Questions for Wade

[_Ray A]

I do find Wade's obsession quite odd. But I imagine his retort being, "well, why are you all so obsessed with Mormonism?" "How does it affect your life?"

To give some leeway to Wade, maybe he feels that SSM will really affect his religion. And maybe he's in a minority who is totally convinced of this. Mind you, I don't agree with 99% of his arguments.

Another way we should, I think, look at this, is that Wade felt he was censored on this topic on MAD. He came here because it's a "free speech" board. I think we can appreciate that. It's a case of though I disagree with what you say, I'll defend to the death your right to say it. Not that I'm suggesting anyone has asked him to leave, but we should at least, I think, respect his right to make even bad arguments, without ridiculing him.

Just my halfpenny. I could be wrong in my assessment. Corrections welcome.

[_Analytics]

What makes me wonder is his argument that heterosexual relationships are "beneficial to society." The basic assertion is that since this type of relationship is beneficial to society, the government created marriage in order to promote it. Doesn't this make you wonder? His POV entails the belief that heterosexual relationships are too-often considered undesireable and that there would be a shortage of people choosing heterosexual relationships if it weren't for the government's intervention.

Doesn't that seem like the way a repressed homosexual would think?

[_Jersey Girl]

Wade's personality clearly rubs me the wrong way. Having said that...

He posted on a related issue on a thread begun by Rollo.
He's been posting regularly on the Roman Story thread.
He started this one (1) new thread on SSM.

Here are my questions:

1. Since when is a poster's sexuality (which is the obvious direction this thread was bound to go in) any of our damn business?

2. Is Wade going to now be the presumed closeted homosexual whipping boy on this board?

3. If the answer to #2 is yes, what does that say about the people here?

[_EAllusion]

Wade has a lengthy history of writing some openly bigoted things about homosexuals. Yet he chooses to focus on the topic of gay marriage in a blatantly condescending way while implying dubious arguments. Light-heartedly joking he is secretly gay in a separate thread isn't exactly a cruel retort.

[_JohnStuartMill]

Oh, chances are Wade is straight. Sure, there's plenty of cases of the most vociferously anti-gay people turning out to have homosexual relations themselves, as anyone familiar with religious right political leaders knows, but it's not as though that's the rule. There actually is some evidence that homophobia (read: expressed bigotry towards gays) does correlate with increased likelihood of homosexual/bisexual orientations, which dovetails nicely with the popular sentiment that homophobes are secretly gay. Obviously most aren't. But that's the basis for the jokes.

That, and the allegations that Wade is a bachelor of relatively advanced age for an unmarried Mormon.

[_beastie]

I do find Wade's obsession quite odd. But I imagine his retort being, "well, why are you all so obsessed with Mormonism?" "How does it affect your life?"

This occurred to me as I wrote the OP, but I thought I'd wait for it to be asked. I'm happy to answer the question, which I think is a fair one, as I think my question to Wade is fair, as well.

My answer is that Mormonism had a HUGE impact on my life, even given the fact that its current impact is very muted (mainly in that half of my family remains LDS, and that impacts their attitudes). I think it's normal to have a heightened interest in things that have had a notable impact on your personal life. Another example is bipolar illness. I, personally, don't have bipolar, but 3 very close members of my family have been so diagnosed, so I spent years reading about it. A third "obsession" is the ancient Maya, although that obsession has faded a bit lately. That one is more along the lines of sequential reading interests I obsess about. I don't generally read fiction (to my chagrin, I'm always setting the goal to read more fiction and fail, aside from Jane Austin), so I become obsessed with a certain topic and spend a couple of years reading almost exclusively about that topic. After dozens of books on the topic, I become sated, so to speak, and move on. That's not to say I still don't find the Maya fascinating, and still won't read new books on the topic now and then. It just means it's no longer my primary interest.

The topic of religion and Mormonism is unique among those sequential obsessions in that it's lasted most of my adult life, so I suspect I'll continue to find it fascinating. (Although I no longer obsessively read about the topic - I've read so much about LDS history that most new materials feels a bit recycled. If, however, a new book comes out taking a new angle, I'll probably read it.) I'm positive that has to do with the huge impact it had on my life.

So, for me, when I see someone obsessing over one topic - over the span of near a decade (he was obsessing about it back on Z) -it's natural for me to assume that maybe that topic had a huge impact on that person's life.

To give some leeway to Wade, maybe he feels that SSM will really affect his religion. And maybe he's in a minority who is totally convinced of this. Mind you, I don't agree with 99% of his arguments.

Clearly, in the last couple of years when same-sex marriage has become a hot topic, I think more LDS will be interested in the topic. But Wade's obsession long predates that topic, so it's hard for me to imagine how homosexuality affected his religion all that time. However, just because I can't imagine it doesn't mean that Wade can't imagine it - hence my question to him. Surely he's had to think about his own deep interest in the topic.

Another way we should, I think, look at this, is that Wade felt he was censored on this topic on MAD. He came here because it's a "free speech" board. I think we can appreciate that. It's a case of though I disagree with what you say, I'll defend to the death your right to say it. Not that I'm suggesting anyone has asked him to leave, but we should at least, I think, respect his right to make even bad arguments, without ridiculing him.

Just my halfpenny. I could be wrong in my assessment. Corrections welcome.

I think that there's no doubt he came here because he was no longer allowed to talk about it on MAD. That was my strong suspicion when he showed up back here. The fact that he came HERE because he could no longer discuss it on MAD is the reason I decided to ask these questions. They've occurred to me, before, but seeing him return HERE to start talking about the topic convinced me that this is a real obsession with him. I'm not trying to silence him with these questions. I, personally, have no interest in interacting with him on the topic, because I seriously interacted with him on the topic back on Z, during his days as the "institute" and when his bigoted anti-gay website was still up. After a couple of tries, it became obvious it was absolutely pointless. He's not really able to "hear" the opposing side on this issue. The same thing could be said about the Mormon/exmormon debate, but since I'm personally interested in the topic, I'm more inclined to keep trying. I'm not that personally interested in gay debate, so am not inclined to continue trying in the face of futility. But others are welcome to try.

[_beastie]

Wade's personality clearly rubs me the wrong way. Having said that...

He posted on a related issue on a thread begun by Rollo.
He's been posting regularly on the Roman Story thread.
He started this one (1) new thread on SSM.

Here are my questions:

1. Since when is a poster's sexuality (which is the obvious direction this thread was bound to go in) any of our damn business?

2. Is Wade going to now be the presumed closeted homosexual whipping boy on this board?

3. If the answer to #2 is yes, what does that say about the people here?

I don't know if this is a chastisement to me for starting the thread, or to others who've made jokes about his sexuality, but I'll assume it's a chastisement to me and defend myself.

My question to Wade wasn't: are you a closet homosexual? If it had been, your criticism would be justified.

I think it's fair to ask someone why a subject is an obsessive interest to him.

I also think it's very fair to assume he came back here mainly because he was banned from talking about same sex marriage on MAD. The timing is just too coincidental.

Yes, so far he's just started one thread on the topic. And now that I've made an issue about it, he may stop there. But I've "known" (in the internet board sense of the word) Wade for around a decade, and this is clearly a topic that obsesses him. I mean, come on. Someone who creates a website about the topic, and calls himself an "Institute" dedicated to studying homosexuality, and then even visits gay boards to try and get posters to come to his website and discuss it with him is clearly so interested in the topic I think it's fair to call it an "obsession".

Most people who are opposed to gay marriage, or who believe homosexuality is a serious sin, don't engage in such aggressive actions to oppose it. They just oppose it, and would vote against it. But creating a website? Visiting gay boards? (I regret that board is no longer in existence, otherwise I'd provide the links which were provided back on Z) Wanting to discuss it over and over, to the point where it's fair to assume that his obsessive posting on the topic was at least one reason the MAD mods decided to ban the topic? That goes beyond simply being opposed to something. It's not as extreme as Fred Phelps, but it's still quite extreme. I think it's fair to ask Wade why.

[_beastie]

What makes me wonder is his argument that heterosexual relationships are "beneficial to society." The basic assertion is that since this type of relationship is beneficial to society, the government created marriage in order to promote it. Doesn't this make you wonder? His POV entails the belief that heterosexual relationships are too-often considered undesireable and that there would be a shortage of people choosing heterosexual relationships if it weren't for the government's intervention.

Doesn't that seem like the way a repressed homosexual would think?

Yeah, I think it does sound like the way a repressed homosexual would think. But it's also a popular argument in religion anti-gay circles, so it may just reflect that.

There could be other reasons he's obsessed with it. I considered mentioning some of those other possible reasons in the OP, but wanted to leave the question more open. But since it appears he's not going to answer my questions, I'll offer the reason that occurred to me, and there are probably other possibilities.

I think someone could end up obsessed with the topic if a very close friend or, more likely, family member, was homosexual and acted out in ways that scarred Wade. It seems like he would have mentioned that in all these years, though.


JSM

That, and the allegations that Wade is a bachelor of relatively advanced age for an unmarried Mormon.

I think this is a very notable factor in the teasings. Anyone who was LDS for a notable amount of time knows that the pressure on young adults to marry is intense. As one ages in Mormonism, and remains single, the concern of the community - and likely the family - is heightened. The pressure is so intense, and the number of females who would be thrilled to marry just about anyone so high, that for a Mormon male to remain single into his fifties is quite remarkable.

by the way, Wade has confirmed that he's never married, so it's not just an allegation.

[_beastie]

I do want to add this -

Wade is a bigot against homosexuals. I'm positive he would never see this in himself, but he is. His "institute" website made that clear. So if he were, in reality, a repressed homosexual, I think it would be morally justified to make hay over that. I'd certainly hope that if Fred Phelps were discovered to be a closeted homosexual, people would make hay over that, as well. I'm not saying Wade is the equivalent of Fred Phelps, by the way, who is in a class of his own. But make no mistake - Wade is a bigot.

And just to avoid a possible strawman - I think it's possible to oppose gay marriage without being a bigot against gay people. Opposition to gay marriage, or even an obsession with the topic, is not what makes Wade a bigot. It is that he consistently associates the worst possible social traits with homosexuals that makes him a bigot.

[_Some Schmo]

Here are my questions:

1. Since when is a poster's sexuality (which is the obvious direction this thread was bound to go in) any of our damn business?

2. Is Wade going to now be the presumed closeted homosexual whipping boy on this board?

3. If the answer to #2 is yes, what does that say about the people here?

1. It's not any of our business. That's true. It's a wonder why he keeps bringing SSM up, however, as though he wants to make it our business.

2. I got the feeling he already was. This has been going on a while now, hasn't it?

3. We're human.

Some people (like me) get annoyed by repeated condemnation of SSM when there's no justifiable reason for it. Discrimination against gay people always has and always will be about people simply (and irrationally) feeling uncomfortable with homosexual acts personally. All the other "reasons" are window dressing used to rationalize bigotry. End of story.

Some people are really uncomfortable letting spiders crawl on them. Would that justify the denial of rights of all people who allow tarantulas to ride their shoulders? That's how I view discrimination against homosexuals. It's ludicrous.

So what it says about me is that rather than try to reason with someone who is acting irrationally, I'm more apt to criticize their phobia through jokes.