A Political and Moral dilemma solved: Homosexuality

[Skylar]

If your OP is genuine, Templar, then you have my respect.

Frankly, I have respect for anyone who puts in that much time and energy into the reconciling conflicting moral narratives. Obviously, I've picked a team on the issue of gay marriage and gay rights. But I'm a bit of a process wonk. And admire careful, principled consideration regardless of the outcome.

That's not to say I won't opposed the outcome if I disagree with it.

 

[Mr.Right]

I had a tough go of it. No really, as a Christian I think homosexuality and gay marriage are wrong and patently sinful, thusly I don't condone either. I've really wrestled my conscience mightily over it. But after a mighty struggle and in a moment of clarity, it has dawned on me that gay people deserve rights like I do, and I will defend them, I won't force equality, I'll fight for it. America is supposed to be a bastion of freedom and free association.

Yes, the Republicans on this board can go ahead and get angry at me all they want, this position will not change. I really don't care how gay people become gay, they deserve to be treated equally. I don't have a problem with people holding true to their morals, but when they agree to serve people equally under the law, they should.

You can't just set aside a just law for the sole reason of your personal belief. You can serve people equally without ever personally condoning the lifestyle choices of others. Equality has no bias.

Excuse me. Gays don't want equal rights. They want special rights. They want to redefine marriage, a holy institution ordained by God. If you support them in this, then you are in opposition to the word of God. We should obey God rather than man.

 

[Skylar]

Where the issue is science, I speak to science. Where the issue is Christianity I speak to Christianity.

Yuu apply sweeping moral implications to acts that science has shit to say about. You condemn gays as 'loathed' 'despised', 'abhorred' and a variety of other melodramatic terms that science doesn't apply.

The worst thing you can say about homosexuality from a scientific perspective is that its unproductive. And...so what?

As for your religious beliefs, that's too relativistic and subjective to use as a basis for strip anyone's rights away. Religion is best used to guide one's own life. Not to try and dictate other people's life with. And that's where you fail.

 

[Skylar]

I had a tough go of it. No really, as a Christian I think homosexuality and gay marriage are wrong and patently sinful, thusly I don't condone either. I've really wrestled my conscience mightily over it. But after a mighty struggle and in a moment of clarity, it has dawned on me that gay people deserve rights like I do, and I will defend them, I won't force equality, I'll fight for it. America is supposed to be a bastion of freedom and free association.

Yes, the Republicans on this board can go ahead and get angry at me all they want, this position will not change. I really don't care how gay people become gay, they deserve to be treated equally. I don't have a problem with people holding true to their morals, but when they agree to serve people equally under the law, they should.

You can't just set aside a just law for the sole reason of your personal belief. You can serve people equally without ever personally condoning the lifestyle choices of others. Equality has no bias.

Excuse me. Gays don't want equal rights. They want special rights. They want to redefine marriage, a holy institution ordained by God. If you support them in this, then you are in opposition to the word of God. We should obey God rather than man.

Marriage the 'holy institution' you can keep. Marriage the legally recognize social contract is what gays are fighting for in court. And rightfully winning.

You get your moral certainty of eternal condemnation by God. They get their rights recognized and protected today. Sounds like a win-win to me! To quote Daniel Tosh:

Just because the state says it's legal, it's not like God's going to let them into heaven. Okay? So you can still sleep sound every night knowing that goal line defense is up at the pearly gates just going, "You're not getting in here faggots."

Just because the state says it s legal it s not like God s going to let them into heaven. Okay So you can still sleep sound every night knowing that goal line defense is up at the pearly gates just going You re not getting in here faggots. - Daniel Tosh on Gay Marriage - quickmeme

 

[TemplarKormac]

Excuse me. Gays don't want equal rights. They want special rights.

I know a few gay people who would say otherwise. They want to be treated equally and left alone. They are tired of being dragged into this hyperpolitical atmosphere where a conglomerate of gays lobbying for equality don't necessarily speak for them. Get to know some of them before you stereotype them.

They want to redefine marriage, a holy institution ordained by God.

I still think marriage is ordained by God. But if you are going to make laws regarding marriage, be prepared to apply them equally. It isn't rocket science. The Constitution demands it.

If you support them in this, then you are in opposition to the word of God.

Really? Where does the Bible say "love thy neighbor, hate thine enemy?"

Matthew 5:43-45

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I had a tough go of it. No really, as a Christian I think homosexuality and gay marriage are wrong and patently sinful, thusly I don't condone either. I've really wrestled my conscience mightily over it. But after a mighty struggle and in a moment of clarity, it has dawned on me that gay people deserve rights like I do, and I will defend them, I won't force equality, I'll fight for it. America is supposed to be a bastion of freedom and free association.

Yes, the Republicans on this board can go ahead and get angry at me all they want, this position will not change. I really don't care how gay people become gay, they deserve to be treated equally. I don't have a problem with people holding true to their morals, but when they agree to serve people equally under the law, they should.

You can't just set aside a just law for the sole reason of your personal belief. You can serve people equally without ever personally condoning the lifestyle choices of others. Equality has no bias.

But will you defend children of legitimate marriage and the state's rights to incentivize that environment to include a father for sons and a mother for daughters? How deeply have you really looked into the matter on behalf of kids on the brand new social experiment. The folks below want to use them as lab rats to see how them playing "mom and dad" pans out for our collective future. Since it is a collective future we are tampering with by redacting the physical structure of the word "marriage", should it be up to just 5 people (2 of which are biased: Breaking Justice Kagan Must Recuse Herself From Upcoming Gay Marriage Hearing Page 51 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum ) or up to the majority within the sovereign states?

Who is more worth fighting for? All the children into time unknown, or these folks? Boy Drugged By Lesbian Parents To Be A Girl US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

That's very cute. I've seen pro gun advocates demanding they not be stereotyped because of the actions of crazed gunmen and murderers, and I agree. But I also demand that homosexuals not be judged by the actions of a few. Really. Stereotypes are destructive. And it's ironic you would stoop to the same behavior.

So you're demanding that not all sexual deviants be judged by the behavior of sexual deviants?

Seriously?

 

[TemplarKormac]

We should obey God rather than man.

But do we? All of us are in some way guilty of not obeying God and succumbing to the whims and edicts of man. You shouldn't throw stones in a glass house.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So you're demanding that not all sexual deviants be judged by the behavior of sexual deviants?

Would I judge all Republicans simply on the asinine reasoning you're using here today? Most certainly not.

There are gays who would force us to accept their way of life, and use the law to affect that end. I hate that just as much as you do. But to judge the entire population because of it is simply ludicrous.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Excuse me. Gays don't want equal rights. They want special rights.

I know a few gay people who would say otherwise. They want to be treated equally and left alone.

Really?

So, you're saying that those who demand that the nucleus of civilization be stripped of the standard which sustains it legitimacy, are only interested in being treated equally?

Who else is demanding that they're sexual deviancy requires civilization to alter its laws to accommodate their kink?

I ask because whoever that is, are the only people who the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality are equal.

And, for what its worth: That's odd way of showing that one just wants to be left alone.

 

[Mr.Right]

We should obey God rather than man.

But do we? All of us are in some way guilty of not obeying God and succumbing to the whims and edicts of man. You shouldn't throw stones in a glass house.

You claim to be a Christian, yet you support the so called right for gays to marry? One has to wonder whether your faith is genuine. Homosexual behavior is an abomination to God, yet you support it.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

We should obey God rather than man.

But do we? All of us are in some way guilty of not obeying God and succumbing to the whims and edicts of man. You shouldn't throw stones in a glass house.

So because we all fall short of the glory of God, we should therefore not recognize sin?

Interesting...

So if I get an extra quarter in my change and fail to alert the clerk, then I've no right to expect that someone should not break into my house?

LOL! TK... Have you suffered a stroke?

Have you a mirror? Ya might check that smile buddy. Odds are its gone crooked on ya. I'd suggest an aspirin, STAT!

 

[rightwinger]

Well thought out. Good on you.

I'd thought I would stop simply calling myself a libertarian and start acting like one. What I said was with a lot of guidance from my devoutly Christian grandmother (surprise!), who like me thinks homosexuality and gay marriage is a sin. She lived through the civil rights era down here in South, so the atmosphere was ready to explode at any moment back then. Heck she got caught in a riot once. As a result she never wants to see that kind of atmosphere again; with that in mind she gave me some advice:

She told me that homosexuals should never be mistreated, and despite her view on their lifestyle she told me that they deserve the same rights under the law that she and I enjoy. So long as there's a mutual respect, people should just leave each other alone. That pretty much nailed it.

It took me the better part of a decade to reach this position. I was a die hard neo-conservative in 2007, I thought gays should be excised from the earth, who were a disease that deserved no dignity nor equality (yeah, that was the mind of a naive 20 year old just two years removed from High School). But, all I am now is a simple libertarian.

Be it known, I will openly challenge attacks on gay rights with the same fervor I do with my other arguments, my belief in limited government dictates that I do just that. If people don't want government in their lives, they shouldn't use government to dictate the lives of others.

If your religion thinks homosexuality is wrong then let God handle it in his own way

He doesn't need your help

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Marriage laws are equally enforced on everyone.

Really? So, where is the proof?

The Proof, at least so far, rests in your failure to have offered any contravening evidence; which means evidence that contests the assertion.

Do you have any evidence that marriage laws are not enforced equally?

Is there a state which prevents the sexually abnormal from marrying, where they apply for marriage within the standards of marriage, requiring one man and one woman?

I'm not aware of any... .

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well thought out. Good on you.

I'd thought I would stop simply calling myself a libertarian and start acting like one. What I said was with a lot of guidance from my devoutly Christian grandmother (surprise!), who like me thinks homosexuality and gay marriage is a sin. She lived through the civil rights era down here in South, so the atmosphere was ready to explode at any moment back then. Heck she got caught in a riot once. As a result she never wants to see that kind of atmosphere again; with that in mind she gave me some advice:

She told me that homosexuals should never be mistreated, and despite her view on their lifestyle she told me that they deserve the same rights under the law that she and I enjoy. So long as there's a mutual respect, people should just leave each other alone. That pretty much nailed it.

It took me the better part of a decade to reach this position. I was a die hard neo-conservative in 2007, I thought gays should be excised from the earth, who were a disease that deserved no dignity nor equality (yeah, that was the mind of a naive 20 year old just two years removed from High School). But, all I am now is a simple libertarian.

Be it known, I will openly challenge attacks on gay rights with the same fervor I do with my other arguments, my belief in limited government dictates that I do just that. If people don't want government in their lives, they shouldn't use government to dictate the lives of others.

If your religion thinks homosexuality is wrong then let God handle it in his own way

He doesn't need your help

Good point.

God is handling it by expecting that those he created are intelligent enough to govern themselves according to the laws of reason he established, which govern human behavior. Such as demonstrated by the laws that respect the natural standard of Marriage... and the civil war which will come should the last vestige of judicial prudence, fail to sustain those laws.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So you're demanding that not all sexual deviants be judged by the behavior of sexual deviants?

Would I judge all Republicans simply on the asinine reasoning you're using here today?

Well you could, but that would establish in you, an irrationally high expectation of all Republicans.

I know this because I have made that same mistake myself.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Skylar]

We should obey God rather than man.

But do we? All of us are in some way guilty of not obeying God and succumbing to the whims and edicts of man. You shouldn't throw stones in a glass house.

You claim to be a Christian, yet you support the so called right for gays to marry? One has to wonder whether your faith is genuine. Homosexual behavior is an abomination to God, yet you support it.

Well, at least you're honest that its your religious beliefs that motivate your opposition to gay marriage. You conveniently demonstrate why your ilk so often lose in court; you can't argue your primary motivation. You're left with half assed second tier arguments that easily refuted.

And if you're going to use the Bible, then riddle me this: would you oppose lesbians marrying each other? Remember, the Bible doesn't say a ******* thing about lesbianism.

 

[Skylar]

Well thought out. Good on you.

I'd thought I would stop simply calling myself a libertarian and start acting like one. What I said was with a lot of guidance from my devoutly Christian grandmother (surprise!), who like me thinks homosexuality and gay marriage is a sin. She lived through the civil rights era down here in South, so the atmosphere was ready to explode at any moment back then. Heck she got caught in a riot once. As a result she never wants to see that kind of atmosphere again; with that in mind she gave me some advice:

She told me that homosexuals should never be mistreated, and despite her view on their lifestyle she told me that they deserve the same rights under the law that she and I enjoy. So long as there's a mutual respect, people should just leave each other alone. That pretty much nailed it.

It took me the better part of a decade to reach this position. I was a die hard neo-conservative in 2007, I thought gays should be excised from the earth, who were a disease that deserved no dignity nor equality (yeah, that was the mind of a naive 20 year old just two years removed from High School). But, all I am now is a simple libertarian.

Be it known, I will openly challenge attacks on gay rights with the same fervor I do with my other arguments, my belief in limited government dictates that I do just that. If people don't want government in their lives, they shouldn't use government to dictate the lives of others.

If your religion thinks homosexuality is wrong then let God handle it in his own way

He doesn't need your help

Good point.

God is handling it by expecting that those he created are intelligent enough to govern themselves according to the laws of reason he established, which govern human behavior. Such as demonstrated by the laws that respect the natural standard of Marriage... and the civil war which will come should the last vestige of judicial prudence, fail to sustain those laws.

There are no 'natural standards of marriage', as there is no marriage in nature. There's ******* in nature. But we invented marriage. And it is whatever we say it is.

And unless you forgot, the judiciary is part of our system of governance.

Sigh....do you have anything to your argument that isn't an appeal to authority fallacy?

 

[rightwinger]

Well thought out. Good on you.

I'd thought I would stop simply calling myself a libertarian and start acting like one. What I said was with a lot of guidance from my devoutly Christian grandmother (surprise!), who like me thinks homosexuality and gay marriage is a sin. She lived through the civil rights era down here in South, so the atmosphere was ready to explode at any moment back then. Heck she got caught in a riot once. As a result she never wants to see that kind of atmosphere again; with that in mind she gave me some advice:

She told me that homosexuals should never be mistreated, and despite her view on their lifestyle she told me that they deserve the same rights under the law that she and I enjoy. So long as there's a mutual respect, people should just leave each other alone. That pretty much nailed it.

It took me the better part of a decade to reach this position. I was a die hard neo-conservative in 2007, I thought gays should be excised from the earth, who were a disease that deserved no dignity nor equality (yeah, that was the mind of a naive 20 year old just two years removed from High School). But, all I am now is a simple libertarian.

Be it known, I will openly challenge attacks on gay rights with the same fervor I do with my other arguments, my belief in limited government dictates that I do just that. If people don't want government in their lives, they shouldn't use government to dictate the lives of others.

If your religion thinks homosexuality is wrong then let God handle it in his own way

He doesn't need your help

Good point.

God is handling it by expecting that those he created are intelligent enough to govern themselves according to the laws of reason he established, which govern human behavior. Such as demonstrated by the laws that respect the natural standard of Marriage... and the civil war which will come should the last vestige of judicial prudence, fail to sustain those laws.

Doesn't seem like he is handling it....seems like a bunch of bigots are handling it

If God objects, he is more than capable of handling it. If he does nothing and allows gay marriage throughout the land....looks like he doesn't mind

 

[Skylar]

So you're demanding that not all sexual deviants be judged by the behavior of sexual deviants?

Would I judge all Republicans simply on the asinine reasoning you're using here today?

Well you could, but that would establish in you, an irrationally high expectation of all Republicans.

Not particularly. You're a one trick pony. You use the Appeal to Authority fallacy almost exclusively. The only thing you change up is which 'authority' you pretend to speak for. Sometimes its 'nature', sometimes you claim to speak for 'science', sometimes its 'god', or 'objective morality'. There's nothing else to you.

When your first, last and only argument is a fallacy of logic, those expectations aren't set high.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

There are no 'natural standards of marriage'...

So you're assuring the Reader, that Nature did not design humanity with two distinct, but complimenting genders, wherein the respective genders were specifically designed for coital union, as a function of the biological imperative to perpetuate the species, wherein the male sexual organs penetrate the female sexual organs... forming one body from two... through which conception is promoted... the consequences of which cause the female to become physically compromised, which is offset by the complimenting traits of the male to tend to her sustenance and security pre-natal and post-natal he trains along side the nurturing female, until such time that the child matures, establishing them self as a productive member of society... OKA: THE NUCLEUS OF CIVILIZATION.

(Reader... I am certain that if you check, you'll find the above contributor's assertion to be false, and an example of the most profound deceit. But if you find her to be correct, you should know that you too, are delusional, suffering from a 180 degree deviation from normal human reasoning. And should seek medical care, immediately.)