[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

TD's 1AR, Part II

OK...
     Now I will try and answer some of the more specific objections.
1.)  Dave Breshrs wrote:
   "You, sir, are an idiot, without prefix, suffix or apology.  I'm so
mortified & offended by your post that I don't even know where to begin.
Hell, it's not even worth the line-by-line.  I'll give you the same
treatment Dan & Nessa gave Ft Hays & their "patriarchy good" argument in
the doubles: an indignant dismissal, which is all your vacuous logic
deserves."

OK Dave...when people *IGNORE* and *DISMISS* agruements like mine and even
"patriarchy good", those arguements are never evaluated.  Are you afraid of the
outcome?  The truth is that all systems, including social ones have to be
maintained by give and take.  Utopia does not exist...to provide for order and
security, something has to give.  You are trying to live in a "perfect world", 
but in the "real world"  (if you have any idea what that is) costs and benefits
must be weighed.  So what you are saying is hat society cannot regulate the
behavior and actions of its members?  Does the moral climate of the society
matter at all?  What is so wrong with discouraging "deviant" behaviors?  How is
this any different from regulating "obscene" material?  You may believe
whatever you wish...you may do whatever "trips your trigger" in the privacy of
your own home...but when you bring "deviant" behavior and actions into the
public forum...how can you not expect them to react?
     Besides...I thought, according to NELA, that we needed patriarchy to save
us from that giant asteroid?  :^)

2.)  To answer the many posts which drew a line between homosexuality and
beastiality/pedophilia by saying that one is consentual, the other is not.  I
answer it this way.  Have laws been made against beastiality because society is
upset by the "rape" of the animal?  No.  A farm animal is no diferent than a
bushel of soybeans or a bale of hay.  It is an organic resourse, and one that
could not either give or not give consent.  The law is there because the
behavior is considered "deviant"...it is termed sick and immoral by the mores
of society.  Otherwise, we would hear the "consent" defense in beastiality
cases.  As for childern, I tend to agree that they cannot give consent...but
what about homosexual groups like NAMBLA that argue that consent can be given. 
This is just a natural extention of homosexual deviance.  I have a friend
that works as a postal inspector, and he tells me that the vast majority of
child porn is homosexual...and created and requested by homosexuals.  Deviance
is deviance...this is a slippery slope towards moral decay if it is not checked
somewhere.

3.)  Alan dove wrote:
     "The military's hypocrisy on homosexuality was phrased in a typical U.S.
military logic loop: gays were not allowed in the armed forces because
they posed a security risk, i.e. they could be blackmailed by foreign
agents.  Therefore, we will discharge or bar homosexuals from the armed
forces.  Of course, if the policy did not exist, the blackmail could not
be accomplished, so it was a neat tautology."
     First of all Allen, gays pose a secirity risk beacause the blackmail would
not only result in removal from the armed services, but also in social
condemation.  In the CIA interview process, one has to answer questions about
their sexuality and sign-off that they are not a homosexual.  ( I know because
I recently filled one out.)  The same is true of the NSA.  People with secrets
they want kept secret, are poor security risks...period.
      
4.)  Sulivan wrote:
     "Um the refusal to admit something into our cultural dialogue (TV) is an
inherently political decision. Why don't you come down from your Sears
Tower for a second and see that perhaps making money is not the a priori
hail mary end-all-be-all purpose of human beings? The media has such a
wonderful defense, they take credit for many advances that happen socially
in our world, but then when someone asks them to do something socially
responsible they can always hide behind the cover of "entertainment" and
"profit"."
      
      OK...I'll take my Sears Tower over that Ivory one anyday.  This county
was built on the profit motive.  The media is responsible to shareholders and
asdvertisers.  If they are not meeting the public's needs, there lose money and
fail.  Ultimately society controls the media...either they buy/watch/read it or
they don't.  Look at the huge business success that the Rush Limbaugh program
has experienced, and the acompanying revival of AM radio.  What other motive,
beyond profit, would cause someone to invest millions into building the
information networks that we now have. If "social responsibility" was our only
motive we would have a telecommunications infrastructure like the Soviets.  Come
out of the stone age Sullivan. 

   This is really turning into a long post.  So look for part 3.  I cannot 
answer all of the posts..there are just too many of them.  Besides it is 
unnecessary.  These are complicted issues.  I really am a believer in personal 
freedom, but I also believe in order and society's right to exercise some 
control over the actions of its citizens.  Otherwise there is chaos.  
Personally, I think that homoseual behavior is deviant and wrong, but if it 
doesn't affect me...I really don't care.  The problem is that it affects the 
overall moral climate of society; the same society that I must live in.  These 
are "dicey" questions and problems.  To ignore the "conservative" or 
anti-homosexual arguements is to bury your head in the sand.  There are actual 
reasons why people are opposed to homosexuality.  It isn't hate.  It might be 
fear.  But it is just too simplistic and easy to lable all of this "hate" or 
"discrimination".

-TD 
    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TD Barnes                                   Senior, College of Computer Science
TBARNES@CCTR.UMKC.EDU                        University of Missouri, Kansas City
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 http://cctr.umkc.edu/user/tbarnes/index.html
Follow-Ups:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page