For Dar and anyone else who harbors his feelings.

[Kaldaur]

Religion is not one of those certain truths. That's what Jice was getting at. Indeed, it is one of the greatest assumptions of humanity. We have absolutely no proof of it. Those are the things we need to question. Questioning everything is stupid. The sky is blue. I cannot question that. We have no proof of God. I cannot question that. Sorry Jice if I'm completely offbase, but I believe, Metanis, that this is what he was aiming at.

[Xzion]

I've yet to see a single persuasive argument as to why the definition of marriage, something that has and always had such an intrinsic value to our society, should be changed to encompass things that are decidedly not marriage. No one is currently being denied the right to have whatever kind of relationship they want with whoever they want.

I love how you basically say "so what if marriage is changed and polygamous and polyamorous relationships are recognized as marriages?" To begin with, something like this that would fundamentally change our society should be decided by the people, not the courts. And, as I said, it's disgusting how much worse off children in broken homes are than ones in stable families. The benefits of marriage are plain to see, we can't even debate that. Marriage may not be what it once was, but it's an institution that is worthy of being protected and preserved.

Wouldnt you say the same thing about the President?
I take it you supported Bush over Gore, as i did four years ago and yet you think it is "right" that he is in office due to the results of the 2000 election

Unless you come out and say "although i disagree with his views, Al Gore should be the president right now, because the people elected him, not the courts" Then I cant find a better example that would point out blatant hypocrisy, but then again i guess im pretty damn stupid to expect anything more out of a neocon

im still waiting from brotha to respond to this

[Brotha]

I've yet to see a single persuasive argument as to why the definition of marriage, something that has and always had such an intrinsic value to our society, should be changed to encompass things that are decidedly not marriage. No one is currently being denied the right to have whatever kind of relationship they want with whoever they want.

I love how you basically say "so what if marriage is changed and polygamous and polyamorous relationships are recognized as marriages?" To begin with, something like this that would fundamentally change our society should be decided by the people, not the courts. And, as I said, it's disgusting how much worse off children in broken homes are than ones in stable families. The benefits of marriage are plain to see, we can't even debate that. Marriage may not be what it once was, but it's an institution that is worthy of being protected and preserved.

Wouldnt you say the same thing about the President?
I take it you supported Bush over Gore, as i did four years ago and yet you think it is "right" that he is in office due to the results of the 2000 election

Unless you come out and say "although i disagree with his views, Al Gore should be the president right now, because the people elected him, not the courts" Then I cant find a better example that would point out blatant hypocrisy, but then again i guess im pretty damn stupid to expect anything more out of a neocon

im still waiting from brotha to respond to this

Whoever is elected president doesn't "fundamentally change our society," but Bush did win the electoral college (although I think the electoral college should be done away with).

[Xzion]

I've yet to see a single persuasive argument as to why the definition of marriage, something that has and always had such an intrinsic value to our society, should be changed to encompass things that are decidedly not marriage. No one is currently being denied the right to have whatever kind of relationship they want with whoever they want.

I love how you basically say "so what if marriage is changed and polygamous and polyamorous relationships are recognized as marriages?" To begin with, something like this that would fundamentally change our society should be decided by the people, not the courts. And, as I said, it's disgusting how much worse off children in broken homes are than ones in stable families. The benefits of marriage are plain to see, we can't even debate that. Marriage may not be what it once was, but it's an institution that is worthy of being protected and preserved.

Wouldnt you say the same thing about the President?
I take it you supported Bush over Gore, as i did four years ago and yet you think it is "right" that he is in office due to the results of the 2000 election

Unless you come out and say "although i disagree with his views, Al Gore should be the president right now, because the people elected him, not the courts" Then I cant find a better example that would point out blatant hypocrisy, but then again i guess im pretty damn stupid to expect anything more out of a neocon

im still waiting from brotha to respond to this

Whoever is elected president doesn't "fundamentally change our society," but Bush did win the electoral college (although I think the electoral college should be done away with).

The Bush white house has changed our society a shitload more then gay marriage would.

Honestly i believe most people against gay marriage is uncomfortable with there sexuality and trys to artificially assure others of there hetrosexuality by spewing hatred and intolerance towards the said minority

So you think Gore deserves to be president right now then, according to democracy?

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Honestly i believe most people against gay marriage is uncomfortable with there sexuality and trys to artificially assure others of there hetrosexuality by spewing hatred and intolerance towards the said minority
?

Honestly, I believe most people for gay marriage spew hatred and intolerance toward the said majority.

[Lynks]

Hatred, no; intolerance to the fact that they think being gay concerns them, yes.

And I'll add, even though I don't have any stats to back me up, it seems that the anti-gay people are the minority now.

[Aaeamdar]

Honestly, I believe most people for gay marriage spew hatred and intolerance toward the said majority.

Ummm, well, yeah. Of course. What are you thinking? You think that Blacks weren't bitter and hateful towards bigots that supported school segregation, anti-miscognation laws, and the host of other "seperate but equal" laws. What makes you think that gays should be loving and tollerant of the christain bigots today that want to keep the unequal treatment of gays by the law in place? That's insane.

If some gays want to start pushing out some sort of gay affirmative action, I'll be the first one to call that out as BS. But that's not up here. Its basic shit, like being permitted to join the military, being permitted to marry, being permitted to adopt children, being able to suck cock in our own bedrooms without being arrested, etc. Basic shit that you breaders all take for granted. If you think that by doing your best to ensure that this sort of inequity is maintained is going to win over the hearts of those you are oppressing, you are nuts.

People who support those inequities are either bigots or just ignorant and I'll never have any issue naming them as such. That does not mean I won't fight for your right to be a bigot, but don't expect a bunch of hugs and goodwill from the people you are out to fuck over.

[Akaran_D]

So you act bigoted to counter the people that are acting bigoted?

[Aaeamdar]

I am failing to see how not liking people who are supporting laws specifically targeted at me and designed in particular to treat me differently than others and worse than others can possibly be considered bigotry. Please feel free to explain further, though. Maybe I am missing something.

You might want to go check out what bigotry means first, though.

[Akaran_D]

Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
- big·ot·ed /-g&-t&d/ adjective
- big·ot·ed·ly adverb

And while I'm at it..

Main Entry: 1prej·u·dice
Pronunciation: 'pre-j&-d&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin praejudicium previous judgment, damage, from prae- + judicium judgment -- more at JUDICIAL
1 : injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights; especially : detriment to one's legal rights or claims
2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics

You lump all Christians into one sect. Heck, you lump almost all religions into one sect. Not all Christians are out to get you. I'd go as far as to say that the majority aren't. Homosexual rights have almost never been supported in all of history until now, and yes, there are Christians in positions that can influence policy right at this time and they don't like your lifestyle. I'm pretty damn certain they wouldn't like mine all that much either.

So, by targeting ALL Christians with your triade, yes, yes you are acting like a bigot. Sorry man, but it's the truth.

[Markulas]

How about this: Do you actually believe God talks to Bush to go to war with Iraq?

[Akaran_D]

No.
edited further: I don't beleive God talked to Bush about banning abortions, banning gay marriage, or going to use the toilet, either. I am not a Bush supporter, but at least he backs SOME issues that I agree with and more than Kerry.

[Aaeamdar]

No, its not. If there is one good apple in a barrel of 1000 apples, calling that a rotten barrel is neither misleading nor unfairly labling the one good apple.

You seem to be under serveral misconceptions.

Firstly, you seem to think that when I state (among other things) that Christian's Suck, that this is a condemnation of all Christians. That's simply not true. I have no issue with any Christian that wants to pratice their religion, publicly or privately. I have stated that repeatedly. I have an issue with the Christian organizations that are directing their political power towards maintaining these inequitable laws through the tools of fear, hatred and bigotry and a problem with every Christian individual that supports those institutions.

Secondly, you seem to be under the very misguided opinion that there is some small group of narrow minded Christains that think homosexuality is a sin that must be curtailed and discouraged by our society. That is so very very far from the truth. The bigorty runs so deap and wide in Christianity, that the Republican Party has as part of its platform a Constitutional Amendment forbidding gay marriage. This is not some small bigoted minority, this is a majority in the Republican Party. In fact, when the platform was voted upon at this year's convention, there was not a single delegate willing to even raise an objection to its inclusion (contrast that with the anti-abortion plank that, while voted in, recieved substantial objections and proposed amendments to its language).

I say Christian's suck because they are the problem. All of them? Of course not. I am sure there were some very kind hearted Nazi's too that objected to the treatment of Jews and other minorities. But that does not make the statement "Nazi's Suck" either bigoted or controversial. Your claim to bigotry is simply absurd.

You want me to stop correctly pointing out how much Christians do in fact Suck, then you show me Christians overwhelmingly rejecting the hate mongering of its leaders. That's not happening. To the contrary, the bulk of Christians agree with that leadership. If they didn't, none of this would even be an issue.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Hatred, no; intolerance to the fact that they think being gay concerns them, yes.

And I'll add, even though I don't have any stats to back me up, it seems that the anti-gay people are the minority now.

The media has succeeded then. Shoving in peoples faces over the last decade has worked.

Personally, I could give two shits what people do, but I reserve the right to think it gross and abnormal.

[Akaran_D]

The bulk of Christians don't even have a voice to broadcast through. The Church of Jesus Christ doesn't exactly have a leader. We're individuals. We don't have a Pope. We don't have a High Priest. We don't have a President, a Ruling Party, or whatever-else-you-want-to-call-it that's living on this earth.

What we have assjacks like Fawell that preach their crap and get airtime with it because they've convinced their followers to go along with it. Heck, I even agree with you - the ones that spew hate ARE a problem and ARE acting intolerant and ARE acting against the teachings of Christ. I have no more respect for them than I do a child murderer. If they don't like it, that's fine, they can not like it as long as they aren't out of line with it. People follow them because they are blinded by their spew - nothing new. Hitler did it. Musilini did it. Stalin did it. They do beleive they are doing what they feel in their heart is right - they may be wrong, but you cannot fault them for following what they beleive to be true. I'm not comming to their defense in that statement. Just because you beleive you are right does not make it so, and like you, they are not correct.

Sorry Dar, but when you make blanket statements, it comes across as you acting as a bigot. And as you are there whenever you find a slight against homosexuals and blame Christians for it, I'm going to be there defending my religion. You are incorrect. Flat out. The Word of God has helped so many people over the last two thousand years - millions more than the ones it's harmed, I'd wager. People always reference the Crusades, or the Inquisition to point out how far back my religion has been evil.

Ever stop to think about what would happen if the morals and teachings of Christ hadn't been around the last two thous years+? I'm willing to bet the world would be a far worse place to live in without the basic tennants of right, wrong, faith, and a belief in God.

You don't beleive, and I'm sorry for you. You will never know what it feels like to find solstice in faith, you will never know what it feels like to have a religion who's basic tennants include helping each other when its needed. I pity you for that, and I hope one day you do change your views on this.

[Lynks]

Hatred, no; intolerance to the fact that they think being gay concerns them, yes.

And I'll add, even though I don't have any stats to back me up, it seems that the anti-gay people are the minority now.

The media has succeeded then. Shoving in peoples faces over the last decade has worked.

I don't think that Ellen and Will and Grace on TV is really shoving it in your face. It only seems that way to you because you think its 'gross' so you become more intolerable towards it.

[Akaran_D]

I think Will and Grace is usually funny.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

I think Will and Grace is usually funny.

I agree.

[Akaran_D]

Too late to retract my statement?

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Too late to retract my statement?

/slap

[Akaran_D]

Innapropiate touching!

[XunilTlatoani]

As former or current players on Veeshan, can we all at least agree that we don't have any fundamental problems with Dar getting fucked in the ass on a regular basis?



just teasin'

[Sylvus]

Personally, I could give two shits what people do, but I reserve the right to think it gross and abnormal.

But you believe that they should have the same rights as you, even though it's "gross", right? How do you feel about heterosexuals who engage in anal/oral sex, or something else that you might find gross or abnormal like maybe a heterosexual couple who are into watersports or scat or even the guy likes the girl to touch his bunghole? Should they still be able to get married and have insurance and inheritance rights and the ability to visit each other in the hospital the same as you or me?

[Metanis]

Personally, I could give two shits what people do, but I reserve the right to think it gross and abnormal.

But you believe that they should have the same rights as you, even though it's "gross", right? How do you feel about heterosexuals who engage in anal/oral sex, or something else that you might find gross or abnormal like maybe a heterosexual couple who are into watersports or scat or even the guy likes the girl to touch his bunghole? Should they still be able to get married and have insurance and inheritance rights and the ability to visit each other in the hospital the same as you or me?

Your argument is nonsensical. Since they are a guy and a girl of course they have a right to marraige and the rest of those things. I don't see your point.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Personally, I could give two shits what people do, but I reserve the right to think it gross and abnormal.

But you believe that they should have the same rights as you, even though it's "gross", right? How do you feel about heterosexuals who engage in anal/oral sex, or something else that you might find gross or abnormal like maybe a heterosexual couple who are into watersports or scat or even the guy likes the girl to touch his bunghole? Should they still be able to get married and have insurance and inheritance rights and the ability to visit each other in the hospital the same as you or me?

Sure. But, I reserve the right to think it is gross, abnormal and a genetic fuckup. Surely you wouldn't want to take away my freedom of expression would you?

[Tenuvil]

Personally, I could give two shits what people do, but I reserve the right to think it gross and abnormal.

But you believe that they should have the same rights as you, even though it's "gross", right? How do you feel about heterosexuals who engage in anal/oral sex, or something else that you might find gross or abnormal like maybe a heterosexual couple who are into watersports or scat or even the guy likes the girl to touch his bunghole? Should they still be able to get married and have insurance and inheritance rights and the ability to visit each other in the hospital the same as you or me?

Your argument is nonsensical. Since they are a guy and a girl of course they have a right to marraige and the rest of those things. I don't see your point.

The doctrine of "separate but equal" comes into play here.

[Atokal]

So getting hit by an egg or a cream pie equals an "agenda of hate and bigotry?" Silly me, I thought that you were referring to, you know, actual actions of hatred and bigotry, like the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard or the dragging death of James Byrd. But no, no, you were talking about getting HIT IN THE FACE BY A FUCKING PIE. Seriously man, you have a long way to go on this one.

Read, Comprehend. Show me one article or shred of proof that these horrendous crimes were condoned by an organized CHRISTIAN religion.

Making Aaeamdar's statement that Christian's that organize, fund, and lobby for new laws resort to violence if they don't get their own way just as ludicrous.

Now saying that people who profess to be Christians are incapable of committing the atrocities you mention above would be equally stupid. But in your world I suppose Gays and Lesbians have never committed murder?

We are talking about Organizations not individuals because if we are talking about the individual then the evil perpetrated by one human being on another happens regardless of whether they say they are Christian, Muslim, Gay, Straight etc. See the point?

[Sylvus]

Personally, I could give two shits what people do, but I reserve the right to think it gross and abnormal.

But you believe that they should have the same rights as you, even though it's "gross", right? How do you feel about heterosexuals who engage in anal/oral sex, or something else that you might find gross or abnormal like maybe a heterosexual couple who are into watersports or scat or even the guy likes the girl to touch his bunghole? Should they still be able to get married and have insurance and inheritance rights and the ability to visit each other in the hospital the same as you or me?

Your argument is nonsensical. Since they are a guy and a girl of course they have a right to marraige and the rest of those things. I don't see your point.

It's far from nonsensical. Midnyte has the right to find whatever he wants "gross" and "abnormal", my question was whether someone else's rights should be limited just because he doesn't care for a particular behavior. I do not think that they should be.

Besides one not being sexually attracted to members of the same sex, there isn't a whole lot of difference between anal/oral sex in a heterosexual or homosexual couple. It's humorous that you say "Since they are a guy and a girl of course they have a right to marraige and the rest of those things". Why do they have that right? I think this is a good example of one of those things that Jice was telling you to question. Why do only men and women have the right to marry? Is it because when the laws were put on the books there weren't people asking for same-sex marriage? Is there another good reason for the law? Is there any good, non-religious reason why only a man and a woman should be able to marry?

The marriage thing is based on religious beliefs, which it shouldn't be, but what reason is there for not allowing tax, insurance, or inheritance rights the same as for any other two people that love each other and have committed themselves to one another? I don't think that it says anything in the Bible about any of those other situations.

[Tenuvil]

Personally, I could give two shits what people do, but I reserve the right to think it gross and abnormal.

But you believe that they should have the same rights as you, even though it's "gross", right? How do you feel about heterosexuals who engage in anal/oral sex, or something else that you might find gross or abnormal like maybe a heterosexual couple who are into watersports or scat or even the guy likes the girl to touch his bunghole? Should they still be able to get married and have insurance and inheritance rights and the ability to visit each other in the hospital the same as you or me?

Your argument is nonsensical. Since they are a guy and a girl of course they have a right to marraige and the rest of those things. I don't see your point.

It's far from nonsensical. Midnyte has the right to find whatever he wants "gross" and "abnormal", my question was whether someone else's rights should be limited just because he doesn't care for a particular behavior. I do not think that they should be.

Besides one not being sexually attracted to members of the same sex, there isn't a whole lot of difference between anal/oral sex in a heterosexual or homosexual couple. It's humorous that you say "Since they are a guy and a girl of course they have a right to marraige and the rest of those things". Why do they have that right? I think this is a good example of one of those things that Jice was telling you to question. Why do only men and women have the right to marry? Is it because when the laws were put on the books there weren't people asking for same-sex marriage? Is there another good reason for the law? Is there any good, non-religious reason why only a man and a woman should be able to marry?

The marriage thing is based on religious beliefs, which it shouldn't be, but what reason is there for not allowing tax, insurance, or inheritance rights the same as for any other two people that love each other and have committed themselves to one another? I don't think that it says anything in the Bible about any of those other situations.

I totally agree that any two people that love each other enough to commit to spending the rest of their lives together ought to be able to marry legally and have the same benefits, straight or gay.

I am however all for Bush and his fundie comrades continuing to push for the Constitutional amendment and keeping this issue in the public eye. Why? Because eventually someone will realize that it's just another form of illegal discrimination against a class of people and then the courts will have no choice but to declare gay marriage lawful.

And to our bible thumper, anti-gay marriage friends on the forum, when Jesus preached about love, it was unconditional love for all, not those just like you. Please feel free to toss scripture at me saying why homosexuality is bad and wrong. Some of you fuckers are a damn sight more deviant than most gay people I know and they still let you breed.

[Marbus]

Here is something to think about...

Say the wives of myself and my best friend both die in a horrible accident. We do everything together and love each other in every way except sexually, thus we aren't gay so the marriage thing isn't an issue. Who is to say it's not right for us to be able to live together in order to have someone to hang out with the rest of our lives because we don't want to deal with the psychological pain of possibly loosing another mate... shouldn't we have the ability to get benefits as well?

Personally I'm all for civil unions and I think we should remove the whole marriage things from any form of Government control... but I'm curious, if this situation came up and we weren't gay but wanted the tax breaks would we be discriminated against because we weren't? It opens up a host of questions...

which of course takes me back to... keep the Government out of marriage.

Marb

[Mawafu]

Please feel free to toss scripture at me saying why homosexuality is bad and wrong.

1 Corinthians 6
8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

This is why Christians believe homosexuality is wrong. As to why they think legal unions and/or benefits should not be granted to homosexual couples, I have no clue..

[Lynks]

Words change over time, ideas change too. Why can't some of you just admit that you are anti-gay instead of hiding behind the "marriage is solely between a man and a woman, its says so in the dictionary".

If we had your way of thinking, people would still believe the world is flat because that used to be the definition of the world.

[Sylvus]

Funny how it's only male prostitutes and not female. Probably because the man that wrote that verse and/or chapter still wanted to be able to pay women for sex.

[Marbus]

The interesting part of this is that many scholors question some of that phrasing...

Example:
Homosexual offenders - this is usually read as people who offend because they are homosexuals. However it's widely know, by those who actually read, that most of the pagan religions of the time (i.e. parts of Greece and Rome) practiced some form of forced homosexuality or pedophilia where boys were forced into acts against their will or participated in a pagan, and thus Anti-Christian ritual. By those standards it could be read (for those of you who don't know there are no periods in the original text, well in the oldest copies we have, we don't have any originals) as individuals who commit homosexual crimes. The people at the time would have understood what the true meaning was... we on the otherhand 2000 years later call that pedophilia rather than Homosexual offender. But that's not even listed here is it? Instead we have the word Homosexual which obviously mean, for most people at least, any form of homosexuality.

I'm not saying that is the correct point of view but rather pointing out there are multiple ways to interpert a 2000 year old document, many of which you will never hear you local minister talk about openly...

I personally try to focus on Love God, Love your Neighbor... Jesus said the whole of the Law and the Prophets all depend on these two things. Seems to me like if we can figure out how to do those first then we are doing pretty well... and probably won't have a lot of time to worry about someone else's sin (if you believe it to be so) rather leave that between them and God, I personally have enough on my plate already with my own actions to go chasing someone else do see if they might be doing something...

Marb

[masteen]

Isn't one of the dogmas of Catholocism that anything the faithful hold true on earth shall also be upheld in Heaven? So basically if the pope came out and said that butt-slamming is OK, wouldn't that make it OK with the big guy?

[Sylvus]

Or so Kevin Smith would have us believe. I went to Catholic school for 12 years and I don't know that I ever heard that, but there's a pretty decent chance I just wasn't paying attention.

[Mplor]

Please feel free to toss scripture at me saying why homosexuality is bad and wrong.

1 Corinthians 6
8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

This is why Christians believe homosexuality is wrong. As to why they think legal unions and/or benefits should not be granted to homosexual couples, I have no clue..

Oh? Whoever translated that appears to have contributed the word "homosexual" on his own, perhaps because it fit with what he thought the Bible should say.

Here's what the tried and true King James Version has said for centuries:

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

WTF, the revilers get off easy in your bubble-gum Bible!

[Tenuvil]

And hence the crux of my issue with the Bible being "the word of God". It was a book written by men, not God. Furthermore it is continually being translated and ...how shall we say, subtly modified by people with an agenda.

If memory serves, and remember I'm a heathen Godless bastage, Corinthians was a group of letters written by the Apostle Paul to early believers in Corinth. Why does Paul's opinion on what wicked acts translate to denial of Paradise equate to "God says these people are evil and bad"?

[Atokal]

How this thread got derailed into more Christian bashing and Bible bashing illustrates my point perfectly.

A self proclaimed gay man starts a thread (based upon a hoax) for the sole purpose of bashing Christians once again. I call him out on his bigotted, hate filled agenda. Pointing out that if anyone on this board were to attack homosexuals with the same vim and vigor they would be drawn, quartered, and the resulting limbs scattered to the 4 corners of the VV kingdom.

If Aaeamdar's little tirades against Christians were limited to his area of concern (gay rights) and if those posts were not presented as a description of ALL Christians I would make an attempt at debate and understanding.

I am not saying that gays do not deserve rights like "breeders"

I am saying that Aaeamdar stands tall as a shining example of what a bigot sounds like.

This is not a gay vs the church issue this is a hatred, intolerance issue.

[Zaelath]

And next week on The O'Reily Factor; Jews and their anti-nazi propaganda machine. We report, you decide!

[Marbus]

Akaran I didn't know you were a Gay man into bashing your own Religion? What PM have you been sending to Atokal...

Marb

[miir]

Those negros bashing the KKK... who the hell do they think are?
Fucking bigots.

[Atokal]

Those negros bashing the KKK... who the hell do they think are?
Fucking bigots.

Yes lets draw a straight line connecting an organization that exists solely for the purpose of persecuting anyone other than white anglos, whose very membership must subscribe to these beliefs, with that of ALL Christians on the planet being anti-gay. Wake up dude you are smarter than this.

This applies to the other poster who drew an analogy with Nazi's and Jews as well.

[miir]

I'm confused, don't Christians in general frown on homosexuality?
Doesn't the standard christian belief advocate tolerance and acceptance of your fellow man and at the same time condem homosexuality?


Homosexuals condemning christianity for it's bigotry does not equate to bigotry.

[*~*stragi*~*]

homosexuality has been around for thousands of years, its hardly abnormal... i do think sticking your peen in something that shoots out feces is pretty nasty though... i mean.. poop!
ew!

[Mawafu]

Pedophilia has been around for thousands of years, it's hardly abnormal.

Christians frown upon all acts of sin. Since the act of homosexuality is considered a sin it too is frowned upon. Only the extremists would go as far to condemn the person committing the act since every person sins. Too bad it's these people who seem to be the loudest and get the most publicity because they do paint Christianity in a bad light.

[Akaran_D]

Akaran I didn't know you were a Gay man into bashing your own Religion?

He's refering to the "Christian's unite!" post by Dar sometime in the last couple weeks.

What PM have you been sending to Atokal

None.. ever.. what kind of man do you think I am?

Christians frown upon all acts of sin. Since the act of homosexuality is considered a sin it too is frowned upon. Only the extremists would go as far to condemn the person committing the act since every person sins. Too bad it's these people who seem to be the loudest and get the most publicity because they do paint Christianity in a bad light.

I agree with this post almost 100%. I don't agree that homosexuality is necessarily a sin because I have yet to find a passage in the Bible from Jesus that says it is. I've seen what was quoted before, but there's OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS you have to take in context. Words that meant something one time may not mean the same thing in another and I can't say for sure either way. Since I don't know I can't judge even if it was my job to do so. I may not be a homosexual, I may not want to be a homosexual, but I'm not going to judge the ones that are as either sinners or saints.

Simply put, it's not my place.

[Hammerstalker Primus]

God and here is Aaeamdar yet again being a down trodden victim ROFLMAO. STFU asshole and stop your militant bashing of Christians.

[miir]

This post is now destined for the retards section.

[Hammerstalker Primus]

It was after your first post.