User Tag List

First 101819202122 Last

Results 191 to 200 of 268

  1. #191
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    I think we should just all have civil unions. Marriage is narrow and passé.

    There. I win the thread.
    Agreed. Marriage should be private and have no legal ramifications.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  2. #192
    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 pure_mercury View Post
    Agreed. Marriage should be private and have no legal ramifications.
    Which means that we shouldn't legalize gay marriage.
    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

  3. #193
    Senior Member Tiger Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    584 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,084

    Default

    Correct.
    INTJ 5w4 sx/sp 584 ILI-Ni

  4. #194
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    Which means that we shouldn't legalize gay marriage.
    Which means we should end government-sanctioned hetero marriage.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  5. #195
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Which means we should end government-sanctioned hetero marriage.
    Yep, the government shouldn't be in the relationship business. People tend to form relationships that work for them in the context of their society. The idea that the 50's-style nuclear family is "the best" or only viable family structure is short-sighted. It may have been "the best" in the 1950s, but society has changed and family structures need to change with it. I guess you could say that the market decides what type of family structure is best, whether that's a nuclear family, extended family, polygamy, polyandry, or anything else.
    "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."

  6. #196
    Knobgoblin mooseantlers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    324

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfboy View Post
    I really don't understand what people see in other ideologies.
    Look at Finland, the number 1 education system in the world, Finland is socialist. I for one am all for paying higher taxes, as long as they are put to use. I am generally socialist, but I do like Ron Paul's ideas. I believe all ideologies have upsides.

  7. #197
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    A vote is a concept and a practice which isnt impossible for any sex, race etc.

    Marriage is a reality, an organic institution, it is a tradition and a norm, for the majority of individuals, no conceptualisation is required and its practice is restricted to men + woman.

    There's no equivalence what so ever. Its a little like proclaiming that two homosexual men have the right to have vaginal sex with one another. Its obvious they can not have vaginal sex with one another, they are both men do not possess vaginas.

    Its still not clear to me why homosexuals and their support want to remove to try and transform marriage into something which robs it of the meaning which the majority attach to it, I really dont see the benefit to homosexuals, is it going to make homosexuality more acceptable to those who do not consider it acceptable? No. Will it void any rejection which individual homosexuals have experienced by having homosexuality apparently endorsed by the state? No. Will it mean that religious and other perceived "foes" of homosexuality will offer ceremonies including same sex "marriages"? No. Will it make homosexuality more widespread than heterosexuality? That's an open question but also not the reason which most homosexuals attach to wanting reforms such as the transformation of marriage from meaning what it always has to meaning whatever the state says it does.
    Everything you say here is not in sync with my view of things.

    Furthermore, it's absolute fucking nonsense.

    That is why I said we do not hold the same position.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I dont agree with you there, you're probably, like a lot of people living in and allowing their outlook to be defined by post-modern culture, that all is subjectivity but there is an objective order with accompanying natural laws and morality is not simply opinion.
    Your arguments about this matter are so tired.

    It's the same thing every fucking day.

    I'm beyond them too.

    But your perspective is subsumed under mine, and I'm likewise well beyond you.

    You have absolutely no proof for the assertion you made here.

    Stop pretending like it's a known fact.

    It's not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    That first post wasnt to you...
    Yes, I understood that.

    I was pointing to how it shows that we don't hold the same position.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    ...the second part of your post is just another exercise in projecting.
    No, not really.

    As you touched upon in your post, many times in the past, and once again in this thread, as soon as I have provided some kind of critique of you or your positions (which I almost never have done with any sort of malice whatsoever), you have thrown a hissy fit and publicly declared your intention to leave the thread. That's being a drama queen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I dont know why I took you off ignore, probably just because it was interesting what you'd wrote about legislating gay "marriage"...
    Trust me, I couldn't give a shit.

    Please put me back on.

    Perhaps then I won't have to listen to your pseudointellectual drivel.

    I was once told something about the difference between stockbrokers and research analysts by a man who'd made a sizeable fortune during his career: he said stockbrokers are an inch deep, and a mile wide.

    Whenever I read your posts, I am reminded of that comment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    ...anyway you're still as badly bent out of shape narcissistic as ever so back on ignore with you.
    If that's the worst you can say about me, I take it as a compliment.

    I do in fact take pride in mon amour de soi.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Haha, after umpteen discussions of this topic Lark is still utterly unable to grasp the issue and look beyond the mere word. I want to scream.
    C'mon, man.

    Can't let yourself get worked up over Lark...

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Eh, just recognize him for what he is, a troll.
    I don't go so far with him; I think he does sometimes troll around intentionally, but I think he does genuinely hold the beliefs that he argues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    Ok, I thought you were making an honest argument against it using that logic. From a legal standpoint I can see your point. -1 for me jumping in on a conversation without context.
    +1 for having the integrity to admit that.

    -0.5 (realized this later) for putting the word "honest" in there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I think my point was pretty obvious. The difference between saying someone can't do something and declaring that by definition it is something that a person is not allowed to do is an example of a semantic difference with no pragmatic relevance. I believe they call that quibbling.
    Once again, completely devoid of engagement with the argument laid out above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    I think we should just all have civil unions. Marriage is narrow and passé.
    I don't know if I agree with this.

    I think it might be taking it further than necessary.

    I think what @pure_mercury recommends below is more sensible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    There. I win the thread.


    The thread is about Ron Paul...

    There should probably be a gay marriage split, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by LEGERdeMAIN View Post
    Wow, we finally have something in common.
    The first time I try to intellectually engage you on the forum, I provide a very thoughtful, detailed critique, and all you offer in return is a failingly unimpressive response of, "really? are you serious?", and this weak shit.

    I suppose I should not be surprised.

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Agreed. Marriage should be private and have no legal ramifications.
    I can probably get on board with that.

    I believe before the 1750s (1650s?) the state was not really involved in marriage at all.

  8. #198
    Senior Member FunnyDigestion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    1,137

    Default

    It pissed me off when he didn't get with Bruno.
    RCUAI
    ---------
    "Man is free, but his freedom ceases when he has no faith in it."

  9. #199
    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 pure_mercury View Post
    Which means we should end government-sanctioned hetero marriage.
    This doesn't implies gay marriage at all. Creation of a statist form of gay marriage is a form of interventionism.

    And hetero marriage is not narrow and passé, it's an important pillar of society.
    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

  10. #200
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mooseantlers View Post
    Look at Finland, the number 1 education system in the world, Finland is socialist. I for one am all for paying higher taxes, as long as they are put to use. I am generally socialist, but I do like Ron Paul's ideas. I believe all ideologies have upsides.
    Finland is not a socialist nation. They actually have a dynamic capitalist economy. They just have high public sector spending, but it's actually lower than Sweden's and Denmark's. They actually spend less per student on primary and secondary education than the U.S. does, too.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] NF, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 08-27-2017, 05:28 PM
  2. [SJ] SJ, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-04-2017, 06:25 PM
  3. [SP] SP, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 05-15-2017, 03:39 AM
  4. Anyone who thinks Ron Paul Shouldn't be President is completly stupid or ignorant...
    By Munchies in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 01-13-2012, 01:47 PM
  5. [NT] NT, How Are You NOT Like Your Type Description?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 09-27-2008, 05:05 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