Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage Is A Fundamental Right
https://www.afer.org/blog/14-supreme-court-cases-marriage-is-a-fundamental-right/
Demonizing people
- Thread starter Sorcerer
- Start date
14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage Is A Fundamental Right
https://www.afer.org/blog/14-supreme-court-cases-marriage-is-a-fundamental-right/
That's cool, Syne.
Josef Stalin is a perfect example.
I thought we agreed to not converse anymore.
I'm putting you on ignore.
jan.
Magical Realis,
Please cut the crap. I meant what I said. If you can't deal with it, then leave it, but don't start with this shite. Okay?
You believe that marriage between a man and woman is no different to that of a marriage between a man and a man.
You have to change my thoughts to fit into your perception of what someone like me thinks.
You'll excuse me if can't take you seriously when you attempt to talk to me about religion.
Oh, so the literal meaning of the word is the intention behind this thread title (at least for some). Why am I not surprised.
jan.
Please cut the crap. I meant what I said. If you can't deal with it, then leave it, but don't start with this shite. Okay?
You believe that marriage between a man and woman is no different to that of a marriage between a man and a man.
You have to change my thoughts to fit into your perception of what someone like me thinks.
You'll excuse me if can't take you seriously when you attempt to talk to me about religion.
Oh, so the literal meaning of the word is the intention behind this thread title (at least for some). Why am I not surprised.
jan.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Don't masquerade your beliefs as what "some believe." If you believe something, own it. Evasion only undermines your credibility.
Love is love. Marriage is marriage. It's all one human thing, whether you think so or not.
In the religious world, demons are real beings that possess people and conspire against the godly to destroy them. So it totally makes sense that religion enables the demonization of others better than any other value system. Maybe even scapegoating too. The religious invented that one too.
Again, an ignorance of historical record is the only way that answer is possible.
And don't be a coward. You made an inaccurate statement, and now you're running from it. Respond to the questions in this post:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?140970-Demonizing-people&p=3176816&viewfull=1#post3176816
This is complete and utter rubbish. MR made a perfectly sensible point and you are unable to respond to it. Maybe it's time you had a break.
Magical Realist,
I said and meant what I said.
Are you so weak in argument that you have to sink to trying control both sides in a bid to convince yourself of your fantasies?
Congrats! You've just rendered this discussion pointless.
jan.
I said and meant what I said.
Are you so weak in argument that you have to sink to trying control both sides in a bid to convince yourself of your fantasies?
Congrats! You've just rendered this discussion pointless.
jan.
Agreed. Since we both know Syne won't moderate him, I'm going to start a ticket with the new help center, see if any of the other mods can do something about him.
You've got my vote. Let's get him out of here.
He never claimed it did. Enough with your strawmen and evasion, jan.
Straw man argument. You said: "By "promiscuous" I suppose you mean people who get laid with more than one person in their lives." I have already tried to correct you once, as that group would include someone who has had sex with the two people they were in long-term monogamous relationships with, which has minimal risk of HIV infection.
I have repeatedly condemned actual promiscuity, whether hetero or homosexual. And since you do not seem to have any idea what actual promiscuity is:
Promiscuity, in human sexual behaviour, is the practice of having casual sex frequently with different partners or of being indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners. - wiki
You just said it yourself. I list "correlations". Anything beyond that is your own imagined inference from the obvious motive of demonizing me. Perhaps you do not know the distinction. A cause implies that all members of a group are equally effected, while a correlation only means that there is a strong relation to the group, behavior, etc. that does not necessarily hold for every individual.
This is why I condemn homosexual behavior but do not demonize gays in general nor advocate any laws to prohibit their sexual activity.
It is sad a moderator has decided to start trolling another mod.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
How long do you think the civil right of marrying whoever you love has been around? Remember now, there was a time when you had to marry whoever your parents decided you'd marry. Later on there was even a time when you could only marry people of your own race. So much for the "tried and true tradition" argument eh?
Mod note
No, demonizing in this thread is not limited to that done only by the religious.
No, demonizing in this thread is not limited to that done only by the religious.
That doesn't explain why, because if you were interested in the cause of the harm, you'd understand that it's the social stigma of homosexuality that makes these traits appear.
But you don't care about that. It's about demonizing a people you don't agree with for whatever reason, probably religious.
Sorry, but that was the OP.
My bold. I think we're getting somewhere now. You seem - and correct me if I'm wrong - to be condemning gay people for having lots of sex, which they do. But so do lots of straight people. You can say they shouldn't, I suppose, but then people do all sorts of things they shouldn't, from drugs to extreme sports to ...... you see what I mean. If that's your only problem then it's one I can understand if not embrace.
None of these cultural differences change the fact that marriage is (by default) between a man and a woman.
Are you going to deny this?
jan.