PaliRichard Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 This isn’t about people on this thread it’s about everyone that has an opinion on gay marriage and the rights and wrongs of it. ---------- Post added 12-02-2013 at 18:30 ---------- Nothing in your opinion or my opinion, that doesn’t alter the fact that some people have a different opinion. And whilst I may not agree with their opinion I accept it as their opinion and don’t see anything homophobic or bigoted in holding their opinion. If nothing about it is irrational why did you say that its supporters can't give a rational explanation for it that would be accepted by the other side? Surely if you agree that it's not irrational, then arguments for it by default are rational arguments, if people don't accept those arguments then those people, again by default, are being irrational. Yet you claim that you don't have an opinion either way - how odd! Btw I accept that it's their opinion, that doesn't mean that it's not an irrational opinion, and pointing this out doesn't make me a bigot - it just means I am using a rational argument against someone's irrational argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Nothing in your opinion or my opinion, that doesn’t alter the fact that some people have a different opinion. And whilst I may not agree with their opinion I accept it as their opinion and don’t see anything homophobic or bigoted in holding their opinion. Holding an opinion that fits the definition of homophobic doesn't make you think that maybe the person holding it is homophobic? Or are you saying that an opinion that society should discriminate against gay people because of their sexuality isn't homophobic? If so, you need to look at the definition again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 As I explained earlier calling homosexuality is a sin, as it has been numerous times, is a form of abuse. I'm not calling out on people saying they 'think it's a sin' which I have not read on this thread, but the direct statement that it is. If I was gay I would be offended every time I heard that said, much more so than if I was insulted for my views which I can argue about or change my mind. Besides, the concept that one side in an argument is more offensive than another is nonsense. It is a sign of weakness in the argument when I hear people claim it. Some people are rude, irrespective of their position, it's not their position that makes them rude. Yes I can see that it would be wrong if religious people were going round everywhere calling gay people sinners, but if you ask a religious person for their reason for opposing gay marriage, and their answer is, “because it’s my belief that being gay is a sin,” it would then be a little unfair to claim they have just abused all gay people, when in fact all they have done is answer your question with honesty. ---------- Post added 12-02-2013 at 19:15 ---------- But when I wrote 'on this thread', that means that I was referring to the people on this thread. Your links to the Daily Mail don't really alter my point about how those of us challenging bigotry on this thread are doing so without coming anywhere close to the intolerance expressed by the other side on this thread. HTH Again that’s just your opinion and different people will have different opinions. Neither is right or wrong because opinion is subjective. If I said anything that you found offensive and I didn't intend to cause offence then I would apologise. If I said something with the intension of offending you then I wouldn’t apologise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 You didn't use the quote function but I will assume the quote is accurate. It reads to me that someone find the act of annul intercourse disgusting, many heterosexuals probably find the thought of annul sex or oral sex disgusting, but that doesn’t mean they find the person giving or receiving oral sex degusting, I find brussel sprouts disgusting but I don’t dislike people that eat brussel sprout. That it I’m done on this topic. Mmm, sounded like that to me, too. I'd like to know why there's so much speculation, curiosity and obsession with what folk (particularly gay folk) do between the sheets? What consenting adults get up to behind closed doors is no-one's business but theirs. Some Gay couples have anal sex, some don't, some straight couples have anal sex, others don't. Ditto for oral sex. I can't say "Right, I don't like the idea of anal sex, so 'you', 'you' and 'you' all can't indulge in it!" If the couple are over the age of consent, and there's no 'abuse of authority' issues, or consanguinity, then it's up to them what they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Yes I can see that it would be wrong if religious people were going round everywhere calling gay people sinners, but if you ask a religious person for their reason for opposing gay marriage, and their answer is, “because it’s my belief that being gay is a sin,” it would then be a little unfair to claim they have just abused all gay people, when in fact all they have done is answer your question with honesty. You've not read my post in full, and have just singled out the first sentence. People are entitled to think that alcohol, homosexuality, television, music, sex, certain foods, whatever are sins and avoid them. They are entitled to say they "believe they are sins" or "think they are sins" with reference to themselves. But examine the language used, and the context, and you will realise that it is more often than not stated in an offensive way. That it is categorically a sin, justifiable to have authority over other people. If you were to get in a taxi and the Muslim driver refused to take you because of some beer in your shopping bag, you would find that offensive. Likewise a gay person when he/she is told that they cannot marry because somebody else says it's a sin. It is no different to saying "you are evil". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 If nothing about it is irrational why did you say that its supporters can't give a rational explanation for it that would be accepted by the other side? Surely if you agree that it's not irrational, then arguments for it by default are rational arguments, if people don't accept those arguments then those people, again by default, are being irrational. Yet you claim that you don't have an opinion either way - how odd! Btw I accept that it's their opinion, that doesn't mean that it's not an irrational opinion, and pointing this out doesn't make me a bigot - it just means I am using a rational argument against someone's irrational argument. Because it’s just my opinion which is subjective, I am of the opinion that both sides of the argument have good points; sadly neither side appears to think the other side as a good point. And if you think their opinion is irrational and they think your opinion is irrational then you have reached dead lock and any further discussion is pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Because it’s just my opinion which is subjective, I am of the opinion that both sides of the argument have good points; sadly neither side appears to think the other side as a good point. And if you think their opinion is irrational and they think your opinion is irrational then you have reached dead lock and any further discussion is pointless. But if you think there is nothing irrational about it, as I said in the rest of my post which you conveniently forget to quote, by default that means those against it are being irrational. So one side is rational, the other is irrational yet you think they both make good points? By default if you think that gay marriage is not irrational and people oppose it you should think they are being irrational, so you're either telling porkies and actually are against it or you're arguing for the sake of arguing. Ok, let's go into it, what good points do you think the anti gay marriage brigade have, let's dissect them one by one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Holding an opinion that fits the definition of homophobic doesn't make you think that maybe the person holding it is homophobic? Or are you saying that an opinion that society should discriminate against gay people because of their sexuality isn't homophobic? If so, you need to look at the definition again. Did you oppose the discrimination that you think existed last year and the year before that, and before that, because according to some on here all previous governments must be homophobic, because under all previous governments gay people couldn’t get married, so were in fact discriminated against. I don't think there is any discrimination so I don't see the governments as homophobic. ---------- Post added 12-02-2013 at 19:30 ---------- Mmm, sounded like that to me, too. I'd like to know why there's so much speculation, curiosity and obsession with what folk (particularly gay folk) do between the sheets? What consenting adults get up to behind closed doors is no-one's business but theirs. Some Gay couples have anal sex, some don't, some straight couples have anal sex, others don't. Ditto for oral sex. I can't say "Right, I don't like the idea of anal sex, so 'you', 'you' and 'you' all can't indulge in it!" If the couple are over the age of consent, and there's no 'abuse of authority' issues, or consanguinity, then it's up to them what they do. I agree. ---------- Post added 12-02-2013 at 19:37 ---------- You've not read my post in full, and have just singled out the first sentence. People are entitled to think that alcohol, homosexuality, television, music, sex, certain foods, whatever are sins and avoid them. They are entitled to say they "believe they are sins" or "think they are sins" with reference to themselves. But examine the language used, and the context, and you will realise that it is more often than not stated in an offensive way. That it is categorically a sin, justifiable to have authority over other people. If you were to get in a taxi and the Muslim driver refused to take you because of some beer in your shopping bag, you would find that offensive. Likewise a gay person when he/she is told that they cannot marry because somebody else says it's a sin. It is no different to saying "you are evil". But surely only a religious person could take offence at being called a sinner or evil because we none believers don’t believe in evil or sin. I tend to ignore the religious ranting of religious people but respect their right to say it. ---------- Post added 12-02-2013 at 19:43 ---------- But if you think there is nothing irrational about it, as I said in the rest of my post which you conveniently forget to quote, by default that means those against it are being irrational. So one side is rational, the other is irrational yet you think they both make good points? By default if you think that gay marriage is not irrational and people oppose it you should think they are being irrational, so you're either telling porkies and actually are against it or you're arguing for the sake of arguing. Ok, let's go into it, what good points do you think the anti gay marriage brigade have, let's dissect them one by one. Sorry confused now, doesn't take much aparantly. My opinion is that both sides have made good points to support their stance, I also think both sides have built a mountain out of a mole hill. I can see why neither side will ever agree with the other side because both sides have very strong deeply seated opinions on the subject. I don’t think gay people are being discriminated against by calling their wedding a civil partnership but I wouldn’t be opposed to changing it to marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Forgive me for being off topic here but is anyone else wondering if maxmaximus is ok? He/she has been missing for 3 or 4 days now after being an ever-present earlier on in the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 maxmaximus has a new mask. Different but equal. Not taking sides but endlessly arguing with no apparent aim or purpose. He doesn't agree, but he does, and he'll flip the meaning of words upside down to explain bigotry is justice and justice is bigotry. A clown of the highest order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.