Sesame Street to Introduce HIV-Positive Muppet

[EmmyMik]

Your Rosie O'Donnell arguement is weak. Just because someone does many good things it does not eliminate a wrong deed. Take the reverse side of the coin, if someone does many evil deeds and one good deed does that mean they are now a good person? She obviously can not be a very good Christian if she isn't living the teachings of the Bible, the book at the center of that religion. I know all about this Rosie O'Donnell arguement because my aunt is gay, a huge Rosie fan, and a similar person. It doesn't work.

Special_Ed, if anything this shows that your argument is weak.

From what you're saying, a person could do everything that a "good Christian" would do, but they can't be a "good Christian" because they are gay. So on the flip side of your argument, a person could do many horrible things, and one good thing would make them a good person.

 

[Phillip]

If everyone can please try to steer this topic back to it's original intent which is how an HIV-positive Muppet might be played out on South American Sesame Street that would be appreciated.

The imminent issue isn't how a gay couple would or would not be appropriate on Sesame Street or anywhere else for that matter. We've discussed that topic for a day now. Let's agree to disagree, but with MUTUAL RESPECT for the people who share different opinions. This isn't being done to "stifle" discussion, but rather to get the topic back on it's original intent.

When we began discussing this original issue on Thursday, it was a very productive and intriguing discussion. As some have mentioned, the HIV-Muppet story has taken off like wild-fire nationally. On Friday it was one of the lead stories on MSNBC. Our local news here even had a five-minute package dealing with the issue last night.

Appreciate everyone's support in moving on....

 

[FellowWLover]

Now here is something that I just do not understand.

Every other thread is permitted to meander on and off a topic, even sometimes on and on about, frankly, nothing. Yet, here we are maturely discussing a timely and thought-provoking issue being asked "to get the topic back on it's original intent." And, it is not as if this discussion has raged on for months or even weeks... after "a day" it has been decided for us that we better get back on track and steer clear of any further controversy.

Honestly, most of us probably have no real idea "how an HIV-positive Muppet might be played out on South American Sesame Street" being that the majority of posters live in the US and Europe. It does not surprise me, therefore, that the thrust of the discussion turned to other topics. What does give me pause is that we are being asked to "move on" in no uncertain terms. So much for the free exchange of ideas.

 

[Janice & Mokey's Man]

Jessica, I'm thinkin' it's probably cause not everyone "expressed an opinion". If everyone had just stated their opinions were just that---their opinions---it probably woulda been more acceptable (along with not usin' "potential insults").

 

[radionate]

Originally posted by Special_Ed
Radionate,

3.) Whn you stait that it took you 20 years to figure out you were gay you are proving my point, people are not born gay, they just decide one day that that's the lifestyle for them. You know what else? All homosexual periodicals printed until the early 1980's PROUDLY PROCLAIMED that homosexuality was a choice and one that they took pride in making. It was not until the mid 80's that the tune changed to "This is a birth defect."

I'm going to adhere to Phil's wishes, but I have to make one statement, I'm just upset that I can't use the words I want to in this post.

I NEVER MADE A CHOICE TO BE GAY. I DIDN'T SUDDENDLY DECIDE TO BECOME GAY IN MY TWENTIES. I WAS BORN THIS WAY. IT'S WHO I AM, BUT I WAS TOO UPSET TO ADMIT OR ACT ON IT. I HAD NO ROLE MODELS GROWING UP. I DIDN'T KNOW WHY I WAS DIFFERENT. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOU A**. OPEN YOUR EYES AND READ. I'M NOT A BIRTH DEFECT, I'M A LIVING HUMAN BEING, WHO DESERVES TO LOVE AND BE LOVED LIKE ANYONE ELSE IN THIS WORLD. A HUMAN LIVING BEING WHO DESERVES RESPECT FROM THEIR FELLOW MAN. A HUMAN LIVING BEING WHO HAS NEVER RAISED A FIST TO ANOTHER PERSON, OR HELD A PREJUIDICE AGAINST ANYONE WHO IS DIFFERENT THEN I. IT'S A CHOICE ONLY IN THE RESPECT THAT I AM OPEN ABOUT WHO I AM (MORE SO AFTER THESE POSTS), NOT WHAT I AM.

How can anyone suddenly think that one day a person is just going to up and decide to be gay. Human logic doesn't work like that. I think your screen name says it all.

Thank you, and I will now return to a civil discussion about S.S.

 

[Special_Ed]

Janice & Monkey boy,

"Birth defect" is widely used for all other things people are born with against the norm, there is nothing degrading about it. I think the reason you or anyone would have a problem with it is because it calls it for what it is, according to your logic.

Yes, I read your post, I was telling you what a fetish is. Ask Mr. Webster and get back to me.

No, they have trouble with their orientation because they know that what they are doing is wrong.

Even if I give you this feelings comment, once they act upon them it would be commiting a sin. You keep refering to Christ, but did not Christ say that sins begin in the mind?

No he said: "It took me twenty something years to accept who I am, and 26 years to finally admit it out loud. "

I understand this to be he is saying he is at least 46 years old, decided he was gay when he was 20, and became open about it 26 years after that. I did not misquote him.

Emmy,

That is exactly what I am saying. It is also more than doing good things to be a Christian and if you are not living fulling in Christ then you are not a good Christian. If someone is a thief but is kind to children and little old ladies does that make it okay that he is a thief? No. THat is what I am saying, the only way to make up for a wrong is to syop doing that wrong.

By the way, I like your Freakazoid reference in the signature.

Phillip,

You are proving Luke's point about people fearing discussion of these subjects. If you would not like to have any more said in this thread, might I suggest we start a new thread on this subject?

Fellowlover,

Very valid points. Now you have lived a day in my shoes.

Janice,

I have yet to intentionally and specifically insult others.

Radiationate,

Your story does indeed suggest that you were not born gay, but decided to become gay. The majority of "How I became gay" stories are the same way. Sad home life, being picked on in school, then turning to be gay in the teens or early twenties. You have not proven you were gay from birth, and in fact no scientist has, just as no scientist has proven that it's learned behavior, hgowever there have been some remarkable studies on both sides, yet they tend to disagree often.

I also was not saying that you as a person were not a birth defect, but your condition can be considered to be a birth defect.

I was not saying you spontaniously decided to become gay, but many experiences through your life drove you that way. It is the media who has taken this birth defect concept and ran with it.

This was a very civil discussion and if you are leaving I am very sorry. It's nice to get a gay person's input on these things. You will be surely missed.

"I think your screen name says it all."

By the way, was that an insult?

 

[Janice & Mokey's Man]

Originally posted by Special_Ed
Yes, I read your post, I was telling you what a fetish is. Ask Mr. Webster and get back to me.

Uhh, I did quote "Mr. Webster" to you---twice, word for word the second time. I was just lettin' you know what a fetish actually is. In your version, a man bein' attracted to a woman makes him a fetishist. That's why I specified it for ya to what it actually means.

No, they have trouble with their orientation because they know that what they are doing is wrong.

That sounds like you're speakin' for all gay people, though. Some feel that it is wrong, but some also feel just "wronged" by society. There are all kinds of different reasons, not just the "it's wrong" one.

 

[Special_Ed]

Janice,

What year is your dictionary? I'm using a Webster's 1880 edition, and my definition coms from there. Since this is the version that Noah Webster himself wrote this is the correct definition. Webster has a lot of interesting definitions in here that I'm sure you and many would disagree with.

 

[Janice & Mokey's Man]

Originally posted by Special_Ed
What year is your dictionary? I'm using a Webster's 1880 edition, and my definition coms from there. Since this is the version that Noah Webster himself wrote this is the correct definition. Webster has a lot of interesting definitions in here that I'm sure you and many would disagree with.

I used the one online, and I have one downstairs. That must be one interesting edition if it says any sexual attraction is a fetish. Then everybody would be a fetishist, lol.

 

[Special_Ed]

I assumed you used the online dictionary because I already went there and compaired your post.

But do you have a thurough dictionary or just a cheapy type?

It doesn't state that everyone is a fetish, but erotic things that get's them in the mood are. If homosexuality gets them in the mood then it's a fetish. It's the best dictionary out there because it's a true dictionary in Webster's own words with definitions that wre used for hundreds of years. It's our recent culture that has tried to change them.