Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (470279)	4/10/2009 8:44:23 AM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574103

What's the "gay agenda?" Spreading the idea morality has no sexual component. Correct. Which is why I'm making true allegations He lies. He calls people who disagree with him hateful bigots. Thats an allegation. >Illicit promiscuity becoming common is not the same as becoming acceptable. Not acceptable to you, maybe. But many people think it's OK now. And it should be. Good. Admitting that illicit promiscuity should be acceptable. Thats an agenda. A moral one. Or immoral depending on how you look at it. Z views acceptance of illicit promiscuity as a moral value. And he wants others to accept this view too. >Families are broken, children are harmed, people engage in bitter divorce, fatherless children are common, social ills are directly tied to this. Yeah. But casual sex doesn't lead to these things if handled responsibly. Actually it usually does. Z's in denial here.

To: SilentZ who wrote (470279)	4/10/2009 10:43:09 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574103

Remarkable response Z. There is very little in your post that doesn’t deserve a great deal of thought and consideration, and there are several separate items that would make great topics for long discussion. I will have to just pick one item to deal with now and maybe others later. …>Nope. If you are a soldier shooting your gun it is not true that you are finger painting. Simple as that. < "What? Wow. Non sequitur City. We're in the outer reaches of Wingnuttia here..." I’m not surprised you don’t get the relevance. Until you do, we are just talking past each other. You saying I don’t want gays to have the life they choose… me saying I don’t care what life other people choose (qualifier: as long as it isn’t harming others)… The word Marriage is a separate issue. But the gun/finger painting point is the bull’s eye of that issue. I have asked myself, why Marriage? And I have answered that question for myself. I have challenged you and others on it and your response is, discrimination, bigotry, segregation, equal rights, and a slew of things related to the gay community including even the death of Mathew Shepard. Of course all of these issues are real and should be taken serious, but none of them have anything to do with the word Marriage. You have agreed with me, after quite a bit of wrangling that Gays are not denied equal opportunity, are not segregated, and though they may be hated by some straights, that is not related to Marriage. There are people in every group who hate the people in other groups. So why the word Marriage if it does not change relationships on the ground? Why not civil unions, cohabitation, civil partnership, human merger, melding, or any other synonymous term? You’ve said the damn paper doesn’t really matter. What matters so much about the term Marriage? I know, so do you. I am just willing to say it. … the hetero traditions are identified by that term. …>No one is forbidden to do what they want. The question is a definitional one. Marriage defines a traditional relationship.< "To you." To anyone who is honest with themselves and others. ...>If you are a soldier shooting your gun it is not true that you are finger painting. Simple as that.<... If you are a gay couple you are not doing what a traditional hetero couple is about and that is where the term Marriage is founded. Simple as that. The fact that you and others don't relate to that traditional stuff is irrelevant.

To: SilentZ who wrote (470279)	4/14/2009 11:18:09 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574103

>Families are broken, children are harmed, people engage in bitter divorce, fatherless children are common, social ills are directly tied to this. ”Yeah. But casual sex doesn't lead to these things if handled responsibly." Gluttony in moderation is no problem. Do you purge? Torture when committed with kindness and consideration is not harmful. You are, after all, martyring someone to be blessed eternally. Stealing, when a victimless crime, is helpful. Do you donate to the Salvation Army? A just murder probably removes someone bad from the world. Of course, we all have a conscience and so we know when we are lying to ourselves, don’t we.