Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Folks, several of you are walking a very fine line here between appropriate and inappropriate posts. Remember that if you start discussing the poster, rather than his argument, you are likely falling off that knife edge on the "please punish me" side. Calm down.

edited to comply with mods warning.

 dogma wrote:

Clever

Ignoring that unlike racisim, homosexuality is specifically addressed in the Bible, but still clever. He earns a cookie.

Great video, thanks for sharing Dogma.

The religious arguments are a bunch of bullgak, because its a very fine line between what is acceptable between the various religious groups. If you let religion dictate civil rights, then it is possible that soon enough, YOUR rights get infringed.

This gentleman says it much better than I ever could...

 generalgrog wrote:
That speech was fiery?

I wasn't surprised at all..I knew what he was doing... because he choose very specific buzzwords.

His whole speech, as is the argument in general, is a false analogy, in that the gay marriage issue is a civil rights issue.

It's a behavior choice issue. Black people didn't choose to be black. Gay people made a choice.

GG

Y'know, This is the exact type of argument that nearly got me to kill myself, at one point i thought i might be gay, with a very religious family that rejects all that, that i would rather die then continue living in a world that hates me, I have since realized i am not.
The point it this line of thinking is poisonous, as much as you talk about wanting to help gays, you are not, you are hurting them, making them feel hated and rejected.
Why not go forth and do gods true work? Help the poor and make sure that they have to ability to live. Remember, She gave all she had.

 generalgrog wrote:
If you consider mattyrms response as discourse you and I have different ideas of discourse. He consistently insults me with seeming impunity. See his post above for an example. I don't and never had an issue with real discourse.

You clearly do. All you talk about is banning, because you are desperate for people who disagree with you to shut up. Also, I didn't insult you, and thats why I am not banned. Its all right there in black and white for everyone to read.

Oh hang on...... Did you read what I wrote about inferring that people might be homosexual themselves if they constantly crow on about sexuality being a choice was as "insult"

I get it now!

Well thanks for proving me right, because no sensible adult other than someone who is bigoted thinks being called "gay" is a heinous insult. By their deeds shall ye condemn them. My "insults" are merely pointing out that I don't for a second believe their is a conscious choice because I didn't choose to like women, I just do.

Some of your words on the other hand, which I have read many times these last two years, are genuinely appalling, and offensive to a great many people, you have referred to gay people as "perverts" on numerous occasions, and I don't cry about banning you, I just retort that what you say is at odds with facts, logic, and pretty much the vast majority of people who are educated on the topic. You believe the same as many other creationist Christians do, not because its a well thought out and rational retort you figured out for yourself, you are simply parroting what many of your ilk do. This also is a fact.

Proof if needed, is obvious in the rest of your posts, because when something isn't at odds with your (or possibly your pastors) own narrow interpretation of the scriptures, you are just like everyone else, talk sports or favourite beer or favourite holiday spot and you are as pleasant and congenial as the next man!

Lets leave the topic open to debate and leave the great dakka reading public to decide just who is being insulting here, I have to point out though.. I'd be fething amazed if any fair minded reader found my comments more "insulting" than yours.

Exalted, seriously Matty you need a book deal or something.

No, Mattyrm, yuo are no insulting anyone. I think you are showing a good distaste for people who deserve it though.
But, lets talk about this, america was not founded on religious principles EVER. Our first colonies where ones of exploitation, founded on profit, and england came over when the puritans where screwing things up.
Also, anyone else find it eerily similiar the witch trial and gay persecution?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Also, anyone else find it eerily similiar the witch trial and gay persecution?

But witches are like, totally dangerous! It says so in the bible! If people were just allowed to be witches then everyone would be a witch! No children would be safe from human sacrifice! It is a slippery slope to wizardry and mime artists!

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
No, Mattyrm, yuo are no insulting anyone. I think you are showing a good distaste for people who deserve it though.
But, lets talk about this, america was not founded on religious principles EVER. Our first colonies where ones of exploitation, founded on profit, and england came over when the puritans where screwing things up.
Also, anyone else find it eerily similiar the witch trial and gay persecution?

Its obvious to Europeans that America was hijacked at some point. Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck and such who endlessly crow on about Jesus and the founding fathers are just Christian revisionists.

