Homosexual marriage... - Page 10 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

Colly Wolly · 03-25-2006, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grapevine

The other day on a boise tv station some lesbian exlds people were saying that is who I am blasting the church saying its none of thee business. Church wouldnt comment on camera sent some statements. Saying thats me nothing you can do about it is denyinb divine potential i think.

???

All-American · 03-25-2006, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

Quote:

Originally Posted by All-American

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

Isn't one purpose of marriage, from a social POV, to encourage responsible behavior in people? Marriage, from the POV of the nation, helps pass some expenses onto the responsible couple, that might otherwise be taken up by the taxpayers. If so many of the problems with the 'gay lifestyle' involve irresponsible behavior that ends up costing taxpayers a lot of money, doesn't it make sense to create policy that encourages a culture of responsible behavior? It seems like gay marriage would work toward that end.

We can also avoid cancer by giving up eating altogether. But we nevertheless are optimistically searching for a better way.

AAA, this is even lamer than usual for you.

Do you have an actual criticism, or would you rather just slap a name on it and call it a day?

I thank you in advance for your contribution.

Robin · 03-26-2006, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by All-American

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

Quote:

Originally Posted by All-American

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

Isn't one purpose of marriage, from a social POV, to encourage responsible behavior in people? Marriage, from the POV of the nation, helps pass some expenses onto the responsible couple, that might otherwise be taken up by the taxpayers. If so many of the problems with the 'gay lifestyle' involve irresponsible behavior that ends up costing taxpayers a lot of money, doesn't it make sense to create policy that encourages a culture of responsible behavior? It seems like gay marriage would work toward that end.

We can also avoid cancer by giving up eating altogether. But we nevertheless are optimistically searching for a better way.

AAA, this is even lamer than usual for you.

Do you have an actual criticism, or would you rather just slap a name on it and call it a day?

I thank you in advance for your contribution.

There are some people on this board who are not worth responding to in any serious way. You did not put out a serious argument. It was a lame argument. I'm not interested in going into the details of why it is a lame argument. Pick up a book on the basic rules of logic and have yourself a good read. Arguing with people who lack such a fundamental grasp of reason will never bear fruit. The day you articulate a serious idea is the day I will give you a serious response.

All-American · 03-26-2006, 03:49 PM

If you're not willing to condescend to our level, why not just agree to disagree instead of taking shots? You consider it below you, but not so far below that you can't call into question the character of those submitting the argument-- how convenient! Such a stance not only relieves you of the responsibility of using logic, but allows you to take the moral high ground as well.

Allowing gay marriage to encourage responsibility is no better than giving up eating to avoid cancer-- it may work to the intended end, but at a price much higher than the former state. If you don't intend to dispute that idea beyond what you already have (as I, and likely many others, do not intend), please acknowledge your disagreement civilly and move along.

Robin · 03-26-2006, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by All-American

If you're not willing to condescend to our level, why not just agree to disagree instead of taking shots? You consider it below you, but not so far below that you can't call into question the character of those submitting the argument-- how convenient! Such a stance not only relieves you of the responsibility of using logic, but allows you to take the moral high ground as well.

Allowing gay marriage to encourage responsibility is no better than giving up eating to avoid cancer-- it may work to the intended end, but at a price much higher than the former state. If you don't intend to dispute that idea beyond what you already have (as I, and likely many others, do not intend), please acknowledge your disagreement civilly and move along.

Bullshit. You have no idea what allowing gay marriage would do. You can guess, and you can appeal to faith/personal morality, and you can even appeal to the majority, but it is a false analogy and you never even attempted to support it with facts.

I'm not here to teach you the most basic principles of logic and rhetoric. Go to community college and take some classes, then come back when you are able to wipe your own nose.

All-American · 03-26-2006, 08:24 PM

Again, if you don't agree with what has been previously stated, agree to disagree with civility and move along. There's no need to throw a tantrum.

Robin · 03-26-2006, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by All-American

Again, if you don't agree with what has been previously stated, agree to disagree with civility and move along. There's no need to throw a tantrum.

If you make a lame argument, that has nothing to do with 'agreeing to disagree.' I can neither agree or disagree with a non-argument. If pointing out the lameness of your non-argument is a tantrum, then whaa.

JohnnyLingo · 05-29-2006, 06:10 AM

For all who missed it:

Church news release

Cali Coug · 05-29-2006, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

For all who missed it:

Church news release

I am very disappointed today.

I think this is a mistake of gigantic proportions.

Colly Wolly · 05-29-2006, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoyacoug

I am very disappointed today.

I think this is a mistake of gigantic proportions.

WE ARE BEING LED ASTRAY!!!

03-26-2006, 03:49 PM	#94
All-American Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,420	If you're not willing to condescend to our level, why not just agree to disagree instead of taking shots? You consider it below you, but not so far below that you can't call into question the character of those submitting the argument-- how convenient! Such a stance not only relieves you of the responsibility of using logic, but allows you to take the moral high ground as well. Allowing gay marriage to encourage responsibility is no better than giving up eating to avoid cancer-- it may work to the intended end, but at a price much higher than the former state. If you don't intend to dispute that idea beyond what you already have (as I, and likely many others, do not intend), please acknowledge your disagreement civilly and move along. __________________ εν αρχη ην ο λογος

03-26-2006, 08:24 PM	#96
All-American Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,420	Again, if you don't agree with what has been previously stated, agree to disagree with civility and move along. There's no need to throw a tantrum. __________________ εν αρχη ην ο λογος

05-29-2006, 06:10 AM	#98
JohnnyLingo Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,175	For all who missed it: Church news release