10 Aug 2007, 3:19 pm
Sedaka wrote:
even kids with 180 IQ do not have the ability to rationalize these things anymore than the mentally ret*d.
Bwahahahaha!! !
10 Aug 2007, 3:19 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
But people don't suddenly turn into a man when they reach a particular age,
Well, depends on where you draw the line, I guess.
Women get more masculine and men get more feminine as they age.Masculine... feminine... whatever. They don't turn into a man. However masculine they are, they still can't marry each other.
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Everyone at some point in their life is a kid and (assuming they reach the average life expectancy etc.) becomes an adult. Different.
Yes, "different", but these differences are merely circumstantial.
The differences between paedophilia and homosexuality are 'circumstantial' are they?
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
I wasn't allowed to marry when I was 8, neither were you. You can marry the woman you want to be with. I never will be able to. The age law is there to protect kids from perverts.
So, who judges them to be perverts? Why are they perverts if, like a woman's lust for a woman, it's just always been natural to them? You're being awfully judgmental of perversions for someone advocating what most people still think is.
Because they're harming kids.
On what atheistic basis, when its consentual? I do believe it harms kids, but I believe that because of my Christian views. I don't see where you can get that true belief from your atheism.
Sopho wrote:
Just like rape is wrong, it's wrong to f**k a child.
Not the same, when the latter is consentual. Both are still wrong, but not because they are identical, as you claim.
Sopho wrote:
Those laws preventing adults from marrying kids are designed to PROTECT people (children). Who needs protecting from gay marriage?
Everyone else.
1. It harms kids because it's getting them involved in something they're too young to understand. An 8 year old shouldn't be having sex. The only adults that children should have relationships with are their family and teachers etc., that kind of relationship, not a sexual one. And I don't get any of my morals from atheism. I get them from myself. I don't follow atheism like a religion or set of rules.
And getting that moral from yourself is humanism. Good, I'm glad we've found that you're a humanist. Atheism has no moral code, but humanism most definitely does, to the extent that it's a religion. So here we are, religion against religion.
Sopho wrote:
2.It's non consensual though. Kids can't consent. And I never said they were identical. I made the point that they're both sex with someone who isn't consenting.
As defined by law. The law also defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
Sopho wrote:
3. How does me marrying a woman in any way harm you? And if it does, then I can just as easily say that you marrying a woman harms me. But I'm not stupid enough to do that, because I know other people's relationships don't have any affect on me.
In various ways, but that's not the point, since you've already stated that your own rights are important enough to you to tread down on Christian rights. So you're clearly a narcisist, and thereby unconsidering of any harm to others so long as it means you're getting what you want.
1. I'm not religious. I don't follow humanism. I don't sit here reading up on what humanists say I should do and then go out and do it. Wow, you're even more ignorant than I had previously thought. I'm not religious in the slightest. lol I know atheism has no moral code. That's exactly what I was saying. I don't follow a moral code. I work out as best I can what I think is 'right' or 'wrong' myself.
2. I've already addressed this. The law has changed regarding marriage before. And kinds not being able to consent is to protect them. I don't need protecting from women.
3. I'm not pissing on your rights. You, as a Christian, can go to church, pray, believe in your god, do all your Christian s**t and follow your religion as much as you like, to the extent that it doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights. ie. you have the right to believe being gay is wrong, but you don't have the right to enforce that on others. Likewise I want to legally get married, but I don't want to force a priest to marry me and my wife in a church (as much as I like a lot of churches).
I'm not a narcasist for wanting the same right that you have.
10 Aug 2007, 3:20 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:21 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
even kids with 180 IQ do not have the ability to rationalize these things anymore than the mentally ret*d.
Bwahahahaha!! !
Having a high IQ doesn't necessarily mean you are mature enough to get married. I have a high IQ, but I'm still very naive in a lot of ways, and apparently have a low awareness of danger.
10 Aug 2007, 3:22 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:22 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Then that doesn't mean she bashes you because you're a Christian. She bashes you because she thinks you're stupid/blind. And you just happen to be a Christian.
Well, likewise, I'm not against you because you're attracted to women, I'm against your blindness in thinking it's right. And I don't "bash" people. To do so is a personal attack -- I'm only attacking your beliefs.
Look who's talking about blindness in thinking he's right
10 Aug 2007, 3:22 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 3:23 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Your logic is flawed. You just draw the lines where you want them, or where you happen to honestly see that they go -- neither of which makes you correct. You could just as easily say that women should be allowed to go into occupied men's restrooms and use the urinals -- "'cause after all, MEN are allowed to! No fair!" Such logic leads to a mess -- in more ways than one.
\you know... if people could all respect one another.... there would be absolutely no need for sep sex bathrooms. did adam and eve need them?
that's the issue here... repsecting everyone. you're not cause god says not to
And also because it affects other people - it would be dangerous to allow men into women's toilets. Whereas allowing me to marry a woman doesn't harm any straight people.
Not in any ways you care to think about, no, but then you've made clear that you don't "give a f**k what they want" when it comes to conflicting with what you want the right to do.
is it offense to your eyes to see them hold hands? what's so terrible?
does it get in the way of you praying to god?
10 Aug 2007, 3:24 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:24 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:25 pm
Sedaka wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
im sure a lot of ppl would want you to stfu.......... but we're not seriously persuing that
Well, when you contemplate breaching the TOS to teach me a lesson, as you did yesterday, and you mention wanting to "slap" me and "pull my teeth" for my opinions, it's clear that the only reason you (and I'm sure others) are not "seriously" planning revenge is that you're circumstantially incapable of carrying it out.
Ill will is bitter to hold onto. Let it go.
lol that's a metaphor you dolt.... a common one used to describe for when people are being obtuse and it's hard to extract anything from them.... and it's not against TOS to use metaphoric expressions...
i dont remember the "slap" incident... but expressing what i'd like to do is doubtfully against TOS anyway...
you seem very threatened.... whereas i laugh at you calling me a moron and damning me to hell
I called you a moron, once, in private, but I never damned you to Hell. And I think you've well paid me back for that by calling me a dolt just now. Still settin' the ol' example for young Kilroy, eh teacher?
10 Aug 2007, 3:26 pm
greenblue wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Again you miss the point.
She's good at that. Wait till she gets going!
I don't know who this was in reference to, although I'm guessing either me or Sedaka, probably me. I haven't missed any points. It would be difficult to miss them, as you only seem to have about two.
You know what, You and Sedaka are the only ones here who have enough common sense and enough intelligence here on this bloody thread.
Out of the 3 or 4 who are regularly posting on this thread, I would agree.
10 Aug 2007, 3:29 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 3:30 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:31 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:32 pm
