Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

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.

Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 247
  1. #121
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    641
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Challenge to support a claim.Support or retract that I hate or am intolerant toward homosexuals.

    My disagreement with the laws regarding marriage and how they are applied has nothing to do with my feelings about homosexuality or the rights of homosexual people. I don't believe that the government should be telling anybody whether their marriage is valid, least of all forcing one group to acknowledge something they believe is morally wrong is the same as one of their sacred rites. I have not demonstrated bigotry in any sense of the word except your own narrowly defined and totally misapplied interpretation.

    If you will not provide a direct quote from me that shows that I hate homosexuals, I demand that you retract your statement. You really need to watch your mouth here. Bigotry isn't exactly a light charge to throw around at people, and I resent your accusation. I take pride in being an open-minded, fair-minded person who relates to people of all faiths, colors, creeds, and backgrounds well. You have no idea who I am or what I believe, and yet you seem to think you have me all figured out based on the fact that I disagree with you on the matter of gay marriage.

    I cite your above statement as Exhibit A that it is impossible to have a reasonable debate with you. Until you retract your accusation and apologize, I refuse to engage with you further. I have reported your post and will await further ruling from the rest of the staff regarding your inflammatory and incredibly rude treatment of not only myself but other members on this thread.
    You don't want the government institution of marriage to apply equally to homosexuals. That is intolerant and not equal. Saying I do not hate or am intolerant of blacks I just don't think the laws should apply to them equally nor do I think they should be allowed to marry outside of their race is bigotry. Also, as I pointed out you don't have to have a visceral hatred to be a bigot. Archie Bunker was a bigot, but he wasn't filled with hate.

    If your problem is anyone having the ability to marry not just gays than why harp on a group who already can't get married? Why not focus on ending heterosexual marriage, and the many benefits those couples get that homosexual couple can't and interracial couple used to be barred from?

  2. #122
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Just for a quick change of pace, and for people to understand the range of right-wing thought on this matter, here are a few topics from rightwingwatch.org from just the front-page:

    Swanson: Disney's 'Frozen' Is A Satanic Push To Turn Kids Gay
    Religious Right talk show host Kevin Swanson railed against the Disney film Frozenon Wednesday, accusing Disney of using the movie to turn children gay.
    Swanson told cohost Steve Vaughn that Satan is using the movie “to indoctrinate my 5-year-old to be a lesbian.”
    ...
    Swanson also criticized Disney for its opposition to the Boy Scouts of America’s ban on openly gay troop leaders, saying that parents should know that the company, along with public schools, is aiming to have “their children indoctrinated” into “the lifestyle of sodomy.”


    Linda Harvey Warns Gay Boy Scouts Will Bring Disaster To America
    Linda Harvey of Mission America is even more upset by Disney’s decision to end its funding of the BSA because the organization still bans older gay members from serving in leadership positions.
    “Yes indeed we know how aggressively the homosexual movement is pushing its views and its behavior on kids and this is one of the most troubling trends in our culture right now, can you imagine how the Boy Scouts will change even more if this happens?” Harvey wondered about the BSA potentially dropping its prohibition on gay adult leaders.


    BarbWire: 'Homo-Maniacal' Gays Will Put Christians In Cattle Cars
    “True American rights and freedoms are being trampled underfoot by the bullies of decadence. The homo-maniacal plans for all traditionalists sound quite unpleasant, not to mention being a clear violation of our First Amendment rights,” Allen writes. “Ah, heck, while the homosexual hordes are busy burning the 'Reichstag,' why not throw in the U.S. Constitution, and the Declaration of the Independence for good measure, as a little more fuel on the ‘gay rights’ fire.”


    Graham says that Russia is a better model of godliness and morality than America because of the Obama administration’s “gay-lesbian agenda” that “is contrary to God’s teaching.”
    He also defended Russia’s support for Syria’s brutal Assad regime.
    “Isn’t it sad, though, that America’s own morality has fallen so far that on this issue—protecting children from any homosexual agenda or propaganda—Russia’s standard is higher than our own? In my opinion, Putin is right on these issues,” Graham writes. “Obviously, he may be wrong about many things, but he has taken a stand to protect his nation’s children from the damaging effects of any gay and lesbian agenda.”

