User Tag List

First 67891018 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 223

  1. #71
    Mamma said knock you out Mempy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,226

    Default

    The serious argument behind all this is just why is there so much emotion put behind this issue. Yes I can understand why Gays do so, but what about non-gays?
    I don't know why I get so impassioned about this issue. I'm a gay rights and gay marriage supporter, and I admit it's a pet peeve of mine. I just find it ridiculous how anyone could be against gay marriage, I truly do. Aside from the religious conviction that God opposes homosexuality, I can't see what anyone sees wrong with it. People who believe that God thinks homosexuality is a sin, to them I ask: do you think God made them that way? Why would He make them that way, and impose such a burden on them, forcing them to live a life of celibacy or to have sex with someone they were not sexually attracted to? I'm sure there are a million and one logical ways a religious person could explain this, but not being religious myself, I just don't buy into it.

    I believe there is NOTHING wrong with it. I'm not a believer in God. And I just get so pissed that these people can be denied the rights that straight people have. To me, it would seem they have been forsaken by God, if there is one, because God made them that way and expects them to suffer much more than heterosexual people. I don't buy into that. Nup.

    And for all the reasons 010 posted, I passionately support them in their efforts to be treated equally in the eyes of the law. Even if people think it is religiously wrong, so what? SO. FUCKING. WHAT? You know what, marriage in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of God are two different things. Because of the separation of church and state, marriage in the eyes of the law should be completely separate from marriage in the eyes of God. I know that religious people put God before country, but nobody's forcing them to marry gays in their churches, and nobody's forcing them to recognize the marriage of gay people in the eyes of God.

    And another thing. Of all the freaking laws in the Bible that religious people support, why the one against homosexuality? Why that one, of ALL the absurd things in the Bible? Why don't religious people campaign to be able to have seven wives and campaign against people touching pig skin, or whatever other cooky things?

    So, in sum: Please recognize gay marriage in the eyes of the law, if not in the eyes of God. But furthermore, please recognize it in the eyes of God. Believing that gay people are not gay (that is, attracted to members of the same sex) by choice (i.e. God made them that way), I just don't understand why God would make them that way and then expect them not to act on their inborn desires. Makes no fricking sense to me. Also, why aren't you guys supporting any of the other insane laws in the Bible? WHYYYY?!

    /
    They're running just like you
    For you, and I, wooo
    So people, people, need some good ol' love

  2. #72
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    Because it highlights the fatal inconsistency in your position. Unless you can prove that the two differ in relevant ways, you cannot simply nag others to refrain from using the argument.
    That goes contrary to the basic rules of logic; where the burden is on those who seek to make the analogy, they have to be able to show that it's a valid analogy.

    Nobody has bothered to come forward to show why that analogy is appropriate.

  3. #73
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    Public opinion isn't the grand arbitrator of values. It can be challenged.
    Well, of course it can. And it must, repeatedly, if it is to be influenced.

  4. #74
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mempy View Post
    And for all the reasons 010 posted, I passionately support them in their efforts to be treated equally in the eyes of the law. Even if people think it is religiously wrong, so what? SO. FUCKING. WHAT? You know what, marriage in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of God are two different things. Because of the separation of church and state, marriage in the eyes of the law should be completely separate from marriage in the eyes of God.
    I already brought up the viewpoint that law and religion are related, and this viewpoint was expressed the second most principal author of the American Constitution.

    I could also get into how many of the basic legal assumptions through which many here have argued in favor of gay marriage are at their roots secularised variations of religious concepts.

    Long story short: the notion that religion and law can ever be completely seperate is an illusion.

  5. #75
    Mamma said knock you out Mempy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,226

    Default

    I could also get into how many of the basic legal assumptions through which many here have argued in favor of gay marriage are at their roots secularised variations of religious concepts.
    I don't care where they started. How does where they originated have any bearing on ANYTHING? So which ones originated in religion, and what does them having originated in religion or originated in religious people's minds imply? That religion is the orginator of all that is good? No.

    Long story short: the notion that religion and law can ever be completely seperate is an illusion.
    I don't see how you've proven this. Nevertheless, I'm inclined to agree with you. Religion and law, both being made by people, can never be completely separate; they are influenced by each other. Intuitively, I know this. People who believe gay marriage is wrong are ultimately never going to support changes to the law that allow gays to marry. Not happenin'.

    Well, it will happen, trust me. It will. Not by your hands, Peguy, or the hands of people like you, but by the hands of people like me. As more and more people, raised like me, raised to believe homosexuality is wrong, interact with gays and come to befriend and love them and come to question why homosexuality is supposedly wrong, they will find no reason to believe it anymore; none that make sense. And they will change their minds and become like me and vote what they believe, and eventually gays will wed. So.

    /discussion
    They're running just like you
    For you, and I, wooo
    So people, people, need some good ol' love

  6. #76
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mempy View Post
    And another thing. Of all the freaking laws in the Bible that religious people support, why the one against homosexuality?
    I think this one is rather obvious. For those who aren't homosexual, the idea of homosexual sex can be revolting. Religion is just an excuse.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  7. #77
    Mamma said knock you out Mempy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    I think this one is rather obvious. For those who aren't homosexual, the idea of homosexual sex can be revolting. Religion is just an excuse.
    That's my theory as well.
    They're running just like you
    For you, and I, wooo
    So people, people, need some good ol' love

  8. #78
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mempy View Post
    How does where they originated have any bearing on ANYTHING?
    It has plenty to do with everything. You often have to go back to the origins in order to more fully understand a concept.

