Redefining the SOI. Redefining Liberty.

[dalebert]

Am I the only one who thinks it actually hurts our cause to welcome bigots into the FSP, particularly bigots fighting for expansion of government into private lives? Click here to see this post in context.

I didn't read the thread closely enough to see who responded like that, but anyone who did is HURTING our cause, not helping it, and should shut the fuck up.

I'm the one that said it. Can someone make a sticky or something that makes that public knowledge so everyone can just be clear on who said that so they can direct their comments directly to me? It was appropriate and I'm most definitely not going to STFU. If you don't want to read the whole thread, just start here and you won't need to read far to see where I'm coming from. While I encourage healthy debate over issues, tactics designed to paint an entire group of people in a horrible color in order to incite disdain toward them is not healthy logical debate. It's emotionalized fear tactics for the sake of getting support for legislation to limit their ability to engage in private contracts with other consenting adults. If that's not bigotry, please tell me WTF is.

As I've already cited earlier in this thread, there is significant precedent for the FSP distancing itself from bigots, because that type of attitude is not healthy for the movement. When did we change that policy? When did we abandon the SOI? Because that marks the beginning of the end of our principles of liberty, and what's made the FSP better than any other freedom movement in history.

[AntonLee]

such bullshit. . . . I can't even copy and paste what I wrote there for my hands are shaking.

[Lloyd Danforth]

Wait until Pat K hear they are screwing with the SOI!

[MengerFan]

I'm sleepy. What exactly are you asking?

[dalebert]

I'm sleepy. What exactly are you asking?

Really I'm just directing attention to a thread over on the FSP where a couple of bigots came on. I called them bigots and a couple of people were saying STFU and don't be mean and welcome them into the FSP because they might help us fight tax increases or somethin'. I'm paraphrasing and reading between the lines. 

[K. Darien Freeheart]

I'm one of the people who thinks there is a principled and consistant standpoint on every issue and that avocation of other viewpoints is inconsistant with liberty.

Advocating that the government should define who can and can't marry whom is anti-liberty.

For me, it's largely moot. The only Free Stater I regularly deal without outside of forums hasn't made that an issue. That said, especially since the election and the sudden recognition (as if somehow nobody thought of this) that "OMG, there are liberals who can be approached with a pro-liberty message too!", I've been thinking some kind of pro-liberty organization coming from the left might make a lot of sense. Denis Goddard was pretty clear that whatever his personal opinions are, the NHLA is funded and mostly composed of left-leaning people and that because of that they aren't gung-ho about advocating pro-liberty issues that are identified as "liberal" issues like gay marriage.

The upside of that is that this organization COULD call out FSP members as bigots when they cling hard to anti-liberty, statist ideas. This new organization could call out those stances (not so much the people) without joining "bigotry" and "FSP".

God I hate being here...

[dalebert]

Just to be clear, this is the specific post where I was inspired to use the term "bigotry" and it's based on the tactic of the argument more than the actual stance, that tactic being to paint an entire group of people in a negative light based on the actions of a few very visible people. What else would you call that except "bigotry"? Keep in mind, this is all part of his argument for an amendment to take the option of marriage away from people who had it in CA at the time. I'm merely calling him out on using an emotional tactic, to inspire prejudice to get people to take his side against an entire group of people that happens to include myself (not promiscuous, not a prostitute, not HIV+, and not a meth-user).  You better stop these people or you might start seeing men kissing each other at stop lights in NH! Read it for yourself and then call me out if you think "bigotry" is an inappropriate term for it.

Well, I am somewhat happy that the people will be deciding on the issue instead of activist judges. It comes down to a personal, moral and religious view. Where I live (in a suburban area) people really do not like homosexuals since they started getting in your face and expecting special rights. There is a predominantly "gay" city in Southern California, by the name of West Hollywood. There is a couple of episodes of COPS in W. Hollywood where the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Dept. has male prostitution stings, many who are repeat offenders and on man who was HIV positive! These episodes are very embarrassing to my area, one of my relatives saw it on t.v. and said "Don't you live near there?". Also, there is a huge drug problem (methamphetamine) there. A recent county health study found that around 75% of people who are HIV positive in the county are homosexual. I am not making this up, it is a gov't/university study! I know an atheist that says that it is unnatural and he is not too happy about gay marriage. I don't know how it is in New Hampshire but you might get tired of seeing men kissing each other a stop lights.