  3. #123
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Several churches, both here and in Canada, have been prosecuted for refusing to allow a gay marriage to be performed on premises, since it contravenes the doctrines of those faiths.
    Could you support that? I'd be against that and don't see how that could be possible.

    ---------- Post added at 12:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:37 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Multiple bakers, photographers, and other private business owners have been prosecuted in court for refusing to participate in a gay wedding as a matter of conscience, even though their services were not exclusive or difficult to obtain.
    Well, that's just segregation. You can't refuse someone a public accommodation because of their sexuality.

    ---------- Post added at 12:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    In Canada, a Christian minister who spoke straight from the Bible against homosexuality was prosecuted under that country's hate speech laws. These lawsuits were purely punitive in nature, and they were done to make a point.
    I'd like to see that story also, please (if you have time).
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  4. #124
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Just a reminder for everyone. Keep the debates about the topics not the debaters. We've had a few close calls from all quarters on this problem as of late. Its common when folks get frustrated or annoyed, but try to show restraint and discipline. Statements saying "you are an X or Y" or "So and so isn't worth my time" or "your arguments are all crap"... not good. Stick to attacking arguments, not the people making them. Sure, sometimes arguments people make say a lot about them, but lets all leave that to the reader to judge for themselves and leave any such conclusions unsaid.

    Remember to honor your opponents for without them you would just be talking to yourself.


    Feed me some debate pellets!

  5. #125
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,699
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    I have been trying in earnest for 3 pages to have a reasonable conversation with Mdougie, and he has repeatedly demonstrated that this is not really possible with him, because any substantial or meaningful deviation from his beliefs is immediately dismissed as hate-filled, sadistic, psychopathic bigotry. For my conversation so far with Mdougie, I'd say that Ibelsd is right.
    And if the debate was over whether one can have a rational debate with MDougie, you might have a point. But I'm not challenging THAT. Ibelsd said that one can't have a rational debate with anyone, including ME, who forwards that comparison. Such an assertion has clearly not been supported.

    And it's not like it would be hard to see if the "proof is in the pudding". I will forward the comparison and we'll see if I'm capable of having a rational debate afterwards.


    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    The Canadians didn't think it would happen in their lifetimes, either, but it did. There are already "hate speech" laws on the books. All it takes is one activist judge to agree with a lawyer that the Bible's take on homosexuality constitutes "hate speech" and you've got the very same thing here. It's not really that hard to imagine.
    I can imagine some official in the US overstepping his bounds and doing something blatantly unconstitutional (it's not like extreme stupidity and/or ignorance can't be found in the US). But I can't imagine (short of my imagination taking me into fantasy land) that such an overstep being upheld by a higher court.

    In other words, if someone arrested a preacher for just saying things in the US, there is no way, given our current laws, that he could be convicted and the conviction could stand. Any judge at all familiar with the US Constitution would have to rule that the preachers first amendment rights were violated and throw the case out. And even if the preacher were unlucky enough to be put in front of such an ignorant judge (whose would be displaying the kind of ignorance that is unheard of as far as I know) who did allow him to be convicted, the case would be appealed and the next judge would overturn it for being blatantly unconstitutional.

    Now, I have provided a clear, supported argument about why that could not possibly happen in the US as it is today. You will need to provide a similarly supported argument about why it can happen here to hold up your end on this issue. Just saying "it happened somewhere else" or "it's possible" will not suffice.

    The kind of support you are forwarding would be akin to supporting the position that my neighbor will kill me based on the fact that someone else was killed by his neighbor and it's possible that my neighbor actually will kill me. It IS possible my neighbor will kill me, but that's not support for the position that I have a legitimate reason to be concerned about this possible event.



    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    The Sea View Methodist incident is hardly the first, and it won't be the last.
    You're going to have to provide a link explaining what this is and what happened before I can respond to this.


