100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Do you think that.... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Do not confuse the 'subjective' personal opinions and moral convictions with reasons based upon fact. I have not ignored the arguments being provided here. Many of the most critical ones offered by me, have been sorely neglected.
As long as one looks out into the world through the worldly fingerprint which is placed upon each of us, it will forever remain incorruptible. The problem is clear to me. Gay marriage has already been condemned in th opposition's eyes. They look for any shred of evidence which confirms that preconceived bias. The facts don't fit. Belief and opinion do not suffice. The world is not flat, nor was it made in six days by dust and spit. We know better than that. When the facts change, our opinions shoudl as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heterosexual marriage procreates. Homosexual relationships cannot biologically procreate.
That's reason to deny gay marriage? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do not confuse the 'subjective' personal opinions and moral convictions with reasons based upon fact. I have not ignored the arguments being provided here. Many of the most critical ones offered by me, have been sorely neglected. As long as one looks out into the world through the worldly fingerprint which is placed upon each of us, it will forever remain incorruptible. The problem is clear to me. Gay marriage has already been condemned in th opposition's eyes. They look for any shred of evidence which confirms that preconceived bias. The facts don't fit. Belief and opinion do not suffice. The world is not flat, nor was it made in six days by dust and spit. We know better than that. When the facts change, our opinions shoudl as well. true, the first time two men or two women lie down and create life together, I will change my view about FEDERAL support for that lifestyle,,, absolutely |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deny celibates the same and infertiles as well, based upon the same reason.
This is absurd. C'mon Ms. we know better than to call this fair and/or reasonable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just admit it.
"I discriminate against gays for no good reason other than they are gay." ****, at least be honest with yourself. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Join the Nazis and KKK...
They share the exact same reasons. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heterosexual marriage procreates. Homosexual relationships cannot biologically procreate. That's reason to deny gay marriage? no , its reason to promote heterosexual marriage. Not because its discriminating AGAINST other relations but because it is SUPPORTING the unique dynamic which is necessary for our communities to EXIST. Once you open the box to support marriage based strictly on the factors of love and legal consent, you open a pandoras box that would necessarily include all types of preferences which add little to the community and perhaps do much to harm it down the line. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deny celibates the same and infertiles as well, based upon the same reason. This is absurd. C'mon Ms. we know better than to call this fair and/or reasonable. why are we going back and forth on EXACTLY what I have already posted. There is a COMPARABLE situtation to just about any objection people can think of. We deny incestuous marriage because of possible genetic defects but in most states, we do not require such genetic scrutiny of non related couples. As I said before, one reason that incestuous couples could cry foul and unequal treatment..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just admit it. "I discriminate against gays for no good reason other than they are gay." ****, at least be honest with yourself. Just admit that everyone obviously doesnt agree on what a 'good' reason is,,, or what discrimination is lets flip the question to ' what is the good reason to PROMOTE homosexual marriage?" and I promise the same can be said about any consentual adult relationship under the sun,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Join the Nazis and KKK... They share the exact same reasons. no, I dont believe anyone should be killed. Im actually quite opposed to the use of violence to solve problems, however , I do still believe there is a legitimate and undeniable reason to support and promote heterosexual relationships which does not exist in any other sort of relations. And I will continue to not see the need to change that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You all really do not get what I have always said.. its a devide and conquer subject and we are the butt end of it..haha.. sorry could not resist  If you look at everything as a hole in our society we are led just where they want us.. its way more than homosexual thing.. just llok around at these boards and its an attack on all of us not in real power.. just look outside the box.. Shalom..Miles I'm sorry Miles, I don't understand what you are saying. (except for the pun - I got that, haha) I'm in on this thing, I live it every day, I read about it from all sides, every angle every day. I lobby my representitives, I have even written letters to the Supreme Court Justices (never answered of course). I have been aware of this issue for 26 years and I have been ivolved for the last 12 years. That's a lot of sessions of Congress, more than a few Presidents, and a lot of media. Who exactly do you think is behind this move to divide society? I can tell you, THAT has NEVER been the goal of those I work with. Our mission is to become an equitable, responsible, accepted, and valued part of society. So where is the division idea coming from? The division comes from all the Press certain things get. The sexual nature of the country is to teach division and Hatred. Why do you think all of a sudden at the same time Homosexual issues come into focus that Sex offenders are all over the news also? Bait and switch. on one hand those who go against the homosexual lifestyle are Bigots and Haters.. This is an Attack on the morals of the history of the church. Then at the same time we have a Villian,.. The sex offender who our Govt. preachs legalized Hate. No more Hate than thier Red. nomatter what you think of them. They lie with stastics and