User Tag List

First 22303132

Results 311 to 319 of 319

  1. #311
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Torai View Post
    I've spent a lot of time thinking. I have not heard from anyone a truly logical argument against gay marriage. If we can't find a well-founded argument, what is the point of going against it? Isn't it just someone's stupid personal bias? Why should we fight against love for the sake of prejudice? I'm asking, can anyone give me a truly logical argument against gay marriage or is prosecuting it a really dumb thing to do?

    If you want to make an argument, you have to make it purely logical. No Bible-quoting. Also, no sweeping generalizations.

    Yeah, I know my demand for logic makes me sound like a T, but it's just wrong to make someone suffer for personal bias.
    One argument is that if you are ready to validate marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman, why are'nt we ready to validate marriage between men and pigs, women and horse or men and harmchair? Actually, marriage is an institution built to validate heterosexual unions and the families of the two different members of the union and the credibility of that institution must be protected. This is not about freedom, because if gay people want to get along together, to live together, to fuck together, etc, they are allowed to do this yet. Advocates of gay marriage actually to impose the pseudo legetimacy of gay marriage to the entire population, they are not really concerned about freedom, because gays are ever free, but not destruct societal norms and impose their own vision, because they pretend they are allowed to do this for irrationals and ideologicals means. This is not about equality anymore, because staight people can't marry with people of the same sex also.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  2. #312
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    let's have an istp heart to heart, speedy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    One argument is that if you are ready to validate marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman, why are'nt we ready to validate marriage between men and pigs, women and horse or men and harmchair?
    Well, because gay people are human, despite what you may have heard from the religious right. They are also capable of consenting.

    Actually, marriage is an institution built to validate heterosexual unions and the families of the two different members of the union and the credibility of that institution must be protected.
    Actually, marriage is an institution originally designed to validate men owning women which has now evolved into equal heterosexual partnerships - and is further evolving into including homosexual ones, in many civilized areas. Haven't you read this thread? Go read it.

    This is not about freedom, because if gay people want to get along together, to live together, to fuck together, etc, they are allowed to do this yet.
    The issue is that (in many places) they don't have rights like property ownership, government benefits, hospital benefits etc which are only given to married couples. Your argument is like saying "gay people have rights, we already allow them to get jobs for chrissakes".

    Advocates of gay marriage actually to impose the pseudo legetimacy of gay marriage to the entire population, they are not really concerned about freedom, because gays are ever free, but not destruct societal norms and impose their own vision, because they pretend they are allowed to do this for irrationals and ideologicals means. This is not about equality anymore, because staight people can't marry with people of the same sex also.
    I understand English (probably) isn't your first language, but this doesn't make sense at all.
    -end of thread-

  3. #313
    @.~*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 Speed Gavroche View Post
    One argument is that if you are ready to validate marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman, why are'nt we ready to validate marriage between men and pigs, women and horse or men and harmchair?
    I think there's a big difference in discussing variances of marriage within human adults, vs humans and other life/non-life forms. And not just human adults, but human adults that produce the same social outputs -- they establish family units, raise children, pay taxes, contribute to community, regardless of sexual orientation. Maybe if you wanted to "slippery slope" your way to polyamory or some other similar alternate adult sexuality among human beings, I could credit you with that.... but these examples are simply absurd due to how dissimilar they are to the current institution of marriage.

    Actually, marriage is an institution built to validate heterosexual unions and the families of the two different members of the union and the credibility of that institution must be protected. This is not about freedom, because if gay people want to get along together, to live together, to fuck together, etc, they are allowed to do this yet. Advocates of gay marriage actually to impose the pseudo legetimacy of gay marriage to the entire population, they are not really concerned about freedom, because gays are ever free, but not destruct societal norms and impose their own vision, because they pretend they are allowed to do this for irrationals and ideologicals means. This is not about equality anymore, because staight people can't marry with people of the same sex also.
    It's okay because "straight people can't marry people of the same sex." As if they would want to? That's a hollow restriction on straight people. It's like taking a restriction on your character in a role-playing game for a skill your character won't even use, ever... which at least RPG designers are intelligent enough to say, "uh, no, that's silly; you're not actually penalized by this restriction; so you are not given the bonus elsewhere for taking it."

    A more valid example would be if you spun it around and everyone was forced to marry same-sex partners, and straight people wouldn't understand why they were being punished/restricted by not being recognized for building relationships with opposite-sex partners.
    "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

  4. #314
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,128

    Default

    I was going to tell him that no response to his post would not signify victory, because all his soldiers are corpses, but now you two have ruined it.

  5. #315
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    it's only a flesh wound!
    -end of thread-

  6. #316
    Senior Member Chiharu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFp None
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Perhaps that marriage itself has its base in religious doctrine. Therefore anyone who is "married" outside of a religious institution is not "married". Perhaps an answer to satisfy everyone would be to change the legal definition of marriage to be "life partners" with all the benefits currently given to those who are "married" regardless of sexual orientation or religious belief. To be actually married then would be an optional status for those who belong to a religious sect which believes in it, affording you no special secular privileges.

    This is more an argument against secular "marriage" then same-sex marriage though... and I know it probably doesn't make all that much sense outside my head.

  7. #317
    Diabolical Kasper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Enneagram
    9w8 so/sx
    Posts
    11,544

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chiharu View Post
    Perhaps that marriage itself has its base in religious doctrine.
    But it's not though, religion did not create marriage. Marriage itself is non-secular.

  8. #318
    Warflower Nijntje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    CRZY
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    3,225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kasper View Post
    But it's not though, religion did not create marriage. Marriage itself is non-secular.
    exactly. marriage was around before christianity.

    I really dont see the big deal, let people marry whomever they want. I mean how can people be okay with marrying off a 11-13 year old girl to an old man in some cultures, yet two consenting adults who happen to be the same sex or transgender cant?

    Where the hell is the logic in that?

    Terrible things happen to good people every day.
    Consequentially, I am not one of the good people.
    I am one of the terrible things.
    .



    Conclusion: Dinosaurs


  9. #319
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nijntje View Post
    exactly. marriage was around before christianity.

    I really dont see the big deal, let people marry whomever they want. I mean how can people be okay with marrying off a 11-13 year old girl to an old man in some cultures, yet two consenting adults who happen to be the same sex or transgender cant?

    Where the hell is the logic in that?
    But if we allow the gays to marry, the Commies have won.

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