ATTN: Cal
-
Okay, so let's take it down a level. Here, the term "absolute" no longer means absolute. We're talking absolute in... political terms I guess. Let me try to define what I mean. An absolute wrong, in this sense would be something such as rape. If someone running for office commits rape, it's career suicide. It's something that no one on any point of the political spectrum should be okay with. So maybe, something, that most everyone would agree unanimously on could be considered an absolute moral truth.
Aside from rape, what else is there? Pedophilia, perhaps, but if both parties are willing and the younger person is at least pubescent, I'd argue that some would find it okay. You mentioned sexual acts of perversion that added nothing to the human agenda as being absolute moral wrongs. Well where does the line get drawn at what sex acts are absolutely morally wrong? Paying for sex is one. Adultery would be another (thanks Wild Bill). What about oral sex? Premarital sex? Anal sex? Gay sex?
I think that we'll find, even now, that the term "absolute" is not static. I would bet if some politicians admitted they were gay, they'd lose their positions and support pretty quickly. I bet that will not be true in 20 years. But hey, if Barney Frank is openly gay, and a member of Congress, I guess that eliminates gay sex (that is, putting a penis in another man's ass) from the list of absolute moral wrongs.
-
Okay, let's see, if you want to claim that you aren't comparing me to Hitler and Stalin, don't use them as explicit examples of what will happen if people think the way I think. Get it? Vapor]
****************************************
el wrongo, bongo.
I never said "what WILL happen", I said what CAN happen, and historically HAS happened. It has nothing to do with
saying you would so and so, or comparing you etc.
Like I said, don't play the liberal victim game. It isn't about you personally, Vapor. I'm explaining how I see things, and how you
sometimes, and liberals, a lot of the time, see them.
And, your comment on the Bible? Your example is cherry picked from the OLD TESTAMENT. The NEW TESTAMENT
supercedes the old.
Or, we would still have to do works out the wazoo and be perfect to be saved, and we are unable to do that, since we
are imperfect.
That is the point of Jesus' death on the cross.
The Bible is hardly the end all for my moral values. ie, the Bible, imho, never says anything anywhere about
interracial marriage. But I know that interracial marriage is perfectly fine by me, and i see no reason to think otherwise.
Others, conservatives and libs perhaps, think that the possible social ostricization is a reason for being against that,
but so would be being a Browns fan in Pittsburg be a problem with that. GGG
My life's experiences over eh... some...decades more than you.. ahem.... give me more reason to believe what I believe,
that you, in that dept. Doesn't mean I'm right, just means my life's experiences are many, as a lot of older folks do, not that I'm
that much of an older folk but ... eh
you know what I mean.
There are some libs screaming in the past on this board about the 2nd ammendment does not mean private citizens can bear arms.
blah blah blah.
then the Supreme Court ruled in exactly what we told them. They disappeared.
I understand subjective judgement, and I understand core principles of our freedom's existence.
Those principles are not subjective.
The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ... is that really open to interpretation when you consider the life
of the unborn? Or just born?
We agree to disagree. But doesn't help to say I compared you, said what you will do etc. That is incorrect, for whatever reasons
prompt you to staunchly emphasize what isn't even the legit statements I've made at the time.
But thanks for the words about my shoulder. It'll be about 3-4 months before I can start using my own left arm again.
crap.
-
Then why do you have such a problem with homosexuality? Jesus said NOTHING about queers being wrong. The NT says women should keep quiet and be pregnant. Do you believe that, too? Everyone cherry picks from the Bible. The difference is, you hold its contents to be absolute truths, I don't.
There are many atheists that have lived as long as you or longer and kept their religious convictions.
-
Oh, I'm sure. But none of them would have my experiences in life. And, they are obviously linear thinkers,
with a restricted development in their childhood development.... @@
anyways... ggg
God created Adam. Then, seeing that Adam was lonely and incomplete in his life....
he created Eve.
Man...Woman.
Now, you show me where God created Adam, then created another Adam to be his eh....
better half... and I'll admit I'm wrong.
"Adam and Eve, sitting in a tree, making wrongie of you, and rightee of me."
-
Adam and Eve is a fairy tale.
-
But however we were created, we became more than one or two, via two different
sexes mating.
It's the natural order of things. It's biology. It's in the Bible. There would be no mammals if not for
MALE and FEMALE... well, except for a very few species like kangaroos, etc.
