Which is exactly why you never rely on the “morals of the majority”! In the1800s it was owning slaves, in the 1900s it was kill the Jews, gays, morons and / or anyone who opposed Socialism / Communism. Today it’s killing babies in the womb (although they possess all the qualities of life).
You believe that morality can be found within man.
In can’t because man is a flawed moral creature as history so amply demonstrates.
Funny how quickly arguments can appear to reverse when the situation changes. When national opinion was against ssm one of the frequent arguments used by those on the Right was "The majority is against same sex marriage." So the counter-argument was, naturally, along the lines of "Well, at one time it was acceptable to own slaves." So now national opinion favors ssm, and those in favor say, "See, now you can't use that argument anymore, the majority favors same sex marriage now." So those on the Right respond, "Well, at one time it was acceptable to own slaves."
Entertaining stuff.
You think I'm arguing for the "morals of the mojority"?
I think that this argument against gay marriage has made a 180 degree turn when it no longer worked for those opposed to ssm.
Which ones are examples of bigotry?
Can someone please fix the spelling in the question? Thank you.
You're dodging my question.
Two parter to that:
1)The argument that the majority approves of ssm is specifically a rebuttal to the idea that an argument that states the majority is against ssm is legitimate. It was never argued in the beginning that a majority determined the rightness of same sex marriage. After all, why would those in favor of gay marriage argue that? They were in the minority at the time so it would be a stupid argument to make.
2)Have you ever argued that the majority determines the rightness (or morality) of a belief or law?
I don’t care.
No. Nazi Germany always sticks out in my mind as a majority that dictated away the rights of a minority.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/archi...iage-church-vs-state-issue-47.html#post571480And when a court does rule in favor of gay marriage they will have created a precedent that courts in every other state will use to find for gay marriage. In the end, the will of the majority of Americans will be ignored.And when a court does rule in favor of gay marriage they will have created a precedent that courts in every other state will use to find for gay marriage. In the end, the will of the majority of Americans will be ignored.
3) You still haven’t answered my question.
I don’t care.
No. Nazi Germany always sticks out in my mind as a majority that dictated away the rights of a minority.
3) You still haven’t answered my question.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/archives/18255-gay-marriage-good-16.html#post578654As far as I know, regardless of your religion everyone agrees that marriage is between one man and one woman. No laws have been established that favor one religion over another.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-and-sexuality/53520-homosexuality-11.html#post1058183390“And while I certainly respect your belief, I oppose it the very minute you attempt to impose it upon the rest of us.” – Singularity
Make no mistake about it. In any society the beliefs--moral, secular, whatever--of the majority or those in power will dictate how the rest of society lives and functions.
I happen to believe that the dictates of this country should be based upon the very Judeo-Christian ideals that this country was founded upon.
Funny how quickly arguments can appear to reverse when the situation changes. When national opinion was against ssm one of the frequent arguments used by those on the Right was "The majority is against same sex marriage." So the counter-argument was, naturally, along the lines of "Well, at one time it was acceptable to own slaves." So now national opinion favors ssm, and those in favor say, "See, now you can't use that argument anymore, the majority favors same sex marriage now." So those on the Right respond, "Well, at one time it was acceptable to own slaves."
Entertaining stuff.
I do not believe that one is bigoted who truly believes in an issue from a religious standpoint. Religion (particularly Christianity) requires a leap of faith- it is not necessary or possible to resolve differences of opinion on religion factually. Because it is based in faith, rather than fact.
For example, if a "gay gene" was discovered- similar to a gene that determines hair color or some other trait that a person can not control, I would not expect a fundamentalist Christian to change their stance on homosexuality or gay marriage. These types of facts don't matter, because a person of fundamentalist Christian faith believes the Bible to be the infallible word of God, notwithstanding any secular facts to the contrary.
You may believe what you believe. It is ok with me as a gay man. It is not bigoted, IMO. It is your firmly held belief.
I don’t care.
No. Nazi Germany always sticks out in my mind as a majority that dictated away the rights of a minority.
3) You still haven’t answered my question.
Which is exactly why you never rely on the “morals of the majority”! In the1800s it was owning slaves, in the 1900s it was kill the Jews, gays, morons and / or anyone who opposed Socialism / Communism. Today it’s killing babies in the womb (although they possess all the qualities of life).
You believe that morality can be found within man.
In can’t because man is a flawed moral creature as history so amply demonstrates.
What would you suggest we rely on then? Can't be morals of any religion without being a theocracy, and there are no objective morals. The only other options are the morals of a single individual or small group, which would be basically a monarchy or oligarchy or something like these, where a few people get to tell everyone else how they should live.
And since people have found religious reasons to do the most horendous things.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?