Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 122

Thread: Warren on Gay Marriage

  1. Top | #91
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,506
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Half-Life View Post
    Christians tried to end the AIDS epidemic in the 80's by speaking out against gay people fornicating. Leftists pushed and pushed for normalcy and AIDS increased and well....here we are.

    But, it's the Christians who didn't care about AIDS. Yep, sure.

    Leftists: How do we stop AIDS from spreading?
    Christians: Teach gay men not to fornicate.
    Leftists: Bigot!
    Christians: But, AIDS will increase if they keep fornicating. We don't want it to increase.
    Leftists: Bigot!
    Christians: We give up.
    Leftists: OMG, why are AIDS out of control now?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    When did "Christians" do anything substantive to combat the AIDS crisis? I remember them pointing fingers and assigning blame, that's not the same as addressing it.
    Monogamy is what Christianity was proposing as the solution. Not homophobia.
    Bullshit. The bigot solution to gay marriage is for me to betray and abandon my partner because he has the wrong genitals. I should stuff him into a closet, do some weird therapy nonsense, and find a "nice Christian girl" to be with instead. Right? That's not monogamy. That's serial adultery based on prejudice. And if I had AIDS (which I don't) my being back in the closet would do nothing to protect the poor girl from also getting infected. So when does the "solution" part kick in?

  2. Top | #92
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    3,561
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Half-Life View Post
    Christians tried to end the AIDS epidemic in the 80's by speaking out against gay people fornicating. Leftists pushed and pushed for normalcy and AIDS increased and well....here we are.

    But, it's the Christians who didn't care about AIDS. Yep, sure.

    Leftists: How do we stop AIDS from spreading?
    Christians: Teach gay men not to fornicate.
    Leftists: Bigot!
    Christians: But, AIDS will increase if they keep fornicating. We don't want it to increase.
    Leftists: Bigot!
    Christians: We give up.
    Leftists: OMG, why are AIDS out of control now?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    When did "Christians" do anything substantive to combat the AIDS crisis? I remember them pointing fingers and assigning blame, that's not the same as addressing it.
    Monogamy is what Christianity was proposing as the solution. Not homophobia.
    You say what? Have you read the Bible?

    Exodus 21:10 ESV /
    If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights.

  3. Top | #93
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Georgia, US
    Posts
    2,516
    Archived
    3,862
    Total Posts
    6,378
    Rep Power
    71
    Wearing condoms is the most effective way to stop or greatly decrease the spread of STIs. Imo, people who aren't monogamous should always use condoms. Unfortunately many don't and that's why we continue to have such high rates of STI's.

    Have you Christian men never paid attention to all the preachers and priests who have not only cheated on a spouse but who have sexually assaulted women and children? Christianity has nothing to do with morality. Some Christians are very decent moral people, just like many atheists are. Some Christians are horrible, immoral people, as I'm sure some atheists are.

  4. Top | #94
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,604
    Rep Power
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post


    Either way, coming from a liberal, it's a pathetically lukewarm response. #appeasement

    Fundy: "Real MarriageTM is between a (real) man and a (real) woman.
    Warren : "That's nice"
    It's a perfect response that frame the issue the only way it should be framed, a matter of personal choice where no one has any say on anyone's marriage but their own.

    If you believe marriage is X, they you should make your own marriage X and that is the only relevance your belief has.
    Yes, it's become the standard goto rebuttal used by the liberal left for everything.

    Don't like abortion? Don't have one.
    Don't like same sex marriage? Don't have one.
    Yes, you get the idea... If there is an ACTION you wish not to take.. don't take the action... The point is that you don;t have the right to prevent others from taking that action.
    But notice how this doesn't work in both directions.
    It works in all "directions" of the action that we invite you not to take if it is distasteful for you.
    Don't think climate change is a problem? Fine. Ignore Greta Thunberg.
    Wait.. "thinking"? That's a bait and switch.. no one is saying what you may think or not.. So this one is rejected as a non sequitur.. Be ignorant if you choose... no one cares.
    Gun stockpiling? Where's the problem. Nobody is forcing you to own guns.
    Where is the problem, indeed? Your point is unclear... another one rejected...
    Uncomfortable with fluid gender theory? Easy - you don't have to accept non-binary pronouns.
    Another "thought police" bait and switch... think what you want about gender. Accept or reject what you want about individual's personal preferences... it's your relationship to have and respect or not.. no one cares enough about your preferences for them to be important to them... that is the "other direction".

  5. Top | #95
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,604
    Rep Power
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post

    Yes, it's become the standard goto rebuttal used by the liberal left for everything.

    Don't like abortion? Don't have one.
    Don't like same sex marriage? Don't have one.

    But notice how this doesn't work in both directions.

    Don't think climate change is a problem? Fine. Ignore Greta Thunberg.
    Gun stockpiling? Where's the problem. Nobody is forcing you to own guns.
    Uncomfortable with fluid gender theory? Easy - you don't have to accept non-binary pronouns.
    There's a difference between an action that hurts someone else, and one that does not. I suspect we agree on this, but not on the boundary between those conditions.


    Pretty sure abortion hurts someone.
    I'm certain that it does not.

  6. Top | #96
    Loony Running The Asylum ZiprHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Do you like my pretty crown?
    Posts
    15,170
    Archived
    3,034
    Total Posts
    18,204
    Rep Power
    87
    ITMFA

    When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

    You submit to tyranny when you renounce truth. - Timothy Snyder

  7. Top | #97
    Veteran Member PyramidHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    4,552
    Archived
    4,389
    Total Posts
    8,941
    Rep Power
    58
    Please take this circa 2004 derail about shit nobody will ever change their mind about elsewhere

  8. Top | #98
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,604
    Rep Power
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    What pattern? Frankly, I am much more worried and concerned about a candidate who does not ever seem to change a position or who thinks that his/her solution is the only solution than someone who is willing to rethink and even change his/her views based on evidence and reason.
    You're being disingenuous. Bernie has shifted his views over time as well, but he has never been a Republican, and his current positions are all better than Warren's.
    If he has shifted views over time, then clearly he cannot be trusted using the rubric that changing one's mind is a sign of insincerity. Moreover, he was never a Democrat until 2016.

    Whether or not his current positions are all better than Warren's is a matter of opinion not fact. I will say that anyone who wishes to abolish private health insurance without a plan on how to both improve Medicare and fund it so that everyone can get the care they need is either a demogogue or an idiot.
    You could be talking about Trump if you just switch "never was a Democrat" to "never was a Republican". If you are sincere about the point you seem to be trying to make (sincerity I challenge), then whomever you vote for, it shouldn't be Trump for all the reasons you are saying.

  9. Top | #99
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,604
    Rep Power
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post

    Nearly everyone was against gay rights until the mid-90s or so. Or at least, too afraid to openly embrace them.
    I think they were mostly invisible to a lot of us.

    I remember a high school teacher in the mid '70's asking a question about whether we believed that sex should be legal between any two consenting adults and my immediate response was: Of course. I think he found it surprising because I was mostly capitalist in those days and certainly not communist then or now. At the time, the notion of 'free love' and down with racism and down with sexism was associated with communism. I was opposed to racism, sexism, discrimination of any kind that I imagined (and my imagination was limited by my youth and lack of experience and exposure).

    Note: I was only vaguely aware of homosexuality at the time but that relative ignorance did not color my view and as I became more aware of homosexuality and other sexual orientations, it only solidified my response. This did not include marriage because to be very honest, I had never heard marriage between same sex partners suggested and lacked the imagination to think about it myself. The political times were much more about bringing down the patriarchal norms of marriage = man owning/having rights over woman. Expanding marriage rights was not on a lot of minds of people like myself who frankly could not picture themselves ever choosing marriage and so not even considering that there were same sex couples who absolutely wanted that right. It was, to be honest: a blind spot, or several.
    It would surprise a lot of people to learn how much gays were looked down upon by the hippies of the 60s. There was no great aura of acceptance of gays or gay lifestyle in the Haight-Ashbury community then, even though this was before the emergence of AIDS. I was there, and was no less bigoted about it than anyone else. Not that gay people generally bothered me, but flaming gay people definitely did. For someone to need to publicly pronounce their sexual preference seemed ... weird, or mentally unbalanced. Same way that super-macho types who needed to proclaim their uber-masculinity seemed psycho. These days, the latter cases bother me as much as, or more than they ever did - many of that type seem genuinely dangerous. But gays loudly flaunting their gayness doesn't bother me a bit - in fact I get a perverse kick out of seeing people who are visibly bothered by it. As far as marriage ... I've never been able to wrap my head around the idea that who or what someone else "marries" should matter much to anyone else - even my bigoted teen aged hippie self didn't get that, unless maybe a parent who got upset about who or what their baby was marrying. IOW objections to others' loving commitments seem 100% irrational to me.
    What changed for you to go from "I found it disgusting to flaunt extreme gayness or straightness" to "I love watching those against it squirm"?

    I get what you are saying.. for me, it also changed a bit. Gayness was funny in the past... now its getting way too in-your-face, in my opinion. I suppose hetrosxuality is pretty "in-your-face" all over every magazine, billboard, TV show, and commercial, though.. .so.. ya.

  10. Top | #100
    Veteran Member Lion IRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,678
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post

    Monogamy is what Christianity was proposing as the solution. Not homophobia.
    You say what? Have you read the Bible?

    Exodus 21:10 ESV /
    If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights.
    I admit that not all Christians value monogamy.
    And not all Christians think marriage is heterosexual by definition.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •