Adahn

[size=2]I am not a fan of tobacco. I grew up with almost all my relatives smoking, and there was never a moment when I wasn't utterly disgusted by it. My opinion, therefore, is biased and based upon my own predispositions, and has naught to do with research. When I'm walking to class, and someone is smoking behind/in front of/anywhere near me, I hate it. I hate the smell of it. I hate the way people smoke so casually. I hate the way they talk casually about it.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Now, people want to make marijuana legal. Do you understand what that means? We've accepted cigarettes and smokers. They're everywhere. They even have their own section in restaurants. The same thing will happen if marijuana is legalized. I'll have to walk around campus, and anywhere else, dealing with the noxious fumes from all that pot. It will at least double the number of people I simply cannot tolerate having around me. There will be a whole new 'class' introduced into the United States. There are smokers, non-smokers, and potheads. Potheads will be in public places everywhere, and I hope I have enough self control not to attack them if I see them.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Now that we've established my bias, I'll try to make some sort of point. From personal experience, students who smoke cigarettes underage tend not to be the brightest stars in the sky. By legalizing marijuana, you'll send a message to all kids saying, "It's not that bad. In fact, it's so not-unhealthy that we're legalizing it after it having been an illegal drug!" You'll be making it very attractive to underage people. I would expect the number of students smoking pot to at least equal those who smoke cigarettes.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Also, despite all the studies on marijuana not having bad side effects, I'd like to see one that showed the benefits of marijuana (being used as it will if made legal). Sure, junk food isn't very healthy, but it's food.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Basically, though, I just really, really don't want to have to deal with potheads on a daily basis in all the public places. I have a little bit of a "Mr. Smith" view on smoking (cigarettes or anything else).[/size] [font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font]

I feel the need to come to Rhian's defense here. You've simply misunderstood her. She related vegetarians saying eating meat is bad to Christians saying (insert sin) is bad. I myself don't completely understand how you could misunderstand her when her meaning seems very clear to me. Anyways, Morpheus was right about plants not feeling pain. Pain is a useful tool used by things that can move to recognize a threat to its well-being. Plants, having no ability to respond to physical damage, cannot feel pain. If you want to say that there is [i]something[/i] there, that's fine, but don't call it (physical) pain. Perhaps there is something on a spiritual level (emotional pain) that a plant could feel in sensing that its life is about to end.

[size=2]I suppose I see competition in a different light. I can and do get along with those who are competent (such as the OB Moderators), but I want to be the best at what I do all the same. Any good-natured person put in a position of power and authority will naturally desire to better him/herself in his/her area of expertise.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I would go so far as to hypothesize that if you were to make a moderator of any member with intelligence, compassion, and a good understanding of the rules/expectations of OB, that person's post count, quality, and overall internet personality would improve. I would, however, avoid those who would quite obviously be corrupted by such power *cough* DW *cough*.[/size] [font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font]

[size=2]Ouch...*nurses his wounded pride*[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]When I like doing something, I like being good at it. If I don't like doing something, people have to tell me to do it, or I won't.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Now, I'll try and put to good use what little logic I have. I would be a great moderator if and only if two conditions were met.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]1. I were allowed to be one.[/size] [size=2]2. I wanted to be one.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]That pretty much goes for everything. If I am able to do something, and I like doing it, I like being good at it. I'm competitive by nature.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I don't know if I'd like being a moderator anywhere, simply because it's something I've never done. Besides, if I were a moderator, I'd be in constant competition with the others to be the best one. I compete with people who don't even know they're competing with me :p [/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size]

Hmm, I suppose it would be appropriate to post what I think and feel about moderators. When I see their posts, (not counting thread closures/duty things) I expect a certain level of quality, be it in the form of intelligence, humor, wit, and/or amazing grammar + punctuation. I'm not so sure it boils down to something as simple as respect, but rather an...expectation. There is the light feeling of joy when a moderator replies to your thread, or something you yourself specifically said. Could I be a Moderator (if the position were offered)? Perhaps, but I'd have to want to do it, and people would have to tell me what to do. I tend to get lazy and do what I want rather than what I should.

[size=2]Now first, I must admit, my knowledge in the field is quite a bit under par, but something has caught my attention.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]From what I can garner, the word 'sociopath' here is being used with a negative connotation. Common sense here is itching at the back of my head. Batman's batman-ness becomes threatened when he develops close relationships with other people. The more people get to know you, the less you are able to hide. All it takes is one slip and the cat's out of the bag. You all want to brand him as a 'sociopath' and ship him off to the psych ward, but do you ask yourselves the one question that's really important?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Could batman, [i]be[/i] batman, and not be a sociopath? Could any hero with a secret identity develop numerous close relationships without threatening his essential heroicness, not to mention the lives of those he gets close to? Batman may or may not be aware of it, but the anti-social character that he's developed in himself is vital to his existence.[/size]

[font=Verdana][size=2]I've spent so much of my life worrying about things that I really don't worry about anything anymore. I take life as it is, and act within the parameters of my laziness/procrastination...ness. On a side note, and the only real reason I'm replying, Talim's my girl :love: . I love her love her love her. You gotta love those double crescent blades.[/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=2]Ahem, now I suppose I should justify my post so it doesn't constitue spam. I, uhhh, like to play SC2 to stop being worried about things. Yeah, that's an outright lie. I actually gave my gamecube/controllers/games/etc. to my little sister for her birthday before I went to college. Neither her nor my little brother will play me. Drix, however, is a ***** with Raphael, damn him to the fiery pits of hell. Not Drix, Raphael.[/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=2]Oh yeah! Anyways, playing games is a great way to relieve stress. It's good to have a few minutes to an hour just to sit back, say, "Screw you world." and kick the crap out of A.I. programs with a cute 15-year old priestess avatar wielding heavily imbalanced double crescent blades.[/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=2]That is all.[/size][/font]

[QUOTE=TOTALIMMORTAL]Here's a simple way of putting it: [b]Anything you'd die for, you love.[/b] [/QUOTE] I wholeheartedly disagree. I think the opposite is true, but with a slight change. [b]Anyone you'd live for, you love.[/b] Any person can give up his/her life, but does anyone stop and think about how the person you love feels? If you truly love them, and they love you, you'd be willing to do anything to live for them. Making them happy is your sole motivation in life, and dying for them will cause them the greatest pain ever. If one of us [b]HAD [/b]to die, and the other would have to go on living, I would suffer the burden of life without her.

[size=2]If the laws of entropy applied to governments, then anarchy would be the most stable (disorderly) form. Perhaps that is what happens. The cyclic way in which our governments move is somewhat representative of this. I would call a democratic republic the most ordered government; a balance of monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic elements. Such order is just waiting for a shift to something much simpler, such as despotism. People like to follow, and no matter how many leaders you kill/depose, there will always be someone there to allay the fears of the masses and restore 'order'. The order will become more and more complex until once again, it collapses. What you're suggesting is just the step immediately before a tyrrany/monarchy. We humans are unnatural. We see something disorderly and try to make it orderly. When entropy catches up to us, you may have your wish, but it will not come without a price.[/size] [font=Verdana][size=2]I need a nap, so I'm sorry if none of that made sense.[/size][/font]

[font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]There were things that took place today that I do not need to write down, as they will forever have their place in my memory. I know not the proper way to do this, as this is the first entry in the only journal I'll ever write. I don't even know if I am writing as myself. It seems that my life as it was before was lived by a different person. I am changed.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Certain things, however, don't change. It was my swagger as I entered the tavern that made him notice me. I was as uncomfortable standing on land as he was sitting near the bar. I met his gaze, and was giddy with the prospect of revenge. No, not on this man, but on those who did the unspeakable. The Spanish Navy will know me by a new name, but first I must earn it.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I took a seat near this man, and listened to what he had to say. Our goals were different, but our means the same. He wanted adventure and gold, and I wanted blood. I offered my services to him, and he accepted. He was looking for crewmembers, and I think it was fate that led me to him.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]He asked me my name.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I told him I didn't deserve one.[/color][/size][/font]

"it's beautiful." I said as he gave it to me. The petals were the deepest red I'd ever seen. The color burned before my eyes, as passionately as my love burned for him. The crimson bled out from the rose. I see my lover's feet walking towards the door, and my last thought, "Roses don't bleed."

