Marriage and other LGBTQ Rights

[only_human]

Originally Posted by retina

These is more than one way to do things. But your arguments suggests to me that you are saying there is only one "proper" way. But if my impression is wrong please correct me.

That is not what I am saying at all.

I'm saying maintaining distinctions between people and the services available to them especially prohibiting services to people identified in some way has a deleterious effect. I'm saying that a separate fountain IS a colored water fountain.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by retina

These is more than one way to do things. But your arguments suggests to me that you are saying there is only one "proper" way. But if my impression is wrong please correct me.

What form of 'correction' is customary in your neck of the woods? Perhaps you would like the variety practiced on his family by the bartender in Kubric's version of "The Shining"?

[Brian-E]

Here's a happy Dutch family who are about to add a very special new arrival.

The two women are a married couple, as are two of the men. All three men are in a permanent relationship and the only reason the third man is not married to the other two is because marriage law does not allow that. The woman in the middle of the group is pregnant, having used sperm donated by one of the men, and will shortly give birth to a child for whom all five adults will be parents in equal measure.

Source article (Dutch language): http://www.vice.com/nl/read/sjoerd-j...en-n-baby-1294

[retina]

Originally Posted by kladner

What form of 'correction' is customary in your neck of the woods?

It is not important or relevant. The point is that different cultures do different things. And no one culture is the "correct" way. And no other culture is the "wrong" way either.

[Zeta-Flux]

Propaganda is such an interesting thing, and it's something I've been thinking about quite a bit lately. It is really interesting to me how easy it is to sway people to different political causes by just reporting issues differently, or focusing on one aspect while neglecting another.

Consider, for instance, the picture of the happy family in Brian's post.

Assuming, for sake of argument, that they really are currently one big happy family, what does it matter? In terms of leading people to support their individual relationship, it matters a great deal. And if we support their individual relationship, what is to prevent us from supporting other similar relationships? If their relationship leads to happiness for everyone involved at least as great as our own, what rational reason do we have to oppose it?

But now assume for sake of argument, it is all a lie and they aren't really a happy family but just random people picked up off the street, used by an organization to promote their political agenda, does it really matter? Again, yes, it means we have to be extra wary of that organization and how it wants to mislead and deceive us.

Now, to be clear, do I really think that they aren't truly happy? Or that their situation is a lie? No, I think that part is most likely accurate. But what I don't like, and what many people are going to ignore because of the moving personal story, is that the story is still incomplete in many important ways. First, we don't know how this family will turn out. We don't know if they will stay together, if any divorces among them will make it even more difficult for any of the children born (because they now could be split 5 ways), if these 5 individuals were chosen because they are extremely more committed than your average homosexual quintuple family or just because they are good-looking, etc.... Second, and more importantly, on some level their personal story is irrelevant. This, may seem harsh but it's true in terms of setting social policy. Let me explain.

If that family turns out horribly, and any children suffer immense pain, that is irrelevant (to your politics) if you support polygamy/multiple-family-parenting as a civil right.

If that family turns out wonderfully, and any children grow up as well-adjusted as any others, that is irrelevant (to your politics) if your politics on family is based around aggregate affects on children.

So, consider this: Suppose those pictures in Brian-E's post were of an ugly family, living in a dump, perhaps with signs of abuse on their faces. If this would lead you to change your politics, then perhaps your politics are not based on the best of principles. And if such a change wouldn't lead you to change your politics, then perhaps you may understand why some would view this new article for the propaganda it is.

[Brian-E]

Right.

And while the above-mentioned people are encouraging propaganda by organising their own family as they want to in one of the safest countries on Earth for doing just that, people in one of the most dangerous countries for being yourself as a LGBTI person, Uganda, are - incredibly - staging their national Pride parade on Saturday under the slogan "We are family". I can't express my admiration adequately for their courage and self-assuredness in the face of threats to their lives simply for being who they are.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/08/05...ite-hostility/

[only_human]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

Propaganda is such an interesting thing, and it's something I've been thinking about quite a bit lately. It is really interesting to me how easy it is to sway people to different political causes by just reporting issues differently, or focusing on one aspect while neglecting another.
/.../
So, consider this: Suppose those pictures in Brian-E's post were of an ugly family, living in a dump, perhaps with signs of abuse on their faces. If this would lead you to change your politics, then perhaps your politics are not based on the best of principles. And if such a change wouldn't lead you to change your politics, then perhaps you may understand why some would view this new article for the propaganda it is.

So you are saying that it is laudable to stay fixed in your politics. That it is superior to not be swayed by information that emphasizes problems with a position because emphasizing something to sway people is propaganda; and if propaganda leads one to change one's politics then one's politics are not the best of principles.

I emphasized politics because it may be clearer to instead use creed, beliefs or opinions. Using politics instead of any of these other words makes it easier to aggregate issues into policy positions of political parties instead of examining issues on their own merits.

But this word that I've emphasized is not actually my focus. My focus is instead that staying fixed in one's beliefs, opinions or even politics and being especially intolerant of other views is not a good thing. There's an ugly word that defines it.

[Zeta-Flux]

only_human,

Originally Posted by only_human

So you are saying that it is laudable to stay fixed in your politics.

No, I'm not saying that.

That it is superior to not be swayed by information that emphasizes problems with a position because emphasizing something to sway people is propaganda; and if propaganda leads one to change one's politics then one's politics are not the best of principles.

Not at all. Being swayed by information is very important.

But being swayed by misleading, incomplete, self-selected, or irrelevant information is not good.

------------

Brian-E,

And while the above-mentioned people are encouraging propaganda by organising their own family as they want to in one of the safest countries on Earth for doing just that, people in one of the most dangerous countries for being yourself as a LGBTI person, Uganda, are - incredibly - staging their national Pride parade on Saturday under the slogan "We are family". I can't express my admiration adequately for their courage and self-assuredness in the face of threats to their lives simply for being who they are.

I don't read Dutch, so I may have missed how the article you posted had anything to do with Ugandan national Pride parades. Sorry!

[kladner]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

Brian-E,

I don't read Dutch, so I may have missed how the article you posted had anything to do with Ugandan national Pride parades. Sorry!

The article I see at
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/08/05...ite-hostility/

is in English. The URL has a .uk suffix.

[Zeta-Flux]

Originally Posted by kladner

The article I see at
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/08/05...ite-hostility/

is in English. The URL has a .uk suffix.

I meant the original article, about the polygamist family.

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

Brian-E,

I don't read Dutch, so I may have missed how the article you posted had anything to do with Ugandan national Pride parades. Sorry!

The connection, tenuous though it may be, has to do with your remarks about propaganda. You don't need to read about the five-parent family. Think about it.