Call to arms!!!

Josh Clarke
Superfan
Josh Clarke's picture
Posts: 107
Joined: 2008-01-27
User is offlineOffline
Call to arms!!!

My mother doesn't know me at all lol!

 

Text message I received:

 

"If you have time get on the internet - www.newsvine.com - big online discussion on palins stand against gay marrige 2day. 2 many liberals n atheist. Need help! The bottom on the page begiuns the current disscussion!"

(I am a STRONG ATHEIST and I consider myself liberal)

LETS GET EM' BOYS!!!!!!

 

KICK SOME RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVE ASS!!!

 

xD

We pop theist like Orville Redenbacher!


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
My sword is in hand .... as

My sword is in hand .... as I mentally sharpen my atheism, as god is not on my side, because I AM GOD , AS YOU .... to divide is to unite, so that all may see, ALL is ONE.

    Peace means War, as to find the comfortable "middle" .... (thanks buddha)

  Don't hurt anyone, Love them, the enemy .... as to understand them, and ourselves.


Josh Clarke
Superfan
Josh Clarke's picture
Posts: 107
Joined: 2008-01-27
User is offlineOffline
Go to the site and let

Go to the site and let people know.


Josh Clarke
Superfan
Josh Clarke's picture
Posts: 107
Joined: 2008-01-27
User is offlineOffline
OWNED.

Okay, I already typed this up but it didn't post because I didn't have an account yet. I feel I need to retype this because all the un-enlightened people I see here.

Before you can decide if Palin is wrong or right for her assertion, we must examine the assertion.

In a basic form, it states that "Homosexuality is wrong"

Let us question into this.

The most pertinent fact about homosexuals is that they are pursuing the only way of life that makes them happy. Sex is a particularly strong urge! Not many people can have a happy life without any sex. But life isn't about JUST SEX. Many homosexuals say that "it's not who you have sex with, it's who you fall in love with". Also, homosexuals and heterosexuals do not choose their sexual orientations; both find themselves to be what they are without having exercised any opinion in the matter. Saying that people cannot express their homosexuality is to condemn them to unhappy lives.

There are no factual basis to state that homosexuals are a threat to the rest of society. Apart from the sexual parter, there is no real moral difference. "The idea that homosexuals are somehow sinister characters proves to be a myth similar to the myth that black people are lazy or that jews are avaricious."

Lets examine homosexuality closer.

The argument often reduces to Homosexuality is "unnatural" or that it is a threat to "family values."As for the first, it's hard to know what to make because "unnaturalness" is so vague. There are three possible meanings I can think of.

1. "Unnatural" might be taken as a statistical notion. This would mean that a quality is unnatural if it's not shared by most people. In this sense, it would be "unnatural", but so would left-handedness. Obviously left-handed people are not evil.

2. It might mean that it doesn't follow the organs "Purpose". Every part of our body seems to have a particular purpose. The eyes see, the heart pumps blood. The genitals, is procreation: Sex is for making babies. It can be argued, then, that gay sex is "unnatural" because it is sex without intent to procreate. This seems to express what most people are thinking when they say it's "unnatural". However, if gay sex is condemned for this reason, almost all other sexual pratices would also be condemned: masturbation, oral sex, using condoms and other contraceptives, and even sex by women after menopause. All of these would be just as sinful as gay sex. But there is no reason to accept this, because this whole line of reasoning is wrong. It rest on the assumption that "it is wrong to use parts of your body for anything other than their natural purposes", and that must be false. The "purpose" of your eyes is to see; is it then wrong to use your eyes for flirting or giving a signal? The fingers are for grasping and poking; so is it wrong to snap your fingers to music? No.

3. "Unnatural" has a sinister sound, it might just be a "term of evaluation". Perhaps it means something like "contrary to what a person ought to be." But if thats what "unnatural" is, than to say something is wrong because it is unnatural would hold no truth value. It would be like saying "This is wrong because it is wrong". This is no reason to condemn anything.

If no other meanings of "unnatural" can be found, this line of reasoning must be rejected!

 

Another problem, which I'm sure a lot of you have, is that the religious text (bible) in Leviticus 18:22 says "You may not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination." Some people arguethat the bible is really not so harsh about homosexuality; and they can explain how each relevant passage (there are 9 of them by the way), should be understood.

BUT lets just play, and say the bible does say homosexuality is a HUGE SIN! What does this mean!!! acred books are honored in religious life, of course, BUT there are 2 problems with using a literal text for guidance.

1. Sacred texts (especially ones written along time ago), give uis more than we ask for. I doubt most of you have actually read the bible, but if you did... Leviticus, you would find that in addition to prohibiting homosexuality, it gives lengthy instructions for treating leprosy, detailed requirements about burnt offerings, and an elaborate routine for dealing with women who are menstruating. Theres a lot of rules about daughters of priests, including if a priest daughter "plays the whore," she shall be burned alive (21:9). Leviticus forbids eating fat (7:23), letting a woman into a church until 42 days after giving birth (12:4-5), and seeing your uncle naked (which is also called an abomination [18: 14, 26]. It says beards must have square corners (19:27) and that we may purchase slaves from neighboring states (25:44). Theres alot more, but you get the point!

Problem is, you cannot conclude that homosexuality is wrong because it says so in Leviticus unless you also agree, that these other instructions are moral requirements; and in the 21st century anyone who tried to live according to all those would go crazy. Also, you might concede that the rules about menstruation, and so on, were peculiar to an ancient culture and that they are not binding on us today. That would be sensible. BUT if you say that, you have to agree that the door is open for saying the same thing about the rule against homosexuality.

In that case, nothing can be morally right or wrong JUST because an authority says so. If the precepts in a sacred text are not arbitrary, there must be a reason for them, lets look into that. Why does the bible condemn homosexuality! In the logic of moral reasoning, the reference to the text drops out, and the reason behind the pronouncement (if any) takes place. The main piont here is not about homosexuality. It concerns the nature of moral thinking. Moral thinking and conduct are a matter of weighing reasons and being guided by them. But, being guided by reason is different from following your feelings. When we have strong feelings, we may be tempted to ignore reason and go with the feelings. But in doing so, you would be opting out of moral thinking altogether. That is why, in focusing on attitudes and feelings, you can't make such condemn someone.

 

So?

We pop theist like Orville Redenbacher!


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3704
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
 Aw, I'm too busy,

 Aw, I'm too busy, sluggish, and apathetic right now to travel to a forum that will inevitably be filled with uneducated morons.

"You're stupid. You fight against something that you don't believe exists."

"How dare you question God; he's the Creator of the universe."

"Evolution is just a theory."

"I will pray for you."

"Do you know why our economy is in decline? It's because people have turned away from the messages taught in the Bible!"

Sigh, I'm really not in the mood. 

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Josh Clarke
Superfan
Josh Clarke's picture
Posts: 107
Joined: 2008-01-27
User is offlineOffline
rofl, thats all true!!! HOW

rofl, thats all true!!! HOW DID YOU KNOW! Laughing out loud JUST KIDDING! xD

yeah basically. annoying fucks.