Yes, it was a good thing. You can ignorantly turn your nose all you want, but those are the facts. Back then if a woman was raped she had no...
---------- Free will cannot exist for beings and obviously does not exist for humans. Whether a being is created or generates randomly, that being...
Yes, I have personal experience to the contrary. I have very ignorant (And very unintelligent, mind you) family members who are racist and liberal. Politically liberal, of course, in the sense that taxes should be high-particularly on the rich, strong belief in social programs, and hatred of big corporations. And racist, in the sense that "A niggеr cannot be president". If the correlation between conservatism and racism is so obvious, please give me a premise ---> conclusion argument for racism where the premise is inherently conservative.
I'm not seeing where exactly this study shows that less intelligent people are more likely to become conservatives. The study is about racism. Unless I'm understanding this phrase incorrectly: Are they saying those kids grew up with conservative parents? Because that's not the same as growing up to become conservative, which the article doesn't mention. The article seems to just assume a correlation between racism and conservatism (Which is disturbing and kind of extremely insulting)
Because, there's this thing called free will. God created man, man created society. Dictating the laws of the land is something God can't do, he can only tell us how we should behave, and it's up to the lawmakers to interpret how that should incorporate into the law (If the lawmakers choose to incorporate God's will into the law). God didn't make it a terrible offense for the rapist, but he didn't make it a law to marry your rapist either, the lawmakers did that. All God did was say that you shouldn't rape women. How to deal with people who did was up to the lawmakers. Yes, the lines are very blurred, I can't deny that. Many of the laws you see in the Bible (i.e. the ones that aren't said directly from God to man like the Law and the Commandments) are man's interpretation of God's will. It could be argued that it was an attempt to protect men from marrying women who would commit adultery against them. But again, I think what we're seeing there is the societal result of attempting to incorporate God's will into law. That argument could be made, sure. If a practice is resulting in things like that it would make sense to condemn such activity. Honestly, I'm pretty compromised about it. There are references to homosexuality still being a sin in the New Testament, in which Jesus makes a point of dismissing the obsolete laws that missed the point of God's morality (Such as stoning adulterers), so the fact that Jesus chooses to leave the topic of homosexuality alone makes me lean more towards him still condemning the practice. However, it's worth noting that all the references to it in the New Testament are more or less directed towards Rome, who were pretty disgusting with their homosexual practices (Systematic raping of kids, etc.), so it may also have been a societal issue. If the issue didn't affect me as much as it did I would probably be fine with just writing it off as a sin or writing it off as okay, but I'm a little more compromised about it. So I don't really have an answer for you. By the way, at this point we're straying really far from the issue of gay marriage, though I'd be glad to continue this conversation with you through VM.
Yes, it was a good thing. I'll say it again: It sounds horrible to us now, but back then if you were raped you basically had no chance of ever...
I wish I had a girlfriend who would cosplay with me ;_;
No, God's morality doesn't change, what changes are the laws necessary to uphold it. God wants what's best for women...and at the time that did mean marrying your rapist. If you want my honest opinion on it, I believe the only reason God forbade homosexual sex was the horribly increased risk of diseases associated with **** sex and fecal matter-penile contact. He was trying to protect us. Now that it's possible to protect yourself, I think God would be a little bit more lenient. Again, context specific laws in some cases are unnecessary or don't work anymore, but moral laws (Honor your mother and father, don't kill) are unchanging.
Thank God, I was almost considering buying a used PS3 or PSV. I was in a really compromised position until right now.
The fact that they have the ability to to just not allow something is a serious problem. That's not how capitalism is supposed to work. That would not have been possible. There's nothing illegal about Megabox.
You're actually wrong about most of those- a lot of those occur in the Bible but are not approved by the Bible. The Bible is very clear about monogamy (Even though some important biblical figures had polygamist marriages- they were still not approved by the Bible). And a lot of those made sense in context. Like the woman and the rapist thing. It sounds horrible to us now, but back then if you were raped you basically had no chance of ever getting a husband, you were basically screwed for the rest of your life-marrying your rapist was pretty much the best you could do for yourself. It wasn't like it is now.
It actually doesn't, the Bible specifically says not to mate with members of your family. Please know your facts before you say things like that. They aren't though, what's actually being denied to them is the tax benefits, which the state has control over. Really it's a voter issue, not a church issue. It wasn't too long ago there was a proposition in California to legalize gay marriage, and it didn't pass. So the issue is with the voters, not the church itself. People make their own decisions and if the voters aren't going to legalize something, then you can only blame the environment you live in, blaming the church automatically is a little unfair. Now this, I do have an issue with. Christianity is a set of beliefs and if you don't believe in it, that's fine. But it really isn't fair to force us to change our belief system for you. Again, I don't see why gay people would want to get married in a church anyway.
Right, I don't have a problem with any of what you're saying, that's the misunderstanding here... What I'm trying to say is, homosexuals are arguing about their love being oppressed and that they're just as good as us when really nobody is denying them that. What they're being denied is the tax benefits (And it is unfair, I agree with you). I guess what I'm trying to say here is they're picking the wrong battle. I think if gay people were less "We deserve to love each other, we're just as good as you" and more "Give us our freaking tax benefits" they'd get a lot further than they're getting. But if the argument is purely about a promise and romance, there isn't really an argument to be had. Also, I'm not sure how it is in other states, but in California, getting a domestic partnership gives you the exact same rights and benefits as getting married. So I'm not seeing where the argument is. If you're going to post, at least read the last page or so of the thread. As we were just talking about, nobody is stopping gay people from loving each other.
Again, marriage is a religious institution and if you have a proper ceremony with a priest, you are married, whether the state will recognize it or not. If what matters is romance, or a promise, there is nothing stopping you. I think you're misunderstanding me, the tax benefits are because children are expensive, so giving them to gay couples that are unlikely to have kids is unfair. It is, married couples get more and more tax benefits for each kid.
That is how much power we let the music industry have. Even without SOPA and PIPA, we are letting them have control over everything. They can stomp anything they want to, like a bug. It's disgusting and unamerican, this fights fair free market capitalism in every way. This is why I don't buy music, and it's why you shouldn't either. Help end the injustice today. Make a statement with your wallet. If you want to support a band you like, go see them live. That's the only way they make real money anyway. But stop feeding the record companies the sustenance they need to take away freedom and fair free market capitalism, while ripping off both you and the bands you love (The amount they make from record sales isn't anywhere near Megabox's promised 90 percent)
I don't believe any of the marriages you mentioned to be any better than gay marriages...that's not a proper argument for me needing to support gay marriage. I truly don't see why gay people want to get married. Though there are obviously tax benefits associated with it now (Which I'll address later) marriage is a religious institution, that's just its origin. If you choose to marry someone of the same sex, you probably don't believe in a religion...so why would you want to get married in the first place? And even if you did, again since marriage is a religious institution, if it really is just about you wanting "to be married" to someone of the same sex there's nothing stopping you...if you have a proper wedding ceremony with a priest and get married, you're married whether or not the state will recognize it. You won't get the tax benefits, but there's nothing stopping you from getting married. So just to reiterate, I'm at the point where I truly don't care if gays want to get married, go for it- I'm just at a loss as to why they want to. With regard to the tax benefits themselves, I don't think it's fair to give gay couples the same tax benefits as straight couples. The point of those benefits is that you probably have kids. Gay people, well, can't. You should definitely get those benefits if you adopt a child whether you're married or not. As for all the other rights that come with marriage, I don't see why gay people shouldn't have them, but at that point it stops becoming "Love is love and you should let people love whoever they want to love" and it starts becoming "Give me my tax benefits". Seems like gay people are picking the wrong battle here.
---------- I'm really worried about Sony...If they stop making games I'm not gonna have anything left to do for fun except watch Animes and...
Sony are nazis and treat their customers like crap. What they did to Geohot was nothing short of unforgivable. Nintendo's characters and games...
There's a lot that Heroes are capable of. The point is they lack the consistency to do it a lot, or enough for it to even be worried about.
Hi, I'm Slaughtermatic, though everyone seems to think it's Slaughtermaniac. I've been posting here less and less because I'm so busy but I shall be more active, I swear it!
