Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Gay Marriage Poll

Question: Gay Marriage Poll :: Total Votes:78 Poll choices Votes Statistics Gay marriage should be legal 75  [96.15%] Gay marriage should not be legal 3  [3.85%] Guests cannot vote

Pages: (6) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 >

thordaddy Posts: 486 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,19:45    clamboy asks, Quote which of the following is straight "marriage"? A) Brad and Janet B) Bob, Carol, and Alice C) Bo Duke and Daisy Duke Before we can continue, we must define just what the heck we mean by straight "marriage." If you aren't sure what most of us call traditional marriage (what you refer to as "straight 'marriage'") then HOW can you vote for or against something that MUST BE equally undefineable? Traditional marriage is the union between one man and one woman at its most fundamental level.  Each state decides the age of consent and level of nonrelatedness required to be state-sanctioned. If you consider this an arbitrary definition and consider those that advocate for this definition as haters of America then by what logic does your advocacy for gay "marriage" NOT constitute equal arbitrariness and hatred for America as you seek to radically alter its traditions? So what is gay "marriage?"

Ichthyic Posts: 3325 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,19:59    Quote Traditional marriage is the union between one man and one woman at its most fundamental level. unless of course you're living in a society where it isn't. where does the constitution fall on your scale of "tradition"? you do amaze. It's like watching an autistic child with a helmet bang his head against a wall. over and over and over again. you couldn't get enough attention on your own dam*n thread, so you came here to bang your head on this wall? again... look at the poll data, and ask youself: who in the 9hells do you possibly hope to convince with your lame-ass, completely idiotic, drivel??? go back to your hovel, idiot. hugs be damned!  you need brain surgery. -------------- "And the sea will grant each man new hope..." -CC

thordaddy Posts: 486 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:09    Icky, Your poll just shows how corrupted science is by liberal ideology.  Are 95% of scientists REALLY political liberals?   But I digress as you have yet to answer which one of these unions are a gay "marriage?" a. Adam and Steve b. Chrissy, Missy and Sissy c. Bo and Luke Duke d. All the above Will you have the courage to answer the question so I can cast my vote?

Ichthyic Posts: 3325 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:15    Quote Your poll just shows how corrupted science is by liberal ideology.  Are 95% of scientists REALLY political liberals?   hmm, glancing at the question the poll is asking, and the potential answers.... nope.  don't see anything about liberal ideology there. or scientists. seems pretty straigtforward. It's YOU that's confused about the issue, and projecting your psychology onto it. it's why we keep asking (only half-jokingly, btw) if you aren't repressing your own sexuality? being "liberal ideologues" tho, if you came out of the closet we wouldn't think you any less stupid than you are now. -------------- "And the sea will grant each man new hope..." -CC

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:16    Quote Traditional marriage is the union between one man and one woman at its most fundamental level So you could marry your mom once you've divorced your sister, TD? -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Ichthyic Posts: 3325 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:20    what if his mom was already married to his brother, who also happens to be his father? would his mom have to divorce his brother/father to marry her son/nephew, before he divorced his sister? -------------- "And the sea will grant each man new hope..." -CC

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:25    As always, the good book makes it clear... "Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of this mother..." Deuteronomy 27:22 "And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter...it is a wicked thing...." Leviticus 20:17 Yet Abraham marries his father's daughter and remains God's favorite: "And Abraham said, Because I thought, Surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will slay me for my wife's sake. And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife." Genesis 20:11-12 from http://www.rotten.com/library/religion/bible/discrepancies/incest/ -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

clamboy Posts: 299 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:31    And so we see what thordaddy's arguments add up to: a slippery slope coupled with an appeal to "tradition." I understand what you're saying, thordaddy, but that dog don't lick its own balls. You still haven't explained why you demand an arbitrary denial of rights based on chromosomes. If you really give a dookie, thordaddy, I'll provide longer answers to your questions. But why should I bother? You present some pretense of interest in discussion, but you ignore the important points raised by folks such as, well, myself, and this tends to lead folk like me to decide to have another shot of Lagavulin rather than take you seriously.

thordaddy Posts: 486 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:35    Icky, I think your responses mirror those of the other posters in that you aren't really serious about the issue at hand.  You only "support" gay "marriage" because it make YOU feel morally superior.  But you certainly aren't morally superior to those that would eradicate ALL criteria for marriage, are you?  Don't you have a ways to go in your "progressiveness?"

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:38    Why does it bother you which groups get married, TD? and as you'll probably try and twist the question around - if the parties involved enjoy it and it hurts no-one, it's fine by me. -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Ichthyic Posts: 3325 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:39    you put out the most idiotic posers anybody's ever seen, and you think WE'RE the one's not taking the issue seriously? yikes. -------------- "And the sea will grant each man new hope..." -CC

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:41    Ichthyic, congrats on 1000 posts! -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Ichthyic Posts: 3325 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:43    Yaay for me! woot! *ahem*, er, actually I hadn't even noticed. (hangs head in shame) I suppose if I had, I might have made it about something a bit more weighty than a rip on the inbred nature of Thordaddy's family. meh, maybe not. -------------- "And the sea will grant each man new hope..." -CC

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:44    I just "wanted" to do a "post" in the "style" of Thordaddy. "Thanks" -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

thordaddy Posts: 486 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,20:45    clamboy, And all your argument adds up to is a denial of the slippery-slope arguments based on your inexplicable appeal to tradition? Traditional marriage bad and gay "marriage" good.  This is your stance.  What you don't explain is how you derive this good from a bad foundation?  You simply throw away the tradition you don't like (opposite sexes) and keep the ones you do (nonrelatedness and 2 person union).  Why do you think that these latter traditions can't be simply discarded like the former?  What is your discriminatory and intolerant excuse for keeping these self-serving traditions intact?

clamboy Posts: 299 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,21:04    Tsk, tsk, thordaddy, please point to where I said, "schminkie+hoohoo=BAD." You know I never said that, so, like afDave, GoP, and others of your ilk here, you deliberately misrepresent the positions taken by those you disagree with. Remember, I only asked you to explain why, if "schminkie+hoohoo=GOOD," why does "schminkie+schminkie and hoohoo+hoohoo=BAD." Of course, I did ask you to explain this in light of the Consitution, and in the light of a respect for individual rights. Go for it. I really want to know, you small-waisted stud, you!

thordaddy Posts: 486 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 07 2006,21:16    clamboy, If traditional marriage is "good" then why change its definition...?  To make it better?  If making the institution of marriage better involves discarding defining criteria then why not discard ALL of the criteria to give us the best institution? The law treats ALL citizens equally AS INDIVIDUALS.  It says two things.  First, those who wish to enjoy the benefits of marriage must abide by the rules of the institution.  This APPLIES equally to ALL American citizens.  Likewise, it says those that do not abide by the rules of the institution will not enjoy the benefits of said institution.  Again, this APPLIES EQUALLY to all American citizens. Where is the inequality in law, I ponder?

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,01:19    How long has "traditional" marriage been a union between one man and one woman?  I thought there were numerous examples in the Bible of men marrying multiple wives.  The Mormons were doing it here in this country not too long ago (and some still do.)  Isn't this appeal to tradition not even correct?

improvius Posts: 807 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,02:38    I answered your questions, TD. Now it's YOUR turn.  Just who are these threesomes and brothers who are clamoring for the right to get married?  As I've demonstrated, there are plenty of REAL same-sex couples affected by this issue.  So please put up some names/numbers/links for the people you think we're discriminating against. -------------- Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37) Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late. Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,03:14    Hey, weren't the slippery slope and the traditional definition of marriage the arguments used against allowing mixed-race couples to marry?

clamboy Posts: 299 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,06:15    Quote (GCT @ June 08 2006,08:14) Hey, weren't the slippery slope and the traditional definition of marriage the arguments used against allowing mixed-race couples to marry? And against granting voting rights to women.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,06:58    The majority of us modern, liberal people who support gay marriage, don't have to explicitly formulate reasons for gay marriage. In fact, I'd say most of us look at it as a simple issue of discrimination. Gays have historically been mistreated, and this should obviously stop. But motivated by the AtBC discussion about explicit reasons, I got curious about what the best arguments are, and I asked gay people. Jason K pointed me to his essay on the topic, and I find it a pretty good essay, and one worth sharing: http://positiveliberty.com/2005....ge.html

Steverino Posts: 411 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,09:41    This was worth posting: Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative: Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them: When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself? A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here? Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. Your devoted fan, Jim -------------- - Born right the first time. - Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers. - It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

Ichthyic Posts: 3325 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,10:40    Quote When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? no, you should use more BBQ sauce.  Then your neighbors will bring beer. Quote I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? No need to ask Dr. Laura, a visit to downtown after midnight should reveal some good sources to ask.  Look for guys wearing a lot of jewelry and a fancy hat, maybe driving a purple Lincoln. Quote I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. ahhh, but it's the level of the response that acts as a good indicator.  If you ask, and the woman simply states offense, probably not.  If you ask, and she hits you upside your head with a baseball bat, you have your answer. Quote I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself? naww, if they're working 7 days a week, the work itself will probably do the job for you. Quote A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? yes.  have them eat shellfish taken during the months of a red tide.  After they're dead, ask them again.  You can get information on the correct time to harvest for best effect here: http://seagrant.uaf.edu/features/PSP/psp_page.html ... -------------- "And the sea will grant each man new hope..." -CC

Spike Posts: 49 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,12:02    Didn't Dr. Laura watch that episode of "West Wing" where they had a Dr. Laura character on and the POTUS said almost the -exact same thing-? See? It's not just Xtain Fundies. Fundmentalism is a disease that does not discriminate. (Yes. You can have fun with that ironic statement.)

improvius Posts: 807 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,12:15    Please, TD (or anyone who cares to try), finish this sentence: The intrinsic societal value of (recent) traditional heterosexual marriage, as opposed to homosexual marriage, is ____. The only condition is that you use some sort of noun phrase.  Predicate adjectives will not count for credit.  (This means you can't just use the word "obvious", TD.) -------------- Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37) Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late. Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

Ichthyic Posts: 3325 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,12:31    OH! OH! is this one of them Mad Libber thingies? ummm. penis! tee hee! -------------- "And the sea will grant each man new hope..." -CC

thordaddy Posts: 486 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,12:38    improvius, How about myself and my 5 heterosexual brothers with our 3 wives, 4 kids and 2 on the way?  Can we "marry" each other and receive a state-sanctioned "marriage" with all the appropriate benefits and tax reductions?  I'm thinking this will be a great way for us to reduce our collective tax burden and sanctify our love as a family.  No sharing of wives or homosexual activity will take place and we probably won't even live together.  We just want the government benefits.  Can you tell me why I SHOULDN'T get my "marriage" if all consent? Secondly, if you are seriously drawing a blank concerning the intrinsic value of traditional marriage then you should be equally ambivalent about the instrinsic value of gay "marriage?"  If there is no value in traditional marriage then THERE IS NO VALUE IN gay "marriage."

improvius Posts: 807 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,12:41    thordaddy- Take a deep breath, relax, and try to focus on what I actually wrote.  If you can't come up with an answer, that's fine, just say so and we can move on. -------------- Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37) Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late. Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

Mr_Christopher Posts: 1238 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 08 2006,12:46    "Traditional" marriage is NOT one man and one woman, it is one man and many women.  The one man one woman thing is actually quite new if you look at history. Ahh how I long for the good old, traditionaldays ;-) Speaking of sexual morality, Mary was what 13 or 14 when the space alien/time traveler knocked her up (while she was married to a 73 year old)? Thordaddy, how many pictures of shirtless men with sweaty biceps do you keep on your bedroom wall at home?  Come on, tell us the truth.  You've got a huge collection of beefcake pictures on your computer, don't you?  You're amongst friends here, you can tell us the truth. Chris -------------- Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

Pages: (6) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard