Poll

What are your views on homosexuals and/or letting them wed?

I accept them.
51 (66.2%)
I tolerate them.
6 (7.8%)
It's flat out wrong.
7 (9.1%)
I don't really care.
9 (11.7%)
I have mixed views. (Describe)
4 (5.2%)

Total Members Voted: 77

Print

Author Topic: Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage  (Read 274920 times)

« Reply #180 on: May 02, 2009, 02:59:51 PM »
No, I was saying what was considered "blasphemous" then isn't now, because our understanding of the world has significantly changed. So why shouldn't our understanding of homosexuality change as well? And don't respond with the cheap "well then rape and [long list of taboos] will have to be condoned also."
« Last Edit: May 02, 2009, 03:03:08 PM by NintendoExpert89 »

Turtlekid1

  • Tortuga
« Reply #181 on: May 02, 2009, 03:01:35 PM »
And I was saying that the rules don't change because our understanding of the world does.
"It'll say life is sacred and so is death
but death is life and so we move on"

The Chef

  • Super
« Reply #182 on: May 02, 2009, 04:41:37 PM »
According to your religion.

According to the rest of us, it does. Now quit acting like you're right by default, friggin' Bible-belter. |:\

CrossEyed7

  • i can make this whatever i want; you're not my dad
« Reply #183 on: May 02, 2009, 05:13:08 PM »
There's not really anywhere in the Bible that says homosexuality is a sin.
Quote from: Leviticus 18:25
Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
Turtlekid1, Leviticus also says not to eat shellfish and/or pork...do you take that seriously?
The difference being that God specifically told Peter to do otherwise later on.
(long rant that assumes the Bible is not divinely inspired)
The rules don't change because our understanding of the world does.
According to your religion.

According to the rest of us, it does. Now quit acting like you're right by default, friggin' Bible-belter. |:\
Quote from: Wikipedia
Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an argument where its conclusion does not follow from its premises.

Summary: Weegee, Turtlekid, and PL were debating whether or not the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. NE89 says that the Bible shouldn't guide morals because of an unstated, unsupported assumption that neither Weegee nor Turtlekid (nor PL, until a few days ago) hold. Turtlekid essentially says as much, and Chef says that Turtlekid needs to STFU about the Bible and stop assuming things.

Am I the only one who sees this?

I don't like this board very much.
"Oh man, I wish being a part of a Mario fan community was the most embarrassing thing about my life." - Super-Jesse

« Reply #184 on: May 02, 2009, 06:26:25 PM »
No, I see it too but I tend to keep quiet.
ROM hacking with a slice of life.

« Reply #185 on: May 02, 2009, 07:04:18 PM »
As much as I disagree with him, I have to commend Turtlekid1. He sticks firm to his beliefs and is basically arguing against the entire board.

He's even arguing against some Christians too, and he's not resorting to name calling.

Luigison: Question everything!
Me: Why?

« Reply #186 on: May 02, 2009, 07:44:51 PM »
Definite "sin". One person's morals may not be the same as another's.

Claiming that goodness and truth are subjective is something that anyone with a functional conscience should absolutely abhor.
YYur  waYur n beYur you Yur plusYur instYur an Yur Yur whaYur

The Chef

  • Super
« Reply #187 on: May 02, 2009, 07:47:00 PM »
"Goodness" and "truth" are such vague concepts it's kinda hard to abhor anything.

Glorb

  • Banned
« Reply #188 on: May 02, 2009, 07:50:53 PM »
Using advanced chemistry, I have distilled this entire board into this:

Person: The  bible is wrong about (X) thing.
Turtlekid: No, the bible is right because (X).
Person 2: No, that's wrong because there's no proof.
Turtlekid: No, because the bible is always right.
Person 3: The bible also condoned (X).
Turtlekid: There's no proof.
People 1-3: JUST HAVE MY OPINIONS ALREADY
every

« Reply #189 on: May 02, 2009, 08:07:05 PM »
"Truth" is probably objective.

"Goodness" is definitely subjective.

Chupperson Weird

  • Not interested.
« Reply #190 on: May 02, 2009, 09:41:55 PM »
The problem here is that neither side of this argument puts forth anywhere near a convincing debate. Furthermore, as we all know, Turtlekid is not going to even consider reading opposing posts with even a hint of consideration, so what real point is there in having a debate? Some people think they are automatically right and do not grasp the concept of new knowledge, so what's the point?
That was a joke.

« Reply #191 on: May 02, 2009, 09:45:45 PM »
Turtlekid is simply standing for what he knows to be true, and for that I commend him as well.
YYur  waYur n beYur you Yur plusYur instYur an Yur Yur whaYur

Turtlekid1

  • Tortuga
« Reply #192 on: May 02, 2009, 09:47:37 PM »
No one is having a debate to have their views changed.  They're having a debate to uphold their existing beliefs.
"It'll say life is sacred and so is death
but death is life and so we move on"

ShadowBrain

  • Ridiculously relevant
« Reply #193 on: May 02, 2009, 10:26:08 PM »
The problem here is that neither side of this argument puts forth anywhere near a convincing debate.
If they could, this argument would've ended about 2000 years ago.
"Mario is your oyster." ~The Chef

« Reply #194 on: May 03, 2009, 02:19:13 PM »
I'm not gay, but this is part of the reason I became atheist. The Bible condemns things that cannot be helped, such as homosexuality. Things weren't understood as well back then.

Print