User Tag List

First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 207

  1. #11
    Enigma Nadir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Enneagram
    4
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    544

    Default

    Kiddo, it's clearly an argument you don't agree with, so I don't actually know why you're supposedly presenting it against Night. How is polygamy and zoophilia a sexual distinction or preference?
    Not really.

  2. #12
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nadir View Post
    Kiddo, it's clearly an argument you don't agree with, so I don't actually know why you're supposedly presenting it against Night. How is polygamy and zoophilia a sexual distinction or preference?
    Um...zoophiles want to have sex with animals.

    Or did he mean "sexual preferences" as in, male and female?
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  3. #13
    Enigma Nadir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Enneagram
    4
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    544

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    Or did he mean "sexual preference" as in, male and female?
    I'm certain that's what he meant. I'm also certain that you know exactly that's what he meant.
    Not really.

  4. #14
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    Um...zoophiles want to have sex with animals.

    Or did he mean "sexual preferences" as in, male and female?
    I think an easy answer would be to compare your thread title against my first comment.

  5. #15
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nadir View Post
    I'm certain that's what he meant. I'm also certain that you know exactly that's what he meant.
    Actually, I am embarrassed to admit that I didn't realize that was what he meant until I read your post.

    I think an easy answer would be to compare your thread title against my first comment.
    My apologies.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  6. #16
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    No worries.

  7. #17
    only bites when provoked
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    Gay rights - I hate that they want more rights than anyone else.

    Gay marriage - Completely against it. Marriage is religious and should be defined by religious groups as they see fit. Most homosexuals are not religious and therefore have no way or reason to be married. If there's serious call, I'm sure some religious group will step up and do it for them... The government should have freeform family unit designation. Civil unions. This extends to all life forms, so if Ms. Smith wants her little fluffy to be part of the family with all rights and privileges, there's nothing wrong with that.

    Gay adoption - Adoption requirements should be established by those caring for children. The parent(s) probably selected the group that they gave the child up to, and that group should be able to choose who they will or will not allow to adopt children from them. They should have no more privileges than single people, IMHO.
    I 100%, N 88%, T 88%, J 75%

    Disclaimer: The above is my opinion and mine alone, it does not mean I cannot change my mind, nor does it guarantee that my comments are related to any deep-seated convictions. Take everything I say with a whole snowplow worth of salt and call me in the morning, if you can.

  8. #18
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf View Post
    Gay rights - I hate that they want more rights than anyone else.
    How so? Generally, I've only heard of gay people who want the same rights as everyone else.

    Gay marriage - Completely against it. Marriage is religious and should be defined by religious groups as they see fit. Most homosexuals are not religious and therefore have no way or reason to be married. If there's serious call, I'm sure some religious group will step up and do it for them... The government should have freeform family unit designation. Civil unions. This extends to all life forms, so if Ms. Smith wants her little fluffy to be part of the family with all rights and privileges, there's nothing wrong with that.
    So you are okay with it as long as some religious denomination does it?

    Gay adoption - Adoption requirements should be established by those caring for children. The parent(s) probably selected the group that they gave the child up to, and that group should be able to choose who they will or will not allow to adopt children from them. They should have no more privileges than single people, IMHO.
    So you think there should be laws that allow the parents who are giving up their children to choose whether or not their child should go to a gay couple or not?
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  9. #19
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    So you think pedophiles, zoophiles, polygamists, etc. should be able to marry and adopt since you don't differentiate on sexual preference?
    It's a bad argument because one has nothing to do with the other. It's really saying: the law is unfair, but if we change it to make it fair, we will lose control of it and legalize things we don't want to legalize. Why is this fallacious?

    1) It doesn't address whether gay people should be entitled to marry, but sidesteps the issue.
    2) It assumes that all these other unions (animal/minor/polygamous) would suddenly become legal, which is not true.The best reason for refusing to recognize any union, as far as I can see, is one person's incapacity to consent. That rules out things like animal-person and minor-adult marriages. No one has brought these challenges. Right now in America, zoophilia or pedophilia is not a protected class, unlike sexual orientation. Establishing these classes as "protected" is not an easy task as history shows. The argument pretends that these changes are imminent or inevitable, and they're not at all.
    3) It assumes that these other unions are illegitimate, which is not clearly established. I happen to agree with n0zflubber that polygamy should be legalized.
    4) It assumes that the costs of accepting these other marriages outweighs the benefit of accepting gay marriage, which isn't that obvious. How do you assess something like that without appealing to your own biases? Is it right to deprive the privileges of one group unfairly (assuming it's unfair) in order to deny it from another group who may or may not deserve those rights? Even assuming that they don't deserve those rights, is it a fair decision? Is it the best decision? I don't know. These same arguments could have been used to combat interracial marriage in the 50s, and should be rejected for the same reasons.

  10. #20
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    It's a bad argument because one has nothing to do with the other. It's really saying: the law is unfair, but if we change it to make it fair, we will lose control of it and legalize things we don't want to legalize. Why is this fallacious?

    1) It doesn't address whether gay people should be entitled to marry, but sidesteps the issue.
    2) It assumes that all these other unions (animal/minor/polygamous) would suddenly become legal, which is not true.The best reason for refusing to recognize any union, as far as I can see, is one person's incapacity to consent. That rules out things like animal-person and minor-adult marriages. No one has brought these challenges. Right now in America, zoophilia or pedophilia is not a protected class, unlike sexual orientation. Establishing these classes as "protected" is not an easy task as history shows. The argument pretends that these changes are imminent or inevitable, and they're not at all.
    3) It assumes that these other unions are illegitimate, which is not clearly established. I happen to agree with n0zflubber that polygamy should be legalized.
    4) It assumes that the costs of accepting these other marriages outweighs the benefit of accepting gay marriage, which isn't that obvious. How do you assess something like that without appealing to your own biases? Is it right to deprive the privileges of one group unfairly (assuming it's unfair) in order to deny it from another group who may or may not deserve those rights? Even assuming that they don't deserve those rights, is it a fair decision? Is it the best decision? I don't know. These same arguments could have been used to combat interracial marriage in the 50s, and should be rejected for the same reasons.
    ...

    Well...um...God said that homosexuality is an abomination, so there!
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

Similar Threads

  1. Gay marriage and black people
    By great_bay in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-22-2016, 10:30 PM
  2. Gay Marriage and SCOTUS: Hi ho and here we go
    By Totenkindly in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-09-2012, 07:20 AM
  3. Texas GOP Platform: Criminalize Gay Marriage and Ban Sodomy
    By Ginkgo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: 07-05-2010, 10:40 PM
  4. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-11-2008, 04:17 PM
  5. Abortion, gay rights, and other social issues.
    By Angry Ayrab in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 08-06-2008, 11:54 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