+483

You shouldn't discriminate against homophobes. Stupid people didn't choose to be stupid, they were born that way. They are still human beings and should have the same rights as everyone else, amirite?

87%Yeah You Are13%No Way
BreakfastFans avatar
Share
17 313
The voters have decided that BreakfastFan is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

Judging by the comments it's clear that people don't get the irony of this post.

There's no point arguing with you. Again you ignored everything I said and started talking about something else. So whatever. Hopefully you never breed and you'll die before you can spread your hatred. :)

Scrantoncity, I wish someone would actually pay you to leave this website and never use it again. I'm so tired of seeing your bullshit everywhere. Ok, you believe in the creation theory and same sex marriage. Guess what? Shoving it down people's throats aren't going to enable people to suddenly "have an epiphany" and follow your beliefs, oh wise one. Just shut up already. I imagine people don't like you outside the internet either. Work on your people skills

Anonymous +5Reply

You don't choose to be gay. Why would anyone hide in the closet if they were just doing it for attention. You are extremely ignorant. Yes, I am gay.

Anonymous +4Reply

I think this was a joke guys... If you didn't get it then, wow, you aren't the smartest of the bunch.

It doesn't matter who you are as far as gay, emo, or whatever you want to categorize yourself in to (I suggest not). It is about the individual themselves, not some lame idiotic labels or grouping of any kind.

If you were really smart enough, then you would walk away, forget the joke, get over it. No need to get flustered over some e-bull.

Anonymous +4Reply

Chill out it's just a post

Anonymous +4Reply

I think one of the teachers in my school is stupid. He does things that come off as kind of stupid to me and I hear other students saying that he is. I'm afraid to have him as my teacher! What if he teaches us stupid things? What if he turns ME stupid?

I wuz raised to believe that stupidity iz wrong. If my teacher turns me stoopid, my parents will kik me out and then I'll have to prostitoot myself, and I could get 1 of those stoopid peepl diseases havin secks with a stoopid purson.

I M SO CONFOOZD.

Oh and if god is going to reject me even though he made me this way then I hope to see your dumb ass in hell. _^

Anonymous +3Reply

A lot of douchebags were born douchebags, that doesn't mean I hate them any less.

@Rene_Magritte A lot of douchebags were born douchebags, that doesn't mean I hate them any less.

The post was a joke, it wasn't meant literally, it was meant to illustrate how stupid homophobes are.

SEXY_BEASTs avatar SEXY_BEAST Yeah You Are +2Reply

I love posts with long debates!

Troll on, my friends.

Anonymous +2Reply

Ok, anyone who beleives that homosexuality is a choice must never have read any sort of research on the matter. It is NOT a choice. Just as being black/tall/blue eyed whatever else is not a choice.

@SpearmintMilk Ok, anyone who beleives that homosexuality is a choice must never have read any sort of research on the matter. It...

No no. It's like being fat through gluttony. I eat hundreds of cookies and I reach the size of a small killer whale. I'm huge. But, as gigantism is frowned upon, I start saying that genetics made me fat. See? It's called lying. Or, just they havent accepted the truth.

@scrantoncity No no. It's like being fat through gluttony. I eat hundreds of cookies and I reach the size of a small killer...

I don't think a 4 year old boy who has only ever has crushes on other boys and wear's his mommy's clothes and plays with little girl toys chooses to be gay. They have no concept of sexuality. That's just the way they are.

@scrantoncity No no. It's like being fat through gluttony. I eat hundreds of cookies and I reach the size of a small killer...

Alright I'll just jump into this thing for the heck of it.
A hypothetical situation: I offer you a billion dollars to find a man attractive and have sex with him while enjoying it.
With your understanding of the subject you'd be able to just choose to be gay and find another man attractive in order to get the money.
But in the real world a straight guy would simply not be able to force himself to be gay, because it IS NOT a choice. And it's the same the other way around a gay guy can't force himself to find women attractive no matter how hard he tries.

@Rene_Magritte Alright I'll just jump into this thing for the heck of it. A hypothetical situation: I offer you a billion dollars...

I didn't say I would find guys attractive, no matter what you pay. That is psychological. I don't care if someone finds someone of the same sex attractive; that doesn't make you gay.

@scrantoncity I didn't say I would find guys attractive, no matter what you pay. That is psychological. I don't care if someone...

"I don't care if someone finds someone of the same sex attractive; that doesn't make you gay."
Yes, that does make you gay. Finding someone of the same sex attractive is the very definition of being gay. Look it up.

This user has deactivated their account.
@570760

Well it would be different before. I realize that yes, they are going against natural tendencies, and choosing to be gay, and yes they fall in Lu-love, sorry- And you know what, someone could fall in love with a duck. But that's irrelevant. The same argument exists. Once we shatter the value of marriage, no longer hold it sacred, then all kinds of stuff will follow. Inter-species marriage.

This user has deactivated their account.
@571389

Who said you can't fall in love with a duck? How would you know? You've never been in love with a duck. The duck makes me so happy! If you can fall in love with someone of the same gender, you can fall in love with a duck. Both are unnatural, both should be frowned upon.
It's not natural. Can two guys make a baby? Is that how Its done? Do ninety nine percent of animals engage in it? Are we built for homosexuality? Then it's Not natural.

This user has deactivated their account.
@571501

Do the majority of people have cancer? Then people with cancer aren't alive.
Seriously. That was a supplemental answer. What about my other points? Huh? Were we built for homosexuality? Is it prosperous in evolution? What? No? There is no argument for homosexuality. None.

@scrantoncity Do the majority of people have cancer? Then people with cancer aren't alive. Seriously. That was a supplemental...

it is prosperous in evolution. it is an affect of over-crowding, when a population becomes too large gays appear in order to stop the over-crowding. In an experiment with rats in a cage once the cage became full, a certain percentage of rats began exhibiting homosexual behavior.

@Saigot it is prosperous in evolution. it is an affect of over-crowding, when a population becomes too large gays appear in...

Well I would be able to look it up, but a certain kid at my school broke my computer, and I'm on my brothers, and won't allow searches for "homosexual rats." Funny. I doubt that is true, but I cannot substantiate my claims, for the children don't care about "homosexual rats." Curse them, and their homosexual attributes.
It isn't an "affect" of evolution. It isn't even an "effect" (with an E) of evolution. Assuming it's true, would you say that humans are the equivalents of rats? What? We are? Shameful. The thing is, there is honestly no need for them to turn homosexual. It's illogical. Primates and dolphins are (I think, and I'm unable to substantiate my claims) the only species/group that have sex for enjoyment. There is no beneficiary in turning gay. What? Do they just want some action? There are enough girls and guys for each other. Plenty. There is no benificial parts in being homosexual. Give me one.

@scrantoncity Well I would be able to look it up, but a certain kid at my school broke my computer, and I'm on my brothers, and...

Using your logic, if it doesn't happen to the majority of animals, it's unnatural. Humans are the only animals who have sex for love, not just procreation or recreation. According to you, that should make love unnatural. So both opposite sex and same sex love is unnatural.

There is nothing beneficial to being gay, but there is nothing beneficial to being in love, regardless of sexual orientation. Love is a product of man (or God or whatever) and is not necessary for procreation. You can have sex without love, but most people don't.

@pikabeau Using your logic, if it doesn't happen to the majority of animals, it's unnatural. Humans are the only animals who...

Wait, most people don't?! What about hookers and one night stands? Huh! There is a benefit to having sex; do you know it? Obviously not. Procreation? Repopulation? Huh!
You're right; I think sex outside of marriage is unnatural. That is, it's outside of it's natural place: the marriage bed.

@scrantoncity Wait, most people don't?! What about hookers and one night stands? Huh! There is a benefit to having sex; do you...

I never said sex wasn't beneficial, I said love wasn't, since according to your logic if animals don't do it, it's unnatural. Animals also don't get married, so that's unnatural too, right?

@pikabeau I never said sex wasn't beneficial, I said love wasn't, since according to your logic if animals don't do it, it's...

Maybe for you, since evolution decrees that we are animals, so I was arguing from an evolution standpoint. For me marriage is a gift from God, and I don't want gays botching that up.

@scrantoncity Maybe for you, since evolution decrees that we are animals, so I was arguing from an evolution standpoint. For me...

You were using arguments that said if animals don't do it, it's unnatural. I believe all consensual love is natural. But, by using your logic, love is unnatural. By the way, your arguments look weak if you don't actually believe in them and then admit that you don't believe in them.

People got married long before biblical times, and not only opposite sex couples.

@pikabeau You were using arguments that said if animals don't do it, it's unnatural. I believe all consensual love is...

Ah, but they apply to you, not me. Yeah, your love is unnatural, because you're gay. Also, did you even read what I believe if it'll make you feel better:

Did you know that Adam and Eve were the first humans? And God destroyed the world with a flood because of sin. He including homosexuality in the sinners. Homosexuality is an abomination, it's a sin, and it is unnatural. It's says so in the Bible. It's logical. We were made as a man and a women. Why not two men? Huh?
Why do you think homosexuality ISN'T unnatural? Huh? Because you're "in love?" Because you're happy?
Well I was in love with that duck up there, but I'm not fighting for that marriage.

@scrantoncity Ah, but they apply to you, not me. Yeah, your love is unnatural, because you're gay. Also, did you even read what I...

You were in love with the duck, but did the duck love you back? I don't think so. If love is not consensual, it is not okay. I should be allowed to marry my girlfriend because I love her and she loves me. We make each other happy. You did not make the duck happy, nor can a duck love you.

@scrantoncity Maybe for you, since evolution decrees that we are animals, so I was arguing from an evolution standpoint. For me...

why should you even care, OMG those guys are holding hands, it doesn't effect you any more than the people of other religions restrict your ability to practice yours

@Saigot why should you even care, OMG those guys are holding hands, it doesn't effect you any more than the people of other...

Because they are diluting the value of marriage. Because it's a sin, and we shouldn't condone sins. The Bible even calls it an abomination.

@scrantoncity Because they are diluting the value of marriage. Because it's a sin, and we shouldn't condone sins. The Bible even...

They're the ones diluting the value of marriage? What about divorce or drunk Vegas weddings or the marriges of celebrities that last a day or two? It is too easy for same sex couples to get married. They treat it like it's nothing while a gay couple has to fight to get married. Gays do not devalue marriage, straight couples who take marriage too lightly devalue it.

@pikabeau They're the ones diluting the value of marriage? What about divorce or drunk Vegas weddings or the marriges of...

Everyone devalues it, including those. But Gays, too.
The honest, only argument for gay marriage is that you're "in love."

@scrantoncity Everyone devalues it, including those. But Gays, too. The honest, only argument for gay marriage is that you're...

If your arguement against gays getting married is that they devalue it, but you say everyone devalues it, you must logically be against all marriage.

The onle reason straight people get married is because they're "in love" so gay people being in love seems like a pretty good arguement to me. (Before you say straight people get married to have kids, that's not true. More and more people have children out of wedlock.)

@pikabeau If your arguement against gays getting married is that they devalue it, but you say everyone devalues it, you must...

First off, that was an exaggeration; not everyone devalues it. Secondly, most people do, by not saving sex for marriage, getting a divorce, or cheating on their spouse. Yes, I am against heathen marriages, but those are impossible to oppose. Gays, however, are obviously, logically, and naturally out of sync. I really don't understand how anyone could be FOR gay marriage. So what, they're "in love." I'm in love with my duck. Hmm. Should I be allowed to marry it?
Hmm let us see. I don't know why every single person on the planet wants to get married.
I know why I wan't to get married, but there is no need to share that with you. I also know why some actual Christians get married, but once again, you're not privy to that information, on account of your heathenism.

@scrantoncity First off, that was an exaggeration; not everyone devalues it. Secondly, most people do, by not saving sex for...

You said, "Everyone devalues marriage," so I wasn't the one exagerating, you were.

It makes just as much sense to oppose premarital sex and divorce and adultery as it does to oppose gay marrige.

Stop using the duck arguement, it is invaild because the duck cannot love you back. All I want is to marry someone I love who loves me back.

I know you're trying to belittle gay relationships by putting "in love" in quotations. You want to get married for the same reasons as everyone else, you want to show your committment to the one you love and maybe start a family.

@scrantoncity First off, that was an exaggeration; not everyone devalues it. Secondly, most people do, by not saving sex for...

you should be able to marry said duck if the duck consents, does it affect others besides yourself...no then why should you care because you think it's wrong, so it only affects those consenting to it, no one is negativity affected. Laws are designed to remove freedoms in order to gain safety, order and/or convenience not allowing Gay marriage just throws away rights and freedoms for nothing.

@scrantoncity Because they are diluting the value of marriage. Because it's a sin, and we shouldn't condone sins. The Bible even...

well other religions worship other Gods before our (yes our) God i guess we should make it illegal to be Jewish and start putting them in concentration camps....
and if you want don't think of them as married think of them as partnered, they aren't married in the eyes of God only the eyes of man, that should be good enough for you.

remember Hate is a sin, a deadly sin,

@Saigot well other religions worship other Gods before our (yes our) God i guess we should make it illegal to be Jewish...

Hmm let me see. Will you go through this and tell me how many times I've said I don't hate gays? I know for sure at least two. I think three. Also, it says several times that God doesn't approve of gays, for they are an abomination.

@scrantoncity Hmm let me see. Will you go through this and tell me how many times I've said I don't hate gays? I know for sure at...

you don't hate gays, you hate the idea of homosexuality. "God" says you can have one slave as long as he's foreign, "God" says those you worship other Gods are abominations. the bible has been changed many many times in the past and the original writers probably changed things as well.

@Saigot you don't hate gays, you hate the idea of homosexuality. "God" says you can have one slave as long as he's foreign...

Ahem, translations do not count as being changed.
Make that being changed once.
You do not know what you're talking about. Once again, do NOT call yourself a Christian without the least bit of insight into my faith.
Let us see, say you are the strongest kid on the playground. You can beat anybody up. You would tell everyone else that you are the strongest, right? And say that you are the only one who can beat up everyone else? That's why God says other gods are abominations. Because they're untrue.
Okay, let me go call my canadian slave. You are ignorant. It doesn't matter if he says you CAN, for today, it's frowned upon/ outlawed. It's not like he tells us we have to own one.
Good try.

@scrantoncity Ahem, translations do not count as being changed. Make that being changed once. You do not know what you're...

i go to a Christian school, we have a daily mass, i go to religion class then attend church on sundays, yeah i'm not a christian at all. Changes and revisions have been made to the biblical text since the very beginning. Apart from inadvertent changes made by copyists, most of these have involved changes to existing material or addition of new material, rather than deletion of material. The Books of Chronicles, believed to have been written during or shortly after the Babylonian Exile, was based on the Deuteronomic History, but changed many of the accounts, particularly from the the Books of Kings. The Book of Daniel was originally written in Hebrew, but also contains a substantial amount of Aramaic material. The Aramaic text is probably somewhat later than the Hebrew text. Mark's Gospel, in its original form, does not say that anyone saw the risen Jesus. There are two known interpolated endings to Mark, known as the "short ending" and the "long ending".

@scrantoncity Ahem, translations do not count as being changed. Make that being changed once. You do not know what you're...

I can't remember the passage exactly, but there is also a part saying how woman are basically inferior beings who can't be trusted, believed ect....

@scrantoncity Hmm let me see. Will you go through this and tell me how many times I've said I don't hate gays? I know for sure at...

Do you even know what abonination means? Do some research. It was translated form a greek word meaning, "not okay for Jewish priest to do." It says eating pork and shellfish is an abomination, but I'm sure you still do that.

@pikabeau You might as well be saying you hate gays if you fight against our happiness.

Bahaha. Good one.
You might as well say you hate all the people in Haiti, as you aren't giving all you're money to them.

Really, fantastic point (sarcasm).

@scrantoncity Bahaha. Good one. You might as well say you hate all the people in Haiti, as you aren't giving all you're money...

If you don't reply that obviouly means you can't come up with a good rebuttle, meaning you were wrong, amirite?

@pikabeau If you don't reply that obviouly means you can't come up with a good rebuttle, meaning you were wrong, amirite?

No it means that your point is so utterly preposterous that there is no reason to correct your flawed thinking.
And, i spent all of yesterday beating halo. Don't be so quick to jump to conclusions. Because I have an opinion, I hate gays? That's logical. Good one. I didn't reply because there is no hope for you. I am opposed to gay marriage because I have morals. Just because you choose to be gay doesn't mean I choose to change my opinion.
You're gonna have to do better than that lousy point to even contest my argument.

@scrantoncity No it means that your point is so utterly preposterous that there is no reason to correct your flawed thinking...

You always tell people that there are flaws to their argument, but you never say why. I made a good point whether you admit it or not.

You have morals? Is judging people morally acceptable? Is belittling someone's relationship moral? I don't think so. It's people like you that make so many gay teenagers commit suicide. All we want is acceptance, but you can't give us that. You call us unnatural, you insult us.

Being gay is not a choice. You have no proof that it is. I have proof that it isn't a conscious choice: I never chose to be gay. Maybe something happened in my childhood to make me this way, I don't know. But I do know that I don't choose what happens to me, so even if a past experience "turned me gay" I didn't choose for it to happen.

Also, you have yet to make an argument that I couldn't rebuttle.

@pikabeau You always tell people that there are flaws to their argument, but you never say why. I made a good point whether...

Ahem, it's "rebuttal," and that is a noun, not a verb. And your statement is one of opinion. I'll make one you cannot "rebuttle."
The Bible clearly indicates that homosexuality is a sin. Clearly. That is un-rebuttleable. I may be belittling your relationship, but you've been trying to devalue my religion this whole time, with biased accounts of the text, most likely not even caring that it's untrue.
There are actually several accounts of homosexual condemnation in the Bible. And ill look them up. And there are more instances of "man-woman only" marriage. God made us, (yes this, too, is undeniable. Evolution is as false as the lies supporting it) and commanded us not to sin. We all sin. Homosexuality is a sin. And I'm against it.

@scrantoncity Ahem, it's "rebuttal," and that is a noun, not a verb. And your statement is one of opinion. I'll make one you...

"God made us, (yes this, too, is undeniable. Evolution is as false as the lies supporting it)"

O rly? "Undeniable?" Uh, no, that is completely false. Is the hand of God going to stop me from saying that it's undeniable right now? No. Is it PHYSICALLY impossible for me to say: "I deny the fact that God made us." No, because I just did.

Good for you, you're against homosexuality.

But is God? In this book, your "word of God" does he ever state, and I want it in quotes, that he doesn't aprove of homosexuality.

Why would he create us like this if he didn't know things like this would happen? If he is so "almighty" why did he make us so flawed?

"Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins."

But whatever. Cause here I am, arguing with a man who wants to marry his duck. Which is just queer.

Anonymous +1Reply
@"God made us, (yes this, too, is undeniable. Evolution is as false as the lies supporting it)" O rly?...

The irony is that it's not queer. Unless you mean strange, in which I was kidding. I don't even have a duck.
Do you know what "undeniable" means? The connotation is that you cannot disprove this, it cannot, scientifically, prove that something else made us. Well, something reasonable made us.
I'm actually in the car, so I will look up some quotations from the Bible when I get back.
Note: The Bible doesn't say "God disapproves of homosexuality." It does say, several times, that homosexuality is a sin. Ill look some up.

@scrantoncity The irony is that it's not queer. Unless you mean strange, in which I was kidding. I don't even have a duck. Do...

The irony? Oh, what kind of education were you given? Apparently, not a good one. If I meant queer as in the homosexual term, which I didn't, there wouldn't have been any irony.

Also, if you want to use scientific fact. There is no scientific fact that "God" exists, nor is there facts that he doesn't.

Homosexuality is a sin, on whose terms? God's? Or the people that think they speak for him, which in itslef is blasphemy.

Anonymous +2Reply
@The irony? Oh, what kind of education were you given? Apparently, not a good one. If I meant queer as in the...

Hmm I'll step out on a limb, and go ahead and say you're not the brighest of the bunch. If I'm wrong, then forgive me, but this is just my first impression.

I also including the strange meaning; did you see that? " Unless you mean strange, in which I was kidding. I don't even have a duck." Did you skim over this? Hmm, pity.

Are you familiar with the old Islam way of "proving" that a god exists? Namely, my God? It's called the "Kalam argument." I'll explain it to you if you wish.

Well, you asked "But is God? In this book, your "word of God" does he ever state, and I want it in quotes, that he doesn't aprove of homosexuality." So I assumed you wanted to know if God was against it. So I told you He was. Don't change the argument, buddy. Stick with an argument, and accept that I responded. Don't suddenly say "oh well who cares that I was wrong, that's not what I want to argue now," which is what you just did.

@scrantoncity Hmm I'll step out on a limb, and go ahead and say you're not the brighest of the bunch. If I'm wrong, then forgive...

Oh for your poor soul. I read the damn part about you not having a duck. If you actually knew how to comprehend instead of just read something you'd realize I was pointing out the fact that there wouldn't be any irony to what you were saying.

NO. You YOURSELF told me that the bible doesn't state "God himself disapproves of homosexuality" which is what I wanted. You gave me the proof right now that God doesn't dissaprove of it.

If it's a sin, fine. I don't care. I'm pansexual and I could care less about what people in the bible say. It's what I want to hear from God's mouth.

Anonymous 0Reply
@Oh for your poor soul. I read the damn part about you not having a duck. If you actually knew how to comprehend...

No, I said the Bible doesn't say "God disapproves of homosexuals." God disapproves of ALL sins. Using the transitive property, that means he disapproves of homosexuals.
No, it's ironic that you called it queer when I'm arguing against homos. That's ironic. But you meant strange or odd.

To be blunt, God disapproves of homosexuality. It just requires more intelligence than the average firs grader to determine. Maybe a third grader could figure it out.

Honestly, bisexuals and pansexuals are all horny sluts. They just want to get laid. You don't love everything. You lust after sex.

@scrantoncity No, I said the Bible doesn't say "God disapproves of homosexuals." God disapproves of ALL sins. Using the...

@589635 (scrantoncity): IM A VIRGIN. But just because I'm pansexual, I lust after sex? That makes sense how?

ALSO, I don't love everything. I don't belive in love, not yet. Not til I know what it is. When I'm finally in love, then I'll belive in it.

If only your poor soul read the dictionary as well as the bible. Pansexuality only goes through two genders, not even the third.

Anonymous +1Reply
@@589635 (scrantoncity): IM A VIRGIN. But just because I'm pansexual, I lust after sex? That makes sense how?...

Then isn't pansexual synonymous with bisexual? Whatever, so I was wrong about how much you lust.
Whatever the case is, if you don't believe In love, then all you want is to get laid.

@scrantoncity Then isn't pansexual synonymous with bisexual? Whatever, so I was wrong about how much you lust. Whatever the...

I don't WANT to get laid, I'm saving myself til
I get married. How about, you not jump to conclusions.

BI means two. Bisexual covers only two sexes, male and female.

Pansexual covers those two sexes and more.

NOT the third gender, which is another thing in itself completely. (It doesn't mean people who are hermaphrodites.)

"Bisexuality is a sexual orientation characterized by attraction to both the same gender and the opposite gender. Unlike pansexuality, it does not specifically include people who fall outside the gender binary."

Anonymous 0Reply
@I don't WANT to get laid, I'm saving myself til I get married. How about, you not jump to conclusions. BI means...

Okay, then what is there? Transsexuality?
Honestly, anyone more than gay is just a horny frog. You'd seriously be okay marrying a guy who changed into a girl? What! Either you are incredibly messed up, or you're lying.

People these days. Seriously, you don't want someone of the opposite gender? That's just odd. And unnatural.
I don't care that you're waiting for marriage, but I respect that, but it doesn't matter, for it won't be true marriage. Not the Christian faith, sincere, marriage. Unless you marry the opposite gender. Otherwise, it's a cheap reproduction.

@scrantoncity Okay, then what is there? Transsexuality? Honestly, anyone more than gay is just a horny frog. You'd seriously be...

Wow, you're bringing up frogs in a conversation about multiple sex when they themselves can change gender. Learn some similies. It's as horny as a rabbit.

I would be okay with marrying a guy who prefers himself as a girl. I don't mind. I NEVER said that I didn't want someone of the opposite gender. I would actually RATHER marry a guy. If I'm happy being with a man, then so be it. If I'm happy with a woman, so be it. If Im happy with a transgender, so be it. I'm not going to sacrifice my happiness over whats "natural" and "unnatural(?)"

Okay, unnatural? Nothing is unnatural, only things created by man. Homosexuality has been around as long as Heterosexuality has.

Anonymous +1Reply
@Wow, you're bringing up frogs in a conversation about multiple sex when they themselves can change gender. Learn...

Sure it WONT be a true marrige if i fall for a woman or a transgender. But It WILL be a true love. I'll make damn sure of that, and you dont have a say in it.

Reproduction? I'm not having kids. I wouldnt because of the career I'm going to chose. I dont want them to go on with only one parent if I'm killed. It's how Im still growing up. But then again, I watched my mother die when I was five while my father was at work.

Anonymous 0Reply
@scrantoncity Ahem, it's "rebuttal," and that is a noun, not a verb. And your statement is one of opinion. I'll make one you...

Judging is a sin according to your "God." As a Christian, you can't tell me that I'm sinning without sinning yourself. I am not biased, I just know more about being gay than you do. There are only 6 verses in the bible condemning same sex acts (acts, not love[yes, there's a difference]) and there are over 300 verses condemning opposite sex acts yet no one thinks heterosexuality is sin. Your religion is too quick to condemn what it does not understand.

@pikabeau Judging is a sin according to your "God." As a Christian, you can't tell me that I'm sinning without sinning...

First off, you're account is highly biased, and I doubt you even bothered to make sure they are correct. Just saying.
Most of the verses just say "homosexuality." You practice "homosexuality," because you're engaged in a relationship with your girlfriend. That is homosexuality. You cannot deny it. Don't twist it. That is the definition of homosexuality.

I'm not judging you. Not in the least. I'm telling you that homosexuality is a sin. Yes, it is. Any true Christian knows that. Heterosexuality isn't a sin, but premarital sex is. Which means that any sex between homosexuals is a sin. The love itself is also a sin, because it's against God's natural creation. God made a man and a women for a reason.

@scrantoncity First off, you're account is highly biased, and I doubt you even bothered to make sure they are correct. Just...

The word homosexual wasn't even around until the late 1800s. The words that have been translated to say homosexual actually mean young male prostitutes and idol worship. People decided to add homosexuals in that category.

Do you know what a eunich is? More and more Christian scholars are starting to believe that a eunich is a gay man (I think they were previously thought to be men with no sexual desire towards woman or something like that). Jesus himself mentions men who are born eunichs, men who have become eunichs, and people who were turned into eunichs by someone else. In a story in the bible, eunichs are not allowed in church. A prophet of Jesus lead a eunich into church and Jesus himself declared that he was allowed in the church. If being gay is a sin, why would Jesus do that? And why would he say some people are born eunichs?

@pikabeau The word homosexual wasn't even around until the late 1800s. The words that have been translated to say homosexual...

Ahem, facts please? References in the Bible, websites, anything but your mindless drivel.
I have no doubt that your account is biased, but I highly doubt that eunUchs were gays.
Eunuchs are people who are unable to procreate, or have damaged genitals. They were either Castrated, or had Birth defects. They were used as guards for women and stuff. Someone could just claim to be gay, and get a position of power.
Your website (homosexuals and the church) is a fraud. They twist words, take verses out of context, and above all, lie.

@scrantoncity Ahem, facts please? References in the Bible, websites, anything but your mindless drivel. I have no doubt that...

until you give the exact bible quotes your argument is invalid, second of all, it doesn't matter in the slightest whether or not it is true because not all people are Christians and so they can'y be governed by the 'law of God' the government is separate from the church.

@Saigot until you give the exact bible quotes your argument is invalid, second of all, it doesn't matter in the slightest...

No, but we're specifically arguing the Bible on homosexuality. I don't need to back up my claims; she does. She brought them up, she needs to give me the location, so I can tell her that she's wrong.

@scrantoncity Ahem, facts please? References in the Bible, websites, anything but your mindless drivel. I have no doubt that...

Learn to read Hebrew and Greek and then tell me where it says homosexuality is a sin. You won't find a single verse. You'll find plenty of verses about same sex temple prostitution and idol worshippers, but none about homosexuality. The places I get my information from (I just googled homosexuality and the bible and went to gaychristian101.org... or maybe it was .com, I don't know for sure) have research from people who have read the bible in it's original form. Until you can do the same, I won't believe a word you say.

I do love (love, not lust) my girlfriend and she loves me. You have no right to belittle our relationship. You don't know what's in our hearts.

Isn't judging a sin (Let he who is without sin cast the first stone)? Making the judgement that I lust after my girlfriend and that our relationship is less than any you've been in is a sin.

@pikabeau Learn to read Hebrew and Greek and then tell me where it says homosexuality is a sin. You won't find a single...

The thing that you don't realize, is that you don't know what your talking about. You do realize that people are capable of lying. You probably haven't even checked the verses they throw out there. You cannot refuse to hear my points just because I cannot read Greek. Neither can you. Don't talk to me until you can. It's plain in English. Until you salvage a copy of the original Greek or Hebrew, translate it yourself, and show it to me, it's invalid. You cannot trust any website anymore. Any subtle changes won't be caught by anyone. Until then, trust the scholars who SPECIFICALLY translated it until English. It's not like they changed it on purpose.
Maybe the definition of words changed. Maybe today it means man-whore, but used to mean homosexual. After all, the Bible was translated into English over 500 years ago. That'd be more accurate than any modern revisions of the Greek language.

Judging is a peculiar thing. I may be belittling your relationship, but ...

@scrantoncity The thing that you don't realize, is that you don't know what your talking about. You do realize that people are...

I haven't made any derogatory comments toward you. Also, what you may not realize, is that a Christian who continually and deliberately sins is not a Christian at all.

You cannot sit there, an honest Christian, and tell me that the Bible I hold in my hands (more than you've done, I'm sure) is wrong. The Bible which every single American can read and understand. The homosexuals are trying to find a loophole in the Word of God. That is insulting. Do not tell me that you know more than the Biblical scholars who translated it from ancient Greek. Many, many Bibles are directly translated, and mine, an accurate one, no doubt, is no different. The people who dedicate their lives to the tedious task of translating the Bible are more learned, and have better credentials, than any old website. Trust them.

@scrantoncity I haven't made any derogatory comments toward you. Also, what you may not realize, is that a Christian who...

the bible is proven to have mistakes in it as i have written above (#578441), as for "After all, the Bible was translated into English over 500 years ago. That'd be more accurate than any modern revisions of the Greek language." at 500 years ago ancient Greek was already extinct, today we have a larger amount of text and information on ancient Greek meaning words we have translated previously now have revised meanings. Very few bibles are directly translated, and even between them there are many discrepancies depending on the translator(s) and the time it was created, in short we can not be sure of anything but the mains gists in the bible. Homosexuality is a finer point in the bible, one that i doubt is correctly translated (whether homosexuality was written to be right or wrong).

Also, my guess as i can't seem to find any anti-gay passages at all, it that all the passages are part of the old testament, which is older and more prone to outside forces...

@Saigot the bible is proven to have mistakes in it as i have written above (#578441), as for "After all, the Bible was...

altering it for there own agenda, in addition the old testament forbids many things that are now ignored or were contradicted by Jesus, like eating shell-fish, that women are no better than cattle and that slavery is okay.

@scrantoncity I haven't made any derogatory comments toward you. Also, what you may not realize, is that a Christian who...

There was no word for homosexual in greek or hebrew so it couldn't have been in the original texts of the bible.

@pikabeau What ever happened to you saying you were going to reply?

I couldn't find it. My computer broke so I couldn't find it.

The thing is, you can't know that. They probably existed, and most likely there was a saying for it.

What really makes me mad is that you're trying to loophole the bible. That is utterly unforgivable. In order to satisfy your own sex drive, you seek to belittle the bible's language.
In short, you disgust me.

@Saigot so to paraphrase, you've run out of arguments and have resorted to irrational insults

No, she repeated her argument. She IS trying to loophole the Bible. No denying.

@scrantoncity I couldn't find it. My computer broke so I couldn't find it. The thing is, you can't know that. They probably...

First off, I am not a christian, thus I do not need a loophole. Second, all I am doing is prooving you wrong. You have not been able to prove that I am wrong yet. If there was a word for homosexual in Greek, it was not in the bible. Translators were able to decide what all the words in the bible meant hundreds of years ago.

@pikabeau First off, I am not a christian, thus I do not need a loophole. Second, all I am doing is prooving you wrong. You...

Also, the word homosexual wasn't around until the late 19th century. Homosexuality wasn't even an issue until one translater decided to impose his own predjudices into the bible.

@pikabeau Also, the word homosexual wasn't around until the late 19th century. Homosexuality wasn't even an issue until one...

you're finding a loophole for your girlfriend. You're looking for a loophole to try to "proove" me wrong.
Tell me, have you ever read more than one verse in the Bible? Then don't act like an expert.

Homosexuality is a sin. Several times it is used.
"well go back to the..." No. You go back to the ancient Greek. You specifically procure a copy, learn Greek, and translate it. Until then, trust the people who dedicated their lives to the task. They were no doubt more educated than you.

You really have no clue what you're talking about. You just keep saying that the language has something to do with it. It really doesn't. The experts knew what it meant, and translated it into English. Until you do the same, your points are invalid, as you are unable to know if you're being lied to.

@scrantoncity you're finding a loophole for your girlfriend. You're looking for a loophole to try to "proove" me wrong. Tell...

as I said above the bible is far from perfectly translated, you also can not find a specific verse damning homosexuality so until you do YOUR point is invalid.

@Saigot as I said above the bible is far from perfectly translated, you also can not find a specific verse damning...

Before I completely and utterly destroy that, do you want to retract it, or should I get 5 verses proving you wrong?

@scrantoncity Before I completely and utterly destroy that, do you want to retract it, or should I get 5 verses proving you wrong?

no i want to see 5 verses so i can go through them and find the problems with them going through generalizations will achieve nothing more

@scrantoncity you're finding a loophole for your girlfriend. You're looking for a loophole to try to "proove" me wrong. Tell...

I know exactly what I'm talking about. There are several Christian scholars who have actually read the original texts and believe being gay is not a sin. Why is this? They were able to interpret the bible in it's original form before it was tampered with by men. Some verses in the bible used to be used to condemn interracial marriage. As a matter of fact, it used to be against the law for a black person and a white person to marry. The same thing is happening to gays right now. The bible was wrong then and it is wrong now.

@pikabeau I know exactly what I'm talking about. There are several Christian scholars who have actually read the original...

And you're blaming the Bible for being out of date? What about the US? The US (234 years old) used to outlaw interracial marriage. The Bible is well over a thousand years old, and you expect it to be modern? Don't make me laugh.
Once again, you are Insinuating that the translators were dumb. Do you know ancient greek? You don't know if there was a word or not.

@scrantoncity And you're blaming the Bible for being out of date? What about the US? The US (234 years old) used to outlaw...

I never said I expect it to be modern. I expect all the translators to agree on one English version of the bible and call it right. So many different translations say something different. How can anyone know what to believe? Some versions say tatoos are bad, while others don't even mention them. You bible condemns being gay, while older and more accurate versions (I say they're more accurate because the more something is translated the more it becomes prone to inaccuarcy, like a game of telephone) don't even mention homosexuality (more commonly known as same sex love).

@pikabeau I never said I expect it to be modern. I expect all the translators to agree on one English version of the bible...

Okay, you know what? You're wrong. It's not like they translate it from other bibles. Some may, but mine doesn't. If older is more accurate, then your "experts" are not experts at all.
Say the King James is correct. Even so, "abusers of themselves with mankind" sounds like male homosexuals.
The verses clearly, in English, express the sinful nature of homosexuality. Don't try to change it. You aren't an expert on Greek. You don't know if homosexual exists in Greek.

@scrantoncity Okay, you know what? You're wrong. It's not like they translate it from other bibles. Some may, but mine doesn't...

Please tell me where you're getting this verse. I have never seen it used to condemn homosexuality. You're probably just taking it out of context. There might have been words for same sex behavoir, but there was no word for same sex love, which is what homosexuality really is.

@pikabeau Please tell me where you're getting this verse. I have never seen it used to condemn homosexuality. You're probably...

I'm taking it out of context? That just may be the funniest thing. You say that. Do you even know what that means? That verse is a standalone verse. It has no reference. It lists several sins. Including homosexuality.
1Corinthians 6:9-11 from king James.

@scrantoncity I'm taking it out of context? That just may be the funniest thing. You say that. Do you even know what that means?...

Does it list homosexuality meaning same sex love, or homosexuality meaning same sex lust and adultery? Like I said before there was no word or phrase for same sex love. I have done nothing wrong by loving my girlfriend. We do not have sex, I have not cheated on her, and I have never lied to her. Tell me, how have we sinned? We are just like any other couple, the only difference is our sexual orientation. Our love is no better or any worse than your love.

@pikabeau Does it list homosexuality meaning same sex love, or homosexuality meaning same sex lust and adultery? Like I said...

Oh really? So basically, you have not thought once about sex with her? Or marriage, or kissing? No?

Homosexuality is not the way humans are made. It's not. Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. It's a choice. You choose to "love" your girlfriend. You choose to orient yourself unnaturally.

@scrantoncity Oh really? So basically, you have not thought once about sex with her? Or marriage, or kissing? No?...

I have kissed my girlfriend, several times. We talk about sex and marriage. There's nothing wrong with that as long as we remain faithful.

