Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Future of mankind at stake over gay marriage


  • Please log in to reply
308 replies to this topic

#61    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 December 2012 - 03:43 PM

View Post747400, on 23 December 2012 - 03:15 PM, said:

oh, try not to be silly.

Oh, try to discuss sociology matters if you know what that term means.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#62    Imaginarynumber1

Imaginarynumber1

    I am not an irrational number

  • Member
  • 4,862 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 23 December 2012 - 03:44 PM

View Postthe L, on 23 December 2012 - 03:42 PM, said:

Okay, I will repeat my question again from post 52.


Simply,
Could gay marriage open doors for other kinds of love marriages?

No. You're using a false equivalency.
Gay marriage opens the door for other kinds of marriage just as much as regular marriage does. The idea that allowing gay people to get married would lead to various other human-dog, human-lamp marriages is, to be honest, and incredibly offensive remark.

"A cat has nine lives. For three he plays, for three he strays, and for the last three he stays."


July 17th, 2008 (Full moon the next night)

RAPTORS! http://www.unexplain...pic=233151&st=0


#63    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 December 2012 - 03:46 PM

View PostDarkwind, on 23 December 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

A dog can't give consent because they don't speak human language, neither can dolphins. Nor can they sign a contract.  The excuse someone might want to marry their dog is a sad lame excuse for discrimination. It is like saying gay and lesbians are subhuman. There was a time when  interracial marriage was illegal, because blacks were considered subhuman by many people.

Some people think that animals are shouldnt be discriminated. That they are not sub. That they are not below on hierarchy.
That there isnt hierarchy between spicies. Life of worm is worth as life of elephant. Or as human.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#64    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 December 2012 - 03:48 PM

View PostImaginarynumber1, on 23 December 2012 - 03:44 PM, said:

No. You're using a false equivalency.
Gay marriage opens the door for other kinds of marriage just as much as regular marriage does. The idea that allowing gay people to get married would lead to various other human-dog, human-lamp marriages is, to be honest, and incredibly offensive remark.

Its called futurism. What if this happened could that possibly lead to this. And so on. No offence to anyone.

Edited by the L, 23 December 2012 - 03:51 PM.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#65    Imaginarynumber1

Imaginarynumber1

    I am not an irrational number

  • Member
  • 4,862 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 23 December 2012 - 03:51 PM

View Postthe L, on 23 December 2012 - 03:48 PM, said:

Its called futurusim. What if this happened could that possibly lead to this. And so on. No offence to anyone.

It's still a false equivalency. It's like saying that since a cat has four legs and a raccoon has four legs, I'm going to call them all cats. It's not a logical argument.
Allowing gay people to marry would never lead to animal marriages. Why would it? Why hasn't regular marriage? There's no difference.

"A cat has nine lives. For three he plays, for three he strays, and for the last three he stays."


July 17th, 2008 (Full moon the next night)

RAPTORS! http://www.unexplain...pic=233151&st=0


#66    FLOMBIE

FLOMBIE

    sapere aude

  • Member
  • 2,654 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seoul/Berlin

Posted 23 December 2012 - 03:58 PM

Furthermore, marriage grants you certain rights, as well as duties, which an animal simply cannot fulfil.


#67    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 December 2012 - 03:58 PM

Imanginarynumber

No it isnt. It is false equivalency to one who dont know to use imagination, dont know history of humanity and to person affraid to think so they would not get brain tumor from thinking.

Why regular marriage didnt lead to animal marriages? Because humanity wasnt ready for it. Humans must be prepared for some idea. Why didnt someone wrote Origins if idea was floating around from Ancient Greeks to Islam scientists to Lammarck?

Why heliocentrism waited till Copernicus even idea was floating around from time BC?

We humans must be prepared for idea. For example Im sure some idea people proposed here on UM which are now seen as alternative views would become hard core science in future.

Time is reason.

Edited by the L, 23 December 2012 - 03:58 PM.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#68    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:04 PM

So there is difference. Because without Lammarck we would never heard about Darwin.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#69    Daughter of the Nine Moons

Daughter of the Nine Moons

    ☆。Fearstriker Do'Teh 。☆

  • 14,496 posts
  • Joined:11 Jan 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:I forgot...

  • ☆彡

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:14 PM

Whoa....lets reign this one back in.

This topic is about the pope believing that gay marriage threatens the future of mankind.

My position  is this; mankind will not and cannot ever be threatened because marriage is not a requirement of procreation. Period.

One does not simply walk into Mordor.

#70    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:18 PM

Also its not how history works. I would say that USA is main contributor to same sex marriages. Its legal there and in many contries which are under western influence.
Remember that was legal to kill jew in Nazi Germany. History needs time distance from event to put final word on it. Legacy of it.  We dont even started gay marriages around the globe. We dont know will that day ever happened. When it does we need time distance to put final word on it. We know only saying foresights, imo.


Also I would on purpose choose whale because its very much different from us. Its big. Bigger then any dinosaur. No natural enemy except humans.
They sing. They play. They are social beings. They communicate by echolocation. This works by the sound waves produced by the killer whale bounce off of objects that are in the water. They return to the whale in the form of an echo. This helps them to determine the size, shape, speed, distance, direction and the internal structure of the object in the water.
Who can say that they dont have consciousness?

View PostDaughter of the Nine Moons, on 23 December 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

Whoa....lets reign this one back in.

This topic is about the pope believing that gay marriage threatens the future of mankind.

My position  is this; mankind will not and cannot ever be threatened because marriage is not a requirement of procreation. Period.

Okay I agree. We went offtopic. I apologize.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#71    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:22 PM

View PostDaughter of the Nine Moons, on 23 December 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

Whoa....lets reign this one back in.

This topic is about the pope believing that gay marriage threatens the future of mankind.

My position  is this; mankind will not and cannot ever be threatened because marriage is not a requirement of procreation. Period.

Thats just more likely prediction. Not a final word. Thats my view.

Edited by the L, 23 December 2012 - 04:23 PM.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#72    GreenmansGod

GreenmansGod

    Bio-Electric sentient being.

  • Member
  • 9,802 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Hurricane State

  • May the laughter ye give today return to thee 3 fold.

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:24 PM

View Postthe L, on 23 December 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

Imanginarynumber

No it isnt. It is false equivalency to one who dont know to use imagination, dont know history of humanity and to person affraid to think so they would not get brain tumor from thinking.


A logical fallacy has nothing to do with imagination.   I'll never understand why they don't teach Logic in high school. To say you can't have same sex marriage because it might lead to bestiality is the Logical Fallacy explained below.

http://www.logicalfa...y/equivocation/

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." Salman Rushdie

#73    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,048 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:26 PM

Gay marriage = End of mankind? No gay marriage = mankind doing great? I don't buy this.

Posted Image

~MEH~


#74    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:29 PM

View PostDarkwind, on 23 December 2012 - 04:24 PM, said:

A logical fallacy has nothing to do with imagination.   I'll never understand why they don't teach Logic in high school. To say you can't have same sex marriage because it might lead to bestiality is the Logical Fallacy explained below.

http://www.logicalfa...y/equivocation/

No I proposed question. second if you know history of human kind you would know that is VERY much logical question. Because when one see that one requirment for marriage is down could organize themselves and gain courage to ask for rights and shut down other requirments. Give people a chance and they will try to use it in own benefits.
So by knowing that there is people who are in love with animals I ask logical question.
Its not logical to people who are affraid of answer. And it has very much with imagination.

Logical Fallacy-As Hasina said. I dont buy this.
Fear of answer- :yes:

Dont ask those kind of question. It is not logic.

Suppression? Fear?

Edited by the L, 23 December 2012 - 04:35 PM.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#75    FLOMBIE

FLOMBIE

    sapere aude

  • Member
  • 2,654 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seoul/Berlin

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:37 PM

View Postthe L, on 23 December 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

No I proposed question. second if you know history of human kind you would know that is VERY much logical question. Because when one see that one requirment for marriage is down could organize themselves and gain courage to ask for rights and shut down other requirments. Give people a chance and they will try to use it in own benefits.
So by knowing that there is people who are in love with animals I ask logical question.
Its not logical to people who are affraid of answer. And it has very much with imagination.

Logical Fallacy-As Hasina said. I dont buy this.
Fear of answer- :yes:

Dont ask those kind of question. It is not logic.

Suppression? Fear?
I don't really see this. Women fought for their right to vote. Who is fighting for the animal's right to vote?

Your example was about Lamarck and Darwin, scientists, whose work is always (mostly) based on someone else's, and does not fit to this topic at all.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users