The NationStates #LoveIsLove Campaign

[Applebania]

I don't see why people are trying to politicize this massacre. Not everyone in a gay bar is gay, and this is not a homosexual issue. It's a security issue, an issue of Muslim extremists committing terrorist acts against Western nations over morals. The thrust of this campaign, Cormac, is that so-called "homophobia" is the problem.* This misidentification is ultimately harmful. The real problem, a problem that all people of good will must confront directly, is a homicidal sect within the Sunni denomination. A person doesn't have to be "pro-gay" to recognize the real problem or to sympathize with the families and friends of the victims of yesterday's terrible attack on human life.

* The word "homophobia" literally means "irrational or obsessive fear of homosexuals." I'm not sure I've ever met a person who is irrationally and obsessively afraid of homosexual individuals. It seems to be a strawman -- i.e., if you disapprove of homosexual conduct, then you must be irrational or obsessively fearful.

When there's an attack on a Synagogue, it's an attack on Jews. When there's an attack on a Church, it's an attack on Christians. When there's an attack on Mosque, it's an attack on Muslims.

When there's an attack on a gay nightclub, it's not an attack on the LGBT community? Nonsense, and a sign of implicit homophobia; the terrorist choose to attack a gay nightclub, rather than a church, or a school, or a supermarket. It was not a coincidence. This was an intentional act of terrorism directed against the LGBT community, the very definition of a hate crime.

The efforts of the political right to deny this are disgusting.

You put this much better than I could.

[Asy]

Equinox is in full support of this. Love trumps hate.

[Korallia]

There's also the fact that someone was stopped with weapons and ammo on his way to a Pride March yesterday, too. Just because his attack wasn't carried out doesn't mean the LGBT community wasn't targeted.

[Christian Democrats]

I don't see why people are trying to politicize this massacre. Not everyone in a gay bar is gay, and this is not a homosexual issue. It's a security issue, an issue of Muslim extremists committing terrorist acts against Western nations over morals. The thrust of this campaign, Cormac, is that so-called "homophobia" is the problem.* This misidentification is ultimately harmful. The real problem, a problem that all people of good will must confront directly, is a homicidal sect within the Sunni denomination. A person doesn't have to be "pro-gay" to recognize the real problem or to sympathize with the families and friends of the victims of yesterday's terrible attack on human life.

* The word "homophobia" literally means "irrational or obsessive fear of homosexuals." I'm not sure I've ever met a person who is irrationally and obsessively afraid of homosexual individuals. It seems to be a strawman -- i.e., if you disapprove of homosexual conduct, then you must be irrational or obsessively fearful.

When there's an attack on a Synagogue, it's an attack on Jews. When there's an attack on a Church, it's an attack on Christians. When there's an attack on Mosque, it's an attack on Muslims.

When there's an attack on a gay nightclub, it's not an attack on the LGBT community? Nonsense, and a sign of implicit homophobia; the terrorist choose to attack a gay nightclub, rather than a church, or a school, or a supermarket. It was not a coincidence. This was an intentional act of terrorism directed against the LGBT community, the very definition of a hate crime.

The efforts of the political right to deny this are disgusting.

Radical Muslims hate Western nations, period. An attack on a synagogue might be an attack on Jews, an attack on a church might be an attack on Christians, an attack on a mosque might be an attack on Muslims, an attack on a gay nightclub might be an attack on homosexuals, an attack on a school might be an attack on schoolchildren, an attack on a supermarket might be an attack on shoppers, an attack on a magazine's headquarters might be an attack on cartoonists, and an attack on a skyscraper might be an attack on businessmen and capitalists. On the other hand, such attacks might be targeted toward an entire society because of disapproval of its morality.

Also, there are two problems with "homophobia." First, if a person suffers from a phobia (a mental disorder), then it will be impossible to persuade him. Instead, he must be treated psychologically. The very use of the term "phobia" (you're mentally ill) subverts open discourse (so I don't have to converse with you), a value of modern Western civilization. (Not to mention the absurdity of diagnosing most of the world's people in almost all times and places as mentally disordered.) Second, if the mass murderer was actually "homophobic" (mentally disordered), then he cannot be held fully morally responsible for his actions. He's as blameworthy as the shark who bites a swimmer.

[North Campbell Nation]

Warzone Asia will be participating, and myself with it.

For anyone who's curious, I got my current flag from http://pridepropaganda.com/. They have a whole archive of soviet-inspired posters and such. Quite hilarious given the soviet, and now Russian government's positions on LGBT issues.

Anyways, my full support for this.

[Sovreignry]

When there's an attack on a Synagogue, it's an attack on Jews. When there's an attack on a Church, it's an attack on Christians. When there's an attack on Mosque, it's an attack on Muslims.

When there's an attack on a gay nightclub, it's not an attack on the LGBT community? Nonsense, and a sign of implicit homophobia; the terrorist choose to attack a gay nightclub, rather than a church, or a school, or a supermarket. It was not a coincidence. This was an intentional act of terrorism directed against the LGBT community, the very definition of a hate crime.

The efforts of the political right to deny this are disgusting.

Radical Muslims hate Western nations, period. An attack on a synagogue might be an attack on Jews, an attack on a church might be an attack on Christians, an attack on a mosque might be an attack on Muslims, an attack on a gay nightclub might be an attack on homosexuals, an attack on a school might be an attack on schoolchildren, an attack on a supermarket might be an attack on shoppers, an attack on a magazine's headquarters might be an attack on cartoonists, and an attack on a skyscraper might be an attack on businessmen and capitalists. On the other hand, such attacks might be targeted toward an entire society because of disapproval of its morality.

Also, there are two problems with "homophobia." First, if a person suffers from a phobia (a mental disorder), then it will be impossible to persuade him. Instead, he must be treated psychologically. The very use of the term "phobia" (you're mentally ill) subverts open discourse (so I don't have to converse with you), a value of modern Western civilization. (Not to mention the absurdity of diagnosing most of the world's people in almost all times and places as mentally disordered.) Second, if the mass murderer was actually "homophobic" (mentally disordered), then he cannot be held fully morally responsible for his actions. He's as blameworthy as the shark who bites a swimmer.

You're being deliberately obtuse. The use of homophobia does not mean that we're calling the person mentally disordered. You're trying to make this discussion about something it's not. From what I've heard, the shooter wasn't even a practicing Muslim. And if he was, he thoroughly missed the point of Ramadan. To the point of not following anything that a Muslim is supposed to do during Ramadan. This was a hate crime against the LGBT+ community, nothing more.

And please don't whip out the dictionary at me. The dictionary tells us what words mean when the dictionary was last updated.

[Noraika]

This is something I can definitely get behind. Non-acceptance and hatred of people because of their sexuality and gender identity is a very big issue, and part of tackling this is to respond to these blatant attacks against LGBT+ people with unity and activism, with such campaigns as this, to show public support for LGB+ and Transgender people. Capitulation to hatred, intolerance and fear is not acceptable.

[Christian Democrats]

You're being deliberately obtuse. The use of homophobia does not mean that we're calling the person mentally disordered.

Then, don't use the term "phobia." Say "anti-gay" if that's what you mean. Using "phobia" outside its clinical context is like using "retarded" outside its clinical context (when "retardation" was the clinical term for what is now called "intellectual disability").

This was a hate crime against the LGBT+ community, nothing more.

That's not what the FBI's director says.

[Noraika]

You're being deliberately obtuse. The use of homophobia does not mean that we're calling the person mentally disordered.

Then, don't use the term "phobia." Say "anti-gay" if that's what you mean. Using "phobia" outside its clinical context is like using "retarded" outside its clinical context (when "retardation" was the clinical term for what is now called "intellectual disability").

Homophobia- Dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people.
Phobia - Extreme or irrational fear or dislike of a specific thing or group

Thank you for using Oxford English Dictionaries do come again. All joking aside though, homophobia is not an improper term to use denotatively. Hope I helped clear that up.

Also, to be honest, an attack can be both anti-West and anti-LGBT+ really. I don't see a reason why it would necessitate that if it was due to anti-West inclinations it wouldn't disregard the fact that LGBT+ people were deliberately targeted in this attack out of those anti-West, and as a part of that anti-LGBT+, sentiments. Regardless the act was a hate crime against LGBT+ people.

It was a hate crime against LGBT+ individuals. It doesn't matter if those anti-LGBT+ sentiments came from religion, anti-Western, or any other source. It was still an anti-LGBT+ hate crime.

[Sovreignry]

Then, don't use the term "phobia." Say "anti-gay" if that's what you mean. Using "phobia" outside its clinical context is like using "retarded" outside its clinical context (when "retardation" was the clinical term for what is now called "intellectual disability").

Homophobia- Dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people.
Phobia - Extreme or irrational fear or dislike of a specific thing or group

Thank you for using Oxford English Dictionaries do come again. All joking aside though, homophobia is not an improper term to use denotatively. Hope I helped clear that up.

Also, to be honest, an attack can be both anti-West and anti-LGBT+ really. I don't see a reason why it would necessitate that if it was due to anti-West inclinations it wouldn't disregard the fact that LGBT+ people were deliberately targeted in this attack out of those anti-West, and as a part of that anti-LGBT+, sentiments. Regardless the act was a hate crime against LGBT+ people.

It was a hate crime against LGBT+ individuals. It doesn't matter if those anti-LGBT+ sentiments came from religion, anti-Western, or any other source. It was still an anti-LGBT+ hate crime.

I'll accept that one.

[We Are Not the NSA]

HYDRA Command will be participating.

[Christian Democrats]

My points are these, and this is my last post:

You should not use clinical terms to describe people with whom you disagree. Just as it would be inappropriate to call a disagreeable but able-minded person "retarded," it is wrong to call others "phobic," unless they actually suffer from phobias, conditions that call for mental health treatment, not discourse and persuasion (civilized values). If the Orlando terrorist was mentally disordered, then he is not morally blameworthy.

You should not play up homosexuality when denouncing the Orlando terrorist attack. Such overt politicization is off-putting. It undermines unity against a common enemy (an either-or fallacy: you're either pro-gay or pro-Islamist). As the President and FBI Director have acknowledged, the attack was motivated by a backwards, homicidal understanding of Islam. To oppose the Orlando massacre, a person does not have to be "pro-gay" anymore than a person has to be "pro-capitalist" or "pro-military" to oppose the attacks of 9/11. Socialists and peaceniks can denounce 9/11. Likewise, sexual conservatives can denounce the Orlando attack. Evil is evil.

[Noraika]

--snip---

I'll refer you to my previous post. I answered your points there.

Overall, the attack remains anti-LGBT+ in its nature. With all things there are varying degrees of severity, but that does not change that this attack remains within the anti-LGBT+ category.

[Caelapes]

Just as it would be inappropriate to call a disagreeable but able-minded person "retarded," it is wrong to call others "phobic," unless they actually suffer from phobias, conditions that call for mental health treatment, not discourse and persuasion (civilized values).

Use of the term "retard" is not even comparable to (correctly) calling out homophobes by using the term "homophobe/-ia." Nobody who uses the term "homophobia" is invoking the DSM definition of "phobia." Words have greater meaning than strict medical terms, and the right wing's pedantic argument of "we aren't IRRATIONALLY AFRAID of gays!" is ridiculous.

You should not play up homosexuality when denouncing the Orlando terrorist attack. Such overt politicization is off-putting.

Yeah, it sure is horrific to "politicize" a homophobic terrorist attack (which, by definition, is political) on a gay nightclub by standing in solidarity with the LGBT community.

[Belschaft]

Denying that a terrorist attack on the LGBT community is actually an attack on the LGBT community is pretty indicative of, at the very least, an unconscious and casual homophobia.

[Sovreignry]

Denying that a terrorist attack on the LGBT community is actually an attack on the LGBT community is pretty indicative of, at the very least, an unconscious and casual homophobia.

Given CD's typical views I'd say that it's not unconscious, but instead very conscious.

[Belschaft]

Denying that a terrorist attack on the LGBT community is actually an attack on the LGBT community is pretty indicative of, at the very least, an unconscious and casual homophobia.

Given CD's typical views I'd say that it's not unconscious, but instead very conscious.

Well, I did say at the very least.....

[Ratateague]

It goes without saying that the Democratic Socialist Assembly will definitely support this cause. Plus, I make this fab flag filter look goood.

[Justin States 3]

The New World Union is now part of the campaign!

[Zaolat]

It's in best interest for CD and others to not argue here. Mall already said this thread as it is straddles the line between Gameplay and General. Arguing about this, despite intentions, is making this thread look more like General.

Which will result in threadlock...

[Bodobol]

Nesapo, as well as I, will be participating in this. There's no words that can sufficiently capture the tragedy of an attack on this scale. I wish the best to the survivors of the attack and all of those affected, directly or indirectly, and I hope that the publicity surrounding this serves only to combat closed-minded and attitudes, particularly those of the homophobic nature.

Also, turns out Stonewall was on my birthday. Interesting.

[Crimoria]

The world is going down hill sadly. All these attacks on different groups. What is this all coming to, the apocalypse ?

[Cormactopia II]

I would also appreciate it if we don't argue about topics that belong in General in this thread. A thread about this campaign and its merits, or more broadly about the merits of showing solidarity with the LGBT+ community after this attack, can be started in General. There may already be such a topic in General, I don't frequent that forum.

This thread is to promote a regional and national campaign, similar to prior campaigns to promote autism awareness, diabetes awareness, etc. It's a thread asking regions and nations to participate by making changes to their regions and nations, which is Gameplay, not anymore General than the other awareness campaigns which were allowed to be promoted in Gameplay.

So happy to see so many regions and nations already participating!

[Tano]

It's in best interest for CD and others to not argue here. Mall already said this thread as it is straddles the line between Gameplay and General. Arguing about this, despite intentions, is making this thread look more like General.

Which will result in threadlock...

<tinfoilhat>What if CD is trying to get the thread locked because he stands against LGBT movement? </tinfoilhat>

[Todd McCloud]

I'll definitely support those who have been victims of Islamic extremism. They have shown to be indiscriminate in their attacks, aside from killing anyone who "isn't like them."

Is there a flag that is dedicated to all of their victims, something that can be used regardless of their latest atrocity? It seems to me the flag seems to change with each increasingly heinous action.