I choose to love my girlfriend? If you believe that you must be able to choose who you're attracted to on a whim. Most people can't do that. You can't just say, "Oh, I don't like you anymore. I think I'll like that girl now." Maybe it works that way for you, but it doesn't work that way for me.

@pikabeau I have kissed my girlfriend, several times. We talk about sex and marriage. There's nothing wrong with that as long...

Oh really? Have you ever heard of falling out of love? Once the novelty wears off, you'll be gone, no doubt. Especially if you don't think love is a choice.
You know i truly believe love is a choice. Obviously you can't choose to love someone you hate, but on the line, yeah, you can choose to love someone.
Orientation is also a choice. You know bisexuals? Yeah, tell me how those would exist.

@scrantoncity Oh really? Have you ever heard of falling out of love? Once the novelty wears off, you'll be gone, no doubt...

Bisexuals just love both sexes. They still don't chose who they love. When you were little and liked someone, did you choose to like them? No. Love is the same way. I never chose to love my girlfriend. We were really good friends first. The feelings grew more intimate over time and now I love her. It's that way with everyone. If people chose who they loved, no one who is seen as "unappealing' would find love because no one would want to love someone the majority of people would make fun of them for being with.

@pikabeau Bisexuals just love both sexes. They still don't chose who they love. When you were little and liked someone, did...

That's because you chose to let those feelings overtake you. Had you been straight, would you have fallen in love with her? No! That's because it's a choice. If it isn't a choice, then you wouldn't've.
Wait nix that. That point could be argued either way.
What I'm saying is that you can control your feelings of love. Mind over matter.
Like if you tell yourself every day that you are beautiful, you'll believe that.

@scrantoncity That's because you chose to let those feelings overtake you. Had you been straight, would you have fallen in love...

If I had been straight I wouldn't love her. I would be straight. That doesn't mean I choose to love her. I bet you like girls. Why? Because you're straight. Do you choose who you like? No. What makes gay people any different? Just like the vast majority of the human population we do not choose who we love. If you could control who you love, the difforce rate would be lower. Just think about it. People wouldn't get divorced because their spouse wasn't right for them, they'd make themselves love them, thus never needing a divorce.

You have obviously never been in love before if you think that it's a choice.

@pikabeau If I had been straight I wouldn't love her. I would be straight. That doesn't mean I choose to love her. I bet you...

Yeah, and you wanna know why the Christian marriages divorce rate is so much lower? Because it's a choice. You can work out the problems, and choose to love your spouse.
However, practically only Christians do that. Everyone else- divorce.
You've obviously never been in love before if you think it isn't a choice.

@scrantoncity Yeah, and you wanna know why the Christian marriages divorce rate is so much lower? Because it's a choice. You can...

Haven't you heard? The southern baptist church has declared divorce the number one thing that ruins the sanctity of marriage, because 48 percent of Christian marriages end in divorce. (I can't give you my exact source, I read that on my AOL homepage this morning. But I do know that those are statistics from a Christian research source, so you can't call it biased.) So Christians get divorced just as often as everyone else because you cannot control how you feel about someone.

Have you ever been in love? If not, I'm not going to waste my time on you anymore, because you will never understand.

@pikabeau Haven't you heard? The southern baptist church has declared divorce the number one thing that ruins the sanctity of...

You know what, we don't know what love is. Did I think I was/ am in love? Yes. Am I truly? Probably not. Will it last? No. Do I wish? Maybe.
You probably aren't in love. No, I'm not being homophobic. You're eighteen. You're just as immature as I am. We don't know what love is.

Have you ever taken AP Statistics? I have. I know that there are multiple ways to swing the data and get a mathematically sound, but incorrect, conclusion.
Simpson's paradox is an example of this.
If you had a source I might could find the fallacy.
Because that's not what I heard, but it may be true.
You know why? Because I believe that barely 59% of people claiming to be a Christian truly are. I'm not judging; I'm calling it as I see it. If you cannot name three verses (excluding John 3:16, and Genesis 1:1), you don't know anything about your Bible, and you deliberately and continously sin, you're not a true Christian. That's judging. But those are symptoms to me, that you are...

@scrantoncity You know what, we don't know what love is. Did I think I was/ am in love? Yes. Am I truly? Probably not. Will it...

A fraud Christian. But if it's right with God it's right with me.

That may be why that rate is so high.

@scrantoncity A fraud Christian. But if it's right with God it's right with me. That may be why that rate is so high.

How is "calling it as you see it" not judging? When I see a girl in a mini skirt and tube top, I see her as a whore, thus making the judgement that she is a whore. You are, in fact, judging people by deciding that they are a fraud Christian when they say they are Christian. There are verses in the bible that state no one is perfect, so you need to stop expecting people to fit this perfect little Christian mold. I'm sure there are plenty of things you do that are not right with God. You've probably told little white lies are got turned on when you saw a hot girl. Those are things God is against, but you still do them. Are you a fraud Christian too?

@pikabeau How is "calling it as you see it" not judging? When I see a girl in a mini skirt and tube top, I see her as a...

There is no hope for you.

Please, next time, actually try to understand the argument, so your reply is more than unconnected drivel.

Did I say everyone is perfect? No. Of course not. However, if you call yourself a Christian, you better be able to back it up. So many people at my school are "Christians," yet they cannot find anything in the bible. Not even Romans. They can't even articulate their beliefs. If you are that low, I've judged you to be a fraud Christian. Yep. There are tons of fraud Christians even by my lax standards. But., as I said, if it's right with God it's okay with me.

In short, people claim to be something they're not.

@scrantoncity There is no hope for you. Please, next time, actually try to understand the argument, so your reply is more...

I love how you always jump to insults when your back is against the wall (Yes, calling my comment "unconnected drivel" is an insult). You know I made a valid. You do not need to be able to quote scripture to be a true Christian. What ever happened to being a good person and doing your best to dedicate your life to God? Isn't that what matters? As a Christian, aren't you supposed to be tolerant of people who are different from you and not judge?

In short, you are claiming to be something you're not.

@pikabeau I love how you always jump to insults when your back is against the wall (Yes, calling my comment "unconnected...

Really, that's an insult? Poor you; getting your essays back from school must be psychologically unbearable. An insult would be calling you a moralless person. For being lesbian. Notice I don't do that.
You really think you made a valid point? Wow. And all this time I thought that valid points had to make sense, and be reasonable.
You just didn't understand my argument. If someone exemplifies those things I listed, then I have judged (yes judged, go cry) them to not be a Christian. However, if I'm wrong then fine with that. Better for them. Any true Christian would know more than three verses. Any true Christian cannot knowingly and deliberately sin. That isn't a judgement; that's in the Bible.
However do I act upon this? No. Do I think less of them, maybe. Depends. Usually I'll try to surreptitiously find out what they think.

"In short, you're claiming to be something you're not." I am shocked. Would you qualify this as an insult? Or do you never insul...

@scrantoncity Really, that's an insult? Poor you; getting your essays back from school must be psychologically unbearable. An...

You admit you judge. That means you deliberately judge. Judging is a sin. You are deliberately sinning. Does this mean you're not really a Christian?

Saying that what I said was unconnected drivel is an insult. If you would have said it made no sense, that would have been acceptable.It's all in the wording.

@pikabeau You admit you judge. That means you deliberately judge. Judging is a sin. You are deliberately sinning. Does this...

You're wordplay is clever, but that won't cut it. Or are you just incapable of reading posts in their entirety? Because I'm pretty sure I said I don't act on it. Also, judging isn't a sin.
Boom rocked owned no comment.
And you kept saying there's not a word for homosexuality. You mustve said that twenty times. And guess what; you were wrong. Now you're trying to defend it saying you only meant love. Sure. Own up when you're wrong.

"Unconnected drivel." I'm pretty sure that isn't an insult to you. It reflects poorly on your poor writing skills, but it isn't an insult. It'd be an insult if I said "you're a terrible writer." but i didn't.

(yes, I didn't capitalize my words this post. I apologize.)

@scrantoncity You're wordplay is clever, but that won't cut it. Or are you just incapable of reading posts in their entirety?...

Homosexuality is love between two people of the same sex, is it not? I'm sure there must have been plenty of phrases for same sex acts, but there wasn't a single word or phrase for same sex love. Same sex sex is immoral if the two people are not consensually in love.

Doesn't the bible say that you shouldn't judge? If the bible says you shouldn't do something, that thing is a sin. Even if you don't act on your judgemnts, you're still judging. Anyway, you acted on your judgement by telling me how you judge people and why. You don't have to physically harm anyone to act on a judgement.

@pikabeau Homosexuality is love between two people of the same sex, is it not? I'm sure there must have been plenty of...

Your logic is utterly preposterous. Why does it being consensual make it right?
Homosexuality is actually "sexual desire towards a person of one's own sex." Desire, lust, what have you. Nowhere does it mention "love." I'm sorry, your arguments are very weak.

@scrantoncity Your logic is utterly preposterous. Why does it being consensual make it right? Homosexuality is actually "sexual...

So you are making the judgment that I don't love my girlfriend? I believe we already established that judging is a sin, and it seems to be a pretty deliberate sin in your case.

@pikabeau So you are making the judgment that I don't love my girlfriend? I believe we already established that judging is a...

Wait, didn't you say that if the Bible says it's bad it's a sin? Woah my hypocrisy meters are going off.

What about homosexuality? Huh? You just gonna explain that away because it makes you feel good?

@scrantoncity Wait, didn't you say that if the Bible says it's bad it's a sin? Woah my hypocrisy meters are going off. What...

Didn't we already decide that homosexuality couldn't have possibly been in the bible? That word wasn't even around until the late 19th century. Before then no one even connected being gay to going to hell. The original texts are what are said to have been without error. Once it was translated, it should not have been taken literally. Also, homosexuality is loving someone of the same sex, not just wanting to screw them. Even if there were words in greek for having sex with someone of the same sex, there was no word for same sex love.

But since you believe people who deliberately sin are going to hell, what does that say about you making the judgement that I don't love my girlfriend? You keep deliberately sinning. I guess I'll see you in hell.

@scrantoncity Your logic is utterly preposterous. Why does it being consensual make it right? Homosexuality is actually "sexual...

You implied it. I might not be the brightest crayon in the box, but when you said:

"Homosexuality is actually "sexual desire towards a person of one's own sex." Desire, lust, what have you. Nowhere does it mention "love,''' you implied that I only have a sexual desire towards my girlfriend. I lust after her. You said no where does homosexuality mention love. That implies that since I am in a homosexual relationship I do not love my girlfriend since your definition doesn't mention love.

@pikabeau You implied it. I might not be the brightest crayon in the box, but when you said: "Homosexuality is actually...

Whoops I wasn't clear. I meant the part about people who deliberately sin are going to hell. I didn't say that. In case You don't recall, we had an entire debate over that. You seem to have conveniently forgotten it.

@scrantoncity Whoops I wasn't clear. I meant the part about people who deliberately sin are going to hell. I didn't say that. In...

People who deliberaltely sin go to hell? You deliberately judge, which is a sin. Like I said before, I will see you in hell.

@pikabeau People who deliberaltely sin go to hell? You deliberately judge, which is a sin. Like I said before, I will see you...

Let me see now. Did I judge anyone? Or did I observe someone and come to a conclusion based on that? Is that judging? Or is judging specifically treating someone differently because of something. Come Now. Don't be an ignoramus.

@scrantoncity Let me see now. Did I judge anyone? Or did I observe someone and come to a conclusion based on that? Is that...

In a previous comment you basically admitted you judged: " If someone exemplifies those things I listed, then I have judged (yes judged, go cry) them to not be a Christian."

I just checked my dictionary: judgement n. an opinion or estimate formed by examining and comparing. (nothing about treating anyone differently).

So yes, you did judge. Judging is a sin. You deliberately judge. Deliberate sinning will land you in hell. Therefore, you will go to hell.

@pikabeau In a previous comment you basically admitted you judged: " If someone exemplifies those things I listed, then I...

Wait wait. If I said deliberate sinning will land you in hell then I didn't judge. That isn't my judgement.

I don't know about you but your argument is crumbling at its seams. Either a: I judged, but said nothing about judging, or b: I didn't judge, but condemned those that did. Either way I win.

@scrantoncity Wait wait. If I said deliberate sinning will land you in hell then I didn't judge. That isn't my judgement. I...

You said you judged. Now you say you didn't judge. Which is it? It seems like you've lost your train of thought. Try to reread what you've said and you will clearly see that you're arguments are inconsistent.

@pikabeau You said you judged. Now you say you didn't judge. Which is it? It seems like you've lost your train of thought...

Listen to me now. Since, as you claim, all who deliberately sin go to hell, I never judged. That would be fact, would it not?

@scrantoncity Listen to me now. Since, as you claim, all who deliberately sin go to hell, I never judged. That would be fact...

I'm not talking about you making that judgement. I am refering to when you admitted you judged people to be fraud Christians way up there. Again, you did, in fact, judge.

@pikabeau I'm not talking about you making that judgement. I am refering to when you admitted you judged people to be fraud...

Well, it wouldn't be judging, now would it, if it were conclusive. You cannot win this argument how you're going about it.
Either a: I judged, but judging doesn't ensure eternal damnation, or b: I didn't judge, and judging ensures eternal damnation.

Pick one, for they're mutually exclusive.

Btw please don't start a new debate on the new post about gay people. One post consisting of 300 some odd comments is enough. (Sorry b-fastfan)

@scrantoncity Well, it wouldn't be judging, now would it, if it were conclusive. You cannot win this argument how you're going...

You forgot option c: You deliberately judged (which you did, you admitted it) and juding is sin so you will go to hell.

I find it humerous how the options you gave involved you not going to hell. Aren't all sins equal? If homosexuality is a sin worth going to hell for, so is judging.

@pikabeau You forgot option c: You deliberately judged (which you did, you admitted it) and juding is sin so you will go to...

Aren't you forgetting the key aspect of Christianity? Forgiveness?

You are going against logic here. If I said that Judging ensures eternal damnation, then I didn't judge those Christians at all! That would be an inherent part of, well, life. So that would mean that I didn't sin.

And if I didn't say that, then I judged, but that would also mean I never said judging ensures eternal damnation, allowing me to keep my soul.

Of course, this is hypothetical, for you know nothing of the Christian faith; I'm just trying to get you to see logic.

@scrantoncity Aren't you forgetting the key aspect of Christianity? Forgiveness? You are going against logic here. If I said...

So basically, you aren't going to hell because even if you deliberately judge, you are forgiven. What about the gay people?

So you're not going to hell because you say you aren't? I'm sorry, but isn't that for your "God" to decide?

@pikabeau So basically, you aren't going to hell because even if you deliberately judge, you are forgiven. What about the gay...

Okay; it's not my problem if you are completely devoid of all common sense and logic. Read through my post; I laid it out for a fifth grader. I cannot believe you don't understand this.

@scrantoncity Okay; it's not my problem if you are completely devoid of all common sense and logic. Read through my post; I laid...

You either judged or you lied about judging. Either way, you sinned. All sins are equal. If you are forgiven for your deliberate lying or judging, then my girlfriend is forgiven for her deliberate homosexuality.

Also, it seems like you never refute arguments. You just call other people wrong or insult their intelegence without basis. I'm sorry, but you have the makings of a very bad debator.

@pikabeau You either judged or you lied about judging. Either way, you sinned. All sins are equal. If you are forgiven for...

Uh, really? Why don't you try reading my post again; you seem to not understand.

You can't have it both ways. Why can't you see this; are you stupid?
Either I judged, but never said it was an eternal damnation, because I'm pretty sure I never said anyone who deliberately sins goes to hell. I said that I've judged them to not be a Christian, meaning I judged them to go to hell.

But, if that does secure eternal damnation, then I never judged, for it was an observation and not a judge. Do you see this? Do you? You don't.

Try to actually read this post, and think it through. One or the other is true; not both.

@scrantoncity Uh, really? Why don't you try reading my post again; you seem to not understand. You can't have it both ways. Why...

You said that people who deliberately sin are fraud Christians. According to your bible, anyone who is not a Christian will go to hell. You said that true Christians cannot knowingly and deliberately sin. You deliberately sinned by either a: judging or b: lying about judging. Using the word of God, I have inferred that you will go to hell.

I am not stupid, you just don't seem to understand plain English. When you don't understand something, I've noticed you tend to try to insult me, but try as you might, you fail.

@pikabeau You said that people who deliberately sin are fraud Christians. According to your bible, anyone who is not a...

Seriously, honestly, did you even read my post? Let me say it, for the fifth time. I'll pretend you are seven.

If I said that those Christians are eternally damned to hell, then I didn't judge. Because that would be confirmed by the Bible and not my own thought. Do you understand this? It's like the textbook says something, and then you read that and repeat it. You aren't making your own opinions, just explaining the text.

OR I did judge, but never said it was a sin eternally damning me to hell. Because I never said anyone was going to hell. I said Fraud Christians were, because they aren't Christians. That is a judge, but in that particular instance, I never said anyone who deliberately sins goes to hell. I said FRAUD CHRISTIANS go to hell. Did I label myself as a fraud Christian? No I did not. You are free to judge me thusly, though.

Clear it up?

@scrantoncity Seriously, honestly, did you even read my post? Let me say it, for the fifth time. I'll pretend you are seven. If...

I understand exactly what you are saying. You just keep ignoring what I say to say thta I don't understand. You do not have to label yourself a fraud Christian to be one. You did not need to say the people who deliberately sin go to hell. I took what you said and what the bible says to infer that fraud Christians go to hell. You deliberately sinned when you judged people to be fraud Christians. According to you, true Christians cannot deliberately sin, but you did deliberately sin. An idiot can put two and two together to determine that that makes you a fraud Christian. The bible says non Christians will go to hell. A fraud Christian is a non Christian, so you will go to hell. Do you understand now?

@pikabeau I understand exactly what you are saying. You just keep ignoring what I say to say thta I don't understand. You do...

Okay, it cannot be you; nobody is so utterly incapable of seeing rationality. I tried. I gave my effort, but some people are just too thick to see reason.

Maybe you should re-read exactly what I said, and come to a conclusion. No doubt it'll be incorrect, But it's a start. Because you, once again, defied logic and pinned two mutually exclusive things on me.

@scrantoncity Okay, it cannot be you; nobody is so utterly incapable of seeing rationality. I tried. I gave my effort, but some...

Deliberately sinning, being a fraud Christian, and going to hell are mutually exclusive? They actually go hand in hand.

I completely understand your post. You are trying to make it seem like you do no wrong. Your logic is severely flawed.

I'll try one more time to explain it to you:
1. You judged people who deliberately sinned to be fraud Christians
2. Judging is a sin
3. You know you were judging, so you deliberatly sinned
4. Deliberate sinning makes you a fraud Christian (according to you)
5. Fraud Christians go to hell (according to your word of God, the Bible)
6.Therefore, you will go to hell

Do you understand my logic now? If not, there is no hope for you.

@pikabeau Deliberately sinning, being a fraud Christian, and going to hell are mutually exclusive? They actually go hand in...

I want to quit, because, as this post says, stupid people cannot help it, but that would lull you into a false sense of accomplishment. I'll bear it out.
What I said had a catch. Obviously, despite my attempts, you didn't see this.
Try number 104721: If I judged them to be fraud Christians then yes, I judged. But, the only way to interpret this from here is that Fraud Christians go to hell. That's the only way to interpret it. However, in this Case, nobody is definitely a fraud Christian. Because I could be wrong in my judges. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
OR, I didn't judge at all. Because, if the Bible clearly lays out what makes a fraud Christian, then I never judged. And in This Case, there is no doubt of who's going to hell. But I never judged in this case.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND? Do you? It's really not that difficult. Just read this.

@scrantoncity I want to quit, because, as this post says, stupid people cannot help it, but that would lull you into a false...

If you judged them to be fraud Christians but it turns out they're true Christians, you still deliberately judged which is a sin worth eternal damnation (if you don't repent) since all sins are equal. If you didn't judge, you lied about judging, which is also a sin.

I understood your catch long ago, what you don't seem to be getting is that there are not 2, but 4 possibilities. There are other possibilities than your own. I'm trying to make you see that you're only human and don't have all the answers. You cannot be the only one who is right. In this case, we are both partly right and neither of us can be proven 100% wrong. In any religious argument, the only possible outcome is, "I don't agree with you, but your beliefs are as valid as mine."

I wish you would stop making me out to be stupid, it just makes you look like a jerk. I'm not calling you a stubborn, pig headed jerk, I'm just saying you have been coming off as one.

@pikabeau If you judged them to be fraud Christians but it turns out they're true Christians, you still deliberately judged...

You still haven't understood, have you? Are you even able to reason, or come up with rational thoughts, or logic your way through a problem?
Because you aren't too hot on rationality. There are no other options. Either I judged, or I didn't. But, if I judged, then there is nothing after that. I judged. Big WHOOP. Nothing else.

Or I didn't, and everyone who deliberately sins goes to hell.

Why can't you see this?

@scrantoncity You still haven't understood, have you? Are you even able to reason, or come up with rational thoughts, or logic...

If you judged, you lied about judging since you said you judged.

Whether or not anyone who deliberately sins goes to hell is irrelevent. What you said is that people who deliberately sin are false Christians. You could have been wrong about that. If you were wrong, you still judged. Understand?

If you were right, then you didn't judge, but you committed another sin. You LIED about judging. Why can't you understand that? I understood perfectly what you said. You are just too closed minded to see any other side than your own.

@pikabeau If you judged, you lied about judging since you said you judged. Whether or not anyone who deliberately sins goes...

If I didn't judge, then I lied about judging? Or was I mistaken? Seriously, you need to learn something.

@scrantoncity If I didn't judge, then I lied about judging? Or was I mistaken? Seriously, you need to learn something.

Fine you were mistaken. Whatever. But even if the people who you judged to be fraud Christians were, in fact, fraud Christians, you still judged. Even if a judgment is right, it's still a judgement, isn't it? (That's not a rhettorical question. I want an answer) If you called someone a whore and it turns out they put out to anyone you were right. But you still judged.

@pikabeau Fine you were mistaken. Whatever. But even if the people who you judged to be fraud Christians were, in fact, fraud...

Well, it isn't a judge if it's in the Bible. It wouldn't be my own thought; it'd be an observation. For example, if someone tells me they are an atheist, and I say they're going to hell, that's not a judgement. That's a conclusion.
Just like then.

@scrantoncity Well, it isn't a judge if it's in the Bible. It wouldn't be my own thought; it'd be an observation. For example, if...

But the biblle says nothing about determining whether or not people are fraud Christians. It says non Christians will go to hell. If the bible said how to tell a fraud Christian from a real Christian, you wouldn't be judging and you would be making a very good point. But since the bible says nothing about it, your logic is severely flawed.

Also, it's not a nice to tell people flatly that they are going to hell, even if they are. There's this thing called tact, you might want to work on it.

@pikabeau But the biblle says nothing about determining whether or not people are fraud Christians. It says non Christians...

Tactless isn't a sin. I prefer being blunt.

You are correct; I think you misintetpreted one of my posts, or I did yours, and wrote that. That's why I never said which option was actually right. Because the other one is true, but i wanted you to realize that.

Hard to explain, but I didn't feel like correcting you. I just went with it.

@scrantoncity Bahaha. Good one. You might as well say you hate all the people in Haiti, as you aren't giving all you're money...

That rebuttle makes no sense. If you would have said, "You might as well say you hate all the people in Haiti, as you tell people you believe giving money to them is wrong." But since I don't do that, that would be a lie. You obviously hate gays because you tell people you're against them getting married (which means you're against they're happiness) and you believe they are "unnatural." I do not hate all people in Haiti and I do not tell anyone not to help them and I don't go around making them out to be inferior. What you are doing is telling gays not to get married, you're belittling our relationships, and making us seem inferior.

oh breakfastfan, your posts are awesome.

Anonymous +1Reply

Lol. Duck marriage xD

Anonymous +1Reply

Your old logo was better. Change it back please!!

Anonymous +1Reply

*beings

Anonymous 0Reply

I'd fuck pikabeaus girl. She can go fuck two dudes.

Anonymous 0Reply

theories change when we discover new information. The earth wasn't flat before 1850, but in that time, that theory made the most sense with the information available. They thought it was flat, but they were wrong. A bunch of our modern theories are probably wrong, and will be reworked in the future.

Anonymous 0Reply
@theories change when we discover new information. The earth wasn't flat before 1850, but in that time, that theory...

Cough evolution. Funny how creation has been one of the first theories, yet It's still the best explaination. The athiest theories have to be reworked every couple years because of new evidence. Creation has yet to be disproved, in all 6000 Years it's existed.

@Saigot you can believe in creation theory and still accept evolution as the truth it really is, .

No you cannot, actually. Not the truth. Because evolution is false. Like I've been arguing for the duration of my account.

@scrantoncity No you cannot, actually. Not the truth. Because evolution is false. Like I've been arguing for the duration of my...

so your saying that a poodle and Labrador who breed to form a labadoodle is in fact a new creature created from scratch by God and has nothing to do with it's parents, or do you think that it really is just a Labrador with curly hair.

@Saigot so your saying that a poodle and Labrador who breed to form a labadoodle is in fact a new creature created from...

Ahem what? That is genetics. Plain and simple. I'm saying MACRO-evolution (species to a whole new species) doesn't, can't, and hasn't happened.

@scrantoncity Ahem what? That is genetics. Plain and simple. I'm saying MACRO-evolution (species to a whole new species) doesn't...

first of all genetics are evolution, second let's say a kid is born with autism, that is a genetic defect, if that kid managed to produce kids those kids would have a high chance of inheriting, at the very least, a watered down version of his genetics. Thats evolution, God (if he exists) creates the defect and lets the rules he created do the rest. Another example, humans begin hunting Deer and moose, killing only the strongest and the ones with the biggest antlers, now only the runty and small antlered survive there kids will inherit the small size. Now along this second generation is a runt who didn't mature as well as the others and is very small, the hunters don't kill this deer so it has a chance to produce lots of offspring, which also have his smallness, eventually small genes like his become all encompassing, and a new species of deer has been born. Scientists have indeed noticed that the population of deer is on average becoming slightly smaller.

123 comments. Sorry, but I just have to mess this up.

Haha. You really think you can find something wrong? Don't you dare say it doesn't apply. If you say that you lose automatically.

Verse one: “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)
This says that all these people are going to hell, unless they repent and change.

@scrantoncity Haha. You really think you can find something wrong? Don't you dare say it doesn't apply. If you say that you lose...

the exact phase says "homosexual offenders" meaning those who have committed crimes of adultery homosexually, second we come back to the point that there was no Greek or Hebrew words for homosexuality and the translation for homosexuality is quite likely incorrect. Next.

@Saigot the exact phase says "homosexual offenders" meaning those who have committed crimes of adultery homosexually...

Okay, you know nothing.
Did you know that homosexuality was commonly practiced in ancient Greece? Did you? They probably had a phrase that they used to describe it. And the translators recognized it. And now, the new translators, are trying to change that. But they're just lying. In king James, it says "abusers of themselves with mankind.". I don't know about you, but that seems to be quite akin to homosexuality.
Refute it. Don't say there isn't a word. You can't know that. Refute it.

@scrantoncity Okay, you know nothing. Did you know that homosexuality was commonly practiced in ancient Greece? Did you? They...

well I'll give you that there I don't know whether or not there are Greek or Hebrew words for homosexuality, i was repeating what pikibeau said before,I am aware that Greeks practiced homosexuality. I do know however that the Bible isn't accurately translated. My other points still stand. The new translators are looking at the same texts, with the same information and more, that extra-information can change the whole meaning of something. Don't insult my intelligence.

@Saigot well I'll give you that there I don't know whether or not there are Greek or Hebrew words for homosexuality, i was...

You know it's not accurately translated? Haha and you don't know anything about Greek? You're sad. You just said you don't know about Greek, and now you're saying that you know it's mistranslated?

I cannot compete with someone like that.

@scrantoncity You know it's not accurately translated? Haha and you don't know anything about Greek? You're sad. You just said...

i know the world is circular as well. Oh wait i haven't been in space how can i tell. Even linguistic Experts agree almost unanimously that they have incomplete knowledge of languages like Ancient Greek.

@Saigot i know the world is circular as well. Oh wait i haven't been in space how can i tell. Even linguistic Experts agree...

Right. So they have no idea if it's correctly translated or not. There's a chance it is.

This also means that more likely than not the people in 1600 got it right, and "abusers of themselves with mankind" is correct.

@scrantoncity Right. So they have no idea if it's correctly translated or not. There's a chance it is. This also means that...

There's also a chance it's not. Your interpretation is based on chance, so is his. You can't prove he's wrong, and he can't prove you're wrong. You can only say he's probably wrong, just as he can say you're probably wrong as well.

@piratedicecream There's also a chance it's not. Your interpretation is based on chance, so is his. You can't prove he's wrong, and...

I see. So neither point is valid.

So in short, he cannot use the argument that there is no word for homosexuality. Word, yes, maybe, but phrase? Who knows.

@scrantoncity I see. So neither point is valid. So in short, he cannot use the argument that there is no word for...

Well, don't worry so much about the argument aspect, man. Can't you guys just give it a rest? Belief isn't about how vehemently you argue your side, you know?

@Saigot not really http://mercytoall.net/dtm/1corinthians.htm

"Greek culture was filled with homoerotic words used to describe various homosexual relationships"

What? From your website. Your entire argument is invalid. Entire.

@scrantoncity "Greek culture was filled with homoerotic words used to describe various homosexual relationships" What? From...

i already said i was wrong that there were no words for homosexuality, however right after that sentence it explains that the Greek word used in the sentence is very rare and could have many meanings. this is getting extremely pointless at this point so i'm going to stop replying to you. Lets just agree to disagree, you leave the Gays alone and I'll leave the right-wing fundamentalists "Christians" alone.

@Saigot i already said i was wrong that there were no words for homosexuality, however right after that sentence it...

The thing is, that they don't know how to translate it. "Homosexuals" fits, so that's what it is. Who knows, I may be wrong, but it's highly doubtful that 5 different verses, with five different words, were translated wrong.

@scrantoncity The thing is, that they don't know how to translate it. "Homosexuals" fits, so that's what it is. Who knows, I may...

Mathematically they are more likely to make mistakes, try flipping a coin 5 times and getting heads as opposed to flipping once and getting heads.

I DONT GET THIS POST

Anonymous -2Reply

That anonymous guy whining must be another butt and penis enthusiast. One that needs to be shredded and mixed into food for pigs and livestock

Anonymous -4Reply

All of you evolution and humankind-hating homos need to be herded and murdered! The holocaust should have been for queers instead of jews. Hitler would have won another Time Man of the Year award or two. Or eight.

Anonymous -5Reply
@All of you evolution and humankind-hating homos need to be herded and murdered! The holocaust should have been for...

Hitler actually killed gay people too. Anyone who was different from him. Try reading a book once in a while.

Gays need to burn. Where's a group of righteous heroes to slaughter the onslaught of evil earth-wrecking homos?!

Anonymous -5Reply

He killed gays? He wasn't that bad after all then. He just should've put 100% of his efforts on destroying fags and homosexuals.

Anonymous -5Reply

How dare any of you defend the cheap burger-meat known as homos.

Anonymous -6Reply

All of you faggot supporters have no ground, for a man to have sex with a man is the worst crime a man can ever commit. You standing by that kind of activity is worse than spitting and peeing on Jesus as he was being hung. Which was probably the idea of some homo in the first place. Judas too was a man lover and a fag.

Anonymous -6Reply

Homosexuals aren't born homosexual period. It's a choice they choose to make. -according to the bible

Anonymous -6Reply

GAYS ARE USELESS! They should have only the right to become low-cost food product or something to fatten pigs and cattle.

Anonymous -7Reply
@GAYS ARE USELESS! They should have only the right to become low-cost food product or something to fatten pigs and...

HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT! SAY THAT TO MY MOM AND SEE WHAT SHE DOES, SAY THAT TO MY SISTER (she's not lesbian, but my mom is) AND YOU WILL BE BEATEN AN INCH AWAY FROM DEATH. THEN AFTER YOUR BEATING, YOU'LL WANT TO DIE,

Anonymous 0Reply

Gays who want to get married should stand on a platform, and it will fold in and the queers will be chopped to tiny pieces by rotating razor fans, shot with flamethrowers, seasoned, put in a frying oven for twenty minutes, and sold as 45 cent hamburgers. At least as hamburgers they'd be doing something useful.

Anonymous -12Reply
Anonymous +10Reply

There's no such thing as stupid people, honey. Just lazy people who were lazy and ignorant because they made themselves that way.

Anonymous -18Reply
@There's no such thing as stupid people, honey. Just lazy people who were lazy and ignorant because they made...

There is no such thing as stupid people? Really? Republicans, anybody who uses ebonics, justin bieber doesn't know what germany is. how about people who buy foreign cars, then complain about the economy? What about the IDIOTS who use meth? No stupid people my ass.

@dweezle There is no such thing as stupid people? Really? Republicans, anybody who uses ebonics, justin bieber doesn't know...

Agree with all of them- except the Republicans thing. There are plenty of smart Republicans.(Unfortunately, not all of them are so smart)

@fangirl12 Agree with all of them- except the Republicans thing. There are plenty of smart Republicans.(Unfortunately, not all...

I agree with all of them execpt the Justin Bieber one. You really need to get over him.

Anonymous -7Reply
@dweezle There is no such thing as stupid people? Really? Republicans, anybody who uses ebonics, justin bieber doesn't know...

I'm not defending him, but Justin Bieber knows what Germany is. Just saying. There's disliking/hating someone, and then there's stupid accusations made only to further the hate and ridicule of him. I honestly don't understand people's EXTREME hate of him, but that's a different story...

@FreeMustacheRides I'm not defending him, but Justin Bieber knows what Germany is. Just saying. There's disliking/hating someone, and...

Justin Bieber is a lot like Twilight. We wouldn't hate them if it weren't for all the fangirls. We also hate them because they both actually suck and it's horrifying to know that this is what our next generation will be exposed to, as opposed to the music/books we heard/read as children that was actually good and not painful to the ears/part of the brain that is supposed to make sense of this crap.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +14Reply
This user has deactivated their account.
@569357

I have seen that video, and as Justin Bieber claimed so on his Twitter, the interviewer's thick accent apparently made it sound like he was saying "jewman" which obviously confused Bieber. It's amazing how media just blew up over that and immediately started titling their articles "Justin Bieber Doesn't Know What GERMAN Means?" just for the heck of it. If you search around YouTube a bit, you'll find another interview of him explaining that he has German ancestry and that he can count from 1-10 in German. So, YES, he knows what German and Germany is. Geez.

tl;dr: RAAAAAAAAGE

This user has deactivated their account.
@571248

It was a simple misunderstanding, sheesh. He was probably still confused with the whole "jewman" thing, or maybe he couldn't see what was on the card. I don't know.

The fact is that the interviewer had a thick accent. He KNOWS what German and Germany is. That is fact, regardless of whether the interviewer showed him the card. Again, just a misunderstanding.

Ease up on the kid, people. I'm not a fan of him at all, but is it really necessary to keep on scrutinizing the hell out of everything this kid does or say? GIVE IT A REST.

@There's no such thing as stupid people, honey. Just lazy people who were lazy and ignorant because they made...

no there a stupid people. If you never met one you're it or incredibly lucky. I know pleanty of kids in my college that study 3x more than I do yet can't pull more than a C. And that's in classes with no exams as well so they aren't "bad test takers" they just do bad cause they are dumb. Working your ass off doesn't always make you smart. Btw op liked the homophobes, ether great job bet not to many people noticed, or spell check screwed you over.

Anonymous +2Reply

I don't understand this. Wait, let me rephrase that; I don't understand why OP thinks people who disagree with gay marriage are stupid. Pardon me for wanting to keep marriage sacred. You know what? I think I love my pet duck. It's true love. She makes me really happy. Would it be acceptable if I marry her?

@scrantoncity I don't understand this. Wait, let me rephrase that; I don't understand why OP thinks people who disagree with gay...

A duck is not a human, dumbshit. Whether you like it or not, homosexuals are just as human as you are. People who use the marrying-an-animal argument really need to think of something better to argue with.

@Adria A duck is not a human, dumbshit. Whether you like it or not, homosexuals are just as human as you are. People who...

@568692 (Lanz): That's what homophobes are... People who disagree/dislike gays. But it's true love! She makes me happy! I feel so great around her.
Tell me one other argument that gays use. They're in lust.. I mean "love," sorry. That's their argument. That they're in "love." Well, what if I'm in love with a duck?

@scrantoncity @568692 (Lanz): That's what homophobes are... People who disagree/dislike gays. But it's true love! She makes me...

Your argument is stupid. So what? Marry the duck. No one should be allowed to stop you. It's your life and as long as you're not infringing on other peoples rights you should be allowed to do whatever the fuck you want. That's why gays should be allowed to marry. It's THEIR life.

@SaintNICK Your argument is stupid. So what? Marry the duck. No one should be allowed to stop you. It's your life and as long...

Okay, so I'm in love with a baby girl like in twilight. I love her to death. Can I marry my own daughter? And then have relations with her? I cannot believe the lack of morals you present.

@scrantoncity Okay, so I'm in love with a baby girl like in twilight. I love her to death. Can I marry my own daughter? And then...

Another stupid argument. Obviously no! Because you would be infringing on her rights. Mostly because she would not be able to consent because she's a fucking baby. My point again: As long as you're not infringing on other peoples rights you should be able to do whatever you want!

@SaintNICK Another stupid argument. Obviously no! Because you would be infringing on her rights. Mostly because she would not...

You know that the constitution is for Man-Woman marriage? I say being gay infringes upon our unalienable rights endowed by our (what?) CREATOR! Not our own choices. What if it were a six year old. She'd love her father. Could I marry her?

@scrantoncity You know that the constitution is for Man-Woman marriage? I say being gay infringes upon our unalienable rights...

No because she's still to stupid to understand the concept of marriage. You're annoying. Not everyone believes in God and it's unconstitutional to impose those beliefs on others. Two gay people getting married has fuck all to do with you so how the fuck does it infringe your rights. You're so ignorant I actually feel sorry for you.

@SaintNICK No because she's still to stupid to understand the concept of marriage. You're annoying. Not everyone believes in...

I cannot believe anybody would tolerate gays. It's completely unnatural. Even for evolution, it's a step backwards. Nothing in nature is homosexual. Nothing in nature even lusts. Except humans. Homosexuality doesn't propel anything forward. It returns you back to the caveman stage where you do whatever feels good. That's a good code to live by. If it feels good, do it!
That won't ever go wrong.

@scrantoncity I cannot believe anybody would tolerate gays. It's completely unnatural. Even for evolution, it's a step...

I cannot believe anyone would tolerate you. You're so ignorant that it's ridiculous.
"Nothing in nature is homosexual." False statement is false.
http://news.nationalgeographic....gayanimal.html
Learn to research before you state stupid things.
Have fun being close-minded.

@Clay_ I cannot believe anyone would tolerate you. You're so ignorant that it's ridiculous. "Nothing in nature is...

Those are, not surprisingly, huge exceptions. They are in the severe minority of animals. People bring them up to say that it's instinct. Well no, it isn't. Those animals are wacko. Did you know that there are cannibalistic animals? Does that mean it's natural? Through your misguided logic, apparently.

@scrantoncity Those are, not surprisingly, huge exceptions. They are in the severe minority of animals. People bring them up to...

How would you know if it's not instinct?
http://www.edgeboston.com/index...p;amp;id=92139A THERE WAS CANNIBALISTIC ANIMALS, HURR DURR. LOOK AT DA PERRTY KITE!1!!1!
By the way, it might be natural or instinctual to the animals. They don't need humans 'approval' to follow their instincts.

@Clay_ How would you know if it's not instinct? http://www.edgeboston.com/index...p;amp;id=92139

You are honestly my least favorite person to argue with.
Your immaturity, "NO I HAD NO IDEA THERE WAS CANNIBALISTIC ANIMALS, HURR DURR. LOOK AT DA PERRTY KITE!1!!1!"
Your terrible retorts, "By the way, it might be natural or instinctual to the animals. They don't need humans 'approval' to follow their instincts." This means nothing, actually.
And condescension emanates from you. You are simply astounding in so many sad, sad aspects.

@scrantoncity You are honestly my least favorite person to argue with. Your immaturity, "NO I HAD NO IDEA THERE WAS CANNIBALISTIC...

Next time you debate with me, just say that you want it to be SRS BSNS.
Also, stick to using debate, I like that word better than argue.
If I have such terrible retorts and I'm oh so immature, why do you even bother to reply to me? Hm? Couldn't you go, I dunno, read the Bible and pray to that invisible man in the sky?
To the condescension part, I have to agree. Whenever I debate with close-minded homophobes, I DO feel more superior, since I have the mental ability to not be so ignorant like you.

@scrantoncity Okay, so I'm in love with a baby girl like in twilight. I love her to death. Can I marry my own daughter? And then...

Yeah here's the difference. With gays, the two people are both in love. If they weren't they wouldn't fight so hard to be allowed to marry. You're idiotic examples however, have you claiming that YOU "love" them and that they can't possibly love you like that back.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +10Reply
@Lanz Yeah here's the difference. With gays, the two people are both in love. If they weren't they wouldn't fight so hard...

The duck loves me. I know it. She has to! She makes me so happy, and she never runs away from me. How would you know? Gay people are weak-minded, as is society for endorsing gays.

@scrantoncity @568692 (Lanz): That's what homophobes are... People who disagree/dislike gays. But it's true love! She makes me...

You have fun with that. However, marriage to a nonhuman creature has nothing to do with homosexuals. That is a completely unrelated and irrelevant topic.

@Adria You have fun with that. However, marriage to a nonhuman creature has nothing to do with homosexuals. That is a...

No it really isn't. And why didn't you counter my argument? Cuz you can't. Because its logical.

@scrantoncity No it really isn't. And why didn't you counter my argument? Cuz you can't. Because its logical.

Oh, because marrying a nonhuman creature who does not have the ability to perform tasks that a human can or cannot communicate properly with with a human is definitely the same thing as marrying a homosexual. Silly me. I believe that I effectively countered your argument. Now I am done wasting my time. See ya.

@Adria Oh, because marrying a nonhuman creature who does not have the ability to perform tasks that a human can or cannot...

That isn't a counter. That wasn't my point. My point is that the same argument exists for anything. Who's to say that we won't become tolerant of bestiality in the near future?

@scrantoncity @568692 (Lanz): That's what homophobes are... People who disagree/dislike gays. But it's true love! She makes me...

Wtf? Homophobes or idiots? Pick one and stick with it so your argument actually makes sense please. And what you said makes no sense. You're saying you can't love someone unless they're the opposite sex and if you love someone of the same sex it's just lust. I believe it's the other way around. Love is in the person and their personality, so there is no gender requirement.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +11Reply
@Lanz Wtf? Homophobes or idiots? Pick one and stick with it so your argument actually makes sense please. And what you...

Really, you think It's lust to be straight? And not the other way around? The gay people.. No hope. They want the loving. Straight people lust too. I'm saying gay people HAVE to be lusting. Nobody just falls in love with someone of the same sex when they thought they were straight. They choose (yes it's a choice) to be gay. They choose to go against natural love, and lust after someone of the same sex. But my duck makes me so happy! It can't be lust! It's happiness! No, I'm pretty sure it's your horniness.

@scrantoncity Really, you think It's lust to be straight? And not the other way around? The gay people.. No hope. They want the...

Why the fuck would any one choose to be gay when they know the bullshit they go through just TRYING to live normally?

@scrantoncity Why would anyone do drugs? Huh? I have no idea. Maybe theyre nuts.

You're making completely random, irrelevant arguments that have nothing to with the core topic. You need to stop dancing around the subject you clearly have no true argument for and give us a clear, logical reasoning.

@scrantoncity Why would anyone do drugs? Huh? I have no idea. Maybe theyre nuts.

Because to them, being high is fun. And it probably is to most people. They are willing to suffer through the consequences to be able to get high. Gays don't have anything to enjoy that they can't enjoy while straight, the only difference is that asshole like you have to make their lives 1000 times harder because they're different.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +6Reply
@Lanz Because to them, being high is fun. And it probably is to most people. They are willing to suffer through the...

They CHOOSE to be different. Just like they CHOOSE to be high. They aren't forced into being high. They choose it, because it makes them feel good. Whatever the lusting reason behind the homosexuality, it makes them feel good. Just like porn. But it's lust. They want the feeling. I don't discriminate against the individual. I may lose some respect, but I won't discriminate. It's the act I'm against.

@scrantoncity Really, you think It's lust to be straight? And not the other way around? The gay people.. No hope. They want the...

You just went against your own argument. If gay people really lust like you say they do, then that's due to their hormones which is what causes lust. You also said they choose to be gay, but you can't choose your hormones. And again, if all they were doing was lusting, then why the hell would they try so hard to get married? They can easily have sex without needing to fight for it. And gays CAN fall in love. You probably wouldn't fall in love with the same sex because there is no attraction since you're straight. So yes there is lust involved, but it's not all lust like you're saying. Besides, all love, even straight love, has lust involved.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +9Reply
@Lanz You just went against your own argument. If gay people really lust like you say they do, then that's due to their...

There is no use trying to make him understand. Stupid people didnt choose to be stupid, they were born that way, apparently, him included.

@SuperAstronaut There is no use trying to make him understand. Stupid people didnt choose to be stupid, they were born that way...

No, actually. People like you disgust me. You are unable to reason through logic, so you resort to unfounded insults, and pointless closures which imply that I'm the ignorant one, but at least I can hold my views.

@scrantoncity No, actually. People like you disgust me. You are unable to reason through logic, so you resort to unfounded...

You have no logical arguments. In any debate I have ever seen you in, you only claim you have logic and bash anyone with actual proof.

@pikabeau You have no logical arguments. In any debate I have ever seen you in, you only claim you have logic and bash anyone...

Oh really. Care to debate my strong point: evolution? THAT all shall crumble before my might, because that's practically the only one that matters. You bring up irrelevant topics, for the lack of a reasonable retort.

@scrantoncity Oh really. Care to debate my strong point: evolution? THAT all shall crumble before my might, because that's...

You lost the evolution debate when you started resulting to insults in favor of evidence. And now you are changing the topic because you have no counter attack, amirite?

This user has deactivated their account.
@568902

I know. People like him never admit when they're wrong. It just ticks me off when people say I only lust after my girlfriend when they have no idea what I feel for her.

This user has deactivated their account.
@568977

Case in point.

@pikabeau You lost the evolution debate when you started resulting to insults in favor of evidence. And now you are changing...

Wait, where did I result to insults? I think I called one person a "dolt" and everyone flipped out. If I recall correctly, I've been called "dumbass, ignorant, mother..."and countless others. I'll argue for a Creator who endowed us with unalienable rights if you wish.

@pikabeau You have personally called me an idiot in a debate over evolution.

Oh really. Did I? Was it because you completely misread my post for the third time, and I became so frustrated? Maybe. And I'm so sorry if my horrible, horrible, insult caused you to become deranged. Maybe I should choose my words more carefully, and not use hurtful words. After all, we're only sixteen.

@scrantoncity Oh really. Did I? Was it because you completely misread my post for the third time, and I became so frustrated?...

First off, the only thing you just did was insult my ability to understand your post. You did say you couldn't love someone you're not attracted to, and that was long before you got frustrated. The only arguments you have used are, "I'm right because I'm right and you're wrong." Everyone else has used solid logic. Also, I'm not sixteen, I'm nearly 18.

@scrantoncity Wait, where did I result to insults? I think I called one person a "dolt" and everyone flipped out. If I recall...

Maybe you should step outside of a church for like ten minutes and realize there's more to life than wasting your time hating gay people.

@The_Enlightened Maybe you should step outside of a church for like ten minutes and realize there's more to life than wasting your...

Hmm I do seem to recall that I said that I don't hate gay people. And I don't even go to church as much as everyone thinks. I go once a week. Boo-hoo.

@scrantoncity Oh really. Care to debate my strong point: evolution? THAT all shall crumble before my might, because that's...

Hate to break this to you, but I've yet to see a debate on this site that you've won. This site is all about popular opinion, and when all of your comments are marked down, it's safe to say you've lost the debate. Simply claiming that you have logic and that you're right does not make you right.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +5Reply
@Lanz Hate to break this to you, but I've yet to see a debate on this site that you've won. This site is all about...

Hmm, if common opinion were right, then apparently the earth was flat for however long, and the universe existed always, until about 1850. But yeah, majority is always right, no doubt. The laws of physics change to suit public opinion.

@scrantoncity Hmm, if common opinion were right, then apparently the earth was flat for however long, and the universe existed...

yea and who were the people who wouldn't let go off those ideas when science proved otherwise? Oh yeah..the church.

@SpearmintMilk @568828 (scrantoncity): Why do you try and bring everything back to the evolution argument?

Is homosexuality beneficial in the least to the non-existent evolution? What? It's not? Hmm.

@scrantoncity Is homosexuality beneficial in the least to the non-existent evolution? What? It's not? Hmm.

How can you sit there and blatantly deny evolution? Species evolve to better fit their environment. It's a fact. Humans who live in colder areas have thicker blood and vice versa. This is because of evolution. The church doesn't deny this. You need to specify what you disagree with; which I'm assuming is the Big Bang Theory.

Briannes avatar Brianne Yeah You Are +3Reply
@Brianne How can you sit there and blatantly deny evolution? Species evolve to better fit their environment. It's a fact...

Actually, no, I disagree with the theory of evolution.

What you described Is microevolution, or adaptation, or variance. That can be observed. However, that does not mean that species evolved into other species. THAT has never been witnessed, cannot be tested, and most certainly never happened. That's the theory of evolution, which I defy anyone to prove.

@Lanz You just went against your own argument. If gay people really lust like you say they do, then that's due to their...

Not all love. If all love were lust then fat girls wouldn't get married. Being gay isn't psychological. It's a choice. Frankly, probably everyone would be gay if we were raised that it was the correct thing to do. Hormones do not control the orientation. They're horny, and they choose to be gay.

@scrantoncity Not all love. If all love were lust then fat girls wouldn't get married. Being gay isn't psychological. It's a...

I said some lust not all lust. And you're fat chick argument makes no sense because everyone finds different things attractive. Just because you don't find them attractive doesn't mean no one does. If you'd stop being an asshole for a moment and actually consider another person's point of view we wouldn't be having this argument and you wouldn't look like a dumbass.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +8Reply
@Lanz I said some lust not all lust. And you're fat chick argument makes no sense because everyone finds different things...

Yeah, because the respectful logical one looks like an idiot compared to the insulting one who can't hold up his views.

@scrantoncity Yeah, because the respectful logical one looks like an idiot compared to the insulting one who can't hold up his views.

I think a ton of people would agree that you have used close to no logic in any of your statements. Once you lose an argument you simply make something up on the spot. I honestly have never heard of your logic, and apparently, neither have most people. I think the majority of the people here agree that you are definitely not being the logical one.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +9Reply
@Lanz I think a ton of people would agree that you have used close to no logic in any of your statements. Once you lose...

While I do agree with most of this post, it is irrelevant. "Logic" isn't like evidence. Logic is the conclusion through close analysis and reasoning on the topic. Logically, once we accept gay people into our community, inevitably other stuff will follow. Pedophilia, bestiality, and rape will ensue. The honest, best argument for gays is that they are "in love." I honestly do not dislike the individuals. They are fine, and can be nice. It's their weak-minded disposition that I disdain. They CAN choose to be straight. They can. It's a choice. I bet that I could be gay. I may not find men attractive, but that's irrelevant. That's lust.

@scrantoncity While I do agree with most of this post, it is irrelevant. "Logic" isn't like evidence. Logic is the conclusion...

Once again you are just saying you're right. You can't just say "It's a choice." and end it with that even though that has been proven against several times.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +5Reply
@Lanz Once again you are just saying you're right. You can't just say "It's a choice." and end it with that even though...

What's been proven? My point. Why thank you, good sir, for finally seeing logic.
They haven't proven it. They have no clue what causes someone to be homosexual. I have a theory as to why that is. It's really shocking, and it's a huge breakthrough. Ready?
It's because nothing causes it. It's a choice.
Woah. That was hard to come up with.

@scrantoncity What's been proven? My point. Why thank you, good sir, for finally seeing logic. They haven't proven it. They have...

I think I speak with everyone when I say we're tired of you. Have you ever chosen a girl that you're attracted to? Probably not. Sexuality is not a choice. Common sense says it's not. (The common sense being: Why would anyone choose to be hated? It doesn't feel very good.)

@pikabeau I think I speak with everyone when I say we're tired of you. Have you ever chosen a girl that you're attracted to?...

Wait, who gets hated on more? Me, or them? Honestly, there are 37 people opposing gay marriage on amirite. 230 or whatever are for it. And have you heard me call a gay person something derogatory? Have I ever insinuated that I'm better than you? No, I haven't. I've said that it is a little weak-minded to make that choice, but I'm no better than you as an individual. And yet, all sorts of names are casually tossed my way, but not back. Hmm. Interesting. Why would I choose to get hated on?

@scrantoncity Wait, who gets hated on more? Me, or them? Honestly, there are 37 people opposing gay marriage on amirite. 230 or...

By saying that gay people lust and not love, you are insinsuating that you and any relationship you are in is better than a same sex relationship.

@scrantoncity Wait, who gets hated on more? Me, or them? Honestly, there are 37 people opposing gay marriage on amirite. 230 or...

You just called gay people weak-minded because of an opinion that isn't proven to be true. And also, as far as insults go...

"You are unable to reason through logic, so you resort to unfounded insults, and pointless closures which imply that I'm the ignorant one"

That's an insult. Would you like to tell me who said that youwhoapparentlydoesnotresorttoinsults?

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +3Reply
@Lanz You just called gay people weak-minded because of an opinion that isn't proven to be true. And also, as far as...

Is that an insult? Really? I thought an insult, judging by the denotation AND connotation, is when you attack a person's attributes. I simply stated some facts. You did resort to insults and pointless closures that DO imply I'm ignorant. That isn't an insult. That is a fact, for the last part, and something assumed for the first part.
Not an insult
Once more, it isn't an insult.
Let me reiterate: It's not an insult.

@scrantoncity Is that an insult? Really? I thought an insult, judging by the denotation AND connotation, is when you attack a...

Actually, those are not facts. Everyone who has argued with you has used logic, and while we did resort to insults, it was not due to our lack of logic, but due to you not acknowledging our logic and reasonable arguments. That, by the way, is being ignorant, which does make you the ignorant one. So you used false accusations. And even so, you still called gays weak-minded, which is an insult.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +4Reply
@Lanz Actually, those are not facts. Everyone who has argued with you has used logic, and while we did resort to insults...

No, the facts were that you resorted to insults. My conclusion was my assumption. Please try to understand normal speech.

@scrantoncity No, the facts were that you resorted to insults. My conclusion was my assumption. Please try to understand normal...

It's not worth arguing with you anymore. It's obvious you're just too stubborn to admit you're wrong. And yes I'm insulting you. It's not because I have no argument, it's because it doesn't matter since you won't listen to the argument anyways. And besides, it is more than obvious that you've lost this argument as pretty much all of your comments are voted down on and the people who argue against you have comments that are voted up. This is amirite and that's how things work here. I obviously can't change your mind because you can't listen to reason. Don't bother responding because I'm done arguing with you when you've already lost.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +5Reply
@Lanz It's not worth arguing with you anymore. It's obvious you're just too stubborn to admit you're wrong. And yes I'm...

I don't know if you realize this, but my comments are minus three. And yours are plus three (for the most part.) Hmm and I was arguing against three people... Woah! It cannot be that y'all voted it down. That's too logical. It must be that evolution formed my posts with less value than yours.

@scrantoncity What's been proven? My point. Why thank you, good sir, for finally seeing logic. They haven't proven it. They have...

Actually I said that your theory there has been proven against several times. And here's why I think it's not a choice: Why would anyone choose to have a harder life? It's all around easier to be straight, so why would they WANT to have a harder life. Now I want you to give me a GOOD reason that doesn't involve you saying that you are automatically right. Don't worry. I'll walk you through this argument since you obviously don't know how to argue the right way.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +5Reply
@pikabeau If you admit that you are not attracted to men, how can you possibly choose to be gay?

I thought your whole argument is that it isn't lust? That you don't care for who it is, it's that you're in love. What? Then why couldn't I fall in love with a man? If it's really true love. I'd say this is a fail on your part.

@scrantoncity I thought your whole argument is that it isn't lust? That you don't care for who it is, it's that you're in love...

As I said, all love has lust. Pika is arguing that it isn't ALL lust like you keep saying it is. You still have to be attracted to someone in order to love them in the way you love a straight person. That's why straight people don't love the same gender. They aren't attracted to them.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +1Reply
@Lanz As I said, all love has lust. Pika is arguing that it isn't ALL lust like you keep saying it is. You still have to...

That's exactly what I'm explaining I disagree with. I feel looks have little matter. Little. Yes, I will probably not marry a hideous person, but there is a difference between lust, and wanting someone pleasing to look at, and able to go on roller-coasters without spilling out of the seat.
I bet, that if I chose, I could decide to be gay. Yes, that is within a realm of probability.

@scrantoncity That's exactly what I'm explaining I disagree with. I feel looks have little matter. Little. Yes, I will probably...

"I bet, that if I chose, I could decide to be gay. Yes, that is within a realm of probability."

That does not work as an argument. I bet the world will explode for no reason on December 21, 2012. That sounds stupid right? But according to you, that can be used in an argument.

Anyways, you can't truly love someone who you are not attracted to in any way. If you are not attracted to them, then it's something we call a friendship.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are 0Reply
@scrantoncity I thought your whole argument is that it isn't lust? That you don't care for who it is, it's that you're in love...

How can you love someone you're not attracted to? I'm attracted to my girlfriend. I know I love her and not lust after her because she is not exactly a size 2 model with a huge rack.

@pikabeau How can you love someone you're not attracted to? I'm attracted to my girlfriend. I know I love her and not lust...

Hmm, let us think. How could this post possibly be logical?
"How can you love someone you're not attracted to?"
"I love her not lust because she isn't (sexy, hot, beautiful?)"
Uh... You obviously don't think your girlfriend is that attractive. I don't find guys attractive. You chose to be gay and seek girls. Even if they aren't attractive.
I choose to love someone whom I'm naturally meant for.
Also, I said I don't find them attractive.
That is way different than being attracted to them. Those words are completely different. One is a choice, and the other is an opinion.

@scrantoncity Hmm, let us think. How could this post possibly be logical? "How can you love someone you're not attracted...

I never said I'm not attracted to my girlfriend. She has the most beautiful eyes I have ever seen. She sings like an angel. She has a slamming booty. Her skin is so soft. We have fun together. I find her to be incredibly sexy. But I do not lust after her. If it was lust, I would only be with her based on the things I like about her. I love her because of who she is.

@pikabeau I never said I'm not attracted to my girlfriend. She has the most beautiful eyes I have ever seen. She sings like...

Stop contradicting yourself. Earlier you said that... Oops I misread that. I thought you said you weren't attracted to her. But that isn't the point. You can love someone whom you don't find attractive.

@scrantoncity Stop contradicting yourself. Earlier you said that... Oops I misread that. I thought you said you weren't attracted...

You said you personally couldn't be with an ugly girl. That is basically you admitting you cannot love anyone you're not attracted to. I'm sorry, but you are the one contradicting yourself.

@scrantoncity Not all love. If all love were lust then fat girls wouldn't get married. Being gay isn't psychological. It's a...

If you believe people choose to be gay, you admit that you chose to be straight.

I don't think anyone other than someone who is actually gay can say whether or not it's a choice. If you haven't gone through it, you have no way of knowing. I can tell you from personal experience that it is NOT a choice.

@pikabeau If you believe people choose to be gay, you admit that you chose to be straight. I don't think anyone other than...

Yeah, your "personal experience" will be either you're gay, or you have a friend. Both are invalid, because obviously gays wouldnt want people to think It's a choice. And otherwise, it's a biased account. It is a choice.

@pikabeau So all gay people lie about it? I never once chose. Did you choose to be straight?

Hmm let me think. Yeah. It wasn't really "Are you going to be gay, or be straight?" Kinda thing. You choose, all the time, that you would rather be with a woman. Just like I choose that I'd rather be with a woman.

@scrantoncity Hmm let me think. Yeah. It wasn't really "Are you going to be gay, or be straight?" Kinda thing. You choose, all...

I don't believe you choose to be attracted to woman. I believe attraction is an innate thing you get from biology and life experiences.

@scrantoncity Yeah, your "personal experience" will be either you're gay, or you have a friend. Both are invalid, because...

What you just said is essentially the same thing as saying that getting shot doesn't hurt and that the people who got shot only want you to think it's hurt. There was no logic or factual content in that whatsoever. I still haven't seen this logic that you claim to have.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +3Reply
@Lanz What you just said is essentially the same thing as saying that getting shot doesn't hurt and that the people who...

Okay, valid point. Gays don't want to be discriminated. (Here's this logic.) Therefore, they would want you to think they are born gay. Even though it is (logically) a choice.
Okay, say I love cookies. (This is true. :D) And I eat them all the time and become giant. Naturally, I would blame something other than my glutton for my being fat. I would say that hormones caused me to eat thousands of cookies. Or maybe talking on a cellphone addled my brain. Whatever it is, the blame lies with another. It isn't my fault. This is what gays are doing. Even though I chose to eat the cookies, I am still claiming that it was hormones.

@scrantoncity Okay, valid point. Gays don't want to be discriminated. (Here's this logic.) Therefore, they would want you to...

See what you did there? Here's what I said to do:

"Now I want you to give me a GOOD reason that doesn't involve you saying that you are automatically right."

Now here is where you messed up:

"Even though it is (logically) a choice."

Once again, you are saying that you are automatically right.

Now the argument is whether gays choose to be gay. You basically just said that being gay is a choice because being gay is a choice. You can't use what you are trying to prove as evidence for anything.

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +4Reply
@Lanz See what you did there? Here's what I said to do: "Now I want you to give me a GOOD reason that doesn't involve...

Shocking. I gave a valid point, and you took one piece of my paragraph, ignoring my evidence, and made this Astounding.

@scrantoncity I don't understand this. Wait, let me rephrase that; I don't understand why OP thinks people who disagree with gay...

He never said people who disagree with gay marriage are stupid. He was making a comparison. And the thing about being gay is you're still marrying a human being. I'm pretty sure a duck would have a hard time committing...

Lanzs avatar Lanz Yeah You Are +9Reply
Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.