Homosexual Marriage

[Chris the Chees]

A fact which worries me, in regards to this argument, is that the Christian right wing is more worried about two gay lovers getting married, than the deaths of over 10,000 Iraqi civilians. Does anybody else feel that the Christian right is somehow missing the point of "Gods word"?

[Seeker_Of_Sins]

Quote by: Chris the Chees A fact which worries me, in regards to this argument, is that the Christian right wing is more worried about two gay lovers getting married, than the deaths of over 10,000 Iraqi civilians. Does anybody else feel that the Christian right is somehow missing the point of "Gods word"?

I am not sure that you can equate a domestic issue to an international issue. Gay marriage is a debate about morality in society from a local point of view, Iraq is an international event and therefore somewhat different.

[Chris the Chees]

Quote by: Seeker_Of_Sins I am not sure that you can equate a domestic issue to an international issue. Gay marriage is a debate about morality in society from a local point of view, Iraq is an international event and therefore somewhat different.

I fail to understand your logic, while the Christian rightwing has the "right" to enforce the will of God locally, they are free to openly support a breach of Gods will abroad.

They are perfectly comparable, as they are both a breach of Gods commands to mankind. The hypocritical Christian right, just chooses to ignore the word of god when it feels like it, and enforce as it chooses.

But then again upholders of the Christian faith have been morally bankrupt for over a millennia, what has changed today?

[fogus]

It depends on the statement. Here is one for you. Everything I say is a lie.

Yes, but that is excused in even the most elementary logic text books as not qualifying as a statement.

[Starboy]

Quote by: fogus Yes, but that is excused in even the most elementary logic text books as not qualifying as a statement.

Oh are you trying to say that bi-valued logic is not perfect?

Starboy

[fogus]

Your "statement" doesn't qualify as a statement. A statement must either be true or false. Go learn something.

[Starboy]

You asked for a statement and I gave it to you. When I gave it to you I knew it was a paradox. That is because I also know that bi-value logic is not the only logic there is. I think it is great that this discussion has forced you to get an education.

Starboy

[fogus]

Your paradox doesn't qualify as a statement! Give me a STATEMENT that can be both true or false. I knew of that paradox when I was in 8th grade.

[Starboy]

Okay here is one.

Call the set of all sets that are not members of themselves "R". Is R a member of itself?

Starboy

BTW this is leading up to something. Perhaps you know what it is?

[fogus]

Same problem. It is a "statement" with no truth value. Paradoxes don't have a place in logic. They arn't good for much else besides ammusement.

[Starboy]

Fogus, this is more than a logical paradox. I thought you said that you had an education? Ca'mon, you can do better than this!

Starboy

[fogus]

How can something not be a member of itself?

[Starboy]

Look up Russell's paradox. And when you are done with that look up Gödel's theorem and Turing's Theorem.

Starboy

[fogus]

How amusing.

Paradoxes have nothing to do with everyday topics, hence your examples do not apply here. Like Einstein said about scientific theory, it is practically useless if it cannot be understood by a child.

Logical statements do not include:

Questions
Statements with no determinable truth value
Nonsense
Sentences which defeat themselves by definition
Commands

Thus, giving me any of the above as a challenge for the law of excluded middle will do you no good.

Of course I can't tell you if:

This statement is false
Pony dragon on the cave blue
Are you hungry?
Do your homework!
Call the set of all sets that are not members of themselves "R". Is R a member of itself?

are true. They aren’t statements which can be looked at logically. Try thinking of a statement which applies to homosexual marriage that is, in the same sense, time, location, and meaning both true and false.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: mr.perfecto But we haven't established that yet. You haven't said how, just that the law is unconstitutional because equal protection is being denied. The requirements are the same for any two people who come who come to get married, the clerks don't ask homosexuals any questions they don't ask heterosexuals, and no rights are being violated. Since we've covered all the bases, how is equal protection being denied

The law is unconstitutional for a number of reasons.


