That's so gay!

A discriminatory thought is not equal to a discriminatory action.

ren wrote: yet, clearly, homosexuals do not like heterosexual relationships (if they did they'd be having them, so they'd at least be bi)

Are you actually reading what your saying ?? I don't think homosexual's do not like heterosexual relationships, I think they're just not interested in that side of things.

I'm a heterosexual male but i don't dislike homosexual relationships, I'm just not into swinging that way myself.

ren wrote: " In the ethic of reciprocity, and how moral concepts are not absolute but vary by culture, religion, and over time."

"In the importance of freedom of conscience and self-determination within religious, political and other structures."

"moral concepts are not absolute but vary over time"

is it not about time we stopped hating on same sex relationships ??

"In the importance of freedom of conscience"

Shouldn't Arcade be allowed this freedom and not be hounded by insensitivity ? do you not think every time he hears "gays are bad" there's a small part of his conscience that annoys him, if you keep telling someone what they do is wrong, eventually they'll start to believe it.

ren wrote: outquoted.

Seem's like there was a little of the "ego" in that statement, a victory claim nonetheless, I'm not in this thread to win an argument, I'm here to show compassion for my friend and fellow Jedi's feelings.

I think ren has a point. Objectively speaking, the parties positions are arbitrary if you remove the personal bias. Sort of like saying "white" is better or more correct than "black" when you look at a yin-yang symbol...

I dunno, maybe I'm reading that wrong... :dry:

I'm the guy who rewrote "Jedi believe". I am very well aware of what is in it, and what it means. i find it hilarious when people quote it to me.

I'm a heterosexual male but i don't dislike homosexual relationships, I'm just not into swinging that way myself.

According to yourself, your are discriminating your partners on the basis of their gender or sexual orientation. You'll also have to explain to me how you manage to fool yourself into thinking you don't dislike something you would never do yourself.

It is you who wants to "set a standard for acceptance" by not tolerating that others do not feel as you do. So much for believing in freedom of conscience and self-determination.

Besides, the ethic of reciprocity means that you should treat people the way you want to be treated. Unlike pretty much everyone in this thread, I am not supporting any double standards on this issue.

people who pretend to accept/tolerate/love who or what you are when in reality they do not? they're the real abusers.
Arcade and I are also well aware of what each other think, And arcade is very free to think whatever he wants about anything he wants as far as I am concerned. If his mind were to change about it, I would not suddenly stop supporting his right to his opinion the way "certain other people" would. And the few non-judgemental members of totjo (some of whom are so gay they're 100% gay) know very well that I don't give a damn about anyone's opinion of homosexuality and would greatly prefer it if everyone could leave everyone else's thoughts in peace by immediately ceasing all attempts at convincing anyone else that it's either good or bad... For if such opinion must exist then the ways of the Force will make it so, not some overzealous "I'll follow the doctrine at the cost of my own manifested reality" Jedi.

rugadd wrote: Objectively speaking, the parties positions are arbitrary if you remove the personal bias.

I prefer Playstation to Xbox, but I don't HATE Xbox, neither do I dislike it... you can't say Gay guys are Gay because the "Don't like heterosexual relationships"

They are Gay because they are attracted to Men and not Women... there is no HATE in that.

and again I reiterate an earlier comment, I've never once heard a gay person say "That's So Hetero" in a negative light, so why do heterosexuals think it's acceptable the other way round. ??

I'm not claiming to be an innocent in this, there have been plenty of time's when I've said to a friend "sake man you throw like a poof", or "put your back into it ya bender"... the difference is that i recognize it's not acceptable and it hurts peoples feeling's and I'm trying to be mindful of what I say, I believe it's the Jedi way.

“The worst wounds, the deadliest of them, aren't the ones people see on the outside. They're the ones that make us bleed internally.”

I dunno...I've been physically intimate and enjoyed extended relationships with both genders but ultimately chose to marry a woman...does that mean by default I'm discriminatory against all the guys who might have wanted to be my life partner? I think I might accept that I'm discriminatory against being in a relationship, right now, with anyone but my wife...but thats not anti gay per se, but anti anyone but my wife...

That is funny because I have a lot of gay friends and I have seen many an eye roll followed by "breeders, tch". I don't think hate is in there either, but happens. Also, personal experience doesn't trump fact.

RyuJin wrote: The word fag used to mean cigarette, and some people still use it in that sense....as vesha pointed out many words have an original meaning before being hijacked for a new meaning...dope= drugs, dope= fool, dope= cool...ill= sick, ill= awesome, ill= awful...

Language constantly evolves remember the movie idiocracy and the "fuddruckers" sign :laugh:

Faggot meant a collection of sticks. You put 'em in a bunch and start a fire. Which is a necessary first step when we're hunting witches. Check you're witch trap periodically. Something caught? Bring the witch and your fire to share with the townspeople and burn her in front of everybody. Remember this is an eradication of evil. Any homosexuals can be burnt as well and just chucked on the fire itself and we can demean and belittle them by calling them the burning materials themselves.

Which is how faggot evolved to mean homosexual. Just a little history, cigarettes as faggots is a form of slang.

On the topic itself, did you know that in Judaism, Islam, Christianity etc etc that the word "forty" simply meant " a lot"? It wasn't literally 40 days in the ark for Noah or 40 days in the wilderness with the guy who lives in the basement of spirituality. They used the word forty to say " many".

How insulting for 40 year olds!!!

Yes, I get that a different paradigm is at work here. I just want to point out that "forty" died out in terms of referencing " a lot" not out of activism but culturally evolving to use it more literally. As "gay" will for not crap, but homosexuals. Notice how the word "swell" is for the most part used sarcastically to refer to something as crap? How insulting for fat people!!!

ren wrote: "I'll follow the doctrine at the cost of my own manifested reality" Jedi.

I would appreciate if you had quoted me correctly on that one, if you found it over zealous that i would happily sacrifice my own life to save that of a child then I really don't know what to say about that.

(I was of the understanding that was a private interview, I personally feel like you have abused your position as a council member by making that statement in the public forum, however it's all good, feel free to post the full interview for everyone to see, I have nothing to hide here, you can post the details of my criminal record also if it will aid in following your bliss)

ren wrote: how you manage to fool yourself into thinking you don't dislike something you would never do yourself.

Who says I haven't tried it and thought "This Isn't For Me" ??, just because I don't eat Brussels Sprouts doesn't mean I'm being discriminate against them.

ren wrote: And the few non-judgemental members of totjo (some of whom are so gay they're 100% gay) know very well that I don't give a damn about anyone's opinion of homosexuality and would greatly prefer it if everyone could leave everyone else's thoughts in peace by immediately ceasing all attempts at convincing anyone else that it's either good or bad.

So then why even get involved in a discussion that you would rather people just kept to themselves ??.

ren wrote: For if such opinion must exist then the ways of the Force will make it so

You've got me there, I fully trust in the Force and your comment is completely correct, if it is to be so then it shall be.

Perhaps you are seeing this from the same position I've seen the Racist card played all of these years, I've seen guys stand and be smarmy and cocky only to get a beat down, and as soon as the police show up it's "he hit me because I'm "black / chinese / pakistani", white guy gets charged for racial assault, but Racism does work both ways.

This however isn't about racism, and from my point of view (which you have so clearly stated previously I'm entitled to) I've never personally seen a flip side to this where the homosexual community have hit out at the straight community, perhaps I'm lacking in life experience on that side of the fence.

I am not however trying to "set a standard for acceptance", merely failing to see your reasoning behind what appears to be a disregard for what is ultimately a "common courtesy".

Again though, perhaps I'm just reading you wrong, it's hard to understand a persons mind when you are reading a post on a topic on a discussion forum.

I suppose in a sense you could wrap this up by saying that they are asking for acceptance and tolerance right ?? and in a sense you are asking for the same, I don't agree with your opinion but I accept it's your's and you're entitled to it.

When we say "some people are offended" you counter with "to tell people what to say, is a restriction of their free speech"...

And you are right...

You, Ren, and I, jestor, are having a conversation about me, and how I feel... How I look at a particular topic...

Nowhere should you find (in this thread, I'm not talking about temple rules) will you find me saying everyone should think this way...

I feel that the path to a better me means taking into consideration the feelings of others...

Whether they would be offended by my words or not, I should do my best to assure they are not....

But, if I do offend, they should do their best to not be offended by a slip on my part...

As to when you and I first met, and I was overly apologetic about if I offended you....

This is my point...

Your logic is flawed because you keep thinking I'm telling you this is how you should be.... I'm not...

I don't know how anyone can come to any other conclusion, especially when "empathy" is one of our traits... Should be, I think...

I don't think anything about your beliefs except a curiosity that you don't come to this conclusion yourself....

Instead, you seem to justify your thoughts, and position, by pointing out the "opposite"....

Which really is a bad (lol) way of of defending something, in my opinion...

"You know, if you say cookies are good, well that is anti-brownie"...

No its not, lol...

By saying, ""that's gay" in a negative way is rude" has nothing to do with the word "bad"...

You are trying to establish a pattern of what? Change? I'm pretty sure we are all aware of "change being the only constant"...

I know you realize this, I say it for the readers...

We have the power to consciously control our destiny... To control the direction of our species...

At least help steer it...

Just as we are doing with religion...

So we can with our words...

There are 2 doctrine that come to mind whenever discussions get to


good. . bad
right. . wrong
logical. . illogical
etc. etc. etc.

1) jedi are wary of attachments, material and personal
2) Morality: the danger of belief, objectivity over subjectivity

Leandros Von wrote:

ren wrote: "I'll follow the doctrine at the cost of my own manifested reality" Jedi.

I would appreciate if you had quoted me correctly on that one, if you found it over zealous that i would happily sacrifice my own life to save that of a child then I really don't know what to say about that.

(I was of the understanding that was a private interview, I personally feel like you have abused your position as a council member by making that statement in the public forum, however it's all good, feel free to post the full interview for everyone to see, I have nothing to hide here, you can post the details of my criminal record also if it will aid in following your bliss)

If you truly believe, then there can never be conflict between your belief and your manifested self: no cost, ever. besides, I don't remember where I read this, anyone could've said it. :whistle:

ren wrote: how you manage to fool yourself into thinking you don't dislike something you would never do yourself.

Who says I haven't tried it and thought "This Isn't For Me" ??, just because I don't eat Brussels Sprouts doesn't mean I'm being discriminate against them.

"I prefer gay to hetero sex therefore I don't have heterosexual sex"
"I prefer women to men therefore I don't employ men"
"I prefer strawberries to brussels sprouts therefore I don't eat brussels sprouts"
"bank A has better rates than bank B therefore I use bank A"

Any choice of one thing over another is discrimination. the choice is (normally) made according to personal needs or taste. Can be sexuality, colour, shape, function, any possible criterion.

ren wrote: And the few non-judgemental members of totjo (some of whom are so gay they're 100% gay) know very well that I don't give a damn about anyone's opinion of homosexuality and would greatly prefer it if everyone could leave everyone else's thoughts in peace by immediately ceasing all attempts at convincing anyone else that it's either good or bad.

So then why even get involved in a discussion that you would rather people just kept to themselves ??.

I'm not discussing the rightness or the wrongness of homosexuality and am not trying to convince anyone of anything in that regard... What i am discussing is the tendency of groups to make demands from other groups. the increase of pack mentality and the slow painful death of freethought.

ren wrote: For if such opinion must exist then the ways of the Force will make it so

You've got me there, I fully trust in the Force and your comment is completely correct, if it is to be so then it shall be.


Perhaps you are seeing this from the same position I've seen the Racist card played all of these years, I've seen guys stand and be smarmy and cocky only to get a beat down, and as soon as the police show up it's "he hit me because I'm "black / chinese / pakistani", white guy gets charged for racial assault, but Racism does work both ways.

I agree with this but it isn't what I'm talking about. Why is it worse to get hit for being black than getting hit for wearing the wrong clothes? Why is it worse to dislike someone for being gay than for being a petrol head?

here is A, and B doesn't like what A is doing. here is B, and A doesn't like what B is doing. Why would one of them be more wrong than the other? Why should the community, the media, a political party point fingers at either A or B considering they are both doing exactly the same thing?

I am not however trying to "set a standard for acceptance", merely failing to see your reasoning behind what appears to be a disregard for what is ultimately a "common courtesy".

Because that is forcing your beliefs onto others instead of accepting the nature of others. ultimately it's incompatible with certain aspects of the Doctrine. There's a difference between choosing for yourself not to call something gay, and expecting others to do the same. It is for you to accept everything else, not for everything else to accept you. It is for you to make the effort and not expect anything in return (see creed).

Now of course I can't expect anyone else to think this way either, after all, my point also is that they have an equal right to make demands (about not "being so gay") as the others have to make demands (about classifying non-gay things as gay).

this really is just an exercise of the mind as nothing I've said will change anything. Except perhaps eventually give me an answer as to why I've been banging on for a few pages about freedom of conscience yet no-one has questioned what it actually means or how it's supposed to fit with the rest of the doctrine.

It's nice to give people what they want. Sure. But that's also what they teach at nursery school, where "why" is neither asked nor answered.

Ren wrote: Any choice of one thing over another is discrimination. the choice is (normally) made according to personal needs or taste. Can be sexuality, colour, shape, function, any possible criterion.[/color]

I do not read "discrimination" as "the choice", just "the recognition of the difference of objects"....

So choosing one over another is not "discrimination" unless you do so based on " the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, esp. on the grounds of race, age, or sex."

I'm not discussing the rightness or the wrongness of homosexuality and am not trying to convince anyone of anything in that regard... What i am discussing is the tendency of groups to make demands from other groups. the increase of pack mentality and the slow painful death of freethought.[/quote]

So then the fact that we Jedi tend to agree is also predicting the death of freethought... :lol:

One group trying to influence another isn't wrong, and isn't the end of freethought (if done through discussion and reason).... Any more than you and I having a discussion, and reaching an agreement is the death of freethought...

