3 ms·

> Hate, prejudice, and discrimination are not valid political views. My point is that there is no indication that hate and prejudice where ever part of Eich's

by afiori 6y ago

> Hate, prejudice, and discrimination are not valid political views. My point is that there is no indication that hate and prejudice where ever part of Eich's views. > your comment would fit right in with that era also. I agree, in that era my comment would have supported people campaigning against slavery in racist states.

camgunz 6y ago
> My point is that there is no indication that hate and prejudice where ever part of Eich's views. Can you explain to me how donating in support of Prop 8 (which would have banned gay marriage) isn't homophobic (and thus hateful, prejudicial, and discriminatory)? Can you explain it in such a way as it would make sense for LGBTQ people but not, say, people of color? > I agree, in that era my comment would have supported people campaigning against slavery in racist states. This isn't a good faith response. Being pro-slavery was never a valid political position. It was simply hateful and cruel. We cannot accept stances like this as civil discourse. Any debate over "well, does group of humans X get the same rights as group of humans Y" is done. The answer is always yes.
- afiori 6y ago
  I am saying that we are conflating some terms. I agree with you that it is discriminatory to bar non-hetero couples from marriage. Given that there is no basis to conflate the intent to be hateful and prejudicial. Based on the very little information we have this is a case of someone having wrong opinions but not being an actual danger to anyone. > Can you explain it in such a way as it would make sense for LGBTQ people but not, say, people of color? no, because I disagree with him and I don't really know of a good reasoning for it. (The only non-contradictory one (a low bar) being that the federal government should not be allowed to decide who can and cannot marry) Regarding slavery it was a good faith response, also it was tongue-in-cheek response. > Being pro-slavery was never a valid political position. It was, it also no longer is, with progress we improve what is a valid position and what is not. Once upon a time in many places abolishing slavery was not a valid political position. Ultimately these are moral decision that each of us needs to take responsibility for.

by afiori 6y ago

camgunz 6y ago

> My point is that there is no indication that hate and prejudice where ever part of Eich's views. Can you explain to me how donating in support of Prop 8 (which would have banned gay marriage) isn't homophobic (and thus hateful, prejudicial, and discriminatory)? Can you explain it in such a way as it would make sense for LGBTQ people but not, say, people of color? > I agree, in that era my comment would have supported people campaigning against slavery in racist states. This isn't a good faith response. Being pro-slavery was never a valid political position. It was simply hateful and cruel. We cannot accept stances like this as civil discourse. Any debate over "well, does group of humans X get the same rights as group of humans Y" is done. The answer is always yes.

afiori 6y ago
I am saying that we are conflating some terms. I agree with you that it is discriminatory to bar non-hetero couples from marriage. Given that there is no basis to conflate the intent to be hateful and prejudicial. Based on the very little information we have this is a case of someone having wrong opinions but not being an actual danger to anyone. > Can you explain it in such a way as it would make sense for LGBTQ people but not, say, people of color? no, because I disagree with him and I don't really know of a good reasoning for it. (The only non-contradictory one (a low bar) being that the federal government should not be allowed to decide who can and cannot marry) Regarding slavery it was a good faith response, also it was tongue-in-cheek response. > Being pro-slavery was never a valid political position. It was, it also no longer is, with progress we improve what is a valid position and what is not. Once upon a time in many places abolishing slavery was not a valid political position. Ultimately these are moral decision that each of us needs to take responsibility for.