But, with humans, it is MALE-FEMALE.
To pervert the natural order of humanity's lives... is to say that the human
species continues via same sex births. That is biologically impossible.
so, if something is un-natural, un-scriptural, not historical in terms of our existence method,
An UNbiological abberation hardly deserves "normal" status, no matter how you shape the cookie.
It's still a cookie.
-
The difference between humans and most other animals is that we don't do things purely for the proliferation of our species. Humans and dolphins and there's one other species (I think) enjoy having sex for pleasure. Is the act of recreational sex unnatural? Why does it matter if it's with the same sex or not?
-
Crack jokes all you like, I don't find gay bashing particularly funny. I have friends whose families have more or less disowned them because of who they're attracted to. I'm an advocate of gay rights. If that makes me some kind of fag, in your eyes, so be it you f'cking prick.
-
And you're an ignoramus. How the f'ck does defending gay lifestyles make me disgusting? You're the one that's being a sickeningly barbaric prick. "Wahhhh, it's different and queer, they're all fags and going to rot in hell anyways." What would Jesus do, you motherf'cker? Answer? Hate fags, apparently.
Nothing like dehumanizing people based on where they stick their penis, especially when they're two consenting adults. Hope you've never committed sodomy. Your Bible says something about that, last I checked. You do know that a bj counts, right?
-
1 - What the hell is a benny boy?
2 - Misery must love company. Must be lonely to have sucked at life as much as you did, and to only be good enough to kill people, you uneducated idiot, no wonder you can't find a job. Of course you don't want me to succeed because you're jealous I'm more intelligent than you.
I hope I have to treat you someday. Keep hating, troll. Keep hating. You're a vile, homophobic, gay-bashing idiot who's already failed at life. Sorry, but I won't be joining you down there.
-
XD
Yes, you are older and probably fatter than I am. You're definitely the biggest idiot on this forum, and that includes the Steelers trolls. So there you have it, superior in the big three.
Also, you're superior at not being very good at finding a job. Haha.
Of course I haven't actually accomplished anything. Do you have any idea what an undergraduate degree does? No. I'm still working on my bachelor's, buddy. Maybe in 2 years, you'll have a case about my accomplishments, but I doubt it.
So, in addition to me wanting to be a doctor for most of my life, knowing that I've come pretty close to not cutting it my fresh and soph year, and having a chip on my shoulder because of that. Because if I fail, not only do I let myself down, completely, but I'd also be bankrupting my father and my grandmother because they co-signed my student loans. On top of all that, you've given me another reason to succeed. Just to spite your hateful, ignorant ass. You had better believe that when I get accepted into med school, I'll be making a topic here, just for you.
Undaunted, I knew the game was mine to win. Just like in life, all my successes depend on me. I am the man that has the ball. I am the one that can throw it faster than xxxx. This is why I'm better than everyone else in the world. Kiss my ass and suck my dick. Everyone.
You can suck it too, you f'cking closet case. Usually, the most vocally opposed are the ones that suppress it the worst.
-
Gosh, Vapor. I thought you liberals were SO wonderfully OPEN-MINDED ABOUT BEING DISAGREED WITH.
yeah. Everybody else has to be "open minded", but liberals go ballistic when other folks won't believe
how liberals want them to believe.
*****NAILED******
And, I gave good reasons why I believe what I believe,
and Vapor says he has friends, emotional ... linear response.
Liberals really can't help themselves.
It's sad.
-
Cal, I'm not 'going ballistic' because he disagrees with me. I'm stooping to his level because of the manner he posted; he's calling me disgusting for supporting the gay lifestyle, and then went on to say that he hopes I fail at everything, and that I'll never amount to anything. That's what I'm responding to.
I just really don't get gay bashing. Why is it that big of a deal if two consenting adults that happen to be the same sex are attracted to each other? Cal, I still don't have an issue with your argument. Well, I guess I do, but the way you're presenting it is fine. Everything in this thread was fine until diehard came in and trolled. Well, guess what, he wants to blatantly troll and call me a disgusting person for supporting gays, I'll make fun of him for being an unmarketable idiot, I don't have a problem stooping down to the lowest common denominator (which in this case, is diehard).
I can't believe you're actually going to support him for coming into what was a pretty damn good debate (as far as this forum goes), and straight up bashing me. Then when I respond with a rational response, and he calls me "xxxxing disgusting." Then he tells me that he knows I'm going to fail at life, and that he's superior to me. And you don't criticize him at all? Sorry, I'm not going to sit there like a good little lib and take that. And you've got the nerve to say I'm the one out of line? Hell no, he can eat my dick. And if you think I'm any more out of line than he was, then you can step outside of your guys' circle jerk and eat my dick, too.
And, I gave good reasons why I believe what I believe,
You did. I'll give you that. I may disagree with them, but in no way was I trying to attack you in any of my responses to diehard.
and Vapor says he has friends, emotional ... linear response.
Yes, because there are no emotional issues that you refuse to budge on
Don't know why you think this affects my ability to have friends, either, I'm in college, lots of people that agree with me are in college. Your point of view on gays would lose you a bunch of respect on most college campuses, even the conservative ones like Dayton. Gay-bashing is equivalent to being a racist, as far as I and many others are concerned.Liberals really can't help themselves.
It's sad.
And with that jab, neither can you. Would you care to continue the discussion, or should we continue to flame each other?
-
Cal, what the hell, are you kidding me. Sir, don't pretend to be of rational conversation and then piggyback on that.
-
/edit
-
piggyback? sorry, I'm only thinking with one arm since I got hurt... GGG
I don't know what you mean.
Diehard's rant? I don't get the hostility, but I don't respect the gay lifestyle. I just
prefer to explain why on an even keel. I'm not bashing gays, I'm explaining
why I don't believe it's normal, and why I believe it is wrong, and why gay marriage
is an oxymoron at best, a biological, social and Biblical abomination and travesty at worst.
I guess bashing Christians is fine. But gays? who gave them super duper special protection ?
There is no such thing as gay marriage in the eyes of most normal Americans, and the Bible.
And, the bigoted openly gay "judge" who just ruled against Prop. 8 in California?
He should have recused himself immediately, and since he didn't, imho, he is dishonest and should
be disbarred and impeached... I believe the Supreme Court will overrule that one, assuming
the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals could care less to overturn it.
-
Diehard's rant? I don't get the hostility, but I don't respect the gay lifestyle. I just
prefer to explain why on an even keel. I'm not bashing gays, I'm explaining
why I don't believe it's normal, and why I believe it is wrong, and why gay marriage
is an oxymoron at best, a biological, social and Biblical abomination and travesty at worst.
What do you think people said about interracial marriages. This is exactly the same. And I like how you cherry pick it being a "Biblical abomination." That comes from Leviticus which is the absolute worst book in the Bible, if you ask me. The same one that says throw your enemies' babies against rocks. All sorts of shit that dehumanizes women. Shellfish? They're an abomination, too. Hope you don't like shrimp, crayfish, crabs, lobsters or mussels. You know what else is an abomination? Wearing clothing of more than one material.
What makes this line about homosexuality any different than any of the above?
I guess bashing Christians is fine. But gays? who gave them super duper special protection ?
Yes, bashing Christians is fine. They think that their god is the absolute moral authority, and his word trumps the rights of everyone, including those that don't even believe in him. Who is the victim when two gays have consensual sex or getting married? Give me a legitimate answer, and I'll back off of Christianity. You can't rationalize your bigotry. You disagree with it because it doesn't lead to procreation, destroys the institution of marriage, and because Leviticus says it's an abomination. How many times have you had sex for pleasure and not to procreate? How is gay people marrying any worse for the institution of marriage than people that marry/divorce 8 people throughout their lives? If this is an abomination, why isn't eating shellfish or wearing mixed clothing an abomination? Give me a legitimate answer, and I'll back off the Church and its belief that it has the moral right to tell people who they should and shouldn't love and marry.
There is no such thing as gay marriage in the eyes of most normal Americans, and the Bible.
Your definition of normal is much different than mine. To me, normal means not being a closed-minded bigot. The Bible is a 2000 year old piece of trash, anyone that takes anything in that book literally needs to wake up and realize it was written during the bronze age.
-
Oh, baloney.
My reference to God creating Adam and Eve is from the book of GENESIS.
You're being a bit frantic to justify your issue position, aren't you?
I'm not cherry picking anything. Adam and EVE. Not Adam and Elton John.
And no, gayness is not a racial matter. Race is a racial matter.
Sexual activity is a sexual activity matter. Go look in the Bible - it says nothing about Adam and Eve's color of skin.
You just did it again. You changed what I said so you could refute it, and
you emotionally make a goofy invalid moral equivalent, in another burst of linear thinking.
Why, your emotional rationalizations are just that - and they can be used to justify parents marrying
their adult kids, polygamy, .... you okay with those too?
And, I'm not in college. I'm much older than that now. But, if I were in college, I would have to at least
pretend that gay activity is perfectly the norm, or I wouldn't be popular?
Yeah, I knew guys who wanted to be popular in college. They did dope. I never did hang around them,
I choose my friends very carefully. But if you let the elitist leftwing activist loudmouth kids in college
tell you what to believe, and that's your "justification" for believing it.. well, look ahead in your life
when you have more experience about life.
So, if everybody you go to college with jumped off a 200 foot cliff onto rocks, you would do it too? GGG
Your attempt to justify your position only cements my belief in liberals emoting in linear fashion, and conservatives
thinking in comprehensive fashion.
The Bible is trash? The Bible is not. That you think it is, and you don't apparently have any principles nor values,
but just a college crowd elitist follower, is trash.
My principles and values don't come from what a bunch of college people around me thought.
and your quip about the shellfish? has nothing to do with what we are talking about, unless you think some shellfish
are gay and abnormal in their sexual activity.
You are getting goofy on the issue, but go ahead and just disagree with me.
I am more right for it.
shall I repost the Groucho Marx "Whatever it is, I'm against it" song again for you?
Bible: againt it. check.
God: against it. check.
Man-Woman real marriage: against it. check.
Christians: against them, check.
Conservatives: against them. check.
But do keep telling us how "open minded" you are. It's just so typical.
-
You wanna see how the inter racial thing plays out?
http://www.gotquestions.org/interracial-marriage.html
There you go. Not necessarily a racial thing, but it was used as an argument against it.
You just did it again. You changed what I said so you could refute it, and
you emotionally make a goofy invalid moral equivalent, in another burst of linear thinking.
Nope, you're the only one that's thinking linearly. The moral equivalent is not invalid. Bashing gays is no different than bashing someone for race. You don't choose who you're attracted to.
Why, your emotional rationalizations are just that - and they can be used to justify parents marrying
their adult kids, polygamy, .... you okay with those too?
Yes, stop using the term emotional as if it's a negative thing. My arguments are logical and coherent. Yours rely on the Bible, and you want to bring up emotions... Please.
I've never said anything about incest. I think it's a bad idea because if you have recessive disorders, your kids can be screwed up. But aside from that, your Bible has tons of cases where parents and kids fornicate. Ever hear of Lot? Probably not, because you only read what you want to. Everything in the Bible you disagree with is just a metaphor, but everything that lines up with your point of view is God's word. That's not hypocritical. Not the slightest
Polygamy, in my eyes, is fine so long as every person involved knows what's going on and is clearly okay with it. And, I'm not in college. I'm much older than that now. But, if I were in college, I would have to at least pretend that gay activity is perfectly the norm, or I wouldn't be popular? Yeah, I knew guys who wanted to be popular in college. They did dope. I never did hang around them, I choose my friends very carefully. But if you let the elitist leftwing activist loudmouth kids in college tell you what to believe, and that's your "justification" for believing it.. well, look ahead in your life when you have more experience about life.
So, because lefties smoked dope, they're wrong, and you're better than them. I only listen to leftwing druggie activists? Okay, that's fine, if that's what you want to believe, but I choose to form my own opinions. You listen to a 2000 year old book that was written by lonely dudes hiding in caves that were high on opiates. Then, you conclude that everything I know is wrong because I don't have as much life experience as you. Makes perfect sense.
So, if everybody you go to college with jumped off a 200 foot cliff onto rocks, you would do it too? GGG Your attempt to justify your position only cements my belief in liberals emoting in linear fashion, and conservatives thinking in comprehensive fashion.
No, Cal, I wouldn't. You're being ridiculous and I apparently struck a chord. My justification of my position was very objective. I'd like to know if anyone else agrees with you in that it cements your belief that I can only think linearly and you are better and can think comprehensively. I mean, you keep telling yourself this, and apparently you believe it, but all that you're doing, from my point of view, is saying I can only think linearly because I disagree with you. Smalls, I hate to call you out for this, but I need some input from someone that has common sense. Would you agree with Cal's assessment that he is a comprehensive thinker, and I am a linear thinker. Or is he just saying that because I disagree with him.
The Bible is trash? The Bible is not. That you think it is, and you don't apparently have any principles nor values,
but just a college crowd elitist follower, is trash.
My principles and values don't come from what a bunch of college people around me thought.
According to Cal: Because I don't believe in the Bible, I have no principles or values.
Protip: I don't need a book written in the bronze age to tell me how to live my life. I derive my values and principles from my life experiences. If you want to ignore all that and say that I'm only a college leftwing elitist follower, then that's fine, albeit hypocritical. If you can't see why it's hypocritical, then take a step back.
and your quip about the shellfish? has nothing to do with what we are talking about, unless you think some shellfish
are gay and abnormal in their sexual activity.
Sorry Cal, it absolutely does. If you're going to use the Biblical interpretation of homosexuality being an abomination, then I'm going to call out the source of that. The source of homosexuality being an abomination is Leviticus. I'm just pointing out other passages in Leviticus that you choose to ignore. It's very relevant to this argument and where you derive your principles and beliefs. The Bible to you isn't the ultimate word of God. Not when it says something you disagree with. When that happens, then it's just a silly ancient law, however, as soon as you see something that aligns with your point of view, you advocate how God said it, and how he's right. It's extremely hypocritical.
You are getting goofy on the issue, but go ahead and just disagree with me.
I am more right for it.
So let's recap. I bring up how you say homosexuality is wrong because it's in the Bible. Adam and Eve, not Adam and Elton John. Right. You say I have no morals because I don't believe in the Bible. I question how you derive your morals. Because you say homosexuality is an "abomination" (your word, not mine) I find the source. I bring up other ridiculous laws from the same book that this comes from, and you say I'm the one that's being goofy. Right on.
Bible: againt it. check.
1 for 1.
God: against it. check.
2 for 2. So far so good.
Man-Woman real marriage: against it. check.
False. I'm all for that. Being an advocate of gay marriage and being an advocate of straight marriage aren't mutually exclusive. Please, please, please argue this. I'd love to see you try.
Christians: against them, check.
Yep. If they stuck more to Jesus' actual teachings, I wouldn't have as big a problem. Unfortunately they focus on bullshit (like gay marriage when they have a pedophile problem) and miracles (also bullshit).
Conservatives: against them. check.
I disagree with most of their major beliefs.
But do keep telling us how "open minded" you are. It's just so typical.
Yes, keep pretending you're not closed-minded. Keep pretending that Jesus said no to gay marriage. You're like the kid that closes his eyes and ears and goes "na na na, I'm not listening," whenever a valid point is brought up against you. It's just so typical.
-
You wanna see how the inter racial thing plays out?
http://www.gotquestions.org/interracial-marriage.html
There you go. Not necessarily a racial thing, but it was used as an argument against it.
**************************************
We are talking about gay "marriage", and you said it was the same thing as inter racial, then you posted
a link about inter racial marriage.
You lost me. I call baloney.
**************************************
Nope, you're the only one that's thinking linearly. The moral equivalent is not invalid. Bashing gays is no different than bashing someone for race. You don't choose who you're attracted to.
***************************************
No, you don't refine what linear thinking it. You just did it yourself. Skin color has nothing to do with
chosen activity of a sexual nature, the defination of marriage between a man and a woman.
It has nothing to do with Adam and Eve. Get a grip on your psyche - it seems to be warping. @@
***************************************
Yes, stop using the term emotional as if it's a negative thing. My arguments are logical and coherent. Yours rely on the Bible, and you want to bring up emotions... Please.
***************************************
Not solely on the Bible. Go back and read what I said, if you ever really do.
You are in college, surely you don't have a problem with reading comprehension. I am not emotional about believing the Bible
is inspired by God, and indeed, God's Word. My belief in the Bible is just a part of what I believe and why I believe it.
****************************************
I've never said anything about incest. I think it's a bad idea because if you have recessive disorders, your kids can be screwed up. But aside from that, your Bible has tons of cases where parents and kids fornicate. Ever hear of Lot? Probably not, because you only read what you want to. Everything in the Bible you disagree with is just a metaphor, but everything that lines up with your point of view is God's word. That's not hypocritical. Not the slightest
Polygamy, in my eyes, is fine so long as every person involved knows what's going on and is clearly okay with it. ****************************************
So, because lefties smoked dope, they're wrong, and you're better than them. I only listen to leftwing druggie activists? Okay, that's fine, if that's what you want to believe, but I choose to form my own opinions. You listen to a 2000 year old book that was written by lonely dudes hiding in caves that were high on opiates. Then, you conclude that everything I know is wrong because I don't have as much life experience as you. Makes perfect sense.
******************************************
No, not better, just living and believing legally and morally and healthily? better. Choosing better, living better, experiencing better,
and living genuinely by my own CHOSEN principles and standards, and NOT other's low ideals dictated to me.
And I call baloney again - I never said anything about you "only listening to druggie activists". At all. Nice liberal twisting of words again.... do you learn that from your college friends? Or is that a college course (elective?) that you liberals take?
Ask a lot of older folks if they believe what they believed on a lot of things when they were in college.
There won't be too many, I think. I never said anything like "everything you know is wrong". Never did. at all.
Neither one of us is old enough to have been there to know what the disciples took, etc.
Give us all a break with the baloney.
****************************** So, if everybody you go to college with jumped off a 200 foot cliff onto rocks, you would do it too? GGG Your attempt to justify your position only cements my belief in liberals emoting in linear fashion, and conservatives thinking in comprehensive fashion.
******************************
No, Cal, I wouldn't. You're being ridiculous and I apparently struck a chord. My justification of my position was very objective. I'd like to know if anyone else agrees with you in that it cements your belief that I can only think linearly and you are better and can think comprehensively. I mean, you keep telling yourself this, and apparently you believe it, but all that you're doing, from my point of view, is saying I can only think linearly because I disagree with you. Smalls, I hate to call you out for this, but I need some input from someone that has common sense. Would you agree with Cal's assessment that he is a comprehensive thinker, and I am a linear thinker. Or is he just saying that because I disagree with him.
*******************************
I know I'm being a bit ridiculous. But the easist way to explain why I think your rationalizations and reasons for believing what you believe is faulty, is by simply extended them a bit.
You see, you can extend a genuine principle and value, and it always holds true.
with rationalizations and emotionally charged and perhaps peer pressure induced stances on issues,
it doesn't work.
A principle extended is just as legit at any stage. And a value is always a value.
You libs don't often do principles and values. You do emotionalist responses, generally based on a single emotional rationalization,
which I refer to as "linear".
Which means, you do not have multi-tiered backup for what you believe. My life's experiences relate, quite profoundly,
to my belief in God, and therefore, the Bible. My life was saved once, when I was in the fifth grade, and it was truly a profound
miracle. My decision, based on what complex truth I see in the Bible, the continued scientific evidence being unearthed
in that part of the world, and in life.
I reckon you don't get to take a class like that in college...
**********************************************
According to Cal: Because I don't believe in the Bible, I have no principles or values.
Protip: I don't need a book written in the bronze age to tell me how to live my life. I derive my values and principles from my life experiences. If you want to ignore all that and say that I'm only a college leftwing elitist follower, then that's fine, albeit hypocritical. If you can't see why it's hypocritical, then take a step back.
**********************************************
No, no and no, I never said anything like that, at all. I'm saying that you libs TEND to see things emotionally, but without principles.
Like, the Bible is trash but you are a huge advocate of being open minded.
Like, you belive in individual rights, but not the rights of the unborn and recently born children.
Bashing is wrong if it's about gays, but bashing God, and the Bible, etc, is fine with you.
do you see the glaring contradictions in your stances? That says to me, that principle is not there.
Principle is a rock upon which beliefs stem. Not a politically and socially expediate stance on an issue.
YOU brought up the college peer justification thing. I'm just sayin......
You said yourself, that believing
in gay marriage is a requirement for being accepted in college, even in more conservative colleges, did you not?
So, there you go. I can only discern that you think on issues in terms of emotionalism, because you don't make logical, consistent
sense to me.
