-
Website
http://randythomas.org/ -
Original page
http://randythomas.org/2008/10/21/florida-international-university-replaces-proper-debate-with-hateful-infotainment/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Jonathan
139 comments · 3 points
-
donbeeson
12 comments · 3 points
-
mdturner77
18 comments · 1 points
-
Matt_V
17 comments · 1 points
-
editorgal
65 comments · 4 points
-
-
Popular Threads
I have to mention too though, that I too have seen anti-gay Christian rallies (in the defense of marriage) that have used pictures and names of 'extreme' supergay people, even considered odd in the gay community, to defend a point, which hasn't been fair either in my opinion. Basically, I would have the same general concept in either case and the fact that I have seen it in both sides doesn't make any of them right.
I have attened debates that I have really really enjoyed though in which a variety of people were indeed represented, breaking many stereotypes of what it means to be liberal and conservative, Christian or non-Christian, struggler and non-struggler, and I think presenting a balanced, more common, perspective in all cases in order to proove any point is always much better in order to resolve anything and build any bridges. Those are my thoughts of the day! :)
The real question in this case would be how thoroughly did the university group attempt to find a suitable, mainstream replacement for the amendment group? Somehow, I don't think that they asked a whole lot of anti-gay marriage groups, because probably somebody would have agreed to attend (unless there is some reason to believe that the forum would be extremely biased). If they extended an invitation they expected to be declined to only a few groups (i.e. only one or two), and then went straight to the Phelps clan, they have acted inappropriately.
However, I would say that same is true over here in CA with the anti-gay marriage side using half-truths and scare tactics in their adds. "If you are insecure and feel that you might not win a debate with compelling points and a good presentation … one way to go is the circus route"
It disapoints me when both sides can't just trust that their arguments are strong enough without having to resort to lies or deception. And I expect a higher standard from people who claim to represent Christ but thats not happening here in CA. Christians/Mormons are reciting the same talking points the campaign is handing down and they're all false.
Its no different with our presidential candidates either. During the debates they don't answer a question, they attack each other. So neither of them has my vote
Talk about a cynical generalization.
And if you are honestly equating what the Christians in California are doing with Phelps ... I don't even know what to say.
I have to mention too though, that I too have seen anti-gay Christian rallies (in the defense of marriage) that have used pictures and names of 'extreme' supergay people, even considered odd in the gay community, to defend a point, which hasn't been fair either in my opinion. Basically, I would have the same general concept in either case and the fact that I have seen it in both sides doesn't make any of them right.
I have attened debates that I have really really enjoyed though in which a variety of people were indeed represented, breaking many stereotypes of what it means to be liberal and conservative, Christian or non-Christian, struggler and non-struggler, and I think presenting a balanced, more common, perspective in all cases in order to proove any point is always much better in order to resolve anything and build any bridges. Those are my thoughts of the day! :)
However, I would say that same is true over here in CA with the anti-gay marriage side using half-truths and scare tactics in their adds. "If you are insecure and feel that you might not win a debate with compelling points and a good presentation ⦠one way to go is the circus route"
It disapoints me when both sides can't just trust that their arguments are strong enough without having to resort to lies or deception. And I expect a higher standard from people who claim to represent Christ but thats not happening here in CA. Christians/Mormons are reciting the same talking points the campaign is handing down and they're all false.
Its no different with our presidential candidates either. During the debates they don't answer a question, they attack each other. So neither of them has my vote
Keep up the good work!
The real question in this case would be how thoroughly did the university group attempt to find a suitable, mainstream replacement for the amendment group? Somehow, I don't think that they asked a whole lot of anti-gay marriage groups, because probably somebody would have agreed to attend (unless there is some reason to believe that the forum would be extremely biased). If they extended an invitation they expected to be declined to only a few groups (i.e. only one or two), and then went straight to the Phelps clan, they have acted inappropriately.
Talk about a cynical generalization.
And if you are honestly equating what the Christians in California are doing with Phelps ... I don't even know what to say.
Keep up the good work!
Ok, seriously, I'm just kidding, but it did strike me as rather odd.
Remove the veneer of a coifed hairdo, the haute couture and the refined and well rehearsed false argument that Amendment 2 is only about protecting the sanctity of marriage from the likes of Janet Folger & those of her ilk, what do you have? Shirley & Margie Phelps!!!
The offer to participate was made by the debate organizers to numerous, more âmainstreamâ of the Amendment 2 Supporters but alas, they declined.
So now we get to see the debate framed in its proper context: Hate & Homophobia at the expense of the thousands of Senior citizens whoâll be hurt by Amendment 2 vs. sound legal arguments defending the equality of all citizens of the State of Florida. Sounds like a great debate! Iâll be there!
Ok, seriously, I'm just kidding, but it did strike me as rather odd.
keep it up
Remove the veneer of a coifed hairdo, the haute couture and the refined and well rehearsed false argument that Amendment 2 is only about protecting the sanctity of marriage from the likes of Janet Folger & those of her ilk, what do you have? Shirley & Margie Phelps!!!
The offer to participate was made by the debate organizers to numerous, more ‘mainstream’ of the Amendment 2 Supporters but alas, they declined.
So now we get to see the debate framed in its proper context: Hate & Homophobia at the expense of the thousands of Senior citizens who’ll be hurt by Amendment 2 vs. sound legal arguments defending the equality of all citizens of the State of Florida. Sounds like a great debate! I’ll be there!