|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 02/03/2010 : 08:55:34 [Permalink]
|
Typical liberal stance. The populace is to stupid and ignorant to take care of themselves so we will ram what we think is best for them down their throats for their own good. The folks have little concern for man made global warming climate change yet the liberals insist on ramming their agenda through anyway. The folks reject gay marriage yet the liberals insist and ramming it though anyway. Etc... Etc...
|
My gods, the hypocrisy is staggering. Here's a few names that might ring a bell along the lines of forcing shit through: Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Bush, and Ford is in there somewhere but he was not much more than a chair-warmer and scumbag-pardoner. These are the assholes that, along with their Congressional lickspittles all but bankrupted the country with their asinine programs, and you are whining about Obama and gay marriage? Yeesh!
But tell me, Bill, how does same gender marriage have an effect on you? Why should you care? Are you worried that you might get an invitation to a gay bachelor's party?
Even if we are not contributing to climate change (we most certainly are!) what's wrong with cleaning a little of the smuch out of our world? Are you invested in coal and you hate green electricity projects? Do you think that methane bubbling up from a thawing permafrost is really neat 'cause you can light it on fire?
Do you think of dumping trash in the oceans as a team sport?
Hey, I'm 70 and if you find anyone more liberal than I, tell it to Ripley.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
 |
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 09:04:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
It can be even more dangerous to allow a liberal fringe to ram through an agenda against the will of the people just because the progressives believe they know what is best for all. At some point the will of the people must be acknowledged or they will revolt in one way or another. The latest example being Massachusetts. |
But the "liberal fringe" cannot do that. If the policy is constitutional, the "liberal fringe" can sue till they are blue in the mouth, they won't get anywhere. The fact that they have been granted their claims in multiple cases, should tell you something.
| While I would agree with the segregation thing this has no relevance to the gay marriage agneda. |
It does. It is one of the many examples where the the majority is withholding rights from a minority.
| Being able to make your own life style choices is a civil right. |
Says who?
|
Both the universal declaration of human rights and the international covenant on civil and political rights, amongst others. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 09:10:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
It can be even more dangerous to allow a liberal fringe to ram through an agenda against the will of the people just because the progressives believe they know what is best for all. |
Gee, the conservatives act in exactly the same way. That, after all, is what a representative republic is all about: electing people to lead us. Not electing people to serve the whims of the mob.| At some point the will of the people must be acknowledged or they will revolt in one way or another. The latest example being Massachusetts. |
What was revolting in Massachusetts was the Democratic candidate's lack of good campaigning. She was an idiot. The vote was not a referendum against progressive policies, no matter how much you want it to be, Bill.| While I would agree with the segregation thing this has no relevance to the gay marriage agneda. |
The "agenda" being no more than gay people wanting the same rights as straight people. Why do you think that's wrong, Bill? Why do you think it's somehow different from the civil rights denied to people of color up until the 1960s?| Being able to make your own life style choices is a civil right. |
Says who? |
Says the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 09:32:10 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
Damn straight. My morality (what's right) is mine.
Do you not believe in some things that you think are right?! |
Just more semantics from Dave as he twists my words around when he knows that I meant was that Dave believes the court's rule should be whatever Dave believes is the right one. And yes I believe the court should rule in the way as I see as right. And there in lies the impasse. Who gets to decide what is right? And it has been my history that Dave gets to decide what is right or wrong, moral or immoral, subjective or objective. At least in Dave's world he does.
| Or do you believe in some things that you think are wrong? |
I believe in slavery but not the boogie man. Slavery happened many different times over many different corners of the world. That is a fact. I also at the same time believe that it is wrong.
| "Etc... Etc..." being a shorthand for "interracial marriage," "the end of slavery," "women being allowed to vote." Yes, Bill, the existence of a bigoted majority means that civil rights have to be enforced by the government, because the bigots won't stop being bigoted all by themselves. |
Those are your words and not mine. What is with you guys and your baseless claiming that anybody who disagrees with you on anything is a racist? I have no problem with an interracial marriage between a man and a women, I have no problem with women, even black women, voting and I am sure glad the North won the civil war. You guys play the race card way to much, even to the point where it loses it's credibility. When you make baseless claims over and over you just get tuned out eventually.
| See, Bill, being gay isn't actually the issue. In Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that marriage is a basic civil right. By denying marriage to gay people, you're denying their civil rights as defined by our government. |
But many state governments have on the books marriage defined between a man and women only. So now you have a court who is trying to trump a states constitution as well as trump the will of the people. Hence ramming it down our throats. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:01:54 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by tomk80 |
| But the "liberal fringe" cannot do that. If the policy is constitutional, the "liberal fringe" can sue till they are blue in the mouth, they won't get anywhere. The fact that they have been granted their claims in multiple cases, should tell you something. |
It does tell me something. Many states constitutions define marriage as between a man and a women. All the states who brought gay marriage to a vote have rejected gay marriage. So the gay marriage activists who continue to push this agenda see no other way to force this on the will of the people then to try and ram it through the courts.
And what this all tells me is that showdowns are inevitable between states and the courts. The many are and will grow tired of the few forcing their agenda on the many and eventually the many are going to revolt in one way or another. Just look at what happens when they try and force obamacare on the masses against their will. You get a social conservative in Teddy's seat. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:04:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Paulos23
What is different about interracial marriage compared to same sex marriage? Other then the sexes involved, nothing.
|
The difference is that a interracial man and women couple can produce children while a homosexual couple, interracial or not, cannot. Therefore a homosexual society cannot sustain itself, without heterosexual interaction, and any homosexual society will have vanished after one generation. So as you can see homosexuality leads to the death of a society while heterosexuality remains the only means by which a society cannot only advance, but sustain itself. The only way a society continues is through heterosexual relationships. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:08:44 [Permalink]
|
The Military will eventually come to accept gay's as they are, not as others falsely paints them. Could they change and accept gay's sooner than some think? Only time will tell. Oh look, can this be an indicator of the military changing soon than later. I hope so.
Gay's will not be accepted in the military, say's who?. SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:20:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Originally posted by Paulos23
What is different about interracial marriage compared to same sex marriage? Other then the sexes involved, nothing.
|
The difference is that a interracial man and women couple can produce children while a homosexual couple, interracial or not, cannot. Therefore a homosexual society cannot sustain itself, without heterosexual interaction, and any homosexual society will have vanished after one generation. So as you can see homosexuality leads to the death of a society while heterosexuality remains the only means by which a society cannot only advance, but sustain itself. The only way a society continues is through heterosexual relationships.
|
I have no idea where you could have come up with the "homosexual society" riff. There has never been such and I think I can safely predict that there never will -- if for no other reason that homosexuals represent such a small population world wide that it's impossible to form one beyond an isolated community. The very thought is ridiculous.
Bill, if you need some Lithium, I can spare some....
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
 Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:22:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Originally posted by Paulos23
What is different about interracial marriage compared to same sex marriage? Other then the sexes involved, nothing.
|
The difference is that a interracial man and women couple can produce children while a homosexual couple, interracial or not, cannot. Therefore a homosexual society cannot sustain itself, without heterosexual interaction, and any homosexual society will have vanished after one generation. So as you can see homosexuality leads to the death of a society while heterosexuality remains the only means by which a society cannot only advance, but sustain itself. The only way a society continues is through heterosexual relationships.
|
Ergo allowing homosexual marriage as well as heterosexual marriage will mean the death of society.
Ergo a heterosexual couple unable or unwilling to re-produce should not be allowed to marry.
Correct? |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:35:14 [Permalink]
|
| This thread is all over the place. Marriage has nothing to do with reproducing or survival of society. Older people and others who have no interest in having children choose to get married. What is marriage about? Ask anyone who has been divorced, it's about property rights. Allowing gay's the same right, the same life style choice, to marry as other people cannot cause the birthrate to change, in either direction. Please explain how it can, bill. That argument is a re herring, unless you an explain that how it's true. SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:36:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
|
| have no idea where you could have come up with the "homosexual society" riff. There has never been such and I think I can safely predict that there never will -- if for no other reason that homosexuals represent such a small population |
Or they cannot reproduce. Thus whether you claim to be a naturalist or not, the fact remains that either God concluded, or natural selection selected, heterosexuality to be the base of society and the only means to proliferate life. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:37:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
The difference is that a interracial man and women couple can produce children while a homosexual couple, interracial or not, cannot. Therefore a homosexual society cannot sustain itself, without heterosexual interaction, and any homosexual society will have vanished after one generation. So as you can see homosexuality leads to the death of a society while heterosexuality remains the only means by which a society cannot only advance, but sustain itself. The only way a society continues is through heterosexual relationships.
|
Did you even read what you wrote before posting it? Nobody is advocating a "homosexual society" and given that homosexuals comprise between 5 and 10% of the population, there will never be one unless they all get together decide to get together and form a state (with lots of fashion and 70's music no doubt).
What is argued for is allowing marriage for homosexuals. At worst, this will lead to a state where 10% of the marriages will not get children of their own, but rather have no children, adopt children or have children through a donor. If sustaining a population is your concern, the only thing we'll have to do is make sure that the remaining 90% of the population fuck a bit harder without using anticonception.
They don't have to fuck that hard either. For a stable population you'd need 2 kids per family. Assume 10% homosexuals without kids and you'll need 2.11 kids per family. In other words, 20% of your population will need to fuck hard enough to get a third kid. Don't tell me your quiverfull friends aren't up to that task. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:39:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by pleco
Originally posted by Bill scott
Originally posted by Paulos23
What is different about interracial marriage compared to same sex marriage? Other then the sexes involved, nothing.
|
The difference is that a interracial man and women couple can produce children while a homosexual couple, interracial or not, cannot. Therefore a homosexual society cannot sustain itself, without heterosexual interaction, and any homosexual society will have vanished after one generation. So as you can see homosexuality leads to the death of a society while heterosexuality remains the only means by which a society cannot only advance, but sustain itself. The only way a society continues is through heterosexual relationships.
|
Ergo allowing homosexual marriage as well as heterosexual marriage will mean the death of society.
Ergo a heterosexual couple unable or unwilling to re-produce should not be allowed to marry.
Correct?
|
The biggest difference between interracial marriage and same sex marriage, other then the sexes, is the fact that homosexuals cannot produce children. Correct? |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:42:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Or they cannot reproduce. Thus whether you claim to be a naturalist or not, the fact remains that either God concluded, or natural selection selected, heterosexuality to be the base of society and the only means to proliferate life.
|
And? I'm trying to see an argument against homosexual marriage here but I can't find it.
It's an ideal argument in favor of promiscuousness though. I'm going to the local swinger's club tonight. It's sanctioned by God! |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 10:43:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tomk80
Originally posted by Bill scott
The difference is that a interracial man and women couple can produce children while a homosexual couple, interracial or not, cannot. Therefore a homosexual society cannot sustain itself, without heterosexual interaction, and any homosexual society will have vanished after one generation. So as you can see homosexuality leads to the death of a society while heterosexuality remains the only means by which a society cannot only advance, but sustain itself. The only way a society continues is through heterosexual relationships.
|
Did you even read what you wrote before posting it? Nobody is advocating a "homosexual society" and given that homosexuals comprise between 5 and 10% of the population, there will never be one unless they all get together decide to get together and form a state (with lots of fashion and 70's music no doubt).
What is argued for is allowing marriage for homosexuals. At worst, this will lead to a state where 10% of the marriages will not get children of their own, but rather have no children, adopt children or have children through a donor. If sustaining a population is your concern, the only thing we'll have to do is make sure that the remaining 90% of the population fuck a bit harder without using anticonception.
They don't have to fuck that hard either. For a stable population you'd need 2 kids per family. Assume 10% homosexuals without kids and you'll need 2.11 kids per family. In other words, 20% of your population will need to fuck hard enough to get a third kid. Don't tell me your quiverfull friends aren't up to that task.
|
| and given that homosexuals comprise between 5 and 10% of the population |
Umm, not here they don't. Maybe in the places where you hang out. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Deceiving in the name of Jesus, again
