Men in dresses against men marrying each other
-
Are you often mistaken for a bishop? :laugh:
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^]Depends if there was a bit of bashing going on.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
-
Are you often mistaken for a bishop? :laugh:
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^]Keith Barrow wrote:
Are you often mistaken for a bishop?
Only by Salma, hence the restraining order.
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
-
Several people are responding with the opinion of "who gives them the right to tell people what to do?" And that is fine. However, where do we draw the line? There was a point in history where if you told people that one day men would be able to marry each other you would have been laughed at and banished from your village. So, what happens when the popular voice starts to say that killing another person is OK? Sounds absurd now but what if? So, what is wrong with a religious organization standing up for what it believes? Separation of church and state meant that the state should not mandate a specific religion. It does not mean church cannot publicize opinion to the state.
If you think homosexuality is a choice and fundamentally wrong then sure, spot on. However as it isn't, and is natural (be that as a response to evolution, because it was made by your god or some other one). Religious hatred is religious hatred, regardless of the religion and who they are hating at that particular time.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
If you think homosexuality is a choice and fundamentally wrong then sure, spot on. However as it isn't, and is natural (be that as a response to evolution, because it was made by your god or some other one). Religious hatred is religious hatred, regardless of the religion and who they are hating at that particular time.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
1. What makes you think homosexuality is not a choice? 2. You say that homosexuality is a "response to evolution." Homosexuality, if followed by all, would mean the end of the human race so how can that be considered evolution? Are you suggesting evolution is intentionally killing us off? Maybe you meant it as humor, like the Darwin awards or something. 3. What definition of "hate" are you using? I hate to do my homework or extreme hostility?
-
1. What makes you think homosexuality is not a choice? 2. You say that homosexuality is a "response to evolution." Homosexuality, if followed by all, would mean the end of the human race so how can that be considered evolution? Are you suggesting evolution is intentionally killing us off? Maybe you meant it as humor, like the Darwin awards or something. 3. What definition of "hate" are you using? I hate to do my homework or extreme hostility?
If homosexuality was a choice then there wouldn't be so many men and women, especially young men and women, hating themselves because other people who purport to care about them tell them they are wrong. Homosexuality exists throughout the animal kingdom, and has existed throughout human history too. It is as natural as being ginger and no more wrong. It will no more be the death of a species than any other thing that stops a small proportion breeding. However, increased homosexuality at a time when a species is growing beyond that which the eco system can support has to be a good thing.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
If homosexuality was a choice then there wouldn't be so many men and women, especially young men and women, hating themselves because other people who purport to care about them tell them they are wrong. Homosexuality exists throughout the animal kingdom, and has existed throughout human history too. It is as natural as being ginger and no more wrong. It will no more be the death of a species than any other thing that stops a small proportion breeding. However, increased homosexuality at a time when a species is growing beyond that which the eco system can support has to be a good thing.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
If you think homosexuality is a choice and fundamentally wrong then sure, spot on. However as it isn't, and is natural (be that as a response to evolution, because it was made by your god or some other one). Religious hatred is religious hatred, regardless of the religion and who they are hating at that particular time.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
Are you implying that murder is fundamentally wrong? Because if so, strange as it may seem, I'll have to disagree. "We" decided that it is wrong, but why would it be fundamentally so? Things like morals are pretty much just the "average opinion of the group", they don't stem from laws of physics or such..
-
Are you implying that murder is fundamentally wrong? Because if so, strange as it may seem, I'll have to disagree. "We" decided that it is wrong, but why would it be fundamentally so? Things like morals are pretty much just the "average opinion of the group", they don't stem from laws of physics or such..
-
Gay marriage: Roman Catholic archbishops step up fight[^] "The letter says Roman Catholics have a duty to make sure it does not happen." They seem to have missed the reformation, or the fact that the UK legal system is secular. They should have no more say in the matter than any of the other citizens in the UK. The legislation doesn't mandate religious bodies to solemnise gay marriages, so I don't see that this is any of their business. To say it will "shame the United Kingdom in the eyes of the world" is just wrong in the parts of the world that matter, and I don't see why we should care anyway. I'd have thought they'd have kept a pretty low profile, seeing as they have lost their moral authority by keeping certain "priestly activities" under wraps - given that is quite possibly the result of repressing normal sexuality, homosexual or otherwise.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^]The catholic church is a failed institution. They are one of the main reasons why I don't believe in organized religion or religious institutions. I can only hope the entire world, especially practicing catholics, come to realize that the church has failed them and the inhabitants of this world. BTW, if I pissed off any catholics here, then I think you really need to analyze your religion and religious views. Are they your views or the views that have been shoved down your throat your entire life. Freedom of thought and life, without church intervention. Remember, the church is man made and man run. God did not start the Catholic church.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
The difference between murder and consensual homosexuality is... Well, anyone who needs that explaining isn't worth the effort.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
Well that's obviously not what I wrote. My point isn't even that murder is OK, though I could argue that. It's just that fundamentally wrong is not something that actually exists. Morals don't just float around through space, nor are they "logically true", we, humans, just made them up.
-
Are you implying that murder is fundamentally wrong? Because if so, strange as it may seem, I'll have to disagree. "We" decided that it is wrong, but why would it be fundamentally so? Things like morals are pretty much just the "average opinion of the group", they don't stem from laws of physics or such..
Not my downvote. It depends what you take fundamentally to mean. Form my point of view it simply means at the base level of whatever system you are discussing, it is something that changes on your viewpoint. Murder is fundamentally wrong in most societies. Murder is fundamentally wrong in most religions. At the base of those constructs it is fundamentally wrong to kill someone else in a way that is regarded as murder. As a base of the human animal then of course it is not fundamentally wrong. The answer changes as to where you are standing.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
Well that's obviously not what I wrote. My point isn't even that murder is OK, though I could argue that. It's just that fundamentally wrong is not something that actually exists. Morals don't just float around through space, nor are they "logically true", we, humans, just made them up.
-
I know, and I didn't mention murder at all. So why has the discussion turned to something neither of us are talking about?
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
Not my downvote. It depends what you take fundamentally to mean. Form my point of view it simply means at the base level of whatever system you are discussing, it is something that changes on your viewpoint. Murder is fundamentally wrong in most societies. Murder is fundamentally wrong in most religions. At the base of those constructs it is fundamentally wrong to kill someone else in a way that is regarded as murder. As a base of the human animal then of course it is not fundamentally wrong. The answer changes as to where you are standing.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
Ryan's probably.. seems like something he'd do While that makes sense, it somewhat conflicts with my understanding of the definition of "fundamentally", which in this context amounts (in my understanding) to something like a "basic truth". IE from the viewpoint of pure logic, the laws of physics, or perhaps the universe itself.
-
On 10 O'Clock Live last week they had a debate about gay marriage. I think the relevant bit may be available here[^] 27:29 in, not sure if available everywhere (or anywhere as is blocked at work). They had Boy George and a young gay Catholic called Milo Yiannopoulos who pretty much just descended into saying how much he hates himself because his religion says he is wrong. Boy George just said marriage is absurd, gay or otherwise, then spent the rest of the time trying to pursuade this kid he should be happy with what he is. It became more of a therapy session than a debate. I found the whole thing very depressing, and the idea that someone should be so miserable with what they are because of some archaic institution tells them they are fundamentally wrong is incredibly sad.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
ChrisElston wrote:
some archaic institution
When I was still at school (only 50 odd years ago), homosexuality between men was still punishable by a prison term, as was attempted suicide. Attitudes change over time but not everyone will agree that the 'new' attitude is the right one. At the end of the day it is better that we have an open reasoned debate, than we just accept some new ruling by the political elite: like making all Jews wear yellow stars.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
-
ChrisElston wrote:
some archaic institution
When I was still at school (only 50 odd years ago), homosexuality between men was still punishable by a prison term, as was attempted suicide. Attitudes change over time but not everyone will agree that the 'new' attitude is the right one. At the end of the day it is better that we have an open reasoned debate, than we just accept some new ruling by the political elite: like making all Jews wear yellow stars.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
I agree entirely. My point wasnt really about the right to gay marriage. Unless you're saying it is a good thing to oppose homosexuals in which case I disagree entirely.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
Ryan's probably.. seems like something he'd do While that makes sense, it somewhat conflicts with my understanding of the definition of "fundamentally", which in this context amounts (in my understanding) to something like a "basic truth". IE from the viewpoint of pure logic, the laws of physics, or perhaps the universe itself.
-
The catholic church is a failed institution. They are one of the main reasons why I don't believe in organized religion or religious institutions. I can only hope the entire world, especially practicing catholics, come to realize that the church has failed them and the inhabitants of this world. BTW, if I pissed off any catholics here, then I think you really need to analyze your religion and religious views. Are they your views or the views that have been shoved down your throat your entire life. Freedom of thought and life, without church intervention. Remember, the church is man made and man run. God did not start the Catholic church.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)Quote:
Freedom of thought and life, without church intervention
It sounds like you are saying the church (I don't care which) is not allowed to share its beliefs. Your own beliefs come from many different sources: news, friends, experiences, personal pondering moments, church, school, books, movies, media, etc, etc. So, why are you trying to take the church out of that list? Why are they not allowed to try and influence people?
-
Quote:
Freedom of thought and life, without church intervention
It sounds like you are saying the church (I don't care which) is not allowed to share its beliefs. Your own beliefs come from many different sources: news, friends, experiences, personal pondering moments, church, school, books, movies, media, etc, etc. So, why are you trying to take the church out of that list? Why are they not allowed to try and influence people?
You again. ;)
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
You again. ;)
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)