Page 20 of 20 FirstFirst ... 10181920
Results 191 to 194 of 194

Thread: The Flowers and the Wedding -- Just the FACTS, please

  1. #191
    tWebber tabibito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    DownUnder
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,849
    Amen (Given)
    199
    Amen (Received)
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    OK, if I am reading you correctly, you believe that a thing is bigoted/prejudiced simply if it is labeled as such by someone? I don't follow that line of reasoning at all.
    You got it wrong by a full 180 degrees. I was saying the opposite. Attitudes are not bigoted just because you consider them bigoted.

    I use the terms "bigoted" and "prejudiced" when one group of people is being held to a different standard than another group for reasons that are not associated with the differences between the groups. That is what racism is/does. A person is treated according to their membership in a particular race and a bias the person has about the status of that race (i.e., they are inferior, evil, etc.).
    There are clear differences between the groups that you nominated. Trying to foist off differences of life-style choices as equivalent to genetic characteristics is - to put it mildly - bulldust.

    I think I have been fairly clear as to why I hold this view about homosexuality and same-sex unions/intimacy. I have outlined it several times now. I will change my view on whether or not the views are bigoted/prejudiced is someone can show me that they actually are not bigoted/prejudiced.
    I'm sure that there are any number of paederasts who would consider opposition to their choices equally bigoted. Same goes for thieves or gossips, come to that. Or people who think they have the right to accuse others of things without knowing that the accusations are valid.
    I don't know how you can do that, however. The moral prohibition and "sinful" declaration is completely rooted in genetic identity - as I have shown.
    To the best of my knowledge, no-one here has been advocating prohibition of a person's choice to engage in homosexual partnerships - the argument has centred on being forced to endorse things that are considered inappropriate.
    Not a single person has actually addressed the core of the argument. Well, Sparko sort of did. He at least acknowledged the argument had been made, and then responded to it by calling it "idiotic." Not much of a rebuttal, but pretty common here.
    So you're saying that Sparko calling it idiotic doesn't make it idiotic?

    We might get somewhere if people would actually address the argument, instead of the person making it.
    Maybe you should set us all a good example and stop using insulting terms when you address the issues.
    1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

  2. Amen RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  3. #192
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    47,335
    Amen (Given)
    4651
    Amen (Received)
    20983
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    You'll have to ask them. I don't see it as relevant, for the reasons noted.



    "Providing a service" does not translate to "accepting the views." Hotels provide facilities for gatherings. That does not mean they endorse the positions/ideals of every group that books the facilities.
    Here is your problem Carp. What YOU think constitutes "accepting their views" doesn't matter. What matters is how the Christian views it, since it it THEIR religious convictions on the line, not yours. You are wrong. And again you think that your OPINION is the only one that matters. It doesn't. The only thing that matters is the Christian Baker/Florists Religious Views and the Constitution of the USA.

    And I note that you did NOT take me up on my invitation to tell me exactly where that line of reasoning was wrong or untrue in my previous post.
    I don't see any such thing?

  4. #193
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    47,335
    Amen (Given)
    4651
    Amen (Received)
    20983
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    And entirely rooted in a person's membership in a class. We used to make a similar argument

    black + black = moral
    white + white = moral
    white + black = immoral

    And we claimed it was perfectly logical then too. That didn't stop it from being a racist/bigoted/prejudicial view.

    This one is not racist. It would be better described as genderist or sexist. But it is bigoted and prejudicial, for the same reasons. Morality is being rooted in a persons genetic identity, ironically by many of the very people that object to "identity politics." But apparently "identity morality" is no problem.

    I don't agree.
    Now it is "class" instead of "genetics?" Make up your mind and stick to it.

    Adult+Child=Immoral
    Man+sheep=Immoral
    Brother+Sister=Immoral


    Look, sometimes "class" can be a perfectly good reason to determine something is immoral

    And I don't care if YOU think incest or bestiality is not immoral, others do, and there you are not calling them bigots because of "class" discrimination.

  5. #194
    God, family, chicken! Bill the Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central VA
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,216
    Amen (Given)
    7774
    Amen (Received)
    7991
    Moderated By: Bill the Cat

    Per request of OP, closing thread.

    ***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
    Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.



    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals --- Manya the Holy Szin --- The Quintara Marathon ---

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common --- Stephen R. Donaldson ---

Posting Permissions

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