Started By
Message
re: If you're outraged over the Michael Sam thing, turn the tv/internet off.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:02 pm to the808bass
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:02 pm to the808bass
quote:
Well, that's probably not the strongest argument. We're restricting marriages based upon the health risks involved in children they may or may not have?
That's an argument that you're free to make. It still doesn't affect the argument for gay marriage.
1
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:02 pm to Yintros
quote:
These are rather easy to answer. Inbreeding leads to health problems in offspring. An animal is not a consenting adult. You might be able to make a compelling argument for human on animal sex, if that's your thing. It still has nothing to do with gay marriage.
So, now you change your argument. You said it was ok for two consenting adults to do what they wish in private. How about first cousins? that is against the laws, and yet it is legal in many/most countries in Europe. Animals do not have to be consenting adults. They have no rights. People can do with them as they please. They do not consent to being killed and eaten either. And who said ANYTHING at all about gay marriage in this thread?
quote:
Two adults engaging in consensual sex is OK
quote:
He was comparing gay sex to pedophilia.
No. He was not. Read his post again. He was saying that neither are acceptable behavior. BOTH are wrong. If you disagree, fine. But don't say he was saying they are equivalent. He was just saying they are wrong.
For instance:
Stealing is wrong.
Murder is wrong. They are not equivalent. But they are both wrong.
quote:
Again, people can do whatever the hell they want in their private capacity.
No, they can't. And if you think they can, then you don't knwo the laws of this land. I can give you a laundry list of things that people cannot do whatever they want in their private capacity.
quote:
It's insane to believe that the government should be allowed to prohibit two people from willingly entering into a contract with one another.
People are prevented from entering into contracts together for a lot of reasons. And, yo know that brothers/sisters, 1st cousins, Uncles/nieces etc are prevented from being married.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:03 pm to Cheese Grits
Damn now I feel old but yeah I'd hit that
and not in a DGB way, I mean in the good way
and not in a DGB way, I mean in the good way
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:09 pm to Mizzou Fan in Da ATX
I thought that was the good way
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:13 pm to Yintros
quote:
Just like Tim Tebow got the attention that he did, when he was the third string QB.
Tebow got the attention he did because he was a former Heisman winner. Also, he never made a huge fuss about his faith, the media did. And for that he was hated and torn apart, while Sam is made out to be a hero. Ironic, huh?
quote:
Just like Obama got attention for being the first black president.
Legitimate point, except that everybody knows that Sam will not be the first homosexual to play in the NFL.
quote:
The media latches on to controversy for the sake of views.
Absolutely and 100% correct, sir!
quote:
You can vote against such practices by not watching.
And I did.....after the first several times it was played. I had no way of knowing that they were going to play the kiss over and over and over again. Once it became apparent they were playing it over for the shock value I turned it off. I will not watch another NFL draft.
I got no problem with you. I hope you have not been taking this personally. Many on here do and get offended. you are welcome to your opinion as I am to mine. If they played it once and then treated it as if it was just another 7th round pick, I would have said, "Eh" and moved on. It was the constant playing it up that I found objectionable. It was forcing it down our throats. I wanted to watch the NFL Draft. that is what they said I was tuning in for. Had they informed us their intent to make social issues out of the homosexual agenda, i would have tuned out immediately.
How would you react, if a network said they were going to be showing a game between your two favorite teams, and when you turned to watch the game there were two different teams on the channel. then they switched back and forth between your teams and a game that was horrible? Would you be upset? If we wanted to watch the NFL Draft, we had to sit through Michale Sam kissing some guy.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:15 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Legitimate point, except that everybody knows that Sam will not be the first homosexual to play in the NFL.
Correct!
Guys were known to be gay in the first 5 or 6 Super Bowls but it was all kept quiet.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:17 pm to EKG
quote:
Yeah, people's beef should be with espn, not with Sam and his guy.
I don't know if it is true or not, but some on here insinuated that the cake thing was set up. I was not watching by then, so, who knows. IF it was set up and they took part in the st up, then I would have a problem with ESPN and Sam and his guy.
quote:
my family's propensity to steal all the stuffed jalapeños off the grill before I can get inside to enjoy em too,
I see your point. Hopefully you will get a jalapeno next time! Good luck!
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:21 pm to MIZ_COU
quote:
It's the "man-made" part of it that makes me snicker.
You and 0.1% of the scientists baby
More than that. There is no credible evidence that it is man made.
However...as he said. Another topic for another board.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:21 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
So, now you change your argument. You said it was ok for two consenting adults to do what they wish in private. How about first cousins? that is against the laws, and yet it is legal in many/most countries in Europe. Animals do not have to be consenting adults. They have no rights. People can do with them as they please. They do not consent to being killed and eaten either. And who said ANYTHING at all about gay marriage in this thread?
quote:
People are prevented from entering into contracts together for a lot of reasons. And, yo know that brothers/sisters, 1st cousins, Uncles/nieces etc are prevented from being married.
I'm more willing to lend credence to those against incest because there are influence and health concerns. You're free to argue otherwise. It still has nothing to do with homosexuality. The same goes for animals.
quote:
No. He was not. Read his post again. He was saying that neither are acceptable behavior. BOTH are wrong. If you disagree, fine. But don't say he was saying they are equivalent. He was just saying they are wrong.
For instance:
Stealing is wrong.
Murder is wrong. They are not equivalent. But they are both wrong.
Homosexuality may be "wrong" in the eyes of God. However, you are not God. You should not be judging people for their lifestyle choices. Glutony is "wrong" in the eyes of God as well. Is there legislation on the way to prevent that as well, or is that just a liberal issue?
quote:
No, they can't. And if you think they can, then you don't knwo the laws of this land. I can give you a laundry list of things that people cannot do whatever they want in their private capacity.
Perhaps they cannot currently. I am referring to what people should be allowed to do in a free society. I am in favor of personal liberty, which means that I want to leave other people alone and to be left alone.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:22 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
Correct!
Guys were known to be gay in the first 5 or 6 Super Bowls but it was all kept quiet.
Really? I didn't know that. Have you got names? I am curious.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:27 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Tebow got the attention he did because he was a former Heisman winner. Also, he never made a huge fuss about his faith, the media did. And for that he was hated and torn apart, while Sam is made out to be a hero. Ironic, huh?
I'm sure the term "Tebowing" came to be from his not making a big deal about his faith. Tebow made a very big deal about his faith. I'm fine with it.
quote:
I got no problem with you. I hope you have not been taking this personally. Many on here do and get offended. you are welcome to your opinion as I am to mine. If they played it once and then treated it as if it was just another 7th round pick, I would have said, "Eh" and moved on. It was the constant playing it up that I found objectionable. It was forcing it down our throats. I wanted to watch the NFL Draft. that is what they said I was tuning in for. Had they informed us their intent to make social issues out of the homosexual agenda, i would have tuned out immediately.
How would you react, if a network said they were going to be showing a game between your two favorite teams, and when you turned to watch the game there were two different teams on the channel. then they switched back and forth between your teams and a game that was horrible? Would you be upset? If we wanted to watch the NFL Draft, we had to sit through Michale Sam kissing some guy.
I don't take debates personally.
That would be false advertising... If you were watching the NFL Draft during the seventh round, you had to know what everyone was waiting for. If you tune into Sportscenter afterwards, they are going to be covering the biggest story.
I'm against the media making a big deal of of the things that they do (Obama's race, Tebow, Sam, etc...), but I'm not surprised when they do it. I know that watching Fox News or CNN will lead to my placing my face in my palm, so I simply don't watch.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:28 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
As would I....on all counts. I hope you aren't misunderstanding me and where i stand on the issue?
No, I understand where you're coming from. We agree.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:31 pm to Yintros
quote:
Glutony is "wrong" in the eyes of God as well. Is there legislation on the way to prevent that as well, or is that just a liberal issue?
Actually, there has been some talk about legislating this exact issue
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:32 pm to Yintros
quote:
I'm more willing to lend credence to those against incest because there are influence and health concerns. You're free to argue otherwise. It still has nothing to do with homosexuality. The same goes for animals.
We aren't going to come to an agreement on this...but I am curious. There are diseases that people have that can be passed on to their offspring. Some are quite debilitating. Sickle cell, for one. People with these genes are allowed to marry. Are you for this, or against?
Mainly curious, since this is the tact we keep going back to.
quote:
Homosexuality may be "wrong" in the eyes of God. However, you are not God. You should not be judging people for their lifestyle choices. Glutony is "wrong" in the eyes of God as well. Is there legislation on the way to prevent that as well, or is that just a liberal issue?
If God says it is wrong, then why can't I judge it based upon His judgement?
And, yes, there is legislation trying to be passed about gluttony. Ask Hilary Clinton and Michael Bloomberg. They try to pass laws legislating eating habits all the time. Take a look at the schools and the rules they are made to follow concerning eating habits.
quote:
Perhaps they cannot currently. I am referring to what people should be allowed to do in a free society. I am in favor of personal liberty, which means that I want to leave other people alone and to be left alone.
Understood. And had they not plastered all over the television while people were watching with their families, this thread would not exist, would it? The only reason it is an issue is because it was made a very public issue. Michael Sam says he wants to be treated the same, then knowingly makes an issue out of his being gay. If he wants to be judged on his football abilities, then he should be more aware of how his actions affect this. By kissing a man on national television, he had to know people would not be talking about his football abilities.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:38 pm to Yintros
quote:
That's an argument that you're free to make. It still doesn't affect the argument for gay marriage.
You've agreed that there is no universal right to marriage and that you're ok with state interests dictating who can and can't get married.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:38 pm to Yintros
quote:
I'm sure the term "Tebowing" came to be from his not making a big deal about his faith. Tebow made a very big deal about his faith. I'm fine with it.
Legitimate point. however, almost every football player celebrates in some way when they make a big play. many tap their chests and point skyward, and these are not Christians, either....or I assume they are not. People don't make a big deal out of them...they did about Tebow.
quote:
That would be false advertising... If you were watching the NFL Draft during the seventh round, you had to know what everyone was waiting for. If you tune into Sportscenter afterwards, they are going to be covering the biggest story.
I actually did not expect him to be drafted. And, I honestly didn't think he would kiss some guy on TV...not after making a big deal of wanting to be judged on football alone. I was watching to see if anymore Georgia players would be taken.
quote:
I'm against the media making a big deal of of the things that they do (Obama's race, Tebow, Sam, etc...),
I understood about Obama. While I don't care for his politics, it was a big deal that he was the first black President. Tebow and Sam? I don't understand. I don't understand why the media made a huge deal and I don't understand the reactions toward the two individuals.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:38 pm to LSUNV
quote:
Actually, there has been some talk about legislating this exact issue
Gluttony is legal, and their behavior should be accepted by society as normal and beautiful. Therefore, ESPN will show a Rosie O'Donnell vs. Michael Moore gluttony contest, closeups of them slamming peach cobbler down their pieholes. If it disgusts you, you're a bigot and a hater.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:40 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Have you got names?
Yes
quote:
I am curious
Gonna stay that way as you will not hear it from me
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:43 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
We aren't going to come to an agreement on this...but I am curious. There are diseases that people have that can be passed on to their offspring. Some are quite debilitating. Sickle cell, for one. People with these genes are allowed to marry. Are you for this, or against?
Mainly curious, since this is the tact we keep going back to.
Honestly, I find it hard to justify prohibiting incest or any prohibition against the actions of consenting adults. In the long run, the bloodlines of those who procreate in such a manner will either fall behind or cease to exist because of the genetic defects.
quote:
If God says it is wrong, then why can't I judge it based upon His judgement?
And, yes, there is legislation trying to be passed about gluttony. Ask Hilary Clinton and Michael Bloomberg. They try to pass laws legislating eating habits all the time. Take a look at the schools and the rules they are made to follow concerning eating habits.
As someone who attended church for the vast majority of their life, and is still surrounded by Christians regularly, I am certain that there is something in the Bible about not throwing the first stone. Is it not your calling to strive to be like Jesus? He was not very judgmental at all, and he was the son of God.
As for gluttony, I am using it to illustrate that laws should not exist prohibiting something simply because it is "wrong" by biblical standards. Children are to obey their parents, but do they get jailed when they fail to do so? I could go on.
quote:
Understood. And had they not plastered all over the television while people were watching with their families, this thread would not exist, would it? The only reason it is an issue is because it was made a very public issue. Michael Sam says he wants to be treated the same, then knowingly makes an issue out of his being gay. If he wants to be judged on his football abilities, then he should be more aware of how his actions affect this. By kissing a man on national television, he had to know people would not be talking about his football abilities.
Honestly, I just don't care that Michael Sam kissed another man. I don't seek out such images, but it doesn't invoke any outrage in me. The media can talk about it if they would like. I'm busy watching Mad Men.
Posted on 5/13/14 at 3:48 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Legitimate point. however, almost every football player celebrates in some way when they make a big play. many tap their chests and point skyward, and these are not Christians, either....or I assume they are not. People don't make a big deal out of them...they did about Tebow.
Christians latched on to the Tebow mania, and ESPN figured out that they would watch coverage of him. Thus you have the reason for what happened.
quote:
I understood about Obama. While I don't care for his politics, it was a big deal that he was the first black President. Tebow and Sam? I don't understand. I don't understand why the media made a huge deal and I don't understand the reactions toward the two individuals.
Again, the media is a reflection of society. People don't want depth, or meaningful analysis. They want to be fed the simple. The media will change when the viewers do. Not that I expect things to change, as a self-perpetuating cycle has been created.
Page 10 of 12
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News