may have to compromise on the issue of gay rights for the purposes of political expediency.
7. I believe that we need to focus on the question of how our party can be competitive nationally without abandoning this core principle. I believe that gay rights is not a make-or-break issue for a majority of voters in any state. The opinions of hard-core homophobes notwithstanding, my impression is that most Americans are supportive of the idea that people should be able to live their lives how they like. How do we convince potential voters that they need not be afraid? How do we convince potential voters that they should care more about their job and their health care and their children than about who some stranger falls in love with? These are the questions we need to be asking.
We are right on this issue, I have no doubt. In 40 years, we are going to look back at opposition to gay marriage as something as bigoted and anachronistic as opposition to interracial marriage.
I am sorry if some of you feel I am putting too much restriction on the discussion of this topic. I am also sorry if some of you feel I am not restrictive enough. My goal is to create a place where we can discuss the issues in an atmosphere of mutual respect.
Won't be long before you get banned for not voting on this. BadCat, what are there, 4900 DUmmies? Won't be long until Skinner expects 4900-0 in favor, or heads will roll. Donor or not.
Nice site you Nazis have over there.
-
Keep the following guidelines in mind:
3. If you are opposed to gay rights, you are a homophobe. Don't share that particular point of view here or else you're going to get banned. You've been warned.
Sounds more like an ultimatum than a "guideline".
-
Sounds more like an ultimatum than a "guideline".
It IS an ultimatum. Now replace "gay rights" with "unionization," and you'll see what's coming up soon from Dumbama and his Merry Band of Dipshit Collectivists.
-
A hearty "sieg heil" seems appropriate.
Where's the Red Army to level that virtual Fuhrer Bunker?
-
If you are opposed to gay rights, you are a homophobe. Don't share that particular point of view here or else you're going to get banned. You've been warned.
How is it this^^^^^
My goal is to create a place where we can discuss the issues in an atmosphere of mutual respect.
And this^^^^^
In the same post? Is this an example of total hypocrisy, or bi-polar disorder? What is there left to talk about? You MUST CONFORM!!!
-
How is it this^^^^^
And this^^^^^
In the same post? Is this an example of total hypocrisy, or bi-polar disorder? What is there left to talk about? You MUST CONFORM!!!
Yes, you must conform, but there will be absolute respect for those with whom they are in absolute agreement. Otherwise :hammer:
-
Individual conformity is mandatory!
-
You know, if I were my fellow alum Skins, I would immediately mausoleumize the bluebore primitive.
Not for the content of the blueboor's post.
But for the way in which the message is being delivered, as if the blueboar primitive is president of Skins's island, which of course the bluebore primitive is not.
I think only Skins, the elusive enigmatic Elad, and unfortunately Lord Marblehead EarlG, can issue edicts concerning Skins's island, and it appears to me the blueboor primitive has taken it upon himself to issue an "official" order, as if the blueboar primitive is a member of ownership and management.
Geesh.
-
Mole trap. Except moles are usually too savvy to fall for it, so $kammer will end up banning four actual Democrats.
-
Frank, is that true???!!! He sounds like the owner, inventor, sole investor, and CEO of the Island. How dare he? Don't they have any Af-Am members who feel the way they did in Calif on Prop 8?
I would gladly quit such a forum if I were addressed in this way. But that's just me, I like to say whatever the hell I want on an internet forum.
Edit: Big, whopping bonfire over there, with some jumping feet-first into gay polygamy. Lovely. And, some people sheeple just LOVE having lots of strict rules. Ya know, this has puzzled me. In the lefty utopian nanny-state, the only fun allowed seems to be gay-sex-without-consequences. Hope you like that sort of thing, moonbats.
-
Bluebear
I voice my agreement with comrade leader Lord Obama when I say "In my hand I hold a list....."
Fixed.
.
-
cboy4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr-09-09 03:16 AM
Response to Original message
18. I have confidence Skinner will be banning the "no" voters
since all he has to do is look who voted that way.
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01289/goose_step_1289913c.jpg)
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr-09-09 02:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. Failure to vote "yes" is failure to follow the DU rules. nt
(http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/08/18/mydans_pic_wideweb__430x273.jpg)
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr-09-09 04:17 AM
Response to Original message
30. The answer MUST be yes if you are a member here.
(http://www.geocities.com/idiotboxwars/execution_in_vietnam.jpg)
-
I can't help but wonder, are all DUmmies also required to sniff asses like dogs?
-
I can't help but wonder, are all DUmmies also required to sniff asses like dogs?
that's not the only thing they are required to do to asses.
-
Freely choosing individual conformity is mandatory!
f1x0r3d! :-)
-
pinto DU Moderator Donating Member (1000+ posts)
Thu Apr-09-09 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
173. Locking.
Thanks.
"Thanks for helping us ban 11 members," I'm sure.
-
f1x0r3d! :-)
thank you. I give you h5 #100
-
On the bright side, such polls are great for helping the many mole accounts.
-
"Gay marriage" has never once been a civil rights issue any more then bigamy,polygamy or for that matter pedophilia is.
It is about one thing and one thing only...economics.
The tax issues written into the code regarding filing jointly,the rights of survivorship regarding estates and social security benefits and the ability to be covered under a family insurance plan for healthcare.
Every one of which has implications on the rest of society as does their attempts at being declared a minority which would bestow additional privileges.