Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-05-2011, 04:14 PM   #661 (permalink)
Anxiety Hangover
 
Buzzov*en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gardenia
Posts: 501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mykonos View Post
Well hey, that's why I don't listen to the Bible! Discrimination is bad kids, and don't let any 2000 year old book tell you otherwise.
I don't listen to any religious text. I don't believe in any of that bull****.
__________________

Save the environment, shoot yourself in the head.
And when there is no hope I'll smoke some crack I'll shoot some dope.
Buzzov*en is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 04:40 PM   #662 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
hip hop bunny hop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,367
Default

Quote:
I stopped taking the author seriously after the following passage:
I'm sorry, your point is what? You're denying the importance of sexual dimorphism?

Quote:
Hmmmmmmm also lets not forget lesbians can be artificial inseminated. No logical arguement against homosexuality. All it boils down to is ignorance and stupidity.
Speaking of ignorance; this is the second time the article I linked to (the sole one, which is quite brief and easy to read) answers your point.

Quote:
One may argue that lesbians are capable of procreating via artificial insemination, so the state does have an interest in recognizing lesbian marriages, but a lesbianís sexual relationship, committed or not, has no bearing on her ability to reproduce.
....

Quote:
Since when has repruduction been the only purpose of a modern sexual relationship?
Again, from the article I linked to earlier:

Quote:
Some argue that the link between marriage and procreation is not as strong as it once was, and they are correct. Until recently, the primary purpose of marriage, in every society around the world, has been procreation. In the 20th century, Western societies have downplayed the procreative aspect of marriage, much to our detriment. As a result, the happiness of the parties to the marriage, rather than the good of the children or the social order, has become its primary end, with disastrous consequences. When married persons care more about themselves than their responsibilities to their children and society, they become more willing to abandon these responsibilities, leading to broken homes, a plummeting birthrate, and countless other social pathologies that have become rampant over the last 40 years. Homosexual marriage is not the cause for any of these pathologies, but it will exacerbate them, as the granting of marital benefits to a category of sexual relationships that are necessarily sterile can only widen the separation between marriage and procreation.
Quote:
Extending the marriage ban to people over 60 is not impractical at all.
Point being?


Quote:
And who said that marriage's sole purpose is to function as formal institution for biological breeding?
Even if we ignore the historical & anthropological evidence which tells us that the function of marriage is procreation; the fact of the matter is that children who grow up in a household headed by a heterosexual married couple are more successful than those grow up in alternative situations, whether homosexual, single parent (of either sex), or the step-parent or adopted child situations.


Quote:
Why would such a thing even be necessary?
Because once birth rates fall beneath a level for a population to sustain itself, there are many notable problems which occur. Amongst them, economic - the GDP will shrink, Govt. revenues will fall, and the only way to prevent this would be massive immigration. I think this is ironic, considering the attitude immigrants from the 3rd world have towards homosexuality. (LINK)


Quote:
If people, regardless of sexual orientation or other circumstances, feel that a formalisation of their relationship will make them happier, who are you or anyone else to deny them that?
Who am I? Well, I'm an Atheist, an American, and unlike those in this thread who claim to oppose Christianity and then fully embrace slave morality, I'm consistent in my rejection of Christian morality.
__________________
Have mercy on the poor.
hip hop bunny hop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 04:48 PM   #663 (permalink)
Anxiety Hangover
 
Buzzov*en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gardenia
Posts: 501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop View Post
Even if we ignore the historical & anthropological evidence which tells us that the function of marriage is procreation; the fact of the matter is that children who grow up in a household headed by a heterosexual married couple are more successful than those grow up in alternative situations, whether
One the funcation of marriage is not procreation genius. That would be sex. Two prove that bull**** statement of yours.
You are beyond joke. Keep on trolling with your psychotic views =)
__________________

Save the environment, shoot yourself in the head.
And when there is no hope I'll smoke some crack I'll shoot some dope.
Buzzov*en is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 04:55 PM   #664 (permalink)
AWhatup Ganache?
 
Mykonos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 381
Default

Then surely if a woman's relationship has no bearing on her ability to reproduce, her partner's hender shouldn't matter anyway? There's always holes in these arguments.
__________________
'Not that Becktionary, the Rhyming Becktionary!'- Bender Bending Rodriguez
Mykonos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 04:59 PM   #665 (permalink)
Anxiety Hangover
 
Buzzov*en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gardenia
Posts: 501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mykonos View Post
Then surely if a woman's relationship has no bearing on her ability to reproduce, her partner's hender shouldn't matter anyway? There's always holes in these arguments.
Like I said it is just ignorance and stupidity against it.
__________________

Save the environment, shoot yourself in the head.
And when there is no hope I'll smoke some crack I'll shoot some dope.
Buzzov*en is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 05:29 PM   #666 (permalink)
Me llamo Marijan
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 6,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop View Post
You're denying the importance of sexual dimorphism?
I'm disputing the importance of gender roles and their perpetuation through upbringing in different-sex families.
Quote:
the fact of the matter is that children who grow up in a household headed by a heterosexual married couple are more successful than those grow up in alternative situations, whether homosexual, single parent (of either sex), or the step-parent or adopted child situations.
Is that so? Mind backing it up with some relevant research?
adidasss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 06:41 PM   #667 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,760
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Monkey View Post
The Bible does advocate, indeed order, capital punishment for (male) homosexuality.

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." (Leviticus 18:22)

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13)
Oh dear, well, my Christian friends told me the opposite and I myself don't remember much about the bible. Well, time to brush up on my reading.
Farfisa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 06:43 PM   #668 (permalink)
Juicious Maximus III
 
tore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 5,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop View Post
It depends on how you'd define "homophobia". Is denying homosexuals the right to marry homophobic? If so, then you are sadly missing out, because there is no shortage of logical secular arguments in this order (link)...

Opposition to homosexuality is part of a broader Conservative reaction to the "sexual revolution" of the 60s. As homosexuals can't breed, it's flashpoint between two very different views on the point and purpose of sexual relationships - that is, whether the primary purpose of these relationships is pleasure or reproduction. Does this clarify things for you?
The purpose of sexual relationships really doesn't enter into it at all. These people love eachother and have a desire to be with eachother, just like heterosexual couples do. Do we require heterosexual couples to produce more babies? No, of course not. If we don't really care if heterosexuals, why should we care whether or not gay people procreate?

That whole argument is far too stupid to use to justify discrimination against gay people, their love and their relationships. Unless of course you are horribly immoral or stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop View Post
the fact of the matter is that children who grow up in a household headed by a heterosexual married couple are more successful than those grow up in alternative situations, whether homosexual, single parent (of either sex), or the step-parent or adopted child situations.
Well, assuming this is true, perhaps that is because of the immoral (imo) discrimination against gay relationships creating a more difficult environment for children with same sex parents. If you want these children to fare better, you should fight discrimination against gays.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop View Post
Because once birth rates fall beneath a level for a population to sustain itself, there are many notable problems which occur. Amongst them, economic - the GDP will shrink, Govt. revenues will fall, and the only way to prevent this would be massive immigration. I think this is ironic, considering the attitude immigrants from the 3rd world have towards homosexuality. (LINK)
Gay people are a real threat to the sustainment of the population? No they're not.

See? Stupid, silly arguments.
__________________
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.

Last edited by tore; 09-05-2011 at 06:50 PM.
tore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 06:49 PM   #669 (permalink)
A.B.N.
 
djchameleon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NY baby
Posts: 11,155
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loose_lips_sink_ships View Post
Oh dear, well, my Christian friends told me the opposite and I myself don't remember much about the bible. Well, time to brush up on my reading.
Your Christian friends told you the opposite because they choose to believe the opposite and don't agree with the bible or possible don't know those verses.

Many Christians cherry pick verses out of the bible that is constantly contradicting itself.

They also decide to take a verse and not read what it says before and after said verse before interpreting it.
__________________
Fame, fortune, power, titties. People say these are the most crucial things in life, but you can have a pocket full o' gold and it doesn't mean sh*t if you don't have someone to share that gold with. Seems simple. Yet it's an important lesson to learn. Even lone wolves run in packs sometimes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RoxyRollah View Post
IMO I don't know jack-**** though so don't listen to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco Pepe Kalle View Post
The problem is that most police officers in America are psychopaths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord View Post
You're a terrible dictionary.
djchameleon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 07:10 PM   #670 (permalink)
The Big Dog
 
14232949's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,949
Default

There is no problem with homosexuality.
There is a problem with small-minded people who take it upon themselves to judge others.
Why can't we all just let others get on with their own lives in peace?
That's what it should all be about, everyone living side by side, being who they are, and being accepted.

It's some of the shameful things written on threads like this, that are the reason we live in a world of hatred.
14232949 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.