Alan Keyes, the Republican import who was brought into Illinois at the last minute to try and run a campaign for the Senate tripped over a land mine earlier this week.
Yes, another Gay marriage thread.
He simply said that all homosexuals were "Selfish Hedonists" and when askes about Vice President Cheney's daughter, "Yes, she is one too."
This bothered me for a while today. There were a lot of witty and silly comments that I wanted to make in rebuttal to this comment.
Then it struck me why his point of view bothered me so much.
It presumes that there can be no love in a homosexual relationship.
To some people, sex is all about the pleasure. They have a very limited, hedonistic, and ultimately empty life.
To people like Alan Keyes, sex is all about procreation and the religious duties involved in such. While that is definately a big step above hedonism, it is still very limited, and somewhat empty.
To me, sex is part of the romantic partnership of mutual admiration, respect, care and that something else mystical and powerful all of which we call love. Certainly there is pleasure involved, and in some cases, procreation. However, to not connect in an emotional and personal way with your sexual partner, either out of hedonism or anti-hedonistic duty, is to really miss something in sex and in life.
Worse, to assume that another group of people are unable to make that connection is to dismiss the basic humanity of those people.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Some of them do miss that, and others are so taken aback by the idea of same sex marriages that they don't know what to think.
I was against it, until I became friends with some gay men and women. Then it became easier to see why SOME gays want marriage....the same reasons that SOME hetero couples want it.
I am still caught in the middle of these issues, because I can see points being made on both sides. It wasn't that long ago that I had different views than I have now, less than 10 years ago really. I wasn't a bigot, and NEVER condoned violence or extreme prejudice, but I was very conservative in my views. In some ways I still am. I had friends that were gay, but not close friends, so I pretty much lived by the "no harm, no foul" view...I didn't talk about my sex life, and I made sure they didn't talk to me about that either...
But once I saw how these people, good people, were hurt by not being able to formalize their commitment to each other, it made me reconsider a lot of things I thought I "knew". Now I am confused, but I would rather error on the side of kindness than cruelty, at least in this matter.
It is easier for both sides to dehumanize each other than to sit down and have a real discourse about the issues.
Kwea
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Do you see the google ad on the bottom?
It was advertizing Hedonism and Hedonism II....
Kwea
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
If I lived in Illinois, and I knew what Obama's record was I might actually go Dem for once. Might.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Selfish? Hedonist?
This is where understanding and education on homosexuality really help out. I wish I could talk to Alan and just ask him, in what ways do you think they are selfish? Or hedonist? I would really like to hear his response.
Them's fightin' words.
[ September 03, 2004, 01:06 AM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Maybe no one is beating him up because they aren't surprised?
Raise your hand if you didn't already know Alan Keyes was against homosexual marriage.
*looks for hands*
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Keyes is the Howard Dean of conservatives. Other conservatives adore him because he's unabashadly a conservative, while on the other hand, they wish he had the tact God gave a pea. Liberals love him because he scares all the moderates away.
I honestly would be interested to see what he did with some real power. Our country is supposed to be about experimentation. It's not my state. I'd be interested to see what happens if he won.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Fiddlestix. I liked Keyes up to this point.
Still-- I wouldn't count him out as a political force. This kind of barbarism is exactly what attracts people to Nader. Raw honesty, even when mistaken, is attractive.
Posted by BookWyrm (Member # 2192) on :
Another thing I 'like' about Keyes, is when he slammed Hillary for going to NY to run for the Senate. Let's see.... his exact quote was....
quote:"I deeply resent the destruction of federalism represented by Hillary Clinton's willingness to go into a state she doesn't even live in and pretend to represent people there. So I certainly wouldn't imitate it."
Seems the Dems ain't the only ones that 'flip flop'.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Yeah, it's safe to say that the Keyes campaign in Illinois was dead in the water even before he opened his mouth; he's on the record as too much of a slavering idiot to get many votes except from the truly hardcore partisans. People kept saying, when he was talking about the possibility of entering in Illinois, that at least it would make for "good debates" -- but I don't see why, as everything I've heard from Keyes has always been one or two steps from babbling incoherence.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Tom, how much have you heard him?