[/quote] ause that is forcing your beliefs onto others instead of accepting the nature of others. ultimately it's incompatible with certain aspects of the Doctrine. There's a difference between choosing for yourself not to call something gay, and expecting others to do the same. It is for you to accept everything else, not for everything else to accept you. It is for you to make the effort and not expect anything in return (see creed).[/quote]

Yes, but through conversation, we can hope to understand, if not agree with, the "other side"....

Sticking to your guns, for the sake of not wanting to "kill free thought" is, well, silly...

I don't expect me and my opinions to change your mind....

I expect you to...

So then the fact that we Jedi tend to agree is also predicting the death of freethought...

I don't find it so funny, but, yeah.

Sticking to your guns, for the sake of not wanting to "kill free thought" is, well, silly...

What is silly is to hope for an agreement. exploration is what matters. But that means stepping out a certain zone and people don't like doing that. it's a comfort thing that echoes our natural reward systems.

ren wrote: Any choice of one thing over another is discrimination. the choice is (normally) made according to personal needs or taste. Can be sexuality, colour, shape, function, any possible criterion.

I'm not discussing the rightness or the wrongness of homosexuality and am not trying to convince anyone of anything in that regard... What i am discussing is the tendency of groups to make demands from other groups. the increase of pack mentality and the slow painful death of freethought.

here is A, and B doesn't like what A is doing. here is B, and A doesn't like what B is doing. Why would one of them be more wrong than the other? Why should the community, the media, a political party point fingers at either A or B considering they are both doing exactly the same thing?

Because that is forcing your beliefs onto others instead of accepting the nature of others ultimately it's incompatible with certain aspects of the Doctrine.

Morality: to know danger of belief (see doctrine)

A Jedi knows how contradicting belief of what is right and what is wrong can lead to devastating crimes and conflicts. A Jedi takes a step away from the subjectivity in favor of the peace of objectivity. A Jedi does not force the values on others.



I just looked up the word danger. Interestly, the definition includes the word menace.

When I believe that others should believe as I believe it is dangerous.
When I expect that others should think or do as I do it is dangerous.
When I need others to believe as I believe it is dangerous.

So if I put the demaands of my beliefs, expectations and needs onto others . .then I am a menace to society by way of obstructing free thought, and by interferring with the ways of The Force.

I accept that.

ren wrote: Because that is forcing your beliefs onto others instead of accepting the nature of others.

I'm not trying to force my belief's onto you, I'm trying to understand your lack of compassion and failing to do so.

I don't think anything Ren has said shows a lack of compassion.
This thread is just coming across like an argument against Ren, my opinion, and he is entitled to think however he wishes as anyone else is.

elizabeth wrote: I don't think anything Ren has said shows a lack of compassion.
This thread is just coming across like an argument against Ren, my opinion, and he is entitled to think however he wishes as anyone else is.

Agreed Elizabeth...

This happens all of the time, and not to just Ren...

Someone takes a stance, and it seems contrary to the opinions of the majority, so in the course of the (multiple/criss-crossed) conversation, it does appear as an attack...

I assure you it is not...

But, because it gets... unpleasant, uncomfortable, it takes a strong person to be able to carry on these type of conversations...

elizabeth wrote: I don't think anything Ren has said shows a lack of compassion.

Sorry that was a bad turn of phrase on my part, what I meant to say was "I'm trying to understand why you think it is acceptable under the guise of freedom of speech to use that's so gay as a descriptive for something that isn't actually gay but actually quite the opposite, especially with the knowledge that it pains others to hear this"

Surely the compassionate route of "ok I'll not say that" toward the greater good would be the Jedi path, I however understand that within Ren himself this would cause a conflict as he feels he should say this regardless of the feelings of other people.

In this position I personally would take the selfless route of not saying it and meditating upon why I have the internal conflict over keeping it to myself, as opposed to the selfish route of saying to get it off my chest at the cost of paining another.

I'm also not saying he is wrong in his belief, I'm just failing within myself to get to grips with his perspective on the matter, perhaps when I was doing my training I read things a little differently from my perspective, I'm sure Ren understands that this is me trying to open my mind to his perspective but failing to see the logic in his thinking, I like to bring things to a close so until I can look at it from his perspective it's hard for me to accept what he is trying to say.

Again I've probably worded this badly, but there is no ill will or intent behind my posts and I'm certainly not trying to "prove anyone wrong", merely gain a deeper understanding of a fellow Jedi's feelings on the matter so I can better connect with him in future conversations.

How much cold can a bare bear bear? Context. My personal observation is the generation that most uses terms such as "that's so gay" etc is the same one that's the most accepting of gay people and gay marriage.