Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Warning: This thread is pretty gay

Warning: This thread is pretty gay (Page 17)
Thread Tools
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 17, 2014, 03:27 PM
 
I guess it could look that way, until you're on the receiving end of it. There's nothing right about using a stick to try and correct moral opinions. Such views are dying out on their own, there's no reason to legislate every damned thing.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 17, 2014, 04:29 PM
 
So is it momentum, or marketing and intimidation?
Same-sex marriage, marketing, and intimidation | LifeSiteNews.com
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 17, 2014, 08:49 PM
 
Marketing is scummy. Film at 11.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 12:17 AM
 
I'm very much pro-gay marriage, I'm pro-anything as long as those involved are consenting adults. It's simply the idea that someone is trying to force people to be nice or tolerant that chaps my ass. F*** that, I don't want anyone to pay lip service just because there's a gun to their head, they need to be able to tell me how they feel and why. That's important to me.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 10:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
I'm very much pro-gay marriage, I'm pro-anything as long as those involved are consenting adults. It's simply the idea that someone is trying to force people to be nice or tolerant that chaps my ass. F*** that, I don't want anyone to pay lip service just because there's a gun to their head, they need to be able to tell me how they feel and why. That's important to me.
Define consenting adults.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 12:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Such views are dying out on their own, there's no reason to legislate every damned thing.
I definitely don't agree with that. Slavery didn't die out on its own, racism didn't die out on it's own, sexism isn't dying out on its own, and homophobia isn't dying out on its own. In fact, IMO, when those that were formerly in the status quo sense that the tide has turned, they fight tooth and nail to impose their view on everyone: Dred Scott and overturning the Missouri Compromise, Jim Crow, DOMA. All of those set back society's progress in the name of preserving dying values (slavery, inequality, and 'traditional' marriage). Maybe there'd be less legislation to advance causes if there was less legislation to obstruct changes in societal values in the first place.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 12:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I definitely don't agree with that. Slavery didn't die out on its own, racism didn't die out on it's own, sexism isn't dying out on its own, and homophobia isn't dying out on its own.
Do you know what differentiates the first three from the last?
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 12:55 PM
 
You obviously didn't live anywhere near the South. Yes, they are ending "on their own", just because laws were passed didn't mean that attitudes or behaviors changed, quite the contrary. Passing laws stopped people from drinking alcohol? No. Passing laws stopped people from using narcotics? No. It's the same thing I tell Republicans where I live, legislating morality does not work. You'd think that Dems would know that, from all the finger-wagging they did during and after prohibition.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2014, 05:35 PM
 
Legislating doesn't work for everyone but there are plenty of people who are very solidly opposed to weed simply because it has been illegal for so long.
It really depends what you're trying to legislate, why and how people feel about it.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 01:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
You obviously didn't live anywhere near the South. Yes, they are ending "on their own", just because laws were passed didn't mean that attitudes or behaviors changed, quite the contrary.
Wrong. After the the 14th, blacks did have more rights. It took Jim Crow to curtail those rights. But overall they still weren't slaves, so behavior changed even if attitude didn't. After Civil Rights, desegregation happened, and blacks had access to better schools and weren't humiliated into switching seats on the bus or drinking from different fountains, because the law protected them. Again, behavior changed, even though attitude didn't. And with recent string of gay marriage rights, again homosexuals have access to rights that must be respected even if attitudes haven't changed.

I can't see how someone could argue that blacks would have the same rights today if Jim Crow hadn't been overturned. The law doesn't change people minds, particularly instantly, but that's an absurd, idiotic argument to make. The law can influence attitudes, however. Further, by forcing the situation it serves to illustrate that previous fears and prejudices were unfounded, undermining previous arguments. (i.e., blacks can be just as smart as whites, accepting gays will not make the country turn gay, gay marriage will not end traditional marriage, etc. etc.)
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 02:46 PM
 
That's not reality, at all. The industrial revolution was responsible for more change in the status of blacks than anything else, by a huge margin. You could change what they were officially called ("slaves") but it didn't change their reality, until improved mechanical harvesters greatly decreased the need for massive amounts of manual labor. Few left their old way of life until there was nothing left of it, as more practical and cost effective means were implemented. The Irish in major cities were as much slaves as any other group, and don't forget the Chinese during the railroad boom (and even Latinos in a few areas today), and it's about money and what people are willing to do to make it. As the old slave owners died (and their children, and their children's children) so did the memory that blacks were once solely a working caste.

What does this have to do with gays? Not much, really. No one has ever enslaved homosexuals to exploit their superior fashion sense.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 03:50 PM
 
I think the larger point you raise, whether or not gays are exploited like slaves were... is that it takes the older generation dying out for progress to happen. However, what I think Dakar's point was, is it takes some initiatives (laws even) for behavior to become commonplace enough that kids are raised up believing equality is status quo.

The bus driver could go home and grumble to his wife about how he had to let the $%^&* black people sit whereever they wanted, so sure, racism is not knocked out, but the fact they got to sit whereever they wanted at all, was progress.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 04:13 PM
 
Even after the bus protests, most blacks still didn't ride in the front, despite the laws that were on the books. That was mostly PR and media manipulation, not reality. When did things actually change? Not for quite some time, like after Good Times and The Jeffersons hit the airwaves (mid-70s). IOW, much later than you'll see in most history textbooks. Isn't revisionism wonderful?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 04:14 PM
 
You can overturn segregation laws without replacing them with integration laws.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 04:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Even after the bus protests, most blacks still didn't ride in the front, despite the laws that were on the books. That was mostly PR and media manipulation, not reality. When did things actually change? Not for quite some time, like after Good Times and The Jeffersons hit the airwaves (mid-70s). IOW, much later than you'll see in most history textbooks. Isn't revisionism wonderful?
Well, I was generalizing, of course.

How did Good Times and Jefferson's get greenlit? Did black people start making more money, making them a market audience? How did TV executives come to realize not just that black people were good to market to, but that white people would also like these shows? For that matter, how did Archie Bunker, get away with the things it did? In the 1950s the only roles on TV for black people were servants, in the 1970s you had a successful businessman getting the last word to a racist white cabbie reluctantly adapting to a new era.

Something made perceptions change.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 05:27 PM
 
There were consumers in America who were under represented for goods and services, and both were great vehicles to market those goods and services*. The shows, in turn, helped foster goodwill (for the most part), by providing a window into black life, rose-colored and oddly distorted though it was. They helped pave the way for Oprah, who has done more to help normalize race relations in the USA than any other person who's ever lived, certainly more than any piece of gov't legislation, simply by being herself.



*I can only imagine how much V05 hot oil treatment they helped sell. 100s of millions of bottles, no doubt.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 06:25 PM
 
Yes... lots of V05. Then surely then there was some similar product they could have sold to black people in 1950? Why didn't they make a show then for black people? Or are you saying the 70s TV shows themselves did more for civil rights then laws and desegregation? Who made those shows? Why? How did they grow up? Did their childhood perceptions of black people shape the shows they would later make?

(not arguing, just wondering... I think this whole topic could be someone's history dissertation and I don't think we have the answers.)
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 19, 2014, 06:48 PM
 
I think you have to pin a lot on All in the Family for portraying a sympathetic racist.


Edit: a more accurate phrasing of the above is "a character with whom you can empathize despite their racism".
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 20, 2014, 11:16 AM
 
Presbyterian Assembly: Gay Marriage Is Christian - ABC News

Is this big? I have no idea. I suspect not.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 20, 2014, 12:42 PM
 
I would hope they would, it's a mostly gay/bi Christian organization. It sounds quite official, but it doesn't represent the US Presbyterian Church.

Holy shit! There's a lot of historical retcon going on, that's amazing (and damned scary).
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 20, 2014, 12:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Presbyterian Assembly: Gay Marriage Is Christian - ABC News

Is this big? I have no idea. I suspect not.
It will result in a split, just as the Anglican church has done.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 20, 2014, 07:14 PM
 
Surely these people must realise that history will remember them the way it remembers people who supported race segregation and those who opposed votes for women?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2014, 08:48 AM
 
yep.
Matthew 7:21-23 RSVCE - Concerning Self-Deception - “Not - Bible Gateway
Concerning Self-Deception
21 “Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.’
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2014, 10:43 AM
 
So you're damned if you do....
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2014, 12:12 PM
 
What the hell do bible passages have to do with how US law treats people?

The answer is nothing
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2014, 01:25 PM
 
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2014, 03:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
As always you don't actually answer with an actual argument.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 08:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
That sounds like an argument to rewrite it to me.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 09:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Surely these people must realise that history will remember them the way it remembers people who supported race segregation and those who opposed votes for women?
I doubt it. Out of the gate, gays had neither been denied a vote nor segregated. Sexual orientation is not the same as race and gender that it'd ever be fully equitable as a protected class as their plights are simply not comparable and the biological components are not equally understood. As long as the question of a definitive genetic foundation for human sexuality remains, so too will homosexuality will be relegated a psycho-social phenomena, not comparable to race and gender. If science advances to such a degree that a definitive genetic component for homosexuality is identified, the new horror will be in seeking to modify or eliminate it.
ebuddy
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 10:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
As long as the question of a definitive genetic foundation for human sexuality remains, so too will homosexuality will be relegated a psycho-social phenomena, not comparable to race and gender. If science advances to such a degree that a definitive genetic component for homosexuality is identified, the new horror will be in seeking to modify or eliminate it.
Heads I win, Tails you lose.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 10:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
If science advances to such a degree that a definitive genetic component for homosexuality is identified, the new horror will be in seeking to modify or eliminate it.
That begs question, will it be considered a genetic defect?
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 01:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
That begs question, will it be considered a genetic defect?
Only by the sorts of assholes who currently consider it a defect. Or a sin.

Of course those who think it a sin should immediately change their tune if definitive evidence of a genetic cause were discovered, but they won't. They'll just keep arguing that the evidence is wrong.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 01:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
As long as the question of a definitive genetic foundation for human sexuality remains, so too will homosexuality will be relegated a psycho-social phenomena, not comparable to race and gender.
That question won't go away until the religious motivation behind it does. And it will. You just have to give them equal rights and then wait a generation or two. Sadly.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 02:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
That question won't go away until the religious motivation behind it does. And it will. You just have to give them equal rights and then wait a generation or two. Sadly.
Distaste for homosexuality transcends regions, races, religions, and cultures. You'll no more eliminate that question than you will homosexuals themselves.
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 02:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Only by the sorts of assholes who currently consider it a defect. Or a sin.
I won't question whether or not it's a "defect", but there isn't a soul on this earth without sin. Some Christians will elevate this behavior above all others as particularly egregious, but that's not Scripture.

Of course those who think it a sin should immediately change their tune if definitive evidence of a genetic cause were discovered, but they won't. They'll just keep arguing that the evidence is wrong.
This goes both ways; those who insist it's genetic when the lion's share of evidence for sexual orientation is that it's psycho-social environmental. If science can be so easily hijacked and manipulated by politics, perhaps we need a new Wall of Separation.
ebuddy
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 02:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Only by the sorts of assholes who currently consider it a defect. Or a sin.

Of course those who think it a sin should immediately change their tune if definitive evidence of a genetic cause were discovered, but they won't. They'll just keep arguing that the evidence is wrong.
Sodomy is a "sin", sex between 2 men is a "sin". (Between 2 women is a grey area, it isn't discussed in scripture beyond some women living together, where it's implied that they were "together".) Genetics or not, it doesn't matter.

However, since no one is perfect and we live in a state of Grace, because "all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God", so as long as you;

1. Love God
2. Love your neighbor
3. Actively work (from your heart) to be a good person

then the substance of Grace is stronger than the nature of sin, and salvation is the eternal reward.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2014, 02:48 PM
 
All sex outside sacramental marriage is a sin.

"More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”
Our Lady of Fatima
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 05:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Sodomy is a "sin", sex between 2 men is a "sin". (Between 2 women is a grey area, it isn't discussed in scripture beyond some women living together, where it's implied that they were "together".) Genetics or not, it doesn't matter.

However, since no one is perfect and we live in a state of Grace, because "all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God", so as long as you;

1. Love God
2. Love your neighbor
3. Actively work (from your heart) to be a good person

then the substance of Grace is stronger than the nature of sin, and salvation is the eternal reward.
I forget, you are a believer right? To some extent anyway?

I'm really not sure why god deserves love or even respect to be honest. If he exists, he has clearly made a huge mess of everything and blaming us would be a cop out for anyone let alone an omnipotent being.
Luckily you don't need him to do the other two.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 05:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
All sex outside sacramental marriage is a sin.


Our Lady of Fatima
Thats just what they told her to spoil her fun.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 08:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I'm really not sure why god deserves love or even respect to be honest. If he exists, he has clearly made a huge mess of everything and blaming us would be a cop out for anyone let alone an omnipotent being.
Really? Is that all that you see when you wake up in the morning? A huge mess of everything? God will not get love and respect from people who don't know Him; those who might question why He didn't merely create a planet of automatons and candy. i.e. Faith holds that there is more to existence than the physical vehicle and environment we occupy here on earth.

Luckily you don't need him to do the other two.
True, but faith might do wonders for a more optimistic point of view.
ebuddy
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 08:39 AM
 
Take a look and opine. I know, some of you hate videos. Don't worry, it's not about the Cristeros.

The Third Way on Vimeo
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 11:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Distaste for homosexuality transcends regions, races, religions, and cultures. You'll no more eliminate that question than you will homosexuals themselves.
That's interesting. In the US most of the distaste for homosexuals comes from the religious sector, though obviously not all of those claiming religious reasons are being honest – a good many people just find the concept disgusting. Still, I don't think disgust is that great a motivator, and if religious opposition were to dry up overnight, I'm pretty sure the question would be relegated to a very small minority, and one that likely wouldn't hold much sway.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 01:50 PM
 
Double-whammy time!

Federal Appeals Court: Utah Can't Ban Gay Marriage - ABC News
A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled for the first time that states must allow gay couples to marry, finding the Constitution protects same-sex relationships and putting a remarkable legal winning streak across the country one step closer to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The decision from a three-judge panel in Denver upheld a lower court ruling that struck down Utah's gay marriage ban. The panel immediately put on the ruling on hold so it could be appealed, either to the entire 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals or directly to the nation's highest court.

Judge Strikes Down Indiana Ban on Gay Marriage - ABC News
A federal judge struck down Indiana's ban on same-sex marriage Wednesday in a ruling that immediately allows gay couples to wed.

U.S. District Judge Richard Young ruled that the state's ban violates the U.S. Constitution's equal-protection clause because it treats couples differently based on their sexual orientation.

"Same-sex couples, who would otherwise qualify to marry in Indiana, have the right to marry in Indiana," he wrote. "These couples, when gender and sexual orientation are taken away, are in all respects like the family down the street. The Constitution demands that we treat them as such."
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 01:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I forget, you are a believer right? To some extent anyway?

I'm really not sure why god deserves love or even respect to be honest. If he exists, he has clearly made a huge mess of everything and blaming us would be a cop out for anyone let alone an omnipotent being.
Luckily you don't need him to do the other two.
We've made the mess, your assumption is that some divine being should clean it up for us. Oh yeah, that's a great way to teach "youngsters" to be responsible. You don't believe in a God, yet feel there's something to blame It for? How does that work?

I'm more of a believer in the "Omniscient Clockmaker" theory (aka. the universe is set into motion and then observed), but ultimately, live or die, it's up to us to learn to be more than our base nature. If we fail as a species, it's on us due to our behavior.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 02:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
That's interesting. In the US most of the distaste for homosexuals comes from the religious sector, though obviously not all of those claiming religious reasons are being honest – a good many people just find the concept disgusting. Still, I don't think disgust is that great a motivator, and if religious opposition were to dry up overnight, I'm pretty sure the question would be relegated to a very small minority, and one that likely wouldn't hold much sway.
From what I've noticed over the years, there's no shortage of infighting within the gay community itself, much less how external observers view them. If they can't keep from being so vicious and nasty towards each other, how can others get a more favorable impression?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 02:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
From what I've noticed over the years, there's no shortage of infighting within the gay community itself, much less how external observers view them. If they can't keep from being so vicious and nasty towards each other, how can others get a more favorable impression?
What is infighting?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 02:24 PM
 
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 03:27 PM
 
I meant examples, but whatever. It's a stupid point because once again, rights are not dependent on our liking the people involved. In fact, I think this qualifies as victim blaming. "The gays wouldn't have so much opposition if they were more likable!"

BTW, don't think I've heard this reasoning before:
Federal appeals court overturns Utah's ban on gay marriage - Los Angeles Times
"A state may not deny the issuance of a marriage license to two persons, or refuse to recognize their marriage, based solely upon the sex of the persons in the marriage union.
This is something I brought up back when DOMA was at the SCOTUS. Probably won't mean shit int he long run, but its nice to see it acknowledged, by a judge no less.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 03:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
That's interesting. In the US most of the distaste for homosexuals comes from the religious sector, though obviously not all of those claiming religious reasons are being honest – a good many people just find the concept disgusting. Still, I don't think disgust is that great a motivator, and if religious opposition were to dry up overnight, I'm pretty sure the question would be relegated to a very small minority, and one that likely wouldn't hold much sway.
Can you cite your source that "most of the distaste comes from the religious sector"?

EDIT: I only ask because, of the people that surround me, most in support of gay-marriage are religious.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2014, 03:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Can you cite your source that "most of the distaste comes from the religious sector"?
The loudest protestation. Not a legit source, just observation. The groups I can recall fighting marriage equality all have some significant funding from religious groups.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:13 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2