livinitup
Broken-in Plebe
In God I trust
Posts: 69
|
Post by livinitup on Apr 21, 2004 10:30:43 GMT -5
When was someone punished in the US for having sex outside of marriage OK that was my mistake, i forgot adulty is not a crime, my fault. However you also must be reminded about swingers, they are quiet about what they do. They dont hold protests, they dont march, they do their own thing and dont worry about what people think (This is also a response to someone above this post about closed doors sorry there are just to many words to find it, but its there) By working past the government i ment the people running it. IE rally get a petition signed to get a bill, rally around the bill, when it comes to a vote, and get your congressman to push it into congress. Also is there not something in our laws about making someone step down who we feel is doing a bad job...like a vote of no confidence, i have not had government in quite a few years so im no longer sure. Yup seperation works great, your leaving out the part that its the HUMANS opinion that causes him to think one way or another, people are gonna vote to what they feel is the correct way to live, the people in congress make the vote homosexuality is wrong, then that is it, the bill goes back into the system and gets rewrote, its alot of fun. NO matter how much you want the people in office to think neutral it just will not happen. So wait you mean a state law? or a federal one? Also as it was said someplace else that is behind closed doors. Gay marriage is NOT, nor are they quiet about it, as the swingers are. Where do you live again? Let me put it this way...i walk 5 miles off campus to NSU (norfolk state University) the likely hood of me getting shot and killed goes up exponentially, the campus is Black (not for nothing) they pay white people to go there. Back home middle school and high school we have largely black or white schools, so integration (that is forced) did not always happen. That was my fault, read above on the previous posts regarding slippery slope. What i ment by acts, was acts (LAWS) in government. You dont think laws of nature exsist? speaking of laws, it alrdy is in some states... "i think it can be very socially hurtful for a kid growing up in a straight society to be raised by a gay couple" Would you agree that people back in the 1800s were more religious than the world today? Also how bout the 1920s? Both i would say are yes... As you can see the culteral decline of religion sad as it may be is happening. So in a few years people will not have to worry about that. Regarding Inter-racial stuff, Emm that goes back to my beliefs, i dont think there is any difference (other than skin color between 2 individuals) Its society that makes a white person act one way and a black person another, i have black friends just as well as white, I have a problem with some of the things that black people are doing as a society IE, sueing for stuff that happened back during slave times or the Civil war times. Personally i feel that history is long gone and does not affect someone, however apparently people still wish to argue it, so i take my stand on it. So No inter-racial stuff does not matter to me, we as in all colors and races are one and the same, its our chemistry that makes us differnet, that and society. For Life Much much agreed, i think it should be for life. Abuse is lawfully wrong, im sorry this society deems its wrong, lets go over to Iran for a second. Since abuse is illegal the offender has alrdy broken the laws of marriage, not to mention people walk into marriage way way way to quickly, its not something to be taken lightly and people do, This is the problem. They do So what is your dog, if its not free, can a dog not do anything it wants? If a dog wants can it pee on a tree, YES, if a dog wants can it jump in the air, YES seems free to me... How is that? Its not the couples fault that their bodys dont funtion correctly, they are infertal, they should be able to have kids. Still think that having both sexes will influence the child more healthy than a 1 sex couple Your right it can, except for the fact we are not talking about inter-racial stuff for 1, and 2 society as a whole is ok with it, which explanes the legal issues... Lets think for a second, where is the majority of the population, The North, and Inner Citys, Now im not gonna go into the north vs south arguement, as views across both directions seems almost evenly spread, however whom lives in the inner citys the most, and who provides for the greatest votes, Demecrats should know this right away... Except animals dont quite think as us, IE why do kittens play by attacking one another? Alot of hissing and hair flys, this is deemed by science as practicing. Yes humans and animals do two seperate things, but the fact comes down we are all still classified as animals Correct? Ehhhh apparently so. Whos set of morals are you using? For the US yes our morals say its wrong, murder occurs and most of the time we try and punish the person who commited it. Go to the middle east, Go into ancient Mian or Inca (sp) times. Look at those societys. Discrimination is not ok, however the problem is who sees it as discrimination, as i said in previous quotes the guy and his dog, would say your discriminating against them. Discrimination is in the eye of the beholder...(sorry for the cruddy saying) Correct Nope im stateing logic, everything moves from order to disorder Humm Im not even gonna go into some of the things i have gathered about you, as its not ment for the boards, what is interesting is how you really dont know anything about me. Let me ask you what do you do for a living, where did you go to college? I was using that as an example, yes im a horrible speller but ya know what im an exellent in is programming, as well as some other things, let me ask you what are you excellent in? Seems to me that is rather extream. I dont know you, so i am not going to insult you with such petty things. BTW, this is the Edit, Since exams are comming up i will not have as much time on the boards, however i will get to them i will respond to everyone elses stuff durring some point promise Dont think im avoiding you Thanks
|
|
|
Post by pieisgood on Apr 21, 2004 11:19:54 GMT -5
Liv, from what I gather--
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your logic on these issues is basically "the majority said it's one way and so I'm giong to support that", right?
|
|
|
Post by Yaw on Apr 21, 2004 13:10:55 GMT -5
Hey! I don't want to have to keep doing this. No gathering stuff on people to use in arguments. For the most part, this argument has been very good and clean, but I will take action if necessary to keep it that way. Don't go down the "smear the person making the argument" route.
|
|
|
Post by Narninian on Apr 21, 2004 15:08:59 GMT -5
Before I respond I want to make sure I have the Anti Gay marriage arguements posted here right. Going back and reading through is a little confusing so I want to make sure I have them right. Please correct me If I get them wrong.
1) If more people think its morally wrong - then do think its not morally wrong - it should be illegal
2) Allowing Gay marriage can be compared to Allowing marriage to a dog - because dogs have freedom to do what they want
3) Gay Marriage should be illegal - even though swingers' practices are legal - because swingers are quiet about it.
4) We are animals - and sex should only be for reproduction - Gay couples are having sex for reproduction so it shouldnt be done
5) Marriage should between a man and women (for life) Divorce should be illegal unless someone breaks the contract (for example abuse)
6 a) Kids should be brought up by 2 parents of different genders. A kid needs healthy parenting from both genders.Parents should 'make' their own kids - unless they can't have them through something no fault of their own (Infertile)
b) Kids might be riducules because they live in a household with gay parents and thats not accepted in society.
7) Allowing Gay marraiges is step towards allowing anything that anybody wants - Pretty much Anarchy
Does this pretty much sum up the Arguements posed so far?
|
|
|
Post by BaalShemRa on Apr 21, 2004 16:20:58 GMT -5
"However you also must be reminded about swingers, they are quiet about what they do." Swingers don't get beaten up, they can leave their estate to their main partner. Not true of gays.
"NO matter how much you want the people in office to think neutral it just will not happen." Sure, but that's not what I was talking about. Opinuions don't have to rely solely on emotions and the judiciary can overturn laws. Also, in your country, it takes more than 50% to amend the constitution, so it's not majoritarian. If it were, you would only need 50+1%.
"So wait you mean a state law? or a federal one?" In the Texas anti-sodomy law case a law supported by a large part of the population was overturned. Same can apply ot the federal level.
"Where do you live again? Let me put it this way...i walk 5 miles off campus to NSU (norfolk state University) the likely hood of me getting shot and killed goes up exponentially, the campus is Black (not for nothing) they pay white people to go there. Back home middle school and high school we have largely black or white schools, so integration (that is forced) did not always happen." How many universitites only accept whites in the South? How many drinking fountains can only legally be used by whites in the South? Integration happened, even if it's imperfect.
"there will be people out there that will use the homosexual acts to get what they want" There are homosexual laws? I'm sorry, I'm afriad I don't understand what you're trying to say. Laws don't have asexual orientation.
"You dont think laws of nature exsist?" Regularities in nature do exist. From that, it doesn't follow that there is a deliberate intention.
Oral sex being banned in some states: How many people got arrested for it last year? Not for haing sex in public, just for having heterosexual oral sex. Do you want it to be banned? If you're consistent, you should.
"Would you agree that people back in the 1800s were more religious than the world today? Also how bout the 1920s? Both i would say are yes... " Yeah, and that didn't happen with people saying "it's never been done before so it shouldn't be done". You seem to think the decline of religion happened by itself.
Blacks and whites: Your argument was about public perception of interracial marriage and the social pressure on children that come from interracial marriages. Whether you think there's a difference between a black and a white doesn't matter.
"Abuse is lawfully wrong, im sorry this society deems its wrong, lets go over to Iran for a second." Wtf does Iran have to do with this?
"Since abuse is illegal the offender has alrdy broken the laws of marriage," Should it be for life or not? Doing something illegal isn't breaking a law of marriage. Otherwise, one could divorce someone because he shoplifted.
"So what is your dog, if its not free, can a dog not do anything it wants?" Oh boy. A free agent in the Kantian sense.
"How is that? Its not the couples fault that their bodys dont funtion correctly, they are infertal, they should be able to have kids." Your point was about people who can't procreate. I coudl just as well say "God didn't mean for them to have children". You don't apply that standard consistently.
"Still think that having both sexes will influence the child more healthy than a 1 sex couple" Did you even read the argument Pie made? He said a 1 gender couple is better than no couple. What if not enough heterosexual couples want to adopt, would you prefer no parents to homosexual parents?
"Your right it can, except for the fact we are not talking about inter-racial stuff for 1" Alright, what is the major premise you're using when it comes to gays? What is the major premise you're using when it comes to blacks?
"Except animals dont quite think as us, IE why do kittens play by attacking one another? Alot of hissing and hair flys, this is deemed by science as practicing. Yes humans and animals do two seperate things, but the fact comes down we are all still classified as animals Correct?"
What is the relevance of that? You said homosexuality wasn't part of nature, I pointed out it is. If you don't want to receive counter-arguments based on nature, don't make arguments based on nature.
Most people think it's ok so it's ok: Ethics is completely dependent on social concensus? I didn't expect a Christian to be a moral relativist. I suppose the Holocaust was ok if enough Germans were ok with it.
"Nope im stateing logic, everything moves from order to disorder" That's not logic, logic is formal, this is content. If you think the more we allow, the closer we get to anarchy, why aren't you in favour of a totalitarian government?
If everything moves from order to disorder, how do you explain that societies have become more and more complex thru time?
"Let me ask you what do you do for a living" Student.
"where did you go to college" Fat chance I'll tell you where I live.
"let me ask you what are you excellent in?" Well, I would say my English is pretty good considering it's my second language. That's "what do you excel in".
|
|
livinitup
Broken-in Plebe
In God I trust
Posts: 69
|
Post by livinitup on Apr 22, 2004 0:07:12 GMT -5
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your logic on these issues is basically "the majority said it's one way and so I'm giong to support that", right? In a sense i agree with the majority, there for, i support them, Its not just because they are the majority. BTW Im about to answer all the stuff directed towards me so bare with me if my next few posts are well...long. Thanks
|
|
livinitup
Broken-in Plebe
In God I trust
Posts: 69
|
Post by livinitup on Apr 22, 2004 0:08:03 GMT -5
Hey! I don't want to have to keep doing this. No gathering stuff on people to use in arguments. For the most part, this argument has been very good and clean, but I will take action if necessary to keep it that way. Don't go down the "smear the person making the argument" route. Quite correct, sorry if i infringed on those rights, i was just stateing a point to defend myself, im sorry if i crossed the lines.
|
|
livinitup
Broken-in Plebe
In God I trust
Posts: 69
|
Post by livinitup on Apr 22, 2004 0:19:22 GMT -5
1) If more people think its morally wrong - then do think its not morally wrong - it should be illegal You will agree that the Majority that votes gets the laws past? Therefor they decide what to make illegal. So in essence by and large yes. If the Majority thinks its wrong then it will be charged as such. not compared in that sense, what i was getting at is it would open up a slippery slope. Swingers i dont think should be allowed to do what they do, personally i run one way, guy girl marriage only, 1 couple not 2, so on and so forth. However the issue i was argueing was about gay marriage not swingers Relating us to nature, would you agree that humans are a type of animal? That is how i feel yes. correct, and just to say on single parenting, it should not happen, you should not have a kid till after your married, and you should be ready for a life long commitment before you do it, its not something to be taken lightly, and should take several years before you decide to get married. This might happen correct, Kids can have be tromatized from this, just as they might from a single parent... What i was getting at is a slippery slope, everyone gets what they want then what is it called? Would you agree that someone will always be unhappy about some law? If so how would you take care of that problem? 2 Ways get rid of the person, which we ardy found out was the wrong idea, or get rid of the law. So the law is the only option left, i guarentee there is someone out there that hates one of each of the laws, so logically all the laws go away. Correct? [/quote] NIce summary BTW let me just clarify for EVERYONE on the boards, since there are new people entering, I CANT SPELL i appologize ahead of time, if you want something clarified just ask, but dont look down apon it, i dont look down on you. Thanks
|
|
livinitup
Broken-in Plebe
In God I trust
Posts: 69
|
Post by livinitup on Apr 22, 2004 0:46:04 GMT -5
"Swingers don't get beaten up, they can leave their estate to their main partner. Not true of gays. You wish to leave your some stuff to somebody, put it into your will. Your right its 2/3 majority in one house and i forget what it is in the other, i was hoping to make a general statement and get away with it, but if you want i can look up what it takes to get a law passed number wise. Key word here however is MAJORITY Federal and state laws are two seperate things though, do you agree? I dont remember what we were argueing for at this point ill look back after i finish my post and recomment Im sorry but would you agree that if it a law would be made that would let homosexuals marry it would be called something to the effect of homosexual marriage? should would not be called free the trees clause... Correct? If your questioning the law look it up, im sure i could find an instance for you would you like me to try? Should it be banned, alrdy is in some states, sounds good to me. What did it happen with? I dont see where you are going with this Ever see what an Iran Man (ha that rhymes) can do to his wife and get away with? Since when does shoplifting have anything to do with the laws in marriage? Care to explane further? So you dont think a Dog is free...Why is it you degrade dogs? Sometimes they act smarter than humans... lol So now you believe in God? Your right God might not have wanted them to have kids, however i have seen cases in churches were women were diagnossed barren by doctors, get prayed over and for and regain the ability to have kids, all things are possible with God. Why are children (largly) being put up for adoption? yes social services sometimes comes and takes the child however, how many cases are their when a single mom, who never had a husband (which if you read my above posts you will see where im going) gave it up? Sorry? What i was saying is that animals arnt doing it for the pleasure, they are doing it because they are acting out the traites of their future adult lives, there have been studys on that. Ok several things with this, I cant argue some Christian arguements here for the simple fact you will just say the bible is wrong, it does not mean a thing and then we will have a whole nother post on our hands, speaking of which i should make a post on what people think Of Jesus Christ, just to see different opinions not to argue. Your point is void, i argued that if everyone gets what they want, what type of government will we have? Someone will always have to be unhappy correct? Ok take perhaps the roman empire....So lets see start....GOLDENAGE...FALling off...Dead, Universe ever expanding, moving to disorder, systems of government getting more spread out. Your own body, organs quit working dieing... and so forth Order to Disorder, its a fundamental idea in science Glad to see more students cool about the comfort lvls in college English is a good thing to excel in makes for a good business person
|
|
livinitup
Broken-in Plebe
In God I trust
Posts: 69
|
Post by livinitup on Apr 22, 2004 0:51:41 GMT -5
Where do you live again? Let me put it this way...i walk 5 miles off campus to NSU (norfolk state University) the likely hood of me getting shot and killed goes up exponentially, the campus is Black (not for nothing) they pay white people to go there. Back home middle school and high school we have largely black or white schools, so integration (that is forced) did not always happen. Intigration might have worked in some places, but not in all places, some people still resist and this is one occurance. The fact that it was inperfect does not keep me alive any more than before...
|
|
|
Post by AuntieSocial on Apr 22, 2004 8:13:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by nonny on Apr 22, 2004 17:26:10 GMT -5
All of these quotes are from Livinitup
“So what is your dog, if its not free, can a dog not do anything it wants? If a dog wants can it pee on a tree, YES, if a dog wants can it jump in the air, YES seems free to me...”
Actually dogs aren’t free, they have collars and leashes, even though they don’t get in trouble for not having this you do. Plus the fact that in the us constitution it is ‘We the people’ that does not apply to dogs, cats, etc
“Relating us to nature, would you agree that humans are a type of animal?”
We are mammals which are animals, not just a type we are full-fledged animals. But nowadays for humans we use sex for pleasure more then procreation wouldn’t you say? I mean if you are saying that sex should only be for procreation then a lot of people would be out of jobs, money form condoms and birth control would be lost, and some would just be pissed off.
““5) Marriage should between a man and women (for life) Divorce should be illegal unless someone breaks the contract (for example abuse)” That is how i feel yes.”
“correct, and just to say on single parenting, it should not happen, you should not have a kid till after your married, and you should be ready for a life long commitment before you do it, its not something to be taken lightly, and should take several years before you decide to get married.”
These kind of contradict each other, having sex before you are married is not the only way to become a single parent. Say you have kids, you are married but then your spouse starts abusing you so you get a divorce. The kids go to the non-abusive parent. You become a single parent.
But it seems this entire thread has gotten of topic.
“Where do you live again? Let me put it this way...i walk 5 miles off campus to NSU (norfolk state University) the likely hood of me getting shot and killed goes up exponentially, the campus is Black (not for nothing) they pay white people to go there. Back home middle school and high school we have largely black or white schools, so integration (that is forced) did not always happen.”
This is what gives me that impression. Maybe all the arguments have been made that can be made.
Sorry if this is long.
|
|
|
Post by Griffey on Apr 22, 2004 21:39:59 GMT -5
correct, and just to say on single parenting, it should not happen, you should not have a kid till after your married, and you should be ready for a life long commitment before you do it, its not something to be taken lightly, and should take several years before you decide to get married... This might happen correct, Kids can have be tromatized from this, just as they might from a single parent... Woah, wait a sec...earlier you were implying that having a single parent was OK, not so traumatizing, or at the very least preferable to homosexual parents. Um, am I missing a transition here?? You seem to have gone from disagreeing with my points to agreeing with them, and I don't see why or where. I don't mean to be snippy, but I'm a little unclear here. Also, nonny has a point. Single parents don't just come from premarital sexual relationships, they can be the result of a previous marriage. Or they could be someone who likes kids but can't stand people of either gender. (Kind of the opposite of what we're talking about here, heheh! Ironic ain't it.)
|
|
|
Post by Superhappyjen on May 9, 2004 11:19:10 GMT -5
I've read this entire thread. I have always been an advocate of legalizing gay marriages (churches could just as easily say that atheists can't marry *gasp*). In high school, I was so vocal about my hatred for homophobia that people thought I was a lesbian and I never got dates (but I digress). There was some good points made about polygamy here. I personally never thought of polygamy as morally acceptable. However, if I were to say that it should been illegal based on my own moral righteousness, then I would be as bad as those who see fit to oppress homosexuals. As long as all parties involved in the union are consenting adults, then it should be legal. What right do governments have to dictate how people love each other? Hugs Jen
|
|
|
Post by pieisgood on May 9, 2004 12:28:20 GMT -5
1) If more people think its morally wrong - then do think its not morally wrong - it should be illegal By that logic, no country should ever gain independence (because they will be outnumbered by their home country, who thinks it's wrong). Women still shouldn't be able to vote, because more people thought that they shouldn't then should. I disagree. 2) Allowing Gay marriage can be compared to Allowing marriage to a dog - because dogs have freedom to do what they want Uh, so can regular marriages-- you are marrying someone who has the freedom to do what they want. 3) Gay Marriage should be illegal - even though swingers' practices are legal - because swingers are quiet about it. So you're saying that Gays should keep quiet and do it illegally? 4) We are animals - and sex should only be for reproduction - Gay couples are having sex for reproduction so it shouldnt be done So you're saying that birth control is illegal, then, because you should only have sex for reproduction. It's not really illegal. Do you think it should be? 5) Marriage should between a man and women why? (for life) Divorce should be illegal unless someone breaks the contract (for example abuse) Then nobody would ever really get married, because they don't want to run the risk of choosing wrong. I think you should be able to get divorced if you choose wrong, but if you choose right you should have the benefits of marriage the whole way through. Really, why does getting married twice hurt anybody? 6 a) Kids should be brought up by 2 parents of different genders. A kid needs healthy parenting from both genders.Parents should 'make' their own kids - unless they can't have them through something no fault of their own (Infertile) Well, it's hardly Gay's fault that they are Gay. They are, technically, infertile through no fault of their own. Why should they make their own kids, they just have to live with them their whole lives. *points back to other argument* Since Gays can't have kids, they have to adopt a kid. Isn't Gay parents better than none? I would certainly rather have it that way. b) Kids might be riducules because they live in a household with gay parents and thats not accepted in society. a) still better than no parents, b) then shouldn't we work to making it more accepted in society? Homophobia is a problem. 7) Allowing Gay marraiges is step towards allowing anything that anybody wants - Pretty much Anarchy Does this pretty much sum up the Arguements posed so far? So no new laws should be passed, then, because that's a step towards allowing what anyone wants. We should cut out all marriages, raise taxes, make the government a dictatorship, because we can't, *gasp* give the people power.
|
|