RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=-

RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Kirata -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/24/2014 2:32:35 AM)
DO quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren If homophobia is not based on religion, then where did it come from? Where do you think religion came from? Religions were created by people. religion was created to try and explain the world around us ~njlauren quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren no other explanation, other than religious moral teaching LOOP K.

Kirata -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/24/2014 4:49:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren The reality of non Christian homophobia is that its roots are in Christianity. What a crock of bullshit. Neither homophobia nor the cruel punishments for homosexuality recited in Leviticus were invented by Christianity. But more to the point, they weren't invented by Judaism either. You can't blame religions for attitudes that predate them, and you can't claim that those attitudes don't predate religion without arguing that religions weren't created by people. If you were ranting against the claim that there is anything "immoral" about homosexuality, I'd be happy to support you. But you're not. You're just using that as a cudgel with which to bash religion, Christianity in particular, in service of your anti-religious agenda. K.

GotSteel -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/24/2014 5:22:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren Estimates are that 50% of the priests in the Catholic Church are gay (which means the hierarchy is likely just as bad), but the fact that they let priests molest kids and moved them around doesn't mean anything, other than they are desperate to keep priests because they literally don't have enough. I haven't seen a statistic that high, could you cite your source?

Musicmystery -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/24/2014 5:42:42 AM)
You say you're not, and from your first sentence, demonstrate that you are. [sm=dunno.gif]

GotSteel -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/24/2014 7:55:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery You say you're not, and from your first sentence, demonstrate that you are. [sm=dunno.gif] And that brings the count to five posters in as many arguments.

Musicmystery -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/24/2014 8:56:32 AM)
Tell you what, sparky. List three times you've changed your position here because you heard a cogent argument that trumped your certainty.

Musicmystery -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/24/2014 8:58:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery You say you're not, and from your first sentence, demonstrate that you are. [sm=dunno.gif] And that brings the count to five posters in as many arguments. If you're going to count people who disagree, you'll have a long list. You could start with all the conservatives. Then you could add people like you, who believe that if they think it, it's automatically true. Or that the way to decide a logical point is to take a vote. Isn't that how we decided the world was flat once? And then add those who, instead of addressing counterarguments, ignore them and merely repeat the original flawed position, adding that "I don't understand" with no further clarification or argument, pretending the objections articulated don't exist. Actual argument is tougher than just being an asshole every Easter and misrepresenting Tyson's talk. If you want to actually engage in the points raised, you'll need to change from silly vendettas to counterarguments. The point raised was diving into the example instead of what it was illustrating. The poster dove right back into the example with no mention of the original point about cause and effect, focusing exclusively on arguing the example. [sm=dunno.gif]

Kirata -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/24/2014 9:47:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery List three times you've changed your position here because you heard a cogent argument that trumped your certainty. I can't list three, but I know it has caused him to change his views on hiding people. [:D] K.

GotSteel -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/25/2014 4:33:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Tell you what, sparky. List three times you've changed your position here because you heard a cogent argument that trumped your certainty. When did I get certainty......oh right, that's imaginary me. I expect that it can frustrate some people to talk with me for pages and not have my position move but please understand that it would take something new for something new to happen. When someone isn't even addressing my position with their counter arguments there's very little chance of that happening. It would be baffling to receive more than an eyeroll. On to the list, I've changed my definition of atheism, thanks to arpig. There was a thread on bestiality that caused me to realize I didn't have sufficient justification to be against it and I went from independent to democrat over the course of a thread. The list goes on but there's you're three, your turn.

Musicmystery -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/25/2014 7:36:32 AM)
Actually, that's posting you -- you're the one who keeps telling me what's what. Three? Sure. Trevelyan and I had a debate about George Washington, and when Trevelyan challenged me to support my claims, I couldn't find that support, and conceded that however I had come by those beliefs, I was clearly wrong. Kirata and I and others had a long debate about assault rifles. His point that he would favor mandatory training loosed my hard stance from against to conditional allowance. Another long debate, Kirata made a convincing case that science vs. religion left an untouched unexplainable gray area, and it was unreasonable to assume much of anything about that beyond we don't know. It opened my mind to examining other options presented. There's your three. Now, are you done making threads about me, so we can return to examine the points made and the assumptions behind those points? Or is the personal crusade going to continue? Because it's getting pretty dull and repetitive.

GotSteel -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/25/2014 3:04:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Now, are you done making threads about me, so we can return to examine the points made and the assumptions behind those points? Or is the personal crusade going to continue? Because it's getting pretty dull and repetitive. Well explaining the principal of charity doesn't seem to be going anywhere so why not, what are my assumptions which you're arguing against?

PeonForHer -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/25/2014 3:18:29 PM)
quote: Neither homophobia nor the cruel punishments for homosexuality recited in Leviticus were invented by Christianity. But more to the point, they weren't invented by Judaism either. You can't blame religions for attitudes that predate them, and you can't claim that those attitudes don't predate religion without arguing that religions weren't created by people. If you were ranting against the claim that there is anything "immoral" about homosexuality, I'd be happy to support you. But you're not. You're just using that as a cudgel with which to bash religion, Christianity in particular, in service of your anti-religious agenda. All right, that's a plausible argument. Presumably any given new religion doesn't cobble together its moral views out of thin air, though it will, I think, serve to codify and entrench existing ones. So where do you think homophobia did come from? I've been pondering this over the last few days and it's pretty damned hazy in my head, I have to say. Intriguing, though. There's a lot of lit out there, but it's pretty speculative, unsurprisingly.

Musicmystery -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/25/2014 3:20:19 PM)
[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D] Principle of Charity? Is that what you're exercising here? [8\|] The asshole who posts about zombie Jesus (which is inaccurate about both the stories of that transformation and zombie lore) every Easter rather than letting Christians enjoy their holiday, the delusional logician who repeats a gross misrepresentation of the role history plays in science, starting with naming rights, as "The Erosion of Progress by Religions" (which it isn't even in part--at best, the stalling of progress), wants to be the hall monitor (<--see, now that's a strawman...thought I'd throw one in so you could see the difference). Nope. You want to re-debate your assumptions? It's not hard, genius (<--that was sarcasm...it could be considered ad hominem) -- simply go back to the posts WHERE I EXPLICITLY TELL YOU I'M QUESTIONING YOUR ASSUMPTIONS (<--see? No having to play "well I know what I think and you don't games) and actually consider the points raised instead of (1) merely repeating your original position as if no points had been raised instead of (2) making a list of other people called on similar positions (<--which is argumentum ad populum...surely someone so ken to avoid strawman fallacies doesn't want to commit others?). Because addressing those objections to your assumptions would be embracing the Principle of Charity. You, instead, are violating it. At least it gives you a new buzzword besides strawman all the time. But until you can do that, I'd just be practicing the Principle of Pointlessness.

GotSteel -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/25/2014 4:54:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery simply go back to the posts WHERE I EXPLICITLY TELL YOU I'M QUESTIONING YOUR ASSUMPTIONS (<--see? No having to play "well I know what I think and you don't games) and actually consider the points raised instead of... But what assumptions are you questioning? If you've got counterarguments which actually do raise points about assumptions I've made you should be able to tell me what those assumptions are, no?

Musicmystery -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/25/2014 7:23:45 PM)
You can't possibly be this much of an idiot. That information is, again, explicitly in those posts. You know . . . the parts you didn't read. There's no mystery here. Just your bullshit.

DomKen -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/25/2014 8:23:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery You can't possibly be this much of an idiot. That information is, again, explicitly in those posts. You know . . . the parts you didn't read. There's no mystery here. Just your bullshit. No it isn't. You have been blithering about but not making actual positive statements. It's been ridiculous.

Musicmystery -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/26/2014 6:11:15 AM)
Another one that doesn't understand when a post challenges the assumptions, what they are, and what the problem is, that (1) the message isn't hidden and (2) you can't just blithely go one singing along with the Voice in your head by repeating the flawed assumption.

DomKen -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/26/2014 7:27:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Another one that doesn't understand when a post challenges the assumptions, what they are, and what the problem is, that (1) the message isn't hidden and (2) you can't just blithely go one singing along with the Voice in your head by repeating the flawed assumption. You can't just wave the magic wand of "challenge assumptions" and we'll all accept your superior wisdom. You have yet to make a cogent argument and if you have actually challenged GS's underlying assumptions in any post you did not do it in any way that made in sense or was presented in a manner that showed that you even knew that you were doing it. Your sole argument seems to have been that homophobia predates religion because religion is manmade. However since we are not discussing homosexuality in the cultures of the Levant but in cultures derived from Europe that argument is at best a red herring.

Musicmystery -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/26/2014 7:34:27 AM)
Here's the thing. I did. The responses weren't "Well, here's the problem with your argument, MM." Nope. They were merely to repeat the original claim, only adding personal attacks. It's your pattern too, only you also add bizarre tangents with some version of "Don't you know that...." so your fragile ego can feel better. Now, the game is "Well, where are these assumptions?" It's ridiculous. When a poster says, "The problem is your assumption that......and here's why....." it's not a mystery. Except to those more interested in face-saving than discussion.

GotSteel -> RE: -=Federal Judge Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban=- (6/26/2014 11:10:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Now, the game is "Well, where are these assumptions?" It's ridiculous. When a poster says, "The problem is your assumption that......and here's why....." it's not a mystery. Except to those more interested in face-saving than discussion. Whoa hold on there, you were the one who wanted to have a conversation about our flawed assumptions, remember: quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Now, are you done making threads about me, so we can return to examine the points made and the assumptions behind those points? So by all means, I'm not stopping you tell us what our assumptions are.

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875