RE: Obama's church buddies on his new gay marriage stance
May 17, 2012 at 3:12 pm
(This post was last modified: May 17, 2012 at 3:13 pm by Jinkies.)
(May 17, 2012 at 2:19 pm)Annik Wrote: I thought I'd made it clear with this post...
No, it's quite clear to me that you meant what I said you meant, especially since you responded to my point of us talking past each other by agreeing that was your view. I'm not sure why the other guy was claiming you used some heretofore unknown scientific definition of homosexuality.
(I actually do know why, and it's because his outrage forced him to respond even though he was wrong and had no actual arguments.)
Quote:Regardless, your dictionary definition has two definitions. This doesn't mean the term is to be used to lump both things together, but that the same word has multiple definitions. I'll use on of the definitions you linked to.
Just to note, I'm fairly confident that you also checked the first site, which only has one definition, which just so happens to be the definition I use. It's disingenuous to completely ignore that and write what you've written here anyway. Cherry picking is not a tactic that leads toward honesty and intelligent discussion.
Regardless, I have no issue with using homosexuality to refer to either aspect even when the definitions have different numbers. There's a definite connection there, and I see no need to ignore one definition (using M-W's) and focus solely on the other, or to at various points in a conversation say, "and guys, to clarify, now I'm talking about physical acts, not feelings," or the reverse. It's not like the word "tire," where different definitions are not related in any way. With homosexuality, the two definitions have a relationship that is deeply intertwined.
Quote:And, as a side note, there's no need to be a dick to anyone.
I know, right? I have no idea why that guy keeps insulting me and calling me names. It really does seems a bit childish. All I did was parody his righteous outrage using a stereotypical Hulk comment. Why would anyone ever post that they got so upset by a comment that they will no longer admit they were wrong, but instead start arguing? In addition to being incredibly stupid, that's just not an attitude that leads to intelligent conversations (as seen by the junk that followed).
