What's new
By:

Gay marriage in Utah put on hold

Why haven't we abandoned this thread yet?

The argument always ends with two sides saying it's only about the definition of marriage, whether it's for love or procreation.

But what it's really about is how gay people want to hump and get legal benefits, and those against gay marriage think the concept of gay sex is gross, and shouldn't exist.

What ever happened to everyone minding their own d*** business?
 
I think there is a point where some people are trying to convince themselves as much or more than convince others.

Some just like to argue.

And then the trolls come out to play.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I think there is a point where some people are trying to convince themselves as much or more than convince others.

Some just like to argue.

And then the trolls come out to play.
Click to expand...

I hope that's not a jab. I'm actually pretty serious. This argument, for me at least, is beating the remains of the first ancestor of a horse that ever existed.
 
ElRoach0 said:
I hope that's not a jab. I'm actually pretty serious. This argument, for me at least, is beating the remains of the first ancestor of a horse that ever existed.
Click to expand...

It's not a jab. There is the 4th faction that really would like to see the conversation go somewhere. I should have included them too. Apologies. But by and large I was answering the question of why these threads don't just die since we are doing just what you said, beating a petrified horse.
 
PearlWatson said:
It seems like you are expending an awful lot of effort if you think I'm purely irrational in my concerns, but who am I to encourage you to give up your Jazzfanz forum mission and do something worthwhile with your time.
Click to expand...

You're not my primary audience, just a convenient foil.

PearlWatson said:
The Doomsday clock originates from a statement from Larry David in 2006 in Sundance during promotion of the liberal eschatological movie an "Inconvenient Truth."

Larry David: "You know, Al is a funny guy, but he's also a very serious guy who believes humans may have only 10 years left to save the planet from turning into a total frying pan."
Click to expand...

OK. Thank you for explaining.
 
LogGrad98 said:
It's not a jab. There is the 4th faction that really would like to see the conversation go somewhere. I should have included them too. Apologies. But by and large I was answering the question of why these threads don't just die since we are doing just what you said, beating a petrified horse.
Click to expand...

People still feel the desire to score political points. Society, in general, seems more concerned with demonizing the other side than actually trying to solve any problems.
 
Stoked said:
People still feel the desire to score political points. Society, in general, seems more concerned with demonizing the other side than actually trying to solve any problems.
Click to expand...

your response to me above was a source for some idle amusement, and possibly for an occasion for sharing a realization of how differently we see ourselves, and how others see us. My big blurb elicited a statement to the effect that I could have said as much just agreeing with you. . . .

Actually, it was your statement including some "should" ideals that got me going. We all want to use the government to do some "should" stuff to make life better, and that is part of the reason government grows. . .. but we are all wrong in doing that. . . . we "should" limit our government, and we "should" improve ourselves first of all, and our neighbors next, and the nation principally by that kind of "Think globally. Act Locally" sort of impulse. Unfortunately the UNsters with the Agenda 21 are hijacking our government in every possible way to re-make us as they think we should be.

To my mind, that is the problem.

It is the whole problem I see with the way the personal rights of some special, I say "made-up", classes of people is being pushed. I say discard the labels and re-write the laws to reflect true equal treatment under the action of every law that can't divide us as people into such stupid classifications.

Our government doesn't need to "see" that kind of information at all. Hell, our government doesn't need to listen to our private conversations, either. Elect me to the state legislature, and I'll write a bill that does that.

Let the churches preach what they believe, and let the unchurched speak as freely. Just limit the damn government from messing with our minds.

Stoked, I don't think I'm saying what you are saying. I'm saying the exact opposite. It all hangs on your ideal of what others "should" do. I'm talking about limiting the tool of abuse here, the government. My idea of "actually trying to solve" the problem is, I admit, another "should" ideal. People shouting at one another is not a problem we need to resolve. People using government as a tool of persecution or abuse is something we "should" not put up with.

Setting up laws enforcing norms for personal standards or personal belief or personal speech, or even personal choices and action within their own business and property, using government as the tool of enforcement, is the wrong way to go. I will probably pop up to make this point as long as the topic is on the board here. . . .
 
Last edited:
babe said:
your response to me above was a source for some idle amusement, and possibly for an occasion for sharing a realization of how differently we see ourselves, and how others see us. My big blurb elicited a statement to the effect that I could have said as much just agreeing with you. . . .

Actually, it was your statement including some "should" ideals that got me going. We all want to use the government to do some "should" stuff to make life better, and that is part of the reason government grows. . .. but we are all wrong in doing that. . . . we "should" limit our government, and we "should" improve ourselves first of all, and our neighbors next, and the nation principally by that kind of "Think globally. Act Locally" sort of impulse. Unfortunately the UNsters with the Agenda 21 are hijacking our government in every possible way to re-make us as they think we should be.

To my mind, that is the problem.

It is the whole problem I see with the way the personal rights of some special, I say "made-up", classes of people is being pushed. I say discard the labels and re-write the laws to reflect true equal treatment under the action of every law that can't divide us as people into such stupid classifications.

Our government doesn't need to "see" that kind of information at all. Hell, our government doesn't need to listen to our private conversations, either. Elect me to the state legislature, and I'll write a bill that does that.

Let the churches preach what they believe, and let the unchurched speak as freely. Just limit the damn government from messing with our minds.

Stoked, I don't think I'm saying what you are saying. I'm saying the exact opposite. It all hangs on your ideal of what others "should" do. I'm talking about limiting the tool of abuse here, the government. My idea of "actually trying to solve" the problem is, I admit, another "should" ideal. People shouting at one another is not a problem we need to resolve. People using government as a tool of persecution or abuse is something we "should" not put up with.

Setting up laws enforcing norms for personal standards or personal belief or personal speech, or even personal choices and action within their own business and property, using government as the tool of enforcement, is the wrong way to go. I will probably pop up to make this point as long as the topic is on the board here. . . .
Click to expand...

If it is any consolation I was not thinking of or including you when I made that statement.
 
PearlWatson said:
It hasn't changed enough if a split poll of 600 people really reflects a statewide shift. The poll would be more compelling on that score if it had been conducted on the same 600 people during both time periods.

Polls are more about influencing then gauging opinion.
Click to expand...

This is a true assessment.

I happened to be one the 600 who were polled, and I took some statistical classes in college and learned about bias in the way polls can be done. It was pretty clear to me that this poll was biased. Yes, the polling personnel identified their association with, their employer, the Salt Lake Tribune. They also asked if you wanted to discuss it with them later on, offering in essence to help you feel better about their position.

Every question was constructed with no doubt about what they thought was the "right" answer,and they clearly had the notion out there that they were doing you service to let you know what you should say.

I invited them to come talk to me, with the intention of grilling them for being such malevolent crusaders for their political agenda, but guess what, after listening to my responses they decided they didn't want to listen to me, after all. The same way they ran me out of their Tribtalk propaganda division. I bet I'm now on their "do not call" list. And I was polite and respectful while positively responding 'wrongly'. I bet they even discarded my contribution to their data.

That's just the kind of lying folks they are. What else can I say.
 
One Brow said:
You're not my primary audience, just a convenient foil.



OK. Thank you for explaining.
Click to expand...

that's a pretty clear and true statement. I sorta laugh, though. I think OB is a "convenient foil", so much so he might just be calling me a troll.

That's the beauty of the 'net forums. Plenty of "convenient foils" out there trolling for one another. . . . what would this stage be without plenty of actors.

///ps. . . translation for Pearl. . .. the guy doesn't care about you at all, probably doesn't even read your responses. . .. he's just using you because he thinks a lot of his buddies will gleefully join in with the whole "bag that trash" project of putting you down.. . .////

ah, some of us have one delusion, some another. mine is I think I'm actually interacting with real people. . . .. ha ha.

My wife is right, I'm wasting my time. If I want friends I should talk to real people I meet in the grocery story, at the bank, at the gas station, or hitching along the desert roads. . . .
 
babe said:
///ps. . . translation for Pearl. . .. the guy doesn't care about you at all, probably doesn't even read your responses. . .. he's just using you because he thinks a lot of his buddies will gleefully join in with the whole "bag that trash" project of putting you down.. . .////
Click to expand...

1) I have never insulted PearlWatson. I will trash her posts, and her beliefs at times, but PearlWatson is just a human, like me, trying to make sense of a world that defies sense.
2) However, I do accept that, in her quest to make sense of the world, she is not interested in the totality of the evidence and the conclusions thereof, but only in the bits of evidence that already support what she wishes to believe. This is again very human (and a tendency I succumb to more often than I would like), but it means that, ultimately, she will not be persuaded by evidence. Therefore, I do not try to persuade her with evidence, even when I bring evidence to bear.
3) I believe she has no more expectation of convincing me than I do of her. We are both players on a stage, I just admitted it first.
 
One Brow said:
1) I have never insulted PearlWatson. I will trash her posts, and her beliefs at times, but PearlWatson is just a human, like me, trying to make sense of a world that defies sense.
2) However, I do accept that, in her quest to make sense of the world, she is not interested in the totality of the evidence and the conclusions thereof, but only in the bits of evidence that already support what she wishes to believe. This is again very human (and a tendency I succumb to more often than I would like), but it means that, ultimately, she will not be persuaded by evidence. Therefore, I do not try to persuade her with evidence, even when I bring evidence to bear.
3) I believe she has no more expectation of convincing me than I do of her. We are both players on a stage, I just admitted it first.
Click to expand...

While "never" is the kind of term that rarely can be absolutely right, I find these three statements "fair enough". I don't think you actually mean to degrade those who disagree with you, probably even when you lump their beliefs with "crackpots" and such. . . . I do get the general sense it is the ideas you are focused on more that the person.

When I first came across her on the 'net, I found her gutsy and daring, and a healthy antidote to my former life as leige servant of the liberal mainstreamers. . . .
 
Since this has become about the people involved instead of the subject at hand, I'll just end this with a few statements.
I agree that for the most part One Brow has been respectful of me.
I am grateful for this and the challenge he offers or I wouldn't engage.
I guess his motive is trying to impress strangers or fellow missionaries,
which seems kind of a shallow ambition to spend such an inordinate amount of time on,
but all this is a lesson in itself.
 
Beantown said:
I'm an active Mormon but the fact that a gay couple cant marry in a Church building but a guy who just killed his whole family can have his funeral their is retarded.
Click to expand...

except a funeral isn't about the dead guy, it is more about those left behind
 
babe said:
///ps. . . translation for Pearl. . .. the guy doesn't care about you at all, probably doesn't even read your responses. . .. he's just using you because he thinks a lot of his buddies will gleefully join in with the whole "bag that trash" project of putting you down.. . .////
Click to expand...

Interesting... OneBlow has "buddies"? I don't think anyone needs OneBrow, or anyone for that matter, to jump on the "Wow, PearlWatson might just be the dumbest thing since curdled turds" bandwagon.

ah, some of us have one delusion, some another. mine is I think I'm actually interacting with real people. . . .. ha ha.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure, with the exception of CarolinaJazz, we're all real people.

My wife is right, I'm wasting my time. If I want friends I should talk to real people I meet in the grocery story, at the bank, at the gas station, or hitching along the desert roads. . . .
Click to expand...

Dude, I ate lunch with you and fondly look back on our conversations. You're a good guy. I'd help you move.

PearlWatson said:
Since this has become about the people involved instead of the subject at hand, I'll just end this with a few statements.
I agree that for the most part One Brow has been respectful of me.
I am grateful for this and the challenge he offers or I wouldn't engage.
I guess his motive is trying to impress strangers or fellow missionaries,
which seems kind of a shallow ambition to spend such an inordinate amount of time on,
but all this is a lesson in itself.
Click to expand...

Or... His motive is the same as everyone else here (besides your knight in shining armor, babe), to point out what a backward fool you are.

But ya, gays are teh bad.
 
Gameface said:
Gay marriage is back on.

The end is nigh?
Click to expand...

In a follow up to this gay marriage advocates in Florida have asked a judge there to reconsider his own hold on Florida gay marriages. This could lead to 30 states having gay marriage.
 
The State's argument against marriage equality was embarrassing. The fact that they would have gone before the Supreme Court with it was mind boggling. So glad the Supreme Court didn't waste their time with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top