Quote# 86875

Why are you willing to tolerate sexual perversion but not racism? In a world with no standards, what makes a malfunction of love higher on your standard than a malfunction of hate? Is an irrational lust and longing to mimic the mating act with a sex with which one cannot mate, at its root, any more or less disconnected to reality than an irrational fear and hatred of a Negro? How do we know race-hate is not genetic? Look at how scorned and put-upon racists are! Can we spare them no cheap Leftist pity? Why don't we simply call racism an alternate anti-ethnic orientation, similar to hetero-toleration, but different?

I know I will hear no rational argument to defend the Leftist position. They do not deal with rational answers. They have one and only one weapon in their arsenal: ad hominem. They will not answer, but they will sneer. I suppose a person who gave a tinker's damn about peer pressure or public opinion would fear to be sneered upon by these professional sneerers. For those professional sneerers ready to ignore my words and to condemn me as a "homophobe" let me just ask, why Oh why is it that no one has ever condemned me (or anyone of mine) as a "sunderophobe" -- even though I condemn divorce more severly than I condemn sodomy, or as an "adulterophobe" -- since I don't approve of cheating on your wife either; or as a "pseudophobe" -- since I don't approve of President Clinton.

Why is this one vice singled out for awe and reverence and glorification? Why is it that the lack of self control in sexual matters, where self control is paramount, is held to be immaculate and beyond reproach, whereas the lack of self-control when it comes to something trivial smoking tobacco is scorned?

John C. Wright, LiveJournal 44 Comments [4/13/2012 2:23:53 PM]
Fundie Index: 55
Submitted By: David

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 | bottom

First of all, racism causes harm to people, homosexuality does not.
Secondly, that's a really shiny mirror you have there.

4/13/2012 2:54:59 PM


Because being gay isn't a "sexual perversion", a "malfunction of love", an "irrational lust", a "longing to mimic the mating act with a sex with which one cannot mate", "disconnected to reality", a "vice" or a "lack of self control in sexual matters".

It's pretty simple when you realise that.

4/13/2012 3:08:41 PM

Blue the Thief

Mirror mirror, on the wall...

4/13/2012 3:10:44 PM


Wright is wrong.

The fact that I am gay has no effect on how I regard black people. The are people with all the rights and privileges that I should have. Actually, I do have them, but then I don't live in the US.

The mere favt that you link the hated gays to black people shows that you have not truly accepted Afro-Americans as full and true equals.

As to the politics of the left, America is weird in that is has two right-wing parties - and two parties only. The left is not evil. If anything, the right wing ensure that the the rich get richer and the poor are victimized to that purpose.

4/13/2012 3:23:40 PM


Love between two people of the same gender, even sex between two people of the sane gender, is nothing out of control.

Out of control lust is rape.

Compare rape to racism. Don't compare homosexuality to racism. (They still don't really equate, but they're far closer that this douchebag gets.)

4/13/2012 3:35:39 PM

Brendan Rizzo

Number one, a "malfunction of love", unlike a malfunction of hate, does not harm anybody, so there is no reason to oppose it. Number two, considering that only two generations ago almost everybody was virulently racist even though their direct descendents are mostly not, that seems like evidence against the hypothesis of racism being genetic. (Or were you trying to apologize for racism?)

4/13/2012 3:47:41 PM


Why don't we simply call racism an alternate anti-ethnic orientation


I think the master race has the right to look down at and scorn the genetically inferior white race. After all, humans originated in Africa, blacks are the most genetically stable, have the best physical defenses against disease, are the best at most sports.

By all means, the whites should finally take their place in the second to last row and bow down to the natural order of racial supremacy.

Oh, wait. I guess that's not how you meant it. Tough shit, whitebread, push that broom.

4/13/2012 4:16:21 PM


That would have been an impressive feat of mental gymnastics had you not taken a rough dismount from coherence and stumbled into addled and innane verbal diarrhoea. Did you sprain anything?

4/13/2012 4:17:22 PM


The fact that this person would even defend racists (and even use racist terms) says all I need to know.

Also, you just proved that homophobia and racism are the same.

4/13/2012 4:33:12 PM


Racist bigotry is now smoking tobacco?... And I suggest that malfunctioning love is still a far higher and nobler thing than the most perfectly functioning hate.

4/13/2012 4:55:10 PM

Blue the Thief

4/13/2012 5:15:06 PM


Let's see. There's no scientific evidence that racism, or any other type of hatred, is something you're born with. It's a learned trait and learned traits can be unlearned.

There is scientific evidence that sexual orientation is something you're born just like the color of your skin is something you're born with. You can't change the color of your skin or your sexual orientation.

Therefore, it seems pretty reasonable to me that I should feel disdain for those that hate others due to the color of their skin or their sexual orientation. Things which they're helpless to change.

How's that for a defense you motherless lump of crap?

4/13/2012 5:35:46 PM


Here's a rational argument: Different sexual orientations are acceptable because expressing them is an act between consenting adults, and as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult, it's acceptable.

Racism, on the other hand, is based on hate, and its expression is a form of attack--no one would consent to being treated the way the KKK treats people. Doesn't matter whether it's genetic.

We don't condemn you for criticizing adultery because it is a violation of informed consent, so we condemn it as well (assuming the term does not include open marriages). Divorce isn't, but it is an unfortunate occurrence and often arises from such violations as adultery, so I tend not to oppose criticism of it.

Homosexuality is not a lack of self-control. There is no reason to control it. There is nothing inherently wrong with being gay or with having gay sex (again, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult).

I can't imagine I'm the first one putting forward this sort of rational argument to you. I think you just choose to ignore such things. Do yourself a favor and open a history book, because it's these "leftists" you so despise who are the only ones who get anything done. Your children will be abiding by our rules - you might as well get used to it.

4/13/2012 5:54:54 PM


It doesn't get reverence or glorification. We, unlike you, don't care about the sex other people have, but we will defend everyone's right not to be hurt for having or wanting to have it.

I seriously doubt you live in a community where a confessed divorcee would get her house grafittied with slurs, or be in danger of a beating, or where any man who has an affair exposed discovers that no one will talk to him in public, or that he's suddenly getting death threats stamped with red letter As, for his treason against his sacred bond with his wife.

The odds are decent this sort of thing would happen to a homosexual in a whole lot of places. And that is why they are getting protection. Not their sex-having. Gay-rights supporters who aren't gay themselves generally don't actually care about gay sex, as such, and are not moved by a desire to defend it. They're protecting the people. People matter.

And also, sex is sex. Having it or not having it is no more irresponsible and lacking in self-control when it's had with the same gender than when it's had with the opposite one. Unless the person in question internalized homophobia and wound up having sex when they intended not to, I guess, which (I don't usually pull this card but this time I'm kinda sincere) might be a problem for you?

4/13/2012 6:12:41 PM


What a homophobic little rat-turd! And some racism thrown in for good measure too.

@Brendan Rizzo:

(Or were you trying to apologize for racism?)

Methinks "...disconnected to reality than an irrational fear and hatred of a Negro?" belies the apologetic here

4/13/2012 6:19:22 PM


Cy said it all for me.

Try to grow up, John.

4/13/2012 6:52:43 PM


One infringes upon individual liberty (racism) and the other does not (sexual fetishism, et al).

I have to point out which is which because John probably couldn't tell.

4/13/2012 7:56:39 PM


Victim complex round 3759274, aka "Won't somebody PLEASE think of the poor oppressed racists!". Yawn. Get something more original next time.

Racists are fine with racism unless they're the ones being discriminated against. Religious fundamentalists are fine with religious persecution as long as they aren't the ones being persecuted. Sexists are fine with sexism as long as it doesn't affect them. Conservatives and libertarians are fine with oppressing the poor as long as they aren't poor. Practical sociopathy at its finest.

4/13/2012 8:17:42 PM


"Why are you willing to tolerate sexual perversion but not racism?"

Because one ends in fun times with ropes, and the other ends with black men hanging from ropes.

This is a pretty big distinction.

4/13/2012 8:30:36 PM

Racism is an aquired attitude or learned behavior. Sexual orientation is not.

4/13/2012 9:04:24 PM


Because sexual perversion never resulted in lynchings of innocent people for no good fucking reason. Pretty much, it doesn't hurt anyone, so why should I fucking care?

4/13/2012 9:11:04 PM


Sex can only be called perverted dependent on your definition of what normal sex is. I'm absolutely kinktastic, but I wouldn't call it perverted, because I've always had these desires. I don't see the purpose of equating abnormal with harmful, either. As a pansexual sexual submissive, I'm coming from a very uninhibited mental space, but really? There's nothing wrong with fucking someone who's got the same bits as you've got, or bits that aren't distinctly one or the other.

Why? Because no one is being harmed by consensual contact. In fact, the purpose is opposite; while people may enjoy pain as well as pleasure, the point is for everyone involved to get off in a way they'd like.

Racism, on the other hand, is about nonconsensually degrading someone because of their genetic makeup and physical appearance. It's all about harming others.

Therefore racism = bad, but sexual 'perversion' isn't. As long as everyone is getting what they want, sex is good.

4/13/2012 9:51:24 PM


Because we can plainly observe that alleged racial differences in anything worthwhile do not exist and because to violate human rights and exploit a group of people for the benefit of another is revolting. On the other hand, two people of the same gender feeling sexual attraction for each other, loving each other et cetera cause no harm to anyone, and are nobody's business except those directly involved.

Moreover it is interesting that conservatives are beginning to pop up flawed analogies between discrimination against gays and discrimination against blacks; where somehow granting equal treatment to some people is the moral equivalent of oppressing some other people.
It is all the more hypocritical given that these bigots, had they lived 50 years before, would have been the first to stand up for racial segregation.

4/14/2012 2:24:42 AM

Leighton Buzzard

They have one and only one weapon in their arsenal: ad hominem. They will not answer, but they will sneer.

Jebus, that blew out a whole bank of irony meters. Also, this must be pretty old, what with the Clinton crack. I wonder what JCW thinks of the current incumbent?

4/14/2012 2:56:00 AM


He seriously thinks we're the bigots (or bigot-analogues morally, whatever) for ACCEPTING homosexuality?

4/14/2012 3:17:40 AM

1 2 | top: comments page