Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Hate the sin but love the person...except when voting?
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 106 of 391 (596983)
12-18-2010 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Panda
12-18-2010 7:16 AM


Re: No one can give a reason
Panda writes:
I agree, I wouldn't be asking what harm it does to society - but I suspect that was not what you were trying to say.
I think that eating shit is perverse - but I don't see what harm it does society.
Just to clarify...
(e.g.) Paedophilia is perverse but not harmful to society: it is harmful to individuals.
(I won't describe the actual 'harm' as I hope that is obvious.)
The 'fear of paedophilia' (often spread by newspapers) is harmful to society - but it is not perverse.
Because:
a) there are sufficient numbers of folk who've lost sight of the topic and headed down the worldview vs. worldview dead end (incl. me)
b) because our only other intercourse managed to chart a tidy course until called, ironically, off-topic.
..I'll point you back to the topic at hand - you could do worse than begin at my first response at Message 5. Take note of the sample, off the top-of-my-head reason given for my opposition to gay marriage. It might help keep the focus on the actual topic, not on my justifcation for the reason I hold as I do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Panda, posted 12-18-2010 7:16 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Panda, posted 12-18-2010 8:58 PM iano has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 107 of 391 (596985)
12-18-2010 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by crashfrog
12-18-2010 7:49 PM


Re: No one can give a reason
Crashfrog writes:
Well, if you're going to try to shape society for the benefit of others, you have a pretty substantial burden of evidence to meet that your changes actually will be beneficial for the people whose rights your trampling all over. I've not seen that you've even tried to meet that burden, you've just assumed that it's in the Bible, therefore it must be good for people.
I'm not suggesting that a prohibition on homosexual marriage would be beneficial to homosexuals.
"Rights" is a sticky wicket. Ultimately they are decided upon by society and if society doesn't grant them in the first place then they aren't being trampled over. The ball can be kicked back to an interpretation of your constitution or mine but nothing really changes since it was society that established that constitution and any rights conferred by it. If society wants to change a constitution (and so the rights conferred by it) then society can do that.
The issue in topic (in case you're unaware) is whether my acting to shape society as I see best is necessarily hating of homosexuals. I can't see how that charge can be made stick..
-
Well, no, actually, you don't. It's called the "Lemon test", and its a form of the principle of the First Amendment, which is that laws should be justified only by secular purpose, not religious justification.
The "underlying motivation" and the "means whereby object is achieved" are clearly different horses. The latter does have to utilise available society-shaping tools.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by crashfrog, posted 12-18-2010 7:49 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by crashfrog, posted 12-19-2010 12:05 AM iano has replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3713 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 108 of 391 (596988)
12-18-2010 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by iano
12-18-2010 8:04 PM


Re: No one can give a reason
iano writes:
Because:
a) there are sufficient numbers of folk who've lost sight of the topic and headed down the worldview vs. worldview dead end (incl. me)
b) because our only other intercourse managed to chart a tidy course until called, ironically, off-topic.
..I'll point you back to the topic at hand - you could do worse than begin at my first response at Message 5. Take note of the sample, off the top-of-my-head reason given for my opposition to gay marriage. It might help keep the focus on the actual topic, not on my justifcation for the reason I hold as I do.
Message 5 does not describe what harm is done to society.
You have spent far more time avoiding describing the harm caused by gay marriage than it would have taken to describe it.
I'll let everyone form their own opinion as to why that would be.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by iano, posted 12-18-2010 8:04 PM iano has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 109 of 391 (596989)
12-18-2010 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by iano
12-18-2010 6:35 PM


Re: No one can give a reason
iano writes:
It's not (necessarily) hateful to consider (and refer to) something as perverse.
Not (necessarily). What a powerful argument.
Slavery isn't (necessarily) a bad thing. Women don't (necessarily) mind being raped. Drugs aren't (necessarily) harmful.
It's probably possible to beat a gay man to death without hating him - but you'd have a hard time convincing most people that you didn't. Hateful actions don't (necessarily) indicate hate - but they usually do.

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by iano, posted 12-18-2010 6:35 PM iano has not replied

subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 110 of 391 (596990)
12-18-2010 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by iano
12-18-2010 7:28 PM


The Golden Rule
Are you trying to tell me that the only motivation I should have for attempting to shape society a particular way is for the direct effect it might have on me.
Not at all. Of course you should consider the effect it has on other people. That's part of living in a society.
Consider this: one of the foremost principals of Christianity (borrowed from countless other earlier religions) is the Golden Rule. Surely, if you are to love the sinner but hate the sin (the actual topic of the thread), following the Golden Rule would be one way to effectively accomplish that task. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Quite simple, really. So, I ask you this question: would you want others to prohibit you from marrying the person you love? Assuming your answer is no, by what right, consistent with the Golden Rule, do you presume to tell others whom they may marry?

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by iano, posted 12-18-2010 7:28 PM iano has not replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4798 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 111 of 391 (596991)
12-18-2010 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by onifre
12-14-2010 6:24 PM


oni writes:
ICDESIGN is a hypocrite who feels that only some people who sin should be loved and allowed to live and enjoy the freedom awarded to everyone else.
Excuse me there Oni but just because I use my freedom to vote against a behavior that I find offensive does not mean I hate the person committing that behavior any more than I would hate my child for committing an act I felt worthy of a spanking.
In my opinion the hypocrisy is in you telling me I don't have a right to stand against a behavior
I disagree with. Hey, if two guys want to blow each other in the privacy of their own wherever and use their outies as innies, that is their choice. I don't hate a person who engages in this behavior.
Just because I vote against calling it normal behavior doesn't mean I am against the person. Its against the behavior and that is a huge difference.
With your way of thinking you are saying the behavior IS the person so I am hating the person.
Well you are absolutely wrong on both accounts. I don't hate the person and the behavior is not the person.
I disagree with the idea that a society should put their stamp of approval on a perverted lifestyle and calling it OK and normal in the name of being politically correct.
Try running down the street with no clothes on and see how far you get. What's wrong with that? Why don't you have the right to do that? Because a society with morals made a law against it, because it is offensive to decent people, that's why!
IC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by onifre, posted 12-14-2010 6:24 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by jar, posted 12-18-2010 10:01 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 113 by subbie, posted 12-18-2010 10:06 PM ICdesign has replied
 Message 118 by bluescat48, posted 12-18-2010 11:21 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 130 by onifre, posted 12-19-2010 2:27 AM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 156 by Theodoric, posted 12-19-2010 1:16 PM ICdesign has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 112 of 391 (596992)
12-18-2010 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by ICdesign
12-18-2010 9:51 PM


Does your behavior match your words?
ICDESIGN writes:
In my opinion the hypocrisy is in you telling me I don't have a right to stand against a behavior
I disagree with. Hey, if two guys want to blow each other in the privacy of their own wherever and use their outies as innies, that is their choice. I don't hate a person who engages in this behavior.
Just because I vote against calling it normal behavior doesn't mean I am against the person. Its against the behavior and that is a huge difference.
Of course, that has nothing to do with the topic.
No one is telling you that you must consider same sex marriage as right, or normal, or approved. The only behavior under discussion is getting married. What married people do is irrelevant to the issue of whether or not they can marry.
If YOUR chapter of Club Christian does not approve of homosexual behavior, then don't behave that way.
If YOUR chapter of Club Christian does not approve of same sex marriages, then don't perform same sex marriages.
BUT in the US, your religious prejudices count for nothing.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 9:51 PM ICdesign has not replied

subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 113 of 391 (596993)
12-18-2010 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by ICdesign
12-18-2010 9:51 PM


The Golden Rule
I'll ask you the same question I asked iano.
Consider this: one of the foremost principals of Christianity (borrowed from countless other earlier religions) is the Golden Rule. Surely, if you are to love the sinner but hate the sin (the actual topic of the thread), following the Golden Rule would be one way to effectively accomplish that task. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Quite simple, really. So, I ask you this question: would you want others to prohibit you from marrying the person you love? Assuming your answer is no, by what right, consistent with the Golden Rule, do you presume to tell others whom they may marry?

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 9:51 PM ICdesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 10:32 PM subbie has replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4798 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 114 of 391 (596998)
12-18-2010 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by subbie
12-18-2010 10:06 PM


Re: The Golden Rule
subbie writes:
would you want others to prohibit you from marrying the person you love?
That is a good question that I would be glad to answer for you subbie.
Our society determined back before all this PC crap started up that it was normal and decent that marriage should be between a man and a woman. If gay people want to be in love and live together that is a choice they have a right to make. To rewrite the law and change what we as a society declare to be normal and OK is an entirely different issue.
If I am in love with my dog and live with it as a spouse that may be my right but I don't have a right to ask society to call it normal and give me a thumbs up.
I say we have already drawn the line in the sand about what is normal and decent and there is no need to change it.
Ic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by subbie, posted 12-18-2010 10:06 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by subbie, posted 12-18-2010 10:34 PM ICdesign has replied
 Message 116 by DrJones*, posted 12-18-2010 10:40 PM ICdesign has replied
 Message 117 by jar, posted 12-18-2010 10:45 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 119 by crashfrog, posted 12-18-2010 11:55 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 157 by Theodoric, posted 12-19-2010 1:17 PM ICdesign has not replied

subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 115 of 391 (596999)
12-18-2010 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by ICdesign
12-18-2010 10:32 PM


Re: The Golden Rule
subbie writes:
would you want others to prohibit you from marrying the person you love?
ICDESIGN writes:
That is a good question that I would be glad to answer for you subbie.
Then why didn't you?

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 10:32 PM ICdesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 11:56 PM subbie has replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 116 of 391 (597001)
12-18-2010 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by ICdesign
12-18-2010 10:32 PM


Re: The Golden Rule
I say we have already drawn the line in the sand about what is normal and decent and there is no need to change it
Right, like when we held the line against interracial marriage.

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 10:32 PM ICdesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by ICdesign, posted 12-19-2010 12:03 AM DrJones* has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 117 of 391 (597003)
12-18-2010 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by ICdesign
12-18-2010 10:32 PM


Re: The Golden Rule
ICDESIGN writes:
If I am in love with my dog and live with it as a spouse that may be my right but I don't have a right to ask society to call it normal and give me a thumbs up.
And no one has said you cannot do that or that anyone else should deem it as normal.
But that is also irrelevant to the discussion.
If and when that topic comes up we can see what the law says.
But now we are talking about same sex marriage and you and your doggie are irrelvant.
Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 10:32 PM ICdesign has not replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 118 of 391 (597011)
12-18-2010 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by ICdesign
12-18-2010 9:51 PM


disagree with the idea that a society should put their stamp of approval on a perverted lifestyle and calling it OK and normal in the name of being politically correct.
Show me where in anything, other than your book of myths, that homosexuality is perverted.
Edited by bluescat48, : typo

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 9:51 PM ICdesign has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by iano, posted 12-19-2010 6:56 AM bluescat48 has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 119 of 391 (597018)
12-18-2010 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by ICdesign
12-18-2010 10:32 PM


Re: The Golden Rule
Our society determined back before all this PC crap started up that it was normal and decent that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
Do you think they asked gay people when they "determined" that?
How about when society "determined" that Africans should be chattel slaves? Doesn't that indicate that maybe the people of "society" making these "determinations" may not have known what would turn out to be best for everybody?
I say we have already drawn the line in the sand about what is normal and decent and there is no need to change it.
You may not feel any need, but you're not a gay person who wants to marry their partner, now are you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by ICdesign, posted 12-18-2010 10:32 PM ICdesign has not replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4798 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 120 of 391 (597019)
12-18-2010 11:56 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by subbie
12-18-2010 10:34 PM


Re: The Golden Rule
subbie writes:
would you want others to prohibit you from marrying the person you love?
I think I did answer the question subbie.
I think same sex relationships are unnatural and wrong on many levels. I believed this long before I became a Christian. If people want to engage this behavior they have a right in this country to engage. I disagree with society giving this behavior a thumbs up and sanctioning this type of a union as normal. Its not a matter of marriage benefits to me. Its a matter of calling wrong right. I have a right to express my opinion about this issue as does everyone else.
I am a man. If I loved another man I would not expect expect society to change the law to accommodate my unusual desires.
The Golden rule isn't a blank check to twist into whatever you desire just because it seems OK to you. Its referring to being kind to others. Its not a license for anything goes.
IC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by subbie, posted 12-18-2010 10:34 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by subbie, posted 12-19-2010 12:04 AM ICdesign has replied
 Message 125 by crashfrog, posted 12-19-2010 12:13 AM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 127 by ringo, posted 12-19-2010 12:21 AM ICdesign has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024