Dr. Phil show today

[guest2013-1]

How does eating food that's dedicated to an idol wrong if one is not aware of it being an idol and just eating it because it tastes good or you're hungry?

And like I said in my post, hundreds of years ago when the doctrine was written and agreed upon for your religion (else it would be a different religion altogether now) the average lifespan of a human did not allow for the "perversion" of gay marriages because we needed more bodies.

With humans over 6 billion now, don't you think it's enough?

Like many said before, if they don't force it upon me, or hurt anyone by it, why care what they do (and I added, at least they won't spawn children to whom they can teach it to now can they? adoption aside...)

If you go to the bible and read about Sodom & Gomorrah and why it was destroyed, you'll soon notice that the gay population within the city basically overpowered and forced others to do/be the same and were sex hungry butt ****ing fiends who's only purpose was to **** new guys (guys/guys as the reference state in there)

THAT I can understand. But anyway. You have your opinion, set in stone, forever ingrained within your DNA, unwilling and unable to change for whatsoever reason. And I have mine.

I will love seeing you guys in the after life

 

[d0b33]

I don't think it's right either

- Says so in the good book
- Means a poor pig had to die
- Causes you to get fat

so yeah, it's totally not right...however I do love eating it...can't get enough!

If you eat meat you kill an animal, a pig is no different.

 

[guest2013-1]

If you eat meat you kill an animal, a pig is no different.

Ooooooooooh a vegetarian perspective *high fiiiiive*

 

[noxibox]

I think the issue stems from society adopting what is essentially a religious rite (christian marriage) as a standard legal contract.

Wrong. Marriage is a traditionally secular, civil institution. It's amazing that much of what we think of as standard elements of a marriage ceremony were put there to allow the church to control marriage and make money from it.

When religious types say they want to retain traditional marriage they in general don't mean that. Traditional, as in my wife is my property? Traditional, as in it is primarily a business arrangement?

However we should not be doing things merely because we have always done them that way. We should be re-evaluating. Is the newer way better than the old way? So for instance if the Christian church muscling its way into and taking control of the marriage business was and still is a benefit, then we could say let's not return it to its secular roots.

The fact though is that religious people have been unable to offer a single reasonable argument against same sex marriage. Every argument is a desperate clutching at straws in the hope that they can retain their discrimination against another group in law. They can certainly choose not to like it, as I can choose not to like them usurping the word marriage and using it to describe religious unions, but that does not entitle either of us to picket venues where these marriages take place or demand that the law be kept the same or changed for purposes of excluding a particular group from marriage.

For me it's un natural but if they want to, they can but I just dont think its right

What does unnatural mean?

 

[dj_jyno]

If a farmer's animals went homosexual, he'd go out of business and the potential for "evolution" would be greatly diminished unless they evolve to be asexual creatures.

If the farmer's animals went homosexual in equal proportion to the number of exclusively gay people on this planet, he would still have approximately 85% of his stock that will reproduce.

If a person is born with a mutation of being an hermaphrodite then it is a deformity, it is not another option or an additional sexual classification. It is like being born down-syndrome or with a cleft pallet, it is not normal, it is from being in too similar a gene pool where the chances of such occurrances are higher.

Deformity it may be, but that doesn't mean that God didn't play a role in the creation of that deformity. We are created in His image, after all. If mutations were so evil, God could always just induce a miscarriage to get rid of all the "imperfect" individuals.

we should avoid fat, blood...

with very good reason. In the olden days, people did not always practise similar levels of hygiene that we do today. Improperly prepared meat transmitted illness to the humans that ate that meat. Considering the genetic similarity between pigs and humans, it is only logical that we would pick up diseases from swine much easier than from sheep or cattle. This did happen, so the holy texts prohibited the human consumption of pork.

no nutritional value in calamari, it is mostly colesterol and that is why such things were deemed unKosher because they were NOT healthy. Lobsters are the cockroaches of the sea.

Once again a question of health - lobsters might be the cockroaches of the sea, but you'll notice that most of the seafood listed as un-Kosher are filter feeders or waste feeders. If something like red tide comes along and you eat the prohibited seafood, you will become seriously ill.

 

[guest2013-1]

Oh, this just made me think of something.

Safferbeauty mentioned how unnatural this is.

And bringing up the topic of cattle, how natural is it to have (for example, with sheep) a ram's sperm being diluted and then impregnating 8000 girl-sheep? (don't know the name of a girl sheep in English, hahaha)

That's not natural. The dick never entered the vagina. Shame, poor ram. And this goes the same route as to artificially inseminated women. That's not natural either.

Or how about making your lips more puffy or breasts bigger or getting a J-Lo butt. Are they all condemned to hell? (hahaaha, I'm taking this WAYYYYY off topic now!! w00t)

I love religion. It's awesome.

 

[Good Life]

Just been watching Dr Phil and he is doing a show on same sex marriages: is it right or os it wrong? I personally don't think it is right. God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. What are your personal views on same sex marriages?

I have no problem with it. Live and let live. And everyone should be equally happy.

 

[TowerGuru]

All you guys could have actually said was yes I agree, no I don't agree... thats all I actually wanted to know but anyways

STOP THE BUS RIGHT THERE! so you think taking away my right to make a formal commitment of marriage to the man i love is a Yay or Nay issue?! I DONT THINK SO. How'd you like it if i walked up to you and asked you Yay or Nay on whether you can marry your man? Long as its heterosexual its okay....thats definately not a Yay or Nay issue?. . . Who cares about these gay people its not like they arent human beings they dont deserve to fall in love or god forbid want to commit to eachother in marriage. No ways! We're like the prawns from District 9. I am deeply offended by your lax attitude on a very fundementaly human right. Like someone else said i DONT know Wat you gonna do if one of your sons turns out gay goodluck!

 

[DJ...]

Oh, this just made me think of something.

Safferbeauty mentioned how unnatural this is.

Well it's certainly not un-natural - just uncommon. Homosexuality occurs naturally amongst many species. Dolphin, apes, elephants, bears, buffalos, cats, dogs, penguins, fish, lizards, tortoises, turtles, snakes, frogs etc as has been posted here before. In fact the last time this was brought up we had a lengthy debate about certain primates who exhibit full-on 3-cents-queer tendencies for the hell of it. They even w@nk each other off...

So to those who keep stating that it's un-natural, try educating yourselves first.

I find it quite ironic that those who use the "evolution" argument to this one are usually the ones who argue against evolution in the first place...

 

[rwenzori]

1. Dr Phil is a hack who lives his lavish life thanks to people like you.
2. So goddidit? He also afforded you the luxury to judge others? Thought not...
3. Wrong or right? By whose standards?

The rings on the fingers of my wife and I have nothing to do with religious motives - it is a sign of commitment to each other, as well as a publicly visible statement.

Whether hetero-, homo-, bi- or trisexual people have the basic right to associate with whomsoever they damn-well want. They are also entitled to equal benefits regarding social and legal conventions. Lastly, anyone is free to attempt to build a life together with anyone else - it's difficult enough as it is, without everyone not conforming to your ideal having to deal with your constant condescending judgement.

Great post - well put.

I have no problem with it. Live and let live.

My god! I actually agree with Good Life on something! It must be snowing in hell.

I am allowed my opinion. I am not forcing my opinion on anyone. I think its not right. All I was doing was asking for other peoples opinions as well, thats all. Jeez you guyz love attacking, I must admit.... Thought we could have a decent debate but clearly not....

You start what is clearly going to be a contentious thread, ask for people's opinions, then bleat when people respond. No, you're not allowed your opinion, unless you can demonstrate it has some worth. What consenting adults get up to is none of your business. It's "not right" to think otherwise.

Are you by any chance one of those repressed tannies who complain to the ASA about risque billboards on the highways too?

 

[BinaryJack]

I am allowed my opinion. I am not forcing my opinion on anyone. I think its not right. All I was doing was asking for other peoples opinions as well, thats all. Jeez you guyz love attacking, I must admit.... Thought we could have a decent debate but clearly not....

We are all allowed our opinions, as you can surmise from the posts that not all opinions are equal. I value your opinion on this matter on a similar level as rza's...just in case you didn't know....that is not very much at all.
Unfortunately this thread popped up at the wrong time, I am in a fractious and contentious mood.

You sit there, typing away at your little keyboard, all self righteous, declaring how unnatural and not right it is for same-sex marriages to take place. Spouting the tired old "Adam and Steve" remark as if it is some kind of secret weapon and not the tired old remark it actually is.

You take your rights for granted as if it is some kind of god granted right.
What have you done to deserve those rights?
What makes you special to be granted this right above me?

You think you are deserving?
*Pffft* Look around you!

We are the clothes you wear, the makeup you put on, the food you eat.
We are the mechanics, the lawyers, the police.
We are the brothers, sisters, uncles and aunts.
We are your neighbours and your friends.
We are everywhere.

You have as much right as I do even though you deserve less.

 

[d0b33]

BTW: Are you HOT?

Well statistically... women against same sex marriage or who use the bible as justification are chubby and not that attractive.

I could be wrong but this is my observation.

 

[arf9999]

Woah people! Stop ganging up on safferbeauty!

In our enlightened constitution she has every right to be a homophobic, bigoted prude. And, now that she's shown her colours so openly, we know exactly how much weight to give her various arguments.

BTW: Safferbeauty, it's time for you to learn about rights and obligations.

 

[BinaryJack]

Woah people! Stop ganging up on safferbeauty!

In our enlightened constitution she has every right to be a homophobic bigoted prude. And, now that she's shown her colours so openly, we know exactly how much weight to give her various arguments.

BTW: Safferbeauty, it's time for you to learn about rights and obligations.

*tsk tsk*
You should know that you must use commas when using a sequence of adjectives qualifying a noun:

In our enlightened constitution she has every right to be a homophobic, bigoted, prude.

 

[RazedInBlack]

Well statistically... women against same sex marriage or who use the bible as justification are chubby and not that attractive.

I could be wrong but this is my observation.

If only we had photographic evidence! :erm:

 

[technofool]

Our self elected Saffer Beauty

If only we had photographic evidence! :erm:

I too am impatient to see what our self elected Saffer Beauty looks like. We have some extraordinarily beautiful people in our country and I would like to see who has chosen to step forward and represent my country and me as our Saffer Beauty.

This has been a fascinating thread and I was thinking of using it to illustrate rational argument to a class of adolescent learners. The opinions are strongly polarized into for and against arguments with few fence sitters. I am hoping the learners will recognize the rational, insightful and enlightened reasoning and stomp on the narrow-minded, bigoted, irrational beliefs with the exuberance that only teenagers can muster.

As homework I might ask them to choose a new nick for safferbeauty as it might not be applicable after the stomping I am expecting to be unleashed. If anyone objects to having their nick exposed pm me and I will protect the guilty. Can you imagine if they all log on to this thread and hunt down the posters they consider to be small-minded, bigoted, ignoramuses?

I have emphasized to the class that opinions and beliefs do not automatically deserve respect, the reasons and evidence supporting your opinions and beliefs may deserve respect. In fact, if you have reliable evidence and rational reasons for your beliefs and opinions then your opposition has no option, if they are sane and rational, but to be convinced and join you in those beliefs.

Safferbeauty, I used to live in your 'belief village' when I was in school. Then I got [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Brain-Sex-Difference-Between-Women/dp/0385311834/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253972861&sr=8-1"]Brain Sex: The Real Difference Between Men and Women[/ame]
by Anne Moir (Author), David Jessel (Author) from the library and changed my beliefs for the better. The sad thing is that this book has been available for over 20 years but people are still struggling with the old ideas when we should have moved on to a better world already. Your beliefs and ideas were attacked not your person.

 

[rwenzori]

She once posted a pic here in the Photos section, but appears to have deleted it.

 

[DJ...]

I have emphasized to the class that opinions and beliefs do not automatically deserve respect, the reasons and evidence supporting your opinions and beliefs may deserve respect. In fact, if you have reliable evidence and rational reasons for your beliefs and opinions then your opposition has no option, if they are sane and rational, but to be convinced and join you in those beliefs.

technofool, I applaud you for this and I for one would gladly send my future kids to a school where this type of thinking is encouraged and embraced,,,

 

[arf9999]

*tsk tsk*
You should know that you must use commas when using a sequence of adjectives qualifying a noun:

Only one was required... so you're partially right.

 

[CathJ]

Biologically I find it silly. It serves no purpose.

Marriage, or gay marriage?

Either way, though, if you're only looking at it biologically you're missing out a large portion of the point of marriage - it's not just to procreate, it's also for security (physical and emotional); for companionship; for sharing life's problems; for sharing life's happinesses. Kids are only a part of all that.