[Vision2020] Re: Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage
Donovan Arnold
donovanarnold@hotmail.com
Fri, 08 Aug 2003 21:36:28 -0700
<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Mr. Harrell,</P>
<P>I will play along. This should be good. </P></DIV>
<P>I think your logic is very good which a sign of strong intelligence. However, your premises are incorrect. I will point out a few. However, I wish to state first that these are not necessarily my personal religious or spiritual viewpoints, just pointing our flaws in the premises.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Your first incorrect premise is in this statement.: "Now lets assume that the "person" we are referring to above is God". </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>God is not a person. To do so would invalidate the remaining of your arguments because it is persons that we are talking about. </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Second false Premise: I did not refer to Jesus as a supreme being, just as a great mind.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Third false premise: You are assuming that the Bible is the word of God. This was not stated. The Bible could be just an old book written by some fat guys that lived a long time ago.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Fourth false premise: You assume that because someone created us that we are 'their' property. Clearly we do not view children as the property of a parent. </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Fifth: You assume that because something is owned that the owner has full and unrestricted rights to do what they wish to or with the property. I own the gasoline in my car, I surely can't dump it out on the ground and into the soil. Nor can the owner of a dog beat it into a bloody pulp. </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Finally, we could make the argument that God speaks to us directly and tells us what to do without anyone having any actual evidence to prove or disprove it unless they accept the premise that the KJV Bible is the absolute unerrored literal interpretation of God.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>I can't argue the logic, it is sound, but when you question the validity of the premises used to make the logical arguments, I don't think it holds up very well. </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>To people that haven't studied philosophy or logic before, it sounds like this to me:</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>A) All Dogs are Camels</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>B) All Camels can fly</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>C) Therefore, All Dogs can fly.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>If A and B were true, I would agree with C. But since A and B are false, I can't agree with the conclusion of C on the basis of the premises of A and B being false. This is how I read Mr. Harrell's argument. Sound logic, but false premises leads to a false conclusion.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Thanks!</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Donovan J Arnold </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P> </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>>To: Sunil Ramalingam <SUNILRAMALINGAM@HOTMAIL.COM>, donovanarnold@hotmail.com, lukenieuwsma@softhome.net, vision2020@moscow.com </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Re: Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 20:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Sunil,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>You and Donovan may be right and Luke may be wrong. And since Jesus has been referenced
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>and used as an authority in Donovans post, I thought we could be tolerant to explore and share
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>our diversity of opinions in that direction for a bit.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Truly, "if it doesn't infringe upon the rights, freedoms, health, life, liberties, or property of
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>another person, let them do it."
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Ok, lets go with that for a bit. And play along for a while, because this can get quite fun. I
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>wouldn't have gone in this direction but since Jesus has been referenced you may as well
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>play along, even if you don't agree with the initial premise. At least, Donovan should play
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>along, since it was Donovan that brought up Jesus and wanted to use Jesus as an authority.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Now lets assume that the "person" we are referring to above is God. Is it possible to "infringe
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>upon the rights, freedoms, health, life, liberties, or property" of God? What is the property of God?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>For starters we could assume ourselves as property of God. We are the property of God. He
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>is our Creator, He owns us, we are expected to do as He says. So therefore, what we
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>do
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>could infringe upon our owner if we violate His standards. Our owner requires of us certain standards
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>of behaviour that don't infringe upon our owner. Those standards have been identified in the Bible.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>We should always be asking ourselves, is what I am doing infringe upon other peoples rights?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>And, is what I am doing infringe upon my owner's rights, my owner being God? In the case of
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>our owner God, we should be behaving according to His standards, and not infringing upon
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>His right as our owner.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Cheers!
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>John Harrell
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Sunil Ramalingam <SUNILRAMALINGAM@HOTMAIL.COM>wrote:
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Donovan, Donovan, Donovan,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Clearly you don't understand that when the other party goes nuclear and unleashes a WMD like 'Says who?' the only thing one can do is slowly back away and be grateful that you weren't completely destroyed by the strength of the opposing argument.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>This applies even when your opponent forgets to end his mighty argument with "Cheers!"
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Sunil
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >From: "Donovan Arnold"
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >To: lukenieuwsma@softhome.net, vision2020@moscow.com
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Re: Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 17:45:05 -0700
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>---------------------------------
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > ATTACHMENT part 2 message/rfc822
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Donovan Arnold"
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>To: lukenieuwsma@softhome.net, vision2020@moscow.com
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Re: Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 17:45:05 -0700
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>All the mental giants of History. Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, John Locke, Thomas Paine, Socrates, Plato, Oliver Wendel Holmes, Martin Luther, even Jesus's teachings fit within this frame of thinking. Perhaps you know something they don't.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Donovan J Arnold
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >From: "Luke"
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >To: "Donovan Arnold" , vision2020@moscow.com
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Re: Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 17:00:18 -0700
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >Luke, It all boils down to one rule:
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >"If it doesn't infringe upon the rights, freedoms, health, life, liberties,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >or property of another >person, let them do it."
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >Says who?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >Luke Nieuwsma
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>---------------------------------
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* _____________________________________________________ List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>---------------------------------
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Do you Yahoo!?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>MSN 8 with <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMXENUS/2740??PS=">e-mail virus protection service: </a> 2 months FREE*</html>