interesting new angle on the gay marriage debate - Page 14 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-13-2006, 11:18 PM   #196
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:15 PM
Speaking of snappy responses...if this is all going to turn into a round of petty tit-for-tat about which "side" has the largest number of polite people rooting for it, I can always close the thread.

I don't care for snappy retorts nor sermonizing either, but neither are per se against the rules, and the reality is no one would like it if they were.

Please keep it civil, guys...there's no need to pad your insights with digs at one another, veiled or otherwise. Thanks.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 07-13-2006, 11:21 PM   #197
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
A couple of points on the theological issues touch upon in this thread. First, the concept of sin is not defined as things we choose. It is defined as things God declares to be unholy. We often confuse the argument with what God ought to say, instead of what God did say.


There are plenty of things once considered sinful from scripture that are no longer considered sinful.



[Q]Second, we are creating a false argument that “homosexuality is not a sin because I do not believe it is a sin, but I am a Christian. Therefore, if you call it a sin, you are telling me I am not a Christian.” I think Christians can have an honest debate on Scriptural understanding and application.[/Q]

Doug, I have known you for almost my entire time here in FYM. You have a problem with my argument, PM me. The quote was very clear and very specific. The implications of which I called AEON out on. There is no other way to read the comment that was made.


Quote:
The quickest response possible is usually not the best thought out response. Getting caught up with the “snappy” responses can be very frustrating. If people complain that your comment is offensive, perhaps it hits too close to home for some posts.
No, it does not hit too close to home.

Do you have somethng to add to the debate?
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-13-2006, 11:25 PM   #198
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Would you care to elaborate (or simply quote) the post where the above argument is made? I know these threads go by quickly, but I don't recall anyone raising the Satan worshiping issue.
For the record, I was not specifically referring to you or any specific event. But I know the attitude in here. The self-righteous "believers" come in, paint the world black and white, and anyone who does not fit in that New World Order can, bluntly, fuck off. That's the "Objective Moral Law," right?

And where I get frustrated is that when I advocate an idea of maximum personal freedom, with an acceptance that there are more conservative and liberal viewpoints in this world that are best left to personal morality than public morality, I'm somehow decried as an "atheist" and that eating babies for dinner is part of my philosophy. Or that, somehow, accepting diversity is accepting Satan.

No, people don't need to use the specific words. But the writing is more than written on the wall.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-13-2006, 11:35 PM   #199
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


For the record, I was not specifically referring to you or any specific event. But I know the attitude in here. The self-righteous "believers" come in, paint the world black and white, and anyone who does not fit in that New World Order can, bluntly, fuck off. That's the "Objective Moral Law," right?

And where I get frustrated is that when I advocate an idea of maximum personal freedom, with an acceptance that there are more conservative and liberal viewpoints in this world that are best left to personal morality than public morality, I'm somehow decried as an "atheist" and that eating babies for dinner is part of my philosophy. Or that, somehow, accepting diversity is accepting Satan.

No, people don't need to use the specific words. But the writing is more than written on the wall.

Melon
No, I don't think you are a Satanist. I disagree with you on many of these points - but I do think you mean well. We just disgaree.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 12:03 AM   #200
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON
No, I don't think you are a Satanist. I disagree with you on many of these points - but I do think you mean well. We just disgaree.
That's all fine and dandy, but you know what it would mean for your viewpoint to be legislated? A restriction of my freedoms and restriction of my ability to exercise my pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. You know what it means to you for my viewpoint to be legislated? Absolutely nothing.

So pardon me if I am unable to merely shrug this off as merely a meeting of ideas. There are, contrary to the hype, real people affected.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 12:07 AM   #201
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


That's all fine and dandy, but you know what it would mean for your viewpoint to be legislated? A restriction of my freedoms and restriction of my ability to exercise my pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. You know what it means to you for my viewpoint to be legislated? Absolutely nothing.

So pardon me if I am unable to merely shrug this off as merely a meeting of ideas. There are, contrary to the hype, real people affected.

Melon
This is why you cannot be objective on this issue. It involves you.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 12:40 AM   #202
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


You know what it means to you for my viewpoint to be legislated? Absolutely nothing.


Melon
Well, I'm not sure I know what your viewpoint is, Melon. Because you are a cultural relativist, or you seem to be arguing this point in the other thread, you essential are saying "to each man his own."

While your "personal" view is one I agree with on most subjects, it is not something we cannot legislate because it is only your subjective opinion for your life, and not an objective idea to which we can govern everybody.

So essentially - your argument, using your adherence to cultural relativism, self-destructs and dissipates before it would ever reach legislation.

Unless, of course, you ARE admitting there at least a FEW objective moral laws (murder, rape).

That being said, I still think we can still get along just fine
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 01:38 AM   #203
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 11:15 AM
Why hasn't anyone actually answered my theological questions from pages ago?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-14-2006, 03:32 AM   #204
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Why hasn't anyone actually answered my theological questions from pages ago?
Which ones? The thread moved pretty fast.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 07:36 AM   #205
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland
Speaking of snappy responses...if this is all going to turn into a round of petty tit-for-tat about which "side" has the largest number of polite people rooting for it, I can always close the thread.


Please keep it civil, guys...there's no need to pad your insights with digs at one another, veiled or otherwise. Thanks.
Thanks for that. Geesh, thankfully we always have dreadsox for some sexual innuendo-laden humor That was the best part of what I read before I just started skipping over all of it...

I hesitate to post this for fear of what will happen, but maybe people can discuss it in a civilized manner if they care to even discuss it all

By Adrienne P. Samuels, Boston Globe Staff | July 14, 2006

PROVINCETOWN -- Town leaders here are holding a public meeting today to air concerns about slurs and bigoted behavior. And this time, they say, it's gay people who are displaying intolerance.

Police say they logged numerous complaints of straight people being called ``breeders" by gays over the July Fourth holiday weekend. Jamaican workers reported being the target of racial slurs. And a woman was verbally accosted after signing a petition that opposed same-sex marriage, they said.

The town, which prizes its reputation for openness and tolerance, is taking the concerns seriously, though police say they do not consider the incidents hate crimes.

``Hate language is usually the early-warning signal that could lead to hate-motivated violence," Town Manager Keith Bergman said. ``And before that happens, we try to nip it in the bud."

Gays have coexisted fairly peacefully alongside other residents in this community on Cape Cod's tip, home to a long-established Portuguese fishing colony.

Provincetown was recently re-certified for its ``No Place for Hate" designation by the AntiDefamation League, which worked with the town on tolerance issues in the 1990s after gays experienced some problems. But the town's ``No Place for Hate" group, set up to address incidents of bigotry, hasn't met in years.

``We have not had problems in a long time," police Staff Sergeant Warren Tobias said. ``I don't necessarily view this as a big problem, but it's certainly a blip on our radar screen."

Along the main shopping street and the wharf, residents of this 3,400-person town -- which swells to some 30,000 over the summer -- say tensions are rising in part because of strong feelings about same-sex marriage.

``I've been here for eight years, and I think in that time the population has changed a bit and there is a little less tolerance," said Simply Silver store owner Bill Mitchell, 53, who said he is gay. ``There has been a little more tension."

Meanwhile, Jamaicans say the intensifying debate over immigration is making racial issues worse.

Winsome Karr, 45, originally from Jamaica, has worked in town since 2002. Lately, she said, the off-color comments stem from gay visitors who mistakenly believe that all Jamaicans share the views of an island religious sect that disagrees with homosexuality.

Karr's strong accent reveals her Jamaican roots.

``After a while people from here get used to you, and it changes," said Karr, who works at a Tedeschi Food Shop not far from Commercial Street. ``It's just because of the image that gay people have of Jamaicans. People -- no matter who they are -- get defensive of their lifestyle."

On same-sex marriage, the clashes have occurred as the state Legislature grapples with whether the electorate should vote on a measure to limit marriage to heterosexuals. A group that supports gay marriage, knowthyneighbor, has created a website displaying the names of more than 100,000 signers of a petition that calls for the state Constitution to be amended to prohibit same-sex marriage.

Knowthyneighbor's tactics are controversial, with critics alleging that knowthyneighbor is making the names of same-sex marriage opponents public in an effort to expose or intimidate them. The group's founders say they are simply promoting civic discourse.

The names of 43 Provincetown residents are listed on the website. Most of the petition signers attend St. Peter the Apostle Catholic Church, which serves the Portuguese community and others in town. The Catholic Church has helped lead the fight against same-sex marriage.

One St. Peter's parishioner, Yvonne Cabral, was verbally accosted last Friday by Provincetown Magazine publisher Rick Hines after Hines learned that Cabral signed the petition, according to police.

Police Chief Ted Meyer plans to seek charges of disorderly conduct against Hines, who saw Cabral shopping and loudly called her a ``bigot," according to both Hines and Meyer. Other people who signed the petition -- and subsequently had their names posted on the same website -- said manure has been spread on their properties in recent months, Meyer added.

All parties involved agree that Cabral was shopping and Hines was buying a hotdog when Hines told Cabral that she was a bigot.

Police said the matter was under investigation and declined to provide the Globe a copy of the police report.

The Rev. Henry J. Dahl, pastor at St. Peter's, heard about what happened to Cabral, and about another parishioner who said she felt intimidated after a flier was stuck on her car in the middle of the night with a list of the names of petition signers -- including her own. Dahl decided to call the police chief.

``People who signed the petition, I think they knew what they were getting into," said Dahl. ``There was a certain expectation of knowing that when you make a statement like that, there could be certain consequences that follow."

``But this was a dramatic experience," he said, referring to Cabral's encounter with Hines.

Hines said the matter was being blown out of proportion.

``I knew she signed the petition and I ran into her, and I gave her a piece of my mind," said Hines.

Hines added: ``After being pushed and prodded your whole life for being gay, you run into someone you know sees you as a second-class citizen and it's human to respond. . . . I regret that it happened that way."

When approached by a reporter yesterday, Cabral, who runs a trolley service , gathered tourists onto her trolley at the Town Hall stop, pulled the bell, and called out: ``I don't want to divide the community over this issue."

As the trolley pulled away, a sign attached to the back came into view. It read: ``That `love they neighbor' thing? I meant it . . . [signed] God."

Provincetown is mostly white, but includes several hundred people who identify themselves as biracial, along with 258 blacks, 11 American Indians, and 17 Asians.

It's not clear what percentage of the residents are gay. Some residents question whether a problem really exists between gays and straight people in Provincetown, suggesting that tourists are the ones bringing in hateful language.

``I haven't noticed a rift," said Luanne Lipkin-Kelman, 53, who was selling artwork with her partner at an outdoor craft fair at the local Unitarian church. ``The whole draw of P-town is that it's an old Portuguese fishing community and friendly to us."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 07:56 AM   #206
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON
Well, I'm not sure I know what your viewpoint is, Melon. Because you are a cultural relativist, or you seem to be arguing this point in the other thread, you essential are saying "to each man his own."

While your "personal" view is one I agree with on most subjects, it is not something we cannot legislate because it is only your subjective opinion for your life, and not an objective idea to which we can govern everybody.

So essentially - your argument, using your adherence to cultural relativism, self-destructs and dissipates before it would ever reach legislation.

Unless, of course, you ARE admitting there at least a FEW objective moral laws (murder, rape).

That being said, I still think we can still get along just fine
No, YOU are the one who has decided that because I don't adhere to your Taliban-like view of the world that I am a "cultural relativist." I know that, in the dualistic world of good and evil, that a "cultural relativist" is the equivalent to a "non-believer" (and where I was talking about how "believers" come in here and paint anyone who disagrees with them as, essentially, atheist Satan worshippers).

If we are going to talk "cultural relativism," why is it that "believers" think it is okay to legislate their moral view of the world, while then telling Muslim nations that they need to "modernize"? Is it the "Objective Moral Law" that whatever you believe is always correct, and what "the Other" believes is always wrong? If a devout Muslim came up to you and demanded that we institute Sharia law, because the Koran told him so, could you, with a straight face, explain to him why he's wrong? And would you be prepared for him to, with a straight face, explain to you why you're wrong?

Or is this where you grab your gun and force your way through? You're in the Air Force, if I remember. Where in the Bible does it state that when the military murders someone that it is "morally correct"? I thought there was "Objective Moral Law" that murder was always wrong. So why don't you speak up when the U.S. uses a large bomb that will, undoubtedly, have civilian deaths? Or, in your patriotic zeal, are you willing to use your "cultural relativism" to look the other way? I guess that murder isn't always wrong, now is it?

What sickens me is that the only consistent logic I see with you is that "Objective Moral Law" is defined by whatever you believe, and that "cultural relativism" is defined by whatever you believe is wrong. That's where I made the Ayatollah Khomeini connection earlier. Your certainty is to the level of zealotry.

Back to what I was saying, before you made your smug, irrelevant response, if gay marriage is legal, you are not affected. At all. You can fume all you want that you can't control other people's lives, but your day to day lifestyle is exactly the same. If your homophobia is legal, then the lives of gays and lesbians are directly affected, no matter how much they disagree with you. THAT was my point.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 09:47 AM   #207
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 06:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
What sickens me is that the only consistent logic I see with you is that "Objective Moral Law" is defined by whatever you believe, and that "cultural relativism" is defined by whatever you believe is wrong.
now this is a very interesting point

Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Back to what I was saying, before you made your smug, irrelevant response, if gay marriage is legal, you are not affected. At all. You can fume all you want that you can't control other people's lives, but your day to day lifestyle is exactly the same. If your homophobia is legal, then the lives of gays and lesbians are directly affected, no matter how much they disagree with you. THAT was my point.
and I would want to see a real answer to this one
__________________
Salome is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 09:49 AM   #208
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 04:15 AM


AEON, have you really been reading FYM a while, as you said a while ago?
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 09:54 AM   #209
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Why hasn't anyone actually answered my theological questions from pages ago?


and i meant for this thread to discuss the legal opinion put forth by the NY State Court, because i thought it was actually really interesting -- that straights need marriage to protect children from irresponsible heterosexuality.



oh well. it continues to amaze me how gay marriage threads explode in FYM.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-14-2006, 10:02 AM   #210
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
oh well. it continues to amaze me how gay marriage threads explode in FYM.
No kidding. But it makes it easier to see why/how politicians use it to effectively deflect debate away from issues that require using your head and not your heart.
__________________

__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
 

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 12:15 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