Gay marriage and god in government convo.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



dadudemon

dadudemon

Bardock42
Hate your style of "debating". The other guy's a moron, too.

On the topics. I think everyone should be allowed to pray when they want and where they want in private. What's wrong is if it is funded by the government or ordered by an authority figure. I don't see a reason why a few people can't get together on a School's campus and pray if they like.

Gay Marriage should either be legal or all marriage should be banned.

And I hate your way of "debating" no expression

dadudemon
Originally posted by Bardock42
Hate your style of "debating". The other guy's a moron, too.

On the topics. I think everyone should be allowed to pray when they want and where they want in private. What's wrong is if it is funded by the government or ordered by an authority figure. I don't see a reason why a few people can't get together on a School's campus and pray if they like.

Gay Marriage should either be legal or all marriage should be banned.

And I hate your way of "debating" no expression

How could I have "owned" him better, then? It "mormon to mormon" so there was some preaching going on, of course.

Bardock42
Originally posted by dadudemon
How could I have "owned" him better, then? It "mormon to mormon" so there was some preaching going on, of course.
I don't know how you could have "owned" him better. But I would have based the argument differently I guess. I would have put more emphasis on it being oppression and no one really being hurt. In the first instance I would have just focussed on why the schools shouldn't pay for prayers and tried to agree that prayers as such should obviously not be banned.

lord xyz
Bardock said what I was going to say.

Dataflux
Prayers are not banned from school. Students are allowed to have a silent personal prayer for themselves. What is not allowed is school sponsored religion, including these bullshit be a Muslim for a day events.

inimalist
"athiesm" had little, if anything, to do with the removal of prayer from school.

Atheists do not have the social, or political, clout or organization to make something like that happen, nor are they numerous enough to make a big difference.

IMHO, groups like the Jehovah's witnesses would have had way more of a role in it.

I could be off, I just don't think atheists in America are powerful enough to change government policy, even in the slightest

lord xyz
Originally posted by Dataflux
Prayers are not banned from school. Students are allowed to have a silent personal prayer for themselves. What is not allowed is school sponsored religion, including these bullshit be a Muslim for a day events. There's actual "Be a Muslim" events?

No ****ing way.

Dataflux
In 2003 Excelsior Elementary School in Byron, California began holding three week courses that instructed students how to follow Islam. The Federal judge ruled that it was not violating the Constitution.

And there is am organization that is called the Council on American-Islamic Relations that sponsors schools to have Islamic Awareness presentation in many California schools.

Symmetric Chaos
I'm just about certain that you can pray in school, teachers just can't lead or suggest prayer session and such.

lord xyz
Originally posted by Dataflux
In 2003 Excelsior Elementary School in Byron, California began holding three week courses that instructed students how to follow Islam. The Federal judge ruled that it was not violating the Constitution.

And there is am organization that is called the Council on American-Islamic Relations that sponsors schools to have Islamic Awareness presentation in many California schools. That's either encouraging people do be a Muslim (unconstitutional) or humouring Islam (unconstitutional).

What a disgrace.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I'm just about certain that you can pray in school, teachers just can't lead or suggest prayer session and such.

You can definitely pray in school. However, some places are making it "illegal". Removing prayer from any school sponsored event. I'm fine with that.


I also mentioned "praying to yourself" if you can't hold yours prayers in. There's no reason one can't pray silently in their brains. It doesn't look or sound as schizophrenic that way, anyway.


I was more concerned about homosexual couples being given rights similar to their heterosexual counterparts. (No, Bards, don't make that argument. You know what I mean.)

Devil King
So were the first 13 colonies. "WRONG!" They might have been regulated and owned by certain groups, but the country in which they were founded did not take that all-important moment to conisder those religious beliefs into consideration when grandfathering in their observence of the laws of the contry in which they were supposed to opperate. Jesus was NOT a founding father of the United States of America; despite how much that assumption is furthered by many subscribers to the Christian ideal of America.

