NATION

PASSWORD

Top Anti-Gay Group Attempts Public Meeting Over LGBT Rights

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

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Resora
Diplomat
 
Posts: 769
Founded: Nov 05, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Resora » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm

Menassa wrote:
Lithosano wrote:
[...]

Menassa, confirm/deny?

Depends which English translation the person is using.

In the Hebrew, no, the words used are not the same... however a Catholic who's KJV only... that argument could be made.

Actually, Catholics don't use the KJV, it's not compliant with Canon law and lacks the Apocrypha.
The history of progress is written in the blood of men and women who have dared to espouse an unpopular cause.

Member of the Free Communists (District 108)
Left/Right: -10.00
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.45
Alternate Test
Political Views

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

Postby Jormengand » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm

The Tovian Way wrote:
Jormengand wrote:Why are these acts sinful?


They are sinful because God, the source of all Goodness, as commanded us in His moral law, not to perform them.

Ah, but why did God command this? Also, since God is omnipotent, that means that he can command anything, and make anything good or sinful. Thus, God could make the murder of innocent children a good act, and make aiding others a sin. Surely, that cannot be so? Perhaps God would not do that, but there are terrifying implications even if He can.
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Lithosano
Diplomat
 
Posts: 801
Founded: Jan 06, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Lithosano » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm

Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.


Ezekiel 16:49 disagrees.

""'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy." (NIV)
Learn Things AND Feed the Hungry!
Pro: Social Democracy, Humanism, Equality, Roosevelt, Free science, US Dollar Coin, Renewable and Nuclear Energy
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.77
Cosmopolitan Social Democrat
Gay Male

User avatar
Rocopurr
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12772
Founded: Aug 06, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Rocopurr » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm

Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.

Rather not. I can't and won't stop being gay.
speed weed ᕕ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )ᕗ

User avatar
Liriena
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 57200
Founded: Nov 19, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Liriena » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:49 pm

Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.

This is actually false.
be gay do crime


I am:
A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist
An aspiring writer and journalist
Political compass stuff:
Economic Left/Right: -8.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92
For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism
Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism,
cynicism


⚧Copy and paste this in your sig
if you passed biology and know
gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧

I disown most of my previous posts

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

Postby Jormengand » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:50 pm

Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality

No.
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Magna Libero
Minister
 
Posts: 2864
Founded: Jun 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Magna Libero » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:50 pm

Menassa wrote:
The Tovian Way wrote:
The Jewish Sabbath was Saturday (Friday sundown to Saturday sundown) not Sunday.
And this was commanded in the societal law of the Jewish state. It is no longer operable.
The moral law is eternal, and not one word of it shall ever pass away.

The Jewish Sabbath is no longer Saturday?

Friday? That's utterly appalling. I don't know what to think. The Friday people (I think they are called that): "First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people".
hi

User avatar
Menassa
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33354
Founded: Aug 11, 2010
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Menassa » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:52 pm

Magna Libero wrote:
Menassa wrote:The Jewish Sabbath is no longer Saturday?

Friday? That's utterly appalling. I don't know what to think. The Friday people (I think they are called that): "First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people".

It's Saturday, Friday night, and Saturday.
-NS's one and only Tanna!
Radical Monotheist
Their hollow inheritance.
This is my god and I shall exalt him
The NS Steam Thread
Jewish Discussion Thread בְּ
"A missionary uses the Bible like a drunk uses a lamppost, not so much for illumination, but for support"
"Imagine of a bunch of Zulu tribesmen told Congress how to read the Constitution, that's how it feels to a Jew when you tell us how to read our bible"
"God said: you must teach, as I taught, without a fee."
"Against your will you are formed, against your will you are born, against your will you live, against your will you die, and against your will you are destined to give a judgement and accounting before the king, king of all kings..."

User avatar
Magna Libero
Minister
 
Posts: 2864
Founded: Jun 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Magna Libero » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:55 pm

Jormengand wrote:
The Tovian Way wrote:
They are sinful because God, the source of all Goodness, as commanded us in His moral law, not to perform them.

Ah, but why did God command this? Also, since God is omnipotent, that means that he can command anything, and make anything good or sinful. Thus, God could make the murder of innocent children a good act, and make aiding others a sin. Surely, that cannot be so? Perhaps God would not do that, but there are terrifying implications even if He can.

I think the Book of Job answers your questions.
hi

User avatar
Resora
Diplomat
 
Posts: 769
Founded: Nov 05, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Resora » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:57 pm

Magna Libero wrote:
Jormengand wrote:Ah, but why did God command this? Also, since God is omnipotent, that means that he can command anything, and make anything good or sinful. Thus, God could make the murder of innocent children a good act, and make aiding others a sin. Surely, that cannot be so? Perhaps God would not do that, but there are terrifying implications even if He can.

I think the Book of Job answers your questions.

Ah yes, the book where God's apology for killing all of a man's children is to say "don't worry, you can still have more!"
The history of progress is written in the blood of men and women who have dared to espouse an unpopular cause.

Member of the Free Communists (District 108)
Left/Right: -10.00
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.45
Alternate Test
Political Views

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

Postby Jormengand » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:57 pm

Magna Libero wrote:
Jormengand wrote:Ah, but why did God command this? Also, since God is omnipotent, that means that he can command anything, and make anything good or sinful. Thus, God could make the murder of innocent children a good act, and make aiding others a sin. Surely, that cannot be so? Perhaps God would not do that, but there are terrifying implications even if He can.

I think the Book of Job answers your questions.

Nonetheless, I would like to hear it from this person, not the inglorious clusterfuck known as "The Bible."
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Magna Libero
Minister
 
Posts: 2864
Founded: Jun 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Magna Libero » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:02 pm

Resora wrote:
Magna Libero wrote:I think the Book of Job answers your questions.

Ah yes, the book where God's apology for killing all of a man's children is to say "don't worry, you can still have more!"

It wasn't God, who killed all of Job's children...
hi

User avatar
Resora
Diplomat
 
Posts: 769
Founded: Nov 05, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Resora » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:05 pm

Magna Libero wrote:
Resora wrote:Ah yes, the book where God's apology for killing all of a man's children is to say "don't worry, you can still have more!"

It wasn't God, who killed all of Job's children...

Oh bullshit, the entire story of Job is a pissing match between God and Satan, where Satan says "oh hey God, I bet Job only loves you because you gave him lots of shit" and God goes "nuh uh, go ahead and wreck his shit, I'll totally prove you wrong!"
The history of progress is written in the blood of men and women who have dared to espouse an unpopular cause.

Member of the Free Communists (District 108)
Left/Right: -10.00
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.45
Alternate Test
Political Views

User avatar
Haflin
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 22
Founded: Apr 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Haflin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:06 pm

Lithosano wrote:
Haflin wrote:Sorry if I offended it was not my intention, But I would say that they are tyranny of majority (sorry if I may be using that phrase incorrectly.) I would also like to say that I never stated the majority was full of or composed of bigots. I was merely suggesting they were using the democratic process to suppress a generally unsupported group.


You didn't offend. No one is being suppressed (although in this case the minority is calling for that), they can still have their meeting but the Senate isn't going to give them a platform to espouse their bigotry.

If this is a democracy a fair debate should be in place. Regardless of how you feel they act. When they are proven wrong in debate then its over. Until then they should not be denied a platform to struggle on.

User avatar
The Truth and Light
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29396
Founded: Jan 12, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The Truth and Light » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:08 pm

Magna Libero wrote:
Resora wrote:Ah yes, the book where God's apology for killing all of a man's children is to say "don't worry, you can still have more!"

It wasn't God, who killed all of Job's children...

Yes it is. Satan was a proxy.

User avatar
Lithosano
Diplomat
 
Posts: 801
Founded: Jan 06, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Lithosano » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:11 pm

Haflin wrote:
Lithosano wrote:
You didn't offend. No one is being suppressed (although in this case the minority is calling for that), they can still have their meeting but the Senate isn't going to give them a platform to espouse their bigotry.

If this is a democracy a fair debate should be in place. Regardless of how you feel they act. When they are proven wrong in debate then its over. Until then they should not be denied a platform to struggle on.


They have more or less been proven wrong.

The right to free speech is not absolute, they cannot express their views in a place where the owner does not want them. The Supreme Court has recognized that people can be denied a platform. No one has a right to unrestricted access to Senate buildings (except maybe the senators themselves), and the person who was apparently in charge of the building decided not to allow them use of the building. No one was being suppressed.
Learn Things AND Feed the Hungry!
Pro: Social Democracy, Humanism, Equality, Roosevelt, Free science, US Dollar Coin, Renewable and Nuclear Energy
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.77
Cosmopolitan Social Democrat
Gay Male

User avatar
Gaelic Celtia
Minister
 
Posts: 3179
Founded: Oct 03, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Gaelic Celtia » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:25 pm

Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.

Hopefully my cup of water will turn into wine as well.
Last edited by Llywelyn ap Iorwerth on Thur May 6, 1208 11:45 am, edited 100 times in total.

Sibirsky wrote:You are offensive to me.
Welsh
Pride!
Economic Left/Right: -7.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.00
Social Attitude Result
Cosmopolitan Social Democrat
Pro: Gay Rights, secularism, Welsh independence, democratic socialism, gun control, choice, progressive tax, death penalty, environmental protection, Plaid Cymru, Stark
Conflicted/Unsure About: Israel, Catalan Independence
Anti: Theocracy, Fundamentalism, Communism, Fascism, National Socialism, Nationalism, USA, Golden Dawn, nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, Lannister

User avatar
Haflin
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 22
Founded: Apr 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Haflin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:26 pm

Lithosano wrote:
Haflin wrote:If this is a democracy a fair debate should be in place. Regardless of how you feel they act. When they are proven wrong in debate then its over. Until then they should not be denied a platform to struggle on.


They have more or less been proven wrong.

The right to free speech is not absolute, they cannot express their views in a place where the owner does not want them. The Supreme Court has recognized that people can be denied a platform. No one has a right to unrestricted access to Senate buildings (except maybe the senators themselves), and the person who was apparently in charge of the building decided not to allow them use of the building. No one was being suppressed.

Id disagree, suppression exists by lets say denying a platform in which to speak upon. The person in charge of the building decided to end the activity( The activity I may not support, but I will defend their ability to express it.) is a form of suppression. Even if they can go elsewhere to complain about what ever it is they want. It is still a weakening of their ability to say what they please. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

User avatar
Menassa
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33354
Founded: Aug 11, 2010
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Menassa » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:31 pm

Gaelic Celtia wrote:
Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.

Hopefully my cup of water will turn into wine as well.

There is greater Biblical evidence for water turning into wine than for Sodom and Gomorrah being destroyed due to homosexuality.
-NS's one and only Tanna!
Radical Monotheist
Their hollow inheritance.
This is my god and I shall exalt him
The NS Steam Thread
Jewish Discussion Thread בְּ
"A missionary uses the Bible like a drunk uses a lamppost, not so much for illumination, but for support"
"Imagine of a bunch of Zulu tribesmen told Congress how to read the Constitution, that's how it feels to a Jew when you tell us how to read our bible"
"God said: you must teach, as I taught, without a fee."
"Against your will you are formed, against your will you are born, against your will you live, against your will you die, and against your will you are destined to give a judgement and accounting before the king, king of all kings..."

User avatar
Wisconsin9
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35753
Founded: May 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Wisconsin9 » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:32 pm

Pastor Visser wrote:Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by Yahweh god due to homosexuality, the same thing will happen to people today if they do not repent and stop being gay.

lolwut? I don't know what Bible you're reading, but mine doesn't even mention homosexuality as a reason for that.
~~~~~~~~
We are currently 33% through the Trump administration.
................................................................................................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................................................................................................

User avatar
Resora
Diplomat
 
Posts: 769
Founded: Nov 05, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Resora » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:32 pm

Haflin wrote:
Lithosano wrote:
They have more or less been proven wrong.

The right to free speech is not absolute, they cannot express their views in a place where the owner does not want them. The Supreme Court has recognized that people can be denied a platform. No one has a right to unrestricted access to Senate buildings (except maybe the senators themselves), and the person who was apparently in charge of the building decided not to allow them use of the building. No one was being suppressed.

Id disagree, suppression exists by lets say denying a platform in which to speak upon. The person in charge of the building decided to end the activity( The activity I may not support, but I will defend their ability to express it.) is a form of suppression. Even if they can go elsewhere to complain about what ever it is they want. It is still a weakening of their ability to say what they please. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I completely agree, but then, that's why societies with bourgeois concepts of property ownership are fundamentally undemocratic and cause communication distortions that give privilege to the interests of those with power. The state is not obligated to provide access to its property, and as the state was acting within its own laws to bar that group from using state property, its actions are no more or less democratic than, say, the lack of obligation of a media company to allow people to use its property to argue positions it disagrees with.
The history of progress is written in the blood of men and women who have dared to espouse an unpopular cause.

Member of the Free Communists (District 108)
Left/Right: -10.00
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.45
Alternate Test
Political Views

User avatar
Haflin
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 22
Founded: Apr 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Haflin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:36 pm

Resora wrote:
Haflin wrote:Id disagree, suppression exists by lets say denying a platform in which to speak upon. The person in charge of the building decided to end the activity( The activity I may not support, but I will defend their ability to express it.) is a form of suppression. Even if they can go elsewhere to complain about what ever it is they want. It is still a weakening of their ability to say what they please. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I completely agree, but then, that's why societies with bourgeois concepts of property ownership are fundamentally undemocratic and cause communication distortions that give privilege to the interests of those with power. The state is not obligated to provide access to its property, and as the state was acting within its own laws to bar that group from using state property, its actions are no more or less democratic than, say, the lack of obligation of a media company to allow people to use its property to argue positions it disagrees with.

I will agree with this.

User avatar
Haflin
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 22
Founded: Apr 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Haflin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:40 pm

So it could be said the senate acted as a company would?

User avatar
The Scientific States
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18643
Founded: Apr 29, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Scientific States » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:42 pm

Hopefully their plan falls flat.
Centrist, Ordoliberal, Bisexual, Agnostic, Pro Social Market Economy, Pro Labour Union, Secular Humanist, Cautious Optimist, Pro LGBT, Pro Marijuana Legalization, Pro Humanitarian Intervention etc etc.
Compass
Economic Left/Right: 0.88
Social Liberal/Authoritarian: -6.62
Political Stuff I Wrote
Why Pinochet and Allende were both terrible
The UKIP: A Bad Choice for Britain
Why South Africa is in a sorry state, and how it can be fixed.
Massive List of My OOC Pros and Cons
Hey, Putin! Leave Ukraine Alone!

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

Postby Condunum » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:43 pm

Haflin wrote:
Lithosano wrote:
You didn't offend. No one is being suppressed (although in this case the minority is calling for that), they can still have their meeting but the Senate isn't going to give them a platform to espouse their bigotry.

If this is a democracy a fair debate should be in place. Regardless of how you feel they act. When they are proven wrong in debate then its over. Until then they should not be denied a platform to struggle on.

The good thing is, this isn't a democracy. Democracy is bad. It is toxic and dangerous to social progress, or any sort of forward movement. What we are is a constitutional republic, and the Rights of individuals shouldn't be up to debate just because you think it's icky.
password scrambled

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Crysuko, Duhon, Emulation White, GLDF, Google [Bot], Heloin, Ifreann, Infected Mushroom, Internationalist Bastard, Loben The 2nd, MSN [Bot], New haven america, Proctopeo, Shrillland, Sundiata, The American Free States, The Isles of the Grey, The Rapture Republic, Uiiop

Advertisement

Remove ads