California to investigate Mormon aid to Prop 8

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
Uh, no.

No matter how much you may like to believe it, you can't equate the gay movement with the civil rights movement.

Discrimination against skin color is ignorant for the simple reason that skin color has no bearing on content of character. Homosexuality is seen by it's enemies as immoral behavior. There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

You can believe what you wish, but that does not mean the government should ban it. Banning immoral behaviors should only ever even be considered when that behavior negatively effects the lives of others directly. That is, beyond mind over matter. The case of homosexual marriages does not apply. You just don't like it because.....you don't like it.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

alot of people once BELIEVED that a black man was worth less than a white man.

 

[badnewcastle]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

There is more bigotry, hatred and ignorance in not allowing someone to have there own opinion...

IMO... I don't think this issue is on the same level of skin color... this issue has an alternative to marriage and there for, people do have the same rights married or not. I believe Marriage comes from religion (several, very different religions) and thus it is not a civil rights issue such as race or sex... etc. "Marriage" is a type of union but "Civil Union" is another type and they afford the same... where is the discrimination as far as rights are concerned?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: badnewcastle

Originally posted by: badnewcastle

Personally, I don't care if gays marry or not but the issue was put to voters before and the outcome was the same.

My issue with the entire thing is that this has more to do with the court essentially making the first vote invalid and it's another attempt to legislate from the bench.

I also do not believe that this is not a civil rights issue and thus it is not uncostitutional for marriage to remain between a man and a woman.

We already have civil unions in CA which afford gays the same benefits. With this alternative they get the same rights and I believe it takes separation of church and state off the table.

I also do believe that this is not a civil rights issue - edited for clarity. I had too many "not's" in there.

By definition, that makes you ignorant, but it doesn't excuse your BIGOTRY. :thumbsdown:

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: badnewcastle

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

There is more bigotry, hatred and ignorance in not allowing someone to have there own opinion...

IMO... I don't think this issue is on the same level of skin color... this issue has an alternative to marriage and there for, people do have the same rights married or not. I believe Marriage comes from religion (several, very different religions) and thus it is not a civil rights issue such as race or sex... etc. "Marriage" is a type of union but "Civil Union" is another type and they afford the same... where is the discrimination as far as rights are concerned?

feel free to have your own opinion. Just don't legislate based off of that opinion IF your opinion happens to limit the protections that others are entitled to.

Marriage is a civil issue because it is so written in the 1000s of laws and millions of contracts in this country. We have to deal with it being that way because our government a long time ago decided on using the term "marriage" instead of "civil union"

This has been discussed before. These arguments are beyond "beating a dead horse"

We just need to have the courts decide the darn thing already...

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

People like the KKK believe that skin color denotes content of character, and they're wrong. Skin color isn't a choice. Content of character is determined by your actions, not your nature.

Anti-gay marriage people are not equivalent to racists, and the pro-gay movement isn't alike to the civil rights movement. Gay people aren't kept from exercising any rights in this country. The blacks were.

Originally posted by: OrByte
We've established in previous threads that according to you the bible says it is so, and you believe in the bible, therefore you are right and everyone is wrong.

Therefore what you "believe" should be legislated against the beliefs of others.

Of course. Just like you "believe" that gay marriage is a right, and that you "believe" I and people and like me are bigots.

We all base our actions on what we "believe." The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: badnewcastle

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

There is more bigotry, hatred and ignorance in not allowing someone to have there own opinion...

IMO... I don't think this issue is on the same level of skin color... this issue has an alternative to marriage and there for, people do have the same rights married or not. I believe Marriage comes from religion (several, very different religions) and thus it is not a civil rights issue such as race or sex... etc. "Marriage" is a type of union but "Civil Union" is another type and they afford the same... where is the discrimination as far as rights are concerned?

Marriage no longer comes from just religion as this government has proven by allowing those of no religious affiliation to get married....or are you against that as well?

However, it is fine if you believe that, but many do not and their opinion counts too. This is why the government should not get involved with banning anything in this case. You may not like the idea of gay marriage and that is fine, but do you really have to go as far as to ban it for everyone that may not agree with you? Why is that the right thing to do? You probably believe in a lot of things that I disagree with due to moral conflicts even though your beliefs do nothing that has a direct negative impact on my life, but you don't see me trying to get the government to ban you from doing or believing in those things now do you? I know you wouldn't appreciate that if I did.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

We all base our actions on what we "believe." The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong.

They are all right and all wrong at the same fucking time

Gay marriage has nothing to do with the personal life?s of basically everyone who is against it

MIND YOUR OWN FUCKING BUSINESS

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

People like the KKK believe that skin color denotes content of character, and they're wrong. Skin color isn't a choice. Content of character is determined by your actions, not your nature.

Anti-gay marriage people are not equivalent to racists, and the pro-gay movement isn't alike to the civil rights movement. Gay people aren't kept from exercising any rights in this country. The blacks were.

Originally posted by: OrByte
We've established in previous threads that according to you the bible says it is so, and you believe in the bible, therefore you are right and everyone is wrong.

Therefore what you "believe" should be legislated against the beliefs of others.

Of course. Just like you "believe" that gay marriage is a right, and that you "believe" I and people and like me are bigots.

We all base our actions on what we "believe." The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong.

I havent called you a bigot, at least not yet.

Previously the SC of CA ruled that gay marriage is protected, Gays were getting married. that has nothing to do with what I believe.

And when you say "which belief is right and which is wrong" I have to ask; Right or wrong ACCORDING TO WHO?

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

People like the KKK believe that skin color denotes content of character, and they're wrong. Skin color isn't a choice. Content of character is determined by your actions, not your nature.

Anti-gay marriage people are not equivalent to racists, and the pro-gay movement isn't alike to the civil rights movement. Gay people aren't kept from exercising any rights in this country. The blacks were.

Originally posted by: OrByte
We've established in previous threads that according to you the bible says it is so, and you believe in the bible, therefore you are right and everyone is wrong.

Therefore what you "believe" should be legislated against the beliefs of others.

Of course. Just like you "believe" that gay marriage is a right, and that you "believe" I and people and like me are bigots.

We all base our actions on what we "believe." The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong.

I havent called you a bigot, at least not yet.

Previously the SC of CA ruled that gay marriage is protected, Gays were getting married. that has nothing to do with what I believe.

And when you say "which belief is right and which is wrong" I have to ask; Right or wrong ACCORDING TO WHOM?

Wait a minute. Do you not believe in the notion of things being right or wrong?

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

People like the KKK believe that skin color denotes content of character, and they're wrong. Skin color isn't a choice. Content of character is determined by your actions, not your nature.

Anti-gay marriage people are not equivalent to racists, and the pro-gay movement isn't alike to the civil rights movement. Gay people aren't kept from exercising any rights in this country. The blacks were.

Originally posted by: OrByte
We've established in previous threads that according to you the bible says it is so, and you believe in the bible, therefore you are right and everyone is wrong.

Therefore what you "believe" should be legislated against the beliefs of others.

Of course. Just like you "believe" that gay marriage is a right, and that you "believe" I and people and like me are bigots.

We all base our actions on what we "believe." The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong.

I havent called you a bigot, at least not yet.

Previously the SC of CA ruled that gay marriage is protected, Gays were getting married. that has nothing to do with what I believe.

And when you say "which belief is right and which is wrong" I have to ask; Right or wrong ACCORDING TO WHOM?

Wait a minute. Do you not believe in the notion of things being right or wrong?

Nothing is inherently right or wrong

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: badnewcastle
Personally, I don't care if gays marry or not but the issue was put to voters before and the outcome was the same.

My issue with the entire thing is that this has more to do with the court essentially making the first vote invalid and it's another attempt to legislate from the bench.

I also do not believe that this is not a civil rights issue and thus it is not uncostitutional for marriage to remain between a man and a woman.

We already have civil unions in CA which afford gays the same benefits. With this alternative they get the same rights and I believe it takes seperation of church and state off the table.

1. What if 52% of the public voted to make Chistianity the official religion and ban all others? Would that be 'the people speaking' and something the courts should not touch?

If you answer no, then you are cherry picking which constitutional rights, which groups discriminated against,, to have the courts protects from the majority.

If you answer yes, you are against the whole concept of constitutional rights that protect any fundamental *individual* rights from the majority - a foundation of America.

Bottom line: the CA Supreme Court found that the constitution protects the right to marriage from the discrimination against gays the majority wanted.

2. Civil Unions do *not* 'give all the rights that marriage does'. You need to get informed and stop spreading false statements like that. Even if it did, I'd say that the word marriage is a right too, not giving it is simply a way of letting bigots continue to look down on gays as second-class, but it doesn't give equal rights.

What's your problem with recognizing gays as people deserving equal rights and stopping any distinctions based on bigotry in history?

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

People like the KKK believe that skin color denotes content of character, and they're wrong. Skin color isn't a choice. Content of character is determined by your actions, not your nature.

Anti-gay marriage people are not equivalent to racists, and the pro-gay movement isn't alike to the civil rights movement. Gay people aren't kept from exercising any rights in this country. The blacks were.

Originally posted by: OrByte
We've established in previous threads that according to you the bible says it is so, and you believe in the bible, therefore you are right and everyone is wrong.

Therefore what you "believe" should be legislated against the beliefs of others.

Of course. Just like you "believe" that gay marriage is a right, and that you "believe" I and people and like me are bigots.

We all base our actions on what we "believe." The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong.

I havent called you a bigot, at least not yet.

Previously the SC of CA ruled that gay marriage is protected, Gays were getting married. that has nothing to do with what I believe.

And when you say "which belief is right and which is wrong" I have to ask; Right or wrong ACCORDING TO WHOM?

Wait a minute. Do you not believe in the notion of things being right or wrong?

Nothing is inherently right or wrong

So you'd say the only truth is that there is no truth? That's a contradiction.

Lots of things are inherently right, and lots of things are inherently wrong.

Murder is wrong, no matter the motivation, coincidences, or circumstances. So is rape.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte
And when you say "which belief is right and which is wrong" I have to ask; Right or wrong ACCORDING TO WHOM?

Wait a minute. Do you not believe in the notion of things being right or wrong?

Nothing is inherently right or wrong

So you'd say the only truth is that there is no truth?

Funny how so many threads get to this point. It's like the nexus of all possible conversations. Well, this and nazi comparisons.

 

[badnewcastle]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: badnewcastle

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

There is more bigotry, hatred and ignorance in not allowing someone to have there own opinion...

IMO... I don't think this issue is on the same level of skin color... this issue has an alternative to marriage and there for, people do have the same rights married or not. I believe Marriage comes from religion (several, very different religions) and thus it is not a civil rights issue such as race or sex... etc. "Marriage" is a type of union but "Civil Union" is another type and they afford the same... where is the discrimination as far as rights are concerned?

Marriage no longer comes from just religion as this government has proven by allowing those of no religious affiliation to get married....or are you against that as well?

I'm not for or against gay marriage. I'm against the courts and gov't being involved.

the government should not get involved.

I couldn't agree more but this was put on the ballot both times by the people. Which is why the courts, gov't shouldn't have been involved after the first vote. Either way if the vote went the other way that would have been fine.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte
And when you say "which belief is right and which is wrong" I have to ask; Right or wrong ACCORDING TO WHOM?

Wait a minute. Do you not believe in the notion of things being right or wrong?

Nothing is inherently right or wrong

So you'd say the only truth is that there is no truth?

Funny how so many threads get to this point. It's like the nexus of all possible conversations. Well, this and nazi comparisons.

Peter Kreeft nailed it in one of his books. He said that modern arguments don't start with a premise and move forward to their conclusions. They start with conclusions, and move backward towards ever successive premise until you have to defend the very notion that good and evil exist.

One of the most telling things I find about abortion for example is that some of its proponents make conclusions that, upon further investigation, betray the fact that they hold as a premise the following: If we admit there is any such thing as evil, a whole lot of what we believe in comes crashing down. It's the same premise I think many atheists hold, although perhaps unknowingly. Even Richard Dawkins made that concession.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: badnewcastle

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: badnewcastle

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

There is more bigotry, hatred and ignorance in not allowing someone to have there own opinion...

IMO... I don't think this issue is on the same level of skin color... this issue has an alternative to marriage and there for, people do have the same rights married or not. I believe Marriage comes from religion (several, very different religions) and thus it is not a civil rights issue such as race or sex... etc. "Marriage" is a type of union but "Civil Union" is another type and they afford the same... where is the discrimination as far as rights are concerned?

Marriage no longer comes from just religion as this government has proven by allowing those of no religious affiliation to get married....or are you against that as well?

I'm not for or against gay marriage. I'm against the courts and gov't being involved.

the government should not get involved.

I couldn't agree more but this was put on the ballot both times by the people. Which is why the courts, gov't shouldn't have been involved after the first vote. Either way if the vote went the other way that would have been fine.

Courts are notoriously slow, that shouldn't be a reason to allow people to start voting on things that aren't legal. Should we allow Wyoming to have a question on their next ballot that bans black people from getting married? Should Massachusetts have a question that imposes a 10% tax on all goods sold to women?

Tyranny of the majority is an awful thing.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

People like the KKK believe that skin color denotes content of character, and they're wrong. Skin color isn't a choice. Content of character is determined by your actions, not your nature.

Anti-gay marriage people are not equivalent to racists, and the pro-gay movement isn't alike to the civil rights movement. Gay people aren't kept from exercising any rights in this country. The blacks were.

Originally posted by: OrByte
We've established in previous threads that according to you the bible says it is so, and you believe in the bible, therefore you are right and everyone is wrong.

Therefore what you "believe" should be legislated against the beliefs of others.

Of course. Just like you "believe" that gay marriage is a right, and that you "believe" I and people and like me are bigots.

We all base our actions on what we "believe." The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong.

I havent called you a bigot, at least not yet.

Previously the SC of CA ruled that gay marriage is protected, Gays were getting married. that has nothing to do with what I believe.

And when you say "which belief is right and which is wrong" I have to ask; Right or wrong ACCORDING TO WHOM?

Wait a minute. Do you not believe in the notion of things being right or wrong?

Obviously I believe in right or wrong. We have different ideas of right or wrong otherwise we wouldnt be in this stupid discussion so yes I do have an understanding of what is right and wrong TO MYSELF.

SO, in the context of this discussion/topic, when you say that, "The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong." I still ask, according to who? YOU?

I believe that to be the case. You and others like you chose to vote to create a group of people that is excluded from the right to marry.

You believe you are right.

I believe differently. But I don't pretend to think I'm right, which is why I say let the courts decide.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: glenn1

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...6.reDrjbxyZIBJjGk7Xs8F

SAN FRANCISCO ? California officials will investigate whether the Mormon church accurately described its role in a campaign to ban gay marriage in the state.

The California Fair Political Practices Commission said Monday that a complaint by a gay rights group merits further inquiry.

Executive director Roman Porter says the decision does not mean any wrongdoing has been determined.

Fred Karger, founder of Californians Against Hate, accuses the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints of failing to report the value of work it did to support Proposition 8.

A representative from the Salt Lake City-based church could not be reached for comment.

Now wouldnt that be something if the Mormon Church did misrepresent it`s role in the campaign to ban.....we will see what transapires!!

Oooh, an investigation! That'll teach 'em! It could have been worse - California might have unleashed a blue-ribbon commission on the LDS church.

Oh, it will be worse. Anybody who thinks gay bashers will wind up different than the racists in the 60's hasn't been paying much attention to history. Future conversations in high school history class about civil liberties will put the anti-gay activists like the LDS church in the same basic category as the people shooting marching black folks with fire hoses decades ago. If history has taught us nothing else, it's that people fighting against civil rights don't end up looking too good in the long run. An investigation, if it turns up anything, will teach them not to break the law. History will teach than that legislative gay bashing is no better than the more physical type.

And just try to guess how the anti-gay apologists will look.

Uh, no.

No matter how much you may like to believe it, you can't equate the gay movement with the civil rights movement.

Uh, yes. They are the same thing - they are two civil rights movements, one for the rights of mainly black people against race bigots, and the other for the rights of gays against sexual orientation bigots. Any time you are defending the civil rights - speech, religion, eating at a public restaurant, marrying - against the discrimnation from a group with power, it is a civil rights movement. No matter how much you don't want to believe it.

Discrimination against skin color is ignorant for the simple reason that skin color has no bearing on content of character. Homosexuality is seen by it's enemies as immoral behavior. There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

There is everything bigoted, hateful, and ignorant about believing something is immoral for reasons of bigotry, not anny rational reason.

You don't think that people opposed inter-racial marriage by calling it "immoral" and saying the bible supported their position, and that tradition did as well?

*If* hiomosexuality were a free choice, we could debate the issue of morality, and you would have a hard time proving its immorality, rather than just its 'unpleaantness'.

But there is no doubt that generally homosexuality is not a 'choice' any more than you and I chose to become attracted to the opposite sex at puberty. I'ts simply how a sall percent of people are built, just as there are tall and short, blind and albino. Between the lack of choice and the lack of harm, at least one of which is needed for a moral argument, you fall flat on your face by *abusing* the word morality, using it as a cover for bigotry.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
They are going after the Mormons because it is a much easier target then going after the minority population which is extremely homophobic.


Of course, go after the white people that ran ads, instead of the people who actually went in the booth and cast the votes. Silly libs.

Do you ever get tired of coming across as someone who posts from a trailer park that finally got wired for internet access this past March 14th?

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Atreus21There's nothing bigoted, hateful, or ignorant about opposing behavior you believe to be immoral.

Yes there is. There is a lot of bigotry, hatred, and ignorance resulting from people's belief that they are somehow more moral than others. People used to think that skin color had a bearing on content of one's character too, just like they do now with sexual orientation. It's rehash of same old bigotry just directed at different people.

People like the KKK believe that skin color denotes content of character, and they're wrong. Skin color isn't a choice. Content of character is determined by your actions, not your nature.

Anti-gay marriage people are not equivalent to racists, and the pro-gay movement isn't alike to the civil rights movement. Gay people aren't kept from exercising any rights in this country. The blacks were.

Originally posted by: OrByte
We've established in previous threads that according to you the bible says it is so, and you believe in the bible, therefore you are right and everyone is wrong.

Therefore what you "believe" should be legislated against the beliefs of others.

Of course. Just like you "believe" that gay marriage is a right, and that you "believe" I and people and like me are bigots.

We all base our actions on what we "believe." The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong.

I havent called you a bigot, at least not yet.

Previously the SC of CA ruled that gay marriage is protected, Gays were getting married. that has nothing to do with what I believe.

And when you say "which belief is right and which is wrong" I have to ask; Right or wrong ACCORDING TO WHOM?

Wait a minute. Do you not believe in the notion of things being right or wrong?

Obviously I believe in right or wrong. We have different ideas of right or wrong otherwise we wouldnt be in this stupid discussion so yes I do have an understanding of what is right and wrong TO MYSELF.

SO, in the context of this discussion/topic, when you say that, "The question is which "belief" is right, and which is wrong." I still ask, according to who? YOU?

I believe that to be the case. You and others like you chose to vote to create a group of people that is excluded from the right to marry.

You believe you are right.

I believe differently. But I don't pretend to think I'm right, which is why I say let the courts decide.

You are starting from the premise that you are right, and I am wrong. Or else, you wouldn't be arguing with me. You can't escape being just as bigoted as I am if you want to make any rational judgement of any kind.

If you gave equal consideration to all points of view, while considering them all morally equal, you couldn't make any argument.

I'm in this thread because I'm tired of people using the word bigotry, as if they know what it means. People use the word whenever they think someone is holding to a conviction. Bigotry is not the certainty that you are right. Bigotry is the absolute inability to fathom how you can possibly be wrong, and hence being unwilling and incapable of listening to any opposing argument. They are different things.

Just because you think you're right doesn't make you a bigot.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
[
Murder is wrong, no matter the motivation, coincidences, or circumstances. So is rape.

That's why people play with the definitions.

Is murder ok, when the state does it to a pisoner and calls it capital punishment?

For most of our country's history, if I understand the history correctly, the notion of a husband raping his wife was not legally recognized; it was a legal impossibility, his 'right'.

I know you have this cool little thing called "the argument there is right and wrong" and you want to play with it, but you are not doing anyone a favor with simplistic use of it.

And needless to say, you are not doing any favors either by pretending that actual, real issues of right and wrong are addressed by it, by trying to make the false analogy that if you can say murder and rape are 'absolutely wrong', than every issue fits into your black and white Manichean (look it up if needed, I had to the first time I saw it) paradigm.

What's the 'absolutely right or wrong' answer on how much the government should provide healthcare to the needy, or other investments in people's needs? What's the absolutely right or wrong amount they should tax? What's the absolutely right or wrong position on how much and how they should influence who is in power in other nations? What's the absolutely right or wrong way for them to split the budget on schools, roads, and police?

Oh, there isn't one? Would zero budgets for schools and police, leaving children uneducated and criminals running wild forming gangs to rule the city be 'absolutely wrong'?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

You are starting from the premise that you are right, and I am wrong. Or else, you wouldn't be arguing with me. You can't escape being just as bigoted as I am if you want to make any rational judgement of any kind.

If you gave equal consideration to all points of view, while considering them all morally equal, you couldn't make any argument.

I'm in this thread because I'm tired of people using the word bigotry, as if they know what it means. People use the word whenever they think someone is holding to a conviction. Bigotry is not the certainty that you are right. Bigotry is the absolute inability to fathom how you can possibly be wrong, and hence being unwilling and incapable of listening to any opposing argument. They are different things.

Just because you think you're right doesn't make you a bigot.

Bigotry is an unfounded or irrational dislike of something, it has nothing to do with how certain you are or whatever else. This is why the argument that people who hate bigots are bigots is stupid.

If you are going to try and argue that opposition to gay marriage based upon a book you believe was handed down to you by god is a rational argument against it, then we have pinpointed the flaw in our discourse here. You are attempting to use an inherently irrational belief system in order to argue rationally against an issue. (note: just because religion is by nature irrational doesn't make it bad)

This is why people call you a bigot, and that's why sadly enough, they are right.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Atreus21
[
Murder is wrong, no matter the motivation, coincidences, or circumstances. So is rape.

That's why people play with the definitions.

Is murder ok, when the state does it to a pisoner and calls it capital punishment?

The murder of the innocent is what is wrong. How dare you equate stopping a murderer from killing again to that of taking an innocent life.