I listened to him civilly discuss with some deep south Republicans why South Carolina should remove the confederate flag from the Capitol; he impressed me very much with his reasoning. When he ran for the Republican nomination in '00, I took every opportunity to give him an ear.
Like Dean, I think people have confused Keyes' passion for his beliefs with rage.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Scott, Keyes' platform combines the worst elements of social conservatism with the worst elements of fiscal libertarianism; he's also got a tiny little anger problem that is distinct from his "passion," as we saw a few times during the last presidential race. Unless, of course, you thought Zell Miller's speech this week was fueled by "passion."
I see him as a tragic figure: a man smart enough to see all the evidence and, after reviewing it, reach the wrong conclusions.
[ September 03, 2004, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Funny, that's how I see you sometimes, Tom.
And I cringed when I heard Ryan was dropping out. I cringed again when I heard Keyes running, without knowing about his comments on Hilary running in NY.
It's ridiculous. If you can't find a competitor in-state, don't field a candidate.
On a 2008 speculation note, if Guliani runs we might finally see the long-delayed Hilary v. Rudy campaign we were deprived of in 2000.
Dagonee
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
You know, I can't stand EITHER Rudy Giuliani OR Sen. Clinton. *shudder* I understand that party faithful like both, but I can't see why.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I don't particularly want Guliani as my candidate, either.
Attorney General, maybe. President, no.
But the campaign would be fun.
Dagonee
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Scott R= social conservative, fiscal liberal.
Alas, now I need to find a candidate that represents my POV.
:searching:
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
You understand the situation correctly, but remember, the era of Illinois Backroom Bad Politics is over.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Considering how the NJ Dems replaced their Senate candidate last cycle, I'll just accept this non-primary replacement as an inevitable, if undesirable, part of the political process.
Dagonee
Posted by ae (Member # 3291) on :
quote:To some people, sex is all about the pleasure. They have a very limited, hedonistic, and ultimately empty life.
Do they?
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"Hedonism Resorts"
What in the name of goodness is a hedonism resort? Aren't all resorts a bit hedonistic by nature? I don't dare click on the link, for fear of Hedonism Camp pop-ups.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
It's like Club Med with nudity.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
To be fair Keyes never said running in another state was a good thing. Even as he accepted the nomination he said that a matter of general principle it was something that shouldn't be done so technically he didn't flip flop as what happened is something that goes beyond the general rule.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Either way IL is sending a black senator to congress.
If I decide to vote at all, on this one I'll probably vote for Obama.
AJ
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:So he went against his strongly-held principles.
Or he thought another deeply held principle was more important.
Dagonee
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
I still think the fact that he recognizes that what he is doing is against his general principles, admits it publicly, and then still decides that his duty to his party (in his mind at the least) shows he genuinely does have convictions even if they are misguided.
Basically, what Dagonee said.
Posted by fil (Member # 5079) on :
It is fun to watch Republicans find new, safer and more positive terms for "flip flop," for a change. Gives the Democrats a break. Please, continue. Works for Zell and Keyes so far!
fil
[ September 03, 2004, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: fil ]
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Both Miller and Keyes cite unique situations to change their minds. Kerry says he voted for something before he voted against it.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Keyes wants to give tax credits for decendents of slaves. I think this is an incredible misunderstanding of the legacy of slavery, and it won't help a darn thing. Sure, the United States has some work to do, but it won't come from paying us off with tax credits. Now anyone who wants to call this a incredible misapportionment of government dollars is okay with me, and this policy also has the added benefit of further severing AA from their identities as Americans.
Keyes is a wreck for a thousand reasons, and that's why I don't think that anyone has spoken up for him.
[ September 04, 2004, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Kerry says he voted for something before he voted against it."
Yes, that would be the Republican soundbyte for the situation.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
So I guess Kerry didn't say that then? Its all Republican fiction right?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Here's a question for you: do you understand what Kerry was saying, in context, when he said that, or does it just amuse you when taken out of context? If the latter, are you also amused by numerous Bush quotes, when taken out of context, in a way that would affect your vote?
Kerry's point was absolutely clear. While I certainly didn't agree with him at the time, and will freely admit that he's not exactly the first Dem on my list, I've never been particularly confused by his position on our hostile occupation of Iraq.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)