What are your attitudes about Homosexuals?

[Derideo_Te]

Homosexuality is no different from beastality (to lie down sexually with animals) Sodomite perverseness is men and women desiring to perform the unlawfulness and unnaturalness of intercourse with men or women through invading the (rear) of their body, and or any oral or any sexual intercourse with of the same sex gender.

What are the odds that Gismys is still a virgin?

 

[Seawytch]

Far right reactionary social cons, cry all you want.

Do you believe Jesus was pro life or pro choice?

Jesus never really said anything...the bible itself is not pro-life. In fact in the bible, abortion isn't murder.

Exodus 21:22-25
22. And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders]. 23. But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life, 24. an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot. 25. a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound, a bruise for a bruise.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Oh that's so cute - poor frustrated little fella



That would be true, if all he said was . But in the context you are using it - you're simply quoting him out of context The word zero was used as an adjective to describe the word CONCRETE. The word CONCRETE was used as an adjective to describe evidence - to quote in context tou need all three words - failure to do so is altering the intent of someones statement , and I know you're a bigger person than that .



You still don't understand the difference between Fact and Theory ?

I think I need to re-evaluate my opinion of your caliber , you just went down a few notches there my friend. Although I will credit you with recognizing that "Plausible" only means it could conceivably, possibly maybe be factual if and when the theory ever proves out .

Perhaps it's a matter of intelligence ? Is English yourfirst Language ?

tu capti ? .... Certe pessimus omnium hominum es, an necesse sit !

The context that LJ framed his allegation was "Zero Concrete Evidence".

No matter how you want to parse those 3 terms he is wrong!

The term "zero" is utterly false. The term "evidence" is fallacious in the light of the indisputable known genetic and epigenetic facts that relate to how gender and sexual attraction develops in the fetus. Therefore using the terms "zero evidence" is erroneous because indisputable genetic evidence exists.

The feeble attempt to qualify his allegation with the term "concrete" merely compounds the fallacy. The term implies that the evidence must be "irrefutable" in order to be acceptable to those whose homophobia is based purely upon their beliefs in religious texts whose veracity has be taken on faith alone.

Science is not about absolutes. It is about knowledge. As new knowledge is acquired it builds upon, and sometimes refutes, prior knowledge. But it is never an absolute. That is something that only those with religious faith believe in.

So the use of the term "concrete" exposes an ignorance of the scientific process and the deliverables in terms of knowledge. Inheritance has something that had only been investigated since 1866. The concept of DNA was unknown prior to 1950. It took another 50 years from discovering the chemical basis of DNA to actually mapping the human genome.

So to expect that science has developed absolute "concrete evidence" about one specific obscure aspect of the immense complexity of human DNA and exactly how every single step of how it works from the joining of the egg and the sperm through to the final development of a fully functioning adult is nothing short of absurd in the 13 year time frame since the mapping of the genome.

Given that you are defending LJ and have been vocal about your own antipathy towards facts and knowledge it is unlikely that you followed any of the above. So feel free to continue to amuse me and others with your unenlightened rantings about the "evils" of homosexuals.

You're an Asshole -I can tolerate people being wrong , even I am wrong sometimes, it's rare but it happens. You're wrong, you've been proven wrong 7 ways to tuesday yet you are not man enough to admit your error - Basically, even though we are on opposite sides of the fence on most issues -I had some respect for you - I was wrong [See like I said -even I am wrong sometimes] - I'll terminate this discussion with 3 words - You're an Asshole

Translation: Greenbean cannot refute any of the facts provided so he was forced to resort to vulgar insults instead. Thank you for conceding your position. Have a nice day.

PS You are aware that I don't tolerate the use of vulgarities so the consequences will be forthcoming in due course.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Far right reactionary social cons, cry all you want.

Do you believe Jesus was pro life or pro choice?

Jesus never really said anything....

Lol, you just proved what an ignoramus and/or liar you are.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Once again, this thread shows that opponents of the homosexual political agenda are not haters; they just disagree.

Which means the militant homosexuals are engaging in good old fascist silencing of the opposition through lies, slander and irrational propaganda techniques.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Being normal, I don't choose anything...I did what my instincts say I am supposed to once I hit puberty and that is have sex with women. You idiots need to stop. My instincts to drain my huevos in a woman to reproduce, and so in a poonanny is where I drain my huevos.

So don't tell me I had to choose what comes natural.

But you insist that Gays are making a choice when you didn't!

Are you incapable of grasping that what "came naturally" to you might not be what comes naturally to others?

Are you "naturally" left handed? Some people are. Same applies to sexual attraction. It is what "comes naturally". To gays that is a same sex attraction. They never made a "choice" to be attracted to the same sex anymore than you made a "choice" to be attracted to the opposite sex.

 

[GreenBean]

The context that LJ framed his allegation was "Zero Concrete Evidence".

No matter how you want to parse those 3 terms he is wrong!

The term "zero" is utterly false. The term "evidence" is fallacious in the light of the indisputable known genetic and epigenetic facts that relate to how gender and sexual attraction develops in the fetus. Therefore using the terms "zero evidence" is erroneous because indisputable genetic evidence exists.

The feeble attempt to qualify his allegation with the term "concrete" merely compounds the fallacy. The term implies that the evidence must be "irrefutable" in order to be acceptable to those whose homophobia is based purely upon their beliefs in religious texts whose veracity has be taken on faith alone.

Science is not about absolutes. It is about knowledge. As new knowledge is acquired it builds upon, and sometimes refutes, prior knowledge. But it is never an absolute. That is something that only those with religious faith believe in.

So the use of the term "concrete" exposes an ignorance of the scientific process and the deliverables in terms of knowledge. Inheritance has something that had only been investigated since 1866. The concept of DNA was unknown prior to 1950. It took another 50 years from discovering the chemical basis of DNA to actually mapping the human genome.

So to expect that science has developed absolute "concrete evidence" about one specific obscure aspect of the immense complexity of human DNA and exactly how every single step of how it works from the joining of the egg and the sperm through to the final development of a fully functioning adult is nothing short of absurd in the 13 year time frame since the mapping of the genome.

Given that you are defending LJ and have been vocal about your own antipathy towards facts and knowledge it is unlikely that you followed any of the above. So feel free to continue to amuse me and others with your unenlightened rantings about the "evils" of homosexuals.

You're an Asshole -I can tolerate people being wrong , even I am wrong sometimes, it's rare but it happens. You're wrong, you've been proven wrong 7 ways to tuesday yet you are not man enough to admit your error - Basically, even though we are on opposite sides of the fence on most issues -I had some respect for you - I was wrong [See like I said -even I am wrong sometimes] - I'll terminate this discussion with 3 words - You're an Asshole

Translation: Greenbean cannot refute any of the facts provided so he was forced to resort to vulgar insults instead. Thank you for conceding your position. Have a nice day.

PS You are aware that I don't tolerate the use of vulgarities so the consequences will be forthcoming in due course.

You were refuted, debunked , declawed and now you just need to be de-loused - asshole.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You're an Asshole -I can tolerate people being wrong , even I am wrong sometimes, it's rare but it happens. You're wrong, you've been proven wrong 7 ways to tuesday yet you are not man enough to admit your error - Basically, even though we are on opposite sides of the fence on most issues -I had some respect for you - I was wrong [See like I said -even I am wrong sometimes] - I'll terminate this discussion with 3 words - You're an Asshole

Translation: Greenbean cannot refute any of the facts provided so he was forced to resort to vulgar insults instead. Thank you for conceding your position. Have a nice day.

PS You are aware that I don't tolerate the use of vulgarities so the consequences will be forthcoming in due course.

You were refuted, debunked , declawed and now you just need to be de-loused - asshole.

But that will never stop him from continuing with his lies and the same goes for Seabitch.

 

[Seawytch]

Do you believe Jesus was pro life or pro choice?

Jesus never really said anything....

Lol, you just proved what an ignoramus and/or liar you are.

And yet, oddly, you posted no passage where Jesus spoke out against abortion. That's because it doesn't exist, not from Jesus and not in the bible. God killed more unborn children than any abortion doctor, evah.

 

[Seawytch]

Being normal, I don't choose anything...I did what my instincts say I am supposed to once I hit puberty and that is have sex with women. You idiots need to stop. My instincts to drain my huevos in a woman to reproduce, and so in a poonanny is where I drain my huevos.

So don't tell me I had to choose what comes natural.

But you insist that Gays are making a choice when you didn't!

Are you incapable of grasping that what "came naturally" to you might not be what comes naturally to others?

Are you "naturally" left handed? Some people are. Same applies to sexual attraction. It is what "comes naturally". To gays that is a same sex attraction. They never made a "choice" to be attracted to the same sex anymore than you made a "choice" to be attracted to the opposite sex.

They know it's not a choice, but it's the last bastion they have to justify being anti gay bigots.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Where in the bible is homosexuality condoned?

Where precisely in the bible does Jesus himself condemn homosexuality?

Instead we have Jesus saying these words to his 12 male disciples.

John 13:34
"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another."

EVERYTHING in the New Testament was a teaching of Jesus that was recorded as either a quote of Him or was a teaching passed on from Him.

You are splitting hairs that do not exist.

Romans chapter one has assertions that come straight from what St Paul heard of Jesus teachings, probably as he spied on Jesus working for the Sanhedrin, and thus he was qualified to be an Apostle.

Newsflash for Jim: Paul never met Jesus! You are taking Paul's hearsay over the actual words of Jesus himself.

 

[Seawytch]

Hosea 13:16
The people of Samaria must bear their guilt,
because they have rebelled against their God.
They will fall by the sword;
their little ones will be dashed to the ground,
their pregnant women ripped open.”

Dang...ripping open pregnant women? How come O'Reilly doesn't call him "god, the baby killer"...

 

[JimBowie1958]

Jesus never really said anything....

Lol, you just proved what an ignoramus and/or liar you are.

And yet, oddly, you posted no passage where Jesus spoke out against abortion. That's because it doesn't exist, not from Jesus and not in the bible. God killed more unborn children than any abortion doctor, evah.

You are so stupid it actually hurts to have to gear down to your speed and respond in any detail.

The over all prohibition by Jesus to not commit murder covers unborn babies just like it also covers three year old blue eyed blonde little girls as well.

Show me the passage where Jesus or the Apostles say that it is murder to kill blue eyed blonde little girls and I will show you where He also says that it is murder to kill unborn babies, you stupid fucktard cretin.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Hosea 13:16
The people of Samaria must bear their guilt,
because they have rebelled against their God.
They will fall by the sword;
their little ones will be dashed to the ground,
their pregnant women ripped open.”

Dang...ripping open pregnant women? How come O'Reilly doesn't call him "god, the baby killer"...

This is not a murder or set of murders committed by God, it is merely a prophesy of coming consequences for rejecting God as it would make Samaria weak and vulnerable to their enemies and so such horrid things will happen.

Dang, you just set all kinds of records for stupid-assedness.

 

[GISMYS]

Hosea 13:16
The people of Samaria must bear their guilt,
because they have rebelled against their God.
They will fall by the sword;
their little ones will be dashed to the ground,
their pregnant women ripped open.”

Dang...ripping open pregnant women? How come O'Reilly doesn't call him "god, the baby killer"...

GOD WAS GIVING THOSE SIN LOVING A WARNING OF WHAT THE RESULTS OF THEIR SIN WOULD BE,JUST AS GOD WARNED SEXUAL PERVERTS,THE WAGES OF SIN IS DEATH AND HELL!!!!Beware!!!

 

[Seawytch]

Lol, you just proved what an ignoramus and/or liar you are.

And yet, oddly, you posted no passage where Jesus spoke out against abortion. That's because it doesn't exist, not from Jesus and not in the bible. God killed more unborn children than any abortion doctor, evah.

You are so stupid it actually hurts to have to gear down to your speed and respond in any detail.

The over all prohibition by Jesus to not commit murder covers unborn babies just like it also covers three year old blue eyed blonde little girls as well.

Show me the passage where Jesus or the Apostles say that it is murder to kill blue eyed blonde little girls and I will show you where He also says that it is murder to kill unborn babies, you stupid fucktard cretin.

Not according to the bible...

And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders]. 23. But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life

Oopsie...life begins at birth, not conception in the bible.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Where precisely in the bible does Jesus himself condemn homosexuality?

Instead we have Jesus saying these words to his 12 male disciples.

EVERYTHING in the New Testament was a teaching of Jesus that was recorded as either a quote of Him or was a teaching passed on from Him.

You are splitting hairs that do not exist.

Romans chapter one has assertions that come straight from what St Paul heard of Jesus teachings, probably as he spied on Jesus working for the Sanhedrin, and thus he was qualified to be an Apostle.

Newsflash for Jim: Paul never met Jesus! You are taking Paul's hearsay over the actual words of Jesus himself.

Yes, St Paul did so meet Jesus, at a minimum on the road to Damascus.

But I think it obvious that St Paul also saw and head Jesus sermons given that Jerusalem was only a town of about 80,000 people at the time according to Josephus, and that St Paul was a very zealous persecutor of Christians and worked for the Sanhedrin.

According to Acts chapter 26:
Then Agrippa said to Paul, “You are permitted to speak for yourself.”

So Paul stretched out his hand and answered for himself: 2 “I think myself happy, King Agrippa, because today I shall answer for myself before you concerning all the things of which I am accused by the Jews, 3 especially because you are expert in all customs and questions which have to do with the Jews. Therefore I beg you to hear me patiently.

4 “My manner of life from my youth, which was spent from the beginning among my own nation at Jerusalem, all the Jews know. 5 They knew me from the first, if they were willing to testify, that according to the strictest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee. 6 And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers. 7 To this promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain. For this hope’s sake, King Agrippa, I am accused by the Jews. 8 Why should it be thought incredible by you that God raises the dead?

9 “Indeed, I myself thought I must do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. 10 This I also did in Jerusalem, and many of the saints I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them. 11 And I punished them often in every synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities.

So St Paul was deeply involved in persecuting Christians and was acting against the 'authority' of Jesus, meaning he was acting contrary to the stated goals and plans that Jesus spoke of.

A town of 80,000 people is not even as big as an NFL football stadium capacity. That one could suggest that a famous teacher and miracle worker like Jesus could come into town and preach for weeks without St Paul ever going to see Him is ludicrous. That one could read of St Pauls active engagement with the Sanhedrin in arresting and persecuting Christians and handing them over to be killed, while living in Jerusalem himself, and to NOT have been there at the trial and conviction of Jesus I think highly unlikely. Jerusalem and all of Israel was so small there was no difficulty in St Paul meeting Jesus, none at all.

Yes, St Paul most certainly heard Jesus speak and probably met Him and confronted Him, so zealous was ST Paul for Judaism and his people that he would have confronted this man he regarded as an imposter and a threat to his nation.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And yet, oddly, you posted no passage where Jesus spoke out against abortion. That's because it doesn't exist, not from Jesus and not in the bible. God killed more unborn children than any abortion doctor, evah.

You are so stupid it actually hurts to have to gear down to your speed and respond in any detail.

The over all prohibition by Jesus to not commit murder covers unborn babies just like it also covers three year old blue eyed blonde little girls as well.

Show me the passage where Jesus or the Apostles say that it is murder to kill blue eyed blonde little girls and I will show you where He also says that it is murder to kill unborn babies, you stupid fucktard cretin.

Not according to the bible...

And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders]. 23. But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life

Oopsie...life begins at birth, not conception in the bible.

It is speaking of the punishment for MANSLAUGHTER of an unborn child, you stupid lying *****.

Go take a reading comprehension class and spare the rest of humanity your stupidity.

 

[GISMYS]

And yet, oddly, you posted no passage where Jesus spoke out against abortion. That's because it doesn't exist, not from Jesus and not in the bible. God killed more unborn children than any abortion doctor, evah.

You are so stupid it actually hurts to have to gear down to your speed and respond in any detail.

The over all prohibition by Jesus to not commit murder covers unborn babies just like it also covers three year old blue eyed blonde little girls as well.

Show me the passage where Jesus or the Apostles say that it is murder to kill blue eyed blonde little girls and I will show you where He also says that it is murder to kill unborn babies, you stupid fucktard cretin.

Not according to the bible...

And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders]. 23. But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life

Oopsie...life begins at birth, not conception in the bible.

LOL!!! A PEANUT HAS MORE WISDOM AND UNDERSTANDING THAN YOU!! BEST YOU LEARN TO Think!!

 

[JimBowie1958]

Hosea 13:16
The people of Samaria must bear their guilt,
because they have rebelled against their God.
They will fall by the sword;
their little ones will be dashed to the ground,
their pregnant women ripped open.”

Dang...ripping open pregnant women? How come O'Reilly doesn't call him "god, the baby killer"...

GOD WAS GIVING THOSE SIN LOVING A WARNING OF WHAT THE RESULTS OF THEIR SIN WOULD BE,JUST AS GOD WARNED SEXUAL PERVERTS,THE WAGES OF SIN IS DEATH AND HELL!!!!Beware!!!

Yes, and using all caps really proves your claims too, doesn't it?