Originally Posted by
LDJ
Originally Posted by
sillyputty
LDJ wrote:
First he didnt blame homosexuality about everything.
Oh really?
Yet you neglected to acknowledge them. Ironic.
Because it was few and far between and 80% maybe more was about his stance on homosexuality.
First of all...PLEASE learn how to quote... damn.
Second of all, I don't care if my ENTIRE response was about him preaching about homosexuality.
Its what I disagreed with.
So what?
he looked dumb as hell being that ignorant.
Again, I spoke on what I agreed wiht.
My focal point was that a clear and definite majority of his speech focused on homosexuality.
Ok it wasnt. His point was the ills of young black males. Granted one of his key points was heavily influenced on gays. But his main objective was ills of black boys. Your main focal was homosexuality in your response.
NO.
NO.
NO.
The focal point of my response was a criticism of him focusing so much on homosexuality as opposed to other influences in society that he barely touched on.
The length of my response does not impact the validity or the content of my response.
It in fact does. If you were to right a paper and its was 10 paragraphs and 8 were about one subject and the title was synonomous with those 8 paragraphs anyone reading the paper would say your focal point of the paper was the title and the 8 paragraphs.
You clearly don't know what "validity" means
The topic of my response does not relate to the RELEVANCY of my response in context of the SOUND ARGUMENTS BEING MADE.
I spoke out against Umars homophobia and also praised him for what I agreed with. If you're not gay then what do you have to worry about?
See the point?
um no that doesnt even address the subject/content in which he used homosexuality. and why would i be worried doesnt even make sense or correlate to the subject.
What are you saying???
So why blame them for the ills in the black community?
he didnt, he stated that as well as others the over-emphasis of homosexual/metro males. and under-emphasis of males in respects of father/mother dynamic in society is a cause. i didnt hear him once elude to any aspect of homosexuality leads to detriment to the black community. he specified it to blacks, moreso the prominance of promoting it as oppose to strong father figures in the aspect of a mother/father family nucleus.
YES.
HE DID.
saying that there is more emphasis of homosexuality being "forced" on black america is him DIRECTLY blaming homosexuality making the black community worse.
Why are you selectively choosing ONLY the black community.
Um because the speaker is giving his stance on the BLACK COMMUNITY thats why. The subject topic isnt about all other races. its about blacks and the black community, so why would he touch on other races and communities when its not relevant to the topic he is discussing?
I said that because you said that the black community is ONLY being affected by homosexuality.
Its NOT just the black community. Its relevant in ALL communities. Umar is trying to make it seem like its a systematic attempt to ruin ONLY the black community. Thats flat out wrong.
OK...thats if lesbian couples choose not to bear children or gay males dont' donate sperm.
The reproductive faculties ARE present, they're just not being used.
Ok so its a non factor so why mention it.
BRUH, YOU MENTIONED THAT GAYS CANT HAVE KIDS.
YOU BROUGHT THIS UP.
NOT ME.
This dude is delirious.
Being gay does not make you MORE HIV positive...its behaviors associated with HIDING being gay that puts you at a higher risk. Hiding that you're being downlow and the sensitivity of anal sex increases the risk of HIV transmission...not just being gay.
Which is currently happening. I can respect your utopian we are the world we are the children stance but the fact still remains dudes are dl, etc and thats has alot to do with social/media influences.
If you had an actual understanding in ANYTHING relating to disease or public health, you'd know that high RISK doesn't not mean high INCIDENT.
Being gay doesn't make you have aids.
Being black doesn't mean you're stupid either.
You can't keep making these idiotic assertions.
Rampid = Rampant
On top of that, just because you want to see everyone dress up in suits doesn't mean they will.
Get over it.
Never said i did. I just stated a fact. And it is a big influence on todays youth.
DUDE just because there are dudes who get manicures and wear skinny jeans does NOT mean that all of a sudden the whole world is gay.
There are dudes in skinny jeans who would beat the crap out of you.
Its a cultural thing, not indicative of gender association or orientation. Its just a sign of the times.
Wake up grandpa.
Plus you didn't state a fact. You state your opinion that this was negatively impacting the youth.
Get over your self.
The world doesn't work the way YOU want it to.
So, why don't you offer more representations to counter that?
Ppl are but it still doesnt change what is going on at this present moment. Your speaking on what could happen, what ppl should do, and in essense your right, but that doesnt negate what is going on currently, which is what the speaker is addressing. He was speaking on the CURRENT ills/conditions etc of the black community.
Again give them something to make them respect you but you can't keep crying about it THEN blaming them for it.
Its not a conspiracy. Its just whats out there. Go change it then my brother.
That doesn't mean you're more Gay.
On top of that, did Adam Sandler just not do a movie where he plays his sister?
um he isnt a prominant actor in no shape of the word. let alone a major big wig example of his race. so that was a horrible example. Are you really going to sit her and say the likes of adam sandler and his prevelance/influence on the white community is up there with the prevelance/influence of a tyler perry, martin lawrence, chris rock etc of the black community?
Adam Sandler makes more per movie than probably any of his black comedic peers combined AND there are more white actors anyways.
Its about money.
Only having a few black faces means nothing. If you want less feminine influence, go start taking acting classes or write scripts.
This woe is me has gotta stop.
This has what to do with gays?
Because if the only perceptions they see of decent well to do males in there likeliness are not str8 or heavily homosexual influenced then..... Thats what it has to do with black prominent males that are GAY. Thats the point/message. He is only addressing issues of the black community. Again your speaking on ppl in general. Nowhere in the speaker topic does it says the ills of all races/sexual orientation. He is specifically addressing blacks, and males/boys.
So seeing gay men makes you gay now?
Lets be honest. You're just scared that something might make you gay. Thats really what this comes down to.
Are there images of men dressing like women in movies? Yeah
But does that mean thats what ALL of it is about? no.
In fact outside of tyler perry and a few COMEDIANS, who has done that?
I'll wait.
My point is, you cant keep complaining but only for so long. Of all blacks in this country we are maybe 10-12%. You either increase that or you do with what you have...but sitting around throwing a pity party is NO good.
This is exactly what i was saying in my last response. The subject is about current state of black males/boys. And yet again like many subjects, you swayed from the topic and start talking about all races and homosexuality of all races of ppl.
No. YOU wanted to talk about that.
I expressed my distaste for Umars focus on homosexuality in a MAJORITY of his speech/answers.
You made it seem like i'm a super huge flag waver for the gay community. YOU did this my man.
On top of that, Umar incorrectly asserts that the media is ONLY trying to push homosexuality on black people.
It be different, if lets say the speaker subject was about the ills of all current youths regardless of race, and it would be different if he spoke on all races that are gay. But he didnt, yet again you switched and bait the topic and made it about injustices of gays.
Of course he didn't speak on other races. Because hes limited minded. Hell, hes against interracial dating.
Homosexuality isn't a "black" thing.
Get over it. There are other people that exist.
The topic or subject in hand has nothing to do with injustices of gays of all races. It has to do with the ills of black males/boys in its current state. And one of his sub-topics addresses the influences of social media/society and promotions over emphasizing gay black males.
Of course it has nothing to do with injustice...but why does he get to blame homosexuality on something that is NOT in any way related to what hes trying to connect it too?
So what are you accomplishing by targeting them?
he didnt he said it was one of the elements. he mentioned several others. its you that is targeting and over emphasizing the gay sub-topic. Again it was a sub-topic umbrella under a topic that has to deal with black males/boys current state. you have taken a sub-topic and made it appear as if it was the main focal point of his discussion and was his o.g. topic which it wasnt. Was it a facet of his argument? YES. Was it his only one? NO. But you have made it seem not only was it his main/only driving force. but also included all homosexuals and all races in general when the topic clearly is addressing blacks only.
Again. 60-70% of his entire speech on the status of the black community made homosexuality to be the enemy.
And you have the audacity to ask this.
Thats a HELL of a subtopic.
Re-watch the speeches.
So why is it being treated as a scapegoat?
Its not it is one of the many elements, and he did infact discuss the other elements. Maybe not as much. But it def. wasnt on some 80-90% kinda like you are in respects of the gay issue.
If only he spoke about them to the same extent that he did the others, I wouldn't have AS MUCH of a problem.
But he didn't
Again, he FOCUSED ON THAT MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.
I talked about what I liked an what I didn't like.It doesn't hit home personally.
I dont have any gay family members.
I'm not gay.
In fact most of my immediate family is pretty homophobic.
I'm just smart enough to know that my view of the world isn't enough and that there are other perspectives out there that need just as much advocacy and legitimacy as our own.
There is no need to act like the black struggle is the ONLY struggle.
No one said it was but again you fail to realize this thread and the speakers subject matter is about blacks. So talking about asian,white etc is irrelevant in the since of the speakers subject and in the since of this thread. You are saying because we arent discussing other races/sexuality in this thread we are ignoring them. And we arent we are just focusing on the black ones because HELLO. That is what this thread is about.
THE BLACK STRUGGLE IS NOT ENTIRELY UNIQUE. THIS IS WHERE HE FAILS.
Hes using gays as a scapegoat for problems in the black community. He wants special attention to say that white people are forcing homosexuality upon him.
These are HIS words.
How are you going to seriously sit here and say this? Did you even watch the video?
It be like if there is a thread about bball and unfair wages, and someone says oh so since yall talking about bball unfair wages yall dont care about football unfair wages, or other sports unfair wages. And then go on to say oh you hate all other sports because you arent talking about them. The reason we wouldnt be talking about unfair wages in other sports, or talking about other sports in general is because the speaker/thread isnt about them. The speaker/thread is talking about a particular sport and about a particular subject of said sport thats why.
I understand that this was about the black community but he incorrectly asserts too much blame on a very SMALL segment of the population and the issue.
What if I started saying that you're a scorned porch monkey for always championing black rights.
But i never called you a derrogatory name, so that would be different. But if you stated oh you seem to focus on more of the topics dealing with blacks, you must relate to blacks or maybe black yourself. Then no i wouldnt be offended because it would make sense and would be logically that you thought that of myself.
NO WRONG AGAIN.
STOP MAKING ASSERTIONS.
I KNOW WHITE GIRLS THAT WILL RIDE FOR BLACK PEOPLE HARDER THAN YOU EVER WILL AND ITS NOT EVEN BECAUSE OF WHITE GUILT...DOES THAT MAKE THEM BLACK?
HELL NOW...MAYBE THEY'RE JUST GOOD HUMAN BEINGS WITH EMPATHY FOR OTHER PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE EQUALITY.
THIS IS RIDICULOUS.
LDJ wrote:
I mean when is it going to end. I mean we get it you heart gays. You are gay. Ive never heard a person with so much conviction about homosexuality and not be gay. I mean just about any and all threads that deal with social/economical/sex/race injustices, discriminations, and/or intolorances and differences you always throw in the element of homosexuality. We could be talking about differences about woman in the workplace etc by race etc... and you'll just throw in something about lesbians.
ok how is saying you love to chime in talk about gay rights and issues and majority of your threads are about defending there rights a diss exactly. And how is saying if you are gay then its whatever I really could care less is a diss? What derrogatory, or disrespectfull words was said there?
YOU INCORRECTLY CALLED ME GAY JUST FOR STICKING UP FOR HOMOSEXUALS BEING INCORRECTLY BLAMED FOR THE FAULTS OF THE BLACK COMMUNITY BY THIS BIGOT ON THE FIRST PAGE.
ITS NOT THAT YOU CALLED ME SOMETHING I'M NOT...ITS THAT YOU
ASSERTED WHAT I WAS WITHOUT ACTUALLY KNOWING.
YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT THINGS YOU DO NOT KNOW ABOUT.
THIS IS YOUR PROBLEM.
If someone said you always seem to favor black topics, and you love black ppl, you must be black. i personally wouldnt see it as a diss. So why would you sit here and say that if i state you love and always chime in on issues dealing with gays a diss/ Unless you feel being associated with gays is a diss then im really perplexed and confused about your stance on things.
ITS A DISS BECAUSE OYU DON'T KNOW ME.
YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ME.
DON'T CALL ME GAY. DON'T CALL ME STRAIGHT. DON'T CALL ME WHITE. DON'T CALL ME TALL.
YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ME. YOU CAN'T MAKE THOSE SORTS OF ASSERTIONS.
THIS IS YOUR PROBLEM.
IF I SUPPORT PLANTING TREES DOES THAT MAKE ME A DEMOCRAT?
THEY AREN'T RELATED THINGS. STOP MAKING ASSERTIONS.
ITS NOT A DISS TO ME...ITS STUPID ON YOUR PART TO MAKE THE SUGGESTION THAT I'M GAY BECAUSE I SUPPORT GAY RIGHTS.
But they spend a extra time and energy on issues that deal with animal cruelty, they spend more time at animal shelters then soup kitchens and donation drives, or peace rallies. And they were particularly upset and outspoken on the whole mike vick incident.
So that means they support bestiality or something extreme, in your eyes, right?
No that they are passionate about treatment of animals, as would anyone else. To most ppl if you extend/spend more time on a subject/cause etc then others, most ppl would tend to think you favor that subject/cause more then others. Out of the four major sports if I spent more time involving myself with football then the other 3, how would it exactly be absurd for someone to think i favor football over the other 3? And why would that mean because I favor football over the other 3 equate that I hate the other 3?
DUDE WHAT THE HELL?
YOU CANT MAKE ASSERTIONS
JUST STOP.
IF I SUPPORT GAY RIGHTS AND EQUALITY.
DOES THAT MAKE ME GAY?
NO.
END OF STORY.
I'M NOT OFFENDED IF YOU THINK I'M GAY OR NOT...I DON'T CARE AND IT SHOULDN'T MATTER TO YOU ANYWAYS.
I'M MORE CONCERNED WITH HOW YOU THINK THAT CORRELATION MAKES ANY SENSE.
You don't have to go through something to identify with something
um yes you do. how exactly for example can you emphatize with the lost of a child if you never had children? .How can you emphatize with someone who lost there mom if yours still living? Could you symphathize for them sure. But to emphatize you have to have felt/expereinced it.
I've never had a child so I don't think killing babies is wrong.
what the hell is wrong with you?
You do not have to have experienced something to empathize OR sympathize.
even if you knew something about "mirror neurons" you'd know this wasn't true.
Empathy is not conditional on experience.
Again, here you go talking about NOTHING you know.
Again, sheer ignorance.
Its not ignorance, if someone addresses or spend more time doing one activity and/or speaking addressing a subject as oppose to others then yes that is a sign of favoritism. I have a 360/wii/ps3. i spend 60% of my gaming on my 360. Based on that stat how would it be ignorant if someone says you favor spending video game time on your 360 as oppose to the other 2 game systems? That is what favoritism is.
if I make laws prohibiting the rights of gays to get married and what not...does that mean I can't be a closet gay senator?
Happens ALL the time.
