[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
News flash: homosexuals want to gain acceptance as human beings in our society and are using “tactics” to do so; film at 11. [/quote]
I do accept homosexuals as human beings. I just don’t accept their behaviour and lifestyles.[/quote]
So what are your facts, logic and proof for not accepting their behavior and lifestyle?[/quote]
See related citations as well. There’s also the facts that they regularly bring up themselves of high suicide rates and drug use.[/quote]
So this is what you call good science? How can you seriously accept stuff like this and ignore things like global warming studies?[/quote]
Lol! [/quote]
This is a serious question. What exactly does a study on global warming have that makes it bullshit while at the same time this one being valid?
How to lie to your own people and have them believe you.
The second use of the phrase by Goebbels is the one commonly referred to when using the expression ‘big lie.’
[/quote]
This one is a myth, started perhaps on the floor of the House of Representatives, and then picked up and ran with. Very ironically so, I might add.
If I am mistaken, then something has been uncovered since I looked into it, or I didn’t put enough effort into the looking. Please cite Goebbels’ words if I am incorrect.
Morality by its very nature must discriminate. If you want to call it propaganda then do so by all means. However the article I linked to does not advocate Goebbels’ ‘big lie.’ The book in question does. It reads like one of Goebbels’ diatribes on propaganda techniques.[/quote]
You LINKED to a far right propaganda website in order to attack the other sides propaganda? How are you not getting this? You constantly link to far right websites which help confirm stuff you already believe to be true. They back up your thinking.
This is why the “discussion” is a waste of time. The entire “mass resistance” website is pushing an agenda and you have the gal to call out something else pushing an agenda? Really? Do you honestly feel as if the website you linked is not pushing an agenda? It’s not like it is trying to hide it.
You just happen to agree with what they are pushing so it doesn’t bother you.
You can choke on this type of irony. [/quote]
They really need to rename their website to something with the words gay and abortion in the name since they seem to talk about nothing else. mass resistance sounds more like a video game or something.
The biological and social function of sex is procreation. Homosexuality subverts this function.
[/quote]
Well, that is one hell of a collection of assumption and fallacy. Let’s start at beginning.
“The biological and social function of sex is procreation.” According to whom? Do you mean that sex is intended for procreation? Intended by whom?
Or are you simply making the rather banal observation that certain kinds of sex lead to procreation? It does not follow from this that other kinds are immoral.[/quote]
So your argument is that procreation is not the function of sex but merely an incidental biproduct of a certain type of sex? That argument is entirely devoid of reason.[/quote]
My argument is that what you’re saying is not cogent, and that it can be dismantled easily and in any number of ways. For example:
That an act can, under the correct circumstances, lead to X does not logically entail that the act is immoral when it does not or cannot lead to X.
So, I ask again:
“The biological and social function of sex is procreation.” According to whom? Do you mean that sex is intended for procreation? Intended by whom?
Or are you simply making the rather banal observation that certain kinds of sex lead to procreation? It does not follow from this that other kinds are immoral.
Morality by its very nature must discriminate. If you want to call it propaganda then do so by all means. However the article I linked to does not advocate Goebbels’ ‘big lie.’ The book in question does. It reads like one of Goebbels’ diatribes on propaganda techniques.[/quote]
You LINKED to a far right propaganda website in order to attack the other sides propaganda? How are you not getting this? You constantly link to far right websites which help confirm stuff you already believe to be true. They back up your thinking.
This is why the “discussion” is a waste of time. The entire “mass resistance” website is pushing an agenda and you have the gal to call out something else pushing an agenda? Really? Do you honestly feel as if the website you linked is not pushing an agenda? It’s not like it is trying to hide it.
You just happen to agree with what they are pushing so it doesn’t bother you.
You can choke on this type of irony. [/quote]
I’m pointing out the tactics used. Not whether or not an agenda exists.
How to lie to your own people and have them believe you.
The second use of the phrase by Goebbels is the one commonly referred to when using the expression ‘big lie.’
[/quote]
This one is a myth, started perhaps on the floor of the House of Representatives, and then picked up and ran with. Very ironically so, I might add.
If I am mistaken, then something has been uncovered since I looked into it, or I didn’t put enough effort into the looking. Please cite Goebbels’ words if I am incorrect.[/quote]
‘If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.’
Some sources claim the above quote is misattributed. However it has been widely published as a genuine quote.
My argument is that what you’re saying is not cogent, and that it can be dismantled easily and in any number of ways. For example:
That an act can, under the correct circumstances, lead to X does not logically entail that the act is immoral when it does not or cannot lead to X.
[/quote]
However if the act is something as vital as the continuation of the human race then it is immoral to subvert it.
According to any rational observer of biology.
I mean its function is procreation. Any rational observer would have to agree.
See above.
[quote]
Or are you simply making the rather banal observation that certain kinds of sex lead to procreation? It does not follow from this that other kinds are immoral.[/quote]
How to lie to your own people and have them believe you.
The second use of the phrase by Goebbels is the one commonly referred to when using the expression ‘big lie.’
[/quote]
This one is a myth, started perhaps on the floor of the House of Representatives, and then picked up and ran with. Very ironically so, I might add.
If I am mistaken, then something has been uncovered since I looked into it, or I didn’t put enough effort into the looking. Please cite Goebbels’ words if I am incorrect.[/quote]
‘If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.’
Some sources claim the above quote is misattributed. However it has been widely published as a genuine quote.
[/quote]
Right, that’s the one. It’s a canard. Look for the actual citation, the primary source, if you doubt this.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
News flash: homosexuals want to gain acceptance as human beings in our society and are using “tactics” to do so; film at 11. [/quote]
I do accept homosexuals as human beings. I just don’t accept their behaviour and lifestyles.[/quote]
So what are your facts, logic and proof for not accepting their behavior and lifestyle?[/quote]
See related citations as well. There’s also the facts that they regularly bring up themselves of high suicide rates and drug use.[/quote]
So this is what you call good science? How can you seriously accept stuff like this and ignore things like global warming studies?[/quote]
Lol! [/quote]
This is a serious question. What exactly does a study on global warming have that makes it bullshit while at the same time this one being valid?[/quote]
You may think it’s a serious question but really it’s not. Global warming is a pseudo science like phrenology.
My argument is that what you’re saying is not cogent, and that it can be dismantled easily and in any number of ways. For example:
That an act can, under the correct circumstances, lead to X does not logically entail that the act is immoral when it does not or cannot lead to X.
[/quote]
However if the act is something as vital as the continuation of the human race then it is immoral to subvert it.
[/quote]
Argument by assertion. This is just a thing you’re saying, and there is absolutely no reason to believe that it’s correct. Hardly a logical and cogent argument for homosexuality’s immorality.
Again, this whole argument stands on a foundation of nonsense. “Here is the list of biological appendages and acts, and here is what they are for. If you use them for anything else, you’re doing something immoral.” It’s just a string of words, and it couldn’t carry less moral weight.
Argument by assertion. This is just a thing you’re saying, and there is absolutely no reason to believe that it’s correct. Hardly a logical and cogent argument for homosexuality’s immorality.
[/quote]
So it’s not immoral to allow the human race to become extinct?
The underlying maxim–because this involves orgasm and can’t lead to procreation, it is immoral–is unsupported gibberish.[/quote]
That’s not the underlying maxim. The undeniable biological function of sex is procreation. To normalise homosexuality is to undermine procreation. I don’t know how I can express it any more clearly than that.