biology, not your subjective "feelings"

Lon

Well-known member
Yes. You and I are on the same side of this issue; that is certain.

I do not think the AIDS argument is valid, however. Selaphiel is right in demanding an argument against homosexuality, qua homosexuality.
Perhaps a similar questioning of smoking related to cancer would give some pause for confusion, but there is no denying whatsoever that smoking is a dangerous behavior. When the numbers are exponential to the degree we are talking about, we are only talking about fractions of errors in the wiggle room. There is no way to ever refute numbers. They are what they are just like all math. It can't be fudged or faked. Sometimes reporting can do that, but we have government stats here. They are 'trying' to report accurate findings. -Lon
 

Lon

Well-known member
You really go out of your way to exalt yourself...a little too much to convince anyone, except perhaps yourself.
Hogwash. The only egocentric here is you. Admit this (I'm serious). You do NOT have my best intention in sight. You really are egocentric.
You need to humble.
:nono: Look above. That man is you. You are an incredibly self-centered putz. Is that mean? :nono: You know you are. You have to know you are. Me? I'd like you to stop being one and actually enter the human race.


Wasn't Jesus big on humility?
Well, having no interest in the divine, you wouldn't know or ever likely to, are you?

You really are this thin. It is sad, and I'd like you to be pushed beyond yourself. You have NO empathy ability.
He's neither of our god....you'll learn that soon enough.

:think: When did you become the actuator of the universe? Remember that arrogance/humility accusation? You might want to look in a mirror.
You have an empty husked soul. It is dried like a raisin and incredibly self-serving (means not very humble). Learn what humility actually is before you try to accuse someone of not having it again. At present, you should make it a habit to never bring the topic up, being your arrogant self. -Lon
 

glassjester

Well-known member
Perhaps a similar questioning of smoking related to cancer would give some pause for confusion, but there is no denying whatsoever that smoking is a dangerous behavior. When the numbers are exponential to the degree we are talking about, we are only talking about fractions of errors in the wiggle room. There is no way to ever refute numbers. They are what they are just like all math. It can't be fudged or faked. Sometimes reporting can do that, but we have government stats here. They are 'trying' to report accurate findings. -Lon

I guess so. But I think you would agree that smoking is only wrong because of the health risks associated with it. Do you believe the same about homosexuality?
 

Lon

Well-known member
I guess so. But I think you would agree that smoking is only wrong because of the health risks associated with it. Do you believe the same about homosexuality?

No, of course that is correct. I think we can approach this from both perspectives. Both physical and spiritual reasons can be the first approach to the conversation. On a political scale, it has to be the former. Maybe one day, the separation clause will not be out of balance on the pendulum we've allowed courts to make it. Imho, they are wrong and out of balance because they are pushing against spirituality (the exact reason the law was written). Secularism is an attack on ALL religions.
 

quip

BANNED
Banned
I am trying to understand your definition of marriage, and how it includes homosexuals, but excludes certain other relationships, which I would consider perverse.

"Two individuals who love each other and want to bond for life."

Why couldn't that include incestuous couples?
Or why not 3 individuals, instead of 2?
What about a couple who doesn't believe marriage is for life? Are you against their right to marry?

We can debate the merits or lack thereof of each, in turn when or if such is being proposed....that is if you're not being rhetorical.

A more pertinent question would be by what practical necessity does one preclude same-sex marriage?
 

quip

BANNED
Banned
Hogwash. The only egocentric here is you. Admit this (I'm serious). You do NOT have my best intention in sight. You really are egocentric.

:nono: Look above. That man is you. You are an incredibly self-centered putz. Is that mean? :nono: You know you are. You have to know you are. Me? I'd like you to stop being one and actually enter the human race.


Well, having no interest in the divine, you wouldn't know or ever likely to, are you?

You really are this thin. It is sad, and I'd like you to be pushed beyond yourself. You have NO empathy ability.

:think: When did you become the actuator of the universe? Remember that arrogance/humility accusation? You might want to look in a mirror.
You have an empty husked soul. It is dried like a raisin and incredibly self-serving (means not very humble). Learn what humility actually is before you try to accuse someone of not having it again. At present, you should make it a habit to never bring the topic up, being your arrogant self. -Lon

Personally, I wish you no ill-will. But you do seem hostile to any challenge regarding your world-view.

Spiritual insecurity's not an endearing quality.
 

quip

BANNED
Banned
Well, I probably won't be viewing it. But if it promotes any type of sexual relationship other than one between a man and a woman in a lifelong commitment, that is ordered toward the creation of new life - then I'm against it.

It's a guide to exotic (hetero) sexual positions. I'm not sure of its stance regarding your other criteria

Anyway....is this normal or perverse sexual behaviour?
 

quip

BANNED
Banned
it encourages the normalization of perversity


but i believe we've covered this ground

You're correct we have....and concluded that heterosexuality can be as perverse as homosexuality. Are you implying that perverse heteros shouldn't be allowed to marry?
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Then you need to define what "normal" sexual activity is.

Does BDSM count as normal? I certainly don't think it does. You?

heterosexual within a Christian marriage


but again, we've covered this ground before
 

quip

BANNED
Banned
heterosexual within a Christian marriage


but again, we've covered this ground before

Or are you claiming that BDSM sex by christians is not perverse? Is BDSM hetero sex by non-christians perverted though?

You're not being clear.
 
Top