Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Oh man Hicks try to BAN Gays
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
admiral



Joined: 21 Sep 2002
Posts: 373
 Reply with quote  

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

what i meant was, could they legally vote blacks out of their county if they wanted to if it was a majority consensus? i don't know the law very well...
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 11:08 am
 View user's profile Send private message
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

They are passing the law for the purpose of not allowing gays in the community - however, you cannot judge based on race, religion or creed in this country so they are forced to only make gays ACTIONS illegal. The actual ACT of gay sex...I would imagine male on male kissing, oral, anal, alla that shit illegal. You CAN make actions illegal in a democracy, just not thoughts (John Stewart Mill, anyone?).

Now, this isn't to say what they're doing is RIGHT. I want to make sure I reiterate that.

Having homosexual FEELINGS would be allowed in this community, however, homosexual ACTS would not. This Democracy allows for that within it's rules (as do most).

Blacks didn't choose to be. "Being black" is not an action. Homosexuals CAN choose not to DO homosexual acts (in the same way that heterosexuals can choose to stay abstinent). That is where the difference lies in your comparison.

- Shane
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 11:42 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tinkleDRINKER



Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 788
 Reply with quote  

MessiahCarey wrote:
They are passing the law for the purpose of not allowing gays in the community - however, you cannot judge based on race, religion or creed in this country so they are forced to only make gays ACTIONS illegal. The actual ACT of gay sex...I would imagine male on male kissing, oral, anal, alla that shit illegal. You CAN make actions illegal in a democracy, just not thoughts (John Stewart Mill, anyone?).

Now, this isn't to say what they're doing is RIGHT. I want to make sure I reiterate that.

Having homosexual FEELINGS would be allowed in this community, however, homosexual ACTS would not. This Democracy allows for that within it's rules (as do most).

Blacks didn't choose to be. "Being black" is not an action. Homosexuals CAN choose not to DO homosexual acts (in the same way that heterosexuals can choose to stay abstinent). That is where the difference lies in your comparison.

- Shane


dude, he has you there! you tell em shane! it is time to take back the USA. were not gonna let these faggots corrupt are youth any longer! i' glad there is someone around here w/ the balls to speak the truth.
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 11:48 am
 View user's profile Send private message
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

tinkleDRINKER wrote:
MessiahCarey wrote:
They are passing the law for the purpose of not allowing gays in the community - however, you cannot judge based on race, religion or creed in this country so they are forced to only make gays ACTIONS illegal. The actual ACT of gay sex...I would imagine male on male kissing, oral, anal, alla that shit illegal. You CAN make actions illegal in a democracy, just not thoughts (John Stewart Mill, anyone?).

Now, this isn't to say what they're doing is RIGHT. I want to make sure I reiterate that.

Having homosexual FEELINGS would be allowed in this community, however, homosexual ACTS would not. This Democracy allows for that within it's rules (as do most).

Blacks didn't choose to be. "Being black" is not an action. Homosexuals CAN choose not to DO homosexual acts (in the same way that heterosexuals can choose to stay abstinent). That is where the difference lies in your comparison.

- Shane


dude, he has you there! you tell em shane! it is time to take back the USA. were not gonna let these faggots corrupt are youth any longer! i' glad there is someone around here w/ the balls to speak the truth.


I'm saying.

The only good thing about fags is that they give better head than any girl I've ever been with.

Word up.

- Shane
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 11:50 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tinkleDRINKER



Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 788
 Reply with quote  

kid you consistently crack me up
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:02 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
the mean
Certified O.G.


Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 6497
Location: philly/sacto/kauai/ohio
 Reply with quote  

MessiahCarey wrote:
They are passing the law for the purpose of not allowing gays in the community - however, you cannot judge based on race, religion or creed in this country so they are forced to only make gays ACTIONS illegal. The actual ACT of gay sex...I would imagine male on male kissing, oral, anal, alla that shit illegal. You CAN make actions illegal in a democracy, just not thoughts (John Stewart Mill, anyone?).

Now, this isn't to say what they're doing is RIGHT. I want to make sure I reiterate that.

Having homosexual FEELINGS would be allowed in this community, however, homosexual ACTS would not. This Democracy allows for that within it's rules (as do most).

Blacks didn't choose to be. "Being black" is not an action. Homosexuals CAN choose not to DO homosexual acts (in the same way that heterosexuals can choose to stay abstinent). That is where the difference lies in your comparison.

- Shane
You actually bring up some pretty interesting point here, but i think your point about the choice whether or not to "DO" homosexual acts is now moot.

Last summer the Supreme Court ruled that homosexual sex is protected by under the Constitution's right to privacy. So any local laws making gay sex illegal are now in the same category with laws discriminating on the basis of race or sex. Sure, the local legislature can pass them, but the courts will strike them down as soon as they are challenged.
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:43 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
apeofdeath
FIRE BREATHING DRAG QUEEN


Joined: 30 Sep 2002
Posts: 2804
Location: Kingston, mang
 Reply with quote  

tinkleDRINKER wrote:
My other posts were jokes but know it has strayed into an area that i deem important so i will weigh in seriously.


there are mulitple proofs for the exisitence of god. Science (deduction/abduction) has been used to prove/disprove (valid or invalid) the exsitence of god in the past by many men/women better and smarter than you or I - it is called philosophy. end of story! if you want to battle i have 5000 years of philospohers backing me up.

I was questioning that persons belief in atheism - blind faith in the non-existence of a single diety is ludicris. where does your faith come from? as a mortal how can you deny the possibilty of omnipotence when it is fact that a normal distributions extended infinetly in both directions? my is whole point was that person is most likely agnostic.



Science is NOT philosophy. The scientific method and philopshical methods are completely disjoint. So these alleged 'philosophers' havent really proved anything. You can't use philosophy as a basis to prove anything. It's a tool with which we use to reason and rationalize. Likewise philosophy and mathematics are also disjoint.

There's a saying, God created numbers and the human brain has done the rest. Mathematics will ALWAYS be finite, it's a construct of the human brain and our brains are most definately FINITE. So your argument about mathematics tending to infinity really makes no sense.
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:45 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Doctrine



Joined: 05 Apr 2003
Posts: 4626
Location: ATL, Livin' Swell
 Reply with quote  

Shane wrote:
"Being black" is not an action.


Funny you say that...Allot of kids from my town got it twisted...
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:51 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

Doctrine wrote:
Shane wrote:
"Being black" is not an action.


Funny you say that...Allot of kids from my town got it twisted...


It's funny...I was thinkin after I typed that of adding a paranthetical expression along the lines of (regardless of what my predominantly white metalhead town thought while I was growing up)...but thought it would be one of my trademark parenthetical expressions that completely breaks the train of thought. Ha.

- Shane
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:53 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tinkleDRINKER



Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 788
 Reply with quote  

Infamous wrote:

Science is NOT philosophy. The scientific method and philopshical methods are completely disjoint. So these alleged 'philosophers' havent really proved anything. You can't use philosophy as a basis to prove anything. It's a tool with which we use to reason and rationalize. Likewise philosophy and mathematics are also disjoint..


science is derived from from logic which is a branch of philosophy. Science is a philosophy - the fact tht you think it is not, shows your misuderstanding of the discipline. deduction and abduction are philosophical theories within logic that are applied in what people now call the scientific method.

Infamous wrote:

There's a saying, God created numbers and the human brain has done the rest. Mathematics will ALWAYS be finite, it's a construct of the human brain and our brains are most definately FINITE. So your argument about mathematics tending to infinity really makes no sense.


the human brain is finite... news to me! where is this published? can you realy say that the human imagination has limits - that is insane to me, but i will listen is you have an argument.

mathematics are a human construct huh? prove it! if you do i will prove that it is not!
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:14 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
cinnamonica



Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 901
 Reply with quote  

infamous,
c'mon, now...science is just a type of philosophy, as is math...many people have said that music is math, but i tend to think of math as being music...
no human has ever had an original thought...just look at dew drops magnifing green veins and you can see where the idea for the microscope came from...newton didnt discover gravity, he just boxed it, marketed it, and profited.
no science is completely objective, not to be trite and start with the heisenburg, but everything is subjective...the scientific method isnt objective, as it relies on a hypothesis, a guess, there is a further subjective factor in deciding all the parameters...its even called research. re:search.
science implies correlation, which is by no means causation...
if you look at all the modern neurobiology/consciousness research, which looks quite impressive at first glance, and is quite respected in western medicine, its all BULLSHIT...i do research because i have to, to get funding to do what i know works with my patients, but its not because its any more valid than pure clinical intuition, observation, understanding, and compassion...
its estimated that the human brain has more neuronal connections than the number of atoms in the known universe.the human mind is only as finite as the imagination.
p.s., i love canadians.
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:24 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
apeofdeath
FIRE BREATHING DRAG QUEEN


Joined: 30 Sep 2002
Posts: 2804
Location: Kingston, mang
 Reply with quote  

The scientifc method entails the observation, collation, and interpretation of data. If one can not perform one of these integral steps the scientific method will fail. Conjectures which can not be proven scientifically are segregated to the realm of philosophy.

A good example is String Theory. If via the scientific method data can not be collated from experiments and verified to be in accordance with theory then it can not exist as an entity in the scientific realm.


If mathematics is not a construct of the mind, tell me what it is.
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:29 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
R. Kamidees



Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 4834
Location: where the wild things are
 Reply with quote  

This debate has been going on for too long, just drop it already! You guys think that you are the only ones to ever have this argument? I'm glad to see that you think that we can all come to an agreement on the Non-Prophets forum! No one is going to change their pov because of what they read here. Get a clue and stop wasting your time on the subject!
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:30 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
cinnamonica



Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 901
 Reply with quote  

i wasnt steppin up using bold fonts and making absolute statements, but when i see shit that just aint right, and i am bored, i will comment.
the idea for a theory is subjective. the hypothesis is subjective. the interpretation is subjective. so how is scientific method objective, again....
the brain is just a thermostat...the imagination is incredible.
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:41 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
tinkleDRINKER



Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 788
 Reply with quote  

Infamous wrote:
The scientifc method entails the observation, collation, and interpretation of data. If one can not perform one of these integral steps the scientific method will fail. Conjectures which can not be proven scientifically are segregated to the realm of philosophy.

A good example is String Theory. If via the scientific method data can not be collated from experiments and verified to be in accordance with theory then it can not exist as an entity in the scientific realm.


If mathematics is not a construct of the mind, tell me what it is.


your choice of the word construct bothers me - try discovery! to say that an equliateral triangle did not exist or have equal sides and angles before pythagorisis thought of it is just plain narrow minded. it is not a construct, but if you want to keep going i will oblige you.

I see what you are saying about actual hypothesis testing, but do not forget about the points leading up to developing a hypothesis; as well as forming conclusions from the test and forming new hypothesis. do these actions exist outside the scientific realm? science is under the umberrlla of philosophy - what you are really tallikng about is the difference between theory and scientific fact and you are mistaking anything theoretical as philosophy - you are wrong.
Post Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:42 pm
 View user's profile Send private message

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:48 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon