"Gay 'marriage' doesnt hurt society"

  • Thread starter Thread starter CrimsonThorn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Farien said:
That is the problem. He should have. He attemped to bring up a secular argument about the “designed” or “intended” usage of certain organs. If that argument would be valid, it would be also applicable to the “mouth”, which is “intended” to be used for eating… And just as the usage of the mouth and the tongue is “valid” in a non-eating context, the sexual organs can be used validly in a non-procreating context.

No one denies that one of the valid uses of those organs is procreation. Biologically, however, the procreation is not logically necessary when using those organs. It is perfectly valid (biologically speaking) to use those organs and bypass the procreative aspect. If you wish to argue against it based on a theological ground, be my guest.

You miss the significance (obviously). Those beings are not “moral” agents, they act according to their biological nature. Therefore it is not a “biological imperative” to use those organs ONLY in a procreative context. Savvy? You are most welcome to argue based upon some theology, but you should argue based upon “biology”, if you know biology. Ed obviously did not.
Click to expand...
If first you don’t succeed, try try again.

Strawman alert, NO ONE posting here said that sex organs can ONLY be used for procreation. NO ONE. But nice try. It’s so easy to set a strawman aflame isn’t it?

What has repeatedly been stated is that while consenting adults are free to use their sex organs in any way they see fit (as long as it’s legal), there is a difference between allowing said consenting adults to do what they wish in the privacy of their home or other appropriate setting (that doesn’t impact those who do not wish to participate) and asking the rest of us to allow these activities to be introduced into our schools, our public spaces, or even our homes and churches.

IOW keep it zipped in public, that means both your mouth and your pants.

As to biology, I’m pretty well versed in the subject, also animal breeding and husbandry.

Lisa
 
LisaA said:
…and asking the rest of us to allow these activities to be introduced into our schools, our public spaces, or even our homes and churches.
Click to expand...
It is not YOUR school, not YOUR public space… it is your home, and your church, and no one tries to bring the activities there.
LisaA said:
As to biology, I’m pretty well versed in the subject, also animal breeding and husbandry.
Click to expand...
There is no sign of that. 🙂
 
Farien said:
It is not YOUR school, not YOUR public space… it is your home, and your church, and no one tries to bring the activities there.

There is no sign of that. 🙂
Click to expand...
Well you are wrong in that. The public has a right to determine what is allowed in the public square and in fact the public schools. Many of us hear this loud and clear when there are objections to religious displays or religious songs or religious celebrations in public places or public schools.

Thus you cannot claim that you as a homosexual activist have the right to insert your ideology, your lifestyle or your sexual practices if the public objects. That is precisely what this debate is about. With respect to schools, the parents should have the opportunity to prevent their child from being a participant, hearing a lecture or reading pro-homosexual material if they so choose.

As to not allowing your homosexual agenda into homes and churches, the reality is that the laws in some countries effectively muzzle pastors and parents as to what they can do or say in their homes and churches. Thus having been warned in advance, we are aware of the objective and will continue to object to the encroachment of this agenda into areas where it is not wanted.

Regarding biology, you have to enlighten me as to any references to biology that were not correct.

Lisa
 
DaddyGirl:
To DaddyGirl -

Progressive? How? Redefining marriage to include homosexual persons is damaging to the natural social order. As far as I can tell, a benefits package and a legal label are the package, for the couple. In the meantime, kids in school are being taught that gay sex is OK, that having two gay dads is OK, that saying a few words against the idea may involve legal consequences, and if a photographer, for example, refuses to photograph a gay wedding, he can and will be sued. If this were simply a private matter, that would be one issue, but the apparent plan is to convince everyone, especially the youngest, that gay sex is 100% OK, because gay people can get married - whatever that means.

Stay away from our kids.

Stay away from from the ballot booth.

And realize what you are actually doing.

You confuse “religious freedom” with “the Church is wrong.” The Church has arguments that include natural biology that it is required to teach not only to its members but proclaim to all men of good will. This idea is a violation of right reason. When it was private, it was private - today, the goal is to saturate all of society with your definition of marriage. That is not freedom. And it certainly infringes on religious freedom.

You also think this is a Christian only thing, it’s not.

jewishworldreview.com/jeff/jacoby_gay_marriage.php3

Had all the gay couples simply did what I did last year, we would not be having thread after thread about this. Personal example:
  1. I named a friend of mine as beneficiary on my IRA last year. It took 5 minutes over the phone. NO QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
  2. I had my friend added to my meager bank account. A few pieces of ID, a few papers signed and done. NO QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
  3. I will write out a will leaving everything I own to my friend, and I AM NOT REQUIRED BY LAW TO STATE OUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
This mad dash to get gays married, indoctrinate little kids and society at large does what? Magically make everything perfect? I don’t think so.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2164783/One-gay-couples-married-New-York-set-to-divorced.html

nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html?_r=0

Gays make it sound like it’s impossible to do the things I did. Instead, they want a label and benefits and to convince everybody they’re married just like straight couples. When the NYT tells us many successful gay marriages include sex outside the marriage then what’s the point? What are the responsibilities? I can’t think of any. If Bob “marries” Fred but decides to fool around with Jim, how are they in a loving relationship? Every time Bob goes on a business trip, he could fool around with whoever and Fred doesn’t care. That’s not marriage. And if Bob picks up an STD along the way, oh well?

This sounds like playing house.

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
The same deception tactics were used to help legalize abortion and convince all us “trusting those in authority” Christians that the ‘experts’ were telling us the truth.

1969

catholicnewsagency.com/resources/abortion/articles-and-addresses/an-ex-abortionist-speaks/

Enemy number one? The Catholic Church.

We can’t afford to wait 30 years. Does anyone see a pattern here?

We know the answers now.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing that link. Never saw it before.
 
fix said:
If they applied they would tell you certain actions are wrong.
Click to expand...
Precisely. Certain actions in certain circumstances are wrong. So what? In order to decide if an action in a specific environment is right or wrong, you need reason and logic - nothing else - as far as atheists are concerned. You are free to introduce faith, theology or superstition into the discussion, and it will stop the exchange. For atheists these are irrelevant premises.
 
LisaA said:
Well you are wrong in that. The public has a right to determine what is allowed in the public square and in fact the public schools.
Click to expand...
Yes, to a certain extent. But “you” are not all the “public”. Those “sickos”, “deviants”, “perverts” and “miscreants” are also part of the public.
LisaA said:
Many of us hear this loud and clear when there are objections to religious displays or religious songs or religious celebrations in public places or public schools.
Click to expand...
Yes, and it is for your protection, so that no group can force their religion onto you. Be grateful for the secular society you live in.
LisaA said:
Thus you cannot claim that you as a homosexual activist have the right to insert your ideology, your lifestyle or your sexual practices if the public objects. That is precisely what this debate is about. With respect to schools, the parents should have the opportunity to prevent their child from being a participant, hearing a lecture or reading pro-homosexual material if they so choose.
Click to expand...
Of course you can resort to home-schooling if you so desire.
LisaA said:
As to not allowing your homosexual agenda into homes and churches, the reality is that the laws in some countries effectively muzzle pastors and parents as to what they can do or say in their homes and churches.
Click to expand...
Not in the US, they cannot.

So far there was not one rational argument that homosexual marraige somehow “hurts” society. It would hurt the agenda of some of the religious groups. But fortunately for the rest of us, even the majority of the catholics sees no problem with it. You are welcome to keep fighting the inevitable.
 
fix said:
Dealing with materialists limits the debate. Morality and logic cannot apply. Basically anything goes simply because it can be done.
Click to expand...
You are correct. There is no morality, only the satisfaction of one’s desires. Oh sure, there may be a short “do not do” list like “don’t murder, rape or steal,” but beyond that, anything goes. Imagine millions of people running off in different directions. That is called anarchy and is a bad thing.

Materialists worship the god “change.” It is their stimulant. Nothing is fixed. I guess it’s their way to pass the time while others understand, on a rational and practical level, how things actually work as individuals, in small groups and society at large. They have only one enemy: boredom.

Peace,
Ed
 
Yes, and it is for your protection, so that no group can force their religion onto you. Be grateful for the secular society you livein.
Click to expand...
Except for you forcing your secularism onto us.
 
Same-sex sexual behavior and psychiatric disorders: findings from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS).
CONCLUSION: The findings support the assumption that people with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for psychiatric disorders.

Sexual orientation and mental health in a birth cohort of young adults.
CONCLUSIONS. The findings suggest a continuum of sexual preferences amongst young adults. Variations in sexual orientation were clearly associated with mental health. These associations tended to be stronger for males.
 
Farien said:
It is not YOUR school, not YOUR public space… it is your home, and your church, and no one tries to bring the activities there.

There is no sign of that. 🙂
Click to expand...
Then why the concern about what the Catholic Church teaches, and why all the in your face media in our homes? I had my TV thrown out, and I watch very little of it. The TV Guide is becoming the TV Gay.

And, oh yes, the thought police are using every opportunity to attempt to shut us up, including a Catholic forum.

Peace,
Ed
 
CrimsonThorn said:
Except for you forcing your secularism onto us.
Click to expand...
Get real. This persecution complex is getting boring and tedious.

You are free to worship, and no one stands in your way. You can express your desires at the ballot-box. Fortunately for all of us, we also can do it, and since you are the minority, your agenda will be turned down. If you can show that the homosexual marriage is somehow unconstitutional, the Supreme Court will strike it down. No majority can force their view onto any minority if it would fly in the face of the Constitution.
 
Farien said:
Yes, to a certain extent. But “you” are not all the “public”. Those “sickos”, “deviants”, “perverts” and “miscreants” are also part of the public.

Yes, and it is for your protection, so that no group can force their religion onto you. Be grateful for the secular society you live in.

Of course you can resort to home-schooling if you so desire.

Not in the US, they cannot.

So far there was not one rational argument that homosexual marraige somehow “hurts” society. It would hurt the agenda of some of the religious groups. But fortunately for the rest of us, even the majority of the catholics sees no problem with it. You are welcome to keep fighting the inevitable.
Click to expand...
That statement about “protecting” our religion is 100% false. This country was founded on established moral principles and right reason. When the Communist inspired ACLU began removing religious monuments from public buildings, how did that protect anybody? Answer. It didn’t. The goal was OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND.

I NEVER lived in a secular country and NEVER WILL.

Don’t pour water on my leg and tell me it’s raining. The ACLU and other anti-theist groups HOPE that this will be a secular country but it never will. Any attempts to resort to force will be fought. Any attempts to put a pretty pink bow on a deceptions package will be exposed for what it really is: deception.

George Washington - 1796

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

We’ve already invented the wheel and it works.

Peace,
Ed
 
Farien said:
It must be a fascinating thing to watch your TV on top of your junk pile… is it plugged in?
Click to expand...
On occasion, as part of my job, I monitor the media. I continue to watch it slide into greater and greater depravity. I do the watching elsewhere and it generally turns my stomach, but it’s useful when I criticize the vomit that passes for entertainment and someone asks: “Did you actually watch the show?” Then I can say yes, and it made me sick.

For the record, the mostly pagan media has latched onto the gay agenda. Too bad.

Peace,
Ed
 
Farien said:
Yes, to a certain extent. But “you” are not all the “public”. Those “sickos”, “deviants”, “perverts” and “miscreants” are also part of the public.

Yes, and it is for your protection, so that no group can force their religion onto you. Be grateful for the secular society you live in.

Of course you can resort to home-schooling if you so desire.

Not in the US, they cannot.

So far there was not one rational argument that homosexual marraige somehow “hurts” society. It would hurt the agenda of some of the religious groups. But fortunately for the rest of us, even the majority of the catholics sees no problem with it. You are welcome to keep fighting the inevitable.
Click to expand...
More ad hominems. I suspect you think you are quite the wordsmith but quite honestly, the references to perverts and sickos has nothing to do with anything I’ve said.

And you are wrong about home schooling. There has been legislation that parents cannot tell their children that homosexuality is detrimental. Not in this country YET but there has been very far reaching legislation here in America regarding home schooling, what must be taught or what cannot be taught. Further why should parents have to resort to home schooling when THEY are the ones paying the property taxes to fund the schools and they are simply exercising their parental authority.

There have been many rational arguments against SSM but you choose to ignore them, perhaps because you have no counter argument.

As for inflicting religion on anyone else, you must have mistaken Catholicism for Islam and Leftism. We aren’t trying to convert people at the point of a sword or a bomb or even a lawsuit. We believe people should be free to make up their own minds and live their own lives without others’ agendas interfering.

Lisa
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top