Gay marriage now legal in Iowa

[Evo]

Your point being...? The whole issue here is that some people feel gay marriage is immoral... Apparently by today's standards its not so outlandish to speak out against it. -I still dont understand your logic of thinking the statement didnt apply at all to the argument. Its NOT about specifics, its about where we draw the line between immoral and moral...

WOW. So because some people think gay marriage is immoral, it should be illegal? By today's standards, it it ridiculous to speak out against it. It's an outdated, holier than thou, archaic belief which has turned into a phobia for some. How about we decide that their way of thinking is immoral? And it is not about where we draw the line between immoral and moral. That shouldn't be an issue at all.

Your reasoning makes no sense at all. If something is based on emotions instead of facts, then it can't be wrong? Are you serious?

 

[Hootenanny]

Im not out to start a fire-storm here, but im gonna have to disagree with that statement because everyone defines logic as well as rationality different... What might seem logical and rational to you might be pure gibberish to someone else... You cant just say that something is not logical when it comes to a matter of pure opinion such as this.

If something is a set in stone fact, then yes, there can be a wrong opinion or belief about it, but for open ended things like this, the same can not be said....

Yes it can!

For example, a Christian may consider bestiality immoral since the bible forbids it (Leviticus 18:23). A secularist on the other hand may consider bestiality immoral since there is no way an animal can consent to intercourse and thus any act of bestiality is considered rape.

The Christian's reasoning is not logical whereas the secularist's is logical.

I also disagree with your statement that logic is not absolute.

 

[NBAJam100]

WOW. So because some people think gay marriage is immoral, it should be illegal? By today's standards, it it ridiculous to speak out against it. It's an outdated, holier than thou, archaic belief which has turned into a phobia for some. How about we decide that their way of thinking is immoral? And it is not about where we draw the line between immoral and moral. That shouldn't be an issue at all.

WHATTTT???? NOT ONCE did i say that gay marriage should be illegal because some people think its immoral. Holy Cow, I said that some people feel that it is immoral, so THEY feel it should be illegal... Im not speaking for anyone here, im speaking for the meaning of opinion. When you say it shouldnt be an issue at all, thats your opinion. this is my main point... some people feel it IS an issue (and im not one of them, im with you on this, trust me). This all started because i felt someone insulted Dr. D when they shouldnt have. Jeez. Im sure some people feel the same way you do in your first sentence except replace immoral with moral, and illegal with legal...

"Your reasoning makes no sense at all. If something is based on emotions instead of facts, then it can't be wrong? Are you serious?"

This was an all out random assault on me.. I did not once support any of the above stated beliefs of gay people being immoral. All i was saying was that to the individual, opinion cannot be wrong because to me opinion is THEIR belief or thoughts on a subject... So how can their own thoughts on an issue be wrong (in their eyes)?Evo, id appreciate it if you would read over my other posts before attacking me like that. Everything i said above makes perfect sense... SOME PEOPLE feel that it is immoral, so THEY feel it shouldnt be legal... Did i once claim that because they feel it is immoral it should be illegal? No, i was expressing an opinion which is felt by some people (once again, dont assault me if you read this, thats not my opinion). When you say it shouldnt be an issue at all, then what is the issue? Apparently there is some issue or there wouldnt be a huge legal argument over it. Was i claiming to be speaking for one side of the "issue," no.

 

[rootX]

[PLAIN]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0038.gif[ATTACH=full]196664[/ATTACH][/URL] [Broken]

[PLAIN]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/jumping/jumping0041.gif[ATTACH=full]196665[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196666[/ATTACH][/URL] [Broken]


[PLAIN]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0011.gif[ATTACH=full]196667[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196668[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196669[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196670[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196671[/ATTACH][/URL] [Broken]

[PLAIN]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0016.gif[ATTACH=full]196672[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196673[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196674[/ATTACH][/URL] [Broken]

[PLAIN]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0007.gif[ATTACH=full]196675[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196676[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196677[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196678[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196679[/ATTACH][/URL] [Broken]
.

[PLAIN]http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/character/character0093.gif[ATTACH=full]196690[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196691[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]196692[/ATTACH] [Broken]

​

I don't understand what worse could happen if two gays are married legally?

 

[siddharth]

Im not out to start a fire-storm here, but im gonna have to disagree with that statement because everyone defines logic as well as rationality different... What might seem logical and rational to you might be pure gibberish to someone else... You cant just say that something is not logical when it comes to a matter of pure opinion such as this.

It's not a matter of pure opinion. Many of the claims put forward by those opposing gay marriage can be refuted objectively by empirical evidence.

For example, where's the logic, or the empirical evidence, that gay marriage will lead to bestiality? It's a nonsense argument.

If something is a set in stone fact, then yes, there can be a wrong opinion or belief about it, but for open ended things like this, the same can not be said....

flawed reasoning?? Err you reason based on your personal rationality and personal logic when it comes to matters that dont contain fact and are OPINION based... So something could be perfectly reasonable to someone that isnt reasonable to another.

I disagree. People can logically debate based on principles which we consider universal, like the declaration of human rights and equality.

For example, if someone says that those committing homosexual acts should be stoned to death, should we treat that opinion with equal value or respect? (espicially in the context of framing a law? answer: no)

Just because people hold opinions, does not mean we should automatically respect or value them. I think that we must critically evaluate those opinions to a standard of ethics using reason.

 

[NBAJam100]

Yes it can!

For example, a Christian may consider bestiality immoral since the bible forbids it (Leviticus 18:23). A secularist on the other hand may consider bestiality immoral since there is no way an animal can consent to intercourse and thus any act of bestiality is considered rape.

The Christian's reasoning is not logical whereas the secularist's is logical.

I also disagree with your statement that logic is not absolute.

Are you claiming that the christian opinion is not logical because the bible is possibly not true, or is not absolute in meaning? If so, isnt someones belief in the bible/god opinion? So how can it be not logical if they believe the bible is true? By their logic, it makes perfect sense.

It thats not the case, sorry, i might be missing what you are getting at here.

 

[OAQfirst]

I don't understand what worse could happen if two gays are married legally?

Then the definition and meaning of marriage will have to be changed and that would mean the tragic rewrite of all our dictionaries.

We will also have to let trioecious relationships enjoy legal status, legalize polygamy, bestiality, recognize the legal status of furries, let the muppets marry, and allow the blind to drive.

Your mushroom cloud must also be allowed to marry other mushroom clouds.

 

[NBAJam100]

It's not a matter of pure opinion. Many of the claims put forward by those opposing gay marriage can be refuted objectively by empirical evidence.

For example, where's the logic, or the empirical evidence, that gay marriage will lead to bestiality? It's a nonsense argument.

I would argue that what deems this a nonsense argument? (once again, so I dont get railed, this isnt my belief, im playing devils advocate.) The nonsensical aspect of it is determined by what? Your beliefs? Social standards/norms? Who says that those are logical?

To your second statement- Who says that our universal standards are logical? They might seem logical to the general public and the vast majority of people, but does that really make them logical? My main point being, on an individual level, some people feel things are logical that others arent. Obviously, we will go with the masses when it comes to determining what is "logical" (by convention). But logic is something that is essentially determined by the individual.

"Just because people hold opinions, does not mean we should automatically respect or value them. I think that we must critically evaluate those opinions to a standard of ethics using reason."

Very true. My argument was for opinions alone. Each person has an individual opinion (that to the individual isnt wrong because opinions cant be wrong). Certain opinions can be widely accepted and are "correct" but really opinion comes down to individual. That is my main point. The people who feel gay marriage is immoral feel that their opinion is logical and correct (and is not in fact wrong because it is theirs.) Is it widely accepted? possibly not. But is it wrong, No. I just dont feel opinions can be wrong. Should we go by individual opinion? No!

 

[Hootenanny]

Are you claiming that the christian opinion is not logical because the bible is possibly not true, or is not absolute in meaning? If so, isnt someones belief in the bible/god opinion? So how can it be not logical if they believe the bible is true? By their logic, it makes perfect sense.

It thats not the case, sorry, i might be missing what you are getting at here.

Whether the bible is "true" is irrelevant here. My point is that the basis of a Christian's argument boils down to "because I read it in a book", which is not a logical argument.

Again, you use the phrase "their logic". There is no such thing as "their logic", "our logic" or "my logic". Logic is an absolute: "Logic is the study of the principles of valid demonstration and inference".

I would like to emphasise at this point that I am not singling out the Christian faith for any reason in particular, I am doing so purely as an example. I do not intend to offend any Christians or followers of other faiths.

 

[Evo]

WHATTTT???? NOT ONCE did i say that gay marriage should be illegal because some people think its immoral. Holy Cow, I said that some people feel that it is immoral, so THEY feel it should be illegal... Im not speaking for anyone here, im speaking for the meaning of opinion. When you say it shouldnt be an issue at all, thats your opinion. this is my main point... some people feel it IS an issue (and im not one of them, im with you on this, trust me). This all started because i felt someone insulted Dr. D when they shouldnt have. Jeez. Im sure some people feel the same way you do in your first sentence except replace immoral with moral, and illegal with legal...

"Your reasoning makes no sense at all. If something is based on emotions instead of facts, then it can't be wrong? Are you serious?"

This was an all out random assault on me.. I did not once support any of the above stated beliefs of gay people being immoral. Evo, id appreciate it if you would read over my other posts before attacking me like that. Everything i said above makes perfect sense... SOME PEOPLE feel that it is immoral, so THEY feel it shouldnt be legal... Did i once claim that because they feel it is immoral it should be illegal? No, i was expressing an opinion which is felt by some people (once again, dont assault me if you read this, thats not my opinion). When you say it shouldnt be an issue at all, then what is the issue? Apparently there is some issue or there wouldnt be a huge legal argument over it. Was i claiming to be speaking for one side of the "issue," no.

I did read several of your posts and they all seem to be saying that a group of people have the right to impose their beliefs on others when it is not an issue that causes harm to others. That kind of thinking is wrong and it's about time that we put an end to it.

Also, you stated that only something "written in stone" can be considered right or wrong. I couldn't disagree more.

I apologize if you think I was too harsh, but based on your previous statements, your post above seems to counter what you said previously.

 

[siddharth]

I would argue that what deems this a nonsense argument? (once again, so I dont get railed, this isnt my belief, im playing devils advocate.) The nonsensical aspect of it is determined by what? Your beliefs? Social standards/norms? Who says that those are logical?

If this isn't your belief, why are you wasting time arguing it?

The nonsensical aspect of it is determined by any standard of modern ethics.

Very true. My argument was for opinions alone. Each person has an individual opinion (that to the individual isnt wrong because opinions cant be wrong). Certain opinions can be widely accepted and are "correct" but really opinion comes down to individual. That is my main point. The people who feel gay marriage is immoral feel that their opinion is logical and correct (and is not in fact wrong because it is theirs.) Is it widely accepted? possibly not. But is it wrong, No. I just dont feel opinions can be wrong.

What you're arguing here is exactly analogous to cultural relativism. I gave you a clear example why it doesn't work (ie, the stoning example).

 

[NBAJam100]

I did read several of your posts and they all seem to be saying that a group of people have the right to impose their beliefs on others when it is not an issue that causes harm to others. That kind of thinking is wrong and it's about time that we put an end to it.

Maybe im terrible at getting my points across or am not communicating in an effecting way... I Never (or never attempted) to make a claim for one side of the other... I never once said (or implied, in my mind) that one group has the right to impose their beliefs on others... I was simply stating that i felt that someone unfairly insulted Dr. D. All i was doing was sticking up for the matter of personal opinion. I dont see how anything i said was countering any of my other statements. People were putting me in situations where i had to act as if i was against gay marriage so i could attempt to explain my definition of opinion.

My main point here for everyone to see: If someone has a personal opinion, i feel that it is not wrong because to me an opinion is how you feel about something. Although it might not be socially accepted and/or thought of as logical by others, its their opinion and for whatever reason, that is how they feel on the issue. I dont feel that issues should be determined by opinion/emotion (especially legal ones). But if someone wants to have an opinion of something, then it is their opinion...

 

[NBAJam100]

If this isn't your belief, why are you wasting time arguing it?

The nonsensical aspect of it is determined by any standard of modern ethics.

Im not arguing anything... I am arguing what i believe in, ae that people have their own opinions, and to an individual, their opinion is not in fact wrong because it is their thoughts determined by their own personal logic... I wasnt arguing anything involving gay marriage, i chimed in to originally protect D's right to have an opinion (which apparently was a really bad idea).

 

[NBAJam100]

Whether the bible it "true" is irrelevant here. My point is that the basis of a Christian's argument boils down to "because I read it in a book", which is not a logical argument.

Again, you use the phrase "their logic". There is no such thing as "their logic", "our logic" or "my logic". Logic is an absolute: "Logic is the study of the principles of valid demonstration and inference".

I would like to emphasise at this point that I am not singling out the Christian faith for any reason in particular, I am doing so purely as an example. I do not intend to offend any Christians or followers of other faiths.

I understand. All i was saying is was that i would see the reason they would believe it would be because they feel that the things in the bible are in fact correct and true, so they would believe it. I would say that the main reason wasnt just because "They read it in a book" but because they genuinely believe its fact.

 

[Astronuc]

Time out!

Posts are going off-topic and some are getting too personal.