# Ron Reagan's presuppositions relating to homosexual marriage



## Me Died Blue (Nov 3, 2004)

*Ron Reagan\'s presuppositions relating to homosexual marriage*

Tonight during the election news, on MSNBC, Ron Reagan remarked that he had only heard "religious" reasons for not allowing homosexual marriage, but had not heard any "practical" reasons. I put this thread in the Philosophy forum because I think his is a good statement to analyze in terms of what it reveals about his presuppositions relating to the issue.

I think it shows that he is taking for granted at least two presuppositions that he obviously does not even realize: 1) that conservative views on homosexual marriage are "religious" in nature, whereas his own view is not, and 2) that there is an inherent distinction between the "religious" and the "practical."

How do you think those presuppositions (and possibly others) to which he is blind relate to and affect his view of homosexual marriage, and also what are some of the other philosophical and practical implications of those presuppositions that are shared by so many people in our culture?

[Edited on 3-11-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Nov 3, 2004)

He also has some other underlying presuppositions, chiefly, that social morality is relative to our culture, popularity, and time, rather than absolute and eternal. His presuppositions are religious, just not Christian.


----------



## crhoades (Nov 3, 2004)

No presuppostional analysis here...Practically speaking if everyone were homosexuals the species would die off. Nature would "select" against homosexuality if you want to be darwinistic about it.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Nov 3, 2004)

It's helpful when considering his presuppositions to be aware that Ron Reagan claims to be an atheist who admires Buddhism.

See the New York Times interview: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/27/magazine/27QUESTIONS.html


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 3, 2004)

Great responses, everyone. He further shows his ignorance of the claims of Christianity in that article. Referring to the Iraq war, he said, "If you are going to call yourself a Christian -- and I don't -- then you have to ask yourself a fundamental question, and that is: Whom would Jesus torture? Whom would Jesus drag around on a dog's leash? How can Christians tolerate it?" Wow - he wonders how Christians can tolerate war, but scratches his head at what real problem we could possibly have with homosexuality. He's claiming a defined moral judgment as his own right there, and doesn't even see it as anything other than him trying to be "practical" and "objective." Between that and the other presuppositions of his to which he is blind, it really shows how real an effect sin has on the unregenerate mind. Other thoughts?

[Edited on 4-11-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## SmokingFlax (Nov 4, 2004)

I don't know if I can even address the whole homo issue without getting hacked off about it. I'm dumbfounded at how anyone (especially a man) could even think twice about the inherent depravity of it. I think the success of the gay movement is a good barometer of the reduction of manhood in the face of the feminist movement. It seems many men are either ok with it (because they've got friends, family or dear old dad into it)or are gay themselves. I just don't get it.


----------



## Brian (Nov 4, 2004)

I think the main thing we need to be speaking on this to those like Reagan is that, as has been already eloquently stated, all of life is religious (or some other word that may be more to sinners' liking, such as worldview, etc.). Therefore, we are all bringing presuppositions to it. Ms. Feminist can bring her worldview, Mr. Smith and his boyfriend can bring their presuppositions, and Reagan can bring his atheistic-with-Buddhist-leanings to the table, and we will bring our Christian view. I don't think anyone here isn't saying this, but simply to press home the point: we are not afraid of putting all disagreement on this level, since we are confidant that our worldview will win.

So American Media, quit cheating us of our intellectual integrity, and treating the public as such simple-minded fools. We understand there is no religious/practical distinction, only competing worldviews and, ultimately, competing gods. 

"For great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised; he is to be feared above all gods. For all the gods of the peoples are worthless idols, but the LORD made the heavens."


----------



## Puritanhead (Mar 2, 2005)

Why doesn't he order up some statistics on how those that practice such a lifestyle seldom life past the average age of 38 and how much terminal disease (i.e. HIV, AIDS), sickness, and mental problems are attendant with the lifestyle. The mass-media likes to make homosexual look trendy and normal as though your doctor, dentist, or lawyer is one. It took me a little while to catch on that Reagan Jr. isn't quite his father's son so to speak.


----------

