Marriage is NOT About Two People Loving Each Other

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

Oh, and I have not engaged you in conversations before because you have a tendency to insult anyone who disagrees with you and I do not debate with people like that, whether they agree with me or disagree. [/quote]

Nope, I respond in kind. Take, for example, Rajraj’s unsupported insinuation that somehow, some way, I actually found jokes about murdering infants that were determined to be gay funny (in fact, I “made him sick”). An idiotic slander with no basis in fact, so I told him so. An insult? Look, you deserve to be insulted if go that route.

62

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

Push and I managed to discuss opposing viewpoints of a sensitive topic in GAL without resorting to insults so I know it is possible.[/quote]

And you have it backwards - what I seek are people with opposing viewpoints. That is what makes PWI interesting. The problem is that w/r/t to left-leaning contributors, we get the likes of K2000 or Rajraj and their playground antics and ad hominem arguments. It’s dull. I am legitimately interested in different viewpoints - I don’t have any reason to suffer fools (of the right or the left).

63

I think what makes discussions like this pointless is that the opponents exist in different dimensions that
result in that they arent able to understand the opponents position. I can take me as an example in that I
dont understand the anti-gay-marriage sentiment at all, I cant see the implications of gay-marriage as they see. The arguments sounds irrelevant. Even if I tried to wrap my head around the religious-conservative perception of gay-marriage I dont think I am able, because it doesnt make sense to me. The point to this is that it makes the discussion as fruitfull as a debate beetwen a english man and a german man who didnt understood eachothers languages. I have the same problem with the populist rights concerns about immigration, all I hear is racist conspiratiorial bullshit and it doesnt fit with my experience of reality. ( I am not saying that the anti-gay-marriage camp is racist, just that I have an equally difficult time understanding and taking the two groups concerns seriously )

Btw this discussion is been beaten to death, so I think we have heard all the arguments by now.

64

[quote]florelius wrote:
I think what makes discussions like this pointless is that the opponents exist in different dimensions that
result in that they arent able to understand the opponents position. I can take me as an example in that I
dont understand the anti-gay-marriage sentiment at all, I cant see the implications of gay-marriage as they see. The arguments sounds irrelevant. Even if I tried to wrap my head around the religious-conservative perception of gay-marriage I dont think I am able, because it doesnt make sense to me. The point to this is that it makes the discussion as fruitfull as a debate beetwen a english man and a german man who didnt understood eachothers languages. I have the same problem with the populist rights concerns about immigration, all I hear is racist conspiratiorial bullshit and it doesnt fit with my experience of reality. ( I am not saying that the anti-gay-marriage camp is racist, just that I have an equally difficult time understanding and taking the two groups concerns seriously )

Btw this discussion is been beaten to death, so I think we have heard all the arguments by now.

[/quote]

U prolly need a solid dose of Pat Buchanan.

Not that I necessarily agree with all or even the majority of his positions, he makes some solid points regarding immigration, identity politics and so on.

65

658×720 73.7 KB

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

Push and I managed to discuss opposing viewpoints of a sensitive topic in GAL without resorting to insults so I know it is possible.[/quote]

And you have it backwards - what I seek are people with opposing viewpoints. That is what makes PWI interesting. The problem is that w/r/t to left-leaning contributors, we get the likes of K2000 or Rajraj and their playground antics and ad hominem arguments. It’s dull. I am legitimately interested in different viewpoints - I don’t have any reason to suffer fools (of the right or the left).[/quote]

you say that, and then you shout them down and call the stupid.

I would like to see an intelligent argument against gay marriage that isn’t based on faith (because of the whole separation of church and state thing). I just can’t see reason for denying someone else rights because of others religion.
On the other hand, how can you adhere to certain things that the bible says, (ie. men shouldnt be gay) and ignore all of the commandments for violence?

66

Still too big of a chicken shit to state his stance on homosexuality.

Anyways back to my point. We live in a a Christian-dominated society, a life permeated with Christian assumptions and premises.

A few examples:

Language

Our language is rich with Christian terminology. “heaven,” “hell,” “angel,” “devil,” “bless,” “soul,” “saint,” “gospel” and so on. These words are all entered our daily vocabulary from one religion.

Art

How much of Western art over the last 2 thousand years has been a reiteration of Christan myths and images? Heck, even contemporary media like the movies Passion of the Christ and the Matrix talk about “the one” and “saviors” and such.

Time

When we state it’s the year 2012 or whatever, we are referring to the Christian Calendar.

Space

Think of all the Christian named places - new Canaan, Conneticut, Bethlehem, PA, St. Paul, MN, Sangre de Cristo Mountains in Colorado, Corpus Christi, TX. Etc etc.

