05-14-2012, 03:25 PM | #26 | |
Volcano Badge
|
short and sweet because I'm not getting involved that much.
yes, gay marriage should be legalized and they should get the same, full 100% equal rights that heterosexual marriages get, ect. I don't really feel like yet another bitchfest with unownmew, but... Quote:
1. Society seems to have moved far, far away from this being termed acceptable, even with the "reduction" of morals you appear to have claimed throughout history. So the Greeks/Romans thought this was ok, well times changed since then. 2. Where's the evidence? I mean, it appears that notable groups, such as the Catholic Church for one, are trying to protect those pedophiles in their midst, instead of fixing the problem, and secondly, I don't know about you, but I don't think that pedophillia's increased bcos some states have legalized gay marriage. 3. Once again, how do we know that what you consider as "degrading morals" are actually reforms to the majority of the population. 4. since when has the church been the legal authority of all matters in the United States? I ask this because of the fact that it isn't the 1600's, the pope/other religious authority doesn't have total control over our politics (no matter how much the GOP tries to insert religion into politics), so why should the church be the deciding factor for blocking a certain part of the populaiton from the same rights as everyone else? It's stupid things like this that make me regret my own religion sometimes 5- last question. If God created everyone and everything then that would mean that he created GLBTQ people as well. Wouldn't that mean, since one of the most important ways to be obedient and to be a true worshiper of his teachings is to love your neighbor as yourself. So aren't you disobeying God's word by extending this hatred towards gay people. also, to pre-empt the other claims of "god made sodomy/gay sex a sin that's equal to death"- that's the old testament, not the new testament- the way that the bible's been interpreted in most circles now is more towards the new testament than the old. |
|
05-14-2012, 05:00 PM | #27 | |||||
Banned
|
Quote:
So you support any length of period, however short it may be, of future history where Pedophilia is an accepted practice? Quote:
And by "down the road" I'm talking 2-3 generations, not 1-2 years. Things are still in their infancy, it is foolhardy to consider the current situation as evident to anything in the future when it comes to full fruition. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Loving your neighbor as yourself means to respect them as a fellow human, Which I try to do. Hate the Sin, love the Sinner. But that does not mean we facilitate the sin either. Not recognizing same-sex marriage legally does in no way disrespect a homosexual as a human. Think of it this way: If A = B and B = C, then must not A = C? Legally recognizing a marriage of a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, as the same as a marriage between a man and a woman, creates an environment where men and woman are no longer legally and socially different entities. In a society as such we are, where there are so many sue happy people trying to shape society, such a lack of legal separation will create a platform where all social and legal differences we currently have in society between men and woman can be systematically eliminated under a reasonable premise. No more separate bathrooms for men and woman, woman open to be drafted in the army, employers won't be able to hire out positions to females only (Men will be able to be Hooter's Girls), sexual harassment will diminish in seriousness, rape of a woman/girl no different then rape of a male/boy, etc. etc. Woman are not the same as Men, marriage must remain legally recognizing only a male and a female. But no one is denying Gays the ability to have legal unions, which are not recognized as marriages. |
|||||
05-14-2012, 06:50 PM | #28 | ||||||||
Volcano Badge
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
so which one is it? Did god, for some unknown reason create a people he decided to destroy for no reason after Sodom and Gomorrah, and or changed his mind about? or does god not exist and most current scientists are correct and some people are genetically determined to be gay? Quote:
Since when have men and women been determined as different legal groups? are we back in the days where women have to sign over all of their property to their husband when they are married? or they can't vote? or is it that they need to stay in the kitchen? tell me dude, how far back are we in history, because this can't be 2012? secondly, some states have already legalized gay marriage, and so have other countries- where is this troubling environment? Quote:
really? REALLY? Where in the fuck did anything that I or anyone else say, lead to this inane babble you mention in this original paragraph. Where does the support of gay marriage, or equal protections/rights for all citizens lead to uni-sex bathrooms, I mean, we've had plenty of civil rights legislation, and they still seperate bathrooms. What's wrong with drafting women into the army as well? the US army already accepts women who sign up voluntarily, why not go the next step. and please, please tell me how decreasing job discrimination is a bad thing? Also, I don't know about you but sexual assault, I feel would actually be taken far more seriously if there were more legislation, or at least acknowledgements in terms of equality for straight people/LGBTQ people, or even men/women. Also, how does a world that I support lead to everyone thinking that rape/assault is ok, or less of a horrific thing than now- I mean, even if this is supposedly not taken care of now, it's very obvious that in earlier times, even less would have been done in these circumstances because people did not care about it as much as they do now. then again, you apparently want to go back to the good ol' days where women stayed in the kitchen, the negroes weren't considered people, and being homosexual was a disease you could beat out of a kid or send them to a camp to. Is it true? I don't know, I'll expect some sort of angry retort that you will deny wanting society to look like that, but everything that I've heard from you in this and the other thread doesn't suggest anything different. Quote:
...damn it, I lied to myself. |
||||||||
05-14-2012, 07:43 PM | #30 |
Volcano Badge
|
...so i'm not the only one noticing that, though I'm kind of guilty of falling for that more than once as well.