    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    If the black man ejects the Klansman because of his beliefs, then it *is* the same as someone being ejected because they are Muslim or Jewish or (by some arguments) homosexual. No difference.
    Again, I said "I don't know" when you originally asked the question so I really wasn't trying to mount an argument against throwing the Klansman out for his beliefs.

    I also don't see this leading to a valid argument against anti-discrimination laws against gays.

    So if you want to argue that the owner cannot, or should not, throw out the Klansman, I will not challenge you on this (for now, at least).
    Last edited by mican333; March 15th, 2014 at 12:45 PM.

  6. #126
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern California, USA
    Posts
    2,018
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    As YOU have CHOSEN to define "proper", that is.
    Okay, if you want me to pretend you don't know how the dictionary defines "proper", or pretend that's not the meaning of it I used in choosing the word, then fine with me, but then I get to think of you as the moron you'd have to be to sincerely expect anyone to go along with something that idiotic. Deal?

  7. #127
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,699
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by cstamford View Post
    Okay, if you want me to pretend you don't know how the dictionary defines "proper", or pretend that's not the meaning of it I used in choosing the word, then fine with me, but then I get to think of you as the moron you'd have to be to sincerely expect anyone to go along with something that idiotic. Deal?
    Once again, a misunderstanding (not necessarily your fault and not necessarily my fault). Once again, a personal attack (that one's on you).

    i'm not questioning the definition of "proper".

    I'm questioning your application of the use of the word. It's like using the word "great" - we both know what "great" means but we can disagree on what makes something "great".

    And you haven't made it clear what criteria you are using to determine what sex is "proper" and why homosexual relationships are improper. Is it because only heterosexuals can procreate? Is it because you don't consider oral and anal (basically non-vaginal) sex "proper"?

    If you think the purpose of sex is to procreate, then oral/anal sex can be considered "improper". But if you consider the purpose of sex to be pleasure, then oral/anal sex is "proper". So before you can forward an objective criteria for what constitutes proper and improper sex, you must establish objective criteria for what constitutions proper sexual relationships.
    Last edited by mican333; March 15th, 2014 at 02:26 PM.

  8. #128
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    641
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Proper Merriam Webster collegiate dictionary. Adjective. Marked by suitability rightness appropriateness: fit.

    When using the word proper in regard to homosexuality it is nothing more than a subjective personal opinion. So one may feel that people with innate homosexual feelings and feelings of love and affection for someone of the same sex expressing that love an affection through sex is not proper, but they think it is so personal opinion of proper in this context is meaningless, and the state dictating that their expression of love an affection illegal or a reason to deny equality is authoritarian.

  9. #129
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern California, USA
    Posts
    2,018
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    i'm not questioning the definition of "proper".
    Yes, you are.

  10. #130
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Tonight's Right Wing Anti-Gay rhetoric comes from:
    Wyoming GOP lawmaker: Promiscuous gays weaponizing AIDS for a ‘national suicide’

    A newly apportioned state Republican representative in Wyoming ... still believes “the real problem in homosexuality is the promiscuity,” which is the means by which “homosexuals” will help America commit “national suicide.”
    And just to balance things out, here's a right-wing Pro-Gay position:

    Lawmakers: Gay marriage fits Republican values

    For us, this issue comes down to what’s right—for our beliefs and for our constituents. This issue is about people and their families, not about government. We cannot embrace a smaller government for business and an overreaching one for the families we claim to support. What starts on one knee and often includes struggles around a kitchen table or cheering from the stands, does not have a place for government. Supporting marriage for all couples is as simple as making sure everyone has the opportunity to find love and happiness. We all strive to treat others the way we wish to be treated.
    ---
    Rep. Ruth Ann Petroff, R-Jackson
    Rep. Keith Gingery, R-Jackson
    Rep. Matthias Green, R-Laramie
    Rep. Kathy Coleman, R-Sheridan
    Rep. Dan Zwonitzer, R-Cheyenne
    Rep. David Blevins, R-Powell
    Sen. Michael Von Flatern, R-Gillette


    Unfortunately spoiled a bit by the comments:

    - You're a bunch of no good cheap politicians trying to gain votes!
    -
    Politicians racing to support overturning a thousand-year definition of marriage in the name of “love” should be asked where their re-definition stops.
    -
    Religious and cultural proscriptions against homosexuality, pederasty, incest and bestiality evolved for good reasons.
    - As a Republican I would certainly disagree with these pillow biters in the party who think this caca fits with party values.
    What's a pillow biter?

  11. #131
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,699
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by cstamford View Post
    Yes, you are.
    No I'm not.

    I'm not questioning the definition of "proper".

    I'm questioning your application of the use of the word. It's like using the word "great" - we both know what "great" means but we can disagree on what makes something "great".

    And you haven't made it clear what criteria you are using to determine what sex is "proper" and why homosexual relationships are improper. Is it because only heterosexuals can procreate? Is it because you don't consider oral and anal (basically non-vaginal) sex "proper"? And if you are referring to anal sex ("The P doesn't belong in A"), then what lesbian relationships where there's no "P" involved at all?

    So AGAIN, my problem is not with the definition of the word but how you are applying it. You are too vague on how you come to the conclusion that it's improper.
    Last edited by mican333; March 17th, 2014 at 08:31 AM.

  12. #132
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,444
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    I did. But the way you put it, to make it an invalid comparison is what is causing the issue.


    I have no idea what other objections there are that underpin the arguments against gays.
    You should listen more. They are out there.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Just because it's not necessary, it doesn't make it an invalid argument. It's perfectly fine to draw lessons from other struggles. No one is saying that just because you're against the gay that you're also a racist!
    If it is not necessary, and it is clearly antagonistic, then what validity does it hold? Well, actually, MD, pretty much has said that if you are against gay marriage then you are a bigot. He has also implied one would also be racist since he equates the two. You have equated the two, yourself. So, you have also, without explicitly saying it, called those who oppose gay marriage as bigoted and possible racists. Later in this thread you go and start hurling your typical diatribe against "right wingers".

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    It happens to be fact since being 'conservative' by definition is to resist changes that are seen as too drastic.
    That would be a component. Should I then presume every liberal is hell bent on revolution since liberals obviously want radical changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    I'm just summarizing the arguments I've been reading here and not engaging in them.
    You are doing a pretty poor job of summarizing.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Some minds cannot be changed - you'll notice it is only a certain kind of people that happen to be peddling a certain set of arguments. The issue is such an old hat now, maybe 30 decades, that if you're still on the wrong side then it is likely that your religion is at issue. To change those minds would require them changing their religion practically, I would imagine.
    This just tells me you are not into having a reasonable discussion. Your mind is made up, both about your own views and about the views of others. If this is how you think, then you are just here to preach and this is the crux of my argument. Your argument is not one of dialogue, but one of judgment.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    They're not equal in the way that you're thinking though.
    I am pretty sure you have no idea what I am thinking.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    I haven't called you anything. I'm just saying that you're wrong, not bigoted.
    No, you've lust lumped everyone against gay marriage into the broad category of "right-winger" and summarily dismissed their arguments as religious and bigoted. You are saying I am wrong, but I have not provided my opinion on gay marriage, itself. Anyone who has, though, you have certainly either called them bigoted or implied it. Frankly, your thinly veiled insults towards anyone Republican or "right wing" is just infantile. It is clear you are not here to engage in a reasonable debate. Again, you and MD really just prove my point.

    ---------- Post added at 07:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:41 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Concern, yes. But he's saying that no reasonable conversation can be had.
    Mican, read through this thread. Read the pro-gay marriage advocates who have been most adamant about comparing gay civil rights to black civil rights. Please explain to me how, with that argument being made, any reasonable discussion can be had. Rather than debating gay marriage on its merits, the discussion very quickly becomes about whether one side is bigoted, racist, etc. At that point, the reasonable discussion is over. This is not an anomaly. It is exactly as I predicted before the arguments were officially introduced. Keep in mind, this level of name-calling occurred in a thread when there was not even debate about gay marriage itself.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  13. #133
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,699
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Read the pro-gay marriage advocates who have been most adamant about comparing gay civil rights to black civil rights. Please explain to me how, with that argument being made, any reasonable discussion can be had.
    Just because ONE PERSON who makes that kind of argument does not engage in a reasonable discussion does not mean that no one who makes that argument can engage in a reasonable discussion (to say otherwise is to engage in the hasty generalization fallacy).

    I likewise have forwarded that comparison and the only reason you and I have not had a reasonable discussion is because you refuse to start such a discussion with me.

    So I Challenge to support a claim. you to start such a discussion with me. If you refuse, then your claim that such a reasonable discussion cannot be had with anyone who forwards the comparison is unsupported for you have not adequately tested your theory despite a clear opportunity to do so.
    Last edited by mican333; March 17th, 2014 at 09:05 AM.

  14. #134
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern California, USA
    Posts
    2,018
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    No I'm not.
    Yes, you are.

  15. #135
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    summarily dismissed their arguments as religious

    What other argument do you have?
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  16. #136
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    641
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    You should listen more. They are out there.


    If it is not necessary, and it is clearly antagonistic, then what validity does it hold? Well, actually, MD, pretty much has said that if you are against gay marriage then you are a bigot. He has also implied one would also be racist since he equates the two. You have equated the two, yourself. So, you have also, without explicitly saying it, called those who oppose gay marriage as bigoted and possible racists. Later in this thread you go and start hurling your typical diatribe against "right wingers".


    That would be a component. Should I then presume every liberal is hell bent on revolution since liberals obviously want radical changes?


    You are doing a pretty poor job of summarizing.


    This just tells me you are not into having a reasonable discussion. Your mind is made up, both about your own views and about the views of others. If this is how you think, then you are just here to preach and this is the crux of my argument. Your argument is not one of dialogue, but one of judgment.


    I am pretty sure you have no idea what I am thinking.


    No, you've lust lumped everyone against gay marriage into the broad category of "right-winger" and summarily dismissed their arguments as religious and bigoted. You are saying I am wrong, but I have not provided my opinion on gay marriage, itself. Anyone who has, though, you have certainly either called them bigoted or implied it. Frankly, your thinly veiled insults towards anyone Republican or "right wing" is just infantile. It is clear you are not here to engage in a reasonable debate. Again, you and MD really just prove my point.

    ---------- Post added at 07:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:41 AM ----------



    Mican, read through this thread. Read the pro-gay marriage advocates who have been most adamant about comparing gay civil rights to black civil rights. Please explain to me how, with that argument being made, any reasonable discussion can be had. Rather than debating gay marriage on its merits, the discussion very quickly becomes about whether one side is bigoted, racist, etc. At that point, the reasonable discussion is over. This is not an anomaly. It is exactly as I predicted before the arguments were officially introduced. Keep in mind, this level of name-calling occurred in a thread when there was not even debate about gay marriage itself.
    Never said what you said I said.

  17. #137
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    You should listen more. They are out there.
    Perhaps but all I hear is religion at its core.


    If it is not necessary, and it is clearly antagonistic, then what validity does it hold? Well, actually, MD, pretty much has said that if you are against gay marriage then you are a bigot. He has also implied one would also be racist since he equates the two. You have equated the two, yourself. So, you have also, without explicitly saying it, called those who oppose gay marriage as bigoted and possible racists. Later in this thread you go and start hurling your typical diatribe against "right wingers".
    I am equating them in terms of social conservatism, so yes, that is the cause. But just as social conservatives have seen the light in terms of inter-racial marriage, they will see the light in gay marriage. And these people happen to sit on the right of the political aisle right now. So it's all factual where the anti-gay policies are coming from.

    That would be a component. Should I then presume every liberal is hell bent on revolution since liberals obviously want radical changes?
    Not sure if gay marriage is really that radical any more. Like I said, it's several decades old already.


