Just because you're not religious doesn't mean the religious agenda hasn't helped shape your beliefs. Like I said, they've done a helluva job over the last 2000 years.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/19/2013 10:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/19/2013 7:59:00 AM (view original):
Are we back to this?  The 1967 decision did not change the basic definition of marriage of "one man, one woman".    Not a precedent and not really comparable.

But let's go back to this:
"Offense is not harm"

The grown men are peppering a lone small black child with racial insults.    Pretty offensive but not harmful, right?    After all, the kid is only having to see/hear things he's been taught as wrong.   But as "offense is not harm", he's not harmed, right?

But it did change the definition of marriage. So it's relevant.

I think that child would be harmed. Allow me to revise, offense isn't necessarily harm. That kid is being bullied at a young age by adults. That's abuse and we know that it is harmful in ways that go beyond offense. Please show how people are harmed by being offended by gay marriage.

It did not change the basic, universally accepted definition of "one man, one woman".

If a parent has taught his child that homosexuality is an abberant behavior, right or wrong and for whatever reason, he will now being seeing his government approve of said behavior.     Is that so much different than a child being subjected to seeing/hearing things he's been taught as wrong? 

Posted by The Taint on 6/19/2013 10:11:00 AM (view original):
Just because you're not religious doesn't mean the religious agenda hasn't helped shape your beliefs. Like I said, they've done a helluva job over the last 2000 years.

Can I say "Just because you're not gay it doesn't mean the gay agenda hasn't helped shape your beliefs"?

Because, quite honestly, I think that sounds kind of dumb but it's an apples to apples comparison.

I have no doubt the gay agenda has helped shape my beliefs.

I'm not even sure there is a gay agenda but OK. 

Bingo Long's Traveling All Star Circus and Motor Kings helped shape my beliefs about racism.  Everything we do see or hear help shape our beliefs.  Its up to us to use critical thinking to decide right from wrong and where we stand on issues.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/19/2013 10:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/19/2013 10:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/19/2013 7:59:00 AM (view original):
Are we back to this?  The 1967 decision did not change the basic definition of marriage of "one man, one woman".    Not a precedent and not really comparable.

But let's go back to this:
"Offense is not harm"

The grown men are peppering a lone small black child with racial insults.    Pretty offensive but not harmful, right?    After all, the kid is only having to see/hear things he's been taught as wrong.   But as "offense is not harm", he's not harmed, right?

But it did change the definition of marriage. So it's relevant.

I think that child would be harmed. Allow me to revise, offense isn't necessarily harm. That kid is being bullied at a young age by adults. That's abuse and we know that it is harmful in ways that go beyond offense. Please show how people are harmed by being offended by gay marriage.

It did not change the basic, universally accepted definition of "one man, one woman".

If a parent has taught his child that homosexuality is an abberant behavior, right or wrong and for whatever reason, he will now being seeing his government approve of said behavior.     Is that so much different than a child being subjected to seeing/hearing things he's been taught as wrong? 

Because one man/one women wasn't being debated then. It's being debated now. It changed another aspect of the definition of marriage.

That's significantly different than direct abuse of a seven year. It's sad (and a little disturbing) that you don't see the difference.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/19/2013 10:16:00 AM (view original):
I'm not even sure there is a gay agenda but OK. 

Well I'm not also...and I use the term religious agenda mockingly really...and not at you or Tec.  

I have been around a lot of homosexuals in my life though, including one of my best friends growing up with two "dads", and now watching one of my best high school friends grow her family with another woman.  They all seem pretty damn normal to me.  Just being influenced by these things leads me to believe that if gay people want to get married, have at it.  Can't **** up the sanctity of marriage anymore than straight people have.  Who am I to tell them no?


What kills me is how many failed marriages and infidelities the politicians that are trying to make marriage policy have been involved in.  It's pretty crazy.

OK, if it makes you happier, the grown men aren't directing their racially charged words towards the child.   He just happens to be hearing them being said.  Over and over again while his government approves of said language.    No harm?

No harm.

Do you think that should be illegal? Because gay marriage is less offensive than white adults saying the N word around a black child.

Just because you're not religious doesn't mean the religious agenda hasn't helped shape your beliefs.

I'm sure a variety of things have shaped most people's beliefs. So what?

I'm not even sure there is a gay agenda but OK.

Part of the goal of the homosexual agenda is to deny its own existence. Don't be fooled - it exists, because without it there is no way the push for things like SSM would even be there.

The so what is that bias against homosexuality is entirely rooted in religion.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/19/2013 10:28:00 AM (view original):
No harm.

Do you think that should be illegal? Because gay marriage is less offensive than white adults saying the N word around a black child.

I'm going to call bullshit on your answer.

Children are impressionable.   Adults saying "The little N over there..." and "Those stupid N at work..." will either lead the child to believe A) the word is acceptable or B) there is truth behind the statements.   Self-esteem drops and what their parents have taught them is questioned.

I won't make a call on how offensive either situation is to everyone.   People believe in different things.   How does SSM improve society?

As much as love your neighbor is preached, there is very little tolerance in religion. 

Posted by The Taint on 6/19/2013 10:31:00 AM (view original):
The so what is that bias against homosexuality is entirely rooted in religion.

Source?