1) Gays are being denied equal rights


2) Married people are being allowed to deffer taxes onto unmarried persons,, which is contrary to the statement in the constitution which says "taxes shall be levied fairly, and evenly".


3) Marriage is an Holy union. The U.S. governmennt has no business doing the Churches dirty work by denying citizens their rights. They do so be denying them the chance to marry legally. They also hold the hands of the corporatioons that deny same sex partners the benefits, and insurance perks that are granted to married couples. ( think day care, after death benefits, etc.)

[Starboy]

Quote by: fogus How amusing.

Glad you liked it.

Paradoxes have nothing to do with everyday topics, hence your examples do not apply here. Like Einstein said about scientific theory, it is practically useless if it cannot be understood by a child.

That's what you think. But if you are going to present logic or mathematics as some sort of absolute standard then you are wrong. The Einstein quote is superfluous because he was talking about scientific theory, not mathematics or logic. I am familiar with Einstein’s ideas on what constitutes a good scientific explanation. He missed the boat on QM so he cannot be regarded to be perfect in that area.

Logical statements do not include: Questions Statements with no determinable truth value Nonsense Sentences which defeat themselves by definition Commands Thus, giving me any of the above as a challenge for the law of excluded middle will do you no good. Of course I can't tell you if: This statement is false Pony dragon on the cave blue Are you hungry? Do your homework! Call the set of all sets that are not members of themselves "R". Is R a member of itself? are true. They aren’t statements which can be looked at logically.

Hey you were the one trying to conflate logic and mathematics with morals. You went down that rabbit hole; I just kept on digging it deeper for you. Why don't you go back to where we started down that hole and pick it up from there. All your points concern the nature of logic and mathematics. If you continue we will just go deeper into that rabbit hole.

Try thinking of a statement which applies to homosexual marriage that is, in the same sense, time, location, and meaning both true and false.

I have already made many such statements in this thread about homosexual marriage. Do you wish to make one or would you rather choose one of mine or do you want do continue to explore the basis of logic and mathematics? If we do however we should start another thread.

Starboy

[MerlinsByte]

"They also hold the hands of the corporatioons that deny same sex partners the benefits, and insurance perks that are granted to married couples."

Merlin writes Sam Walton must be a homosexual then because Walmart recognizes same sex marriages. (this was written tongue in cheek, by the way)

I am undecided on this issue of same sex marriage.

MB

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: MerlinsByte "They also hold the hands of the corporatioons that deny same sex partners the benefits, and insurance perks that are granted to married couples." Merlin writes Sam Walton must be a homosexual then because Walmart recognizes same sex marriages. (this was written tongue in cheek, by the way) I am undecided on this issue of same sex marriage. MB

That would be the exception, not the rule.

[Starboy]

Social security doesn't recognize gay families. That is a biggy for many people.

Starboy

[mr.perfecto]

Quote by: Milton Bradley The law is unconstitutional for a number of reasons. 1) Gays are being denied equal rights

Considering that there are people who consider themselves homosexuals who have been or are married, you've still got to explain how this is happening.

2) Married people are being allowed to deffer taxes onto unmarried persons,, which is contrary to the statement in the constitution which says "taxes shall be levied fairly, and evenly".

You might want to check your facts on this one--it's not true.

3) Marriage is an Holy union. The U.S. governmennt has no business doing the Churches dirty work by denying citizens their rights. They do so be denying them the chance to marry legally. They also hold the hands of the corporatioons that deny same sex partners the benefits, and insurance perks that are granted to married couples. ( think day care, after death benefits, etc.)

If a business doesn't want to offer those benefits, why should the government require it to do so?

Sounds like a violation of the buisness owner's rights to me.

Quote by: Starboy Social security doesn't recognize gay families. That is a biggy for many people. Starboy

:confused:

If you mean SS doesn't provide survivor benefits to unmarried people, what is the problem? Boyfriends and girlfriends can't leave benefits to one another either.

But, leaving that aside, you think it is the benefits that cause most people to get married?