|
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that.
|
On January 30 2013 05:44 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:41 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:35 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 30 2013 05:24 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:20 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 30 2013 04:43 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 04:32 Alay wrote:On January 30 2013 03:48 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 03:38 sVnteen wrote:On January 30 2013 03:27 BlazeFury01 wrote:
[quote]
I figured that would be an argument you would try to direct my way. Homosexuality has no color. lol you comparing a hate crime organization to a religious organization. I see what point you're trying to make though. But still, Homosexuality has no color and it certainly doesn't say Race: Homosexual on your license. so what you are saying is taht it is ok to believe that homosexuality is bad but not that being black is bad? Well, I look at it this way. Being A color of race doesn't stop reproduction. Ask yourself this: If the whole world was homosexual, how on earth would mankind cease to exist with no reproduction? If the whole world was black that wouldn't effect anything. However, it would certainly cure racism. I would say that it's not your choice to be born black, but in the same instance people tell me that they're born homosexual, so I have to rule out this comparison and refer to the reproductive analogy above. Is it right? Logically, no. Is it wrong to discriminate against them? Yes, but not under religious intent. There should be a similar program for homosexuals. I'm not sure I can understand how you feel that the element of banning homosexuals on a basis of religious views is any more or less inherently 'wrong' than the previous widespread banning of blacks from organizations because of religious views (they were previously considered 'dirty souls' and stuff like that.) Further, segregation of sexualities is kind of pointless and would only be there to try and belittle a minority or empower a majority. Their both wrong in a sense. However, being of color doesn't affect the mentality of someone of youth like two men kissing in public can. Kids are like monkey see, monkey do; these days. If a parent doesn't want their kids to be exposed to such activity them they should have the right to join an organization that teaches their young boy how to become a man, not a gay man and vice versa. There should be an organization like the BSoA that all gay men should be allowed to join a well. So they have the same opportunity. You did not seriously just use the "gay people convert straight people to become gay" argument did you? No, I used a "fact" of what occurred at my middle/high school. Unless you just want to call it a factual argument. It was the straight kids decision to make the choice they did. The same as peer pressure. Some people do what they have to do to "be cool". Which is why I brought up the monkey analogy. There is no factual argument. Even if you do have some hilarious anecdotal evidence about a straight kid peer pressured into engaging in a homosexual act, you're talking about 0.001% of the population, at best. Did you go to middle school in an extremely rural area, by any chance? I went to school in an urban area. Also, where did you get that percentage from? If you were talking about yourself when you said "there is no factual argument" then I completely agree with you after seeing your false percentage. So to clarify, yes, you think gay people turn straight people gay.
It depends on the mind of the individual in question and what they're trying to accomplish by doing so. Is it possible? Of course it is.
|
On January 30 2013 05:46 sam!zdat wrote:
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that.
There's a difference between knowing about it and being exposed to it first hand. Hate is such a strong word. Nobody is teaching them to "hate". Hate is when you enslave a race because of their color.
|
On January 30 2013 05:47 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:46 sam!zdat wrote:
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that. There's a difference between knowing about it and being exposed to it first hand.
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from being exposed to it first hand.
edit: c'mon, dude, ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?". Not that hard.
|
Out of interest do BSA members still swear loyalty to god AND THE QUEEN?!
Since we're being pedantic with old traditions it would be a shame to miss some out.
|
On January 30 2013 05:49 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:47 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:46 sam!zdat wrote:
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that. There's a difference between knowing about it and being exposed to it first hand. It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from being exposed to it first hand. edit: c'mon, dude, ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?". Not that hard.
I have no idea what he would do. I do know of a story called "Sodom and Gomorrah".
