Marriage For Everyone!

[The Inglorious One]

Instead of exchanging barbs, why not convey to each other our foundational premises? Here's mine.

“Humans consider themselves unique, so they've rooted their whole theory of existence on their uniqueness. 'One' is their unit of measure. But it's not. All social systems we've put into place are a mere sketch. 'One plus one equals two.' That's all we've learned. But one plus one has never equaled two. There are, in fact, no numbers and no letters. We've codified our existence to bring it down to human size, to make it comprehensible. We've created a scale so we can forget its unfathomable scale.” — Lucy

We know Reality is unbounded, which is to say it is indeterminate. We know also reality is not objectively external to our perception of it: we cannot establish how Nature is by measuring it because the act of measuring interferes with how it manifests. We know this because experiments have been done that verify it. Hence, we can only make sense of the world by creating labels for the perceived average.

People may not like it, but normative boundaries are indispensable. Without normative boundaries of some kind, there is no sense of any kind. The ontological or metaphysical substance we accord such immense generalities as truth, goodness and beauty determines our conscious intentionality. They constitute the absolute orientation for thought and the horizon to which the mind is always turned and against which every finite object is measured.

Modern humans have created such strong personal boundaries that we have forgotten the true extent of our nature. Every creature has the right to denigrate or even deny the true scale of their existence by identifying with the mind's circumscribed and concretized content, but that does not mean I have to respect or condone it in any way. Others may believe they are celebrating “Caitlyn” Jenner finding its (I cannot find it in myself to use a personal pronoun) “true self” and living its “personal truth,” but what they are really celebrating is a creature's confinement to a self-created self-image. It's sad, and a sad reflection of our society. If 'transgender' is not deviant or a mental illness, neither is 'transracial.'

Fortunately, “Behind the barricades of pre-established structures, the foxes of the intellect may engage in clever reasoning, but the lion of Being continues to roar outside the gate.” The lion of Being may not always win on the micro or individual scale, but on the macro scale it always wins.

This is where I'm coming from. Where are you coming from? What are your foundational premises? Do you have any? Do you even know what 'foundational premises' even means?

[The Inglorious One]

Inglorious. Please answer this question.

If homosexuality is a lifestyle choice then why on earth would anybody choose it?

Because they do not know who they are: they do not know that they are not the mind's circumscribed and concretized content.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

You sound like the the student yelling, "We won! We won!" without realizing that all you really did with your ad hominem comment is destroy your credibility -- and now you are trying to blame me."

No, I think this is an important question, which you have now avoided twice.
Let me put it another way.
What is your objection to people behaving as they wish with regard to their sexual preference?

At the end of the day, even if you think it is a choice, or innate you are still left with this question.

My problem is with the lack of respect for the larger community.

Hitler came into power using the same tactics the "gay" community is using. Remember: Hitler came to power using legal means. At the end of the day, the important thing is to ask yourself whether the ultimate goal is instant gratification or to conform with the cosmos. Values should be allowed to evolve, not forced down the throats of the majority. The latter can end only in disaster.

Your attitude proves something I have believed for a long, long time: secularism is that ideal which, once having found a voice, must impose its values (or lack thereof) in order to attain its goals. Your willingness to excuse, propagandize (I.e., anyone who disagrees you is a "homophobe") and impose your ideas on the pre-existing order makes you different than ISIS and Hitler only in degree. Does this make me afraid? Yes. Not of change or homosexuality, but of the eventual consequences of human beings taking it upon themselves to challenge the cosmos.

You seem to be confusing sexuality with politics. So what if it's a 'choice' anyway? That's none of anyone else's business. I'm sick of arseholes who think they have the right to poke their (invariably religious) snouts into others' lives. No one is forcing you to marry a man, idiot. There is absolutely no rational reason to not allow same-sex marriage, and I mean RATIONAL!

[artisticsolution]

You seem to be confusing sexuality with politics. So what if it's a 'choice' anyway? That's none of anyone else's business. I'm sick of arseholes who think they have the right to poke their (invariably religious) snouts into others' lives. No one is forcing you to marry a man, idiot. There is absolutely no rational reason to not allow same-sex marriage, and I mean RATIONAL!

I agree...that we even have to have a debate over something so obviously rational...well just blows me away. What is wrong with people?

[Melchior]

You seem to be confusing sexuality with politics. So what if it's a 'choice' anyway? That's none of anyone else's business. I'm sick of arseholes who think they have the right to poke their (invariably religious) snouts into others' lives. No one is forcing you to marry a man, idiot. There is absolutely no rational reason to not allow same-sex marriage, and I mean RATIONAL!

I agree...that we even have to have a debate over something so obviously rational...well just blows me away. What is wrong with people?

Because it's not 'marriage', dumbass!

[vegetariantaxidermy]

You seem to be confusing sexuality with politics. So what if it's a 'choice' anyway? That's none of anyone else's business. I'm sick of arseholes who think they have the right to poke their (invariably religious) snouts into others' lives. No one is forcing you to marry a man, idiot. There is absolutely no rational reason to not allow same-sex marriage, and I mean RATIONAL!

I agree...that we even have to have a debate over something so obviously rational...well just blows me away. What is wrong with people?

Because it's not 'marriage', dumbass!

I didn't know there was some Platonian concept of marriage that is perfect and objective. Personally, I don't know why ANYONE wants to get married-- but each to their own I suppose. I think it's just so they can say 'my husband' or 'my wife', and feel validated as a desirable human being.

[Melchior]

I didn't know there was some Platonian concept of marriage that is perfect and objective. Personally, I don't know why ANYONE wants to get married-- but each to their own I suppose. I think it's just so they can say 'my husband' or 'my wife', and feel validated as a desirable human being.

Thousands of years of tradition have defined 'marriage'. The very concept of marriage is for the production of children from those who are marrying. It is not capricious or arbitrary, but based in biology. You cannot exchange a man for a woman in marriage. They are not interchangeable.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I didn't know there was some Platonian concept of marriage that is perfect and objective. Personally, I don't know why ANYONE wants to get married-- but each to their own I suppose. I think it's just so they can say 'my husband' or 'my wife', and feel validated as a desirable human being.

Thousands of years of tradition have defined 'marriage'. The very concept of marriage is for the production of children from those who are marrying.

You don't have to be married to have children. Marriage is only a contract, invented to get rid of nuisance, 'inferior' female offspring and pay someone to take them off your hands.

[Kayla]

Thousands of years of tradition have defined 'marriage'.

"traditional marriage" took many different forms across thousands of years

[Vor]

Others may believe they are celebrating “Caitlyn” Jenner finding its (I cannot find it in myself to use a personal pronoun) “true self” and living its “personal truth,” but what they are really celebrating is a creature's confinement to a self-created self-image. It's sad, and a sad reflection of our society. If 'transgender' is not deviant or a mental illness, neither is 'transracial.'

Agree.

One cannot ignore the fact that HE has become a serious contender in the publicity/money stakes for Chris Jenner.

[The Inglorious One]

Based on what I've seen in this forum, I am not surprised that my critics would not take me up on my suggestion that they put forward their basic premises for consideration. But without a supporting premise, “That's none of anyone else's business” is just another random thought thrown on the rubbish heap of other random thoughts.

“There is absolutely no rational reason to not allow same-sex marriage, and I mean RATIONAL!” Okay. So, can you please explain why normative boundaries and values are not indispensable?

Thousands of years of tradition have defined 'marriage'.

"traditional marriage" took many different forms across thousands of years

So? This is now, and never has it between members of the same sex.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Based on what I've seen in this forum, I am not surprised that my critics would not take me up on my suggestion that they put forward their basic premises for consideration. But without a supporting premise, “That's none of anyone else's business” is just another random thought thrown on the rubbish heap of other random thoughts.

“There is absolutely no rational reason to not allow same-sex marriage, and I mean RATIONAL!” Okay. So, can you please explain why normative boundaries and values are not indispensable?

Thousands of years of tradition have defined 'marriage'.

"traditional marriage" took many different forms across thousands of years

So? This is now, and never has it between members of the same sex.

Haven't you got better things to worry about? It doesn't fucking affect you in ANY way.

[The Inglorious One]

Haven't you got better things to worry about? It doesn't fucking affect you in ANY way.

Quit acting like a bratty child.

How do you know that? What is the ontological or metaphysical premise supporting your statement? This is a philosophy forum, after all, not a home for snotty trolls.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Haven't you got better things to worry about? It doesn't fucking affect you in ANY way.

Quit acting like a bratty child.

How do you know that? What is the ontological or metaphysical premise supporting your statement? This is a philosophy forum, after all, not a home for snotty trolls.

It doesn't warrant a philosophical debate. Explain then how it affects you personally. In a rational sense, not a bullshit religious one.

[The Inglorious One]

Haven't you got better things to worry about? It doesn't fucking affect you in ANY way.

Quit acting like a bratty child.

How do you know that? What is the ontological or metaphysical premise supporting your statement? This is a philosophy forum, after all, not a home for snotty trolls.

It doesn't warrant a philosophical debate. Explain then how it affects you personally. In a rational sense, not a bullshit religious one.

See post at top -- or is your vocabulary too limited to make any sense of it? How it affects me personally has nothing to do with it. Just because you're egocentric doesn't mean everyone is.

In any event, why won't you explain the rationale for your belief? Are you just a bunch of hot air?