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.
I know people with gay tendencies who don't believe God approves of gay marriage. One of them was a respected member of this board.
So I take the point that the religion itself might have a root in hatred, but there are people, even some gay people, who object to gay marriage on grounds other than hatred.
Of course, I don't think religion should have any place in the state sanctioned union of two people, so those arguments don't work for me. But still, it's hard to say that hatred directly accounts for all opposition to gay marriage.
Let's say you're Scottish. What would your opinion be if I wanted a law passed which said Scots could not marry each other? Where do you think that would come from? Logical thought or emotion? Emotion, naturally. If emotion, love or hate? Does it sound loving to forbid mature adults who care for each other from marrying?
Yeah, there could be a few people who might have some convoluted logic and a few psychological misfits who think they are operating out of thought and not emotion, but in all honesty, it DOES stem from irrational hatred.
So I am weaseling out of my position by expressing what my position actually is? You really are a ticket for sure. The only person weaseling here is you as you ignore what the post I just reffered you to said. My point was that some positions are just hateful given that they are held for no other reason other than hate and are defended by using nothing but hate.
And I said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Come on . . . you aren't seriously trying to suggest that hatred actually IS the ONLY reason to oppose gay marriage?? You are dismissing the entire panoply of potential human emotions and motivations on the basis of WHAT???
To which you replied:
Quote:
I am suggesting what I said and no more or less than what I said. What I am suggesting is that I have not been made aware of any arguments against gay marriage except what I just listed in my previous post.
To which I replied:
Quote:
And your being aware or not being aware is evidence of WHAT???
To which you replied :
Quote:
I never claimed it was evidence of anything. Maybe try reading post #418 again.
Which you now further try to weasel out of by switching to the subjunctive:
Quote:
If there are no cogent arguments against gay marriage and those against it are giving us nothing but "Homosexuality is unnatural" or "Anal sex is disgusting" then this _is_ a position of hate, like it or not.
You make sweeping judgments about the ONLY motivation for holding a position and then weasel out when confronted with the absolute absurdity of such an assertion.
Quote:
Now if you want to present some arguments attacking gay marriage on its merits and demerits then this would change things - but that is not what we are being given is it - and the fact such arguments are not forthcoming from these people is very telling indeed - after all if they really cared about the positions they are expressing they would bring all their arguments to bear would they not? Yet they do not - which tells us much.
I am not interested in presenting arguments attacking gay marriage since I do not oppose it. It is none of my business. But to pretend that all who oppose it do so out of hatred or any other malicious or sociopathic motivations is just sick and cannot be defended on any grounds . . . logical, psychological or otherwise. It is patently false given my stated "entire panoply of potential human emotions and motivations."
Last edited by MysticPhD; 05-30-2012 at 03:42 PM..
There is enormous psychological ignorance displayed in this post attempting to reduce the panoply of potential human emotions and motivations to a dichotomous "either or" love or hate. It is ludicrous.
HATE -
1. to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest: to hate the enemy; to hate bigotry.
2. to be unwilling; dislike: I hate to do it
Wow. You don't have to even avail yourself of that panoply, you can just dislike gay marriage to be considered hateful of it. No panoplies required.
1. to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest: to hate the enemy; to hate bigotry.
2. to be unwilling; dislike: I hate to do it
Wow. You don't have to even avail yourself of that panoply, you can just dislike gay marriage to be considered hateful of it. No panoplies required.
A fixation on hate as motive reveals an unhealthy preoccupation with that emotion . . . but does nothing to support the absurd contention that hate is the only motive for opposition to gay marriage.
Well Mystic, I do not believe that hatred is the only motivation against gay marriage, I think it's more like ignorance and the unwillingness to educate oneself about the subject that leads to the hatred. Goes back to the old saying, what one does not understand, one fears, what one fears, one has a tendency to destroy. Personally I think that the only reason a lot of Christians have this hatred towards homosexuality is because they have not taken the time to educate themselves.
And I said:To which you replied: To which I replied: To which you replied : Which you now further try to weasel out of by switching to the subjunctive:You make sweeping judgments about the ONLY motivation for holding a position and then weasel out when confronted with the absolute absurdity of such an assertion.I am not interested in presenting arguments attacking gay marriage since I do not oppose it. It is none of my business. But to pretend that all who oppose it do so out of hatred or any other malicious or sociopathic motivations is just sick and cannot be defended on any grounds . . . logical, psychological or otherwise. It is patently false given my stated "entire panoply of potential human emotions and motivations."
Still weaseling I see. It really is too funny to see you get so desperate that you declare people expressing their own positions are avoiding their own positions.
Again the point I am making is that some positions are driven by hate only. If they were not then the people holding those positions could argue for them. That is not what we see in the homosexual marriage debate however. We just see poeople declaring it to be unnatural or disgusting or evil.
By all means prove me wrong by actually providing cogent arguments against gay marriage. If such an argument exists it would prove what I am saying wrong instantly. The point I am making however is that as much as we spend time demanding such arguments be presented... they never actually are. And this is a problem. I certainly have sympathy therefore for the OP who is left with the impression that being against gay marriage is just a hate position and based on nothing else.
A fixation on hate as motive reveals an unhealthy preoccupation with that emotion . . . but does nothing to support the absurd contention that hate is the only motive for opposition to gay marriage.
Then present another. Maybe try and do a little better than the usual "appeal to tradition" fallacy that we usually get offered. Otherwise you are all talk and no substance. If there are other arguments against gay marriage then stop talking about how many arguments there are and actually tell us WHAT they are.
I am yet to see "proof" that heterosexual marriage is beneficial so I am not sure why you want us to prove homosexual marriage is beneficial.
However I am a great believer in "innocent until proven guilty" so if there is anything wrong with homosexuality or homosexual marriage I think the burden of proof is on you not us.
If "shut up" is the best argument one has to offer though one should probably takes ones own advice.
I am yet to see "proof" that heterosexual marriage is beneficial so I am not sure why you want us to prove homosexual marriage is beneficial.
However I am a great believer in "innocent until proven guilty" so if there is anything wrong with homosexuality or homosexual marriage I think the burden of proof is on you not us.
If "shut up" is the best argument one has to offer though one should probably takes ones own advice.
Nope....proof. Hetro is proven already by evol..a fact...I need proof
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.
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.
