Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discrimination against homosexuals carried into the 21st century
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 76 of 313 (378257)
01-19-2007 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Rob
01-19-2007 10:24 PM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
no no no no no. listen to what you said.
of the natural order which must be assumed to be correct and good
you are talking about a single, specific natural order. why can't there be other natural orders? that's what I was getting at by referencing slavery and fuedalism. those concepts were once part of the natural order. but those natural orders no longer exist for the majority of us. Which means you cannot assume that this specific natural order is right and good--because history shows us that the natural order of things changes, and today, we view slavery as bad. 200 years ago, it was, if not good, not bad. changing natural order.
sin also has no real relation to right and wrong. I recognize right and wrong--but sin is a religious concept superimposed on "wrong". I view purposeful lying as wrong. you view it as a sin. the difference? your religious worldview. You do not need the concept of sin to determine right and wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Rob, posted 01-19-2007 10:24 PM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 12:10 AM kuresu has replied
 Message 84 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 12:33 AM kuresu has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 77 of 313 (378259)
01-20-2007 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by jar
01-19-2007 10:59 PM


The purposes of individual moral laws...
Proverbs 20:5 The purposes of a man's heart are deep waters, but a man of understanding draws them out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by jar, posted 01-19-2007 10:59 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Taz, posted 01-20-2007 12:08 AM Rob has replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 78 of 313 (378263)
01-20-2007 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Rob
01-20-2007 12:04 AM


Re: The purposes of individual moral laws...
Rob, ever considered a career being a fortune cookie writer rather than driving trucks?
Edited by Tazmanian Devil, : No reason given.

AKA G.A.S.B.Y.
George Absolutely Stupid Bush the Younger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 12:04 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 12:14 AM Taz has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 79 of 313 (378266)
01-20-2007 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by kuresu
01-19-2007 11:59 PM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
why can't there be other natural orders?
Because being is dependant upon law. No Gravity = no you. What you see as a fence is the only thing keeping you from floating into space.
Same in the moral realm.
You don't have to believe me, and I cannot convince you. It's just something you come to terms with at the proper time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by kuresu, posted 01-19-2007 11:59 PM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by kuresu, posted 01-20-2007 12:13 AM Rob has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 80 of 313 (378267)
01-20-2007 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Rob
01-20-2007 12:10 AM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
um. . .acutally, w/o gravity, I would just float away. i would still exist, but i don't think anything beyond molecules would exist if there was no gravity (i'm no phycist, so i can't comment accurately on matters of existence w/o gravity, thats just my opinion)
however, mind actually responding to my rebutal? you know, with some real words, instead of a single phrase that's fairly insignificant and says nothing about the issue at hand?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 12:10 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 12:19 AM kuresu has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 81 of 313 (378268)
01-20-2007 12:14 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Taz
01-20-2007 12:08 AM


Re: The purposes of individual moral laws...
Rob, ever considered a career being a forune cookie writer rather than driving trucks?
I actually expected more from you...
Once again, what is written is true.
Mattew 8:22 But Jesus told him, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Taz, posted 01-20-2007 12:08 AM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Taz, posted 01-20-2007 12:22 AM Rob has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 82 of 313 (378271)
01-20-2007 12:19 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by kuresu
01-20-2007 12:13 AM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
I view purposeful lying as wrong. you view it as a sin. the difference? your religious worldview. You do not need the concept of sin to determine right and wrong.
So a man drinking snakes blood mixed with hard liquor and sexually devastating an 18 month old baby girl is only incorrect in your mind? A mistake?
You don't believe in evil?
Have you ever heard of Auschwitz or Mydanek?
Are you alive Kuresu or as the Nazi's liked to say, are you nothing but 'blood and soil'?
Jesus didn't come to the world to make bad people good. he came into the world to make dead people live. To make those dead to God, alive to Him. Those who will hear the truth.
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by kuresu, posted 01-20-2007 12:13 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by kuresu, posted 01-20-2007 2:27 AM Rob has replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 83 of 313 (378272)
01-20-2007 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Rob
01-20-2007 12:14 AM


Re: The purposes of individual moral laws...
Rob writes:
I actually expected more from you...
Thanks, but the truth is I have absolutely zip knowledge in theology and lalaland philosophy. Your discussion looks like a bunch of messages from the fortune cookies I've read over the years.

AKA G.A.S.B.Y.
George Absolutely Stupid Bush the Younger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 12:14 AM Rob has not replied

anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 84 of 313 (378274)
01-20-2007 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by kuresu
01-19-2007 11:59 PM


Inalienable Rights...from now on, that is.
kuresu writes:
you are talking about a single, specific natural order.
I'll rebut you.
You are talking about a single natural order too. You just don't realize it.
why can't there be other natural orders?
There might be other orders, but they aren't natural.
You say slavery was part of the natural order. No, it wasn't. The natural order is equality.
What do you not understand about the word 'inalienable'?
Do you think an 'inalienable right' is supposed to change? Do you think it was ever GOOD to take away a person's freedom? Was it ever GOOD to take away their life? Is it 'natural'? Slavery was not good just because a lot of people in a certain time period got away with it. If that were the case, then why don't we say it used to be good, and things changed? Do you think the descendents of those slaves would be happy to hear you say 'slavery used to be natural'?
You know what is funny? When a christian tries to rationalize the crusades by talking about how conquest was 'natural' back then, it doesn't go over well. We recognize the same natural law looking backwards as that which we have in the present. There are plenty of things that change in the course of history. Coal mining is still not evil just because people switched to oil. I don't see why giving up slavery would be any different, if it was so 'natural'.
Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by kuresu, posted 01-19-2007 11:59 PM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by kuresu, posted 01-20-2007 2:36 AM anastasia has replied
 Message 89 by Fosdick, posted 01-20-2007 11:35 AM anastasia has replied
 Message 90 by ringo, posted 01-20-2007 11:46 AM anastasia has replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 85 of 313 (378276)
01-20-2007 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Rob
01-19-2007 6:51 PM


Re: Descrimination...
I see... another one of those pesky coincidences.
no, just a misreading. this is not the topic for this thread. perhaps you'd like to carry on elsewhere?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Rob, posted 01-19-2007 6:51 PM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 1:21 AM arachnophilia has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 86 of 313 (378279)
01-20-2007 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by arachnophilia
01-20-2007 12:46 AM


Re: Descrimination...
no, just a misreading. this is not the topic for this thread. perhaps you'd like to carry on elsewhere?
Topic shmopic... it's all the same, you know that. Good game though... I feel alive and humble, and energized, and weak.
High stakes abundant life adventure.
I may not conquer the dragon, but the dragon cannot have me. I am His.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by arachnophilia, posted 01-20-2007 12:46 AM arachnophilia has not replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 87 of 313 (378286)
01-20-2007 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Rob
01-20-2007 12:19 AM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
there's a difference between mistake and wrong. Doing such things are wholeheartedly wrong. and yes, in my mind, what the Nazi's did to twelve million people was pure evil.
that doesn't make those actions sins. i thought I laid out the difference clearly enough. the concept of "sin" is a wholly religious idea--basically, you are breaking god's law/word/whatever.
He doesn't like that. hence, its a sin.
Now then, since sin requires a god, and is a religious concept, and since I don't believe in God and don't follow any religion, how can sin apply to me?
There are right actions, and there are wrong actions. "sin" is an added layer, fluff if you will, to this picture. It is neither required or necessary to make value judgements. Removing the concept of "sin" does not remove concepts of "right" and "wrong".
and as a personal question, why do you have to have someone constantly reminding you such and such an action is "sinful"? is your moral fiber so weak that you have to have "sin" and the retribution that comes with it?

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 12:19 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 1:28 PM kuresu has not replied
 Message 107 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 6:52 PM kuresu has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 88 of 313 (378288)
01-20-2007 2:36 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by anastasia
01-20-2007 12:33 AM


Re: Inalienable Rights...from now on, that is.
The natural order is equality
it is today. Go back 1,000 years ago. What was equality for medieval europe? they had no such concept. heirarchy was the natural order of things. from Lord->Vassal/Lord->Vassal/Lord . . .->Serf. Go back to the classical world. Slavery was acceptable. If you didn't pay your bills, were a prisoner of war, among other things, you could/did end up as a slave. And this was not seen as out of the natural order of things.
2-300 years ago, it was argued that africans were a lower race. the best way to use them was in slavery, and since they weren't human, it didn't matter. That was the natural order of things.
The natural order of things I refer to is an always changing ideal of the world--of how things should be. I recognize that this thing is changing, ever changing, for good or for worse.
You are referring to a natural order stuck in a specific idea/time, of an unchanging one. You say that this "natural order of sexuality" must be recognized as good and correct. This order, too, will change. It has changed. even 50 years ago, it was "unnatural" for blacks and whites to marry. it disturbed the "natural order of things". Today, it doesn't. why? that order has changed.
your arguments against homosexuality have about as much credence as those against interracial marriages.
Now you say the natural order is
The natural order is equality
then how is it natural to prohibit homosexuals the right to marry and enjoy the benefits of marriage? doing so, would be unnatural, to your order. Something tells me you didn't mean this--because you find homosexuality to be an abomination before the lord. therefore, its only right to discriminate against them. But then, that destroys your order of equality, doesn't it?
Rob, be careful. Be very careful. You claim to want equality, and yet you do not want to give equality.

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 12:33 AM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 1:24 PM kuresu has replied

Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5499 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 89 of 313 (378341)
01-20-2007 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by anastasia
01-20-2007 12:33 AM


Re: Inalienable Rights...from now on, that is.
anastasia wrote:
You say slavery was part of the natural order. No, it wasn't. The natural order is equality.
Well, I'm certainly not in favor of slavery, but I don't think "equality" is the natural order of anything. Nature is NOT fair, NOT a democracy. In fact, slavery is quite a natural thing in many insect colonies, if you call capturing other bugs alive and forcing them into domestic servatude, sometime even making them feed the larvae with their own bodies.
”Hoot Mon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 12:33 AM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 12:48 PM Fosdick has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 90 of 313 (378343)
01-20-2007 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by anastasia
01-20-2007 12:33 AM


Re: Inalienable Rights...from now on, that is.
anastasia writes:
You say slavery was part of the natural order. No, it wasn't.
The point is that people claimed that slavery was part of the natural order - just like people continue to claim that heterosexuality is part of the natural order. The "natural order" might not change, but our ideas about it do change.
Do you think an 'inalienable right' is supposed to change?
The men who wrote about "inalienable rights" owned slaves and denied women the vote. So, yes, "inalienable rights" do change.
We recognize the same natural law looking backwards as that which we have in the present.
Obviously not.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 12:33 AM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 12:27 PM ringo has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024