Now playing on dirty.radio: Loading... |
|
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Quote:
Please keep in mind that I'm a meat-eating atheist, so I'm not trying to advocate a vegan diet or anything here. I'm personally at peace with the fact that humans are simply a link in a food chain, and that a portion of our diet requires the nutrients we can get from meat. And I generally place the preservation of human life above other animals simply because I am a human, and the survival of all species depends on self-preservation. I'm just interested in the contradictions we face at this point in our species' evolution, and it's undeniable that as we learn more about the planet we live on and the space around us, we're forced to re-examine many of our long-held beliefs that have been shaped largely by religious dogma. Which, incidentally, leads quite nicely into the other half of this thread's subject that's been passed over so far - gay rights. Aside from religiously-based views of homosexuality, what's the problem with affording all the same rights to gays that straight people enjoy? As I've said before, the whole concept of marriage being between a man and a woman made far more sense in the past when procreation was a necessity for survival - families needing more hands to tend the fields, do the chores and such. But at this point in our history, marriage has simply become a public declaration and celebration of our commitment to the person we've chosen to share our lives with. And along with it has come a set of rights that respect that commitment, and make it easier to get through difficult situations as a couple. Or how about children? How do those who oppose gay adoption justify the consequences of that position? Why would they rather see a child denied a loving home at all than see them raised by a loving gay couple? If we as a species are capable of empathy that extends all the way to an unformed cluster of cells in the womb, then why is it so hard to extend the same empathy to a fully matured man who finds themselves physically and emotionally attracted to other men, or a woman attracted to other women? What is the actual threat that justifies a law called "The Defense of Marriage Act"? It even amazes me that a name like that has been assigned to it....the DEFENSE of marriage...as if there were a bunch of gay people with torches and pitchforks coming to burn down marriage with their gayness or something. I believe it's time that we as a species thought a little more. We're capable of it, but we're lazy. Instead of applying critical thought, we use religious dogma and "tradition" as a crutch. Or we allow politics to trump knowledge, as in the case of the 212 House Representatives that opposed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill the other day, defending their positions with statements such as saying climate change is a “hoax...perpetrated out of the scientific community” - a declaration that was actually met with applause. But religion and tradition says that gays are bad, so they don't get the same rights as the rest of us. And religion says human life is sacred, so abortion must be banned (although we'll kill the doctors who perform them). It's extremely disheartening, and we're not going to survive as a species if we don't start thinking better. Okay, I'm just rambling now, but I did try to keep it somewhat on topic....
__________________
Download all my remixes Last edited by Sean; 06-30-2009 at 05:24 PM. |
#102
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Quote:
However, the fact is that we, as humans, are superior to the rest of the animals. And this is because we have the ability to choose and think out our actions. We don't just go on instinct like the animals do. This makes us vastly different than the animals. When a lion is hungry, it is going to go hunt and kill some other animal to satisfy it's hunger. When we are hungry, we can choose to wait awhile before eating, or not even eat at all. This is why the fish thing doesn't hold water for me. However, an interesting thing could be said that because people like you (no offense, here) hold this opinion, it actually allows humans to act like animals. After all, if we evolved from animals, then there is justification for us acting like them. And this is where the whole marriage thing comes into play. Marriage is yet another thing that separates us from the animals. If you come out of the club at the end of the night and see the dogs running around, you will see them all chasing down that one female dog. Then they get, and do their thing, and away she goes. How is this not different then a lot of human behavior, especially in modern times? Seriously, think about it. Quote:
Quote:
Because of the above, I can never say that it would be 'okay' for a gay couple to adopt or raise a child. Once again, it is not because they are incapable of it - I personally know a Lesbian couple who raised a girl who is 21 now and she is, in a general sense, perfectly normal. It is simply because I could not put a child into a situation that I consider to be morally wrong. To me it is similar to giving a child to an alcoholic (who is of the non-violent type). The alcoholic could be perfectly capable of providing a loving and caring home, however most people would object to giving a child to him or her. Why? Because most people think that it is wrong to expose a child to that type of behavior. So where do we draw the line? This is the issue I have with how society is going. There are no longer any lines to be draw, and everything is becoming 'okay'. This to me is bad, and the 'traditions' of society are there for a reason, even if we no longer remember what that reason is. |
#104
|
||||
|
||||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Quote:
(Environmental factors may or may not contribute to that outcome - none of us knows for sure at this stage - but either way, by the time a person is 11 or 12, same-sex attraction is as natural and innate and feels as impossible to alter as opposite-sex attraction is for heterosexuals) Quote:
Quote:
1) There is no single "natural disposition of man" in the way that you insinuate. If 6% or whatever (for the sake of argument) of the population have a fundamental attraction to members of the same sex, that is their natural disposition. It exists naturally, thus it's perfectly natural. It just makes it less common. Common and natural (as in innate) are not the same thing. 2) The fact that the natural disposition of that 6% rules out the ability to sexually procreate doesn't make the disposition (or behaviour) of that 6% less natural or less innate. It just means it doesn't fit into the cycle of natural reproduction. 3) There exists no single reasoned argument that links morality to the mere fact that something doesn't fit into the cycle of natural reproduction. I say no reasoned argument - there are of course plenty of arguments that resort to the world's many creation myths. To most of the rest of us though, right and wrong are typically not decided by: a) whether something is common b) whether something leads to procreation If you're judging this whole issue objectively, it should be quite telling that most opponents of homosexuality are more likely to subscribe to one of the various creation myths with their primitive ideas about sin (despite you using the words "in my system of morals") whereas those who resort to reason alone are far more likely to reach the conclusion that there is nothing morally wrong with it. Quote:
2) What do you fear will happen if you "expose a child" to same-sex 'togetherness' and occasional displays of affection? My guess is they will simply be more likely to end up tolerant and broad-minded. More likely to grow up appreciating that homosexuality is not a sin. There is no evidence that they will grow up gay any more than the millions of heterosexual parents of homosexuals were able to make their offspring straight, despite the overwhelming social pressure (and in most cases, personal desire) to conform to heterosexuality. I'm somewhat amazed you need to ask. Consenting adults? Harming no-one else? All pretty standard stuff. Rules out bestiality, paedophilia and all the other horrors that slippery slope proponents wave around. Panic about where to draw the line is unnecessary. We can - and do - always draw a line. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Quote:
|
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Yeah, and make EVERYONE in the world gay. That would be scary, I mean, all these witty trash talking bitches EVERYWHERE. I WOULD commit suicide if that happened.
__________________
8=====)~~(=====8 |
#107
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Quote:
Quote:
The scientists had placed two pieces of wire in the room. One was bent into a hook, the other was straight. They figured Betty (the crow) would choose the hook to lift the basket by its handle. But experiments don't always go according to plan. Another crow had stolen the hook before Betty could find it. Betty is undeterred. She looks at the meat in the basket, then spots the straight piece of wire. She picks it up with her beak, pushes one end into a crack in the floor, and uses her beak to bend the other end into a hook. Thus armed, she lifts the basket out of the tube. "This was the first time Betty had ever seen a piece of wire like this," Kacelnik said. "But she knew she could use it to make a hook and exactly where she needed to bend it to make the size she needed." They gave Betty other tests, each requiring a slightly different solution, such as making a hook out of a flat piece of aluminum rather than a wire. Each time, Betty invented a new tool and solved the problem. "It means she had a mental representation of what it was she wanted to make. Now that," Kacelnik said, "is a major kind of cognitive sophistication." Now these examples may not be on par with the extent of human ability to think - I mean hell, we've gone to the freakin' moon and landed probes on Mars for cryin' out loud. But just because a cheetah runs far, far faster than us doesn't mean we're incapable of running. We're just not evolved to be as fast a runner as cheetahs, exactly as other animals haven't evolved to be as complex a thinker as humans. But the abilities to "choose and think" themselves are in no way unique to us. Quote:
And where marriage is concerned, our mating habits are not unique to us. We share similar behavior to quite a variety of animals. Penguins stay with a single mate for life, as do gibbons, wolves, many types of eagles, etc. All told at this point, we've observed that approximately 3% of all animal species share this monogamous behavior with us. Likewise, we share no significant common traits in reproduction with other animals, like sharks or turtles. But again, we certainly aren't unique in this sense. So when you say my beliefs "allow humans to act like animals", frankly, I don't see what the problem you're trying to illustrate is. We are animals, so of course we act like animals. What's inherently bad about being an animal? Quote:
Deckard has spoken eloquently to these points, and I fully agree with him. Quote:
__________________
Download all my remixes Last edited by Sean; 07-01-2009 at 05:12 PM. |
#108
|
||||
|
||||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Quote:
Quote:
So technically, a lesbian who never had been with a man is still a virgin. Same with a man who has never been with a women. I am just stating this because I am not sure if you meant that a virgin can be both a homosexual and a heterosexual (as in the same time), or they can be either one or the other. Quote:
Quote:
I am running out of time, I'll address more later. |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
I'll write more of a response to you later, I just want to mention something here.
Quote:
So then, if I saw you and your wife walking down the street, and I happen to be horny, you would have no problem if I roundhouse kicked you in the head to knock you out, then bend your wife over and take her right there on the street corner? After all, isn't this how animals act? Would I be wrong, when you say that I raped her, that my response would be that we are animals and I was just acting like one? |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
Quote:
humans are social animals, and therefore require cohabitation and therefore require a body of ethics in order to survive. Its as much our animal-ness to be ethical and treat eachother with compassion as it is natural for the frog to swim. nice try though. there's a bunch of this kind of fallacy in the book of mormon too.
__________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain |
Post Reply |
|
|