Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by 007, Dec 28, 2005.
"...the community reserves the right and obligation to prevent a person from harming others, so society has the obligation to help a person not to harm himself physically or spiritually."
That is exactly what makes this country so great. It was founded on the idea that its citizens should be free of religious persecution like this.
When someone advocates a vigorous campaign of re-education without any real merit, or claims religious beliefs as an excuse for such a campaign, I'm always reminded of this quote:
"In Germany they first came for the Communists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me--and by that time no one was left to speak up."
--Pastor Martin Niemoller.
Without any real MERIT? Are you kidding? Obviously you haven't researched before you espoused that. There's volumes upon volumes of information and fact that supports how dangerous and destructive the homosexaul lifestyle is.
Now please don't ask me to provide the links. They're there. Now the initiative is your's to look.
Typical blowhard move. "I'm so sure of what I say that I don't have to provide any corroborating viewpoints from qualified individuals."
Why don't you try explaining what the merit is in invading someone else's privacy and attemtping to brainwash them out of their alternative belief system. I'm not saying that this type of action is never justified, I want you to justify in this case. I don't think you can. I think you are so self-centered that you just can't stand that some people are getting away with bahavoir that you find extremely objectionable. Go ahead. I await your justification.
I'd be interested in a discussion of homosexuality that is devoid of religion and the the word "natural".
Yeah, my primary reason for being against it is religious, but I've never known God to do anything without a reason, so I did some research, and have found that statistically, practicing homosexuals are more promiscuous, less likely to engage in long term relationships, engage in more risky behavior, are more likely to spread STDs, and are more likely to molest children. As such, I tend to use these in my arguments, rather than religion or the word 'natural.' After all, my religion says to be in church on Sunday, but I wouldn't force anybody, and animals follow pure, 'natural' instinct, and they crap everywhere and have sex with everything they see.
So we have a group of people who for whatever reason have preferences that go against the majority, against religions, against what some claim as "natural. They have long been in the shadows and claim oppression once thier preferences were exposed to the light of day. The oppression in the form of words and deeds has indeed occured to the point of murder. Now their cuase feeds on intolerance and angers them to the point of pushing thier agenda even further. They have gained sympathy from the bleeding hearts of the world who defend terrorism as the actions of oppressed people.
Are anti-homosexuals following a course of action that will stop the negative effects that the homosexual lifestyle promotes or is it merely providing homosexuals with tools to use to gather further sympathy for thier ever growing agenda?
Not...the 'people' have spoken at the box office and in the vote...gay marriage is a dead issue...so why don't they just go back to the sandbox...and do what they always have...'Ultimate masturbation' can we move on and away from this boring issue? :coffee3:
Because people can't just ignore them and let them fizzle out by themselves.
Separate names with a comma.