Bizzle (Christian Rapper) Responds to Macklemore "Same Love"

[blackslash]

I listened to the song, and while dude had a nice flow, rhyme pattern, most of what he was saying could be broken down into illogical, rhetoric-based fallacies by anyone with common sense.

For instance, saying that god made marriage when we all know damn well that's not true. Plenty of other smart dumb nikka shyt as well.

shyt will only convince you or have you nodding your head if you already had your own bias going for you, even just a little one.

Sht goes the same way vice versa

 

[DaChampIsHere]

Sht goes the same way vice versa

That's only because the song doesn't provide any verifiable 100% proof that being attracted another adult is wrong. There's no way for the other side to be wrong here, because frankly, (a) the song is a bunch of re-hashed rhetoric (b) there's nothing wrong with 2 adults deciding to get married or whatever they wanna do (c) everyone's not a christian or even religious.

Most or a lot of people who are okay with homos, also give no fukk about the bible or what's in it.

 

[blackslash]

That's only because the song doesn't provide any verifiable 100% proof that being attracted another adult is wrong. There's no way for the other side to be wrong here, because frankly, (a) the song is a bunch of re-hashed rhetoric (b) there's nothing wrong with 2 adults deciding to get married or whatever they wanna do (c) everyone's not a christian or even religious.

if ur gonna say the bolded...u pretty much cant condemn any action at all

 

[DaChampIsHere]

if ur gonna say the bolded...u pretty much cant condemn any action at all

Unless you are violating someone else's personal property, if you have consent, almost nothing is wrong ole hall monitor ass nikka.

 

[blackslash]

Unless you are violating someone else's personal property, if you have consent, almost nothing is wrong ole hall monitor ass nikka.

consent is within the realm of morality and that is not 100% verifiable of whether its rights or wrong

 

[DaChampIsHere]

consent is within the realm of morality

No. Consent is a legally defined entity.

Most business practices aren't moral. But if you consent, you have made a legal pledge.

 

[blackslash]

No. Consent is a legally defined entity.

Most business practices aren't moral. But if you consent, you have made a legal pledge.

Are we talking within the law of the land or morals outside of govt?

Morals are not something to be studied scientifically.

Morality is not a tangible idea..

So when ur using the phrase "100% verifiable" when it comes to the issue to morality it sounds silly...cuz u cant prove something to be right or wrong solely on a scientific level that's not how it works

Which is why I say...with that statement u made previously..u cant assert anything to be wrong or right morally

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

u a cac riiii??

Well that ends the conversation

oh man, you hurt my feelings so bad, I've had so many intellectually stimulating and enlightening conversation with you on these forums

 

[blackslash]

oh man, you hurt my feelings so bad, I've had so many intellectually stimulating and enlightening conversation with you on these forums

glad to provide that for u

 

[DaChampIsHere]

So when ur using the phrase "100% verifiable" when it comes to the issue to morality it sounds silly...cuz u cant prove something to be right or wrong solely on a scientific level that's not how it works

Lol. With this sentence you just proved why Christianity is the laughing stock of America, considering that Christianity does just this: assert a moral standpoint as truth.

If morality is not 100% verifiable (which it's not), who's to say anyone should listen to anything written in a "bible"?

Morality is personal. Consent is not. Outside of mercy killing, consent is all anyone needs to do anything.

 

[blackslash]

Lol. With this sentence you just proved why Christianity is the laughing stock of America, considering that Christianity does just this: assert a moral standpoint as truth.

If morality is not 100% verifiable (which it's not), who's to say anyone should listen to anything written in a "bible"?

I expected his answer but naw

Cuz the bible within itself claims a worldview not limited to the tangible so my arguments dnt pertain to it

U on the other hand, who seems to be appealing to the naturalistic worldview, which is insinuated by the "100% verifiable proof" statement you use, combined with what I assume to be ur stance on the issue, my argument works, because the issue of morality is not a tangible thing and science only deals with the tangible so due to this limited point of reference, you are left with no foundation to assert anything as right or wrong morally

 

[aRoMaN21]

No. Consent is a legally defined entity.

Most business practices aren't moral. But if you consent, you have made a legal pledge.

So its ok for a man to get raped in jail by a gay man bc he was forced into consent?

 

[Kaypain]

This thread is 18 pages too long

 

[Drew Wonder]

I respect his stance more than I respect some of ya'll's. At least with diehard Christians, they genuinely believe homosexuality is a sin and take the whole "hate the sin, not the sinner approach." Some of ya'll haven't been to church since Easter Sunday and are going around fornicating, lusting, cussing, slandering, hating, etc. then got the nerve to act like you're morally outraged when it comes to homos

 

[MiC]

How can Christian people use the Bible as it's reason for condemning homosexuality, yet many have no problem with sex before marriage or getting drunk (two VERY common themes in hip hop) when the Bible says all sins are viewed negatively by God. Makes no sense