Yes, I expect this from Alabama.

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Eldanar**

Melissia:

Here are your purported reasons for not liking Alabama ( a place you have never been, and pretty obviously no little or nothing about):

Melissia wrote:I don't expect any better from Alabama either. Being a non-Christian there is... unpleasant. And it's actually phsyically dangerous to travel there if you're a homosexual (or a bisexual who isn't disguising themselves as a heterosexual).

Not that anyone actually WANTS to go to Alabama.

I know several non-Christians, who apparently have no more problems here than anywhere else. I also know several homosexuals, none of whom have ever expressed to me that they are fearful of travelling. Now, I probably would suggest that they stay away from the more rural areas, but most homosexuals tend to congregate in larger metropolitan areas anyhow; and I would imagine that this would be good advice irregardless of where someone might live.

And another:

Melissia wrote:
Eldanar wrote:Speaking as an AL resident, all I can do is slap my head and say, "not again..."

Needless to say, most of our living former governors are in jail or are or were under indictment, so I would not put too much stock in his comments.

As a Christain, I can only say what a wholly un-Christian thing to say... But that is kind of what you get when you are dealing with idealogue Evangelicals.

@ Melissia, are you basing your comments on rumor and speculation, or do you actually have any significant first-hand knowledge? I just wonder because I have a friend who is a gay Buddhist, who has lived here for 15-20 years. He says he likes it a lot more than LA where he grew up.

That's part of the reason a friend of mine (and her lover) left Alabama in the first place. Alabama's court system considers homosexuality a sin and bases legal rulings off of the bible. They have plenty of anti-homosexual laws there, as well-- for example, public libraries in the state are forbidden from purchasing books or the scripts to plays by gay authors (no matter their subject matter).

All of this I found with a cursory five minute news search off of google. The Alabama legislature is a just few steps below violently homophobic, and a lot of its citizens aren't.

Conjecture, speculation and inuendo. You made some factually incorrect statements and then proceeded to construct a false argument around them.

As I pointed out:

"As for the laws, almost every state has anti-sodomy (with sodomy defined as anything not hetero-missionary style) laws on the books. However, they simply are not enforced (or haven't been in 20+ years). Hell, they outlaw most heterosexual sex acts as well, many of which I find quite enjoyable. And your google search returned a proposed bill that was dropped with little or no support. Every state has right wing puritanical nut jobs."

Melissia wrote: Right, I bash Alabama as a whole for entirely different reasons.

Don't worry, I make fun of my home state too, I just so happen to dislike Alabama more.

Melissia wrote:Statements like what? I pulled everything I said in response to you off of reputable news sources.

You made a cursory search, found something that bolstered your argument, and never bothered to look beyond the headline. The "law" you are referencing was actually a proposed bill, that died when it received no traction. It is no different than any other half-baked quak bill that is proposed by legislators all over the world in democratic societies. And like most of them, it did not go anywhere.

Melissia wrote: That said, no, I have my reasons for disliking Alabama. I named some of them earlier in this thread.

I find it somewhat ironic that someone from Texas is lobbing grenades...

Soladrin wrote:
Eldanar wrote:@ Melissia

With statements like that, all you do is re-confirm your own ignorance...

And with statements like this, you become disliked by the Melissia worshippers.

But seriously? she said nothing wrong :\ I don't like belgium or germany, why? cause their anoying drivers. Is that a good reason to hate the entire country? Probably not. Does that bother me? Nope.

I really could care less. I have nothing against her?/him? I just think the series of arguments are petty, ill-informed and juvenile. I mean, I did not like George Bush, but I don't think everyone from Texas is a moron simply because he comes from there, and they gifted him to the rest of us.

I'm not overly enthused with Gov. Bentley in general, and his comments in particular. But I do not paint 5 million people with a broad brush and say I hate them all because of one insensitive and idiotic comment from a newly elected public official. And even with that, he apologized; which is a lot more than George Bush ever did.

I dislike some of the politics in this state and think it is often idiotic, and it is inherently corrupt. It is just the nature of the system here.

**sennacherib**

sorry... computer inept person here. My full message is in the lower box.

**sebster**

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:[You mean that two separate words could have different meaning?!?! I had no idea! (sarcasm)
I have never heard of denigration used in a happy fuzzy "I love you" sort of way.
But I thank you for pointing out that the two different words are in fact different.

