Random Poll of the Day! (161)

[ProfParanoia]

But why having a definition if you don't follow it anyway?

Like the definition of "fagot"? If it will make them happy, why does it matter if we tweak the definition?

[blurfbreg]

The problem with all of this is that it is VERY subjective.

I agree. It's subjective in the sense that everything is dependent on the culture (the values, norms, attitudes, beliefs) that a person holds.

Although the culture is different at many points of history (even for the same group of people), the people were satisfied with the society that they lived in. This means that there was some sort of agreement to the ideals at that time. For example, it wasn't negative for woman to be "round". It was known (in the Victorian era) to be a sign of wealth and was desirable. In 1980-1990 Western society, woman who are "round" are seen as people who lack self-control, ugly, those who can't try hard in life (No offense meant in these statements). Yet, if you can't figure out which one is right on some basis, there isn't a point to say which idea about roundness is right and which one isn't. Applying this outside of roundness, looking at another group or culture always contains the seed for bias from our view and I'd rather not join the debate (and would like to end the debate).

[nomemory]

By the way!

Isn't same-sex marriage legal in Sweden?  Nom, Kain?

It is. They called it partnership first but it is marriage now. Gay couples may also adopt. As for religious marriage it is up to the "church" in question. The Church of Sweden (our largest Christian church) allows homosexual marriages, I think, either that or it was blessed partnerships. I do think it was marriages though. But the priest has the right to say no if it is against his/her believes.

[Memesu]

Yes...I guess.

[Abs.]

By the way!

Isn't same-sex marriage legal in Sweden?  Nom, Kain?

It is. They called it partnership first but it is marriage now. Gay couples may also adopt. As for religious marriage it is up to the "church" in question. The Church of Sweden (our largest Christian church) allows homosexual marriages, I think, either that or it was blessed partnerships. I do think it was marriages though. But the priest has the right to say no if it is against his/her believes.

I <3 Sweden 

[Kleene Onigiri]

But why having a definition if you don't follow it anyway?

Like the definition of "fagot"? If it will make them happy, why does it matter if we tweak the definition?

Because if you tweak that definition it makes other people sad D:


And what akonyl said. I also wonder about that :V

[Kor]

But why having a definition if you don't follow it anyway?

Like the definition of "fagot"? If it will make them happy, why does it matter if we tweak the definition?

Because if you tweak that definition it makes other people sad D:


And what akonyl said. I also wonder about that :V

It also made a lot of white people in the US sadder when they gave civil rights to the black people. It also made a lot of people sad when they gave the jews a state.

Society is going away slowly from religioun (and marriage, as it seems), and society becomes more open for others, so as far as I'm concerned, in less than 50 years there will be same sex marriage throughout most of the US.

Black people got civil rights
The anti semitism against jews in Europe, stopped.

Same sex marriage isn't so far away from us.

[Kleene Onigiri]

But why having a definition if you don't follow it anyway?

Like the definition of "fagot"? If it will make them happy, why does it matter if we tweak the definition?

Because if you tweak that definition it makes other people sad D:


And what akonyl said. I also wonder about that :V

It also made a lot of white people in the US sadder when they gave civil rights to the black people. It also made a lot of people sad when they gave the jews a state.

Society is going away slowly from religioun (and marriage, as it seems), and society becomes more open for others, so as far as I'm concerned, in less than 50 years there will be same sex marriage throughout most of the US.

Black people got civil rights
The anti semitism against jews in Europe, stopped.

Same sex marriage isn't so far away from us.

you mean state wise or church wise?

[Kor]

But why having a definition if you don't follow it anyway?

Like the definition of "fagot"? If it will make them happy, why does it matter if we tweak the definition?

Because if you tweak that definition it makes other people sad D:


And what akonyl said. I also wonder about that :V

It also made a lot of white people in the US sadder when they gave civil rights to the black people. It also made a lot of people sad when they gave the jews a state.

Society is going away slowly from religioun (and marriage, as it seems), and society becomes more open for others, so as far as I'm concerned, in less than 50 years there will be same sex marriage throughout most of the US.

Black people got civil rights
The anti semitism against jews in Europe, stopped.

Same sex marriage isn't so far away from us.

you mean state wise or church wise?

state wise

[Kleene Onigiri]

But why having a definition if you don't follow it anyway?

Like the definition of "fagot"? If it will make them happy, why does it matter if we tweak the definition?

Because if you tweak that definition it makes other people sad D:


And what akonyl said. I also wonder about that :V

It also made a lot of white people in the US sadder when they gave civil rights to the black people. It also made a lot of people sad when they gave the jews a state.

Society is going away slowly from religioun (and marriage, as it seems), and society becomes more open for others, so as far as I'm concerned, in less than 50 years there will be same sex marriage throughout most of the US.

Black people got civil rights
The anti semitism against jews in Europe, stopped.

Same sex marriage isn't so far away from us.

you mean state wise or church wise?

state wise

I'm talking church wise all the time here tho :V
So yes, state wise it will be like that for sure XD

[Kor]

But why having a definition if you don't follow it anyway?

Like the definition of "fagot"? If it will make them happy, why does it matter if we tweak the definition?

Because if you tweak that definition it makes other people sad D:


And what akonyl said. I also wonder about that :V

It also made a lot of white people in the US sadder when they gave civil rights to the black people. It also made a lot of people sad when they gave the jews a state.

Society is going away slowly from religioun (and marriage, as it seems), and society becomes more open for others, so as far as I'm concerned, in less than 50 years there will be same sex marriage throughout most of the US.

Black people got civil rights
The anti semitism against jews in Europe, stopped.

Same sex marriage isn't so far away from us.

you mean state wise or church wise?

state wise

I'm talking church wise all the time here tho :V
So yes, state wise it will be like that for sure XD

oh, I guess I missed it in the discussion.

[Kleene Onigiri]

guess I didn't point it out enough My bad.

[KainTheVampire]

Yeah

[Dus]

I don't get it why we even argue about whether it should be allowed by the Catholic church, of all institutions. The Catholic church isn't exactly known to go with the times or to listen to the voice of the people or, frankly, for having the tiniest bit of common sense.
Why are there nor woman priests? If anything, they would be better-suited for the job. Why can't priests marry?
These are issues where almost all believers would agree with me that the Church's view is hopelessly outdated (except for Anne Widdecombe, of course, but I don't mind that). I wouldn't dream of getting the Vatican to allow same-sex marriage - smaller churches are more progressive in that regard - but what gets to me is that it's still considered a sin, which is just bigoted.

It never even occured to me that this poll could be interpreted as Do you approve gays marrying in church?, because when I think of the issue of gay marriage, then I think of them not having the same rights as heterosexual married couples and I thought that was what we were to discuss here.

[Kor]

It never even occured to me that this poll could be interpreted as Do you approve gays marrying in church?, because when I think of the issue of gay marriage, then I think of them not having the same rights as heterosexual married couples and I thought that was what we were to discuss here.

I also didn't intend for the church discussion (which is why I thought Kleene as referring to state wise marriage, and not church wise), but somehow along the way this was what the discussion turned to.