re: #9 Obdicut

Do you realize that when you play dumb it makes you look dumb?

Was it in there or are you reading between the lines? Do you really believe that most xtians want to outlaw homosexuality or premarital sex? I’m sure there are some but I wouldn’t call them anything close to a majority of believers. Yesterday I posted a poll about gays in the military. I find it hard to believe that 75% of evangelicals are ok with gays in uniform but at the same time want to outlaw sodomy.

Yes, Rogue. I really am very familiar with your and Rand Paul’s line of logic that says that people should be allowed to discriminate against black people in hiring them, letting them shop at their stores, live in their buildings, etc. You don’t need to type it out every time.

Do you get the slightest ‘boy am I fucking up right now’ when you talk about stopping people from banning black people from shopping at their stores as the majority forcing the minority into doing something? Like, a little twinge at all?

What about the PBA ban Michigan that’s about to pass. If the majority thinks it’s morally abhorrent than you must be all for it, right? After all, the majority is entitled to decide something like that in your view or am I mistaken?

Yes, that is the idiotic argument the moron in the video above is using. It’s something that’s obvious, trivially, pathetically untrue.

I don’t want anyone to stop legislating based on morality, if you’re stretching morality so far as to include all of human behavior.

Of course, what we’re actually talking about is morality as it applies to personal liberty. Gay marriage, gay adoption, women being able to have access to birth control, these are all personal matters, private, individual liberty that does not affect others.

Dumping pollutants into the atmosphere, banning black people from your store, refusing medical treatment to women because of your own morality, all of these have direct effects on other people.

I really at this point can’t tell whether you honestly think your position that discrimination based on race is peachy-fine and shouldn’t be illegal is actually a sensible, moderate position, or you just want attention for being a glibertarian rebel.

Either way, it just makes you look naiver than the Pauls, which is tricky to pull off.

Have you considered trying to work for them? They could use someone with your mastery of illogic.

Gliberal policy. “It’s unacceptable for religious people to hold and vote based on religious views but it’s perfectly acceptable for others to enforce a code of morality because we’re only doing it because it’s right”. If it’s unacceptable for religious people to try to hold others to their standard of good conduct then it’s unacceptable for everyone. In my view of a perfect world if you don’t like the idea of gay marriage then don’t marry someone gay. If you don’t like a business because they only want to cater to a particular race of people then don’t go into their business, and if you don’t like abortion then don’t abort your fetus. I know that the concept of allowing people to live by their own conscious is tough for those who insist on controlling people but sometimes it’s healthier to just let stuff go.

I love how you managed to squeak in clean air laws into a discussion of morality and the law. It’s nice to see you semi-admit that you don’t really mind laws based on morality as long as it lines up with your own view of which moral codes are correct and which aren’t. Personally, I don’t think my views should be enforced on others even if those views happen to be in the majority.