Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 62
  1. #41  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    no-man's land in Texas
    Posts
    2,168
    Quote Originally Posted by LogansPapa View Post
    So - again, what effect, exactly, will these marriages have on you and yours?

    Personally (at the risk of looking like Iím playing both sides of the coin), as long as I donít have to witness two 70ish ladies tongue-kissing, it all means nothing to me. Now two 20ish yumsters is another issue. ;)
    Nothing like a good ole fashioned sexist remark to make friends.

    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #42  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The West
    Posts
    1,618
    Quote Originally Posted by linda22003 View Post
    I think that really is what it boils down to, all smokescreens about children notwithstanding; many straight people just don't want gays to get married, because they think it's icky.
    In other words, you think anyone who has objections, hasn't really thought out their opinion and is just reacting emotionally. Because no sane person would have any reason to object, unless they were a bible thumper or something, right?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #43  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    no-man's land in Texas
    Posts
    2,168
    Personally, I do have a problem with gays being married. Civil unions, I am ok with. But marriage should be between a male and female.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #44  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Teetop View Post
    Personally, I do have a problem with gays being married. Civil unions, I am ok with. But marriage should be between a male and female.
    I used to be not so long ago that the Church was the entity that untited couples in marriage.
    Then, as in all societal functions, city, state and now the fed got involved. This would never be the issue it is today if it was left up to the community.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #45  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Hartford, CT USA
    Posts
    2,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Lager View Post
    In other words, you think anyone who has objections, hasn't really thought out their opinion and is just reacting emotionally. Because no sane person would have any reason to object, unless they were a bible thumper or something, right?
    That view is very well supported by this thread, if one assumes that thinking involves rationality. Thus far, the arguments put forward herein seem to be of three types:

    1. It's morally wrong, reflecting the erosion of society's morals
    2. Same sex marriages can't produce children without artificial means
    3. It will lead to polygamy, beastiality, and legal pedophilia

    Note that none of these are rational arguments. (1) relies upon morality, not logic, and morality almost certainly derived from religion; (2) is not a condition for opposite sex marriages and, therefore, cannot be made for same sex ones; (3) is the slippery slope fallacy that represents opinion, not fact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #46  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The West
    Posts
    1,618
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Warrior View Post
    That view is very well supported by this thread, if one assumes that thinking involves rationality. Thus far, the arguments put forward herein seem to be of three types:

    1. It's morally wrong, reflecting the erosion of society's morals
    2. Same sex marriages can't produce children without artificial means
    3. It will lead to polygamy, beastiality, and legal pedophilia

    Note that none of these are rational arguments. (1) relies upon morality, not logic, and morality almost certainly derived from religion; (2) is not a condition for opposite sex marriages and, therefore, cannot be made for same sex ones; (3) is the slippery slope fallacy that represents opinion, not fact.
    I don't believe religion is the exclusive antecedent for morality, but that's for another discussion. When the State sanctions same sex marriage, it is elevating the practice on a par with traditional marriage. It could be argured, rather easily I believe, that society has an interest in encouraging and promoting stable family units, and that traditional marriage has best facilitated that goal up til now. So one might rationally believe that the State's actions weaken the role of traditional marriage by acting as if it has no inherent importance or significance that distinguishes it from any other type of union.

    Of course traditional marriage as it has become today has enough problems on its own that question its "sanctity", but that needn't affect the current debate.

    Now, how about the other side. If civil unions offer the exact same benefits and legal protections as marriage, then how is the desire to have your union sanctified as a "marriage" anything more than an emotional need for acceptance or affirmation of "normalcy"?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #47  
    HR Corporate Scum patriot45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Plant City, Florida
    Posts
    10,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Warrior View Post
    That view is very well supported by this thread, if one assumes that thinking involves rationality. Thus far, the arguments put forward herein seem to be of three types:

    1. It's morally wrong, reflecting the erosion of society's morals
    2. Same sex marriages can't produce children without artificial means
    3. It will lead to polygamy, beastiality, and legal pedophilia

    Note that none of these are rational arguments. (1) relies upon morality, not logic, and morality almost certainly derived from religion; (2) is not a condition for opposite sex marriages and, therefore, cannot be made for same sex ones; (3) is the slippery slope fallacy that represents opinion, not fact.
    CW, I like the way your rebuttal is framed so nice, numbered and everything! I am rational while I am making these statements.
    Two of your bullet points are aimed at me.

    #1. I actually think the way this is going morals will decline, this is not emotional but practical. Todays youth do not display the respect of my youths youth ;) . I dont know about you, but if when I was in school(government school) and they made us read and study books like the Prince and the Prince, like they are doing now, I would have grown up stupid! And quite possibley thinking that it was the right thing to try being gay. My era new better.


    #2. I stand behind this one, it is proven that a man and a man or a woman and woman cannot procreate, so it follows that gay marriages will not further humanity. But it will lead to anarchy.

    #3. When you open the door a crack for the liibs , they will advocate anything. Think NAMBLA, and I dont know the acronym for the beast lovers.

    : ďGrow your own dope. Plant a liberal.Ē
    Ē Obummercare, 20 percent of the time it works everytime.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #48  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    11,492
    Quote Originally Posted by Lager View Post
    In other words, you think anyone who has objections, hasn't really thought out their opinion and is just reacting emotionally. Because no sane person would have any reason to object, unless they were a bible thumper or something, right?
    I don't think they have to be "Bible thumpers", but I think it probably is primarily emotional. I'm hearing all the same arguments that were used against interracial marriage, years ago ("unnatural", "damages society").
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #49  
    Patent Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Warrior View Post
    1. It's morally wrong, reflecting the erosion of society's morals
    2. Same sex marriages can't produce children without artificial means
    3. It will lead to polygamy, beastiality, and legal pedophilia
    Hmm..how about this one:
    4. Lawmaking is a function held entirely by the legislature.

    Gays should not have the right to marry because a majority of Californians say so.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #50  
    Senior Member LogansPapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Surf City, USA
    Posts
    3,782
    Quote Originally Posted by Teetop View Post
    Nothing like a good ole fashioned sexist remark to make friends.

    Yeah, guess they don't have too many twenty-something sweeties on the beach, in thong bikinis, in most tumble weed-hick Texas shit-kicker towns.
    At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •