• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

JREF a Gay Organization?

Heh. I was thinking this morning as I was listening to the For Good Reason podcast, that we should perhaps now be calling him James "The Fabulous" Randi.

Great news, BTW. My only regret is that I don't get to see what dglas thinks of it.
 
This morning I was wiki-surfing and for a moment I swore someone had vandalized Randi’s article.… :D
 
I have difficulty understanding why there is all this fuzz about some people being gay or not. I have no intention of having sex with Randi or anybody else from the JREF, no matter if they are gay or heterosexual; nor do I think that this is what any of the people intend, who seem preoccupied with knowing if the JREF is a gay organisation. I understand the courage it takes for Randi to "come out", but I fail to see why such statement would be necessary: the JREF is not occupied with sexual politics, so why do we need to know what sexual preferences people in the JREF may have?

Perhaps it is a cultural thing. I doubt that this would interest people in Denmark as much.
 
steenkh said:
... but I fail to see why such statement would be necessary: the JREF is not occupied with sexual politics, so why do we need to know what sexual preferences people in the JREF may have?

Perhaps it is a cultural thing. I doubt that this would interest people in Denmark as much.
Click to expand...
.
My thoughts also.
I could care less.
It probably interests the anti-intellectual homophobic rightwingnuts, of which there are many here in CA, but not me.
 
Randi's sexuality isn't interesting. However, the fact that he made a public statement about himself regarding a topic that many people are uncomfortable with is quite outstanding.

There are countries, in this world TODAY, where someone could get killed for coming out.

There are many, many people who are gay, but are hiding it for hear they will be ridiculed by the religious right. It's a real fear.

If we lived in an ideal society, the reponse to this would be "so what?". Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal society.

When leaders like Randi and others make public statements about their sexuality, it helps the "everyday" people to hopefully feel better about their plight.

I do think that this is relevant to the skeptic community in the sense that most people hate homosexuality because of supersitions. I have yet to hear a non-religious argument against homosexuality.
 
A gay person in showbiz? *shrug*

I just hope he has not let being officially closeted keep him from having personal relationships, though it probably has. :(
 
Wow, amazing news (pun not intended). Good for him for having the courage to come out.
 
I wonder if any mainstream news organizations will mention it. Google News shows only a handful of mentions at this point.
 
LadyMitris said:
Randi's sexuality isn't interesting. However, the fact that he made a public statement about himself regarding a topic that many people are uncomfortable with is quite outstanding.

There are countries, in this world TODAY, where someone could get killed for coming out.

There are many, many people who are gay, but are hiding it for hear they will be ridiculed by the religious right. It's a real fear.

If we lived in an ideal society, the reponse to this would be "so what?". Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal society.

When leaders like Randi and others make public statements about their sexuality, it helps the "everyday" people to hopefully feel better about their plight.

I do think that this is relevant to the skeptic community in the sense that most people hate homosexuality because of supersitions. I have yet to hear a non-religious argument against homosexuality.
Click to expand...

And you won't, because there is none.:hit:
 
Could we trade closets?

James

Like you I find a few of the homo-lexicon dramatically unkind to our sexual counterparts when we should be defining ourselves in more positive ways. Gay gives the impression that we are happy go lucky people who have no cares in the world. Sadly we are forced to look over our shoulders all the time wondering when some self proclaimed vigilante for Victorian morals is ready to strike in a Country that thinks it is a modern society. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” doesn’t deny the reality that there are homosexuals in all walks of society. I for one find the word ”queer” to be totally offensive, since I am not strange in anyway other than my humor.

Many of us older homosexuals are facing our winter years alone since we have spent so much time keeping a low profile that many of us have missed the opportunity to find that special someone with whom to spend our twilight years with. Then we look back at the “older” men who used to try to buy us drinks and then think how badly we treated them. Hopefully the younger crowd will think before they open their mouths and slam an older fellow for wanting company. The art of conversation seems completely gone, so I guess if someone did decline the offer of a drink you’d have to try to decipher their reply whether verbal or text. What does, ROTFLMAO mean anyhow. Sounds French!

So welcome into the Out world. Although I would have to say that I’m sure your closet has such wonderful secrets and skeletons.

Bright blessings,

Ray

PS. Pagans don't seem to have an issue with homosexuals:jaw-dropp
 
Goddess worshippers don't rant about homosexuality since a mother loves all her children just as they are. Which is the way it should be.
 
