LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Forum for posts that are not hockey-related.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby MRandall25 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 2:21 am

I've done a little thinking:

Would this whole "gay marriage" thing be an issue if the government had used a term other than "marriage" to define the union between 2 people? I think most people (at least those who oppose same-sex unions) see the term "marriage" as religious in connotation. Marriage to them is something sacred, done in a religious context. Using "gay marriage" is a threat, in a way, to their definition of religious marriage between a man and a woman as laid out in the Bible. "How dare two people of the same sex try to infringe on our religious institution," they may think.

Perhaps if the government moved away from the term "marriage", maybe those who oppose "gay marriage" would lessen their stance? If the various parties were arguing over "same-sex unions" as opposed to "same-sex marriage", would we even be worrying about this issue now?
MRandall25
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 19,692
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 6:11 pm
Location: BOBROVSKY!!!

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby skullman80 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:39 am

That may very well be true, but no religion owns the word marriage or its meaning. So they need to get over themselves to be honest.
skullman80
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 21,391
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:55 pm
Location: New Kensington, PA

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby tifosi77 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:38 am

The problem is people using religion to define a legal term.
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 14,085
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby pittsoccer33 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:57 am

MRandall25 wrote:I've done a little thinking:

Would this whole "gay marriage" thing be an issue if the government had used a term other than "marriage" to define the union between 2 people? I think most people (at least those who oppose same-sex unions) see the term "marriage" as religious in connotation. Marriage to them is something sacred, done in a religious context. Using "gay marriage" is a threat, in a way, to their definition of religious marriage between a man and a woman as laid out in the Bible. "How dare two people of the same sex try to infringe on our religious institution," they may think.

Perhaps if the government moved away from the term "marriage", maybe those who oppose "gay marriage" would lessen their stance? If the various parties were arguing over "same-sex unions" as opposed to "same-sex marriage", would we even be worrying about this issue now?


Yes I think that would eliminate 95+% of the opposition.

But plenty of people fighting for it want to destroy religion. That's a broad goal of many on the left. That's why they attack the pledge of allegiance and the nativity in town square. It is about oppressing and condemning views other than their own.
pittsoccer33
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,756
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:06 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby PensFanInDC on Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:59 am

pittsoccer33 wrote:
MRandall25 wrote:I've done a little thinking:

Would this whole "gay marriage" thing be an issue if the government had used a term other than "marriage" to define the union between 2 people? I think most people (at least those who oppose same-sex unions) see the term "marriage" as religious in connotation. Marriage to them is something sacred, done in a religious context. Using "gay marriage" is a threat, in a way, to their definition of religious marriage between a man and a woman as laid out in the Bible. "How dare two people of the same sex try to infringe on our religious institution," they may think.

Perhaps if the government moved away from the term "marriage", maybe those who oppose "gay marriage" would lessen their stance? If the various parties were arguing over "same-sex unions" as opposed to "same-sex marriage", would we even be worrying about this issue now?


Yes I think that would eliminate 95+% of the opposition.

But plenty of people fighting for it want to destroy religion. That's a broad goal of many on the left. That's why they attack the pledge of allegiance and the nativity in town square. It is about oppressing and condemning views other than their own.


I think this is true for a vocal minority just as much as it is true for the other side.
PensFanInDC
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 27,916
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Fredneck

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby tifosi77 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:24 am

Religion will destroy itself in the fullness of time.

The Pledge had existed for 60 years before the religious component was grafted on.

Besides, this
Image
is more than a little creepy.
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 14,085
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby pittsoccer33 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:34 am

I am by no means a religious or church going person but it is easy to recognize that the activist wing of the Democrat party actively wants to impugn and mock Christianity. Instead of simply not sharing beliefs they want to ridicule and bully church going Americans.

[No, I do not think it is right for Christians to defame and deride people who don't agree with them. They're idiots tying their own nooses]

The interesting part is how quick they are to defer reverence, tolerance, and understanding towards Islam. Judaism seems to escape any kind of controversy too unless it is dealing with the state of Israel, in which they get condemned in their dealings with their neighbors.
pittsoccer33
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,756
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:06 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby DropEmJayBird on Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:40 am

Since we are into changing definitions, I'd like to be considered an Indian African American Female Vet for the purposes of getting benefits that I want.
DropEmJayBird
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,712
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:38 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby shafnutz05 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:42 am

Just think how lucky we are to be having this debate. In some (Islamic) countries, they torture and murder people just for suspecting they might be homosexual.
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 60,559
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby DropEmJayBird on Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:42 am

Gay marriage should be instituted by the voters, doing it through the courts via the equal protection is an awful idea in my opinion.
DropEmJayBird
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,712
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:38 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby DropEmJayBird on Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:47 am

tifosi77 wrote:The problem is people using religion to define a legal term.


So whenever a gay couple sues a church for not marrying them, and a photographer for refusing to photograph their wedding, the church or individual has no right to deny them their legal right to the term is essentially what you are saying?

I would hope democrats would be lining up to protect a church's or individuals first amendment right to express their religious beliefs on the matter.. perhaps some of you will, but I think when the push comes to shove, and we need something else to distract us from budget matters, this will be the next big fight.
DropEmJayBird
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,712
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:38 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby GaryRissling on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:02 am

redwill wrote:
GaryRissling wrote:Our separation from England was predicated on the belief that rights are inherent to our nature as man. I would go further and say all of what we know of western civilization is predicated on that belief as it is what was codified into the Magna Carta as well as our founding documents. It is the premise which brought about "due process" so that the king/ruler couldn't arbitrarily apply his own subjective judgement behind closed doors.


Belief does not imply truth. I don't care what people at the time of our separation from England "believed." They also happened to believe that enslavement of Africans was justified. So poo-poo. They didn't really believe in the inherent rights of man. You must admit that. They had no justification and were only looking for words to make themselves look good. They were cynically looking for someone to agree with us and support our coup d'etat.

GaryRissling wrote:You are advocating a devolution into a pre-magna carta (rogue) non-"western" civilization


I'm not sure what I'm advocating, other than an end to self-serving dissembling lies. Our society does what is necessary to promote and preserve itself. Period.

I suppose we'd agree on a huge list of things that the USA has done in its history that are contrary to its easily-mimed "ideals." I just don't get why you're so pumped on this latest episode of hypocrisy.

The USA is no different than any other society in the history of the world. It does what it does to preserve itself.

Laugh at it. Mock it. Don't try to change it. Be happy that you got what you got and you aren't under them drone strikes.



You're perfectly entitled to be a nihilist. The problem is though, that if/when some outraged pakistani decides to strike on american soil; we're going to be inundated with astonished reports on how it must have been some brainwashed sub-human who committed the act; rather than a predictable and rational response to our policies.
Last edited by GaryRissling on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
GaryRissling
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,635
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby GaryRissling on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:06 am

tifosi77 wrote:Religion will destroy itself in the fullness of time.

The Pledge had existed for 60 years before the religious component was grafted on.

Besides, this
Image
is more than a little creepy.


I'm increasingly of the belief that our political parties are becoming a religious belief for many people. Any republicans who remain republicans after Bush; or Democrats who remain Democrats after Obama must be highly devoted indeed.
GaryRissling
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,635
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby tifosi77 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:23 am

DropEmJayBird wrote:Since we are into changing definitions, I'd like to be considered an Indian African American Female Vet for the purposes of getting benefits that I want.

See that's the problem. Your use of the word 'considered' is operative and telling.

Gay people don't want to be 'considered' married. The want to be married. So unless you truly in your heart of hearts harbor a desire to actually be a Indian African American Female Vet..... I mean, more power to you, it's not my place to judge.

DropEmJayBird wrote:
tifosi77 wrote:The problem is people using religion to define a legal term.


So whenever a gay couple sues a church for not marrying them, and a photographer for refusing to photograph their wedding, the church or individual has no right to deny them their legal right to the term is essentially what you are saying?

I would hope democrats would be lining up to protect a church's or individuals first amendment right to express their religious beliefs on the matter.. perhaps some of you will, but I think when the push comes to shove, and we need something else to distract us from budget matters, this will be the next big fight.

First, I am not a Democrat.

Second, try to go to a Catholic church and get married as a non-Catholic. Or marry your Orthodox Jewish girlfriend in her synagogue as a non-Jew. Shoot, there's a church in North Carolina that has stopped performing all marriages unless and until NC recognizes marriage equality.

Religious organizations are already free to restrict marriages performed under their auspices. You propose a non-extant slippery slope.

That's not to say that some knucklehead won't sue a church to gay marry he and his boyfriend, her her and her girlfriend. Just like I'm sure when same-sex marriage finally has a legal dispensation some idiot will try to use it as justification for polygamy. But simply because they bring suit doesn't mean they can - or should - prevail.

To be perfectly clear, I don't give a rat's patootie if churches refuse to marry same-sex couples, and don't think it would be right to compel them to do so. But, as I said earlier, in the fullness of time, such closed-offedness (?) will ultimately be the undoing of organized religion. So I actually welcome such behavior.
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 14,085
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby redwill on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:27 am

pittsoccer33 wrote:I am by no means a religious or church going person but it is easy to recognize that the activist wing of the Democrat party actively wants to impugn and mock Christianity. Instead of simply not sharing beliefs they want to ridicule and bully church going Americans.

[No, I do not think it is right for Christians to defame and deride people who don't agree with them. They're idiots tying their own nooses]

The interesting part is how quick they are to defer reverence, tolerance, and understanding towards Islam. Judaism seems to escape any kind of controversy too unless it is dealing with the state of Israel, in which they get condemned in their dealings with their neighbors.


Sorry to lump all Christians together, but the maddening thing about them is that they comprise almost 80% of the American population yet often insist that they are being persecuted. It just doesn't make sense. If we 1.6% atheists "impugn and mock" Christians they should, at the very least, not be too worried about it. It's not like we're ever gonna hurt them in this country. Hell, in a few states we can't technically even run for office or testify in court. And that's not even considering the fact that an atheist could never be elected to national office, simply because of the fear that people have of us godless heathens.

But people are still gonna complain. I live in rural Kansas in a county which is 94% white, yet the extremely white people here still rail against what is happening to the whites of this area. It's kind of comical.
redwill
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 7,342
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:04 pm
Location: Wichita, KS

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby shafnutz05 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:29 am

redwill wrote:But people are still gonna complain. I live in rural Kansas in a county which is 94% white, yet the extremely white people here still rail against what is happening to the whites of this area. It's kind of comical.


Apartheid proved that a minority can oppress a majority :pop:
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 60,559
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby redwill on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:33 am

shafnutz05 wrote:Apartheid proved that a minority can oppress a majority :pop:


Oh, yeah. Forgot about that. Good thing I own a gun to protect my white self.
redwill
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 7,342
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:04 pm
Location: Wichita, KS

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby redwill on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:47 am

GaryRissling wrote:You're perfectly entitled to be a nihilist. The problem is though, that if/when some outraged pakistani decides to strike on american soil; we're going to be inundated with astonished reports on how it must have been some brainwashed sub-human who committed the act; rather than a predictable and rational response to our policies.


So you're troubled by potential "astonished reports"? Surely you should be used to it by now.

And no, I didn't call you "Shirley."
redwill
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 7,342
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:04 pm
Location: Wichita, KS

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby GaryRissling on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:56 am

redwill wrote:
GaryRissling wrote:You're perfectly entitled to be a nihilist. The problem is though, that if/when some outraged pakistani decides to strike on american soil; we're going to be inundated with astonished reports on how it must have been some brainwashed sub-human who committed the act; rather than a predictable and rational response to our policies.


So you're troubled by potential "astonished reports"? Surely you should be used to it by now.

And no, I didn't call you "Shirley."


I'm troubled by the consequences of our policies.
GaryRissling
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,635
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Gaucho on Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:10 pm

shafnutz05 wrote:
redwill wrote:But people are still gonna complain. I live in rural Kansas in a county which is 94% white, yet the extremely white people here still rail against what is happening to the whites of this area. It's kind of comical.


Apartheid proved that a minority can oppress a majority :pop:


Except the minority in numbers was the majority in power, which is all that matters.
Gaucho
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 44,371
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:22 am
Location: Ignoranti

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby shafnutz05 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:11 pm

Gaucho wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:
redwill wrote:But people are still gonna complain. I live in rural Kansas in a county which is 94% white, yet the extremely white people here still rail against what is happening to the whites of this area. It's kind of comical.


Apartheid proved that a minority can oppress a majority :pop:


Except the minority in numbers was the majority in power, which is all that matters.


Spoiler:
Image
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 60,559
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Gaucho on Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:14 pm

I don't get it?
Gaucho
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 44,371
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:22 am
Location: Ignoranti

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby columbia on Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:17 pm

Gaucho wrote:I don't get it?


The black guy is coming for your guns.
columbia
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 51,888
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:13 am
Location: دعنا نذهب طيور البطريق

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Sam's Drunk Dog on Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:22 pm

I'm sure that the Supreme Court is busy counting the number of people that changed their Facebook profile picture before coming to a decision.
Sam's Drunk Dog
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 20,586
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:31 pm
Location: Shutter Island

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Gaucho on Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:23 pm

columbia wrote:
Gaucho wrote:I don't get it?


The black guy is coming for your guns.


Image
Gaucho
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 44,371
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:22 am
Location: Ignoranti

PreviousNext

Return to NHR

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


e-mail