I
- Status
P
PRmerger
Guest
But, um, what if it’s actually true?
What if you have a student who comes to you and tells you, “You keep saying that this is a circle. Just repeating the assertion over and over does not make it true.”
http://etc-mysitemyway.s3.amazonaws...r-icon-symbols-shapes-shapes-circle-clear.png
Would that make the student’s assertion correct?
Incidentally, I would find it quite amusing to do a search of your posts, Dr. Taffy, to find some repeated assertions you’ve made.
It would be fun to post, in response to your repeated assertions: “Just repeating the assertion over and over does not make it true.”
But I’m too lazy to do that right now.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Here’s my favorite analogy, again (sorry to the folks who have been reading the thread in its entirety, but the analogy apparently needs to be presented again).
Imagine a senior citizens baseball team that shows up to play the 2011 World Series champs, the St. Louis Cardinals. They have absolutely no chance of achieving the proper end of baseball (gaining more runs than the other team), but so long as they play according to the rules their play is still ordered toward its proper end. Even if it is “impossible for a victory to occur” for the senior citizens team.
But in the case of homosexual unions, the play itself is changed. It would be like showing up at the game without bats, wanting to play with their backs to each other, so that even if they have the intent of winning a baseball game, what they are doing can’t possibly be ordered toward that end because they are, quite simply, no longer playing baseball.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Then, clearly, you haven’t been doing it right.
(Assuming you’re not a virgin and assuming you haven’t acted on any disordered desires for any same sex attraction you may have had).
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Denying God’s sovereignty is one thing, admitting He can possibly change it is another. Its not power, its love.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Because sometimes it is predicated on a lie, and having a lie as your foundation will never produce true happiness.
And here’s some info regarding “loving consensual sex” not bringing a couple closer together:
truthaboutdeception.com/cheating-and-infidelity/stats-about-infidelity.html
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Needless to say, I concede that point. I see no victory on that horizon.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Sure. The Catholic Church has always been pro-love and pro-intimacy!Which in no way prevents them from expressing love and intimacy.
Were you under the misapprehension that 2 women cannot have an intimate relationship sanctioned by the CC?
I can tell you that as a woman I have many, many intimate, loving relationships with women that are completely endorsed and embraced by the CC.
No.
If they are having sex that is not ordered towards procreation, then they ought not be engaging in this activity. That’s the Church’s teaching on this.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Because then it’s not a marriage. If they can’t become ONE FLESH, then they can’t be married.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
They can or not. The point is purposeful interaction as opposed to pleasure for the sake of pleasure. I would think here running from loneliness “pain” becomes a contingent to pleasure. Behavior, for certain.
D
DrTaffy
Guest
Then you should be able to show that.
Then I would show him or her why I call that a circle. I would not just repeat the assertion, as you have done.
What assertion?
I think you left a bit out.The closest parallel to gay marriage would be someone asserting that a square is a polygon, so I was wrong to say that a triangle is a polygon.
That you have a narrower definition of marriage than the rest of society does not entitle you to force everyone else to use your definition. It certainly does not justify couching your assertion in the form of a rather rude and condescending metaphor.
Or apparently to address an actual argument.Incidentally, I would find it quite amusing to do a search of your posts, Dr. Taffy, to find some repeated assertions you’ve made.
It would be fun to post, in response to your repeated assertions: “Just repeating the assertion over and over does not make it true.”
But I’m too lazy to do that right now.
The point is not that you should not make the same assertion in different posts, but that merely repeating the assertion is not a valid response to a logical counterargument.
B
Bahman
Guest
What is wrong with pleasure?
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
In itself, nothing, where the negative continent resides is in the motivating factor to seek pleasure. Which in itself would need to be carefully viewed.
P
PRmerger
Guest
And I find it astonishing that there are folks here who actually want to associate marriage without sex.
Thank goodness for the Catholic Church proclaiming that no homosexual ought to be spat on but rather treated with the dignity inherent given to all human persons made in the image and likeness of God!
D
DrTaffy
Guest
Because we all know that repeating an assertion or couching in the form of a condescending metaphor makes it true, so doing both must make it extra true!
This assumes that you and you alone get to dictate what is called ‘baseball’ despite the rest of society disagreeing with you - furthermore you are not just refusing to call it baseball, you are trying to prevent them from playing at all unless they play your game, by your rules, with who you say.
If you don’t like their game, don’t play and don’t watch. Trying to stop them playing, or trying to ruin their game by heckling, is just selfish and rude.
After all, christians have kicked up a stink about ‘civil unions’ based on their religious views on marriage precisely because that despite their attempt to prevent homosexuals from calling marriage, that is exactly what it is!
No, if you and your lover end up literally ‘one flesh’, bonded together as siamese twins, you are doing it wrong.Then, clearly, you haven’t been doing it right.
Again, this is just using jargon to obscure your lack of an argument. Homosexual couples bond socially and psychologically during sex just as much as heterosexuals.
B
Bahman
Guest
Don’t we love or like to be love for pleasures? Life without pleasure is tasteless and meaningless since there is no tendency toward doing anything and those in this state of mind are extremely depress.
P
PRmerger
Guest
D
DrTaffy
Guest
You’re wrong. Sterile couples can have sex. Inside marriage, of course.
Ask a priest as I am sure you won’t believe me.
So Joseph and Mary were not married according to you?
Gosh, almost as though they’ve read the Bible!
P
PRmerger
Guest
Firstly, are you proposing that there is indeed a WRONG way to have sex? That is so utterly intolerant of you, Dr. Taffy!
Secondly, you have attached some sort of ridiculous assertion that being ONE FLESH means that we are “bonded together as siamese twins.” That is your assertion. Not mine.
Please try and argue against my position, not some weird proclamation you have imagined.
- Status