Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-06-2015, 06:27 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
(02-06-2015 06:16 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(02-06-2015 06:05 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  I never once said that a homosexual nor a single parent home is either better or worse, (although from a hunter gather standpoint two is probably better than one). So I don't know why you are building a strawman. Secondly, I never said how marriage came to be. Considering that I said that it was part of human nature and since humans evolved I see no logical reason to deny that procreation as a purpose for marriage evolved, although I think the institution probably predates Homo-Sapiens sapiens.

You paper stated the purpose of marriage was to provide a "stable environment" for children. You implied the values of your cult are the values that lead to that. It's not a "strawman". It's addressing YOUR assumptions. You never said "procreation" (that BTW is a Catholic biased term) is "a" purpose. You implied it was THE purpose. I never realized how dishonest you are.

I don't believe I stated that anywhere in the paper, while I did say that it is a natural institution, to distinguish it from being custom. I said the purpose of all societies must be subordinate to their end, and since marriage is the society which involves the most of one's life then the highest end is preferred. Since God is the highest end, then marriage should have God as its final end.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2015, 06:32 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
(02-06-2015 06:09 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(02-06-2015 05:36 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  Also, why do you say it is impossible for an institution to cover ones entire life.

I did not say it was impossible, I said none did.

Thank you, that is what I wished to clarify. I disagree with you, is there a particular reason why you think that current intuitions are not capable of this. I would like to point out that since I disagree with other religions based upon their competency not with their claim at jurisdiction over the entirety of one's life.

Also I think I am making the positive claim here thus I should be required to provide evidence but I hope that enough can be garnered from my essay to understand my position and proofs.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2015, 06:40 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
(02-06-2015 06:27 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  
(02-06-2015 06:16 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You paper stated the purpose of marriage was to provide a "stable environment" for children. You implied the values of your cult are the values that lead to that. It's not a "strawman". It's addressing YOUR assumptions. You never said "procreation" (that BTW is a Catholic biased term) is "a" purpose. You implied it was THE purpose. I never realized how dishonest you are.

I don't believe I stated that anywhere in the paper, while I did say that it is a natural institution, to distinguish it from being custom. I said the purpose of all societies must be subordinate to their end, and since marriage is the society which involves the most of one's life then the highest end is preferred. Since God is the highest end, then marriage should have God as its final end.

The question is, "Why would you post that shit here ?"
You have not demonstrated either here (ever) or in your paper there is even ONE reason to accept your presuppositions. There is NOT ONE REASON anyone should share you unproven assertions. You can't possibly think you can build a cohesive secular multi-cultural society on the values of a bunch of idiot (gay) priests. "The purpose of all societies must be subordinate to their end, and since marriage is the society which involves the most of one's life then the highest end is preferred" is a meaningless non-sequitur. It's also an unsupported assertion. So is your garbage about a god.

The entire thing REEKS of an insular uncritical parroting of bullshit that is never challenged. It's all CRAP. The fact you would write this crap this way is PROOF your "school" is a fraudulent institution that lets you get away with spouting nonsense.

If "God is the highest end", then NO MARRIAGE, and lives of complete and singular WORSHIP are THE ONLY alternative. BTW, "Since God is the highest end, then marriage should have God as its final end." is also a non-sequitur, and the fact that you have heard this shit SO often, and don't recognize it as such, is MORE proof your cult has swallowed you up. It pious drivel. It's utterly meaningless shit that's been repeated to you SO often you actually think it means something. It doesn't.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2015, 06:42 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
duplicte

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2015, 06:42 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
(02-06-2015 06:09 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(02-06-2015 05:36 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  Also, why do you say it is impossible for an institution to cover ones entire life.

I did not say it was impossible, I said none did.

Quote:Since faith and morals must invariably cover all of one's actions and thoughts, then any institution which has the role of teaching on faith and morals must logically cover all of one's actions and thoughts.

Faith, in the theistic sense, is a barrier to rational thinking and can not logically be involved in any aspect of your actions or thoughts. Believing things and acting on them without evidence is not an approach that is likely to be optimal. That you can't see that is understandable because you accept faith as a valid tool.

The Catholic Church teaching on morals? Now THAT is funny. If any institution is evil, it is the Catholic Church. That again, I'm sure you can't see because your faith requires you to whitewash everything it does.

While I do not use faith in sense you described, you are correct in that for clarity I should have maybe used a better word. The word that I believe fits the best would maybe be philosophy. It basically means how one accepts reality to be.

In regards to the church, while it is true I tend to see the church's actions in a better light than you guys, I by no means whitewash it. I am fully aware of my church's past. However, the purpose of the Catholic church is to teach. That is why it is called the magisterium, which means teacher. While I can't say that I'm fine with the church being hypocritical, I would much rather it wouldn't, what really matters to me is that they are at least teaching the truth, one which I'm well aware that you disagree with, and as far as I can tell the church teaches the truth. One of my favourite things is to come up with my own concepts regarding reality, and when I go and talk to my theology prof I find that the Church already teaches what I came to independently.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2015, 06:43 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
"Anyone writing the paper has to presume that God exists, because the question is why would a Catholic think he has the right."

WTAF. Another non-sequitur. So you can ONLY write papers that presume gods exist ? Weeping

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2015, 06:48 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
(02-06-2015 06:42 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  However, the purpose of the Catholic church is to teach. That is why it is called the magisterium, which means teacher.

The purpose of the Church is to lead it's members to salvation. Nowhere did Jesus or ANYONE ever say, that you can quote, the "purpose of the Church is to teach". Just more indoctrinated bullshit. The Magisterium is ONE of the FUNCTIONS of the church. You should become an atheist and actually learn about the RCC.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-06-2015, 06:54 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
(02-06-2015 06:40 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(02-06-2015 06:27 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  I don't believe I stated that anywhere in the paper, while I did say that it is a natural institution, to distinguish it from being custom. I said the purpose of all societies must be subordinate to their end, and since marriage is the society which involves the most of one's life then the highest end is preferred. Since God is the highest end, then marriage should have God as its final end.

The question is, "Why would you post that shit here ?"
You have not demonstrated either here (ever) or in your paper there is even ONE reason to accept your presuppositions. There is NOT ONE REASON anyone should share you unproven assertions. You can't possibly think you can build a cohesive secular multi-cultural society on the values of a bunch of idiot (gay) priests. "The purpose of all societies must be subordinate to their end, and since marriage is the society which involves the most of one's life then the highest end is preferred" is a meaningless non-sequitur. It's also an unsupported assertion. So is your garbage about a god.

The entire thing REEKS of an insular uncritical parroting of bullshit that is never challenged. It's all CRAP. The fact you would write this crap this way is PROOF your "school" is a fraudulent institution that lets you get away with spouting nonsense.

If "God is the highest end", then NO MARRIAGE, and lives of complete and singular WORSHIP are THE ONLY alternative. BTW, "Since God is the highest end, then marriage should have God as its final end." is also a non-sequitur, and the fact that you have heard this shit SO often, and don't recognize it as such, is MORE proof your cult has swallowed you up. It pious drivel. It's utterly meaningless shit that's been repeated to you SO often you actually think it means something. It doesn't.

How is it a non-sequiter. I didn't get this from the Church, this entire essay is based of the principles of Aristotle and St Thomas Aquinas, who basically got his stuff from Aristotle. Can you not follow a logical syllogism.
Again you are putting words in my mouth, I made absolutely no presuppositions about God in my essay nor did I say this was how to make a cohesive multi-cultural society.
I never set out to prove the premises in my paper, I even specifically said it would be pointless to prove them since the purpose of the paper was not to prove that a catholic does in fact have a right. The purpose of the paper was to give the reason for why a Catholic would think that he has the right to legislate against gay marriage. As such, my answer was that given the premises that a Catholic normally holds, it does not follow illogically that they would think they have a right to legislate against homosexuality.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2015, 06:56 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
(02-06-2015 06:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "Anyone writing the paper has to presume that God exists, because the question is why would a Catholic think he has the right."

WTAF. Another non-sequitur. So you can ONLY write papers that presume gods exist ? Weeping

Yes in order to think like a catholic you must believe in God.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2015, 06:59 PM
RE: Catholics, gays and Logic? Maybe
(02-06-2015 06:48 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(02-06-2015 06:42 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  However, the purpose of the Catholic church is to teach. That is why it is called the magisterium, which means teacher.

The purpose of the Church is to lead it's members to salvation. Nowhere did Jesus or ANYONE ever say, that you can quote, the "purpose of the Church is to teach". Just more indoctrinated bullshit. The Magisterium is ONE of the FUNCTIONS of the church. You should become an atheist and actually learn about the RCC.

Yes and the way in which the Pope and the Bishops do this is by teaching, hence why they are called the magisterium. You are correct in that I erroneously called the entire church the magisterium, but we were discussing teaching and since many of the crimes of the church were committed by the popes and cardinals, I didn't think it was that off base. Mea culpa.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: