What loyalties should minorities have?

[Green Arrow]

I was carrying on a rather one-sided discussion with @Howey (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=387) yesterday and never really got an answer to this question. I disagreed with him that the SPLC's word on what makes a group a hate group was the only real qualification necessary, and said that I don't think the groups he posted that were related to Kim Davis sounded hateful. I asked for evidence of any hatefulness and I didn't get an answer to that question either. I did, however, get asked a rather puzzling question.

Where are your loyalties?

That question puzzles me. I am a gay man, I have no qualms saying that. My loyalties are to my G-d first, my family second, my friends third, and anyone else after that. I'm not really sure what loyalties I am expected to have, but neither Howey nor @TrueBlue (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1308) could answer that question.

So, what loyalties should gay people have? What loyalties should black people have? What loyalties should anyone have?

[Common]

They should be loyal to their hearts

[Safety]

I don't think people should have any loyalties other than to their family and who they consider their friend(s). That's not to say you can't defend or speak about other traits that you may have, but it would be best for a multicultural country such as ours to try and treat people as individuals rather than as part of some predescribed group.

[Ravens Fan]

I was carrying on a rather one-sided discussion with @Howey (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=387) yesterday and never really got an answer to this question. I disagreed with him that the SPLC's word on what makes a group a hate group was the only real qualification necessary, and said that I don't think the groups he posted that were related to Kim Davis sounded hateful. I asked for evidence of any hatefulness and I didn't get an answer to that question either. I did, however, get asked a rather puzzling question.

Where are your loyalties?

That question puzzles me. I am a gay man, I have no qualms saying that. My loyalties are to my G-d first, my family second, my friends third, and anyone else after that. I'm not really sure what loyalties I am expected to have, but neither Howey nor @TrueBlue (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1308) could answer that question.

So, what loyalties should gay people have? What loyalties should black people have? What loyalties should anyone have?

Good questions. I have been wondering that myself since reading that thread. Not too long ago we were both accused of not actually being gay because our opinions differ with the "Gay Movement". TB like to deny that she does this, and then brings it up every time you or I disagree with her.

My opinions tend to side with the Constitution. I believe that ALL people should be treated equally under the law, and that NONE should be given special treatment. I also like to play the devil's advocate at times, but will usually make it clear that I am not necessarily defending my personal position. But anytime my beliefs, or my argument go against what straight supporters of gay rights think I should think, my sexuality comes into question.

[Cigar]

Family, First, Second and Last ... there's a lot Black People I don't trust ... as a matter of fact, there's some Black Family members I don't trust, but God forbid if someone outside the family messes with them.

:wink:

[Green Arrow]

Family, First, Second and Last ... there's a lot Black People I don't trust ... as a matter of fact, there's some Black Family members I don't trust, but God forbid someone outside the family messes with them.

:wink:

Family is always like that, I think. Pretty much all of my uncle F's kids are sluts and druggies, I don't have much good to say about that section of the family. But if anyone thinks they can fuck with them, I'll still open a can of whoop ass on them.

[kilgram]

Loyalties?

The only loyalty that a person should have is to its own principles. But never to any person, myth or whatever.

Also I disagree with the OP about being gay (firstly because he has a girlfriend/wife). He always has defined himself as bisexual. And sorry, but bisexual is different to gay or heterosexual. A gay is a person who has preferences for people of same sex. And a heterosexual is a person who has preferences for people of different sex. A bisexual is the god of sex :)

[Safety]

Family is always like that, I think. Pretty much all of my uncle F's kids are sluts and druggies, I don't have much good to say about that section of the family. But if anyone thinks they can fuck with them, I'll still open a can of whoop ass on them.

http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag137/nelsonmonty/openingacanofwhoopass_zps4680ef25.gif

[Chris]

Self, family, friends, community (which can be broadly defined). Principles, I don't know, maybe, but not causes, unless you, yourself, have something at stake in.

[Green Arrow]

Loyalties?

The only loyalty that a person should have is to its own principles. But never to any person, myth or whatever.

Also I disagree with the OP about being gay (firstly because he has a girlfriend/wife). He always has defined himself as bisexual. And sorry, but bisexual is different to gay or heterosexual. A gay is a person who has preferences for people of same sex. And a heterosexual is a person who has preferences for people of different sex. A bisexual is the god of sex :)

Does a bisexual not have preferences for people of the same sex?

[TrueBlue]

I was carrying on a rather one-sided discussion with @Howey (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=387) yesterday and never really got an answer to this question. I disagreed with him that the SPLC's word on what makes a group a hate group was the only real qualification necessary, and said that I don't think the groups he posted that were related to Kim Davis sounded hateful. I asked for evidence of any hatefulness and I didn't get an answer to that question either. I did, however, get asked a rather puzzling question.

Where are your loyalties?

That question puzzles me. I am a gay man, I have no qualms saying that. My loyalties are to my G-d first, my family second, my friends third, and anyone else after that. I'm not really sure what loyalties I am expected to have, but neither Howey nor @TrueBlue (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1308) could answer that question.

So, what loyalties should gay people have? What loyalties should black people have? What loyalties should anyone have?
When it concerns loyalties of Gay people, one has to feel and know who they are and what they stand for in their heart, first and foremost. They have to then see what society thinks about them as a whole and whether it is worth defending those loyalties or not. Some defend them fiercely especially being Gay. Others, not so much. It all depends on how deeply felt and special they consider their sexual orientation to be. Therein will lie their true loyalties Green Arrow But that is as it concerns a Gay person.

As it concerns one who is not Gay but who adheres to religious beliefs but works for a government office then that individual need not bring in their religious beliefs into the workplace if it is going to interfere with their job duties and become disruptive unless their workplace happens to be a church or religious institution. There are the Laws of the Land that they must adhere to and follow as a public servant. If they fail to do that and cite their "loyalties" to their religious beliefs then that is also their right to do but they must then vacate their paid position in government and leave the office open to one who does not share those same feelings and beliefs and who will actually do the job they were hired to do and are being paid to do by the citizens of the city or state they work for.

[Green Arrow]

When it concerns loyalties of Gay people, one has to feel and know who they are and what they stand for in their heart, first and foremost. They have to then see what society thinks about them as a whole and whether it is worth defending those loyalties or not. Some defend them fiercely especially being Gay. Others, not so much. It all depends on how deeply felt and special they consider their sexual orientation to be. Therein will lie their true loyalties @Green Arrow (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=868) But that is as it concerns a Gay person.

So, you don't know what these loyalties are?

[Chris]

When it concerns loyalties of Gay people, one has to feel and know who they are and what they stand for in their heart, first and foremost. They have to then see what society thinks about them as a whole and whether it is worth defending those loyalties or not. Some defend them fiercely especially being Gay. Others, not so much. It all depends on how deeply felt and special they consider their sexual orientation to be. Therein will lie their true loyalties Green Arrow But that is as it concerns a Gay person.

As it concerns one who is not Gay but who adheres to religious beliefs but works for a government office then that individual need not bring in their religious beliefs into the workplace if it is going to interfere with their job duties and become disruptive unless their workplace happens to be a church or religious institution. There are the Laws of the Land that they must adhere to and follow as a public servant. If they fail to do that and cite their "loyalties" to their religious beliefs then that is also their right to do but they must then vacate their paid position in government and leave the office open to one who does not share those same feelings and beliefs and who will actually do the job they were hired to do and are being paid to do by the citizens of the city or state they work for.



Can you clarify, TrueBlue, exactly what stake you have in these culture wars you so vigorously fight? What personal stake you have?

[kilgram]

Does a bisexual not have preferences for people of the same sex?
Does a bisexual not have preferences for people of different sex?

My point is that you cannot define a bisexual as gay or heterosexual. Because they have preferences for any sex. The only way to define them as gay or heterosexual is by the actual relationship with their partner and making reference to the actual relationship. That person has a gay or heterosexual relationship, and based in that say that person is gay or heterosexual.

Ok, let's rewrite my sentence:

A gay is a person that only has preference for people of their own sex.
An heterosexual is a person that only has preference for people of different sex.

And going to the topic, I believe every person can choose its own loyalties. As long those loyalties don't betray their own principles that I believe that are what define ourselves as different people.

[Dr. Who]

I won't pretend that my loyalties aren't with my family and personal life first and foremost, however when it comes to intolerance, this poem resonates:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—


Because I was not a Socialist.


Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—


Because I was not a Trade Unionist.


Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—


Because I was not a Jew.


Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

[Green Arrow]

Does a bisexual not have preferences for people of different sex?

My point is that you cannot define a bisexual as gay or heterosexual. Because they have preferences for any sex. The only way to define them as gay or heterosexual is by the actual relationship with their partner and making reference to the actual relationship. That person has a gay or heterosexual relationship, and based in that say that person is gay or heterosexual.

Ok, let's rewrite my sentence:

A gay is a person that only has preference for people of their own sex.
An heterosexual is a person that only has preference for people of different sex.

And going to the topic, I believe every person can choose its own loyalties. As long those loyalties don't betray their own principles that I believe that are what define ourselves as different people.

I believe that is a lot of hooey that only serves to divide people that should otherwise be united. There's a lot of bigotry in the LGBT community toward bisexuals and I think unnecessary divisions like this only serve to increase that bigotry rather than lessen it.

[TrueBlue]

Can you clarify, TrueBlue, exactly what stake you have in these culture wars you so vigorously fight? What personal stake you have?
My stake is that I have vigorously fought for the rights of minorities all of my life in one way or another. As an advocate for Gay and other people's rights I have seen first hand the suffering and consternation they go through daily with their non-acceptance by society. That is so wrong. They deserve so much better being God's creation also. But prejudice and intolerance, and discrimination along with bigotry unfortunately prevail in many a bigot's black heart. I have cried along with Gay people and have felt their pain due to their being ostracized from their own homes and families because they were Gay and then society turning a blind eye on them. So, if I can ameliorate a Gay person's suffering even to the tune of just one tiny ounce it would have all been worth it. And that is my personal stake in this -- to see that JUSTICE is done to turn people's hate into Love and that it will PREVAIL! Only then will I personally feel that I have done my job to help make the world a better place for these fine and beautiful people to live in. To that end, I will work to see that that goal comes to fruition.

[Chris]

My stake is that I have vigorously fought for the rights of minorities all of my life in one way or another. As an advocate for Gay and other people's rights I have seen first hand the suffering and consternation they go through daily with their non-acceptance by society. That is so wrong. They deserve so much better being God's creation also. But prejudice and intolerance, and discrimination along with bigotry unfortunately prevail in many a bigot's black heart. I have cried along with Gay people and have felt their pain due to their being ostracized from their own homes and families because they were Gay and then society turning a blind eye on them. So, if I can ameliorate a Gay person's suffering even to the tune of just one tiny ounce it would have all been worth it. And that is my personal stake in this -- to see that JUSTICE is done to turn people's hate into Love and that it will PREVAIL! Only then will I personally feel that I have done my job to help make the world a better place for these fine and beautiful people to live in. To that end, I will work to see that that goal comes to fruition.


I see, "they", so no personal stake. Thank you.

[Chris]

Does a bisexual not have preferences for people of different sex?

My point is that you cannot define a bisexual as gay or heterosexual. Because they have preferences for any sex. The only way to define them as gay or heterosexual is by the actual relationship with their partner and making reference to the actual relationship. That person has a gay or heterosexual relationship, and based in that say that person is gay or heterosexual.

Ok, let's rewrite my sentence:

A gay is a person that only has preference for people of their own sex.
An heterosexual is a person that only has preference for people of different sex.

And going to the topic, I believe every person can choose its own loyalties. As long those loyalties don't betray their own principles that I believe that are what define ourselves as different people.


Life doesn't work by definitions.

[The Xl]

I have loyalty to my family and friends first, of which are made up of many different races and ethnicities. Outside of that, I have no loyalties, I'll just side with what I perceive to be justice and righteousness in a situation, whether it be between individuals or groups.

[Dr. Who]

I see, "they", so no personal stake. Thank you.
True is a person of faith, so perhaps has a personal stake:
Matthew 25:40
"The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'

[Safety]

Well, this does bring up an interesting discussion. Let's take #blacklivesmatter for instance. A lot of people say this is a racist group because they say #alllivesmatter. However, when you step back and think about it, the BLM group is not saying "only black lives matter" but rather "black lives matter too".

An analogy would be you sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don't get any. So you say "I should get my fair share". And as a direct response to this your dad corrects you, saying "*everyone* should get their fair share." Now, that's a wonderful idea, everyone *should*, and that was kinda your point in the first place, that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share *also*. However, your dad's comment just dismissed you and didn't solve the problem that you didn't get any dinner. The problem is that the statement "I should get my fair share" had an implicit "too" at the end. "I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else". But your dad's response treated your statement as though you meant "*only* I should get my fair share", which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that "everyone should get their fair share," while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.

It's like going to a breast cancer awareness event and saying "all cancer matters".

Understanding does not equate to loyalty.

[The Xl]

Well, this does bring up an interesting discussion. Let's take #blacklivesmatter for instance. A lot of people say this is a racist group because they say #alllivesmatter. However, when you step back and think about it, the BLM group is not saying "only black lives matter" but rather "black lives matter too".

An analogy would be you sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don't get any. So you say "I should get my fair share". And as a direct response to this your dad corrects you, saying "*everyone* should get their fair share." Now, that's a wonderful idea, everyone *should*, and that was kinda your point in the first place, that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share *also*. However, your dad's comment just dismissed you and didn't solve the problem that you didn't get any dinner. The problem is that the statement "I should get my fair share" had an implicit "too" at the end. "I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else". But your dad's response treated your statement as though you meant "*only* I should get my fair share", which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that "everyone should get their fair share," while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.

It's like going to a breast cancer awareness event and saying "all cancer matters".

Nah, I get what they're saying, but it would behoove them to clarify that. My issue with them is the fact that they don't clarify stuff like that and kinda go about shit wrong, like picking bad cases to represent or bothering random white people at diners. Otherwise I agree with the sentiment and generally support it.

[Safety]

Nah, I get what they're saying, but it would behoove them to clarify that. My issue with them is the fact that they don't clarify stuff like that and kinda go about shit wrong, like picking bad cases to represent or bothering random white people at diners. Otherwise I agree with the sentiment and generally support it.

Being radical about it is not the way to tackle the problem.

Didn't mean to divert your thread Green Arrow

[Chris]

True is a person of faith, so perhaps has a personal stake:
Matthew 25:40
"The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'

Right, I can respect her advocating for others, just not when that advocacy turns against those she professes to advocate for just because they don't kowtow to her agenda.

[Mister D]

The problem with BLM is that it's based on a false premise which, among other false premises regarding crime and the law, seems to be embraced by segments of the black community.

Anyway, I think the question is perhaps too narrow. It need not be specific to minorities. I'm loyal to my community of faith, the European community of peoples, and I'm still loyal to my country although my enthusiasm in that regard has been considerably dampened.

[Mister D]

Being radical about it is not the way to tackle the problem.

Didn't mean to divert your thread @Green Arrow (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=868)

As long as it generates good conversation I doubt he cares.

[Chris]

Well, this does bring up an interesting discussion. Let's take #blacklivesmatter for instance. A lot of people say this is a racist group because they say #alllivesmatter. However, when you step back and think about it, the BLM group is not saying "only black lives matter" but rather "black lives matter too".

An analogy would be you sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don't get any. So you say "I should get my fair share". And as a direct response to this your dad corrects you, saying "*everyone* should get their fair share." Now, that's a wonderful idea, everyone *should*, and that was kinda your point in the first place, that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share *also*. However, your dad's comment just dismissed you and didn't solve the problem that you didn't get any dinner. The problem is that the statement "I should get my fair share" had an implicit "too" at the end. "I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else". But your dad's response treated your statement as though you meant "*only* I should get my fair share", which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that "everyone should get their fair share," while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.

It's like going to a breast cancer awareness event and saying "all cancer matters".

Understanding does not equate to loyalty.


Good point, and agree. Next will be #whitelivesmatter, oh, wait, already happening: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/08/13/3691278/jeb-bush-black-lives-matter/

[Safety]

Good point, and agree. Next will be #whitelivesmatter, oh, wait, already happening: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/08/13/3691278/jeb-bush-black-lives-matter/

The end game will just be #alllivesmatters

[TrueBlue]

I see, "they", so no personal stake. Thank you.
I'm sorry to see that you would prefer to judge me rather than to see what's in my heart.

[Mister D]

I'm sorry to see that you would prefer to judge me rather than to see what's in my heart.

Think about applying that to the people who disagree with you sometimes. You know, like Green Arrow .

[Chris]

The end game will just be #alllivesmatters

I think that's too much--getting back to topic--we tend to care for those around us. I tend to agree with Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments:


Let us suppose that the great empire of China, with all its
myriads of inhabitants, was suddenly swallowed up by an
earthquake, and let us consider how a man of humanity in Europe,
who had no sort of connexion with that part of the world, would
be affected upon receiving intelligence of this dreadful
calamity. He would, I imagine, first of all, express very
strongly his sorrow for the misfortune of that unhappy people, he
would make many melancholy reflections upon the precariousness of
human life, and the vanity of all the labours of man, which could
thus be annihilated in a moment. He would too, perhaps, if he was
a man of speculation, enter into many reasonings concerning the
effects which this disaster might produce upon the commerce of
Europe, and the trade and business of the world in general. And
when all this fine philosophy was over, when all these humane
sentiments had been once fairly expressed, he would pursue his
business or his pleasure, take his repose or his diversion, with
the same ease and tranquillity, as if no such accident had
happened....

[Chris]

I'm sorry to see that you would prefer to judge me rather than to see what's in my heart.

What's in your heart is, by your own words, vicarious. That well and good and I don't judge you, I put your agenda in context and perspective.

[Ravens Fan]

The end game will just be #alllivesmatters

12570

Sorry... I had to :laugh:

[TrueBlue]

What's in your heart is, by your own words, vicarious. That well and good and I don't judge you, I put your agenda in context and perspective.
But after all, isn't the vicarious experience that which is also experienced by most every loving Mother and Dad as it relates to their child? Should we simply put their "agenda" in context and perspective also and what about those not related by blood at all who care about others like Malala, Mother Teresa, and so many others around the world who reach out to others and help them with love and compassion?

[Chris]

But after all, isn't the vicarious experience that which is also experienced by most every loving Mother and Dad as it relates to their child? Should we simply put their "agenda" in context and perspective also and what about those not related by blood at all who care about others like Malala, Mother Teresa, and so many others around the world who reach out to others and help them with love and compassion?



Stop playing victim.

http://i.snag.gy/pHAtT.jpg

[TrueBlue]

Stop playing victim.

http://i.snag.gy/pHAtT.jpg
Stop trying to make this about me. It isn't about me. It is about the millions of LGBT people around the world who are being routinely victimized and society not caring about their welfare. That's what it is all about.

[Bob]

Stop trying to make this about me. It isn't about me. It is about the millions of LGBT people around the world who are being routinely victimized and society not caring about their welfare. That's what it is all about.

What do you think of the way Muslims treat homosexuals?

[Chris]

Stop trying to make this about me. It isn't about me. It is about the millions of LGBT people around the world who are being routinely victimized and society not caring about their welfare. That's what it is all about.

Actually, the thread is about loyalties, stop trying to make it about you.

[del]

Actually, the thread is about loyalties, stop trying to make it about you.

lol

stop hectoring the poster and making baseless accusations

[Common]

But after all, isn't the vicarious experience that which is also experienced by most every loving Mother and Dad as it relates to their child? Should we simply put their "agenda" in context and perspective also and what about those not related by blood at all who care about others like Malala, Mother Teresa, and so many others around the world who reach out to others and help them with love and compassion?


You carry it way to far and you make it all worse cuz you piss people off by trying to bogart them trueblue. That NEVER works

[Chris]

lol

stop hectoring the poster and making baseless accusations

So he hectors.

[Safety]

The problem with BLM is that it's based on a false premise which, among other false premises regarding crime and the law, seems to be embraced by segments of the black community.

Anyway, I think the question is perhaps too narrow. It need not be specific to minorities. I'm loyal to my community of faith, the European community of peoples, and I'm still loyal to my country although my enthusiasm in that regard has been considerably dampened.

Could you quantify that?

[Cthulhu]

Minorities loyalties outside of faith and blood should reside to the host nation that accepted them, not the one they came from.

If your culture of origin is so great, go back to where it sprang from. Don't bring corrupting influences to the place of refuge.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Safety]

Minorities loyalties outside of faith and blood should reside to the host nation that accepted them, not the one they came from.

If your culture of origin is so great, go back to where it sprang from. Don't bring corrupting influences to the place of refuge.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

And if you are a minority that was born here?

[Redrose]

Green Arrow

I would say be loyal to your core beliefs, your values. I am loyal to family, immediate family. I agree with @Cigar (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=294) on that. I may criticize them, but I frown on someone else doing so. If someone hurt my children, they'd have a lifelong enemy with me. I have some extended family member who I couldn't care less what happened to them, total embarrassments. We share DNA nothing else.

The Clerk of Court in the news was loyal to her beliefs. She was jailed for that. I admire her courage. I disagree with her position only because of her sworn oath as a government elected official.

If she was just a citizen exercising her rights to hold a religious view, and was openly opposed to SSM, I would agree with her stance. She has that right as a private citizen, but not in her job...not that job.

Being loyal to certain causes, groups, beliefs can be difficult. We change, laws change. We need to be open to some change without compromising our basic values.

[Cthulhu]

And if you are a minority that was born here?
Then the country you're born in. Unless you plan on leaving for another.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Green Arrow]

Fascinating that in both threads, Howey is suddenly nowhere to be found.

[Cthulhu]

Fascinating that in both threads, Howey is suddenly nowhere to be found.
Some simply can be next to magnificence without their inferiority complex coming to a head.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.