Basing society on christianity (or any religion for that matter) is wrong. Religion is incredbly shallow, and has never been proven. it has NEVER been proven that all the events claimed in the bible actually happened. In fact, there is not a single bit of evidence that there even is a god. Ever wondered why creationism is never taught in school, besides religion class? Because religion is too flawed.
For example, the Earth is NOT flat, the earth does NOT have edges, like the bible claims.
You are, right here and now, shoving your belief (which is unproven, and the only reason you belief it is because you are told to believe it, without a shred of evidence) onto someone else. even when its none of your bussiness.
When you claim something to be the truth, you need to bring evidence, and a simple book of 2000 years old is not going to cut it.
I wasn't going to reply to this until I read you claiming that the BIble says that the Earth is flat...no it doesn't. You can have your opinions, however absurd I believe them to be...but I won't tolerate you lying about the Bible.
Did Bible Writers believe the earth was flat?
No—this false idea is not taught in Scripture!
In the Old Testament, Job 26:7 explains that the earth is suspended in space—the obvious comparison being with the spherical sun and moon. By 150 B.C., the Greek astronomer Eratosthenes had already measured the 25,000-mile circumference of the earth. The round shape of our planet was a conclusion easily drawn by watching ships disappear over the horizon and also by observing eclipse shadows, and we can assume that such information was well known to New Testament writers. Earth's spherical shape was, of course, also understood by Christopher Columbus. Some people may have thought the earth was flat, but certainly not the great explorers. Some Bible critics have claimed that Revelation 7:1 assumes a flat earth since the verse refers to angels standing at the "four corners" of the earth. Actually, the reference is to the cardinal directions: north, south, east, and west. Similar terminology is often used today when we speak of the sun's rising and setting, even though the earth, not the sun, is doing the moving. Bible writers used the "language of appearance," just as people always have. Without it, the intended message would be awkward at best and probably not understood clearly. When the Bible touches on scientific subjects, it is entirely accurate.
I thought creationist believe in Ptolemy's geocentric model ? Im sure you posted a Answers in Genesis link the described a geocentric model ? WIthout starting an argument on how completly, totaly and utterly absurd this is, i was just curious why you slipped up with your beliefs ?
Religion, and its VARIOUS interpretations of the bible have been wrong before, and the will be proven wrong again.
Off to read your biblical passages about Homosexuality, see if i can add a bit of my infamous interpretations to it
Where did Geocentrism really come from? Does Scripture unambiguously teach that the earth is the physical centre of the solar system?
I find it absolutely appalling that people cannot learn to accept others for who they are. Do you think it was their choice to be born like that? No! Some seem to think that they choose to be homosexual, but that is not the case.
You may find it absolutely appalling however the human capacity to show injustice to other human beings is not a new concept. As long as people are different, look different, behave different there will be biased and prejudice, its simply human nature. As far as my particular issues with homosexuals doesn’t lie in the fact that they are gay, but in the fact they want society to condone their behavior.
People may make the argument that being gay isn’t a choice, however acting upon that behavior is. We can’t ‘morally’ judge one another as we are all prone to human error, faults and weaknesses, however we can judge actions and behavior, which is something we do have a power over by virtue of choice.
It may make people feel good about themselves when they project an attitude of tolerance towards homosexuals, however human beings will always have some level of biased against another human being. People cannot simply separate their humanity and nature by virtue of perceived tolerance.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Basing society on christianity (or any religion for that matter) is wrong. Religion is incredbly shallow, and has never been proven. it has NEVER been proven that all the events claimed in the bible actually happened. In fact, there is not a single bit of evidence that there even is a god. Ever wondered why creationism is never taught in school, besides religion class? Because religion is too flawed.
For example, the Earth is NOT flat, the earth does NOT have edges, like the bible claims.
You are, right here and now, shoving your belief (which is unproven, and the only reason you belief it is because you are told to believe it, without a shred of evidence) onto someone else. even when its none of your bussiness.
When you claim something to be the truth, you need to bring evidence, and a simple book of 2000 years old is not going to cut it.
I wasn't going to reply to this until I read you claiming that the BIble says that the Earth is flat...no it doesn't. You can have your opinions, however absurd I believe them to be...but I won't tolerate you lying about the Bible.
Did Bible Writers believe the earth was flat?
No—this false idea is not taught in Scripture!
In the Old Testament, Job 26:7 explains that the earth is suspended in space—the obvious comparison being with the spherical sun and moon. By 150 B.C., the Greek astronomer Eratosthenes had already measured the 25,000-mile circumference of the earth. The round shape of our planet was a conclusion easily drawn by watching ships disappear over the horizon and also by observing eclipse shadows, and we can assume that such information was well known to New Testament writers. Earth's spherical shape was, of course, also understood by Christopher Columbus. Some people may have thought the earth was flat, but certainly not the great explorers. Some Bible critics have claimed that Revelation 7:1 assumes a flat earth since the verse refers to angels standing at the "four corners" of the earth. Actually, the reference is to the cardinal directions: north, south, east, and west. Similar terminology is often used today when we speak of the sun's rising and setting, even though the earth, not the sun, is doing the moving. Bible writers used the "language of appearance," just as people always have. Without it, the intended message would be awkward at best and probably not understood clearly. When the Bible touches on scientific subjects, it is entirely accurate.
I thought creationist believe in Ptolemy's geocentric model ? Im sure you posted a Answers in Genesis link the described a geocentric model ? WIthout starting an argument on how completly, totaly and utterly absurd this is, i was just curious why you slipped up with your beliefs ?
Religion, and its VARIOUS interpretations of the bible have been wrong before, and the will be proven wrong again.
Off to read your biblical passages about Homosexuality, see if i can add a bit of my infamous interpretations to it
Where did Geocentrism really come from? Does Scripture unambiguously teach that the earth is the physical centre of the solar system?
Geocentric gobbledegook (Semi-technical, critique of Marshall Hall’s book The Earth is Not Moving)
So its a point of contention amongst christians ?
Wow, and its been said that science is useless because of conflicting theories, I didnt know the bible itself had conflicting theories. I suppose thats what happens though when your basis no longer is viable (nothing is written in the bible about what rotates around what)
scientist assume "world is real, facts are real, experiments mean something"
christians assume "World is real, facts are real, experiments mean something, bible is real, god exist, god is infallable, genesis is a definiative work on physics, and God can do whatever he wants"
the less assumptions, normally, the better the results
Keep in mind that we can’t quantify God with just simple human concepts either, any more than we could produce an omnipotent being for the purposes of proving there is an omnipotent being. If a skeptic requires empirical proof, ask them to prove empirically that something needs empirical proof to be believed. As you can see the conversation can quickly become absurd.
grr, so much for attempting to fix the quote issue.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Saying "He said homosexuality is an abomination, not homosexuals!" is probably the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life. A person is a homosexual because their sexual orientation is homosexuality. The fact that they are a homosexual is dependant on their acting out of sexual acts with a member of the same sex. So by saying that homosexuality is an abomination, he is saying that homosexuals are an abomination since the only thing identifying them as homosexuals is their homosexuality. To clarify: a homosexual is someone who engages in homosexual activity. To say "I dont hate homosexuals, I hate homosexual activity" is like saying "I dont hate teachers, I just hate people teaching!"
As you point out, part of the difference in understanding is purely a difference of definition. I would understand a "homosexual" to be someone is attracted to someone of the same sex, and therefore someone could still be described as a "homosexual" even if they had had no sexual experience (otherwise what word would you use for such a person?). Does a homosexual between boyfriends stop being a homosexual?
Even aside from that though, the concept which you find to be "the dumbest thing you've ever heard in your life", is still a perfectly valid one. I'm not even in full agreement with KeeperofKeb on the homosexuality issue, but the same concept applies to many things and it is an important distiction and probably worth addressing in a thread where people are accusing christians of hating gays.
Scenario 1: Your mother becomes an alcoholic. You see how she changes when she drinks, you see how addiction is affecting her life. You still love her as much as ever, but you hate it when she drinks.
Scenario 2: Your teenage daughter is clearly sleeping around. You worry about her getting used and abused, picking up STDs or getting pregnant. You're not going to stop loving her, but you hate that she is being promiscuous.
Scenario 3: Your friend has an affair with a married woman. You might express your views to your friend that nothing good will come of it. Your heart aches for the husband. You hate what your friend is doing, but he is still your friend and you still love him.
Scenario 4: Someone with the same views as KeeperofKeb discovers that his best friend is a practicing homosexual. He doesn't abandon that friendship and continues to love his friend, even though he doesn't approve of what his friend gets up to with his boyfriend.
(1) Hates alcoholism, does not hate the alcoholic. (2) Hates promiscuity, does not hate promiscuous person. (3) Hates adultery, does not hate the person commiting adultery. (4) Hates homosexuality, does not hate the homosexual.
So, yes, it is like saying "I don't hate teachers, I just hate people teaching", but that sentence only sounds like a dumb thing to say because people don't usually hate teaching and the use of the word "people" makes the meaning a little unclear. Perhaps it makes more sense if we put it into another scenario: Your brother starts teaching hatred towards homosexuals in his classroom. You believe your brother is misguided and is now misguiding others. You hate that he is teaching this, but you still love your brother (who is the teacher).
So then if we take on board that chrsitians are asked to love everybody, then it is quite possible for christians who are against homosexuality to "hate the sin and love the sinner" without being hypocritical. In fact, as shown in the above scenarios, if you didn't love them, why would you care anyway?
I'm not saying that every christian achieves this, of course.
You can not try to save someone, and not make it personal, it is totally impossible. All homosexuals have a right to be offended by what your saying, to compare someones love for someone to alcoholism is offensive, no matter which context you try in vain to fit it into. Be real, people, dont hide behind your own predjudices and make them out to be God's.
What?
Either I have no understanding of what you're trying to say here, or you completely missed the point I was trying to make.
As you point out, part of the difference in understanding is purely a difference of definition. I would understand a "homosexual" to be someone is attracted to someone of the same sex, and therefore someone could still be described as a "homosexual" even if they had had no sexual experience (otherwise what word would you use for such a person?). Does a homosexual between boyfriends stop being a homosexual?
So any guy on Earth that has ever held some attraction for the same sex is gay? Damn.
Anyway, if you're against homosexuality for religious reasons, take an objective step back and think about what you believe: An omnipotent creator is actually closed minded enough to damn a group of people to eternal suffering because of their sexual preferences. If my creator is that egotistical and closed-minded, I think I'd rather hang out with Satan.
As you point out, part of the difference in understanding is purely a difference of definition. I would understand a "homosexual" to be someone is attracted to someone of the same sex, and therefore someone could still be described as a "homosexual" even if they had had no sexual experience (otherwise what word would you use for such a person?). Does a homosexual between boyfriends stop being a homosexual?
So any guy on Earth that has ever held some attraction for the same sex is gay? Damn.
Heh...perhaps I should have added "as a general sexual preference". By the other definition, you could have had one homosexual experiment sometime in your past and be classed as a homosexual.
Anyway, if you're against homosexuality for religious reasons, take an objective step back and think about what you believe: An omnipotent creator is actually closed minded enough to damn a group of people to eternal suffering because of their sexual preferences. If my creator is that egotistical and closed-minded, I think I'd rather hang out with Satan.
I'll assume that you read my earlier post and that this part wasn't aimed at me - I've never said anything about anyone being damned for their sexual preference.
Reasons for Christianity's(very well others too, not just picking on lion food) views on sex in general:
Sex for procreation only, and no birth control. Why?! MONEY! Make more people so they can keep on paying the church/king. There's no money in recreational sex(in this regard).
People are around for X years and have their own religions. A bit later, a story about some Jesus and 2 others almost jus like him come along. The people in power FORCE their new religion upon you, and than go and kill anyone else who doesn't agree with them.
And, to make the transition a bit easier, the authors of the big 3 incorporate this and that from the pagan's they conquer. Not just Christmas trees, Jesus' whole trip to hell, the way he died, yadayadayada.
To sum up: Religion is a terrible excuse for this whole thing. You're simply ignorant if you think you know the best way for people who aren't you to live, and arrogant in your ill founded belief in something Divine.
Murder(for ANY reason, soldier) rape and theft are all that should get you damned by society, not where ya wanna stick it.
Everyone has the right to believe in whatever they want. Whether it's The Chrizzist, Nazi-ism, or a retard named Bush being an interdimensional reptoid(some people really do, Reptile Agenda, neat/funny stuff). No one has the right to force their views on others, but it seems to be all alot of people wanna do.
They came from the sea and they came from the sky, Captain America is going to die!
You cant say that Hating alcoholism and not the alcoholic is the same as hating homosexuality not the homosexual. Love is an emotion, alcoholism is a disease, people are normally in very unfortunate states when they become alcohlics, homosexuals and homosexuality... this is just natural. You have no right to question any persons natural emotion, and compare it to helping someone with a disease. Its hardly acting with compassion.
The comparison was not between alcoholism and homosexuality. The point is thatin the same way that one can hate alcoholism but love the alcoholic, one could hate homosexuality but love the homosexual (the assumption is made that the person in question disapproves of homosexuality - whether that is right or wrong is not the issue I'm dealing with). The point is aimed at someone who can't seem to understand the difference between hating an action but loving the person doing it. I'm not making any point about what someone's response to such a situation should be, just that they can still love someone in that situation, no matter what they think of what the person is doing.
Hate homosexuality all you want, but that does not give you the right to judge a single man on this planet. And thats exactly what you are doing by trying to 'save' him, save him from your own personal beliefs.
I mention nothing of try to "save" anyone. Even if I thought homosexual sex was sinful, how would stating that I believed it was sinful be judging anybody? I can understand a homosexual not liking that viewpoint, but nobody would be judging or trying to save anyone.
There are probably plenty of things that some people do that you don't approve of (not signaling at roundabouts for example) - are you judging them because you think that behaviour is wrong and wouldn't do it yourself? (and NO, I'm not comparing homosexuality with not signaling at roundabouts )
From a christian perspective, the only saving is done by Jesus, and as we all fall short of God's glory, gays don't get any special mention there.
Well then christains are that way. I have only met about 8 christains who don't say they Hate gays. The other ones said because it was a sin. And yes-some cristains are gay and some don't believe in that but I would say the madjority does. Fact it is so wound up that the amrecian people wont even vote for a president unless they say there christain and hate gays.
And necrotherion-if you that pregdiuce Ihope your kids love takin it up the ass-that will show you somthing also if you don't care then why the hell did you post
My mind has changed so much. Yet I'm still acting like I'm the same.
necrotherion is clearly a closet homo. He so wants a rod up his ass, but he's scared to admit it, so he takes it out on others. Not what The Good Book teaches, but very Christian. Good job.
They came from the sea and they came from the sky, Captain America is going to die!
I reserve hate for people, behavior or organisations that deserve it.
Homosexuals are not on that list.
But as someone said, I do not understand, or agree with, their obsession with underlining peoples stereotype of them.
Gay pride parades and the sort I have a hard time understanding, as it seems to only fuel the fire.
I would not mind yet another explanation of this?
I very much doubt I would ever participate in a "straigth pride parade", for any reason, in fact such a thing would probably be viewed as homofobic.
People are people and their sexual preferences should have no value in how you judge them, unless that is they are either going after my children or my dog.
As an answer to the original question, fear and ignorance is probably the answer, same as with racism or "faithism" ( he, did I just make up a word? Is there a word for what I tried to describe? ).
I can say what I do hate, people who are willfully ignorant, not even bother trying to understand, and quite often these are the people who hate people for shallow reasons such as skincolor or sexual orientation.
You could say I hate haters..
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saying "He said homosexuality is an abomination, not homosexuals!" is probably the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life. A person is a homosexual because their sexual orientation is homosexuality. The fact that they are a homosexual is dependant on their acting out of sexual acts with a member of the same sex. So by saying that homosexuality is an abomination, he is saying that homosexuals are an abomination since the only thing identifying them as homosexuals is their homosexuality. To clarify: a homosexual is someone who engages in homosexual activity. To say "I dont hate homosexuals, I hate homosexual activity" is like saying "I dont hate teachers, I just hate people teaching!"
As you point out, part of the difference in understanding is purely a difference of definition. I would understand a "homosexual" to be someone is attracted to someone of the same sex, and therefore someone could still be described as a "homosexual" even if they had had no sexual experience (otherwise what word would you use for such a person?). Does a homosexual between boyfriends stop being a homosexual?
Even aside from that though, the concept which you find to be "the dumbest thing you've ever heard in your life", is still a perfectly valid one. I'm not even in full agreement with KeeperofKeb on the homosexuality issue, but the same concept applies to many things and it is an important distiction and probably worth addressing in a thread where people are accusing christians of hating gays.
Scenario 1: Your mother becomes an alcoholic. You see how she changes when she drinks, you see how addiction is affecting her life. You still love her as much as ever, but you hate it when she drinks.
Scenario 2: Your teenage daughter is clearly sleeping around. You worry about her getting used and abused, picking up STDs or getting pregnant. You're not going to stop loving her, but you hate that she is being promiscuous.
Scenario 3: Your friend has an affair with a married woman. You might express your views to your friend that nothing good will come of it. Your heart aches for the husband. You hate what your friend is doing, but he is still your friend and you still love him.
Scenario 4: Someone with the same views as KeeperofKeb discovers that his best friend is a practicing homosexual. He doesn't abandon that friendship and continues to love his friend, even though he doesn't approve of what his friend gets up to with his boyfriend.
(1) Hates alcoholism, does not hate the alcoholic. (2) Hates promiscuity, does not hate promiscuous person. (3) Hates adultery, does not hate the person commiting adultery. (4) Hates homosexuality, does not hate the homosexual.
So, yes, it is like saying "I don't hate teachers, I just hate people teaching", but that sentence only sounds like a dumb thing to say because people don't usually hate teaching and the use of the word "people" makes the meaning a little unclear. Perhaps it makes more sense if we put it into another scenario: Your brother starts teaching hatred towards homosexuals in his classroom. You believe your brother is misguided and is now misguiding others. You hate that he is teaching this, but you still love your brother (who is the teacher).
So then if we take on board that chrsitians are asked to love everybody, then it is quite possible for christians who are against homosexuality to "hate the sin and love the sinner" without being hypocritical. In fact, as shown in the above scenarios, if you didn't love them, why would you care anyway?
I'm not saying that every christian achieves this, of course.
The thing is homosexuality isnt like being an alcoholic, being promiscuous (though there are promiscuous homosexuals), or committing infidelity. Those three are choices (one chose to drink, even if they dont choose to continue drinking). Being a homosexual is not a choice. Acting on homosexual urges is as much of a choice as acting on heterosexual ones, which really isnt a choice seeing as how the compulsion to have sex is instinct. Furthermore, being any of those things does not socially define you as much as your sexual orientation.
I dont know about you, but my sexual preference is a VERY large aspect of my life and my existence. I indentify myself as an American heterosexual, white, male college student. Being heterosexual, engaging in heterosexual relationships, thinking about heterosexual actions, engaging in heterosexual actions, and so on takes up most of my time. If someone hated a prime aspect of my social idenity, they'd hate me. Dont people take it personally when people elsewhere in the world say "I hate Americans?" They hate a significant portion of your identity, therefore they hate you. This isnt so hard.
Furthermore, KeeperofKeb and the rest of you shouldnt hate anything. Christianity teaches not to hate. Therefore hating a major aspect of someone's life (because along with consumption of food, sex is the only thing any organism really needs) is akin to hating them.
And as I for my "teaching" metaphor, you missed the point. Being a teacher is a profession. Teaching is what a teacher does. People is not ambiguous because people means human beings. I dont know what you're talking about by saying that the usage of the word "people" is somehow ambiguous. In my statement in my last post, it means "I dont hate teachers (as in people who make their profession to teach), but I hate it when people teach (anything... at all)" SInce a teacher is defined as one who teaches, if you hate teaching, you hate teachers.
Being a homosexual and engaging in homosexual acts are not seperate.
This also brings up the question about long term homosexual relationships. Like many heterosexual relationships, after you've been with one person for a very long time, you usually stop having sex or have sex rarely. So would these people still be an object of KeeperofKeb's hatred? Yes, I bet they would.
The thing is homosexuality isnt like being an alcoholic, being promiscuous (though there are promiscuous homosexuals), or committing infidelity. Those three are choices (one chose to drink, even if they dont choose to continue drinking). Being a homosexual is not a choice. Acting on homosexual urges is as much of a choice as acting on heterosexual ones, which really isnt a choice seeing as how the compulsion to have sex is instinct. Furthermore, being any of those things does not socially define you as much as your sexual orientation. I dont know about you, but my sexual preference is a VERY large aspect of my life and my existence. I indentify myself as an American heterosexual, white, male college student. Being heterosexual, engaging in heterosexual relationships, thinking about heterosexual actions, engaging in heterosexual actions, and so on takes up most of my time. If someone hated a prime aspect of my social idenity, they'd hate me. Dont people take it personally when people elsewhere in the world say "I hate Americans?" They hate a significant portion of your identity, therefore they hate you. This isnt so hard. Furthermore, KeeperofKeb and the rest of you shouldnt hate anything. Christianity teaches not to hate. Therefore hating a major aspect of someone's life (because along with consumption of food, sex is the only thing any organism really needs) is akin to hating them. And as I for my "teaching" metaphor, you missed the point. Being a teacher is a profession. Teaching is what a teacher does. People is not ambiguous because people means human beings. I dont know what you're talking about by saying that the usage of the word "people" is somehow ambiguous. In my statement in my last post, it means "I dont hate teachers (as in people who make their profession to teach), but I hate it when people teach (anything... at all)" SInce a teacher is defined as one who teaches, if you hate teaching, you hate teachers. Being a homosexual and engaging in homosexual acts are not seperate. This also brings up the question about long term homosexual relationships. Like many heterosexual relationships, after you've been with one person for a very long time, you usually stop having sex or have sex rarely. So would these people still be an object of KeeperofKeb's hatred? Yes, I bet they would.
Ok, I could pick apart your various points, but when it comes down to it, it seems like you are not able to separate the two. However, most Christians (and non-Christians for that matter) do separate their feelings for what a person does from the person (and would apply that to homosexuality) and that's all I was trying to explain. I wasn't comparing homosexuality to being an alcoholic or being promiscuous, I was using the anaology to explain that distinction. If you refuse to accept the distinction, there's nothing more I can say to you on the matter, but you're the one saying that Christians hate gays - that's not what they're saying.
Like you, some Christians also get the distinction confused or get so single minded on a particular sin, that they lose sight of the more important things. That's when there are problems.
I didnt claim that all Christians hate gays. In fact, I think I stressed the point that real Christians wouldnt hate gays because Christians arent supposed to be hateful. In fact I know a few Christians who are gay (oddly enough, one is majoring in religious studies with the intent of becoming a minister... she's an interesting person I'd have to say). I am saying that the distinction between the act and the indentity which is something defined by that act and that act alone is a false one to make. I see what you are saying, but someone who doesnt act on homosexual urges really isnt a homosexual, just like someone who doesnt teach isnt a teacher... to use that metaphor once again.
In which case I'd disagree with your definition for the same reason that I would say that a virgin who is attracted to people of the opposite sex would be classed as heterosexual and not as someone of undetermined sexual preference.
I probably should have said that you're the one saying KeeperofKeb hates gays (not Christians generally)...he clearly stated that he didn't.
Christians are expected to hate sin - everyone sins - Christians are supposed to love everybody.
Christians are expected to hate sin - everyone sins - Christians are supposed to love everybody.
Wait, what? Christians hate sin, everyone sins, christians love everybody. My blatant contradictionmeter is going off. I hate when people judge others based on their own morals, everyone has different morals, so what's the point of judging? And don't tell me you aren't judging. You think homosexuality is a sin, therefore you judge such acts. Your judging of these acts indirectly damns people to eternal damnation.
Wait, what? Christians hate sin, everyone sins, christians love everybody. My blatant contradictionmeter is going off. I hate when people judge others based on their own morals, everyone has different morals, so what's the point of judging? And don't tell me you aren't judging. You think homosexuality is a sin, therefore you judge such acts. Your judging of these acts indirectly damns people to eternal damnation.
Do you hate that other people have their own morals? Is having their own morals automatically judging you in some way if yours aren't the same?
I think that not loving God with all your heart, mind and strength is a sin. It's breaking what Jesus stated was the most important commandment. I hope I don't judge anyone who commits it, because I certainly do.
If Christians believe that everyone sins, then I guess, by using your argument, that they indirectly damn everyone to eternal damnation - nobody is getting singled out.
To be honest, I have a real problem with anyone who points out that by doing a certain thing you'll go to hell. For a start, they don't know the mind of God and how the afterlife works well enough to judge that. Secondly, it's always going to be hypocritical because the person pointing that out certainly isn't perfect and is likely to do something everyday that would condemn themselves by their own reasoning.
Wait, what? Christians hate sin, everyone sins, christians love everybody. My blatant contradictionmeter is going off. I hate when people judge others based on their own morals, everyone has different morals, so what's the point of judging? And don't tell me you aren't judging. You think homosexuality is a sin, therefore you judge such acts. Your judging of these acts indirectly damns people to eternal damnation.
Do you hate that other people have their own morals? Is having their own morals judging you in some way if yours aren't the same?
I think that not loving God with all your heart, mind and strength is a sin. It's breaking what Jesus stated was the most important commandment. I hope I don't judge anyone who commits it, because I certainly do.
If Christians believe that everyone sins, then I guess, by using your argument, that they indirectly damn everyone to eternal damnation - nobody is getting singled out.
Well said. Everyone sins, and if God hates gay people, that makes my dick limp.
I find it absolutely appalling that people cannot learn to accept others for who they are. Do you think it was their choice to be born like that? No! Some seem to think that they choose to be homosexual, but that is not the case.
You may find it absolutely appalling however the human capacity to show injustice to other human beings is not a new concept. As long as people are different, look different, behave different there will be biased and prejudice, its simply human nature. As far as my particular issues with homosexuals doesn’t lie in the fact that they are gay, but in the fact they want society to condone their behavior.
People may make the argument that being gay isn’t a choice, however acting upon that behavior is. We can’t ‘morally’ judge one another as we are all prone to human error, faults and weaknesses, however we can judge actions and behavior, which is something we do have a power over by virtue of choice.
It may make people feel good about themselves when they project an attitude of tolerance towards homosexuals, however human beings will always have some level of biased against another human being. People cannot simply separate their humanity and nature by virtue of perceived tolerance.
"As long as people are different, look different, behave different there will be biased and prejudice, its simply human nature. As far as my particular issues with homosexuals doesn’t lie in the fact that they are gay, but in the fact they want society to condone their behavior. "
"People may make the argument that being gay isn’t a choice"
"however we can judge actions and behavior, which is something we do have a power over by virtue of choice. "
"being gay isn’t a choice, however acting upon that behavior is"
"however human beings will always have some level of biased against another human being. People cannot simply separate their humanity and nature by virtue of perceived tolerance. "
How wonderfully ignorant you are
Your comment could not have illustrated my point any better.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Christians are expected to hate sin - everyone sins - Christians are supposed to love everybody.
Wait, what? Christians hate sin, everyone sins, christians love everybody. My blatant contradictionmeter is going off. I hate when people judge others based on their own morals, everyone has different morals, so what's the point of judging? And don't tell me you aren't judging. You think homosexuality is a sin, therefore you judge such acts. Your judging of these acts indirectly damns people to eternal damnation.
Hate the sin, not the sinner, that's not a contradiction.
And the whole "God hates gays" thing has been very damaging to Chrianity as a whole...I wish those people would go back to reading the parts of the Bible that say "love one another" and stop reading Leviticus.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Homophobes scream about how the most votes wins? I don't know what it's like in Australia but anybody who says anything remotely resembling a homophobic remark is immediately ostracized and bombarded by the media, while the gay community pretty much has free reign on what they are allowed to say about their beliefs. A United States general recently made the comment that he believes homosexuality is immoral, he didn't say anything hateful, he simply said that it is immoral...the press had a field day with that...so what's the difference between his belief that it's immoral, and somebody else's belief that it is not? Does he not have a right to his opinion? It seems to me that a group of people (The gay community, GLAD in particular) who are so adament about their rights as Human Beings, and as Americans should really think twice when they open up with the hypocritical attempts to silence someone for THEIR beliefs, while simultaneously promoting an agenda that does nothing but push their own.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and admit a truth about myself. Some will interpret this as anit-gay. I am aware of that. I hope that people can at least respect the fact that I'm being honest when I know that I'm setting myself up to be attacked. Ok, it's like this. I don't hate homosexuals. My philosophy is live and let live. But I do hate gay parades, gay rallies, gays on television ranting about homophobia, gay rights, the supposed need for gay marriage to be legally recognized and all the fuss made about that issue, and basically any and all in-your-face promotion of the gay lifestyle. What I've always wondered is why gay people can't just be gay and get on with their lives without making a public issue of it. Ok, to be fair about it I'm sure that many do. Maybe most, I don't know. It's the attention whoring and making a mountain out of a molehill types who generate anti-gay sentiments in my mind. Ok, now you can attack me for being a politically incorrect, homophic nazi.
Well said IMO. I hate gay parades, african american parades, hispanic parades, etc... Why not just have a parade? Why do you have to be special in some way? What about you being gay or being a minority makes you want to be seen? I'm a straight white male - if I held a white straight male parade, there'd be thousands of protesters charging me with white supremisist and homophobic charges. Turn it around, how do they think I feel when I see a gay parade stroll by, it makes me feel as if they think they're superior to me somehow.
So again I wonder, why not just have a parade for everyone? You could always say "this parade is sponsered by the American Gay Movement" and that'd be cool with me, I would say "hey these guys are contributing to our communities and holding events, that's down right cool of them". But when they essentially isolate themselves or segregate themselves, it leaves me with the impression that they don't want to be equal to me, and so, I feel no desire to strive for equality.
Representation is everything.
What greater tribute to free will than the power to question the highest of authority? What greater display of loyalty than blind faith? What greater gift than free will? What greater love than loyalty?
Comments
I wasn't going to reply to this until I read you claiming that the BIble says that the Earth is flat...no it doesn't. You can have your opinions, however absurd I believe them to be...but I won't tolerate you lying about the Bible.
Did Bible Writers believe the earth was flat?
No—this false idea is not taught in Scripture!
In the Old Testament, Job 26:7 explains that the earth is suspended in space—the obvious comparison being with the spherical sun and moon. By 150 B.C., the Greek astronomer Eratosthenes had already measured the 25,000-mile circumference of the earth. The round shape of our planet was a conclusion easily drawn by watching ships disappear over the horizon and also by observing eclipse shadows, and we can assume that such information was well known to New Testament writers. Earth's spherical shape was, of course, also understood by Christopher Columbus. Some people may have thought the earth was flat, but certainly not the great explorers. Some Bible critics have claimed that Revelation 7:1 assumes a flat earth since the verse refers to angels standing at the "four corners" of the earth. Actually, the reference is to the cardinal directions: north, south, east, and west. Similar terminology is often used today when we speak of the sun's rising and setting, even though the earth, not the sun, is doing the moving. Bible writers used the "language of appearance," just as people always have. Without it, the intended message would be awkward at best and probably not understood clearly. When the Bible touches on scientific subjects, it is entirely accurate.
I thought creationist believe in Ptolemy's geocentric model ? Im sure you posted a Answers in Genesis link the described a geocentric model ? WIthout starting an argument on how completly, totaly and utterly absurd this is, i was just curious why you slipped up with your beliefs ?
Religion, and its VARIOUS interpretations of the bible have been wrong before, and the will be proven wrong again.
Off to read your biblical passages about Homosexuality, see if i can add a bit of my infamous interpretations to it
Where did Geocentrism really come from? Does Scripture unambiguously teach that the earth is the physical centre of the solar system?
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
You may find it absolutely appalling however the human capacity to show injustice to other human beings is not a new concept. As long as people are different, look different, behave different there will be biased and prejudice, its simply human nature. As far as my particular issues with homosexuals doesn’t lie in the fact that they are gay, but in the fact they want society to condone their behavior.
People may make the argument that being gay isn’t a choice, however acting upon that behavior is. We can’t ‘morally’ judge one another as we are all prone to human error, faults and weaknesses, however we can judge actions and behavior, which is something we do have a power over by virtue of choice.
It may make people feel good about themselves when they project an attitude of tolerance towards homosexuals, however human beings will always have some level of biased against another human being. People cannot simply separate their humanity and nature by virtue of perceived tolerance.
The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
I wasn't going to reply to this until I read you claiming that the BIble says that the Earth is flat...no it doesn't. You can have your opinions, however absurd I believe them to be...but I won't tolerate you lying about the Bible.
Did Bible Writers believe the earth was flat?
No—this false idea is not taught in Scripture!
In the Old Testament, Job 26:7 explains that the earth is suspended in space—the obvious comparison being with the spherical sun and moon. By 150 B.C., the Greek astronomer Eratosthenes had already measured the 25,000-mile circumference of the earth. The round shape of our planet was a conclusion easily drawn by watching ships disappear over the horizon and also by observing eclipse shadows, and we can assume that such information was well known to New Testament writers. Earth's spherical shape was, of course, also understood by Christopher Columbus. Some people may have thought the earth was flat, but certainly not the great explorers. Some Bible critics have claimed that Revelation 7:1 assumes a flat earth since the verse refers to angels standing at the "four corners" of the earth. Actually, the reference is to the cardinal directions: north, south, east, and west. Similar terminology is often used today when we speak of the sun's rising and setting, even though the earth, not the sun, is doing the moving. Bible writers used the "language of appearance," just as people always have. Without it, the intended message would be awkward at best and probably not understood clearly. When the Bible touches on scientific subjects, it is entirely accurate.
I thought creationist believe in Ptolemy's geocentric model ? Im sure you posted a Answers in Genesis link the described a geocentric model ? WIthout starting an argument on how completly, totaly and utterly absurd this is, i was just curious why you slipped up with your beliefs ?
Religion, and its VARIOUS interpretations of the bible have been wrong before, and the will be proven wrong again.
Off to read your biblical passages about Homosexuality, see if i can add a bit of my infamous interpretations to it
Where did Geocentrism really come from? Does Scripture unambiguously teach that the earth is the physical centre of the solar system?
So its a point of contention amongst christians ?
Wow, and its been said that science is useless because of conflicting theories, I didnt know the bible itself had conflicting theories. I suppose thats what happens though when your basis no longer is viable (nothing is written in the bible about what rotates around what)
scientist assume "world is real, facts are real, experiments mean something"
christians assume "World is real, facts are real, experiments mean something, bible is real, god exist, god is infallable, genesis is a definiative work on physics, and God can do whatever he wants"
the less assumptions, normally, the better the results
Keep in mind that we can’t quantify God with just simple human concepts either, any more than we could produce an omnipotent being for the purposes of proving there is an omnipotent being. If a skeptic requires empirical proof, ask them to prove empirically that something needs empirical proof to be believed. As you can see the conversation can quickly become absurd.
grr, so much for attempting to fix the quote issue.
The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
As you point out, part of the difference in understanding is purely a difference of definition. I would understand a "homosexual" to be someone is attracted to someone of the same sex, and therefore someone could still be described as a "homosexual" even if they had had no sexual experience (otherwise what word would you use for such a person?). Does a homosexual between boyfriends stop being a homosexual?
Even aside from that though, the concept which you find to be "the dumbest thing you've ever heard in your life", is still a perfectly valid one. I'm not even in full agreement with KeeperofKeb on the homosexuality issue, but the same concept applies to many things and it is an important distiction and probably worth addressing in a thread where people are accusing christians of hating gays.
Scenario 1: Your mother becomes an alcoholic. You see how she changes when she drinks, you see how addiction is affecting her life. You still love her as much as ever, but you hate it when she drinks.
Scenario 2: Your teenage daughter is clearly sleeping around. You worry about her getting used and abused, picking up STDs or getting pregnant. You're not going to stop loving her, but you hate that she is being promiscuous.
Scenario 3: Your friend has an affair with a married woman. You might express your views to your friend that nothing good will come of it. Your heart aches for the husband. You hate what your friend is doing, but he is still your friend and you still love him.
Scenario 4: Someone with the same views as KeeperofKeb discovers that his best friend is a practicing homosexual. He doesn't abandon that friendship and continues to love his friend, even though he doesn't approve of what his friend gets up to with his boyfriend.
(1) Hates alcoholism, does not hate the alcoholic. (2) Hates promiscuity, does not hate promiscuous person. (3) Hates adultery, does not hate the person commiting adultery. (4) Hates homosexuality, does not hate the homosexual.
So, yes, it is like saying "I don't hate teachers, I just hate people teaching", but that sentence only sounds like a dumb thing to say because people don't usually hate teaching and the use of the word "people" makes the meaning a little unclear. Perhaps it makes more sense if we put it into another scenario: Your brother starts teaching hatred towards homosexuals in his classroom. You believe your brother is misguided and is now misguiding others. You hate that he is teaching this, but you still love your brother (who is the teacher).
So then if we take on board that chrsitians are asked to love everybody, then it is quite possible for christians who are against homosexuality to "hate the sin and love the sinner" without being hypocritical. In fact, as shown in the above scenarios, if you didn't love them, why would you care anyway?
I'm not saying that every christian achieves this, of course.
What?
Either I have no understanding of what you're trying to say here, or you completely missed the point I was trying to make.
As you point out, part of the difference in understanding is purely a difference of definition. I would understand a "homosexual" to be someone is attracted to someone of the same sex, and therefore someone could still be described as a "homosexual" even if they had had no sexual experience (otherwise what word would you use for such a person?). Does a homosexual between boyfriends stop being a homosexual?
So any guy on Earth that has ever held some attraction for the same sex is gay? Damn.
Anyway, if you're against homosexuality for religious reasons, take an objective step back and think about what you believe: An omnipotent creator is actually closed minded enough to damn a group of people to eternal suffering because of their sexual preferences. If my creator is that egotistical and closed-minded, I think I'd rather hang out with Satan.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
So any guy on Earth that has ever held some attraction for the same sex is gay? Damn.
Heh...perhaps I should have added "as a general sexual preference". By the other definition, you could have had one homosexual experiment sometime in your past and be classed as a homosexual.
Anyway, if you're against homosexuality for religious reasons, take an objective step back and think about what you believe: An omnipotent creator is actually closed minded enough to damn a group of people to eternal suffering because of their sexual preferences. If my creator is that egotistical and closed-minded, I think I'd rather hang out with Satan.
I'll assume that you read my earlier post and that this part wasn't aimed at me - I've never said anything about anyone being damned for their sexual preference.
Sex for procreation only, and no birth control. Why?! MONEY! Make more people so they can keep on paying the church/king. There's no money in recreational sex(in this regard).
People are around for X years and have their own religions. A bit later, a story about some Jesus and 2 others almost jus like him come along. The people in power FORCE their new religion upon you, and than go and kill anyone else who doesn't agree with them.
And, to make the transition a bit easier, the authors of the big 3 incorporate this and that from the pagan's they conquer. Not just Christmas trees, Jesus' whole trip to hell, the way he died, yadayadayada.
To sum up: Religion is a terrible excuse for this whole thing. You're simply ignorant if you think you know the best way for people who aren't you to live, and arrogant in your ill founded belief in something Divine.
Murder(for ANY reason, soldier) rape and theft are all that should get you damned by society, not where ya wanna stick it.
Everyone has the right to believe in whatever they want. Whether it's The Chrizzist, Nazi-ism, or a retard named Bush being an interdimensional reptoid(some people really do, Reptile Agenda, neat/funny stuff). No one has the right to force their views on others, but it seems to be all alot of people wanna do.
They came from the sea and they came from the sky, Captain America is going to die!
And necrotherion-if you that pregdiuce Ihope your kids love takin it up the ass-that will show you somthing also if you don't care then why the hell did you post
My mind has changed so much. Yet I'm still acting like I'm the same.
They came from the sea and they came from the sky, Captain America is going to die!
I reserve hate for people, behavior or organisations that deserve it.
Homosexuals are not on that list.
But as someone said, I do not understand, or agree with, their obsession with underlining peoples stereotype of them.
Gay pride parades and the sort I have a hard time understanding, as it seems to only fuel the fire.
I would not mind yet another explanation of this?
I very much doubt I would ever participate in a "straigth pride parade", for any reason, in fact such a thing would probably be viewed as homofobic.
People are people and their sexual preferences should have no value in how you judge them, unless that is they are either going after my children or my dog.
As an answer to the original question, fear and ignorance is probably the answer, same as with racism or "faithism" ( he, did I just make up a word? Is there a word for what I tried to describe? ).
I can say what I do hate, people who are willfully ignorant, not even bother trying to understand, and quite often these are the people who hate people for shallow reasons such as skincolor or sexual orientation.
You could say I hate haters..
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As you point out, part of the difference in understanding is purely a difference of definition. I would understand a "homosexual" to be someone is attracted to someone of the same sex, and therefore someone could still be described as a "homosexual" even if they had had no sexual experience (otherwise what word would you use for such a person?). Does a homosexual between boyfriends stop being a homosexual?
Even aside from that though, the concept which you find to be "the dumbest thing you've ever heard in your life", is still a perfectly valid one. I'm not even in full agreement with KeeperofKeb on the homosexuality issue, but the same concept applies to many things and it is an important distiction and probably worth addressing in a thread where people are accusing christians of hating gays.
Scenario 1: Your mother becomes an alcoholic. You see how she changes when she drinks, you see how addiction is affecting her life. You still love her as much as ever, but you hate it when she drinks.
Scenario 2: Your teenage daughter is clearly sleeping around. You worry about her getting used and abused, picking up STDs or getting pregnant. You're not going to stop loving her, but you hate that she is being promiscuous.
Scenario 3: Your friend has an affair with a married woman. You might express your views to your friend that nothing good will come of it. Your heart aches for the husband. You hate what your friend is doing, but he is still your friend and you still love him.
Scenario 4: Someone with the same views as KeeperofKeb discovers that his best friend is a practicing homosexual. He doesn't abandon that friendship and continues to love his friend, even though he doesn't approve of what his friend gets up to with his boyfriend.
(1) Hates alcoholism, does not hate the alcoholic. (2) Hates promiscuity, does not hate promiscuous person. (3) Hates adultery, does not hate the person commiting adultery. (4) Hates homosexuality, does not hate the homosexual.
So, yes, it is like saying "I don't hate teachers, I just hate people teaching", but that sentence only sounds like a dumb thing to say because people don't usually hate teaching and the use of the word "people" makes the meaning a little unclear. Perhaps it makes more sense if we put it into another scenario: Your brother starts teaching hatred towards homosexuals in his classroom. You believe your brother is misguided and is now misguiding others. You hate that he is teaching this, but you still love your brother (who is the teacher).
So then if we take on board that chrsitians are asked to love everybody, then it is quite possible for christians who are against homosexuality to "hate the sin and love the sinner" without being hypocritical. In fact, as shown in the above scenarios, if you didn't love them, why would you care anyway?
I'm not saying that every christian achieves this, of course.
The thing is homosexuality isnt like being an alcoholic, being promiscuous (though there are promiscuous homosexuals), or committing infidelity. Those three are choices (one chose to drink, even if they dont choose to continue drinking). Being a homosexual is not a choice. Acting on homosexual urges is as much of a choice as acting on heterosexual ones, which really isnt a choice seeing as how the compulsion to have sex is instinct. Furthermore, being any of those things does not socially define you as much as your sexual orientation.
I dont know about you, but my sexual preference is a VERY large aspect of my life and my existence. I indentify myself as an American heterosexual, white, male college student. Being heterosexual, engaging in heterosexual relationships, thinking about heterosexual actions, engaging in heterosexual actions, and so on takes up most of my time. If someone hated a prime aspect of my social idenity, they'd hate me. Dont people take it personally when people elsewhere in the world say "I hate Americans?" They hate a significant portion of your identity, therefore they hate you. This isnt so hard.
Furthermore, KeeperofKeb and the rest of you shouldnt hate anything. Christianity teaches not to hate. Therefore hating a major aspect of someone's life (because along with consumption of food, sex is the only thing any organism really needs) is akin to hating them.
And as I for my "teaching" metaphor, you missed the point. Being a teacher is a profession. Teaching is what a teacher does. People is not ambiguous because people means human beings. I dont know what you're talking about by saying that the usage of the word "people" is somehow ambiguous. In my statement in my last post, it means "I dont hate teachers (as in people who make their profession to teach), but I hate it when people teach (anything... at all)" SInce a teacher is defined as one who teaches, if you hate teaching, you hate teachers.
Being a homosexual and engaging in homosexual acts are not seperate.
This also brings up the question about long term homosexual relationships. Like many heterosexual relationships, after you've been with one person for a very long time, you usually stop having sex or have sex rarely. So would these people still be an object of KeeperofKeb's hatred? Yes, I bet they would.
Ok, I could pick apart your various points, but when it comes down to it, it seems like you are not able to separate the two. However, most Christians (and non-Christians for that matter) do separate their feelings for what a person does from the person (and would apply that to homosexuality) and that's all I was trying to explain. I wasn't comparing homosexuality to being an alcoholic or being promiscuous, I was using the anaology to explain that distinction. If you refuse to accept the distinction, there's nothing more I can say to you on the matter, but you're the one saying that Christians hate gays - that's not what they're saying.
Like you, some Christians also get the distinction confused or get so single minded on a particular sin, that they lose sight of the more important things. That's when there are problems.
In which case I'd disagree with your definition for the same reason that I would say that a virgin who is attracted to people of the opposite sex would be classed as heterosexual and not as someone of undetermined sexual preference.
I probably should have said that you're the one saying KeeperofKeb hates gays (not Christians generally)...he clearly stated that he didn't.
Christians are expected to hate sin - everyone sins - Christians are supposed to love everybody.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
Do you hate that other people have their own morals? Is having their own morals automatically judging you in some way if yours aren't the same?
I think that not loving God with all your heart, mind and strength is a sin. It's breaking what Jesus stated was the most important commandment. I hope I don't judge anyone who commits it, because I certainly do.
If Christians believe that everyone sins, then I guess, by using your argument, that they indirectly damn everyone to eternal damnation - nobody is getting singled out.
To be honest, I have a real problem with anyone who points out that by doing a certain thing you'll go to hell. For a start, they don't know the mind of God and how the afterlife works well enough to judge that. Secondly, it's always going to be hypocritical because the person pointing that out certainly isn't perfect and is likely to do something everyday that would condemn themselves by their own reasoning.
Do you hate that other people have their own morals? Is having their own morals judging you in some way if yours aren't the same?
I think that not loving God with all your heart, mind and strength is a sin. It's breaking what Jesus stated was the most important commandment. I hope I don't judge anyone who commits it, because I certainly do.
If Christians believe that everyone sins, then I guess, by using your argument, that they indirectly damn everyone to eternal damnation - nobody is getting singled out.
Well said. Everyone sins, and if God hates gay people, that makes my dick limp.https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
You may find it absolutely appalling however the human capacity to show injustice to other human beings is not a new concept. As long as people are different, look different, behave different there will be biased and prejudice, its simply human nature. As far as my particular issues with homosexuals doesn’t lie in the fact that they are gay, but in the fact they want society to condone their behavior.
People may make the argument that being gay isn’t a choice, however acting upon that behavior is. We can’t ‘morally’ judge one another as we are all prone to human error, faults and weaknesses, however we can judge actions and behavior, which is something we do have a power over by virtue of choice.
It may make people feel good about themselves when they project an attitude of tolerance towards homosexuals, however human beings will always have some level of biased against another human being. People cannot simply separate their humanity and nature by virtue of perceived tolerance.
"As long as people are different, look different, behave different there will be biased and prejudice, its simply human nature. As far as my particular issues with homosexuals doesn’t lie in the fact that they are gay, but in the fact they want society to condone their behavior. "
"People may make the argument that being gay isn’t a choice"
"however we can judge actions and behavior, which is something we do have a power over by virtue of choice. "
"being gay isn’t a choice, however acting upon that behavior is"
"however human beings will always have some level of biased against another human being. People cannot simply separate their humanity and nature by virtue of perceived tolerance. "
How wonderfully ignorant you are
Your comment could not have illustrated my point any better.The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Hate the sin, not the sinner, that's not a contradiction.
And the whole "God hates gays" thing has been very damaging to Chrianity as a whole...I wish those people would go back to reading the parts of the Bible that say "love one another" and stop reading Leviticus.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Well said IMO. I hate gay parades, african american parades, hispanic parades, etc... Why not just have a parade? Why do you have to be special in some way? What about you being gay or being a minority makes you want to be seen? I'm a straight white male - if I held a white straight male parade, there'd be thousands of protesters charging me with white supremisist and homophobic charges. Turn it around, how do they think I feel when I see a gay parade stroll by, it makes me feel as if they think they're superior to me somehow.
So again I wonder, why not just have a parade for everyone? You could always say "this parade is sponsered by the American Gay Movement" and that'd be cool with me, I would say "hey these guys are contributing to our communities and holding events, that's down right cool of them". But when they essentially isolate themselves or segregate themselves, it leaves me with the impression that they don't want to be equal to me, and so, I feel no desire to strive for equality.
Representation is everything.
What greater tribute to free will than the power to question the highest of authority? What greater display of loyalty than blind faith? What greater gift than free will? What greater love than loyalty?