Why The Future Laughs at You (Part 1)

Because one series about irrationality just isn't enough.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• gay marriage
• gay rights
• gay pride
• LBGT
• LGBT
• purple triangle
• alan keyes
• the state of marriage
• the institution of marriage
• logic
• reason
• civil unions
• procreation
• adoption
• lesbian couples
• homosexual couples
• gay couples
• gay humor
• alan keyes argument
• alan keyes gay marriage
• sanctity of marriage
• prop 8
• senate debate 2004
• obama alan keyes debate

[deRoyLight]

internet trolling... because sometimes being an awful person in real life just isn't enough for some people.

[devourage]

Abstaining from "society" is impossible. If the land is populated it inevitably brings about economic and social interactions. It's arbitrary to say this is "not society". Also, it is a really bad idea to judge societal contribution by whether or not the government benefits, or whether the government's definition has been met.

Economic and social interaction exists wherever people exist. That's society. Society is not the state, nor is it industry, or any specific form of social organization.

[Xeonxtreme]

@deRoyLight Why are not standing up for the institution between a man and a woman to which you came from? Tell me!

Who said our primary goal is to have children to become workers for the state? Was it the state that gave me the ability to have children? Did the state create me? NO!

I'll accept homosexual relationship as equal to that of a man with a woman, when they are able in and of themselves to produce offspring as only a man and woman can!

p.s I suggest you stop watching so much T.V

[bull1504]

@zerogullibility As I mentioned in my previous answer to your question, it would be pretty unfortunate, if and only if that is completely true. Its pretty obvious to me that you have no interest whatsoever in what I write and that's ok. Save your "christian conservative" and Michael Jackson rant for another occasion pal.

[zerogullibility]

@bull1504 You call it "pretty unfortunate" for Keyes to have shunned his own child due to her sexual attractions in which she had no choice. Her only choice would have been to keep on lying to her father.

The only acceptable gay person to the "Christian conservatives" is one who is denying their sexuality and not obvious about it. They never accepted Michael Jackson, because despite his denials about being gay, nobody believed him, so he was STILL unacceptable. How hypocritical was THAT?

[bull1504]

@deRoyLight During our discussion I wrongly assumed that you knew I was refering to Keyes original video not your rebuttal. This is where the misunderstanding came from.

[bull1504]

@zerogullibility If he in fact did that to his daughter, it is pretty unfortunate. But remember..we are talking about Allan Keyes...the man who is hated because of his christian values and because he firmly stands for the truth regardless of whom he is speaking to or where he is speaking at. It wouldn't surprise me if that story was made up by his enemies or overly exaggerated but I have no factual information for either position. Its all speculation and hear say as far as I understand.

[zerogullibility]

@bull1504 You must be thinking of Alan Keye's daughter. When she came out to him as a lesbian, Mr. Keyes disowned her, telling her she will go to hell. That's the same girl who worked tirelessly on her father's campaigns and always was a good daughter to him. Now she doesn't exist to him, she is forever shunned (or until she pretends to be heterosexual, marries a man and has chidren? Not sure what the rules are in ultra-conservative Christian families...do you?)

Your thoughts on this?

[bull1504]

@deRoyLight Yeah. Thanks for letting me know that this was a rebuttal to Keyes ideas.

[deRoyLight]

@bull1504 K, I just saw you have the same argument from Alan Keyes on your YouTube channel. I think you are confused. I think you just watched the beginning of this video and assumed it was the same thing, it's not. This video showcases the entirety of Keyes' argument, and then offers a rebuttal after he is done speaking.

It's my video, I should know. I think that's why you appear confused to me, and why I sound stubborn to you.

[deRoyLight]

@bull1504 This entire video is a direct rebuttal to what you seem to somehow think is an argument. The only thing this video doesn't address that you've said, are silly things that have either been A. addressed previously in this thread, or B. are so nonsensical I have a hard time believing you could even comprehend an explanation, particularly considering many have already been made available.

Your entire argument is a myriad of logical fallacies. Watch the video, it's a rebuttal not a support