LogFAQs > #978801603

Katanablade posted...

And Antiyonder, i am not interested in having any debates with you on what subjects Procon.org is addressing and saying, thats not the reason i mentioned it. Im not being a spokes person for what other people have said

Yet you showed up in thread to trash people for not being as enlightened or wise like yourself for your middle ground

If you aren't willing to discuss matters, then it just seemed like your earliest post was just antagonizing us for the sake of it.

At any rate posting the rest of this as your more recent comment wasn't up.

Now please copy and paste everything that is written under "pro's" about gay marriage thats from that same website please?

Haven't seen the site, but the cons are why again good faith to opposition of gay marriage is difficult.

Requoting the cons:

Con 5
Gay marriage is contrary to the word of God and is incompatible with the beliefs, sacred texts, and traditions of many religious groups.

Con 6
Homosexuality is immoral and unnatural, and, therefore, same sex marriage is immoral and unnatural.

1. Just recap relating to Con 6 as I covered it, embracing modern conveniences and such while singling out gay marriage for being wrong cause it's unnatural just seems to be more of an excuse.

I mean some like the previous generation would say television and vehicles make us soft and weak, but I don't see those being banned, ever.

Plus it's funny. Gay marriage is wrong cause it's unnatural, but you bring up how other creatures don't have that hang up and the response "Being natural doesn't mean it's good".

2. Con 5, keep in mind I am a Christian. Problem with playing the religious card:

A. It then makes one seem like they are unwilling to compromise on the rules if religion is THE reason. But how many people in this camp strictly follow their own religious rules?

I'm talking less of occasional slip ups and more of say regular vices one has no intent to drop anytime soon. Though again people who cite religion tend to downplay their own capability of sin to act as if they are flawless.

If all rules of decency have to be abided by and no exception, well it would be incredibly dickish to veto gay marriages while indulging in movies, shows and books that contain even the slightest profanity.

B. Yeah those reported cases of a Christian baker acting appalled to serve in a gay wedding? Would they at least refuse service to a hetero couple where one or both were divorces to other spouses?

Or to look at other religions, if a Hindu baker refused to serve cake to someone cause they hate eating meat, would said baker get the same praise from Christians who believe in the right to refuse gay customers?

Even if yes, there would probably be some behind their back ridicule.

And yeah it's why it's hard to respect those claiming their opposition is due to religion and those who hear said argument and taking it at face value too easily.

Even with willingness to assume good faith, I think it's at least a recognized fact that a person claiming to oppose something on religious ground isn't always sincere or sound.