Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Ireland recovering from Theocracy.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sam
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Ok, so far so good.

    Which all of these goals can be done, without being married (believe it or not). You don't even really need a boyfriend/girlfriend to make two of them possible.

    Depending on what study you read. I've seen several articles, by the children of same sex couples, who say otherwise. What do they know though? They disagree with Sam so naturally, they have to be wrong.
    Raising a developmentally-mature and happy set of children can be done without marriage, too. So it would be unwise to use that argument against my list of goals, as it equally works against your defined goal.

    Articles by children of same-sex couples are anecdotal evidence, not empirical evidence. One might as easily say that because children of opposite-sex couples write articles detailing poor childhoods that equates to empirical evidence that opposite-sex couples do a poorer job of rearing children.

    Of course that would be crazy, which is why we don't rely on anecdotal evidence.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    I thought Walt Disney died almost 50 years ago. What does the views of Walt Disney, have to do with the modern Disney company?

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
    I’m thinking of the really big picture of where civilisation is going based on how far we know it has come already. Our golden age is still ahead of us; not that there won’t be a few bumps in the road along the way.
    I wouldn't call the death of millions a 'bump in the road'. Again, how well have these dreams of utopia, turned out over the past century?

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Enlightenment does not have a paradigm to agree with.
    So I should stop hearing the snide comments against anything you disagree with, from now on. Right?

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    I was making a general point, as I assume you were when you wrote that hatred of gay people isn't the driving force behind opposition of same-sex marriage for many people. We were both making general statements.
    Ok, so far so good.

    Mutual edification, chastity, economic security, desire to rear children, etc. Marriage need not have a sole or even primary goal.
    Which all of these goals can be done, without being married (believe it or not). You don't even really need a boyfriend/girlfriend to make two of them possible.

    But for those who see marriage as principally about the family unit (i.e., spouses + children), we have sufficient empirical evidence showing that children of same-sex couples are developmentally similar to children of opposite-sex couples. It is unlikely, then, that any strong arguments against same-sex marriage can be made on the basis of the family unit.
    Depending on what study you read. I've seen several articles, by the children of same sex couples, who say otherwise. What do they know though? They disagree with Sam so naturally, they have to be wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by Sea of red View Post
    That's your belief and you're entitled to it, but some of us have different view-points. As long as nobody is being harmed I have no issue with a legal institutions definition changing.
    Different points of view still don't take care of the reality that children seem to do best, when they have a mom and dad, in a good relationship. The fact of the matter is that there's much out there that seems to show that if you want your children to have the best start in life, having a mom and dad in a decent family seems to be the best for the children involved.

    You can still practice your beliefs and peacefully co-exist with gay marriage.
    Like I have much of a choice in the matter.

    Leave a comment:


  • JonathanL
    replied
    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
    No. Your agreement is not needed because what changes is the zeitgeist. You might not agree with it at any particular moment but it will nevertheless drag you along behind it at some, acceptable to conservatives, distance. The old nutter fogies drop off the end of the tail to die; their death helping to drive the whole thing forwards like releasing the brakes on your moped …. to a position that will allow us to tackle the next thorny problem.
    Are we there yet?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    Hey, I ain't the guy randomly snarking at posts on the Internet ...
    And I ain't the guy using up half of the internet's entire search capability all by my lonesome.

    But you do amuse me, so....

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post



    You really need to get a life, brother.
    Hey, I ain't the guy randomly snarking at posts on the Internet ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    My point was that I have, on this board and in threads where you (and a good number of current posters here) were an active participant, giving me some liberty in alluding to sufficient empirical evidence. Rather than being a "weak point," it's a point that I've strongly supported. No need to go through the trouble again unless there's a compelling need and an earnest audience.




    You really need to get a life, brother.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Well, not so much me, cause I'm only kinda sorta paying attention.



    Cool.



    Ummmmm... what claims am I making?



    Sam, calm yourself.... I'm just amused by your claim of "sufficient empirical evidence". If it were, indeed, sufficient.....

    It kinda reminds me of the preacher who wrote in the margin of his sermon manuscript "weak point - yell louder".
    My point was that I have, on this board and in threads where you (and a good number of current posters here) were an active participant, giving me some liberty in alluding to sufficient empirical evidence. Rather than being a "weak point," it's a point that I've strongly supported. No need to go through the trouble again unless there's a compelling need and an earnest audience.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    I have spent many hours (weeks, even) describing the various studies to folks on this board, including you.
    Well, not so much me, cause I'm only kinda sorta paying attention.

    If the Crash hadn't taken it all, I'd link back to 'em.
    Cool.

    To date, you haven't provided anything empirical to back your claims.
    Ummmmm... what claims am I making?

    I'm sitting on past work, true enough, but you're sitting on no work.
    Sam, calm yourself.... I'm just amused by your claim of "sufficient empirical evidence". If it were, indeed, sufficient.....

    It kinda reminds me of the preacher who wrote in the margin of his sermon manuscript "weak point - yell louder".

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    I love it when you make this claim, Sam. I just can't understand why these guys continue to argue with you after that!
    I have spent many hours (weeks, even) describing the various studies to folks on this board, including you. If the Crash hadn't taken it all, I'd link back to 'em. To date, you haven't provided anything empirical to back your claims. I'm sitting on past work, true enough, but you're sitting on no work.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    ...we have sufficient empirical evidence....
    I love it when you make this claim, Sam. I just can't understand why these guys continue to argue with you after that!

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    No, enlightened, i.e. tolerant and accepting as opposed to bigoted and judgemental.
    Yeah, liberals always want tolerance and acceptance, except when they're in charge - like at universities, democratically controlled cities, or concerning things like religious liberty.....

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
16 responses
103 views
0 likes
Last Post One Bad Pig  
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
53 responses
301 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
25 responses
109 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
196 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
84 responses
357 views
0 likes
Last Post JimL
by JimL
 
Working...
X