17 Nov 08
Originally posted by EladarLOL! Are you suggesting that polygamy is a horrible thing?
My point is that you are on the fringe. The number of people who believe that homosexuals should have a right to be married is small, those who believe that polygamy should be legalized and recognized with marriage rights is even smaller.
Perhaps one day most people will agree with you, but that day isn't today.
I do applaud you for being consistant in your belief in giving everyone the right to marry.
Here, I'll give you the secret word. The word that would explain precisely
my point of view: consensus.
If all parties directly involved in an act are in consent, no one is harmed
physically and it doesn't affect their abilities to do their part for the
society they live in, it's o-friggin-k with me, son. Let them have their
orgies and what not. What do you care? You're a self-proclaimed
Christian I presume? Well, then turn the other cheek safe in your
knowledge that when the day comes you'll enter the kingdom of your
god, and leave the judging and decisions of what's moral and not to him.
17 Nov 08
Originally posted by JigtieLegalizing gay marriage is a 'slippery slope'. Yes, you would have to consider legalizing polygamy, incest, marrying your pet -- anything people wanted to do and call it 'marriage'. You would have no more rational reason to stop at any one stage than any other.
LOL! Are you suggesting that polygamy is a horrible thing?
Here, I'll give you the secret word. The word that would explain precisely
my point of view: consensus.
If all parties directly involved in an act are in consent, no one is harmed
physically and it doesn't affect their abilities to do their part for the
society they live in, it's o-friggi ...[text shortened]... kingdom of your
god, and leave the judging and decisions of what's moral and not to him.
That is probably the best reason not to start.
17 Nov 08
Originally posted by EladarSexual immorality? The ancient sciptures are full of polygamy. Here in Indonesia, polygamy is not considered 'sexually immoral' and this is in accordance with the ancient scriptures of one of the world's oldest and well established religions. In fact it shares many of its scriptures with the Judeo-Christian tradition. Religions are belief systems. You can hardly argue that Christianity is "better" than Islam. They both exist. They are both belief systems based on literature and cultural tradition and codefied superstitions. You have your Book. They have their Book. What? Are you saying that their Book is not as good as yours? What is this: theological conkers? Do you seriously think a system of civil rights and responsibilities can be based on someone with your kind of mind map?
I know [polygamy and homosexuality] are two totally different forms of sexual immorality, but they are both only immoral if one judges them immoral.
As Indonesia modernizes, more and more people frown upon upon polygamy but there is no move to restrict their rights. And as for you referring to homosexuality as "Sexual immorality", the mind boggles. You strike me as having been brought up really badly. In fact, personally, I feel that the inculcation of narrow minded religiosity in children is a form of mental abuse and an abdication of duty by parents.
17 Nov 08
Originally posted by spruce112358There is absolutely no discussion here whether to legalize those things.
Legalizing gay marriage is a 'slippery slope'. Yes, you would have to consider legalizing polygamy, incest, marrying your pet -- anything people wanted to do and call it 'marriage'. You would have no more rational reason to stop at any one stage than any other.
That is probably the best reason not to start.
17 Nov 08
Originally posted by FMFThe Bible is full of polygamy as well. You know, there is very little difference between Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Sexual immorality? The ancient sciptures are full of polygamy. Here in Indonesia, polygamy is not considered 'sexually immoral' and this is in accordance with the ancient scriptures of one of the world's oldest and well established religions. In fact it shares many of its scriptures with the Judeo-Christian tradition. Religions are belief systems. You can hardly ...[text shortened]... d religiosity in children is a form of mental abuse and an abdication of duty by parents.
17 Nov 08
Originally posted by spruce112358Again, consensus is key. We abandoned arranged marriages centuries
Legalizing gay marriage is a 'slippery slope'. Yes, you would have to consider legalizing polygamy, incest, marrying your pet -- anything people wanted to do and call it 'marriage'. You would have no more rational reason to stop at any one stage than any other.
That is probably the best reason not to start.
ago simply because one or both were not interested in marrying the
other. As long as there's consensus, who are you to say people can't
marry each other if they so wish?
By your logic, marriage should be forbidden all together, because we
can't really tell where the line should be drawn. We can't let one group
be allowed to marriage, when another group aren't, can we?
Also, marriage is about having your partnership blessed by God, or
something like that, right? Well, why not let God decide who gets to
marry and who doesn't? If He doesn't approve of a marriage, I'm sure
He'll deal with it when the day comes.
17 Nov 08
Originally posted by spruce112358I've addressed this bogus argument in two other threads. It's simply not
Legalizing gay marriage is a 'slippery slope'. Yes, you would have to consider legalizing polygamy, incest, marrying your pet -- anything people wanted to do and call it 'marriage'. You would have no more rational reason to stop at any one stage than any other.
true.
Nemesio
17 Nov 08
Originally posted by generalissimoLook. I specifically addressed it with you. You didn't debate it. You just
or so you say...
kept insisting that your opinion should be legislated. You can pretend it's
not there (obviously, I can't help that; I can't force you to look at it). That
doesn't mean it isn't.
Nemesio
17 Nov 08
1 edit
Originally posted by EladarThis is true to an extent. I can prove 2+2=4 and people can still refuse to
You've proven your point in your own mind. That's far from proving your point to the rest of us. But to tell you the truth, I don't think you are capable of understanding the difference.
accept it. And those people who think 2+2=5 can be just as strongly convinced
of their convictions as I can.
The difference between me and them is that I can demonstrate the inconsistency
in their line of thinking, and they cannot do the same for me. Yes, they're in
the majority and thus aren't obligated to prove anything to anyone, but
ultimately reason prevails and the irrational falls away. I'm unconcerned
about the direction things will go (that same-sex unions will be legally
permitted), although I'd prefer to see it go faster than it is. This is why
I present what I do and people like you just continue to stick your heads
in the sand.
Eventually, there will only be a few people with their heads in the sand and
the civil privileges granted to some will be granted to all.
But you're a troll whose very accusations mirror his own attitudes, who is
unable to read an opposing argument and critique it because of his inordinate
hubris in understanding what God really wants, so I daresay that if Jesus
Christ came down and told you that society is ready for loving same-sex
relationships, you'd probably get out your wood and nails and crucify Him
all over again before you'd support same-sex unions.
Nemesio