pesty100:
I feel something about it but then am not on the receiving end

How do you mean, sir?

plaetton:
I am opposed to gay marriage for the simple reason that my culture and tradition does not recognise same gender relationships, talk less of marriage.
It is also, in my opinion unnatural and disruptive to family values and the continuity of Genetic heritage.

What family values?

Lennycool:

What family values?

The Natural family hierarchy of Father, mother, children and home, community and society.

plaetton:

The Natural family hierarchy of Father, mother, children and home, community and society.

Family values evolve my friend. 200 years ago, having only one wife would be against African family values.
Polygamy was the norm.
Not owning a slave would probably be against this said African values, worshipping your dead ancestors and their Gods would by all means be a part of these family values and it would be an abomination not to do so.
But today do you see this things as integral or important?
Our values evolve.
Less intelligent Animals don't hate the homosexuals in their species, so why should we, the more intelligent ones hate?

plaetton:

The Natural family hierarchy of Father, mother, children and home, community and society.

Not to argue or anything but aren't values supposed to be changeable? Calabar culture dictates the killing of but they know better now. If you as an atheist can question the established culture of religious belief then is there a reason why you choose not to do so in this case? Studies show that kids raised by same-sex couples are generally healthier both physically and socially.

CoolUsername:


Not to argue or anything but aren't values supposed to be changeable? Calabar culture dictates the killing of but they know better now. If you as an atheist can question the established culture of religious belief then is there a reason why you choose not to do so in this case? Studies show that kids raised by same-sex couples are generally healthier both physically and socially.

Yes, societal values evolve. That's exactly my point. African societal values and norms are yet to evolve to the point of accepting same sex relationships, talkless of marriage. Maybe my grandchild's generation, but certainly not mine.

Lennycool:

Family values evolve my friend. A 100 years ago, having only one wife would be against African family values.
Polygamy was the norm.
Not owning a slave would probably be against this said African values, worshipping your dead ancestors and their Gods would by all means be a part of these family values and it would be an abomination not to so.
But today do you see this things as integral or important?
Our values evolve.
Less intelligent Animals don't hate the homosexuals in their species, so why should we, the more intelligent ones hate?

Exactly my point that family values evolve.

But, I never said nor implied that I hated homosexuals.
I just said my sense of values does NOT agree with it.
I also know that it is not a choice.

plaetton:

Exactly my point that family values evolve.

But, I never said nor implied that I hated homosexuals.
I just said my sense of values does NOT agree with it.
I also know that it is not a choice.

Okay I get you

Etesam:
How do you mean, sir?

I oppose but then am not a gay

plaetton:

Yes I do.

Fair enough. I should like to rephrase the question. Are you in support of the ban on gay marriage imposed by the state?

Nickydrake:


Fair enough. I should like to rephrase the question. Are you in support of the ban on gay marriage imposed by the state?

I am in support of the state enacting laws to safeguard the core values and norms upon which society stands.

The state has every right to feel nervous and threatened by a completely unorthodox practice that turns its most basic and important social unit, the family, upside down.

I think it's hypocritical and very unrealistic not to expect an angry pushback when an unorthodox and unnatural practice seeks validation from the State.

Going back to early human history, we recognize that the first communities were forged around common core values, interests and or threats. The values of every society begin and revolve around the family unit.
The family unit is the center of gravity for community and society.
Therefore, the state has the power and mandate to safeguard and preserve the mutual core values of the society.

I am not in support of criminalizing homosexuality, but I agree that the state should not endorse any alternative structure to the family unit.

plaetton:

I am in support of the state enacting laws to safeguard the core values and norms upon which society stands.

The state has every right to feel nervous and threatened by a completely unorthodox practice that turns its most basic and important social unit, the family, upside down.

I think it's hypocritical and very unrealistic not to expect an angry pushback when an unorthodox and unnatural practice seeks validation from the State.

Going back to early human history, we recognize that the first communities were forged around common core values, interests and or threats. The values of every society begin and revolve around the family unit.
The family unit is the center of gravity for community and society.
Therefore, the state has the power and mandate to safeguard and preserve the mutual core values of the society.

I am not in support of criminalizing homosexuality, but I agree that the state should not endorse any alternative structure to the family unit.

Atheism is not a common, shared value as well

Do you think it hypocritical and unrealistic to not expect support from the government for atheistic causes as well?

Should the state not endorse a family's lifestyle because they are atheists?

wiegraf:


Atheism is not a common, shared value as well

Do you think it hypocritical and unrealistic to not expect support from the government for atheistic causes as well?

Should the state not endorse a family's lifestyle because they are atheists?

Atheists have suffered pushbacks from the state and its agents throughout history.
But atheism is far from being a lifestyle. There are no peculiar rituals or structures peculiar to atheism that threaten basic structure of society.

plaetton:

I am in support of the state enacting laws to safeguard the core values and norms upon which society stands.

The state has every right to feel nervous and threatened by a completely unorthodox practice that turns its most basic and important social unit, the family, upside down.

Going back to early human history, we recognize that the first communities were forged around common core values, interests and or threats. The values of every society begin and revolve around the family unit.
The family unit is the center of gravity for community and society.
Therefore, the state has the power and mandate to safeguard and preserve the mutual core values of the society.

I am not in support of criminalizing homosexuality, but I agree that the state should not endorse any alternative structure to the family unit.

Is it your view then that, at its most fundamental level, the duty of the state is to the family, rather than, say, the individual?

plaetton:

But atheism is far from being a lifestyle. There are no peculiar rituals or structures peculiar to atheism that threaten basic structure of society.

I don't quite follow the above. Do you mean that legal recognition of gay marriage may result ultimately in the attrition of straight unions? That marriage between people of opposite sexes may grow increasingly unpopular and eventually disappear?

Edit: The last two questions are in reference to what is implied in the quote, namely that gay marriage 'threatens the basic structure of society.'

plaetton:


Atheists have suffered pushbacks from the state and its agents throughout history.
But atheism is far from being a lifestyle. There are no peculiar rituals or structures peculiar to atheism that threaten basic structure of society.

Communism
Marxism
Leninism
Juche Ideology

These were atheistic ideologies - atheism is an integral part . Atheism is imposed , extreme intolerance of religious beliefs and practices by states who choose these theories as their nation's guiding principle .

The indelible havoc caused by the practice of these ideologies - mass murder , mass suicide , blatant abuse of human rights etc .
https://www.nairaland.com/3286519/communist-leaders-killed-millions-because

There are variants of the Marxism-Leninism ideology such as the Juche Ideology which is currently practiced in atheist state North Korea where religious citizens are marginalized and abused continually .

Other variants of Communism include

Stalinism
Trotskyism
Moaism

I can go on and on

KingEbukasBlog:


Communism
Marxism
Leninism
Juche Ideology

These were atheistic ideologies - atheism is an integral part . Atheism is imposed , extreme intolerance of religious beliefs and practices by states who choose these theories as their nation's guiding principle .

The indelible havoc caused by the practice of these ideologies - mass murder , mass suicide , blatant abuse of human rights etc .
https://www.nairaland.com/3286519/communist-leaders-killed-millions-because

There are variants of the Marxism-Leninism ideology such as the Juche Ideology which is currently practiced in atheist state North Korea where religious citizens are marginalized and abused continually .

Other variants of Communism include

Stalinism
Trotskyism
Moaism

I can go on and on

They are anti-theistic to ensure absolute loyalty to the state. Atheism is only a by-product of those ideologies and not vice-versa.

Simply put, the only ideology that isn't compatible with atheism is theism.

plaetton:

I am in support of the state enacting laws to safeguard the core values and norms upon which society stands.

The state has every right to feel nervous and threatened by a completely unorthodox practice that turns its most basic and important social unit, the family, upside down.

I am not in support of criminalizing homosexuality, but I agree that the state should not endorse any alternative structure to the family unit.

Would you permit gays to live together--as if they were a married couple?

To me marriage is an artificial construct--there is no meaningful difference between a couple who lives together without a marriage certificate and one who does, legal niceties aside.

Nickydrake:


Is it your view then that, at its most fundamental level, the duty of the state is to the family, rather than, say, the individual?

The duty of the state is or should be to the community, and the family is the nucleus of the community.

Nickydrake:



. Do you mean that legal recognition of gay marriage may result ultimately in the attrition of straight unions? That marriage between people of opposite sexes may grow increasingly unpopular and eventually disappear?

I said and implied no such thing personally.

I simply implied that it is very natural for the state to pushback against threats or perceived threats to its natural order of norms, and the family unit , being the most fundamental, needed to be defended with even greater veracity.

CoolUsername:


They are anti-theistic to ensure absolute loyalty to the state. Atheism is only a by-product of those ideologies and not vice-versa.

Simply put, the only ideology that isn't compatible with atheism is theism.

I have no time to argue , stop being disingenuous and stop the pathetic attempts every damn time to absolve atheism as the animus that instigated those ideologies .

https://www.nairaland.com/3286519/communist-leaders-killed-millions-because

onetrack:


Would you permit gays to live together--as if they were a married couple?

To me marriage is an artificial construct--there is no meaningful difference between a couple who lives together without a marriage certificate and one who does, legal niceties aside.

Personally, I am indifferent to whatever people do in the confines of their private space.
However, I do not support the state giving a validation to a matrimonial and family arrangement that is completely UNNATURAL to the basic arrangement . That kind of shift normally takes time, generations to evolve. That is my point. It is impossible, and not advisable to seek same sex legalisation in societies that are even still to grant women equal rights.

KingEbukasBlog:


Communism
Marxism
Leninism
Juche Ideology

These were atheistic ideologies - atheism is an integral part . Atheism is imposed , extreme intolerance of religious beliefs and practices by states who choose these theories as their nation's guiding principle .

The indelible havoc caused by the practice of these ideologies - mass murder , mass suicide , blatant abuse of human rights etc .
https://www.nairaland.com/3286519/communist-leaders-killed-millions-because

There are variants of the Marxism-Leninism ideology such as the Juche Ideology which is currently practiced in atheist state North Korea where religious citizens are marginalized and abused continually .

Other variants of Communism include

Stalinism
Trotskyism
Moaism

I can go on and on

Just shut up

plaetton:


The duty of the state is or should be to the community, and the family is the nucleus of the community.

Do you believe then that it is proper for the state to foist the customs of the group -- whether family or community -- on unwilling individuals? In other words, is it your view that the liberty of the individual is subordinate to the culture of the group?

I'm sorry if it's beginning to sound like an inquisition.

plaetton:

I said and implied no such thing personally.
I simply implied that it is very natural for the state to pushback against threats or perceived threats to its natural order of norms, and the family unit , being the most fundamental, needed to be defended with even greater veracity.

Okay. I must have misread you. My apologies.

plaetton:


It is impossible, and not advisable to seek same sex legalisation in societies that are even still to grant women equal rights.

Why's that? Is there a desirable order in which segments of society ought to acquire rights?

plaetton:

Just shut up

I'll do that when you disabuse yourself of the belief that there are "no structure peculiar to atheism that threaten basic structure of society."

Seriously sir , what were you thinking ?

KingEbukasBlog:


I have no time to argue , stop being disingenuous and stop the pathetic attempts every damn time to absolve atheism as the animus that instigated those ideologies .

https://www.nairaland.com/3286519/communist-leaders-killed-millions-because

Intentional misinformation.

I'm better off arguing to a mirror. There are bad atheists, obviously. But atheism is not a philosophy, there's nothing in atheism that tells you to be good or bad. Therefore, it is not the bedrock of humanism neither is it the bedrock of communism or whatever.

Tell me where in the Big Book of Atheism that communism is advocated.

Atheists have different political views so how exactly does it encourage communism?

Don't try to argue what you know is clearly wrong, I won't respond. This just asinine logic.

CoolUsername:


Intentional misinformation.

I'm better off arguing to a mirror. There are bad atheists, obviously. But atheism is not a philosophy, there's nothing in atheism that tells you to be good or bad. Therefore, it is not the bedrock of humanism neither is it the bedrock of communism or whatever.

Tell me where in the Big Book of Atheism that communism is advocated.

Atheists have different political views so how exactly does it encourage communism?

Don't try to argue what you know is clearly wrong, I won't respond. This just asinine logic.

Atheism being the animus that instigated those theories simply means that the theories were developed due to the founders' unbelief in God - you can deduce this from the scrutiny of the foundation of those theories (even the founders openly acknowledged this ) . The same way theistic ideologies were founded because of the belief in God .

And to achieve the aims of these ideologies , atheism (the unbelief in God ) had to be imposed .

All these were expounded here : https://www.nairaland.com/3286519/communist-leaders-killed-millions-because

Only if you can read and comprehend . I think you understand my explanation on that thread and you are just being disingenuous .

Nickydrake:


Do you believe then that it is proper for the state to foist the customs of the group -- whether family or community -- on unwilling individuals? In other words, is it your view that the liberty of the individual is subordinate to the culture of the group?

.

Personally, I am liberal, but I don't accept that individual liberty should supercede the collective well-being or interest of the community.
There should always be limits to liberty, otherwise , individual choices and actions would be on permanent collisions.

Imagine, for example, if for the sake of individual liberty, everyone had the individual choice to wear clothes or go about naked.

The norms of society usually evolve along with the interests and acceptance of the majority( majority meaning as many as possible).

NB: let me reiterate, before you misunderstand me, that everyone is entitled to equal basic fundamental freedoms.
No one is entitled to special freedoms.
Turning the basic natural structure of matrimony upside down is NOT a basic freedom.

plaetton:

Personally, I am liberal, but I don't accept that individual liberty should supercede the collective well-being or interest of the community.
There should always be limits to liberty, otherwise , individual choices and actions would be on permanent collisions.

Imagine, for example, if for the sake of individual liberty, everyone had the individual choice to wear clothes or go about naked.

My view is that individual freedom is the bedrock of collective well-being. The only permissible limits are those which:

a. prevent the initiation of force against another individual; and
b. protect the immature who tend to learn by mindless imitation.

The first is essence of civilized society; the second is the entire function of public morality laws. What do you think of this?

The norms of society usually evolve along with the interests and acceptance of the majority( majority meaning as many as possible)

This isn't in doubt. The question is whether a thing or practice is necessarily beneficial to the community itself just because the majority believes that it is.

NB: let me reiterate, before you misunderstand me, that everyone is entitled to equal basic fundamental freedoms.
No one is entitled to special freedoms.
Turning the basic natural structure of matrimony upside down is NOT a basic freedom.

What is a basic freedom?

plaetton:


Atheists have suffered pushbacks from the state and its agents throughout history.
But atheism is far from being a lifestyle. There are no peculiar rituals or structures peculiar to atheism that threaten basic structure of society.

It can easily be argued that atheism is more of a lifestyle than sexuality, as there's no biological component to it as far as I can tell

And I'm looking real hard, but I struggle to see just exactly where homosexuality threatens the basic structure of society. I mean, the Netherlands legalized same sex unions since 2001 and they seem to be doing just fine.

You seem to think there's a false dichotomy here; there isn't. Let me put my main question in another manner though

In an Islamic state, do you think it hypocritical and unrealistic to not expect support from the government for a cause such as the freedom of religion? The freedom to apostate, to inherit, women's rights, etc?

Supposing I grew up in such a state, I should just shut up and expect all these to go on unabated because it offends the majority's values? If I expect some sort of decency that makes me unrealistic and a hypocrite??!

FOLYKAZE:
Here.....

The society defines what morals and bind laws....my society, culture and tradition do not support homosexuality.

I don't have gays nor stand against their right but I don't just vote for it.

........ But your society, culture and tradition do not support atheism, so why're you an atheist? Show some consistency, will ya!

..... By the way, why would anyone oppose gay marriage? It's not like it's anyone's business what two consenting adults decide to do with their sex life, is it?!

joyContraMundum:
........ But your society, culture and tradition do not support atheism, so why're you an atheist? Show some consistency, will ya!

My society supports atheism.

Ori eni la ba bo aba fi Orisha sílè. Solve the riddle