PRE-EMPTIVE MOD RULING: This is a thread for free and open expression. If anyone says that they oppose marriage equality, that's fine and no-one should attack them for it. But they must expect that we're going to insist on them justifying their views.
Watch this:
Then this:
It's kindof a wierd thing. Of course I'm happy that the US Supreme Court legalised marriage equality. But it really doesn't effect me. I already lived in a state with gay marriage and all my American friends but one did too. On the other hand, Australia is still behind the times and is now the only developed English-speaking country that hasn't legalised it.
We've got our own fundies too. My favourite at the moment is Senator Eric Abetz who says that because Australia is in Asia, and because everyone says this is the Asian century, and because no country in Asia has yet equalised marriage laws, we shouldn't. To me that just sounds like he's really fucking reaching for a justification.
So... discuss gay marriage. And pull quotes from the most ridiculous people both anti and pro!
__________________
:
Spending as long as I do here, it's easy to forget that Oddworld has actual fans.
Wow that second video kind of misses the point of the first. These people in the first video don't have a problem with homosexuality, they have a problem with same-sex couples in their one specific old ass religious ceremony. I know lots of Christians, and lots of people who have been Christian for years. None of them are anti-gay, even the ones who had those views in the past (ie the 1970s). They're happy for homosexuals to live their lives together, but for reasons beyond my understanding they just can't budge on marriage.
My problem with marriage is that it's a religious thing, when there's really no reason for it to be any more. If you want to have a religious ceremony, that's great. The religious and traditional ties are restrictive though, and makes it harder for the ceremony to keep up with cultral change. I actually understand why certain people who honestly believe in and live their lives by Christianity would not want this. Some of these people are told from birth that marriage is between a man and a woman, until they don't know how to think differently. The first question to come into my mind on this is: "Why are so many non-religious people restricted by the backwards old views of a religious ceremony?".
I find catholic people who are pro-gay marriage even more stupid and hypocritic than regular catholic people. The old testament condemns homosexuality.
That said, I find all religions stupid.
EDIT:
Also, in the most importans part of the first video, I keep hearing "I believe marriage is just three men and a woman". That's fucked up.
I think most religious argument [against gay marriage] comes down not to "I don't think those people are loved by God", but "I'm not comfortable with my religious organisation losing power over this aspect of society."
Faith and gnosticism is a personal philosophy. Religion is a political tool. Organisations like the Catholic Church were established primarily to amass wealth and power while keeping those dirt-eating plebs in line with cautionary ghost stories, and this aspect has been internalised by their followers, usually subconsciously. With that in mind, of course Catholics are upset by gay marriage. It's a violation of the rules their masters set, and that means that people don't feel obligated to have their actions cleared by the Pope any more. In other words, it's another puppet string that's slipped out of their hands.
Phylum: I'll try to write up a more detailed reply when I'm a bit more awake. My initial response (working from memory of the video and not having rewatched it) is that the problem with the first video is a bunch of white Christians acting as if they're the most persecuted segment of society rather than the most powerful. And acting as if the gaining of rights by another group necessarily means a loss of rights by them.
:
I find catholic people who are pro-gay marriage even more stupid and hypocritic than regular catholic people. The old testament condemns homosexuality.
No it doesn't. It prohibits anal sex. Nothing more, nothing less. And even that prohibition is no stronger than the ban against eating shellfish and plenty of Catholics do that.
__________________
:
Spending as long as I do here, it's easy to forget that Oddworld has actual fans.
You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
:
If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.
Phylum: I'll try to write up a more detailed reply when I'm a bit more awake. My initial response (working from memory of the video and not having rewatched it) is that the problem with the first video is a bunch of white Christians acting as if they're the most persecuted segment of society rather than the most powerful. And acting as if the gaining of rights by another group necessarily means a loss of rights by them.
Oh yeah the video was a load of wank. Don't think for a second anything I said somehow means I like that video, for their love of god. The response video still missed the mark though, in my eyes.
In my experience living in Northern Ireland the Catholic population aren't exactly hardcore scripture nuts. Their opinions on such things rely on how they were brought up, the views espoused at mass (if they attend), views espoused by their peers, what the Pope says and/or just their own personal feelings mixed in. So you're going to get a wide variety of Catholics with a wide variety of opinions. No one is following the Bible verbatim (or at least very few) and like all things religion, and what's accepted or not accepted, is going to evolve - despite what's written in Leviticus.
Some take homosexuality, and gay marriage, very seriously. Some choose to focus on the message of love and compassion over discrimination. Or they're too busy hating on the damn Protestants.
As far as the youth are concerned I get the impression that fundamentalism is more likely to be found in Protestant communities, here, rather than Catholic ones. But, you know, this is all just what I reckon. I ain't no darn sociologist....
I kind of forget the point. Am I vaguely arguing with Varrok?
You said "Catholic" so I decided to bang on about my great nation for a minute it seems...
Also, Nate, NI doesn't allow same sex marriage either. But we did get the plastic bag tax before the rest of the UK (I think) so we've got that going for us...
If you refrain from sex with women, only doing so with men, then you are not lying with a man as you would a woman, because you are not lying with a woman.
You can't be sure what sexuality it is till you bang him/her/it
I think you're joking, but I'm not sure. In any case, I was pretty damn confident I was gay well before I banged anything. And even if I wasn't, my first kiss with a guy would have been all the proof I needed of what it is I like. And there's plenty more steps between there and anal to provide further proof.
And going back to a previous post...
:
Wow that second video kind of misses the point of the first. These people in the first video don't have a problem with homosexuality, they have a problem with same-sex couples in their one specific old ass religious ceremony. I know lots of Christians, and lots of people who have been Christian for years. None of them are anti-gay, even the ones who had those views in the past (ie the 1970s). They're happy for homosexuals to live their lives together, but for reasons beyond my understanding they just can't budge on marriage.
I think you're missing the point of the second video. They're not mocking the first video for being homophobic or opposing gay marriage or for simply being Christian. They're mocking them for having a victim complex, for using the rhetoric and style of the 'It Gets Better' campaign, and for acting like they've got all the answers and no other point of view can ever be relevant.
__________________
:
Spending as long as I do here, it's easy to forget that Oddworld has actual fans.
I notice that prior to the 26/6 ruling, conservatives in politics were using every argument they could against marriage equality that did not mention anything religious. we all knew what their real reasons were, but they knew that using them as justification for legislature would be too overtly unconstitutional to ever work.
Now that they've lost, they're simply being open about their religious motivations and demonstrating just how far removed from reality their internal models really are.
I find catholic people who are pro-gay marriage even more stupid and hypocritic than regular catholic people. The old testament condemns homosexuality.
I don't.
The Bible also condemns people who wear mixed fabrics, eat shellfish, get angry with their brother, women wearing gold jewelry etc. I'd bet all those Christians against homosexuality because "it's a sin" have done at least three of these.
Religious people like to cherry pick the rules they follow, that's why religion is such a successful scam. People can make it fit to their own desires which happen to agree with some of the Bible's many rules. They're all hypocrites.
__________________
:
all Meechmunchie did by trying to troll me was distract from the fact you all have no regard for Hetro or their rights at all, none.
This is one area where I have never been able to agree with Nate. I think that dissecting those few mentions of homosexuality that are in the Bible to attempt to find loop holes is kind of silly. It's pretty clear what the people who wrote the thing felt about it. I just don't understand why anyone would care what the book has to say on the subject. It's all nonsense, anyway.
This is one area where I have never been able to agree with Nate. I think that dissecting those few mentions of homosexuality that are in the Bible to attempt to find loop holes is kind of silly. It's pretty clear what the people who wrote the thing felt about it. I just don't understand why anyone would care what the book has to say on the subject. It's all nonsense, anyway.
How is it clear in any way other than what I suggested?
__________________
:
Spending as long as I do here, it's easy to forget that Oddworld has actual fans.
How is it clear in any way other than what I suggested?
The people that wrote the book liked their prose, even though they aren't particularly good at it. They like to present their ideas with a bit of a flourish. So, saying that the "man lays with a man as he would with a woman" section doesn't make sense, or only precludes anal sex just seems a bit like reaching to me. It also seems like a waste of time. Because you are basically saying that the text actually does lay out the ways in which a person should live their life, but it isn't being interpreted correctly. It doesn't. It's drivel. That should be the focus. Not the interpretation.
The people that wrote the book liked their prose, even though they aren't particularly good at it. They like to present their ideas with a bit of a flourish. So, saying that the "man lays with a man as he would with a woman" section doesn't make sense, or only precludes anal sex just seems a bit like reaching to me. It also seems like a waste of time. Because you are basically saying that the text actually does lay out the ways in which a person should live their life, but it isn't being interpreted correctly. It doesn't. It's drivel. That should be the focus. Not the interpretation.
As a matter of practicality it's easier to make the world slightly less shit by convincing people not to take the hateful aspects seriously than it is to convince them that the whole thing is crap.
Well, different people respond better to different approaches.
Even if that's the case, there is so much reaching going on with that line of reasoning, that you are probably going to make the fundies feel even more secure in their case.
The thing about fundamentalists is, annoying as they are, they aren't automatically lost causes. I've met so many non-believers who used to be fundamentalists who were reasoned out of their views. They say that they were worth talking to.
I also imagine, when I speak to a fundamentalist, what I'm going to say to them if the next time I meet them they are atheist, and I was a complete asshole to them the last time we spoke. I got nothing.
Actually no, I was many stupid things, but a fundie I was not. Fuck you BM I was a moderate. A MODERATE I SAY.
A lot of people with shit world views can easily be made to see things more in line with how they really are, you just need to show them the reality of a situation and isolate them from people with like minded shit opinions.
__________________
:
Oh yeah, fair point. Maybe he was just tortured until he lost consciousness.
Fundies say the darndest things