|
05-14-2012, 09:04 PM | #31 | |||
Banned
|
Quote:
I'm not the one arguing to change anything, it's already clear that if we keep the status quo, the same society that exists today will exist tomorrow (tomorrow being generations down the road). you want to change the status quo, so You prove that the change will be beneficial and worth aiming towards. And this is what makes me conservative, because I want to know beforehand if the changes made to society will effect it for the better before we make them. Liberals just want to charge right in without thinking it through. [Spoilered for Brevity] Spoiler: show [no need to respond to the spoilered part, I summarized the main points below.] Key point, the "God made us Gay" Argument: You said God created everyone the way they are, sexuality and orientation included, and also gave them the agency to choose. You're absolutely right. He gave both gays and straights to ability to choose to deny their sexuality or not, to overcome it, or give in to it. He also gave both gays and straights a list of commandments to follow, and unless new revelation from God countermands what he's said previously, what he's said still stands. If you're going to pull this argument, you need to understand that God placed us on Earth in order to learn and grown to strive to become perfect beings. Each person is given a specifically tailored set of challenges, strengths and weaknesses, that they need to overcome. For some, it may be pedophilia, for others, it may be homosexuality, for still others, it may be obsession with sex-gay or straight, or drugs, or a particularly difficult household to grow up in. It is then our responsibility to overcome our challenges and trials, and obey the commandments we are given as best we can. For gay and straight people. As for your other questions, how about you do some critical thinking of your own, and tell me why your world can NOT end up the way I described. I can keep telling you and explaining myself why it does, but when I'm not listened to, it grows quite tiring, so, if you really want the answer, you can do the work, since you're not listening to me. Quote:
Quote:
Just stop telling me equality means fairness, and human rights means government benefits. Please! Because they do not!! Last edited by unownmew; 05-14-2012 at 09:26 PM. |
|||
05-14-2012, 10:24 PM | #33 |
beebooboobopbooboobop
|
I'm pretty sure every civilization in history has failed, you can't just say that about religious civilizations.
__________________
|
05-14-2012, 10:26 PM | #34 |
Foot, meet mouth.
|
Exactly my point. Unownmew seems to be saying that gay marriage will take us on a slippery slope and we will lose morals because blah blah blah blah blah it happened in history. At least that's what I think he's saying because he seems to be a politician with his words.
__________________
Spoiler: show Last edited by Rangeet; 05-14-2012 at 10:32 PM. |
05-15-2012, 05:10 AM | #35 | ||
我が名は勇者王!
|
Knock off the tangential discussion, there's another topic for it.
Quote:
Granted, not all states are as legally progressive as California, although I'm optimistic even Texas will come around some day. Quote:
This is why I wanted the debate to first start off with definitions, because if not the issue becomes there are effectively three controversies under the "gay marriage" umbrella - A. Is marriage only between a man and a woman? B. If (A) is true, should civil unions/domestic partnerships be legalized/recognized? C. If yes to (B), should same-sex couples be awarded the same legal benefits of married couples? -but the rebuttals to each are subtly different and do not always cross apply.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
||
05-15-2012, 08:25 AM | #36 |
Dominator of Bike Levels
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,321
|
This is why we are best buds.
__________________
The Kim Il Sung of ASB. |
05-15-2012, 02:35 PM | #37 |
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
unownmew, if gay marriage is legalized, then the AIDS rate will go down with the premarital sex rate. Are you pro-STI?
(I typed up a really long post and then lost it but this is the best point I can remember)
__________________
|
05-15-2012, 04:42 PM | #38 |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
In truth, I am trying to stay as far away from the debate thread as possible, but, I do have to say some beliefs of mine that have practical meaning here:
1. Religion should have no say in politics, not should it have influence in the law making process. 2. Christians do NOT have a monopoly on morals or marriage. 3. Your religion is just as likely to be wrong as the next guys, we just don't know. So, don't parade your religion as a means to try and combat the marriage of two same sex members. 4. Same-sex marriages do no harm to society or too other people. It is just perceived that way because of the prevelance of Christians in our society. 5. A person should not be viewed as "inferior", or "deeply wrong(morally)" just because they are gay. Last time I remember, there were no gay serial killers were there? 6. There is no proof that marriage between a man and a woman is more "right" than same sex marriage EXCEPT IN BIASED RELIGIOUS TEXTS. THIS INCLUDES THE BIBLE!" 7. In the words of my friend Sam(a fellow Athiest), "It's hilarious how in the Bible that their is only like three or four things that say anything about gays, but easily five or six times more that say to love your neighor." "Hating the sin, not the sinner" is one of the most stupid things I have ever seen. Because if you hate the sin, you hate the sinner as well. 8. We don't know that same-sex marriage is a "universal sin", or one that is traditionally disliked by all religions and cultures. Like murder is. My points are done.
