- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Was Gay Marriage a Slippery Slope?
Posted on 11/1/19 at 8:56 pm to dawgfan24348
Posted on 11/1/19 at 8:56 pm to dawgfan24348
If there’s no god then Christianity’s moral values are no more or less arbitrary than yours. Why enforce anything at all?
3
Posted on 11/1/19 at 8:59 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Also that is a frankly shoddy article by Encyclopedia Britannica. This one is far better. LINK
Give me a bit, that's a good 20 or 30 pages of text. A bit different than the 2 sentence quote I gave.
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:00 pm to Flats
quote:
there’s no god then Christianity’s moral values are no more or less arbitrary than yours. Why enforce anything at all?
It’s almost as if there are a set of universal principles that most humans adhere to. Why does anyone’s God or anyone’s religion have to be a part of that?
ETA: The principles and concepts that make America great are rooted in absolute pragmatism and the functionality of a multi-religious society. Legislating your personal opinions on religion is not ever, ever, ever a winning strategy. Source: world history
This post was edited on 11/1/19 at 9:06 pm
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:00 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
It’s almost as if there are a set of universal principles that most humans adhere to. Why does anyone’s God or anyone’s religion have to be a part of that?
But they're not universal, and if every single person doesn't adhere to them then you're still have what you're complaining about; a majority forcing morality on a minority.
And they're going to be religious by definition:
"Religious", Websters:
: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
This isn't physical science; you can't prove that something is objectively good or bad. You just have beliefs, which is all anybody has. It might be based on a religious text or the Boy Scouts or something your imaginary rabbit friend told you; it's still nothing more than an opinion. Your opinions are ok to codify into law but a Hindu's aren't? Why?
This post was edited on 11/1/19 at 9:07 pm
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:02 pm to Flats
Non religious morality is not arbitrary. Making things such as murder, rape, and robbery illegal is far different then telling gay people they can't marry or outlawing alcohol
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:03 pm to Bayoubred
quote:
have been stating publicly for years that the culmination of two evils, evolution and homosexuality, will be beastality. There's a reason that God thought it necessary to explicitly forbid it in the Law.
Is this a real opinion or a troll?
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:07 pm to Indefatigable
They don't problem is many religious people feel that it's their need to push their own views on eveyonesle. These are the same people that got upset over some purple haired college kid bitching about Halloween costumes
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:10 pm to Flats
quote:
Why enforce anything at all?
Because the vast majority of people want to live in a safe and productive society, and there's only a few combinations of laws that allow for such a society to exist.
Whether we're aware or not, we've been testing this petri dish style for thousands of years with different civilizations. Sure the occasional natural disaster might have screwed up a few dishes, akin to a scientist dropping a dish or two, but we've gotten to see which ones make it and which ones do not.
We can objectively judge how effective certain law sets are in achieving a peaceful and prosperous society. Subjectivity enters the conversation with respect to the goals - prosperous and peaceful. Why should that be the goal of a society?
While entirely subjective, the fact that the vast vast vast majority of people subjectively want that doesn't allow much room for concern that society will change direction and push for laws that lead us to a non-prosperous and non-peaceful society. It might happen ignorantly, but seeing as most people want the opposite, measures would be taken to get us back on the right track.
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:11 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
Non religious morality is not arbitrary. Making things such as murder, rape, and robbery illegal is far different then telling gay people they can't marry or outlawing alcohol
Sure they are. Why is rape bad? Happens in the animal kingdom all the time, and we're just animals, correct? So does murder, which is just survival of the fittest. You can''t prove values; you can't put a fence around your values and say "mine are special" and tell someone else theirs aren't. Not logically, anyway.
I can tell that some of you haven't given this a lot of thought. Nietzsche was right; nihilism is the only logical conclusion to an absence of objective morality.
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:12 pm to Azkiger
The vast majority of people are not for outlawing gay marriage. The only people who still believe that are bible beaters and older generations who can't evolve as society evolves
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:13 pm to Azkiger
quote:
Because the vast majority of people
quote:
While entirely subjective
Exactly; we're back to the majority and the entire thing is subjective. But then we're told that sometimes what the majority wants is invalid.
Which is it? Does what the majority values matter or not?
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:30 pm to Azkiger
quote:Several ways. For starters it forces the morality of the minority on the majority. It forces those with moral/religious objections to either violate their consciences or be penalized in various ways. It also normalizes sexual deviancy and encourages relationships that are incapable of reproduction. It creates a parenting situation that is not good for raising children, as children need a father and a mother.
How does gay marriage harm society?
So yeah, there are a few ways.
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:32 pm to Flats
quote:
Which is it? Does what the majority values matter or not?
It absolutely matters because people, and not Jesus or God, are the ones sitting at the desks where laws are written. Christian values are only represented when there are enough Christians to be a majority.
To go back a line to your counterpoint to the above.
quote:
But then we're told that sometimes what the majority wants is invalid.
This is usually said with respect to past generations, correct? Slavery use to enjoy support from the majority but it doesn't now. Same for women's suffrage, etc.
The majority today overrides the historical majorities, unless there are serious hurdles placed preventing those sorts of laws being overturned; and even then, given enough of a majority for a long enough time, you'll see the majority still win out.
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:34 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
forces the morality of the minority on the majority
False
quote:
forces those with moral/religious objections to either violate their consciences or be penalized in various way
Also false
quote:
sexual deviancy
Not everyone sees homosexuality as deviancy
quote:
encourages relationships that are incapable of reproduction.
Not really a case to make it illegal plus we have too many asssholes here now
quote:
creates a parenting situation that is not good for raising children, as children need a father and a mother.
Also false I have friends who were raised in either one parent households or ones who had gay parents and they were fine.
Again your entire case stems from your own religous views which are not enforceable in a democratic society especially when those views no longer reflect what the majority want
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:37 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:You don't think that a philosophy that leads to the deconstruction of objectivity itself in terms of language, truth, and ethics wouldn't create problems like we're seeing here?
You haven't made any specific arguments other than to blame postmodernity as a whole
You're trying to devolve this into something more than I care to take the time to discuss any longer. Objective truth exists and those who try to say otherwise are adhering to an irrational and incoherent worldview.
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:40 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Several ways. For starters it forces the morality of the minority on the majority. It forces those with moral/religious objections to either violate their consciences or be penalized in various ways. It also normalizes sexual deviancy and encourages relationships that are incapable of reproduction. It creates a parenting situation that is not good for raising children, as children need a father and a mother
Woooow. So much ignorance here.
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:41 pm to Azkiger
quote:
Christian values are only represented when there are enough Christians to be a majority.
Right, but I'm responding to posts like this:
"Point is you can believe in all the bible claims but the moment you try to enforce it via the law you're a dick. "
He appears to be arguing that he can enforce secular morality and he's not a dick but if a majority enforces a moral value based on their religious beliefs* then there's something inherently wrong with that regardless of their majority status. This was the entire justification of gay marriage via judicial fiat; the majority's views were just wrong and needed to be overturned by five people with the correct views. I'm just pointing out that enforcing morality is enforcing morality. If there's no objective moral code then it's all just opinions, formed by some electro-chemical reactions in our brains.
*Unless it's a value the atheist agrees with, then it's totally cool
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:42 pm to TwoTimeTiger
quote:
The average pedophile doesn’t really give a shite about gay marriage they just want to frick kids anyway they can. Most people get that
Yeah but they don’t stand up against it when they support what it’s strapped to
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:46 pm to Flats
The point being made is that you can't infuse religion with government it's something our founders agreed upon and it's what the settlers left. You're actively denying people the right to marry based on the views of some. The majority isn't always right it's why we have representatives and don't just put everything up to popular vote
Posted on 11/1/19 at 9:48 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
For starters it forces the morality of the minority on the majority.
But the majority of the country supports gay marriage. You've just admitted that your own stance "harms society" since you're the minority attempting to force its morality on the majority.
quote:
It forces those with moral/religious objections to either violate their consciences or be penalized in various ways.
No it doesn't. You can both gay marriage recognized by the federal government and Christian bakers allowed to let their religious beliefs inform their business model. Just because that isn't happening now doesn't mean those two ideas are mutually exclusive.
quote:
It also normalizes sexual deviancy and encourages relationships that are incapable of reproduction.
Oral sex deviates from the designed intent of a penis and a mouth, I wonder how harmful you think oral sex is to society at large?
With respect to the bolded part, there's no difference, as far as society is concerned, between being incapable of reproduction and *NOT* reproducing. Being that's the case, do you view single people and straight couples who do not have children with similar disdain?
quote:
It creates a parenting situation that is not good for raising children, as children need a father and a mother.
Not necessarily, if you forbid gays from adopting or lesbian couples from getting sperm donors you won't have an issue here. This has nothing to do with "marriage".
Moreover, what about single parents? Sure, you'll argue that you want to make divorce harder, but unless you want to make it *impossible* you're going to have, however small, a portion of the children being raised by single parents.
Also, what about deaths? My wife's father died when she was young. Was it "harmful to society" that her mother didn't remarry until my wife was an adult?
Page 9 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News