Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - U.S. Supreme Court Considers Gay Marriage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

U.S. Supreme Court Considers Gay Marriage

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1415161718 22>
Poll Question: What is your opinion on this?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
55 [73.33%]
1 [1.33%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
8 [10.67%]
9 [12.00%]
2 [2.67%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Message
geneyesontle View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 14 2012
Location: Quebec
Status: Offline
Points: 1266
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote geneyesontle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 18:16
Thanks Obama.
Being homosexual is okay. Marring someone that is from the same sex as you is okay.
Poseidon wants to Acquire the Taste of the Fragile Lamb
- Derek Adrian Gabriel Anderson, singer of the band Geneyesontle
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 16440
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The T Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 18:21
Thanks Obama??
Back to Top
Larree View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 10 2013
Location: Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 869
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Larree Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 18:23
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Larree Larree wrote:

So true.  One cannot apply 21st Century morals and ethics to people who lived in biblical times.  You cannot even do it with people who lived just a few hundred years ago.  That is one of the biggest problems with the study of history in general.
Actually on many things you can. Human nature has not changed that much over several tens of thousand years, and considering that a lot (or "most" or "all" depending on who you choose to believe) of our morals and ethics are supposed to come from "the church" in the first place then we can judge them by our standards because our standards are their standards with a small amount of modifcation that we've managed to crow-bar into our codes of morality inspite of the overwhelming influence of the church over the past two thousand years. Like it or not we are as bigotted now as they were then, we are as homophobic now as they were then, we are as immoral and as amoral as they ever were, we are as prudish and we are as promiscuous. We did not invent all those "sins" listed in Leviticus, Romans, Corintians and the gospel acording to saint Tim - all we've ever did different was ease up on the punishments - we no longer consider that "...that those who do such things deserve death..." and feel ourselves "righteous" for saying it... and that is the only thing we can judge them differently on.

Well, I never went to church.  Unless you consider Hollywood a church in it's own right!  I always hung out in mixed-race crowds and have known and hung out with gay, bi, straight, and transgendered people as long as I have been alive.  Bigotry and homophobia does not exist in my personal world.

And the bible did not start out as a Christian book anyway.  The early Christians changed the order of the books of the bible, and even added books.  Personally, I like the original pre-Christian version better.  (Isn't the original always better than the remake?)  

As a 21st Century (Schizoid) Man I can see how the laws of keeping kosher had more to do with staying alive than the observance of any kind of god ordered religious ritual.  Imagine what your stomach would have felt like after eating raw meat and washing it down with non-pasteurized milk.  Exactly.   Utter pukage.

Like I said in an earlier post...  Stop thumping on your bibles and thump some bass and drums!  




Edited by Larree - April 10 2013 at 18:35
Back to Top
Triceratopsoil View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Deadmonton
Status: Offline
Points: 17423
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Triceratopsoil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 18:48
What's wrong with raw meat?  I had sushi for lunch today.
Back to Top
Tapfret View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: August 12 2007
Location: Arlington, Wash
Status: Offline
Points: 2920
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tapfret Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 19:05
Originally posted by geneyesontle geneyesontle wrote:

Thanks Obama.
Being homosexual is okay. Marring someone that is from the same sex as you is okay.


Is he president of Quebec now too?
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Status: Offline
Points: 33272
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 19:05
Wink
Originally posted by Larree Larree wrote:

 
Like I said in an earlier post...  Stop thumping on your bibles and thump some bass and drums!  


Confused Okay...  




...You do know I'm the only atheist in the village don't you? Wink


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
A Person View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 10 2008
Location: MI, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 63742
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote A Person Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 19:36
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Thanks Obama??

I think he's referencing the meme.

I think people should be allowed to marry people. < id="bpm-darkle"> < id="bpm-invert">
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: DruryUniversity
Status: Offline
Points: 2533
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ambient Hurricanes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 19:53
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

Roger/Dark Elf:

First of all, nowhere in Scripture does it say that God hates homosexuals.  It says that He condemns their behavior.  There's a big difference.  God also condemns my own pride, lust, and selfishness, but I believe that I am forgiven because Jesus Christ died on my behalf.  All those who believe, homosexual or heterosexual, will also be forgiven:
"There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." 

Secondly,

Originally posted by Dictionary Dictionary wrote:


Objective (adj): Having actual existence or reality.


Yes, I do know what the word means, I'm just using a different definition than the one you're thinking of.  I never said that everyone who makes a truth claim has an objective perspective.  I said that religious and moral truth claims are objective because they don't deal with subjective criteria that differ from person to person but with reality. 

That's the worse misused of "objective/subjective" I've seen for awhile. I assumed you would have been aware that you cannot mix the differing definitions of words on a whim because the various meanings are only applicable within the contexts they are being used. It seems I was wrong.


I didn't mix them.  The word has different meanings, and I was using one of the meanings and it was unfortunately mistaken for the other.  Perhaps I should have explained myself better.

A truth claim is objective because it is a claim about something that has actual reality (i.e. a scientific theory, universal moral law, etc.)

The person who makes that truth claim is not objective, in the other meaning of objective that means "unbiased."  People have presuppositions and biases.  I make no claim to being unbiased. 

And are you going to explain how you think I misused the word at all?  You simply stated that I misused it while I explained how my use of the word was clear and valid.
In blood, he's writing the lyrics of a brand new tune.
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: DruryUniversity
Status: Offline
Points: 2533
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ambient Hurricanes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 20:13
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

  It says that He condemns their behavior.  There's a big difference.  God also condemns my own pride, lust, and selfishness, but I believe that I am forgiven because Jesus Christ died on my behalf. 



But what is there to condemn about it if that's just the way the guy is?  Sorry, but to me, that sounds very regressive and it would have to be coming from a text written thousands of years back.    If one side can take shelter under religion to judge others in a very prejudiced way, the other side is entitled to take shelter under freedom of expression to pay right back in the same coin.   I cannot and will not accept religious belief as a sound reason to judge another person.   Religious belief is for the person himself to judge his own actions as to whether he has or hasn't incurred the wrath of his God, not impose on others and pooh pooh their choices.


I realize that you raised something like this question earlier; sorry for not answering it then (I'm a bit busy at the moment).

The Bible doesn't even have a word for "homosexual."  All words in the Bible referring to homosexuality are referring to the practice, not the state of being homosexual.  That's why I try (not consistently, I admit) to identify homosexual behavior as sinful according to Scripture as opposed to homosexual orientation.  From the Biblical perspective, just being gay isn't a sin; you have to indulge your desires for it to be sinful.  Scripture teaches the same thing about many other innate desires.  I am heterosexual and have an innate sexual impulse that drives me to want to have sex, but I believe that sex outside of marriage is sinful and, as I am unmarried, I choose to abstain from sexual activity.

And yes, I do realize that there are other interpretations of the passages of Scripture that deal with homosexuality.  I personally have never heard a very convincing argument against the traditional reading, although I'm open to being convinced.  I don't hate homosexuals.  I don't judge them either.  Just because I believe that someone's actions are sinful doesn't mean I have any animosity or judgement toward them personally.

I just don't like to see people get attacked for their views on this issue.  I would never ridicule a homosexual for his lifestyle.  I disagree with the moral choice but I still would respect him.  I don't mind if I get attacked for my views as much, it just saddens me to see a fellow Christian attacked for his views on the issue.  I realize that it's a sensitive issue.  There are other passages in Scripture that I really struggle with, and I understand why people react so strongly against what the Bible says about homosexual behavior.  But I know where Alex is coming from, and I know that I didn't come here to stir up crap; I just want to have a respectful discussion on the issue.  I can't speak from Alex, but I think he wants the same thing, even though we might disagree on the issue quite a bit.
In blood, he's writing the lyrics of a brand new tune.
Back to Top
CPicard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 9418
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CPicard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 20:42
I'm a bit perplex in front of the evolution of the thread: first, it was about gay marriage in the USA, but it has turned to a philosophical discussion about the Scriptures.

Another proof that I should quit PA and watch cartoons instead: it would be more serious.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: September 03 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 5670
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 21:15
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

 That's why I try (not consistently, I admit) to identify homosexual behavior as sinful according to Scripture as opposed to homosexual orientation.

The difference is not very significant.  A homosexual would ultimately want to seek out others of a similar orientation to make love and live with.  Either which way, his choice of coming out with it instead of pretending to be a hetero, which he is not, is being condemned.


  
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


I just don't like to see people get attacked for their views on this issue.  I would never ridicule a homosexual for his lifestyle.  I disagree with the moral choice but I still would respect him.  I don't mind if I get attacked for my views as much, it just saddens me to see a fellow Christian attacked for his views on the issue.  I realize that it's a sensitive issue.  There are other passages in Scripture that I really struggle with, and I understand why people react so strongly against what the Bible says about homosexual behavior.  But I know where Alex is coming from, and I know that I didn't come here to stir up crap; I just want to have a respectful discussion on the issue.  I can't speak from Alex, but I think he wants the same thing, even though we might disagree on the issue quite a bit.


I think I have responded to this when it was put to me in a different way so I am not going to re-iterate my position but the part I marked in bold, is the reason why I do not practice religion.  I never ever want to identify myself as part of a clan, especially one that abides by and promotes blind faith in ideas that intrude upon the choices of others who have only committed the 'crime' of being different.  You've lost your objectivity in trying to defend one who you see as part of the same club, but one who was a lot more rude and offensive in the way he expressed his beliefs.


Edited by rogerthat - April 10 2013 at 21:16
Back to Top
Larree View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 10 2013
Location: Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 869
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Larree Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 21:24
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Wink
Originally posted by Larree Larree wrote:

 
Like I said in an earlier post...  Stop thumping on your bibles and thump some bass and drums!  


Confused Okay...  




...You do know I'm the only atheist in the village don't you? Wink


Cool!  Cool
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: DruryUniversity
Status: Offline
Points: 2533
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ambient Hurricanes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 21:32
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

 That's why I try (not consistently, I admit) to identify homosexual behavior as sinful according to Scripture as opposed to homosexual orientation.

The difference is not very significant.  A homosexual would ultimately want to seek out others of a similar orientation to make love and live with.  Either which way, his choice of coming out with it instead of pretending to be a hetero, which he is not, is being condemned.


I see a significant difference.  There are homosexuals who choose to abstain from sexual activity (usually for religious reasons).  I don't condemn merely having a homosexual orientation as sin.  I don't deny that some churches do (and that fact saddens me deeply). 


  
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


I just don't like to see people get attacked for their views on this issue.  I would never ridicule a homosexual for his lifestyle.  I disagree with the moral choice but I still would respect him.  I don't mind if I get attacked for my views as much, it just saddens me to see a fellow Christian attacked for his views on the issue.  I realize that it's a sensitive issue.  There are other passages in Scripture that I really struggle with, and I understand why people react so strongly against what the Bible says about homosexual behavior.  But I know where Alex is coming from, and I know that I didn't come here to stir up crap; I just want to have a respectful discussion on the issue.  I can't speak from Alex, but I think he wants the same thing, even though we might disagree on the issue quite a bit.


I think I have responded to this when it was put to me in a different way so I am not going to re-iterate my position but the part I marked in bold, is the reason why I do not practice religion.  I never ever want to identify myself as part of a clan, especially one that abides by and promotes blind faith in ideas that intrude upon the choices of others who have only committed the 'crime' of being different.  You've lost your objectivity in trying to defend one who you see as part of the same club, but one who was a lot more rude and offensive in the way he expressed his beliefs.


I respect your choice not to practice religion.  However, I hope you don't misunderstand my comment; it wasn't intended to mean that I'm not saddened to see non-Christians attacked (I am).  I do feel loyalty to my brothers and sisters in Christ, however; no one wants to see their family or their friends attacked for their opinions; I feel (to a lesser degree) the same way here, although of course I will defend anyone on here who I think is being unfairly treated.  If he had, in my view, deserved it, it would have been a different matter entirely.  I don't think the way he expressed his opinions was offensive at all; I think it was the opinions themselves that were offensive to some, and in general, I think it's usually better not to voice offense in that case (although I'm not by any means perfect on that point either).

If you were offended, I respect that.  I also respect Alex's opinion.  I try to have respect for others, and I want others to have respect for each other too.  Maybe that's an impossible goal, but that doesn't stop me from trying to attain it.
In blood, he's writing the lyrics of a brand new tune.
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: DruryUniversity
Status: Offline
Points: 2533
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ambient Hurricanes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 21:35
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

Gay affirming Christian here, and proud of it!  It is NOT unbiblical, regardless of what the false prophets say! Wink


Off topic, but,

Geoff!  Where have you been, man?
In blood, he's writing the lyrics of a brand new tune.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: September 03 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 5670
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 21:37
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

 I don't think the way he expressed his opinions was offensive at all; I think it was the opinions themselves that were offensive to some, and in general, I think it's usually better not to voice offense in that case (although I'm not by any means perfect on that point either).


Yeah, sure, I guess you could very politely say that Hitler was the true inspiration for Nelson Mandela (and in a twisted way, such dictators probably inspired the fightback) and would you really expect no ripostes at all, no sharp disagreements, no sarcastic digs at such an opinion?  What if there were gays in the conversation?  Do they have no right to be offended at homosexuality being equated with bestiality just because Alex took shelter under religious beliefs?  A homosexual per se is being cruel to no one, he is only being true to his nature.
Back to Top
Larree View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 10 2013
Location: Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 869
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Larree Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 21:42
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

What's wrong with raw meat?  I had sushi for lunch today.

Nothing at all!  But I would not drink unpasteurized milk with that!  Or any kind of milk for that matter!  LOL
Back to Top
Triceratopsoil View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Deadmonton
Status: Offline
Points: 17423
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Triceratopsoil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 22:38
Don't babies drink unpasteurized milk all the time? ;)

edit: not with sushi, of course.  I will concede as much.


Edited by Triceratopsoil - April 10 2013 at 22:39
Back to Top
Larree View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 10 2013
Location: Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 869
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Larree Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 22:41
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Don't babies drink unpasteurized milk all the time? ;)

edit: not with sushi, of course.  I will concede as much.


HAHAHA, true!  NOT with sushi!  LOL
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 2426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Dark Elf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 22:48
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

Roger/Dark Elf:

First of all, nowhere in Scripture does it say that God hates homosexuals.  It says that He condemns their behavior.  There's a big difference.  God also condemns my own pride, lust, and selfishness, but I believe that I am forgiven because Jesus Christ died on my behalf.  All those who believe, homosexual or heterosexual, will also be forgiven:
"There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." 

Secondly,

Originally posted by Dictionary Dictionary wrote:


Objective (adj): Having actual existence or reality.


Yes, I do know what the word means, I'm just using a different definition than the one you're thinking of.  I never said that everyone who makes a truth claim has an objective perspective.  I said that religious and moral truth claims are objective because they don't deal with subjective criteria that differ from person to person but with reality. 

That's the worse misused of "objective/subjective" I've seen for awhile. I assumed you would have been aware that you cannot mix the differing definitions of words on a whim because the various meanings are only applicable within the contexts they are being used. It seems I was wrong.


I didn't mix them.  The word has different meanings, and I was using one of the meanings and it was unfortunately mistaken for the other.  Perhaps I should have explained myself better.

A truth claim is objective because it is a claim about something that has actual reality (i.e. a scientific theory, universal moral law, etc.)

The person who makes that truth claim is not objective, in the other meaning of objective that means "unbiased."  People have presuppositions and biases.  I make no claim to being unbiased. 

And are you going to explain how you think I misused the word at all?  You simply stated that I misused it while I explained how my use of the word was clear and valid.

ob·jec·tive

noun
a
: relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independent existence —used chiefly in medieval philosophy
b : of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind <objective reality> <our reveries … are significantly and repeatedly shaped by our transactions with the objective world — Marvin Reznikoff> — compare subjective 3a
c of a symptom of disease : perceptible to persons other than the affected individual — compare subjective 4c
d : involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena <objective awareness> <objective data>
2
: relating to, characteristic of, or constituting the case of words that follow prepositions or transitive verbs
3
a : expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations <objective art> <an objective history of the war> <an objective judgment>
b of a test : limited to choices of fixed alternatives and reducing subjective factors to a minimum

I think we've moved past the discursive,
prosimetrical dialogues of Boethius and Thomas Aquinas' repudiated Scholasticism, so unless you're referring to medieval objectivism, then your definition of a "truth claim" is specious. Spurious even. If you look at the numerous sub-definitions of "objective", you will see words and phrases like "sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers", "involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects", "expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations".

"Objectivity" is to be perceptible, sensible, observable, nondiscriminatory, nonpartisan, impartial, unbiased, detached, reasonable, concrete, material, scientific.

Ergo, your statements are subjective and based on faith, not measurable and demonstrable data.

Shall we rattle off a few synonyms for "subjective"? Emotional, illusory, prejudiced, instinctive, egotistical, self-centered, unsubstantial, supernatural, disembodied, ingrained, inherited, abstruse, esoteric, inexplicable, transcendental, capricious, judgmental, ethereal, heavenly.

One could just as easily say "I believe in aliens" and not be objective in the least, although that could be the same type of "truth claim" as you imply. In the sense you impute, "I believe in aliens" does not involve personal tastes, preferences or feelings; therefore, it is a "truth claim". It is the same as other wholly illusory perceptions like believing in Yetis, leprechauns, Thor, Odin or Dionysus. One might as well worship the sun. At least it is regular and consistent.

Please pay a visit to my blog...The Dark Elf File...a slighty skewed journal of music reviews, literary comment, fan-fiction and interminable essays.
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: DruryUniversity
Status: Offline
Points: 2533
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ambient Hurricanes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2013 at 22:50
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

 I don't think the way he expressed his opinions was offensive at all; I think it was the opinions themselves that were offensive to some, and in general, I think it's usually better not to voice offense in that case (although I'm not by any means perfect on that point either).


Yeah, sure, I guess you could very politely say that Hitler was the true inspiration for Nelson Mandela (and in a twisted way, such dictators probably inspired the fightback) and would you really expect no ripostes at all, no sharp disagreements, no sarcastic digs at such an opinion?  What if there were gays in the conversation?  Do they have no right to be offended at homosexuality being equated with bestiality just because Alex took shelter under religious beliefs?  A homosexual per se is being cruel to no one, he is only being true to his nature.


I never said they didn't have the right to be offended; I said that they shouldn't express that offense in the form of ridicule.

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree.  I can try to understand your position; if I was a practicing homosexual, would the equation of my homosexual behavior with bestiality be offensive to me?  Probably yes.  At the same time, I see it from Alex's point of view also. 
In blood, he's writing the lyrics of a brand new tune.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1415161718 22>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.