Originally posted by Nellinator
Ok, it sounds like some clarification is needed.
The answer was clearly 'politely suggest'. Using your grammar as an example, he politely suggested that you correct it and showed you how without forcibly imposing you into it. It was pretty obvious.
as i pointed out that i refer to law and not correction of grammar. must i quote myself or shall we move on?
Originally posted by Ushgarak
But even if totally correct, it would have far more smug than clever, and in repetition in answering PVS, usagi is apparently answering that correction should be forced, from which, as Christian history shows, it is not many steps until you reach the Inquisition.
i was going to mention that, but felt it would just spiral us down the tangent of spelling nazism. but yes, he did correct me dispite a complete lack of willingness to be corrected or soliciation for his help.
Originally posted by Nellinator
Within the context of law:Soon to be corrected: *steals*
Corrector: You should not steal.
The corrected (accepting correction): You are right.Its not complicated.
this is a breach of law which addresses the victimization of the innocent.
may i also add that common law addresses these crimes without need of religious intervention. unless you honestly believe that humans need to believe in your diety in order to feel that murder/rape/stealing/etc is unethical.
i refer to matters which are not addressed by law but are passionately supported/objected by certain religions. take homosexuality for example. would you wish it to be punishable...or rather...'correctable' by law?
Originally posted by Nellinator
Correctable, of course. If correction works, there is no need for punishment.
you miss the hidden and quite sadistic meaning in his reply. allow me to elaborate:
state mandated and forced 'correction' of homosexuality would be acceptable, and failing that, punishment.
am i right or did you simply not put your thoughts down adequately?
Originally posted by PVS
this is a breach of law which addresses the victimization of the innocent.
may i also add that common law addresses these crimes without need of religious intervention. unless you honestly believe that humans need to believe in your diety in order to feel that murder/rape/stealing/etc is unethical.i refer to matters which are not addressed by law but are passionately supported/objected by certain religions. take homosexuality for example. would you wish it to be punishable...or rather...'correctable' by law?
Actually - *sodomy* is on the books as being illegal in certain states(mostly southern states - as they still enforce it to convice child molestors, even though the Supreme Court has ruled against it being illegal.) I was watching a report several months ago - regarding a man getting charged with it in a molestation case.
Anyway - not all laws can be enforced at all times, but I think the idea is(from God's perspective) to have them in place, so people have some sort of *correct*(Godly and good) model to live by. That's really the point. We wouldn't know what was *correct*(or good/loving) - if there was no law in place. This goes for those who believe in a deity(such as God) - just as much as it goes for those who don't. Unless you're(you are) stating that you are(you're) a firm supporter of anarchy? Is that what you're saying(stating)?(please feel free to *correct* me if I'm wrong..in a non-judgmental way of course).
Originally posted by PVS
you miss the hidden and quite sadistic meaning in his reply. allow me to elaborate:state mandated and forced 'correction' of homosexuality would be acceptable, and failing that, punishment.
am i right or did you simply not put your thoughts down adequately?
Originally posted by Nellinator
Apparently I did not elaborate enough. Of course, forced correction is not what I support either. Of course, I can tell them they are wrong. However, it is a choice I allow them to make. Punishment becomes necessary when sin affects others and is harmful to others.
When is Homosexuality eveer harmful to oneself or others ?
1) Rape is not exclusive to homosexuality. There are far more heterosexual rapists.
2) Peadophilia is not exclusive to homosexuality. There are actually more straight peadophiles than gay.
3) Promiscuity is not exclusive to homosexuality. Again, there are far more promiscuous heterosexuals than homos..and so on.....
I do not get where you are going with this.
Originally posted by usagi_yojimbo
Actually - *sodomy* is on the books as being illegal in certain states(mostly southern states - as they still enforce it to convice child molestors, even though the Supreme Court has ruled against it being illegal.) I was watching a report several months ago - regarding a man getting charged with it in a molestation case.Anyway - not all laws can be enforced at all times, but I think the idea is(from God's perspective) to have them in place, so people have some sort of *correct*(Godly and good) model to live by. That's really the point. We wouldn't know what was *correct*(or good/loving) - if there was no law in place. This goes for those who believe in a deity(such as God) - just as much as it goes for those who don't. Unless you're(you are) stating that you are(you're) a firm supporter of anarchy? Is that what you're saying(stating)?(please feel free to *correct* me if I'm wrong..in a non-judgmental way of course).
How is Sodomy wrong ? Assuming it is consentual...
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
When is Homosexuality eveer harmful to oneself or others ?1) [b]Rape
is not exclusive to homosexuality. There are far more heterosexual rapists.2) Peadophilia is not exclusive to homosexuality. There are actually more straight peadophiles than gay.
3) Promiscuity is not exclusive to homosexuality. Again, there are far more promiscuous heterosexuals than homos..and so on.....
I do not get where you are going with this. [/B]
Originally posted by Nellinator
Whoa, slow down there man. I wasn't saying this at all. I was referring in general to all sins, not homosexuality.
But I would like to know how homosexuality can be harmful to a anyone....in a way that heterosexuality can't.
Unless I am entirely mistaken as to your previous point, then forgive me.
Originally posted by Nellinator
Apparently I did not elaborate enough. Of course, forced correction is not what I support either. Of course, I can tell them they are wrong. However, it is a choice I allow them to make. Punishment becomes necessary when sin affects others and is harmful to others.
Oh, am I ?
So you are saying that Homosexuality is wrong, but it's not harmful ? 🤨 ?