19-06-2004 17:50									#91
	Increase Your PM Length

PH

quote: What goes on between two consenting adults is no business but their own.

Fine, so why do gays want their relationship to be the state's business? Just keep it private and hidden and no-one will complain or beat them up.

	19-06-2004 18:32									#92
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Why do straights want their relationship to be state sanctified too? Should you expect to be beaten up for kissing a girl in public?

Last edited by Drogue on 19-06-2004 at 21:16

	19-06-2004 18:36									#93
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Fine, so why do gays want their relationship to be the state's business? Just keep it private and hidden and no-one will complain or beat them up.

Because whereupon one is oppressed, one wishes to fight that oppression. Also many people view their marriage as a public declaration of their love. Marriage is also a states recognition of that relationship, so if a state refuses to recognise that relationship via marriage or something to that effect, then it is inherently discriminating against homosexuals if it allows heterosexuals to do the same, denying a fundamental civil right both in its own right and in the right to express oneself, including ones love.

Now you have said that one should take an action based upon the reaction of bigots like yourself. However, that is unacceptable considering that those in the wrong in this matter are said bigots, and thus it seems reasonable that one should not bow to intimidation or such threats in order to appease the petty prejudices of small minded troglodytes.

	19-06-2004 18:41									#94
	Inflate your Upload Space

"Should you expect to eb beaten up for kissing a girl in public?"

That is normal and socially accepted at the current time. There's no moral absolutes remember.

	19-06-2004 18:44									#95
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

The state is not stopping anyone from marrying.

	19-06-2004 18:55									#96
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: That is normal and socially accepted at the current time. There's no moral absolutes remember.

Just as institutional racism is socially accepted. If homophobia is socially accepted, then there is a problem that should be addressed. Fortunately however, homophobia is reducing and homosexuals, their attitudes and lifestyles are becoming mainstream . The issue of moral absolutes is irrelevant in a sociological instance. You could use that to say that racism isn't absolutely morally wrong, and you'd be right, but that is not a basis for society, whereby in this context certain rules need to apply. As a relativist, I would not dream of saying that murder, racism or institutional, embedded homophobia is acceptable in society.

quote: The state is not stopping anyone from marrying.

Then you're problem is on public displays of homosexual relationships? That's a woefully tired and flawed position, since you're making a "should" or "ought" statement from your own highly subjective, bigoted opinions that fortunately are heading into the minority anyway, so you can't even use democracy as your defense!!

	19-06-2004 20:06									#97
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Seeker You are confusing me for my robot dog-drone, Boshko.

Blarg, too many Zimesque avatars.

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Seems like we need a better definition of what constitutes 'coercion' before we get any further. I think it is possible to have morally legitimate forms of coercion.

I'm using the dictionary definition: Forcible domination/control/restraint, or put another way, forcing somebody to think and/or act a certain way.

And yes, there are morally legitimate forms of coercion, else the legal system would be pretty worthless -- you'd have to politely ask criminals to stop breaking the law if you weren't able to impose fines, community service, imprisonment, etc. on them (all of which are forms of coercion). However, a majority arbitrarily restricting the liberties of a minority is a morally illegitimate form of coercion, which is why your "coercion through popular vote" proposal is unsatisfactory. Whether or not a majority like or dislike gay marriage (or anything else, for that matter) is morally irrelevant.

	19-06-2004 20:09									#98
	Increase Your PM Length

BK: You'd argue that democracy is a valid reason against gay marriage where most people don't want it? Why exactly is that? What premise or conclusion of democracy (beyond brute force which is irrelevant in my view in a civilised society) is relevant to the question of whether a minority should be granted a right... or more fundamentally, how free-wills have a right to impede the right of another free-will to do anything, except impede that of another?

Anal sex is no different to iced tea. Don't knock it until you've tried it .

	19-06-2004 20:09									#99
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Moderates do not seek to impose injustified morals onto other people.

Injustified is a matter of opinion, is it not? I'm sure to Communists imposing capitalism on the populace (which is done by moderates as well) is unjustified.

	19-06-2004 20:11									#100
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Moderates do not seek to impose injustified morals onto other people.

The question is justified and they are not morals being imposed upon the majority of people, they are rights being granted to a minority.

EDIT: Imran -

	19-06-2004 21:08									#101
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Monk If somebody truly feels they've changed during the years, then who are we to say that couldn't possibly be true? As far as I can tell, your view is that the people who claim to have switched sides during the years are unfit to tell for sure just what they really are, or they're outright lying. I think if anybody said something like that to you, the eternal preacher of tolerance and diversity, you'd be pissed (and with a good reason to be so).

When you find out what it feels like to live in heterosexist, homophobic society, and feel the pressures to conform, let me know.

	19-06-2004 21:10									#102
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Park Avenue "Should you expect to eb beaten up for kissing a girl in public?" That is normal and socially accepted at the current time. There's no moral absolutes remember.

In the southern states of United States in the early twentieth century, lynching blacks was considered to be a moral norm.

	19-06-2004 21:12									#103
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Moderates do not seek to impose injustified morals onto other people. Injustified is a matter of opinion, is it not? I'm sure to Communists imposing capitalism on the populace (which is done by moderates as well) is unjustified.

Unjustified imposition of morality, IMO -- is when people seek to deprive others of rights and/or equal privileges.

	19-06-2004 21:12									#104
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

"In the southern states of United States in the early twentieth century, lynching blacks was considered to a moral norm."

Exactly. It depends on the viewpoints of society whether something is considered moral or immoral. And sorry to break it to you but...

	19-06-2004 21:22									#105
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by MrFun When you find out what it feels like to live in heterosexist, homophobic society, and feel the pressures to conform, let me know.

What's that supposed to mean?

(edit... deleted the irrelevant part.)

	19-06-2004 21:24									#106
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Exactly. It depends on the viewpoints of society whether something is considered moral or immoral. And sorry to break it to you but...

The fact that undereducated, overprejudiced idiots had a simplistic morality that allowed them to do that does not make it acceptable at the time. In a sociological context, you cannot hijack the banner of relativism to justify that such intolerance is acceptable because this is not a neutral context. You bring in the question of morality, where of course, you are correct. Whether it is moral or immoral is dependent upon the disposition of the beholder, but whether something is socially acceptable or not is another matter. You could say that having intercourse with a tree in public is morally acceptable according to you, and you'd be right, however, does that make it socially acceptable. Repeating and misusing relativistic arguments that you probably got from me in the first place does nothing for you in this debate, so I suggest you deal with the situation on its merits. The only place in this context where relativism applies is in the rights of the individual to do what he wants provided he does not impede others from doing the same. Marriage and public declaration of that relationship form part of that.

	19-06-2004 21:39									#107
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

The senate is going to steal the judiciary's job now?

	19-06-2004 21:53									#108
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by MrFun I suppose whenever any minority group has made progress towards equal rights in the past, they caused nothing but needless trouble, and thus deserving of callous, vicious, unjustified backlash?

It's the way history has worked in this country. One step forward, two steps back.

	19-06-2004 21:55									#109
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

"The fact that undereducated, overprejudiced idiots had a simplistic morality that allowed them to do that does not make it acceptable at the time. In a sociological context, you cannot hijack the banner of relativism to justify that such intolerance is acceptable because this is not a neutral context. You bring in the question of morality, where of course, you are correct. Whether it is moral or immoral is dependent upon the disposition of the beholder, but whether something is socially acceptable or not is another matter. You could say that having intercourse with a tree in public is morally acceptable according to you, and you'd be right, however, does that make it socially acceptable. Repeating and misusing relativistic arguments that you probably got from me in the first place does nothing for you in this debate, so I suggest you deal with the situation on its merits. The only place in this context where relativism applies is in the rights of the individual to do what he wants provided he does not impede others from doing the same. Marriage and public declaration of that relationship form part of that."

What the hell are you saying? Using big words don't impress no-one..

	19-06-2004 22:50									#110
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: What the hell are you saying? Using big words don't impress no-one..

Nor does using poor grammar. Try reading it again, more slowly, I'm not going to repeat myself because you are intimidated by the polysyllabic .

	19-06-2004 23:10									#111
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Hell let them marry and then tax them excessively like the rest of the married couples.

	19-06-2004 23:12									#112
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

That's the spirit!

	19-06-2004 23:26									#113
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

BK, There is no enviromental influence on homosexuality, that is religious righ bullsh*t.

	19-06-2004 23:31									#114
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Monk What's that supposed to mean? (edit... deleted the irrelevant part.)

I'm wondering if you're aware of the heterosexist and homophobic pressures that have caused a small number of gays to claim that they have changed their sexual orientation.

	19-06-2004 23:34									#115
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Why should the minority dictate terms to the majority?

How are the minority dictating terms to the majority? Last I checked, the majority could still marry...

	19-06-2004 23:36									#116
	One post to destroy them all: Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi However, this is irrelevant to the case of marriage, for the same reason why we do not affirm one religion over another.

If your reason for denying gay people the right to marry is because marriage is a religious institution, it does not belong in the hands of the government, period.

	19-06-2004 23:40									#117
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by MrFun I'm wondering if you're aware of the heterosexist and homophobic pressures that have caused a small number of gays to claim that they have changed their sexual orientation.

Yeah, and I'm wondering how you can be certain the pressures in question are the causes of every and all such 'conversion'. Your sexuality is a living, ever-changing part of your personality so it's highly unlikely your tastes won't change over time. Changing from gay to straight is probably a pretty rare occurence, I'll grant you that, but given the complexity of human sexuality I can imagine stranger things happening.

	19-06-2004 23:58									#118
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Whaleboy That's the spirit!

It's the reason why I don't understand the rush to marry. It seems like a loosing proposition to me.

	20-06-2004 00:05									#119
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Whaleboy Anal sex is no different to iced tea. Don't knock it until you've tried it .

Umm, no. I haven't tried it (my back door is one-way) but I can definitely see a difference....


Ben - You argue an unpopular position with logic and civility.

Name callers - If your position is so strong why the need to insult? It detracts from your arguments.

	20-06-2004 00:26									#120
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Why should the minority dictate terms to the majority? Let the people vote on the laws on the country.

*insert obligatory remark about Jews in Nazi Germany*