Moral failure of LDS Leadership in Iraq invasion by US.

[_The Nehor]

Because in war, people are killed, communities are destroyed, and governments are replaced. Men and women's lives are sacrificed for the cause of the war. Is the cause just? It's a much bigger moral question than whether two people of the same gender can marry. To even compare the two issues is an insult to the military.

For a guy with a Porkins avatar you should understand. Porkins sacrificed himself for the cause of the rebellion. Was the cause just? Yes it was. And we know that because the religious leaders (the Jedi) took a stand.

The Rebellion didn't have any Jedi in it. The ex-Senators told them it was a good idea to fight the war and they did. I hope you're not suggesting that as a good precedent........

I don't think I'm insulting the military. They've made their feelings on gays quite clear: http://www.theonion.com/content/video/g ... to_risk_in

[_GoodK]

There is the historical precedent that sexually libertine societies (usually including lots of homosexual sex) don't last more then 2 or 3 generations though that's not the only problem.

What does that have to do with homosexuals getting married. I'm pretty sure they aren't waiting for the Supreme Court to say it's ok for them to have "lots of homosexual sex."

The family unit is incredibly weak when it's there at all.

Is there a reason to believe that married homosexuals - or even "lots of homosexual sex" - has anything to do with that?

I actually still believe in the ideal family with both a male and female role model in charge is very important for a child's development.

Any good reasons to believe that heterosexual parents are better than homosexual parents?

It's hard for me to exclude God from the equation. I admit this.

Why can't you just refrain from getting married to someone of the same gender?

Why must the Mormon church ask their congregation to spend money on preventing other people from getting married?

Any good reason - excluding the belief in a Creator who cares about the type of sex the human mammals he created is having - that the church needs to force other people to live in a society that resembles this Zion you long for?

[_Angus McAwesome]

There is the historical precedent that sexually libertine societies (usually including lots of homosexual sex) don't last more then 2 or 3 generations though that's not the only problem.

Ok, I'll bite. Name some "historical" examples of societies that one day decided to allow openly gay people in their society that suddenly went away as a society in the span of 2 to 3 generations. Because I bet I can name more societies where homosexuality was considered just as normal as heterosexuality that lasted far longer then just 2 to 3 generations.

The family unit is incredibly weak when it's there at all.

Maybe your family and the families you've been exposed to are just weak to begin with? Can't be anything other then the threat of those godless heathen faggots that could be weakening families at all, right?

I actually still believe in the ideal family with both a male and female role model in charge is very important for a child's development.

Who cares what you "believe". Show some actual evidence for what you're saying instead.

It's hard for me to exclude God from the equation. I admit this. My ideal society is Zion. It's hard to build Zion without factoring in God.

Well, since you want to exclude gays from society, and you justify that bigotry with your God, then that would mean your God is a bigot too!

I mean, hey, if you can justify things by appealing to invisible entities then I can use leaps of logic too.

[_Angus McAwesome]

The Rebellion didn't have any Jedi in it. The ex-Senators told them it was a good idea to fight the war and they did. I hope you're not suggesting that as a good precedent........

Because Luke Skywalker was so totally not a Jedi in RotJ? Yoda and Obi Wan didn't both work along with Senator Bail Organa at the very birth fo teh Rebellion in concocting a plan to hide Luke and Leia in order to preserve the Jedi for the future to help fight the friggin' Empire either, right?

And you call yourself a fan...

[_Jason Bourne]

The entire premise of this thread is based on a priori assumptions that are far from proven factual. Accordingly there is nothing here to discuss.

[_The Nehor]

Because Luke Skywalker was so totally not a Jedi in RotJ? Yoda and Obi Wan didn't both work along with Senator Bail Organa at the very birth fo the Rebellion in concocting a plan to hide Luke and Leia in order to preserve the Jedi for the future to help fight the friggin' Empire either, right?

And you call yourself a fan...

Yoda and Obi Wan were not part of the Rebellion. All they were was part of a small group trying to keep the Jedi alive. Yoda and Obi Wan then fled and hid. They had nothing to do with it. Luke wasn't a Jedi until the very end of Jedi. He never teaches any Jedi philosophy to the troops or even his close friends.

[_Tarski]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/0 ... 16950.html

(of course Droopy will say its communist lies before even reading the article let alone the book)

[_Thama]

The entire premise of this thread is based on a priori assumptions that are far from proven factual. Accordingly there is nothing here to discuss.

When the most serious discussion in a thread after the first page is a debate over finer points of the Star Wars plot, it becomes pretty hard to disagree with that.

[_Angus McAwesome]

Yoda and Obi Wan were not part of the Rebellion. All they were was part of a small group trying to keep the Jedi alive. Yoda and Obi Wan then fled and hid.

So I guess you've never seen RotS or read the novelization (which counts as cannon according to Lucas Films, by the way), both of which show Yoda and Obi Wan taking active roles in helping with the planning and logisitcs of the Rebellion at it's very start.

They had nothing to do with it. Luke wasn't a Jedi until the very end of Jedi. He never teaches any Jedi philosophy to the troops or even his close friends.

After leaving Yoda on Degobah, Luke would have been considered a Padawan at the very least. Once again, the novelizations back this up. Also, Luke got pretty good at pulling the "toss off half-assed mystical one-liners" thing that Jedi were so good at in RotJ, both the movie and Novelization. Or are you saying that the entire last third of RotJ where Luke is trying to convince Vader to renounce the Sith never happened now?

You're not a fan, you're just another person that watched the movies not really paying attention to much beyond "pew pew lazors!" and "mhmmmmmm woosh hiss lightsabers!".

[_The Nehor]

Ok, I'll bite. Name some "historical" examples of societies that one day decided to allow openly gay people in their society that suddenly went away as a society in the span of 2 to 3 generations. Because I bet I can name more societies where homosexuality was considered just as normal as heterosexuality that lasted far longer then just 2 to 3 generations.

Maybe your family and the families you've been exposed to are just weak to begin with? Can't be anything other then the threat of those godless heathen faggots that could be weakening families at all, right?

Who cares what you "believe". Show some actual evidence for what you're saying instead.

Well, since you want to exclude gays from society, and you justify that bigotry with your God, then that would mean your God is a bigot too!

I mean, hey, if you can justify things by appealing to invisible entities then I can use leaps of logic too.

Ummm...actually my family is great. The families I watched disintegrate include my friends whose idiot father decided he was gay and ran off and a variety of other cheating fathers and often moron mothers.

Evidence? Dear God.......you want evidence that the family unit is collapsing? I can't and won't pin it all on gays. It's also the fault of sexually libertine heterosexuals though virtually every study I've read shows that homosexuals have them beat on that front too. Societies throughout history depend on members of that society pairing off in heterosexual relationships and raising children in as stable an environment as possible. Gays either don't participate or destroy preexisting family units. Homosexuality is a cancer. It's not the whole affliction but it plays it's part.