Thursday, May 14, 2009

"Outrage" Trailer

Looks fascinating.

5 comments:

D.J. Free! said...

not to mention controversial!

Intrepid Wanderer said...

Quick question:

Does being gay != being against gay marriage? It seems like you could be gay but still be against it. While I agree it is makes for a good movie I am not sure there is a connection. For instance you could look at porn but still be against it. Now if you were against porn but made and sold it there would be a problem.

D.J. Free! said...

Intrepid,

SURE you can be gay and be against gay marriage (or any other policy that might benefit being gay). I think the problem people really have with it, though, is that these men aren't being very honest. They're very adamant about all the evils of homosexuality . . . all except the evils in their own lives, as they sneak out on their wives to sleep with men. It's self-deprecation and projection at its worst, really. Complete honesty would probably be much better tolerated. To say "hey, look, I know what it's like to have same-sex attractions, I struggle with it, and I consider it contrary to the moral fabric of humanity, so this is how I'll vote . . . " That's respectable. I'm not in agreement with it, but it's at least respectable.

Intrepid Wanderer said...

My point is that stirring up public outcry by looking at the contradictions in their own lives is not helpful. To be like, 'You live as a gay man, so you should support the gay agenda' is a logical fallacy in my opinion.

http://thelosttheses.blogspot.com/2009/05/logical-fallacies-to-spur-public.html

I think the more important thing to do is to look at this and say, ok, they have problems. So instead of attacking them for the voting record against gays while being gay the attack should be on the 'oppression' of gays. If the public is convinced to vote out these people intelligently instead of 'in the heat of passion' then justice is better served.

I also think the problem is that many people hate things about themselves and most people do not admit these 'problems'. If instead of attacking the person you instead created an environment more accepting of their situation then you may change their minds and allow them to accept themselves. Outwardly attacking them is not a good idea. If you attack someone you are more likely to turn them off to your voice regardless of whether or not that voice is correct (or rational or whatever).

However at the end of the day I agree their voting records will ensure that I never support, but attacking them may galvanize their base. Unintended consequence of what you were trying to accomplish.

Selly said...

But how do you "create an environment more accepting of their situation" when these are the guys in power who can do that and they are working to do the exact opposite?