Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 43 of 43

Thread: Another Day, Another Loss

  1. #41
    Raptors Republic All-Star ezz_bee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Kigali, Rwanda
    Posts
    1,674
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    This is what I find quite interesting. Did I insinuate that Multipaul may be gay? Well interpret that for what you will, it really is of minor importance....

    but I do SERIOUSLY think calling the idea of being homosexual 'heinous' is incredibly close minded, homophobic and wrong. I also think that saying that someone should be banned because they feel strongly for gay rights is wrong. Now if he is not against gay rights, but still thinks one should be banned for 'insinuating'(as you put it) that he is gay... is that really any better?

    What does it matter if one is gay or not? What does it matter if one calls someone gay? Isn't taking that as an insult in and of itself exactly where the problem lies? If one was to say... oh you or so muslim, or you are so african american, or you are so white or you are so straight, or you are so christian. Would you think that is 'heinous'? Would you call that heinous? Would you call for punishment towards that individual?

    The greatest tradegy that befell the Jews was indifference and silence. So criticize me for not being silent. Criticize me for not being indifferent. Criticize me for being open and honest. It does not change what is really wrong here. That said, I will let it go, to appease the masses that don't want to see reality for what it really is, the minute he apologize for saying that being gay, or that being called gay, is 'heinous' and should be punishable.

    Thank You.

    Also.... Bargnani sucks. Anyone who thinks otherwise is gay.
    This is exactly my point, you put together a reasonable and logical argument (if somewhat open to rebuttal) and you undermine it with the last line. By putting those two sentences together you are implying to your audience that being gay is negative because you are associating it with your negative opinion of bargnani. Now I am inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are throwing in a little bit of cheeky irony. However, don't go playing the high road like you are speaking out against injustice. Queer theorists have spent that better part of the last decade fighting against broad applications being applied. I have no right to make any judgement's of your sexual orientation just like you have no right to make any judgement about multipaul. IT IS NOT HEINOUS THAT YOU CALLED HIM GAY. IT IS HEINOUS THAT YOU BELIEVED YOU HAD THE RIGHT TO MAKE STATEMENTS ABOUT WHAT YOU BELIEVE HIS SEXUAL ORIENTATION IS. It would be just as bad if I rationalized your mistake by saying "you only made it because your are straight". I don't know your sexual orientation and have no right characterizing it as straight, gay, lesbian, queer, bisexual, transgendered, two-spirited, or any other terms referring to sexual orientation. IT IS NOT ABOUT STRAIGHT VS GAY, it is about your right as an individual to make statements about another's sexuality. Although I stand by my original belief that your association with multipaul and homosexuality was meant to be negative. Even IF it wasn't it is STILL unacceptable. Do you understand the point I am trying to make?
    Last edited by ezz_bee; Thu Mar 17th, 2011 at 02:10 PM.
    "We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon

  2. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,183
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote ezz_bee wrote: View Post
    This is exactly my point, you put together a reasonable and logical argument (if somewhat open to rebuttal) and you undermine it with the last line. By putting those two sentences together you are implying to your audience that being gay is negative because you are associating it with your negative opinion of bargnani. Now I am inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are throwing in a little bit of cheeky irony. However, don't go playing the high road like you are speaking out against injustice. Queer theorists have spent that better part of the last decade fighting against broad applications being applied. I have no right to make any judgement's of your sexual orientation just like you have no right to make any judgement about multipaul. IT IS NOT HEINOUS THAT YOU CALLED HIM GAY. IT IS HEINOUS THAT YOU BELIEVED YOU HAD THE RIGHT TO MAKE STATEMENTS ABOUT WHAT YOU BELIEVE HIS SEXUAL ORIENTATION IS. It would be just as bad if I rationalized your mistake by saying "you only made it because your are straight". I don't know your sexual orientation and have no right characterizing it as straight, gay, lesbian, queer, bisexual, transgendered, two-spirited, or any other terms referring to sexual orientation. IT IS NOT ABOUT STRAIGHT VS GAY, it is about your right as an individual to make statements about another's sexuality. Although I stand by my original belief that your association with multipaul and homosexuality was meant to be negative. Even IF it wasn't it is STILL unacceptable. Do you understand the point I am trying to make?
    This guy is just trolling you man, don't bother with him, he is not worth it.

  3. #43
    Super Moderator MangoKid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Scarborough
    Posts
    3,119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    This thread is going nowhere fast.. lockin it up, lads.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •