Tossing around the word "fascism" a bit much, eh?

<I, however, am very concerned about it. And is probably the single most important factor that I contemplate before deciding how to vote.>

Such poor, sloppy, obfuscating language usage when deciding to use such a valuable right? Sad, very sad.

<My cousin is a lesbian, and she was never able to get married until the opposition to gay marriage was overcome.>

Oh, you mean, like in the whole history of the world? I see. The entire world suffered under fascism until recently. I never knew. Thanks for enlightening me. Your emotional affection for your relative has clearly addled your brain. This is about the lowest quality post I've ever seen from you. Truly pathetic.

< That opposition came mostly from the Right, especially after Obama won a second term and flipped on the issue.>

Wow, such a complicated issue and he flipped from a fascist to just a really swell guy. What a step forward for this country.

<I've never seen my cousin happier.>

Hey, that's what it's all about, isn't it? I am guessing you've never seen millions of professing Christians sadder, but if they're not your relatives, they don't enter into the equation. But let's plug your equation into a formula:

"My relative who wants to ______________ has never been happier since it became legal to ________________." We could fill in some blanks here to show how incredibly irrational your point is here, but you get the picture, I'm sure.

<Her mother, my aunt, can't stop talking about what a positive impact the marriage has made in my cousin's life.>

Oh, that settles it then. On a related note, all parents in this country have decided to make their kids happy by not insisting they brush their teeth and not making them go to bed at night.

<This would never have happened if the sexual fascism wing of the GOP had their way.>

This is way beneath you. This is disgusting. Truly.

<If anything, the Republican Party seems more fascist to me than the Democratic Party. Obviously that is an opinion, formed by each individual, based on which issues are more important to them. And I don't expect you will change your mind based on what I write here.>

Yeah, no chance of that. This is by far the most intellectually void post I've ever seen from you.

<But at least be aware that reasonable people can see the same situation in quite different lights.>

Please review my "Democrats are doomed" prediction from 2015:

Kenneth S Rogoff (kibitz #194581)

I see a persistent lovefest triangle formed between the Far Left, the liberal mainstream media, and social media. They have all spent the last eight years congratulating themselves for being on the "right side of history" regarding such niche issues - green energy, climate change, same sex marriage, transgender bathroom privileges - that they actively blocked out the average American who cares far more about jobs, trade and the economy. The "open borders" question really struck a nerve with Americans who perceive the Democratic Party as more concerned about votes (through illegal immigrants) than ethics like spending American taxpayer dollars on Americans. As to the popular vote versus the electoral college, I was amused seeing Millennials out protesting the result as if elections should be decided through social media like any other online vote on a television show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPc...

LOL, no, I didn't like HRC. Just because I voted for her doesn't mean I liked her.

Tossing around the word "fascism" a bit much, eh?>

Nope. wrong again, <Ohio>.

<Diceman> brought up the topic of fascism, two posts in a row:

Big Pawn chessforum (kibitz #2020)

Big Pawn chessforum (kibitz #2021)

So I joined in a conversation with <Diceman> about fascism.

If you don't like it, then why are you only criticizing the person who responded (me), and not the person who *initiated* the conversation (<Diceman>)?

<Oh, you mean, like in the whole history of the world? I see. The entire world suffered under fascism until recently.>

LOL, pretty much yes, it did. Until about 1776. Unless you think taxation without representation, and the divine right of kings, slavery & serfdom, etc. is somehow not fascist.

<Hey, that's what it's all about, isn't it? I am guessing you've never seen millions of professing Christians sadder, but if they're not your relatives, they don't enter into the equation.>

A great example of the sexual fascism of the Right! Why is my cousin's personal life their business?

And yet, even if I just talk about it (it isn't even *my* life we are talking about), the Christian Sex Police jump into my conversation with a third party, to rip into me about my cousin's marriage.

Your action in this matter is proving my point.

<"My relative who wants to ______________ has never been happier since it became legal to ________________." >

"Smoke marijuana". And the fun police are losing that battle, just as the fun police lost on "drink alcohol" with the repeal of prohibition. Also, I can throw another one in there - "hunt". Fortunately, that one never was illegal.

<On a related note, all parents in this country have decided to make their kids happy by not insisting they brush their teeth and not making them go to bed at night.>

The fact that you are comparing brushing one's teeth to who someone partners with in marriage is mind boggling. This is a ridiculous analogy.

<I can't even categorize this rant as reasonable.>

I wasn't ranting. But you were.

If I were ranting, I would have insulted <Diceman> and belittled his views, the way you have done to me, in your post, like this:

Are they treated poorly because they are gay, or because they support Trump?

I didn't read <diceman's> post. Okay, he was sloppy, you were sloppier, but that's fine. I get using a term someone else initiated.

<OCF: Oh, you mean, like in the whole history of the world? I see. The entire world suffered under fascism until recently.>

<tga: LOL, pretty much yes, it did. Until about 1776. Unless you think taxation without representation, and the divine right of kings, slavery & serfdom, etc. is somehow not fascist.>

We won't count that little 241 year chunk of history that came after.

<A great example of the sexual fascism of the Right! Why is my cousin's personal life their business? >

Bunhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. THAT is the lie that the Homosexual Agenda has foisted on the Kardashian obsessed American public. It is not her private life we are discussing. It's her very public life and her public claim to be married. How can you be so hopelessly wrong on this topic? In any case, <YES>, the general moral climate of my society, my surroundings, do have an immense impact on my life. What kids hear and see every day surely impacts them. What people hear and see every day, whether coarse and base, or spiritual and uplifting, has an immeasurable impact on me and my country.

<And yet, even if I just talk about it (it isn't even *my* life we are talking about), the Christian Sex Police jump into my conversation with a third party, to rip into me about my cousin's marriage.>

There are things that are legal that I am 100% certain you'd think were out of bounds in a public conversation. And if I condoned/encouraged/praised those things, would you sit quietly and not criticize me?

<Smoke marijuana". And the fun police are losing that battle, just as the fun police lost on "drink alcohol" with the repeal of prohibition. Also, I can throw another one in there - "hunt". Fortunately, that one never was illegal.>

We've lost men in your little girl's bathroom too. The Asians lost being interred during WW2. The Africans lost being enslaved. Funny how sometimes history does a reset when they start to reap what they've sown.

<The fact that you are comparing brushing one's teeth to who someone partners with in marriage is mind boggling. This is a ridiculous analogy.>

Is it "gays" who are being prosecuted, vilified, having their small businesses destroyed by assorted "human rights" agencies, being forced to take part in "celebrations" which to them are morally abhorrent, forced into "sensitivity training," and having their free speech rights attacked every day?

Or is it Christians?

Some gays and lesbians are so intent on perpetual victimhood status (with the full support of the liberal triangle) that they will invent hoaxes as a pretext to bash straight people. This case is all too typical:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/...

<Why is my cousin's personal life their business?>

Agreed. If LGBTQ want equal treatment, then they should stop demanding special treatment, like novel pronouns and bathroom privileges. I have real sympathy for American schools built 50-100 years ago that now must adjust to transgender needs (new bathrooms and locker rooms, shower curtains) or else lose federal funding. The same bullying approach that New Age liberals supposedly protest.

<sexual fascism wing of the GOP> One person's fascism is another's family values.>

We won't count that little 241 year chunk of history that came after.>

Good, since it was only in one country and your position was based on, and I quote, "the whole history of the world", so you would lose the point anyway if we did count it.

Most of Europe was either directly fascist, quasi-fascist monarchies, or fascist in the name of the people (communist) until after WWII, and Eastern Europe for long after that. And the other continents were far behind Europe.

<Bunhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. THAT is the lie that the Homosexual Agenda has foisted on the Kardashian obsessed American public. It is not her private life we are discussing. It's her very public life and her public claim to be married.>

you don't have a clue what you are talking about. My cousin isn't a Kardashian, and she and her wife just go about minding their own business, living a family life like everyone else around them.

So stop projecting whatever it is that you dreamed up in your head, because you don't know what you're talking about. You don't know my cousin or anything about her.

<How can you be so hopelessly wrong on this topic? In any case, <YES>, the general moral climate of my society, my surroundings, do have an immense impact on my life. What kids hear and see every day surely impacts them. What people hear and see every day, whether coarse and base, or spiritual and uplifting, has an immeasurable impact on me and my country.>

And it is the same for everyone else! In case you haven't noticed, you aren't the only American citizen.

Fortunately, the US Constitution prohibits the establishment of religion, preventing you and others like you from forcing your religion down the throats of other Americans.

<There are things that are legal that I am 100% certain you'd think were out of bounds in a public conversation. And if I condoned/encouraged/praised those things, would you sit quietly and not criticize me?>

This is where we differ in how we live. I don't stick my nose into how you live your life, but you seek to do so to me or my family based on some nonsense you dreamed up in your head or saw on TV.

<We've lost men in your little girl's bathroom too. >

Over here exactly the same thing. Personally I don't care what people do own their personal life, but the minorities here are loud and belligerent aa well .

Is it "gays" who are being prosecuted, vilified, having their small businesses destroyed by assorted "human rights" agencies, being forced to take part in "celebrations" which to them are morally abhorrent, forced into "sensitivity training," and having their free speech rights attacked every day?>

Completely off topic. I was talking about my cousin getting married. So the only projection going on was what you imagined in your head!

To be clear, no one was "forced" to go to the wedding, or to have sensitivity training, or any of the other baloney you mentioned.

If you want to discuss *my* post with me, and the topic I am engaged in debating, I will be more than happy to do so.

<unf>, I've deleted most of your posts since this forum is for elevated discussion. I left a couple of your posts even though they fail to meet the threshold of being elevated, just to show where the absolute bottom threshold of approval is for this forum.

Wow, what next? Now my cousin is under suspicion for being in a social media lynch mob?

Are there any hard right people here who can discuss this topic without blaming me and my cousin for all the ills of the world, even though you don't know anything about our family, the ceremony, or the way we live our lives?

