|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:47 pm
divineseraph Semiremis divineseraph Semiremis divineseraph I don't care about the law. Remember, it was once legal to own slaves and illegal for women to vote. This is a case of a logical fallacy of Begging the Question- Gay marriage is wrong because it is against the law. Gay marriage is against the law because it is wrong. Slavery is OK because it is legal. Slavery is legal because it is OK. It's circular and begs the question "Why is it wrong in the first place, to be against the law?" *nods* Although I'm not sure how that applies here. Did any of the sources try to make a case that something being lawful means it must necessarily than be correct? I know the video didn't, I didn't see it in any of the articles either but I didn't read through them front to back so I could have missed it. The first article said that the law restricts some marriages. So if the point wasn't about legal justification, what was it about? It was to help provide a foundation to the fact that marriage isn't a legal right granted to all citizens. A lot of people argue that marriage is a right and that gay marriage should be allowed because as a right it should be granted to all and if not than you are denying someone their equal rights. The author did not then proceed to make the argument that gay marriage is not okay because it's not legal (which is the direction you were going in with it). On this topic (on marriage restriction) he says "I only bring them up to illustrate that marriage is heavily regulated, and for good reason. When a state recognizes a marriage, it bestows upon the couple certain benefits which are costly to both the state and other individuals. "And that's exactly why I said what I said. I don't care if it's a legal right. The law is irrelevant. The logic there is still begging the question for the very same reason- Gay marriage is wrong because it is illegal. It is illegal because it is wrong. Invalid logic. Try again. We're talking about two different things here. No one is saying gay marriage is wrong because it's not recognized within the law. You're on a different wavelength.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:59 pm
Well, to answer the first post:
I have met some religious bigots against gay rights.
I have also met some homosexual bigots against religious rights.
It's a 2-sided coin. If homosexuals are allowed to live and believe as they do, then why not a religious person who believes what they think they should.
I have seen homosexuals get the crap beaten out of them when the truth became known, but I have seen more instances around here anyway, where the gays have slandered, beat, and bullied people just because they know those people do not feel that homosexuality is "right".
I support gay rights, and I have several gay friends. I think that acceptance, tolerance, and education are necessary in today's day and age from both sides. As long as people can talk about the issues without getting overly zealous, then I don't consider those people bigots whatever side they are on. Until there is more educational communication and less defensive communication between both sides, there will not be much change.
I don't feel any causes or religions should be championed in school, unless ALL causes and religions can be championed at school. I think school should be a place of learning absolutes. There are other venues for people of causes to get together.
Why should gays have precedence over other groups in school? Like I said, I'm not against homosexuals, I feel that a gay couple should have the same rights as a straight couple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:06 pm
Semiremis Captain_Shinzo Semiremis Captain_Shinzo There not religious but they aren't good either.
I took a look at the first link and it was just talking of how it would cause problems for other marriage cases such as incest. However, that is a poor excuse for an argument.
The second link was mostly on reproduction which can easily be tampered with.
I couldn't see the third one because I can't use my speakers. Like I said before. You have to be open minded to have a decent conversation on this.
Again, I was opened minded on this before and it didn't hold too much water to an argument.There were more arguments than the ones based on human reproduction which do have their merits but eventually break apart (my opinion even after reading the arguments based around the necessity of having a father and mother in order to ensure the best scenario for the development of human young). You must be some sort of genius though, to go through the information so fast while at the same time giving it some thought, either that or you fit into a category similar to the first one I mentioned: Most far left liberals are typically not open minded enough to even briefly look over some of the arguments made in articles like the two I posted above which makes discussion and consideration of the points sort of difficultMaybe I'm being rude here but I don't think you really looked into it. You couldn't have. Take some time...think about it. Meditate over what being fair and open-minded really means. A quick glance with your mind already made up doesn't fit the category of open-minded but maybe I'm the only one who thinks that. If it takes a genius to see a logical fallacy, then I may very well be a genius. Why don't YOU take some time to meditate on the idea that love is love and should not be controlled by legal systems of man. Open minded rarely means denying others of rights that harm no others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:26 pm
divineseraph Semiremis Captain_Shinzo Semiremis Captain_Shinzo There not religious but they aren't good either.
