Are you born gay?

[jillian]

It isn't about retribution and control. That's lame, and just bullshit. It's about people being accountable for their actions. You lefties are only big on holding conservatives/Republicans accountable for their actions, even if they didn't do it.

But that's not going off on a tangent?

The determination of when a fetus has life is not religious. That also is bullshit. It has life at conception. No-brainer.

I've already posted that in my religion, it is acceptable and life is not considered to begin at conception. So your religious beliefs should take precedence over mine? Where's it written?

I already stated what the REAL final analysis is: you call something what it is not to justify killing it for personal convenience.

Heaven forbid one be responsible for his/her actions. How you get retribution and control out of that must take some REAL liberalthink.

I just love it when people parse words. retribution ... responsibility... either way you want to impose your beliefs, and they are nothing more than your religious beliefs, on everyone else.

Near as I can tell... that's a no no.

 

[MissileMan]

They're human beings that don't make it, for whatever reason. What IS the point? Some human beings don't make it all the way across the street either. So what?

We are human beings. Homo sapiens. Our offspring are human beings. They aren't tadpoles until they become frogs. It's human life from conception to death. A physical fact.

Are we going to argue human life or human being? There is a difference between the two. Again, define human being please.

 

[Gunny]

But that's not going off on a tangent?

I don't recall being the one that brought it up. YOU are.


I've already posted that in my religion, it is acceptable and life is not considered to begin at conception. So your religious beliefs should take precedence over mine? Where's it written?

Because what you seem to be unable to grasp is that my argument has nothing to do with my religion. You're so busy thinking you know all the answers you don't hear what's being said. You jumped into the other thread ass first.

Why is THAT?


I just love it when people parse words. retribution ... responsibility... either way you want to impose your beliefs, and they are nothing more than your religious beliefs, on everyone else.

Near as I can tell... that's a no no.

Get off the religion soapbox. It's bullshit. Physical fact: a fertilized egg is a living thing. A fertilized human egg is a living human being. When you kill it, you kill a human being.

And you can also shut up about trying to force beliefs on others because you're all about THAT. You're trying to do the same thing, you just choose to use a different definition that suits what YOU want based on YOUR political and religious beliefs. Near as I can tell ... that's a no no.

 

[Gunny]

Are we going to argue human life or human being? There is a difference between the two. Again, define human being please.

What's the matter? Did I **** up some game of literalism you want to play? I did define it. Human being human life .... same shit to me. It is to anyone who uses common sense and logic instead of some dehumanizing literalist BS.

 

[MissileMan]

What's the matter? Did I **** up some game of literalism you want to play? I did define it. Human being human life .... same shit to me. It is to anyone who uses common sense and logic instead of some dehumanizing literalist BS.

The little toe on my right foot is human life. If I were to amputate it and provide it with a blood supply, it wouldn't be a human being. Certain things need to be present to distinguish human life from a human being, not the least of which is a functional brain and nervous system. This should be painfully obvious to someone who touts common sense.

 

[Gunny]

The little toe on my right foot is human life. If I were to amputate it and provide it with a blood supply, it wouldn't be a human being. Certain things need to be present to distinguish human life from a human being, not the least of which is a functional brain and nervous system. This should be painfully obvious to someone who touts common sense.

See? I KNEW you had some literalist BS to post!

I'm out. Tomorrow comes early. You can explain to me tomorrow what-all's wrong with me and why I don't know anything.

 

[mattskramer]

It matters because it is FACT that homosexuals have a higher risk of carrying and passing on STDs because of their unclean sexual behavior. Of course, by your attitude it's pretty clear you choose to ingore it, or even worse, have another of your irrelevant, relativist analogies to go with it.

Some heterosexual couples preferred to engage in “unclean sexual behavior”. I had a girlfriend who liked anal and oral sex more than she liked vaginal sex. Anyway, for the sake of argument, I’ll agree that the promiscuity and “unclean sexual behavior” of gays results in the chance of getting a disease from a homosexual greater than the chance of getting a disease from a heterosexual. Again, what is the relevancy? The only thing that this prejudicial and discriminatory conclusion tells me, assuming that I agree with it) is that if I were to engage in risky sexual promiscuity, I may need to me more careful if I have sex with a homosexual than if I have sex with a heterosexual.

Well, thanks for the warning but since I became married I have remained monogamous and intend to continue to remain monogamous.

 

[glockmail]

Who had the first case of AIDS and how did he get it? What does it matter? What about other venereal diseases? Did Heterosexuals pass them to homosexuals? Again, what does it matter?

It matters because AIDS is responsible for killing millions- much more than a simple VD that is managed relatively easily with contemproray medicine. Homosexuality has inflicted great harm to the world.

 

[glockmail]

Some heterosexual couples preferred to engage in “unclean sexual behavior”. I had a girlfriend who liked anal and oral sex more than she liked vaginal sex. Anyway, for the sake of argument, I’ll agree that the promiscuity and “unclean sexual behavior” of gays results in the chance of getting a disease from a homosexual greater than the chance of getting a disease from a heterosexual. Again, what is the relevancy? The only thing that this prejudicial and discriminatory conclusion tells me, assuming that I agree with it) is that if I were to engage in risky sexual promiscuity, I may need to me more careful if I have sex with a homosexual than if I have sex with a heterosexual.

Well, thanks for the warning but since I became married I have remained monogamous and intend to continue to remain monogamous.

Any woman that wants it up the ass, or any man that would give it to her, is a pervert. And homosexuality is all about perversions, basically. They are all in the same dirty, sick tent.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Any woman that wants it up the ass, or any man that would give it to her, is a pervert. And homosexuality is all about perversions, basically. They are all in the same dirty, sick tent.

And in the mouth?

 

[manu1959]

..... at the moment of conception, Voila! A human being!

correct! what the hell else at the moment of conception was being created?

a dog?

 

[glockmail]

And in the mouth?

Don't try putting words in mine.

 

[Huckleburry]

Do you all live in a bunker trapped in the 1950's?

Question 1: What continent has the biggest problem with AIDS?

Question 2: What is the primary reason for AIDS being spread on that continent?


Hint: It is not the US and it is not Homosexual intercourse.

Well I have to run, Susy and I are going to the soda fountain for some malts and if I am really lucky we are going to go out to the bluff for some heavy petting.

Huck

 

[Huckleburry]

PS.

There is solid genetic evidence that a person is born gay.

 

[MissileMan]

correct! what the hell else at the moment of conception was being created?

Something with the potential to become a human being.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Don't try putting words in mine.

You evade like a liberal. Is oral perverted?

 

[glockmail]

PS.

There is solid genetic evidence that a person is born gay.

Where is it?

 

[glockmail]

You evade like a liberal. Is oral perverted?

Did I say that it was? Is there a biblical argument against it?

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Did I say that it was?

No. Hence why I ask. Over and over. And over. With the hope that eventually you'll understand questions are asked for clarity, and require a concrete answer to accomplish that goal.

Is there a biblical argument against it?

Beats me. I'm no biblical scholar. What about other kinky things? If there's no biblical argument against them, does that make them ok?

 

[glockmail]

No. Hence why I ask. Over and over. And over. With the hope that eventually you'll understand questions are asked for clarity, and require a concrete answer to accomplish that goal. Beats me. I'm no biblical scholar. What about other kinky things? If there's no biblical argument against them, does that make them ok?

I look for the bible for answers:

Sex is God's idea and its purpose is not only for procreation, but also for recreation and the development of a deep relationship between man and woman. Nothing is wrong or dirty about sex when it is engaged in the bonds of marriage as the Lord commanded in the Bible. However, when perversions are committed inside the marriage relationship, this can be sinful also. God made man and woman and brought them together "face to face." Oral sex is of homosexual origin that replaces the normal "face to face" relationship God intended in a marriage. The Bible describes the sex act in Song of Solomon Chapter 4. In this chapter it speaks of this "face to face" relationship by describing looking into his lover's eyes and kissing his lover's lips and fondling his lover's breasts. Oral sex is not normal or natural as it is an unclean act. http://www.bible.com/bibleanswers_result.php?id=220