Ron Brown issue/discussion wonderfully articulated...

[Showman]

50 years ago African Americans were getting strung up in the south for wanting to drink out of the same water fountains as whites. We rightly look back in shame at the way things used to be. We'll probably do the same regarding gay marriage in 50 years. There's no logical argument to made against it, it's prejudice and fear. There are plenty of logical arguments to be made against sex with children. Again, it's a false analogy.

[ChitownHusker]

But even child molesters have more liberties in some areas than gay citizens.

Congratulations Mort on coming up with the left-wing corrollary to huskrdavy's ridiculous statement. Wow.

[ChitownHusker]

Pedophilia was an accepted practice in ancient Greece. If merely social norms dictate acceptable practices, it could conceivably be accepted again in any culture.

Social norms should never dictate acceptable practices. We are not a theocracy. There should be a secular rationale for every law on the books.

[cm husker]

I'm not sure if it was or not, but perhaps the point is that societal mores have changed over time (eg. homosexuality) and perhaps one should be careful about certain generalizations about what is perceived as aberrant or not. Homosexulaity was perceived as aberrant by most and now perhaps not by most. Davey may have been making the point of what happens if our society continue to morph in such a way that sex with children is more mainstream.

Society acknowledging that two people of the same sex can have a consensual, fulfilling and beneficial relationship by outlawing discrimination based on homosexuality isn't a step on a logic progression line toward society accepting non-consensual relationships between adults and children.

They aren't even in the same sport, let alone league.

[hskrdavey]

To clear the record. 1st off.. I'm not a homophobe. 2nd. I have a couple close friends that are homosexuals. I honestly do NOT care what they do in the privacy of their own home. One believes that he should not be discriminated against and should be equal to everyone.....the other actually thinks its "taking advantage of a situation" to use his sexual preference as a means to be put on equal ground via the law. To him, he believes he has made a choice and that he wasn't born with it. In fact...he would say that he leans more towards being "bi-sexual". Should that "GROUP" (Bi-Sexuals) not be discriminated against? Where does it stop?

My concern is what we as a society deem as acceptable BEHAVIOR via the court of law. It's going down the wrong road.

[RedPhoenix]

A few of the regular posters over there jumped in on a RB thread. I knew RP was on vacation when he didn't jump in and skewer the newbies.

I was feeling charitable!!!! And I was feeling a strange sense of disconnect.....

[RedPhoenix]

To clear the record. 1st off.. I'm not a homophobe. 2nd. I have a couple close friends that are homosexuals. I honestly do NOT care what they do in the privacy of their own home. One believes that he should not be discriminated against and should be equal to everyone.....the other actually thinks its "taking advantage of a situation" to use his sexual preference as a means to be put on equal ground via the law. To him, he believes he has made a choice and that he wasn't born with it. In fact...he would say that he leans more towards being "bi-sexual". Should that "GROUP" (Bi-Sexuals) not be discriminated against? Where does it stop?

My concern is what we as a society deem as acceptable BEHAVIOR via the court of law. It's going down the wrong road.

You would prefer the more discriminatory road then?

[OmaHusker]

Social norms should never dictate acceptable practices. We are not a theocracy. There should be a secular rationale for every law on the books.

Cannibalism is perfectly rational to the cannibal. Secular rationale can always be disputed/argued. Even if you agree on the reason (consent) one can argue the true age of consent. Social norms are the "established" rationale for acceptable practice and thus acceptable practice can change for any reason.

[ChitownHusker]

To clear the record. 1st off.. I'm not a homophobe. 2nd. I have a couple close friends that are homosexuals. I honestly do NOT care what they do in the privacy of their own home. One believes that he should not be discriminated against and should be equal to everyone.....the other actually thinks its "taking advantage of a situation" to use his sexual preference as a means to be put on equal ground via the law. To him, he believes he has made a choice and that he wasn't born with it. In fact...he would say that he leans more towards being "bi-sexual". Should that "GROUP" (Bi-Sexuals) not be discriminated against? Where does it stop?

My concern is what we as a society deem as acceptable BEHAVIOR via the court of law. It's going down the wrong road.

In terms of whether a particular group is entitled to protection from discrimination, I look at two factors:

1.) Has the group historically been subjected to systemic discrimination?

2.) Is there a reasonable justification for discriminating against that group?

To me, it's pretty clear that homosexuals have been systemically discriminated against, and there is no reasonable justification for doing so. To me, the burden of proof is on the Ron Browns of the world to justify the discrimination, and the law traditionally doesn't look favorably upon "that's the way it has always been" as a legitimate justification. Ron Brown of all people should understand why that is the case. Moreover, just as the state cannot force people with religious convictions to act contrary to those convictions, people with religious convictions cannot force people who do not share their beliefs to act in accordance with their convictions. It is a two way street.

[ChitownHusker]

Cannibalism is perfectly rational to the cannibal. Secular rationale can always be disputed/argued. Even if you agree on the reason (consent) one can argue the true age of consent. Social norms are the "established" rationale for acceptable practice and thus social norms can change for any reason.

Gee, I wonder if there might be a secular rationale for outlawing cannibalism. What do you think?

[cm husker]

To clear the record. 1st off.. I'm not a homophobe. 2nd. I have a couple close friends that are homosexuals. I honestly do NOT care what they do in the privacy of their own home. One believes that he should not be discriminated against and should be equal to everyone.....the other actually thinks its "taking advantage of a situation" to use his sexual preference as a means to be put on equal ground via the law. To him, he believes he has made a choice and that he wasn't born with it. In fact...he would say that he leans more towards being "bi-sexual". Should that "GROUP" (Bi-Sexuals) not be discriminated against? Where does it stop?

My concern is what we as a society deem as acceptable BEHAVIOR via the court of law. It's going down the wrong road.

Why should anyone NOT be on equal ground via the law? Why should anyone engaged in consensual relationships with other adults be subject to discrimination for simply that reason? Why can't society, through laws, state emphatically: bigoted and discriminatory behavior is bad.

As far as your concerns about society deeming homosexual behavior "acceptable," what do you find unacceptable about it? What do you fear when it comes to homosexuals?

[OmaHusker]

Gee, I wonder if there might be a secular rationale for outlawing cannibalism. What do you think?

consent?

[ChitownHusker]

Society acknowledging that two people of the same sex can have a consensual, fulfilling and beneficial relationship by outlawing discrimination based on homosexuality isn't a step on a logic progression line toward society accepting non-consensual relationships between adults and children.

They aren't even in the same sport, let alone league.

It is not in the same ballpark. In fact, it is not in the same solar system that has the planet with the continent and the country and the city that contains the ballpark in question.

[ChitownHusker]

consent?

Holy cow, I think we've achieved a breakthrough.

[RedPhoenix]

To clear the record. 1st off.. I'm not a homophobe. 2nd. I have a couple close friends that are homosexuals. I honestly do NOT care what they do in the privacy of their own home. One believes that he should not be discriminated against and should be equal to everyone.....the other actually thinks its "taking advantage of a situation" to use his sexual preference as a means to be put on equal ground via the law. To him, he believes he has made a choice and that he wasn't born with it. In fact...he would say that he leans more towards being "bi-sexual". Should that "GROUP" (Bi-Sexuals) not be discriminated against? Where does it stop?

My concern is what we as a society deem as acceptable BEHAVIOR via the court of law. It's going down the wrong road.

Also, I think it speaks volumes that you feel the need to publicly declare you aren't a homophobe, when no one has said that you were, and that you also have a couple gay friends......

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Friend_argument

[cm husker]

Cannibalism is perfectly rational to the cannibal. Secular rationale can always be disputed/argued. Even if you agree on the reason (consent) one can argue the true age of consent. Social norms are the "established" rationale for acceptable practice and thus acceptable practice can change for any reason.

How old was Mary when she was to be married? Obviously biblically based moralists believe the bible shouldn't be taken literally.

Why the constantly shifting standards?

[OmaHusker]

Holy cow, I think we've achieved a breakthrough.

Really? So if I consent to being consumed by cannibals, that's ok?

[RedPhoenix]

How old was Mary when she was to be married? Obviously biblically based moralists believe the bible shouldn't be taken literally.

Why the constantly shifting standards?

Age of consent in bible was not an "all timesies rule", only a "part timesies rule".

[ChitownHusker]

Really? So if I consent to being consumed by cannibals, that's ok?

I think that would make the vast pro-cannibalism movement in this country very happy. I mean, there really are so many people out there just waiting to be fried up and served with chips, if only the law would allow it. If we outlaw discrimination against gays, next in line is the legalization of pedophilia and cannibalism.

[hskrdavey]

Also, I think it speaks volumes that you feel the need to publicly declare you aren't a homophobe, when no one has said that you were, and that you also have a couple gay friends......

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Friend_argument

Nope Sorry RP. Guess it was more of a gut reaction since most Left Wingers immediately move to the "Your a Homophobe" or "Your just scared of homosexuals...??" when you disagree with them on this subject... Typically that's how it works. So thought I'd beat them to the punch... (and I noticed I just made the post in time....(CM's "What do you fear when it come to homosexuals>....)