I doubt TJ would be a happy man if he could see Bush talking about how God told him to invade Iraq.

I mean, Stuff like this comes up quite more frequently in times of strife, persecution of others. Like the witch trials came up during a time of war. and people used witches as scape goats, like we use gays right now.

 mattyrm wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
No, Mattyrm, yuo are no insulting anyone. I think you are showing a good distaste for people who deserve it though.
But, lets talk about this, america was not founded on religious principles EVER. Our first colonies where ones of exploitation, founded on profit, and england came over when the puritans where screwing things up.
Also, anyone else find it eerily similiar the witch trial and gay persecution?

Its obvious to Europeans that America was hijacked at some point. Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck and such who endlessly crow on about Jesus and the founding fathers are just Christian revisionists.

I doubt TJ would be a happy man if he could see Bush talking about how God told him to invade Iraq.

Actually, support for homosexual marriage in the United States has grown over the last 3 years in about every poll conducted on the subject. As an example, Gallup polls show that support for homosexual marriage has risen from 34% in 1982 to 54% in 2011. This is mostly due to the youth not caring what two consenting adults--for example;

Again, the data indicate that young adults are helping drive the change in public perception: 65% of 18 to 29 year olds currently say homosexual relations should be legal, compared to 58% of 30 to 49 year olds, 49% of 50 to 64 year olds, and 33% of those age 65 and older.

So, really--the debate is mostly over. As that demographic shifts to the 35+ voting demographic---it's only a matter of time before the issue is put to rest. It actually reminds me of the youth movement in Iran---really we don't have to change the clericalism in Iran--we just need to make sure we don't give the youth a reason to hate us--and wait until the older generation dies.

Goddamn, yes.

Somebody start a slow clap for that guy.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Also, anyone else find it eerily similiar the witch trial and gay persecution?

No. I think the comparison made by the preacher in the OP is honestly the greatest analogy anyone can draw between gay rights and comparable issues. I actually wish he'd had more than a minute. I'd be interested to hear a ten minute blurb when he can do that so brilliantly.

Somebody start a slow clap for that guy.

Not a terrible bit or anything, but hardly an earth shattering piece of oratory.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Exalted, seriously Matty you need a book deal or something.

How do you know he doesn't have one? I'm pretty sure he writes under the pen name E L James.

 AustonT wrote:

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Exalted, seriously Matty you need a book deal or something.

How do you know he doesn't have one? I'm pretty sure he writes under the pen name E L James.

I'd have thought he wrote under the name Michael Rotch Sr.

 dogma wrote:


Apparently we do. Discourse does not involve allowing people you consider odious to maintain their views without insult. If you consider a person's views odious, then you should make that statement; refraining from doing so is cowardly.

Edit for Mod warning.

It does matter when there are rules on a forum...which get routinely ignored by mods. I appreciate janthkin stepping in. I actually have matty on ignore..but unfortunately the ignore feature doesn't work when someone quotes him. I find certain views quite odious, as you put it...but I try to maintain some sense of self control.

I don't want the guy banned(unless he can't learn to control himself)..I just want the rules properly enforced..why is he given free reign to insult someone and attempt to shout down their viewpoint because it's unpopular on THIS forum.

Dogma, you routinely come close to crossing the line, and sometimes do. However you seem to be able to balance out your intolerance and lack of consistent logical dialogue with what appears to be sincere attempt at trying to enlighten someone.

GG

 generalgrog wrote:

 dogma wrote:


Apparently we do. Discourse does not involve allowing people you consider odious to maintain their views without insult. If you consider a person's views odious, then you should make that statement; refraining from doing so is cowardly.

Edit for Mod warning.

It does matter when there are rules on a forum...which get routinely ignored by mods. I appreciate janthkin stepping in. I actually have matty on ignore..but unfortunately the ignore feature doesn't work when someone quotes him. I find certain views quite odious, as you put it...but I try to maintain some sense of self control.

I don't want the guy banned(unless he can't learn to control himself)..I just want the rules properly enforced..why is he given free reign to insult someone and attempt to shout down their viewpoint because it's unpopular on THIS forum.

