0
skinnay

Dumb ass social conservatives

Recommended Posts

It also refers to marrying someone from outside your tribe; that can be taken to mean someone from another race.

Before citing too many Levitican arguments, one has to consider that Jesus put paid to those customs (if all the other reasons to put people to death don't count any more, why should that one still be proscribed?).

The New Testament arguments are very subject to interpretation -- just as the arguments that used to be used to justify segregation.

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Tribe does not in anyway mean race.
race=human

So what does that mean? That you shouldn't marry outside of your town? Your country club? Your congregation? I seriously doubt that the biblical passage in question means you shouldn't marry outside the human species.

Are you ever going to explain how you can reconcile a constitutional amendment to force your religious beliefs on every American with the guarantee of religious freedom in the First Amendment? That seems downright un-American to me.

Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Simply put, I disagree with it.



I think this is one of the most honest posts ever made on this forum.

It has no pretentions of logic or argument.

I admire it because it's the most straightforward written form of curling up into a ball, closing your eyes, covering your ears, and shouting "NAH NAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU". There is no invitation to any kind of dissenting view. It simply says: nothing you can say will change my mind.

I'm sure we can all sympathize... "If only the world didn't have other people in it with their offensive dissenting views. If only they all just went away. If only I was the only one who gets to decide..."

Perversely, the thought is expressed on a forum where the purpose is debate! And in that sense it has absolutely no value whatsoever - literally none. Just a position statement: "I disagree".

So bold... so honest. It speaks ten times more about the author than the sum total of her words.

Amazing on so many levels. Post of the year in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't believe that it's pushing my religious beliefs on anyone by saying I would in theory support marriage being defined as one man and one woman. I think there are many people that do not share the same beliefs that i do that feel the same way. If I say I base part of this on the way I was raised will you also attack that? In using the term, simply put I am saying that i understand I am not going to change the way you believe and you're not going to change the way I believe. But, i do think that people can have a fair and interesting discussion on any topic and still remain respectful of each other.
No matter how slowly you say oranges it never sounds like gullible.
Believe me I tried.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But, where does it say "race"? The Bible refers to marrying a non believer.



Considering at the time, a non-believer was everyone who was not Hebrew, then that pretty much sums up every other race outside the Hebrews.

(btw, I'm a non-believer, but raised Christian, so I have a good understanding of the material, as bogus as I think it is)

Quote

Tribe does not in anyway mean race.
race=human



species=human. race=ethnicity, color, nationality etc... that's why it's called racial hate. the racist don't hate humans, they hate a particular "race"
In every man's life he will be allotted one good woman and one good dog. That's all you get, so appreciate them while the time you have with them lasts.

- RiggerLee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I don't believe that it's pushing my religious beliefs on anyone by saying I would in theory support marriage being defined as one man and one woman. I think there are many people that do not share the same beliefs that i do that feel the same way. If I say I base part of this on the way I was raised will you also attack that? In using the term, simply put I am saying that i understand I am not going to change the way you believe and you're not going to change the way I believe. But, i do think that people can have a fair and interesting discussion on any topic and still remain respectful of each other.




Ill support your amendment if you support mine.


Just ETA:

I believe all people are created equal under God. I have a real hard time believing the Jesus I was taught about would come down and hate on some people for loving each other.

I find it much more in line with what I learned that he would be disgusted with bigotry and denying people civil rights because of who they love.

Thats my Jesus. I don't think he has any place in legislature, but I don't think he would be as bigoted towards gays as you make him out to be.

AFAIK Jesus didn't write the bible. It was written by close minded people who wanted to spread THEIR interpretations of things.

Before you go citing it too much you might go read what it says about women, and keeping slaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>I think its a leap to go from gay marriage to interracial marriage.(there is only one
>race and that is human,many different ethnic backgrounds). Not, sure who the "they"
>are. You cannot use the bible to support that argument, and yes I would tell any
>Christian that does that they are dead wrong.

Here's what the Virginia Supreme Court said about that:

"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

It took the Supreme Court to tell them they were dead wrong. The Supreme Court is now considering a very similar issue with respect to gay marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I have no issue with the government saying that churches can't perform legal marriages any more, that there has to be a civil ceremony as well..



This is how it should be. NO reason the state should use churches as an agent for who can be married (and no reason churches should allow themselves to be used in this way either).
"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I want to interject a thought; it seems that it's something that the pro-gay marriage proponents don't understand, and the religious don't seem to be able to articulate.

If something is against the moral code that one believes in, it is not possible to vote to allow it without going against ones conscience.



Of course it is possible. I am a libertarian (or at least lean that way). I believe the government has no business regulating an entire range of behaviors which I do not approve of.
"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But, I'm not asking you to support mine:P



Let me ask you a very simple question. My mother is a lesbian. She has been in a monogamous relationship with another woman for around 30 years. Between them they have brought up 5 successful children (all straight) they own numerous properties, several businesses, pay their taxes and do everything that any other couple does. Do you think that they should be allowed the same legal rights as a heterosexual couple has? A simple yes or no answer will do here.
Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rights, yes. Entitlements, no.

Why bother even asking the question of someone whos base argument for their belief stems from their religous views? Do you really think you will make any progress lobbying that group by pulling at heart strings or using reason (not intended to be disparaging)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I want to interject a thought; it seems that it's something that the pro-gay marriage proponents don't understand, and the religious don't seem to be able to articulate.

If something is against the moral code that one believes in, it is not possible to vote to allow it without going against ones conscience.

lif

Of course it is possible. I am a libertarian (or at least lean that way). I believe the government has no business regulating an entire range of behaviors which I do not approve of.



Are you saying that it is possible to vote against your moral convictions and NOT violate your conscience? Politicians do it all the time, but then I'm not sure most of them have moral convictions (or consciences either).

Personally, I try not to lie to myself. YMMV
lisa
WSCR 594
FB 1023
CBDB 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Do you think that they should be allowed the same legal rights as a heterosexual couple has.



that's a great question - other than it's not 'rights', it's 'benefits' - speech, worship, bearing arms, bearing witness (bearing witness is point of discussion) applies to all individuals

all individuals are supposed to have the same rights

"couples" shouldn't have special gov benefits...
INDIVIDUALS should.

why do hetereosexual 'couples' get to have special benefits that singles don't?

giving special benefits for anybody just because of how they associate (other than becoming a citizen) - is unfair



it's very insightful how people talk about entitlements and benefits.....yet use the words "rights"

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

I want to interject a thought; it seems that it's something that the pro-gay marriage proponents don't understand, and the religious don't seem to be able to articulate.

If something is against the moral code that one believes in, it is not possible to vote to allow it without going against ones conscience.

lif

Of course it is possible. I am a libertarian (or at least lean that way). I believe the government has no business regulating an entire range of behaviors which I do not approve of.



Are you saying that it is possible to vote against your moral convictions and NOT violate your conscience? Politicians do it all the time, but then I'm not sure most of them have moral convictions (or consciences either).

Personally, I try not to lie to myself. YMMV



No, I am saying that it is quite possible to realize that such things as rights and morality are quite different and that it is not necessary to tie legality to morality as tightly as some people would like to. I am personally against using marijuana, have no interest in doing so, and would tell anyone who asked my advice that they should abstain. I also view our "war on drugs" as a ludicrous waste of resources and assault on civil liberties and wish for immediate legalization. My personal view is that government is not and should not be used for morality. It is very poorly constructed for that purpose.
"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I don't believe that it's pushing my religious beliefs on anyone by saying I would in theory support marriage being defined as one man and one woman. I think there are many people that do not share the same beliefs that i do that feel the same way.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, and are entitled to live your life according to your own ideas of right and wrong. I may not agree with you, but so what? Where I think you go too far is in supporting a constitutional amendment to impose your opinion on everybody else. That's what changes the nature of the game from a disagreement between people about morality to an attack on freedom of religion.

Quote

If I say I base part of this on the way I was raised will you also attack that?

No. But can you really not offer any reason for your beliefs deeper than "that's the way I was raised"? Do you never question the ideas you were handed as a child?
Quote

In using the term, simply put I am saying that i understand I am not going to change the way you believe and you're not going to change the way I believe. But, i do think that people can have a fair and interesting discussion on any topic and still remain respectful of each other.

I do think an interested discussion can be had, but the discussion tends to be more interesting when people have actually thought about their beliefs, and can debate based on rational ideas. Also, I have on occasion changed my position on things, based on discussions with other people, even discussions here in speaker's corner. I for one am always interested in arguments that make me think about my own beliefs; if I can refute the argument, then I understand my own belief better, and if I can't refute the argument then I have to modify my beliefs. I was raised in a fairly conservative family, and this process has definitely trended towards a more socially liberal perspective, but some of my ideas have gone in the opposite direction.

Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0