|
On January 30 2013 05:45 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:37 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 30 2013 05:35 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 30 2013 05:24 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:20 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 30 2013 04:43 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 04:32 Alay wrote:On January 30 2013 03:48 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 03:38 sVnteen wrote:On January 30 2013 03:27 BlazeFury01 wrote:
[quote]
I figured that would be an argument you would try to direct my way. Homosexuality has no color. lol you comparing a hate crime organization to a religious organization. I see what point you're trying to make though. But still, Homosexuality has no color and it certainly doesn't say Race: Homosexual on your license. so what you are saying is taht it is ok to believe that homosexuality is bad but not that being black is bad? Well, I look at it this way. Being A color of race doesn't stop reproduction. Ask yourself this: If the whole world was homosexual, how on earth would mankind cease to exist with no reproduction? If the whole world was black that wouldn't effect anything. However, it would certainly cure racism. I would say that it's not your choice to be born black, but in the same instance people tell me that they're born homosexual, so I have to rule out this comparison and refer to the reproductive analogy above. Is it right? Logically, no. Is it wrong to discriminate against them? Yes, but not under religious intent. There should be a similar program for homosexuals. I'm not sure I can understand how you feel that the element of banning homosexuals on a basis of religious views is any more or less inherently 'wrong' than the previous widespread banning of blacks from organizations because of religious views (they were previously considered 'dirty souls' and stuff like that.) Further, segregation of sexualities is kind of pointless and would only be there to try and belittle a minority or empower a majority. Their both wrong in a sense. However, being of color doesn't affect the mentality of someone of youth like two men kissing in public can. Kids are like monkey see, monkey do; these days. If a parent doesn't want their kids to be exposed to such activity them they should have the right to join an organization that teaches their young boy how to become a man, not a gay man and vice versa. There should be an organization like the BSoA that all gay men should be allowed to join a well. So they have the same opportunity. You did not seriously just use the "gay people convert straight people to become gay" argument did you? No, I used a "fact" of what occurred at my middle/high school. Unless you just want to call it a factual argument. It was the straight kids decision to make the choice they did. The same as peer pressure. Some people do what they have to do to "be cool". Which is why I brought up the monkey analogy. There is no factual argument. Even if you do have some hilarious anecdotal evidence about a straight kid peer pressured into engaging in a homosexual act, you're talking about 0.001% of the population, at best. Did you go to middle school in an extremely rural area, by any chance? On January 30 2013 05:25 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:24 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 30 2013 05:22 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:16 farvacola wrote:On January 30 2013 05:04 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 04:44 farvacola wrote:On January 30 2013 04:43 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 04:32 Alay wrote:
[quote]
I'm not sure I can understand how you feel that the element of banning homosexuals on a basis of religious views is any more or less inherently 'wrong' than the previous widespread banning of blacks from organizations because of religious views (they were previously considered 'dirty souls' and stuff like that.)
Further, segregation of sexualities is kind of pointless and would only be there to try and belittle a minority or empower a majority. Their both wrong in a sense. However, being of color doesn't affect the mentality of someone of youth like two men kissing in public can. Kids are like monkey see, monkey do; these days. If a parent doesn't want their kids to be exposed to such activity them they should have the right to join an organization that teaches their young boy how to become a man, not a gay man and vice versa. There should be an organization like the BSoA that all gay men should be allowed to join a well. So they have the same opportunity. Kids are not like monkeys, and if a parent treats them as such, they deserve to have shit flung in their face. Gay men kissing do not owe shitty parents anything. I'm not talking about how a parent treats them, I'm talking about their mentality to copy what say see an what he/she thinks is cool. I actually heard people say in mid and high school that being gay was "cool" and straight kids tried it because it was the "thing to do" so to say. A teenager's sexual confusion is no justification for the different treatment of homosexuals. If a child has grown up with the notion that his sexual identity is some sort of plaything, I cannot dismiss such a notion out of hand but can only chalk such a thing up to the environment he/she comes from; an environment in which parents are the ones with the most influence. I agree. I believe that homosexuals should be treated equally to an extent and that extent is where religion comes in. Other than that, I have no problems. So basically then you'd agree that BSA should not be provided with federal funding anymore then? No, because that's where that extent comes in. Also, it's a double negative as removing federal funding wouldn't fix the problem either. So you think that our secular government should provide funds to an organization that actively discriminates against its members? Would you not be upset if the KKK received federal funding as well? Taxpayers dollars? BSA can discriminate if they want on the basis of religion, you'll find a lot of people in this topic would support that, but the issue comes in taht they receive federal funding. The difference between the two is that one promotes violence and blatant hatred while the other doesn't promote hate nor violence but just doesn't accept one of a certain orientation to join due to religious morals and not to have kids exposed to such activity.
Oh man, you're too much.
|
On January 30 2013 05:51 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:49 sam!zdat wrote:On January 30 2013 05:47 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:46 sam!zdat wrote:
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that. There's a difference between knowing about it and being exposed to it first hand. It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from being exposed to it first hand. edit: c'mon, dude, ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?". Not that hard. I have no idea what he would do. I do know of a story called "Sodom and Gomorrah".
Old Testament, buddy. Old Testament. haven't you heard the Good News?
Jesus would dissolve the obligation of strict adherence to the old Law and replace it with a new, non-deontological ethics of Love. He would exhort you to forget about your old prejudices and "Love your neighbor as yourself." I don't see you loving your neighbor as yourself. Better get on it.
|
On January 30 2013 05:51 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:49 sam!zdat wrote:On January 30 2013 05:47 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:46 sam!zdat wrote:
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that. There's a difference between knowing about it and being exposed to it first hand. It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from being exposed to it first hand. edit: c'mon, dude, ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?". Not that hard. I have no idea what he would do. I do know of a story called "Sodom and Gomorrah".
Something about 2 angels going to a town and the townspeople obviously then want to rape those angels. Then that one good guy offers his daughters up for rape instead of the angels. And then something about god killing everyone and turning that good guys wife into salt, because she looked at it. I think homosexuality is like the smallest problem there.
|
On January 30 2013 05:54 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:51 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:49 sam!zdat wrote:On January 30 2013 05:47 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:46 sam!zdat wrote:
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that. There's a difference between knowing about it and being exposed to it first hand. It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from being exposed to it first hand. edit: c'mon, dude, ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?". Not that hard. I have no idea what he would do. I do know of a story called "Sodom and Gomorrah". Old Testament, buddy. Old Testament. Jesus would dissolve the obligation of strict adherence to the old Law and replace it with a new, non-deontological ethics of Love. He would exhort you to forget about your old prejudices and "Love your neighbor as yourself." I don't see you loving your neighbor as yourself. Better get on it.
That action would be blasphemous to his father. Hence the story of Sodom to begin with.
|
Yeah, I think the main lesson of Sodom and Gormorrah is "dude, don't rape your guests!"
|
On January 30 2013 05:56 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:54 sam!zdat wrote:On January 30 2013 05:51 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:49 sam!zdat wrote:On January 30 2013 05:47 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:46 sam!zdat wrote:
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that. There's a difference between knowing about it and being exposed to it first hand. It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from being exposed to it first hand. edit: c'mon, dude, ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?". Not that hard. I have no idea what he would do. I do know of a story called "Sodom and Gomorrah". Old Testament, buddy. Old Testament. Jesus would dissolve the obligation of strict adherence to the old Law and replace it with a new, non-deontological ethics of Love. He would exhort you to forget about your old prejudices and "Love your neighbor as yourself." I don't see you loving your neighbor as yourself. Better get on it. That action would be blasphemous to his father. Hence the story of Sodom to begin with.
Did you just call Jesus a blasphemer? You're a weird sort of Christian.
edit: do you have any idea what the "Good News" IS?
|
On January 30 2013 05:57 sam!zdat wrote:
Yeah, I think the main lesson of Sodom and Gormorrah is "dude, don't rape your guests!"
Homosexuality in general actually.
|
On January 30 2013 05:58 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:57 sam!zdat wrote:
Yeah, I think the main lesson of Sodom and Gormorrah is "dude, don't rape your guests!" Homosexuality in general actually.
a) you're reading it wrong
b) it doesn't matter, because of the Good News.
|
On January 30 2013 05:57 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:56 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:54 sam!zdat wrote:On January 30 2013 05:51 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:49 sam!zdat wrote:On January 30 2013 05:47 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:46 sam!zdat wrote:
It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from "such activity". Trust me, they know about gay people. You are just teaching them to hate them, by making them the Other. Can't think of anything more un-Christian than that. There's a difference between knowing about it and being exposed to it first hand. It's cute that you think it's possible to protect children from being exposed to it first hand. edit: c'mon, dude, ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?". Not that hard. I have no idea what he would do. I do know of a story called "Sodom and Gomorrah". Old Testament, buddy. Old Testament. Jesus would dissolve the obligation of strict adherence to the old Law and replace it with a new, non-deontological ethics of Love. He would exhort you to forget about your old prejudices and "Love your neighbor as yourself." I don't see you loving your neighbor as yourself. Better get on it. That action would be blasphemous to his father. Hence the story of Sodom to begin with. Did you just call Jesus a blasphemer? You're a weird sort of Christian. edit: do you have any idea what the "Good News" IS?
No, I said the action in which you claimed that he would make based off your opinion would be blasphemous.
|
On January 30 2013 05:59 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2013 05:58 BlazeFury01 wrote:On January 30 2013 05:57 sam!zdat wrote:
Yeah, I think the main lesson of Sodom and Gormorrah is "dude, don't rape your guests!" Homosexuality in general actually. a) you're reading it wrong b) it doesn't matter, because of the Good News.
I read it right. Read the story instead of the Wikipedia page.
|
Ah, so you don't understand Christianity! How sad 
edit: what was the nature of paul's conversion? What was he before? What was his problem? what did he realize that caused him to convert? How about Augustine? why did he decide to get baptized NOW, as opposed to right before his death as he originally planned?
|
On January 30 2013 06:03 sam!zdat wrote:Ah, so you don't understand Christianity! How sad
You're funny. I love how you stray off topic because you have no argument left. How about you learn how to debate properly and don't act like such a jerk. I'm open minded, I heard what you had to say. I didn't insult your orientation or anything about you. But I see you like to take it there.
|
Why don't you keep kosher?
edit: I'm trying to educate you about the philosophical content of your own damn religion and you say I have no argument left. Why don't you shut up and learn something?
|
On January 30 2013 06:07 sam!zdat wrote:
Why don't you keep kosher?
I'm done with you bro. You don't have anything of interest to say. You're just wasting my time. Good night
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
