3 ms·

And the important point here isn't the validity of these arguments, it's that people do use them to inform their position on gay marriage, and that that is orth

by peeters 13y ago

And the important point here isn't the validity of these arguments, it's that people do use them to inform their position on gay marriage, and that that is orthogonal to being "anti-gay".

bertil 13y ago
I’ll jump on my militant stead now, and attack you bitterly on one of the things I actually care deeply about: the abuse of the idea of ‘perpendicular’ in non-obvious algebraic context. (I’m like that: you can way what you want is subjective, but Statistical methodology… I instantly switch to heavy weaponry and my loud voice.) If you mean conceptually independant: absolutely. Social recognition of a homosexual orientation has been associated with many choice patterns, most of which didn’t include marriage, mainly because that hasn’t been a historically considered model: priesthood, separation of family ties and sexual pleasures, even projection onto educational purposes… If you mean “statistically not correlated”, then you are wrong: there is a high correlation between people holding unambiguously homophobic position, and them opposing same-sex marriage. You can’t consider one in abstract without the other. Let’s take an example: There is little logical connection between being rich and behaving like a jerk, yet… psychological experiments tend to indicate the former appears to cause the later. If you want a more honest society and a fair market, that correlation needs to be considered to inform reforms. There is little formal connexion between coding and favoring libertarian ideas, yet… that happens a lot, and it does influence the role of technology in society. If you held sincerely an opinion that is mainly shared by jerks, that’s fine if you are not one -- but you can’t expect to defend it without some preliminaries; not excuses, just precautions.

3 ms·

And the important point here isn't the validity of these arguments, it's that people do use them to inform their position on gay marriage, and that that is orth

by peeters 13y ago

And the important point here isn't the validity of these arguments, it's that people do use them to inform their position on gay marriage, and that that is orthogonal to being "anti-gay".

bertil 13y ago
I’ll jump on my militant stead now, and attack you bitterly on one of the things I actually care deeply about: the abuse of the idea of ‘perpendicular’ in non-obvious algebraic context. (I’m like that: you can way what you want is subjective, but Statistical methodology… I instantly switch to heavy weaponry and my loud voice.) If you mean conceptually independant: absolutely. Social recognition of a homosexual orientation has been associated with many choice patterns, most of which didn’t include marriage, mainly because that hasn’t been a historically considered model: priesthood, separation of family ties and sexual pleasures, even projection onto educational purposes… If you mean “statistically not correlated”, then you are wrong: there is a high correlation between people holding unambiguously homophobic position, and them opposing same-sex marriage. You can’t consider one in abstract without the other. Let’s take an example: There is little logical connection between being rich and behaving like a jerk, yet… psychological experiments tend to indicate the former appears to cause the later. If you want a more honest society and a fair market, that correlation needs to be considered to inform reforms. There is little formal connexion between coding and favoring libertarian ideas, yet… that happens a lot, and it does influence the role of technology in society. If you held sincerely an opinion that is mainly shared by jerks, that’s fine if you are not one -- but you can’t expect to defend it without some preliminaries; not excuses, just precautions.