OK to OUT - Part II

[MadeUpName27]

Happy now???

[Kulindahr]

I don't see how a Libertarian, or even a libertarian, can vote "yes". Outing someone is a violation of his personal integrity and sovereignty, which isn't very libertarian.

[Eric28]

I think we should always encourage our fellow brothers and sisters to come out, but it's ultimately a personal decision that shouldn't be dictated by public opinion or service! I voted Independent and No!

[Toriko]

I don't see how a Libertarian, or even a libertarian, can vote "yes". Outing someone is a violation of his personal integrity and sovereignty, which isn't very libertarian.

Agreed.

I think we should always encourage our fellow brothers and sisters to come out, but it's ultimately a personal decision that shouldn't be dictated by public opinion or service! I voted Independent and No!

Agreed, and I also had voted the same.

[sparky95]

Well, I think they should be outed if they act in ways that harm the gay community, like voting against anti-dicrimination legislation!

[james1200]

i'll pretend to be a republican for a sec *shudder*...ok, i am now a complete hypocrite. i want everyone outed now even tho i myself am not out!

[turtle]

Personal integrity.

Honesty.

If you have something to hide, stay out of politics and public service.

-D

[Kulindahr]

I think we should always encourage our fellow brothers and sisters to come out, but it's ultimately a personal decision that shouldn't be dictated by public opinion or service! I voted Independent and No!

Well said.
All such decisions are personal -- something today's society seems to have forgotten.

[turtle]

Well said.
All such decisions are personal -- something today's society seems to have forgotten.

If you are not honest, privately, how can I expect you to be honest publicly?

No more carefully nurtured, but false, images.

No more lies.

I did not ask or require that politician to enter the arena. He volunteered.

Now, if there is any dishonesty, any lack of integrity, if there are any lies, it is my right, even my duty, to know.

Integrity, by definition, means the practice of integrating one's beliefs and values thoroughly through one's entire life, without compartmentalizing one or another part of your life and living it by different standards.

Once again, to be quite clear, I do not care if a politician is Gay, I care whether he is honest. If a candidate cannot be honest about his personal life, because such honesty may hurt him, then how can I expect him to stand up and tell the truth in any other difficult situation?

We have had so much dishonesty that we cannot simply trust any more.

-D

[Kulindahr]

If you are not honest, privately, how can I expect you to be honest publicly?

No more carefully nurtured, but false, images.

No more lies.

I did not ask or require that politician to enter the arena. He volunteered.

Now, if there is any dishonesty, any lack of integrity, if there are any lies, it is my right, even my duty, to know.

Integrity, by definition, means the practice of integrating one's beliefs and values thoroughly through one's entire life, without compartmentalizing one or another part of your life and living it by different standards.

Once again, to be quite clear, I do not care if a politician is Gay, I care whether he is honest. If a candidate cannot be honest about his personal life, because such honesty may hurt him, then how can I expect him to stand up and tell the truth in any other difficult situation?

We have had so much dishonesty that we cannot simply trust any more.

-D

As I said elsewhere....

Do you want all candidates to parade around with billboards tacked to their backs, listing everything from whether they have hemorrhoids to whether they pick their nose when no one is looking? whether a man has sex in the kitchen or not?
If you don;t think any of those, or quite a number of other things, can hurt a politician, you're living in la-la land. I've known a good number of people who would NEVER vote for a man who had sex ANYWHERE outside the bedroom, or for any candidate who picked his/her nose anywhere at all, and a fair number who wouldn't even think to vote for someone who so much as mentioned hemorrhoids.

Sorry, but you have no right to know anything about anyone but what they choose for you to know, so long as that person isn't inflicting harm on you by keeping it private. What you are asking for isn't honesty, it's ownership. A person does not give up self-ownership by entering politics. Nor does he enter any unwritten contract to lay his life open before us -- only what he chooses to.

And your choice is to not vote for him if you think there's something he's hiding -- and that's all. You have NO right to invade his privacy and disrupt his life by prying into his affairs or revealing what he wishes not to reveal. To believe you do is arrogance and shows a total misunderstanding of human rights.

[Roland00]

If you are not honest, privately, how can I expect you to be honest publicly?
No more carefully nurtured, but false, images.
No more lies.

