Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 17, 2024, 10:03 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Same sex marriage
RE: Same sex marriage
(May 13, 2012 at 3:00 pm)genkaus Wrote:
(May 13, 2012 at 2:10 pm)StatCrux Wrote: Read what I said, "open to procreation in principle" not the principle of procreation, there is a huge distinction. I'm not saying that all individual marriages must be capable of producing offspring. Same sex marriages are not in principle open to procreation.

Marriages between infertile couples or with post-menopausal women are also not capable of producing offspring. They too are not "in principle open to procreation". Try and understand the complete implications of your own damn arguments.

I do fully understand, you don't. Infertile couples do not invalidate the principle of male-female unions being open to procreation. I'm not saying that all unions must be capable of procreation, I'm saying that in principle the definition of marriage is a procreative union. Individual extreme or special cases do not invalidate the argument.

Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
(May 13, 2012 at 3:10 pm)StatCrux Wrote:
(May 13, 2012 at 3:00 pm)genkaus Wrote: Marriages between infertile couples or with post-menopausal women are also not capable of producing offspring. They too are not "in principle open to procreation". Try and understand the complete implications of your own damn arguments.

I do fully understand, you don't. Infertile couples do not invalidate the principle of male-female unions being open to procreation. I'm not saying that all unions must be capable of procreation, I'm saying that in principle the definition of marriage is a procreative union. Individual extreme or special cases do not invalidate the argument.

So why can't one of your exceptions be same-sex marriage?
Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
(May 13, 2012 at 3:10 pm)StatCrux Wrote: I do fully understand, you don't. Infertile couples do not invalidate the principle of male-female unions being open to procreation. I'm not saying that all unions must be capable of procreation, I'm saying that in principle the definition of marriage is a procreative union. Individual extreme or special cases do not invalidate the argument.

Why not? If the validity of the principle does not rely on its universal applicability then by definition that argument is invalidated.
Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
(May 13, 2012 at 3:12 pm)Tobie Wrote:
(May 13, 2012 at 3:10 pm)StatCrux Wrote: I do fully understand, you don't. Infertile couples do not invalidate the principle of male-female unions being open to procreation. I'm not saying that all unions must be capable of procreation, I'm saying that in principle the definition of marriage is a procreative union. Individual extreme or special cases do not invalidate the argument.

So why can't one of your exceptions be same-sex marriage?

Because same sex unions in principle are not open to procreation. An infertile marriage remains in principle open to procreation. That is the distinction.

Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
(May 13, 2012 at 3:26 pm)StatCrux Wrote: Because same sex unions in principle are not open to procreation. An infertile marriage remains in principle open to procreation. That is the distinction.

No, actually, its not. Neither is open to procreation in principle, in theory or in reality.


By the by, advances in genetic research would ensure soon enough that same-sex couples would be open to procreation. Can we count on you as a staunch gay-marriage activist then?
Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
(May 13, 2012 at 3:13 pm)genkaus Wrote:
(May 13, 2012 at 3:10 pm)StatCrux Wrote: I do fully understand, you don't. Infertile couples do not invalidate the principle of male-female unions being open to procreation. I'm not saying that all unions must be capable of procreation, I'm saying that in principle the definition of marriage is a procreative union. Individual extreme or special cases do not invalidate the argument.

Why not? If the validity of the principle does not rely on its universal applicability then by definition that argument is invalidated.

So if I make a statement of "men have a penis, women have a vagina" using your logic one man without a penis would invalidate the statement? Is that what you are proposing? I've seen this reasoning before....

Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
Obviously, if there are men without penises, the blanket statement "Men have a penis" would be too general.
[Image: SigBarSping_zpscd7e35e1.png]
Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
Ok guys I think StatCrux has made there point. Know I am boring of you try to change there mind, it is obviously fixed and there no way were going to change there closed mind, or even open it, I wasted enough time on them as it is and frankly boring. lets leave them alone, I know a lost cause when I see one.
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" - Edward Gibbon (Offen misattributed to Lucius Annaeus Seneca or Seneca the Younger) (Thanks to apophenia for the correction)
'I am driven by two main philosophies:
Know more about the world than I knew yesterday and lessen the suffering of others. You'd be surprised how far that gets you' - Neil deGrasse Tyson
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain
Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
Haha, the OP says "start an all out war with the church."

For pity's sake. No one has to use gay marriage as a ruse to do that. There is reason enough, and better reason, without it.
Reply
RE: Same sex marriage
(May 13, 2012 at 3:35 pm)Shell B Wrote: Haha, the OP says "start an all out war with the church."

For pity's sake. No one has to use gay marriage as a ruse to do that. There is reason enough, and better reason, without it.

Indeed. These bigots have a hard time understand that this is an issue of equality and human love.
[Image: SigBarSping_zpscd7e35e1.png]
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Is there a kink to have sex with certain atheist tribes? Woah0 5 788 September 11, 2022 at 3:28 pm
Last Post: onlinebiker
  a new atheist and marriage Thegoodatheist 70 11579 August 9, 2017 at 9:35 pm
Last Post: Astonished
  Responding to "Homosexuality is wrong, the same way incest is wrong" JewishAthiest 106 26289 February 9, 2016 at 3:48 pm
Last Post: robvalue
  Would you have sex with a Christian fundamentalist? Jehanne 110 15598 February 2, 2016 at 8:35 pm
Last Post: GodCherry
  Atheism and Anti-Theism same thing? ErGingerbreadMandude 114 18001 February 2, 2016 at 12:04 pm
Last Post: God of Mr. Hanky
  Anti gay-marriage atheist?? Catholic_Lady 154 24623 September 9, 2015 at 11:25 am
Last Post: TheRocketSurgeon
  People are essentially the same TheoneandonlytrueGod 4 1416 April 25, 2015 at 10:09 pm
Last Post: Hatshepsut
  Are Nonreligious Organizations Able to Provide the Same Services as Churches? Nope 22 5911 March 6, 2015 at 3:41 pm
Last Post: rexbeccarox
  Charlie Brooker on Gay Marriage pop_punks_not_dead 4 2098 December 29, 2013 at 9:01 pm
Last Post: NoraBrimstone
  Atheists and marriage Owlix 45 8034 November 9, 2013 at 7:09 am
Last Post: T.J.



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)