Proposition 8 discussion continued - Page 31 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-18-2008, 10:54 AM   #451
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
You know, that comment might be cute or funny if this weren't an incredibly hurtful issue for many people. Try empathy.
Empathy is saved for a select group, I guess
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 08:21 PM   #452
Blue Crack Addict
 
Irishteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 29,624
Local Time: 08:48 PM
My favourite argument about gay marriage has to be that being gay is unnatural; it doesn't matter if it is or not look at the world we live in.

Such great natural things such as planes and cars; I mean we never do unnatural things do we?

I'd like it so much better if people actually came up with either decent arguments about it or just come out and say how bigoted they are. It'd be so much better than all the bad arguments like the unnatural one...
__________________

__________________
Irishteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 08:32 PM   #453
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:48 PM

psst:

Quote:
This view is not a doctrine of the Church and has never been practiced by the Church at any time.



Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
This seems like some frightening ideasBlood atonement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The repudiation built on the idea that it should only be practiced in a theocracy is a mirror of Hizb ut Tahrir declaring that homosexuals and apostates should only be killed when true Islam dominates a society.
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 09:57 PM   #454
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 05:48 AM
Can you say that religiously sanctioned capital punishment is always wrong?
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 11:05 PM   #455
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:48 PM
yes.


Capital Punishment
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards the question of whether and in what circumstances the state should impose capital punishment as a matter to be decided solely by the prescribed processes of civil law. We neither promote nor oppose capital punishment.
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 11:15 PM   #456
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards the question of whether and in what circumstances the state should impose capital punishment as a matter to be decided solely by the prescribed processes of civil law.
Since when is capital punishment part of civil law??
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 12:20 AM   #457
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 05:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
yes.


Capital Punishment
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards the question of whether and in what circumstances the state should impose capital punishment as a matter to be decided solely by the prescribed processes of civil law. We neither promote nor oppose capital punishment.
You didn't answer my question, is it always wrong?
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 12:22 AM   #458
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,337
Local Time: 11:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
You didn't answer my question,

Don't get your hopes up.
__________________
martha is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 12:31 AM   #459
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 05:48 AM
Silence can be incriminating, is religiously backed capital punishment always wrong?
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 09:20 AM   #460
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:48 PM
what part of yes, didnt you understand?
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 10:56 AM   #461
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishteen View Post
My favourite argument about gay marriage has to be that being gay is unnatural; it doesn't matter if it is or not look at the world we live in.


here's what you say to that.

it is true that being gay is abnormal.

but so is being left-handed. so is having red hair.

being gay is a naturally occurring abnormality.

and if anyone tries to throw out the "nature vs. nurture" argument, all you have to say is that all sexual orientation is involuntary. it's likely a mix of nature and nurture, probably more nature, but the individual plays no role in who he/she is attracted to.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 11:00 AM   #462
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
yes.


Capital Punishment
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards the question of whether and in what circumstances the state should impose capital punishment as a matter to be decided solely by the prescribed processes of civil law. We neither promote nor oppose capital punishment.


i see.

so LDS only gets involved in politics and spends upwards of $30m when they're seeking to demean and rip apart couples who love each other, but not when it comes to putting criminals to death or not because of the whole "render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's."

this really does sum it up for me.

why the obsession with sex? that's all it comes down to.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 11:43 AM   #463
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 08:48 PM
^ Families more than sex per se, I think. Although there are obvious links between the two (reproduction, sanctioned 'stages of life,' etc.). Most churches recognize that they don't really have much social and political clout anymore when it comes to things like the criminal justice system, but on matters that could be construed as 'family issues,' they do.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 12:25 PM   #464
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
^ Families more than sex per se, I think. Although there are obvious links between the two (reproduction, sanctioned 'stages of life,' etc.). Most churches recognize that they don't really have much social and political clout anymore when it comes to things like the criminal justice system, but on matters that could be construed as 'family issues,' they do.


i still think it's about sex. "family" being a stand-in for s-e-x.

saying you are "pro-family" or whatever pretty much means that you think other people should only be having sex within the bounds of matrimony, and it's a way to make sure that the only kind of s-e-x being "promoted" is that which involves penises and vaginas, since those make more family.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 12:27 PM   #465
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 02:48 PM
a possible plan of action to consider:


Quote:
I no longer recognize marriage. It’s a new thing I’m trying.

Turns out it’s fun.

Yesterday I called a woman’s spouse her boyfriend.

Quote:
She says, correcting me, “He’s my husband,”
“Oh,” I say, “I no longer recognize marriage.”
The impact is obvious. I tried it on a man who has been in a relationship for years,

Quote:
“How’s your longtime companion, Jill?”
“She’s my wife!”
“Yeah, well, my beliefs don’t recognize marriage.”
Fun. And instant, eyebrow-raising recognition. Suddenly the majority gets to feel what the minority feels. In a moment they feel what it’s like to have their relationship downgraded, and to have a much taken-for-granted right called into question because of another’s beliefs.

Just replace the words husband, wife, spouse, or fiancé with boyfriend, girlfriend, special friend, or longtime companion. There is a reason we needed stronger words for more serious relationships. We know it; now they can see it.

A marriage is a lot of things. Culturally, it’s a declaration to the community that two people are now a unit, and that unity should be respected. Legally, it’s a set of rights and responsibilities. And spiritually, it’s whatever your beliefs think it is.

That’s what’s so great about America. As a constitutionally secular nation, or at least in reality a vaguely pluralistic nation, we can all have our own spiritual take on what marriage is. What’s troublesome is when one group’s spiritual beliefs deny the cultural and legal rights of another.

But, back to the point. They say their beliefs don’t recognize my marriage, I say my beliefs don’t recognize theirs. Simple. It may seem petty, and obviously the legal part of the cultural/legal/spiritual trilogy is flip-floppy, but it may be the cultural part that really matters.

People get married to be recognized as a permanent couple. To be acknowledged by friends, family, and strangers as being off the market, in a relationship, totally hooked up, yikes… it’s impossible to say without saying ‘married.’ We wear rings to declare this!

So, we can take this away. We can refuse to recognize marriage in the cultural sense. It is totally within our rights, as Americans, to follow our beliefs and recognize or not recognize what we like.

I guess this is a call out to all Americans with beliefs similar to mine.

If you believe that all people should have equal rights, and if you believe that marriage is one of the greatest destinations of a relationship, then perhaps you believe that nobody should have marriage, until everybody does.

That’s what I believe.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com