|
"American Dad" Edpsode Takes Cheap Shots
Politics with a Liberal Bias |
 Blog For Free! Archives Home 2007 June 2007 May 2007 January 2006 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June My Links Candidates on the Issues Young Democrats of America MoveOn.org Alan Colmes DNC.org Air America The New York Times Reuters 9/11 Conspiracy Theory tBlog My Profile Send tMail My tFriends My Images Sponsored Blog
by The JavaScript Source
|
posted by: heavyarms (reply) post date: 11.06.06 (9:13 am) You've basically just characterized me as a bigot and I don't appreciate that. I'm a registered Republican, and guess what, I DO believe that all American citizens should be treated the same, and deserve equal RIGHTS. I assume you're referring to the issue of homosexuals being allowed to get married. Marriage is not a RIGHT, marriage (like driving your car) is a privelege. If it were a right, then you would be free to marry your mother or your brother, correct? (Rights with limitations are not "rights" at all.) Homosexuals, just like blacks, DO have the same RIGHTS as I do. They have the right to free speech, they have the right to own and carry a firearm (for now), they have the right to practice whatever religion they choose, they have the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, etc. I don't support a federal amendment to ban "gay marriage." Nor do I believe it is something the federal government should make legal. This is simply because I don't think it should be in the FEDERAL government's realm of responsibility to regulate marriage in the first place. I think this is a matter that should be left up to the individual states and those states' voters. If California chooses to legally recognize a union between two men as a "marriage" while Louisiana chooses not to do so, fine. As long as Uncle Sam doesn't come sticking his big nose in the matter, I'm okay with it. This is the problem with you liberals, you always turn to the federal government to fix things you want fixed instead of first considering whether they should be the ones doing the fixing in the first place. History has shown that the Federal Government does a LOUSY job of fixing anything. Name a federal program other than the military and DOT that could be described as anything other than a massive beauracracy and waste of tax dollars. Regardless, the US Constitution doesn't empower the Federal Government to regulate marriage, and if it isn't explicitly stated that they CAN do it, they shouldn't be doing it at all as far as I'm concerned. The MAIN problem I have here is that you are characterizing Republicans as a bunch of racists, bigots, and "homophobes" (what a propagandized term) when they are not. I'm probably one of the most open-minded people you will ever meet. I don't look at people who are "different" than me and think "Second-class citizen." Well, I do, but their race, gender, sexual orientation has nothing to do with it. (Their actions do.) You may be surprised to learn that, even though I am a white person, I actually have one friend who is black (which may not sound like much, but I don't have that many friends in the first place, so he makes up a signifigant percentage. Well over the percentage required by Affirmative Action.) I even met a gay dude one time, and managed not to be repulsed. I know, I was surprised to. Just to expound a little further. My grandfather is one of the most racist and bigoted people I know. He refers to black people as "niggers." He doesn't do it with any hatred or malice, its just that he grew up at a time and in an area when that is what you called blacks. If we watch a football game, he will say "That's a big ol' nigger," as an offhand comment. He doesn't burn crosses, or wear a white shee or anything. I like to say that he'd sell a bushel of beans to a man and charge him the same price regardless of what color he is. He does hate homosexuality, he believes that homosexuality is a sin (I do not. Or at least it isn't any more a sin than heterosexual pre-marital sex or lying. We all have sinned at one point, and I'm not above any other "sinner" in this world.) He also thinks there are two evil things in this world, the Devil and Republicans. He ALWAYS pulls the lever for the people on the ballot with "D" after their name. Recommending people vote straight party-line is very dangerous, and I'd caution you against it. posted by: tfruge1 (reply) post date: 11.06.06 (9:53 am) Reply to: heavyarms I must say. You make very good points even though I don't have to agree with them. Everything you wrote was very well said and defines the right quite well. I will not criticize based on your opinions due to the fact that you are definatly entitled to them. Another thing is that I am sorry if I offended you. I was just trying to make a few points not be offense. I can agree with you on one sentence you said and that was the last sentence you wrote. Voting along party-lines is very dangerous because a lot of time you don't get what you expected. Before one votes you need to do research on that candidate and see exactly where the candidate stands on the issues. My post was not intended to pursuade people to vote just based on party-lines, however, the point I was making above is very true. Republicans are against gay marriage. That is a fact. The point I was making is that this show is wrong to do an episode misrepresenting the GOP in order to get gay people to support and vote for the Republican party. posted by: heavyarms (reply) post date: 11.06.06 (12:43 pm) I'm not offended in the least. I understand that everyone has an opinion, and some opinions I may not agree with. I just took exception to the fact that you basically characterized all republicans as being a certain way when, in fact, most (or at least most of the ones I know) are not. (And I'm not a TRUE Republican, I'm more of a conservative/libertarian/constutionalist than a Republican because I see most Republicans as being no better than Democrats. That is, big on government and taxes. But I am registered as Republican.) I want you to understand that Republicans in general are not opposed to gay marriage because we see homosexuals as something less than they are. Most are opposed to it because they don't want the Federal Government telling us who we can marry. There's nothing in federal legislation that explicitly forbids gay marriage, and there should NOT be. As I stated earlier, its a matter that needs to be left up to the states. If you take the stance that the Federal government can tell you who you CAN marry, who's to say they won't be able to tell you who you CAN'T marry? A better option would be to keep them out of the whole damn affair to begin with. My other point was to illustrate that there are just as many bigots and racists on the left as there are on the right. Living in Louisiana, you should know that. Remember, southern Democrats were the ones who mostly opposed to Civil Rights only 40 short years ago. A lot of those Democrats are alive and well. Well, obviously we have reached an impasse. I don't hope to persuade you to my side of the argument, and you certainly wouldn't be able to persuade me. Talk to you later, and stay dry! posted by: PastorDave (reply) post date: 11.06.06 (12:44 pm) I actually saw most of that episode last night, which is highly unusual because I never watch the show. I was working on my laptop, and somehow American Dad was droning in the background. When the guy with the big chin announced he wanted to become gay, I took notice. Next thing I know these two cartoon characters are in bed together. They kiss. the "American Dad" announces that he did not feel anything when the kiss happened, and his bed partner explained that it is likely because he is not gay. There are some clear moral implications being promoted by this episode: *Clearly, that it is alright to be gay *It is alright to be gay and to sleep with another person's husband *Being gay is natural- something you are born with- just like being heterosexual *To be "conservative" is equivalent to being stupid. I don't know for sure this is a moral mesage, but it is morally irritating to me. Instead of seeing this adult cartoon show to be pro-Republican, I think it ridicules the conservative values of many Republicans. It is, instead, pro-gay. I disagree with the message of the show. I certainly do not think it is the kind of show our kids need to be watching. It is interesting to me that Fox has such a fair news division, even though the liberal media and politicians have the audacity to call them conservative. And, in contrast to their news division, Fox seems to have a lot of raunchy programming. I don't think liberals have anything to fear about a conservative slant to the entertainment programming of Fox. posted by: PastorDave (reply) post date: 11.06.06 (3:07 pm) Reply to: breakouttheglass Good point about the bottom-line, profit focus of some economic conservatives. Touche. I'll give you what I truly believe about homosexuality. And I will do so with trust that you, and whoever else reads what I have to write, will keep this conversation civil. I am not disparaging of any person who is gay. I think he or she should have the legal right to enter into private sexual relations, and even public union, with any gender so chosen. I even consider that gay marriage should be legalized. If the church opposes, then the church should not perform these unions and not recognize them. I think there should be secular ceremonies, and religious people can choose religious ceremonies with associated vows. So my opposition to homosexuality is not political. And while I personally feel it tends to have a negative impact on our society, I do not think it can be discriminated against legally. I do not think a person is born gay. I believe a person can be born with personality and physical tendencies that can, in a particular climate of life, lead a person to choose to be gay. For instance, some men are by nature and/or conditioning effiminate, and women are masculine. Thus, I believe some persons are conditioned by resultant experiences of life to see being gay as an attractive choice. Still, I believe all who are gay choose to be so. Now, I believe my faith teaches that heterosexual relationship, governed by guidelines from the scripture, in proper. And homosexual relationship, against scripture, is improper. We do not have the right to just do whatever we want, whatever we feel makes us happy. As a Christian, I owe my allegiance to God. What He wishes is what I am to do. And as i obey and please Him, I experience the best of life- even if it runs counter to my basic urges of life. Thus, even if a person feels the desire to engage in a gay relationship, the Lordship of Christ is to triumph. I'm aware that what I believe is not shared by some. It is interesting to me how angry and agressive some become in countering what I have to say- even becoming quite personal and nasty. At this point, I have no interest in engaging in such exchange. But, if you or anyone wants to discuss as intelligent and respectful adults, I'm quite willing. posted by: heavyarms (reply) post date: 11.07.06 (6:31 am) This is going off topic. Sorry truge1. PDave: That's interesting that you'd think that people choose to be gay. My parents and my wife feel the same way. Before I go over this, I want you to understand I am socially conservative, and I come from a Southern Baptist background. I wonder if it is possible to CHOOSE to be gay. I cannot point to the specific instant in my life where I chose to be heterosexual and decided that I was going to be attracted to women. None of the people I have spoken to who believe homosexuality is a choice can do this either. Based on this, I have pretty much come to the conclusion that humans do not choose to be heterosexual. So why do we believe that a human could "choose" to be homosexual? posted by: quickwit (reply) post date: 11.07.06 (12:18 pm) This blog is totally pointless. The premise behind tfruge1’s blog was the conspiracy between FOX and the fox news network. The cartoon American Dad, if anyone has ever seen, is a spoof of the republican way. The show is called satire (following the word satire I have a brief definition of that word for you people like tfruge1 and other idiots). Although satire is usually witty, and often very funny indeed, the primary purpose is not humor as such – but to criticize a person, an idea or attitude, an institution or a social practice by holding it up to ridicule, and, ideally, shaming it into reform. An essential, defining feature of satire is a strong vein of irony or sarcasm, in fact satirical writing or drama very often professes to approve values that are the diametric opposite of what the writer actually wishes to promote. The show is in no way connected to Karl Rove and the people who run the republican campaigns. Only a fool would think such. Only someone blinded by the stupidity of liberalism would think of something this ridiculous. I also suppose the episode of Family Guy that came on that night was also trying to get people to join the military. This is so stupid; I can’t believe I wasted so much time responding to something so goofy. I wish the blogger would remove his head out of his rectum and watch pay a little more attention to what is actually happening and not make up stuff like he wants it to be. Conservatives have all bad ideas and Liberals have no ideas. |
Political Party Beliefs Know Your Candidates Political Podcasts
|