__________________
|
05-15-2012, 04:58 PM | #39 | |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
05-15-2012, 07:33 PM | #40 | |||||||||
Banned
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
See two can play at that game, so I'd suggest you not start it. Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by unownmew; 05-15-2012 at 07:44 PM. |
|||||||||
05-15-2012, 09:26 PM | #41 | |
Dominator of Bike Levels
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,321
|
Quote:
Sorry for the topic derailment, but I thought it was interesting to think about. |
|
05-16-2012, 06:12 AM | #42 | |||||
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The point of the quote you so brilliantly denied is actually one of the core tenets of Christianity. You seem to be unable to grasp this, so I will provide analogical aids. If your best friend is a terrific douche one day, does something stupid, but feels ashamed that it happened and works actively to prevent it happening again, should you hate him? Will you continually and always define him by the mistakes that he makes, the sins that he commits, and the immoral actions he has done? Of course not. This is just a tiny fraction of all that the quote represents. To love the sinner and to hate the sin are two entirely different concepts that have been blended together and often confused due to their linguistic similarity. Quote:
Meh, can't say any more. I'm hungry and my word quota for this post is almost full. In fact, the
__________________
|
|||||
05-16-2012, 06:14 AM | #43 | |
Foot, meet mouth.
|
Quote:
Also, the word quota is far, far, FAR more than that.
__________________
Spoiler: show |
|
05-16-2012, 07:08 AM | #44 |
我が名は勇者王!
|
Strawman.
Shuckle was talking about sex and didn't mention marriage at all, because blaze was implying that marriage has no inherent sex bias. Seeing as marriage is a human institution that evolved out of mating pairs, that inference is both wrong and irrelevant. I'm going to stop here, but as a warning, everyone needs to agree on the same definition of marriage. I can't stress this enough. If we use the definition I proposed earlier, Rangeet has no reason to post, because the question proposed answers itself. blaze doesn't make a wild claim. Using a definition, any mutually agreed upon definition doesn't lock out argumentation, and instead focuses the debate and makes it easier to follow. We're moving away from that. Again.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
05-16-2012, 07:12 AM | #46 | |
Marsh Badge
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,736
|
Quote:
The following is just a little rant, it is not that necessary to read. Spoiler: show Also everything Jeri said.
__________________
Fizzy Bubbles: Karmas
|
|
05-16-2012, 03:09 PM | #47 | |
Banned
|
Quote:
|
|
05-16-2012, 04:03 PM | #48 |
プラスチック♡ラブ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
|
>I eat breakfast, not gay eat breakfast.
I don't know what you're talking about; my breakfasts are pretty gay. *shot x100* To stay on topic, the other half of the Vlogbrothers, John Green, counters most of unownmew's points: Boy I love it when I don't have to do the work.
__________________
Last edited by Jerichi; 05-16-2012 at 04:31 PM. |
05-16-2012, 05:04 PM | #49 |
Banned
|
Ah, but Jerichi, you still have to defend it. You can't just unload a slew of debate points and then expect them to stick without defending their merit.
King Solomon's marriage habits were most certainly untraditional- compared to what all the other Israelites practiced as tradition at the time, so it's pointless to use such an example. The problem with legalizing same-sex marriage, is, you in turn mess up the legal definitions of Male and Female and make them the exact same entity, opening up the potential legal basis to rule in favor of a slew of crazy lawsuits like whether or not a man can force Hooter's to hire him as a Hooter's Girl, where they specifically hire only females for that position- for a reason. Furthermore, if we're going to talk about legal injustice and discrimination,same-sex marriage opens up a legal pathway to Sue-FORCE churches to accept and perform same-sex marriages against their beliefs and conscience, under the guise of "preventing discrimination" or "ensuring 'equal' 'rights.'" Frankly the only meaningful argument I heard there, was regarding Hermaphrodites. Whom I think have a MUCH MUCH greater claim to injustice than a gay ever could. As for what to do about it, I have no idea- save, allowing them the ability to pick their gender and marry from the opposite. Anyway, Dopple wants us to agree on a definition of marriage. Unfortunately, I think that's what the whole problem is here: neither side wants to accept the other's definitions. Those in favor of keeping the status quo, want to keep the definition as what it's meant legally since early times, while the proponents want to radically change the definition to fit their own, ideas, which really are quite divergent from societal norms. In order words, they want to pervert or adulterate what is considered "fact" to suit their needs. Last edited by unownmew; 05-16-2012 at 05:20 PM. |
05-16-2012, 05:32 PM | #50 | |
Aroma Lady
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,760
|
Quote:
Note that I do agree that gay's should have equal rights I also believe that the church should have the right to refuse gay marriage in front of God, even if it's pretty stupid as people just leave the church altogether with that attitude. (I'm an agnostian btw) |
|
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|