StaffSaberist Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 As has been said, that is garbage. Its trying to twist words to make you feel better about hating a group of people. If a group of people is DEFINED by something, and you hate that something, by definition you hate that group of people. What you say is ludicrice. If a group of black people is defined by a long series of illegal acts (i.e. a black-only gang) I hate the illegal actions they are defined by. Does that make me a racist? No. It means I hate the actions of a bunch of people who happen to be black. In the same way, homosexuals have been breaking anit-sodomy laws. Of course, instead of adapting to the laws like the rest of us, they seek to strike down these laws. I have no problem with their endeavor to change laws; that's perfectly legal. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with what they're doing simply because they are trying to make their ways legal. Just like marijuana is being made legal in some parts of the US (a bad mistake) doesn't mean that I like marijuana. You mean like all those bigots who didn't tolerate hitler and saddam's views about jews, kurds and americans? hating someone for no reason makes you a bigot, telling someone to stop hating doesn't make someone else a bigot. FOA, I was being sarcastic. Second, gays are not parallel to Hitler, Stalin and Sadaam because gays don't seek to mass-murder innocent civilians, making them die cruel, painful deaths. Yeah, I know I said AIDS kills, and it does. But not in the 33 million range. As usual, that isn't the point. The point is that just because something is old or traditional, it doesn't make it good. Heterosexual marriage/sex is old, traditional, and preferred by most of the world. I asked you if it was good because you seem to be insinuating that it's not. Designed is a silly idea, as others have said. What you mean by designed is "traditional". And your view of traditional is what you were brought up to believe in your community. If you'd been brought up in other communities or other times you'd have totally different views about what humans were "designed" to do. Infact, surely if anything disproves the whole "intelligent design" nonsense, its that so many species enjoy homosexual sex? Why would your god have built that into the design? FOA, if humans were designed for anal/oral sex, then why can't two males reproduce? Two females can't either, without outside help. A male/female combination is the only logical combination that allows reproduction. As for God putting that into the disign, your argument can be refuted by looking at nature. What percentage of any given species is gay? The number should be around 0%. Mankind is the only species that commits gay acts. Why? Well, you brought God into this, so don't expect anything for source other than the Bible for this answer. Consder yourself warned. God designed man and woman, but the first two sinned by disobeying a direct order from God. Thus, after the rebellion of Lucifer, God withdrew partly from the Earth, but not entirely. (Ever wonder why there are no miracles today like the Old Testament? There you go.) Lucifer (Satan) has since been allowed to tempt the people of the world. One such temptation is homosexuality. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is the only passage in the entire Bible that directly deals with homosexuality, but it is there. (And translations vary from KJV to NIV, but all translations of the Bible say the same thing worded differently. The only real difference is Bibles like the New International Version have had the words adapted so we don't have to read "art" "thou" and "something-eth". I do have KJV, by the way, so I know what the first ones say. I'll get to the rest of this later, but I am severely pressed for time at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Heterosexual marriage/sex is old, traditional, and preferred by most of the world. I asked you if it was good because you seem to be insinuating that it's not. Being right-handed is old, traditional, and preferred by most of the world. So much so that even in some cultures today, left-handed people are shunned. Is it wrong to be left-handed? FOA, if humans were designed for anal/oral sex, then why can't two males reproduce? Two females can't either, without outside help. A male/female combination is the only logical combination that allows reproduction. What if reproduction isn't a goal? Humans don't appear naturally selected for flight, yet we fly. We aren't naturally selected for the cold, yet we live in cold climates. H. sapiens has the ability to overcome its evolved limitations. What percentage of any given species is gay? The number should be around 0%. Mankind is the only species that commits gay acts. You're absolutely wrong on this. Do you not even visit the zoo? There are many species that have individuals within its populations that "commit gay acts." Bonobos, orangutans, and geladas along with dolphins are but a few examples. Some of our genetically closest cousins. God designed man and woman, but the first two sinned by disobeying a direct order from God. Poppycock. Lets leave religious indoctrinations out of it unless you have some testable evidence of "design," shall we. This is nonsense and if its your only point of reason then its just another example of the fundamentally religious attempting to push its crap on the rest of society. Lets hear arguments that haven't a cult reasoning. Lets hear logical arguments please. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is the only passage in the entire Bible that directly deals with homosexuality, but it is there. (And translations vary from KJV to NIV, but all translations of the Bible say the same thing worded differently. The only real difference is Bibles like the New International Version have had the words adapted so we don't have to read "art" "thou" and "something-eth". I do have KJV, by the way, so I know what the first ones say. And as I pointed out earlier, the original Greek has been mistranslated. Moreover, as I pointed out now, religious arguments can be summarily discarded. They have no bearing on society since their source is flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 What you say is ludicrice. If a group of black people is defined by a long series of illegal acts (i.e. a black-only gang) I hate the illegal actions they are defined by. Does that make me a racist? No. It means I hate the actions of a bunch of people who happen to be black. And you would be allowed to hate the gay-only-criminal gang because of their criminal actions in a similar way. However as being gay is intrinsically related to the actions of homosexual sex you cannot unlink the two. What you are saying is you only hate GAY gay people, not the straight ones? Heterosexual marriage/sex is old, traditional, and preferred by most of the world. I asked you if it was good because you seem to be insinuating that it's not. It doesn't matter, it has no relation to the argument. (but if you must know i have no problem with marriage in any way - unless they make it an exclusive club and exclude others from it's benefits). But many ancient (pre and post christian) cultures had no problem with homosexuality... so you could argue its pretty traditional after all. But it wouldn't matter if 99.99999999999% of the world was straight and there was only one gay couple in the entire world... who cares.. if they wan't to be happy together what the heck does it have to do witht he other 99.999999999%? Slavery, arranged marriages, forced female castration and a lot of other things are/were traditional and prefered by a lot of the world... that doesn't mean to say that just because they are old and have become accepted they are right. FOA, if humans were designed for anal/oral sex, then why can't two males reproduce? Two females can't either, without outside help. A male/female combination is the only logical combination that allows reproduction. But is reproduction the only goal in our lives? Darwin would probably state that it is. But surely the thing that makes us feel we are better than mere animals, controlled by our genes, is the fact we can strive to do more than just propogate and die. Most straight sex has no reproductive value - it is done for pleasure. Kissing, fondling, oral sex, anal sex - none of that is needed for reproduction, and 99% of the time it doesn't lead to reproduction. Should kissing be frowned on because it has no reproductive value? What all this IS is pleasurable.. and you could argue that god, or nature, or whatever made it pleasurable in order to encourage us to mate and reproduce. But then howcome god or nature or whatever also decided to make anal sex pleasurable? Must have been a reason. Eitehr it was all made pleasurable on purpose or it wasn't, you can't have it both ways. Otherwise all those people, pigs, monkeys, penguins, ducks and other species wouldn't be at it... unless lucifer is spending his time tempting ducks into homosexuality?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Heterosexual marriage/sex is old, traditional, and preferred by most of the world. Much of the world still prefers arranged marriages and polygamy to this day, as well... yet these fall outside the realm of what's currently acceptable in our country. The biblical patriarchs all practiced polygamy, as well as using concubines. Does that make it OK for our society? (Not to mention if there were only Adam, Eve, Cain, and Able in the beginning... who exactly did Cain mate with? His mother, or one or more of his undescribed siblings? So that means God looked away from an incestuous marriage then, is it OK to do now?) Seems to me the defintion of marriage has been pretty flexable in our history about what it will allow and not allow, and still be considered a marriage. But it's also been altered over the years. If it's been changed in the past... then why not now? Times change, and our societial rituals need to be able to change with them. When did the rules get set in stone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 God designed man and woman, Please take your Intelligent Design Creationism here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 ...Eh:confused:? I knew someone would probably question that. What I mean is, all the communist dictators are athiests, and to me that sends a bad sign to people that when you take god out of government, you get communism and ****. I know it sounds stupid to me and you, but that's the kind of thing that fundies would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 That's because the fundies don't realise that Communism is just as religious as their own secterian beliefs. It has it all: High priests, heresy, redemption, salvation, purgatory, paradise. And, of course, the mandatory larger-than-life Dear Leader who selflessly serves the People. Terms like 'class traitor' is a dead giveaway too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 'kay, TK, now I get it. Thanks:). That's because the fundies don't realise that Communism is just as religious as their own secterian beliefs. It has it all: High priests, heresy, redemption, salvation, purgatory, paradise. And, of course, the mandatory larger-than-life Dear Leader who selflessly serves the People. Terms like 'class traitor' is a dead giveaway too. Not to mention their own holy books like Mao's little Red Wart and Karl Marx's Communist Crapofesto:p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 When did the rules get set in stone? 100bc or something like that... though those rules didn't have anything about the illegality of same-sex (pengiun) marriages. (well, maybe the first lot did, but not the lot we got to hear about..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rccar328 Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 That's because the fundies don't realise that Communism is just as religious as their own secterian beliefs. It has it all: High priests, heresy, redemption, salvation, purgatory, paradise. And, of course, the mandatory larger-than-life Dear Leader who selflessly serves the People. Terms like 'class traitor' is a dead giveaway too. Or maybe we 'fundies' realise it...we just don't buy into that particular religion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Or maybe we 'fundies' realise it...we just don't buy into that particular religion... Coming from someone who couldn't tell the difference between SPD and KPML-r to save his life... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffSaberist Posted January 19, 2006 Author Share Posted January 19, 2006 Coming from someone who calls me a bigot but can't tolerate Christian opinions to save his life... I'll respond to the rest later, but I'm enjoying my B-day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rccar328 Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Coming from someone who couldn't tell the difference between SPD and KPML-r to save his life... I can find no discernible reason why that matters, or why I should care in the least... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 I'll respond to the rest later, but I'm enjoying my B-day. Happy b-day... another year wiser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Coming from someone who calls me a bigot but can't tolerate Christian opinions to save his life... Opinions enjoy no protection in a civilised society. Everyone must be allowed to attack any opinion - ruthlessly - for democracy to function. I can find no discernible reason why that matters, or why I should care in the least... Ignorance is Strength Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Coming from someone who couldn't tell the difference between SPD and KPML-r to save his life... Coming from someone who calls me a bigot but can't tolerate Christian opinions to save his life... It isn't so much about not tolerating people's opinions...anyone has the right to question anyone else's opinions. Its about not tolerating people. I may not like what you say, but i DON'T say you don't have the right to say it. I also have the right to challenge it though. You don't like gay people, but you DO say they don't have the right to be gay. That is the fundamental difference. I'll respond to the rest later, but I'm enjoying my B-day. Happy birthday! What the heck are you doing here? Go have some fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Coming from someone who couldn't tell the difference between SPD and KPML-r to save his life... Socialdemokratische Partei Deutchlands and KommunistParti Marxist-Leninistisk - radikalt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rccar328 Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Socialdemokratische Partei Deutchlands and KommunistParti Marxist-Leninistisk - radikalt Gee, that tells us a lot... If knowing the difference between the two is as significant as you seem to think, why don't you enlighten us to it, instead of playing stupid games? Otherwise, the whole argument (if you can call it that) is just a waste of everyone's time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 20, 2006 Share Posted January 20, 2006 Despite not know precisely what language those are, I'd guess the first to be the Socialist Party of Germany and the second to be a radical communist marxist/leninist party. I would guess the import of the assertion is knowing the difference between the socialist party and communist party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffSaberist Posted January 20, 2006 Author Share Posted January 20, 2006 I'm having trouble accessing the thread. What's going on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted January 20, 2006 Share Posted January 20, 2006 No problem here. *Shrug* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffSaberist Posted January 20, 2006 Author Share Posted January 20, 2006 If I click the thread, it says "invalid post specified". The only way I can access this thread at all is to click on "reply" from my Control Panel. And even then, it gives me the error after I post. I can only tell what you are saying by reading below this reply box. NOT fun at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted January 20, 2006 Share Posted January 20, 2006 No problem here either. Try a different browser, or clear all your cookies and session data, and try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffSaberist Posted January 20, 2006 Author Share Posted January 20, 2006 Cache cleared, but this spam is the only way I can reach the thread still. As soon as I can, I'll delete this and the above post, I promise. But in the meantime, I'll have to wait for this to work itself out. All other threads work fine, this is strange... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted January 20, 2006 Share Posted January 20, 2006 Despite not know precisely what language those are, I'd guess the first to be the Socialist Party of Germany and the second to be a radical communist marxist/leninist party. I would guess the import of the assertion is knowing the difference between the socialist party and communist party. Hole in one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.