<tga: Good, since it was only in one country and your position was based on, and I quote, "the whole history of the world", so you would lose the point anyway if we did count it. >

In "the whole history of the world", no society endorsed homsexual marriage. That was the point.

<you don't have a clue what you are talking about. My cousin isn't a Kardashian, and she and her wife just go about minding their own business, living a family life like everyone else around them.>

My point about the Kardashians is the relative intellectual level of our society. People as talentless and immoral as the Kardashians are heroes. And in such a society, homosexual marriage is embraced. I see a real ugly relationship between those two.

<Fortunately, the US Constitution prohibits the establishment of religion, preventing you and others like you from forcing your religion down the throats of other Americans.>

It prohibits Congress from doing so. I will note it's the homosexuals trying to force their unreligion down my religious throats. I think you know that, deep down, and are just suppressing it. Anyway, you're just all over the map here, moving goalposts. I don't need to chase you much more, because any honest observer can see you're in a different universe than the world of the rational.

<I don't stick my nose into how you live your life, but you seek to do so to me or my family based on some nonsense you dreamed up in your head or saw on TV.>

Do you care that the bakers are going to lose their livelihood if they follow their conscience and refuse to make cakes for a homosexual wedding? <tpstar> is dead on correct on who is the problem here, who is getting into violation of personal rights, who is driving the government to enforce laws against the other side. You're so far wrong here it's pathetic.

<OCF: We've lost men in your little girl's bathroom too. >

<tga: Wrong topic, liar. I said nothing about that. Try to have an *honest* debate, instead of throwing up red herrings or straw men.>

Actually that is wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histo...

<My point about the Kardashians is the relative intellectual level of our society. People as talentless and immoral as the Kardashians are heroes. And in such a society, homosexual marriage is embraced. I see a real ugly relationship between those two.>

I think problem here is education. The depletion of parental power is a plague of "modern" society and afamilies. Religious or not. Kids nowadays "straight" or not are usually bunch of spoiled and fated to be ill mannered individuals.

They are not incentive their kids to read a book, to acquire knowledge or to explore critical thinking. So we have ill mannered homosexuals (usually younger) and straight kids nowadays doing bizarre things despite their sexuality.

We can`t put everyone on the same bag. Radicalism usually goes with intolerance and always sucks. Most homosexuals I know (not coincidence are >30 y.old) are nice people, works and pay their taxes and respect others, don`t go shake their booties for all to see. Likewise most of my friends are very nice Christians people but I also met some Christians (even a preacher) who live <very> dubious lives.

In "the whole history of the world", no society endorsed homsexual marriage. That was the point. >

Yes, I understand that, <Ohio>. It is only a recent phenomenon, and AFAIK, restricted to Western cultures.

At the same time, the whole history of the world is fascism in government. Now of course I apply the term fascism to include monarchies, because the forms are similar.

<My point about the Kardashians is the relative intellectual level of our society. People as talentless and immoral as the Kardashians are heroes. And in such a society, homosexual marriage is embraced. I see a real ugly relationship between those two.>

Thank you for clarifying that. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. And I am entitled to discuss topics I want to discuss. Reality TV focused on people who are famous for their parents is not one I will continue to discuss.

< I will note it's the homosexuals trying to force their unreligion down my religious throats.>

Except your "note" is demonstrably wrong. men and women have the right to marry. There are no large-scale homosexual movements trying to prevent men and women from marrying. Nor were there ever.

And there were no homosexual movements trying to dictate *who* other people could marry, nor were there ever. But what I have described as the Right's "sex fascists" did indeed fight tooth and nail to dictate who could marry whom. This is a matter of the historical record, your *feelings* on the matter notwithstanding.

< I think you know that, deep down, and are just suppressing it.>

See previous 2 paragraphs for what I know about it.

<Anyway, you're just all over the map here, moving goalposts.>

Again, the data show just the opposite.

I've been focused on the topic of my cousin getting to marry her wife.

In reply you moved the goalposts to <We've lost men in your little girl's bathroom too. >

<PP> moved the goalposts to <having their small businesses destroyed> etc.

<tpstar> moved the goalposts to <social media lynch mob>.

I seem to be the only person here trying to keep the conversation focused on the original topic, and it's like herding cats.

<I don't need to chase you much more, because any honest observer can see you're in a different universe than the world of the rational.>

I view this as a separate issue.

I am respectfully challenging your original premise that conservatives are "fascist" while liberals are "tolerant" as lately college campuses are littered with blatant intolerance toward dissenting viewpoints. I cited "Gays For Trump" on purpose, and remember when writing "Trump 2016" in chalk at Emory was taken as hate speech. It is indeed the social media lynch mob who go around so desperate to root out "intolerance" that they will invent phony examples as needed, or blow things way out of proportion. The ultimate endpoint is transgender bathroom rights; everybody knows that transgenders are not the potential problem here, but predators and pedophiles posing as females to gain access where women and girls are most vulnerable. Social justice warriors have completely spun this around to where opposing the idea of men in the women's bathroom or the girls' locker room is now "intolerance" which I find to be a ridiculous position for them to maintain and pursue.