The Divine Institution of Marriage

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

It really is the great irony of this whole "fight". That a church known best for it's one time non-traditional definition of marriage now spearheads a movement to preserve the most traditional definition. That the "enemy" now uses many of the same arguments (the non-religious arguments of course) that our forefathers used to defend their right to polygamous marriage.

Exactly. If you look at the legacy of polygamy in the US, it can be argued that we have done more to alter the traditional definition of marriage than anyone.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

That the "enemy" now uses many of the same arguments (the non-religious arguments of course) that our forefathers used to defend their right to polygamous marriage.

How so? I wasn't around back then, but I thought The Church's primary argument on polygamy was religous freedom. Those supporting gay marriage appeal to civil liberties.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

Do we call you a "mullah" because of your race or sexual orientation? You don't see the difference? Don't know if there's any way to help you out, then, because there's a fundamental difference in our social paradigms.

So class-ist slurs are OK if there is any degree of voluntary membership in that class?

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

Do we call you a "mullah" because of your race or sexual orientation? You don't see the difference? Don't know if there's any way to help you out, then, because there's a fundamental difference in our social paradigms.

C'mon, people here throw that term out as a way to try to shame, silence, or label one as outside the norm. Its usage is fairly bigoted, particularly in religious terms, a category protected under civil rights law.

But this is a pretty hard-nosed crowd, so I doubt it has much effect. Indy, you should apologize to 3D for making him feel bad.

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

So class-ist slurs are OK if there is any degree of voluntary membership in that class?

What class is "mullah"?

The other terms have been used as pejoratives against blacks and homosexuals for a long time. They are very value-laden terms. There are such discriminatory undertones and meanings to them that some people have determined to avoid their use at all, in any context, because of that. You are obviously not one of those people.

Again, I don't think arguing with you about this is going to get anywhere.

[MikeWaters]

I want to see a rebuttal of my long post from Pelagius. If he so desires.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I want to see a rebuttal of my long post from Pelagius. If he so desires.

When trolling, even with bait that you believe with all your heart, I suggest you not put such a big piece on the hook.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

When trolling, even with bait that you believe with all your heart, I suggest you not put such a big piece on the hook.

Ah, thanks for using the Indy/Tex device of calling a well-written thoughtful post a troll.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

C'mon, people here throw that term out as a way to try to shame, silence, or label one as outside the norm. Its usage is fairly bigoted, particularly in religious terms, a category protected under civil rights law.

But this is a pretty hard-nosed crowd, so I doubt it has much effect. Indy, you should apologize to 3D for making him feel bad.

I could be wrong, because getting a read on DDD can be difficult at times, but I'm pretty sure there are quite a few that took a lot more offense at my comment than DDD did. I'm not sure that DDD actually took any offense to begin with; he just used what I said to take another dig at me.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I could be wrong, because getting a read on DDD can be difficult at times, but I'm pretty sure there are quite a few that took a lot more offense at my comment than DDD did. I'm not sure that DDD actually took any offense to begin with; he just used what I said to take another dig at me.

I took no personal offense bcause I am not gay, nor am I a bundle of sticks (or a British cigarette). Nonetheless, it probably wasnt a great idea to use that word, even in jest. Given the tone of our exchanges that day, it came across as very hostile.....as you stated yourself, "context." This time, context betrayed you when you were trying to make a joke.

I said in my post today that I apologize for not being civil in this matter. I meant it. I take you at your word that you were clowning around.