bman, NOM Blog

Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In Forums

Quote# 87083

[on the question of how same-sex marriage would harm society]

This is like asking, "How would the official endorsement of men having sex with men as normal behavior by the public school system hurt society?."

The question presumes it would take time for the new generation to undergo indoctrination before the hurt would statistically manifest.

Since those raised under the old teaching would not be molded by the new teaching, we should expect the old ways to be practiced until the new generation replaced the older generation.

Thus, your reference to Massachusetts fails to allow adequate time for the process.

I think we can also obtain a clearer perspective if we pose the question this way, "Would it hurt society if a whole generation was taught to disregard traditional sexual morality?

That question is not "unbelievably difficult to answer" as you claimed.

Indeed, by default, one would naturally expect the obvious answer to be, "yes, it would hurt society."

If you want a question that is "unbelievably difficult to answer" try proving it would not hurt society!

Since it's intuitively obvious that it would hurt society, your job does not look easy at all.

bman, NOM Blog 55 Comments [4/25/2012 3:08:42 AM]
Fundie Index: 50
Submitted By: Aspergus

WTF?! || meh

Username:
Comment:

Check here

1 2 3

#1396298

Berny

In all of that rant you didn't really answer the question. Yes, a whole new generation will be taught that who you sleep with has no bearing on the type of person you are and is your choice alone.
Sexual morality is subjective. Your religion has condemned most sexual behavior since the first Israelites decided to put pen to parchment. So what?
The Bible is wrong about a lot of things. Sexuality is one of many of those things.

4/25/2012 9:25:55 AM

#1396310

Atheissimo

I notice you haven't actually answered the question.

'How would it hurt society? Are you serious? How would it NOT hurt society' provides no new information

4/25/2012 9:37:08 AM

#1396317

freako104

Proving not hurt society? Well ok. Consenting adults will only affect each other. Now prove your bigotry is beneficial to society.

4/25/2012 9:48:32 AM

#1396324

Tatsukun

Wait, why would we want to learn or keep anything from your wholly babble about morality? It is FULL of incest, rape, torture, and sexism. Add to that the fact that the bible belt has far higher divorce rates (not to mention rapes by incest) and it's clear that your insane ideas about morality are just that... insane.

This is what happens when you take all your advice about love and sex from an eccentric elderly virgin in Rome who grew up in the Hitler Youth.

4/25/2012 9:56:33 AM

#1396333

farpadokly

Allow me to translate: If we do not persecute homosexuality, or at least pretend it doesn't exist, then all our kids will catch teh ghey.
I'm sick of all this shit about "traditional sexual morality". When did this prevail? Certainly not in the Victorian era, when there was enormous hypocrisy and incredible numbers of prostitutes, much more than there are today.
Face it. People like to fuck. They always have and they always will.
If it's not hurting anyone, then it's none of your business. Simple as that.

4/25/2012 10:18:58 AM

#1396337

Just answer the fucking question.

4/25/2012 10:35:48 AM

#1396350

Passerby

That is a whole hell of a lot of non-answer.

4/25/2012 11:00:00 AM

#1396364

NonProphet

This is one of the most long-winded ways of saying "I don't have an answer for that" I have ever read.

4/25/2012 11:54:32 AM

#1396367

@ Extraintrovert

I have close gay friends and am well aware that they're still treated like shit (hello, Prop 8---I live in CA), I was talking about the days when there was rote, institutionalized teaching of kids, outside of religious circles, that gays were evil. Those I grew up with in the 70s,thankfully, didn't have that, which lead to much greater acceptance/tolerance of gays among people our age when we were in our teens/twenties in the eighties, and the improvement in attitudes toward them today.

My point about the OP was simply that he seems to think the changes in attitude that have gradually developed over the last thirty years (albeit not enough changes, of course) never happened.

4/25/2012 12:02:09 PM

#1396374

Sasha

What else do you expect from NOM? All they have is hatred, bigotry, and lies.

4/25/2012 12:04:23 PM

#1396375

Shadoboy

Excuse me waiter, I asked for an answer and you brought me a word salad!

4/25/2012 12:05:05 PM

#1396420

Old Viking

Traditional sexual morality means haggling about the price.

4/25/2012 1:56:27 PM

#1396433

Fundies Make Me Sick

The bullshit is suffocatingly strong with this group...

4/25/2012 3:02:25 PM

#1396434

SpukiKitty

NOM-Nuts sez:

"This is like asking, 'How would the official endorsement of men having sex with men as normal behavior by the public school system hurt society?'"

Notice the complete ignorance of the existence of Lesbians!

4/25/2012 3:02:29 PM

#1396456

Iel

It's not difficult to answer:

So people fuck people who have the same junk, junkless, and there ain't nothin' wrong with that.

4/25/2012 3:38:56 PM

#1396458

Alencon

A couple of minor problems here.

First, the acceptance of same-sex marriage is not the same thing as disregarding traditional sexual morality.

Second, you can't prove a negative.

Third, it's amazing how much of reality isn't intujitive at all.

4/25/2012 3:50:59 PM

#1396464

Renon

So, in other words..

Gay is bad because it just is, while it hasn't destroyed society, it will, just you wait!

4/25/2012 4:26:06 PM

#1396482

Shem

@Mudak
""Strip naked. We will blindfold you and put you in a room. We will make sure you're comfortable. We would then parade ten people into your room, a random mixture of men and women but at least one of each. They will all seek to pleasure you, sexually, using non-gender specific body parts and otherwise masking their gender to you (eg no perfumes or makeup, hair tied back, nails trimmed, body parts used completely shaven, they won't speak or moan, etc...) ""

Wait a damn minute!
You have an army of androgynous quiet sex experts who work as a co-ordinated team to get someone off, and you want to send them to NOM people?!

Send them here... I promise to be objective! (This might need a number of tests to make sure it is't a fluke).

4/25/2012 5:45:23 PM

#1396498

Mudak

@Shem, I'm not so sure I'd call ten people an "army", but point granted... :)

4/25/2012 8:43:55 PM

#1396505

agentCDE

Your ability to talk without actually saying anything is astounding.

4/25/2012 9:34:07 PM

#1396511

rebel

Wow, that's basically the long way of saying that you can't prove it would. Try again.

4/25/2012 11:31:21 PM

#1396517

Sylvana

My personal prefered answer to this would be to bitch-slap them and ask them to answer the damn question. However in a attempt to be non violent, I would have to ask them "So? Give me specifics on how it would harm society. Answer the damn question."

This is like the kind of dodging the question you get in university exam papers. Where you pretend to give an answer while waffling off random crap.

4/26/2012 12:18:49 AM

#1396624

aaa

Thanks for the non-answer.

4/26/2012 5:01:40 AM

#1396863

TheLastCenturian

"If robosexual marriage were legalized, imagine all the terrible things that would happen to the children! Then imagine we said those things, because we couldn't think of any"

4/26/2012 3:14:37 PM

#1396871

Ebon

You ducked the question. We have evidence from any number of countries and various historical sources that same-sex marriage isn't new, novel or harmful. You have none. We win.

4/26/2012 3:29:42 PM

1 2 3