Duck Dynasty: TV pastor points out demonic nature of homosexuality, liberals foam at mouth..

[Blackking]

Gays are not missing out on a right that everyone else has. No one can marry the same gender, and everyone can marry the opposite gender.
.

I've never heard anyone say this like this before

 

[Blackking]

Our laws are supposed to be based on secular reasoning. .

You're educated right? What do you think many of our laws are based on? What do you feel is the inspiration for the men who created most of the worlds laws in most nations?

 

[Type Username Here]

You're educated right? What do you think many of our laws are based on? What do you feel is the inspiration for the men who created most of the worlds laws in most nations?

Here you go again. The "religion came before everything" argument that has no validity in any form.

The only thing I know is that for every law that might have been inspired by religion, there are many more that are secular oriented, including advocating SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

Dawkins shyts on this pretty well in this clip:

 

[Type Username Here]

Can anyone here or outside of here make an argument as to why a handful of religions should dictate secular and constitutional law when the Constitution itself explicitly forbids it?

@DEAD7, you're a constitutional head, can you explain to me why the bible should play a role in designing and shaping laws in a secular state?

I'll wait.

 

[The Real]

It is fallacious because of the reason for the discrimination.

If you are racist you will discriminate against someone based on their origin. If you are a homophobe you discriminate against someone based on an action that you find disgusting.

If you're going to do something that people find disgusting (even if you enjoy it), you shouldn't be shocked and appalled when people don't want to be around you. If I knew my neighbor sat home and masterbated 14X a day to pictures of Susan Boyle (the extreme example is intentional), then guess what.... I would avoid my neighbor, and I would probably not want to hire him to work for me. Fukking disgusting. Does he have the right? Sure. Does avoiding the dude make me similar to a racist? Hell no.

Homosexuality isn't an act, though. It's a sexual orientation, and furthermore, one with no rational basis for discrimination. And sure, you can avoid them all you want, and it would be ridiculous to force people to interact in their private lives, but work and social services are a different story. We aren't allowed to not hire a qualified Black person because we hate things that some or even most Black people do in their private lives, even of our religious books instruct us to hate them. Sexual orientation works the same way. It's a kind of unwarranted categorical judgment and further, one that is irrelevant to the working context.

 

[Type Username Here]

I argue on this based on the philosophical concept of consent and secular law (i.e., Constitutional Law), therefore arguing from a position about your desert fairy tale myth being grounds for establishing secular laws as if it is some form of be-all and end-all is laughable. We are about to go into the year 2014.

 

[Type Username Here]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Where in there does it say "but we should take account of Religious Morality"?

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

no link... just assumption.

Yeah, that's what I figured.

 

[Blackking]

Here you go again. The "religion came before everything" argument that has no validity in any form.

The only thing I know is that for every law that might have been inspired by religion, there are many more that are secular oriented, including advocating SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

Dawkins shyts on this pretty well in this clip:

I'm not saying it should be that way.... or that religion influence on secular laws- are better than secular laws based on secular ideas.

I'm just pointing out the facts.
-Many laws are rooted in religious law.
-Most 'good' organizations, charities, orphanages, advanced private schools, and nearly everything else that's good has a religious backing.... because those things are used to look out for society...
-There is a reason religion and law has been debated since the creation of the US - nearly all the nations before it had heavy religious influence... and you really can't make a clean separation of church and state if most of you politicians and citizens who vote on laws are religious.
- laws can, have been, and will continue to be influenced by religion.
- laws are based on societal standards and social norms --- and social norms are deeply rooted in all major world religions... lol, look at the ideas of most empire and nation creators over the last 3K years.
- It is possible that some of these laws would still exist were it not for religion.... but fact is they came because of religion.
- There is a reason you find God on many federal buildings.
- Does the first amendment say "separation of Church and state"? or does it say " prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

The only parallel is the excuses and reasons the ones discriminating give. There is a very real parallel there. I can pull up countless examples if you wish.

Nah, I'd rather not have what my grandparents and parents went through to be treated as equal citizens compared to homosexuals wanting to change the definition of marriage.

Keep your examples. They won't change my view.

Ethnicity can't (and shouldn't be) be compared to sexual orientation any more than left or right-handedness can be compared to political affiliation.

​

 

[The Real]

Nah, I'd rather not have what my grandparents and parents went through to be treated as equal citizens compared to homosexuals wanting to change the definition of marriage.

Keep your examples. They won't change my view.​

No one is comparing those. What @Type Username Here was saying is that the justification for discrimination in both cases is equally vacuous and irrational, not that the discrimination itself is equivalent in severity.

 

[Type Username Here]

No one is comparing those. What @Type Username Here was saying is that the justification for discrimination in both cases is equally vacuous and irrational, not that the discrimination itself is equivalent in severity.

He knows that's what I meant.

 

[The Real]

He knows that's what I meant.

It's crazy how much cognitive dissonance sets in when you talk about subjects like this. Emotions can really distort otherwise functioning rationality.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

No one is comparing those. What @Type Username Here was saying is that the justification for discrimination in both cases is equally vacuous and irrational, not that the discrimination itself is equivalent in severity.

I was well-aware of what he was driving at, but the justification for discrimination based on sexual proclivities is completely justified dependent upon particular proclivity. There is no justification for discrimination based on ethnicity.

Co-opting the Civil Rights struggle to highlight homosexuals' desire to change the definition of marriage is plain disingenuous and unnecessary.​

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

@Candor by changing the thread title, you allowed the op to save face by not having the word "righteous" (before that riteous, lol) being used to describe that racist redneck dumb ass. His bufoonery and penchant for stanning white supremacists should be on display for every to see.