Now. Let me clarify. What is socially accepted?
Is it okay to say on national TV that Christians are ALL wackos like this governor?
Is it okay to say on national TV that all homosexuals are disgusting deviants?

Which comment would cause more 'fuss'? (Which would be more offense on these boards?)

Are you actually claiming that Christianity is victimised party in the US. That's absurd.

Seriously, just think about what you're claiming. Stop and honestly think about it. Then tell me how many overtly Christian governors there are in the US, who use their Christianity as a major part of the campaign. Then tell me how many gay governors there are.

Stop being silly.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

sennacherib wrote:No one with the kind of conviction that the Alabama gov. expressed should be allowed in public office. He needs to have a special office where he can lord over people with his same conviction.

Nah, he has to be allowed in public office. If you run and win, you gain office. That's how democracy works. If Alabama want's a Christian supremacist for governor, they can have one.

**sennacherib**

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:
dogma wrote:

Denigration and hate are not the same thing. You seem to be making a bold attempt at equivocation.

Well, that, or you don't know the meaning of the words you're using.

You might as well say "Change 'hate' to 'love' and witness the changes!"

You mean that two separate words could have different meaning?!?! I had no idea! (sarcasm)
I have never heard of denigration used in a happy fuzzy "I love you" sort of way.
But I thank you for pointing out that the two different words are in fact different.

Now. Let me clarify. What is socially accepted?
Is it okay to say on national TV that Christians are ALL wackos like this governor?

Is it okay to say on national TV that all homosexuals are disgusting deviants?

Which comment would cause more 'fuss'? (Which would be more offense on these boards?)

Just to clarify, the ONLY people who are calling Homosexuals disgusting deviants on TV are the Christian wackos. Just saying.

@ sebster... your right. Hopefully he does some more shameful stuff and gets the boot. No state in the union deserves a looser like him.

**Gen. Lee Losing**

sebster wrote:
Are you actually claiming that Christianity is victimised party in the US. That's absurd.

Seriously, just think about what you're claiming. Stop and honestly think about it. Then tell me how many overtly Christian governors there are in the US, who use their Christianity as a major part of the campaign. Then tell me how many gay governors there are.

Stop being silly.

I am not claiming "victimized" status. It is just a double standard.
I am just asking how is it perfectly acceptable to bag on Christians but not on other groups of people?
If I picked a race or sexual orientation and started treating them with the same aggression and contempt that is so common here in the OT Forum, I'd be called horrible things, reported, then banned. There is a hypocrisy in trashing "all those evil Christians" for their closed minded bias against a group of people.
Maybe that is just me "being silly".

**sennacherib**

Maybe if christians treated EVERYONE the same then they would be more appreciated. But since christian's (not all but many) appear on TV talking about how gays are terrible, and how Hurricane Katrina was gods doing cause we are all evil and sinners and blah blah blah, people are getting sick of it. There are a lot of non christians that feel the christianity is meddling a little to much in their buisness. My life is my buisness. If i was gay and wanted to marry and have the same life that everyone else has... I couldnt. I would be held to a different standard by the christians here in america. THat is the double standard.

**Ahtman**

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:It is just a double standard.

So? Sometimes a double standard is necessary. They aren't inherently evil or wrong things.

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:I am just asking how is it perfectly acceptable to bag on Christians but not on other groups of people?

It isn't, but you seem invested in some perverted reality so I don't think you'll be convinced. You want to know what it is like to actually be 'bagged on' go to China and proclaim Christianity.

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:If I picked a race or sexual orientation and started treating them with the same aggression and contempt that is so common here in the OT Forum, I'd be called horrible things, reported, then banned.

You are wrong on both accounts, but to be more accurate you would need to select a different religion, like, oh say, Islam. Which btw does get 'bagged on' with equal fury. There is a difference between a toss of the genetic dice (race) and a choice of which imaginary friends you like the most. One is a choice, the other isn't and shouldn't be equated. I mean, sure the KKK equates race and religion, but who gives them any thought? I won't call you a horrible person, but I will tell you that you are just flat out wrong.

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:There is a hypocrisy in trashing "all those evil Christians" for their closed minded bias against a group of people.

I think the only group really being unfairly painted here are the citizens of Alabama. Besides, 'all those evil Christians' describes only evil Christians, not all Christians.

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:Maybe that is just me "being silly".

