NATION

PASSWORD

Why is homosexuality wrong?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Sociobiology
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18396
Founded: Aug 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Sociobiology » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:05 pm

CVT Temp wrote:So it's wrong to have gay sex if you don't want to have gay sex? Okay.

this is not what he said but it is what most of us would agree is true.
I think we risk becoming the best informed society that has ever died of ignorance. ~Reuben Blades

I got quite annoyed after the Haiti earthquake. A baby was taken from the wreckage and people said it was a miracle. It would have been a miracle had God stopped the earthquake. More wonderful was that a load of evolved monkeys got together to save the life of a child that wasn't theirs. ~Terry Pratchett

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:05 pm

Objectiveland wrote:
Philosophical claims are different. I am using an objectivist philosophy. I would suggest you check your premiss.


No, you are not. You are citing a PHILOSOPHICAL CLAIM, and attempting to use that citation in order to justify your objectivist philosophy. The problem? The philosophical claim that Ayn Rand makes has been made before, and the conclusions were different. Thus, Ayn Rand's philosophy about morality is subjective, and your beliefs are in no way objective.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Condunum
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26273
Founded: Apr 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Condunum » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:06 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
Philosophical claims are different. I am using an objectivist philosophy. I would suggest you check your premiss.


No, you are not. You are citing a PHILOSOPHICAL CLAIM, and attempting to use that citation in order to justify your objectivist philosophy. The problem? The philosophical claim that Ayn Rand makes has been made before, and the conclusions were different. Thus, Ayn Rand's philosophy about morality is subjective, and your beliefs are in no way objective.

Completely relevant.
password scrambled

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:07 pm

Condunum wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:
No, you are not. You are citing a PHILOSOPHICAL CLAIM, and attempting to use that citation in order to justify your objectivist philosophy. The problem? The philosophical claim that Ayn Rand makes has been made before, and the conclusions were different. Thus, Ayn Rand's philosophy about morality is subjective, and your beliefs are in no way objective.

Completely relevant.


Image

The previous record sustains this objection, Counselor.

Samuraikoku wrote:Your Honor, he said "My views". Therefore, it's his views, logically. And since they're are his views, the views of a single subject, his views are subjective.

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=6262083
Last edited by Samuraikoku on Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Objectiveland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 736
Founded: Oct 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Objectiveland » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:08 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
Not if sex is between one worthy of receiving and one worthy of providing sex. "Sex, to a rational man…is an expression of self-esteem—a celebration of himself and of existence and for this man (or woman) sex is properly a physical expression of romantic love. Celebration of one's own life and of existence is essential to promoting one's happiness; thus, it is moral to make choices that allow oneself this celebration and immoral to deny or negate it."Ayn Rand, "Of Living Death," The Objectivist, Oct. 1968,


So what you're saying is, rape is moral.


of course not force cannot be used.
"Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom."

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:09 pm

Objectiveland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:
So what you're saying is, rape is moral.


of course not force cannot be used.


Punctuation.

"Of course not, force cannot be used."

User avatar
Gauthier
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52887
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauthier » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:09 pm

Because if homosexuality was considered just a normal human orientation then all those family values politicians would miss that high from illicit taboo homosexual affairs.
Crimes committed by Muslims will be a pan-Islamic plot and proof of Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of loners who do not represent their belief system at all.
The probability of one's participation in homosexual acts is directly proportional to one's public disdain and disgust for homosexuals.
If a political figure makes an accusation of wrongdoing without evidence, odds are probable that the accuser or an associate thereof has in fact committed the very same act, possibly to a worse degree.
Where is your God-Emperor now?

User avatar
The Emerald Dawn
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20824
Founded: Jun 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Emerald Dawn » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:10 pm

Objectiveland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:
So what you're saying is, rape is moral.


of course not force cannot be used.

Image


Relevant.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:11 pm

Samuraikoku wrote:


Image

The previous record sustains this objection, Counselor.


Had to be done.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:13 pm

Objectiveland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:
So what you're saying is, rape is moral.


of course not force cannot be used.


"Sex, to a rational man…is an expression of self-esteem—a celebration of himself and of existence and for this man (or woman) sex is properly a physical expression of romantic love. Celebration of one's own life and of existence is essential to promoting one's happiness; thus, it is moral to make choices that allow oneself this celebration and immoral to deny or negate it."Ayn Rand, "Of Living Death," The Objectivist, Oct. 1968,


In other words, ANY decision to make a choice that allows you to engage in dominating sex with a female is moral. Even worse, she essentially says that to deny the choice of a male to rape a female, it's immoral. Putting words in Ayn Rand's mouth, are we?
Last edited by Mavorpen on Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:13 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Samuraikoku wrote:
Image

The previous record sustains this objection, Counselor.


Had to be done.

Is this how debates will occur on NSG now? :p

User avatar
Objectiveland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 736
Founded: Oct 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Objectiveland » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:13 pm

Samuraikoku wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
of course not force cannot be used.


Punctuation.

"Of course not, force cannot be used."


edit if you care to if not I don't care
"Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom."

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:14 pm

Objectiveland wrote:
Samuraikoku wrote:
Punctuation.

"Of course not, force cannot be used."


edit if you care to if not I don't care


You do realize punctuation changes the whole meaning of your sentence?

You should thank me for that.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 pm

Divair wrote:

Is this how debates will occur on NSG now? :p

I would love that. :lol:
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 pm

Objectiveland wrote:
Samuraikoku wrote:
Punctuation.

"Of course not, force cannot be used."


edit if you care to if not I don't care

"Edit if you care, if you don't I won't care"

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Divair wrote:Is this how debates will occur on NSG now? :p

I would love that. :lol:


I object to the usage of the whip.

User avatar
Objectiveland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 736
Founded: Oct 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Objectiveland » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
of course not force cannot be used.


"Sex, to a rational man…is an expression of self-esteem—a celebration of himself and of existence and for this man (or woman) sex is properly a physical expression of romantic love. Celebration of one's own life and of existence is essential to promoting one's happiness; thus, it is moral to make choices that allow oneself this celebration and immoral to deny or negate it."Ayn Rand, "Of Living Death," The Objectivist, Oct. 1968,


In other words, ANY decision to make a choice that allows you to engage in dominating sex with a female is moral. Putting words in Ayn Rand's mouth, are we?


Of course not. force cannot be used.
"Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom."

User avatar
Condunum
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26273
Founded: Apr 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Condunum » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 pm

Divair wrote:

Is this how debates will occur on NSG now? :p

One can only hope. I'd great;y enjoy pseudo-courthouse debates.
password scrambled

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 pm

Objectiveland wrote:Of course not. force cannot be used.


You're welcome.

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:16 pm

Samuraikoku wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:I would love that. :lol:


I object to the usage of the whip.

Would you prefer a cane?

User avatar
Jormengand
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8414
Founded: May 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Jormengand » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:16 pm

Samuraikoku wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
edit if you care to if not I don't care


You do realize punctuation changes the whole meaning of your sentence?

You should thank me for that.

Editing people's punctuation is generally a sign that you're losing the argument, and have no real answer to what they're saying.

Not that I'm saying that's the case, but you're not doing yourself any favours.
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Samuraikoku
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31947
Founded: May 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Samuraikoku » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:16 pm

Divair wrote:
Samuraikoku wrote:
I object to the usage of the whip.

Would you prefer a cane?


I would prefer no physical violence in the courthouse. The attorneys are doing their job. :p

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:16 pm

Objectiveland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:


In other words, ANY decision to make a choice that allows you to engage in dominating sex with a female is moral. Putting words in Ayn Rand's mouth, are we?


Of course not. force cannot be used.


Mavorpen wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
of course not force cannot be used.


"Sex, to a rational man…is an expression of self-esteem—a celebration of himself and of existence and for this man (or woman) sex is properly a physical expression of romantic love. Celebration of one's own life and of existence is essential to promoting one's happiness; thus, it is moral to make choices that allow oneself this celebration and immoral to deny or negate it."Ayn Rand, "Of Living Death," The Objectivist, Oct. 1968,


In other words, ANY decision to make a choice that allows you to engage in dominating sex with a female is moral. Even worse, she essentially says that to deny the choice of a male to rape a female, it's immoral. Putting words in Ayn Rand's mouth, are we?
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Condunum
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26273
Founded: Apr 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Condunum » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:17 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
of course not force cannot be used.


"Sex, to a rational man…is an expression of self-esteem—a celebration of himself and of existence and for this man (or woman) sex is properly a physical expression of romantic love. Celebration of one's own life and of existence is essential to promoting one's happiness; thus, it is moral to make choices that allow oneself this celebration and immoral to deny or negate it."Ayn Rand, "Of Living Death," The Objectivist, Oct. 1968,


In other words, ANY decision to make a choice that allows you to engage in dominating sex with a female is moral. Even worse, she essentially says that to deny the choice of a male to rape a female, it's immoral. Putting words in Ayn Rand's mouth, are we?

Don't argue a strawman. Ayn Rand, while not arguing an objective point of view, was saying that no one should deny them the expression of romantic love. Rape is not that for both parties.
password scrambled

User avatar
Objectiveland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 736
Founded: Oct 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Objectiveland » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:17 pm

Samuraikoku wrote:
Objectiveland wrote:
edit if you care to if not I don't care


You do realize punctuation changes the whole meaning of your sentence?

You should thank me for that.


Of that sentence? To you maybe.
"Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom."

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Edush, Ifreann

Advertisement

Remove ads