Please stop. You're the one who's avoiding discussion with posts like this.
Answer these questions:
1. Why does normality affect whether gays should marry or not?
2. What is the definition of normal (I checked, you never defined it).
3. Why do you avoid the questions and instead decide to blatantly troll?
That's funny no matter what political denomination you are :lamoThat is ironic, as economics seems to as well.
You really need to tighten up what you are trying to say. I agree with the general gist of what you are saying, but you need to be clearer and avoid ambiguities. You need to state that what you are saying is it is against man's nature, why and what this means.
It's not normal. My question is why normality affects people's rights. And no, you cannot be for their rights, because you don't want them to marry. That's not the same amount of rights as straight people.The answer to the first question:
For me to accept two men or two women marrying I would have to accept it as normal and I do not...I do not have any animosity or hatred for homosexuals. I certainly dont wish them any harm...I believe they are entitled to live a free life free from any kind of persecution and they should enjoy all the rights and benefits of any other single american man and woman.
The answer to number two is I answered the question in this thread and its not my problem if you cant find it.
The answer to your third question its YOU thats the troll and every other homosexual cheerleader
Now you Define how homosexuality is normal and natural....
If you want to deny people rights then it's up to you to show why, not up to us to show why they deserve the rights. The automatic position is to help people not to hurt them.Thats where your wrong...I cant be any clearer than I have been...and there seems to be a suggestion here thats its up to me to prove its abnormal...lol..umm NO...its up to the cheerleaders to prove to me that it is normal...
This is all depends on how you define nature. You are defining nature as something that just happens in the 'natural world' (which itself needs to be defined, but I understand your meaning enough to continue, for the present). So deafness would be natural in this sense. But you can also define deafness to be unnatural because it is against the natural function of an ear to be deaf. In this sense natural is related to Essences and Formal and Final Causes.My definition does prove that it is natural, it happens in nature, it is natural, plain and simple. And yes having sex with a sheep is natural, it occurs in nature, doesn't make it right, but it is natural. You are putting a moral connotation to natural that it just doesn't have. And my generation have no problem with homosexuality, my generation will change the society, and thank the good Lord above for that. And you take about us repeating the same line over and over, but isn't that what your doing? Just saying the same thing over and over, not thinking, not even considering challenging your position. We are not evil, we don't bite(unless you want us too) we aren't any different from straight people. My relationships that I have had I guarantee you are very similar to straight peoples relationships, we are the same, just accept that now, it's just the truth.
If you want to deny people rights then it's up to you to show why, not up to us to show why they deserve the rights.
This is all depends on how you define nature. You are defining nature as something that just happens in the 'natural world'. So deafness would be natural in this sense. But you can also define deafness to be unnatural because it is against the natural function of an ear to be deaf.
Marriage? They shouldn't be allowed to marry while straight people should? That's taking away rights. One group of people can do something that another group can't for the sole reason that the latter group has different genes.LOL amazing, I was waiting for the YOUR DENYING US OUR RIGHTS thingy.....im not denying them anything...they are DEMANDING what they shouldnt have in the first place....
I understand, and largely agree with, your point. I also think that often such innate feelings are enough and not being able to put everything into exhaustive discursive argument is not a problem. The problem here though is you have entered where discursive argument is clearly needed and expected.Wessexman I am not a scientist or a biologist nor am I a professor...I state what I believe in terms I am capable of...I make no claims to being anything more than what I am...Ok...so if your looking for some deep scientific explanation...your not getting one from me
It's not normal. My question is why normality affects people's rights. And no, you cannot be for their rights, because you don't want them to marry. That's not the same amount of rights as straight people.
You said he asked the question 20 times. He only asked it once, and after that you said that you had already answered. I promise, if you post the link I will not bother you on the subject anymore. I will if you don't.
I never called you a homophobia cheerleader. You call us cheerleaders and accuse us of diversion in a trollish matter. We calmly pointed out that you didn't answer the question.
Normal, no. Natural, animals do it.
I understand, and largely agree with, your point. I also think that often such innate feelings are enough and not being able to put everything into exhaustive discursive argument is not a problem. The problem here though is you have entered where discursive argument is clearly needed and expected.
You before said that you weren't taking away rights. Now you are saying that people who are abnormal don't get rights. Tell me how that's not discriminatory.Why does normality effect rights ? so your suggesting then anyone that has abnormal proclivities have the same rights as anyone else...I hope you can realize how absurd that is..
It's a common usage term. I'm a student of psychology and I learned that many terms such as "psychopath" "sociopath" are not actually used. Homophobia is more word play than anything else. In a sense however it is correct, the people who are referred to as homophobes often have something nasty to say about homosexuality, and often fear it.Homophobe is such a stupid term. It is so obviously pseudo-psychoanalytical, meant to give some sort of diagnosis and is therefore, in my opinion, quite sinister.
Marriage? They shouldn't be allowed to marry while straight people should? That's taking away rights. One group of people can do something that another group can't for the sole reason that the latter group has different genes.
It's a common usage term. I'm a student of psychology and I learned that many terms such as "psychopath" "sociopath" are not actually used. Homophobia is more word play than anything else. In a sense however it is correct, the people who are referred to as homophobes often have something nasty to say about homosexuality, and often fear it.
You before said that you weren't taking away rights. Now you are saying that people who are abnormal don't get rights. Tell me how that's not discriminatory.
You will certainly have to run the last two sentences by me again. Presumably the person will try and make an argument about what is right or proper or natural and not just assert it.
Lieing to me and about me wont work CC...Ive answered your question more than a few times...and sadly but understandably you cannot answer mine...to do so would make you look wrong and ridiculous...I understand your reluctance...but you shall not got off easily...now all you have to do is answer the question.
Define how Homosexuality is normal
Why does it matter if homosexuality is normal or not?
Good question...on a day to day part of life it means nothing...Normal only comes into play to ME and I stress to me because i speak only for myself...when they demand laws be changed to make homosexuality appearnormal...like marriage...i find it absurd for two men to be married and two women....just Like I find it absurd that heterosexual sons and daughters marry their mother or father if they divorce or sisters and brothers marrying..
I dont care what anyone does behind closed doors...I dont want to see homosexual activitity in public..nor do I want to see heterosexual activity in public...hey do whatever flips your switch privately.
Hmmm I think its absurd to deny two men to marry or two women to marry. Why is it absurd to allow SSM?
Omgitsme, nothing against you...but im weary of answering that same question over and over...if you would be so kind..go back a page or two or 3 and you will see my reasons ok..
I pretty much skipped over those pages because they all seemed to be the same thing over and over again. What post are you talking about exactly?
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?