Dogma, you routinely come close to crossing the line, and sometimes do. However you seem to be able to balance out your intolerance and lack of consistent logical dialogue with what appears to be sincere attempt at trying to enlighten someone.

GG

Not defending any insulting that may have gone on from either side, but trying to shout down someone's viewpoint because you disagree with it is, I believe, the whole point in a discussion.

 generalgrog wrote:

No I'm just not brainwashed.

GG

Just what I would expect someone who is brainwashed to say.

The number of homosexual out there should be enough to provide some insights in the phenomenon.

GG, did you ask any of them when they made their choice? Because most coming out stories I've heard went along the line of 'I was 14, in the team's locker room, I saw some dude take a shower, and there it was, I said myself, ''wow, I'd love to gag on that junk'''. Doesn't strike me much as a choice, and much more has an intuition.

 mattyrm wrote:

 generalgrog wrote:
That speech was fiery?

I wasn't surprised at all..I knew what he was doing... because he choose very specific buzzwords.

His whole speech, as is the argument in general, is a false analogy, in that the gay marriage issue is a civil rights issue.

It's a behavior choice issue. Black people didn't choose to be black. Gay people made a choice.

GG

The reason I have so much distaste for people like GG is very simple... They are basically trying to claim that all straight men would be just as happy sucking blokes off as we are sleeping with a woman.

Now, I've obviously not got any issue with gay people at all, but I would strongly deny being homosexual if anyone asked me as I happily cohabit with my missus. But I don't "prefer" to kiss women than men. I don't "pick" womens vaginas over big hairy arses... its not a close run thing that I have to think about.

Clearly you have no choice in the matter at all, I don't choose to like staring at womens tits, something in my brain demands it of me... no doubt something to do with our lowly origins.

Thus, I can only presume that GG and all those like him are repressed homosexuals, and I feel genuinely sorry for them that they think they have to hide their feelings for other men. America is a tolerant society, and as such he should be free to wear assless chaps and ride around on the back a motorcycle driven by a burly moustachioed man in a string vest.

Matty, once again you prove yourself to be awesome. Congrats man.


GG, sometimes I think you post the anti-gay words that you do only to rally everyone against you. How close to the truth am I? You can't honestly believe being gay is a choice-it's part of some peoples' biological makeup. The only 'gay' act that is a choice is practiced by 18-21 year old girls who move away from home for 4 years and experiment with new friends at Greek parties. And every man in his right mind should support those gay acts with thunderous applause.

Did anyone watch the link to the actual opponents of this bill are saying??..... apparently gay people cause crime to increase and will sue business out of this town! Why didn't anyone tell me this...I would have started suing people years ago!!

 Huffy wrote:
Why didn't anyone tell me this...

We all thought you knew already.

Too long have we lived under the shadow of our homosexual overlords...

 d-usa wrote:
Too long have we lived under the shadow of our homosexual overlords...

We must cast down their idols

and return to the arms of God!

 generalgrog wrote:
It's a behavior choice issue. Black people didn't choose to be black. Gay people made a choice.

No.

Besides the factual problems with the argument, it's a terrible argument anyway. We are certainly opposed to bigotry based on religion (for example, not allowing Christians to marry other Christians), and religion is a behavior choice issue. Members of a religion made a choice. So should it be legal to discriminate against people based on their religion? Do you support repealing every law against discrimination based on religious belief?

 generalgrog wrote:
why is he given free reign to insult someone and attempt to shout down their viewpoint because it's unpopular on THIS forum.

Because you seem to consistently make up your own "facts" in defiance of the easily available truth of the subject. For example, making a false claim about how many weeks it takes the human nervous system to develop in a recent thread about abortion, even though it would take little more than a 30 second google search to discover that you are wrong. Your viewpoints aren't just unpopular, they're laughably wrong.

 Huffy wrote:
Did anyone watch the link to the actual opponents of this bill are saying??..... apparently gay people cause crime to increase and will sue business out of this town! Why didn't anyone tell me this...I would have started suing people years ago!!

Did you not receive your pamphlet? You can stop by our offices to receive your taking over the world instructional packet, just make sure you get the right one, we share office space with the jews.

Believing in religion is a behaviour choice.