Can we make up a secret handshake?
images
 
TSR said:
.
When you asked if MM would report the story, by definition.
.
Click to expand...

No, not by definition. If I said, "This belongs in the news" that would mean I thought it was newsworthy. Asking if the mainstream press covered it does not imply that I personally believe it is newsworthy but rather a question as to whether those who publish the news think it will hold the public interest. I didn't think the prank some kid pulled in Walmart was newsworthy, but I acknowledge that it received lots of press coverage.

Only a handful of sites found by searching "News" on Bing and Google covered it. A lot of websites (bloggers and discussion boards) apparently found it worth mentioning, though. In fact, the Gaytheists site has it on their front page.
 
So my favorite Skeptic is gay
My favorite author (Arthur C Clark) is (was) gay
My favorite inventor (Da Vinci) was purported gay
So I have much “gay” influence in my thinking
But just remember the Ellen Show (the sit com) was really funny until she made the show about her being gay.
The JREF promotes rational thinking not what one does in the bedroom.
 
UncaYimmy said:
No, not by definition. If I said, "This belongs in the news" that would mean I thought it was newsworthy. Asking if the mainstream press covered it does not imply that I personally believe it is newsworthy but rather a question as to whether those who publish the news think it will hold the public interest.
Click to expand...

The value of Randi coming out is to continue to serve to make homosexuality ordinary to those who are acquainted with him (this was the point of the movie Milk - not that homosexuals exist, but that they are among your ordinary contacts, even if you don't know it). So it makes sense that it is of little interest to the mainstream press, but it is of some interest to those who have some sort of connection with Randi. And most of these connections will be through skepticism/atheism groups. So, while I thought it was odd and perhaps inappropriate that he use SWIFT to make his announcement, maybe it does make sense if you look at it as a convenient way to reach the relevant audience for this news. We can look upon it as a Good Thing that the response from most people seems to be "so what".

Linda
 
fls said:
We can look upon it as a Good Thing that the response from most people seems to be "so what".

Linda
Click to expand...
Er, yeah. Not a real surprise for the few thousand folks who might actually have a clue who he is, many who are probably here.

This board appears somewhat left of dailykos, Maddow, Olbermann, etc, and "alternative lifestyles/who cares".
 
Randi said on the podcast interview where he came out that JREF is not a gay organization. He said it is not an athiest organization too.
 
arthwollipot said:
we should perhaps now be calling him James "The Fabulous" Randi.
Click to expand...

wow. I shouldn't have laughed at that.

...of course Randi's not exactly "fabulous..." If I had to guess a magician was gay purely on his girly flamboyance, I'd guess Jeff McBride.
 
Bill Thompson said:
Randi also said he does not like the tern gay.
There is nothing gay about being gay.

I agree with that. My gay friends are the most unhappy people I know.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, none of my gay friends are lame, either.

Linda
 
fls said:
The value of Randi coming out is to continue to serve to make homosexuality ordinary to those who are acquainted with him (this was the point of the movie Milk - not that homosexuals exist, but that they are among your ordinary contacts, even if you don't know it).
Click to expand...
Exactly that. I have admired Randi for decades. I never gave a second thought as to his preferences. There was a several-second-shift between what little I might've assumed, if I gave a code10, but the shift was quickly and happily made. James, my mentor these 30 years, all I can ask for you is my blessing, if you, can approach these things as I do, "That ain't my religion, but I wish them well none the less, and hope that positive outcomes are credited to me."

Worked at the end of the same runway, before they realized it was Ground Zero. Listened as a bizjet shifted into reverse thrust and ended up on a railroad embankment instead of my office.
 
Last edited:
What I don't get is why anyone gives enough of a flyin' ***** to even care.
Check your calendars, people.
It should say 2010.

Do not use alternate spelling to get around the auto-censor.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It doesn't matter to me, I wish I was bi-sexual; twice the pleasure of walking down the beach on a hot summers day.. But it does nag me a bit that Randi didn't come out of the closet before. Lots of homosexuals have taken the heat in the states for "coming out" - for ages - and Randi, as an oracle of truth and justice (ok, that may be too much), should've been foremost.. Shouldn't he? Or is it all about the money?!

Anyway, I haven't really read this forum for somewhat a year or so, so I'm sure I'm..

dead+horse.gif
 
The people who would care about JREF being gay are precisely the people most of the members wouldn't care for associating with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom