Israeli TV's blasphemous show sparks outrage

From the article below:

" People of the opposite sex are naturally attracted to one another, couple with each other, co-create children, and raise those children."

Most are, most are hetero, but a percentage naturally are not. If gay marriage were legal, then why do the heteros fear it so much? Would they then feel compelled to act on gay urges they currently keep in check because they deem gay attraction "unnatural?"

Heteros are naturally attracted to other Heteros, they have nothing to fear from gays, but so are gays naturally attracted to other gays in a small percentage of our society.

Most people are right handed, does this mean that left handed people should not have the same rights simply because they have a left handed preference over a right handed preference?

Do we outlaw scissors for lefties? Do we ban left handed baseball mitts? Or do we accommodate the difference because people should be free to throw from whatever hand they prefer?

What about the ambidextrous...are they to be condemned because they are bi and comfortable with either right or left handed relationships?

Gays should be denied the same right of marriage as heteros just because they are not attracted to the opposite sex?

Not a very "libertarian" argument at all...nor a free society.



Quote from Mom0/pH0x:

Marriage is a naturally occurring, pre-political institution that emerges spontaneously from society. Western society is drifting toward a redefinition of marriage as a bundle of legally defined benefits bestowed by the state. As a libertarian, I find this trend regrettable. The organic view of marriage is more consistent with the libertarian vision of a society of free and responsible individuals, governed by a constitutionally limited state. The drive toward a legalistic view of marriage is part of the relentless march toward politicizing every aspect of society.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/2939396.html
More...
 
I suspect it is rare that you have conversations with people who are not "your kind."

People felt the same way about blacks in the 50's and 60's. Many of them not black, many of them Jews and Christians and atheists, all of them understood the need for fairness to all human beings. All of them understood their own faith and ethnicity had been under attack at some point in the past by a majority against their "kind" so the understood the need for the minority to have a champion to help them fight passionately for their rights.

They were passionate about equality for all, but apparently that is not your "libertarian" way...

The real question in my mind is how a so called Libertarian could not be passionate about equal rights for all Americans, gay or straight, and desirous of granting the freedom to marry whomever a consenting adults wanted to in the sight of God and man.

Quote from Mom0/pH0x:

LOL rarely have i seen anyone as passionate about anything as you are about gay rights... why is that zzzenu?
More...
 
You sure do have some kind of need to talk about yourself...

Quote from Mom0/pH0x:

i have never argued against gay marriage, any more than in the context of which i have against straight marriage... i don't believe in marriage as a legal entity period, gay straight, whatever, i dont think the legal status should exist...

i don't know what your perception of ''my kind'' is, but i can assure you i have a VERY diverse group of friends, black, white, jew, gentile, latino, european, anglo, cathiolic, highschool dropouts to phds...and they ALL think pedophilia is disgusting....

i attended elite boarding schools and 95% black inner city highschools, community colleges and world class universities...

i have a rather diverse background and an even more diverse group of personal and professional acquaintances... and i can assure you that if i have a ''kind'' that the expanse of my social predilections extends well beyond it... and you know what?

oh, and again, i never said i was a libertarian...and yes, i think all americans should have freedom FROM marriage as a legal status...
More...
 
You see yourself as the subject of discussion?

"And they called the wind...Mariah"

Apparently "your kind" are narcissists for you think the subject of the discussion is you.

Quote from Mom0/pH0x:

yes, particularly when i am the subject of the discussion... kind of makes sense when you think about it...

alot more sense than you continually rushing to passionate defense of gay and pedophiles... now THERE'S a conundrum...
More...
 
momo has it right.

a true libertarian might say that gov' t should have nothing to do with marriage.

or you might say that marriage being between 1 man and 1 women is as old as government. it may have been the first government.

gays had a right to marry in CA for a few months due to an activist court. No one is taking rights away from gays. they have civil unions.

But that is a side argument. Only a fascist pretending to be tolerant would say that a religious person can not vote their informed conscience because it may have been influenced by the bible.

What a disgusting view of Amerca.

You can vote as long as you do not let the bible influence your vote. its laughable. Where do you think our laws come from. Vacuums of religious free zones.
 
So hypothetically speaking:

If Muslims became the majority in America, and voted though our system that Christians must obey Sharia Law, and that Christianity would be censured...you would be fine by that?

Just checking to see if you are consistent with your thinking...

Quote from jem:

momo has it right.

a true libertarian might say that gov' t should have nothing to do with marriage.

or you might say that marriage being between 1 man and 1 women is as old as government. it may have been the first government.

gays had a right to marry in CA for a few months due to an activist court. No one is taking rights away from gays. they have civil unions.

But that is a side argument. Only a fascist pretending to be tolerant would say that a religious person can not vote their informed conscience because it may have been influenced by the bible.

What a disgusting view of Amerca.

You can vote as long as you do not let the bible influence your vote. its laughable. Where do you think our laws come from. Vacuums of religious free zones.
More...
 
If the supreme court found that the majority vote is consistent with the constitution - that is the way it would be, it is why I suggest people need to well aware that immigration policies are of fundamental importance.

It is why I argue with liberal dopes about the need for respect for our history and the fact that america became great because of our people and our values. (in spite of our flaws).

When you go pulling Christian values out of America you will unlikely enjoy what replaces it. Like I said we are all ready reaping the rewards of the social engineering which started with the Supreme Court in the 1950s.

Our schools and our cities manifest the problems.

Thats my view, lets see your spin. I suspect you will choose a few examples of "intolerance and say we are better off"

I will then ask you to name a better country for those very same people you cited as being shit upon.
 
You gave your view, any more to add?



You have become a bitter resentment filled old man jem, and that is nobody's fault but your own. Life is moving forward and you are stuck in the past, it is a pretty sad and pathetic existence, filled with the rage of not being in control of life...and not getting any real sense of contentment from your own religion.

Here is my response to our being the "best country."

This is the face of America today:

<img src=http://beta.strangecosmos.com/images/content/2419.jpg>



Quote from jem:

If the supreme court found that the majority vote is consistent with the constitution - that is the way it would be, it is why I suggest people need to well aware that immigration policies are of fundamental importance.

It is why I argue with liberal dopes about the need for respect for our history and the fact that america became great because of our people and our values. (in spite of our flaws).

When you go pulling Christian values out of America you will unlikely enjoy what replaces it. Like I said we are all ready reaping the rewards of the social engineering which started with the Supreme Court in the 1950s.

Our schools and our cities manifest the problems.

Thats my view, lets see your spin. I suspect you will choose a few examples of "intolerance and say we are better off"

I will then ask you to name a better country for those very same people you cited as being shit upon.
More...
 
Far from it. I am making more money than I every have. I love being on the first page of google for many important terms. And my family life is fine. My only problem is that I am not working out enough so your picture scares me.

I just calling them as I see them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top