Posts: 1298
Threads: 42
Joined: January 2, 2012
Reputation:
32
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 6:13 pm
(May 13, 2012 at 6:09 pm)StatCrux Wrote: (May 13, 2012 at 5:38 pm)Gooders1002 Wrote: Why do we need a general rule when it come to love and marriages, love is love, marriage is between two people. Whats your fucking problem, you just don't like the idea of gay marriage? then don't get married to a man for fucks sack. It's always the religious holding back on progress.
There were same sex marriage before xianity arrived, and fucked us over.
Grow up and stop acting like a two year old who can't have his own way.
Religion had it turn of ruling the world, you fucked it up, its over, deal with it. Time for science and sanity to lead the world. Religion give it 100-200 years will only be in the history books.
Perfect example of solid reasoning, totally ignore the argument and hurl insults, I'm impressed, but then this does seem to impress the less intelligent people in society, good old reverting to abuse, wins every time 
And what have christians done for the last 1,500 years? Oh yeah, abuse everyone who doesn't agree with them.
Posts: 1066
Threads: 248
Joined: February 6, 2012
Reputation:
7
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 6:15 pm
(May 13, 2012 at 6:09 pm)StatCrux Wrote: (May 13, 2012 at 5:38 pm)Gooders1002 Wrote: Why do we need a general rule when it come to love and marriages, love is love, marriage is between two people. Whats your fucking problem, you just don't like the idea of gay marriage? then don't get married to a man for fucks sack. It's always the religious holding back on progress.
There were same sex marriage before xianity arrived, and fucked us over.
Grow up and stop acting like a two year old who can't have his own way.
Religion had it turn of ruling the world, you fucked it up, its over, deal with it. Time for science and sanity to lead the world. Religion give it 100-200 years will only be in the history books.
Perfect example of solid reasoning, totally ignore the argument and hurl insults, I'm impressed, but then this does seem to impress the less intelligent people in society, good old reverting to abuse, wins every time
I am intelligent but you really pissed me off and I am in no mood for you. And what I said is the truth or will be. Your whole concept of a 'general rule' is invalid.
"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
Posts: 390
Threads: 8
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
2
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 6:17 pm
(This post was last modified: May 13, 2012 at 6:20 pm by StatCrux.)
(May 13, 2012 at 6:06 pm)genkaus Wrote: A general rule is invalidated by an exception.
Really? So if a gym had a general rule admitting both men and women except for Thursday night which is women only, does the Thursday night exception invalidate the general rule admitting both sexes into the club? Or does the general rule still remain? I think anyone with half a brain can see that exceptions do not invalidate general rules, rather the exception proves the rule!
(May 13, 2012 at 6:15 pm)Gooders1002 Wrote: Your whole concept of a 'general rule' is invalid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_t...s_the_rule
Posts: 1066
Threads: 248
Joined: February 6, 2012
Reputation:
7
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 6:23 pm
(May 13, 2012 at 6:17 pm)StatCrux Wrote: (May 13, 2012 at 6:06 pm)genkaus Wrote: A general rule is invalidated by an exception.
Really? So if a gym had a general rule admitting both men and women except for Thursday night which is women only, does the Thursday night exception invalidate the general rule admitting both sexes into the club? Or does the general rule still remain? I think anyone with half a brain can see that exceptions do not invalidate general rules, rather the exception proves the rule!
Well there don't check if you were formerly male or genetically male, that have to take face value and what gender it says on your ID or membership card and they would know that they were obviously male.
"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
Posts: 390
Threads: 8
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
2
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 6:26 pm
(May 13, 2012 at 6:23 pm)Gooders1002 Wrote: (May 13, 2012 at 6:17 pm)StatCrux Wrote: Really? So if a gym had a general rule admitting both men and women except for Thursday night which is women only, does the Thursday night exception invalidate the general rule admitting both sexes into the club? Or does the general rule still remain? I think anyone with half a brain can see that exceptions do not invalidate general rules, rather the exception proves the rule!
Well there don't check if you were formerly male or genetically male, that have to take face value and what gender it says on your ID or membership card and they would know that they were obviously male.
 I think you're missing the point
Posts: 1066
Threads: 248
Joined: February 6, 2012
Reputation:
7
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 6:29 pm
(May 13, 2012 at 6:26 pm)StatCrux Wrote: (May 13, 2012 at 6:23 pm)Gooders1002 Wrote: Well there don't check if you were formerly male or genetically male, that have to take face value and what gender it says on your ID or membership card and they would know that they were obviously male.
I think you're missing the point
Not really, I am being realistic but I know were your coming from.
"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
Posts: 390
Threads: 8
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
2
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 6:49 pm
(May 13, 2012 at 6:12 pm)frankiej Wrote: Abuse is all you deserve now.
beautiful humanist sentiments...
Posts: 3188
Threads: 8
Joined: December 9, 2011
Reputation:
31
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 7:03 pm
(May 13, 2012 at 6:17 pm)StatCrux Wrote: Really? So if a gym had a general rule admitting both men and women except for Thursday night which is women only, does the Thursday night exception invalidate the general rule admitting both sexes into the club? Or does the general rule still remain? I think anyone with half a brain can see that exceptions do not invalidate general rules, rather the exception proves the rule!
Not if the exception is part of the rule. If your general rule regarding marriage had been "potential for procreation except when...." then you might have an argument. As it stands, you don't.
(May 13, 2012 at 6:17 pm)StatCrux Wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_t...s_the_rule
Read it. It gives a lot of examples of why your concept is wrong.
Posts: 1066
Threads: 248
Joined: February 6, 2012
Reputation:
7
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 7:08 pm
(May 13, 2012 at 6:49 pm)StatCrux Wrote: (May 13, 2012 at 6:12 pm)frankiej Wrote: Abuse is all you deserve now.
beautiful humanist sentiments... I think your getting off quite lightly considering all the the abuse you spurted today, especially in a personal area of mine.
"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
Posts: 390
Threads: 8
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
2
RE: Same sex marriage
May 13, 2012 at 7:08 pm
(This post was last modified: May 13, 2012 at 7:15 pm by StatCrux.)
(May 13, 2012 at 7:03 pm)genkaus Wrote: (May 13, 2012 at 6:17 pm)StatCrux Wrote: Really? So if a gym had a general rule admitting both men and women except for Thursday night which is women only, does the Thursday night exception invalidate the general rule admitting both sexes into the club? Or does the general rule still remain? I think anyone with half a brain can see that exceptions do not invalidate general rules, rather the exception proves the rule!
Not if the exception is part of the rule. If your general rule regarding marriage had been "potential for procreation except when...." then you might have an argument. As it stands, you don't.
(May 13, 2012 at 6:17 pm)StatCrux Wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_t...s_the_rule
Read it. It gives a lot of examples of why your concept is wrong.
Not at all, its a perfect example. The exception that infertile couples can't procreate proves that there is a general rule that male-female couples can procreate. I did say procreation in principle, not procreation in actuality. Procreation in principal is a better term than potential, because potential implies actual procreation must be potentially present, only the principal need be present not the potential.
|
