California overturned gay-marriage ban today!

Page 25 of 27 [ 420 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27  Next

oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

21 May 2008, 4:31 pm

skafather84 wrote:


i realize the failed logic here...you take it as all of YOUR morals should be legislated whereas you don't have any consideration for others. law is obviously morality in the sense of a basic code of conduct...it's inseparable. however, the separation is functionless morality like many of the arbitrary laws found within religious texts that may have been applicable and useful back in BC or even so far as 1500AD or later but many of the needs for those laws have disappeared as technology has gotten better and people have been able to operate more freely without the troubles previously caused by breaking those laws (take the muslim and jewish dietary laws regarding pork and shellfish for example).

laws are also in place to keep a semblance of order within society and again, this is constantly redrawn as better understanding is achieved on how society operates and how the individual operates.

you're still wrong..but it's mostly just because you're dismissive of scientific, technological, and medical progress.



1) Your want in changing the definition of marriage is part of your moral agenda.

2) Nowhere have I brought religion as a focal point of my argument. You are blinded by your disdain towards religion and so you feel the need to constantly bring it up.

3) The part of Semblance of Order within a Society can be taken into consideration many ways. Just think about it.

4) I would like to understand your logic on me being dismissive of science, technology and medical practices. Really, I would like to. Considering that I'm against homosexual marriage, I don't see any of these coming into conflict with that stance.


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


srriv345
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 523

21 May 2008, 4:57 pm

Oh, goodie! Now we get to apply to the government so they can tell us if we can get legally married or not. That's not open to abuse at all.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

21 May 2008, 5:44 pm

srriv345 wrote:
Oh, goodie! Now we get to apply to the government so they can tell us if we can get legally married or not. That's not open to abuse at all.


Why shouldn't it? How many people marry to only divorce a month later? How many are coerced into marriage or marry with infidelities in mind?

As noted already, it is a "contract" with legal status.


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

21 May 2008, 6:06 pm

oscuria wrote:
Why shouldn't it? How many people marry to only divorce a month later? How many are coerced into marriage or marry with infidelities in mind?

As noted already, it is a "contract" with legal status.

Right, and as a contract, why can't it just be covered under contract law? The US government is not involved with creating and directly officiating every contract in existence, so why this one?



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

21 May 2008, 6:49 pm

If marriage is not legally binding, then it is not serious.
If marriage is serious, then it is legally binding.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

21 May 2008, 7:08 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
oscuria wrote:
Why shouldn't it? How many people marry to only divorce a month later? How many are coerced into marriage or marry with infidelities in mind?

As noted already, it is a "contract" with legal status.

Right, and as a contract, why can't it just be covered under contract law? The US government is not involved with creating and directly officiating every contract in existence, so why this one?


It's considered important, :shrug:


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


srriv345
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 523

21 May 2008, 7:13 pm

oscuria wrote:
srriv345 wrote:
Oh, goodie! Now we get to apply to the government so they can tell us if we can get legally married or not. That's not open to abuse at all.


Why shouldn't it? How many people marry to only divorce a month later? How many are coerced into marriage or marry with infidelities in mind?


You tell me. I have no reason to believe that this accounts for a significant percentage of marriages, and surely we should establish that fact before setting up what conservatives like to call a nanny state. Even divorce statistics can be misleading because they frequently refer to couples who married several decades previously. In previous times, people wouldn't even have lived that long to divorce each other. Personally, I think that if we want to take marriage seriously, we should stop treating it as a license to engage in sexual experiences.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

21 May 2008, 11:57 pm

oscuria wrote:
It's considered important, :shrug:

All the more reason to take it further away from the government.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 May 2008, 1:33 am

oscuria wrote:
1) Your want in changing the definition of marriage is part of your moral agenda.


you're right. except my side hurts no one and you've yet to present any evidence otherwise. yours promotes discrimination based upon what is otherwise none of your damned business.

oscuria wrote:
2) Nowhere have I brought religion as a focal point of my argument. You are blinded by your disdain towards religion and so you feel the need to constantly bring it up.


and nowhere have you brought any proof or even tried to disprove the pro argument other than stating your obviously ignorant points of view which are obviously derived from the christian faith. and i know that because no one else in the western world gives as much of a rat's ass about it as christians do. simple logic. something you're not capable of.

oscuria wrote:
3) The part of Semblance of Order within a Society can be taken into consideration many ways. Just think about it.


no, i'm not playing garbage semantics games with you. you've yet to present point 1 of a REAL reason for gay marriage to not be legalized.

oscuria wrote:
4) I would like to understand your logic on me being dismissive of science, technology and medical practices. Really, I would like to. Considering that I'm against homosexual marriage, I don't see any of these coming into conflict with that stance.


easy. you're not interested in facts. you've proven that over and over again in this thread. considering your religious preference, your militant stance within that preference, and your outspoken nature on such obvious issues, you most likely aren't the biggest supporter of therapeutic clone and likewise, you probably won't listen to sociological studies that say that gay marriage doesn't harm society and that kids of homosexual parents still grow up normal and healthy. of course since i'm calling you out on it, you can easily just dismiss it (this is the land of pretend, afterall)...but i'm not playing chess so i don't care if i move early.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

22 May 2008, 3:04 am

skafather84 wrote:

you're right. except my side hurts no one and you've yet to present any evidence otherwise. yours promotes discrimination based upon what is otherwise none of your damned business.


and nowhere have you brought any proof or even tried to disprove the pro argument other than stating your obviously ignorant points of view which are obviously derived from the christian faith. and i know that because no one else in the western world gives as much of a rat's ass about it as christians do. simple logic. something you're not capable of.


no, i'm not playing garbage semantics games with you. you've yet to present point 1 of a REAL reason for gay marriage to not be legalized.

easy. you're not interested in facts. you've proven that over and over again in this thread. considering your religious preference, your militant stance within that preference, and your outspoken nature on such obvious issues, you most likely aren't the biggest supporter of therapeutic clone and likewise, you probably won't listen to sociological studies that say that gay marriage doesn't harm society and that kids of homosexual parents still grow up normal and healthy. of course since i'm calling you out on it, you can easily just dismiss it (this is the land of pretend, afterall)...but i'm not playing chess so i don't care if i move early.




1) How can you declare that which involves society is not part of my business? Do people marry and retreat to the forests?


2) You are incapable of acknowledging other faiths. You have proven yourself anti-Christian.

Let me quote to you from the al quran il karim:

"And Lot! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you? Lo! ye come with lust unto men instead of women."

"Of all the creatures in the world, will ye approach males, And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates? Nay, ye are a people transgressing (all limits)!"

"Would ye really approach men in your lusts rather than women? Nay, ye are a people (grossly) ignorant!"

"And Lot! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Lo! ye commit lewdness such as no creature did before you."


India? They'll arrest and punish you if you are a homosexual. Neither Manu nor the Yajnavalkya smrti state that a marriage is to be between the same sexes.


3) You have yet to present a convincing one either. There is nothing in marriage that a homosexual can or should attain.


4) What does that have to do with Science, Technology, and Medical practices? You're just insulting my position against same-sex marriage.


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

22 May 2008, 4:14 pm

oscuria wrote:
1) How can you declare that which involves society is not part of my business? Do people marry and retreat to the forests?
Gay marriage is just as much your business as it is your neighbor's. Yes, if gay marriage is offensive to your scruples, it is your place to feel out of sorts out of it. However, you have not given me any real reason that I should go to any great length to keep you from feeling out of sorts. In fact, I think that I would take delight in your misery. All the more reason for me to advocate gay marriage, I suppose. You haven't earned a scrap of my sympathy in all the time that I've known you.

Quote:
2) You are incapable of acknowledging other faiths. You have proven yourself anti-Christian.
So my sister is anti-Muslim if she doesn't wear a burka. I will inform her of this.

Quote:
India? They'll arrest and punish you if you are a homosexual. Neither Manu nor the Yajnavalkya smrti state that a marriage is to be between the same sexes.
The sodomy laws in India are a hangover from British colonialism. One of their princes has made some of the opening moves in repairing this problem. It has cost him dearly, but he is a true hero for gay rights in his country. His countrymen will praise him for it one day, and perhaps his heritage will be restored. His integrity and heroism will be remembered. The Asian gay rights movement has begun.

I have heard you and your ilk insist that you bear no ill will toward homosexuals. I have heard your sort, when pressed, renounce such things as the sodomy laws. I have heard you deny that you are homophobic. Why don't you herald such men as Manvendra Singh Gohil as heroes of a good cause, though? Your silence is informative. I think that your ilk are insincere when you claim you are not homophobic. How can I not see you as liars when you speak elsewhere, then? How can I ever trust such as you? Why should your word have any meaning to me? for it doesn't; it is empty. It is nothing.

Quote:
3) You have yet to present a convincing one either. There is nothing in marriage that a homosexual can or should attain.
Socio-economic stability, commitment, and a sense of societal approval. Mostly, it is a sense of societal approval, and leadership in gay rights is one of California's most important symbols.

Quote:
4) What does that have to do with Science, Technology, and Medical practices? You're just insulting my position against same-sex marriage.
Whereas I just insult you personally. You're a dick.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

22 May 2008, 4:20 pm

You're free to advocate anything you want, and we are free to advocate against it.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

22 May 2008, 4:42 pm

oscuria wrote:
1) How can you declare that which involves society is not part of my business? Do people marry and retreat to the forests?

Well, the issue is that EVERYTHING can be labeled as "involving society", but the idea of a free society IS that the choices of other people are their's and NOT part of your business. People marry and retreat to their homes, as it is a personal choice that involves you in only the slightest of degrees. There are a thousand things more public than this, so why this specifically?

Quote:
2) You are incapable of acknowledging other faiths. You have proven yourself anti-Christian.

Let me quote to you from the al quran il karim:

"And Lot! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you? Lo! ye come with lust unto men instead of women."

"Of all the creatures in the world, will ye approach males, And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates? Nay, ye are a people transgressing (all limits)!"

"Would ye really approach men in your lusts rather than women? Nay, ye are a people (grossly) ignorant!"

"And Lot! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Lo! ye commit lewdness such as no creature did before you."

India? They'll arrest and punish you if you are a homosexual. Neither Manu nor the Yajnavalkya smrti state that a marriage is to be between the same sexes.

Christianity is the tradition best known here, but I bet that most atheists are anti-other religions too.

Quote:
3) You have yet to present a convincing one either. There is nothing in marriage that a homosexual can or should attain.

Should? Who determines should? We already know that marriage is a package of legal rights that can be useful for any couple.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 May 2008, 9:56 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Quote:
3) You have yet to present a convincing one either. There is nothing in marriage that a homosexual can or should attain.

Should? Who determines should? We already know that marriage is a package of legal rights that can be useful for any couple.



the should is the bigotry that i repeatedly call out as such and as nothing more than a personal problem on the "none of your damned business" level. he feels like he is superior to everyone else and as such can define their lives legally as many fundy christians in this country do.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

22 May 2008, 10:00 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
You're free to advocate anything you want, and we are free to advocate against it.

Well, that may be true, but the power to accomplish anything you advocate is a dangerous step towards fascism. When all choices made are seen as societal choices to be controlled at an arbitrary whim, then we lose that little thing called individual freedom.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

23 May 2008, 5:20 pm

Griff wrote:
...


1) I need not your sympathy, I need not your prayers. I need not your blessings. I need nothing from you, neither your acceptance towards my stance. You taking delight in a person's misery shows your character, but if you mean that it would be a misery for me to see homosexuals touch and marry, no. I will look down upon it just as I look down upon the "freedom and liberty" derelicts of society masquerade their worthless lives under.


2) is Gohil speaking of homosexual marriage? No, he is advocating for more rights towards the homosexual, to be allowed to practice behind closed doors. He isn't advocating to go around kissing in public, or whatever other thing. He just wants them to be accepted and not characterized as criminals. There is nothing in my position that advocates the removal of something that a person cannot himself change (after all, many are said to be "born" homosexual, no?). Homosexuality is one thing, marriage is another.

I asked before, what does "homophobic" mean? Fear of homosexuals? Hatred towards homosexuals? I have none of these emotions inside of me.


3) Social approval? Approval on what? "homosexual marriage" is an oxymoron.


4) Have fun.


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.