U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Nebraska > Omaha
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-14-2011, 09:00 PM
 
Location: Midtown Omaha
1,225 posts, read 1,812,610 times
Reputation: 546

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
Good post!

Regarding the issue of science, I think that refusal to accept science is another defense mechanism of the deeply religious, because accepting it would open a huge Pandora's box of challenges for them. Think about it from Calvinist's point of view. Accepting the scientific consensus that homosexuality is not a choice, you're left with only a couple logical conclusions.

- God is not real

- God is real, but the bible is wrong.

- God is real and the bible is correct, which means that God created a significant portion of humanity that is predisposed to sin, and will sentence them to eternal damnation for the way he made them.

None of those options are really fun things to think about for someone like Calvinist, so they take the easy way out of going into denial and closing the door to science.
Spot on.

I really have the upmost respect for thinkers that believe in God, but have the ability to evolve and reason without following what another tells them verbatim.

Pasteur, Newton, Boyle and Mendel are prime examples of some of the greatest scientists ever that were either Christian scholars(Newton) or devout Christians themselves.

Mendel is even the father of genetics, his discoveries helped lead modern scientists to conclude that sexual orientation isn't simply a choice. Btw Mendel was an Augustinian friar.

A quote from one of the greatest Christian minds of the past century.

Quote:
If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin, and in the end, despair.
C. S. Lewis

 
Old 09-14-2011, 09:04 PM
 
Location: Midtown Omaha
1,225 posts, read 1,812,610 times
Reputation: 546
This probably didn't need to head this far to the religious side though.

Until I can hear, think of or read a reasonable secular reason to not allow homosexual marriage I am going to be standing on this side of the debate.
 
Old 09-15-2011, 08:17 AM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,672,690 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamjacobm View Post
Spot on.

I really have the upmost respect for thinkers that believe in God, but have the ability to evolve and reason without following what another tells them verbatim.

So you have respect for religious thinkers that don't really believe in religion? Is that it?

Quote:
Pasteur, Newton, Boyle and Mendel are prime examples of some of the greatest scientists ever that were either Christian scholars(Newton) or devout Christians themselves.

Mendel is even the father of genetics, his discoveries helped lead modern scientists to conclude that sexual orientation isn't simply a choice. Btw Mendel was an Augustinian friar.

A quote from one of the greatest Christian minds of the past century.


Honestly...I don't really care if homosexuality is shown to be genetic. It doesn't change a thing. The behavior is what's immoral....not the temptation or urges one gets. But it is fun to tweak the folks that base their entire argument on an unproven idea that it MUST be genetic...but we haven't seen any actual scientific reason to believe it.

But that's not really the point, as I've routinely pointed out on this board, there are plenty of reasons to deny same-gender "marriage" that are not religious in nature.
 
Old 09-15-2011, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Midtown Omaha
1,225 posts, read 1,812,610 times
Reputation: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
So you have respect for religious thinkers that don't really believe in religion? Is that it?
So your claiming that Gregor Mendel and Robert Boyle didn't believe in religion?
 
Old 09-15-2011, 09:08 AM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,672,690 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamjacobm View Post
So your claiming that Gregor Mendel and Robert Boyle didn't believe in religion?
I honestly know very little about either of them. I was responding to your statement. You seemed to imply that a little bit of religion is good...as long as it doesn't actually affect the way you think or live.
 
Old 09-15-2011, 12:12 PM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,672,690 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshbarj View Post
And you have just gone and shown you are THE definition of a bigot! How can you expect a gay person not to act gay when it's what they are? That would be like asking a heterosexual person to stop loving the other sex and start loving the same one.
Do you need marriage to love someone? I don't care what people do in their homes.
Quote:


No, you thus far have only given religious based reasons. I have yet to hear even one argument that was not. And the reason is quite simple, there are no reasons.
Aside from the fact that I have repeatedly stated that we shouldn't legislate based on the whim of a very small, very vocal minority?
 
Old 09-15-2011, 12:41 PM
 
Location: the Beaver State
6,468 posts, read 11,526,258 times
Reputation: 3527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
Do you need marriage to love someone? I don't care what people do in their homes.


Aside from the fact that I have repeatedly stated that we shouldn't legislate based on the whim of a very small, very vocal minority?
There was a very vocal minority that used to say Blacks (don't forget Indians, and Asians,) should be able to marry whites.

The arguments against such were that it was "immoral," "unnatural," "against God's Will." Legal arguments were structured such that the 14th Amendment was bypassed (by Judges!) By 1950, 37 States had laws against interracial marriages with some heavy penalties such as ten year prison sentences.

But in 1967 that all was changed. These days, how many people really complain about interracial marriage? Has it really affected society to the point that we can stand back and say "Allowing this was a bad idea!"?
 
Old 09-15-2011, 12:49 PM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,672,690 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamellr View Post
There was a very vocal minority that used to say Blacks (don't forget Indians, and Asians,) should be able to marry whites.

The arguments against such were that it was "immoral," "unnatural," "against God's Will." Legal arguments were structured such that the 14th Amendment was bypassed (by Judges!) By 1950, 37 States had laws against interracial marriages with some heavy penalties such as ten year prison sentences.

But in 1967 that all was changed. These days, how many people really complain about interracial marriage? Has it really affected society to the point that we can stand back and say "Allowing this was a bad idea!"?
Your point? skin color <> sexual choice.

You tell me how we identify gay people and make sure they can marry.
 
Old 09-15-2011, 01:21 PM
 
816 posts, read 1,415,705 times
Reputation: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
Do you need marriage to love someone? I don't care what people do in their homes.
You keep saying that, and then you end up taking it right back! If you truly did not care what they did in their homes you would not care if they got married. Also the same would go for heterosexual couples. Do they need to get married to love each-other? If no why have marriage at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
Aside from the fact that I have repeatedly stated that we shouldn't legislate based on the whim of a very small, very vocal minority?
And that is not a legal reason. Hamellr gave an EXCELLENT example with the rights of black people. Black people can't sop being black anymore than a gay person can stop being gay. Sure they can stop the activity, but that dose not change WHO the person is. Though I know you dispute the science that points to gayness being linked to genetics, despite the strong evidence.
 
Old 09-15-2011, 01:51 PM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,672,690 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by harshbarj View Post
You keep saying that, and then you end up taking it right back! If you truly did not care what they did in their homes you would not care if they got married. Also the same would go for heterosexual couples. Do they need to get married to love each-other? If no why have marriage at all.
Marriage does not exist to allow people to love each other.
Quote:


And that is not a legal reason. Hamellr gave an EXCELLENT example with the rights of black people. Black people can't sop being black anymore than a gay person can stop being gay. Sure they can stop the activity, but that dose not change WHO the person is. Though I know you dispute the science that points to gayness being linked to genetics, despite the strong evidence.
Sorry...I don't think skin color and sexual choice is really a valid comparison.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Nebraska > Omaha
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:45 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top