View Poll Results: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

Voters
320. You may not vote on this poll
  • No

    177 55.31%
  • Yes. please explain.

    143 44.69%
Page 95 of 121 FirstFirst ... 45859394959697105 ... LastLast
Results 941 to 950 of 1209

Thread: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

  1. #941
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by CLAX1911 View Post
    There isn't force to attend public school, you can home school or put them in private school

    sorry no, if i have only 1 parent or i am low -income i dont have that option, and i am forced to send my child to public school.

  2. #942
    Advisor douglas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    06-29-16 @ 03:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    458

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by Logicman View Post
    Nuts. What is is about 'love your neighbor as you love yourself' do you even remotely believe justifies any of those things?
    It doesn't, and yet I've heard major Christian leaders defend those things using the bible. In our history, every single one of those injustices has been defended by using one or more quotes in the bible. The golden rule, the basis of Secular morality, is downplayed by most Christians in those cases. There's a contradiction there, and that causes the problems we see with Christian morality today; Christian based discrimination of Homosexuals is condoned by passages of the bible, but ultimately undone by the golden rule; which one do we hear about? If Christian Righteousness was really based on the golden rule, it'd be compatible with Secular Righteousness, but that's not what most Christian Fundamentalists have in mind.

    "It is certainly arguable that “progressive” liberal fundamentalism substantially undermines the basic effectiveness of the government and other societal elements of democracy. Despite the idealistic goals of liberalism, attempts to build a utopian liberal society in America have only led to heightened outbreaks of AIDS, VD, porno-related crime, social divisions, divorce, abortion, drug addictions, deficit spending, the welfare state, a crushing tax burden, the breakdown of the family unit, moral depravity, and numerous other such scourges which have resulted in enormous societal suffering and discontent. As a result, secular liberal fundamentalism is strongly associated with left-wing fanaticism, reverse-racism, anti-intellectualism, elitism, nihilism, godlessness, and societal violence." – Author Unknown
    Author Unknown is a moron. Let's address that quote piece by piece.

    Utopian =/= Liberal and never did. I am not a liberal, Libertarianism is nearly the exact opposite of liberalism. Most secularist movements are for a reduction of existing laws and reducing the power of government, everything the Liberals hate.

    Is AIDS/VD caused by Liberals, Secularists, or any other Progressive movements? Uh, no. The biggest outbreaks of AIDS correlate with the largest densities of Religiosity. Most secularists are promoting the use of condoms where religious movements promote abstinence; According to every study I could get my hands on, Abstinence only education yields higher teen pregnancies, higher teen std rates, and are an all around failure. Effective Sex Education

    Porno-related crime? What in the hell is a Porno-related crime? If you mean crime being induced by the maddening effects of pornography, you're right up there with reefer madness. All countries that had banned pornography and then legalized it later found that crime was worse during the dry years, especially sex offenses. I seriously laughed at my screen when I read that line.

    Social divisions are not any sort of problem that is solved by any form of "righteousness", since there's no problem with social divides. We are a diverse people, and that's a good thing.

    Divorce rates of Atheists/Secularists are half that of Christians. Atheism & Divorce: Divorce Rates for Atheists are Among the Lowest in America - Why Do Conservative Christian Defenders of Marriage Get Divorced Most?

    Abortion is tolerated but not condoned by secularists. I promote bans on all abortions that aren't due to Rape, Incest, or if the Child will endanger the life of the Mother. That doesn't make me pro-life, but I seriously don't condone the practice. I tolerate it under very specific conditions, and "inconvenience" or "choice" isn't one of them. I'm not Pro-life or Pro-choice.

    Drug Addiction I'll give you, there is a mild increase in drug use and addiction among Secularists. But, we all know that Authoritarian laws against drug use are even worse than the drugs themselves; to use this as a "victory" for Religious Righteousness stops the second the Religious Right endorses the War on Drugs. That's the instant where the Religious Right promote more harm than Secularists.

    Deficit Spending? Every president we've ever had was a Christian and there's only one Atheist in Congress. How can you possibly blame Atheists/Secularists for anything the Government does? I don't like paying taxes or living under an oppressive government; I support the deregulation of nearly every facet of every industry. I want smaller government, as do most secularists. "Author Unknown" doesn't know what "Liberal" even means.

    Breakdown of the family unit goes right along with Divorce rates, Atheists have better family cohesion than Religious families. If you mean that we also love our neighbors and accept their families as valid, even when it goes against some Religious Fundamentalist's Bigoted world view, then yes we are destroying the family unit. How dare we be tolerant of others. Oh yeah, the golden rule. Again, the Religious Righteousness you speak of would be all fine and dandy if it actually entailed following the golden rule, but that's almost never the case.

    Moral depravity and Societal Violence? Firstly, if you just define everyone that doesn't agree with you as immoral, then what's the point of even debating morality. It's simply close mindedness, and ultimately a contradiction of the golden rule. If we're talking about quantifiable and measured immorality/violence, such as federal crimes, Atheists beat Religion every time. From the Federal Bureau of Prisons (What Percentage of Prisoners are Atheists? It’s a Lot Smaller Than We Ever Imagined ), 0.07% of Federal inmates self identified as "Atheist", vs ~6% of the general population; 1/85th the population we would expect from statistics alone, and completely against any claim that Secularism breeds immoral or violent tendencies.

    Reverse-Racism is a non-sensical statement. Either you're racist or you're not, there's no such thing as Reverse-Racism. If you mean tolerance and loving our neighbors, then Secularists are your guys.

    How do you put anti-intellectualism and elitism in the same sentence? They literally mean opposite things. Again "Author Unknown" is a moron.

    Nihilism? The most selfish people I've ever met were Christians. As an atheist, I've had several debates on this forum trying to prove the value of humility and selflessness; you can look up my profile if you want. Although I've met some bad Atheists before, the vocal majority emphasizes the golden rule and selfless lifestyles.

    Godlessness. Yup, that's sort of the point of Secularism.

  3. #943
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,798

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by eph210 View Post
    Just some rebuttals to your rebuttals:

    1.) Religion/god/bible: There is yet to be a definitive proof against god and therefore none of those three can be considered meaningless or debunked (unless you know something I've never seen, heard or researched)
    2.) Slippery slope argument: We've seen it happen before. We all have. Regularly. So as a generally applied principle it has grounds
    3.)Marriage is between a man and a woman: Yes it is a foolish way to debate it (like saying someone in court "murdered because they are a murderer"). And yes it is an opinion but there's nothing to state its a lie in any form of the definition.
    4.) Gay Parents will "turn" their kids gay: Well if you are arguing with someone that thinks being gay is ok then that isn't a legitimate point. That's why it isn't useful in the debate NOT because it's ignorant.
    5.) Churches will lose their rights: It isn't ludicrous. Churches believe homosexuality is wrong and so, yes, they discriminate (please don't make the common assumption that discrimination is all bad. I discriminate by avoiding someone on a dark street who looks like a murderer. That's common sense) and a global legal passing of gay rights would force churches to go completely against what they believe.


    5.)I do apologies if any of the above seemed like an attack. That was not intended, I simply wished to point out that the points you made to rebut the rebuttals aren't really all that legitimate.

    1.) nobody said GOD is debunked im religious myself what was said is believing in god religion is not a reason fight against equal rights for gays
    2.) well then simply put up or shut up. PLEASE explain to us all how granting equal rights for gays will solely lead to other things using only the precedence for gay rights. Otherwise you got nothing.
    3.) facts prove you wrong so there nothing to debate here
    4.) yes it very ignorant there is nobody educated and honest that thinks you can catch gay
    5.) well since the constitution exists and since churches already discriminate again STRAIGHT,INTERRACIAL and RELIGIOUS couples RIGHT NOW your argument is simply not true and a huge failure. But most importantly has nothing to do with gays. Theres no danger of "churches" being forced to marry anybody. nice try but a complete failure. Are tou from the us?

    5.) no apology need i dont feel attacked at all and all your points failed, facts and reality prove them all wrong.

    but please feel free to come back when you have legit concerns or reason to stop equal rights for gays. Ill gladly read then too.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  4. #944
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,798

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    lets check in with the counter. 2 threads and 95 pages deep in the second thread.

    OFFICIAL COUNTER
    how many sound, reasonable, logical, non-bias, non-selfish, non-arrogant, non-hypercritical, non anti-american, non-discriminating reasons are there to "Stop" gay marriage

    GOOD REASONS: 0[/QUOTE]
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  5. #945
    Sage



    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,247

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by douglas View Post
    Is AIDS/VD caused by Liberals, Secularists, or any other Progressive movements? Uh, no. The biggest outbreaks of AIDS correlate with the largest densities of Religiosity. Most secularists are promoting the use of condoms where religious movements promote abstinence; According to every study I could get my hands on, Abstinence only education yields higher teen pregnancies, higher teen std rates, and are an all around failure. Effective Sex Education
    Going down the AIDS route...one of the biggest national failures in my book surrounds AIDS and our response in the early years.

    I was a Reagan Republican in those days - bought into trickle down and all. Where he completely lost me was the AIDS crisis. If you want to pick and chose where federal money is spent - even the "small government" minded individual would understand that public safety and preventing epidemic is high priority. But in what was blatant pandering to the Moral Majority (immoral majority in my book) he basically ignored the epidemic. TO think we could have thrust our resources while deaths were in the thousands and prevented millions of deaths worldwide. Lack of needed resources and lack of national recognition of the seriousness of the situation were the fault of the Moral Majority and the Reagan administration.

    For people who think they are in step with Jesus, they sure do not do what he would have done.

  6. #946
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,204

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    sorry no, if i have only 1 parent or i am low -income i dont have that option, and i am forced to send my child to public school.
    Yes you do have that option. your inability to afford that option is. your problem

  7. #947
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by year2late View Post
    Going down the AIDS route...one of the biggest national failures in my book surrounds AIDS and our response in the early years.

    I was a Reagan Republican in those days - bought into trickle down and all. Where he completely lost me was the AIDS crisis. If you want to pick and chose where federal money is spent - even the "small government" minded individual would understand that public safety and preventing epidemic is high priority. But in what was blatant pandering to the Moral Majority (immoral majority in my book) he basically ignored the epidemic. TO think we could have thrust our resources while deaths were in the thousands and prevented millions of deaths worldwide. Lack of needed resources and lack of national recognition of the seriousness of the situation were the fault of the Moral Majority and the Reagan administration.

    For people who think they are in step with Jesus, they sure do not do what he would have done.
    I don't have enough fingers to count who I know that died. And I do remember hearing people saying it was gods revenge

  8. #948
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by CLAX1911 View Post
    Yes you do have that option. your inability to afford that option is. your problem
    but yet!....... i have force applied to me.

  9. #949
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,204

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    but yet!....... i have force applied to me.
    No you don't, private school, home school. No force that is an option.

  10. #950
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

    Quote Originally Posted by CLAX1911 View Post
    No you don't, private school, home school. No force that is an option.
    Sorry clax I agree with ernst on this point. With compulsory education children have to be in school. Parents are forced to comply with this law. I do not however agree with enst"s angle on this

Page 95 of 121 FirstFirst ... 45859394959697105 ... 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
  •