It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pleasurable Sin

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by KyoZero
Sorry but I fail to see how I am hurting you. I am not in anyway making you live our way.


We can agree to disagree.

I have also avoided any religious reasoning in this discussion with you, instead only reasoning and using real examples to illustrate the points.

I am not saying that your sex life is ruining our society, because by itself is relatively harmless, just as one who smokes cigarettes isn't "hurting" anybody. But in large numbers, your lifestyle is just as damaging in terms of society as smoking (which is a drain on the healthcare system, drops quality of life and life expectancy, affects job productivity).

Incidentally, I imagine that most of the male population finds having sex with multiple women simultaneously to be a very erotic thought, even if they don't want to admit to it. However, we practice self-control because there is something innately wrong and deceptive with the action, even if the female consents to it, if for no other reason than because humans are territorial creatures. But to really get personal: I wonder how your wife would react if she were no longer able for some reason to have a sexual relationship with you. And I don't mean pregnancy issues, but like she was in an accident where she became quadriplegic and oral sex was a danger to her health. Would you stay married to her? Or does your relationship break down if sex is removed? Or do you just stay married and find a concubine? If you did such, would she continue to trust in you as her husband?

The problem is not your actions so to speak, but rather the worldview which allows them. It is self-centered and hedonistic -- it focuses on "what is good for you" rather than "what is good for others." Sin is not just about what is "wrong" with an action or how it "hurts" others, but also in what is "right" about something and how it "helps" others.

Your worldview destroys families and DOES lead to the downfall of our society, even if it is not the only culprit. The problem with perversity is that it leads to more perversity, and with sexual attitudes, Pandora's box has been opened. I have tried to respect our differences, and I am not telling you how to live... I cannot nor should I. But neither will I condone it, nor will I accept that it is harmless because it isn't.

The monogamous family structure back as far as human history... it is time tested and has been supported by virtually every society that has existed on this planet. Societies where polygamy is practiced, either simultaneous or serial, have a whole host of problems that result from the practices. There is NO good reason to deviate from the traditional family. Not because a small minority thinks it is a good idea or "fair" to do so. Homosexuals may try to assert their "rights" to marriage, but I am fed up with having this forced down my throat and having people like you use political and economic means to make me submit to this deviant ideal.




posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 05:07 PM
link   


However, we practice self-control because there is something innately wrong and deceptive with the action, even if the female consents to it, if for no other reason than because humans are territorial creatures.


But what if consent wasn't the only thing? What if she wanted it more than I?



But to really get personal: I wonder how your wife would react if she were no longer able for some reason to have a sexual relationship with you. And I don't mean pregnancy issues, but like she was in an accident where she became quadriplegic and oral sex was a danger to her health. Would you stay married to her? Or does your relationship break down if sex is removed? Or do you just stay married and find a concubine? If you did such, would she continue to trust in you as her husband?


This is quite the simple answer. Yes...yes I would stay married because sex is not all that matters to us. It's the love that keeps us together. Sex is merely an expression to be shared. Trying to think of a good example...

Ok for those who are married. Think about something you do to share enjoyment. Maybe a dinner...movie whatever it is. Well frankly we shared this moment. It was for both of us equally and made us stronger.



It is self-centered and hedonistic -- it focuses on "what is good for you" rather than "what is good for others."


Precisely. What you call hedonistic is what we call normal. I really fail to see how this is harming folks. Like I said we aren't forcing our ways on others. Again I keep seeing this reference of a one-time act as my lifestyle. If sex had to end to us today then so be it. That doesn't change love. I am a very honest man and I won't say it would be easy but the love is what sustains us. The sex is just the nice little add-on.



Societies where polygamy is practiced, either simultaneous or serial, have a whole host of problems that result from the practices.


I don't doubt this at all. Meanwhile however our monagamous society has a 50% divorce rate. If you ask me the issue here is personal responsibility not a set of sins.



There is NO good reason to deviate from the traditional family. Not because a small minority thinks it is a good idea or "fair" to do so. Homosexuals may try to assert their "rights" to marriage, but I am fed up with having this forced down my throat and having people like you use political and economic means to make me submit to this deviant ideal.


I don't see this as an attack on me but this makes me laugh. How did we deviat? We had sex with another girl? Am I still married to one woman? Yup. So because some think it's good the majority has a right to shut them down? Thing is, in normal society and laws what I did is not illegal. We didn't rape her. She didn't rape us. We all chose to engage.

You say you are fed up with with people like me trying to cram stuff down your throat using eco-politcal means? What have I crammed down your throat? Don't sleep with another gal. I've said a few times now it isn't safe for most but don't take our right away to do so because in my opinion if my sexual experiences mess with 'Bob's' (fictional person so as not to target one person) relationship, then I don't think his relationship was that strong to begin with.

Think about it like this...a Christian doesn't care for the fact that I am a Pagan right? If I ask you to be a Pagan (which I never will) will it make you a Pagan? If it does it is because you as a christian didn't have a rock-hard foundation. If you do have a rock-hard foundation then nothing I ever say will change you. Then again if you are tired of us cramming it down our throat then I would love for the Christians to stop telling me to 'find the way to God' when I simply don't need it and don't want it. Again though, I will never tell people to do what I do.

-Kyo



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by KyoZero
You say you are fed up with with people like me trying to cram stuff down your throat using eco-politcal means? What have I crammed down your throat? Don't sleep with another gal. I've said a few times now it isn't safe for most but don't take our right away to do so because in my opinion if my sexual experiences mess with 'Bob's' (fictional person so as not to target one person) relationship, then I don't think his relationship was that strong to begin with.

I didn't say eco-political, whatever that means. What you do in your own personal time is your business, and I have no control over it, nor do I wish to. I think you really slander Christians when you make statements like that.

The big problem I have as a parent is that worldviews like yours are pushed on my children in the public school system, where all relationships are treated as equal. So, my kindergarten children receive propaganda lessons like "Heather has two mommies" and this notion that homosexual "marriage" is an acceptable "alternative family." And people like you vote for politicians who push these agendas to capture the minds of the youth. So yes, it is crammed down our throats. I see it on TV and hear it on the radio, see it on busses, in the movie theaters... it is literally everywhere. Especially during an election year.

So-called tolerance and relativism is what people like you are all about, regardless of how you paint it otherwise. And yes, it irks me.


Think about it like this...a Christian doesn't care for the fact that I am a Pagan right? If I ask you to be a Pagan (which I never will) will it make you a Pagan? If it does it is because you as a christian didn't have a rock-hard foundation.


Children do not have a rock-hard foundation. They are malleable which is why regimes like the Nazis and Bolsheviks made education of the youth such a high priority. This is also why homeschooling is such a battlefield in the U.S. right now.



If you do have a rock-hard foundation then nothing I ever say will change you. Then again if you are tired of us cramming it down our throat then I would love for the Christians to stop telling me to 'find the way to God' when I simply don't need it and don't want it. Again though, I will never tell people to do what I do.


But I don't see "people like you" (as if I know you, which admittedly I do not, so this is a gross generalization) saying, "let's not push this agenda in the schools." If I see your behavior as sin, then this agenda should not be presented to children.

I suppose that is really at the root of my issue with this. And I think it really is with a great many people. We will protect our children, and the government promoting these lifestyles is eroding our foundation as parents. There is no reason to give homosexual couples "married" status, other than to cram an agenda down people's throats.

Incidentally, you claimed that our society is monogamous. It is quite the opposite; our society is very accepting of serial polygamy. That was necessary before homosexuality and other deviant relationships could ever even begin to find acceptance. And serial polygamy only finds widespread acceptance if abortion is legal to deal with the "problem" of children.

So, in short... it is all about the children.

P.S. To the rest of ATS... why the hell am I the only one carrying this position on the thread?



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   


I didn't say eco-political, whatever that means


I'll take the hit on that one. I was shortening for whatever reason. You said economic and political means. Apologies for that

So let me move on...sorry again



The big problem I have as a parent is that worldviews like yours are pushed on my children in the public school system, where all relationships are treated as equal.


So let me understand. This is not a flame I truly want to know this answer. Do you not view gays as equal to you? Trust me you won't offend me no matter how you answer that.



So, my kindergarten children receive propaganda lessons like "Heather has two mommies" and this notion that homosexual "marriage" is an acceptable "alternative family."


Now obviously I haven't been in grade school in ages :-p

If the propaganda is truly happening and you children object to it or you object to it I would recommend mentioning it to the board. I will STILL always agree no person's views should ever be forced. I mean look at us. We don't agree but you don't see either of us telling the other to be like them. So yes we have a debate but we aren't idiots here and forcing the other to do something.



And people like you vote for politicians who push these agendas to capture the minds of the youth. So yes, it is crammed down our throats.


Now I WILL agree that they come out of the woodwork at election year. They do this just like the Christian groups, Big Tobacco, Big Oil. Everyone tries to lobby their causes. Christians want to ban gay marriage and keep it that way. So homosexuals have that crammed down their throats. I am a Pagan and I am told I am evil and wrong even if I don't want to hear it. So I have that crammed down mine. You are tired of it and so am I.



So-called tolerance and relativism is what people like you are all about, regardless of how you paint it otherwise. And yes, it irks me.


I do really wish you would stop lumping me in with everyone else over and over. But if it were about making a broad generlization well then fine I can handle it. The thing is, if I may generlize as well, Christians are supposed to promote peace and tolerance and they are supposed to love all and let God judge the sinners like myself. If that's the case, and I do believe it's a fabulous message, then why am I constantly bombarded by messages of Christ and 'take his life preserver' here and on TV and everywhere else?



Children do not have a rock-hard foundation. They are malleable which is why regimes like the Nazis and Bolsheviks made education of the youth such a high priority. This is also why homeschooling is such a battlefield in the U.S. right now.


The Nazis wanted homosexuals and Jewish peopel to be wiped off the face of the Earth. That is horrible and I will never disagree there. Homosexual and human rights groups want to be treated equally. I can't find it in my heart to view that as wrong.



If I see your behavior as sin, then this agenda should not be presented to children.


Right and that is most certainly your opinion and a vlaid one. The thing is I would tend to agree but what if others see allowing ONLY heterosexual marriage as a travesty and a sin? Do I now need to allow my kids to be sucked in by the propoganda from the hetero world? Granetd I don't have kids but I am just making the point.



There is no reason to give homosexual couples "married" status, other than to cram an agenda down people's throats.


I disagree completely. Human equality is what we are supposed to be about.



So, in short... it is all about the children.


Again I agree but in my mind if all they are allowed to listen to is the heterosexual way and the Christian way, then that is propoganda to me.



P.S. To the rest of ATS... why the hell am I the only one carrying this position on the thread?


I am seriously not making fun of you but maybe they think you are doing a wonderful job alone. I think you are arguing your side fairly. You haven't attacked me ever. So kudos. Then again, maybe many others agree. I know nobody is afraid of me or to step up to me. I am nothing special and neither is anyone else. Again though I think you're doing a fine job despite the fact that I disagree.

Now, I would like to ask you a tough question and I invite you to do one of a few things as this is a totally free country.

I say either

A. Post your answer here
B. U2U it to me
C. You don't have to answer at all

No matter what you choose my opinion of you will not choose and I guarantee I will not bash you for not answering.

The one and only thing I ask is that you don't say "That will never happen"

Of course that is clearly your decision but I really hope you won't.

Ok...

What if one of your kids grew up and said, Daddy, I am gay?

Thanks again for the rousing conversation and I look forward to your response.

-Kyo



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by KyoZero
If the propaganda is truly happening and you children object to it or you object to it I would recommend mentioning it to the board.


Yes, this is a good thing to do, but there is a great deal of diversity within community/school systems. So, I homeschool most of my children. And I get a lot of kickback from just about everyone I come in contact with. There is this idea that if children do not get processed through the propaganda machine, then they are freaks. So, these issues I raise are not made up or paranoia--I have seen this happen.



Christians want to ban gay marriage and keep it that way. So homosexuals have that crammed down their throats.


It is not crammed down "their" throats... it is simply not changing the way things are done. Homosexual "marriage" has never been socially acceptable here. The proposed changes are being forced on the rest of the population of the U.S. by a handful of states and interest groups.



If that's the case, and I do believe it's a fabulous message, then why am I constantly bombarded by messages of Christ and 'take his life preserver' here and on TV and everywhere else?


They are recruitment efforts. They are an annoyance, but they really are relatively harmless. As a parallel, I suppose this would communicate the severity of my perspective, so humor me here: imagine that junk mail, TV, movies, and bus signs were coated with a special paint that looked beautiful but increased the cancer rate in the general population by 37% of those who viewed the images due to the radiation that was emitted by the paint. I imagine that some would be proponents of the beautiful art, but others would decry that it is pervasive and dangerous.


The Nazis wanted homosexuals and Jewish peopel to be wiped off the face of the Earth. That is horrible and I will never disagree there. Homosexual and human rights groups want to be treated equally. I can't find it in my heart to view that as wrong.


They murdered more slavs than Jews or Homosexuals. Also, the Nazis targeted Gypsies, Poles/Slavs, political dissidents, dissenting clergy, physically/mentally disabled, and Jehovah's Witnesses. Soviets targeted mainly Orthodox Christians (virtually no Jews were targeted except for political purposes).

The point about the Nazis and Soviets were with respect to using the educational system to indoctrinate the youth, with no consideration to what the indoctrination entailed because it is irrelevant.


I disagree completely. Human equality is what we are supposed to be about.


Equality sounds nice but that is silly. Criminals lose rights and equality by their actions. Infants are killed by the millions through the practice of abortion, not having their rights recognized. The results? All people are equal, but some are more equal than others.



Again I agree but in my mind if all they are allowed to listen to is the heterosexual way and the Christian way, then that is propoganda to me.

There still exists the fact that most people do not support homosexual marriage. Thus, it is a minority that is trying to change a social norm for no good reason other than their demands. Just like abortion "rights" could only be snuck into policy by activist judges and was a travesty of the American system.


I am seriously not making fun of you but maybe they think you are doing a wonderful job alone...What if one of your kids grew up and said, Daddy, I am gay?


Oh, it is very possible this could happen. And I am in no way feeling attacked... it is a reasonable question to ask.

My response would be:

I love you my child. Just as I may have a temptation to anger, your mother may have a temptation to overeat, your aunt has a temptation to be narcissistic, so you now are facing a temptation. These are all caveats and struggles in the flesh that many people face daily, and it is hard. It is not ok for you to act on these temptations, to have sexual relationships with people of the same sex. This is an abominable act, which is akin to murder, rape, arson, and embezzlement.

Thus, you have a calling to live a celibate life and control your urges. Prevent yourself from falling prey to the lifestyle which will consume you with lust. Having homosexual urges is not a sin, but acting on them is.

I hope that as having been your father, that you see my concern for you is in love and compassion, as I too have my own temptations, and that overcoming this problem will allow you to be a greater and even more respectable person than you already are. Don't listen to the liars and hedonists who tell you that you must be sexually active in order to be a whole person. This is not true, and you are a dynamite individual. Thus, keep yourself and those who love you from this disgraceful lifestyle. Equally, do not listen to those who condemn you in hypocrisy because that you are inherently flawed for facing temptation, while they hide or minimize their own struggles. There is much more to life than sexual relationships and feeling good.

Please do the right thing!



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Warren Zevon said it best.

"im very well aquainted with the seven deadly sins, I keep a buisy schedule tryin to fit them in. Im proud to be a glutton and I have no time for sloth, im greedy and im angry and I don't care who I cross"

The seven deadly sins are sins only because too much of a good thing can kill you. Everything in moderation.



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Sin only appears pleasurable and the satisfaction is fleeting. When one really thinks about it with honest reflection and without deluding oneself, sin is not very pleasurable once faced with the consequences. And I am not necessarily talking about spiritual consequences but the here and now. Sit there and think about it.



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
Warren Zevon said it best.

"im very well aquainted with the seven deadly sins, I keep a buisy schedule tryin to fit them in. Im proud to be a glutton and I have no time for sloth, im greedy and im angry and I don't care who I cross"

The seven deadly sins are sins only because too much of a good thing can kill you. Everything in moderation.


For some things, there is no middle ground. I have heard this is true for Methamphetamine, although I cannot personally confirm that. You cannot moderately commit rape or murder... either you do or you don't. Your statement is too simplistic.



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ScienceDada
 


To simplistic is to say all crime is theft.


What I am talking about is the seven deadly sins.

Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth Wrath, Envy and Pride. These sins if one commits them in excess can be deadly. If one is lustful and it goes to an extreme one might get a disease, If one overeats all the time they may get overweight and suffer from heart disease, If one is too greedy one may end up in a situation where they cross the wrong person and get killed for it. If one is lazy they may find themselves out on the streets or worse. If one is envious they may do something that will get them incarcerated or worse. And if one is too prideful someone who is envious may do something to them.

As you can see. These seven deadly sins can be deadly in their own way. If taken too much these can indeed be deadly if used in moderation there is nothing wrong with any of these excesses.



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by ScienceDada
[What I am talking about is the seven deadly sins. Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth Wrath, Envy and Pride. These sins if one commits them in excess can be deadly.


Oh. That is a Roman Catholic thing, and has to do with mortal and venial gibberish. Gotcha.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ScienceDada
 


Sorry it took me so long. I have some family business that has taken up my day and evening. Thanks for your patience



Yes, this is a good thing to do, but there is a great deal of diversity within community/school systems. So, I homeschool most of my children.


Good for you. I mean that too with zero sarcasm. I am practically afraid of the school system these days. Who is safe anymore? Plus the school system these days suck so no you will get no flak from me.



There is this idea that if children do not get processed through the propaganda machine, then they are freaks. So, these issues I raise are not made up or paranoia--I have seen this happen.


But the whole Christianity is the only way to live isn't propoganda? I have to completely disagree there.



It is not crammed down "their" throats


But just because you don't view it that way doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It IS crammed down their throats. These people who are gay are not equal in the eyes of people who believe this way.



Homosexual "marriage" has never been socially acceptable here. The proposed changes are being forced on the rest of the population of the U.S. by a handful of states and interest groups.


This is what I can never fathom. I hear that it's forced on you. How is it forced? Are heterosexual people in California forced to participate or even watch a gay marriage? No they aren't.



They are recruitment efforts. They are an annoyance, but they really are relatively harmless.


One man's belief and I think you are welcome to it. It isn't harmless when it keeps an athiest from being promoted in the military or when people are laughed at and ridiculed for not being one of 'us.' (Us meaning the mainstream. That is not harmless. Watching a wonderful Airman not be promoted shortly after learning that he is agnostic is harmful to his career and his family. Why can't gays openly serve in the military? They serve closed and do just as good a job as straight soldiers.



They murdered more slavs than Jews or Homosexuals


So because Hitler didn't kill as many homosexuals as he did Slavs that makes it right? And you are right I should have thrown some examples in so here you are. These speeches and words plastered everywhere in full view of children.

Nazi Propoganda



All people are equal, but some are more equal than others.


I couldn't agree more. Christian groups want to shut down homosexual marriage. That isn't equality. What is equal?

2 = 2

So heterosexual men are allowed to marry. Homosexual men are not. That is NOT equal because therein lies a right that the homosexual man does not get. So no there isn't even equality because the heterosexual nation, often led by religious groups wants to be MORE equal.



Thus, it is a minority that is trying to change a social norm for no good reason other than their demands.


So, at the risk of sounding rude, which I promise I am not attempting to be...should we take away the rights we gave blacks? Blacks were a severe minority and the majority view them as animals not worthy of a vote or census consideration. I can't see any difference in the fight Malcolm X and Dr King led and the fight that homosexuals are leading just to be considered normal. According to this idea if you are homosexual you do not count.

So let me tack on a second question since you were so lovely to answer my first. I do thank you for that by the way.

What if that same child actually performed homosexual acts and enjoyed them?

Thanks again and sorry for the long pause.

-Kyo



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 




Sin only appears pleasurable and the satisfaction is fleeting. When one really thinks about it with honest reflection and without deluding oneself, sin is not very pleasurable once faced with the consequences.


I can agree with things such as murder but what difference has it made in my life sleeping with a second girl and my wife at one time? It has made a HUGE difference. My marriage is so much closer having shared somethign so personal. Yes I agree there is an emotional risk there hence I will still ALWAYS continue to caution people highly that it takes a certain type of person to do something like what my wife and I did. I am not delusional. I thoroughly enjoyed what happened on many levels and there hasn't been a single negative consequence since. The military tests everyone every year for STD's to include AIDs. I am totally clean. My marriage is more powerful now that it was three years ago. We are still great friends with the girl in question.

There were no consequences in the negative at all here.

To Whatuknow:

I agree completely in moderation. I think if my wife and I were swingers, constantly on the prowl there could be some heavy damage here even IF I never caught a disease. I love to eat, sometimes to filling. I am a cher part time and I eat til I am jolly and can't breathe properly but that act is maybe once a month. My LDL/HDL and heart health are wonderful. Lust...yeah I 'fall prey' to lust once in a while. Pornography is fine in my opinion and sometimes my wife use it but we don't use it constantly. The point is, and I completely agree, some of these 'sins' are just fine in moderation.

-Kyo



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by KyoZero

Homosexual "marriage" has never been socially acceptable here. The proposed changes are being forced on the rest of the population of the U.S. by a handful of states and interest groups.


This is what I can never fathom. I hear that it's forced on you. How is it forced? Are heterosexual people in California forced to participate or even watch a gay marriage? No they aren't.


In my State, this is not legal nor recognized; nor has it ever been. But California, Vermont, and Mass decide they want to legalize such behavior and this is a ploy to force other states to follow suit. These are exactly the types of State's rights issues that were debated from the founding of our nation, and why the power of the central government must be controlled. Because in the coming years, there will be some sham court decision that forces all States to recognize what is now happening in California.

In a more local illustration... a few years ago, local commissions voted to force property owners to rent "without discrimination" meaning that you must rent to a homosexual couple regardless of how you view this behavior. That is not freedom and it is cramming a social agenda on the public. All of these issues are bundled together under this sham idea that what you choose to do with your sexual organs is equated with physical attributes like race or sex.

This is a travesty, and it is a violation of our principles of freedom.


One man's belief and I think you are welcome to it. It isn't harmless when it keeps an athiest from being promoted in the military or when people are laughed at and ridiculed for not being one of 'us.'

This is the way people are, and these things will continue to happen even with the liberal agendas succeed. They are just turned on the majority, and the minority feel justified because they came from a position of weakness (real or perceived).

There is just as much power in a position of weakness as there is in a position of "strength" because people can justify their bad behavior.



They murdered more slavs than Jews or Homosexuals

So because Hitler didn't kill as many homosexuals as he did Slavs that makes it right?

No, it doesn't make it right. I was only pointing out that the Nazis were fascists who were against many groups. Often they are portrayed as Christians who hated Jews and Gays. But often overlooked is the fact that the Nazis hated everyone who was not a Nazi or "Aryan." The fact that more Slavs than Jews were killed only illustrates this point.

The American left has a lot in common with the Nazis, but they refuse to acknowledge this fact.



All people are equal, but some are more equal than others.

I couldn't agree more. Christian groups want to shut down homosexual marriage. That isn't equality. What is equal?

Our conversation is not about Christianity, and I have avoided any such language as best I can. So please keep it "secular."

Most people aren't shutting down anything. They are preserving the social norms as we have had them for a LONG time. It is the homosexual and "civil rights" activists who are trying to change things. But these changes are bad for society because they attack the very heart of our culture -- the traditional family.

Homosexuals can live their lives together, work and make money, go on vacations, etc. But that does not mean that I have to recognize their relationships as a marriage. Why does the left feel so justified in forcing this?




So, at the risk of sounding rude, which I promise I am not attempting to be...should we take away the rights we gave blacks?

No. Blacks are black. It is not a choice (unless you are Michael Jackson).

Where you insert your penis is a choice. Inability to procreate, thereby seeking out children to make an artificial family is a choice. And forcing a social agenda that is against other people's beliefs in order to "feel normal" is a choice.

It is not even in the same league.


Blacks were a severe minority and the majority view them as animals not worthy of a vote or census consideration. I can't see any difference in the fight Malcolm X and Dr King led and the fight that homosexuals are leading just to be considered normal.

No, it is not the same. It is taking a behavior and equating it with an immutable trait. This is a logical fallacy and a justification.

We, as a society, do not extend all rights to a thief or a murder, even if they "naturally" possess an inclination to steal or murder. Why? Because it behavior is a choice. Many criminals say "I couldn't help myself" but that is of no consequence. We all have our issues, but that doesn't mean the line has to be changed to make people feel good.


What if that same child actually performed homosexual acts and enjoyed them?

The child probably would have by the time an admission is made. It is a forgivable action. I suppose it would depend greatly on the circumstances and the child's attitude.

If the attitude were one of defiance and asserting that they were going to continue the behavior, then I suppose that would be difficult for the family--no different than if they had committed rape, murder, or incest.

If the child were to be humble, and keep themselves from the act, then there would be no issue, just as if they had committed a crime, "done time," and were getting their life together.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 12:08 AM
link   


In a more local illustration... a few years ago, local commissions voted to force property owners to rent "without discrimination" meaning that you must rent to a homosexual couple regardless of how you view this behavior.


So...a homosexual couple doesn't deseve housing? I'm not making light of your comment but that is what it sounds like to me.

See alot of people say it's a choice. So I have two situations to ask about.

1. What about all the scientific research showing that in many cases it isn't a choice?

2. What about all the people who don't wanna be gay and yet they can't help it? They go to priests and doctors and therapists and no matter what happens they are still gay.

That isn't a choice to me

Now granted some do choose to be gay but to think every single homosexual is only by choice isn't right IMO.



This is the way people are, and these things will continue to happen even with the liberal agendas succeed.


See what I don't understand is, when the liberals and pro-gay individuals promote their beliefs it is a travesty but when a church goer won't leave me alone and when an athiest doesn't get promoted it is ok?



The American left has a lot in common with the Nazis, but they refuse to acknowledge this fact.


Alot of liberals want nothing more than equality. The Nazi's wanted supreme power. How is that a fact?



Our conversation is not about Christianity, and I have avoided any such language as best I can. So please keep it "secular."


But alot of this argument is based through Christianity. I realize of course that non-Christians can argue against it as well but I'm sorry I hear alot of the anti-homosexual marriage arguments coming from the Christian denominations. So I can't keep it totally secular honestly. Don't get me wrong I am not saying Christians are bad but they preach a message of tolerance and love and peace. They teach that God is the one and only judge. So why are some of the Christians down here judging as if they held that divine power?

For that matter, look around ATS itself. There are many Christians here who believe gays SHOULD be allowed to marry because it doesn't harm them at all.

I remember a Christian I once met said the best way to approach is to inform people of Christianity. If they refuse, dust off, thank them for the time, and walk away.

Be it Christian or just the right-wing extremes who aren't religious, they do not seem to grasp that if we don't care for the message they deliver, they need to walk away. The minute they become beligerent is the minute I stop listening to their message.



Homosexuals can live their lives together, work and make money, go on vacations, etc. But that does not mean that I have to recognize their relationships as a marriage. Why does the left feel so justified in forcing this?


Now that's fine. I mean this too. If you NEVER want to recognize their marriage I promise I will never talk down to you or bad about you. This country is bound by the ideas of freedom. If you alway believe this I guarantee I will support your freedom to believe that. The fact is this country isn't free. So what I am wondering is if you are happy to let them live together, work and make money...why stop them at the last step?



No. Blacks are black. It is not a choice (unless you are Michael Jackson).


First of all....I laughed...that was funny

But again I don't see most homosexuals as choosing to do so. Many of them live their lives 'straight' but never feel right.



And forcing a social agenda that is against other people's beliefs in order to "feel normal" is a choice.


And thus I think religious and right-wing groups should stop forcing theirs? It wasn't always like this either. The social norm of being all straight isn't the oldest trick. Back in the older days being gay was very accepted. Things changed. (not in this country of course)



We, as a society, do not extend all rights to a thief or a murder,


And since when is a man sleeping with another man a crime? That to me isn't in the same league. Not even close. If I sleep with a guy who is hurt? When I slept with my wife and that girl, who was hurt? Nobody. Now if I RAPE that guy, there is hurt there. If I murder that girl, there is hurt.

So then what if the child said they couldn't help it?

-Kyo



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by KyoZero

So...a homosexual couple doesn't deseve housing?

If, in order to obtain it the renter's rights are trampled in the process, then no. Let them find renters who are sympathetic to their lifestyle, or buy property for themselves.


What about all the scientific research showing that in many cases it isn't a choice?

Where you insert your penis is always a choice, unless you are being raped.


What about all the people who don't wanna be gay and yet they can't help it?

Who you let insert things into your vagina is always a choice, unless you are being raped.


That isn't a choice to me

That is because you have chosen to change the definition of "gay" and "homosexual" depending on the context to serve your own purposes.


Now granted some do choose to be gay but to think every single homosexual is only by choice isn't right IMO.

Then what you are really saying is that people aren't responsible for their actions because they have urges. A kleptomaniac should then be allowed to shoplift whenever they wish. Road rage-ers should be allowed to behave however they wish. Men should be able to molest children whenever they wish. People should be able to smoke wherever they wish. Because, after all, these all have "scientific research" showing and that "it isn't a choice." This is not good for society though, so they are still not acceptable.


when an athiest doesn't get promoted it is ok?

I am not following the arguments here, nor does it seem relevant to the discussion at hand. You are pointing out an isolated incident that I am unaware of and using it to justify changing the whole of society. I am sure that your athiest in the military had a bad time, but either demonstrate why then this one incident should change national policy or drop it. It is a Red Herring type of logical fallacy and wasting my time. So are the Nazi arguments.


Our conversation is not about Christianity, and I have avoided any such language as best I can. So please keep it "secular."

But alot of this argument is based through Christianity.


In a previous post you wrote "Let's leave religion down for this specific argument" and I am doing just that. My arguments have not been religiously based, they are secular. I imagine that this style bothers many who hold your position because they are so prepared to defend against a "Christian" argument that they cannot against a secular one. In fact, they almost cannot imagine that a secular argument exists.

But it does. And that argument is that same-sex marriage is not good for society, and there is no compelling reason to adopt such practices. Homosexuals can live together and copulate all they want with no interference as things stand now. There is no reason give them the same status as a heterosexual marriage or allow them to adopt children; these are demands in an attempt to be "equal" which are unacceptable from the point of view of our society, and most people agree with me (as polls have shown). The only reason to extend such a privilege is to make some people feel comfortable... but the good of society and the health of families does not result from comfort and nice feelings, but from hard work and dedication.

The problem with the homosexual lobby is that it is not enough to be tolerated. They have this pathological need to assert equivalence or even preference for a lifestyle that is detrimental to society (because cannot procreate and, to a lesser extent, these fraudulent "families" are not cohesive). They only have a derivative and parasitic existence with respect to heterosexual couples. Homosexual marriage is not equal to heterosexual marriage. It is a forgery.


Be it Christian or just the right-wing extremes who aren't religious, they do not seem to grasp that if we don't care for the message they deliver, they need to walk away.

Then why must they be subject to homosexual "marriage rights" arguments and propaganda? This is really a double standard and shoots down your position in advocating homosexual "marriage." You then should grasp that society as a whole doesn't care for your message, and you need to walk away. So, why the double standard?



Homosexuals can live their lives together, work and make money, go on vacations, etc. But that does not mean that I have to recognize their relationships as a marriage. Why does the left feel so justified in forcing this?

Now that's fine. I mean this too. If you NEVER want to recognize their marriage I promise I will never talk down to you or bad about you...

Yes, but that is not what happens as a general rule. Once the law is changed, then homosexual marriage becomes a protected class and those opposed then become a discriminated class. If then a renter gives resistance to renting to the homosexual couple, he will be persecuted (and/or prosecuted) for this stand.


But again I don't see most homosexuals as choosing to do so. Many of them live their lives 'straight' but never feel right.

This really is the crux of the argument, that society should grant homosexuals the status of "marriage" so they will "feel right". This is not compelling. It is political correctness and sensitivity that is beyond reason and is actually quite pathetic. The good of society is more important in this instance and if some people's feelings are hurt, then they can grow up and deal with it. It is not the job of society to pander to hurt feelings and wounded egos to the detriment of society.


And thus I think religious and right-wing groups should stop forcing theirs? It wasn't always like this either. The social norm of being all straight isn't the oldest trick.

Show me a single society in the history of this world where homosexual couples have been granted "marriage" as heterosexual couples, and if one even exists, please provide a source describing how long it existed and what was its downfall. If you can provide an example where it was good for the society, my argument. would suffer; I don't think you can. Even in successful societies like Greece/Rome, they did not have marriage status.


...what if the child said they couldn't help it?

Unless rape is involved, it would be a lie, because they can always control where they stick their penis.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Well I can admit it is clear we will not come to an agreement. I am also going to say this last post seemed like you just don't like me for what I believe. If that is the case I can accept that but I really have no more plans to stick with this argument. I really don't think you want honest equality.

Now you can feel as if you have beaten me and I will accept that too. I just cannot understand why people think homosexuality is a choice in every situation. There are actual people who don't want to be gay but still are. So apparently they just don't have the right to sex then but they can be gay all day long if they like.

I never said something of the Greek nature involved marriage. What I said was that homosexuality was accepted.

I can fully accept your feelings but I can't accept you speaking for 'society as a whole' when all around I see changes. I even see Christians off this forum saying "let them marry...what do we care?" I apologize to all but if my sleeping with two women at once harms you that much, it isn't my problem. It wasn't in view of your kids. Your kids don't know about it. Heck only a few adults outside of this forum know. Where is the damage? I don't see it and as long as I am not forcibly hurting someone or pushing my views on others then I am sorry I just don't care.

What I do in my life is my business. Granted I brought it here for the sake of argument and that's fine. There are many things I do that some don't like and there are many things others do that I don't like. The difference to me is I don't push my views.

You told me not to compare Christians pushing their views on me to homosexuals pushing their views. You're right I can't. The thing is I have the Christian issue at least a good 6-7 times a year and I have yet to once be approached by a homosexual in any manner. I haven't yet had a friend or family member tell me this either but goddess for bid I mention Paganism. Then I am the devil himself.

I'm sorry but I will accept all you say until you speak on society's behalf. If society as a whole despises gay marriage then why are we winning states? If it was something as you mentioned I could see a few uprisings here and there that would fail miserably such as the neo-nazis in Northern Illinois. Yeah they exist but nobody has heard from them in ages.

I just wonder what people against gay marriage will do when more states begin winning this right because as I see it, it's growing and it's going to continue to grow.

Well I don't ever want to leave in a huff and I am not angry or even upset right now. I just don't se this argument going anywhere. We are obviously both intelligent individuals with passion for our sides. It has been lovely debating with you and I mean that. I also hate when people leave wanting the last word so though I may not respond I will come back and read whatever you write back to be fair.

Good day my friend

-Kyo



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by KyoZero
Well I can admit it is clear we will not come to an agreement.

I concur.


I am also going to say this last post seemed like you just don't like me for what I believe.

No, not at all. It is nothing personal, and I am not condemning you. This was just an opportunity to debate ideas, and I have to hand it to you that you conducted yourself very well and dignified. Commenting on your actions is quite different than liking or disliking you, and I have no ill will. I suppose I could even go to the point of saying it has been a pleasure.


...I really have no more plans to stick with this argument.

I agree.


I never said something of the Greek nature involved marriage. What I said was that homosexuality was accepted.

It still is. But acceptance that some people will participate in homosexual relationships is quite different than creating a marriage status that is advocated and enforced by the government. That is crossing the line.


I apologize to all but if my sleeping with two women at once harms you that much, it isn't my problem.

I appreciate the sentiment and I really believe that you do not see your actions as malicious; in that sense, at least you are acting in good conscience. I wish more people had your attitude in this respect. I suppose then that in a similar way---I am sorry that my advocacy for the traditional family hurts you and homosexuals, but that isn't my problem. For all that is worth. I mean it in the nicest way



The difference to me is I don't push my views.

We all push our views through voting and advocating positions. You may not be condemning others, but you are still involved in "pushing" just by participating in the process.


I'm sorry but I will accept all you say until you speak on society's behalf. If society as a whole despises gay marriage then why are we winning states?

Society as a whole has spoken, both recently and throughout history. The vast majority of Americans do not and have never supported marriage for homosexuals. So, society can speak for themselves, and this has been measured with public polls, voter referendums (including California), and public election platforms. The homosexual lobby is not winning states, they have only passed legislation or exploited the systems' judicial loopholes in a few states. This is very clear in California where it was controversial because it explicitly violated a public referendum and society HAS already spoken.

Using these indirect methods to force the will of a minority upon the majority is how the Nazis operated. And the homosexual lobby plans to then leverage this ill-gotten support to force all other States to comply. A similar technique was used to legalize abortion... the states had outlawed the practice, so the only way to force compliance was to obtain legislation from the bench. Once it was mandated that abortion was legal, only then did society follow suit. It was a sham, and now 40+ Million people have been murdered as a result of it, and our society is suffering.


Well I don't ever want to leave in a huff and I am not angry or even upset right now.

Neither do I. I really expected this topic to attract more activity, and was surprised that you and I carried virtually the entire discussion. I do not agree with you, but we were both respectful. I also hope that you have not felt that I used an opportunity to proselytize you or condemn you; quite the opposite, I have enjoyed holding a debate with a worthy adversary. In real person, my rhetorical style is quite apparent, and is usually quite amiable, even during disagreement. I blame any impressions that I did not like you on the medium, and sincerely and emphatically stress that I do not think ill of you in any way. I think that your sexual activity is abominable, that is true... but I am not one to judge. My sins are so great that it would be a sin for me to do so (and I REALLY mean that... I have probably done worse than you have, so I am not in a position to condemn ANYONE).


It has been lovely debating with you and I mean that. I also hate when people leave wanting the last word so though I may not respond I will come back and read whatever you write back to be fair.

Likewise. I even debated writing what I did above. I thought it would help clarify to other readers in case anything I wrote previously had been ambiguous or easily misunderstood. I think you have communicated your points clearly, and I hope I have as well.

I used to fence as a sport, and you always shake hands after a match as a gentleman. You did not fight dirty, and I hope that I haven't either.

So, here is my virtual handshake.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join