SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,785
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on May 8, 2009 19:00:09 GMT -5
Why does murder have to be immoral to be outlawed? There's a perfectly legit argument that it is outlawed by society because no one would want to live in a society where it is condoned.
In other words, while I think almost everyone agrees it is immoral, there's also a practical component to it.
Not many people are going to stay in a town where there is no repercussions or determent of their own murder.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,910
|
Post by Filo on May 10, 2009 20:57:41 GMT -5
Not sure if any of you have read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, a very bright (and arrogant and condescending) British scientist who is probably most famous now for his anti-religion campaign. The book, which is basically centerd around Darwinism, is quite thought-provoking, even if you don't agree with a lot that he says or don't like his style. I lent my copy out, and I can't recall the details, but he dedicated a fair amount of space to trying to debunk the idea that religion is some sort or pre-requisite to morality in societies.
In fact, the book touches on lots of issues that have been discussed here.
|
|
SoCalHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
No es bueno
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by SoCalHoya on May 10, 2009 21:32:29 GMT -5
That's the same Richard Dawkins that is featured in this episode of South Park (mentioned in my earlier post in this thread): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_God_Go
|
|
|
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on May 12, 2009 15:36:02 GMT -5
Joan Rivers reveals the OTHER non-homophobic reason to be anti-gay marriage on Larry King Live: personal finance!
"Rivers: Can I say one thing quickly? King: Quick Rivers: Gay marriage, I am so against it because all my gay friends are out. And if they get married, it will cost me a fortune in gifts"
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Jan 13, 2010 12:36:12 GMT -5
A powerful, compelling and convincing argument by Olson. I have to say, he pretty much lays out my feelings on gay marriage more clearly than I could ever hope to articulate. From Newsweek, Ted Olson "The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage" www.newsweek.com/id/229957www.newsweek.com/id/229957/output/print#"Conservatives and liberals alike need to come together on principles that surely unite us. Certainly, we can agree on the value of strong families, lasting domestic relationships, and communities populated by persons with recognized and sanctioned bonds to one another. Confining some of our neighbors and friends who share these same values to an outlaw or second-class status undermines their sense of belonging and weakens their ties with the rest of us and what should be our common aspirations. Even those whose religious convictions preclude endorsement of what they may perceive as an unacceptable "lifestyle" should recognize that disapproval should not warrant stigmatization and unequal treatment."
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Jan 13, 2010 18:44:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jan 19, 2010 20:32:03 GMT -5
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Mar 3, 2010 14:14:36 GMT -5
It's legal in DC today.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Aug 4, 2010 19:11:41 GMT -5
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,785
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Aug 4, 2010 20:22:49 GMT -5
I love this quote:
""Judge Walker has ignored the written words of the constitution, which he swore to support and defend and be impartially faithful to, and has instead imposed his own homosexual agenda upon the voters, the parents and the children of California," he told the AFP news agency. "
Yes, damn those people who impose their agenda on other people...
|
|
afirth
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 289
|
Post by afirth on Aug 4, 2010 21:09:06 GMT -5
Prop 8 overturned. One more step on the inevitable road to SCOTUS Kennedy..... Fixed that for you In all seriousness, I believe Judge Walker's opinion was legally and constitutionally sound (should come as a shock to no one). Next year or so should be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Aug 4, 2010 21:13:02 GMT -5
Does anyone have any report of the undoubtedly long line of heterosexual couples now filing divorce papers due to the new threat posed by others to their marriages?
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 5, 2010 8:19:41 GMT -5
Using Judge Walker's logic, it is now legal for three people to marry one another.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Aug 5, 2010 8:27:24 GMT -5
Yeah, it's going to SCOTUS, everybody get ready to fight it out.
What I find more interesting is that, within two weeks, federal courts have struck down the Arizona law and Prop 8. No matter what your views on the issue, this seems total red meat for the Republican base, in both fundraising and voter turnout ("see what the radical left-wing is doing!").
Short version - Democrats are going to be in even more trouble in November than they already were.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,459
|
Post by TC on Aug 5, 2010 8:47:51 GMT -5
uot;). Short version - Democrats are going to be in even more trouble in November than they already were. I love the line of message board thinking that a political victory always means OOOOH, they're really in trouble now!
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Aug 5, 2010 8:59:18 GMT -5
I doubt this will actually be much of an election issue. Arizona? Definitely. This one? Not so much.
It will certainly be something used to fire up (read: raise gobs and gobs of money from) the social conservative base. And as long as we're talking political victories and such, let's not pretend that isn't a key component of winning elections.
But come November, I doubt this is even one of the top five issues voters say they're going to the polls for.
I could be wrong, just MHO.
Then again, maybe I'm just projecting, since I couldn't care less.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Aug 5, 2010 9:06:24 GMT -5
uot;). Short version - Democrats are going to be in even more trouble in November than they already were. I love the line of message board thinking that a political victory always means OOOOH, they're really in trouble now! Don't want to hijack this thread, but they're legal victories, not political ones - one involving decisions made by judges, the other being votes made by the general public. There have been a variety of cases where the decisions of the two don't coincide. Saying that a legal victory automatically equates to a political one doesn't track (see the 2004 election, where a few court cases focused on gay marriage led to a variety of ballot initiatives and jacked up social conservative turnout). Second, legal issues have historically been a big rallying point for money and turnout (Democrats used the confirmations of Roberts and Alito to tag big fundraising drives). People opposed to the legalization of gay marriage will, if history is any guide, have a spike in donations, volunteering, and turnout, especially as both decisions come relatively close to the election.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Aug 5, 2010 9:12:21 GMT -5
Using Judge Walker's logic, it is now legal for three people to marry one another. Yeah, those raging liberal Reagan appointees need to be stopped now!
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Aug 5, 2010 9:20:20 GMT -5
But hey, as long as we're all being snarky about it, we should probably discuss how one opponent of gay marriage plans to handle this crushing defeat.
What say you, Mr. President?
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Aug 5, 2010 9:32:28 GMT -5
But hey, as long as we're all being snarky about it, we should probably discuss how one opponent of gay marriage plans to handle this crushing defeat. What say you, Mr. President? Touche Seriously, I really don't care too much about the issue. As long as there's a legal equivalent to marriage open to gays (i.e. civil unions), I'm fine with it.
|
|