No, but it is you being stubborn, short sighted, and unaware of the reality of your environment. White Christians run this country by a HUGE majority. In the parlance of the internet, stop being but-hurt and attacking others when you have all the advantages to begin with.

**sennacherib**

+1
My brother in law is from pakistan. He is muslim, so is my sister.
Most of America are white - christians. They do run most of this country. I really doubt that a absolute saint of a atheist who ran for office here in america could get elected if he ran against an Idiot like Palin, just based on her faith.

**Melissia**

Eldanar wrote:[snip]

... no. None of those things I mentioned are false. They were on reputable news sites.

Although I feel bad for effectively saying tl;dr, I seriously do not want to read the rest of that post. I have no intention of getting into an argument with someone who wants to jump to the defense of Alabama. Instead, I'm gonna go over there to some other thread and talk about... I dunno... cats.

**sebster**

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:I am not claiming "victimized" status. It is just a double standard.
I am just asking how is it perfectly acceptable to bag on Christians but not on other groups of people?

It isn't acceptable. The issue is clearly that what you consider bagging on Christians is miles away from what people consider the same. sennacherib chose his words poorly, but it's pretty hard to dispute the content - Christians are obligated to spread the word, tell others about Christ. Pointing this out, even in blunt language, is hardly bagging on Christians in the same way that calling gays people deviants would be.

If I picked a race or sexual orientation and started treating them with the same aggression and contempt that is so common here in the OT Forum, I'd be called horrible things, reported, then banned. There is a hypocrisy in trashing "all those evil Christians" for their closed minded bias against a group of people.

There is hostility towards Christians on the off-topic forum. As a non-Christian I wish it would stop. But this is a gaming forum on the internet, people can choose to post or choose one of hundreds of other gaming sites if the odd passing attack at their faith gets too much for them. Comparing that in any way to the actual hardships many minorities suffer is ridiculous.

Maybe that is just me "being silly".

Pretty much, yeah.

**Emperors Faithful**

sebster wrote:
Gen. Lee Losing wrote:I am not claiming "victimized" status. It is just a double standard.
I am just asking how is it perfectly acceptable to bag on Christians but not on other groups of people?

It isn't acceptable. The issue is clearly that what you consider bagging on Christians is miles away from what people consider the same. sennacherib chose his words poorly, but it's pretty hard to dispute the content - Christians are obligated to spread the word, tell others about Christ. Pointing this out, even in blunt language, is hardly bagging on Christians in the same way that calling gays people deviants would be.

I would think that depends on whether you view the word 'deviant' as an inherently bad word. It really isn't, but is often used as such.

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:If I picked a race or sexual orientation and started treating them with the same aggression and contempt that is so common here in the OT Forum, I'd be called horrible things, reported, then banned. There is a hypocrisy in trashing "all those evil Christians" for their closed minded bias against a group of people.

I see you haven't read many posts about Islam here.

**DA's Forever**

Deviant definitely has a negative connotation attached to it.

**Emperors Faithful**

I'd disagree. Like I said, it's often viewed as negative, but it really isn't any more offensive than the word unorthodox. For example, DeviantArt doesn't give off any warning signs.

**DA's Forever**

Oh dont get me wrong I'm not saying the Word deviant is Negative. But rather viewed as such by people.

**mattyrm**

Mannahnin wrote:Matty, the First Amendment is freedom of speech/expression, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion.

A governmental official doesn't lose his right to free speech, which includes the right to say offensive things. He is supposed to be careful not to use his official position to promote one religion over another, but this is a line that can be tricky to judge and which some jackholes don't care too much about.

Yeah so, was he clearly not using his official position to promote one religion over another!?

Seems pretty cut and dried to me!

As I said, I dont think what he said was offensive, people are allowed to believe in anything they want so I dont think its the correct term to use, but if were just talking about violation of the amendments (which seem a pretty big deal to you guys considering they get parroted whenever its used an as excuse for irresponsible gun ownership) then he clearly and obviously did, no questions.

He didnt say "If you dont embrace some form of monotheistic God you are not my brothers and sisters"

**dogma**

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:
You mean that two separate words could have different meaning?!?! I had no idea! (sarcasm)
I have never heard of denigration used in a happy fuzzy "I love you" sort of way.
But I thank you for pointing out that the two different words are in fact different.

