|
On June 25 2013 03:41 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:26 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:25 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:12 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:09 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:04 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 02:57 [F_]aths wrote:On June 25 2013 02:50 Qwyn wrote:
A. It's an anomaly, since the vast majority of all mammals on earth including humans are heterosexual and the components of sex cater towards reproduction. The vast majority of humans are right-handed. Should a left-hander be disagreed upon his usage of hands? He/she could have been "nurtured" to learn to use the right hand more often. If homosexuality would be disadvantageous to reproduction, why is a percentage of mammals (including humans) still gay? Probably it does have a purpose. On June 25 2013 02:50 Qwyn wrote:
B. People begin to cultivate sexual preference even before sexual hormones are activated during puberty and that the vast majority of our behaviors and tendencies are influenced by culture.
- Thus, as our societies become more accepting of homosexuals and promote homosexuality it is reasonable to postulate that an increase in homosexuality would occur as a result of that (another great opinion). Whats wrong with acceptance and cultivation of gay culture?? 1) Is underpopulation an issue? 2) Can't gay couples adopt kids and still do something for parentless kids? Because I am religious. And that is part of my reasoning for the popularization of Paul's doctrine, with whom originated the New Testament idea that homosexuality is a "sin," if you will. A modern take on an age old doctrine. 1. Overpopulation is an issue - part of the cultural shift of sex to predominantly an act of pleasure, the use of birth control... 2. I have no problem with gay couples adopting children. I have no right to say what people can or cannot do in their personal life. Paul also says that heterosexual marriage is nothing more than an indulgence of temptation. Citing that weirdo isn't going to do your case much good. No he does not...He says that if man should marry, it should be according to God's covenant. But yes, he also says that ideally man would live in the image of Jesus. I'm going to avoid making this a religious debate, though. 1 Corinthians 7:1-2 "Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband." You are basing your archaic and bigoted views on your religion. You made this a religious debate. Either man up and defend your book or gtfo out of the thread. You just quoted what I just said, lol. So you're really ok with Paul saying that all sex is immoral and that marriage is just an indulgence of that immorality? But if you're ok with that you wanna turn around and say that people indulging their gay desires is somehow wrong? Oh and of course we have to respect you. Nothing but respect. *bows head* I'm back! Paul says that it is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman in line with the idea that the best man follows the path of Jesus. When he says that "sexual immorality" is occurring, he's talking about homosexual sex and orgies. He specifically says, as according to marriage, that "each man should have sexual relations with his own wife." Just want to help clear up that misunderstanding for you.
It's not a misunderstanding. I'm more than capable of reading. You're just engaging in mental gymnastics in order to avoid admitting that your New Testament hero has some grossly nonsensical ideas about sex and marriage. And he's not even remotely an authority on homosexuality.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On June 24 2013 22:31 wo1fwood wrote:
TL to cover WoT and LoL? :D
That's never going to happen. There's a reason why TL picked dota 2 over LoL
|
On June 25 2013 03:24 MasterReY wrote:
Ugh, could you guys please bring the religious discussion into PMs.
Most of us dont care about useless debates.
This thread is about the banner, not about religious views on homosexuals.
Thanks.
That's a good point. You probably meant to suggest someone should make a thread for the homosexuality discussion though, since one-to-one PMs don't allow everyone to communicate publicly with one another the way a thread does.
|
On June 25 2013 03:33 TheDougler wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:25 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:21 Plansix wrote:On June 25 2013 03:18 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:15 Plansix wrote:On June 25 2013 03:12 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:09 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:04 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 02:57 [F_]aths wrote:On June 25 2013 02:50 Qwyn wrote:
A. It's an anomaly, since the vast majority of all mammals on earth including humans are heterosexual and the components of sex cater towards reproduction. The vast majority of humans are right-handed. Should a left-hander be disagreed upon his usage of hands? He/she could have been "nurtured" to learn to use the right hand more often. If homosexuality would be disadvantageous to reproduction, why is a percentage of mammals (including humans) still gay? Probably it does have a purpose. On June 25 2013 02:50 Qwyn wrote:
B. People begin to cultivate sexual preference even before sexual hormones are activated during puberty and that the vast majority of our behaviors and tendencies are influenced by culture.
- Thus, as our societies become more accepting of homosexuals and promote homosexuality it is reasonable to postulate that an increase in homosexuality would occur as a result of that (another great opinion). Whats wrong with acceptance and cultivation of gay culture?? 1) Is underpopulation an issue? 2) Can't gay couples adopt kids and still do something for parentless kids? Because I am religious. And that is part of my reasoning for the popularization of Paul's doctrine, with whom originated the New Testament idea that homosexuality is a "sin," if you will. A modern take on an age old doctrine. 1. Overpopulation is an issue - part of the cultural shift of sex to predominantly an act of pleasure, the use of birth control... 2. I have no problem with gay couples adopting children. I have no right to say what people can or cannot do in their personal life. Paul also says that heterosexual marriage is nothing more than an indulgence of temptation. Citing that weirdo isn't going to do your case much good. No he does not...He says that if man should marry, it should be according to God's covenant. But yes, he also says that ideally man would live in the image of Jesus. I'm going to avoid making this a religious debate, though. It always says I can stone my mother to death for sowing with two types of cloth, kill people for working on the Sabbath and sell my sister into slavery. But we ignore those parts. Quit quoting from the Old Testament of the Israelites to make a point about the New Covenant of Jesus, please. We can pick and choose which parts of the book follow. If you choose to ignore those teachings, why can't you just ignore the part where is says being gay is a sin? Because the Covenant of the New Testament specifically invalidates the Old Testament. If you read the Gospel, you would know this. I PM'd you. I'm done derailing. I might not agree with a single thing you said, but I respect your civil manner of expressing your opinion. I wish debates on the Internet were like that more often.
That's fine, you don't have to agree with me. That's the beauty of the world. I may not agree with you, but I respect your right to an opinion.
|
On June 25 2013 03:44 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:41 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:26 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:25 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:12 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:09 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:04 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 02:57 [F_]aths wrote:On June 25 2013 02:50 Qwyn wrote:
A. It's an anomaly, since the vast majority of all mammals on earth including humans are heterosexual and the components of sex cater towards reproduction. The vast majority of humans are right-handed. Should a left-hander be disagreed upon his usage of hands? He/she could have been "nurtured" to learn to use the right hand more often. If homosexuality would be disadvantageous to reproduction, why is a percentage of mammals (including humans) still gay? Probably it does have a purpose. On June 25 2013 02:50 Qwyn wrote:
B. People begin to cultivate sexual preference even before sexual hormones are activated during puberty and that the vast majority of our behaviors and tendencies are influenced by culture.
- Thus, as our societies become more accepting of homosexuals and promote homosexuality it is reasonable to postulate that an increase in homosexuality would occur as a result of that (another great opinion). Whats wrong with acceptance and cultivation of gay culture?? 1) Is underpopulation an issue? 2) Can't gay couples adopt kids and still do something for parentless kids? Because I am religious. And that is part of my reasoning for the popularization of Paul's doctrine, with whom originated the New Testament idea that homosexuality is a "sin," if you will. A modern take on an age old doctrine. 1. Overpopulation is an issue - part of the cultural shift of sex to predominantly an act of pleasure, the use of birth control... 2. I have no problem with gay couples adopting children. I have no right to say what people can or cannot do in their personal life. Paul also says that heterosexual marriage is nothing more than an indulgence of temptation. Citing that weirdo isn't going to do your case much good. No he does not...He says that if man should marry, it should be according to God's covenant. But yes, he also says that ideally man would live in the image of Jesus. I'm going to avoid making this a religious debate, though. 1 Corinthians 7:1-2 "Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband." You are basing your archaic and bigoted views on your religion. You made this a religious debate. Either man up and defend your book or gtfo out of the thread. You just quoted what I just said, lol. So you're really ok with Paul saying that all sex is immoral and that marriage is just an indulgence of that immorality? But if you're ok with that you wanna turn around and say that people indulging their gay desires is somehow wrong? Oh and of course we have to respect you. Nothing but respect. *bows head* I'm back! Paul says that it is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman in line with the idea that the best man follows the path of Jesus. When he says that "sexual immorality" is occurring, he's talking about homosexual sex and orgies. He specifically says, as according to marriage, that "each man should have sexual relations with his own wife." Just want to help clear up that misunderstanding for you. It's not a misunderstanding. I'm more than capable of reading. You're just engaging in mental gymnastics in order to avoid admitting that your New Testament hero has some grossly nonsensical ideas about sex and marriage. And he's not even remotely an authority on homosexuality.
He's a disciple of Christ. If you are a Christian, and read the Gospel, you'd know that the disciples speak the words of God. No engaging in mental gymnastics, here. I think I've got my logic pretty well sorted out.
You can insult the Bible and the books of the disciples all you want, that's fine by me. But for millions of Christians, the Bible IS the final authority on homosexuality.
|
I cant wait to live in a time where people can make decisions for themselves. Be it abortion, religion, who they choose to love.
|
I noticed today too. Is this some announcement of announcements , or jst supporting gay rights ?
|
On June 25 2013 03:51 SkelA wrote:
I noticed today too. Is this some announcement of announcements , or jst supporting gay rights ?
Gay pride week.
|
Homosexuality is clearly not a choice. We don't fully know the cause, but it's VERY clear that it has existed from the dawn of mankind and no, it cannot be cured. And as it turns out, "those damn gays" didn't ruin society. It's a fact that some % of the population is gay. There's nothing to suggest that statistic changed, just that as homosexuality is becoming more accepted, more people come out.
Some people argue that acting upon homosexual "urges" is wrong, but what the fuck is your solution then? Should those people feel disgusted with themselves for the rest of their lives and never have intimate human contact? If you're ok with straight people having sex as a regular normal thing, you should be ok with gays as well. Otherwise you're a hypocrite who cannot use common sense and rational thought and instead relies on emotions to base their understanding of the world.
Homosexual relationships are mutual relationships between two consenting adults. No one is getting hurt. You can call it a "disorder" if that makes you inflate your ego and feel superior to others, I don't give a shit, but punishing people for feeling affection towards another human being when they aren't hurting anyone is simply stupid.
I browsed through the thread and saw a lot of people saying things like "I don't hate gays blah blah blah, but I don't support their marriage or them adopting children".
Sure, most religions won't support marriage in the traditional sense, that's their right, but preventing homosexuals from establishing a legal bond and gaining same social benefits straight couples have is straight up discrimination.
As for adoption, studies have shown that gay parents raise their children better than straight ones because raising a child is always a choice and there are no "oopsies". What about single parents? By recent statistics 27% of children grew up in a single parent household. If a child truly needs "a father figure and a mother figure" to be raised "properly" what happens to those kids?
There are thousands of kids growing up in adoption centers, are you really claiming they are better off with no parents than a loving family of two same sex parents?
|
United States7639 Posts
On June 25 2013 03:45 amazingxkcd wrote:That's never going to happen. There's a reason why TL picked dota 2 over LoL
The thing is, TL already has quality LoL coverage. It's only a matter of whether or not TL decides to finally grace the dedicated and hardworking LoL staff with the chance to have the fruits of their labor displayed on the front page.
|
On June 25 2013 03:34 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:26 Chairman Ray wrote:
TL has never involved itself with any political or social issue before. What is different about now? TL has always been strongly in favour of equality for all people.
Sorry, but this has always been a nonsense argument. Nobody supports equality for all people. Not minors, not felons, not pedophiles... Just say "we favor equality for homosexuals." That's perfectly fine, no reason to exaggerate your argument to make it feel stronger than it is.
|
On June 25 2013 03:49 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:44 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:41 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:26 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:25 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:12 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:09 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:04 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 02:57 [F_]aths wrote:
[quote]The vast majority of humans are right-handed. Should a left-hander be disagreed upon his usage of hands? He/she could have been "nurtured" to learn to use the right hand more often.
If homosexuality would be disadvantageous to reproduction, why is a percentage of mammals (including humans) still gay? Probably it does have a purpose.
[quote]
Whats wrong with acceptance and cultivation of gay culture??
1) Is underpopulation an issue?
2) Can't gay couples adopt kids and still do something for parentless kids? Because I am religious. And that is part of my reasoning for the popularization of Paul's doctrine, with whom originated the New Testament idea that homosexuality is a "sin," if you will. A modern take on an age old doctrine. 1. Overpopulation is an issue - part of the cultural shift of sex to predominantly an act of pleasure, the use of birth control... 2. I have no problem with gay couples adopting children. I have no right to say what people can or cannot do in their personal life. Paul also says that heterosexual marriage is nothing more than an indulgence of temptation. Citing that weirdo isn't going to do your case much good. No he does not...He says that if man should marry, it should be according to God's covenant. But yes, he also says that ideally man would live in the image of Jesus. I'm going to avoid making this a religious debate, though. 1 Corinthians 7:1-2 "Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband." You are basing your archaic and bigoted views on your religion. You made this a religious debate. Either man up and defend your book or gtfo out of the thread. You just quoted what I just said, lol. So you're really ok with Paul saying that all sex is immoral and that marriage is just an indulgence of that immorality? But if you're ok with that you wanna turn around and say that people indulging their gay desires is somehow wrong? Oh and of course we have to respect you. Nothing but respect. *bows head* I'm back! Paul says that it is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman in line with the idea that the best man follows the path of Jesus. When he says that "sexual immorality" is occurring, he's talking about homosexual sex and orgies. He specifically says, as according to marriage, that "each man should have sexual relations with his own wife." Just want to help clear up that misunderstanding for you. It's not a misunderstanding. I'm more than capable of reading. You're just engaging in mental gymnastics in order to avoid admitting that your New Testament hero has some grossly nonsensical ideas about sex and marriage. And he's not even remotely an authority on homosexuality. He's a disciple of Christ. If you are a Christian, and read the Gospel, you'd know that the disciples speak the words of God. No engaging in mental gymnastics, here. I think I've got my logic pretty well sorted out. You can insult the Bible and the books of the disciples all you want, that's fine by me. But for millions of Christians, the Bible IS the final authority on homosexuality.
He speaks the word of God, which was then translated by man for 2,000 years through several languages. The King James Bible was approved by the King as an appropriate interpenetration of the scriptures. It is one of the longest games of telephone in human history.
|
On June 25 2013 03:39 Jinsho wrote:
As long as you people think that there are no gay people around you in real life, you will never accept that they are just as normal as any of you.
Being gay is way high up on the scale of abnormal, on many levels. You can lie yourself about it as much as you want but that doesn't change reality.
On June 25 2013 03:39 Jinsho wrote:
That is why gay people demonstrate : because some people really think there are no gay people in their neighborhood, or whatever, just some other place. Always some other place.
That's so stupid. There are all kinds of deviants. If my next door neighbor is a zoophile, why do I need know that? I don't try to burst into his dormitory to check out what's he doing there, why does he have to push his deviancy to me and my children?
I was a big TL fan, but this is sooo disappointing...
|
In addition to this being a great initiative I really like the subtle yet highly effective graphical style used. Using the TL horse makes it even more powerful. Go TL, go graphics team! 
|
I support Rainbow Dash being our new mascot. Really, though, it's great to see more LGBT support. =)
|
On June 25 2013 03:53 datcirclejerk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:34 KwarK wrote:On June 25 2013 03:26 Chairman Ray wrote:
TL has never involved itself with any political or social issue before. What is different about now? TL has always been strongly in favour of equality for all people. Sorry, but this has always been a nonsense argument. Nobody supports equality for all people. Not minors, not felons, not pedophiles... Just say "we favor equality for homosexuals." That's perfectly fine, no reason to exaggerate your argument to make it feel stronger than it is.
Don't harp on semantics to pretend you're making a meaningful point.
|
On June 25 2013 03:53 datcirclejerk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:34 KwarK wrote:On June 25 2013 03:26 Chairman Ray wrote:
TL has never involved itself with any political or social issue before. What is different about now? TL has always been strongly in favour of equality for all people. Sorry, but this has always been a nonsense argument. Nobody supports equality for all people. Not minors, not felons, not pedophiles... Just say "we favor equality for homosexuals." That's perfectly fine, no reason to exaggerate your argument to make it feel stronger than it is.
You misunderstand or misinterpret the meaning of equality.
|
On June 25 2013 03:53 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:49 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:44 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:41 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:26 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:25 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:12 Qwyn wrote:On June 25 2013 03:09 Klondikebar wrote:On June 25 2013 03:04 Qwyn wrote:
[quote]
Because I am religious. And that is part of my reasoning for the popularization of Paul's doctrine, with whom originated the New Testament idea that homosexuality is a "sin," if you will. A modern take on an age old doctrine.
1. Overpopulation is an issue - part of the cultural shift of sex to predominantly an act of pleasure, the use of birth control...
2. I have no problem with gay couples adopting children. I have no right to say what people can or cannot do in their personal life. Paul also says that heterosexual marriage is nothing more than an indulgence of temptation. Citing that weirdo isn't going to do your case much good. No he does not...He says that if man should marry, it should be according to God's covenant. But yes, he also says that ideally man would live in the image of Jesus. I'm going to avoid making this a religious debate, though. 1 Corinthians 7:1-2 "Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband." You are basing your archaic and bigoted views on your religion. You made this a religious debate. Either man up and defend your book or gtfo out of the thread. You just quoted what I just said, lol. So you're really ok with Paul saying that all sex is immoral and that marriage is just an indulgence of that immorality? But if you're ok with that you wanna turn around and say that people indulging their gay desires is somehow wrong? Oh and of course we have to respect you. Nothing but respect. *bows head* I'm back! Paul says that it is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman in line with the idea that the best man follows the path of Jesus. When he says that "sexual immorality" is occurring, he's talking about homosexual sex and orgies. He specifically says, as according to marriage, that "each man should have sexual relations with his own wife." Just want to help clear up that misunderstanding for you. It's not a misunderstanding. I'm more than capable of reading. You're just engaging in mental gymnastics in order to avoid admitting that your New Testament hero has some grossly nonsensical ideas about sex and marriage. And he's not even remotely an authority on homosexuality. He's a disciple of Christ. If you are a Christian, and read the Gospel, you'd know that the disciples speak the words of God. No engaging in mental gymnastics, here. I think I've got my logic pretty well sorted out. You can insult the Bible and the books of the disciples all you want, that's fine by me. But for millions of Christians, the Bible IS the final authority on homosexuality. He speaks the word of God, which was then translated by man for 2,000 years through several languages. The King James Bible was approved by the King as an appropriate interpenetration of the scriptures. It is one of the longest games of telephone in human history.
If you need to cut to the chase regarding the validity of scripture, the Aramaic should do wonders. If you are talking about the Council of Nicaea, you can read all the left out epistles and Apocrypha if you disagree with the council's direction.
|
On June 25 2013 03:54 bonse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:39 Jinsho wrote:
As long as you people think that there are no gay people around you in real life, you will never accept that they are just as normal as any of you.
Being gay is way high up on the scale of abnormal, on many levels. You can lie yourself about it as much as you want but that doesn't change reality. Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:39 Jinsho wrote:
That is why gay people demonstrate : because some people really think there are no gay people in their neighborhood, or whatever, just some other place. Always some other place.
That's so stupid. There are all kinds of deviants. If my next door neighbor is a zoophile, why do I need know that? I don't try to burst into his dormitory to check out what's he doing there, why does he have to push his deviancy to me and my children? I was a big TL fan, but this is sooo disappointing...
Not as much as we are in you. There was hopes that every TL fan would be for equal treatment for all. I guess we will have to live with the majority of TL members being pro-equality.
|
As a new TL-er, but a long time lurker on the site, I'm not sure how to feel about the rainbow logo. On one hand I think it is great that a rather large online community is openly supporting gay marriage. However, on the other hand I think that the banner change and large amount of discussion generated from the engagement has really taken away from the "Equality" aspect of it.
I have no problem with homosexuals. In fact, on my high school wrestling team, I knowingly wrestled with homosexuals in tournaments and even on my team (so don't take this a homosexual hate post). However, I feel that some homosexuals make it seem as if they are bombarded with extreme hate daily in every single part of their lives, when in truth, I see huge leaps and bounds towards general acceptance of homosexuality today as compared to say, a few years ago. In addition to that, many gays are extremely flamboyant and flashy, and this drives many people away from them which may contribute to the hate that they do get.
But this large outcry just seems like ALOT, maybe even too much? Does anyone else see where I am coming from or...?
Btw that rainbow mane on the horse does look awesome. They should keep it just because.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
