What do you think of heterosexuals who often make anti-homosexual comments? (Canada, world)
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.
Originally Posted by MilkDrinker
The marriage is not a civil right! It's a religious practice! Sorry but we can't change the religions just to accommodate the failed ones!
Civil unions are not really a right neither but they can have it! In my country the state doesn't have anything to do with the marriage! People get married at the city council then at the church (does that are not religious remain just with the civil union made by the state). The marriage at the church is not official!
Actually I think that just in US the marriage made by the church is recognized by state!
Actually, he had a really good point. The opposition to gay marriage is religiously based--I haven't heard another, rational argument against it. I go to a Christian church that supports gay marriage, so it isn't an across the board "Christian" thing. Since there are so many legal rights and benefits to being "married" to someone, (taxes, estates, health care decisions, you name it), many countries have removed churches from the process. EVERYONE (gay or straight) goes to the court house and signs the contracts creating a civil union. Then, if you believe marriage is a union before God, you have the option of going to your church and performing a traditional religious ceremony there. The court house is the legal portion, the church service is an expression of faith, and is legally non-binding. That way, if your church doesn't support gay marriage, they don't have to marry gay people. I think that's what we need to go to here, and the problem is solved.
One last comment--I'm a devout Christian who thinks MY religious rights are best protected by keeping government out of the church, and vice versa.
But, because we value freedom in this country, YOU are free to not engage in any sex act you think is immoral, based on whatever hangup, book of religion of your choice, etc. that you please.
Why is it so hard to understand that YOU are the one seeking to force your morals on others by seeking to restrict behaviors, and not the other way around? Why are you not satisfied with allowing people to live the way they want? Has anyone ever told you that you HAVE to engage in a certain sex act?
So you are saying your values system is better than mine? You seem so bent out of shape that anyone would dare tell you that you're wrong...but you're forcing your morals on us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald
Children are not capable of consenting to a relationship. Pedophilia has no place in this argument.
This argument is about the fact that you think people are incapable of changing their preferences and they should be able to live as they want to sexually. Pedophilia is relevant here. Mind you, I'm obviously not suggesting that homosexuals are pedophiles, but both are immoral.
At least that's what my values system says...do you have any way of telling me that I'm wrong?
nice try, but neither of those signs even use that word.
funny that you're willing to invent a word out of whole cloth and see no problem using it to defame a group - but only a group you happen to disagree with.
what happened to that 'context' you esteemed so highly previously?
nice try, but neither of those signs even use that word.
funny that you're willing to invent a word out of whole cloth and see no problem using it to defame a group - but only a group you happen to disagree with.
And I think it's funny that you're trying to turn me into a bad person by making accusations like that. I almost always make it a point to refer to tea partiers as tea partiers. Perhaps you're not reading my words, and you're just using stereotypes and generalizations about me because you know I tend to have a liberal point of view.
So you are saying your values system is better than mine?
My values system is thus:
People should be free to do what they want with other consenting adults, especially when it causes no harm to others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
You seem so bent out of shape that anyone would dare tell you that you're wrong...but you're forcing your morals on us.
The only "morals" being forced on you is the demand that you let others to live without interference from YOUR notion of "morality."
Think of it in terms you can understand: Religion.
Demanding "freedom of religion" be respected by everyone does not mean that I am forcing Islam down your throat, or Hinduism, or Shintosim. It means you are free to believe what you want, and you have NO RIGHT to say others cannot worship how they please (or not worship at all).
Same with "freedom of sexuality." I can demand you accept that you live in a country where people are free to have sex as they please. It does not mean that YOU have to have sex with people of the same sex, or with the lights on, or whatever other behavior you "disagree with morally." It doesn't even mean you have to "approve" of the sex. It means you LIVE, and you LET LIVE, and not get your panties in a wad about other people's sex lives. Just like we agree that people should be able to WORSHIP and LET WORSHIP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
This argument is about the fact that you think people are incapable of changing their preferences and they should be able to live as they want to sexually.
And? If I believe people cannot change their preferences (anymore than a brunette dyeing her hair blonde makes her a "true blonde").... then I believe that people should live their lives according to their nature. Not "how they want," because it's not a choice.
The moment you tell me that you'd be able to MAKE yourself WANT to get down with another dude the same way you have attraction to women now without trying... is the day I believe your perspective. To date, I have not been able to find anyone that can say that is possible for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
Pedophilia is relevant here. Mind you, I'm obviously not suggesting that homosexuals are pedophiles, but both are immoral.
And if I say religion is immoral? Do you give a damn? No? Well, I couldn't care less what you and other behaviorial socialists think about the morality of sexuality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
At least that's what my values system says...do you have any way of telling me that I'm wrong?
I have no way of saying that you're wrong. You have no way of proving you are right.
But, your value system is rooted in fear of retribution from divine power if you step out of line from what a book allegedly written by your deity and translated 20X before you ever read it says SHOULD be your values.
Mine is not. I don't rape, murder, steal because they go against my personal morals and committment to do no harm to others. I have no proscription against sexuality in my belief system, because there is no harm done to anyone when two people have sex consensually. Whether they're doing it the Christian way, or some crazy porn way.
People should be free to do what they want with other consenting adults, especially when it causes no harm to others.
The only "morals" being forced on you is the demand that you let others to live without interference from YOUR notion of "morality."
Think of it in terms you can understand: Religion.
Demanding "freedom of religion" be respected by everyone does not mean that I am forcing Islam down your throat, or Hinduism, or Shintosim. It means you are free to believe what you want, and you have NO RIGHT to say others cannot worship how they please (or not worship at all).
Same with "freedom of sexuality." I can demand you accept that you live in a country where people are free to have sex as they please. It does not mean that YOU have to have sex with people of the same sex, or with the lights on, or whatever other behavior you "disagree with morally." It means you LIVE, and you LET LIVE. Just like we agree that people should be able to WORSHIP and LET WORSHIP.
I honestly don't care what you do in your bedroom---knock yourself out. But don't try to force your values on me by wanting legal rights declared based on it. I call that forcing your values.
Quote:
And? If I believe people cannot change their preferences (anymore than a brunette dyeing her hair blonde makes her a "true blonde").... then I believe that people should live their lives according to their nature. Not "how they want," because it's not a choice.
The moment you tell me that you'd be able to MAKE yourself WANT to get down with another dude the same way you have attraction to women now without trying... is the day I believe your perspective. To date, I have not been able to find anyone that can say that is possible for them.
If I allowed myself to become misguided and perverted enough I imagine there would be a point where it'd become a viable option.
Quote:
And if I say religion is immoral? Do you give a damn? No? Well, I couldn't care less what you and other behaviorial socialists think about the morality of sexuality.
Nope. My religion is guaranteed to me.
Quote:
I have no way of saying that you're wrong. You have no way of proving you are right.
God says you're wrong. He created the universe. Give me a morals system that can supercede that.
Quote:
But, your value system is rooted in fear of retribution from divine power if you step out of line from what a book allegedly written by your deity and translated 20X before you ever read it says SHOULD be your values.
Do your homework. Your strawman caricature makes you look uninformed, or disingenuous.
Quote:
Mine is not. I don't rape, murder, steal because they go against my personal morals and committment to do no harm to others. I have no proscription against sexuality in my belief system, because there is no harm done to anyone when two people have sex consensually. Whether they're doing it the Christian way, or some crazy porn way.
If you're going to base your morals off of a subjective source, what happens when someone says rape, murder, stealing, etc is ok?
I read some of his stuff--I thought most of it was off the wall but he actually brought up a good point with that one comment. Just because I really disagree with someone doesn't mean everything they say is wrong or bad--it's called civilized discourse. We need more of it in this country.
And I think it's funny that you're trying to turn me into a bad person by making accusations like that. I almost always make it a point to refer to tea partiers as tea partiers. Perhaps you're not reading my words, and you're just using stereotypes and generalizations about me because you know I tend to have a liberal point of view.
where did i say anything remotely akin to you being a bad person?
you're just wrong, that's all...
and quite hypocritical when it comes to using certain terms, obviously
I honestly don't care what you do in your bedroom---knock yourself out. But don't try to force your values on me by wanting legal rights declared based on it. I call that forcing your values.
So if I demand legal rights declared for guaranteeing freedom of religion, that's forcing other religions on you? How does that make sense?
Please try to make coherent, logical arguments. The Bible, what your pastor says.... these are not compelling nor authoritative sources outside of your particular religious circle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
If I allowed myself to become misguided and perverted enough I imagine there would be a point where it'd become a viable option.
You've already allowed yourself to be misguided. The pervert part? Well, that's subjective.
But thank you, you only "imagine." You do not "know." You cannot fool nature, as hard as you try.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
Nope. My religion is guaranteed to me.
And by luck you were born in a country that allows you to live openly according to your lifestyle choice to believe in the deity of your choosing, even if the ideas you preach pursuant to your religion are often inherently evil and oppressive to the values of others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
God says you're wrong. He created the universe. Give me a morals system that can supercede that.
My God is not the same person as your God. He's not spiteful, vindictive, or concerned with earthly things like who is having sex with whom. Yours, on the other hand, is apparently the gossipy, nosy neighbor obsessed with their neighbor's sex lives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
Do your homework. Your strawman caricature makes you look uninformed, or disingenuous.
Strawman caricature? Do you deny it? I bet you read the King James Version of the Bible without any sense of irony.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
If you're going to base your morals off of a subjective source, what happens when someone says rape, murder, stealing, etc is ok?
It's not a subjective criteria. It's objective criteria. Again, in terms you can understand: The Golden Rule.
Long before there was "your religion," people had laws that reflected a disagreement with raping, murdering and stealing.
where did i say anything remotely akin to you being a bad person?
you're just wrong, that's all...
and quite hypocritical when it comes to using certain terms, obviously
We've talked about this before. I believe that there is a nuance to language and communication. To quote an old saying, "There's a time and place for everything." You take a more blunt view of it, and believe that if someone refers to themselves using a certain word, then it's okay for everyone to use that word to describe them.
If you're having sex with a girl and she refers to herself as a "wh*re", do you think that suddenly means it would be okay for you to introduce her to your family as a wh*re? I would assume not. But using your argument, you would have a right to call her a wh*re since she's already called herself that.
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.
but he actually brought up a good point with that one comment. Just because I really disagree with someone doesn't mean everything they say is wrong or bad--it's called civilized discourse. We need more of it in this country.
I would assume not. But using your argument, you would have a right to call her a wh*re since she's already called herself that.