We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing
analytics and serving ads.
Learn More
Forums → WEPR → Homosexuality
| 704 | 68093 |
Since this topic hasn't been popping up much, and since the old threads are all so cluttered up, I took the liberty of creating this new one.
So yes, someone asked me for sources about my claims that 1500 species of animals practice homosexual behaviour? Here.
Source 1
Source 2
Now on to one of the sub questions. Is it natural? Well, someone mentioned that it wasn't natural only for humans. Now, why this discrimination? If the Gods of various religions keep throwing and creating people who are homosexual, either a) They're bad factory operators or b) Something is fishy with whatever anti-gay talk religious conservatives swear is sacred.
- 704 Replies
A legally recognized union of a same-sex couple, with rights similar to those of marriage, or to put it more simply, gay marriage.
I think conflating these terms is problematic. The term 'marriage' has historically been viewed as a religiously recognized ceremony. While the definition itself has changed, the public opinion for the most part hasn't. If you're stumping for civil unions, that's all well and good. But I wonder if such a position is tenable, since it falls under the auspices of 'separate but equal'.
In fact, there are many gay rights groups that reject the notion of a civil union for similar reasons (although more complex issues do crop up). That's not to say, however, that there aren't plenty of gay couples who would be very satisfied with a civil union.
Still, the issue is complex and I would stump for one or the other. Trying to say that gay marriage and civil unions are the same thing is a tough argument in itself.
America was created off of the concept of the majority ruling but not at the expense of the minority.
I'm not sure this is right. I mean, we'd certainly like it to be right. But looking at the 236-year long history of the country (and the actions of the early European settlers who later became Americans) I just don't think this claim can withstand scrutiny.
Not allowing gay couples to marry is pretty much the same thing as not allowing Blacks or Hispanics to marry.
I don't think this is the way you want to go here. The analogy is weak. Minorities simply lacked the rights of whites altogether.
But my criticisms aside, I think you make a very strong, well-written argument. You undercut the opposition's arguments, and the essay flows quite well. I hope you received high marks for your assignment.
Some people here are saying that Same sex marriage is only frowned upon by religious people. I wouldn't say that. Some religious people thin it should be legal while some don't. Same goes for atheists, some think it is wrong some think it is good. Some say Only christians are against it and that it violates the first ammendment because it has to do with religion. The truth is,it is just considered common sense not to allow homosexuality. If you go to some christian usualy he will say it is against his beliefs. On the radio there was a discussion about homosexuality mostly christians came up expressing their views, but then some ateist comes up and say, "Well i'm not a christian, but to me I believe it is common sense not to allow homosexuality. It has been immoral for thousands of years and I think it is immoral today."
The truth is,it is just considered common sense not to allow homosexuality.
Give me one solid reason why homosexuality is "immoral". Don't just invoke "common sense".
As a matter of fact some studies have shown that the majority thinks that marriages between lesbian and gay couples should be recognized as legal. Thus, its not really so "common sense"
Poll: Majority supports gay marriage
It has been immoral for thousands of years and I think it is immoral today.
Not that accurate and even if it was it's still poor reasoning. With such reasoning one could argue slavery is okay because it was practiced for thousands of years.
it is just considered common sense not to allow homosexuality.
not where i come from.
homosexuality is seen as normal by prety much every1 around here.
It has been immoral for thousands of years and I think it is immoral today."
no homosexuality was seen as normal in history aswell. and in some times it even was a way to worship a god.
tbh the oldest known record of human homosexuality is that it was used to worship a god.
Minorities
the homosexual community are minorites.
I think conflating these terms is problematic. The term 'marriage' has historically been viewed as a religiously recognized ceremony.
if you read the whole thing, i explained why marriage isnta religious ceremony.
its not an argument haha, its just what it is.
Not that accurate and even if it was it's still poor reasoning. With such reasoning one could argue slavery is okay because it was practiced for thousands of years.
Many Christians argue that morality does not evolve (gah, that evil word again). Hence, by that logic every action that was considered immoral centuries ago should be still considered immoral.
Many Christians argue that morality does not evolve (gah, that evil word again). Hence, by that logic every action that was considered immoral centuries ago should be still considered immoral.
And every action that was considered moral should still be considered moral. Since that's clearly not the case so much for that idea.
easy example:
50 years ago, smoking was seen as a good social thing to do.
today, smoking is seen as the cancer producing bad habit.
morals change
Rejoice my friends, Maryland now allows same sex marriage!
Rejoice my friends, Maryland now allows same sex marriage!
Ah, yes I heard about this.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/maryland-gay-marriage-bill_n_1297910.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009
but nowhere does it say in the bible that you can't be gay.
Leviticus 18:22
Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
This is commonly misinterpreted in my opinion though.
you have to look at the time frame and the context.
back then women were treated like ****, everyone knows it. so it was essentially saying, dont treat a man as you would treat a women.
This is commonly misinterpreted in my opinion though.
Uh...
Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
That quite clearly means sex.
lol i always found those things so unimportant. one could just say that its ok to be gay as long as you dont have sex. i do know christians who think its ok to be gay too. honestly when it comes to christianity where there are so many sins and that you are a horibble sinner because you just exist i cant understand why look just at that specicif, small single sin. i mean... its as logic as if id started hating every person who eats dairies and meat products.
besides, according to christianity just not being christian is a sin. why not hate all non-christians? also, since we are all sinners (even the christians) according to christianity why not just hate everybody uncluding yourself?
ugh, i guess miserable people need people who are more miserable to feel better
You must be logged in to post a reply!