?

Log in

No account? Create an account
nukes, outing - Greg [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Greg

[ website | gregstoll.com ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| * Homepage * Mobile apps (Windows Phone, Win8, Android, webOS) * Pictures * LJBackup * Same-sex marriage map * iTunesAnalysis * Where's lunch? ]

nukes, outing [Sep. 6th, 2007|10:17 am]
Greg
[Tags|, ]
[Current Mood |okayokay]

I'm back at work today, feeling decentish. Took care of canceling utilities and setting up new ones yesterday, which is a load off of my mind. Also, my RFID blocking wallet came so I'm using that now. No more foil in my pants!

Air Force investigates mistaken transport of nuclear materials - yikes.

Per our earlier discussion, here's an article about the guy who's been outing anti-gay politicians. (there was a more biased version of the article in the Washington Post this morning) This isn't exactly the same since Craig was arrested and it seems like Mike Craig just brought that arrest to light, but it brings up the question:
Poll #1051068 outing anti-gay politicans

Should anti-gay politicians be outed?

Absolutely - anything less than full support for marriage rights, etc. is hypocricy
0(0.0%)
Yes, if they consistently vote for discriminatory policies
6(50.0%)
Not unless they use gay issues as scare tactics in their campaigns (and vote for discriminatory policies)
4(33.3%)
No, no matter their behavior or voting record
2(16.7%)

My thoughts (no peeking before you vote!):This is no longer quite the issue it once was, since being gay in and of itself is fairly widely accepted these days. But after being closeted myself for a while, it put a big emotional strain on me to keep it a secret. I get the hypocricy angle, but I don't think outing is justified except in the most extreme situations. I'm also a big believer in keeping one's personal and work lives separate.
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: gregstoll
2007-09-06 02:53 pm (UTC)
aaand I can't spell "politician" or "hypocrisy". Great.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: omega697
2007-09-06 05:00 pm (UTC)
How is this any different from other hypocrisy?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: gregstoll
2007-09-06 08:09 pm (UTC)
I don't think it is. The question is what responses are appropriate.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: omega697
2007-09-06 08:24 pm (UTC)
I mean, if someone in a position of power was saying "we should not allow exploitative child labor practices" but that person was engaged in exploitative child labor practices, don't you think that person ought to be called out?

I guess there is a difference if they truly believe what they are doing is wrong and should be frowned upon. In that case, though, they have more serious issues.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: gregstoll
2007-09-06 08:40 pm (UTC)
But there's a difference - I'm unaware of anyone in congress calling for the extermination of gays. Maybe a closeted gay member of congress really doesn't believe that gays should be allowed to marry? (unlikely, I'll admit...although I could see thinking that if you think being gay is exclusively about sexual attraction)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: omega697
2007-09-06 08:53 pm (UTC)
Right, that is what I was saying. That I think if they truly do believe that, they have other problems.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: omega697
2007-09-06 08:53 pm (UTC)
Think of it as an intervention.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: djedi
2007-09-07 09:53 pm (UTC)
Well, I disagree some with Greg. I think politicians have a bit less of a right to a private life than the average joe. That said, I tend to think they have more of a right than what the average person THINKS politicians should have.

The difference is that the hypocrisy is over something pretty private, their sex life. It's not about who they have mow their yards or hwo they make their money.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: omega697
2007-09-08 12:03 am (UTC)
This would be a totally valid argument if they weren't trying to legislate restrictions on people's private lives.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: djedi
2007-09-08 12:17 am (UTC)
Which is why I disagree with Greg here.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: winocas
2007-09-10 01:53 am (UTC)
I actually wanted to submit an answer not on there. They can be outed, personally I would not because of skirting the line of slander and or libel.
But as long as it's legal, let them do it. I don't think it's very ethical, and I think that those who do give up the moral high ground that they normally have over hypocrites and hate mongers.
(Reply) (Thread)