Bobby Hart under pressure

[Mike M (the other one)]

(06-24-2020, 11:00 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: People need to get over their own insecurities and mind their own business when it comes to people being gay.

A normal response.  

I'd like to know why ypu think people who oppose homosexuality are insecure in their own sexuality?

[*Nately120*]

(06-25-2020, 07:19 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: A normal response.  

I'd like to know why ypu think people who oppose homosexuality are insecure in their own sexuality?

I think of it more of an insecurity to focus on themselves and exist within a world where people are free to do things that they don't like. 

On many topics insecurity about yourself can lead to focusing on others and/ or scapegoating.  Just my take.  

I can say for myself years ago when I was struggling finding a decent job I allowed mysrlf to consider that white males like me were possibly being punished by quota hiring and if I could check one of those minority boxes I'd be golden.  I considered it, but got over it.  Sucks to admit but I didn't make a life long gripe out of it and haven't thought about it since I've been gainfully employed.  

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-25-2020, 01:32 AM)Nately120 Wrote: As a semi-neutral party here (and someone who is going to bed after this message) I think you may be letting past interactions with bfine color your judgement a bit here.  I'll admit I take not of long-term attitudes and what not, but I also try to keep a "new thread, new threshold" sort of mindset, too.   


I respect you both as contributors and pot-stirrers (a good thing in my mind, as long as there is some substance there), so that's just my take.  Then again, what the hell do I know, eh?


EDIT - Until further notice, I think there is enough of a strategic political background to his point to keep it from being an insult. It's the difference between saying Trump polls well with those without a college or higher education compared to "Trump supporters are morons."

No doubt his past gas lighting of blatantly racist comments from a White Nationalist as extreme, but not racists certainly influences my opinion.


But, hey, speaking in “generalities,” why is it always a conservative with a MAGA hat and the Stars and Bars who gets caught speaking in generalities some might protest, but when the video goes viral they claim they “blacked out” with the obligatory “that’s not who I am” song and dance?

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/branson-missouri-kkk-woman-apology-043845043.html

Quote: Jenkins said she “blacked out” during the event and doesn’t remember what she said as anti-racism protesters gathered outside a store that sells Confederate merchandise.

However, the moment was caught on a widely shared video as Jenkins ― decked out in a “Make America Great Again” cap and draped in a Confederate flag ― told the protesters she would teach her grandchildren to hate them.

“I’m teaching them to ******’ hate all of you people,” she said, then she raised a fist and called out “KKK belief.”

You know, she probably should have prefaced her comments by claiming she was speaking in generalities first.

[GMDino]

(06-24-2020, 09:49 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I didn't see a thread on this in jungle noise (small favor, I guess) so I figured I'd toss it down here.  I haven't looked into it much, but Bobby Hart posted and deleted what has been deemed a homophobic tweet.


https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/news/bobby-hart-homophobic-instagram-post

I quickly glanced over the article but didn't see the original post so I'll just say this:  If you feel like you have to delete something you either don't want to deal with the backlash or you realized you said something wrong.  Either way thinking two or three times before you hit "send" is always a good idea.

(06-24-2020, 10:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Speaking in generalities that I'm sure some will pretest but:

I'd assume one of the most bitter internal struggles the liberal has is trying to reconcile the black's views on homosexuality.

Yeah, you knew your "generality" would distract.  Good job.

This "liberal" has the same view on black who are homophobes as whites or asians or anyone:  You're welcome to your opinion but that's not the law.

It's the same view I have on any nationalities view on minorities.

It's easy even without generalities.

[BmorePat87]

(06-25-2020, 07:19 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: A normal response.  

I'd like to know why ypu think people who oppose homosexuality are insecure in their own sexuality?

You have to have some sort of insecurity in your life to hate a whole class of people for how they were born.

It could be sexual, it could be some other type of insecurity.

[*Nately120*]

The jungle noise version of this thread is where the pro Hart sentiment seems to be. Interesting stuff.

[CJD]

I thought the Bengals community was relatively progressive based on the interactions in this forum.

And then this was posted in the main chat and there are people saying homosexuality promotes pedophilia.

I no longer think the Bengals community is relatively progressive.

It's apparently filled with crazy nut jobs.

[*Nately120*]

(06-25-2020, 01:04 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I thought the Bengals community was relatively progressive based on the interactions in this forum.

And then this was posted in the main chat and there are people saying homosexuality promotes pedophilia.

I no longer think the Bengals community is relatively progressive.

It's apparently filled with crazy nut jobs.

I just dont get why they never come by this part of the board if they have such a desire to air their political beliefs.  Maybe they figure saying the liberals are training children to be the victims of gay pedos isn't political?

[CJD]

(06-25-2020, 01:08 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I just dont get why they never come by this part of the board if they have such a desire to air their political beliefs.  Maybe they figure saying the liberals are training children to be the victims of gay pedos isn't political?

I dunno. Maybe they don't view these issues as political but "common sense"

To them, it's obvious we shouldn't "promote homosexuality to our children" (whatever the hell that means) because kids are kids. They shouldn't be exposed to things such as homosexuality (because homosexuality is, inherently, a bad thing that we just accept in this liberal extremist society of ours, apparently).

If you try too hard to evaluate why they think the way they do, you just end up with a headache and no other positive results to go with it.

This is the second "political" post that has ended up in Jungle Noise and the second time I've thought "Oh my God. There are some absolutely insane people in this community."

That first one about Burrow went so far off the rails, we even reached "George Soros is a fascist that is paying and training Antifa" territory hahaha.

[*Nately120*]

(06-25-2020, 01:13 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I dunno. Maybe they don't view these issues as political but "common sense"

To them, it's obvious we shouldn't "promote homosexuality to our children" (whatever the **** that means) because kids are kids. They shouldn't be exposed to things such as homosexuality (because homosexuality is, inherently, a bad thing that we just accept in this liberal ***** society of ours, apparently).

If you try too hard to evaluate why they think the way they do, you just end up with a headache and no other positive results to go with it.

This is the second "political" post that has ended up in Jungle Noise and the second time I've thought "Oh my God. There are some absolutely insane people in this community."

That first one about Burrow went so far off the rails, we even reached George Soros is a fascist that is paying and training Antifa territory hahaha.

I'd wager 60 years ago they'd be warning that letting a black man like Bobby Hart in the NFL would ruin the purity of the sport.  Ah but im being mean now. 

[CJD]

(06-25-2020, 01:16 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'd wager 60 years ago they'd be warning that letting a black man like Bobby Hart in the NFL would ruin the purity of the sport.  Ah but im being mean now. 

60 years ago, I would not have been able to marry my wife.

Luckily, there has never been a period of time in human history where one generation has been less progressive than the last.

From sexism, to racism, to homophobia, to transphobia, each generation has been more accepting than the last.

Social Conservatives are perpetually fighting a losing battle and are ceding ground every year.

That's what helps me sleep at night.

[*Nately120*]

(06-25-2020, 01:21 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: 60 years ago, I would not have been able to marry my wife.

Luckily, there has never been a period of time in human history where one generation has been less progressive than the last.

From sexism, to racism, to homophobia, to transphobia, each generation has been more accepting than the last.

Social Conservatives are perpetually fighting a losing battle and are ceding ground every year.

That's what helps me sleep at night.

I'd say thats where the myth of people getting more conservative as they age being a product of wisdom cones from.  If you stand still you "move" to the right as society moves left. 

[CJD]

(06-25-2020, 01:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'd say thats where the myth of people getting more conservative as they age being a product of wisdom cones from.  If you stand still you "move" to the right as society moves left. 

I think it's a combination of that and the age old discussion on taxes. Maybe there was a time when social issues were not the main platform pieces of the two parties. Like, maybe in the 20s or 30s, there was a truly fiscally conservative and a truly fiscally liberal party and that was their main platform. If this were the case, I could see why young people would want more social programs to help poor people and then once they had some money would want their taxes lowered.

But now that social issues are, in a lot of ways, the main parts of the parties' platforms, it is much harder to move from left to right as you age. Because if you thought racism was bad in the 60s, the odds that you no longer think racism is bad in the 90s or 00s are pretty low.

[*Nately120*]

(06-25-2020, 01:31 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I think it's a combination of that and the age old discussion on taxes. Maybe there was a time when social issues were not the main platform pieces of the two parties. Like, maybe in the 20s or 30s, there was a truly fiscally conservative and a truly fiscally liberal party and that was their main platform. If this were the case, I could see why young people would want more social programs to help poor people and then once they had some money would want their taxes lowered.

But now that social issues are, in a lot of ways, the main parts of the parties' platforms, it is much harder to move from left to right as you age. Because if you thought racism was bad in the 60s, the odds that you no longer think racism is bad in the 90s or 00s are pretty low.

I have seen a lot of old propaganda saying giving women the right to vote will ruin our country and children, so I doubt anything changed really.  

[CJD]

It amazes me how many people still don't understand what the first amendment is...

[CJD]

(06-25-2020, 01:37 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I have seen a lot of old propaganda saying giving women the right to vote will ruin our country and children, so I doubt anything changed really.  

Yea, that's fair enough haha.

[*Nately120*]

The JN thread got closed because people dared to challenge the homophobes. This is where I'm gonna erroneously whine that my 1st amendment rights are trampled! I'm a political prisoner! Nelson Mandela has nothing on me. Peter, Paul and Mary are writing a song about me as we speak!

[HarleyDog]

(06-25-2020, 01:44 PM)Nately120 Wrote: The JN thread got closed because people dared to challenge the homophobes. This is where I'm gonna erroneously whine that my 1st amendment rights are trampled!  I'm a political prisoner!  Nelson Mandela has nothing on me.  Peter, Paul and Mary are writing a song about me as we speak!

Untrue. I closed it because it was getting off topic and too political as I stated in the final post. 

[*Nately120*]

(06-25-2020, 02:07 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Untrue. I closed it because it was getting off topic and too political as I stated in the final post. 

You can't prove Peter, Paul and Mary aren't writing the ballad of Nately120.

[fredtoast]

Few random comments.


-No one that I know of is "promoting homosexuality" to children. But at the same time we can't just say "don't tell kids" because kids are going to see other kids with 2 moms or 2 dads. Homosexuality is not something you can keep locked away in the dark anymore.

-It is okay if you think Homosexuality is a sin. It is NOT okay to deny homosexuals equal treatment because of their sexual preference. I don't think Hart's comments crossed any serious line.

-Democrats do have an issue with supporting rights for both blacks and homosexuals, but it s not a "one or the other" position. We do not excuse homophobia from black people. We can also support the rights of the Palestinians without agreeing with actions of the extreme Muslims that treat women like dogs. It really isn't that complicated. I agree it is a shame that Pete didn't make the cut because he had such low support from Blacks, but the Republicans have to deal with similar issues. You won't see them banning white supremacist or rejecting the support of the KKK. Hell, Trump tried to act like he didn't even know David Duke.

-I think this story about Hart was planted by Steeler fans who really want Fred Johnson starting for us.