tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post3118516467194088119..comments2024-03-18T03:40:39.185-04:00Comments on The Curious Jew: Gay MarriageChanahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-25739329528196078272012-12-28T15:31:53.302-05:002012-12-28T15:31:53.302-05:00Tesyaa, you argue that any sort of sexual relation...Tesyaa, you argue that any sort of sexual relation should be allowed if there are enough people who advocate for it. Do you not think there is some sort of sanctity to be upheld. Doesn't this seem like a slippery slope to caving into any pressure to allow any sort of act, because we can't withhold people's "rights". Do you think there are no objective standard; ethics that don't change no matter the time. Do you consider yourself a moral relativist?warpedrealityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08172188173911258423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-81426961692388164272012-11-12T08:44:31.787-05:002012-11-12T08:44:31.787-05:00I discovered your web site via Google while lookin...I discovered your web site via Google while looking for a related subject, lucky for me your web site came up, its a great website. I have bookmarked it in my Google bookmarks. You really are a phenomenal person with a brilliant mind! <a href="http://www.dateats.com/" rel="nofollow">transgender</a> hildahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07730252576275557221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-68476975521657020432012-11-11T11:04:08.394-05:002012-11-11T11:04:08.394-05:00I'm not sure I understand why everyone is so g...I'm not sure I understand why everyone is so gung-ho about comparing gay marriage to slavery or anti-semitism. Not having the "right" to marry does not stop anyone from living successful happy, lives with the ones they love.<br /><br />As for insurance or tax benefits. That has nothing to do with marriage, and everything to do with our legal system. You can change the law to allow gay couples to get all the benefits other couples have, without calling it marriage. I know some people who work or have worked with the congressional committee responsible for changing wording of laws. Every law that is passed has potential to affect thousands of other laws. We change the laws anyway, and we pay lots of tax dollars so people can do that.<br /><br />I can just imagine in 2025 (after we've proven that some animals can communicate their consent) where people will be fighting for animal rights - the right for animals to marry humans. To prove their point, activists will say "People said the same exact thing when black americans wanted to vote in the 1960s and women wanted to vote in the 1920s, or gay people wanted to marry in the 00s" as if history somehow proves their point, and it's all the same.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-14902505262586551182012-11-11T01:43:57.166-05:002012-11-11T01:43:57.166-05:00Freedom of speech (at least the way I understand i...<i>Freedom of speech (at least the way I understand it) exists so that people don't feel restraints about expressing their opinion.</i><br /><br />No. Freedom of Speech exists so that people may say what they choose to say without legal repercussions.<br /><br />It is not a license to be free from criticism.<br /><br /><i> Personal attacks (even chiding) while allowed under freedom of speech only serve to undermine the very concept. </i><br /><br />Let me be sure I understand this. Your position is that other people expressing their opinions undermines freedom of speech?<br /><br />Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04391023891253673160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-62561838415569296462012-11-10T21:40:09.524-05:002012-11-10T21:40:09.524-05:00According to the "letter of the law" of ...According to the "letter of the law" of freedom of speech, you can call Chana whatever you want in response to her position on this issue, but it certainly violates the "spirit of the law."<br /><br />Freedom of speech (at least the way I understand it) exists so that people don't feel restraints about expressing their opinion. Personally, I am against gay marriage, but I am afraid to express this position publicly. Why? Because of people who will ridicule me, call me a bigot, and say other mean and nasty things to me (not to mention I am afraid how publicly stating this opinion will affect my career). Do these people have the right to ridicule me and attack me as a person? Of course! But the fact that I am afraid to express my opinion means that all of these people are ignoring what freedom of speech is meant to do.<br /><br />Chana is not saying that you must agree or even respect her opinion. She is just asking that when you disagree with her, then disagree with her on the issue only. Personal attacks (even chiding) while allowed under freedom of speech only serve to undermine the very concept. simple jewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-48854316271940504302012-11-10T21:17:26.115-05:002012-11-10T21:17:26.115-05:00"Why can there not be a place for people who ..."Why can there not be a place for people who believe in God, believe God does not desire for people to be gay or act on their gay impulses, but who would still never do anything deliberately cruel or hurtful to people who identify as gay?"<br /><br />Sure there's a place for it. But you can't ask people to redefine homophobia to your liking. <br />Someone may hate Jews, loath the Jewish religion, and believe that this is how his God wants him to feel. But he would never do anything deliberately cruel or hateful to a Jew. Doesn't matter, he's still an antisemite. Right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-57102120755030287712012-11-10T11:38:13.670-05:002012-11-10T11:38:13.670-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04391023891253673160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-90405617156003406282012-11-10T11:28:53.906-05:002012-11-10T11:28:53.906-05:00All she asks is that she not be regarded as "...<i> All she asks is that she not be regarded as "evil." She wants a middle grounds where her opnion can be respected, just as she respects their opinions.</i><br /><br />That's not how free speech works.<br /><br />Hell, that's one step beyond, you are asking for thought control there.<br /><br />You have the right to state your opinion. You do <b>not</b> have the right to state your opinion but forbid others from commenting on it (or you).<br /><br />That's how Freedom of Speech works. Your speech. Their speech. Not your speech which is magically beyond reproach.<br />Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04391023891253673160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-8015093544591753712012-11-08T22:25:09.801-05:002012-11-08T22:25:09.801-05:00"US does not need to help by creating a socie..."US does not need to help by creating a society where this type of immorality is embraced"<br /><br />People said the same exact thing when black americans wanted to vote in the 60s and women wanted to vote in the 20s, or interatial couples wanted to marry<br /><br />Its not immoral, my friend. Its not, regardless of what your precious bible claimsKsilnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-64248963242820152962012-11-08T21:50:42.762-05:002012-11-08T21:50:42.762-05:00Ksil-
Yes, a married man having sexual relations ...Ksil-<br /><br />Yes, a married man having sexual relations with another woman is immoral though not necessarily sexually immoral. The Torah places great importance on shalom bayis, and in our day and age when a married man would ruin his marriage by cheating, that would be immoral by all standards. <br /><br />I was just quoting one Chazal. Whether that's meant to be taken literally or not is debatable, but it was taught at the very least to teach a lesson, that sexual immorality is very important to the physical existence of society. <br /><br />And I never said that the US should outlaw homosexuality because of it's immorality. I believe that they shouldn't exacerbate the problem by reinventing the definition of marriage despite the political pressure to do so. The US cannot tell a person what to do or not to do from a moral standpoint. A person has to make his or her own choices. But the US does not need to help by creating a society where this type of immorality is embraced. simple jewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-33506520123383870932012-11-08T21:31:48.770-05:002012-11-08T21:31:48.770-05:00I wonder if simple jew thinks that a married man h...I wonder if simple jew thinks that a married man having sexual relations with a woman other than his wife is "immoral"<br /><br />The torah does not think so....<br /><br />And by the way, the flood came because of chamas, which means robbery/stealing...not gay marriage<br /><br />And one more thing, we live in a free society, something the world has never seen before, historically speaking,. We have liberty and rights and freedoms that were never available at any other time in the recorded history of the world....so for you to sit there and tell other people what they can and cannot do based on your definition of what is moral or not is highly disturbing. You want government to tell you what is moral? Go live in iran.....<br /><br />Ksilnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-72133630091347112752012-11-08T21:20:04.799-05:002012-11-08T21:20:04.799-05:00Unfortunately, many have reached a point where we ...Unfortunately, many have reached a point where we share society's values- in other words, everything is moral unless you hurt someone else. People have lost the sensitivity to sexual immorality. Consenting adults permits anything. The things you listed may be weird and disturbing but it's much different than sexual immorality. Incest is not only disturbing and disgusting but it is sexually immoral, even if the adults are consenting. So is bestiality, pornography (especially children watching pornography which I'm sure you find morally objectionable even if no one is getting hurt), and homosexuality. It's not simply that these things are disturbing but it's this depravity that's destroying the very moral fiber of society. There's a reason that Chazal says that the flood was brought when men started writing marriage contracts to other men. It's not simply a sin, it's not simply disgusting, it is immoral. Yes, something can be immoral without hurting someone else.simple jewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-56717720129204582362012-11-08T21:04:33.993-05:002012-11-08T21:04:33.993-05:00simple jew - just a couple of other things that di...simple jew - just a couple of other things that disturb me but I don't think should be banned:<br /><br />- body piercing<br /><br />- mothers drinking their own breast milk<br /><br />should we stop other people from doing everything that someone might find disturbing?tesyaanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-5902847578781517602012-11-08T18:31:44.672-05:002012-11-08T18:31:44.672-05:00Sure, incest between close family members disturbs...Sure, incest between close family members disturbs me, but I can't say whether it comes from religion or not, having been raised with religion. But you know what? I know a family in which first cousins are married, and a lot of other people in the family find it disturbing (I find it a little weird myself). Yet it's clearly not a religious problem.<br /><br />Just because something is disturbing doesn't mean it must be banned.<br /><br />Sure, incest is a major taboo. But if people got used to it, it wouldn't be a taboo anymore. That's just a fact, not my opinion on whether the world should get used to it. There's no significant minority of the population that wants to engage in it, articles from New Zealand to the contrary.<br /><br />I also made a point that most incest is nonconsensual, probably by a large margin. How many brother-sister couples are there, really? Inquiring minds want to know.tesyaanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-80962594622006464432012-11-08T17:10:59.568-05:002012-11-08T17:10:59.568-05:00tesyaa-
Just to clarify, you admitted before that...tesyaa-<br /><br />Just to clarify, you admitted before that the idea of an affair between a mother and a son disturbs you. Where do you think this disgust comes from? Is it natural or does it somehow come from religion? simple jewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-47904125089977656322012-11-08T14:38:16.729-05:002012-11-08T14:38:16.729-05:00Its not just New Zealand. Do some reading. Give it...Its not just New Zealand. Do some reading. Give it a few years and that will be the "hot button issue."<br /><br />Apparently you dont know the definition of chide. I am having a discussion, I have not chided anyone. <br /><br />At the end of the day, as I have been saying all along, this is a topic which simply should not be voted on or decided by government. This is the way someone chooses to lead their individual life. I dont support gay pride parades as that is a vile way of imposing their lifestyle on me. I can only imagine the uproar were someone to organize a "straight pride parade."<br /><br />BUT, as our disturbed society has decided that people should be allowed to impose their beliefs and wills on others through voting on personal matters, it is therefore not wrong to vote against gay marriage. Then there is also the simple "tat is not marriage". It may be love, but marriage it aint. All those distinctions, however, would not matter if the government got rid of all taxes (aside for a possible flat tax on consumption) and ended social programs. Then who was "officially" married would make no difference.Technoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-54319407116532373862012-11-08T14:35:06.037-05:002012-11-08T14:35:06.037-05:00Well then, I guess it's fair to say that we co...Well then, I guess it's fair to say that we consider each other's belief's with regard to homosexual marriage despicable. simple jewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-21415115854240497062012-11-08T14:34:18.600-05:002012-11-08T14:34:18.600-05:00I was not the first one who used the word despicab...I was not the first one who used the word despicable. A commenter asked me to rank two activities in terms of how despicable they are (the commenter's choice of words). I personally don't even think Chana's beliefs are despicable. I think they are misguided. Am I allowed to say that?tesyaanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-24105061562962339402012-11-08T14:33:08.354-05:002012-11-08T14:33:08.354-05:00But it is one's right to use the word despicab...But it is one's right to use the word despicable. That's free speech. In the presidential campaign that just ended, I am sure their are candidates (and certainly supporters of both candidates) who called their opponents despicable. Was that wrong? It is an opinion, which others may disagree with.<br /><br />If Chana has a thick skin, she will ignore those who call her or her beliefs despicable. tesyaanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-2528743094914940442012-11-08T14:30:03.668-05:002012-11-08T14:30:03.668-05:00tesyaa-
"In 21st century American it is mor...tesyaa- <br /><br />"In 21st century American it is more despicable to oppose gay marriage because many people are fighting for that right." <br /><br />Calling someone despicable doesn't seem like simple chiding to me.simple jewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-6922215307219784442012-11-08T14:24:59.845-05:002012-11-08T14:24:59.845-05:00No, no she can be chided. Just like you are chidi...No, no she can be chided. Just like you are chiding me, which is your right.<br /><br />She cannot be yelled at, egged, libeled, etc.tesyaanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-46502908182271345422012-11-08T14:24:29.091-05:002012-11-08T14:24:29.091-05:00New Zealand is pretty far away, I don't read t...New Zealand is pretty far away, I don't read their papers (even online), and I can't vote there, so to me, it's still not an issue. tesyaanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-84664851992008918202012-11-08T14:24:09.787-05:002012-11-08T14:24:09.787-05:00Tesyaa, The point exactly. She should be entitled ...Tesyaa, The point exactly. She should be entitled to her opinion without being "chided". That is all shes asking for.Technoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-53669101802697806802012-11-08T14:22:30.956-05:002012-11-08T14:22:30.956-05:00Tesyaa, people do advocate incest. http://www.nzhe...Tesyaa, people do advocate incest. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3567929Technoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-65094235874334121962012-11-08T14:22:13.002-05:002012-11-08T14:22:13.002-05:00Chana IS allowed to voice her opinion. I made tha...Chana IS allowed to voice her opinion. I made that clear. If other people chide her for it and she feels upset, that's not their problem. People have the right to speak out against those they disagree with, and religious beliefs shouldn't shield her from criticism. Do people have the right to call her names or be rude? Of course not.<br /><br />I said that at least once in this thread already.tesyaanoreply@blogger.com