Tweet
What you think Wiglaf should have no bearing on what others want to do? Societal norms? Who are you or your type to define them or impose them on other people. I will reiterate - it is no business of yours to define the relationships of other people...would you like me to define by which parameters who should live your life? No...
-
Speaking of Erith:
"It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda Smith -
The United States government has thrived with basic instiutions intact, marriage between a man and woman being one of them.
Culturally the world is in upheaval, this liberal idea that advocates pleasure above all else.
The United States has fallen victim to this culture to an extent, but to maintain some common theme on a topic so fundamental as marriage, it chooses not to embrace gay marriage.
Tell me why that's wrong and I'm a liar.Comment
-
You want a culture where men can screw their dogs legally. Ridiculous, haha would you like a biscuit. FETCH,Don't you mean justice for all?Comment
-
Wiglaf, that is not correct. A gay relationship is between two human beings who can consent. You cannot compare this to bestiality. That's a logical fallacy. The United States governemnt has thrived with basic institutions intact? You have a big problem with denial. What is the divorce rate these days? The US Government does not rely on marriage to survive in the first place so I see no harm in granting gay couples marriage. Societal norms? According to whom? Crazy nutcase christians? I don't think so. I'm as much part of this country as you are.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
You're drawing complete nonsequiturs...what the hell has gay marriage got to do with the position of the United States in the world? Nothing whatsoever. What has the principles of hedonism to do with homosexuality rather than heterosexuality? It's a matter of different horses for different courses and nothing else. Unless of course you are alluding to your antiquated, outmoded concept of sin and how 'pleasure is bad'. Quite frankly, that's a load of outmoded codswallop...Originally posted by Wiglaf
The United States government has thrived with basic instiutions intact, marriage between a man and woman being one of them.
Culturally the world is in upheaval, this liberal idea that advocates pleasure above all else.
The United States has fallen victim to this culture to an extent, but to maintain some common theme on a topic so fundamental as marriage, it chooses not to embrace gay marriage.
Tell me why that's wrong and I'm a liar.Speaking of Erith:
"It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda SmithComment
-
Ah yes, the type of logical fallacy I was looking for was nonsequiturs. Thanks, PH, for helping me out. Well afterall in his mind he thinks homosexuality will collapse civilization.Originally posted by Provost Harrison
You're drawing complete nonsequiturs...what the hell has gay marriage got to do with the position of the United States in the world? Nothing whatsoever. What has the principles of hedonism to do with homosexuality rather than heterosexuality? It's a matter of different horses for different courses and nothing else. Unless of course you are alluding to your antiquated, outmoded concept of sin and how 'pleasure is bad'. Quite frankly, that's a load of outmoded codswallop...
For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
As long as your dog doesn't mind, why should I?Originally posted by Wiglaf
You want a culture where men can screw their dogs legally. Ridiculous, haha would you like a biscuit. FETCH,
ACK!
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust!Comment
-
"Outmoded concept of sin, responsibility" = language of a cultural slide.outmoded concept of sin and how 'pleasure is bad'. Quite frankly, that's a load of outmoded codswallop...
Homosexuals ought not to be state sanctinoned because this is a fundamentally hedonistic practice - marriages ending in divorce can also be (although largely not at the outset) but most serve far more functional and substantive roles.Comment
-
Originally posted by Wiglaf
Homosexuals ought not to be state sanctinoned because this is a fundamentally hedonistic practice -
Wiglaf is Alan Keyes!To us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
Re: Issues concerning gays -- part XXXVVV
That has absolutely nothing to do with the arguments against gay marriage.Originally posted by MrFun
I am reading a new book titled "Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People's Right to Marry" by Evan Wolfson.
I found out that in 1987 the Supreme Court of United States ruled in the Turner v. Safley case that convicted felons have the right/freedom to marry.
Apparently, convicted felons are worthy of equal citizenship over law-abiding gays and lesbians who pay their taxes, earn a living through a job, and are actively involved in their community.
Comment
-
Nonsequitur...and you keep repeating it. Homosexuality is inherently no more hedonistic than heterosexuality - it is a matter of inclination.Originally posted by Wiglaf
"Outmoded concept of sin, responsibility" = language of a cultural slide.
Homosexuals ought not to be state sanctinoned because this is a fundamentally hedonistic practice - marriages ending in divorce can also be (although largely not at the outset) but most serve far more functional and substantive roles.
And believe it or not, very few people plan to get divorced when they get married (I would say tending towards zero). And what if a homosexual marriage is more likely to last - which is very probable!
And what is a 'cultural slide'? It sounds like more conservative bullsh*t to me with no grounding in rationality...Speaking of Erith:
"It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda SmithComment
-
Explain the 50% divorce rate amongst heterosexual couples these days. Your words will keep backfiring on you. Homosexuality is no more hedonistic then heterosexuality.Originally posted by Wiglaf
"Outmoded concept of sin, responsibility" = language of a cultural slide.
Homosexuals ought not to be state sanctinoned because this is a fundamentally hedonistic practice - marriages ending in divorce can also be (although largely not at the outset) but most serve far more functional and substantive roles.
The christian bible does not control the morality in a democracy.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
The christian bible does not control the morality in a democracy.
To us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
The fact that straight couples divorce is irrelevant. As you said they do not plan to divorce when they are married; the idea is usually to start a family.
If it fails, that is unfortunate, but the fundamental practice results in procreation by and large. It is not entirely rooted in pleasure or two lovebirds being able to have sex. Throughout history is served as a good way to provide family stability.
To change that pretty noble institution into a "bang whatever you want" mentality is more than a little stirring. It is also the government's call, and the government can decide what is and what isn't fundamentally or historically founded for the best interests of the country.
Sounds like more liberal BS to me, and in addition this has nothing to do with the argument. If you want to call an institution for raising stable families a wildly right wing operation then I think you need to rethink your widly liberal philosophies.The christian bible does not control the morality in a democracy.
PS Kuciwalker at least you keep an open mind more than I can say about the rest of the world
Comment
-
Sounds like more liberal BS to me
It's necessary to be a liberal to think we shouldn't have a biblical theocracy?Comment
Comment