Remove Ad, Sign Up
Register to Remove Ad
Register to Remove Ad
Remove Ad, Sign Up
Register to Remove Ad
Register to Remove Ad
Signup for Free!
-More Features-
-Far Less Ads-
About   Users   Help
Users & Guests Online
On Page: 1
Directory: 118
Entire Site: 5 & 1054
Page Staff: pennylessz, pokemon x, Barathemos, tgags123, alexanyways, RavusRat,
03-29-24 05:14 AM

Thread Information

Views
2,765
Replies
23
Rating
2
Status
CLOSED
Thread
Creator
janus
07-02-15 06:06 PM
Last
Post
Celestial Knight
11-16-15 03:18 PM
Additional Thread Details
Views: 1,325
Today: 0
Users: 2 unique
Last User View
11-11-16
RDay13

Thread Actions

Thread Closed
New Thread
New Poll
Order
Posts


<<
2 Pages
 

Separating marriage and government

 

09-12-15 12:01 PM
janus is Offline
| ID: 1201909 | 49 Words

janus
SecureYourCodeDavid
Level: 124

POSTS: 1783/4808
POST EXP: 565097
LVL EXP: 21405423
CP: 62620.2
VIZ: 459058

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
Sword legion : "You don't need peer reviewed research when you can see what it does on your own."

Using that logic, I can assess that there is catastrophic, man-made globlal warming because it's too hot/cold/rainy/dry/stormy/normal. I can also assess that female drivers are dangerous based on observations I've made.
Sword legion : "You don't need peer reviewed research when you can see what it does on your own."

Using that logic, I can assess that there is catastrophic, man-made globlal warming because it's too hot/cold/rainy/dry/stormy/normal. I can also assess that female drivers are dangerous based on observations I've made.
Site Staff
YouTube Video Editor
the unknown


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 12-14-12
Location: Murica
Last Post: 43 days
Last Active: 6 hours

09-12-15 04:22 PM
Chindogu is Offline
| ID: 1201943 | 588 Words

Chindogu
Level: 68


POSTS: 999/1197
POST EXP: 82905
LVL EXP: 2648023
CP: 3326.1
VIZ: 126892

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
Sword legion : I'm glad we agree there are unhealthy relationships between straight people. Just what psychological problems does being in a same-sex relationship cause, might I enquire, since you keep bringing this point up. I am not a student of psycholoy so I am unable to properly guess at what your reffering to.

"Because of the nature of homosexual couples though, mostly in the fact they lack the proper tools to procreate. Then in taking other routes their body isn't designed to handle"
I'm addressing this point later on in my response.

I know just how different spicy foods are from homosexuality, I was merely reffering to how some people enjoy that sensation and how some do truly loath it. Perhaps it was not the best analogy to be made. It was, however, the only one I could think of at the time of writing though.

Yes, the body was not designed for anal penetration. There is no escaping this fact. On the other hand, the average vagina is not designed to take abnormally large phallic-like objects either, yet how many woman crave something larger than a normal man can offer? Sex is weird to say the least, everyone gets off to something different. Sometimes its the misuse of thier body. Most times its vanilla in its nature.

I said, and I quote: "Sexuality has been desribed as being somewhat fluid, changing as one ages and has different life experiences. Some kids might grow out of wanting a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex, others won't. Some are simply 'experimenting' and trying to find out who they are." I'll liken this to a facet of sexuality that changes in everyone as they age or have different life expierences: body type preference. Not exactly the same as gender preference, but its also apart of the spectrum that is sexuality.

The sex-drive is an annoying thing about puberty, the sudden introduction of such a powerful instict is hard to ignore. If only it made it easier for me to study and improve my skills rather than distract me from what is important... But was I "willing to hump anything" when I started to develop a sex-drive? No, far from. When I would look at a woman I did not feel anything sexualy, despite how much I wanted to. When I looked at that cute and skinny nerdy guy, though... Flash forward about seven years (I had an early puberty) and the only thing thats really changed is my body-type prefernce. I still do not find women sexually attractive whether they be beautiful, average, or ugly. I claim to be gay because thats what society has labeled my sexual attraction. Did I immediantly say I was gay when puberty started? No. I was hoping it was some wierd confusion or something, but after having these attractions not change from same-sex to opposite-sex after 5+ years I've finally accepted that I am gay. Therefore, I need to stop pretending that I am, at the very least, bi with a male preference. Call me certifibly crazy and I'll say madness adds a unique spice to life.

As I said before, even though mainstream psychology no longer regards homosexuality as a disorder you may continue to believe that it is. I will not try to sway your opinion.

Lets agree to disagree on overpopulation, I don't want this thread to go to off topic. It was a mistake of mine to mention it in the first place.

Well, I think that covers everything.
Sword legion : I'm glad we agree there are unhealthy relationships between straight people. Just what psychological problems does being in a same-sex relationship cause, might I enquire, since you keep bringing this point up. I am not a student of psycholoy so I am unable to properly guess at what your reffering to.

"Because of the nature of homosexual couples though, mostly in the fact they lack the proper tools to procreate. Then in taking other routes their body isn't designed to handle"
I'm addressing this point later on in my response.

I know just how different spicy foods are from homosexuality, I was merely reffering to how some people enjoy that sensation and how some do truly loath it. Perhaps it was not the best analogy to be made. It was, however, the only one I could think of at the time of writing though.

Yes, the body was not designed for anal penetration. There is no escaping this fact. On the other hand, the average vagina is not designed to take abnormally large phallic-like objects either, yet how many woman crave something larger than a normal man can offer? Sex is weird to say the least, everyone gets off to something different. Sometimes its the misuse of thier body. Most times its vanilla in its nature.

I said, and I quote: "Sexuality has been desribed as being somewhat fluid, changing as one ages and has different life experiences. Some kids might grow out of wanting a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex, others won't. Some are simply 'experimenting' and trying to find out who they are." I'll liken this to a facet of sexuality that changes in everyone as they age or have different life expierences: body type preference. Not exactly the same as gender preference, but its also apart of the spectrum that is sexuality.

The sex-drive is an annoying thing about puberty, the sudden introduction of such a powerful instict is hard to ignore. If only it made it easier for me to study and improve my skills rather than distract me from what is important... But was I "willing to hump anything" when I started to develop a sex-drive? No, far from. When I would look at a woman I did not feel anything sexualy, despite how much I wanted to. When I looked at that cute and skinny nerdy guy, though... Flash forward about seven years (I had an early puberty) and the only thing thats really changed is my body-type prefernce. I still do not find women sexually attractive whether they be beautiful, average, or ugly. I claim to be gay because thats what society has labeled my sexual attraction. Did I immediantly say I was gay when puberty started? No. I was hoping it was some wierd confusion or something, but after having these attractions not change from same-sex to opposite-sex after 5+ years I've finally accepted that I am gay. Therefore, I need to stop pretending that I am, at the very least, bi with a male preference. Call me certifibly crazy and I'll say madness adds a unique spice to life.

As I said before, even though mainstream psychology no longer regards homosexuality as a disorder you may continue to believe that it is. I will not try to sway your opinion.

Lets agree to disagree on overpopulation, I don't want this thread to go to off topic. It was a mistake of mine to mention it in the first place.

Well, I think that covers everything.
Trusted Member

Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 01-17-13
Last Post: 2530 days
Last Active: 1769 days

09-14-15 12:29 AM
Changedatrequest is Offline
| ID: 1202279 | 435 Words


Txgangsta
Level: 57


POSTS: 477/789
POST EXP: 104913
LVL EXP: 1409131
CP: 2185.3
VIZ: 149875

Likes: 1  Dislikes: 0
Sanctity of Marriage was destroyed when no-fault divorce was allowed.

Western bureaucracy is inefficient and expensive. Homosexual marriage just adds more paperwork where there should be none (including heterosexual marriage). If we want to concentrate on a socialized economy (medicine, welfare, wealth redistribution, etc), we cannot also concentrate on social issues(marriage, drugs, guns, FDA, environment, etc). It ends up becoming cumbersome.

Homosexuality is obviously a defect of the organism. Even homosexuals can understand this. A species is evolutionary "fit" when it can survive in it's environment and reproduce. Homosexuality does not lead to reproduction, and therefore is a kind of flaw. (Many homosexuals do actually have kids, but this is rare-ish and does not stem from their homosexual tendencies.)

However, this objection carries no moral weight. Someone could embrace this kind of flaw and then respond "so what?" and an evolutionary argument can make no counter-objection. This is because evolution does not have an "ought". There is no ethics within a purely evolutionary worldview. If you wish to embrace both "ought" and evolution, you need teleology. Teleology is a worldview that contains proper functions for individual objects. Aristotle's old example is that an acorn's function is to become a fully-grown oak. This is often assumed in modern medicine, saying that the heart is "supposed" to do this, the liver is "supposed" to do that, and if it isn't functioning correctly, it is called diseased. A good acorn is one that most easily becomes a fully-grown oak. A good heart is one that performs it's regular functions and overcomes any disturbances to them. A good liver has no trouble filtering out the toxins in the body.

This is my objection to homosexuality. Our species sexuality is "supposed" to do a few things. Homosexuality is a corruption of this function. The easiest (though not the best) example is procreation. The sexual function of a species (any species) is to procreate. This does not happen between two people of the same gender. I, however, find that out too easy. The best objection (and sadly the most difficult to convince) is romantic love, a function of two rational animals of opposing genders in accordance with their intellect and will. At this point I'm not going to elaborate. I'd have to define a lot of terms and essentially convince everyone of Thomistic metaphysics prior to making the argument. Also, it's pretty off topic. Instead, I leave my argument in this basic form.

Back to politics: there is no reason why the government needs to do so much paperwork. This isn't social justice, it's a further corruption of an efficient government.
Sanctity of Marriage was destroyed when no-fault divorce was allowed.

Western bureaucracy is inefficient and expensive. Homosexual marriage just adds more paperwork where there should be none (including heterosexual marriage). If we want to concentrate on a socialized economy (medicine, welfare, wealth redistribution, etc), we cannot also concentrate on social issues(marriage, drugs, guns, FDA, environment, etc). It ends up becoming cumbersome.

Homosexuality is obviously a defect of the organism. Even homosexuals can understand this. A species is evolutionary "fit" when it can survive in it's environment and reproduce. Homosexuality does not lead to reproduction, and therefore is a kind of flaw. (Many homosexuals do actually have kids, but this is rare-ish and does not stem from their homosexual tendencies.)

However, this objection carries no moral weight. Someone could embrace this kind of flaw and then respond "so what?" and an evolutionary argument can make no counter-objection. This is because evolution does not have an "ought". There is no ethics within a purely evolutionary worldview. If you wish to embrace both "ought" and evolution, you need teleology. Teleology is a worldview that contains proper functions for individual objects. Aristotle's old example is that an acorn's function is to become a fully-grown oak. This is often assumed in modern medicine, saying that the heart is "supposed" to do this, the liver is "supposed" to do that, and if it isn't functioning correctly, it is called diseased. A good acorn is one that most easily becomes a fully-grown oak. A good heart is one that performs it's regular functions and overcomes any disturbances to them. A good liver has no trouble filtering out the toxins in the body.

This is my objection to homosexuality. Our species sexuality is "supposed" to do a few things. Homosexuality is a corruption of this function. The easiest (though not the best) example is procreation. The sexual function of a species (any species) is to procreate. This does not happen between two people of the same gender. I, however, find that out too easy. The best objection (and sadly the most difficult to convince) is romantic love, a function of two rational animals of opposing genders in accordance with their intellect and will. At this point I'm not going to elaborate. I'd have to define a lot of terms and essentially convince everyone of Thomistic metaphysics prior to making the argument. Also, it's pretty off topic. Instead, I leave my argument in this basic form.

Back to politics: there is no reason why the government needs to do so much paperwork. This isn't social justice, it's a further corruption of an efficient government.
Banned

Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-04-13
Last Post: 2595 days
Last Active: 2592 days

Post Rating: 1   Liked By: janus,

11-16-15 03:18 PM
Celestial Knight is Offline
| ID: 1219739 | 181 Words

Level: 20


POSTS: 17/79
POST EXP: 14722
LVL EXP: 38846
CP: 777.0
VIZ: 1829

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
janus : I think the government has gotten so much  involved with marriage because the LGBT community has made claims that their constitutional rights have been violated, now let me start off by saying this while I personally feel as though Gay marriage is completely wrong and down right disgusting under the constitution they do have the right to practice that kind of immoral behavior, But while they have the right to practice it, most churches will not and refuse to carry/condone a "Homosexual wedding" because in the old testament marriage is a spiritual and sacred bond between a MAN and WOMAN and homosexuality is considered a "Sin". Now with that said the LGBT community complained and won that there rights were technically violated because they weren't allowed to be married now  rather or not a public servant should issue the license I think they should because technically there is suppose to be a separation between church and state, and while it pains me to say it they LGBT community has the right to marry and that right is recognized under the law. 
janus : I think the government has gotten so much  involved with marriage because the LGBT community has made claims that their constitutional rights have been violated, now let me start off by saying this while I personally feel as though Gay marriage is completely wrong and down right disgusting under the constitution they do have the right to practice that kind of immoral behavior, But while they have the right to practice it, most churches will not and refuse to carry/condone a "Homosexual wedding" because in the old testament marriage is a spiritual and sacred bond between a MAN and WOMAN and homosexuality is considered a "Sin". Now with that said the LGBT community complained and won that there rights were technically violated because they weren't allowed to be married now  rather or not a public servant should issue the license I think they should because technically there is suppose to be a separation between church and state, and while it pains me to say it they LGBT community has the right to marry and that right is recognized under the law. 
Perma Banned

Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 11-11-15
Last Post: 3043 days
Last Active: 3043 days

Links

Page Comments


This page has no comments

Adblocker detected!

Vizzed.com is very expensive to keep alive! The Ads pay for the servers.

Vizzed has 3 TB worth of games and 1 TB worth of music.  This site is free to use but the ads barely pay for the monthly server fees.  If too many more people use ad block, the site cannot survive.

We prioritize the community over the site profits.  This is why we avoid using annoying (but high paying) ads like most other sites which include popups, obnoxious sounds and animations, malware, and other forms of intrusiveness.  We'll do our part to never resort to these types of ads, please do your part by helping support this site by adding Vizzed.com to your ad blocking whitelist.

×