****************************************Sorry Cal, it absolutely does. If you're going to use the Biblical interpretation of homosexuality being an abomination, then I'm going to call out the source of that. The source of homosexuality being an abomination is Leviticus. I'm just pointing out other passages in Leviticus that you choose to ignore. It's very relevant to this argument and where you derive your principles and beliefs. The Bible to you isn't the ultimate word of God. Not when it says something you disagree with. When that happens, then it's just a silly ancient law, however, as soon as you see something that aligns with your point of view, you advocate how God said it, and how he's right. It's extremely hypocritical.
*****************************************
No, I did no such thing. I simply said that the Bible clearly says God made Adam, and made him a companion, a mate.
HER name was EVE.
So, I discern that in Gods' eyes, for a man to have a mate, she will be a woman. That's all I said.
I never said once, that the Bible says so and so that gayness is wrong. ever, I never said it. Never.
Stop with the made up baloney for your own retorts' cause. That is another psychological defense mechanism I see
from liberals most of the time. The laws in the old testament are impossible to follow. That is the point. No human being
could possibly be that perfect. THAT IS THE POINT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, and JESUS' HAVING DIED ON THE CROSS FOR OUR SINS. The history in the Bible is not superceded, but the NEW TESTAMENT supercedes the absolutely impossible and zillions of
"laws" for salvation.
I didn't quote any scripture. I deduced a conclusion on the basis of GOD having created ADAM and his FEMALE MATE, EVE.
I never once have referred to what God said on a particular subject, mostly because the Bible has errors in it, from the
conservation of the original Hebrew and Greek to English. for example, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" doesn't mean that, it MEANS
"Thou Shalt Not MURDER". Two different things.
Really. Get a grip, it's slipping away.
******************************************
So let's recap. I bring up how you say homosexuality is wrong because it's in the Bible.
**************************************
Totally wrong and invalid. Next.
**************************************
Adam and Eve, not Adam and Elton John. Right. You say I have no morals because I don't believe in the Bible.
**************************************
MOO. More bs. I never once said anything of the sort. Never said you have no morals. But in our conversations, and liberals in general I keep SAYING - the TENDENCY is to decide stances on issues based on emotionalist responses, NOT based on principle or values.
Clearly you have morals, that isn't the point of our discussions.
IOW's, you are playing the liberal VICTIM game again.
NAILED.
****************************************
I question how you derive your morals. Because you say homosexuality is an "abomination" (your word, not mine) I find the source. I bring up other ridiculous laws from the same book that this comes from, and you say I'm the one that's being goofy. Right on.
****************************************
I say again, I never quoted from the Bible. But clearly, it is pretty well known that the Bible says God created
ADAM and a FEMALE, EVE, for his MATE.
So, in THAT, I simply deduce that God meant for a WOMAN to be a MAN's MATE.
Now, how freakin hard is that for you to follow?
****************************************
Bible: againt it. check.
1 for 1.
************************
Oh yeah, I'm good.
***********************
God: against it. check.
2 for 2. So far so good.
************************
HOT, HOT, HOT !
***********************
Man-Woman real marriage: against it. check.
False. I'm all for that. Being an advocate of gay marriage and being an advocate of straight marriage aren't mutually exclusive. Please, please, please argue this. I'd love to see you try.
***********************
Sorry, I simply meant that you are against the defination of marriage as being only between a man and a woman.
So, yes, they are mutually exclusive. Of course I didn't mean you don't believe men should ever marry women.
Nice liberal tweak for your own cya.
so, I'm still perfect on my appraisals.
************************
Christians: against them, check.
Yep.
**************************
HOT DANG, I'm 4 for 4 !
****************************
Conservatives: against them. check.
I disagree with most of their major beliefs.
***************************
so, I tentatively give myself another point.
That makes me 5 fo 5.
That's pretty accurate deductive reasoning (read: "comprehensive") to me.
but then, I used to read Sherlock Holmes in the third grade. It really intrigued our teacher to the max.
**************************************
But do keep telling us how "open minded" you are. It's just so typical.
Yes, keep pretending you're not closed-minded. Keep pretending that Jesus said no to gay marriage. You're like the kid that closes his eyes and ears and goes "na na na, I'm not listening," whenever a valid point is brought up against you. It's just so typical.
************************************
In conclusion, "no I'm not but you are, nyah nyah nyah". Admit it. I'm five for five. And you got nothin but bull-only sandwiches.
MOO! LOL
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login