If they mean different things, then why would you be surprised that someone might react differently when the words are interchanged?

I suspect that, perhaps, you didn't put much thought into what you wrote.

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:
Now. Let me clarify. What is socially accepted?
Is it okay to say on national TV that Christians are ALL wackos like this governor?
Is it okay to say on national TV that all homosexuals are disgusting deviants?

Which comment would cause more 'fuss'? (Which would be more offense on these boards?)

Ah, yes, ad populum, a favorite fallacy of many.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gen. Lee Losing wrote: There is a hypocrisy in trashing "all those evil Christians" for their closed minded bias against a group of people.
Maybe that is just me "being silly".

It is just you being silly, because that's not hypocrisy.

As with many words denoting abstract concepts, the popular understanding of "hypocrisy" is incorrect.

It ranks up there with "irony" in terms of frequency of misuse.

**sebster**

sebster wrote:If Alabama want's a Christian supremacist for governor, they can have one.

Just occurred to me I meant dominionist, not supremacist.

**DA's Forever**

sebster wrote:
sebster wrote:If Alabama want's a Christian supremacist for governor, they can have one.

Just occurred to me I meant dominionist, not supremacist.

Almost interchangeable in this case given his attitude

**Ahtman**

I suppose we should be happy that he said Christian and not Muslim because if had said that only Muslims were his brothers and sisters the ****storm generated would cover the East Coast.

**reds8n**

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:Interesting question, sort of OT, is who are we allowed to hate?

Lichenstein.

..and, can we please turn down a notch please everyone. Ta.

**Commander Endova**

I did a stint at Redstone Arsenal, AL, while I was in the Army. As far as I'm concerned, the place is that donkey-cave of the United States. Hot, humid, and stuck in the last century.

**The Kilted Samurai**

Ahtman wrote:
The Kilted Samurai wrote:You know, I'm not a huge fan of southern politics or fundamentalists Christians either but there was no need to bash Alabama as a whole for that.

That is far to sensible a solution.

The Governor was speaking for himself there and not necessarily representing everyone's views in that state.

Except he was speaking as the Governor from the Governors podium at a government gathering. If he had said it at a fundraiser or a social event where he was speaking for himself that would be fine and reasonable. What happened here was tantamount to the state endorsement of a specific religion.

I live in Southern California and go to school in North Cal and I can tell you right now, we are faaaaaaaar from perfect.

I don't think you'll have any trouble convincing anyone that California has issues. After all, it isn't Texas, amiright Fraz?

That said as an agnostic, whether the governor knew it was offensive or not, he should go F himself.

An agnostic? In California? This changes my whole world view.

Wow, thanks for critiquing every sentence of my comment like a real smart

. lol

As for the one reasonable thing you said (the second quote), I kind of agree with that but this still falls more under freedom of speech here to me. He just wanted to preach to a largely pro-christian crowd, say something to get them fired up, and like I said until he makes laws for it he's not breaking any rules. Now was it poor choice of words politically for him? Definitely. But as I said he's not breaking any rules other than being an idiot and inconsiderate of how his words may sound to others. Now according to a new article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_alabama_governor_christians) he's already apologized for his words so it's clear he wasn't about to install mandatory prayer in schools or anything, so chill out everyone. The guy was simply an idiot who had no idea what he was saying was offensive.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mannahnin wrote:Matty, the First Amendment is freedom of speech/expression, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion.

A governmental official doesn't lose his right to free speech, which includes the right to say offensive things. He is supposed to be careful not to use his official position to promote one religion over another, but this is a line that can be tricky to judge and which some jackholes don't care too much about.

Exactly. Government officials in this country, both right and left, have been saying offensive religious things like this for years but as far as I'm concerned he has every right to say it but considering his political position he should have known better than to say it in the first place, thats all.

