Homosexual Militancy

HannahBanana

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2006
9,840
457
36
Concord, MA
✟12,558.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
but all the bad people will be in prison when i come to power.
So just because someone wouldn't make a good parent, you would deem them "bad" and put them in prison without a second thought? How sad. :( You do realize that if you just put them in a rehab clinic instead of a prison, many of them would actually be able to recover from whatever is making them such an unfit parent, don't you?
 
Upvote 0

AirPo

with a Touch of Grey
Oct 31, 2003
26,359
7,214
60
✟169,357.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
but all the bad people will be in prison when i come to power.

This reminds me of an old Twilight Zone episode. Some zealot goes around telling everyone that god is going to punish all the evil people at exactly 4:00. He's going to shrink them all down to two feet tall. At 4:00, the zealot is quite suprised to find he is the only one who has been shrunk.
 
Upvote 0

MercuryAndy

Senior Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
4,525
37
33
Scotland
✟12,446.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
This reminds me of an old Twilight Zone episode. Some zealot goes around telling everyone that god is going to punish all the evil people at exactly 4:00. He's going to shrink them all down to two feet tall. At 4:00, the zealot is quite suprised to find he is the only one who has been shrunk.

:cry:bad people will be in prison. when they are good they will no longer be bad and let go...
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
It's a horrible law. What about impotent couples?

The most ironic thing ever - a soldier goes to war, is shot you know where, becomes incapable of having children. He cannot get married for more than 3 years suddenly.

Hilarity ensued.

Nota bene: the whole point is not to make a law, but to make a point. The activists are likely just trying to point out how ridiculous it is to establish a legal standing that denies certain rights/perks to some while maintaining them for others, and all without firm physical justification as to why the denial is allowable.

It is only on the table to make people think about their personal stance against gay marriage.

It is kind of like an argumentum ad absurdum. Take the argument to it's logical extreme and see if it is still defensible or see how it can be abused or made ridiculous.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

chalice_thunder

Senior Veteran
Jan 13, 2004
4,840
418
64
Seattle
Visit site
✟7,202.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The initiative would never pass but the most vocal among its critics will likely be the very people who are against gay marriage. That will be the best part. It will point out the real hypocrisy.

Besides, if most gay people feel they can't get a good shot at legalized marriages in most states, it costs them nothing to make everyone examine what is really meant by a marriage.

My wife and I have no kids, nor do we want any. Many of our friends who are in committed gay relationships would be better parents that we would. I never once questioned the validity of my marriage even though we both didn't want kids.

So in the end the brilliance of this proposal is to make people really ask the question "What do _I_ get from my marriage and why can't OTHERS have that?" I doubt there is are many couples out there who detest each other but simply want to make more christian babies. If there is, they should be locked up and kept out of the gene pool.

No one enters into marriage for the experess purposes of making more babies. They can do that without marriage. Marriage obviously means a lot more than just making kids.

So gay people can then ask "Why can't we have a committed relationship with appropriate recognition?" The only answer the right has been able to come up with is "Because you can't make babies" to disguise their hatred of homosexuals.

I've had enough with this "love the sinner but hate the sin" garbage. They hate the sinner.

Bravo for anyone who can make the rest of society actually think about why they reject gay marriage. Because ultimately they will accept it if they know why they are married.
AMEN!

Washington is no longer the Evergreen State - we are "THe Initiative State."

One particularly sinister minister is trying to get an initiative on the ballot to repeal the recently passed equal rights legislation. (It does not look like he's going to make it... :clap:)

This no-child initiative, I believe, comes partly in response to the attempts of the religious right to legislate their agenda on the rest of the state.
 
Upvote 0

chalice_thunder

Senior Veteran
Jan 13, 2004
4,840
418
64
Seattle
Visit site
✟7,202.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
yes, the homosexual militancy is getting ratcheted up a notch.

pretty soon i'll be marching down YOUR street in pink pumps and gold daisy dukes leading families out of their homes like a fruity pied paper down the yellow brick road towards the emerald city disco.
...a picture I would love to see!!!
 
Upvote 0

whatbogsends

Senior Veteran
Aug 29, 2003
10,370
8,314
Visit site
✟281,429.00
Faith
Atheist
It's a horrible law. What about impotent couples?

The most ironic thing ever - a soldier goes to war, is shot you know where, becomes incapable of having children. He cannot get married for more than 3 years suddenly.

Hilarity ensued.

It's kind of the whole point. The Christian argument against gay marriage is that God intended for people to procreate, and marriage is specifically intended to foster procreation. They follow this with the argument that since a gay couple can't procreate, they shouldn't be allowed to marry.

Hence, by proposing that all marriages must be for procreation - and finding opposition by the same people who are against gay marriage - it shows that the Christian argument is hollow, as it is more than the non-reproduction which is behind the anti-gay marriage movement.
 
Upvote 0

kermit

Legend
Nov 13, 2003
15,477
807
49
Visit site
✟27,358.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Nota bene: the whole point is not to make a law, but to make a point. The activists are likely just trying to point out how ridiculous it is to establish a legal standing that denies certain rights/perks to some while maintaining them for others, and all without firm physical justification as to why the denial is allowable.

It is only on the table to make people think about their personal stance against gay marriage.

It is kind of like an argumentum ad absurdum. Take the argument to it's logical extreme and see if it is still defensible or see how it can be abused or made ridiculous.
It quite ingengious, isn't it? This bill forces the anti-gay-marriage crowd to take a stance that is the opposite of the primary argument against gay marriage.

If procreation is the purpose of marriage and therefore excludes gay marriage it only follows that procreation is a requirement for marriage. Right?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums