Miss USA Controversy

[Infiniteloop]

A (very small) part of me is proud of her for stating what she believes in, but the other 99.9bar% of me just has to sigh and the unwillingness of people to be so unaccepting of others and stony towards their struggles for equality.

To echo tels, the "That's how I was raised" argument shows an unwillingness to think for yourself or question the actions and beliefs of the past and how they pertain to modern society. When Richard Dawkins gave a lecture at OU, (that I attended ) he said "What on earth is a university for if it only enforces opinions students already hold?" Deriving from that, what is the purpose of personal logic and free will if we only believe the opinions that came before us?

By that logic let's get rid of all textbooks, teachers, and schools because knoweldge is bad and must be stamped out!

 

[ExodusinFlames]

I still don't get why everyone is still so up in arms about gay marriage. Seriously.

I'm a firm believer of the rule: "Let em get married. It'll take that spring out their steps and make em as miserable as the rest of us, more power to em."

 

[Cliff_m85]

Everyone who says "thats how I was raised" makes her an idiot really don't understand human nature. Our parents views heavily influence our own and some we never can shake, no matter how intelligent a person is.

They asked her a question and she gave them her opinion, she wasn't putting herself out there making her views heard, they asked her.
She never said she's against homosexuality or that all gays should die and go to hell or something equally flame worthy, she just stated she believes that MARRIAGE should be between a man and a woman.
Marriage was set up as a religious bonding, why do gay people want to get married? Cos they still have this belief from their parents that you marry the person you love and that marriage bonds you, which leads back to my first point that parental POV influence well after childhood.

Just to make things clear I am straight, I am not against homosexuality, but I am against homosexuals (or in fact anybody ie religious people/atheists/Gamers/Non-Gamers) chucking hissy fits over someones private views. You want people to accept your way of life, fine, but accept that other people will have their (possibly differing) way of life. As long as nobody is trying to force someone around to their thinking there shouldn't be a problem. Not that I expect it will ever happen that way, but hey we can hope.

Marriage was set up for the family of a young girl to be married against her own choices to a man of higher financial or political power. Most marriages in Roman times consisted of girls being married and bedded at 12 years old.


So why are you trying to ruin traditional marriage?

 

[iJosh]

I just rofl'd

 

[Cliff_m85]

If you think this broad should have lied to win this bllshit contest then you believe in selling yourself out just to get ahead. Also, her belief isn't "outdated" or "prejudice", there is no right or wrong in this debate, there's resons that are good and bad on both sides of the debate. Just leave eachother alone and we'll all be fine.

There are no good reasons on the "marriage is between a man and a woman" side of the debate. That's why she had to say: "I think...in my family...that's how I was raised" instead of supplying, you know, good reasons.

The religious reasons are valid, if not what you want them to be, (Soddom and Gammora anybody? Spelling?), and the pro-gay marriage side of it is valid, too. Why can't gay people commit to eachother like straight people can? Afterall, God makes us the way he intends us to be right? There's a valid point to each side of the debate, if you don't want to listen to the other side then don't, but don't presume you know whts best for someone else when they're not affecting anybody else/

God called Lot the only just man in Sodom. Remember that Lot offered his daughters up to be gang raped to death when the townspeople wanted to 'know' the angels.


Just? Yeah, God has an odd opinion on what's classified as just.

 

[Ridonculous_Ninja]

In my opinion, you can be gay but I'm not, so if a gay guy tried to hit on me, I would either run like hell or punch him out.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion so long as it isn't "OMG your gay that means god hates you burn them!".
No homophobes will be tolerated.
Gays will be, so long as they don't try to force me to be.

 

[SoonerMatt]

A (very small) part of me is proud of her for stating what she believes in, but the other 99.9bar% of me just has to sigh and the unwillingness of people to be so unaccepting of others and stony towards their struggles for equality.

To echo tels, the "That's how I was raised" argument shows an unwillingness to think for yourself or question the actions and beliefs of the past and how they pertain to modern society. When Richard Dawkins gave a lecture at OU, (that I attended ) he said "What on earth is a university for if it only enforces opinions students already hold?" Deriving from that, what is the purpose of personal logic and free will if we only believe the opinions that came before us?

By that logic let's get rid of all textbooks, teachers, and schools because knoweldge is bad and must be stamped out!

Right, I think I'm the only one who goes to OU and knows the back story behind that....

Before Dawkins gave his lecture one of Oklahoma's state representatives, Todd Thompson, proposed a bill condemning the university for inviting Dawkins because his material "and opinion about those who do not believe in the theory [of evolution] are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma." So in that context Dawkins was saying it was the responsibility of a university to get students to formulate and think up their own opinions and viewpoints.

Intro to the Dawkins lecture that contains this part [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gnHeCgcMSw]

Some Christian in attendance getting kicked out for causing a scene during the Q&A [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYPaNV3q6Jw]

 

[Cliff_m85]

In my opinion, you can be gay but I'm not, so if a gay guy tried to hit on me, I would either run like hell or punch him out.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion so long as it isn't "OMG your gay that means god hates you burn them!".
No homophobes will be tolerated.
Gays will be, so long as they don't try to force me to be.

I completely agree, baby. I love how you write too....it's so manly. I bet you have nice strong arms, am I wrong?

 

[Ridonculous_Ninja]

A (very small) part of me is proud of her for stating what she believes in, but the other 99.9bar% of me just has to sigh and the unwillingness of people to be so unaccepting of others and stony towards their struggles for equality.

To echo tels, the "That's how I was raised" argument shows an unwillingness to think for yourself or question the actions and beliefs of the past and how they pertain to modern society. When Richard Dawkins gave a lecture at OU, (that I attended ) he said "What on earth is a university for if it only enforces opinions students already hold?" Deriving from that, what is the purpose of personal logic and free will if we only believe the opinions that came before us?

By that logic let's get rid of all textbooks, teachers, and schools because knoweldge is bad and must be stamped out!

Right, I think I'm the only one who goes to OU and knows the back story behind that....

Before Dawkins gave his lecture one of Oklahoma's state representatives, Todd Thompson, proposed a bill condemning the university for inviting Dawkins because his material "and opinion about those who do not believe in the theory [of evolution] are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma." So in that context Dawkins was saying it was the responsibility of a university to get students to formulate and think up their own opinions and viewpoints.

Intro to the Dawkins lecture that contains this part [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gnHeCgcMSw]

Some Christian in attendance getting kicked out for causing a scene during the Q&A [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYPaNV3q6Jw]

On the note of evolution, everyone states evolution and intelligent design as two seperate theories, why does no one combine them?
I think the God being if it exists, got lazy or just did it the way we do it with computer programs and put in evolution to do all the work for it.
It makes sense.

 

[Eiseman]

In summation: pageant girl's an idiot, Perez Hilton's a ****.

Hmm, nope, nothing new there.

 

[Cliff_m85]

A (very small) part of me is proud of her for stating what she believes in, but the other 99.9bar% of me just has to sigh and the unwillingness of people to be so unaccepting of others and stony towards their struggles for equality.

To echo tels, the "That's how I was raised" argument shows an unwillingness to think for yourself or question the actions and beliefs of the past and how they pertain to modern society. When Richard Dawkins gave a lecture at OU, (that I attended ) he said "What on earth is a university for if it only enforces opinions students already hold?" Deriving from that, what is the purpose of personal logic and free will if we only believe the opinions that came before us?

By that logic let's get rid of all textbooks, teachers, and schools because knoweldge is bad and must be stamped out!

Right, I think I'm the only one who goes to OU and knows the back story behind that....

Before Dawkins gave his lecture one of Oklahoma's state representatives, Todd Thompson, proposed a bill condemning the university for inviting Dawkins because his material "and opinion about those who do not believe in the theory [of evolution] are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma." So in that context Dawkins was saying it was the responsibility of a university to get students to formulate and think up their own opinions and viewpoints.

Intro to the Dawkins lecture that contains this part [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gnHeCgcMSw]

Some Christian in attendance getting kicked out for causing a scene during the Q&A [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYPaNV3q6Jw]

On the note of evolution, everyone states evolution and intelligent design as two seperate theories, why does no one combine them?
I think the God being if it exists, got lazy or just did it the way we do it with computer programs and put in evolution to do all the work for it.
It makes sense.

A perfectly acceptable thing to think......if it had any evidence behind it. Evolution can be observed whereas 'Intelligent' Design is just rambling faith-based poofery with no evidence to back it up.

 

[Galliam]

If you think this broad should have lied to win this bllshit contest then you believe in selling yourself out just to get ahead. Also, her belief isn't "outdated" or "prejudice", there is no right or wrong in this debate, there's resons that are good and bad on both sides of the debate. Just leave eachother alone and we'll all be fine.

There are no good reasons on the "marriage is between a man and a woman" side of the debate. That's why she had to say: "I think...in my family...that's how I was raised" instead of supplying, you know, good reasons.

There are no good reasons on the "marriage for all" side of the debate.

The entire debate is pointless.

 

[SoonerMatt]

Because Intelligent Design is just a facade for creationism and its proponents see evolution as a "threat to faith" and are doing everything in their power to create a controversy that doesn't even exist in the scientific community and convince their followers that "god planned for intelligent design/creationism and not evolution."

 

[Infiniteloop]

A (very small) part of me is proud of her for stating what she believes in, but the other 99.9bar% of me just has to sigh and the unwillingness of people to be so unaccepting of others and stony towards their struggles for equality.

To echo tels, the "That's how I was raised" argument shows an unwillingness to think for yourself or question the actions and beliefs of the past and how they pertain to modern society. When Richard Dawkins gave a lecture at OU, (that I attended ) he said "What on earth is a university for if it only enforces opinions students already hold?" Deriving from that, what is the purpose of personal logic and free will if we only believe the opinions that came before us?

By that logic let's get rid of all textbooks, teachers, and schools because knoweldge is bad and must be stamped out!

Right, I think I'm the only one who goes to OU and knows the back story behind that....

Before Dawkins gave his lecture one of Oklahoma's state representatives, Todd Thompson, proposed a bill condemning the university for inviting Dawkins because his material "and opinion about those who do not believe in the theory [of evolution] are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma." So in that context Dawkins was saying it was the responsibility of a university to get students to formulate and think up their own opinions and viewpoints.

Intro to the Dawkins lecture that contains this part [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gnHeCgcMSw]

Some Christian in attendance getting kicked out for causing a scene during the Q&A [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYPaNV3q6Jw]

In that context that makes more sense. An individual bases their opinion on both "old" and new information.

 

[Sphinx86]

Marriage was set up for the family of a young girl to be married against her own choices to a man of higher financial or political power. Most marriages in Roman times consisted of girls being married and bedded at 12 years old.


So why are you trying to ruin traditional marriage?

Ok not entirely sure what you're meaning here.

Marrying off 12yo to rich old lecherous bastards is messed up, so I'm going to assume that your next line is meant to be sarcastic, which is stupid, seeing as sarcasm is based in tone of voice, which isn't present in textual forums.

Either that or you're saying marrying 12yo is right and that gay marriage is wrong. Which in most (all??) countries make you a pedophile and in most western countries are about to get flamed by all those (aggressively) in support of gay marriage.

Clarifying would be good.

 

[Cliff_m85]

Because Intelligent Design is just a facade for creationism and its proponents see evolution as a "threat to faith" and are doing everything in their power to create a controversy that doesn't even exist in the scientific community and convince their followers that "god planned for intelligent design/creationism and not evolution."

Well, I can certainly understand them. Believing that we came from apes is incredibly offensive, I mean it's obvious that we came from mud and dirt that God blew into.


That's not offensive at all!!!

 

[13lackfriday]

Beauty pageant contestants aren't known for their smarts, so they shouldn't be judged on anything deeper than their skin.

I don't agree with her, but they asked for her opinion, and she rightly gave it.
To the fag* Hilton, you shouldn't ask questions which have answers you aren't willing to hear.

*For justification of homophobic slur used, please see reference HERE [http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/8531/1210552660582.jpg].

 

[Ridonculous_Ninja]

In my opinion, you can be gay but I'm not, so if a gay guy tried to hit on me, I would either run like hell or punch him out.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion so long as it isn't "OMG your gay that means god hates you burn them!".
No homophobes will be tolerated.
Gays will be, so long as they don't try to force me to be.

I completely agree, baby. I love how you write too....it's so manly. I bet you have nice strong arms, am I wrong?

*BIFFED*

 

[Cliff_m85]

Marriage was set up for the family of a young girl to be married against her own choices to a man of higher financial or political power. Most marriages in Roman times consisted of girls being married and bedded at 12 years old.


So why are you trying to ruin traditional marriage?

Ok not entirely sure what you're meaning here.

Marrying off 12yo to rich old lecherous bastards is messed up, so I'm going to assume that your next line is meant to be sarcastic, which is stupid, seeing as sarcasm is based in tone of voice, which isn't present in textual forums.

Either that or you're saying marrying 12yo is right and that gay marriage is wrong. Which in most (all??) countries make you a pedophile and in most western countries are about to get flamed by all those (aggressively) in support of gay marriage.

Clarifying would be good.

I'm stating that Traditional Marriage has been changed multiple times. The argument of gay people 'changing' Trad marriage is ridiculous because it's already been changed about 50 times. If we went back to traditional marriage, we'd have to support pedophilia. That's why I snicker when I hear how important it is to 'save Traditional Marriage'.

I'm pro-gay marriage because anyone should be able to get married as long as they are of age and consenting.

 

[Ridonculous_Ninja]

Because Intelligent Design is just a facade for creationism and its proponents see evolution as a "threat to faith" and are doing everything in their power to create a controversy that doesn't even exist in the scientific community and convince their followers that "god planned for intelligent design/creationism and not evolution."

Well, I can certainly understand them. Believing that we came from apes is incredibly offensive, I mean it's obvious that we came from mud and dirt that God blew into.


That's not offensive at all!!!

Ya I just tried to find a middle ground for people. There are "scientific" Christians who believe there is no truth whatsoever in evolution, even though we know that genes swap through procreation, and the strong genes are passed down which is basically all evolution is (excluding mutations), what I stated before is more of something that actual religious scientists could get behind, without shattering their faith.
I personally still don't believe in god.