**Skylifter**

sennacherib wrote: I'm from California, not Alabama, having been through Alabama and the south while travelling I have to say that it is beautiful country and from what I saw they were very hospitable. But I am white, and if they had known that I am an atheist, things might not have been so friendly. But who can say, there might be a really interesting sociological experiment waiting to be undertaken on this subject.
The separation of church and state is of extreme importance to me both as a citizen and as a human being. Why ... because my views and those of the religious are widely disparate from one another. I believe that homosexuals are no different than anyone else with the one exception being their choice of partners. I firmly believe in evolution and recognize that we are no different than many other animals except that we have the capacity to think symbolically which has allowed us to elevate our culture to its current level. I believe in a woman’s right to choose whether or not she is ready to have a child. I believe in the use of contraception to help reduce overpopulation, which I believe is a reality. I absolutely believe that global climate change is a reality and that WE, not god are the ones that are driving ourselves toward an early demise. These are divisions between my philosophy and that of many, not all; members of the christian faith. These are all elements of our society that remain within the governments realm to act upon and I would hope that anyone in the government would act on these concerns based on a sound logical perspective.
Since this man who was elected is supposed to be representing and working for all the citizens of his state, I would say that his statement raises legitimate concern as to his ability to fairly govern. I want to know that any decisions he makes are based on sound logical though, not some feeling/ unfounded belief that he has, supported by a 2000 year old text written in a time period that lacked all but the most basic understanding of the functioning of the world. A text that I might add cannot be taken literally anymore and instead must be interpreted.
And as for all the hater comments... when I am attending classes here at the university, the Free Speech area often has and abundance of religious individuals holding crosses and shouting about how god hates f@gs, how we are all sinners and about how we MUST accept jesus christ or else we will all go to hell and suffer for all eternity. Seems ironic that an all loving god would condemn his children to suffer for all of eternity. And if my opposition to being controlled by the aforementioned individuals makes me a hater, then so be it.

Wow, an intelligent american!

.. just so you know, I posted this only to show you that once you are not from the USA, you can bash the whole country for how close-minded the christian fundamentalists in Alabama are. And it is an easy mistake to make, too. Rationally, I know that fundamentalist christians are not the absolute majority in the USA, but there is so much talk about fundamentalistic laws or things like banning evolution theory from schools in the german media, you could really get the idea that the USA were more dangerous to human rights in the world than China. And when places like Alabama elect fundamentalists as governors (let's not even talk about your last president here), that makes it even easier to believe that idea.

Luckily, all the americans I have met personally were a intelligent, open-minded non-fundamentalists, and that has persuaded me that maybe China is the more dangerous superpower after all.

**Ahtman**

The Kilted Samurai wrote: The guy was simply an idiot who had no idea what he was saying was offensive.

I'd be willing to be he's a lot smarter than you think and that he knew exactly the kind of reaction he would get. Politicians aren't nearly as dumb as people pretend. Giving a message to Christians from a government podium at a government event? Yeah, I'm sure he thought no one would notice. Again, you replace 'Christian' with 'Muslim' this would be an ever bigger event. He made himself out to be the enemy of the athiest and godless left as well as well as a defender of the Christian faith to the right. How much do you thank that is worth in campaign contributions?

**Frazzled**

sennacherib wrote:No one with the kind of conviction that the Alabama gov. expressed should be allowed in public office. He needs to have a special office where he can lord over people with his same conviction.

Why? We have avowed socialists, loser politicians with no concept of economics (cough president cough), lesbians, homosexuals, and...lawyers.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:
sebster wrote:
Are you actually claiming that Christianity is victimised party in the US. That's absurd.

Seriously, just think about what you're claiming. Stop and honestly think about it. Then tell me how many overtly Christian governors there are in the US, who use their Christianity as a major part of the campaign. Then tell me how many gay governors there are.

Stop being silly.

I am not claiming "victimized" status. It is just a double standard.
I am just asking how is it perfectly acceptable to bag on Christians but not on other groups of people?
If I picked a race or sexual orientation and started treating them with the same aggression and contempt that is so common here in the OT Forum, I'd be called horrible things, reported, then banned. There is a hypocrisy in trashing "all those evil Christians" for their closed minded bias against a group of people.
Maybe that is just me "being silly".

This is true.

**Skylifter**

Frazzled wrote:
This is true.

Him being silly? Yes.

**Frazzled**

sebster wrote:
There is hostility towards Christians on the off-topic forum. As a non-Christian I wish it would stop. But this is a gaming forum on the internet, people can choose to post or choose one of hundreds of other gaming sites if the odd passing attack at their faith gets too much for them. Comparing that in any way to the actual hardships many minorities suffer is ridiculous.

You have it the other way around. This is a gaming forum. If constant attacks in some minor subdirectory drives off viewers, then those posters creating those attacks can leave the forum.

After re-reading the thread the attacks on an entire state and a religion is not appropriate. This thread is closed.