Gay Marriages

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by Anonymouse Furthermore, my objection to granting them marriage is purely on moral grounds.

Okay. Produce an argument that homosexuality is immoral.

[SexyAries]

There is no argument! Homosexuality is only immoral for those who believe it to be! Its all about choice, A person chooses there own morals, there is no one person that chooses morals for everyone! Morals are like decisions and choices, they are yours and no one else's! Something that is moraly wrong in my book can not be in someone else's book and vise versa.


I know this was directed to Anon but I just wanted to give my point of view. Sorry Lose, Anon if i got on your nerves by answering!

[PASAMONSTER]

Ok i don't have a problem with being gay and xxxx, but when it comes to the hollyness of marriage. the union of two souls in holly matrimony. I say give me a shot gun. NO is my vote.

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by SexyAries There is no argument! Homosexuality is only immoral for those who believe it to be! Its all about choice, A person chooses there own morals, there is no one person that chooses morals for everyone! Morals are like decisions and choices, they are yours and no one else's! Something that is moraly wrong in my book can not be in someone else's book and vise versa.


I know this was directed to Anon but I just wanted to give my point of view. Sorry Lose, Anon if i got on your nerves by answering!

Well, don't worry my nerves are made of steel. But yea, you're right. People choose their own morals. My morals involve killing. So if I kill you or one of your family members am I morally right?

[PASAMONSTER]

Anon me and you might have different political views, but we have the same morals.

Gay people been around since ages, so cool I accept that, and let them be aound.

But when they come out and want their own rights and privilages and stuff, thats the straw that broke the camels back.

gay is made to stay in the closet, hidden away in the darks of society. NO ON GAY MARRIAGE.

[Anonymouse]

What are you talking about?

I was trying to show Aries that her moral relativism would imply that killing is okay if my morals involved killing.

[anileve]

Originally posted by PASAMONSTER
gay is made to stay in the closet, hidden away in the darks of society. NO ON GAY MARRIAGE.

You know what I don’t comprehend? How can one be homophobic and enjoy watching or playing football? That is as intimate of male bonding as it can get, but for some reason it is considered very heterosexually manly.

Now in terms of Gays, the reason why we believe that homosexuality is immoral is simply because of a biblical impact on our ethics. If one to believe that the spiritual side of the individual exists and after the termination of the physical state the soul “elevates” to heaven, than a soul cannot have a gender for it has no physical traits to make the assumption. So than the physical level is only the layer of the “gender-less” core, which means that two people can be in love with each other regardless of their gender for it is the soul that we fall in love with. Thus the idea of morality conflicts with itself.

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by Anonymouse What are you talking about?

I was trying to show Aries that her moral relativism would imply that killing is okay if my morals involved killing.

Meanwhile, you ignore my arguments that don't involve ethical relativism. You still have not produced any reason to believe that homosexuality is immoral. Do so, and I will shoot it down.

[Anonymouse]

For the purposes of this thread, I am not using the Bible, God, or Jesus for this argument because of the assumption among the "tolerant liberals" that somehow all arguments against homosexuality are "Biblical".

With that said, it serves no purpose other than perversion, therefore is negative and not in accordance with morality. The world is simple it revolves around right and wrong. The homosexuals' "love" each other argument is shady, since they are the most prolific bunch hence why diseases spread faster in them, than anyone else. And from this homosexuality has been equated to an end in itself, with nothing but perverted lust for hedonistic ends. Such perversions that are to be accepted as "normal" and condoned is silly at best. Understanding and tolerating someone and their behavior, is quite different from labeling his lifestyle as "normal". While I understand pedophiles may themselves have suffered abuse as kids, it doesn't give their perversion any more validity. While such perversions may be human psychic drives of lust and such and even animals have, but to somehow lard that as "normal" or "right" is insane and to even call that "beautiful"? The relativism eventually implies over time that anything goes as long as the majority believes it be so. And hence how in a "democracy" where we are in an endless game of "rights", even "right and wrong" concepts become a matter of majority and "tolerance".

Now this isn't to say I am about destroying them. They can do perfectly well in their privacy and whatever they want. No one is stopping them, but to have the arm of Leviathan come and legislate morality and grant officialdom to such a behavior in the form of "marriage" and "tax break" and "love", is horsepucky. The State itself should never have gotten rights to grant anyone marriage, not even heterosexuals. The State itself is conflicting with morality. They State shouldn't even tax us to begin with. The State and morality do not coincide.

Thus what you are arguing for is the State to step in and grant them their "rights". Such thinking presumes that only the State can give you "rights" and you yourself have no inherent rights. The State is an articial entity, and man was a free agent to do as he willed even prior to the formation of the State. And knowing you will "shoot this down" I will end my participation in this thread. No matter how many times the State "legalizes" their marriage, no matter how many posts insist it is "okay", it doesn't change the fact that such behavior is against all moral codes that have existed in human civilizations. Only with moral relativism can this be "okay". Thus you contradict your previous position of aggreeing that morality is objective. I have nothing more to add to this.

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by Anonymouse For the purposes of this thread, I am not using the Bible, God, or Jesus for this argument because of the assumption among the "tolerant liberals" that somehow all arguments against homosexuality are "Biblical".

I am not tolerant, I am not liberal, and I never said that.

With that said, it serves no purpose other than perversion, therefore is negative and not in accordance with morality.

Loving another human being is perverse? You're acting like all homosexuals do is screw each other and spread disease. Some do, some don't. Same thing with heterosexuals. The only reason diseases have a tendency to spread more rapidly through the homosexual community is that diseases are more readily spread through anal sex.

The homosexuals' "love" each other argument is shady, since they are the most prolific bunch hence why diseases spread faster in them, than anyone else.

So couples that stick with each other through thick and thin, remain monogamous, and support each other for many years do not love each other?

And from this homosexuality has been equated to an end in itself, with nothing but perverted lust for hedonistic ends.

That just simply does not hold up. I dare you to produce any evidence that homosexuals have any more of a tendency to engage in sexual acts for no purpose other than pleasure than do heterosexuals. Even if you do, what is wrong with that? Are all acts that bring nothing but physical pleasure wrong? Wouldn't this include the smoking of marijuana?

Such perversions that are to be accepted as "normal" and condoned is silly at best.

That statement is beyond silly. Homosexuality is quite common and is not confined to human beings. There is no good reason to believe that it is unnatural, much less abnormal.

While I understand pedophiles may themselves have suffered abuse as kids, it doesn't give their perversion any more validity.

What does pedophilia have to do with it? Homosexuality is not a perversion. Certain fetishes can be considered perverse, and most certain pedophilia is one of these, but homosexuality is not even a fetish. It is a gender preference.

And hence how in a "democracy" where we are in an endless game of "rights", even "right and wrong" concepts become a matter of majority and "tolerance".

Exactly. This is the tyranny of majority rule. The majority of Americans, including yourself, believe fallaciously that homosexualty is immoral, and because of this, homosexuals are deprived of their natural right to consumate their love in marriage.

Thus what you are arguing for is the State to step in and grant them their "rights". Such thinking presumes that only the State can give you "rights" and you yourself have no inherent rights.

That isn't what I'm arguing at all. I'm arguing that homosexuals have the natural right to consumate their love for each other in the act of marriage. The state cannot grant this right, as it is a natural right. The state can only take this right away, which is exactly what has been done. That is wrong.

Only with moral relativism can this be "okay". Thus you contradict your previous position of aggreeing that morality is objective. I have nothing more to add to this.

Whatcha talking about, Mousy? Homosexuality is objectively right. This has nothing to do with the state making it right, as I pointed out above.