User Tag List

First 3111213141523 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 319

  1. #121
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    What's your authority for that statement?
    What's your authority to say that it isn't so?

    And for that fact, how can any one person be an authority over any one elses life? Authority, the right to rule or govern, master, slave... these are all human inventions.
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

  2. #122
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,530

    Smile Persuasion

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I typically don't engage you much on your comments publicly simply because (imo) you operate pretty rational from your initial assumptions.

    If I agreed with your assumption that the essence of marriage was the union of male and female, then I would agree with your conclusions as well.

    I just think your assumption is an arbitrary one, so I cannot agree with the exclusive conclusion you draw from it.
    I as wary of taking you to task as I am of taming a tiger. But it seems to me we make a fetish of assumptions and conclusions, when in fact we are engaging in persuasion. And in persuasion we have no interest in the logic of assumptions and conclusions, but rather we are interested in the plausible and the implausible.

    And it seems to me that the logic of assumptions and conclusions is implausible.

    Jane Austen didn't write,"Assumptions and Conclusions", she wrote, "Persuasion", and it was her last word.

  3. #123
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Wow. I can't believe you just stepped right in and admitted that your entire stance is based on your personal religious beliefs, which means it's essentially your opinion and not actually a "natural right" of any sort. It's only got as much weight as anyone else's beliefs of what a "natural right" should be -- to whit, that some believe marriage for anyone of any gender is a "natural right." Why is your definition of "natural right" more trustworthy than theirs?

    I think I also explained elsewhere that homosexual instinctive seems built right into various species' natural conduct.
    If there is a law of nature here in your post, it's one of religious origin and not one of observational origin.


    To the bold: agreed... look anywhere in nature, and you'll often find a homosexual tendency. Even most heterosexuals will at some point in time have a homosexual moment. They may not always act on it... but will typically consider it at some point in time, or find their self with a strong attraction to a same sex member, or have a fantasy at some point in time about a same sex member. It's only natural.
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

  4. #124
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,805

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Wow. I can't believe you just stepped right in and admitted that your entire stance is based on your personal religious beliefs, which means it's essentially your opinion and not actually a "natural right" of any sort.
    How in the world does my opinion count for less when I say that there is an ultimate authority to appeal to?
    How do my religious beliefs fundamentally differ from any other type of bias that everyone in this conversation has?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    It's only got as much weight as anyone else's beliefs of what a "natural right" should be -- to whit, that some believe marriage for anyone of any gender is a "natural right." Why is your definition of "natural right" more trustworthy than theirs?
    What does add weight to a belief or make it trustworthy?


    Quote Originally Posted by IndyAnnaJoan View Post
    So, basically you're telling me that you believe that homosexuality is deviant behavior?

    Science has shown that this is not so... homosexuals are born gay. God created these people, then, right? Just the way they are?
    There are plenty of behaviors that people might be born with an inclination to do or not to do. That doesn't mean the government should sanction that behavior.


    Quote Originally Posted by IndyAnnaJoan View Post
    What's your authority to say that it isn't so?
    You're the one setting forth the proposition. The burden is on you.

    Quote Originally Posted by IndyAnnaJoan View Post
    And for that fact, how can any one person be an authority over any one elses life? Authority, the right to rule or govern, master, slave... these are all human inventions.
    So you're an anarchist?
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  5. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arclight View Post
    OK, I will say it again.. I live in a society where gay marriage is legal.. I live in Ontario Canada.. please look it up if you don't know what I am talking about.
    Legal does not mean fully accepted.
    The status here, has been reached.. But If I try to organize my heterosexual pride parade.. I'll meet seriously stiff resistance, and will most likely be stopped.
    I don't think you het pride parade would get stopped. But it would look silly since it would consist of average everyday people that you already see on the streets.
    This is my "logical" argument against gay marriage in a society where gay marriage is legal..
    Because it seems to want to keep it's "special" status even once it has achieved equality.
    So they have to choose between legalized marriage and the right to hold a parade?

    OH???? They are only identifiable in most cases, because they draw attention to it by proclaiming their homosexuality.
    They are the ones who single themselves out , not the majority.
    Two guys kissing in public would not be identifiable as gay?

    NO I am not comparing homosexuality to violent crimes..
    You said exposing someone to something makes them more likely to accept it..
    I Proved beyond a doubt what nonsense that is..
    The point was that being expose to something innocuous would lead to acceptance because it can be seen that there are no bad consequences. You cannot say the same for crime. The more you are exposed to it, the more unpleasant it gets. Isn't it obvious?

  6. #126
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arclight
    even when equal status is achieved, gays still want to be considered a "culture" and different, based on nothing more than sexuality.
    Which is fine.. accept then if sexuality defines a culture, and a culture deserves special rights.
    Then the culture of heterosexuality was violated in the name of equal rights for homosexuality.
    It's hypocrisy.
    i agree that cultures don't deserve special legal rights.

    attempt below to argue against your point logically

    my question to your original argument is, does it make sense to forbid equal marriage rights to prevent pressing for additional rights? because it seems like a projective argument - an argument based off the projection that if any society bestows equal marriage rights, then queer people will believe they are entitled to special rights... but allowing one right does not automatically allow others. if there are excesses in terms of special rights in other areas, those should be cut, but that does not mean gay marriage itself is unfair.

    like this:

    gay rights


    in other words - the blue situation does not logically entail the orange situation.
    Last edited by skylights; 01-23-2011 at 10:36 PM. Reason: paint = easier than dealing with whitespace lol

  7. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,278

    Default

    How can any one person be an authority over any one elses life? Authority, the right to rule or govern, master, slave... these are all human inventions.
    Look what happens when authority breaks down.
    They are human inventions all right. Are you suggesting they exist on a whim?
    If necessity is the mother of invention, then humans invented these things out of a necessity.

    In fact you support the use of authority when it suits your cause..

    Which further explains my whole point.. Gays have used authority to obtain their means.. They have forced people to accept them.. By using legal means.. Which is exactly the behavior they were apparently fighting against. It's still systematic force fed morality.
    They have become the MAN!!! The MAN they say they hate..
    At least in this Country.

  8. #128
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arclight View Post
    Which further explains my whole point.. Gays have used authority to obtain their means.. They have forced people to accept them.. By using legal means.. Which is exactly the behavior they were apparently fighting against. It's still systematic force fed morality.
    Rly? You're really making arguments like this?

    And what are your alternatives to going through the system legally?

    The only two I can think of are:

    1. Violence and bloodshed (a la American Civil War, which started as a fight against secession but also had black liberation piggybacking on it)
    2. Leaving everything just the way it is, and minorities who are repressed by the system have no recourse

    A third option is using oratory and long-term attitude shifts and proper living to get people on your side, but that's such a passive approach that it takes a very long time and meanwhile does nothing to make the majority rethink their position. I would say blacks and women both used this third method to make changes occur, but it was accompanied by civil disobedience and working the legal system (which you're bitching about here) to get changes made against the will of some constituents.

    I would say also that gays have definitely used their third method in the US, just like blacks and women, to effect policy change on their behalf, since the early 70's -- it's a two-pronged effort, where continued positive exposure to gay citizens have won over increasing amounts of fellow citizens, plus legislated policies have created forcefully an equal playing field.

    I just find it kind of amazing that you are criticizing a process that has been used legitimately by other demographics for decades or centuries in countries all around the world... and not leaving much in lieu of that process except for violent uprising OR allowing the majority to restrict minorities. Just.... wow. Did I miss another method here?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  9. #129
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    You're the one setting forth the proposition. The burden is on you.



    So you're an anarchist?
    My point is that no one has any right to govern another human being. No, I'm not an anarchist, as I do believe government has it's place. However, I believe that place is to govern between human interactions, to discourage humans from corruption and to protect from harm. I don't think it is the governments place to allow one group a set of rights and yet hold them from another. I believe every human being deserves an equal right to happiness, and I don't believe that anyone has the right to keep that from being made possible.
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

  10. #130
    Senior Member Shimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    SEXY
    Posts
    1,868

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mkenya View Post
    Maybe...
    Homosexuality is biologically counter productive.
    So is monogamy/marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by perfectgirl View Post
    So, I'll refrain and simply state that gay marriage is illegal for a logical reason.

    -end of thread-
    I don't really want to go into a discussion on this subject since, as stated before, I don't support the concept of marriage at all, but I would like to point out that saying something happens for a logical reason is not in fact an arguement. Also, there are quite a few countries where same-sex marriages are legal.

    Quote Originally Posted by guesswho View Post
    You'll never get an entirely logical argument against gay marriage? Seriously?

    Here is a logical argument:
    2 men get married...

    ...does not want that.

    Of course this operates on the premise that after gay marriage will be OK, the next thing on the list will be gay adoption.

    I'm just saying I wouldn't want to have 2 dads, would you want that?
    Again, this is not a logical arguement. You did just state that YOU don't want two dads, but that's not what I'd call logic.
    (removed)

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTP] The Limits of Awesomeness (alternatively, Common ENTP Issues)
    By Qre:us in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-09-2011, 10:23 AM
  2. The issues of fatherlessness.
    By guesswho in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 07-02-2011, 12:40 AM
  3. 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
  4. So what's really the big deal about Gay marriage?
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 222
    Last Post: 12-19-2008, 12:06 PM
  5. Gay marriage, adoption, related issues -- Take 2
    By Zergling in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-10-2008, 01:10 PM

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