User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 108

  1. #31
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Have you read What's the matter with Kansas?
    I have not, and I now plan to, but the exact argument you posed in that quotation is exactly the same as the eight religious leaders' argument against Martin Luther King's dealings in Birmingham.

  2. #32
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    I have not, and I now plan to, but the exact argument you posed in that quotation is exactly the same as the eight religious leaders' argument against Martin Luther King's dealings in Birmingham.
    Implying that I'm what?

    Racist, a bad person, the kind of man your mother's warned you about?

  3. #33
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Implying that I'm what?

    Racist, a bad person, the kind of man your mother's warned you about?
    No, for the eight religious leaders were not racist, and nor were they bad people. They simply told Martin Luther King that if the African Americans just waited, society would eventually progress to the point where segregation would die out; they told him that the African Americans would just have to endure for as long as they could until society could finally get its shit together at some unplanned, later date. Of course, Martin Luther King responded somewhat vehemently to that assertion.

  4. #34
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    No, for the eight religious leaders were not racist, and nor were they bad people. They simply told Martin Luther King that if the African Americans just waited, society would eventually progress to the point where segregation would die out; they told him that the African Americans would just have to endure for as long as they could until society could finally get its shit together at some unplanned, later date. Of course, Martin Luther King responded somewhat vehemently to that assertion.
    Well we went from prop 8 being passed in California in 2008, to Eich being forced to resign over a donation in support of prop 8 in 2014.

    It's happening regardless of what you or I or anyone else thinks.

    The situations aren't analogous.

  5. #35
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est
    While the suppression of certain individuals' rights to marry is unnecessarily evil, there is nothing in the law that allows homosexuals to marry yet, so while Mozilla in this example is firing someone based on their opinions and thus theoretically going against the law, the C.E.O. isn't but at the same time is attacking the foundation of total political equality for all minorities.
    I don't think marriage is a right. If it were a right, you'd be correct, but marriage is a privilege and by definition, all privileges are discriminatory. The correct and proper course of action is to convince the good people of California to grant you that privilege through persuasion and sound reasoning.

    "The American Bill of Rights is essentially a list of things that the government is prevented from doing to you. Rights in the sense of exemptions from the power of government are very different from rights to things that can be provided only by incurring costs. Your right to free speech does not require someone else to pay for broadcasting what you say or to publish it in a newspaper or magazine. But if you have a right to water, then others are forced to pay the inescapable costs of getting it to you." Thomas Sowell, Applied Economics

    Is gay marriage going to cost the Californian tax payer any money at all? If it does, then it must be a privilege to be granted.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  6. #36
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    I don't think marriage is a right. If it were a right, you'd be correct, but marriage is a privilege and by definition, all privileges are discriminatory. The correct and proper course of action is to convince the good people of California to grant you that privilege through persuasion and sound reasoning.

    "The American Bill of Rights is essentially a list of things that the government is prevented from doing to you. Rights in the sense of exemptions from the power of government are very different from rights to things that can be provided only by incurring costs. Your right to free speech does not require someone else to pay for broadcasting what you say or to publish it in a newspaper or magazine. But if you have a right to water, then others are forced to pay the inescapable costs of getting it to you." Thomas Sowell, Applied Economics

    Is gay marriage going to cost the Californian tax payer any money at all? If it does, then it must be privilege to be granted.
    Now that is a sound, just argument, one that attacks the stem of another value of government, separation of church and state. By the first amendment, we see the granting of religious freedoms, which would include marriage as a right if government did not juxtapose this status by recognizing marriages as civil unions. So now we have a problem, by the constitution, homosexuals have the technical right to marry according to their own religious belief system, but the government won't recognize that marriage as a true marriage due to the fact that the government's concept of marriage (or civil union) is based on the idea that marriage is between a man and a woman, a judeo-christian foundation. So the question is whether or not a homosexual marriage should be lawfully recognized by the government, which really wouldn't impact tax-payers either way that much at all in my own outlook of the situation, though that, of course, is my own outlook (and I will therefore defer to any evidence that states it will cost tax-payers more).

  7. #37
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Well we went from prop 8 being passed in California in 2008, to Eich being forced to resign over a donation in support of prop 8 in 2014.

    It's happening regardless of what you or I or anyone else thinks.

    The situations aren't analogous.
    Ultimately yes, we have no control over the situation, but the initial argument was whether or not Eich is a bad person (based on ethics, not law).

  8. #38
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est
    So now we have a problem, by the constitution, homosexuals have the technical right to marry according to their own religious belief system, but the government won't recognize that marriage as a true marriage due to the fact that the government's concept of marriage is based on the idea that marriage is between a man and a woman, a judeo-christian foundation.
    If gay marriage were an exercise of religion, you'd be correct, but I've never heard that argument used by gay activists. My perception is that the majority of gay activists are hostile towards religion.

    So the question is whether or not a homosexual marriage should be lawfully recognized by the government, which really wouldn't impact tax-payers either way that much at all in my own outlook of the situation, though that, of course, is my own outlook.
    I don't think there would be any issue at all if marriage were decoupled from government. As it stands, marriage confers a host of other privileges like adoption preferences (not an expert, but I'm guessing that married couples are given favored status), tax filing privileges, etc.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  9. #39
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    If gay marriage were an exercise of religion, you'd be correct, but I've never heard that argument used by gay activists. My perception is that the majority of gay activists are hostile towards religion.



    I don't think there would be any issue at all if marriage were decoupled from government. As it stands, marriage confers a host of other privileges like adoption preferences (not an expert, but I'm guessing that married couples are given favored status), tax filing privileges, etc.
    I agree with you, the separation of marriage from government affairs, while reducing economical benefits that could easily be replaced by perhaps an economic eligibility package of some sort based on the amount of individuals living in the same household (?), would eliminate this problem entirely, and people would be much happier that the unrest is over.

    Not a gay activist, by the way, I just want people's freedoms to be respected, that's all, and no, @DiscoBiscuit, I don't want to get off my cross, it's comfortable.

  10. #40
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,931

    Default

    We're slowly entering in a check-your-privilege-society on which anyone with non politically correct opinions must be stupid/ignorant/unethical/unreliable. And that's just the beginning.

    When it peaks, we might see 3 years old girls saying "my body, my rules", barely understanding what that means.

    Progressive thinking, people. Don't judge.

Similar Threads

  1. Type and the Use of Emoticons
    By MerkW in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 07-09-2010, 12:59 PM
  2. [INFP] INFPs and the Lack of Initiative
    By nolla in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 09-02-2008, 01:38 PM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-30-2008, 08:38 PM
  4. "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" review...
    By The Ü™ in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-22-2007, 03:34 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