Page 7 of 40 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111217 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 988

Thread: How does same gender marriage hurt you?

  1. #151
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996

    Human Sacrifice

    Spexvet:

    It has, it's called abortion.

    Chip

  2. #152
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    Spexvet:

    It has, it's called abortion.

    Chip
    That's a religious rite? Well, I'll be....
    ...Just ask me...

  3. #153
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Posts
    238
    It is choice behavior, not genetics. I say that because of the huge increase in recent years of this practice. If it had been as prevalent in times past, it could not be concealed, as it can't now. If it is choice, why does the rest of the world have to "accept" it? Do we accept the person who enjoys sex with children? Even if there is "mutual love"? Or the person who likes to do it with corpses? There are many kinky desires that come into the heart. Sorry folks, but this "ultra conservative" thinks it belongs in the closet. Keep it to yourself and don't flaunt it at me. It's hard to watch society deteriorate in so many many ways. I long for "the good old days" but know they are lost forever.

  4. #154
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    It is choice behavior, not genetics. I say that because of the huge increase in recent years of this practice. .
    When did you "decide" to be heterosexual?:hammer:

    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    If it had been as prevalent in times past, it could not be concealed, as it can't now. .
    Ever wonder why it's called "Greek"? Because it was prevalent in ancient Greece.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    If it is choice, why does the rest of the world have to "accept" it?
    You don't have to "accept" it. You should "tolerate" it and give our homosexual citzen the same rights and privelages that our heterosexual citizens get.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    Do we accept the person who enjoys sex with children? Even if there is "mutual love"? .
    There is a line drawn for everything. We allow nicotine and alcohol, but not marijuana, cocaine or herion. I think we can successfully draw the line for this issue, too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    Or the person who likes to do it with corpses? .
    I don't hear anybody complaining, so to speak.;)

    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    There are many kinky desires that come into the heart. .
    You devil, you!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    Sorry folks, but this "ultra conservative" thinks it belongs in the closet. Keep it to yourself and don't flaunt it at me. .
    Then you shouldn't flaunt your heterosexuality at homosexuals.:p

    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    It's hard to watch society deteriorate in so many many ways. I long for "the good old days" but know they are lost forever.
    "The good old days" when we lived and let live? :idea:
    ...Just ask me...

  5. #155
    Underemployed Genius Jacqui's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Frostbite Falls, Mn.
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    7,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Spexvet
    Ever wonder why it's called "Greek"? Because it was prevalent in ancient Greece.
    Also very common in Rome, Egypt and several other popular spots

  6. #156
    Master OptiBoarder chm2023's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Camp Hill/NYC
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    2,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    It is choice behavior, not genetics. I say that because of the huge increase in recent years of this practice. If it had been as prevalent in times past, it could not be concealed, as it can't now. If it is choice, why does the rest of the world have to "accept" it? Do we accept the person who enjoys sex with children? Even if there is "mutual love"? Or the person who likes to do it with corpses? There are many kinky desires that come into the heart. Sorry folks, but this "ultra conservative" thinks it belongs in the closet. Keep it to yourself and don't flaunt it at me. It's hard to watch society deteriorate in so many many ways. I long for "the good old days" but know they are lost forever.
    It is not choice (who would choose this???? Read this thread and see what sort of attitudes prevail re homosexuals. You think people want this????). The "huge increase" is due to people being more open. Of course it was concealed in the past. Read about Oscar Wilde--his openness was a huge scandal and cost him his career and health, not to mention time in jail. All to say there was a great incentive to stay in the closet.

  7. #157
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Posts
    238
    Well, my previous post certainly got response :0)

    The original question asked for opinion, and I gave mine honestly. Morality is ours to decide only if there is no higher law. I just happen to think that there is, and nature in itself seems to show what the parts are for, and how they should be used by their owners. Anything apart from that is a deviation away from natural law. I guess I do choose to obey that law. And you have the choice too.

    :idea:

  8. #158
    Just An Optician jediron1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    USA, New York
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,727
    chm 2023 said:It is not choice (who would choose this???? Read this thread and see what sort of attitudes prevail re homosexuals. You think people want this????). The "huge increase" is due to people being more open. Of course it was concealed in the past. Read about Oscar Wilde--his openness was a huge scandal and cost him his career and health, not to mention time in jail. All to say there was a great incentive to stay in the closet.

    I don't care about Oscar Wilde, maybe as you said he should have stayed in the closet.

    Shutterbug said:Well, my previous post certainly got response :0)

    The original question asked for opinion, and I gave mine honestly. Morality is ours to decide only if there is no higher law. I just happen to think that there is, and nature in itself seems to show what the parts are for, and how they should be used by their owners. Anything apart from that is a deviation away from natural law. I guess I do choose to obey that law. And you have the choice too.

    Parts are there for a purpose. There is an entrance and an exit for very good reasons. And I agree, deviation away from the God given law is not right because there is no higher law than GODS!
    Last edited by jediron1; 12-16-2004 at 07:27 PM.

  9. #159
    One of the worst people here
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    8,331
    Quote Originally Posted by jediron1
    Parts are there for a purpose. There is an entrance and an exit for very good reasons. And I agree, deviation away from the God given law is not right because there is no higher law than GODS!
    But you are not God. Let God pass his/her judgment and take care of it himself. Additionally, the last time I checked the United States of America had a seperation of church and State.

    Sometimes when I come to this place I feel like I am watching an episode of All in the Family.

  10. #160
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996
    U.S. does not have separation of church and state. The constitution says the government cannot establish a state religion. Does not prohibit church and church people from interfering with the government. There have been some courts who have attempted to write laws (not within thier legal limits) that furthered the concept, but they were outside thier bounds attempting to do so.

    Chip

    Remember the Supreme Court is not located in Washington.

  11. #161
    Opti-Lurker
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Menlo Park, how the h*ll did that happen?
    Occupation
    Consumer or Non-Eyecare field
    Posts
    527
    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    Anything apart from that is a deviation away from natural law.
    This is an interesting point, mostly because there are a number of common examples of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. The most striking is in bonobos, a sub species of chimp with the DNA that most closely matches that of humans. There are many others including species of lizard, fish, rodents as well as man's best friend the canine.

    My understanding of current generally accepted Christian theology is that only humans have free will (in the theological sense). Therefor, at least among bonobos and a variety of other species, homosexuallity is in line with 'natural law'. I wonder how this is reconciled.

  12. #162
    Underemployed Genius Jacqui's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Frostbite Falls, Mn.
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    7,417
    Quote Originally Posted by For-Life
    Sometimes when I come to this place I feel like I am watching an episode of All in the Family.
    I agree. :)

  13. #163
    Just An Optician jediron1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    USA, New York
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,727
    For-Life said:Sometimes when I come to this place I feel like I am watching an episode of All in the Family.

    The only reason you feel like your watching an episode of "All in The Family" is because your writing is more like the character of Archie Bunker, and that is more than you want to admit.

  14. #164
    Just An Optician jediron1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    USA, New York
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,727
    Coda said:This is an interesting point, mostly because there are a number of common examples of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. The most striking is in bonobos, a sub species of chimp with the DNA that most closely matches that of humans. There are many others including species of lizard, fish, rodents as well as man's best friend the canine.

    This is the same inane argument that people have been trying to make since Darwin. Come on I thought you guys had more brains then to think a monkey fell out of a tree, broke his tail off from the fall, stood upright and started walking on his evolutionary tail. Oh I forgot, then once there tail was broken off they figured out how to talk and write. Come on even the village idiot would not believe that tale. Even with the best computer knowledge today taking a monkey and teaching him at most 300 words which he translates back by computer usage and flash cards, that is only accomplished with the best training in monkeyology and not the evolutionary hog wash that most people want to believe !:hammer:

  15. #165
    One of the worst people here
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    8,331
    Quote Originally Posted by jediron1
    For-Life said:Sometimes when I come to this place I feel like I am watching an episode of All in the Family.

    The only reason you feel like your watching an episode of "All in The Family" is because your writing is more like the character of Archie Bunker, and that is more than you want to admit.
    Yep, because you know me and everything.

  16. #166
    OptiBoardaholic
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    United States
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    U.S. does not have separation of church and state. The constitution says the government cannot establish a state religion. Does not prohibit church and church people from interfering with the government.
    Haven't we been over this earlier in the thread? Again, the Constitution does NOT say: “Government cannot establish a state religion”. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. Everyone has their own opinion on what that means but for all intents and purposes the only opinion that really counts in the United States is the one defined in Article III of the Constitution... that of the Supreme Court. And what the Supreme Court has said is this: “[T]he First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable.”

    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    There have been some courts who have attempted to write laws (not within thier legal limits) that furthered the concept, but they were outside thier bounds attempting to do so.
    People typically say the Supreme Court is “overstepping their bounds” or “attempting to write law” in situations in which they disagree with the Court's decisions. Well, tough. Those people should take it up with the framers of the Constitution if they don’t like it because the framers are the ones that gave the power to interpret and make rulings on laws (i.e. “judicial power”) to the Supreme Court (see Article III of the Constitution).

    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    Remember the Supreme Court is not located in Washington.
    The Supreme Court Building is not located in the State of Washington, but it is certainly located in Washington DC... about one or two blocks east of the Capitol Building last I checked. More important than the physical location of the Court, the powers granted by the Constitution to the
    Judicial Branch are as vital to our system of government as are those granted to the Executive and Legislative Branches.

  17. #167
    Just An Optician jediron1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    USA, New York
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,727
    1968 said:People typically say the Supreme Court is “overstepping their bounds” or “attempting to write law” in situations in which they disagree with the Court's decisions. Well, tough. Those people should take it up with the framers of the Constitution if they don’t like it because the framers are the ones that gave the power to interpret and make rulings on laws (i.e. “judicial power”) to the Supreme Court (see Article III of the Constitution).


    "Well Tough" The problem with YOUR little scenario is that you think everybody agrees with you. Come on get a grip. The problem the Supreme Court and other branches have is they are trying to interpert what the framers said through there minds instead of gathering documents from people like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Ben Franklin ect.ect. and comparing those papers and see exactly what the framers intent were, not someone's interpertation of what the framers thought or were thinking.

  18. #168
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996
    1968:

    You missed the point, the Supreme Court of the United States is not Supreme. There are two higher courts with one of them being supreme.
    The court of public opinion is higher if it makes its wishes heard loud enough.
    The next court is the judgement of the Almighty and it is Supreme and it is not in Washington, D.C.

  19. #169
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Posts
    238
    This is an interesting point, mostly because there are a number of common examples of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. The most striking is in bonobos, a sub species of chimp with the DNA that most closely matches that of humans. There are many others including species of lizard, fish, rodents as well as man's best friend the canine.

    My understanding of current generally accepted Christian theology is that only humans have free will (in the theological sense). Therefor, at least among bonobos and a variety of other species, homosexuallity is in line with 'natural law'. I wonder how this is reconciled.
    Yes, there is evidence of this bahavior in animals (although in fewer numbers than humans);) But as you said, we have free will and intellect. While animals are driven by in inherent instinct which drives their need to reproduce, we humans have the ability to contemplate, decide and control our behaviors. Surely we don't want to use the "animals do it, so it must be OK" argument.

    The traditional family arrangement is under attack, and we are doing little to preserve it. Yes, this is a moral issue. Animals are amoral. Humans can be immoral or can choose to be moral. Some of you younger ones have not witnessed the moral decline, and what you see around you seems normal to you because you have no comparisons. But what I've seen tells me the human family is morally bankrupt and digressing to lower and lower standards of conduct all the time. It's dangerous and depressing at the same time.

    What we are seeing in this thread underscores how easily we condone what is dangerous to us in the name of tolerance.

  20. #170
    OptiBoardaholic
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    United States
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    1968:
    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson

    You missed the point, the Supreme Court of the United States is not Supreme. There are two higher courts with one of them being supreme.
    The court of public opinion is higher if it makes its wishes heard loud enough.
    The next court is the judgement of the Almighty and it is Supreme and it is not in Washington, D.C.
    Sorry, Chip. I did indeed miss the point you were making. I plead guilty to missing the equivocation and relying on the correct usage of proper nouns (i.e. Supreme Court vs. supreme court). *wink*

    Regarding "the court of public opinion": As part of the "government of the people, by the people, and for the people", I would agree that the Judicial Branch is ultimately a tool of the people.

    Regarding "the court of the Almighty": Fortunately we don't live in a theocracy, nor were the framers of the Constitution referring to the Almighty when they wrote: "The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court."

  21. #171
    Objection! OptiBoard Gold Supporter shanbaum's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Manchester, CT USA
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    2,976
    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    What we are seeing in this thread underscores how easily we condone what is dangerous to us in the name of tolerance.
    You bet I’ll “condone what is dangerous to us in the name of tolerance.” Consider the alternative... although, I rather doubt you can. Your comments reveal a willingness to promote the legal suppression of the activities of persons, of whose choices you do not approve. I understand that you would say your disapproval is mandated by the disapproval of Almighty God, for whom you presume to speak.


    Unfortunately, you’re wrong. God speaks only to me, and the people who agree with me. He has told us that we must smite you - you, and your fellow evil-doers.


    Sorry, it’s nothing personal.

  22. #172
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Shutterbug
    Well, my previous post certainly got response :0)

    The original question asked for opinion, and I gave mine honestly. Morality is ours to decide only if there is no higher law. I just happen to think that there is, and nature in itself seems to show what the parts are for, and how they should be used by their owners. Anything apart from that is a deviation away from natural law. I guess I do choose to obey that law. And you have the choice too.

    :idea:
    So you only have sex in order to procreate? Never just for enjoyment or to show love to your partner?;)

    BTW, has a dog ever mistaken your leg for a sex partner? Is that consistent with natural law, or against it????
    ...Just ask me...

  23. #173
    Opti-Lurker
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Menlo Park, how the h*ll did that happen?
    Occupation
    Consumer or Non-Eyecare field
    Posts
    527
    Quote Originally Posted by jediron1
    Coda said:This is an interesting point, mostly because there are a number of common examples of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. The most striking is in bonobos, a sub species of chimp with the DNA that most closely matches that of humans. There are many others including species of lizard, fish, rodents as well as man's best friend the canine.

    This is the same inane argument that people have been trying to make since Darwin. Come on I thought you guys had more brains then to think a monkey fell out of a tree, broke his tail off from the fall, stood upright and started walking on his evolutionary tail. Oh I forgot, then once there tail was broken off they figured out how to talk and write. Come on even the village idiot would not believe that tale. Even with the best computer knowledge today taking a monkey and teaching him at most 300 words which he translates back by computer usage and flash cards, that is only accomplished with the best training in monkeyology and not the evolutionary hog wash that most people want to believe !:hammer:
    Hmm, you seem to have missed my point and gotten caught up in your own misunderstanding of evolutionary theory. Of course for someone who believes the planet is only about 10,000 years old, evolution would have to happen on the time scale you posit (a little word of the day just for you). You're right that only the 'village idiot' would believe your 'tale' but of course the majority (as you admit in your own post) of Americans do, in fact, believe in evolutionary theory. I wonder if that makes you the only smart one? No, based on your ability to make a cogent argument supporting your opinion probably not.

  24. #174
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by jediron1
    Coda said:This is an interesting point, mostly because there are a number of common examples of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. The most striking is in bonobos, a sub species of chimp with the DNA that most closely matches that of humans. There are many others including species of lizard, fish, rodents as well as man's best friend the canine.

    This is the same inane argument that people have been trying to make since Darwin. Come on I thought you guys had more brains then to think a monkey fell out of a tree, broke his tail off from the fall, stood upright and started walking on his evolutionary tail. Oh I forgot, then once there tail was broken off they figured out how to talk and write. Come on even the village idiot would not believe that tale. Even with the best computer knowledge today taking a monkey and teaching him at most 300 words which he translates back by computer usage and flash cards, that is only accomplished with the best training in monkeyology and not the evolutionary hog wash that most people want to believe !:hammer:
    Is it less any inane, or more reasonable or logical, to say that an omnipotent being created everything we know in the blink of and eye, out of nothing? How do you explain that there are fossils of living things older than humans, when God created Adam first, then later in the week created his animal companions?

    It's really a matter of belief and faith - and don't impose your beliefs and faith on others - you wouldn't want others' beleifs imposed on you, I'll bet.
    ...Just ask me...

  25. #175
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by shanbaum
    You bet I’ll “condone what is dangerous to us in the name of tolerance.” Consider the alternative... although, I rather doubt you can. Your comments reveal a willingness to promote the legal suppression of the activities of persons, of whose choices you do not approve. I understand that you would say your disapproval is mandated by the disapproval of Almighty God, for whom you presume to speak.


    Unfortunately, you’re wrong. God speaks only to me, and the people who agree with me. He has told us that we must smite you - you, and your fellow evil-doers.


    Sorry, it’s nothing personal.
    I'm still laughing!:D :bbg: :)
    ...Just ask me...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. How would you define Marriage?
    By Night Train in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-13-2005, 02:27 PM
  2. Same Sex Marriage Bans
    By Cindy Hamlin in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 146
    Last Post: 11-11-2005, 07:22 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •