User Tag List

View Poll Results: Do you think same-sex marriage should be legal?

Voters
135. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes and I'm an NF.

    48 35.56%
  • Yes and I'm an NT.

    51 37.78%
  • Yes and I'm an SP.

    10 7.41%
  • Yes and I'm an SJ.

    4 2.96%
  • No and I'm an NF.

    5 3.70%
  • No and I'm an NT.

    4 2.96%
  • No and I'm an SP.

    2 1.48%
  • No and I'm an SJ.

    7 5.19%
  • I don't know and I'm an NF.

    2 1.48%
  • I don't know and I'm an NT.

    1 0.74%
  • I don't know and I'm an SP.

    1 0.74%
  • I don't know and I'm an SJ.

    0 0%
First 789101119 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 258

  1. #81
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    No. And weak appeals to abstract individual "rights" will not sway me. Neither will the argument of claiming that religion and law should have nothing to due with each other; not least of which because legal precepts are always built upon theological presuppositions. Need we forget much of Western law is built upon theological Canon law, especially the modern concept of "rule by law".
    Okay, you obviously believe there's something wrong with it. Where does this belief come from? Other people? A study? Where?

  2. #82
    @.~*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 Peguy View Post
    Yeah but that raises a rather tricky question of how one discerns which laws should be obeyed and which ones you can break.
    Yes, it most certainly does.

    (About the most I'll say is that if one is willing to break a law, one must be prepared to suffer the punishment for doing so as part of the moral stand one is taking, even if one believes the law should not exist.)
    "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

  3. #83
    Systematic chaos Cenomite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Opposition to court decisions mandating the legalization of gay marriage is not the same as opposition to legalized gay marriage-there are very good reasons to be opposed to the former, and no reason (that withstands objective scrutiny) to be opposed to the latter.
    What I got from that is that opposing the court legalizing gay marriage isn't the same as opposing gay marriage? I don't really see the difference. Could you explain?

    It seems to me that if you're against mandating the legalization of something like gay marrige, then you're against it. That's like saying "well OK these people can get married I'm fine with that, I just don't want them to be able to do it without breaking a law"

    If it has something to do with changing how marriage is defined in law, well sometimes when something is written poorly it has to be revised.
    The probability that I was procrastinating when I was typing this post:

    P(have big assignment due) = 0.6
    P(posting on TypoC) = 0.2
    P(having big assignment due | posting on TypoC) = 0.7

    P(posting on TypoC | having big assignment due) = .......


    Eh, I'll finish it later.

  4. #84
    @.~*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 Cenomite View Post
    What I got from that is that opposing the court legalizing gay marriage isn't the same as opposing gay marriage? I don't really see the difference. Could you explain?
    sounds like the one is about disapproving of the judicial system's (ab)use of power, while the other is about disapproving of homosexual marriage.
    "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

  5. #85
    Systematic chaos Cenomite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    sounds like the one is about disapproving of the judicial system's (ab)use of power, while the other is about disapproving of homosexual marriage.
    Isn't that what the judicial system is built for, though? That seems like a much bigger complaint, that can be applied to a lot more than gay marriage.

    EDIT: Now that it couldn't be a valid complaint (haven't really thought about it at all), but it seems out of the scope of this discussion.
    The probability that I was procrastinating when I was typing this post:

    P(have big assignment due) = 0.6
    P(posting on TypoC) = 0.2
    P(having big assignment due | posting on TypoC) = 0.7

    P(posting on TypoC | having big assignment due) = .......


    Eh, I'll finish it later.

  6. #86
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Just want to summarize the data up to now. So far we have:

    For NF: 92% vote "yes", 8% vote "no", 0% vote "I don't know".
    For NT: 96% vote "yes", 0% vote "no", 4% vote "I don't know".
    For SP: 57% vote "yes", 29% vote "no", 14% vote "I don't know".
    For SJ: 60% vote "yes", 40% vote "no", 0% vote "I don't know".


    On a side note, I think "I don't care" already implies "I don't know". I can't imagine someone who don't care but somehow know whether same-sex marriage should be legally recogized or not.

  7. #87
    Allergic to Mornings ergophobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ENFP
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    No. And weak appeals to abstract individual "rights" will not sway me. Neither will the argument of claiming that religion and law should have nothing to due with each other; not least of which because legal precepts are always built upon theological presuppositions. Need we forget much of Western law is built upon theological Canon law, especially the modern concept of "rule by law".
    Legal precepts are based on theological presuppositions but these are more of the universal truth kind. There is no universal truth opposing gay marriage. Supporting one theological viewpoint over another is inherently discriminatory.

    Secondly theological presuppositions makes it sound like the Christian bible (THE theological presupposition you refer to is a literal text that is not open to interpretation?). That is itself is a weak presupposition and should be questioned. Are you basing your view on one such interpretation of limited passages? If not, what are these views based on?

    Without providing the basis of your own views, it seems you only provide a partial argument against the pro-gay marriage view based on a literal interpretation of the Christian bible and a decision to not honor individual rights as important (the foundation of democracy). Should we also abandon democracy as an ideal since you think the foundation isn't important?

    What makes the appeals on the basis of individual rights weak? Just saying they are weak is not an argument.

  8. #88
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    No. And weak appeals to abstract individual "rights" will not sway me.

    Intelligent people don't give a shit about "swaying" bigots.
    We have better things to do.

  9. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    938

    Default

    Yes and I'm an NF. Why not? It seems reasonable to me.

  10. #90
    Senior Member Grayscale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    istp
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    since this issue is only being represent by one side here, allow me to advocate the far less popular opinion that it's not unreasonable to consider that it shouldn't be legalized. however, a lot of my argument here is actually not against proponents of homosexuality or homosexual marriage, but the attitude and arguments of people who oppose it.

    the reason i think this is convoluted is because, like many sensitive topics, people do not know what grounds the argument is actually over. i also think that the government is contradictory in what purpose the laws serve and therein lies some blame for confusion. The main point being made is that the government has no say in this. First off, the government can't stop homosexual relationships or behavior, their control is over the legal aspect and therefore it is something they should be involved in. This comes down to the question: what are laws for? another question, why are things like suicide, use of hard drugs like cocaine and heroine, etc. illegal if they don't hurt anybody else? as bad as it sounds, it is not necessarily right to give people absolute freedom, because it assume they have the knowledge and discipline to not abuse even themselves. this is why we don't give children freedom around dangerous things like firearms or chemicals, because they don't know better. realistically, there is no switch that flips at the age of 18 that suddenly instills everybody with a healthy, responsible attitude. however, it doesnt accomplish much to force someone to do what's best for them, the world already has a natural system of checks and balances to teach that. i think, aside from this issue, a lot of laws need to be reconsidered... personally, i believe the government should protect our freedom, which sometimes means restraining other people from doing things which infringe on our own, but not things which dont affect others.

    pointing out that it is relevant to consider the extremely unpopular assertion that homosexuality is not a completely acceptable lifestyle. now, this is often blown way out of proportion by the evangelical christian community, and therefore cant be stated without someone getting butt-hurt, pun unintended. under their merits of the christianity, i think people who condemn homosexuality to be worse offenders than the people they are attacking and should reexamine their understanding (see romans 3:23). under those beliefs, those people are trying to 'play god' by judging others which is more or less against the 10 commandments, not one of the other guidelines not to partake in homosexuality. as far as 'sinning' goes, it is one of many and i can only assume the reason people make it out to be so horrendous is because it's easier to do that than to examine our own shortcomings, homosexuality is just an easy target. this has lead to a very bitter response from people who feel homosexual attraction and in the end they usually won't listen to anything, reasonable or not. however, im not really sure why anyone would think homosexuality is entirely acceptable, because it's obvious that we are not intended to function that way biologically. no, it doesn't make you a despicable person in any sense for feeling that way, there are far more people who commit adultery, lie, steal, covet, etc. its very common for people to feel like they want to do things that they probably would be better off not doing and the people who criticize you are, in my opinion, far worse offenders in succumbing to short sighted and self serving emotions to their own detriment. being hateful towards others, saying they are lesser than you, "messed up", sick, or unclean to put you below them is, in no way, a part of the christian doctrine as far as i understand it and downright backwards for anyone claiming to follow those beliefs.

    the second beef i have with the argument against legalizing homosexual marriage is that it will defile the sanctity of marriage. i find this fucked up because people already defile the sanctity of heterosexual marriage, and not just the IDEA, but their own! if you want something worth being so vocal about, that would be it, not homosexual marriage.

    people are okay with homosexuality because its not any more condemnable than a lot of things, but that doesnt make it entirely healthy or intended as far as behavior goes. i understand a lot of people would like to claim it as part of their unchangeable identity, but it's no different than any desire, and not all of them should be acted upon. it's hard for me to say that, because although i think it is true, i am no better and i do and have done things i dont think were best for me either, everyone has. i also understand the need to stubbornly rationalize any behavior outside of the ieal, and why wouldnt I? i feel that i want to do it, the motivation is not hard to understand and neither is the conflict of interest to ignore the plain ol reality and make excuses.

    people who say it shouldnt be legalized are clearly just as wrong as the people who do. so no, i dont think we should encourage homosexuality, but it does no good to simply force people out of the legal aspects of a committed homosexual relationship and completely ignore all of this stuff, and to completely ignore all of the things we are already fucking up in heterosexual marriage.

    we live in a culture that encourages freedom at all costs, freedom to eat whatever we want, say whatever we want, fuck whatever we want, and really, freedom is great, because forcing someone to do something right or do something that is probably better for them doesnt mean a thing, especially if they dont even understand why they being made to do it. we need freedom, but we also need the knowledge to know what choices to make within all that we are free to do. that is why i do not think it really matters that much if we legalize it or if we dont, because that isnt the real problem, is it?

Similar Threads

  1. What way do you think the former USA will be carved up?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-31-2017, 05:09 PM
  2. What MBTI type do you think is the hardest to be?
    By OrangeAppled in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 09-02-2010, 02:04 AM
  3. What MBTI type do you think is the EASIEST to be?
    By Such Irony in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-27-2010, 09:22 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