U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 08-31-2013, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Phila & NYC
4,573 posts, read 2,925,843 times
Reputation: 1819

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
apples and oranges.
race and homosexuality are two different things.
No conclusive eveidence that one is born gay.

Churches that caved in to the gay agenda are those who are dying anyway, ( i.e. episcopalians, ELCA Lutherans, etc).

There is no conclusive evidence that one is born left handed either. Does that make it a choice? Common sense says no.
Rate this post positively

 
Old 08-31-2013, 07:58 AM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,077 posts, read 10,196,352 times
Reputation: 8792
Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
apples and oranges. race and homosexuality are two different things. No conclusive eveidence that one is born gay.
No conclusive evidence that one isn't born gay, and indications are that there is a biological linkage. Stalemate. Even if you refuse to accept that it is such.

Regardless, your flawed analogy would explain only allowing minorities to marry each other: You cannot explain away the interracial marriage parallel with such nonsense. If people can choose who they love, then offensive right-wing logic would say that the interracial couple should have chosen someone of the same race.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
Churches that caved in to the gay agenda are those who are dying anyway
Christianity, itself, is dying in the United States, declining from 78% to 73% in just five years. [Source: Pew Research.] Being for or against same-sex marriage isn't bringing many new people to Christianity. Just ask the Southern Baptists.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-31-2013, 08:53 AM
 
Location: I live wherever I am.
1,935 posts, read 4,548,944 times
Reputation: 3308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lior Arel View Post
I couldn't read anymore of the OP's senseless drivel. I'm sure it's the same discussion that's been yawned out by the phobes (who cry that they are not phobes) a million times. So, why do they keep trying? They not only look hateful, now they look silly and desperate.

Compare my relationship to sex with corpses and kids, and then cry when I mock you and am not nice? Nope. I'd tell someone like that to their face where to go an how to get there. Not that these Internet cowards ever confront someone in person, guess that's why they have the need to post their fear, hate, and ignorance ad nauseum on here.
I confront plenty of people in person about this stuff. The opportunity to do so just rarely presents itself. Usually, such confrontations are pleasant and civil even if we disagree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 0marvin0 View Post
"This is the exact reason why I state that society cannot function without an unchangeable "absolute standard" upon which that society is founded."

Seems you have never heard that the only constant is change. Perhaps you can point out an existing society that has never changed from its inception. If you were to look through history you would find that the societies that were the most resitant to change were the ones that lasted the least amount of time.
I never said the society wouldn't change. I said that the foundation / absolute standard wouldn't change. Using the "house" analogy I mentioned earlier - you can add on to a house, you can change furniture or appliances, you can change the entire appearance of the house by getting new siding, painting it a different color, etc. I even knew a family that added an entire second floor onto their existing house. But the FOUNDATION never changes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax View Post
I've just read some of your other posts and your objections to same sex marriage are based on your "Christian" religious beliefs.

You have also stated that you are divorced and have remarried. The gospels state that Jesus Christ condemned this as Adultery - one of the Big Ten no nos in your religion.

Please explain:

Why your current adulterous marriage should be recognized as legal?
There are two conditions explicitly stated in the Bible (New Testament, even) whereby divorce is permissible. Without going into detail (look 'em up yourself if you don't already know them) because I'm not here to bash my ex either directly or indirectly, both were committed against me. I had no foreknowledge of the possibility thereof - it took me completely by surprise. (If you want me to tell you what the two conditions are, private-message me.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax View Post
Why you should not be stoned to death for Adultery?
Because, due to the conditions I stated above, my marriage is not adulterous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax View Post
Why you shouldn't go to hell and burn in eternal hellfire when you die because you are living an unrepentant sinful lifestyle?

Thank you.
See above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Park View Post
Thanks ... you made the point I wanted to make.

Legal same sex marriage is already a fact - in 13 states, so far, the District of Columbia, and also on the reservations of 5 Tribal Nations in the US. Also in many countries around the world from Canada to Argentina to South Africa to Spain and Portugal ...

The "slippery slope" arguments posed by the OP are ridiculous and stupid. I need not dignify them with an answer ... but will pose this one question: in all of the places that have Marriage Equality, where is it also legal for parents to marry their children or is polygamy or human-non-human marriages? Where?
When your argument hinges upon what is and is not legal, that's pretty sad.

I'm assuming you support same sex marriage. Same sex marriage has been illegal in America for over 200 years. Was it okay and acceptable back then, in your mind?
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-31-2013, 08:56 AM
 
Location: I live wherever I am.
1,935 posts, read 4,548,944 times
Reputation: 3308
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU View Post
Christianity, itself, is dying in the United States, declining from 78% to 73% in just five years. [Source: Pew Research.] Being for or against same-sex marriage isn't bringing many new people to Christianity. Just ask the Southern Baptists.
That's what the government wants. The reason why religion has been dying is because our government has been working toward its demise. Since the government has decided to take over all of the "charitable functions" once served by the church, if it causes the church to die, the result is more government dependence. That's exactly what they want, because there are people getting rich off of the present system and the more the system becomes entrenched into the lives of Americans, the more money these people will make thereby.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-31-2013, 10:59 AM
 
Location: McKinleyville, California
6,413 posts, read 10,130,140 times
Reputation: 4285
Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
apples and oranges.
race and homosexuality are two different things.
No conclusive evidence that one is born gay.

Churches that caved in to the gay agenda are those who are dying anyway, ( i.e. episcopalians, ELCA Lutherans, etc).
Well, I did not choose to be gay. Why is that not enough proof? Why would any gay or lesbian person lie and say they did not choose and what right is it of any straight person to say we did choose? All that is is an admission from a straight person that they themselves chose to be straight. Well, do not use your own example as evidence that everyone made the choice to be gay.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-31-2013, 11:15 AM
 
1,111 posts, read 1,271,965 times
Reputation: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomaniGypsy View Post
Don't worry your pretty little head. I'm happily married, to a full-fledged legal adult close to my age who satisfies my needs to an extent that even were we not married, I'd still not need anyone else in my life... adult or otherwise. On top of that, I've never committed any crime of any kind and if I haven't done so yet, it seems rather unlikely that I'm going to start when I'm in my mid freaking thirties.


I say that the person's ability to do so at age 15 years and 364 days is so close to his/her ability to do so at age 16 years and 0 days that they may as well be called the same. Therefore, since that singlehandedly defeats the argument that "it's all about age", it should be all about intellectual capacity and maturity... meaning that ability to consent should be determined by an examination when the person is under a certain age (such as 21), and it should not be all about age.

The parts that I've highlighted really do make me a little concerned for you.

When someone is so adamant that "it shouldn't be all about age" the ability to give consent should be determined by intellectual capacity and maturity, those sound like the arguments from pedophiles. And believe it or not, I'm not trying to be insulting, but again when you equate the love of 2 grown adults, with the love between and older person and an "intellectual & mature" CHILD, it raises red flags, or it should. When you say "I haven't done so yet, it seems rather unlikely that I'm going to start when I'm in my mid freaking thirties" and then couple that with your reasoning that a child's consent should be determined by their own maturity level, it really makes it sound like you are trying to make a case for yourself.
Again, not trying to be insulting, just maybe something you should be aware of, you may have subconscious feelings that you are not ready to deal with, and don't hide behind the age factor, many people commit crimes later in life that they never thought they would in their "mid freaking thirties"
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-31-2013, 01:00 PM
 
3,124 posts, read 4,737,697 times
Reputation: 1955
We can use all the logic we want against the homophobes. They want to hate us, they need to hate us, so they will ignore it all to hold on to it. Their self esteem depends on their prejudice. Not a happy or fulfilling life, but we can't help them in a message board.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-31-2013, 01:18 PM
 
26,676 posts, read 27,666,548 times
Reputation: 7937
Live and let live. It's the American way. If you don't like it, you'd probably be better off living in the Middle East.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-31-2013, 03:34 PM
 
Location: Deep Dirty South
5,190 posts, read 5,081,372 times
Reputation: 3860
Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
No conclusive eveidence that one is born gay.
Although this isn't true at any rate, whenever someone brings up this disingenuous line of nonsense, I feel compelled to say: "Who freakin' cares?"

Makes absolutely no difference whatsoever whether or not a person "chooses" to be gay. They should have the same rights and privileges and everyone else. It harms nobody and is nobody else's business.

Quote:
Churches that caved in to the gay agenda...
The "agenda" of course being nothing but equality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzy jeff View Post
There is no conclusive evidence that one is born left handed either. Does that make it a choice? Common sense says no.
Seriously.

Once again it is a good time to point out the fact that there is not one single reason to oppose same sex marriage that doesn't arise from fear, hate, ignorance, bigotry, or some combinaiton of those things.

Not a single one.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-31-2013, 04:22 PM
 
Location: I live wherever I am.
1,935 posts, read 4,548,944 times
Reputation: 3308
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Rob123 View Post
The parts that I've highlighted really do make me a little concerned for you.

When someone is so adamant that "it shouldn't be all about age" the ability to give consent should be determined by intellectual capacity and maturity, those sound like the arguments from pedophiles. And believe it or not, I'm not trying to be insulting, but again when you equate the love of 2 grown adults, with the love between and older person and an "intellectual & mature" CHILD, it raises red flags, or it should. When you say "I haven't done so yet, it seems rather unlikely that I'm going to start when I'm in my mid freaking thirties" and then couple that with your reasoning that a child's consent should be determined by their own maturity level, it really makes it sound like you are trying to make a case for yourself.
Again, not trying to be insulting, just maybe something you should be aware of, you may have subconscious feelings that you are not ready to deal with, and don't hide behind the age factor, many people commit crimes later in life that they never thought they would in their "mid freaking thirties"
Dude... you really need a hobby.

You obviously missed the part where I stated that the test would be designed by psychologists.

If you can sleep better at night thinking that I may at some point become a pedophile, go for it. I can't change your delusions. Trying to argue that I never have been, and never will be, a pedophile, will just give you fodder for more nighttime fantasies... so I'm not going to waste my time. But think on this. How could I reconcile pedophilia with my Christian beliefs? Especially since I (obviously) cannot reconcile homosexuality therewith? (Not like I expect an answer. This question will get dodged, as is common with any intelligent question that would muck up the argument of someone else who disagrees with me. But think on it anyway.)

I find it funny that you haven't answered my previous question. You'll get on my case for saying that it shouldn't be all about age, yet you obstinately refuse to produce an intelligent rationale for why it SHOULD be all about age. So I'll try my question for a third time, worded a bit differently, since obviously the people on this thread whose responses would be relevant (those who don't already agree with me) are slow on the uptake.

What is the functional difference between the intellectual "ability to consent" of a person aged 15 years and 364 days, and that of the same person aged 16 years and 0 days?
Rate this post positively
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:25 AM.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top