05-23-2005, 10:16 PM | #141 | |||
Quasi Evil
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 4,634
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"People's political beliefs don't stem from the factual information they've acquired. Far more the facts people choose to believe are the product of their political beliefs." "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." |
|||
05-25-2005, 05:31 PM | #142 | ||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
Quote:
No, IRex - it's obvious that "WE" don't ALL think that 9 months is too late. What is true is that MANY people do NOT think 9 months is too late - they disagree with you. So why should YOUR opinion, which they disagree with, be forced on them? You don't think partial birth abortion is right - fine, so don't do it yourself (second-hand, that is). But given the way you talk to me about gay marriage, I would certainly expect you to say, "Well, I think it's wrong based on my evaluation standards, but obviously other people do NOT think it's wrong, so I certainly would not restrict their freedom to follow what they think is right." Yet it doesn't appear that you say that. That sure looks like a double standard to me. I'll illustrate that by the following 2 paragraphs: MANY people, by their own chosen methods of evaluation, think gay marriage is wrong. Yet you say that we can just not enter into a gay marriage ourselves, and so we shouldn't push our definition of wrong on others who do NOT think it's wrong. MANY people, by their own chosen methods of evaluation, think partial birth abortion is wrong. Yet you DO NOT say that we can just not have a partial birth abortion ourselves, and so we shouldn't push our definition of wrong on others who do NOT think it's wrong. Why would you try to force YOUR definition of wrong on people who do NOT agree with you and who think partial birth abortion is right? You tell me not to force MY definition of wrong on people that disagree with me; why would YOU do it? The only reason that I see you give is this: "Because of they are allowed to kill this person then whos to say they cant kill someone related to you and attempt to justify it." Obviously they don't think it's a person - IOW, you're forcing YOUR definition of personhood on them. Again, why should you force your beliefs on other people? Personally, I think that a pre-born infant is a person from conception, yet I doubt that you would encourage me to force my definition of personhood on others. Why should YOU force YOUR definition on others, then?
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá Ă«?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Ăž Ă° Ăź ® ç ĂĄ ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lĂłmĂ«! AurĂ« entuluva! |
||
05-25-2005, 05:34 PM | #143 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
(and I don't think “transcendence” just means drug use, btw, but I can't even begin to sort out that post right now...)
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá Ă«?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Ăž Ă° Ăź ® ç ĂĄ ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lĂłmĂ«! AurĂ« entuluva! |
05-25-2005, 06:45 PM | #144 |
Word Santa Claus
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,922
|
Rian - just a small point. There is a third party to the abortion (the aborted fetus, whether or not taken to be a person), which there is not in the gay marriage. Hence the two would not be analogous. You could say that, if the fetus is a person, you have a collective responsibility to care for that person (as that person is a minor, and the state has a recognized responsibility to care for minors). However, there is no such third party in the gay marriage, unless the state itself is taken as a third party... and even then, the situation is not directly analogous because the state is not being extinguished.
Not to say anything about the validity of said positions - just that the difference is there.
__________________
Sufficient to have stood, yet free to fall. |
05-25-2005, 07:48 PM | #145 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
I see what you're saying, Count, but it is irrelevant because what I'm pointing out is IRex's inconsistent position. He talks about not forcing our views of right/wrong on others, yet he apparently does this himself in the case of PBA. I would imagine he thinks early abortions are fine, but to me, they involve a third party - yet I imagine he would tell me to let others alone that think it's fine. So I'm just making sure that he would act the same way himself, yet it doesn't look like he would. From what I can tell, he would vote against PBA - is that right, IRex?
The pre-born child may be a person to SOME people, but obviously not to all. To me, it is a person from conception. To others, obviously it's not. From what IRex has written, I guess he thinks it's NOT a person in the early stages and IS a person later on. But that is an entirely subjective opinion, and people have different opinions. We all form our differing opinions based on our underlying beliefs of how we should decide what right and wrong is. IRex tells me to not force my beliefs of right and wrong on other people when I can choose to not do that thing (as in the case of gay marriage), yet he appears to be doing the very thing he's telling me NOT to do in the case of PBA. This sure appears to be an unfair double standard to me, and I think it is important to point out. Let me get his totally clear - IRex, if you had a chance to vote to make PBA illegal, how would you vote?
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá Ă«?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Ăž Ă° Ăź ® ç ĂĄ ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lĂłmĂ«! AurĂ« entuluva! |
05-25-2005, 09:25 PM | #146 |
Quasi Evil
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 4,634
|
Rian stop with your spin and your continual ignoring of my main point. Gay marriage DOESNT kill or harm anyone. If you have some scientific data showing what a deadly horrific harmful thing it is that it would actually justify barring homosexuals ONLY from marriage then please publish it and show the world. so far you havent. Now ONCE AGAIN I can show you reams of SCIENTIFIC data showing that a 9 month old fetus can feel real pain and that having willy nilly partial birth abortions just for the heck of it are not only bad for the unborn fetus but are highly dangerous for the MOTHER as well. for THESE reasons it makes logical sense to restrict this type of procedure in the same way we restrict other things that can cause real harm. Should it be illegal? no. never said it should. should it be difficult to have and only under certain conditions? Absolutely. Kind of like handling major explosives. You can do it under certain conditions but its potentially very harmful so we need to keep on top of how we allow it exactly. And with partial birth abortion, again I can prove the HARM. The same thing you CANT do with gay marriage. So please stop trying to spin the topic and make me look like a hypocrite when you are looking to control all parties involved here. My positions are consistant in that i attempt to balance the liberty of the highly developed fetus which is clearly far different from 2 cells smaller then a pin tip and the liberty of a mother who for medical reasons may need to resort to such a horrible choice to save her own life. At the same time I believe there is no reason to discriminate against homosexuals based on religious reasons. But you do. You believe that abortion is wrong and homosexuality is wrong. Your approach is top down and rigid and irrelevant of the specifics of each individual case. My approach is an attempt to tip toward the delicate balance of liberty in an imperfect world.
__________________
"People's political beliefs don't stem from the factual information they've acquired. Far more the facts people choose to believe are the product of their political beliefs." "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." |
05-26-2005, 08:21 PM | #147 | ||||||||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
I'm not ignoring your main point, because I'm not talking about gay marriage here, except as an example of how you are inconsistent. We both know we have different opinions on gay marriage. We can debate the merits of those positions in another thread if you want to. I only brought up gay marriage to show that you tell me not to push my opinion on other people in this area, then you turn around and push YOUR opinion on other people in another area. Double standard. Period. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Double standard - please stop asking me to stop forcing my opinion on gay marriage on others, since you yourself would restrict something that other people think is fine. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And if I'm "looking to control all parties", then so are you in the same way. You're obviously trying to control people that think PBA is fine, because you said in your post that it should only be under "certain conditions". That's - guess what? - CONTOLLING other people's actions. Quote:
You think PBA should be "restricted", so you are forcing YOUR opinion on others that don't think it's wrong or should be restricted. And yet you tell me to not force my opinion on gay marriage on others that don't think it's wrong. At least I'm consistent - I think EVERYONE should vote for what they think is right, even if their position is different than mine. You are forcing YOUR personal opinion on others in a way that restricts THEIR freedoms on an issue THEY think is right, even though you don't have to be involved with it personally. You are being hypocritial. Period.
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá Ă«?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Ăž Ă° Ăź ® ç ĂĄ ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lĂłmĂ«! AurĂ« entuluva! Last edited by RĂan : 05-26-2005 at 08:32 PM. |
||||||||
05-26-2005, 11:21 PM | #148 | |||||||||
Quasi Evil
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 4,634
|
Oh already resorting to taking the gloves off I see. Ok…
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"People's political beliefs don't stem from the factual information they've acquired. Far more the facts people choose to believe are the product of their political beliefs." "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." |
|||||||||
05-27-2005, 06:05 PM | #149 | |||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Let me get one thing straight - You talk about basing your opinion if something should be allowed or not on whether or not that thing is harmful or kills someone. Simple question - do you think it is wrong to harm someone or kill them? Let me get that answer, and then I think we can go on and hopefully understand each other better.
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá Ă«?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Ăž Ă° Ăź ® ç ĂĄ ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lĂłmĂ«! AurĂ« entuluva! |
|||
05-27-2005, 06:09 PM | #150 |
The Intermittent One
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: here and there
Posts: 4,671
|
a religious view on 'harm' (ie homosexuality) is slightly different from killing someone, which, i think we can safely say, is definitely harming someone, i am with IR here, i am afraid
|
05-27-2005, 09:13 PM | #151 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
And I'll ask you, too, Chrys - do you think it is wrong to harm someone?
Do you think partial birth abortion is right? Do you think abortion at any time is right or wrong?
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá Ă«?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Ăž Ă° Ăź ® ç ĂĄ ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lĂłmĂ«! AurĂ« entuluva! |
05-28-2005, 06:52 AM | #152 | |||
The Intermittent One
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: here and there
Posts: 4,671
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
05-28-2005, 09:44 AM | #154 | |
The Intermittent One
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: here and there
Posts: 4,671
|
Quote:
hmm, religion.... ah yes, in 'the guardian' (best british newspaper), a vicar said that jesus never said anything against homosexuality, and all anti-gay stuff in the bible is in the old testament. discuss. |
|
05-28-2005, 10:37 AM | #155 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Jesus did not say anything about homosexuality in the written gospel accounts of the New Testament. That's logical, for it wasn't a big issue at that time. Everyone was agreed on that point, and they all followed the Mosaic teachings. In the Law of Moses, (OT) homosexual behavior is considered a sin.
Meanwhile, it is clear from the New Testament that Jesus did consider some sexual acts moral and others not. In Luke 7:21 he says that sexual immorality, along with many other evil things, makes a man unclean. Now Jesus' followers were the people who wrote the epistles. Paul spoke against homosexuality very clearly in the books of Romans and Corinthians. In Corinthians he said, "no homosexual shall enter the kingdom of heaven," and in Romans he spoke of people abandoning natural relations with women for unnatural ones. In context it was clear he was speaking about homosexuality. In Jude verse 7, the author says that Sodom and Gomorrah gave themselves to sexual immorality and perversion, and hence they were destroyed. There is another scripture in the Old Testament that says Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of their pride. This is a passage some people use to argue against the Jude 7 version, saying that they were destroyed because of pride, not perversion. However, when Paul talks about people whom God gave over to homosexuality as a punishment to them for not believing in God, he says that they were given also a "depraved mind". He goes on to describe this depraved mind, and among its faults is arrogance. So the people of Sodom and Gomorrah could have been punished for both arrogance and sexual immorality- the passages are not in opposition to one another. Some people claim that these different New Testament passages that speak on the subject of homosexuality are mistranslated. They should consider, however, that nowhere in the scripture is anything clear written that is in favor of homosexuality. Sex is spoken of frequently in scriptures. Marriage is lauded even in sexually explicit terms in "Song of Songs," and is described as a Revelation as a parallel between the Church and Christ. Jesus said, "Haven't you read that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female? For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." If the New Testament writers were in favor of homosexuality, one would think that such a major step aside from the Old Testament would be defended in their writings. Instead, you'll find no support of homosexuality from the Early Church Fathers and nothing supporting the practice in the epistles. Nothing in the New Testament either. That absence of support for homosexuality says something very loudly, even if one says that the New Testament passages speaking against it are "mistranslated." So that's my direct response to what that vicar was saying. However, on the subject of homosexuality, I have a couple things to add. Firstly, this is talking about practicing homosexuals. I believe, though, that people who feel homosexual inclinations can change/be-changed. It's not a lost cause. Secondly, about the Corinthians passage that "no homosexual shall enter the kingdom of heaven." While I believe that to be true, I believe this to be true of every sin. No sinner is coming to heaven. Instead, everyone who has been washed clean in Christ and purified in him shall come to heaven. He cleans people, and as it says in Revelation, gives them white robes to wear. As Jesus said in the New Testament, anyone who comes to the marriage banquet without wedding clothes will be thrown out. God will not accept any sinners in his courts, but only those that have been wiped clean by the blood of Jesus. They will be clean, as Paul puts it, "shining like stars." So that's the goal, and it's impossible for humanity to accomplish on its own. Humanity needs God to help them to do it. When Jesus comes into a person, he changes them from the inside out. He changes their behavior. He sometimes disciplines them for their own good, but he encourages them. I have met God, and I can tell you he is extremely gentle, extremely loving. He is possible to meet and to know, in the same way as people in the New Testament met him.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
05-28-2005, 11:00 AM | #156 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Homosexuality is a man-man relationship or woman-woman, rather then man-woman, so it must be different simply because of differences between genders. Therefore it should have studies taken of it before the same laws are made concerning it as are already in place about heterosexual marriage. New laws may well be appropriate. Also there is the fact that homosexuality impacts society in general. This is the whole country we're talking about. One has to broaden his horizons beyond "it's entirely between these two people." If homosexual marriage is accepted in society, it will appear on the television. It will appear in magazines. It will appear on the streets or when bringing children home from school. It will be hard to raise children in an environment where the line everywhere is blurred between what is marriage and what is not. People in this environment will be encouraged to follow through with their homosexual inclinations by the government, which will have said it is 100% fine to practice homosexuality. The act of allowing homosexuals marriage is an encouragement. It is an implicit statement that "this is good, this is fine," for if it weren't good and fine, why would it be permitted to receive the rights of marriage? While heterosexual marriage is tried and true, homosexual relationships have very conflicting data on them. Therefore studies must be taken, showing what kind of an impact they will have on society and what goes into those relationships, before they should be given laws that have been traditionally applied only to heterosexual unions. Actually though, I'm not all that interested in getting into another huge debate on this issue. You can respond to this post if you want, but I don't really think it's worth my time to keep debating this. I will discuss the Biblical issue a bit longer, though, in case anyone continues to question what the Bible says on the matter.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 05-28-2005 at 11:02 AM. |
|||
05-28-2005, 11:02 AM | #157 | |
The Intermittent One
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: here and there
Posts: 4,671
|
Quote:
|
|
05-28-2005, 12:13 PM | #158 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: sikeston, MO, usa, earth, sol
Posts: 3,114
|
Well, if you really want to discuss depending on societies' views, and all views are equally valid (until you become convinced of one view as correct, that is), I suggest these views for consideration:
http://saveelca.blogspot.com/ May 28, 2005 The article on "Hardwired" questions the use of certain concepts in one area but not another, and the article on "Educate yourselves: Homomyths" is a clear and thought-provoking point of view regarding currently disseminated disinformations.
__________________
Inked "Aslan is not a tame lion." CSL/LWW "The new school [acts] as if it required...courage to say a blasphemy. There is only one thing that requires real courage to say, and that is a truism." GK Chesterton "And there is always the danger of allowing people to suppose that our modern times are so wholly unlike any other times that the fundamental facts about man's nature have wholly changed with changing circumstances." Dorothy L. Sayers, 1 Sept. 1941 |
05-28-2005, 03:02 PM | #159 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
Kid 1 - Mom, she hit me! Mom - Kid 2, you know that you are not supposed to hit people! Kid 2 - I didn't hit him! I just slapped him! Mom - Lief answered this one like I would, so I'll just say read his post.
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá Ă«?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Ăž Ă° Ăź ® ç ĂĄ ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lĂłmĂ«! AurĂ« entuluva! |
|
05-28-2005, 03:21 PM | #160 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
There IS something that I might post on the abortion thread, tho - there's some interesting legislation in Congress, the fetal pain bill, that if passed, would REQUIRE physicians performing abortions to inform women that the latest studies show that a fetus feels pain, and to give them the option of giving the fetus some anesthesia before it gets aborted (which involves some pretty awful things that I won't list here)
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá Ă«?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Ăž Ă° Ăź ® ç ĂĄ ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lĂłmĂ«! AurĂ« entuluva! |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
LOTR Discussion: Appendix A, Part 1 | Valandil | LOTR Discussion Project | 26 | 12-28-2007 06:36 AM |
Rotk - Trivia - Part 3 | Spock | Lord of the Rings Books | 277 | 12-05-2006 11:01 AM |
LotR Films in Retrospect and Changed Opinions | bropous | Lord of the Rings Movies | 41 | 07-14-2006 10:14 AM |
Were the Nazgul free from Sauron for the most part of the Third Age? | Gordis | Middle Earth | 141 | 07-09-2006 07:16 PM |
Theological Opinions | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 992 | 02-10-2006 04:15 PM |