Print

Author Topic: You Rage (or Lose Faith in Humanity), You Lose  (Read 149851 times)

« Reply #90 on: June 26, 2011, 02:18:37 AM »
How is trying to show someone a better way akin to "forsaking" them?
YYur  waYur n beYur you Yur plusYur instYur an Yur Yur whaYur

BP

  • Beside Pacific
« Reply #91 on: June 26, 2011, 02:40:47 AM »
Hah... I guess it isn't, if you turn a blind eye to how sexuality is linked more to biology than environment
All your dreeeeeeams begiiin to shatterrrrrr~
It's YOUR problem!

Turtlekid1

  • Tortuga
« Reply #92 on: June 26, 2011, 11:37:44 AM »
I thought you said it wasn't?

My point still stands. Isn't divorce a bigger blow against the sanctity of marriage than gay marriage is? Isn't burning a house down worse than calling a garage a house?
I said it wasn't in the same way.  That is, while divorce happens way too much in today's society, you'll still have people on both sides of the fence admitting it's an ugly thing to deal with.  And again, you don't have a massive movement pushing for it to be legal, which brings me to the point (again) where I say that divorce is legal for a reason, and that there is an exception to the rule for divorce, where no such exception exists for homosexuality.  As for which is "more" wrong and why, that's something you'll have to take up with God, I suppose.  But even if divorce is a much worse insult to marriage, it doesn't mean we can afford to ignore the debate regarding homosexuality.

We can keep calling everything into question whether God exists or not. The only difference is that if God does exist, you can bring authority into it, but then all it takes to equalize them is to question authority. Where does God get his authority? Why should I respect his authority?
Because it would be wrong not to.  If that reason isn't good enough - if something's being inherently right isn't good enough reason to do it - then I wonder if any reason is.  I dunno, I guess that reason is plain as day to me whereas I'm still struggling to find a logical reason to take "moral" action from an atheistic standpoint unless it would somehow benefit me.

Anyway. If you're telling me that the only reason that you ever hold a door open for someone on your way out of the gas station, that the only reason you ever save the last slice of cake for your friend even when you really want to take it and they wouldn't mind if you did, that the only reason you ever help somebody who looks lost, is because you're offered a reward when you die... that's a miserable, pitiable life.
Don't remember saying anything - at all -  about being offered a reward (mind you, saying Heaven is a reward is like saying the Grand Canyon is a crack in the ground, and to be in the presence of God for all eternity is certainly good enough incentive for me).  What I said was, I follow God's law because it's right.  Not because of a threat, or because of a bribe, but because that's what's right.

On the other hand, if Christian mythology is real, I'm already going to Hell not because I'm a bad person, but simply because I don't believe in God. If there is a God and He doesn't like that I'm good to people because they're people like me and not because I believe something terrible will happen if I don't, or if He creates gay people as target practice that I am expected to automatically find repulsive or try to change, He can suck my mortal dick. Through fire and brimstone I will not forsake my fellow human even if paradise awaits me if I do.

Take that, God. I'm a nicer guy than you.
No, it's pretty much that you're a bad person.  Like, not "you" specifically, but "you" generally.  Everyone is a bad person by default.  It's just that not believing in God coincides with not recognizing one's own sinful nature (something about correlation and causation here).  You're making God out to be some sort of merciless pagan deity who just takes potshots at people and sends everyone to Hell for the lulz, when if you read the Bible you know that God gave us fair warning to not disobey.  You can't take an action for which you know the consequences and then complain the consequences aren't fair.  I hardly think God is a jerk for doing exactly what he said he would and then even being so merciful as to let us off the hook for confessing what we did wrong and repenting.

He likes that you're good to people, and he likes that you're selflessly good to people, but that doesn't mean He expects you to be unconditionally supportive of everything they do.  Are you being bad to someone if you see them doing something evil and tell them "that's not cool"?  Being good to people doesn't mean that you approve of their actions if their actions are wrong.  Rather, if you really love someone, then you're going to try to help them see where they're wrong if they're wrong.  You seem to be under the impression that the only choices are "it's all good, let homosexuals marry whomever they want" and "kill all dem eeeevil gays."

Why did God create homosexuals?  This is really getting to the age-old problem of evil.   Why did God make sin if he's not okay with it, right?  Well, I guess what I usually answer with is "He made us knowing we would sin, but He's not the one who committed the sin, so we're still the ones to blame."  He didn't create gay people for "target practice," but why He did create them is irrelevant because it's what we do now that matters.

(Just a thought - maybe He made them that way so they could learn to overcome temptation.  If you've ever had something sucky happen to you and conquered it then you know where I'm coming from - overcoming a situation like that makes you a better person for the experience.)

Hah... I guess it isn't, if you turn a blind eye to how sexuality is linked more to biology than environment
I'm honestly not sure why this matters in relation to Weegee's question.
"It'll say life is sacred and so is death
but death is life and so we move on"

BP

  • Beside Pacific
« Reply #93 on: June 26, 2011, 02:10:48 PM »
I'm honestly not sure why this matters in relation to Weegee's question.
Trying to change someone's qualities that cannot be changed, after convincing yourself it's bad. It's got a history and it's never helped anyone. I think instead of comparing gays to blacks we should probably be comparing them to lefties, who were feared for "being witches" and forced to become right-handed, at the lefty's expense...

(Just a thought - maybe He made them that way so they could learn to overcome temptation.  If you've ever had something sucky happen to you and conquered it then you know where I'm coming from - overcoming a situation like that makes you a better person for the experience.)
No I can't say I've ever had an epic trial where I had to overcome something about the way I was born. Especially not in any case where I had to throw away a part of myself in favor of something everybody else likes better. That sure would be a great learning experience though :U

In the end, I don't take back those very harsh words. If there's a God, and He's in control of everything, the situation at hand makes me see Him as little more than a sadist who enjoys making toys He can torture, make fight each other over absolutely stupid reasons, all before killing them. His rules are biased; when most sins and crimes are based on "that's not fair to everyone else" or "that hurts somebody else," a rule where the bad thing is "I don't like that and I'm the boss" is a [dukar]ty rule. If He appeared in my bedroom right now and demonstrated His absolute, reality-defying power to me, I would still defy Him as a crappy guy. I can't stand a person who abuses their power, deity or not.
All your dreeeeeeams begiiin to shatterrrrrr~
It's YOUR problem!

Turtlekid1

  • Tortuga
« Reply #94 on: June 26, 2011, 02:29:11 PM »
Trying to change someone's qualities that cannot be changed, after convincing yourself it's bad. It's got a history and it's never helped anyone. I think instead of comparing gays to blacks we should probably be comparing them to lefties, who were feared for "being witches" and forced to become right-handed, at the lefty's expense...
Who are you to tell a gay man he can't master his own impulses?  I'm not talking about "qualities," I'm talking about actions.

In the end, I don't take back those very harsh words. If there's a God, and He's in control of everything, the situation at hand makes me see Him as little more than a sadist who enjoys making toys He can torture, make fight each other over absolutely stupid reasons, all before killing them.
He's not torturing anyone or making them fight.  We torture and fight amongst ourselves, all by ourselves.  Then when he came and said "stop that" we tortured and killed Him, too.  Then today we have your argument that somehow even though God has shown amazing mercy to us, somehow he's the bad guy for actually punishing sins he said he would punish.

His rules are biased; when most sins and crimes are based on "that's not fair to everyone else" or "that hurts somebody else," a rule where the bad thing is "I don't like that and I'm the boss" is a [dukar]ty rule. If He appeared in my bedroom right now and demonstrated His absolute, reality-defying power to me, I would still defy Him as a crappy guy. I can't stand a person who abuses their power, deity or not.
See, you're trying to take a rule of God's which is a good principle - "abuse of power is bad" - but you're ignoring the fact that He has every right to do what He wants with his own creation, and it's not possible for Him to abuse his power considering that, y'know, He made it.  How would you feel if I looked at your art and said "it sucks, change it to what I say to change it to"?  Your reply would probably be "it's my art, I'm not doing this for you; I'm not changing anything," would it not?  So why is "I made it, I'm the boss" a valid excuse for running things your way with your creations, but when God runs things His way with His creation, suddenly it's an abuse of power?
"It'll say life is sacred and so is death
but death is life and so we move on"

Koopaslaya

  • Kansas
« Reply #95 on: June 26, 2011, 04:36:25 PM »
Churches can go **** themselves, continue being bigoted, and slowly lose their members until they decide that discriminating against their fellow man because of ancient myths might not be the best idea.

Why is it bigoted when a Church (or even a secular philosophy which appeals not to God) defends traditional one-man-one-woman marriage, but when someone in favor of homosexual "marriage" tells a Church to "**** itself" it is not?
Εὐθύνατε τὴν ὁδὸν Κυρίου

The Chef

  • Simon Cowell
« Reply #96 on: June 26, 2011, 04:59:02 PM »
That depends on what you mean by "defending" and "being in favor of".

WarpRattler

  • Paid by the word
« Reply #97 on: June 26, 2011, 05:00:57 PM »
There's a difference between
defend[ing] traditional one-man-one-woman marriage
and

discriminating against their fellow man

The Church doesn't need to defend anything here. The traditional institution of marriage between a man and a woman is not threatened in any way whatsoever by the existence of gay marriage; straight men aren't suddenly going to decide they're going to marry another man all of a sudden just because it's now legal (unless they're really invested in the idea of liking and doing things ironically).

Incidentally, an awful lot of these "it's in the Bible/God said so" arguments are awfully reminiscent of the arguments once used by American slaveowners to defend the idea of owning people as property.

Koopaslaya

  • Kansas
« Reply #98 on: June 26, 2011, 05:33:14 PM »
Defending marriage as one-man-one-woman, of necessity, means that one would object to same-sex unions to be considered marriages.

I refuse to use the "Bible says so" arguments. They are flimsy arguments at best. Because we cannot all agree that the Bible is Revelatory, we must appeal to a more common source of human understanding, reason alone. Using reason, without even making explicit any mention of the Christian God in any way, we can discern that homosexuals cannot marry. Plato decided upon this in his work, The Laws, hundreds of years before Christianity and without any exposure to Jewish virtues. It is especially dangerous to appeal to the Bible in arguments like these because it creates two "camps," religious and secular, which ought not exist for the purpose of debate. I really think that we have this mixed-up idea going on here which suggests that the only possible argument against homosexual marriage is religious. This is not the case, not should it be. Rather, Churches (and I [carelessly enough, I suppose] use this as a blanket term for Jewish and Islam groups as well) are simply pointing out that homosexual marriages are contrary to nature and that they are not perfective of the human good. Nobody is upset that the Church is against people killing other people, or that it is against genocide, or that it is against wife beating, or that it is against any number of other issues that are not "controversial."

No, not everyone who is religious is an evil gay-hater. Telling entire Churches to "**** themselves" is careless and bigoted itself. Take away the Catholic Church (to name one of many religious institutions) and you automatically take away 25% of all AIDS relief worldwide. Hurling around ad hominem attacks for the sake of rhetorical emphasis is immature and unintellectual. We would be much better off if we could stick to the topic, argue rationally, and actually critique the issues, not the people holding them. This charity in speech makes for arrival at the truth much more fruitful for all. After all, the point of an intellectual argument is not to "win," but rather it is to arrive at wisdom and correct action together.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2011, 05:37:47 PM by Koopaslaya »
Εὐθύνατε τὴν ὁδὸν Κυρίου

Turtlekid1

  • Tortuga
« Reply #99 on: June 26, 2011, 05:59:50 PM »
Defending marriage as one-man-one-woman, of necessity, means that one would object to same-sex unions to be considered marriages.
I think Warp thought that you thought that one-man-one-woman marriages in and of themselves would somehow be threatened by allowing homosexuals to marry, rather than the idea that marriage is only one man and one woman.  I guess the "as" in that statement makes a pretty big difference?
"It'll say life is sacred and so is death
but death is life and so we move on"

« Reply #100 on: June 26, 2011, 06:19:10 PM »
Using reason, without even making explicit any mention of the Christian God in any way, we can discern that homosexuals cannot marry. Plato decided upon this in his work, The Laws, hundreds of years before Christianity and without any exposure to Jewish virtues.

Um...wouldn't reason lead one to accept gay marriage?

Rather, Churches (and I [carelessly enough, I suppose] use this as a blanket term for Jewish and Islam groups as well) are simply pointing out that homosexual marriages are contrary to nature and that they are not perfective of the human good.

You're kidding right? Endless reproduction through heterosexual sex is far more harmful.

Also, what is "unnatural" anyway? Because nature encompasses all of existence. That includes man-made objects. So there is nothing "not natural" about homosexuality.

Why is it bigoted when a Church (or even a secular philosophy which appeals not to God) defends traditional one-man-one-woman marriage, but when someone in favor of homosexual "marriage" tells a Church to "**** itself" it is not?

Because gay marriage is a victimless crime, so you're baselessly denying a person equality.

Many religious people (conservative Christians namely) love to cry fowl after being told to shove it, but our so-called "discriminatory words" are justified. They're baselessly denying gay people equal rights, so we have every reason to be ****ed.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2011, 07:06:05 PM by PaperLuigi »
Luigison: Question everything!
Me: Why?

« Reply #101 on: June 26, 2011, 07:04:09 PM »
The issue brought up with homosexuals marrying that I get most surprised by is when people throw that it's unnatural because it does not lead to childbirth. What? Are we still cavemen? Do we really need to base existence on procreating? Is there no other judgment for the value of the life I live than if I do the deed with a viable female? There is plenty of things I desire to do, and while I might imagine someday having kids by some means, if I don't that should be fine. 
"We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special." Stephen Hawking

« Reply #102 on: June 26, 2011, 07:05:39 PM »
Do we really need to base existence on procreating? Is there no other judgment for the value of the life I live than if I do the deed with a viable female? There is plenty of things I desire to do, and while I might imagine someday having kids by some means, if I don't that should be fine. 

Perfectly stated.
Luigison: Question everything!
Me: Why?

BP

  • Beside Pacific
« Reply #103 on: June 26, 2011, 07:10:32 PM »
Who are you to tell a gay man he can't master his own impulses?  I'm not talking about "qualities," I'm talking about actions.
Actions that harm no one, so why force 'em to stop? Why deny 'em what they like?

Quote
He's not torturing anyone or making them fight.  We torture and fight amongst ourselves, all by ourselves. 
Then what does He control if not our actions, anything at all?

Quote
See, you're trying to take a rule of God's which is a good principle - "abuse of power is bad" - but you're ignoring the fact that He has every right to do what He wants with his own creation, and it's not possible for Him to abuse his power considering that, y'know, He made it. 
Doesn't make it right.

Quote
How would you feel if I looked at your art and said "it sucks, change it to what I say to change it to"?  Your reply would probably be "it's my art, I'm not doing this for you; I'm not changing anything," would it not?  So why is "I made it, I'm the boss" a valid excuse for running things your way with your creations, but when God runs things His way with His creation, suddenly it's an abuse of power?
I make comics. Fan comics. I do make art for you and anyone else who will give them the time of day. I would listen and consider your input.

Regardless, that's a false analogy--a closer one would be if the characters got ****ed off about what I write for them to do and say. In which case I'd probably be freaked out enough to comply.

All your dreeeeeeams begiiin to shatterrrrrr~
It's YOUR problem!

Turtlekid1

  • Tortuga
« Reply #104 on: June 26, 2011, 07:33:42 PM »
Actions that harm no one, so why force 'em to stop? Why deny 'em what they like?
Because it's wrong. 

If I may ask my own question, what is it to you if someone forces them to stop?  If I'm wrong, then it doesn't matter one way or another, so why does it bother you?  Again, I'm claiming that it's wrong because the all-powerful and all-knowing Creator of the entire universe has said that gay sex is wrong. 

You're claiming that it's not wrong... which, from an atheistic standpoint, it isn't.  Neither is genocide, or theft, or anything else.  So now we're back to the same issue from four pages ago: by what standard do you live your life and decide your morals, and what makes that standard any better than any other?

Then what does He control if not our actions, anything at all?
Depends how you define "control."  In the sense that He is in charge of everything and that nothing happens that He doesn't allow to happen, then yeah, He controls everything.  In the sense that He is some sort of cosmic puppet master, no.  We're still guilty of sin because we're still the ones who committed the sin.  Mind you, this isn't an issue that can be unraveled just like that.  Theologians debate the nature of evil and God's role in it all even today.

Doesn't make it right.
I'm still not sure how you can tell the Arbiter of everything that is right "you're not right."  You're using distorted versions of His own principles to try and tell Him He's wrong.

Regardless, that's a false analogy--a closer one would be if the characters got ****ed off about what I write for them to do and say. In which case I'd probably be freaked out enough to comply.
You're saying you would be caught unaware by something you yourself wrote the characters doing?
« Last Edit: June 26, 2011, 07:36:39 PM by Turtlekid1 »
"It'll say life is sacred and so is death
but death is life and so we move on"

Print