• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proposition 8 Struck Down!!!

Barber Shop said:
As long as they don't let left-handed people serve openly in the military (or get married) I am fine. But these deviants should not be rubbing it in the face of decent, God-fearing right-handers.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with it as long as they don't flaunt it by writing left-handed in public! What they do behind closed doors is their own business.

-Bri
 
Spindrift said:
He seems to simply always ignore what isn't convenient to his world view.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is a matter of convenient. Or, maybe better, I think convenient is too weak of a word. Assuming RP''s world view really is as presented here, imagine how jarring it would be to accept homosexuality as simply normal behavior. It would turn his world upside down with the consequence that his other black-and-white, simplistic views would come into question. Everything would necessarily change. It'd be like me foregoing my atheism and becoming a dyed-in-the-wool Benny Hinn acolyte. Ugh.

So RP will, I opine, continue to ignore reality until something BIG happens to him in real life. I don't think posts, facts, links, etc. on an internet forum are sufficient.
 
Shalamar said:
Robert, why do you repeatedly ignore the evidence of homosexual acts being found in nature in the animal kingdom?

I really would like an answer.
Click to expand...

Common Sense tells me Human beings have intellect and conscience, which lower forms of life do not have.
 
Robert Prey said:
Common Sense tells me Human beings have intellect and conscience, which lower forms of life do not have.
Click to expand...
And my conscience tells me that what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms is none of your business.
 
Dessi said:
The problem here is that the word "natural" has many loaded meanings. It can mean morally good or bad, or it can mean man-made, or it can mean paranormal / not described by physics, or it can mean in concert with a person's interests and inclinations.

The whole argument is based on a word game:

- Having romantic relationships with men or women is by no means restricted by the laws of physics, so its "natural" in that sense.

- Homosexuality certainly isn't man-made anymore than heterosexuality, nevermind that people use all sorts of man-made things in their daily lives all the time, so things being man-made or not is clearly irrelevant.

- People certainly never evolved to live in skyscrapers or to use contraception, so criticizing homosexuality on the basis that it's not an evolved tendency either carries over to every other facet of modern living or is non-sequitor.

- When talking about a person's inclinations and interests (i.e. what "comes naturally" to people), its much natural for gay women to pursue romantic relationships with other women than with men, its natural for straight women to pursue romantic relationships with men than women. Things that "come naturally" to people are relative to their private and personal interests.

So, the only meaning we're left with is "natural = morally good, unnatural = morally bad". The argument "homosexuality is morally wrong because its unnatural" literally means "homosexuality is morally wrong because its morally wrong", its circular, it doesn't explain why its morally wrong.

That's kind of a problem. You state over and over again that being gay is unnatural without ever explaining what "unnatural" even means, let alone explain what possible moral distinction is between someone having romantic relationships with one gender vs another.

At best, you're confabulating an argument against gay couples. You likely don't give a crap what is or is not natural (whatever you mean by that word), just what you find personally disgusting (presumably gay men, because lesbians are awesome, amirite?). If that's a sufficient reason to deny them of a fundamental right to marry, I will inform you that a majority of Americans are profoundly disgusted by anti-gay prejudice, therefore you should lose your right to marriage too. Seems to be the "natural" implication of your argument, right?
Click to expand...

It may be an inclination for human beings to sin, but that does not make it right nor does it make it a part of the Natural Order.
 
Robert Prey said:
Common Sense tells me Human beings have intellect and conscience, which lower forms of life do not have.
Click to expand...

Your common sense flies in the face of evidence.

Even so, you are defeating your own argument now. If humans alone have intellect and conscience, then how is homosexuality "unnatural"?*

Aren't you really merely arguing that only the opinion of your intellect and conscience (or those who agree with it) count in establishing morality?

Why are you opposed to allowing some people to use their own intellect and conscience?

Are you the only human with "common sense"?

*ETA: In other words, if this is the reason for not using "nature" to consider infanticide to be moral, why should we ever turn to "nature" to answer questions of morality? If you're only talking about human nature, then the argument that homosexuality is contrary to human nature is demonstrably factually false. (Homosexuality actually exists, both in non-human and human nature.)
 
Last edited:
Barber Shop said:
Growing up on a farm I observed that all chicken sex was non-consensual (rape).

This was natural. So, rape must be good!

(Is this chicken logic a smaller version of the 'ostrich fallacy' you pointed out earlier?)
Click to expand...

Despite the depth of your post, I'd wager you probably are not a chicken.
 
Robert Prey said:
It may be an inclination for human beings to sin, but that does not make it right nor does it make it a part of the Natural Order.
Click to expand...
Using computers isn't part of the natural order. Neither is wearing clothes. That doesn't make them wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom