Total Posts:88|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A Right to Same-Sex Marriage?

Contradiction
Posts: 409
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 8:59:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm writing a paper on same-sex marriage and wanted to know how those who are pro SSM would argue for the following proposition:

"There exists a right to same-sex marriage"

By "right," I'm not referring to legal rights. I'm referring to a natural right (One that we have even if it is not entailed by any enacted laws). I'm aware that there might be those who are pro SSM yet who deny this claim. That's fine, this is only for those who accept it.

Thanks!
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:02:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The only way I could come to the conclusion of a "right" would be from the right to contract. You own your body and property and so "naturally" you have the "right" to enter into contracts with that property that binds you to one or more people financially or legally.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:06:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
but this is like saying there is a right to form friendships. Of course there is, and the government doesn't care. The only distinguishing factor of marriage is that the government recognizes it. So if you're asking for a right to SSM, you're asking for a right to force the government to recognize your relationship. What kind of creative and imaginative non sense could someone conjure up suggesting that they have a right to state recognition?....a privilege, even for heterosexual marriages.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Calvincambridge
Posts: 1,141
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:07:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 8:59:17 PM, Contradiction wrote:
I'm writing a paper on same-sex marriage and wanted to know how those who are pro SSM would argue for the following proposition:

"There exists a right to same-sex marriage"

By "right," I'm not referring to legal rights. I'm referring to a natural right (One that we have even if it is not entailed by any enacted laws). I'm aware that there might be those who are pro SSM yet who deny this claim. That's fine, this is only for those who accept it.

Thanks!

There are no natrual rights and even if there were gay marriage would not be one of them
Trying to figure out women is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube with missing pieces. While blind. And on fire. And being shot.-Agent_Orange
Dude. Shades
That is all.- Thaddeus Rivers
One thing that isn't a joke though is the fact that woman are computers.Some buttons you can press and it'l work fine, but if you push the wrong one you'll get the blue screen of death.
silly, thett. girls are only good for sex. being friends with a female is of no value.-darkkermit
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:13:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'd say that people have the logistic right to SSM. My libertarian side would argue (as socialpinko has), that simply we have self-determination, and if two consenting aduls wish to enter a marriage, then they have the right to.

But to delve JUST a bit deeper, we're entering the realm of what is fair. Neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality nor bisexuality, etc, is determined via conscious decision, nor can/should be treated as an illness (according to the American Psychological Institute).

Of course, ACTS themselves are conscious decisions, but to imply that one set of people should restrict a natural attraction while another shouldn't is unfair.

This connects to marriage. In our society, heterosexuals (or bisexuals with opposite-sex partners) are allowed to express that union with over 1000 state and federal rights. So, if we allow these people to do it, then wouldn't it be unfair to allow homosexuals (or bisexuals with same-sex partners) to do the same?

After all, as I said, most gender-based sexualities are not decided, so why should some be effectively penalized for being born with a certain attraction?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:16:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:06:52 PM, 000ike wrote:
but this is like saying there is a right to form friendships. Of course there is, and the government doesn't care. The only distinguishing factor of marriage is that the government recognizes it. So if you're asking for a right to SSM, you're asking for a right to force the government to recognize your relationship. What kind of creative and imaginative non sense could someone conjure up suggesting that they have a right to state recognition?....a privilege, even for heterosexual marriages.

I'm sorry, where did I say anything about the state recognizing marriage? The state should just mind it's own damn business.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:16:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:07:15 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
At 9/8/2011 8:59:17 PM, Contradiction wrote:
I'm writing a paper on same-sex marriage and wanted to know how those who are pro SSM would argue for the following proposition:

"There exists a right to same-sex marriage"

By "right," I'm not referring to legal rights. I'm referring to a natural right (One that we have even if it is not entailed by any enacted laws). I'm aware that there might be those who are pro SSM yet who deny this claim. That's fine, this is only for those who accept it.

Thanks!

There are no natrual rights and even if there were gay marriage would not be one of them

Eh. What makes you say that SSM is not a good thing/a right?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:17:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:16:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:06:52 PM, 000ike wrote:
but this is like saying there is a right to form friendships. Of course there is, and the government doesn't care. The only distinguishing factor of marriage is that the government recognizes it. So if you're asking for a right to SSM, you're asking for a right to force the government to recognize your relationship. What kind of creative and imaginative non sense could someone conjure up suggesting that they have a right to state recognition?....a privilege, even for heterosexual marriages.

I'm sorry, where did I say anything about the state recognizing marriage? The state should just mind it's own damn business.

I agree, and ideally, it would. But, at least from my standpoint, if the state is recognizing marriages currently, then I will by all means advocate state-recognized marriages of all sorts between two (or more) consenting adults.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:18:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:16:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:06:52 PM, 000ike wrote:
but this is like saying there is a right to form friendships. Of course there is, and the government doesn't care. The only distinguishing factor of marriage is that the government recognizes it. So if you're asking for a right to SSM, you're asking for a right to force the government to recognize your relationship. What kind of creative and imaginative non sense could someone conjure up suggesting that they have a right to state recognition?....a privilege, even for heterosexual marriages.

I'm sorry, where did I say anything about the state recognizing marriage? The state should just mind it's own damn business.

Actually, its you that needs to mind your own business. Marriage is a compact where the state benefits and would like to recognize marriage, and the people benefit and would like their marriage recognized. It is a mutual desire on both ends therefore, the state and the people have all the freedom in the world to establish recognition. You have no right to tell them not to, when they BOTH want it and BOTH benefit. Gay marriage does not benefit the state, so its missing half the equation. Simple.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Calvincambridge
Posts: 1,141
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:21:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:16:15 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:07:15 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
At 9/8/2011 8:59:17 PM, Contradiction wrote:
I'm writing a paper on same-sex marriage and wanted to know how those who are pro SSM would argue for the following proposition:

"There exists a right to same-sex marriage"

By "right," I'm not referring to legal rights. I'm referring to a natural right (One that we have even if it is not entailed by any enacted laws). I'm aware that there might be those who are pro SSM yet who deny this claim. That's fine, this is only for those who accept it.

Thanks!

There are no natrual rights and even if there were gay marriage would not be one of them

Eh. What makes you say that SSM is not a good thing/a right?

A. Rights don't exist
B it is immoral
C who the hell would want to marry someone of the same sex anyway
Trying to figure out women is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube with missing pieces. While blind. And on fire. And being shot.-Agent_Orange
Dude. Shades
That is all.- Thaddeus Rivers
One thing that isn't a joke though is the fact that woman are computers.Some buttons you can press and it'l work fine, but if you push the wrong one you'll get the blue screen of death.
silly, thett. girls are only good for sex. being friends with a female is of no value.-darkkermit
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:25:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:21:18 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:16:15 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:07:15 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
At 9/8/2011 8:59:17 PM, Contradiction wrote:
I'm writing a paper on same-sex marriage and wanted to know how those who are pro SSM would argue for the following proposition:

"There exists a right to same-sex marriage"

By "right," I'm not referring to legal rights. I'm referring to a natural right (One that we have even if it is not entailed by any enacted laws). I'm aware that there might be those who are pro SSM yet who deny this claim. That's fine, this is only for those who accept it.

Thanks!

There are no natrual rights and even if there were gay marriage would not be one of them

Eh. What makes you say that SSM is not a good thing/a right?

A. Rights don't exist
B it is immoral
C who the hell would want to marry someone of the same sex anyway

A: Even if rights don't exist, then by proxy all rights exist.
B: How so? I don't see anyone getting hurt by SSM?
C: I would.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
kohai
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:25:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
There should be no marita rights for anyone.well, as far as benifiting and being federally recognized. Everyone, including gays, can have private ceremonies if they do please...but should not be recognized legally
1) Whatever has contradictory attributes does not exist.
2) The Biblical God has contradictory attributes.
3) Therefore, the Biblical God does not exist
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:29:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:25:24 PM, kohai wrote:
There should be no marita rights for anyone.well, as far as benifiting and being federally recognized. Everyone, including gays, can have private ceremonies if they do please...but should not be recognized legally

if you're not going to actually respond to the challenges of that logic, then don't say it.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:29:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:16:11 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:06:52 PM, 000ike wrote:
but this is like saying there is a right to form friendships. Of course there is, and the government doesn't care. The only distinguishing factor of marriage is that the government recognizes it. So if you're asking for a right to SSM, you're asking for a right to force the government to recognize your relationship. What kind of creative and imaginative non sense could someone conjure up suggesting that they have a right to state recognition?....a privilege, even for heterosexual marriages.

I'm sorry, where did I say anything about the state recognizing marriage? The state should just mind it's own damn business.

Actually, its you that needs to mind your own business. Marriage is a compact where the state benefits and would like to recognize marriage, and the people benefit and would like their marriage recognized. It is a mutual desire on both ends therefore, the state and the people have all the freedom in the world to establish recognition. You have no right to tell them not to, when they BOTH want it and BOTH benefit. Gay marriage does not benefit the state, so its missing half the equation. Simple.

extended.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
thett3
Posts: 14,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:30:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:29:15 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:25:24 PM, kohai wrote:
There should be no marita rights for anyone.well, as far as benifiting and being federally recognized. Everyone, including gays, can have private ceremonies if they do please...but should not be recognized legally

if you're not going to actually respond to the challenges of that logic, then don't say it.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:31:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:21:18 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
A. Rights don't exist

Maybe not, but if you're giving a right to one group, then it doesn't make sense not to do the same for everyone.
B it is immoral

According to your own personal morals, yes. If my morals said wearing blue was immoral, should I stop others from doing so? No, I should just stop wearing blue and let you wear whatever you want. Do you see my point here?
C who the hell would want to marry someone of the same sex anyway

Really? I don't even know what to say to that...
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:33:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:31:43 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:21:18 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
A. Rights don't exist

Maybe not, but if you're giving a right to one group, then it doesn't make sense not to do the same for everyone.
B it is immoral

According to your own personal morals, yes. If my morals said wearing blue was immoral, should I stop others from doing so? No, I should just stop wearing blue and let you wear whatever you want. Do you see my point here?
C who the hell would want to marry someone of the same sex anyway

Really? I don't even know what to say to that...

Lol, he probably raged out of this thread because for C I answered I would (because I would/probably intend to). And, seeing as how in a previous debate on the subject, he suggested gays be punished a la Uganda, I don't think he's apt to respond to me...
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Contradiction
Posts: 409
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:34:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Thanks for the feedback so far. I'm writing a paper for consideration in an undergraduate journal which responds to several popular arguments for SSM. I can post the abstract if you're interested.
kohai
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:35:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:34:07 PM, Contradiction wrote:
Thanks for the feedback so far. I'm writing a paper for consideration in an undergraduate journal which responds to several popular arguments for SSM. I can post the abstract if you're interested.

I'm interested in it. I'm surprised you take so much hatred for the gay community and want to oppress their rights.

Contra, I think a good debate topic should be on federaly recognized marriage. I believe the state has no business in marriage--gay. Or straight.
1) Whatever has contradictory attributes does not exist.
2) The Biblical God has contradictory attributes.
3) Therefore, the Biblical God does not exist
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:35:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:34:07 PM, Contradiction wrote:
Thanks for the feedback so far. I'm writing a paper for consideration in an undergraduate journal which responds to several popular arguments for SSM. I can post the abstract if you're interested.

Sure! And I'm glad to be of service, even if (and in a way especially if) you disagree with my view.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:36:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
This is ridiculous, they're all casually ignoring my argument.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:36:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:35:33 PM, kohai wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:34:07 PM, Contradiction wrote:
Thanks for the feedback so far. I'm writing a paper for consideration in an undergraduate journal which responds to several popular arguments for SSM. I can post the abstract if you're interested.

I'm interested in it. I'm surprised you take so much hatred for the gay community and want to oppress their rights.

Contra, I think a good debate topic should be on federaly recognized marriage. I believe the state has no business in marriage--gay. Or straight.

Actually, he doesn't have hatred for the gay community--according to him (I think), he got involved in the debate because several of his friends are gay.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Contradiction
Posts: 409
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:36:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:35:33 PM, kohai wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:34:07 PM, Contradiction wrote:
Thanks for the feedback so far. I'm writing a paper for consideration in an undergraduate journal which responds to several popular arguments for SSM. I can post the abstract if you're interested.

I'm interested in it. I'm surprised you take so much hatred for the gay community and want to oppress their rights.

Contra, I think a good debate topic should be on federaly recognized marriage. I believe the state has no business in marriage--gay. Or straight.

How the heck is that hatred?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:37:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:31:43 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
According to your own personal morals, yes. If my morals said wearing blue was immoral, should I stop others from doing so? No, I should just stop wearing blue and let you wear whatever you want.

Do you see my point here?
No.

If my morals said raping and killing people was immoral, should I stop others from doing so?
hmm... Maybe!

At 9/8/2011 9:21:18 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
C who the hell would want to marry someone of the same sex anyway

yeah, that'd be gay people..
gay people would wanna marry someone of the same sex.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:37:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:36:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
This is ridiculous, they're all casually ignoring my argument.

I'm not ignoring--you were talking to socialpinko. If you'd like to respond to my first post in the thread, then I'd be happy to discuss the subject.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Contradiction
Posts: 409
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:37:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Here's the abstract:

Abstract: Defenders of the thesis that same-sex marriage should be legalized advance several common arguments in its favor. These include both the equal rights and benefits arguments. In this essay I argue that both these and other popular arguments are fundamentally and fatally flawed in that they miss the core issue at stake in the marriage debate. The controversy should not be thought of as being centered around notions of equality or social benefits, but over what marriage is. I will not be focusing here on the legal arguments for same-sex marriage, but the underlying philosophical arguments.
Calvincambridge
Posts: 1,141
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:39:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:33:39 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:31:43 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:21:18 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
A. Rights don't exist

Maybe not, but if you're giving a right to one group, then it doesn't make sense not to do the same for everyone.
B it is immoral

According to your own personal morals, yes. If my morals said wearing blue was immoral, should I stop others from doing so? No, I should just stop wearing blue and let you wear whatever you want. Do you see my point here?
C who the hell would want to marry someone of the same sex anyway

Really? I don't even know what to say to that...

Lol, he probably raged out of this thread because for C I answered I would (because I would/probably intend to). And, seeing as how in a previous debate on the subject, he suggested gays be punished a la Uganda, I don't think he's apt to respond to me...

Hi i'm responding if I were per say athiest could I kill someone since I make my own morals
Trying to figure out women is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube with missing pieces. While blind. And on fire. And being shot.-Agent_Orange
Dude. Shades
That is all.- Thaddeus Rivers
One thing that isn't a joke though is the fact that woman are computers.Some buttons you can press and it'l work fine, but if you push the wrong one you'll get the blue screen of death.
silly, thett. girls are only good for sex. being friends with a female is of no value.-darkkermit
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:39:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:37:51 PM, Contradiction wrote:
Here's the abstract:

Abstract: Defenders of the thesis that same-sex marriage should be legalized advance several common arguments in its favor. These include both the equal rights and benefits arguments. In this essay I argue that both these and other popular arguments are fundamentally and fatally flawed in that they miss the core issue at stake in the marriage debate. The controversy should not be thought of as being centered around notions of equality or social benefits, but over what marriage is. I will not be focusing here on the legal arguments for same-sex marriage, but the underlying philosophical arguments.

From this abstract, it looks like it'll be a very well written essay (even if I disagree with you).

PS: I'm responding so frequently because this is the only thread that really catches my fancy at the moment.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:41:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 9:39:47 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:33:39 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:31:43 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 9/8/2011 9:21:18 PM, Calvincambridge wrote:
A. Rights don't exist

Maybe not, but if you're giving a right to one group, then it doesn't make sense not to do the same for everyone.
B it is immoral

According to your own personal morals, yes. If my morals said wearing blue was immoral, should I stop others from doing so? No, I should just stop wearing blue and let you wear whatever you want. Do you see my point here?
C who the hell would want to marry someone of the same sex anyway

Really? I don't even know what to say to that...

Lol, he probably raged out of this thread because for C I answered I would (because I would/probably intend to). And, seeing as how in a previous debate on the subject, he suggested gays be punished a la Uganda, I don't think he's apt to respond to me...

Hi i'm responding if I were per say athiest could I kill someone since I make my own morals

Well, as an atheist, I'd say that you may have deep issues if you believe that killing people is okay. In other words, atheists are NOT devoid of moral compasses Calvin..
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus