ben. Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 Well put, Max. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 Yeah Max, just look what you started! It is interesting and a bit disturbing to see how much "tolerance" we as a society seem to have for lowering the bar of acceptable behaviors. Some things that used to be taboo are now common. But not all taboos are taboo for the same reasons, eh? Mixed-race marriage was only looked down upon through ignorance and blatant racism. Such is not the case with homo-sexuality. Rather, it is and has always been wrong because God said it was wrong. It's not even natural, for crying out loud! And as for comparing sin, (adultery vs. homosexuality) you are right; we have become tolerant, even apathetic towards divorce, but this was not the case just a few decades ago. So, in my opinion, there is a downward spiral effect. Everything that becomes accepted just lowers our defense for the next thing to be promoted as OK, or even good. I would never have dreamed twenty years ago that I'd be seeing things that are going on today. And though, you may not think pedophilia would ever become accepted, I think you are wrong. I think there is no limit to the depravity that man is capable of, or to his ability to rationalize and excuse his own behavior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluless Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 hmmm...kinda reminds me about something....OH YEAH. Seperation of Church and State. Interesting concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 The original idea behind separation of church and state was to restrict the state from mandating a national religion, forcing you to be a member of the Church of England, for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 Exactly, Paul. The spirit of that document is being twisted and perverted in ways the writers could scarcely have imagined. It's ironic that our freedom of speech in this country is being abused and misused by those who want to promote and market every imaginable form of pornography, while the same people would use "separation of church and state" as a manifesto to exclude even the least aknowledgment of God from any public forum or venue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 I would prefer that On 3/1/2004 3:36:47 PM James D McCall would have written: Yeah Max, just look what you started! It is interesting and a bit disturbing to see how much "tolerance" we as a society seem to have for lowering the bar of acceptable behaviors. Some things that used to be taboo are now common. But not all taboos are taboo for the same reasons, eh? Same sex marriage is only looked down upon through ignorance and blatant bigotry. This is the case with homo-sexuality. Rather, some think it is and has always been wrong because God said it was wrong. It's even natural, for crying out loud! And as for comparing sin, (adultery vs. homosexuality) you are right; we have become tolerant, even understanding towards divorce, but this was not the case just a few decades ago when many women would endure years of abuse to avoid being ostracized. So, in my opinion, there is a downward spiral effect. Everything that becomes accepted just lowers our defense for the next thing to be promoted as OK, or even good. I would never have dreamed twenty years ago that I'd be seeing things that are going on today. I thought I would go blind from impure thoughts first! And though, you may not think audiophile nervosa would ever become accepted, I think you are wrong. I think there is no limit to the depravity that man is capable of, or to his ability to rationalize and excuse his own behavior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 Am I the only one finding it ironic that the champion for decency here is someone with a dog's bunghole made into a face as his avatar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 The problem with "marriage" (ISFAISI) (uh, in so far as I see it) is that there are certain issues that are clearly not religious that are impacted by whether one exists in a married state or not. For example, income taxes. The rules by which a couple are taxed depend very much upon whether or not they are "legally married". If two gay people cohabitate, and contractually agree to the same legal stipulations regarding joint income and liability, shouldn't they be taxed the same way a married couple would be taxed? Also, what about medical rights - if someone in a monogomous gay relationship is injured and unable to direct treatment, shouldn't their partner have the same right to instruct the doctors in what to do that a husband or wife would have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 ---------------- On 3/1/2004 4:59:17 PM bclarke421 wrote: I would prefer that On 3/1/2004 3:36:47 PM James D McCall would have written: ---------------- Why don't you stick to writing your own posts and let others write their own. Unless you've graduated to king of the world and we weren't informed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 Graduated? I thought I had been demoted from the position of God. Seriously, though, it was obviously a device intended to amuse. Oh yes, that's right. You have no personality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 Now that's a funny post all the way around, even your lame insult. But the reason I didn't think the other one was humorous was because it wasn't funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 Lame insult? OK, here's a better one. I found a picture from your prom night. If you weren't such a flaming as$hole, I'd have gone home from work earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 More nonsense from you: That was *not* prom night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 I Seem to have struck a nerve here, Mr. Clarke. I'm just stating my beliefs - in my own words, I might add, though I don't really mind you appropriating my post as long as you are obvious about it, which you were. Actually, I kind of take it as a compliment, mockery being the most sincere form of flattery and all. I don't really understand the charge of bigotry being leveled at people who happen to believe homosexuality is wrong. Am I also a bigot for believing pedophilia is wrong? One definition of bigotry is being intolerant of people who believe differently than you. So perhaps you should look closer to home the next time you want to hang the bigot tag on someone. Oh, by the way, that is the dog's tail that appears to be a nose in my avatar, not his "bung hole" as you so eloquently put it. Sincerely, The "Champion of Decency" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stan krajewski Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 CNN headline - "Catholics ordered to offer birth control." Holy crap. It never ends with the left. What does this have to do with Rosie? Well, since same sex marriage is the same as any other, then how dare we not teach sex education in 3 "equal" parts, man & woman, man & man and woman & woman. Why not, we can't descriminate and besides it all fits nicely with the obsession with diversity. Yes, diversity above all, thats what will make this world a better place. Diversity rules!!! "Daddy, whats an individual"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 I really feel like we're working this out, gentlemen. I'll bet the higher-ups are watching this thread closely. Keep it up, we're close to a breakthrough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 We're no worse than the pundits on TV, not that that's saying much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodog Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 ---------------- On 3/2/2004 9:07:37 AM fini wrote: I really feel like we're working this out, gentlemen. I'll bet the higher-ups are watching this thread closely. Keep it up, we're close to a breakthrough. ---------------- the higher ups live in Massachusetts. http://www.theonion.com/news.php?i=1&n=1 woo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Good one, Woodog. What makes it funny is it's not all that inconceivable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted March 2, 2004 Author Share Posted March 2, 2004 "I don't really understand the charge of bigotry being leveled at people who happen to believe homosexuality is wrong. Am I also a bigot for believing pedophilia is wrong?" Interesting question James. The trouble is that these kind of justifications have been used before most notably with the words purity and German people...and there were rather unpleasant results from that one. Maybe bigot is the wrong word. (Bigot - a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices). Hell I dont know you choose. Prejudiced seems to fit the bill. (2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics.) Of course wrong is an emotive word on its own - and a lot will depend on whether you have any intention of acting on these feelings of wrongness on the part of others. I imagine, given the religious nature of some of your arguments that you also feel Jews are wrong, as are Moslems, buddists, Hindus etc. - not to mention all others beleivering in different flavours of Christianity from you (Mormons, Catholics, Christian Scientists, Protestants, - I dont know which sect you belong to). The thing is that they feel much as you do but with reversed positions. This is how religious wars start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.