    This just tells me you are not into having a reasonable discussion. Your mind is made up, both about your own views and about the views of others. If this is how you think, then you are just here to preach and this is the crux of my argument. Your argument is not one of dialogue, but one of judgment.

    Well, I think by now if you're on the fence then you must be seriously uniformed about the issue. There's nothing wrong having my kind made up on the matter. I am still willing to hear the other side but if Regnerus is still being peddled after being wholly debunked and if the root of the issue is religion then there is nothing else new.



    No, you've lust lumped everyone against gay marriage into the broad category of "right-winger" and summarily dismissed their arguments as religious and bigoted.
    Religious yes, bigoted isn't a term I have used yet. And yes, it is factual that the political move mnt against the Gay is coming from the right wing. That's why it's called social conservatism.



    You are saying I am wrong, but I have not provided my opinion on gay marriage, itself.
    That's not what you're wrong about!

    [

    Anyone who has, though, you have certainly either called them bigoted or implied it. Frankly, your thinly veiled insults towards anyone Republican or "right wing" is just infantile. It is clear you are not here to engage in a reasonable debate. Again, you and MD really just prove my point.
    I am just explaining MDs angle as being valid. I have my own arguments that are fact based and correct on the matter. I don't see any insults - being called right wing isn't an insult!

  18. #138
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,444
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    What other argument do you have?
    I am not here to debate gay marriage. Won't do it. As far as you know I am 100% in favor of it. I entered this thread because the person who wrote the OP stated the following:
    "I put this thread in the Formal Discussion section because I wasn’t looking to debate the issues I presented. Not exactly anyways. No amount of debating would change how I feel. I just like to try and step into the shoes of other when I can. Try and genuinely understand where the other side is coming from, intellectually at least. But in these arguments, I just don’t get it."

    It seemed this person was looking for an open dialogue on the issue. Not to be convinced, but to gain understanding. So, I offered some suggestions, in the spirit of the OP, how both sides could do a better job understanding the other and engaging in constructive dialogue. While the marriage traditionalists don't seem to be overly offended by asking them to tone their rhetoric down, the pro-gay marriage side seems to have gotten their panties all up in a bunch by the recommendation that injecting comparisons to the black civil rights movement is neither necessary nor constructive.

    In fact, rather than toning down the rhetoric, some debaters have pretty much spit into the wind and derided social conservatives, right-wingers, et al. and either explicitly or implicitly labeled them as bigots. I should add the following; there is nothing wrong with someone having a religious argument against gay-marriage. This is a valid view so long as they do not turn towards the hyperbole of destroying morality, ethics, the family etc. Much like one can rationally argue that gay marriage is a civil rights issue unique in its own merits, religious folk may similarly construct a religious argument that avoids hyperbole and doomsday scenarios (i.e. insinuating gay marriage is a progressive plan to instill a socialist secularist dystopia).

    The idea should be debating and discussing the subject with respect and courtesy and not simply jumping to the lowest common denominator (i.e. calling someone a bigot) in order to make your point.

    ---------- Post added at 11:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Perhaps but all I hear is religion at its core.
    So what? Let's say that's true. Are religious views banned or verboten?

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    I am equating them in terms of social conservatism, so yes, that is the cause. But just as social conservatives have seen the light in terms of inter-racial marriage, they will see the light in gay marriage. And these people happen to sit on the right of the political aisle right now. So it's all factual where the anti-gay policies are coming from.


    Not sure if gay marriage is really that radical any more. Like I said, it's several decades old already.
    You are really missing the point. If you are going to narrowly define conservatives, then wouldn't it be equally fair to narrowly define liberals?


    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Well, I think by now if you're on the fence then you must be seriously uniformed about the issue. There's nothing wrong having my kind made up on the matter. I am still willing to hear the other side but if Regnerus is still being peddled after being wholly debunked and if the root of the issue is religion then there is nothing else new.
    Of course.... dare anyone disagree with your morally superior viewpoint... lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Religious yes, bigoted isn't a term I have used yet. And yes, it is factual that the political move mnt against the Gay is coming from the right wing. That's why it's called social conservatism.
    You know. I already disproved this theory of yours. Prop 13, to make gay marriage unconstitutional in CA, was passed largely due to black, Democratic voters who came out in large numbers to support Obama back in 2008. So, are black, Democrats now considered right wing?



    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    I am just explaining MDs angle as being valid. I have my own arguments that are fact based and correct on the matter. I don't see any insults - being called right wing isn't an insult!
    Sure, right wing is not an insult... except when it is used by a liberal in a pejorative manner to describe someone you believe is racist, bigoted, etc. No one here is so stupid that they do not understand the implicit meanings of your arguments.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  19. Likes CowboyX liked this post
  20. #139
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    So what? Let's say that's true. Are religious views banned or verboten?
    No but if it is a religious argument then it has no place in a political discussion. Why should a particular religion's rules hold away over the whole country?
    You are really missing the point. If you are going to narrowly define conservatives, then wouldn't it be equally fair to narrowly define liberals?
    Sure if you can defend it, which you haven't and I have.


    Of course.... dare anyone disagree with your morally superior viewpoint... lol.

    .
    Not at all but this study has been disproven.


    You know. I already disproved this theory of yours. Prop 13, to make gay marriage unconstitutional in CA, was passed largely due to black, Democratic voters who came out in large numbers to support Obama back in 2008. So, are black, Democrats now considered right wing?
    With the help of Mormons I might add. To your other point then those people are social conservatives. Where it become left or right wing is what the politicians make and the choices they offer.

    Sure, right wing is not an insult... except when it is used by a liberal in a pejorative manner to describe someone you believe is racist, bigoted, etc. No one here is so stupid that they do not understand the implicit meanings of your arguments.
    Well if the cap fits then it's not an insult. It's factual.

  21. #140
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,444
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    No but if it is a religious argument then it has no place in a political discussion. Why should a particular religion's rules hold away over the whole country?
    That would be something to debate about. It isn't my argument. The question is whether you know how to have a civil debate.


    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Not at all but this study has been disproven.


    With the help of Mormons I might add. To your other point then those people are social conservatives. Where it become left or right wing is what the politicians make and the choices they offer.
    First, I am not sure what has been disproven. Secondly, you are having difficulty comprehending the argument. Yes, Mormons helped Prop 13. You got me. Unquestionable. Yet, your claim is that being against gay marriage is some right wing, bigoted position.

    Let me quote you one more time before you attempt to dissociate yourself from the statement you made:
    And these people happen to sit on the right of the political aisle right now.
    This is what you claimed about social conservatives. Yet, and this was my point, blacks, Democrats are the reason Prop 13 passed. Without their overwhelming support, Prop 13 fails. It would have failed despite the influx of Mormon money. Do you get that point? Does this register? Black, Democratic voters enabled Prop 13 to pass. In a state that leans heavily Democratic, where Republicans hold not a single statewide office, Prop 13 passed. So, your theory that social conservatives are exclusively on the right of the political aisle is simply not a factual claim. It is just your broad, overly simplisitic, ideological ad hom, which you use to try to demean those whose views differ from your own. It is intellectually lazy. It is beyond ignorant. It is this sort of argumentation ineptitude which I was attempting to quell before it ever began, but alas, with simpleton arguments all the rage among some liberal posters, my attempts doomed for failure.

    I have nothing more to say. I think your argumentation pretty much locked up my point.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

 

 
Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 116
    Last Post: January 26th, 2013, 05:38 PM
  2. Gay Marriage vs Incestuous Marriage argument
    By Apokalupsis in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: October 17th, 2011, 06:43 AM
  3. Marriage better for children
    By chadn737 in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: July 5th, 2009, 05:19 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 1st, 2007, 08:27 PM
  5. Do you have, or want children?
    By Jamie in forum ODN Polls
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: October 24th, 2005, 06:36 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •