Jump to content
IGNORED

2014: the year Ellen Page made scores of neckbeards cry out in psychic anguish

lumpenprol

By lumpenprol
in General Banter

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 553
  • Created
  • Last Reply
LimpyLoo Grand Master

LimpyLoo

Posted
Posted

 

question cause you have no answers? no clue?

because Brian's position isn't clear

 

 

Yes, why is the old institution better than the one that's replacing it?

 

 

It is only better if you don't want gay people to get married.

 

 

A bigot tautology

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brian trageskin Grand Master

brian trageskin

Posted
Posted
You haven't given a single reason why that tradition should be respected and kept as it is.

 

first, i never said that tradition should be kept as it is. i didn't even share my opinion on the matter, not a single time. because i think my opinion on this specific matter is irrelevant.

 

what's relevant is this: the government violating the democratic process by unilaterally imposing its agenda, by forcing it despite the protests (anti- gay marriage) and by blatantly lying about it (gender theory at school). not to mention all the lies told by the media about the protesters' motivations (you all homophobes). the whole case is one big intellectual fraud to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DerWaschbar Veteran

DerWaschbar

Posted
Posted

Well I asked question because I get the sense that Brian is against gay marriage for nationalist reasons, not religeous ones. Which seems odd because he said he accepts civil unions, which is essentially the nation granding a marriage like status to homosexuals. So the difference is? Using the word marriage? Have a ceremony in a denomonation that supports it? Frankly if a religeous organization doesn't want to conduct those ceremonies it's between the church and it's patrons imo and if a church within a religeous institution wants to marry people of the same sex, they should go for it and create a discussion within that organisation. But I don't think a nation should have a right to force a private institution to change it's practices, unless they are harmful. I understand there could be an arguement for non acceptance of a group being harmful, but that group doesn't have to be a part of that institution if it doesn't want to be. The less people who maintain those organizations the better imo.

But opposing gay marriage because it will somehow destroy a piece of French culture is pretty lol. French culture has obviously evolved quite a bit over the years... What exactly was the purest French point in history that you would like to revert to? It seems like Brians opinion on this is fueled even more by a fear of multiculturalism/globalism than by a bigotry towards gays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rpeg Collaborator

Rpeg

Posted
Posted

summary of dialogue with sheatheman.

 

  1. Sexuality is not a part of human identity
  2. People can change their sexual orientation at will
  3. Equal rights for homosexuals is not justifiable based on 1 and 2

 

if anyone wants to (with diplomacy) examine this argument, feel free. I'll be out the rest of the night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hoggy Veteran

hoggy

Posted
Posted

what's relevant is this: the government violating the democratic process by unilaterally imposing its agenda, by forcing it despite the protests (anti- gay marriage)

a protest is not a democratic majority

 

and by blatantly lying about it (gender theory at school)

what gender theory do they teach in school where you are? I don't necessarily agree with all kinds of gender theory, but lying? you'd have to be more specific about what you think they are lying about

 

not to mention all the lies told by the media about the protesters' motivations (you all homophobes).

it may not be that they are individually homophobic exactly, but more that their identity depends on homophobic institutions

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brian trageskin Grand Master

brian trageskin

Posted
Posted

This is what I'm going to do...

 

Because xox, sheatheman, and brian cannot put together reasonable arguments, and generally do not contribute to a successful conversation in doing so. I've decided you have little to no value in being heard. So, I'm blocking all three of you and leaving the thread. The thread speaks for itself. Enjoy being dogmatic bigots. You are indeed on the wrong side of history, and you are part of the problem. Good day.

 

1381568042982.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LimpyLoo Grand Master

LimpyLoo

Posted
Posted

 

what's relevant is this: the government violating the democratic process by unilaterally imposing its agenda, by forcing it despite the protests (anti- gay marriage) and by blatantly lying about it (gender theory at school). not to mention all the lies told by the media about the protesters' motivations (you all homophobes). the whole case is one big intellectual fraud to me.

 

 

Yes and this is because civil rights trump popular opinion. For instance, America did away with slavery despite roughly half the country being pro-slavery. And Woman's suffrage. And de-segregation. And now Gay marriage. All done irrespective of popular opinion.

 

 

And that is exactly how it should be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xox Grand Master

xox

Posted
Posted

 

 

what's relevant is this: the government violating the democratic process by unilaterally imposing its agenda, by forcing it despite the protests (anti- gay marriage) and by blatantly lying about it (gender theory at school). not to mention all the lies told by the media about the protesters' motivations (you all homophobes). the whole case is one big intellectual fraud to me.

 

 

Yes and this is because civil rights trump popular opinion. For instance, America did away with slavery despite roughly half the country being pro-slavery. And Woman's suffrage. And de-segregation. And now Gay marriage. All done irrespective of popular opinion.

 

 

And that is exactly how it should be done.

 

 

should be done? maybe in america

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugh Mughnus Grand Master

Hugh Mughnus

Posted
Posted

 

 

what's relevant is this: the government violating the democratic process by unilaterally imposing its agenda, by forcing it despite the protests (anti- gay marriage) and by blatantly lying about it (gender theory at school). not to mention all the lies told by the media about the protesters' motivations (you all homophobes). the whole case is one big intellectual fraud to me.

 

 

Yes and this is because civil rights trump popular opinion. For instance, America did away with slavery despite roughly half the country being pro-slavery. And Woman's suffrage. And de-segregation. And now Gay marriage. All done irrespective of popular opinion.

 

 

And that is exactly how it should be done.

 

 

I think that's his point. That's not democratic. And democracy is part of civil rights innit'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brian trageskin Grand Master

brian trageskin

Posted
Posted

a protest is not a democratic majority

 

of course not, but by googling "manif pour tous", you'll have a glimpse of the situation. btw it's not one protest, there were several ones, and they were crowdy.

 

what gender theory do they teach in school where you are? I don't necessarily agree with all kinds of gender theory, but lying? you'd have to be more specific about what you think they are lying about

 

the joke is the minister of education, coupled with the minister of woman rights, are lying about the very existence of this program being teached at school, when all the proofs are there. to deal with ridicule, they're using euphemisms such as "gender studies", to hide the fact that this program is indeed being teached in some schools.

 

it may not be that they are individually homophobic exactly, but more that their identity depends on homophobic institutions

 

proove me the homophobic nature of the protesting movement in france.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brian trageskin Grand Master

brian trageskin

Posted
Posted
Yes and this is because civil rights trump popular opinion. For instance, America did away with slavery despite roughly half the country being pro-slavery. And Woman's suffrage. And de-segregation. And now Gay marriage. All done irrespective of popular opinion.

 

 

And that is exactly how it should be done.

 

this is a fallacy, and a very popular one:

you're articulating the gay marriage reform with other historical civil rights progresses, as if giving access to civil rights to more population was the sense of history in democratic regimes, thereby annihilating all debate on the matter, and you're also ignoring that gay people already have civil rights in france. they do can pretty much whatever they want with their lives, as everybody else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.