Gay Marriage

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[omgNiko]

.

[Sachaztan]

absolutely insane? please cite the parable of the madman again!? lol!

E-FLAT, SALIERI! E-FLAT!

Look, I am not vermillion hawk. How many times do I have to tell you this?

[omgNiko]

.

[Sachaztan]

ok sachaztan ill entirely stop purporting my bias of you, but i don't want to see any more troll insult attacks like ur insane remark, which i see is just a response to my troll post

I just want to know what kind of parallel universe that you live in where I am anti-abortion and lgbt-rights.

[omgNiko]

.

[TheWindCriesMary]

Look, I am not vermillion hawk. How many times do I have to tell you this?

lol

and wind, http://ww3.tvo.org/video/171085/charles-taylor-and-jonathan-sacks-future-religion%22%3EWatch%20the%20video%20>

Dude, you wanna tell me at what point that fact is said so I can check it out + context? Linking me to a 54 minute video is not really citing a source :p

[Sachaztan]

every time i addressed you thus far it was in the paradigm of negative bias, it was trollery, nuff said. other than those times, which are loaded remarks, i would be very grateful if you would analyze my actual opinion posts and report

Wow...you mean just like the way you actually read my posts before you just pulled your assumptions out of your ass?

[Sachaztan]

People generally don't base their religious beliefs on logic and thinking, so it kinda makes sense that they don't apply any kind of scrutiny or research to whatever holy book that they subscribe to.

Tig, I want you to answer honestly to this question:
Have you ever read the entire bible?

It's ok if you haven't, in fact this very common even for believers. But it would explain a few things.

[PonySlaystation]

the ethics of society change with the times. now to be a loyal conservative only to the ethics of an ancient desert tribe from 2 millennia ago should only be viable if you embrace the message, not the specifics- the morality that everyone has the right to their own beliefs and non-violence. this core belief in modern secular society must impair you from saying abortion is bad or gay marriage is bad, otherwise you are totally conservatively embracing the ethics of a fundamentally middle-eastern philosophy.

It's true when some religions follow their texts too closely, they miss the original message. When Islam was born it made sense for men to marry polygamous because after decades of war the female population outnumbered the male population. It was better for a man to provide for a woman rather than her living in the street. But in modern society it makes little sense. Another example is kosher food, animals were to be slaughtered in a certain way to drain them of blood as it was considered their soul or lifeforce but also because it was a merciful way to kill the animals so that they wouldn't suffer. However in modern society it's a barbaric way to treat the animals. Hence, the original concept is lost.

But you seem to mix a lot of concepts together into one. Women's rights is a socioeconomic issue. Homosexuality is a moral issue, something inherently bad, like a sickness. it's a simple issue that's cannot be devolved into specifics as it's not compatible with basic human nature. Of course rules against it have been around since the dawn of mankind, just like murder and other crimes against nature that harm the well-being of others. That doesn't make it less relevant, would you promote the legalization of murder because it's an ancient rule? or because murders deserve happiness and not rehabilitation even though it's something inherently wrong that they're doing?

[omgNiko]

.

[Sachaztan]

Of course not.

So then it wouldn't be much of a stretch to think that Wind has a better understanding of the bible than you do, right?

[TheWindCriesMary]

Homosexuality is a moral issue, something inherently bad, like a sickness. it's a simple issue that's cannot be devolved into specifics as it's not compatible with basic human nature.

No, it is not. There is absolutely zero philosophical or scientific evidence that it is "bad". It exists both in nature (thousands of documented examples of homosexual animals) and has existed in countless historic civilizations where it was not considered immoral.
 

Of course rules against it have been around since the dawn of mankind, just like murder and other crimes against nature that harm the well-being of others.

This is absolutely false. There is zero evidence of homosexuality being outlawed prior to organized religion. In fact in Babylon, Egypt, Greece and Rome it was an accepted part of every day culture.


Pony, you are a bigot. You make up bullshit arguments against homosexuality that are completely absent of facts, science, or evidence.


You do it because you hate something that is absoloutely none of your business. You are a bigot and you represent the worst kind of human: that which uses his own hate and distaste to infringe upon the freedom of two consenting adults to engage in a non-harmful activity that has no victims.

You are a bigot and you are disgusting.

[omgNiko]

.

[omgNiko]

.

[hans]

srry dble post, hit quote button

post whore, u can delete posts

[omgNiko]

.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

You cant you fool, You are now disgraced your family and all your children.

[hans]

You can you fool, You are disgraced your family and all your children.

fixed*

[omgNiko]

.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

fixed*

Thats you with your own fucking powers eagle, srsly make another account and then try to.