Delusions of the Pope

[charby]

I wonder if the folks who use the whole procreation argument as grounds for no gay marriage have sex for pleasure with their spouse?

[Perd Hapley]

You guys don't have to drag out all of your cheap, manipulative tricks all at once.

[brimic]

You mean like lying is bad, unless you are lying for Jesus, in which case it is ok?  Case in point: the Liberty Counsel claiming that 100,000 people in Peru rallied for Kim Davis:  http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2015/09/liberty-council-lies-about-100000-person-prayer-rally-for-kim-davis/  http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/09/28/3706199/kim-davis-prayer-rally-peru/ 

But I am sure this is just the gay-infested liberal media trying to smear the good folk at Liberty Counsel.

Sort of like the lefty counting techniques used for Million Man March or Million Mom March?

[brimic]

In biblical times, random large numbers just meant "a lot."  They were never intended to be accurate counts.  They're just following biblical methods of survey and math.

Or when ol Mo (PBUH) consummated his marriage with Aisha, she wasn't really 9, it was more like the Qu'ran was exaggerating her youth...

[Perd Hapley]

And one should except the punishment for their actions. Supremes can be impeached, just need enough members of congress to do it.

Obviously, civil disobedience can invite punishment. We know this. As for the Supremes being impeached for making blatantly wrong, dishonest decisions? Yeah, like I said: Too bad they can't be held accountable.

[Perd Hapley]

You mean like lying is bad, unless you are lying for Jesus, in which case it is ok?  Case in point: the Liberty Counsel claiming that 100,000 people in Peru rallied for Kim Davis:  http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2015/09/liberty-council-lies-about-100000-person-prayer-rally-for-kim-davis/  http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/09/28/3706199/kim-davis-prayer-rally-peru/ 

But I am sure this is just the gay-infested liberal media trying to smear the good folk at Liberty Counsel.

More like, lying is OK, so long as it's the lie about same-sex unions being marriages. Now let's be offended when someone tells the truth about homosexual acts, and let's be offended when someone allegedly lies about some rally somewhere. Consistency is, like, homophobic, or something.

[Perd Hapley]

I wonder if the folks who use the whole procreation argument as grounds for no gay marriage have sex for pleasure with their spouse?

Fortunately, that's only a problem for you Catholics. 

[makattak]

I wonder if the folks who use the whole procreation argument as grounds for no gay marriage have sex for pleasure with their spouse?

...As for opposing gay marriage, I think you’re going beyond your supposed reliance on evidence here. The strongest conservative case against gay marriage is that it reinforces a centuries-long redefinition of marriage from a strategic partnership focused on child-rearing to a ceremonial acknowledgment of romantic infatuation, potentially leading to a deep shift in the way people think about issues like who to marry, when to have kids, when to get divorced, and how to treat their family. That argument hasn’t been rigorously evaluated by statisticians and found wanting. It’s been found annoying and left untouched. Your differences are foundational assumptions and methodological disagreements about what sorts of issues to focus on, not simple “he made an arithmetic error when calculating the effects” style obvious superiority.

[MillCreek]

Sort of like the lefty counting techniques used for Million Man March or Million Mom March?

Well maybe, but in the citation above, I don't think there was any sort of rally in Peru for Kim Davis; not that I could find with a Google search, anyway. So is it a counting issue or that the Liberty Council was lying about it altogether? 

[Perd Hapley]

Well maybe, but in the citation above, I don't think there was any sort of rally in Peru for Kim Davis; not that I could find with a Google search, anyway. So is it a counting issue or that the Liberty Council was lying about it altogether? 

And there's no sort of marriage going on, when one of the sexes is left out of the process. But some lies are more equal than others.

[makattak]

Well maybe, but in the citation above, I don't think there was any sort of rally in Peru for Kim Davis; not that I could find with a Google search, anyway. So is it a counting issue or that the Liberty Council was lying about it altogether? 

Well, he might be lying or he might be mistaken. How often do the rest of us get a piece of information that confirms our biases and don't spend time checking it out?

Of course, being that I know nothing about Liberty Council, he could be lying. Seems rather strange to make such an easily disprovable lie, though.

[roo_ster]

Amusing to see moral and logical degeneracy set up one beside the other in such an overt fashion, where inconvenient and unpalatable (but completely accurate) fact is judged as unpleasant and outrageous as a very possibly inaccurate report that (if it were true) would also be inconvenient.

The pattern displayed is one of judging fact/reality by its adherence to the preferred narrative, not by factual content.

But, then, degeneracy in one part of one's life often leads to degeneracy in another.  IOW, don't be too surprised to find out that your adulterous/promiscuous business partner is also screwing your part of the business in the books.

[White Horseradish]

Is it cheap or manipulative to be specific about the nature of a thing?

No, but pretending the nature of the thing boils down to this is.

You guys are funny.  Kinda like this dude.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euXQbZDwV0w

[Perd Hapley]

No, but pretending the nature of the thing boils down to this is.

It's so much better to claim that any principled opposition to fake-marriage recognition is really just hatred and/or disgust. That's super-duper honest. Major integrity move, there.

[charby]

It's so much better to claim that any principled opposition to fake-marriage recognition is really just hatred and/or disgust. That's super-duper honest. Major integrity move, there.

or stomping on the freedom of people. You can get legally married to your partner of choosing, why everyone else be allow the same rights?

[White Horseradish]

It's so much better to claim that any principled opposition to fake-marriage recognition is really just hatred and/or disgust. That's super-duper honest. Major integrity move, there.

If the shoe fits...

[Perd Hapley]

or stomping on the freedom of people. You can get legally married to your partner of choosing, why everyone else be allow the same rights?

Because not recognizing a few sham marriages was really stomping - STOMPING! - on people's freedoms. 

Charby, come on. At some point you have to recognize that a homosexual person last year had the same rights as I had. He had the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, just like I had. Now, we both have a right to legally claim a fake marriage to someone of the same sex. Equality then; equality now. The only difference is that the first condition adhered to reality a bit better than what we now have.

[charby]

Because not recognizing a few sham marriages was really stomping - STOMPING! - on people's freedoms. 

Charby, come on. At some point you have to recognize that a homosexual person last year had the same rights as I had. He had the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, just like I had. Now, we both have a right to legally claim a fake marriage to someone of the same sex. Equality then; equality now. The only difference is that the first condition adhered to reality a bit better than what we now have.

A sham? Why is two adults of the same sex marrying each other out love a sham?

[Hawkmoon]

I wonder if the folks who use the whole procreation argument as grounds for no gay marriage have sex for pleasure with their spouse?

A long time ago, when I was in college, I dated a girl from a nearby Catholic women's college. She explained to me in all seriousness that the priests had taught them it was okay to make out as long as they didn't enjoy it.

[Hawkmoon]

Well, he might be lying or he might be mistaken. How often do the rest of us get a piece of information that confirms our biases and don't spend time checking it out?

Of course, being that I know nothing about Liberty Council, he could be lying. Seems rather strange to make such an easily disprovable lie, though.

Maybe he didn't think it was easily proven to be a lie.

I spent a few minutes looking at the video of the 2014 rally, and the "visuial cues" are indeed obvious.

[Perd Hapley]

A sham? Why is two adults of the same sex marrying each other out love a sham?

You know very well why. You know it's not because of any religion, or anybody's personal opinion.

[charby]

You know very well why. You know it's not because of any religion, or anybody's personal opinion.

Well, I'm perfectly fine with it. I don't see it as a sham. I do see Kim Davis as a sham.

[Perd Hapley]

Well, I'm perfectly fine with it. I don't see it as a sham.

There are many truths we choose to ignore.

[roo_ster]

A sham? Why is two adults of the same sex marrying each other out love a sham?

"We have now sunk to a depth at which re-statement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men."
----George Orwell

[charby]

There are many truths we choose to ignore.

"We have now sunk to a depth at which re-statement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men."
----George Orwell

Well enlighten me.