I took a look at the first link and it was just talking of how it would cause problems for other marriage cases such as incest. However, that is a poor excuse for an argument.
The second link was mostly on reproduction which can easily be tampered with.
I couldn't see the third one because I can't use my speakers. Like I said before. You have to be open minded to have a decent conversation on this.
Again, I was opened minded on this before and it didn't hold too much water to an argument.There were more arguments than the ones based on human reproduction which do have their merits but eventually break apart (my opinion even after reading the arguments based around the necessity of having a father and mother in order to ensure the best scenario for the development of human young). You must be some sort of genius though, to go through the information so fast while at the same time giving it some thought, either that or you fit into a category similar to the first one I mentioned: Most far left liberals are typically not open minded enough to even briefly look over some of the arguments made in articles like the two I posted above which makes discussion and consideration of the points sort of difficultMaybe I'm being rude here but I don't think you really looked into it. You couldn't have. Take some time...think about it. Meditate over what being fair and open-minded really means. A quick glance with your mind already made up doesn't fit the category of open-minded but maybe I'm the only one who thinks that. If it takes a genius to see a logical fallacy, then I may very well be a genius. Why don't YOU take some time to meditate on the idea that love is love and should not be controlled by legal systems of man. Open minded rarely means denying others of rights that harm no others. You tried to push a point that wasn't relevant to the discussion and I agreed with the point you made but the counterargument just wasn't being made anywhere in the sources I provided... You may have seen a logical fallacy but it's in something that was never even proposed to begin with in this case. I never said love should be controlled by a legal system... @everyone in the guild: Someone asked about secular arguments against gay marriage. They exist, they are made, I don't agree with most of them I have yet to see ONE person with strong opposing opinions even consider them and give them a fair chance... open mindedness and tolerance works both ways. DO NOT EXPECT someone against gay marriage to give your side a fair shot if you cannot provide them the same courtesy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:28 pm
Eltanin Sadachbia I have seen homosexuals get the crap beaten out of them when the truth became known, but I have seen more instances around here anyway, where the gays have slandered, beat, and bullied people just because they know those people do not feel that homosexuality is "right".That's interesting, I've never seen that at least not physically. I've seen a fair amount of verbal abuse from both sides.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:32 pm
Semiremis divineseraph Semiremis Captain_Shinzo Semiremis Like I said before. You have to be open minded to have a decent conversation on this.
Again, I was opened minded on this before and it didn't hold too much water to an argument.There were more arguments than the ones based on human reproduction which do have their merits but eventually break apart (my opinion even after reading the arguments based around the necessity of having a father and mother in order to ensure the best scenario for the development of human young). You must be some sort of genius though, to go through the information so fast while at the same time giving it some thought, either that or you fit into a category similar to the first one I mentioned: Most far left liberals are typically not open minded enough to even briefly look over some of the arguments made in articles like the two I posted above which makes discussion and consideration of the points sort of difficultMaybe I'm being rude here but I don't think you really looked into it. You couldn't have. Take some time...think about it. Meditate over what being fair and open-minded really means. A quick glance with your mind already made up doesn't fit the category of open-minded but maybe I'm the only one who thinks that. If it takes a genius to see a logical fallacy, then I may very well be a genius. Why don't YOU take some time to meditate on the idea that love is love and should not be controlled by legal systems of man. Open minded rarely means denying others of rights that harm no others. You tried to push a point that wasn't relevant to the discussion and I agreed with the point you made but the counterargument just wasn't being made anywhere in the sources I provided... You may have seen a logical fallacy but it's in something that was never even proposed to begin with in this case. I never said love should be controlled by a legal system... @everyone in the guild: Someone asked about secular arguments against gay marriage. They exist, they are made, I don't agree with most of them I have yet to see ONE person with strong opposing opinions even consider them and give them a fair chance... open mindedness and tolerance works both ways. DO NOT EXPECT someone against gay marriage to give your side a fair shot if you cannot provide them the same courtesy.
