"Gay marriage makes Jesus cry"

[Heywood Jahblome]

(27-02-2013 02:39 AM)Vera Wrote:  

(27-02-2013 02:37 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  You give me one, just one semi-valid argument against homosexuality and we might, just might, have a discussion.

However, seeing as there are none...

As an intellectual excercise I will attempt to put forth a valid argument against homosexuality.
1. It is good for society if all members can procreate with someone who they love.
2. Homosexuals cannot procreate with the people they love.
Therefore heterosexuality is more preferrable to society than homosexuality.

[Vera]

(27-02-2013 02:56 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  As an intellectual excercise I will attempt to put forth a valid argument against homosexuality.

Think again. And do open that dictionary I mentioned.

Quote:1. It is good for society if all members can procreate with someone who they love.
2. Homosexuals cannot procreate with the people they love
Therefore homosexuality is not good for society.

Are you trying to tell me that the only sex you have ever, ever, had has been procreational sex? Ever? (Because of the answer is yes, I think you might want to put the bible down, leave this place and go have some recreational sex. Would do you a world of good).

And if you honestly believe that a person is only "good for society" if they procreate, you live in a sad, sad world, not to mention that you just discarded all the achievements that we owe to single, childless people.

Also, two more words for you - human overpopulation. The days when people breeding like animals was considered something to be proud of are gone.

And your last sentence is one of the most offensive I've seen on these boards.

By the same token, religion has caused and continue to cause immense suffering in this world. Thus, it is not only "not good" for society, but is extremely harmful to it. What do you suggest we do about that?

[Heywood Jahblome]

(27-02-2013 02:55 AM)Vera Wrote:  

(27-02-2013 02:46 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  If a gay rights critic says, "Homosexuality is unnatural". An appropriate response might be "So what? Does that make it wrong or evil? IQs of 150 are unnatural too....

Really? I mean, really?!

Do you know the difference between not common and unnatural?

I suggest you open a dictionary.

Quote:If you say " homosexuality is natural because it occurs in nature", the critic is going to think your an idiot who doesn't understand what "natural" means. And the sad part is the critic has some justification because you didn't make a compelling counter argument.

Don't bring it back to the natural/unnatural dichotomy (with which you're obviously groping somewhat). I said that your suggestion that normal people should use the same definitions as bigots, is flawed, as that would imply they, too, should start pulling "arguments" out of their asses. Which is what gay rights "critics" do.

I took your suggestion and opened a dictionary.

In the Word English Dictionary the third defintion of natural is "As is normal or to be expected; ordinary or logical".

[Vera]

(27-02-2013 03:08 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I took your suggestion and opened a dictionary.

In the Word English Dictionary the third defintion of natural is "As is normal or to be expected; ordinary or logical".

Well, that proves it. You were right all along.

No wait, you weren't. Seriously, if you're gonna be "debating", a bit more thought and facts, as opposed to regurgitated and already dismissed crap. would come in handy.

[Heywood Jahblome]

(27-02-2013 03:08 AM)Vera Wrote:  

(27-02-2013 02:56 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  As an intellectual excercise I will attempt to put forth a valid argument against homosexuality.

Think again. And do open that dictionary I mentioned.

Quote:1. It is good for society if all members can procreate with someone who they love.
2. Homosexuals cannot procreate with the people they love
Therefore homosexuality is not good for society.

Are you trying to tell me that the only sex you have ever, ever, had has been procreational sex? Ever? (Because of the answer is yes, I think you might want to put the bible down, leave this place and go have some recreational sex. Would do you a world of good).

And if you honestly believe that a person is only "good for society" if they procreate, you live in a sad, sad world, not to mention that you just discarded all the achievements that we owe to single, childless people.

Also, two more words for you - human overpopulation. The days when people breeding like animals was considered something to be proud of are gone.

And your last sentence is one of the most offensive I've seen on these boards.

By the same token, religion has caused and continue to cause immense suffering in this world. Thus, it is not only "not good" for society, but is extremely harmful to it. What do you suggest we do about that?

You are conflating sex with the ability to procreate. You are conflating the value of an individual with the value of homosexuality. You are conflating an ability to procreate with a mandate to procreate. Your mention of overpopulation and religion are red herrings. You suggested I open a dictionary....and I did. Now I have a suggestion for you. You would benefit from some education in critical thinking and argumentation.
Start watching Kevin deLaplante short classes on critical thinking and argumentation(its completely secular).
http://www.youtube.com/feed/UCFLCAm7HCyw6DEY9jvOMTvA

[Vera]

(27-02-2013 03:21 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  [quote='Vera' pid='264258' dateline='1361956082']

You are conflating sex with the ability to procreate. You are conflating the value of an individual with the value of homosexuality. You are conflating an ability to procreate with a mandate to procreate. Your mention of overpopulation and religion are red herrings. You suggested I open a dictionary....and I did. Now I have a suggestion for you. You would benefit from some education in critical thinking and argumentation.
Start watching Kevin deLaplante short classes on critical thinking and argumentation(its completely secular).
http://www.youtube.com/feed/UCFLCAm7HCyw6DEY9jvOMTvA

Do you honestly think you refuted anything of what I said? Because if you do, I would love to live in your world. I've always liked fantasy.

[EvolutionKills]

Yay, QualiaSoup time again!







Go to 5:30 - 7:30 so see the specific bit on same sex marriage.



From the YouTube page...

Resources/recommended:
http://www.secularism.org.uk --- http://www.humanism.org.uk
Underling's video intro to his excellent list of resources on belief and science issues: http://www.youtu.be/VX45gTu5UpQ

Research mentioned:
- Ipsos MORI on declining UK Christianity:
http://c3414097.r97.cf0.rackcdn.com/I...
- Majority of UK and US now express support for same-sex marriage:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/Fir...
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/06/13/t...
- Costing the Heavens (National Secular Society study of hospital chaplaincy costs):
http://www.secularism.org.uk/uploads/...
- Faith primary schools: better schools or better pupils? Gibbons, S. & Silva, O:
http://cee.lse.ac.uk/ceedps//ceedp72.pdf

Archbishops' anti-same-sex marriage letter sent to 2500 churches, 385 schools:
Letter read aloud by Vincent Nichols at http://vimeo.com/38151274 Catholic Education Service send letter and petition to schools:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-1...

Andrew Copson (British Humanist Association) on secular issues:
http://www.youtu.be/eDqTSfEWKmk (item begins at 30 second mark)
http://www.youtu.be/x-Wreyq33c0

Bernard Lynch (Catholic priest) speaks in support secularism:
http://www.youtu.be/eBW1bcu6OLo

Faith schools documentary:
http://www.youtu.be/pzJv-5yWx2g
- If the above link doesn't work in your country, try:
http://www.youtu.be/ulX8nZjeCXE

Becky Fischer: "Children are so usable in Christianity":
http://www.youtu.be/Kx1yN2yMw14

Proselytizers playing the victim:
The truth behind the 'crosses banned from workplace' myth:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfr...
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/terry...

'In God We Teach" (teacher plays victim after preaching in the classroom):
http://www.youtu.be/pmRajX5fuSE

[Heywood Jahblome]

(27-02-2013 03:31 AM)Vera Wrote:  

(27-02-2013 03:21 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  [quote='Vera' pid='264258' dateline='1361956082']You are conflating sex with the ability to procreate. You are conflating the value of an individual with the value of homosexuality. You are conflating an ability to procreate with a mandate to procreate. Your mention of overpopulation and religion are red herrings. You suggested I open a dictionary....and I did. Now I have a suggestion for you. You would benefit from some education in critical thinking and argumentation.
Start watching Kevin deLaplante short classes on critical thinking and argumentation(its completely secular).
http://www.youtube.com/feed/UCFLCAm7HCyw6DEY9jvOMTvA

Do you honestly think you refuted anything of what I said? Because if you do, I would love to live in your world. I've always liked fantasy.

I merely made a list of your errors and directed you to a resource that you can use to educate yourself in the hope that you stop making them.

[Vera]

(27-02-2013 04:23 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I merely made a list of your errors and directed you to a resource that you can use to educate yourself in the hope that you stop making them.

Don't you worry about me. Just make sure there's enough oxygen in that bubble of yours. Lack of oxygen to the brain is not good for you.

A quick question: do you think only certain sexual positions are "normal", just the ones that could possibly lead to the ultimate goal of every human being - to procreate?

[ClydeLee]

(27-02-2013 02:56 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  As an intellectual excercise I will attempt to put forth a valid argument against homosexuality.
1. It is good for society if all members can procreate with someone who they love.
2. Homosexuals cannot procreate with the people they love.
Therefore heterosexuality is more preferrable to society than homosexuality.

If you like to make a list of errors, let's start here:

You say, intellectual exercise, and then all you do is make an assertion without merit. I fail to see the reasoning or validity.

How is it good for society in this day in age if everyone could procreate with someone they love? That means absolutely nothing and the concept of there being able to be more people is not what many would call good for society anyway.