"It's just how I was raised."
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-09-2013, 11:40 AM
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 08:12 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  However, concentrate please. We are talking about the legal recognition of someone's marriage affecting the value of your own marriage. Lets stay on point.

You can try to make the causation between a homosexual couple's offspring going on to commit more crimes, but the data simply doesn't support that. Irrespective of your personal take on it.

Do you need an English lesson in the different meanings of the words "can" and "did"?

Had i said, "You make the causation..." but I didn't say that and I didn't say that YOU DID! I followed the logical progression that your prior posts make when YOU USED the "Argument from Exception" to state that a neighbor abusing his wife means that other people's relationship affect my own.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 12:22 PM
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
Philo - I don't always lead with the saddest parts of my life story. I have no living children (yet). Its a personal story and I don' t always want to explain to people that my son died in utero, strangled by the umbilical. So I choose to say that I don't have children (yet) because its easier than describing to people, whose business it is not, that I had a baby, but he died before he was born.

Now, I do not consider this to be a personal attack because there is no way you could have known (well, if you read my other posts, you would have since you were researching me), but its the way you brought this to my attention which IS the personal attack.

And I don't appreciate it, pal. Don't jump on your soapbox when you say:

(29-09-2013 11:00 AM)Philosoraptor Wrote:  I honestly don't understand why someone would lose their temper over an Internet debate. Huh

and proceed to tell me I appear to be uneducated, un-researched, inarticulate, deficient in debating, and disingenuous to name a few when you perceived me to be "putting words in your mouth" (something I didn't do) Now is that nice? Is that someone who sounds like they are keeping their cool?

Me thinks not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 01:09 PM
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 10:46 AM)morondog Wrote:  I'd love to know on what authority you decide who gets to marry whom. Are gays somehow non-citizens ? Are they less allowed to determine their own lives than heterosexual people ?

He doesn't get to decide....society decides. As a member of society, he gets a voice and nothing more.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 01:37 PM
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 08:13 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  What's left to argue for in favor of discrimination (at least in the United States)? I hope you don't take your 'slippery slope' argument into bestiality territory, because I'd hate to see you stoop that low.


Careful, Evolution! The fact that you mentioned a possible logical progression of the slippery slope argument (his original argument and also, an argument from exception I might add), and mentioned bestiality, Philo will say that you are putting words into his mouth since he never said anything about bestiality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 01:43 PM
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 06:29 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  I think society doesn't have a say in someone else's relationship! You are overstating the effect on society as a whole. It actually has very little effect. Do you care whether your neighbors are married or not? If they have kids? If they fight? If they have sex on the dining room table? No. You shouldn't care. It has no effect on you whatsoever!

While there are a few benefits, those benefits are so indirect to you that's its not really a consideration.

It only has a little effect because there are so few gays.

If all the gay people in the world suddenly and magically turned straight, there would be no ill effects on society. However if all the straight people in the world suddenly and magically turned gay society would begin to collapse for obvious reasons.

Now if you do this thought experiment with races instead of sexuality, there is no dramatic shift. All the white people can suddenly and magically turn into black people today and there would be no lasting ill effects on society.

What this shows is that being black isn't any better than being white, but being heterosexual is better than being homosexual. Because heterosexuality is better there is nothing wrong with society viewing it as such. There is nothing wrong with society saying we want couples to pair off in heterosexual relationships and when they do, we will reward them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 01:46 PM
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 01:09 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(30-09-2013 10:46 AM)morondog Wrote:  I'd love to know on what authority you decide who gets to marry whom. Are gays somehow non-citizens ? Are they less allowed to determine their own lives than heterosexual people ?

He doesn't get to decide....society decides. As a member of society, he gets a voice and nothing more.

OK then, how come one group of citizens gets to force their decision about something on another group ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 01:49 PM
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 01:43 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(30-09-2013 06:29 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  I think society doesn't have a say in someone else's relationship! You are overstating the effect on society as a whole. It actually has very little effect. Do you care whether your neighbors are married or not? If they have kids? If they fight? If they have sex on the dining room table? No. You shouldn't care. It has no effect on you whatsoever!

While there are a few benefits, those benefits are so indirect to you that's its not really a consideration.

It only has a little effect because there are so few gays.

If all the gay people in the world suddenly and magically turned straight, there would be no ill effects on society. However if all the straight people in the world suddenly and magically turned gay society would begin to collapse for obvious reasons.

Now if you do this thought experiment with races instead of sexuality, there is no dramatic shift. All the white people can suddenly and magically turn into black people today and there would be no lasting ill effects on society.

What this shows is that being black isn't any better than being white, but being heterosexual is better than being homosexual. Because heterosexuality is better there is nothing wrong with society viewing it as such. There is nothing wrong with society saying we want couples to pair off in heterosexual relationships and when they do, we will reward them.
So your justification for no gay marriage has turned into this ludicrous thought experiment ?

"No gay marriage because if we all turned gay society would collapse".

FFS.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 02:00 PM (This post was last modified: 30-09-2013 07:05 PM by Cathym112.)
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 01:43 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  It only has a little effect because there are so few gays.

If all the gay people in the world suddenly and magically turned straight, there would be no ill effects on society. However if all the straight people in the world suddenly and magically turned gay society would begin to collapse for obvious reasons.

Now if you do this thought experiment with races instead of sexuality, there is no dramatic shift. All the white people can suddenly and magically turn into black people today and there would be no lasting ill effects on society.

What this shows is that being black isn't any better than being white, but being heterosexual is better than being homosexual. Because heterosexuality is better there is nothing wrong with society viewing it as such. There is nothing wrong with society saying we want couples to pair off in heterosexual relationships and when they do, we will reward them.

Actually, there would be an ill effect on society, since a black man and a white man have different genetics and different diseases that singularly effect those races. Sickle cell anemia, for example. Evolution and population thrive because of the genetic diversity it presents. So, it does have an ill effect as we drastically slow down our ability to evolve.

Second, even if all heterosexuals magically turned into homosexuals, you made several assumptions in this fun little thought experiment that I will not give you (mainly because you did not ask for these assumptions when you described the though experiment parameters):

1) you need to be married to the person you are procreating with;
2) sexual intercourse and thus conception only occurs when both parties "want" or "enjoy" intercourse.
3) sexual orientation prevents copulation purely for reproductive purposes.

that still not does not address the idea of procreation within marriage. Remember, procreation is not a condition of marriage. we already established that. because people have children inside AND outside the confines of marriage. Further, you already conceeded that otherwise homosexual men had children with women because of social pressures. Therefore, wanting or enjoying sexual intercourse is not a condition of conception (as is the case with rape, homosexual having sex with a hetero, etc). And therefore, it's clear that sexual orientation does not prevent copulation for reproductive purposes (as you said that gay men married straight women - or vice versa - and that sexual orientation, regardless of their marital status, did not prevent copulation for reproductive purposes.

If everyone turned gay, it would not, in any way, create the extinction of our species. We would just adapt to a very different way of doing things....as our species has and will continue to adapt to change. In fact, I would see the benefits of this type of arrangement because it would mean every child was planned and desired. Empty orphanages would make this world a better place

There is also no way to measure - with any real degree of accuracy - the number of gay and lesbian people or who otherwise identify with "gay".

A heterosexual is not better than a homosexual as each is naturally occurring in nature. Different doesn't mean better, Mr. Star Belly Sneetch
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 02:04 PM
 
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 12:22 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Don't jump on your soapbox when you say:

(29-09-2013 11:00 AM)Philosoraptor Wrote:  I honestly don't understand why someone would lose their temper over an Internet debate. Huh

and proceed to tell me I appear to be uneducated, un-researched, inarticulate, deficient in debating, and disingenuous to name a few when you perceived me to be "putting words in your mouth" (something I didn't do) Now is that nice? Is that someone who sounds like they are keeping their cool?

Me thinks not.

And you called me intolerant, afraid of change, immature, and my reasoning "ridiculous. childish. stupid rationale." Unlike you, I don't whine about it. Sadcryface2

But anyway, let's consider the following:

- I asked you to demonstrate societal benefits of gay marriage, you listed individual benefits.
- You incorrectly assumed that I was religious.
- You misunderstood my analogy of driver's license by thinking that the point is about age.
- You incorrectly assumed that I think all women want children [feminist victim mentality]
- You incorrectly assumed that I blame women for the shortage of pensions and social security systems [more feminist victim mentality]
- You erroneously linked my skeptical stance on gay marriage with restrictions of women's suffrage and interracial marriage (repeatedly, although I explained why the link is fallacious)
- You claim that I'm in favor of discrimination, I quoted the ruling of the court that is an authority on human rights on my continent, and it says it is not discrimination.
- You argue from exception
- You incorrectly assumed that I think legalization of gay marriage equals less children
- You are emotional and dramatic, and you project that on me ("by refusing homosexuals equal stance in their marriage, alienating is exactly what you are doing")
- You ignore most of what I say and repeat your assertions and misinterpretations
- You quote a study that involved 78 children (in my statistics classes I was taught that any study that doesn't involve at least 1,000 participants is not worthy of even being looked at)
- After all that, you started telling your personal story
- You misunderstood my questioning of your statement that the society doesn't have a say in someone else's relationship. I asked if someone should intervene if abuse occurs, you said "yes and no" (?) and continued talking about something completely unrelated.

And you call this "debating" and "personal insights." And you take offense that I "insult your ability to read and think." No, I don't - you do it yourself. Dodgy

You proceed in the same fashion:

Quote:You made a claim that marriage traditions changing devalues the meaning: we countered that marriage traditions always have and will continue to change.

Irrelevant, because I never used the argument from tradition.

Quote:You stated that heterosexual couples give the best environment for children, we countered that the data doesn't support that.

A study with 78 participants? Totally devastating.

Quote:You compared adoption, surrogacy, egg and sperm donation to human trafficking. We countered that you only apply that extreme an insulting definition to same sex couples.

No.

Quote:You argued that the population is decreasing. We countered that the data suggests otherwise.

Because you constantly talk about the population of the entire world combined. I didn't.


One would have to understand why I became a bit edgy and frustrated after all this. It's hard to swim against a tide, especially when debating feels like talking to a wall. Nowhere have I had more of my statements misinterpreted than here. Not to mention the implicit hostility towards me because I don't "toe the party line." The title says that this is an atheist forum. And I was told that atheism is not an ideology, and that the only thing atheists have in common is the lack of belief in a deity. Therefore, one would expect a diversity of opinions here, yet it is not what I found. I encountered an almost dogmatic belief which I'm apparently not allowed even to question, let alone disagree with. I don't expect people to agree with me of course, but at least an acknowledgement of my efforts would be polite - ignoring, twisting and attacking is not a good manner of communication. And this goes for most forum members who debated me on this thread:

- Morondog lost his temper, but later apologized. Even later, however, he repeated an assertion that I explained away several times, like I never did.
- Slowminded took offense having read my story about the war (because he is a member of the nation that waged war against mine), so he attacked me personally by comparing me to a Nazi.
- WeAreTheCosmos just dropped in with a sarcastic, smartass remark.
- Clj joined the debate late and misunderstood my argument (post 87). Probably intentionally, because I know he is a strong intellect otherwise.

I didn't start this discussion to change opinions. I did it in order to test whether members of this forum are genuinely open-minded and free-thinking as most usually claim. I also wanted this discussion to make me rethink my stance on marriage. However, in a cluster of fallacies, passive-aggressive remarks, personal attacks and misinterpretations of my arguments, I struggled to spot a proper argument. I noted a consistent lack of respect for my opinion, which led me to a conclusion that this forum is not an oasis of free thought which I had been looking for when I searched for a forum to join a month ago. And that makes me disappointed.

Therefore, I don't intend to continue posting on this topic, and I'll take a break from this forum altogether. Maybe I won't come back at all - I have yet to see.
If I can take only a stance that agrees with the official "manifesto," then I don't really enjoy the discussion at all.



In conclusion...

(30-09-2013 01:09 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  He doesn't get to decide....society decides. As a member of society, he gets a voice and nothing more.

Exactly. And if I voted on a referendum on gay marriage, I would mark the option "AGAINST." Don't like it? Suck it up. Dodgy
Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2013, 02:15 PM
RE: "It's just how I was raised."
(30-09-2013 02:04 PM)Philosoraptor Wrote:  - Morondog lost his temper, but later apologized. Even later, however, he repeated an assertion that I explained away several times, like I never did.

What assertion, and how did you explain it ? The assertion about equality under law ? I still haven't seen a satisfactory answer from you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: