Page 4 of 48 FirstFirst 123456789101114 ... LastLast
Results 40 to 52 of 616
  1. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by exreo View Post
    Well what if I was a middle school teacher and I wanted to poke 14-year-olds girls? I just want to be free to live as I choose. Where do you libertarians draw the line? Or do you?
    You draw the line where you do not have the right to violate someone else's rights. Two consenting adults? No one should have a problem because thats their choice. An adult manipulating, or using violence against a minor? I have said before on this board what I think should happen to them, and it's not "PC". You can't fix people whom are willing to harm children for their own pleasure. In my opinion if you convict them and the evidence is certain only capital punishment will keep them from doing it again.

    Exreo libertarian principals stem from the non aggression principle and the idea of self ownership.

    Here is a quick primer Exreo


  2. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,395
    Quote Originally Posted by hearthman View Post
    You're usually pretty bright, too JP but I'm actually basing this off of actual cases where nutty people have tried to obtain a legal marriage to a car and to a pet. These cases were in the news. Now, even most liberals would agree these are pretty absurd but not all. This is my point: the lines of sanity have been crossed a while back. There is no sanctity of marriage anymore. Rather, morality, virtue and values have been thrown out the window. Nobody seems to notice that as fast as the Left is fighting to destroy the values that built our society, it is crumbling without them .

    That concludes today's lesson.

    I'm aware of those cases as well.

    They were thrown out of court for the exact reason that I stated, validating my point and invalidating yours.



    Marriage, as a concept, pre-dates any current religion, so your religious morality construct has no authority to define it.

  3. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,395
    Quote Originally Posted by exreo View Post
    Really, you see nothing wrong with one guy putting his device in another guy's hairy rectum? Then, there is an ending to it, and I don't even want to discuss that. But you have no problem with that huh?
    I have no desire to perform the act myself.

    If two other dudes want to do the bone dance, however, and both are of age and consent to the act, it is beyond me to try to stop them.

  4. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,395
    Quote Originally Posted by exreo View Post
    Well what if I was a middle school teacher and I wanted to poke 14-year-olds girls? I just want to be free to live as I choose. Where do you libertarians draw the line? Or do you?
    A 14 year old girl cannot legally give consent, making this an illegal act.

  5. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    432
    Marriage is a religious notion. I think it should stay religious.

    Civil partnerships are, I think, superior, they do not invoke gods, they are pure and honest human constructs of devotion and all that we expect would go with a partnership worked at by all partners.

    The notion of gods being involved adds nothing but potential misery to the institution of partnerships.

  6. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,395
    Quote Originally Posted by thermophysics View Post
    Marriage is a religious notion. I think it should stay religious.

    Civil partnerships are, I think, superior, they do not invoke gods, they are pure and honest human constructs of devotion and all that we expect would go with a partnership worked at by all partners.

    The notion of gods being involved adds nothing but potential misery to the institution of partnerships.
    http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/0...prising-facts/

    Marriage has only recently invoked gods and religion.

    Marriage is the human extension of what is called "pair bonding" in the animal kingdom. In our arrogance, we've attached great significance to a simple biological imperative.

  7. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,395
    Quote Originally Posted by air1 View Post
    In the old testament they did some of the things you listed.

    What business does the State have getting involved in marriages ? It's basically a legal contract. The moral issue is a personal one and the State has no business getting involved in personal moral issues as long as it does not harm anyone else.
    Your argument shoots itself in the foot.

    The "state" is the arbiter of laws. Contracts are legal devices. Therefore, the state is involved in the execution and enforcement of this contract.


    To those who would have the Church define marriage and completely exempt the state from marriage, are you willing to sacrifice your tax breaks, insurance benefits and the like?

    I doubt it.

  8. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by jpsmith1cm View Post
    Your argument shoots itself in the foot.

    The "state" is the arbiter of laws. Contracts are legal devices. Therefore, the state is involved in the execution and enforcement of this contract.


    To those who would have the Church define marriage and completely exempt the state from marriage, are you willing to sacrifice your tax breaks, insurance benefits and the like?

    I doubt it.
    Religious folk are in a catch 22 with this JP. Either it has nothing to do with religion and what their religion says will have no bearing on the laws surrounding it, or its a religious institution and the government can't make laws concerning it and thus gay people simply have to establish their own church to be married.

  9. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Elfshadow View Post
    Religious folk are in a catch 22 with this JP. Either it has nothing to do with religion and what their religion says will have no bearing on the laws surrounding it, or its a religious institution and the government can't make laws concerning it and thus gay people simply have to establish their own church to be married.
    I'm well aware of the catch-22.

    See, this isn't too far removed from the circular Sandra Fluke argument that stated "stay out of my womb, but subsidize my birth control"

    Now, it is the other side arguing "leave my church alone, but make marriage what my church says it is"


    Can't have it both ways, folks.

  10. #49
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Posts
    1,942
    Quote Originally Posted by jpsmith1cm View Post
    I'm well aware of the catch-22.

    See, this isn't too far removed from the circular Sandra Fluke argument that stated "stay out of my womb, but subsidize my birth control"

    Now, it is the other side arguing "leave my church alone, but make marriage what my church says it is"


    Can't have it both ways, folks.
    What are the both ways? I just don't understand your argument here. From my point of view, God invented sex and He laid down the ground rules for how it is suppossed to work. There are penalties if you violate those rules. Yes, the rules have changed over time. Solomon had what, 800 wives? At least by the time of Christ, the rules were 1 man and 1 woman. Not only that, but sexual relations were to be limited until such a union was made in marriage. Homosexuality is clearly forbidden according to Romans 1 and even well before that in the description of the city of Sodom in the Old Testament. It is the U.S. government that has challenged the Biblical definition of marriage. My position is unchanged. I only want to have it one way, and that is the Bibilical way. I was just watching Fox News, and they showed two women kissing in a marriage ceremony. I had a grimmace on my face and shook my head and reached for the remote to turn the channel as fast as possible. I find this at least as repulsive as watching pornography. Please help me to understand what the "both ways" that "church" people like myself want. I only want it one way--the Biblical way.

  11. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by exreo View Post
    What are the both ways? I just don't understand your argument here. From my point of view, God invented sex and He laid down the ground rules for how it is suppossed to work. There are penalties if you violate those rules. Yes, the rules have changed over time. Solomon had what, 800 wives? At least by the time of Christ, the rules were 1 man and 1 woman. Not only that, but sexual relations were to be limited until such a union was made in marriage. Homosexuality is clearly forbidden according to Romans 1 and even well before that in the description of the city of Sodom in the Old Testament. It is the U.S. government that has challenged the Biblical definition of marriage. My position is unchanged. I only want to have it one way, and that is the Bibilical way. I was just watching Fox News, and they showed two women kissing in a marriage ceremony. I had a grimmace on my face and shook my head and reached for the remote to turn the channel as fast as possible. I find this at least as repulsive as watching pornography. Please help me to understand what the "both ways" that "church" people like myself want. I only want it one way--the Biblical way.
    I don't see any difference between your biblical and Sharia Law. Your biblical way holds no merit in the eyes of the law in a nation where one of the founding principles was the separation of church and state.

    You have no more right to impose your beliefs on others then Muslims do.

    You made the right choice when faced with something repulsive to you, you turned the channel. That is your right.

  12. #51
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,395
    Quote Originally Posted by exreo View Post
    What are the both ways? I just don't understand your argument here. From my point of view, God invented sex and He laid down the ground rules for how it is suppossed to work. There are penalties if you violate those rules. Yes, the rules have changed over time. Solomon had what, 800 wives? At least by the time of Christ, the rules were 1 man and 1 woman. Not only that, but sexual relations were to be limited until such a union was made in marriage. Homosexuality is clearly forbidden according to Romans 1 and even well before that in the description of the city of Sodom in the Old Testament. It is the U.S. government that has challenged the Biblical definition of marriage. My position is unchanged. I only want to have it one way, and that is the Bibilical way. I was just watching Fox News, and they showed two women kissing in a marriage ceremony. I had a grimmace on my face and shook my head and reached for the remote to turn the channel as fast as possible. I find this at least as repulsive as watching pornography. Please help me to understand what the "both ways" that "church" people like myself want. I only want it one way--the Biblical way.
    God made homosexuals, too.

    Your argument falls apart when you slowly realize that to be true.

    If He created them, then they cannot be all that wrong, now can they.


    As to my comment about "both ways" you cannot cry about government intervention in your church, then cry FOR government intervention when it suits you.

    Marriage, as I said before, predates all religions, least of all the youngster of the group, Christianity. The argument of religion as a "sacrament" is a foolish one at best.

  13. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SW MO.
    Posts
    5,181
    As to my comment about "both ways" you cannot cry about government intervention in your church, then cry FOR government intervention when it suits you.
    Someone with morals needs to run this country

Page 4 of 48 FirstFirst 123456789101114 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event