North Carolina passes same-sex marriage ban

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Narriage for some, miniature American flags for others.

And always twirling twirling twirling towards freedom.

[jammies]

You know, I hate ######bags, but that doesn't mean I secretly want to be a ######bag. The whole "you must be a repressed homosexual!" schtick is not only dubiously logical, but also implies that homosexuality is a lesser state of being, regardless of the person making the claim actually feels.

Yes, there are cases where this is true. But just because some dogs are black doesn't mean all dogs are black.

[Thor]

There is a study that does show correlation, but yeah its not everyone who's against gays is gay, but certainly there is a segment of them, especially the more angry/passionately against it who are candidates for harboring same sex feelings.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Thor

There is a study that does show correlation, but yeah its not everyone who's against gays is gay, but certainly there is a segment of them, especially the more angry/passionately against it who are candidates for harboring same sex feelings.

Which is almost like causation, but not quite

[Thor]

lol true

[photon]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I know this is the problem. But I've never heard one of them actually explain it.

Why do you feel that your way is the only way? And why does it make a difference to you if someone disagrees? You may say its for the better, but better for who? For you? How does someone marrying someone else affect you in any way?

I'm not trying to be condescending, I really want to know.

Based on what I've seen and been told (indoctrinated with) from those opposed to the "homosexual agenda", I think the "it's harmful to families/society" meme is basically a safe rationalization for an unsafe position.

They don't like it, and God says its wrong (amazing how God always shares their opinions!), so they oppose it, for that reason alone. So they know they are Correct(tm) because that's the Truth(tm).

That doesn't carry any weight outside their own circles though so any and all data that can be found that supports the desired conclusion that can be found/created is collected and used, safe in the knowledge that that data must be right because it supports the desired conclusion. All opposing data or claims of lack of relevance of data must be wrong because they don't support the position that's the right one (because God said so).

Ultimately discussing data or statistics with such a one is useless, because the data could be staggeringly against their position and they won't change their minds (see young earth creationism), because the position isn't something based on reason, it's based on belief.

The ones I know anyway.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I know this is the problem. But I've never heard one of them actually explain it.

I attempted to offer an explanation for the way in which conservative Christians reason through this issue in a few earlier posts. There was a time when I was a raging fundamentalist, and at that time, I would have offered the following answers to your questions below:

Originally Posted by MattyC

Why do you feel that your way is the only way?

Fundy-Text: Because Jesus was quite specific about the exclusivity of his teachings. If the Bible is the Word of God, and if it mandates against homosexual behaviour, then there is no middle ground, and any sign of support or concession is akin to cosmic treason.

Originally Posted by MattyC

And why does it make a difference to you if someone disagrees?

Fundy-Text: It would not be a disagreement with me, but with God. Disagreeing with God is dangerous, and I see it as my responsibility as someone who knows the truth to ensure that everyone else knows it.

Originally Posted by MattyC

You may say its for the better, but better for who? For you?

Fundy-Text: Better for everyone. History shows that social health is absolutely dependent upon the strength of family, and once that is diminished, it always leads to social decay. Take the Roman Empire as an example for how sexual and moral degradation resulted in its weakness and destruction. Homosexuality is bad for society.

Originally Posted by MattyC

How does someone marrying someone else affect you in any way?

Fundy-Text: Again, not me personally, but society as a whole. Our world is subject to cosmic forces of good and evil, and this is but one more step towards deferring to evil. It is a war, and if we concede on this point, it would be like laying down our arms and surrendering to the enemy on the front line of the battlefield. What we are trying to do is two things: First, to show our solidarity with God—we want to be on the winning side in the end. Second, to prevent the continuing and rapid moral and social decay, which is but a symptom of a much greater, much more pernicious and insidious form of evil. Ultimately, this is about combatting and defeating evil.

Originally Posted by MattyC

I'm not trying to be condescending, I really want to know.

I have tried to be as transparent about this system of belief as I can recall. I hope that everyone here recognizes this for what it is: an attempt to explain why conservative Christians are so concerned with private life. As wrong-headed as it is, it is sincere. When I used to think this way, I was absolutely sure that the defence of traditional marriage was courageous and noble, and that it was for everyone's eternal benefit.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by photon

...That doesn't carry any weight outside their own circles though so any and all data that can be found that supports the desired conclusion that can be found/created is collected and used, safe in the knowledge that that data must be right because it supports the desired conclusion. All opposing data or claims of lack of relevance of data must be wrong because they don't support the position that's the right one (because God said so).

I think that people who have never been immersed in system of indoctrination will tend to greatly underestimate how powerful the circle can be. There is an incredibly strong sense of worth and power that comes from being "in the right" in a world run amok. The assurance and validation that one constantly receives from his or her peers will tend to strengthen one's resolve, and this is a significant reason why they will refuse to consider even the most damning evidence that thwarts their position.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I attempted to offer an explanation for the way in which conservative Christians reason through this issue in a few earlier posts. There was a time when I was a raging fundamentalist, and at that time, I would have offered the following answers to your questions below:


Fundy-Text: Because Jesus was quite specific about the exclusivity of his teachings. If the Bible is the Word of God, and if it mandates against homosexual behaviour, then there is no middle ground, and any sign of support or concession is akin to cosmic treason.

Fundy-Text: It would not be a disagreement with me, but with God. Disagreeing with God is dangerous, and I see it as my responsibility as someone who knows the truth to ensure that everyone else knows it.

Fundy-Text: Better for everyone. History shows that social health is absolutely dependent upon the strength of family, and once that is diminished, it always leads to social decay. Take the Roman Empire as an example for how sexual and moral degradation resulted in its weakness and destruction. Homosexuality is bad for society.

Fundy-Text: Again, not me personally, but society as a whole. Our world is subject to cosmic forces of good and evil, and this is but one more step towards deferring to evil. It is a war, and if we concede on this point, it would be like laying down our arms and surrendering to the enemy on the front line of the battlefield. What we are trying to do is two things: First, to show our solidarity with God—we want to be on the winning side in the end. Second, to prevent the continuing and rapid moral and social decay, which is but a symptom of a much greater, much more pernicious and insidious form of evil. Ultimately, this is about combatting and defeating evil.


I have tried to be as transparent about this system of belief as I can recall. I hope that everyone here recognizes this for what it is: an attempt to explain why conservative Christians are so concerned with private life. As wrong-headed as it is, it is sincere. When I used to think this way, I was absolutely sure that the defence of traditional marriage was courageous and noble, and that it was for everyone's eternal benefit.

I'm glad that you used "was" in regard to your fundamentalism, because good lord you sucked

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Wow, ....its even less than that.

http://www42.statcan.gc.ca/smr08/201...8_2011-eng.htm

You do realize that not every person who is gay, reports it to the government right?

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Yeah exactly, the nuclear family in the west has been severely downgraded over the years. Marriage rates are down, out of wedlock births are routine now, and the replacement fertility number is anywhere from 1.3-1.7 in most modern, western nations (including western Europe). You need a fertility rate of 2.2 to replace both parents (the .2 is to compensate for accidental premature child death) for a stable population. This is the real reason why we need such a high number of immigrants for the economy.

They did know how to keep a family together before cultural marxism became so deeply ingrained into American culture (eg. radical feminism).

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I attempted to offer an explanation for the way in which conservative Christians reason through this issue in a few earlier posts. There was a time when I was a raging fundamentalist, and at that time, I would have offered the following answers to your questions below:


Fundy-Text: Because Jesus was quite specific about the exclusivity of his teachings. If the Bible is the Word of God, and if it mandates against homosexual behaviour, then there is no middle ground, and any sign of support or concession is akin to cosmic treason.

Fundy-Text: It would not be a disagreement with me, but with God. Disagreeing with God is dangerous, and I see it as my responsibility as someone who knows the truth to ensure that everyone else knows it.

Fundy-Text: Better for everyone. History shows that social health is absolutely dependent upon the strength of family, and once that is diminished, it always leads to social decay. Take the Roman Empire as an example for how sexual and moral degradation resulted in its weakness and destruction. Homosexuality is bad for society.

Fundy-Text: Again, not me personally, but society as a whole. Our world is subject to cosmic forces of good and evil, and this is but one more step towards deferring to evil. It is a war, and if we concede on this point, it would be like laying down our arms and surrendering to the enemy on the front line of the battlefield. What we are trying to do is two things: First, to show our solidarity with God—we want to be on the winning side in the end. Second, to prevent the continuing and rapid moral and social decay, which is but a symptom of a much greater, much more pernicious and insidious form of evil. Ultimately, this is about combatting and defeating evil.


I have tried to be as transparent about this system of belief as I can recall. I hope that everyone here recognizes this for what it is: an attempt to explain why conservative Christians are so concerned with private life. As wrong-headed as it is, it is sincere. When I used to think this way, I was absolutely sure that the defence of traditional marriage was courageous and noble, and that it was for everyone's eternal benefit.

I always find it a tad odd when fundies bring up the decay of the Roman Empire as an arguement against sin and moral decay, the empire lasted close to a thousand years, you could argue 500 more if count Byzentium as an extension of the eastern empire.
Protestant western democracy will be lucky to survive 500 as the dominant theology of the world, with or without decay!

[GP_Matt]

If they could just ban gay marriage though then maybe the west can turn things around and last for another thousand years as the dominant society.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I always find it a tad odd when fundies bring up the decay of the Roman Empire as an arguement against sin and moral decay, the empire lasted close to a thousand years, you could argue 500 more if count Byzentium as an extension of the eastern empire.
Protestant western democracy will be lucky to survive 500 as the dominant theology of the world, with or without decay!

As much as there was moral decay in the Roman Empire that caused it to collapse. It was caused more by a line of weak Emperors, a constant series of invasions and wars, a loss of the spirit of their military, and a fracturing of society then a moral decay.

They're went through what the States is going through now. A fractured civilian base, a constant state of war that drained their treasury and a string of misguided and ineffective leaders that were willing to sell out what their empire was founded on.

Not because some guy looked at another guys butt and said "Hey that's just alright"

[Knalus]

So much about the discussion in this thread saddens me. There isn't a single position anyone has brought forward from either end that sounds fair and right. So much anger all around.

That's what I'm afraid the real end of this civilization is going to be from. People can't argue calmly, no one wants to hear a point of view from the other side without mocking it, and if a discussion really happens, it degenerates into a place where only one point of view is welcome.

There is a lot of Hate being directed at people being accused of Hate. The irony would be funny, if it wasn't so sad.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Knalus

So much about the discussion in this thread saddens me. There isn't a single position anyone has brought forward from either end that sounds fair and right. So much anger all around.

That's what I'm afraid the real end of this civilization is going to be from. People can't argue calmly, no one wants to hear a point of view from the other side without mocking it, and if a discussion really happens, it degenerates into a place where only one point of view is welcome.

There is a lot of Hate being directed at people being accused of Hate. The irony would be funny, if it wasn't so sad.

Really?
Because I'm pretty sure "Let any two people who want to get married" is pretty fair to everyone.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by Rathji

I'd LOVE to hear Mikey's explanation of what Cultural Marxism is...

[photon]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think that people who have never been immersed in system of indoctrination will tend to greatly underestimate how powerful the circle can be. There is an incredibly strong sense of worth and power that comes from being "in the right" in a world run amok. The assurance and validation that one constantly receives from his or her peers will tend to strengthen one's resolve, and this is a significant reason why they will refuse to consider even the most damning evidence that thwarts their position.

Totally agree. And not just a sense of self worth, but actual worth; positions of trust, leadership, regard in the culture all are often given or taken away based on one's agreement with the indoctrination.

Those that don't agree are often marginalized, demonized, and ostracized. I've seen so many church splits or people/families torn apart over differences in doctrine.. and I'm not talking Catholic/Protestant level differences. People who were great friends holding decade long grudges after the fallout.

[Ben_in_Canada]

I'll just leave this here....

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

I think we should ban this whole idea of monogamy being a good thing

And if one of you guys could tell my wife that'd be great

Hey, I'm not gonna agree to plow your wife until I see some pics first.