Quote:
|
Originally Posted by filtherton
Really? I guess when you said this:
You threw me off.
|
I'm not sure why. I specifically said at the end of that paragraph that it's stupid to use the bible to justify *or condemn* anything.
Quote:
|
I think that people have every right to cherrypick whatever they want from the bible as long as they have some sort of justification beyond "well, i do like this part" for your cherrypicking. That's basically the process by which one makes sense of the world. You take in information, you decide what is relevant, and you disregard the rest. It isn't always an intellectually honest process, but it is pretty standard.
|
People have the right to do whatever they want regarding religion, provided that what they want to do does not trample the rights of others. If you want to only read every 3rd word in the bible and call THAT the truth, that's OK by me. I really don't care. If you start trying to force ME to acknowledge it as the truth, or start trying to pass laws limiting MY freedom based on this truth that YOU believe, that's where we start having issues.
Quote:
|
I think you're mistaken if you think that religious thought is the only thing standing in the way of legal gay marriage.
|
It's not the only thing, but it's a very big thing.
Quote:
|
Right here on the tfp there have been 100+ post threads on that very subject without religion coming up at all. People don't need religion to justify their disfavor towards gay marriage. They can use perspectives based on interpretations of economics, biology and sociology.
|
That's fine because an honest debate can ensue from an argument based on those branches of thought. Additionally if you think the majority of those opposed to gay marriage feel that way for anything BUT religious convictions, you are mistaken.
Quote:
|
Despite being more "honest" than religion, these disciplines are easily commandeered for the purpose of denying gays the right to marry. Do you think the fact that certain sociological theories can be used to justify the continued denial of gay rights should mean that any argument based on sociological theory is automatically unfounded?
|
No. You seem to be trying to get me to admit that I feel that anything which is the opposite of what I want is automatically unfounded. That isn't true, however. What I AM saying is that if you want to ban gay marriage, you'd better have a damn good reason for it, and you'd better be able to back it up. Even a selfish and morally bankrupt reason such as "well I don't want gays to have the same tax advantages as everyone else does when they marry" is better than "the invisible man in the sky told me not to do it."