So would you make a difference between a closet case, a person who doesn't want to admit emotionally to himself that he is gay vs a person who realizes he is gay has no problems with that, accepts himself, but doesn't broadcast it to the world that he is gay.

Due to our society people will assume he is straight, after all we live in a "heterosexist society."

Does that make a difference?

[turtle]

As I have said over and over, I do not want liars in office.

I am "straight-appearing". I raised a child. People took for granted that I was straight.

And still, over and over again, I had to decide whether to tell the truth, or to obfuscate, prevaricate or lie.

Because it does come up.

"Are you married?" "Do you have a girlfriend?" "Would you like to meet my cousin?" "Be sure to bring your 'significant other'."

Oh, yes, you can get by a lot of those by simple stonewalling.

But not always, and not easily.

I will reject any politician who I know lies about anything, no matter how inconsequential, and that includes Bill Clinton, who made me as angry as George Bush does, and whose lie put the Neo-cons in office.

-D

[Rand]

As I have said over and over, I do not want liars in office.
-D

A person does not have to answer a question, but they should never lie. If I knew a politician was gay and he answered a question stating he was not, he would lose my vote.

Where that politician to say, that is a person question and I will not answer. Integrity is a value which should be highly prized, but is normally seen as a liability for most politicians.

None in DC have any.

[iman]

Why should we accept deception from anyone? Why shouldn't we expect honesty and integrity from everyone? Sexual preference is not a "private matter" for st8's, why is it suddenly a private matter for closeted gays? If someone does not want to tell the world that they are gay then they should not be having gay sex. If you are ashamed of it, don't do it. If you want the benefits of being st8, go get married.

It is the phonies like Foley and his closet case Republicans, not to mention the pervert priests, that do harm to the rest of us.

[Toriko]

Why should we accept deception from anyone? Why shouldn't we expect honesty and integrity from everyone? Sexual preference is not a "private matter" for st8's, why is it suddenly a private matter for closeted gays? If someone does not want to tell the world that they are gay then they should not be having gay sex. If you are ashamed of it, don't do it. If you want the benefits of being st8, go get married.

Why don't you stop telling people how to live?

It is the phonies like Foley and his closet case Republicans, not to mention the pervert priests, that do harm to the rest of us.

Priests in general are, sure; religion is antiquated and I wouldn't shed a tear if they all disappear from the face of the earth. However, Foley and the pervert priests in particular, the crimes to which you are referring, do no harm to you or us here unless you are a under the age of 18. At which point say goodbye to your presence here; I'm certain you'll be missed by someone.

[Gen_Lafayette]

OK, so I know all this stuff has been said before, and will be said again, but here's my three cents (inflation, you know) on this issue. If you are closeted, and do not do anything, in any way, shape, or form to hurt or "shut-down" the "Gay Agenda" (for lack of a better all-encompassing term), then, in my book you are perfectly allowed to remain in the closet.

If you are out, then, for God's sake be out! Don't sissy-foot around being faboo at night and silent by day. It just adds fuel to the fire that being Gay is something of which to be ashamed.

If you're Straight, I mean actually Straight not just "straight-acting" or whatever, then be Straight, and that's great too. Especially if you dress to show off. We won't touch, but we might just sneak-a-peek.

However, if you are Gay, and attempting to make yourself feel better by publicly screwing the rest of the "Gay Family" over, then you lose your right to keep it quiet, and someone's gonna barrel-roll your ass outta the closet, and be celebrated for it. No one gets to put a group down, especially if they're part of the group, without first identifying themselves as part of the group.

If you don't want to be Gay, that's tough, it's the way you were made. Deal with it the best you can, and seek help. That's why we're a community.

If you try to make us out the bad guys cause you're uncomfortable, watch how uncomfortable you get when we get you. Thus endeth the rant.

[Kulindahr]

Were that politician to say, that is a person question and I will not answer. Integrity is a value which should be highly prized, but is normally seen as a liability for most politicians.

None in DC have any.

I disagree. Representative Ron Paul, from Texas, has loads.
I think maybe he got all the integrity a certain more well-known Texas politician lacks.

[Kulindahr]

OK, so I know all this stuff has been said before, and will be said again, but here's my three cents (inflation, you know) on this issue. If you are closeted, and do not do anything, in any way, shape, or form to hurt or "shut-down" the "Gay Agenda" (for lack of a better all-encompassing term), then, in my book you are perfectly allowed to remain in the closet.

If you are out, then, for God's sake be out! Don't sissy-foot around being faboo at night and silent by day. It just adds fuel to the fire that being Gay is something of which to be ashamed.

If you're Straight, I mean actually Straight not just "straight-acting" or whatever, then be Straight, and that's great too. Especially if you dress to show off. We won't touch, but we might just sneak-a-peek.

However, if you are Gay, and attempting to make yourself feel better by publicly screwing the rest of the "Gay Family" over, then you lose your right to keep it quiet, and someone's gonna barrel-roll your ass outta the closet, and be celebrated for it. No one gets to put a group down, especially if they're part of the group, without first identifying themselves as part of the group.

If you don't want to be Gay, that's tough, it's the way you were made. Deal with it the best you can, and seek help. That's why we're a community.

If you try to make us out the bad guys cause you're uncomfortable, watch how uncomfortable you get when we get you. Thus endeth the rant.

It was a very good rant -- worth quoting in full in hopes it will be read once more.

[iman]

Why don't you stop telling people how to live?

It's what humans do, we make choices. Dogs and cats don't get to do that.

[Kulindahr]

Why don't you stop telling people how to live?

It's what humans do, we make choices. Dogs and cats don't get to do that.

You almost become honest....

you see yourself as the human, and everyone else as your cats and dogs.

[Toriko]

It's what humans do, we make choices. Dogs and cats don't get to do that.

So you choose to make people into dogs and cats? Because that's what you are doing---you making the choice to be a tyrant and tell how others are to live.

[Kulindahr]

Whoa!

Libertarian minds think alike?

















Well, at least they THINK.

[iman]

So you choose to make people into dogs and cats? Because that's what you are doing---you making the choice to be a tyrant and tell how others are to live.

We are all tyrants, we all tell others how to live. There is a constant interaction of exchanging bits of freedom with others.

Rand never understood that, she probably never had good sex.

[Toriko]

We are all tyrants, we all tell others how to live.

That's a bold claim and a hasty generalization. I don't believe you.

Rand never understood that, she probably never had good sex.

She may not have, just as she might not have fallen victim to some vicious logical fallacies. There is of course a difference between telling how others are to live as a suggestion and telling as a demand---it has to come down to intent, I suppose. It appears that instead of refuting the charge of tyranny, which is arguably the worst and most unhappiest person to be (Plato even created a hell for them), you embrace it and condemn everyone else to your own misery. Telling... I guess that explains your approach to politics and your adherence to the Democratic Party, it must give good sex when it fucks you over. The Republicans fuck too rough and badly and hurt you too terribly so.

Perhaps if you release yourself from the bonds of slavery to your party, and let loose the tyranny of your heart, you can find that being free is much better than being fucked. Own yourself, iman, you know you want it badly.

[Kulindahr]

I tell others how to live.

I say, "Own yourself, and respect the ownership others have of themselves. Live with dignity. Stand up for freedom. Exercise all your rights, as often as possible."

[The_Reaper]

As a person who was outed, I have to say it's not alright.


Sure, if the person is hypocritical about it it might seem like sweet justice to reveal it....

But one of Canada's greatest Prime Ministers, Pierre Trudeau, said:

"The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation."


I'd like to think that since that applies, this should to:

"The nation has no business in the bedrooms of the state."


Unless the activity is illegal, there's no reason to chase after someone for it.
Let them do it on their own time and in their own way.

[sparky95]

I'm sorry but I'm about to lose it here. You guys are comparing a politician who lies about being gay to hemeroids. Is that how you regard homosexuality? The equivalent to varicose veins on the arse? Perhaps this says a lot more about your self image than you think! If I thought that I was so disgusting I would be happy to keep my closet and everyone elses closed too!

[Kulindahr]

Not at all, sparky. I'm using a certain post-er's own criteria for why a person should come out, namely, that a candidate who conceals anything that might hurt him in the eyes of voters HAS to be revealed, or he is lying. Yes, I know people who would vote for someone else if they knew a candidate had hemorrhoids, along with all the other things I listed. So what the post-er is saying is that candidates should publish a list of everything about them that might possibly offend some voters.
So I suppose, after all, that someone is doing what you suggest, but it's the one who insists that we should out politicians -- by his reason for doing so, he's making being gay a trivial, indeed political shopping-list, thing.

[turtle]

If it was trivial, it wouldn't even be a question, would it?

Honesty in public officials is far from trivial.

I'll say it and say it and say it again -

If you want my vote, don't lie to me.

[iman]

The obvious analogies are an African American who passes for white and someone of Jewish heritage that passes for gentile. While these things may be nobody's business and not relevant, it nevertheless suggests a degree of shame or an intent to avoid prejudice.

Personal integrity and honesty should require that prejudice be confronted and not avoided.

[Kulindahr]

The obvious analogies are an African American who passes for white and someone of Jewish heritage that passes for gentile. While these things may be nobody's business and not relevant, it nevertheless suggests a degree of shame or an intent to avoid prejudice.

Personal integrity and honesty should require that prejudice be confronted and not avoided.

Perhaps.
But THAT is not what Turtle has been arguing.

And still, it is THEIR decision. Outing someone is the same thing as assault, except with words instead of weapons. The ONLY legitimate reason for outing someone else is if he is publicly, openly, verbally denying it -- then you call him on it, because THAT is lying.
Otherwise, as I have said, you should pry into every last detail of a candidate's life, to find out if they are impotent ('out' him!) or have a family history of cancer ('out' him!), etc.


I could conceive of an approach in which outing a candidate MIGHT be acceptable: go to a public meeting where he's answering questions, and bluntly inquite, "Is there anything about you we should know that might impact my friends and I as gays?" If you KNOW he's gay (better be VERY, VERY, VERY sure!), and he answered "No", continue, "Would you say that it is important for a gay candidate to let the gay community know that about him?"
But at that point, if he says "No", you don't out him -- you respectfully disagree, and that's it. Everyone has things they don't want known, and have a right to that.

[Kulindahr]

If it was trivial, it wouldn't even be a question, would it?

Honesty in public officials is far from trivial.

I'll say it and say it and say it again -

If you want my vote, don't lie to me.

Then you'd better never vote for anyone, because by your argument, as I pointed out before, anyone who is impotent and doesn't publicly announce it is lying, anyone who is celibate and doesn't announce it is lying, anyone who is vegetarian and doesn't announce it is lying, anyone who only buys American and doesn't announce it is lying, anyone who ever skinnydipped and doesn't announce it is lying, anyone who ever...
Well, as you said, anyone who has anything in his life that might make people not vote for him -- if he doesn't shout it from the rooftops, he's lying to you. Not even Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan, who were both incredibly open, would qualify by your standard.

[iman]

^No, those are all things one chooses and are relatively inconsequential. Although if vegetarians are being persecuted it is a responsibility for other vegetarians to speak up.

Being gay is not a real choice, gays are being persecuted for who they are with no rationale. To remain in the closet under such circumstances is morally wrong and a tacit collaboration with the persecution. All gays should be outed, they have no right to live a lie while others suffer in their place. We should catch them and shave their heads, not that anyone would notice. Maybe a tattoo?
.

[Toriko]

All gays should be outed, they have no right to live a lie while others suffer in their place. We should catch them and shave their heads, not that anyone would notice. Maybe a tattoo?.

And then thrown in their own special ghetto? Maybe sent to camp with other gays so they can concentrate in one area and learn to be open and honest about what they are with their own kind?

[iman]

^Yes, you're beginning to get it. No traitors, no collaborators, just honest folk standing up for their rights. You do believe in fighting for your rights, don't you? You wouldn't allow your fellow gays to be hauled off to the concentration camp while you hid in the bathroom at Wendys, would you? Of course not!

[Toriko]

^Yes, you're beginning to get it.

I've had the idea that you would be one of those that would shave, tattoo, and send people to concentration camps. Tyrants are similar in intention and motivation, although some are more creative in approach.

No traitors, no collaborators, just honest folk standing up for their rights.

I'm surprised you believe in rights, since you deny self-ownership, the basis within philosophy that brought about individualism and natural law. However, now you think that those that practive their right to privacy are traitors and collaborators and are not honest folk? Why must you hate freedom?

You do believe in fighting for your rights, don't you? You wouldn't allow your fellow gays to be hauled off to the concentration camp while you hid in the bathroom at Wendys, would you? Of course not!

This cowardice charge is ridiculous, iman, and unfounded, not to mention an ad hominem that you can stop using. You don't know anything about me and what you do know you've got entirely wrong---I don't frequent Wendy's and I definitely do not eat inside whenever I do get Wendy's food. I am fighting for one's right to live one's life as one sees fit---you, on the other hand, the one that has not once refuted the charge of being a tyrant and has in fact highlighted its universal appeal and hastily generalized all as being tyrants, have stated that your absolutist morality and way to live is the only way. In fact, for you it will be the only way if so empowered because you will destroy all others' lives to make it happen. And you complain about guns empowering the insecure and vulnerable, your anti-liberty rhetoric is no different than a gun and could do far more damage.

[turtle]

Then you'd better never vote for anyone, because by your argument, as I pointed out before, anyone who is impotent and doesn't publicly announce it is lying, anyone who is celibate and doesn't announce it is lying, anyone who is vegetarian and doesn't announce it is lying, anyone who only buys American and doesn't announce it is lying, anyone who ever skinnydipped and doesn't announce it is lying, anyone who ever...
Well, as you said, anyone who has anything in his life that might make people not vote for him -- if he doesn't shout it from the rooftops, he's lying to you. Not even Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan, who were both incredibly open, would qualify by your standard.

Baloney.

Lying is an action.

[Toriko]

Baloney.

Lying is an action.

It's amazing how you were so quick to jump on my "inferring" things you've not said only to turn around and start saying them.

You can vote for whoever you want by whatever fucked-up credentials you utilize. Kulindahr has a point; people lie (by commission or omission) all the time about all kinds of things, so you'll just never have to bother voting again.

[RKuper]

Being gay is not a real choice, gays are being persecuted for who they are with no rationale. To remain in the closet under such circumstances is morally wrong and a tacit collaboration with the persecution. All gays should be outed, they have no right to live a lie while others suffer in their place. We should catch them and shave their heads, not that anyone would notice. Maybe a tattoo?
.

Who appointed you god?

When forcing someone to do something against their will, like coming out of the closet, you become no better than those right wing self-righteous zealots we all love to criticize. I didn't start coming out of the closet until the first part of this year and thank god I didn't have to deal with the likes of you. Besides, if I had come out any earlier, I would have most likely been dead because of the circumstances that surrounded me at the time. I came out on my own terms and that's the way it should be!!!

I will say though, that you do make a good point concerning the advancement of gay rights in general and that's why we should encourage, not force, gays to eventually come out!

[turtle]

It's amazing how you were so quick to jump on my "inferring" things you've not said only to turn around and start saying them.

You can vote for whoever you want by whatever fucked-up credentials you utilize. Kulindahr has a point; people lie (by commission or omission) all the time about all kinds of things, so you'll just never have to bother voting again.

No, sir.

A lie is anything said or done with the intent to deceive.

An ommission can be a lie, if it is calculated to convey an incorrect impression.

I have ommitted (until now) telling anyone here that I wear boxers.

How is that a lie?

It would only be a lie if I wanted to decieve you.

Instead, it just never came up for discussion.

If it had come up for discussion, I would certainly not have lied about it, but I might well have told you to mind your own business, which, again, is no lie.

-D

[turtle]

When forcing someone to do something against their will, like coming out of the closet, you become no better than those right wing self-righteous zealots we all love to criticize. I didn't start coming out of the closet until the first part of this year and thank god I didn't have to deal with the likes of you. Besides, if I had come out any earlier, I would have most likely been dead because of the circumstances that surrounded me at the time. I came out on my own terms and that's the way it should be!!!

But were you asking us to invest you with public trust at the time?

Asking me for my vote, and promising me you are honest?

We are not talking about outing anyone other than politicians, who are a very special case.

If I thought you really did need such secrecy, I might even consent to lie for you.

But neither you nor I are running for public office.

-D

[Toriko]

If it had come up for discussion, I would certainly not have lied about it, but I might well have told you to mind your own business, which, again, is no lie.

So, with regards to any-and-all politicians, as long as they are asked if they are gay, deny it but actually are, then it is ok to out them and oust them from office? Otherwise, you don't care if they say "mind your business" or something similar and not actually answer the question since it is definitely not relevant to politics; the problem is only if they lie and then get caught buggering someone?

[turtle]

So, with regards to any-and-all politicians, as long as they are asked if they are gay, deny it but actually are, then it is ok to out them and oust them from office? Otherwise, you don't care if they say "mind your business" or something similar and not actually answer the question since it is definitely not relevant to politics; the problem is only if they lie and then get caught buggering someone?

Yes, that is pretty well what I am saying, though the truth may come to light in some other way than being caught buggering someone.

It is the dishonesty which bothers me.

[RKuper]

We are not talking about outing anyone other than politicians, who are a very special case.

Turtle,
I wasn't addressing you specifically, as I understand your concern with just politicians, but I still disagree! I was actually addressing the comment made by iman, who said....

All gays should be outed, they have no right to live a lie while others suffer in their place.

If he meant to say only politicians, he should have said gay politicians!

Oh and BTW, I have been in public service locally and I was in closet at the time, although I'm not now! Still, my private life should be mine and is no ones business. We all should vote for someone based on their said political views and voting record, not on whether they're gay, straight, white, black, female, male, and/or whatever!

[Kulindahr]

^No, those are all things one chooses and are relatively inconsequential. Although if vegetarians are being persecuted it is a responsibility for other vegetarians to speak up.

Being gay is not a real choice, gays are being persecuted for who they are with no rationale. To remain in the closet under such circumstances is morally wrong and a tacit collaboration with the persecution. All gays should be outed, they have no right to live a lie while others suffer in their place. We should catch them and shave their heads, not that anyone would notice. Maybe a tattoo?
.

Nice to see you coming into the open -- a Nazi-type totalitarian.
YOu don't understand freedom, human rights, or human dignity, do you? All you understand is the desire to dictate to other people how to live their lives -- exactly what is to be expected of an enthusiastic adherent of one of the major parties.

[iman]

How did I get to be a Nazi and a tyrant? I'm trying to free you folks from your self imposed shackles. You all need to throw away all those religious restraints, those bogus ideas like "I own myself" (hope you didn't pay too much), and fear of being out.

If you want to be gay, be gay. If you want to eat at Wendys, go in and sit down. If you want to be free, be free and dump all that baggage you have loaded yourself down with.

[Kulindahr]

How did I get to be a Nazi and a tyrant? I'm trying to free you folks from your self imposed shackles. You all need to throw away all those religious restraints, those bogus ideas like "I own myself" (hope you didn't pay too much), and fear of being out.

If you want to be gay, be gay. If you want to eat at Wendys, go in and sit down. If you want to be free, be free and dump all that baggage you have loaded yourself down with.

Nazi -- because you announce that you'd use their mthods.
Tyrant: because you want to impose your will on others -- and because you can't admit personal sovereignty; you believe in slavery, essentially (that's what denial of self-ownership means).

[iman]

Do I get a uniform and riding crop?

[Kulindahr]

Probably. And a whip.

[Toriko]

How did I get to be a Nazi and a tyrant?

Because of previous discussions that went unrefuted.

I'm trying to free you folks from your self imposed shackles.

I said that to you first, thief.

You all need to throw away all those religious restraints...

What religious restraints?

...those bogus ideas like "I own myself" (hope you didn't pay too much), and fear of being out.

For the first part, it's entrenched in philosophy; I'm sorry you aren't with it. For the latter part, don't presume that arguing for someone's right to privacy means that the arguer has a fear for himself. I don't have to explain my life to you as credentials because it isn't about me, and really opens up for pointless logical fallacies on your part, not that it stops you. Anyone who bolsters their own argument with their own experiences are only using a case study anyway, one that isn't backed up by anything other than "trust me"---it's the Dubya approach to argument. The merits and principles of the argument alone are all that is necessary and it is a sad, pathetic sign that you had to resort to attacking a person's character by making unnecessary and/or untrue assumptions in the hope that it aids you.

If you want to be gay, be gay. If you want to eat at Wendys, go in and sit down. If you want to be free, be free and dump all that baggage you have loaded yourself down with.

Shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition. And you shouldn't be a hypocrite, once arguing against freedom and now telling one to be free but only a certain way within your conditionals.