Judge Amy Barrett Confirmation Hearings

[Dan Fienen]

There are several aspects to this "sexual preference" dust-up. There is an ongoing dispute on the etiology and nature of sexual orientation. This is reflected in the preferred terminology and the change in terminology. Courtesy and respect would suggest using the terminology regarding people that they prefer. It would also suggest giving people due warning when changing terminology to allow people to adjust their language. To be offended when people are caught unawares by a change in language is not reasonable.


The abrupt language change and high dudgeon at the use of the "wrong" terminology is perhaps more of a political ploy to create offense rather than a simple call for respect.   

[Steven W Bohler]

Jebutler:
Why was it OK three weeks ago but offensive yesterday?

Me:
Because understanding changes and uses of words Change. Sometimes they change faster than at other times. There are lots of words which, Not too long ago, were inoffensive. But now they are.
And by the way, there's no law that says you can't use these  anyway you want to use them. You just have to consider how they will be heard. Or you don't have to consider how they will be heard. It's your call.
Personally, I would not go to the barricades on either side of the "sexual preference" dust-up. I'll use whatever words I think will make me best understood by the largest numbers of people. There are bigger issues.
If your personal ideology, your sense of morality or your faith would collapse in a pile of rubble if you could not use the term "sexual preference," then keep using those words. And then worry a little about the strength of your sense of morality or your faith.

Yes, sometimes they change faster -- like as soon as someone wants to manufacture a sense of being offended, abused, and/or persecuted.  And people like you will excuse and accept it, as long as it scores points for "your" side.

[Donald_Kirchner]

The abrupt language change and high dudgeon at the use of the "wrong" terminology is perhaps more of a political ploy to create offense rather than a simple call for respect.

Ya think?!

[Tom Eckstein]

LGBT folks are offended by the use of the word "preference." It says that an LGBT "prefers" to relate to someone of their own gender. It isn't something like leaning one way or the other. It is a fact that there is no either/or. So, did most of you folks make it a "preference" that you live your life as a straight person? When Senator Hirono brought it up with Justice Barrett, she apologized for using the word incorrectly and did not mean to offend LGBT people.

No one suggests that people simply choose to have same-sex attraction as though they are simply flipping a switch.  But the fact is that we all have a multitude of sinful desires that we did not choose to have.  However, we DO choose to affirm those sinful desires and we DO choose to act on those sinful desires.  So, the mere fact that one does not choose to have same-sex attraction does not make that attraction morally neutral much less a moral good anymore than heterosexual desire for someone who is not your spouse is morally neutral much less morally good.

[Jim Butler]

Jebutler:
Why was it OK three weeks ago but offensive yesterday?

Me:
Because understanding changes and uses of words Change. Sometimes they change faster than at other times. There are lots of words which, Not too long ago, were inoffensive. But now they are.

In general, I agree with your argument.

But not in this case. Three weeks ago, a LBGTQ advocate, writing in an LBGTQ magazine, used the term "sexual preference." Yesterday, a Supreme Court nominee used the same term and it became cause célèbre. Sorry, language doesn't change *that* quickly.

But you are cute when you try to make ludicrous arguments.

If your personal ideology, your sense of morality or your faith would collapse in a pile of rubble if you could not use the term "sexual preference," then keep using those words. And then worry a little about the strength of your sense of morality or your faith.

Sorry, this won't work. This became a problem for people on the Democratic side of the aisle. Three weeks ago, a LBGTQ publication used the term "sexual preferences" and it wasn't an issue. Candidate Biden used the "sexual preference" and it wasn't an issue. The question is why now, all of sudden, it is an issue, to the extent that Merriam-Webster saw fit to change the definition of the phrase literally overnight.

It's silliness like this that gave us Donald Trump as president. People simply got tired of rules changing in the middle of the game and made to feel bad for absolutely no reason at all. One of the things they liked about the Donald was that he fought back against it.

It's because of silliness like this, and, frankly, your consistent defense of such silliness, that I have seriously been reconsidering my earlier decision not to vote for a president this year in favor of voting for His Trumpness. I do not like how he acts, but I'm thinking its what certain people deserve. If I do end up voting for him, I will give you full credit for pushing me in that direction.

[peter_speckhard]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6-mJpqTqSw

For anyone who missed it and who is depressed about this interminable election season, I can almost guarantee that watching this video of Ben Sasse and Amy Barrett will be the most informative, uplifting, and faith-in-America-and-humanity-restoring 20 minutes of your day. As an English major (like Barrett), I especially appreciate the ease with which they use exact vocabulary in complex sentences and organized paragraphs while speaking off the cuff. Barrett doesn't speak nearly as much as Sasse in this video, but the questioning from Dick Durbin, in which she tries unsuccessfully not to make him look like a comparative ignoramus, showcases her command of the principles, context, facts, and language. It is simply not possible to picture Trump and Biden interacting at their level.

[readselerttoo]

LGBT folks are offended by the use of the word "preference." It says that an LGBT "prefers" to relate to someone of their own gender. It isn't something like leaning one way or the other. It is a fact that there is no either/or. So, did most of you folks make it a "preference" that you live your life as a straight person? When Senator Hirono brought it up with Justice Barrett, she apologized for using the word incorrectly and did not mean to offend LGBT people.

Many gay men and lesbians have biological children of their own. They have sex with members of the opposite sex quite commonly; many have even been married to members of the opposite sex. People are CAPABLE of having sex with anyone, but PREFER to have sex according to how they understand their sexual orientation. Thus, sexual preference is a perfectly adequate way of describing sexual orientation.

The people who dominate others by threatening to feel offended are simply trying to force everyone to think in their categories.

Thank you for these words.  Refreshingly simple and to the point, imo.

[Julio]

Multiple senators commented in amazement on the fact that the judge had no notes and made no notes. Regardless of the above negativity, the Judge is a bright star 🌟 in the country's future.

It is rather difficult to understand how commending the Judge as was done above results in the following condescending, disrespectful and downright degrading response.  One would hope that the forum standards require and expect better than this ...

I'll say it again with some embellishment hoping that it will calm things down here and maybe prevent people from overreacting and desiring to read stupid things into my comments. {bold added}

Please identify the stupid comment ... or was there just an insatiable desire to use stupid in a post today?

[Charles Austin]

Pastor Bohler:
Yes, sometimes they change faster -- like as soon as someone wants to manufacture a sense of being offended, abused, and/or persecuted.  And people like you will excuse and accept it, as long as it scores points for "your" side.

I comment:
You have made the great "leap-to-conclusion-because-it-supports-my-view" plunge, propelled by the "plus-it-gives-me-a-chance-to-fire-a-shot" fuel again.
Read what I said. I do not have a pony in the "shall we say sexual preference" derby. I personally think saying "sexual preference" has been a workable way to refer to sets of people. Those who say their ears burn with the "preference" word are, in my not-so-humble-opinion, offbeat and looking for a reason to be hurt.
OTOH whose ox is gored if we set aside the "sexual preference" phrase? Not mine.
Would your world or your sense of GREAT MOMENT, Pastor Butler, quiver if you would use some other phrase than "sexual preference"? 
And if a group - presently somewhat inconsistently - took offense, would you, at least in some circles, consider other terminology? Or is it "I'M saying 'sexual preference' and that's the end of it!"
P.S. and TMI, I'm sure but...
My own sexual preference is boringly oriented towards normal heterosexual and conventional marriage. But I have sometimes wondered why many of the women I have seen or met whom I consider incredibly sexy meet hardly any of the conventional magazine-cover, glamor girl, breathy movie star "standards."

[Tom Eckstein]

LGBT folks are offended by the use of the word "preference." It says that an LGBT "prefers" to relate to someone of their own gender. It isn't something like leaning one way or the other. It is a fact that there is no either/or. So, did most of you folks make it a "preference" that you live your life as a straight person? When Senator Hirono brought it up with Justice Barrett, she apologized for using the word incorrectly and did not mean to offend LGBT people.

Many gay men and lesbians have biological children of their own. They have sex with members of the opposite sex quite commonly; many have even been married to members of the opposite sex. People are CAPABLE of having sex with anyone, but PREFER to have sex according to how they understand their sexual orientation. Thus, sexual preference is a perfectly adequate way of describing sexual orientation.

The people who dominate others by threatening to feel offended are simply trying to force everyone to think in their categories.

Many years ago I was visiting with a man who had left his wife and 3 children for a gay relationship.  After I attempted to speak God's truth in love to him about his sin, his response was:  "But I'm gay!  I can't function in any other way!"  I then said:  "But you were married to a woman for several years and fathered three children."  After pausing a few seconds, he then said:  "OK.  I PREFER to have sex with men!"

[Brian Stoffregen]

Myers-Briggs Type Theory uses "preference" as their preferred way of talking about a person preferring one type (i.e., a group of typical behaviors) over the other, e.g., Extroversion over Introversion. However, it also assumes that a person is born with those preferences - like being right-handed or left-handed. A right-handed person prefers to right with his right hand. It doesn't mean he can't do it with his left hand (it usually takes longer and is not as exact). We don't make a conscious choice to favor one hand over the other. It's a part of who we are.

[Dan Fienen]

Seems tome that we have two issues here.


One is over whether proper usage has shifted away from "sexual preference" and if so why. Seems to me foolish to choose word use as the battlefield for wrangling over the etiology and nature of sexual orientation. Whatever we agree to call it does not affect its nature and wrangling over it diverts attention from that question. It is a kind of word magic, I make it to be what I believe it to be by getting everybody to call it by the name I choose. Personally, out of respect for the people involved, I'm quite willing to use their preferred locution du jour for themselves be a useful that does not change my beliefs or opinions no matter what logomancy is attempted.

The other issue is the convenient abruptness of this change effected just in time to render ACB's word usage offensive. Raises the suspicion that this is not about courtesy and respect for a group of people and honoring their dignity, but attacking an opponent with gotcha games.

[RogerMartim]

So far not one of you have said, "My sexual preference is to be straight." Think about that for a moment.

Pastor Speckhard, I cannot believe that you are that dense. Of course Gay people get married, engage in heterosexual sex but societal pressure is always the overriding concern that these people have and they do not act to their true selves. I'm 72 years old and from a very early age I have had the prescience to know that getting married and having children were not in the cards for me. I have seen so many Gay people get married and have families. They are the unhappiest group of people around with a big, big secret. And some can no longer handle it and separate from their wives and families to start a new life thus devastating those left behind.

If it were that simple, why don't straight people flip the switch since it is so easy.

[peter_speckhard]

So far not one of you have said, "My sexual preference is to be straight." Think about that for a moment.

Pastor Speckhard, I cannot believe that you are that dense. Of course Gay people get married, engage in heterosexual sex but societal pressure is always the overriding concern that these people have and they do not act to their true selves. I'm 72 years old and from a very early age I have had the prescience to know that getting married and having children were not in the cards for me. I have seen so many Gay people get married and have families. They are the unhappiest group of people around with a big, big secret. And some can no longer handle it and separate from their wives and families to start a new life thus devastating those left behind.

If it were that simple, why don't straight people flip the switch since it is so easy.

Nowhere was it said or implied that changing one's preferences, sexual or otherwise, is easy as flipping a switch. "Sexual preference" doesn't mean that. The point is that language police push an agenda by making speech a matter of virtue signaling. The most up-to-the-minute terminology serves no real purpose other than to distinguish the people who are really on board with progressivism from those who are merely going along with it to avoid conflict.

There was zero reason to correct Judge Barrett. There was not even real offense taken, as it evidenced by the lack of a rebuke even in recent days and weeks when other people used that term. It was purely a power play, to make the point that Judge Barrett is not a true believer, a fellow traveler with the Left.   

[David Garner]

So far not one of you have said, "My sexual preference is to be straight." Think about that for a moment.

Pastor Speckhard, I cannot believe that you are that dense. Of course Gay people get married, engage in heterosexual sex but societal pressure is always the overriding concern that these people have and they do not act to their true selves. I'm 72 years old and from a very early age I have had the prescience to know that getting married and having children were not in the cards for me. I have seen so many Gay people get married and have families. They are the unhappiest group of people around with a big, big secret. And some can no longer handle it and separate from their wives and families to start a new life thus devastating those left behind.

If it were that simple, why don't straight people flip the switch since it is so easy.

Nowhere was it said or implied that changing one's preferences, sexual or otherwise, is easy as flipping a switch. "Sexual preference" doesn't mean that. The point is that language police push an agenda by making speech a matter of virtue signaling. The most up-to-the-minute terminology serves no real purpose other than to distinguish the people who are really on board with progressivism from those who are merely going along with it to avoid conflict.

There was zero reason to correct Judge Barrett. There was not even real offense taken, as it evidenced by the lack of a rebuke even in recent days and weeks when other people used that term. It was purely a power play, to make the point that Judge Barrett is not a true believer, a fellow traveler with the Left.

This is why "virtue signaling" is a term in modern parlance.