My point is that what happens in the Churches has a substantial effect on culture in North America. What is preached from the puplit shapes our thoughts and attitudes in society. The mass preaching against homosexuality in the thousands of churches across the country is no different. Whether you guys want to admit it or not, Christianity contributes to anti-gay culture. Anti-gay culture leads to hatred against gays. Hatred of gays leads to violence against gays.

So no, my point isn’t based internet tweets.

67

[quote]boomdat wrote:

I would like to see an intelligent argument against gay marriage that isn’t based on faith (because of the whole separation of church and state thing). I just can’t see reason for denying someone else rights because of others religion.
On the other hand, how can you adhere to certain things that the bible says, (ie. men shouldnt be gay) and ignore all of the commandments for violence?[/quote]

Whoa, whoa that’s sounding a lot like logic and that don’t go well in these parts round here (at least not with this argument).

68

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:
I think what makes discussions like this pointless is that the opponents exist in different dimensions that
result in that they arent able to understand the opponents position. I can take me as an example in that I
dont understand the anti-gay-marriage sentiment at all, I cant see the implications of gay-marriage as they see. The arguments sounds irrelevant. Even if I tried to wrap my head around the religious-conservative perception of gay-marriage I dont think I am able, because it doesnt make sense to me. The point to this is that it makes the discussion as fruitfull as a debate beetwen a english man and a german man who didnt understood eachothers languages. I have the same problem with the populist rights concerns about immigration, all I hear is racist conspiratiorial bullshit and it doesnt fit with my experience of reality. ( I am not saying that the anti-gay-marriage camp is racist, just that I have an equally difficult time understanding and taking the two groups concerns seriously )

Btw this discussion is been beaten to death, so I think we have heard all the arguments by now.

[/quote]

U prolly need a solid dose of Pat Buchanan.

Not that I necessarily agree with all or even the majority of his positions, he makes some solid points regarding immigration, identity politics and so on.
[/quote]

I havent heard any of his positions, but they need to be solid as granit if they are going to change my mind about the subject of immigration. The only good argument for restricting immigration I have heard is that there needs to be a correlation beetwen the number of immigrants and the countrys capacity to integrate them. Now if this argument can be used to restrict a countrys immigration policy hangs on the question if the country has met that limit or not. Is it along those lines he argues, or is he more concerned about the negative impact immigration from the third world could have on the existing culture in a country( typical populist rightwing arguments )?

69

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:
I think what makes discussions like this pointless is that the opponents exist in different dimensions that
result in that they arent able to understand the opponents position. I can take me as an example in that I
dont understand the anti-gay-marriage sentiment at all, I cant see the implications of gay-marriage as they see. The arguments sounds irrelevant. Even if I tried to wrap my head around the religious-conservative perception of gay-marriage I dont think I am able, because it doesnt make sense to me. The point to this is that it makes the discussion as fruitfull as a debate beetwen a english man and a german man who didnt understood eachothers languages. I have the same problem with the populist rights concerns about immigration, all I hear is racist conspiratiorial bullshit and it doesnt fit with my experience of reality. ( I am not saying that the anti-gay-marriage camp is racist, just that I have an equally difficult time understanding and taking the two groups concerns seriously )

Btw this discussion is been beaten to death, so I think we have heard all the arguments by now.

[/quote]

U prolly need a solid dose of Pat Buchanan.

Not that I necessarily agree with all or even the majority of his positions, he makes some solid points regarding immigration, identity politics and so on.
[/quote]

I havent heard any of his positions, but they need to be solid as granit if they are going to change my mind about the subject of immigration. The only good argument for restricting immigration I have heard is that there needs to be a correlation beetwen the number of immigrants and the countrys capacity to integrate them. Now if this argument can be used to restrict a countrys immigration policy hangs on the question if the country has met that limit or not. Is it along those lines he argues, or is he more concerned about the negative impact immigration from the third world could have on the existing culture in a country( typical populist rightwing arguments )?
[/quote]

Yeah well, his typical right wing arguments has a point.

Like or not, the US was founded on ran on WASPs for a very long time. Since culture runs a bit deeper than what clothes you wear or what food you prefer it matters.

Now, if the immigrants culture is better or only on par with the existing one in the country they chose to come to, why would they come?

Insofar there is cause for concern, if only because a fundamental shift in the demographics of a nation will almost necessarily also lead to a fundamental shift in that nations culture.

The fundamental problem in the US is, added on top, is that there is very little holding the nation together and there is political coin to be made by dividing people in to more or less arbitrary groups and pitting them against each other and if ethnonationalism ever raises its ugly head in America what are they going to do?

It took Europe a few hundred years of wars and ethnic cleansing before everyone settled in more or less undisputed nation states and regarded that issue as settled.

71

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

…Push and I managed to discuss opposing viewpoints of a sensitive topic in GAL without resorting to insults so I know it is possible.
[/quote]

I might not be so easy on you in here.

:slight_smile:

Seriously though, I have to endorse T-bolt’s last post. When discussion with a lib/progressive/lefty just out and out gets ridiculously inane I will resort to drawing out the sharp knife. He had every reason to slice the liver out of Raj for his stupidity on this thread.[/quote]

LOL! Bring it on, old man. My point was just that I don’t use personal insults in my debates and do not debate with those who do. He may be right about raj in this thread, but looking through his posts in other threads shows otherwise in other cases. I normally just wouldn’t have talked to him at all, but he seems eager to debate and I am willing to as long as personal insults stay out of it.

73

[quote]boomdat wrote:

you say that, and then you shout them down and call the stupid.[/quote]

If they say something stupid, I tell them so. And I don’t shout them down.

Do a search. There are pages and pages in thread after thread where I (and others) provide an argument against gay marriage that don’t mention, refer to, or relate at all to religion. At all. Period.

Here is the short version: gay marriage is a solution in search of a problem. It doesn’t address any glaring social need. It’s therapeutic legislation that, at best, accomplishes next to nothing, and at worst, reinforces many cultural assumptions and habits that have made our society worse over the last 60 years.

74

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

And you have it backwards - what I seek are people with opposing viewpoints. That is what makes PWI interesting. The problem is that w/r/t to left-leaning contributors, we get the likes of K2000 or Rajraj and their playground antics and ad hominem arguments. It’s dull. I am legitimately interested in different viewpoints - I don’t have any reason to suffer fools (of the right or the left).[/quote]

No you’re not.

You jumped into this thread with an aggressive post and turned this into a shitfest. Go read your first post. Furthermore I’ve explained my POV and you still haven’t stated your opinion on homsexuality… but I do know you have a lot of gay friends. LOL

75

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

…Push and I managed to discuss opposing viewpoints of a sensitive topic in GAL without resorting to insults so I know it is possible.
[/quote]

I might not be so easy on you in here.

:slight_smile:

Seriously though, I have to endorse T-bolt’s last post. When discussion with a lib/progressive/lefty just out and out gets ridiculously inane I will resort to drawing out the sharp knife. He had every reason to slice the liver out of Raj for his stupidity on this thread.[/quote]

LOL! Bring it on, old man. My point was just that I don’t use personal insults in my debates and do not debate with those who do. He may be right about raj in this thread, but looking through his posts in other threads shows otherwise in other cases. I normally just wouldn’t have talked to him at all, but he seems eager to debate and I am willing to as long as personal insults stay out of it.[/quote]

I’ve pretty much marveled out how restrained he is in many cases. I know I don’t have his patience.[/quote]

Yep, he is direct and accurate, i do enjoy watching him as he hits them out of the ballpark.

76

[quote]therajraj wrote:

No you’re not.[/quote]

Sure I am, from interesting and smart ones - do you know any?

I did, I even re-posted it. You made a ridiculous claim about the “evidence” provided by a series of Tweets and how the ugly commentary in them was somehow a function of Christian intolerance of gays. I pointed out how stupid it was because it was incredibly stupid and didn’t need to go unanswered.

You’ve since slinked away from that stupidity, and frankly, I would have too once I realized the error of my ways.

Well, I assumed that you were capable of figuring out that because I have gay friends, I am not exactly be ferociously intolerant of homsexuality, but once again, I’ve have given you too much credit. You couldn’t fgure that out.

Here it is for you, in color-by-number fashion: (1) I have gay friends and ipso facto I don’t have a problem with them or their sexuality, and (2) I don’t support gay marriage and never have. One my gay friends - get ready to have your mind blown - doesn’t support gay marriage either.

And, as I said earlier, I am living proof your asinine reductionism doesn’t work in the real world, and since your POV is based on asinine reductionism - i.e., an uneducated and idiotic oversimplication of the issues with a real motive to slander Christians - your POV isn’t very compelling.

77

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

I did, I even re-posted it. You made a ridiculous claim about the “evidence” provided by a series of Tweets and how the ugly commentary in them was somehow a function of Christian intolerance of gays. I pointed out how stupid it was because it was incredibly stupid and didn’t need to go unanswered.

You’ve since slinked away from that stupidity, and frankly, I would have too once I realized the error of my ways.

[/quote]

I explained how Christianity contributes to anti-gay culture. The tweets are part of overarching issue. There are other factors but religion is a big one.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Well, I assumed that you were capable of figuring out that because I have gay friends, I am not exactly be ferociously intolerant of homsexuality, but once again, I’ve have given you too much credit. You couldn’t fgure that out.[/quote]

No it was nothing but an avoidance technique to deflect away from stating your stance on homosexuality… which you still haven’t answered. Having gay friends doesn’t preclude you from considering their actions immoral.

Pat mentioned he has a friend at his church who is gay… and he still think his lifestyle is immoral

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Here it is for you, in color-by-number fashion: (1) I have gay friends and ipso facto I don’t have a problem with them or their sexuality, and (2) I don’t support gay marriage and never have. One my gay friends - get ready to have your mind blown - doesn’t support gay marriage either.[/quote]

So does that mean you don’t consider homosexuality a sin? I’m still waiting for an answer.

I don’t care if you have a gay friend who doesn’t support gay marriage. Prepare to have your mind blown: most gays support gay marriage. Your friend doesn’t represent the majority of gays.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

And, as I said earlier, I am living proof your asinine reductionism doesn’t work in the real world, and since your POV is based on asinine reductionism - i.e., an uneducated and idiotic oversimplication of the issues with a real motive to slander Christians - your POV isn’t very compelling.[/quote]

You seem to ignore the fact that Christianity has shaped our culture and continues to do so. You are extremely naive if you think Christianity has had no impact on anti-gay culture.

78

[quote]therajraj wrote:

I explained how Christianity contributes to anti-gay culture. The tweets are part of overarching issue. There are other factors but religion is a big one.[/quote]

No, the tweets aren’t anything but an bunch of idiots saying stupid things on social media for shock value. That’s it. They aren’t part of an “overarching issue”.

No, it wasn’t an “avoidance technique” - my point (made with my post) was to point the idiocy of your example, which has nothing to do with my stance on homosexuality, etc. It was you that somehow equated my pointing that out with my liking the tweets and therefore my complicity in gay hatred. Given that, I didn’t have much interest in pursuing other topics with you, because given your inability to follow a basic point (i.e., suggesting that the tweets were not genuine does not equal endorsing their contents), I knew you’d be a waste of time.

And I was right. But I am a sporting man, and so here I am.

Super. Take that up with Pat.

No, I don’t. Man, you really are dense.

That doesn’t blow my mind because I didn’t believe otherwise. My point is that your cheap reductionism doesn’t work - it’s more complicated than your numbskull theory suggests, and my friend is an example of that complication.

Oh, I don’t ingore it - once again, you leap to a conclusion for which you have no basis. I never anything about Christianity’s impact on our culture.

But, since you brought it up, of course, Christianity has had an huge impact on our culture, and we are the better for it.

As for its impact on “anti-gay culture”, I doubt we’d agree as to what “anti-gay culture” means. I know plenty of Christians who don’t support gay marriage, but aren’t anti-gay.

In any event, this isn’t getting more interesting, it’s getting less.

EDIT: typos.

79

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

I did, I even re-posted it. You made a ridiculous claim about the “evidence” provided by a series of Tweets and how the ugly commentary in them was somehow a function of Christian intolerance of gays. I pointed out how stupid it was because it was incredibly stupid and didn’t need to go unanswered.

You’ve since slinked away from that stupidity, and frankly, I would have too once I realized the error of my ways.

[/quote]

I explained how Christianity contributes to anti-gay culture. The tweets are part of overarching issue. There are other factors but religion is a big one.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Well, I assumed that you were capable of figuring out that because I have gay friends, I am not exactly be ferociously intolerant of homsexuality, but once again, I’ve have given you too much credit. You couldn’t fgure that out.[/quote]

No it was nothing but an avoidance technique to deflect away from stating your stance on homosexuality… which you still haven’t answered. Having gay friends doesn’t preclude you from considering their actions immoral.

Pat mentioned he has a friend at his church who is gay… and he still think his lifestyle is immoral

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Here it is for you, in color-by-number fashion: (1) I have gay friends and ipso facto I don’t have a problem with them or their sexuality, and (2) I don’t support gay marriage and never have. One my gay friends - get ready to have your mind blown - doesn’t support gay marriage either.[/quote]

So does that mean you don’t consider homosexuality a sin? I’m still waiting for an answer.

I don’t care if you have a gay friend who doesn’t support gay marriage. Prepare to have your mind blown: most gays support gay marriage. Your friend doesn’t represent the majority of gays.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

And, as I said earlier, I am living proof your asinine reductionism doesn’t work in the real world, and since your POV is based on asinine reductionism - i.e., an uneducated and idiotic oversimplication of the issues with a real motive to slander Christians - your POV isn’t very compelling.[/quote]

You seem to ignore the fact that Christianity has shaped our culture and continues to do so. You are extremely naive if you think Christianity has had no impact on anti-gay culture.[/quote]

This kind of anti-orthodox Christian talk is going to get them shot in the head.

80

I think adulterers are immoral. No, it’s not my fault if someone kills one.