Marriage Debate

thaiboxerken said:
It's not a percieved bigotry. People that are against same-sex marriage are bigots.
Click to expand...

I agree. To claim otherwise is to ignore the commonly agreed upon definition.

Bigot:
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

(from yahoo dictionary)
 
rocketdodger said:
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken :

It's not a percieved bigotry. People that are against same-sex marriage are bigots.
Click to expand...
I agree. To claim otherwise is to ignore the commonly agreed upon definition.

Bigot:
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

(from yahoo dictionary)
Click to expand...

Ummmmmmmmm........hate to burst your bubble, but.............

That definition also fits proponents of same-sex marriage.
 
Huntster said:
Ummmmmmmmm........hate to burst your bubble, but.............

That definition also fits proponents of same-sex marriage.
Click to expand...

Yep. You didn't burst any bubble! The difference is that one kind of bigot's activites are passive and the other is active. When it comes to interfering with the lives of others... well I am sure you know which kind is worse.
 
rocketdodger said:
...The difference is that one kind of bigot's activites are passive and the other is active. When it comes to interfering with the lives of others... well I am sure you know which kind is worse.
Click to expand...

So "our" bigotry is okay, and "theirs" is not?
 
Huntster said:
So "our" bigotry is okay, and "theirs" is not?
Click to expand...

I am a moral subjectivist so I would never claim any such thing. I would only claim that my bigotry is not contradictory to my ethical structure while the bigotry of many opponents of SSM is contradictory to their ethical structure.

I cannot judge others according to my morals, because I don't think absolute morals exist. I can, however, judge people to be either of high or low integrity, based upon the level of self-contradiction they exhibit. As for me, I strive to achieve 100% integrity and I consider myself to be pretty close.
 
Huntster said:
Ummmmmmmmm........hate to burst your bubble, but.............

That definition also fits proponents of same-sex marriage.
Click to expand...

You missed out the last bit of the defintion - the bit about "intolerance" i.e ."... and is intolerant of those who differ".

Not one of the homosexuals in this thread has been intolerant toward the heterosexuals because of that difference, the opposite is not true.
 
Huntster said:
Oh, I see.

And if their common ancestors (such as their great-great grandparents) were quite probably redheads, that means they abandoned their mates and offspring?
Click to expand...

OK, so you're not going to bother even trying to understand. I get it.

I joined the military at age 17 (had to have my parents signature to do it) and shipped off to Vietnam (at my request). I've lived across the globe from them almost ever since.

My Dad passed away a year or so ago. Several years ago, in a phone conversation, he told me that "kids are forever". As my adult children (away building their own lives) grow into adulthood, I understand exactly what Dad meant.
Click to expand...

Inexplicably, you still managed to move away, and your Dad didn't spend the rest of his life raising you. Thus, your claim that "raising them is a lifetime committment" remains false.

Considering the greater number of kids raised unsuccessfully in single-parent homes, this most assuredly shouldn't be denied.
Click to expand...

Talking out of your ass, I see. Ho-hum.
 
Hunster, your point that two parents are better than one needs examining. You claim that having grandparents and grandmothers around is good. Quantity is no substitute for quality. One good parent, or two who merely happen to share the same plumbing, is better than a whole gaggle of intolerant, bigoted, repressive zealots.
 
Nonsense. You can have quantity and quality at the same time. It's certainly a lot easier raising a family with two parents.
 
Hardenbergh said:
Nonsense. You can have quantity and quality at the same time. It's certainly a lot easier raising a family with two parents.
Click to expand...
It's easier to raise a family with two parents? That depends entirely on the nature of those two parents. The best thing my father's father ever did was leave the house forever.
 
Darat said:
Don't you mean two good parents?
Click to expand...
Certainly not! He means that a family with an abusive, alcoholic father and a self-indulgent, drug addled mother is better than a pair of homosexual fathers who are happy, well adjusted, successful, and have lots of time to spend tending their child's needs, because heterosexuality is apparantly the most important criterion for raising children.
 
ImaginalDisc said:
Hunster, your point that two parents are better than one needs examining. You claim that having grandparents and grandmothers around is good. Quantity is no substitute for quality. One good parent, or two who merely happen to share the same plumbing, is better than a whole gaggle of intolerant, bigoted, repressive zealots.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but where are the statistics to back that up? How do you measure intolerance, bigotry and repression? Not exactly as easy as counting, is it?

I'm sorry, but while individual exceptions certainly exist, the overall trend is simply undeniable: children of two-parent families fare MUCH better than children of one-parent families. If you want to get widespread support for SSM, you simply need to accept and acknowledge that fact, and show how SSM's don't threaten that picture. I happen to agree that they don't, that there are much bigger problems to deal with, but to cling to the idea that one-parent families are just as good is simply PC garbage.
 
ImaginalDisc said:
Certainly not! He means that a family with an abusive, alcoholic father and a self-indulgent, drug addled mother is better than a pair of homosexual fathers who are happy, well adjusted, successful, and have lots of time to spend tending their child's needs, because heterosexuality is apparantly the most important criterion for raising children.
Click to expand...

It appears that you're portraying a heterosexual couple as dysfunctional so that it's in stark contrast or pales in comparison to the alternative family unit. Of course many heterosexual couples are lousy parents but there are also lousy homosexual parents.
 
Hardenbergh said:
It appears that you're portraying a heterosexual couple as dysfunctional so that it's in stark contrast or pales in comparison to the alternative family unit. Of course many heterosexual couples are lousy parents but there are also lousy homosexual parents.
Click to expand...

So do you agree then that what is important is for a child to have good parents rather then any specific number of parents?
 
Meadmaker said:
It's also nonsensical, as phrased. How could you discuss "women's psychology" without at least tacitly acknowledging a constrast with men's psychology? What I believe is that a typical man has different psychological traits from a typical woman, and those differences are founded in biology, not society. Yes, I am saying that men and women are different, and not even naked photographs will reveal all of the important differences.
Click to expand...
I'll rephrase: Do you believe that all psychology is biologically driven?

In other words, if it is okay to legally differentiate between male and female behavior based on biology, is it also okay to legally differentiate between those, for instance, who are and are not genetically inclined to drink in terms of DWI's?
 
Huntster said:
rocketdodger said:
thaiboxerken said:
It's not a percieved bigotry. People that are against same-sex marriage are bigots.
Click to expand...
I agree. To claim otherwise is to ignore the commonly agreed upon definition.

Bigot:
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
Click to expand...
Ummmmmmmmm........hate to burst your bubble, but.............

That definition also fits proponents of same-sex marriage.
Click to expand...
Hate to burst your bubble, but I'm a proponent of same-sex marriage and I'm not gay.

Would you like to try again?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom