Not at all, actually.
I may be told by Neo-Nazis to be tolerant of their views, but that doesn't mean I'm going to be tolerant of them.
Advertisement
by Wamitoria » Mon May 16, 2011 9:55 am
by SpectacularSpectacular » Mon May 16, 2011 9:55 am
Undivulged Principles wrote:-snip-
by Idealismania » Mon May 16, 2011 9:56 am
The Corparation wrote:What makes them different then the next person when it comes to basic rights? None. They should get all the rights of heterosexuals. However for marriage rights, churches should also have the right to deny marrying them. which is fine as a church isn't needed to marry.
by Tekania » Mon May 16, 2011 9:56 am
Wamitoria wrote:Kleomentia wrote:I didn't mean that, i said it wrong. I mean i don't want a giant parade about their rights that will only cause trouble and damage to the city.They can make out in the public any time they want, but not to make a parade about it.Seriously...
I fail to see how Gay Pride parades cause trouble and damage to anyone.
Apart from the horrid fashion senses of the participants, of course.
by Kleomentia » Mon May 16, 2011 9:58 am
Wamitoria wrote:Kleomentia wrote:I didn't mean that, i said it wrong. I mean i don't want a giant parade about their rights that will only cause trouble and damage to the city.They can make out in the public any time they want, but not to make a parade about it.Seriously...
I fail to see how Gay Pride parades cause trouble and damage to anyone.
Apart from the horrid fashion senses of the participants, of course.
by Lithatrius » Mon May 16, 2011 9:58 am
-St George wrote:Sanguinthium wrote:
Nonexistant. unless you consider being hanged, drawn, and quartered a right. in which case, the right is to be executed publically old style english treason way. Hanged, Drawn, Quartered.
Why: Leviticus 20:13
"A man who lays with a man as a man lays with a woman have commited an abommination; they shall surely be put to death. they have no one to blame but themselves; they have forfeited their lives"
as an islamic nation, we follow Sharia law, which coincidentally is almost exactly the same as OT justice.
however, women get off free. the reason is **Redacted**
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." - Jesus Peace Be Upon Him.Sooo, you want more children in an already overstretched care system in the US, the reduction of the rights Homosexuals already have, and keeping homosexuals from marrying for what reason exactly?Aestalis wrote:There should be a comprehensive banning of sexual orientation based discrimination in terms of occupation, welfare, health, and the like.
Marriage, civil unions, and the right to adopt, however, should remain heterosexual privileges.Herp derp 1: teh gheys can into reporduction brahAestalis wrote:
Marriage is the bedrock of our society. Our population has grown and flourished around the family unit, and our societies have developed around the family unit, reinforced by the institution of marriage. The institution was conceived to, and has been maintained to, regulate procreation and the continuation of the human species. It has existed for centuries to facilitate families and kinship. The forming of families is the key function of marriage, and extending the scope of marriage to those who are biologically unable to procreate makes marriage itself redundant. The upholding marriage between man and woman simply recognises important and inherent differences between the two sexes. There is nothing unequal about recognising difference.
The government does not and should not regulate or concern itself with love, and if you argue that those who love each other should be able to be married to announce that love, then I seriously wonder about their notion of love that needs paper, formal ceremony, or nomenclature to justify itself.
herp derp 2: if marriage is the 'bedrock of our society' then why is the divorce really quite large? and why are homo relationships apparently more stable?
herp derp 3: Err, so you want the government to stop homos getting married but don't want the government involved in marriage? fallacy much?John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Child, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but have eternal life"Muffin Button wrote:Now none of this is to hurt anyone, You asked the question and i am answering it, but I am stongly angainst them and i shall prove to you with two scripture verses why homosexualality is a bad thing, now these are toned way down from other verses i could have used.
Romans 1:27 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.
Ezekial 16:49 “Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy."
Samuel II 1:26 "I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women."
Mathew 5:43-44 "You have heard that it was said, "Love your neighbor and hate your enemy." But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"
As a Christian, your use of the Bible as a way to condemn homosexuality is not only wrong, but an insult to His Word. All of Leviticus is apart of the Old Covenant, which is irrelevant to modern Christianity and was made so by the New Covenant, the Council of Jerusalem, and the teachings of both Christ and Paul, the former in Mathew 5:43-44 and the latter in Romans 7.
Paul, who forms much of New Testament theology (as the author/central source for Romans, Corinthians and others), never outwardly condemns homosexuality, and Mathew leaves it off a list of condemnable acts in his Gospel, and, of course, there's the central fucking theme of the New Testament, Tolerance, as evidenced by Mathew 5:43-44 which, for the third time this post, states: "You have heard that it was said, "Love your neighbor and hate your enemy." But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"
by Wamitoria » Mon May 16, 2011 9:58 am
Tekania wrote:Wamitoria wrote:I fail to see how Gay Pride parades cause trouble and damage to anyone.
Apart from the horrid fashion senses of the participants, of course.
Well, if they hadn't thrown the parade, then those anti-gay protestors wouldn't have had to come out and shoot people, attempt to attack police officers and firebomb buildings.... It's clearly those queers fault.
by Farnhamia » Mon May 16, 2011 9:58 am
Tekania wrote:Wamitoria wrote:I fail to see how Gay Pride parades cause trouble and damage to anyone.
Apart from the horrid fashion senses of the participants, of course.
Well, if they hadn't thrown the parade, then those anti-gay protestors wouldn't have had to come out and shoot people, attempt to attack police officers and firebomb buildings.... It's clearly those queers fault.
by Kleomentia » Mon May 16, 2011 9:59 am
Tekania wrote:Kleomentia wrote:I didn't mean that, i said it wrong. I mean i don't want a giant parade about their rights that will only cause trouble and damage to the city.They can make out in the public any time they want, but not to make a parade about it.Seriously...
The parade doesn't damage the city, it's the idiots attempting to shoot people and firebomb buildings that damage the city.
by Wamitoria » Mon May 16, 2011 9:59 am
Kleomentia wrote:Wamitoria wrote:I fail to see how Gay Pride parades cause trouble and damage to anyone.
Apart from the horrid fashion senses of the participants, of course.
Well here in Belgrade there were about 3000 people ho rampaged the city when the parade was, and people were hurt, and even killed, damage was caused to buildings and all of us knew it was going to happen but people just had to go and have that parade didn't they.And what good did it do, they didn't get any more rights, people just got hurt.
by Wamitoria » Mon May 16, 2011 9:59 am
by Great Agram » Mon May 16, 2011 10:00 am
by Kleomentia » Mon May 16, 2011 10:00 am
Wamitoria wrote:Kleomentia wrote:
Well here in Belgrade there were about 3000 people ho rampaged the city when the parade was, and people were hurt, and even killed, damage was caused to buildings and all of us knew it was going to happen but people just had to go and have that parade didn't they.And what good did it do, they didn't get any more rights, people just got hurt.
That was the fault of the anti-gay protesters who caused the damage, not of the homosexuals.
by Farnhamia » Mon May 16, 2011 10:00 am
Kleomentia wrote:Wamitoria wrote:I fail to see how Gay Pride parades cause trouble and damage to anyone.
Apart from the horrid fashion senses of the participants, of course.
Well here in Belgrade there were about 3000 people ho rampaged the city when the parade was, and people were hurt, and even killed, damage was caused to buildings and all of us knew it was going to happen but people just had to go and have that parade didn't they.And what good did it do, they didn't get any more rights, people just got hurt.
by Yavin 1221 » Mon May 16, 2011 10:00 am
Kleomentia wrote:Wamitoria wrote:I fail to see how Gay Pride parades cause trouble and damage to anyone.
Apart from the horrid fashion senses of the participants, of course.
Well here in Belgrade there were about 3000 people ho rampaged the city when the parade was, and people were hurt, and even killed, damage was caused to buildings and all of us knew it was going to happen but people just had to go and have that parade didn't they.And what good did it do, they didn't get any more rights, people just got hurt.
by Wamitoria » Mon May 16, 2011 10:01 am
Great Agram wrote:Farnhamia wrote:So? That's more a comment on the state of Serbian culture than it is on homosexuality.
every nation has it culture, that must be respeced, you might do not like football and the serbs, so the serbs might call you an assholle for example. did you get he point: every nation has its own culture, you are from the diferent culture and you cannot judge them for that.
by Farnhamia » Mon May 16, 2011 10:01 am
Great Agram wrote:Farnhamia wrote:So? That's more a comment on the state of Serbian culture than it is on homosexuality.
every nation has it culture, that must be respeced, you might do not like football and the serbs, so the serbs might call you an assholle for example. did you get he point: every nation has its own culture, you are from the diferent culture and you cannot judge them for that.
by Tekania » Mon May 16, 2011 10:01 am
Wamitoria wrote:Tekania wrote:
Well, if they hadn't thrown the parade, then those anti-gay protestors wouldn't have had to come out and shoot people, attempt to attack police officers and firebomb buildings.... It's clearly those queers fault.
Indeed. And if women would just wear sensible clothing, they wouldn't get raped. *nods*
by Kleomentia » Mon May 16, 2011 10:02 am
by Great Agram » Mon May 16, 2011 10:02 am
by Wamitoria » Mon May 16, 2011 10:02 am
by Soheran » Mon May 16, 2011 10:02 am
Flameswroth wrote:To borrow a page from the Gaga book, "I'm on the right track baby"
by Wamitoria » Mon May 16, 2011 10:03 am
by Kleomentia » Mon May 16, 2011 10:03 am
Farnhamia wrote:Kleomentia wrote:
Well here in Belgrade there were about 3000 people ho rampaged the city when the parade was, and people were hurt, and even killed, damage was caused to buildings and all of us knew it was going to happen but people just had to go and have that parade didn't they.And what good did it do, they didn't get any more rights, people just got hurt.
Yes, the homosexuals should just be quiet, and stay indoors, and pretend that they are heterosexual, right? That's why God created closets, isn't it?
Again, more a comment on the sorry state of Serbia than it is on homosexuals.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Grinning Dragon, Mutualist Chaos, Statesburg, Tungstan
Advertisement