    So which ones originated in religion, and what does them having originated in religion or originated in religious people's minds imply?
    Well one example would be the general concept of the omnipotence of the law to decide on matters such as these is largely a legalistic twist to the concept of omnipotent deity.


    Well, it will happen, trust me. It will. Not by your hands, Peguy, or the hands of people like you, but by the hands of people like me. As more and more people, raised like me, raised to believe homosexuality is wrong, interact with gays and come to befriend and love them and come to question why homosexuality is supposedly wrong, they will find no reason to believe it anymore; none that make sense. And they will change their minds and become like me and vote what they believe, and eventually gays will wed. So.
    Thank you providing a perfect example of the type of rhetoric I find so irritating in discussions such as these.

    Let me explain: you basically try to protray the legalization of gay marriage as an inevitable unalterable fact that will occur whether one likes it or not.

    Which in effect means that any questioning of your premise is thus rendered a "practical impossibility", even though technically it remains a theoretical possibility.

    Thankfully history is a little bit more complex than that, and involves literally endless possibilities. So claiming history is simply on your side is just downright dishonest to perfectly frank.

    Although if you really wish to go there, two can play that game.

    Overall, the major concerns of pro-gay marriage movement are in many ways a luxury afforded by the current affluence of Western societies. Take that affluence away, and the whole structure from which the homosexual agenda depends upon will collaspe. And plenty of factors are undermining that basic structure as we speak.

    For one thing; we can simple talk about birth-rates. Liberal-minded people, due to the basic nature of their world-view, tend to have less children. And the last 50 years, in wake of the Sexual revolution, has seen a dramatic drop in birth-rates within the First World - which is why it's share of the world population has dropped from a height of 30% in 1900 to about 10% in 2000s.

    Of course the only people within the first world who are reproducing near a replacement level are more conservative-minded people. Hence that's why(along with other reasons) that Phillip Longman argues:
    Advanced societies are growing more patriarchal, whether they like it or not. In addition to the greater fertility of conservative segments of society, the rollback of the welfare state forced by population aging and decline will give these elements an additional survival advantage, and therefore spur even higher fertility. As governments hand back functions they once appropriated from the family, notably support in old age, people will find that they need more children to insure their golden years, and they will seek to bind their children to them through inculcating traditional religious values akin to the Bible's injunction to honor thy mother and father.

    Societies that are today the most secular and the most generous with their underfunded welfare states will be the most prone to religious revivals and a rebirth of the patriarchal family. The absolute population of Europe and Japan may fall dramatically, but the remaining population will, by a process similar to survival of the fittest, be adapted to a new environment in which no one can rely on government to replace the family, and in which a patriarchal God commands family members to suppress their individualism and submit to father.

    The Return of Patriarchy | The New America Foundation
    So yes we'll see which side history is really on.

  9. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Peguy, let's say we legalize gay marriage. Will any horrible, or even bad, things come of this?
    That depends on your definition of bad. I mean, let's face it aj, tolerating gay marriage for other people is a socially slippery slope! It could lead to total mayhem and anarchy. Remember Reefer Madness anyone!?

    On the flipside, I'd be free to romantically pursue seaweed and you could seek a common law marriage with your toaster.

    It could happen!
    "The purpose of life is to be defeated by greater and greater things." - Rainer Maria Rilke

  10. #80
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Continuning on my previous line of thought, I can also point to the research done by Colleen Carroll Campbell and others into how more and more young people today are actually embracing traditional religion:
    These new faithful, as I call them, are the children of the Baby Boomers a generation famous for its eclectic spiritual journeys, situational ethics, and deep distrust of tradition. Yet many of todays young adults are not embracing the hippie ethos of their parents generation. Instead, they are embracing traditional morality and religion. Their choice arises not from fear, ignorance, or nostalgia. It springs from an intense and abiding hunger for God, and a deep disillusionment with what they view as the God-substitutes of our post-modern culture.

    These young men and women have not seen too little of a secular, hedonistic society to understand its allure. They have seen too much to believe its promises. They have turned instead to an older promise, rooted in the traditions their parents rejected: the promise of a life guided by a transcendent vision and ordered by absolute truth....

    ....Still, the new faithful do not consider themselves throwbacks or traditionalists. They do not see their recovery of tradition as a return to the past, but as an investment in the future. They often blend elements of medieval and modern, ancient and new, in their worship and evangelization efforts. They chat about religion on the Internet, use e-mail, radio, and film to spread the faith, and stay current on American pop culture, even as they critically evaluate that culture through the eyes of faith. To paraphrase author Romano Guardini, these young believers do not see religion as a question of old things or new things, but as a question of things eternal.

    In matters of faith, todays young orthodox Christians often have more in common with their grandparents than with their parents....

    Reporting on the ‘new faithful’ in America

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-03-2013, 10:30 AM
  2. The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage
    By teslashock in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 04-12-2010, 02:51 PM
  3. whats the big deal about being me?
    By ThatGirl in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-09-2008, 07:46 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO