Battling Disinformation In The Ssm Debate

[california boy]

Nope the strongest argument against homosexual marriage is that it is a non-reproductive dead end path for humanity.

Really? That is the best argument against gay marriage??? Well good luck with that. No wonder there continues to be growing support for gay marriage in this country. Because most people are rational enough to realize that gay marriage is not going to end humanity.

[USU78]

Australia: Tasmania to legislate for equal marriage rights if federal bill fails

So . . . it's to be a war of extermination and not one to drive us out.

Figures.

[pmccombs1]

Nope the strongest argument against homosexual marriage is that it is a non-reproductive dead end path for humanity.

I see lots of great arguments against homosexual marriage that presume something fundamental about what marriage is. Maybe it's for raising kids with a mother and a father, maybe it's God's plan, maybe it's for procreation--for things that gays can't naturally do. So let's put something into the law books and save America! Homosexuals need marriage licenses like the blind need drivers licenses... right?

Only suppose we all were to put on blindfolds before we got into our cars to drive them. Then where would be the justice in our law? That is the state of marriage and families today, though; these institutions were ruined--mostly by economic interests at the time when the father was removed from the home and the family trade--long before anybody decided to "redefine" them. Maybe homosexual marriage is a symptom of the disease, not a cause of it.

It's hard for me to imagine a people so caught up in debunking this movement when more than half of all so-called traditional marriages end in ruin as it is. We have crises unfolding within the walls of our own homes (mostly because they've been turned into dormitories) and we're absolutely apalled that homosexuals would get a chance at ruining families of their own. Because that would just be wrong!

The best thing we can do is to look to our own families and marriages, and heal them. When we've done that, maybe we'd be righteous enough to say something about other people's ideas of marriage.

[ERayR]

Really? That is the best argument against gay marriage??? Well good luck with that. No wonder there continues to be growing support for gay marriage in this country. Because most people are rational enough to realize that gay marriage is not going to end humanity.

Stop the hyperbole and quite attributing thing to me I didn't say. It is obvious it will not end humanity but it can be and is detrimental to a society. However, it should be plainly obvious that it is not an evolutionary survival trait for a species and, now that you bring it up, were it to become the norm could push humanity into a dead end in a few millennia. Or do you not subscribe to evolutionary thought?

[ERayR]

I see lots of great arguments against homosexual marriage that presume something fundamental about what marriage is. Maybe it's for raising kids with a mother and a father, maybe it's God's plan, maybe it's for procreation--for things that gays can't naturally do. So let's put something into the law books and save America! Homosexuals need marriage licenses like the blind need drivers licenses... right?

Only suppose we all were to put on blindfolds before we got into our cars to drive them. Then where would be the justice in our law? That is the state of marriage and families today, though; these institutions were ruined--mostly by economic interests at the time when the father was removed from the home and the family trade--long before anybody decided to "redefine" them. Maybe homosexual marriage is a symptom of the disease, not a cause of it.

It's hard for me to imagine a people so caught up in debunking this movement when more than half of all so-called traditional marriages end in ruin as it is. We have crises unfolding within the walls of our own homes (mostly because they've been turned into dormitories) and we're absolutely apalled that homosexuals would get a chance at ruining families of their own. Because that would just be wrong!

The best thing we can do is to look to our own families and marriages, and heal them. When we've done that, maybe we'd be righteous enough to say something about other people's ideas of marriage.

Talk about hyperbole and red herrings. Sorry I, at present, I don't respond to them as it is fruitless.

[Libs]

Myth #21: Gay issues (not to be errantly confused with "Gay rights"--see the busting of myth #6) are just about threats, and there is no threat; whereas, in actual fact the issue is also about the absence of net benefits in relation to costs (as pointed out in the busting of myth #10). And, there are also threats--not the least of which is to religious freedom, the beginnings of which were manifest during the Chick-Fil-A debacle. There are also potential threats in governments and societies promoting behaviors that are at above average risk for mental/emotional illness, certain physical illnesses, lack of long-term commitment, substance abuse, and domestic violence.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Myth #665 that mental/emotional/physical "illness" has anything, at all, to do with being born ss attracted. There has been absolutely no evidence to connect the dots that people are trying to connect, here, on these issues. That gays have more incidence of any of or all of those things, does not prove a causal relationship to simply being ss attracted. Societal attitudes and pressures are much more likely the major factors.

Wade, I understand that you and others are concerned about religious freedom, but what I don't understand is, in what way your actual religious freedom is in jeopardy? Dan Cathy, for example, actually benefited, in the long run from speaking out against ss marriage. He had a couple of threats to withhold business licenses, but truth be told, I am fairly sure the law is on his side and will protect him....and public opinion, is on his side, as well (regarding free speech)...even most liberals were outraged by threats of withholding business licenses. I, honestly, do not see a serious threat to religious freedom. Most people in this country value that freedom much too much.

Edited August 7, 2012 by Libs

[california boy]

Stop the hyperbole and quite attributing thing to me I didn't say. It is obvious it will not end humanity but it can be and is detrimental to a society. However, it should be plainly obvious that it is not an evolutionary survival trait for a species and, now that you bring it up, were it to become the norm could push humanity into a dead end in a few millennia. Or do you not subscribe to evolutionary thought?

Hyperbole? This is what you said. And I quote.

Nope the strongest argument against homosexual marriage is that it is a non-reproductive dead end path for humanity.

If you met something other than what you said,And this post you said this

It is obvious it will not end humanity but it can be and is detrimental to a society. However, it should be plainly obvious that it is not an evolutionary survival trait for a species and, now that you bring it up, were it to become the norm could push humanity into a dead end in a few millennia. Or do you not subscribe to evolutionary thought?

Seems pretty clear to me you are pushing an idea that society will cease to procreate if gay marriage is allowed. If that is not your opinion, then what is the point of both of your posts??

[Libs]

So . . . it's to be a war of extermination and not one to drive us out.

Figures.

Only if you seriously believe you cannot peacefully co-exist in a country that has ss marriage. (Btw, no one wants to exterminate you, just because you don't agree with ss marriage....I mean, really??)

[wenglund]

If that is what your point was, then I am in complete agreement. Gay marriage has firm legal arguments. It is why I believe it will be legal in this country in the near future.

My comment can no more be interpreted to say "yea" as to say "nay". Clearly, there have been legal arguments against restricting marriage to between a man and a woman (not to be confused with arguments in favor of SSM) that have persuaded a few judges of late.

However, given the Supreme Court ruling in Romer v. Evans, which explicitly said its ruling didn't apply to SSM cases, I wouldn't be so sure about the direction the court will take. But, we shall see.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[pmccombs1]

Talk about hyperbole and red herrings. Sorry I, at present, I don't respond to them as it is fruitless.

Have I overstated the situation of the modern traditional marriage? If so, where? Have I misdirected the argument into an irrelevant blind alley? How so?

It is a simple thing, when one has no argument, to end the debate by labeling the opposing claims as "hyperbole" and as "red herrings."

[USU78]

Only if you seriously believe you cannot peacefully co-exist in a country that has ss marriage. (Btw, no one wants to exterminate you, just because you don't agree with ss marriage....I mean, really??)

http://protectbiblicalmarriage-christinewjc.blogspot.com/2008/11/crazed-homosexual-activists-attack.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-protest7-2008nov07,0,3827549.story

[ERayR]

Hyperbole? This is what you said. And I quote.

If you met something other than what you said,And this post you said this

Seems pretty clear to me you are pushing an idea that society will cease to procreate if gay marriage is allowed. If that is not your opinion, then what is the point of both of your posts??

I take then that you don't subscribe to the evolutionary tenet that traits that do not lead to the survival and advancement of a species is a detriment to that species?

[cwald]

Have I overstated the situation of the modern traditional marriage? If so, where? Have I misdirected the argument into an irrelevant blind alley? How so?

It is a simple thing, when one has no argument, to end the debate by labeling the opposing claims as "hyperbole" and as "red herrings."

Exactly.

[Calm]

The best thing we can do is to look to our own families and marriages, and heal them. When we've done that, maybe we'd be righteous enough to say something about other people's ideas of marriage.

Why does it have to be one or the other? If one assumes that SSM is destructive, then how would putting off dealing with it be good while the putting off of dealing with what has helped with the breakdown of the family in the past has resulted in the current situation?

[altersteve]

A tendentious oversimplification and, frankly, slander.

I'm sorry, that wasn't my intention.

[Ahab]

Given some of the salient points raised in the excellent FAIR presentation by Joshua Johanson on Navigating the Labyrinth Surrounding Homosexual Desire, in contrast to the many shenanigans surrounding the recent Chick-Fil-A controversy, I thought it may be wise to, in the spirit of one of my favorite TV programs (Mythbusters), expose all the disinformation and propaganda myths plied by gay advocates generally in pursuit of their presumed agenda, and in relation to the SSM debate in particular.

Let me start this off by listing a few myths that come to mind, which we can discuss in greater detail later. Feel free to list some of your own if you wish.

The point being is to increase critical thinking in relation to these issues and sift through all the disinformation in hopes of making sound choices and holding rational positions.

Busted Propaganda:

1. People are homophobic if they are against SSM or other pro-gay issues.

2. People are anti-gay if they are against SSM.

3. People are hateful if they prefer that legalized marriage be reserved between a man and a woman.

4. The high rate of suicides among gays is due to _______ (anything other than homosexual behavior--i.e. having gay sex at an early age and having more same-sex partners)

5. It is unhealthy to suppress same-sex behaviors or to attempt to change same-sex desires, values, etc.

6. SSM is a right--fundamental, civil, human, or otherwise.

7. People with SSA can't have a healthy, sexually satisfying, relationship/marriages with someone of the opposite sex.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

8. Having sex with someone of the same sex is a good thing - for whatever reason they can come up with, like,

a. because they like it, and since they like it, it must be a good thing.

b. because what is "good" is subjective, so if someone likes it, it must be good.

c. because it's better than spending the rest of their lives alone which supposedly equates to not having someone to "love" them.

9. Everyone should approve of marriage between 2 people of the same sex as long as they're both adults and agree to it.

10. We really shouldn't be living by the same standards expressed in the Old Testamant regarding homosexuals

... after all it's 2012 now and we're more advanced now.

Pffflech. Such silly ideas, and I hope we can agree they're all busted.

[Libs]

http://protectbiblic...sts-attack.html

http://www.latimes.c...0,3827549.story

[media=]

? I see a bunch of people protesting. That went on for months during and, for a time, after the whole Prop 8 debacle. This is over politics and the church's involvement, not about religion or religious belief, per se. I didn't see anyone protesting in front of the Temple, before Prop 8. I worked there for a whole year....not one single protest, even from anti-Mormons.

[Zakuska]

Only if you seriously believe you cannot peacefully co-exist in a country that has ss marriage. (Btw, no one wants to exterminate you, just because you don't agree with ss marriage....I mean, really??)

Intresting you bring up "extermination". Have gays in america EVER been threatend with "extermination" as one religious group has been?

(Note: not a random lynching but a systematic government proclaimed extermination, of every man, woman, child or barking yellow dog. No Im not claiming victim status)

Edited August 8, 2012 by Zakuska

[happy]

I think this conversation has run its course if you ask me. No one is listening. No one is learning. Everyone us just taking over each other.

[KevinG]

I think this conversation has run its course if you ask me. No one is listening. No one is learning. Everyone us just taking over each other.

Yeah- we should all drop this and go out for a Chick-fil-a sandwich.

[Calm]

Who is buying?

[CV75]

I don't disagree with your statement. It is a strong argument to allow anyone who wants to participate in marriage to do so. Encouraging people to not get married and live together seems to be a bad public policy.

You do know that such marriage is between a man and a woman, of course. I'm not sure why you're not grasping the biological requirement in perpetuating civilization and this is why marriage is institutionalized and same-sex "marriage" isn't. It doesn't matter one way or another biologically if gay people live together, but it does matter with straight people--it creates life. While life can be created without marriage, the reason marriage is institutionilzed is because the creation and protection of new life is beneficial and merits extra-special recognition. This is what human beings do when sustaining civilization and what they value above all else.

Don't go off on a tangent about married couples who don't reproduce--the institution still applies because of its importance in what it recognizes for the whole of humanity.

Gay people who live together can still get what they want out of a relationship and contribute whatever it is they contribute to society without having their union falsley recognized as life-creating or representing life creation.

[CV75]

I think this conversation has run its course if you ask me. No one is listening. No one is learning. Everyone us just taking over each other.

Actually, I'm listening and learning quite a bit!

[Damien the Leper]

I remember a few years ago that over on the CARM board a critic started a thread about their favorite false teaching or lie told by Mormonism. Some of the contributions of other critic board members were honest criticisms but the major majority was all propaganda about how evil, amoral, unethical, and deceitful Mormonism was. That thread was truly reprehensible because it was a baiting thread with the sole purpose to victimize Mormons and demonize their faith.It really was heartbreaking to see that happen.

I wish I could say that the attitudes and tactics demonstrated and on display here were different.

I'm probably going to be accused of a Godwin's Law violation by comparing some of the Mormons here to the CARMites but certain individuals lead others to see them in such a way.

In the end, no one wins. Someone will get hurt and people who are like those who started both the thread on CARM and here on MDD show their Christian love so well.

[Libs]

Zaskuska, I didn't bring up "extermination". USU did. Apparently, he believes that not being able to find a "gay marriage FREE" country, on the planet, equates to extermination of Christians.

I agree, that statement was pretty bizarre.

So . . . it's to be a war of extermination and not one to drive us out.

Figures.

Edited August 8, 2012 by Libs