Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
There's no need to be thoughtful in response to just any old tripe.I'm struck by the very superficial response you've made to the article. Clearly, your aim in commenting on it is to be dismissive rather than thoughtful.
Selah.
You can't equate employees with slaves and expect the logic to carry over. This is absolutely not a reason to doubt accounts of the atrocities that occurred. Employees can leave. Employees have legal autonomy. Employees are recognized as human beings. Of course you aren't going to see the average boss doing something that will lose him his best employee or even land him in prison.
Biologically, yes, it was known that we're all of the same species. Culturally and legally speaking, no, only white men were given the full rights that were set aside for human citizens. Nothing ridiculous about the truth.Pretty much, the argument you put forward is that only white men were considered human beings until slavery and patriarchy ended. Which is ridiculous.
Biologically, yes, it was known that we're all of the same species. Culturally and legally speaking, no, only white men were given the full rights that were set aside for human citizens. Nothing ridiculous about the truth.
And patriarchy hasn't "ended," though I'm sure you'd disagree.
I do disagree, because whoever believes that patriarchy still exists here in our society is completely disconnected from reality.
You couldn't so much as provide a simple argument testifying to the contrary, and that's one of the many reasons why I basically conclude feminism as a mental illness.
Which "back then" are you referring to? I was under the impression that we were discussing the Antebellum. You're correct that land ownership was also a requirement, if that's what you meant, but the prerequisites were male and white.Human rights didn't exist back then, the one's with rights were the one's who built and protected their culture. They were their own right, you see. Very much different then today's society, where one can be sued for looking at somebody the wrong way.
There's no need to be thoughtful when the material is the same old garbage that's been refuted countless times.
There's no need to be thoughtful in response to just any old tripe.
You're welcome to read through the last 42 pages of this thread.So, where are these countless refutations? You certainly haven't offered any. It's kinda' intellectually lazy - if not dishonest - to respond as you have.
Well, fortunately, simply calling the article "tripe" doesn't make it so. It'll take more than your dismissive characterizations of Koukl's arguments to actually show that his arguments are, in fact, tripe.
Selah.
So that makes slavery OK?
It was ok when it was legal to do, just as it's ok to force people to do things now in violation of their religious beliefs because that's what the law tells them to do under the guise of "anti-discrimination". I say this because liberals seem to think the law is the final word on whether something is ok or not. Slavery was legal when it existed, so I guess it was ok.
What is anyone being forced to do in violation of their religious beliefs?
Baking a cake does not violate his religious beliefs.
Yeah, I guess you want to go in circles again. Just look at one of the many thread already discussing the cake topic. It's already been done to death.
Yeah, I guess you want to go in circles again. Just look at one of the many thread already discussing the cake topic. It's already been done to death.
Yea. And you're wrong about your position. All those threads just bolster that fact.
So what if the so-called "anti-discrimination" law didn't exist. Would refusing to bake a cake for a "gay marriage" ceremony be ok with you then?
]For me, no, it wouldn't be OK. But it would be legal.[/B] Alas, it is not.
What? No. Where did you get that idea?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?