Click here to see it in context.

[Friday]

Dale, I think there are two different issues here:

1) are bigots who would use government to impose their bigotry on others welcome in the FSP?
2) are bigots welcome in the FSP?

I don't think Denis was advocating #1 in the post where he said to STFU.  He made it pretty clear that he hadn't read the whole backstory, but that IF one did not promote #1, one is welcome in the FSP.  However, he did directly contradict this long-standing section of the FSP FAQ:

Q: What kind of people are not welcome as members of the Free State Project?

A: Anyone who promotes violence, racial hatred, or bigotry is not welcome.
http://www.freestateproject.org/org/faq

Denis' post does leave me with the impression that he feels you can hate fags all you want and still be welcomed into the FSP as long as you don't try to bring government into it.  Hmmmm.     I support anyone's right to hate whomever they want, but that doesn't mean I'm necessarily going to encourage them to be my neighbor.   

Please keep in mind that Denis does not speak for the FSP.  Officially, anyway.

[dalebert]

I can't really disagree with anything you said, Friday. If anyone bothered to read the entire thread, you'll see me explaining that the FSP and the SOI is pretty much honor system anyway and I think it's silly to try and "police" it and make sure people are in line with it or else kick them off the list or somesuch. What I AM concerned with, however, is the image that we portray to the public. I did express concern that a couple of reasonably prominent people involved with the FSP came to the defense of a couple of bigots, while at the same time criticizing me for calling them that when the term fits perfectly and when we should be distancing ourselves from their attitudes publicly. Instead, there seems to be this eagerness to kiss the butts of anyone who might add one or two to the counter in a sort of desperate eagerness to reach that magic 20,000. What they're failing to account for is negative press and possibly changing the image of the FSP in a way that turns away a lot more potential signers.

I personally don't give a flying f**k whether we hit 20,000 signers. I've said I'd rather have 20 more Laurens, Kats, Ians, and Russells than 20,000 more political activists. Even if one doesn't agree with me on that point, one must realize that a political activist who's working to selectively expand government and who's going to taint the public image of the FSP with their bigotry is not a benefit to us. They're most certainly not worth the damage control that they're trying to exercise over me appropriately using the "B" word. 

[MengerFan]

Word. I think you know I've got your back, as long as you won't call me a bigot if I avert my eyes when you start orally stimulating some dude in front of me.

[dalebert]

Word. I think you know I've got your back, as long as you won't call me a bigot if I avert my eyes when you start orally stimulating some dude in front of me.

Don't worry. That's a show I'd have to charge admission for. 

[AntonLee]

I'd get REALLY tired of two men kissing at a stoplight if I were behind them.  Especially if it turned green

I'd get REALLY tired of two people of any gender kissing at a stoplight if I were behind them.  Especially if it turned green.

I'd get REALLY tired of two lifeforms of any species kissing at a stoplight if I were behind them.  Especially if it turned green.

I'd get REALLY tired of anyone taking more than 2 seconds to start moving at a stoplight.  Green means I honk.

I'm from Mass, anyone who's ridden with me knows I'm courteous, kind, and I drive wicked fast.  The object of the game is to get where you're going as fast as possible.  I've calmed in recent years, I don't have the eclipse I once did.

[Pat K]

I agree with you Dale.

I have one sarcastic post over
on the FSP board about this.

I have not posted further because
it just pisses me off to much.

[Puke]

The Ambassador is doing a fine job. 

[Sam A. Robrin]

I'd get REALLY tired of two men kissing at a stoplight if I were behind them.  Especially if it turned green

Oh, let's not revive that "green on Thursdays" nonsense . . . !