use Hollywood for thier agenda parading around children trying to make them think thier is a Boogie man on every corner. You know when the last time a Govt. promoted legalized hate and told the people to spy on a certain people? It was Hitler. Exactly the same tactics as he was proposing a Supreme Race. Some people do not deserve to live.. Does that rederic sound familiar? With the religious people or the old school you might say religious movement at odds with the Homosexual and what happens? War a Lieing war that killed and is still killing thousands and blaming Religious zealots for our Attack. Many do not believe it but do you know why we could not get a Coalition to go to war with us against Irack this time like we did in Desert Storm? France got experts the ones who actually designed the world trade Center and the film on the pentegon and made a Documentary in 2002 and showed it on European Television that by thier experts showed we killed our own people. Now I know people will thin k i am crazy but I am stating facts of what happened. What did we do? We made fun of France.. Remember the French Fry Jokes. Remember Colin Powell going Before the United Nations saying they had absolute Proof from 2 expert chemists defectors. ABC did a special on these 2 defectors years later and they had to run for thier lives and thier families did to because of this lie. Colin Powell did not like what they had to say that they knew of no chemicals being produced for warfare so he made it up. Do you see him being held accountable? Do you know that President Bushs father who is on the board of the Federal Reserve who is the agency that loans money to banks at 1 dollar for 10? What does that mean? that when you see something is Federally insured that is saying when the banks loan money they are allowed to loan on Paper 10x the amount they actually have on hand. Thats why they are always worried about a run on the banks. What the heck does all this have to do with the subject matter? Its like i said we can not see the trees for the Forest. When congress handed out 787+ billion to the banks to bail them out they were not bailing out the banks. The banks are insured by the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve borrows its money from many countries that are communists and Arab. Some of the biggestest investors are 12 of the Richests families in America. Now very little was ever said but when this Bail out was going on a The New York Times reporter did some checking on the federal reserves books. What did he find out? Thier was 2 Trillion dollars unaccounted for. So he filed for the books under the freedom of Information act. They refused. So he Filed in The Federal Courts for them and won. The Federal court served a supena to the Federal Reserve. Thier answer? Excutive Privilage.. No way was anyone seeing thier books who really is who we gave all the bailout money to that was insuring the banks against Bad Loans. Remember when Bush and cheney was to turn over documents to the senate Means committee. What did they say? Exucutive privelege and they got by with it but President Clinton gets a BJ by an intern and they want to impeach him when the country was in the best shape it had been in for decades. The big 3 auto manufactures wanted 25 Billion in loans to keep 2 million families at work. &87 Billion was no problem for the rich but 25 for the working class was outrages. WE just saw it again in Dec. 700+ Billion for the rich or Millions of People will go without. We are fed by the news what they want. We argue on here about religious Bigots and Homosexuals and everything else and forget where all this Hatred comes from. Our Leadership.. The people follow what the top tells us. In the 90's Hollywood put out wilol and Grace made the Gays Cool and those who apposed Bigots. A well thoughtout show. They feed us deception and we argue about stuff when behind the scenes they are getting ready for something BIG. You look at the History of Germany before they broke out into WW@ and then look at us and thier not much difference. The play is the same just with differnt actors and different words. Then we fight each other while they kick back and make us to where we will not beable to have a Voice because we will not have the money to fight them and without it they can make the laws say whatever they want them to say when they want to. If you have been petitioning Capital Hill then you should know this is true. No money no voice thats the Real world we live in. Our struggles for equality is a misdirection to take all our rights away . EVERYONes but The ELITE CLASS/.. Blessings. of Shalom and May Yahweh have Mercy on us ALL....Miles Miles, can you narrow the scope of all the material above to issurs regarding Homosexuality only? Or maybe you are just attempting to show why there is so much hatred and discrimination against homosexuals - could that be it? Shalom Red. I believe the Hostility between Homosexuality and many other things are a cause and effected that has not come about by chance. Lot is said to be righteous yet he lived in Sodom and Gommorrah by choice. Thier is the substance of being unhospitable to each other also as we see how Lot responded to the strangers/Angels. The gay issue has been around for a long time and we are told it will be worse for us than then but we will be living among each other. we have different beliefs but knowledge and compassion go hand in hand. we all have choices what we all do not have is esp. To know anothers Heart. Blessings of Shalom..Miles Thanks for your patience and responces. Our world, today, is FULL of noise. The noise is everywhere and it's like reading the minds of a million poeple a day. THAT's how I see media - from billboards, to radio, TV, Cable, the world wide web and the hand-held technology that keeps us connected 24/7. The problem, you seem to have identified, is that people lack the ability to discern validity in the endless, numerous streams of information that flood our senses every day. There ARE monsters out there, and even though it's ingrained in my personality to be skeptical of people I don't know very well, I STILL believe there is a human there with fears, doubts, cares, and concerns and precious few answers to life's questions, even when they don't admit to such frailty. We are LED to believe many things, but have relatively few personal experiences to support those beliefs. We take so much on faith that we forget or perhaps have never been taught that we are capable of 'knowing' so much more. Equality and justice, dispensed with the least possible encumbrance to freedom, levels the playing field in which we conduct our daily lifes. In that kind of level playing field, we would all be fighting the same kinds of monsters (together) instead of making monsters where none exist. First off Red, I don't hate homosexuals. I despise hypocrisy though. They can't say I'm descriminatory when they would descrimate also. Here's something you might like to read: Ezekiel 16:55 (King James Version) 55 When thy sisters, Sodom and her daughters, shall return to their former estate, and Samaria and her daughters shall return to their former estate, then thou and thy daughters shall return to your former estate. It's better to take it in full context, you will appreciate it me thinks. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+16&version=KJV Thanks for the link.. That is very deep. The Amorite is some strong language. "your mother was an Hittite, and your father an Amorite." Do you think that is speaking of our day as I need to study this more. But is this why sodom and Gommorrah would of repented because of the Amorite type lifestyle that is or is to come? I know the Amorite is as about as bad as it gets because they killed women and children attacking them with thier backs turned. very intersting stuff. Thanks.. Blessings..Miles Miles, thank you for the kind words. While you always give me things to ponder, I never would have thought I'd inspire you. I am really not sure, but I think it about what is yet to come. From my understanding, it's about Jerusalem's hypocrisy of judging Sodom when they ended up being more wicked in their ways. I think it was obvious that Jerusalem was hypocritical and racist. I think it's also about pride (a fools folly), of taking one's gift and "running" with it. I believe it speaks about when the "new covenant" will finnaly be realised. I don't think Sodom's downfall was homosexuality, I think it was wickedness. "Thou shalt not steal" is really about kidnapping, is it not? I think the men of the city were in violation of that law in the form of rape as well as other violations. People think we're under the new covenant now, I do not believe that is the case. Not untill every person recognises how we're all connected and learns to love will the new covenant be in effect. Was it not said the new covenant will be marked by not needing to teach your neighbor? That everyone will have YHWH's law instilled in their heart? Right now, the world seems to be filled with hate. They hate for what another does or doesn't believe. They hate because of their color or nationality. Hate because of what someone says. The world is also full of lies and liars right now. What do I think causes lies? Greed and Pride... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It still comes down to adults of age and mental consent should be allowed to marry.
none of the supposed reasons against it hold water or logic. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It still comes down to adults of age and mental consent should be allowed to marry. none of the supposed reasons against it hold water or logic. In your oppinion... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's look at 'em some more!
So far Ms. has concluded that gay marriage should not be promoted because gay people cannot naturally procreate, and until that happens, she'll be against it. The same could be said for infertile heterosexual couples. Is that reasonable justification? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pan,
You could put your reasons out there too! Justification is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. "That's your opinion." is a weak response that attempts to equally justify all opinions because they're opinions. No one here would grant equal justification to Hitler's opinions - would they??? Let us look at what those opinions are based upon, because that is what justifies opinions. Internal justification requires no agreement, external justification requires being shown. That is being reasonable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Mon 01/10/11 01:03 PM
|
|
Let's look at 'em some more! So far Ms. has concluded that gay marriage should not be promoted because gay people cannot naturally procreate, and until that happens, she'll be against it. The same could be said for infertile heterosexual couples. Is that reasonable justification? that wasnt actually my conclusion, my point was there is a SUBSTANTIAL reason to promote heterosexual activity that just doesnt exist for homosexual relations, period when we start nit picking the details of one group over the other what you will be left with is an ANYTHING goes that only has boundaries founded upon adult consent,,,, claim that incest is a genetic risk, and its discriminatory based upon the EXISTENCE within heterosexual couplings to have genetic risks,,, if the only valid criteria are going to be those which can be proven to NOT ALSO exist within certain heterosexual couplings,, than there wil be no VALID criteria at all, beyond that of legal capacity to consent so instead of approaching the argument from the 'whats wrong' with this group(homosexual, incestuous) which isnt ALSO wrong with that group I approach it from what is the 'UNIQUE' characteristic of this group(heterosexual) which should be promoted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my point was there is a SUBSTANTIAL reason to promote heterosexual activity that just doesnt exist for homosexual relations, period What is that? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pan, You could put your reasons out there too! Justification is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. "That's your opinion." is a weak response that attempts to equally justify all opinions because they're opinions. No one here would grant equal justification to Hitler's opinions - would they??? Let us look at what those opinions are based upon, because that is what justifies opinions. Internal justification requires no agreement, external justification requires being shown. That is being reasonable. OK, my reason for saying "In your oppinion..." in response to Dragoness' claim of "none of the supposed reasons against it hold water or logic." should be clear. She's already showed her subjective nature by claiming incestuos sex is "sick". She also makes the fallacious claims of: "Christians have to be disingenuous or restrictive in their relationships with gay folks because there is no way they can approve and not say anything derogatory about the gay person's life." and "Causing the religious person to be ungenuine in their relationships due to the doctrines of the church in this case causing fear. " But wait, it gets better... "As for marriage it sure as hell isn't your damn business who marries who. You over step your boundaries in that area as are all those who oppose gay marriage for whatever reason they do. None of the opposition to gay marriage is valid it is all undue demonizing of people." Two points here: 1. If who marries who is none of anyone's business, why does she oppose underage, incestuous and mentally challenged marriage? 2. She demonizes the religious with her fallacious claims. So I have the right to assess her words and action as invalid as it's just the demonization of those who don't agree with her. Hence, "In your oppinion..." Now if you want to really delve into the issue, I'm going to have to ask that you justify what you mean by these words: "Being biased for equal affordances of right/priveleges to all people does not require automatically granting priveleges to all. It only requires that sufficient reason be given to justify not granting such priveleges, and that when any attempt to deny is unjustified, that those priveleges be granted." To me, all means all. Not all, except those I don't feel deserve it. Justification is a subjective term, one which some may or may not agree with. In the case of incest, would you object to a homesxual, incestuos marriage? Being there would be no case for genetics? If you lived 100 years ago, would you oppose "underage" marriage? What about the age descrimination between male and female? 16 for females and 18 for males. Science has shown that the brain isn't fully developed until 20 years of age... Do we raise the requirements for marriage because of this? I know some would oppose using these as parallels, but this discussion is about marriage priveleges and I think they are valid points. I know this isn't related to marriage, but do you oppose nudism in public? I do apreciate this sentiment: "The road to being reasonable is better walked without throwing the religious stones around. It is not necessary to bring religion up unless it is being openly claimed as support for the discrimination." If you like, send me a private message and I will discuss this further, but I'm to "PC" to actually say everything here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you think that being Christian or Islamic (since they are so similar) makes a person overly obsessed with death/reward so that they cannot live life? Or even truly be themselves and genuine? Christians are saved through Grace, not works. I'm worried about treating the people around me with love and kindness and not death or reward. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pan, You could put your reasons out there too! Justification is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. "That's your opinion." is a weak response that attempts to equally justify all opinions because they're opinions. No one here would grant equal justification to Hitler's opinions - would they??? Let us look at what those opinions are based upon, because that is what justifies opinions. Internal justification requires no agreement, external justification requires being shown. That is being reasonable. OK, my reason for saying "In your oppinion..." in response to Dragoness' claim of "none of the supposed reasons against it hold water or logic." should be clear. She's already showed her subjective nature by claiming incestuos sex is "sick". She also makes the fallacious claims of: "Christians have to be disingenuous or restrictive in their relationships with gay folks because there is no way they can approve and not say anything derogatory about the gay person's life." and "Causing the religious person to be ungenuine in their relationships due to the doctrines of the church in this case causing fear. " But wait, it gets better... "As for marriage it sure as hell isn't your damn business who marries who. You over step your boundaries in that area as are all those who oppose gay marriage for whatever reason they do. None of the opposition to gay marriage is valid it is all undue demonizing of people." Two points here: 1. If who marries who is none of anyone's business, why does she oppose underage, incestuous and mentally challenged marriage? 2. She demonizes the religious with her fallacious claims. So I have the right to assess her words and action as invalid as it's just the demonization of those who don't agree with her. Hence, "In your oppinion..." Now if you want to really delve into the issue, I'm going to have to ask that you justify what you mean by these words: "Being biased for equal affordances of right/priveleges to all people does not require automatically granting priveleges to all. It only requires that sufficient reason be given to justify not granting such priveleges, and that when any attempt to deny is unjustified, that those priveleges be granted." To me, all means all. Not all, except those I don't feel deserve it. Justification is a subjective term, one which some may or may not agree with. In the case of incest, would you object to a homesxual, incestuos marriage? Being there would be no case for genetics? If you lived 100 years ago, would you oppose "underage" marriage? What about the age descrimination between male and female? 16 for females and 18 for males. Science has shown that the brain isn't fully developed until 20 years of age... Do we raise the requirements for marriage because of this? I know some would oppose using these as parallels, but this discussion is about marriage priveleges and I think they are valid points. I know this isn't related to marriage, but do you oppose nudism in public? I do apreciate this sentiment: "The road to being reasonable is better walked without throwing the religious stones around. It is not necessary to bring religion up unless it is being openly claimed as support for the discrimination." If you like, send me a private message and I will discuss this further, but I'm to "PC" to actually say everything here. how do you color your post that way,,lol |
|
|
|
|