I read most of the articles and, have said, they are pretty weak as an argument. They are week because they address things that can EASILY be avoided, like the reproduction for example. Other examples such as security deposits and other legal jurisdictions are the fault of the law system itself an not homosexuality. If you can have proof for an argument without holding water in the cup, you have an empty drink and no use.
Again though, you can't use the law in civil marriage with homosexuality. Mostly because half was what-ifs and the others are easily passable or debunkable.
The one thing I asked, however, was an argument that was not religious and could pass as a fairly good argument and I haven't seen that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:42 pm
Semiremis divineseraph Semiremis Captain_Shinzo Semiremis Like I said before. You have to be open minded to have a decent conversation on this.
Again, I was opened minded on this before and it didn't hold too much water to an argument.There were more arguments than the ones based on human reproduction which do have their merits but eventually break apart (my opinion even after reading the arguments based around the necessity of having a father and mother in order to ensure the best scenario for the development of human young). You must be some sort of genius though, to go through the information so fast while at the same time giving it some thought, either that or you fit into a category similar to the first one I mentioned: Most far left liberals are typically not open minded enough to even briefly look over some of the arguments made in articles like the two I posted above which makes discussion and consideration of the points sort of difficultMaybe I'm being rude here but I don't think you really looked into it. You couldn't have. Take some time...think about it. Meditate over what being fair and open-minded really means. A quick glance with your mind already made up doesn't fit the category of open-minded but maybe I'm the only one who thinks that. If it takes a genius to see a logical fallacy, then I may very well be a genius. Why don't YOU take some time to meditate on the idea that love is love and should not be controlled by legal systems of man. Open minded rarely means denying others of rights that harm no others. You tried to push a point that wasn't relevant to the discussion and I agreed with the point you made but the counterargument just wasn't being made anywhere in the sources I provided... You may have seen a logical fallacy but it's in something that was never even proposed to begin with in this case. I never said love should be controlled by a legal system... @everyone in the guild: Someone asked about secular arguments against gay marriage. They exist, they are made, I don't agree with most of them I have yet to see ONE person with strong opposing opinions even consider them and give them a fair chance... open mindedness and tolerance works both ways. DO NOT EXPECT someone against gay marriage to give your side a fair shot if you cannot provide them the same courtesy. The crux of the argument was that some marriages are not protected by law. How is my argument against the validity of using the law as proper reason of goodness irrelevant?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:50 pm
Semiremis Eltanin Sadachbia I have seen homosexuals get the crap beaten out of them when the truth became known, but I have seen more instances around here anyway, where the gays have slandered, beat, and bullied people just because they know those people do not feel that homosexuality is "right".That's interesting, I've never seen that at least not physically. I've seen a fair amount of verbal abuse from both sides. Well, the gay guys around here are every bit as tough as the straight ones, and if they didn't get loving ladies from their daddies, they still learned how to kick a** xp The gay guys pretty much stay together in groups around here, because they worry that people may come after them when they are alone, which isn't entirely impossible. There have been a couple of instances where they have taken the offensive, which I can understand, but it doesn't help the tolerance factor any. In other parts of the country, I haven't seen the physically violent trend, but what I have seen is the more verbally abusive stuff. I tell you what, I think the homosexuals have a more highly evolved tongue-lash than others of the species, because they seem know how to do the most damage with the fewest words. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:21 pm
Eltanin Sadachbia Semiremis Eltanin Sadachbia I have seen homosexuals get the crap beaten out of them when the truth became known, but I have seen more instances around here anyway, where the gays have slandered, beat, and bullied people just because they know those people do not feel that homosexuality is "right".That's interesting, I've never seen that at least not physically. I've seen a fair amount of verbal abuse from both sides. Well, the gay guys around here are every bit as tough as the straight ones, and if they didn't get loving ladies from their daddies, they still learned how to kick a** xp The gay guys pretty much stay together in groups around here, because they worry that people may come after them when they are alone, which isn't entirely impossible. There have been a couple of instances where they have taken the offensive, which I can understand, but it doesn't help the tolerance factor any. In other parts of the country, I haven't seen the physically violent trend, but what I have seen is the more verbally abusive stuff. I tell you what, I think the homosexuals have a more highly evolved tongue-lash than others of the species, because they seem know how to do the most damage with the fewest words. sweatdrop
There have been some tough gays I have met, though, but they are pretty nice people when you don't give them any crap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:56 pm
Captain_Shinzo Eltanin Sadachbia Semiremis Eltanin Sadachbia I have seen homosexuals get the crap beaten out of them when the truth became known, but I have seen more instances around here anyway, where the gays have slandered, beat, and bullied people just because they know those people do not feel that homosexuality is "right".That's interesting, I've never seen that at least not physically. I've seen a fair amount of verbal abuse from both sides. Well, the gay guys around here are every bit as tough as the straight ones, and if they didn't get loving ladies from their daddies, they still learned how to kick a** xp The gay guys pretty much stay together in groups around here, because they worry that people may come after them when they are alone, which isn't entirely impossible. There have been a couple of instances where they have taken the offensive, which I can understand, but it doesn't help the tolerance factor any. In other parts of the country, I haven't seen the physically violent trend, but what I have seen is the more verbally abusive stuff. I tell you what, I think the homosexuals have a more highly evolved tongue-lash than others of the species, because they seem know how to do the most damage with the fewest words. sweatdrop
There have been some tough gays I have met, though, but they are pretty nice people when you don't give them any crap.I understand their reasoning, but when people attack others viciously, it just serves as justification to those that they are attacking as to why the attackers are "wrong" in the first place. This is why bigotry doesn't die easily, because people choose to stay offended.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:02 pm
I have also met some real asses that are gay. Gay folks are human, too.
Most of gay people I meet are wonderful people, just like most of the straight folks, but there are jerks on either side. Those who take a fanatic stance on either side only serve to procreate ignorance and intolerance for their cause.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:02 pm
Lets play role reversal. Whenever we say the word Christian we'll say gay and whenever we say gay we'll say Christian. Here we go. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCzbNkyXO50&feature=relatedSo how would it feel if Christianity was treated as a mental disease of a genetic defect? You really don't know how it feels until you get put in the same situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:10 pm
First of all, marriage is a solely religious serimony. If the government and other factors were not involved with marriage, I think gay marriage should'nt be allowed since the belief of the religion (Christianity for example) does not allow for gays to marry. HOWEVER, since government IS involved in marriage, along with health care and other benefits, gay marriage should be allowed so that all couples, whether gay or straight, should have the same benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:29 am
suprgrl12 First of all, marriage is a solely religious serimony. If the government and other factors were not involved with marriage, I think gay marriage should'nt be allowed since the belief of the religion (Christianity for example) does not allow for gays to marry. HOWEVER, since government IS involved in marriage, along with health care and other benefits, gay marriage should be allowed so that all couples, whether gay or straight, should have the same benefits.
Almost every culture since man has had some form of marriage. Christianity showed up a little late to claim the right to own marriage.
Or how about this? I'm an atheist. Should I not be allowed to marry unless I convert?
And what makes it okay for a couple to marry in Vegas within a few hours of meeting each other, but not two men who are ready to commit to one another?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:52 am
I'm gay, clearly for gay marriage, but what I DON'T get is that people refuse to accept that the Bible and Abrahamic religions (Christianity included) are anti-gay and anti-women and a slew of other unpleasant things. And yet they persist on being part of that religion, despite the fact their own views are at odds with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
