Daleth

And let's not forget the parallel to the intimidation practiced by civil rights activists to allow blacks to go to schools, universities, vote, marry whites that is now being practiced by homosexual rights activists against straight blacks. What goes around, comes around, right?

I am curious. Am I more culpable because I live in New York, even though I don't attend the parade? If I did attend the parade, would I be morally obligated to find out why NAMBLA was allowed to march?

yguy

You don't want fairness. You want us to ignore the rotting corpse in the middle of the living room. Dane Hall can see that. Why can't you?

yguy

It's not the same at all. MLK, at least superficially, was appealing to what was decent and just about white America. The homosexuals in the 70's appealed to America's gullibility and cowardice far more than its decency, IMO.

I don't see why.

I would think so, wouldn't you?

Daleth

That bad in them? Both are struggles for equal rights. Nothing more.

No. I know what the purpose of the march is. The march is to support pride and self-respect in homosexuals who have traditionally been told to be ashamed of who they are and to support equal rights that are being denied to them. It's an excellent purpose. If NAMBLA or the Hell's Angels decide they want to march in support of that purpose, let them.

I've been to rallies that I knew had a rather high percentage of antisemites present, where even some of the sponsors had marginal antisemitic agendas. But the rallies weren't about Jews and the purpose of the marches had nothing to do with antisemitism. If I attend a function it's because I support the goals of the function. I don't feel I need to investigate the sentiments of every other person who supports that goal.

I also don't investigate the business practices of every company that sponsors a float in the thanksgiving day parade, but if I did I'd probably have problems with quite a few of them.

yguy

Pedophiles are struggling for equal rights too.

How exactly does NAMBLA's presence support pride and self-respect in homosexuals?

If they're really interested in that, the best way to achieve it is to find the guts to tell these people to get lost. That would gain them not only self-respect, but respect from the straight community as well.

I can understand the reasoning, but I think it's misapplied here. They'd be better off with no parade at all than with one that has NAMBLA in it - or even the simulated copulation, for that matter.

There is no investigation needed here. If you don't know your money is funding the gassing of Jews, you have no guilt. When you find out, you are no longer innocent.

Daleth

If they get their own parade, I will never attend. They want equal rights for people who disregard the rights of others, specifically the rights of children.

If the organization NAMBLA decides they want to participate in a march to show that they support pride and self-respect among homosexuals, that's the only message I need to draw from their presence. Now if NAMBLA has a parade the purpose of which is to support pederasty or pedophilia and PFLAG decides to march in NAMBLA's parade, that's a different story.

What? I didn't say anything about funding anybody.

Hedwig

How are homosexuals doing that?

yguy

They don't think they're doing that. Obviously they are the people who Fr. Andrew refers to who are able to engage in sex with children without abusing them.

You don't need to pay any heed to the corpse in the living room either. You and the owner can sit there chatting about soap operas or whatever...but it's very weird, to say the least.

I was making a leap there, since you mentioned businesses, and there is presumably some moral threshhold which if a business passed you would no longer do business with them.

Daleth

I know they don't think they are abusing children's rights. But I do. Therefore I would not attend their parade to try to win them the right to do it more freely.

You keep talking about the corpse and this living room. And now we have some "owner" as well? Please say what you mean. It gets exhausing trying to sort out your metaphors. And I hate soaps. That's the extent of my conversation about them.

Yes, I was talking about why it would be that I'm morally obligated to investigate why NAMBLA was allowed in the parade. Now you seem to have skipped over that... I'm not morally obligated to find out why they were allowed, but morally obligated to boycott the parade regardless of why. Is that right?

yguy

The living room is the parade. Its organizers are the owner. The NAMBLA contingent is the corpse.

Yes, since there is no way in hell to justify their presence.

In the American Revolution, we made confederation with the Iroquois who were cannibals, because we reasonably figured we were better off with them than without them. How could the parade possibly be better off with NAMBLA than without them?