|
| Thread: Limited Rights or Limited Government? [religious opinions not banned from this thread |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted March 29, 2013 10:17 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Well, that quote may have the opposite effect on him because it is as if he learns the meanings of words from a dictionary that gives opposite definitions. A Marxist American government, materialistic dogma... A dogma is a belief that can not be questioned, so it is religious in nature not materialistic, dogma is when you say: "it's God's universe and he makes the rules, how dare you object to them, what a nerve!" Sounds familiar?
With Nietzsche being massively anti-Christian he will treat him and his quotes like those of Comrade Mao anyway.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 29, 2013 11:38 AM |
|
Edited by xerox at 11:41, 29 Mar 2013.
|
Elodin: Raising a kid is always brainwashing to some extent. So don't you think it's better to "brainwash" kids with critical thought instead of blind belief and with values of tolerance instead of intolerance? Children must have the possibility to become something else than their parents. That's an important part of liberty. The government can ensure that all children have a realistic possibility to realize that liberty.
Also, here's something very interesting when it comes to traditional vs secular values:
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 29, 2013 12:32 PM |
|
|
|
What exactly is the Survival Values in this chart?
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted March 29, 2013 12:47 PM |
|
|
I agree with Artu, the chart is rather meaningless in its current state.
____________
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 29, 2013 05:05 PM |
|
|
|
You can read more in-depth about it here.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted March 29, 2013 10:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
support for democracy........... the impact of globalization
Survey? Yes. Relevant and not rigged? No. You just shot yourself in the foot.
____________
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted March 30, 2013 05:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
angelito said....
Per monday, last news drafts I have read, the law was IN DRAFT, meaning you are essentially a propaganda machine yourself.
Regardless of what the law is drafted into, so long it causes a bankrun AND a loan to avoid that, its high daylight robbery.
Maybe you try reading news who are posting facts instead? The banks were closed to avoid a bankrun forced by overaction, but people were still able to get money from the cash dispenser (limited). Again, deposits BELOW of 100,000 Euros were NOT taxed.
There are many sources where you can read about it, I have chosen a source outside of germany so you don't have to think it is german propaganda: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21970655
Maybe you tell us your source?
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 30, 2013 06:48 PM |
|
Edited by Shyranis at 18:52, 30 Mar 2013.
|
Best limited government argument I have seen against a "Benevolent father" approach to government from a surprising source.
Allowing all consenting adults to marry takes away from nobody's rights but allows others to enjoy the same rights as us straight folk. It's really win-win because nobody can take away a person's personal definition of marriage but themselves, but to force that definition on somebody else is exactly what a restrictive "big brother" would do. I mean, it just brings us one step further from Iran's laws =D
(Gay people already could marry here since 2003, but seeing people south of the border be denied even civil union rights by people saying even those somehow impact their personal definition of marriage is disheartening. I mean, your personal convictions have to be pretty weak if seeing somebody else getting married hurts your own.)
There is so much more freedom we can allow people to have without infringing on the rights of others. It's a kind of love that needs to spread 
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 30, 2013 11:02 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 23:07, 30 Mar 2013.
|
Gays already have the right to get married. What they want is the right to redefine marriage. I don't think gays have the inherent right to redefine marriage and don't see why the government should acknowledge them to have such a non-existant right. Like I said, any gay person in any state can apply for a marriage license and get married, the same as any other citizen.
Oh, shall we get into a war of who can post the biggest picture with the most words in capital letters? 
____________
Revelation
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 30, 2013 11:53 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 00:23, 31 Mar 2013.
|
|
Redefine marriage? There's a single, absolute definition to marriage?
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 12:20 AM |
|
|
Marriage has already been redefined. People can divorce, women have rights, etc.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 01:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Gays already have the right to get married. What they want is the right to redefine marriage. I don't think gays have the inherent right to redefine marriage and don't see why the government should acknowledge them to have such a non-existant right. Like I said, any gay person in any state can apply for a marriage license and get married, the same as any other citizen.
Sadly that's untrue. Only a handful of states permit Gay Marriage in any form explicitly and many ban it outright even for civil unions (which takes away visitation rights etc)
Also federally the government will not recognize even civil unions as a financial marriage-like state for gay couples. It's just a case of big government getting in the way of everybody having the rights they should 
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 04:38 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 04:40, 31 Mar 2013.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Gays already have the right to get married. What they want is the right to redefine marriage. I don't think gays have the inherent right to redefine marriage and don't see why the government should acknowledge them to have such a non-existant right. Like I said, any gay person in any state can apply for a marriage license and get married, the same as any other citizen.
Sadly that's untrue. Only a handful of states permit Gay Marriage in any form explicitly and many ban it outright even for civil unions (which takes away visitation rights etc)
No, it is not untrue. Any citizen can get married in any of the states no matter what his sexual fetish may be. Some people just don't like what marriage is and want to change what marriage is. John, a gay man, can get married to Susan or Janet or any other woman who is eligible to be married.
John can't marry Tina, who is already a married woman, and who thus is not legally able to marry him. He can't marry Tom because Tom is not eligible to marry him either, being a man. He can't marry Glenda, because Glenda is only ten years old. He can't marry Thelma, because even though Thelma is not married, Thelma is his mother. John also can't marry Becky, because Becky is his sister.
So we see there are lots of people that John can't marry. John not being able to marry those people does not mean his rights are being trampled.
____________
Revelation
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 04:46 AM |
|
|
|
So when you say "Gays already have the right to get married" what you you mean is a gay man can marry a woman. That's just...
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 04:46 AM |
|
|
If everyone is consenting (and is capable of consenting), then yes, their rights are being trampled. Their freedom of association is being infringed upon.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 05:24 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 05:27, 31 Mar 2013.
|
This is really simple. Homosexuality is not considered a mental illness since the early seventies, so when we talk about a gay couple we are talking about two consenting, single, adults.
Now if you are talking about marriage as a religious bond, the church or any other institution has a right to say we believe this is a sin and we will not perform the ceremony.
If on the other hand, we are talking about marriage as a contract of the law, gays should be allowed to marry and benefit from the advantages like any other couple such as special bank loans, prison visitation, life insurance, inheritance of property etc etc.
There has never been a single form or definition of marriage all over the world or through history and no one can be forced to define it according to someone else's religion. It's people's own business, let them be.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 12:13 PM |
|
|
Am I the only one that considers the institution of marriage completely obsolete?
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 12:24 PM |
|
|
Religion is still powerful through the world, is not a matter of tiny isolate groups, but milliards. They were taught gay is a sin and against nature (for the last I am with them) so their opinion is not to throw easily.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 01:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Am I the only one that considers the institution of marriage completely obsolete?
That depends on what is meant by "the institution of marriage". If it means privileging marriage in the tax code, then it's not so much obsolete as something that should have never happened in the first place. If it means something limited to one man and one woman who are socially expected to act a certain way (a ring, a wedding, monogamy) then it would be better if that was something people could choose for themselves without it being something that's socially expected of them. If it means people making a commitment to love and take care of each other, then it's good.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 31, 2013 02:19 PM |
|
Edited by shyranis at 14:57, 31 Mar 2013.
|
Quote:
No, it is not untrue. Any citizen can get married in any of the states no matter what his sexual fetish may be. Some people just don't like what marriage is and want to change what marriage is. John, a gay man, can get married to Susan or Janet or any other woman who is eligible to be married.
Wow, that's just. You seem to (at least pretend) not to get that a gay person does not get to marry the consenting, unmarried person they love. In the examples you gave people were married and there is a simple fix (divorce) to fix the already married problem. -If- you really want to use the government to defend the sanctity of marriage why not outlaw divorce? Even then, strictly monogamous relationships are a recent development in human history. The bible does not even define marriage as a single man and single woman.
A gay person can be married to another gay person and that is their own personal bond. If you think that redefines the Christian definition of marriage, than your faith is really weaker than I thought. The (certain members of certain denominations of) Christian (Or Muslim for that matter) definition of marriage is a deeply held personal belief. If a non-susbstantial governmental entity that is not forcing you to get gay married changes your beliefs by allowing gay marriage for others than perhaps you need to re-examine your relationship with God if you're listening to the government over him.
Don't you also believe in the free market? Don't like gay marriage, don't get gay married. Don't like skinny jeans, don't buy them. Don't like drinking, don't drink. Don't like rap music, don't actively listen or buy it. But why deny other people the freedom to do so? The government needs to get out of the way. Stopping gay marriage is as patently ridiculous as the religious headwear ban in France you mentioned. Rather than to respecting everybody and giving them all the same rights you take away something from the minority.
You still have your own freedom to worship as you see fit. Freedom is awesome
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
|
|