[quote name='James][color=#334366']I think that shame is a tricky thing. Shame is often used to force people into one particular way of behaving.[color=#000000][/quote][/color] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]This is true. There is great power in the determination of what one should or should not be ashamed of, especially when many people ascribe to your beliefs, as in the case of religion.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=James] For example, many women who are raped feel [i]ashamed[/i] and that can sometimes partly be the reason why they may not alert the authorities. This also happens with children who are sexually abused. It's often shame that stops them from coming forward and starting a process of recovery (however much one can recover from such horrific events, anyway).[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I think both of these cases result from a single perversion of shame. America has taught its people from childhood to be ashamed of their bodies, especially those parts associated with sex. It is this deep-seeded notion in the minds of all citizens that causes anyone who is sexually violated to feel shame where there is nothing to be ashamed of.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=James] So I don't think that shame is even mostly a good thing. We are often ashamed of things that we shouldn't be ashamed of and that in turn isn't good for one's self confidence and so on.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]All cases of feeling ashamed when we shouldn't is a result of a perversion of shame used as a tool by the government, a religion, the media, etc. to control us (as you touched on above).[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=James] But like anything else, it depends. Sometimes I think you can be ashamed of yourself for something (maybe a lack of effort in school or whatever) and that can be a good thing, if only because it allows you to acknowledge a personal failure to yourself. And that in turn may help you to change in the future, for your own betterment.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Yes, this is where shame can be a useful tool for us to learn and grow.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=James] But in terms of public shaming and stuff like that...eh, I don't know. The whole concept of "shame", at least from a religious point of view, seems mostly to be a system of control and belittlement. Not to say that this is always the case, or that shame is always bad (as mentioned above). It's just that I don't think shame is always good.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I think that shame on anything but a personal level is wrong.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=James] If you do something (or avoid doing something) because you might feel ashamed otherwise, I kind of wonder how good that is if it's your primary motivation. I know that I don't do good things for people to avoid feeling shame, I do good things because I care about people and I want to help them. So it's not about avoiding the stick or incurring the wrath of a deity, it's instead about improving my relationship with someone and making a genuinely positive impact in their life.[/color][/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Shame certainly doesn't have to be the primary motivation, but if it were taken into consideration for every decision we make (make a habit of it), it would help us second-guess decisions that seem okay at first, but are actually wrong. It would have helped in my decision not to help my brother.[/color][/size][/font]

[font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]Oh no! Not another sorry excuse for a philosophical debate thread! And you thought I was done with these.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]In order to appease those with the 'I hate debates' mentality, I'll make this a little more interesting.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]For the more lighthearted of you out there, I have a question. What are you ashamed of?[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]To start off the neat little sharing of tales, I'll post my own little tidbit.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Last night, my brother needed help with his biology class, and I brushed him off simply because I didn't feel like helping him. It probably wouldn't have been too hard for me, but the will to help him just wasn't there. He probably had a hell of a time with it by himself, and could be having a pretty bad day today, all because of my selfishness.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Now, for the second part.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I've been thinking about shame, and have decided that it is a good thing. What we are ashamed of dictates our morality, and because of this it is a useful tool. If one were to consider every decision one makes on the basis of whether that decision will bring one shame or not, that person would lead a virtuous life (if one were to avoid actions that would bring one shame).[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]However, there are a couple perversions of shame. One is that you should be ashamed of something because other people say it's wrong. Another is to consider something right because other people say it's wrong (nonconformity).[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Many flaws in morality can be attributed to these two perversions, because they emphasize both extremes. The first is the classic religious dogma morality, where right and wrong are made up of long-standing good values, but also of perversions that have stood the test of time. It is from these that the second perversion springs. People recognize the perversions in religious dogma, and use that as a basis for saying that the whole dogma (good and bad) is bad.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Well, that's my take on shame.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Comments? Personal experiences? All are welcome.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font]

I believe that everyone knows the difference between right (good) and wrong (evil), and that inherently gives us the potential to be good (do what's right). The only thing that makes people bad (evil) is when they choose not to do (or believe in) what is right (good). There are no broad definitions necessary, and the knowledge of what's right and wrong (good and evil) have been, are, and always will be the same.

[size=2]I posted this a couple years ago, but hey, I might as well copy it down again for old time's sake.[/size] [size=2]I've had one dream twice, but only when I had some sort of weird, feverish feeling, like I was sort of sick, but not. Anyway I'm on a white plane (not an airplaine, kind of like a plane of existence) and there is a big black glob. I have an opponent, or if not that, then some sort of resistance. There are three consciousnesses (referees/judges?) that I can't really perceive except for that they are different and they communicate. The object of the "game" was to push the glob around mentally, trying to move it to one side or the other, or split it, or combine it. I don't really know the rules, just that there were some while I was dreaming, and I knew what I had to do. "I" wasn't touching the glob, but I willed it to move against the will of my resistance, and the game seemed to go on for a very, very long time. I don't know if I "won" or not, because it was a long time ago.[/size]

[size=2]Hmm, I don't have problems, so it's sort of difficult to decide. I'm not a very violent person. If people don't like me, or are mean to me, I tend to be nice to them. I guess it's just the kind of person I am. I have a funny little story. I was at the Olive Garden, and I really like their breadsticks, so I asked for more so I could take them home. Being the good person that I am, I ate one of them so as not to seem wasteful, and asked for 'doggie bags' to take home my uneaten food. The waitress put the meal I was eating in the container thing, then took my breadsticks and threw them away. My mom insisted that I give her hardly a tip, because we both (well, all three) knew she was doing it to be a *****. But, I felt compelled to over-tip her. I don't know what kind of an effect it had on her, being rewarded for doing something nasty to me, but I really didn't want to give her less of a tip in response to poor service.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]On the other hand (sorry for the tangent), I love fighting for fun. My friends and I did it for a while, and people eventually were afraid of me, because I fought like my life depended on it, even though it was just for fun. I didn't fight dirty, but I wanted to hit the other guy so bad they all must have seen it. One kid who must be a good half-foot taller than me, and a football player to boot, refused to fight me because he said he was afraid. I've always sort of hoped someone would come along to test my mettle, but it hasn't happened yet. If it does, I hope I can fight with the same passion for victory as I did for fun, and am not blinded by rage.[/size]

[size=2]I suppose I'll eventually get published once I get into some real research. Right now, I'm just learning the basics :( . I fear I'll become the science guy who knows a lot of information and finds it all very interesting. Woe be to those polite enough to listen to me once I get rolling on such topics.[/size] [size=2]Other than that, damn, Alex. That's one hell of an essay. I wouldn't be afraid to send that to every applicable publisher you can find (though you may have already done that). Have you tried to contact the Wachowski brothers? It may not be easy to get ahold of them directly, but spreading your work around as much as possible would increase the chances of it being brought to your attention. I hope good things happen to you because of it.[/size]

People love starting topics about what's wrong with their relationship, and what people want in a relationship, but I haven't seen a thread devoted to taking relationships as they are. Feel free to spill your guts here, and comment on other people's relationships (and prepare to be commented on). I, for one, am in love. I met her on OB a ways back, and we had a very good string of PM's going. After a while, we communicated a little by e-mail, but lost touch. A little before I started college, I e-mailed her again and got a reply. We exchanged AIM screen names and started talking. We talked for hours every day, and somewhere along the way fell madly in love. Even though she lives a thousand miles away, I flew down to her for a couple weeks over Christmas and new years. We got along very well, and when the time came for us to part, we were both heartbroken. It only took a couple days after I got back for us to decide to see each other again, this time for almost two months starting in early May. I'm confident that she's the love of my life, and we will be together forever. We're very sad to be apart from each other, but we try to talk to each other every day for as long as possible, and the pain is fading away as we start counting down the days it will take for us to be together again.

[quote name='Siren]Pet ownership (i.e., taking care of one's pet) versus abusing an animal for sexual pleasure. Come on, Adahn. You're trying to spin this and it's not working, because there's no way in hell you're ever going to be able to draw some type of correlative link between those two. You're trying to argue the slippery slope angle, and it's not working, because as you go farther and farther down the [i]imagined[/i'] slippery slope, your "argument" is becoming more and more asinine and removed from reality.[/quote] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]I never said that recognizing homosexuality as a morally right thing would cause other traditionally accepted morals to come into question. Is it better for animals if we kill them and skin them to make fashionable clothing for people to wear, or is it better for people to screw them? Is it better to put them in labs and perform agonizing experiments on them? Is it better to kill them indiscriminately in order to prepare delicacies to eat? If we do all these things now, why is using them for sexual pleasure wrong? I'll answer the question for you. It's wrong because it goes against [i]morality. [/i]There is no logical explanation for it being wrong other than that it [i]feels[/i] wrong.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] I'm going to say this again. I'm putting animals [i]beneath[/i] humans. I never treated them as being on the same level, because they're not. But regardless of the different levels, taking sexual advantage of a lower being that lacks the capacity to communicate--[i]regardless of what specie, class, level[/i]--is wrong.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]You're saying it's wrong because it's wrong. You know what? I agree with you. It is wrong. If you can give me any explanation other than that it is [i]morally[/i] wrong to take sexual advantage of something, I'd like to hear it.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] Funny, that's precisely what you were saying about homosexuality. So, then, you also have no intelligent argument?[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Morality is illogical. It sets up rules and regulations that don't make sense. If you want an intelligent argument, I'll give you one. We [i]need[/i] a system of morality, no matter how illogical it may seem. The reason humanity is crying out against homosexuality is because its system of morality is being attacked. We've taken it for granted for so very long, and now we're trying to break it down. I'm not saying that all hell will break loose, I'm just saying that Morality is being eroded, and we don't know what the consequences will be. Changes that seem good now may prove to be disastrous later.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] Your apathy is your own fault. You have a voice; everyone does. The people driving our country are drunk at the wheel, Adahn. We need to take the keys from them.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I suggested localizing government to create smaller democracies to allow everyone to have a voice, but my idea was absurd. We don't have a democracy, the country is too large. I may have a voice, but I would have to scream in order to be heard above the din of our republic.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] Okay, and wisdom should prevail all the time, then, so you should never have even had those morality-based thoughts to begin with, because wisdom (i.e., logic, intelligence, reason, rationality) overrules emotion.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Fine. Let's eliminate morality and see what happens.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] I find that last night's South Park is useful here. The episode centered around a Woodland Critter Christmas, with the whole immaculate conception thing. As the episode proceeds, we learn that a mountain lion is hunting these critters, year after year killing their lord and savior. They get Stan to go kill it. He comes back, and they reveal themselves to be demonic woodland critters, and the "lord and savior" is actually the antichrist. Here comes the end of the world, basically, and the animals sing with malicious glee. One of the bunnies is happily sacrificed, then the other critters go, "Blood orgy!" and start making love to one another, using the bunny's blood as lubricant. The slippery slope argument is a lot like that. It basically boils down to because of homosexuality, gay rights, etc., the world is going to degenerate into a blood orgy.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]First of all, that episode was heavenly. Second of all, actions have consequences. Eroding morality is an action, and since this is [i]unprecedented[/i], anyone's prediction of the consequences is valid. Absolutely nothing may happen, and the world could be a better place full of happy, happy gay people. On the other hand, everything could happen, and the world could degenerate into a blood orgy. We're opening a door, and we don't know what's on the other side. Is the possibility of a better world for gay people worth the possibility of a worse one for everyone?[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] The complete and utter void of logic in the slippery slope argument should be obscenely apparent to anyone there.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Are you saying that the idea that unprecedented actions could have unprecedented consequences is absurd? I'll say it again. We don't know what's going to happen, but we know what could happen. It's really a gamble for humanity. It's not a very good one, either. We don't know what the odds are, and we don't know what we can win or lose. It's not the kind of bet I'd be willing to make, but so many people here would stand behind it diligently, putting their [i]faith[/i] in the [i]hope [/i]that they will win, and that the prize will be good.[/color][/size][/font]

[quote name='Siren]Adahn, how am I putting animals on the same level as humans? Fact of the matter is, I'm [b][i][u]not[/u][/i][/b']. Nowhere in my post was I placing animals at the same level as humans. In fact, I was placing them beneath humans, and that's very clear to see in my post. I'm just as much as an animal rights activist as the next guy, but even I know that the family dog isn't going to be able to help me put up the Xmas tree, or to bounce thesis ideas back and forth with him.[/quote] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]You're saying that bestiality is wrong because of an animal's inability to consent to sex, correct?[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] You honestly and truly believe that homosexuality is akin to beastiality? And I'm the twisted one?[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]All this says is, 'your idea is disgusting and wrong!' There's no intelligent argument here.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] How about that it's taking advantage of a lesser being, one that can't fight back, can't speak out, can't even tell you what it's thinking. Beastiality isn't homosexuality. Beastiality is rape of an invalid.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Then what is hunting, or the mass slaughter of animals in factories? If bestiality is rape, then hunting is murder. You [i]are[/i] putting animals on the same level as humans. Don't deny it.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] Do I still need to tell you how it's wrong, Adahn? I've said it about five times now and you keep asking why. Any further question on your part is a result of deliberate ignorance.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Deliberate ignorance? It's just that your argument can be used to argue against pet ownership as slavery and hunting as murder. I would suggest you choose a different path of logic to explain to me how bestiality is wrong.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] You would be surprised what you can do when you put your mind to it (which, I recall, is said in that book).[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Well, there's also the complete lack of desire to do anything about it. What do you think this country is, a democracy? I have a vote, but I have no voice.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] They very much relate to the same topic. You said you find the act to be vile and disgusting, but then say that if two people love each other very much, and make love, you're happy about it, and happy for them, and consider them married. Which is it? Do you find it vile, disgusting, wholly disturbing and without any moral value whatsoever, or do you appreciate the love something like that can stand for?[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]What I think is right (my morality) and what I can understand (my wisdom) are different. It's perfectly ok for me to understand [i]why[/i] something could be thought of as right because of my wisdom, and still disagree with it because of my morality. Not everything is black and white.[/color][/size][/font]

[quote name='Siren]I don't see why I'd even have to explain this...if animals cannot communicate what they are feeling, and thus, communicate consent, how can anyone view beastiality on any comparable level with activity between two cognitively-developed humans, who [i]are[/i'] able to communicate consent? Beastiality is wrong because a party involved has absolutely no way of fully communicating and/or fully expressing cognitive processes. Animals lack the ability to. It's essentially inter-specie rape.[/quote] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]Animals are unable to communicate consent? You're putting them on the same level as humans. I suppose we should all take everyone's pets away, because it's very obvious that the relationship is master/slave. We even breed them and sell their children! Do you see what I'm getting at? If you want to show me how bestiality is wrong, tell me how it hurts someone, or how it's anyone's business but the person's and the animal's. That's the argument for homosexuality, isn't it? It doesn't hurt anyone, it's nobody's business, and people are going to do it anyway. You can sit there all day and call it 'rape' because of a lack of 'consent', but I'm asking you [i]why[/i] it's [i]wrong.[/i] Remember, by today's definition, if it doesn't hurt anyone, it's not wrong.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] But it does concern you, because you are living in the United States of America, the same country that dear ole Bushy is President of. You're more willing to be apathetic to the entire process than to make your voice heard? Bush doesn't really display any lean towards moral relativism, by the way.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I cannot affect the President's actions, so I will not concern myself with them. Have you ever read the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People? The President is well out of my sphere of influence, so concerning myself with it is a waste of time.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] Quote above, you were describing how you thought it was vile and disgusting, and in the second quote, you're fine with it--in fact, you seem to be glad about it. Now, call me crazy, but given that first quote there, it seems that you're completely unable to "have no problem" with homosexual marriage, lol. Regarding the morality of homosexuality, the two quotes above seem to contradict each other pretty badly.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]They're hardly relating to the same topic. One is my personal opinion, and the other is my understanding as a compassionate human being. I can [i]understand[/i] how it could be seen as right, and even agree with it on some level based upon my understanding, even though it conflicts with my personal feelings.[/color][/size][/font]

[QUOTE=Siren] Not opinion. When people are able to distance themselves from the emotional attachment they have to the Bible, they'll see that it is no different at all from Gilgamesh, Beowulf, Iliad, etc. Bible as Literature. Pure fact. The Bible is a piece of Literature rooted in Historicity, Ideology, Sociology, Economics, etc. [i]I view the Bible as a piece of Literature that is...[/i][/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]I'm sorry, when I start sentences with 'I view', what usually follows is an opinion of mine.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] If you ask a human how they're feeling, they can reply because they [i]have[/i] the capacity to understand the question. If you ask an animal the same thing, they're going to sit there and just stare at you blankly, because they [i]lack[/i] the capacity to even [i]realize[/i] you're asking a question. Until animals are able to fully communicate their emotions and feelings, attempting to compare homosexuality and beastiality is absurd.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Tell me, then, why bestiality is wrong.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] Do you think Bush believes right and wrong are relative? (you want to play Socratic Method, fine)[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I don't really care what Bush believes, I didn't vote for him. He's got free reign of the country for another four years, and there is [i]nothing[/i] I can do about it. I don't concern myself with matters that don't concern me.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] Then what's the problem with the government recognizing it in a legal state of marriage?[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]There is no problem with it. I voted for it. We aren't debating homosexual marriage, here, we are debating the morality of homosexuality.[/color][/size][/font]

[QUOTE=Siren]Your sarcasm is as clumsy as it is stupid. In that AIM convo you and I had, I was explicitly referring to [i]your[/i] blatant misinterpretation of scripture in your Reincarnation debacle, Adahn, and was showing you precisely how you were mis-reading it. Dave knows this, because he knew exactly what I was telling you, and had also been saying it the entire time. I say again, your sarcasm is as clumsy as it is stupid. [/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]I wasn't being sarcastic. I was saying that the strength of sin was the law, and you told me that that line was referring to [i]Roman[/i] law. It was all about interpreting the Bible in terms of the time period it was written in. I'm a big fan of sarcasm in RL, but I'm almost never sarcastic here.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] I view the Bible as a piece of Literature that is heavily, heavily rooted in Historicity, Ideology, Sociology, and Economics, and fundamentally, it's no different than any other piece of Lit, except people have elevated it to unreasonably high levels and believe it to be suitable material from which one can quote in support of supposedly "reasonable" social dogma (i.e., your Reincarnation debacle, religious-based arguments against homosexuality, etc).[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I won't argue against your personal opinion, you're entitled to it.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] All I was telling you back there on AIM was to read things [i]in context[/i], both textually and historically, that's it.[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]This is what I was talking about, it was a good point. Sorry, no sarcasm here, either. Maybe next time.[/color][/size][/font] [QUOTE=Siren] Now, I'd like for you to address the other points of mine that you omitted:[/QUOTE] But what if the act of anal sex, whether homo or hetero, is out of love, compassion, caring, and [i]isn't[/i] an act of lust? How would you respond to that? Would it still be wrong, even when it's out of love? [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I thought I made it clear that I agreed with you in presenting the possibility that homosexuality in the Bible was written in the context of the active/passive relationship that characterized male homosexuality in that time period.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] And how does the animal feel? What does the animal think? Is it consenting to this? Come on, lol. Remember the quote. [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Is it going to cause any physical/emotional harm to the animal? From what I can tell, that's the direction the morals of the country are heading in. If there are no real harmful consequences to an action, then the action is not wrong.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] I've bolded an interesting idea there. "Belief is not truth." Hmm...what have people been saying to you in this entire thread? That Christianity doesn't apply to everyone, and that Christian doctrine is not truth...interesting. [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Are you trying to tell me that right and wrong are relative?[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] So, if two people who truly love each other make love, then they're married? I think you just made millions of homosexuals very happy, Adahn. You may argue that they didn't really make love...but somehow, I don't think your assessment is all that substantial. If they connected on both an emotional and a physical level...I'd say that's certainly making love, as opposed to screwing like there's no tomorrow. [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]Yep. If two people who are in love make love, then I would consider them 'married' in a spiritual sense, despite the lack of a political or religious recognition. Marriage is a ceremony. The act of love is what God recognizes as binding two souls together. Anything else is fornication.[/color][/size][/font]

[QUOTE=Boba Fett][color=green]You mean being limited to the time in which Jesus "lived"? I doubt it. If that were true, you could discount everything the bible says, because it'd have no relation to the events of today's world. I'm thinking that mainstream organized religion won?t be recognizing homosexuality for a very, very long time. If at all.[/color][/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]Umm, Leviticus wasn't written any time near when Jesus lived. You should have a chat with Siren. He can tell you all about how certain things written in the Bible [i]must[/i] be read with regard to the time period they were written in. Also, there are churches that perform homosexual marriages, and accept homosexual couples.[/color][/size][/font]

[QUOTE=Siren] So, then, you're entertaining the possibility that the Bible isn't really saying what you've been saying it's been saying?[/QUOTE] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue]That's exactly what I'm saying, and I'm a little surprised you didn't say it first. But, perhaps you lead me in that direction? I [i]am[/i] easy to manipulate.[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]So, everyone, what would you say to the possibility of homosexual relationships being prohibited in the Bible only pertaining to the situation that existed at that time?[/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]If this were true, then homosexual people pushed away from Christianity based on 3 or 4 lines could reconsider disregarding the Bible. Do you think this is possible?[/color][/size][/font]