Page 37 of 39 FirstFirst ... 273536373839 LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 390

Thread: United Church of Christ sues over NC ban on same-sex marriage

  1. #361
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,878

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post

    So are you saying that the holocaust was not objectively immoral?
    Yes. *I* think it was immoral. That does not prove it was.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  2. #362
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Already explained. But here is some more to help you out.

    http://www.vorpal.us/2007/10/the-fiv...all-dead-ends/

    Plus, how can the FSM or Zeus or a cadre of little green men that do not have to conform to the laws of physics or nature not be just as valid of an explanation for what Aquinas opined as proof? Afterall, he nor you have any proof that any specific god exists, let alone the one you believe in. It is just as likely that any or all gods ever imagined really have a hand in the existence of the universe.
    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Already explained. But here is some more to help you out.

    http://www.vorpal.us/2007/10/the-fiv...all-dead-ends/

    Plus, how can the FSM or Zeus or a cadre of little green men that do not have to conform to the laws of physics or nature not be just as valid of an explanation for what Aquinas opined as proof? Afterall, he nor you have any proof that any specific god exists, let alone the one you believe in. It is just as likely that any or all gods ever imagined really have a hand in the existence of the universe.
    1. When Aquinas and other classical philosophers used the word "motion", they mean change. Thus new discoveries regarding the nature of physical movement are not invalidating.

    2. When particles and antiparticles are created, they do not come from nothing, rather they require energy to create them, and when they mutually annihilate, they produce energy. If the classical philosophers had known of modern physics regarding energy, they would termed it matter for philosophical purposes, since it is physical by nature, and is thrush of immaterial or spiritual.

    Thus it remains that something cannot come from nothing. This also disproves the article's claim that things cannot be created by other things (the article makes a strawman implication, as classical philosophy agrees that matter cannot actually be created by other created beings, but can only be rearranged), as particles and antiparticles can create energy, and vice versa.

    Only created things require a cause, thus something which existed forever would not need a cause. The five ways aren't it intended to prove Christianity specifically, but only classic monotheism. Thus it is sufficient to show an eternal unchanging being as the cause of everything else.

    Regarding the suggestion that the universe could have existed forever, this is not possible as it would require infinite time. Infinite time is impossible since it would require a countable infinity, which cannot really exist. In other words, if there had been a moment that was infinitely long ago, now would not exist as it would never be possible to actually get from then to now.

    3. The problem is that in the Demiurge the monster did have other created things, such as the cloud. Plus his memory was not eternal, thus he should have known that he was contingent, since he didn't exist at some point.

    In any case, the reason why there must be a necessary being is because if they're weren't then it would be possible for nothing to exist at some point, in which case nothing would exist now, which is absurd.

    4. The classical philosophers were aware of decay, they knew it was a necessary result of a thing being subject to time. However if there were a spiritual benign not subject to time, it would not be subject to decay.

    5. As the article admitted, there are things, such as rocks, that clearly lack minds.

    Zeus isn't eternal and unchangeable.

  3. #363
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    1. When Aquinas and other classical philosophers used the word "motion", they mean change. Thus new discoveries regarding the nature of physical movement are not invalidating.

    2. When particles and antiparticles are created, they do not come from nothing, rather they require energy to create them, and when they mutually annihilate, they produce energy. If the classical philosophers had known of modern physics regarding energy, they would termed it matter for philosophical purposes, since it is physical by nature, and is thrush of immaterial or spiritual.

    Thus it remains that something cannot come from nothing. This also disproves the article's claim that things cannot be created by other things (the article makes a strawman implication, as classical philosophy agrees that matter cannot actually be created by other created beings, but can only be rearranged), as particles and antiparticles can create energy, and vice versa.

    Only created things require a cause, thus something which existed forever would not need a cause. The five ways aren't it intended to prove Christianity specifically, but only classic monotheism. Thus it is sufficient to show an eternal unchanging being as the cause of everything else.

    Regarding the suggestion that the universe could have existed forever, this is not possible as it would require infinite time. Infinite time is impossible since it would require a countable infinity, which cannot really exist. In other words, if there had been a moment that was infinitely long ago, now would not exist as it would never be possible to actually get from then to now.

    3. The problem is that in the Demiurge the monster did have other created things, such as the cloud. Plus his memory was not eternal, thus he should have known that he was contingent, since he didn't exist at some point.

    In any case, the reason why there must be a necessary being is because if they're weren't then it would be possible for nothing to exist at some point, in which case nothing would exist now, which is absurd.

    4. The classical philosophers were aware of decay, they knew it was a necessary result of a thing being subject to time. However if there were a spiritual benign not subject to time, it would not be subject to decay.

    5. As the article admitted, there are things, such as rocks, that clearly lack minds.

    Zeus isn't eternal and unchangeable.
    All gods or higher powers that any person or group has ever thought of is just as capable as the Abrahamic god of doing those things mentioned by Aquinas. And the Abrahamic god is not unchangeable either. Can you prove otherwise? In fact, prove that the Abrahamic god is eternal.

    As for your rebuttal, you are mistaken. Aquinas was simply proven wrong. He was not in any way scientific in his methods. He started from a set conclusion, "there is a god", and worked to validate that conclusion. That is not how science works. Philosophy sure, but philosophy is subjective as well.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  4. #364
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,984

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    So are you saying that the holocaust was not objectively immoral?
    There you go again, clinging to a fallacy by hoping to demand people prove a negative.

    The Holocaust was SUBJECTIVELY immoral. This is indicated by the fact that members of the Nazi regime felt it was absolutely moral, while many others felt it was incredibly immoral. This clearly demonstrates how the morality of the holocaust varied based on individual opinion.

    If you want to claim that the Holocaust was OBJECTIVELY immoral, you need to provide facts to back up your assertion.

  5. #365
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: United Church of Christ sues over NC ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Very interesting lawsuit. So the question is this? If the United Church of Christ, which supports gay marriage, is not allowed to perform gay marriages, then are their first amendment religious freedoms being violated? They have certainly opened up a can of worms with this lawsuit.

    Discussion?

    Article is here - United Church of Christ sues over NC ban on same-sex marriage.

    Note to mods - Title would not fit, so I had to take a couple of words out to make it fit.

    Second note to mods. The source changed the title, so now it doesn't match at all. LOL.
    I've said this a million times already - the government should play no role in marriage.

    Marriage should be completely secular from government.

  6. #366
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    There you go again, clinging to a fallacy by hoping to demand people prove a negative.

    The Holocaust was SUBJECTIVELY immoral. This is indicated by the fact that members of the Nazi regime felt it was absolutely moral, while many others felt it was incredibly immoral. This clearly demonstrates how the morality of the holocaust varied based on individual opinion.

    If you want to claim that the Holocaust was OBJECTIVELY immoral, you need to provide facts to back up your assertion.
    It also shows how humans can be corrupted via propaganda.

    Humans are extremely flawed and extremely gullible and easy to take advantage of.

    This is why my social politics are based on the founding documents and I keep my religious beliefs to myself - well at least the believes that contradict what is stated in our founding documents (Constitution & Bill of Rights).

    I do oppose gay marriage, however that issue is something I hardly ponder or philosophize about. However if I had the choice to ban gay marriage I wouldn't - I would find such a concept authoritarian, and as a libertarian that contradicts my politics.

    Honestly, I'm a bit perturbed that this is even an issue.... Like I said before; government shouldn't play a role in marriage.

  7. #367
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    All gods or higher powers that any person or group has ever thought of is just as capable as the Abrahamic god of doing those things mentioned by Aquinas. And the Abrahamic god is not unchangeable either. Can you prove otherwise? In fact, prove that the Abrahamic god is eternal.

    As for your rebuttal, you are mistaken. Aquinas was simply proven wrong. He was not in any way scientific in his methods. He started from a set conclusion, "there is a god", and worked to validate that conclusion. That is not how science works. Philosophy sure, but philosophy is subjective as well.
    You don't seem to get it. The five ways aren't about which religion is correct, they're about monotheism.

    How was he proven wrong?

  8. #368
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    You don't seem to get it. The five ways aren't about which religion is correct, they're about monotheism.

    How was he proven wrong?
    Polytheism works with those just as well. Why exactly would it be necessary for one god to exist but not allow for more than one god?

    And he has no quantitative values nor scientific information, i.e. experimentation, to back up his "theories". He is starting with assumptions, particularly that God exists.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #369
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Polytheism works with those just as well. Why exactly would it be necessary for one god to exist but not allow for more than one god?

    And he has no quantitative values nor scientific information, i.e. experimentation, to back up his "theories". He is starting with assumptions, particularly that God exists.
    For which argument specifically?

    You are starting with the assumption of empiricism, that only those things which are scientifically testable are true, this view is self-refuting since it cannot be scientifically tested.

  10. #370
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Polytheism works with those just as well. Why exactly would it be necessary for one god to exist but not allow for more than one god?

    And he has no quantitative values nor scientific information, i.e. experimentation, to back up his "theories". He is starting with assumptions, particularly that God exists.
    IMO, it would be impossible to have more than one God.... Don't you think if there was more than one God they would get into fights from time to time?

    Obviously I have no evidence that they would, but being human and observing human behavior I would expect that would be an issue amongst Gods..

    This can be taken as satire or literally - neither would bother me, considering I find the idea funny myself...

Page 37 of 39 FirstFirst ... 273536373839 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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