Giving It Some Thought

it’s odd to me…. I caught a lot of shit for the article written by Michael Payne.  believe me I have no problem with that I can take it as well as I can dish it out.  the general thought is that I approved the article and thus I must agree with it.  Neither is the case.  Someone who has an authors login here as Michael does, can write and post entirely without my knowledge.  Others have this ability as well, Goddess, Kayden Kross had it, My friend Dan Patterson and still others would have it simply by expressing an interest in having it.

I like to read things written by people who believe differently than I do, it expands my horizons.

When you read Mr Paynes article it should come as no surprise to you that while it is arguably a minority opinion it is NOT a small minority, of the top three radio talk shows in existence all three of them share his views and they represent a very significant number of people.  Rush Limbaughs cume is 13.25 and Sean Hannitys is 12  that means that they have 13.25 million listeners and 12 million listeners respectively.  but for Mr limbaugh or Mr Hannity to claim someone has an “agenda” is …well the pot calling the kettle black so to speak.

Indeed this whole thing brings up a dilemma even for me.   As libertarian in principle as I am its problematic.

In general I support the right of a business owner to do business with or refuse to do business with anyone he or she chooses. but should there be a line? and who should determine what that line is?

For example if I owned a tobacco shop i think it is ENTIRELY unreasonable for me to have to not allow my customers to smoke in the establishment.

By the same token if I own a restaurant and choose to allow my customers to smoke in my establishment I should be able to post a sign at the door, this is a smoking establishment if you dont like it go someplace else.  if my business succeeds then I did something right, if not I did something wrong, but its was ME who did it…not the government.  This is in line with Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand” theory of economics.

It gets a bit fuzzier when it comes to outright discrimination based on sex or religion or whatever.

Consider I am former Georgia governor Lester Maddox and I have a very popular eatery in Atlanta called “The Pickrick“.  In my establishment I have chosen NOT to serve black people or as governor Maddox called them “integrationists”.  Im my mind the best thing that can happen is that he is perfectly within his rights to do that and that he will fail because people realize how wrong that is and do not wish to support that establishment not matter how good the fried chicken is.

Now in the grand scheme of things does that promote the social harmony and equal rights that the government wants us to?  of course not, but then neither does the United Negro College Fund.

The main thing in making people equal is for that equality to apply unilaterally, gay or straight, male or female, white or yellow or red or black, athiest or 7th day adventist, Arab or Isrealie….You get the picture.  As long as someone holds themselves forth as different, no matter the intent, it undermines the whole equality thing.

But lets take it to another level, now its not a restaurant but a 24 hour emergency medical center.  You own it, you take NO funding from the government, state local or city….do you have a right to refuse a patient?  what about one that is dying?  Now it’s not so clear is it.

This is a very complex legal issue and personally I dont see it as any sort of agenda as a general rule but it is an issue that has people divided on both sides of it.

I think if you are smart, you read Mr Paynes editorial and you gain some understanding of this and particularly if you oppose it, you understand how YOUR opposition thinks.

One of the more vocal people about this article was Mike Stabile, but when I offered that i would run his opposing view, unedited, he never responded…seems it’s a lot easier to bitch and moan than it is to actually take a stand…

What you should take away is that knowledge is power and knowing what your adversary is up to is very valuable knowledge.

As for me, I’d like to live to see the day when we are all truly equal, and judged by our character not by our color, or sexual preference or which diety we believe in…But I won’t, maybe though some of you will.



120680cookie-checkGiving It Some Thought

Giving It Some Thought

Share This

18 Responses

  1. You let the dude post on your site. His sensibilities on this issue sucked, like it was a hot garbage piece. That’s it. I don’t see calls for peoples heads. It was just hot garbage word diarrhea and people are saying so. It was on your site so whether you gave particular or just general approval (by giving him access) then you will be linked in some way.

    Honestly citing talk radio and Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannity and the idea that others think this too as a good reason to have it up is really silly defense. There are whole countries of people who believe tons of dopey shit that would be called out by many if posted. So just saying ‘there’s other people that believe this’ doesn’t eliminate or even really lessen critique. You are arguing for “Free Speech” even though it isn’t the government condemning his piece or trying to silence or jail him. It’s your readers clearly and then when they use their “Free Speech” to complain you call it ‘bitching’ and ‘moaning’. It was a weak piece on every level on a touchy subject. So when you really suck and dealing with a touchy subject you will get negative reactions. That’s the way that is.

    You also in this kinda focused on the business angle, but I don’t think that was the worst part of his piece.

  2. Wow! I thought equality in terms of rights (in other terms, you guys enjoy being equal to one another, i’ll pass, thanks) meant also equal right to express an opinion and/or to criticize. Judging from the reactions to the object article by Michael i have to say that you have proven him just right, guys.

    What is it that someone cannot move some criticism, right or wrong, towards some lobbies (i didn’t read any criticism towards homosexuality per se) when these lobbies are the gay, the feminism, the muslim, the black etc lobbies? Are you guys trying to deny that there is a worldwide gay lobby with a political agenda that goes beyond equal rights? Don’t confuse gay people with gay lobbies: one can criticize the second without being homophobic; the LGBT UKIP has just been banned from attending the UK annual gay pride by the organizers (LGBT Brit lobby) because allegedly they are not LGBT-friendly. Shall we add a LOL?

    I don’t know if Michael is homophobic and personally i don’t even care about it, but calling garbage his point about the power of the gay lobbies is ludicrous to say the least. I don’t think Mike is complaining about people saying that they didn’t like the article, i think he is complaining about the tones.
    I bet you all that if the article was written by a gay with the same Michael’s arguments but with the players exchanged you would have been much more accommodating if not even compliant.

    I don’t need to comment on garbage, unless i use that noun as self defense against something so powerful that i cannot counter with arguments. Long live the gays, the straights, the muslims, the black and the withes and any other categorized (sigh!) group of human beings, but not their lobbies which are the main responsible for fomenting divisions and hatred among all of us for personal gain.

  3. Worldwide? There are still countries where it’s illegal and the consequences are dire….but yeah WORLDWIDE lobby is what I’m worried about in gay issues lol. What are on about. I called it garbage because I thought it was. Is that word as a descriptor not allowed? If I call an idea garbage it’s only because there is no rebuttal not because I think it’s garbage? Okay then that seems awful convenient. Linking to is certainly a great way to change minds and find common ground on issues like this. The tones of people not liking an article is a pretty nitpicky thing, are people not allowed to have reactions outside specific “tones” now? C’mon, people are allowed to dislike and disagree even with a passion. Just like you are allowed to come on and agree and do your links. The dude had many silly points and some really poor pseudo-science like opinions about what gay even is. I’m sorry people don’t have to be deferential. ‘Wow, that sucked’ is a fair review of some things, that article was one. If he wanted to go after some specific cases and cite how they were blown out of proportion that would have made more sense and maybe he could have got somewhere. He went big picture on a touchy issue and showed a lot of lack of knowledge and finesse. It was bad.

  4. Thank you sabrina its good to see some people get it….Its so easy for people to just whine and bitch but when it comes to taking responsibilty for educating themselves so that they may argue from a standpoint of knowing the facts about their opponents they prefer, instead to simply make noise….You and I understand that is destructive way too many others dont.

    And for all the noise not one single person has offered to write a counterpoint to what he write…only I did and the whiners didnt like what I said because it wasnt what they would have said….SMFH
    If you are ever in Atlanta Sabrina…drinks for you and your significant other are on me!

  5. Are you dismissing a fact because it’s on a site you don’t like? That’s a poor argument. Did the LGBT lobby banned the LGBT UKIP from the gay pride march stating that those gays are not gay friendly, yes or not?,d.ZGU,d.ZGU,d.ZGU,d.ZGU–TzwqHM7Rj-A&bvm=bv.95277229,d.ZGU,d.ZGU

    Do you want more? Are any of those sources reputable enough for you? Can you comment on that? Is there a gay lobby with a political agenda in the UK yes or not? Can be said that there is a gay lobby with a political agenda without being called homophobic? Also, what is a touchy issue? Is talking about anything related to gays more touchy than any other issue? Why? Do you consider the gay universe an issue? A so touchy one that needs to be discussed with certain boundaries and limitations? Why is that? Is it because if you criticize anything related to the gay universe the gay lobbies call you homophobic and their supporters label your opinion as garbage? You didn’t understand that worldwide was referred to places around the world where LGBT lobbies are allowed to exist? Let me know when you’ll hear that the LGBT lobby have marched and paraded against gays discrimination and killings in Islamic countries. No, you are right…they have no political agenda at all and whomever says the opposite it’s just garbage.

  6. This is a shit show, I’m out. “The gay universe” WTF. I’m sure this is somehow a win in your mind, but I just genuinely think arguing when you are talking with someone who isn’t on the same book let alone page is fruitless. Pretty amazing honestly. Just to be clear I didn’t say “#! touchiest issue ever” or anything, I said touchy which I think is true. You are now trying to cite a specific case, the thing I just argued could have made the article have a point. That was not done at all, so I’m not sure what it has to do with the original piece.

  7. @Sabrina,

    An “agenda” cannot make a woman who does not like women like them along with a man who doesn’t like men like them.

    One can have a lobby for everything, but making a straight person gay isn’t something a lobby can do.

    However, I did read on the internet that Lululemon is funding Clinton’s campaign and the gays have banded together and decided that over-priced yoga apparel is the way to turn straight men to gay.

    Sabrina, if you have a man then I suggest you hold him close. He’s probably gonna go full-fag really soon if what I read on the net is correct. Did you read Michael Payne’s post?

  8. I’m not afraid of my man turning gay; i’ve got nothing against being gay, to the contrary. Your words suggest that you would be pretty pissed if your partner turned gay, instead. It’s typical of the politically correct fanboys to be gay with someone else’s ass.

    An agenda cannot turn someone gay; you might be right, although you forget to argument your statement and therefore it has the same credibility as Michael opposite statement, in my book. But an agenda can aim at twisting the perception that people have about the subject and influence if not rule several aspect of their lives, also some very intimate ones.

    Do you remember when until a few decades ago gay people were afraid to do coming-out as a result of centuries of Church and other lobbies agenda? Did those agendas turned gay people into straight people for centuries? Of course not. Gay people kept intimately liking same gender individuals and in many cases kept secretly engaging other gays in bed, but publicly they were married to the opposite gender making children, wearing what was considered straight etc. A political agenda, never aims at changing your true beliefs; a political agenda aims at changing your public life and externalized beliefs in a way that it is beneficial to the cause (officially to the cause of all humans, practically to the cause of few in terms of both power and finances).

    That is what i have understood from Michael’s contribution and i certainly don’t feel like calling it garbage. There is a gay lobby which aims at going beyond rights equality and it’s no relief to know that straight people will continue being intimately straight if their freedom of externalizing their straightness will be limited at some point in some ways. You say it’s impossible? Think again. Discrimination comes from both sides and it’s always the result of opposite agendas which use rights equality and the natural state of things as a lever to subvert the status quo. One thing any lobbies are not interested in is rights equality. Once you can influence decisions, you’re not going to stop when the balance is even. There is no such a virtuous example in all humanity history.

  9. Things could always be worse. This site could turn into LukeIsBack. New owner killed all Cindi’s traffic, viewers, and commentators. Now she is trying to sell her whole network for 11k. Cindi was selling LIB for 50k when she was the owner and now its only worth 11k?

  10. LOL true dat….and LIB isnt even worth 11K now prolly…although cindi was dreaming thinkiing she wold get 50 for it…..offer me 50 and Ill sell and even continue to wwrite for 6 -12 months 😉

  11. I suspect this site is worth more than $50K, especially if it includes your continued services. You have a lot of contacts in the adult film industry that a new owner probably would not have which would make your continued services necessary for the site to survive in its current form. I also think if you were to sell you would feel regret about selling after about six months.

    Another issue if you were to sell is that you get into the mainstream media with this site at least twice a year. That “advertising” drives a lot of traffic to this site (we have discussed a website that measures this before on here, traffic does go up substantially when an article including you hits the mainstream media) and likely through the advertising links you have here to your pay porn sites. If you were to sell this site so cheap it might end up being a money loser as you would have fewer new subscribers for your pay sites due to the loss of advertising (what could be the increased server and bandwidth costs for — maybe $1000 a month at most — banner ads on five industry sites would cost that or more each month and probably bring in less business). This site may sometimes lose money if you only consider this site’s expenses and outside advertising revenue (I currently count eight outside ads on here, at $100 a month each — a lowball estimate — this site brings at least $800 a month in ads alone) but I think once the extra subscriptions to your pay sites from readers here are factored in this site likely makes you money, unfortunately without reprogramming parts of both this site and your pay sites (way beyond my abilities, I am certainly not a computer programmer) so this traffic and the subscription rate could be measured the amount of this is hard to ascertain.

  12. “Consider I am former Georgia governor Lester Maddox……chosen NOT to serve black people or as governor Maddox called them “integrationists””
    – I respect your work Mike but I wish it were so simple. There is no need to propose a hypothetical to make your point. America has been that hypothetical for a 100 years after Lincoln died. These establishments and restaurants flourished. It took the blood and noisy protest of blacks and whites to change the laws which changed these establishments…..

  13. and thats the point…it isnt a hypothetical its real and Lester Maddox was a bleeding heart next to others I remember like J B Stoner. There are times when it seems cut and dried that as an owner of something I may do as I please with it, other times…not so much.

  14. thats easy …no because the first person to bring up Nazis in an internet argument loses. Everyone knows that…It’s called Godwins Law.

  15. I for one would love to have some Jewish bodybuilder plow his fist right into a Holocaust denier’s mouth. People ask me why I am so pro-Israel. My answer is we owe them a safe country to live in after what Adolf had done to six million of their parents and grandparents in the name of Christianity even if it takes shipping every last Arab in Israeli territory to another country and bombing the piss out of those that refuse to leave (I guarantee after one or two bombings they will get the fuck out of Israel without any further action on our part). I have seen more than enough evidence to prove to me that the Holocaust did take place and that it was beyond horrible for the Jews living in Europe at that time. The least Western society can do is ensure they have a place to live safe from their enemies.

Leave a Reply