First  Prev  231  232  233  234  235  236  237  238  239  240  241  242  243  Next  Last
Post Reply Sexual Orientation
3525 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / "Spaaaaace!"
Offline
Posted 5/9/13 , edited 5/9/13

Iainfixie wrote:


>Nudest

>Believes that nudists have wild public orgies.



I was being facetious. It was a joke... Who pissed in your cornflakes?
Posted 5/9/13

spacebat wrote:


Iainfixie wrote:


>Nudest

>Believes that nudists have wild public orgies.



Who pissed in your cornflakes?


3690 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Opposite of SoCal
Offline
Posted 5/9/13
no glove no love baby!
2673 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Sexual Chocolate
Offline
Posted 5/10/13

kurishima wrote:

What Spacebat said Lol
As well as imagine the spread of the diseases..


Still waiting on that explanation for how giving gays the right to marry is going to eventually lead to the downfall of the US within the next 200 years.

I want bullet point examples of key events/moments that will lead to this catastrophic result as well as actual evidence why this will happen along with projections that account for things like increasing globalization and the reduction in violent deaths world wide as we move forward. If you're going to make outrageous claims at least do more to support them than make vague statements and flawed comparisons.
Posted 5/10/13 , edited 5/10/13

History repeats itself, it is self explanatory.

Edit: I take it you don't like to allow people to have any beliefs that differ your own? How sad, you won't always get what you want. Keep your beliefs though and if its truly what you believe don't let anyone change them.
I won't be reply to your posts by the way. Feel free to post away madam.
22561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / Northern California
Offline
Posted 5/10/13

kurishima wrote:


History repeats itself, it is self explanatory.

Edit: I take it you don't like to allow people to have any beliefs that differ your own? How sad, you won't always get what you want. Keep your beliefs though and if its truly what you believe don't let anyone change them.
I won't be reply to your posts by the way. Feel free to post away madam.


I'm with Pomff on this one. You made the claim, and so the burden of proof is on you. How sad that you make statements like that, then shy away from actually supporting your position with reasoned evidence. What you have is an opinion, not an debate, much less a coherent argument. Pointing to a single example from many centuries ago, and then saying, "history repeats" is insufficient evidence to rest on your laurels.

Want to see an example? I can point to the bible for examples of arguments against marriage, because women were property to be sold by their fathers, and a man wouldn't be punished for raping a girl, as long as he paid her father and married her. Or how about the rule that a marriage is only valid if the woman is a virgin, and if she is not, she is to be executed? By that definition, a widow isn't meant to remarry, but it's perfectly fine for a man to do so, as long as his new wife's a virgin...

To which you might reply, "But wait, that's not valid, because things aren't like that these days!" History hasn't repeated in these cases, right?

...And that is precisely why your assertion's logic fails.
2673 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Sexual Chocolate
Offline
Posted 5/10/13 , edited 5/10/13

kurishima wrote:
History repeats itself, it is self explanatory.

Edit: I take it you don't like to allow people to have any beliefs that differ your own? How sad, you won't always get what you want. Keep your beliefs though and if its truly what you believe don't let anyone change them.

I won't be reply to your posts by the way. Feel free to post away madam.


The forum is called "Extended Discussion". If you aren't capable of discussing your beliefs at length and backing them up then why are you even bothering to post here? So because it's your belief nobody should call you out on your faulty logic and lack of evidence to support it? In that case I believe the sun is made of super heated cheese! Don't call me out on how incredibly wrong the science is there, it's my belief and you should respect that.

"History Repeats Itself" is not a real argument. It's you throwing out a cliche in an attempt to get out of using any kind of facts or logical arguments to support your claim.

edit: Wanna know why i'm asking you to defend your claim? Aside from it being what people should do during a discussion anyways?


kurishima wrote:

edit: Not meant to offend anyone but just to show that we're making a mistake lol


You claimed in your first post that increasing acceptance of gays and lesbians is a mistake. And i'm supposed to just shrug and say "well that's his opinion I shouldn't respond if i'm not going to agree with it."? If you're going to make that kind of controversial claim you better be prepared to back it up with something beyond your opinion.
Posted 5/10/13 , edited 5/10/13


I made the claim because I do think society is going downhill and a lot of people think so as well and part of it is because were letting people do whatever they want. Won't be too long before incest lovers come out saying they want to wed as well. Then animals lovers.. etc. I feel that allowing gays to wed is wrong and if we do allow them it will set an example to all the other couples that they should have their rights as well. I also don't get what gays mean by their rights. They have every single right I have. If a church refuses to marry them because it doesn't fall in the guidelines of what they consider marriage then too bad. To force the church to do something isn't getting the blessing of god, it's like spitting in his face and making him to wed them.

Depends which bible you read, it goes both ways a divorced man or woman is not supposed to remarry. Why? it's still considered adultery and will condemn them to hell. I actually agree with that woman should be virgins when they get married just as men should as well. I don't see how the mistreatment of women has to do with the right for gays to wed.

edit: there are gays that don't agree with the marriage laws they are trying to pass to allow gays to wed. Why? Because they don't believe it's right to force the church to marry them, they want the church to accept them on their own. There are a few churches that will marry gays btw.
Posted 5/10/13


Read my reply to Spazticus.
Posted 5/10/13
I'm pretty sure the whole gay thing wasn't the only reason Rome fell, lmao.

-

Heard an argument the other day, that once we legalize gay marriage, we're going to legalize bestiality and pedophilia, and then who knows what.

Posting that here, because it's obviously true.
13494 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / SoCal
Offline
Posted 5/10/13
Let them live the way they want to. I live how I like and its not like they are doing anything that impacts you in any negative way.
2673 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Sexual Chocolate
Offline
Posted 5/10/13

kurishima wrote:

I made the claim because I do think society is going downhill and a lot of people think so as well and part of it is because were letting people do whatever they want. Won't be too long before incest lovers come out saying they want to wed as well. Then animals lovers.. etc. I feel that allowing gays to wed is wrong and if we do allow them it will set an example to all the other couples that they should have their rights as well.

I also don't get what gays mean by their rights. They have every single right I have. If a church refuses to marry them because it doesn't fall in the guidelines of what they consider marriage then too bad. To force the church to do something isn't getting the blessing of god, it's like spitting in his face and making him to wed them.

Depends which bible you read, it goes both ways a divorced man or woman is not supposed to remarry. Why? it's still considered adultery and will condemn them to hell. I actually agree with that woman should be virgins when they get married just as men should as well. I don't see how the mistreatment of women has to do with the right for gays to wed.


I'll break my response up into three points, one to answer each of your points.

#1. As I called you out on in the other thread, this is the same type of slippery slope stupidity that people who argued against race equality made. You wanna know the difference between marriage between two adults and marriage between an adult and a child or animal? The two adults are capable of consent. Children and animals cannot give consent. This is not a difficult concept to wrap your mind around, use your head.

#2. Can two gay adults get married legally in every US state? No? Then they don't have the same rights you do. If they get married in one state will their marriage be recognized by every state in the US? No? So they don't have the same rights as you do.

Do you know how marriage works in the US? You don't need to marry in a church and you don't need a church's approval to marry. Marriage is a legal contract that can be performed anywhere provided an ordained minister is there to preside over the ceremony. Ordained ministers can be pastor from an accepted religious organization or a judge of the Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeals, Court of Civil Appeals, any circuit court or any district court within this state, by a judge of any federal court, or by a judge of probate within his or her county, or any retired judge of the Supreme Court, retired judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals, retired judge of the Court of Civil Appeals, retired judge of the circuit court, retired judge of the district court within this state or a retired judge of probate within his or her count.

I don't believe a church should be forced to marry someone, but you don't need a church to get married.

#3. I have no idea what you're going for here. The US has separation of church and state so what you believe shouldn't have any baring on what two other consenting adults believe. I have even less idea what your last sentence is supposed to mean because I said nothing relating to mistreatment of women. If you're talking about religious organizations mistreating women then that's on the religious organization for being backwards not on gay people for wanting to have the same rights.
Posted 5/10/13
First off the reply of mistreatment of women wasn't for you. Lol

What about incest then? it's still two adults.

They have every single right I have, just like they have the right to marry someone of the opposite gender, they just don't want to. Lol so Yes they do have the same rights. I don't know what idiot would compare blacks being discriminated against and gay people wanting to be wed.

I know how marriage is done, I simply thought that was a part of what gays wanted, especially christian gays.
22561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / Northern California
Offline
Posted 5/10/13

kurishima wrote:



I made the claim because I do think society is going downhill and a lot of people think so as well and part of it is because were letting people do whatever they want. Won't be too long before incest lovers come out saying they want to wed as well. Then animals lovers.. etc. I feel that allowing gays to wed is wrong and if we do allow them it will set an example to all the other couples that they should have their rights as well. I also don't get what gays mean by their rights. They have every single right I have. If a church refuses to marry them because it doesn't fall in the guidelines of what they consider marriage then too bad. To force the church to do something isn't getting the blessing of god, it's like spitting in his face and making him to wed them.

Depends which bible you read, it goes both ways a divorced man or woman is not supposed to remarry. Why? it's still considered adultery and will condemn them to hell. I actually agree with that woman should be virgins when they get married just as men should as well. I don't see how the mistreatment of women has to do with the right for gays to wed.

edit: there are gays that don't agree with the marriage laws they are trying to pass to allow gays to wed. Why? Because they don't believe it's right to force the church to marry them, they want the church to accept them on their own. There are a few churches that will marry gays btw.

First off, you "think" society is going downhill, but that is so subjective in scope, it doesn't qualify as anything other than an opinion. Guess what, you can't control all of the people all of the time, and "letting people do what they want" is very much the result of living in a society based upon...the principles of freedom from oppression by the tyranny of the majority. If you want an authoritarian, theocratic government, a government so small it can fit in your bedroom, and tell you who you are able to love, what positions you can have sex in, and what brand of religion must be worshiped, great for you. Find enough like minded individuals, go buy an island, and live out your dystopic dreams. Have fun with that, or not. Don't bring the rest of us along with you, because you don't get to speak for us. We can speak for ourselves just fine, thank you very much.

The slippery slope argument is illogical, and has been disproven time and time again. It does not constitute any valid argument in the debate regarding gay marriage. Why? Because it's already been established as law that first cousins can marry in 26 states (six of which require certain conditions before the marriage is considered valid.) By the definition of the law, it is incestuous, though not illegal. Nowhere in the US is it legal for siblings to marry, nor will it be so as a result of marriage equality being recognized. The same goes for bestiality, or the other personal favorite of bible thumpers, pedophilia.

I mentioned widows specifically. I did NOT mention divorcees, though good job trying to make a pathetic straw man argument out of that. The point you completely missed is that the misogyny of the bible is still being carried out today, in the teachings of fundamentalist churches. The notion as it's written now is that the role of women lies in being subservient to men, and they are not to be in any way superior, much less equal, to them. Yeah, it's fine if the men of the bible have their concubines, and still have a wife, and that's considered marriage in the biblical sense, too. That's what you're arguing in favor of here, and again, it's yet another point where your logic fails.

As for your blatantly false assertion that they have every single right you have, no, that is not the case. For insurance purposes, funerary arrangements, and hospital visitation rights, as just some of many examples, they do not. This is by definition not equal treatment under the law, which is the crux of just about every pro-marriage equality argument I am aware of. Most importantly, they do not have the right to marry the person they love, in most states.

I challenge you to find a logical and reasoned argument against gay marriage, that isn't based upon religious dogma. or an illogical slippery slope argument. The burden of proof is on you here, as it is your assertion, your opinion, and not remotely based on reality. Nobody in favor of gay marriage has logically argued that a couple who wants to be married in a church can force their way into having the ceremony there. No, why would someone want to be married in the church of a congregation that hates them? It doesn't follow, since acknowledgement by the state is what is desired. Equal treatment and protection under the law is precisely the right you are denying should exist here.

Then again, I personally feel that religious organizations have far too much hold on marriage equality, and they hold it so sacred that...how many opponents of gay marriage have at least one divorce under their belts? Oh, right. They're the hypocrites in the majority, so it's somehow okay when they do it. For the record, I am a straight man, and very much in favor of marriage equality.

Come back when you have something other than tired slippery slope arguments, and perhaps we can engage in a debate. What you're bringing to the table now barely constitutes more than a weak and flaccid opinion.
2673 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Sexual Chocolate
Offline
Posted 5/10/13 , edited 5/10/13

kurishima wrote:

What about incest then? it's still two adults.

They have every single right I have, just like they have the right to marry someone of the opposite gender, they just don't want to. Lol so Yes they do have the same rights. I don't know what idiot would compare blacks being discriminated against and gay people wanting to be wed.

I know how marriage is done, I simply thought that was a part of what gays wanted, especially christian gays.


"It is most definitely not the case that we disallow incest just because it’s traditional to do so. While it is true that it is not traditional to allow it, it is also true that is not allowed because: 1) sexual union between close relatives produces dangerous genetic aberration, 2) incest, like statutory rape and certain kinds of workplace sexual harassment, too often by definition involves a perpetrator who holds authority and control over a victim who doesn’t have sufficient freedom or maturity to make a decision otherwise, and thus violates the requirement of consent (admittedly this is a limited argument, but a forceful one in the cases where it applies, i.e. child-parent incest) 3) there is an observed biological imperative against incest which suggests that we are backed up by natural law in censuring it. None of these arguments apply to gay marriage."
not my words, source: http://babelwright.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/if-you-allow-gay-marriage-incest-will-be-next/

I bolded what I felt to be the most important part, incest creates a situation of questionable consent where one party can have too much influence over the other party for them to make rational choices. It's still a rather irrelevant argument you're making since it hinges on your slippery slope fallacy actually holding true.

If that's the definition for equal rights you want to run with then sure they have the same rights. Most people would point out though that since being attracted and romantically involved with someone of the same sex are a part of their identity, like being black or white for example, then by not allowing them to marry you're denying them that right. Spaz did a good job of laying down the situation more eloquently than I did.

Maybe you should actually look at the arguments gay people are making instead of just assuming. While I believe churches should agree to marry gay couples i'm against forcing them to, the majority of gay people are the same way. The fact that you automatically jumped to the "gays want to force churches to marry them" line makes me question that you know what marriage in the US is.

I'm also still waiting for you to acknowledge the obvious differences between Rome and the US (issues such as globalization being the most obvious) or provide actual evidence beyond your blind supposition for the US collapsing in 200 years.
First  Prev  231  232  233  234  235  236  237  238  239  240  241  242  243  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.