Gay Marriage: Traditional Marriage Predates State and Church

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
401

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< Actually I hold that human homosexuality is a sin and that sin entered the world by man. <<<>>> And “our nature” is not the same as “natural”.[/quote]I agree. Both counts. I gotta say. I may have missed it, but I’m having a hard time figuring out where exactly you’re coming from.
[/quote]

I wrote it later: I don’t care if homosexuality has been around since the dawn of man! SIN has been around since the dawn of man, it doesn’t make it in our nature just because a scientist might label it as “natural”

402

[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< I wrote it later: I don’t care if homosexuality has been around since the dawn of man! SIN has been around since the dawn of man, it doesn’t make it in our nature just because a scientist might label it as “natural” [/quote]I couldn’t agree more. What I meant was what precise communion you’re hailing from here. I’m leaning toward one of the orthodox branches maybe, but then again I’ve spent enough time around _______________________ to know that some groups are masters of Christian terminology with utterly disparate definitions. Not sayin that’s you, jist thinkin out loud.

403

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< I wrote it later: I don’t care if homosexuality has been around since the dawn of man! SIN has been around since the dawn of man, it doesn’t make it in our nature just because a scientist might label it as “natural” [/quote]I couldn’t agree more. What I meant was what precise communion you’re hailing from here. I’m leaning toward one of the orthodox branches maybe, but then again I’ve spent enough time around _______________________ to know that some groups are masters of Christian terminology with utterly disparate definitions. Not sayin that’s you, jist thinkin out loud.
[/quote]

I am Orthodox Christian. I am a convert though who rejected Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism primarily because they seemed to be becoming less traditional. At the last DIOCESAN Roman Catholic Mass I attended the entrance, offertory, eucharistic and closing “hymns” were Let it Be, The Greatest Love, Here comes the Sun and Goodbye Stranger.

And the Greek, Russian, American, Romanian, Ukranian, Serbian, and almost all of the “branches” are in full communion, they are not branches, but rather jurisdictions. There are a few fringe groups that I might call “branches”.

404

[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< I am Orthodox Christian. I am a convert though who rejected Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism primarily because they seemed to be becoming less traditional. At the last DIOCESAN Roman Catholic Mass I attended the entrance, offertory, eucharistic and closing “hymns” were Let it Be, The Greatest Love, Here comes the Sun and Goodbye Stranger. [/quote]The music pretty much matches contemporary practice from what I’ve seen in the Catholic forums I’ve been in. [quote]mertdawg wroteAnd the Greek, Russian, American, Romanian, Ukranian, Serbian, and almost all of the “branches” are in full communion, they are not branches, but rather jurisdictions. There are a few fringe groups that I might call “branches”.[/quote]I’m not sure exactly where you and I will end up.

405

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Obviously they were right for 2000 years.
[/quote]

Practiced =/= right.[/quote]

Experience = knowledge.[/quote]

If that’s the case then Hinduism must be the true religion seeing as they’ve existed and have been “getting it right” for more than 2,000 years whilst gaining the experience and knowledge to successfully have you reincarnated as livestock.

406

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
At the last DIOCESAN Roman Catholic Mass I attended the entrance, offertory, eucharistic and closing “hymns” were Let it Be, The Greatest Love, Here comes the Sun and Goodbye Stranger.
[/quote]

That’s not change. That’s liturgical abuse, and you should report it to the Bishop. Go to a Tridentine Mass, or a Divine Liturgy if you want old school. That’s all I go to unless I don’t have a choice.

P.S. It’s not called Diocesan Roman Catholic Mass, it’s called Novus Ordo, or Ordinary Form and it should be sung with English Chant or approved hymns, and Let it Be is definitely not one of them (the rest I am not sure what they are).

407

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The music pretty much matches contemporary practice from what I’ve seen in the Catholic forums I’ve been in. [/quote]

Don’t talk to a traditionalist, you’ll have your mind blown…because you know those are the people that actually listen to the Pope and have read what documents of Vatican II.

Wait until we have our new mass starting at Advent next November. English Chant, and a much better translation into Latin (and Latin in the Mass), I am so excited!

Woot! Woot! I knew my Georgian Chant lessons would come in handy one day (kidding, I do chant all the time).

here is the rest if you wish to hear them: http://www.chantcafe.com/2010/09/tutorial-videos-on-new-missal-chants.html

408

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Obviously they were right for 2000 years.
[/quote]

Practiced =/= right.[/quote]

Experience = knowledge.[/quote]

If that’s the case then Hinduism must be the true religion seeing as they’ve existed and have been “getting it right” for more than 2,000 years whilst gaining the experience and knowledge to successfully have you reincarnated as livestock.

[/quote]

Except they haven’t been consistent, they have morphed into a complete different religion then what they were. Catholics, same truths since the beginning, same G-d, same salvation.

409

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:<<< Actually I hold that human homosexuality is a sin and that sin entered the world by man. <<<>>> And “our nature” is not the same as “natural”.[/quote]I agree. Both counts. I gotta say. I may have missed it, but I’m having a hard time figuring out where exactly you’re coming from.
[/quote]

I wrote it later: I don’t care if homosexuality has been around since the dawn of man! SIN has been around since the dawn of man, it doesn’t make it in our nature just because a scientist might label it as “natural” [/quote]

I think he was addressing the argument that homosexuality is bad because it is unnatural.

You’re presenting a different argument, which is that homosexuality is bad because it is a sin. However, there are a lot of unproven assumptions in your argument so it doesn’t carry a lot of weight.

Faith <> Proof

410

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
At the last DIOCESAN Roman Catholic Mass I attended the entrance, offertory, eucharistic and closing “hymns” were Let it Be, The Greatest Love, Here comes the Sun and Goodbye Stranger.
[/quote]

That’s not change. That’s liturgical abuse, and you should report it to the Bishop. Go to a Tridentine Mass, or a Divine Liturgy if you want old school. That’s all I go to unless I don’t have a choice.

P.S. It’s not called Diocesan Roman Catholic Mass, it’s called Novus Ordo, or Ordinary Form and it should be sung with English Chant or approved hymns, and Let it Be is definitely not one of them (the rest I am not sure what they are). [/quote]

I am not titling it “Diocesan Roman Catholic Mass” I am describing it. It was a Roman Catholic Mass done in a Diocesan parish. What is wrong with describing something with, um, adjectives?

Well you’ve answered, but Goodby Stranger is a song from Supertramp about saying goodbye to a lover from a one night stand.

- YouTube if you want.

I also was appalled by the number of hosts I uncovered stuck under the pews and into missellettes.

Most of the music in maybe 250 masses I attended were old protestant hymns like How Great thou Art, Peace is flowing like a River, As the Rain Rushes Down…

411

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The music pretty much matches contemporary practice from what I’ve seen in the Catholic forums I’ve been in. [/quote]

Don’t talk to a traditionalist, you’ll have your mind blown…because you know those are the people that actually listen to the Pope and have read what documents of Vatican II.

Wait until we have our new mass starting at Advent next November. English Chant, and a much better translation into Latin (and Latin in the Mass), I am so excited!

Woot! Woot! I knew my Georgian Chant lessons would come in handy one day (kidding, I do chant all the time).

here is the rest if you wish to hear them: http://www.chantcafe.com/2010/09/tutorial-videos-on-new-missal-chants.html[/quote]

Nice chant, though its too bad that Popes Leo I and III both forbade singing “and the Son” at mass.

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Filioque

412

[quote]Dustin wrote:

C’mon, that was hilarious. You take this forum far too seriously.[/quote]

Negative - would it have been hilarious! if someone had told Forlife “A fire. Please, go die in it. And all your loved ones. Please.” on the basis of his sexuality?

Would it have given you some delightful chuckles?

The etiquette of these forums is largely self-regulated, i.e., we speak as to what kind of talk we will tolerate and what kind we won’t. I wouldn’t tolerate that kind of talk if it was directed at Forlife - would you?

Who cares?

413

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

A fire. Please, go die in it. And all your loved ones. Please.[/quote]

Disgusting. I’ve tolerated you for some time, while keeping my expectations low about your actual contributions, and now I am reminded of why I never should have wasted my time in the first place.

You compound being a terrible debater with being a disrespectful and hateful worm. Can’t unring that bell.[/quote]

I’m eternally grateful that you’ve tolerated me for so long, sir. Best comfort yourself with the block function. Take care.

414

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]GLOCKTHNP wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
“Deep down in every person they know it is wrong”

A fire. Please, go die in it. And all your loved ones. Please.[/quote]

Please logically debate.

[/quote]

You will first need to embrace and apply logic to your own position before you ask someone to logically debate.[/quote]

This.

Trying to “logically debate” a point on which the opponents logic rests that fucking sky wizard said its bad is utterly useless.

415

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Dustin wrote:

C’mon, that was hilarious. You take this forum far too seriously.[/quote]

Negative - would it have been hilarious! if someone had told Forlife “A fire. Please, go die in it. And all your loved ones. Please.” on the basis of his sexuality?

Would it have given you some delightful chuckles?

The etiquette of these forums is largely self-regulated, i.e., we speak as to what kind of talk we will tolerate and what kind we won’t. I wouldn’t tolerate that kind of talk if it was directed at Forlife - would you?

Who cares?[/quote]

Well, dipshit,omeones sexuality and someone making a claim that everyone, deep down, agrees with their idiotic bigoted opinion are clearly the same thing. And we should react the same way towards someone attacking them for either.

Frankly, I dont care about his family. As to him, since he’s got both the low mental capacity and hubris to claim that everyone, deep down, even homosexuals themselves, “know its wrong” (even you, thunderbolt, you, deep down, “know its wrong”…right?) - there is no room for logical debate or hope that he’ll rethink his position based on sound principles. His position warranted a hateful personal attack.

416

Its also awful nice that you wouldnt tolerate that kind of talk if it was directed at Forlife for his homosexuality, TB.

Its equally nice that you’ll tolerate years of accusations that he “lives in sin”, “is a sinner”, “is a pedophile”, “knows he’s wrong”, “hates himself”, that him raising a child would be child abuse, that he can’t “really love” his partner, attacks on him “abandoning his family”, that he will burn in hellfire for all eternity, that having consentual sexual relations with his partner should be considered a criminal activity, and thus he should be in jail, that he “has a mental disorder”, that he should not be able to marry his longtime monogamous partner…

I remember years back someone posted, in some random thread, a picture of two teenage guys kissing. One poster replied “Ugh, Kill them both.” Shockingly, I didn’t see a ton of replies “self regulating” the “etiquette of these forums”.

417

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

I’m eternally grateful that you’ve tolerated me for so long, sir. [/quote]

You should be. It’s hard work.

418

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Well, dipshit,omeones sexuality and someone making a claim that everyone, deep down, agrees with their idiotic bigoted opinion are clearly the same thing. And we should react the same way towards someone attacking them for either.

Frankly, I dont care about his family. As to him, since he’s got both the low mental capacity and hubris to claim that everyone, deep down, even homosexuals themselves, “know its wrong” (even you, thunderbolt, you, deep down, “know its wrong”…right?) - there is no room for logical debate or hope that he’ll rethink his position based on sound principles. His position warranted a hateful personal attack.[/quote]

I’ve been reading your arguments for some time and you ain’t exactly in a place to lecture on logic, but that aside, no, nothing he said “warranted a hateful personal attack”.

And, this exchange says more about you than him, or anyone else that you disagree with. You aren’t interested in “logic”, or “debate”, or hell, even “tolerance” - you want to throw a tantrum at people you disagree with.

As is, one of the great things about free speech is that you learn who the idiots are really fast…and so, thanks for the disclosure.

419

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

I remember years back someone posted, in some random thread, a picture of two teenage guys kissing. One poster replied “Ugh, Kill them both.” Shockingly, I didn’t see a ton of replies “self regulating” the “etiquette of these forums”. [/quote]

And? So? Does that mean that somehow your idiotic drivel is somehow exempt from scorn just because you - sniff - think there wasn’t adequate reaction in the past?

Nope. And I’ve defended Forlife from unpleasant rhetoric directed at him in the past. Unlike you, I actually think the door of standards swings both ways, and certain comments are off-limits.

Don’t like it? Who cares? You are one of the dimmest bulbs around here. Say something worthwhile and intelligent and no one will lash out at you for being a twerp. Till then, I’ll treat your obnxious speech in the same way as I treated the obnoxious speech calling Forlife a “f*g” - worthy of contempt and worthy of letting the person responsible of the comment that they are contemptible.

420

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Well, dipshit,omeones sexuality and someone making a claim that everyone, deep down, agrees with their idiotic bigoted opinion are clearly the same thing. And we should react the same way towards someone attacking them for either.

Frankly, I dont care about his family. As to him, since he’s got both the low mental capacity and hubris to claim that everyone, deep down, even homosexuals themselves, “know its wrong” (even you, thunderbolt, you, deep down, “know its wrong”…right?) - there is no room for logical debate or hope that he’ll rethink his position based on sound principles. His position warranted a hateful personal attack.[/quote]

I’ve been reading your arguments for some time and you ain’t exactly in a place to lecture on logic, but that aside, no, nothing he said “warranted a hateful personal attack”.

And, this exchange says more about you than him, or anyone else that you disagree with. You aren’t interested in “logic”, or “debate”, or hell, even “tolerance” - you want to throw a tantrum at people you disagree with.

As is, one of the great things about free speech is that you learn who the idiots are really fast…and so, thanks for the disclosure.[/quote]

Please point out an argument I’ve made (about homosexuality, gay marriage, or anything else) and explain how it was illogical. (Note - if you reply to this with some form of “its not worth my time”, you automatically concede that you have no argument).

I’m interested in logic and debate. As I explained, his comment reliably indicated that logic and/or debate would be wasted on him - no “logical” reason to claim that homosexuality is immoral (sinful) exists, and less “logical” reason to claim that everyone agrees with this claim exists. I’ve tried reasonably and logically debating the topic with bigots for years (remember me and mick28?) and its never any good.

They dont come to the conclusion that “homosexuality is wrong” based on logic or rational thought, they come to it based on emotional response and social conditioning. They are generally rewarded for expousing an anti-gay bias, so they continue to build around that. Not from logic, but because they enjoy the support. I see them as being a bit like dogs in that respect. You dont use logic and reason on a dog; you smack it on its nose, yell “bad dog” and tell it to go outside.

Likewise, when someone makes a claim as pompous and bigoted as his, I see no reason to waste my time and energy “logically debating” the point. So I said something mean, which was intended to evoke an emotional response. If you, or he, or anyone else took it to literally mean I wish death on him or his loved ones, so be it. And if you, he, or anyone else thought it crossed a line of decency, I accept that as well.

For the record, I did not mean it literally.