If they might have the chance to disagree, the actual voted-on and vote-approved measures of the founding fathers are there for all of us to see. Sadly, in their particular and specific case, the proposals don't involve a state or christian-centric religion. So, their claims to the contrary are as full of substance as is a balloon full of cow shit and hot air...or answered prayers, for that matter. The next foolish poster on this site that thinks they have a link to post that will take it's reader to an actual reference to a single line of the American Constitution or Bill of Rights that illustrates how this country was founded on soley-christian principles has a lot of work to do if they think that link is going to take it's reader to anything of actual substance when it comes to their point that this is a christian nation. If it's real, it won't substantiate a single notion that is actually put forth in the bill of rights or constitution of the United States. For any readers or posters who feel contrary; look it up. There won't be one moment of slack-jawed, mythological consideration of that particular talking point found anywhere in the supposedly chrstian-centric action or words of the supposedly bible thumping-founding-fathers of this country. When they wrote the founding documents of this country, they paid about as much attention to christian mythology as the muslim terrorist that are eating up our duct-tape and bottled water supply.

BackFire
Why waste time debating such an idiot?

dadudemon
Originally posted by Devil King
So were the first 13 colonies. "WRONG!" They might have been regulated and owned by certain groups, but the country in which they were founded did not take that all-important moment to conisder those religious beliefs into consideration when grandfathering in their observence of the laws of the contry in which they were supposed to opperate. Jesus was NOT a founding father of the United States of America; despite how much that assumption is furthered by many subscribers to the Christian ideal of America.

If they might have the chance to disagree, the actual voted-on and vote-approved measures of the founding fathers are there for all of us to see. Sadly, in their particular and specific case, the proposals don't involve a state or christian-centric religion. So, their claims to the contrary are as full of substance as is a balloon full of cow shit and hot air...or answered prayers, for that matter. The next foolish poster on this site that thinks they have a link to post that will take it's reader to an actual reference to a single line of the American Constitution or Bill of Rights that illustrates how this country was founded on soley-christian principles has a lot of work to do if they think that link is going to take it's reader to anything of actual substance when it comes to their point that this is a christian nation. If it's real, it won't substantiate a single notion that is actually put forth in the bill of rights or constitution of the United States. For any readers or posters who feel contrary; look it up. There won't be one moment of slack-jawed, mythological consideration of that particular talking point found anywhere in the supposedly chrstian-centric action or words of the supposedly bible thumping-founding-fathers of this country. When they wrote the founding documents of this country, they paid about as much attention to christian mythology as the muslim terrorist that are eating up our duct-tape and bottled water supply.


In my response's defense, we're both Mormons. Mormons believe that the "founding fathers" were inspired by God. What I was doing was pointing out his error in assuming that religion is the centerpiece. As a Mormon, he should have known better. What I was doing was guilting him.

He is obviously a horrendous monotheist who refuses to accept any other ideals. If people like him were greater in number, this nation would literally be hell. Thank the Lord that these types are few in numbers.

Originally posted by BackFire
Why waste time debating such an idiot?

Despite these types of peoples' resistance to fairness and logic, you can get through to them and show them their folly. As I explained to Bardock, I used his own religion against him. I'm fairly certain that the Jesus from the new testament wouldn't hate homosexuals nearly as much as these Christian Conservative types. He'd probably protect them. (Remember the story about the adulterous lady about to be stoned? As far as I was aware, adultery is a greater sin than homosexuality...it's the third worst thing you can do...2nd is shedding innocent blood and first is denying the Holy Ghost.)

Devil King
Originally posted by BackFire
Why waste time debating such an idiot?

Because I allow the other side to dicated where the divide is, based on the lack of common sense or reality enjoyed by the most educated segments of our population. Sadly, that is what "democracy" involves. People who're swayed by the candidate they'd like to have a beer with rather than have a joint with.

Sad, obviously, but reality.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Devil King
Because I allow the other side to dicated where the divide is, based on the lack of common sense or reality enjoyed by the most educated segments of our population. Sadly, that is what "democracy" involves. People who're swayed by the candidate they'd like to have a beer with rather than have a joint with.

Sad, obviously, but reality.

I'm not sure if you're trying say.

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm not sure if you're trying say.

Isn't it obvious? Weed > Beer

lord xyz
Originally posted by BackFire
Why waste time debating such an idiot? Is that debating with or debating as?

Shakyamunison
I have one question that I wish that a fundamentalist Christian would answer for me. So far, no one has been able to answer the question:

How does the marriage statues of people who are not part of your religion degrade marriage within your religion?

For example: polygamy is also a sin, and not allowed by Christian belief. How does the fact the many Muslim nations allow polygamy effect marriage in the Christian world?

leonheartmm
it isnt about your relegion or my relegion shaky. its about THE relegion, the truth and the light, jesus christ {and his band of merry outlaws}!!!!!!!! all other relegions are false and handiworks of the devil. all people SHUD follow the right relegion and if they follow the wrong path, they MUST be guided onto the path of righteousness or destroyed without pity as evildoers. seeing as some christians have sway over these NON christians, the right laws SHUD be implemented on them. AMERICA is a christian country dammit dont you heathens know?! {its even in our constitution, really i swear!!!!!!}

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by leonheartmm
it isnt about your relegion or my relegion shaky. its about THE relegion, the truth and the light, jesus christ {and his band of merry outlaws}!!!!!!!! all other relegions are false and handiworks of the devil. all people SHUD follow the right relegion and if they follow the wrong path, they MUST be guided onto the path of righteousness or destroyed without pity as evildoers. seeing as some christians have sway over these NON christians, the right laws SHUD be implemented on them. AMERICA is a christian country dammit dont you heathens know?! {its even in our constitution, really i swear!!!!!!}

Well then, they should not allow gays in there religion to get married. However, why should they stop gay Buddhists from getting married? Buddhists are heathen in their minds, so why should it matter to them what we do?

leonheartmm
in terms of a christin "NOT IN MY BACKYARD YOU DONT!!!!!!!!!"

"NOT IF I CAN HELP IT!" {im sure you can think of plenty others}

besides, were doing a GOOD thing by stopping those evil doers from sinning, its what god COMMANDED us to do, and his laws will rule in this world {through us christian lawmakers ofcuorse} as his will rules in heaven, and after all, were only saving them from the hell fire so its a good deed on my resume, so really, why NOT do it {apart from me not liking it, heck if it were upto me, id stand em in a line and execute em}

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by leonheartmm
in terms of a christin "NOT IN MY BACKYARD YOU DONT!!!!!!!!!"

"NOT IF I CAN HELP IT!" {im sure you can think of plenty others}

besides, were doing a GOOD thing by stopping those evil doers from sinning, its what god COMMANDED us to do, and his laws will rule in this world {through us christian lawmakers ofcuorse} as his will rules in heaven, and after all, were only saving them from the hell fire so its a good deed on my resume, so really, why NOT do it {apart from me not liking it, heck if it were upto me, id stand em in a line and execute em}

Now, if I can just get a Christian to be that truthful. wink

leonheartmm
^which is kinda ironic seeing that i was being UNTRUTHFUL there as i am not a christian. so technically, the christians are just as truthful as me! lol. oh no wait, they arent, seeing as i atleast am truthhful about their motivation{not to steretype but what the hell stick out tongue } while they falsify even the motivations of atheists and beleifs other then theiur own on top of lying about their own motivations and beleifs, so theyr twice as bad.

{lol, ok so not every christian is, obviously, just a lil humour}

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by leonheartmm
^which is kinda ironic seeing that i was being UNTRUTHFUL there as i am not a christian. so technically, the christians are just as truthful as me! lol. oh no wait, they arent, seeing as i atleast am truthhful about their motivation{not to steretype but what the hell stick out tongue } while they falsify even the motivations of atheists and beleifs other then theiur own on top of lying about their own motivations and beleifs, so theyr twice as bad.

{lol, ok so not every christian is, obviously, just a lil humour}

wacko laughing

Devil King
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Isn't it obvious? Weed > Beer

Weed is better than beer. But that doesn't mean that smoking is better than drinking.

Devil King
Originally posted by dadudemon
In my response's defense, we're both Mormons. Mormons believe that the "founding fathers" were inspired by God.

They also believe that the garden of eden was in Missouri.

But, in defense of my response, I was really only addressing the other guy.

Not that any of this discussion should be of interest to a person that describes themselves as "practically an atheist".

dadudemon
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I have one question that I wish that a fundamentalist Christian would answer for me. So far, no one has been able to answer the question:

How does the marriage statues of people who are not part of your religion degrade marriage within your religion?

For example: polygamy is also a sin, and not allowed by Christian belief. How does the fact the many Muslim nations allow polygamy effect marriage in the Christian world?

My answer:


It doesn't in anyway shape or form. I've actually argued FOR any marriage type among consenting adults. My only exception to that rule: those not able to give legal consent cannot legally get married. Duh. big grin



Originally posted by Devil King
They also believe that the garden of eden was in Missouri.

True.

Originally posted by Devil King
But, in defense of my response, I was really only addressing the other guy.

My bad. That's what it looked like. I was just throwing it out there because I did say that "God was the reason". Anytime I use that reasoning, I feel that it fails in an intellectual discussion for obvious reasons.

Originally posted by Devil King
Not that any of this discussion should be of interest to a person that describes themselves as "practically an atheist".

Religion is obviously still a part of my life so this type of discussion is still very much relevant. However, that doesn't change the fact that your comment holds truth.




On another note, he admitted I was completely right about everything. (You see, Bardock, my "tactics"did work.)

Here is what he had to say.


"I agree with everything you have said. D&C 134 supports all that you have said concerning prayer in school, etc. but, I still am hesitant to allow them to marry."

Here is a link to section 134. Don't worry, it is not heavily religious. Almost all of you will probably agree with it.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/134

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by dadudemon
My answer:


It doesn't in anyway shape or form. I've actually argued FOR any marriage type among consenting adults. My only exception to that rule: those not able to give legal consent cannot legally get married. Duh. big grin

...

We agree, but I hope a fundamentalist Christian comes along and answers my question.

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by Devil King
They also believe that the garden of eden was in Missouri.


You ever hear the old joke "How do you know Adam wasn't Black?...A: Have you ever tried to take a rib from a black person? *rimshot*"

Well if Eden was in MO, then Adam was definitely black. And it was probably in Kansas City with all their famous BBQ.

lord xyz
Originally posted by Devil King
Weed is better than beer. But that doesn't mean that smoking is better than drinking. There are other ways to get Cannabis in your system.

Brownies and Tea are probably the next best thing.

inimalist
Originally posted by lord xyz
Brownies and Tea are probably the next best thing.

http://www.ganja.co.uk/cannabis-seeds/bong/vaporise/volcano/images/volcano-vaporiser.jpg

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by inimalist
http://www.ganja.co.uk/cannabis-seeds/bong/vaporise/volcano/images/volcano-vaporiser.jpg

Oh! man, I got to get one. smokin' laughing out loud

leonheartmm
^ u party shaky?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by leonheartmm
^ u party shaky?
Did you go to the web site and read the add? laughing It's really funny.

http://www.ganja.co.uk/cannabis-seeds/bong/vaporise/volcano

However, to answer your question: No. I don't like to get drunk or high. That doesn't mean I drank or smoke in light moderation, but I just don't like to loose control. I used to be a real party animal, when I was young, and I was in a rock band.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Did you go to the web site and read the add? laughing It's really funny.

http://www.ganja.co.uk/cannabis-seeds/bong/vaporise/volcano

However, to answer your question: No. I don't like to get drunk or high. That doesn't mean I don't drank or smoke in light moderation, but I just don't like to loose control. I used to be a real party animal, when I was young, and I was in a rock band.

Correction. I ran out of time. embarrasment

leonheartmm
party animal? rock band? lmao, ill build a time machine and take the present you to meet the 70s you.

Devil King
Originally posted by inimalist
http://www.ganja.co.uk/cannabis-seeds/bong/vaporise/volcano/images/volcano-vaporiser.jpg

Thos things are great. Expensive, but great. I don't own one, but friends of mine do.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by leonheartmm
party animal? rock band? lmao, ill build a time machine and take the present you to meet the 70s you. laughing That would be interesting. Hey! I think I remember you. laughing out loud

UKR
Dadudemon's argument is ridiculous. Just because some group of people is not a "white male" does not mean that they're some kind of oppressed, persecuted ethnic minority that should be given a bunch of rights and legally forced social acceptance. If gays are "oppressed" then I guess pedophiles and people who like to fck animals are too. Crawl out of our conservative hole? Liberals should crawl back down the filthy sewer hole they squeezed out of and take their egalitarianism with them.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.