Does God Hate G@ys??

[QUOTE="SegaGenesisfan"]

Theo, the bible even states in psalms that god does hate sinners, he hates perverse people, they are an abomination to him. So, what now? And I dont know what lies we have really talked about, we dont even know who pm'ed you something horrible. homosexuals can't enter in heaven, god won't allow homosexuals, sorry theo, but you have to die, and be reborn, like jesus said.

We have not lied about you at all, if so, point it out, but we are not lieing when we are sayying, yeah your pretty much doomed if you dont repent.

Funky_Llama

And yet you're incapable of proving that gays are sinners and are perverse people...

Oh, they're definitely sinners, but you're right about the perverse part. . . .

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

Funky_Llama

Laughing. . . .so hard. . . . .sides hurt. . . .:lol:

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="N-I-N"][QUOTE="TheFlush"][QUOTE="N-I-N"][QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"][QUOTE="N-I-N"]

But behind all that rubbish the sad truth remains; i just dont like to see men holding hands. I just dont.

N-I-N

Close your eyes? That or deal with it.

Oh yeah thats a great way to deal with something if its bothering you :roll:

Society isnt open minded enough to accept your relationship.

IM not open minded enough to accept your relationship.

Believe it or not, most people have a very low tolerance for those that are different. Hence the KKK , hence the black panthers, and hence all the wars in the east.

I would love to run around naked with an M4 rifle and fire at cats i see in the street. It wont necessarily hurt humanity either would it? but society is too NARROW MINDED to welcome such an art, much like society and I are too NARROW MINDED to welcome homo sexuality.

Always remember; what isnt the status quo, is in most cases always viewed negatively or with fear.

I don't understand, how could narrow-mindedness be a justification for homophobia? It's not the justification, it's the cause.

In many cases People are narrow minded for a reason, in this case, the reason for this is that homosexuality is , as i said before, a direct opposite notion to our most basic of biological purposes. THIS ISNT A GOOD THING. It isnt a good thing that should be supported or publicly accepted. In my opinion and in the opinion of many other people, otherwise we wouldnt be having this discussion right now.

:roll: NATURALISTIC FALLACY! DEAR GOD, GET THE ****ING POINT!

is there a godMcents

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

Theokhoth

Laughing. . . .so hard. . . . .sides hurt. . . .:lol:

Heh... and still he doesn't get it...

is there a godMcents

I don't know, why don't you go and start a thread about it? :x

There is a distinct difference between the Two Testaments, you know. Nobody but ignoramuses "picks what they like;" much of the distinction is from the Two Testaments.

Theokhoth

so **** what?

is it in the bible yes or no?

is the bible the word of god yes or no?

why is the part you like real and the part you don't like not?

the question again:

God destroying Sodom (I think) beacose of homesexuals is a supernatural event described in the bible (A), jesus turning watter to wine is a supernatural even described in the bible (B), why is even B true and event A isn't and we should ignore it?

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

There is a distinct difference between the Two Testaments, you know. Nobody but ignoramuses "picks what they like;" much of the distinction is from the Two Testaments.

Enosh88

so **** what?

is it in the bible yes or no?

is the bible the word of god yes or no?

why is the part you like real and the part you don't like not?

Not all Christians think the Bible is the word of God.

[QUOTE="Mcents"]is there a godFunky_Llama

I don't know, why don't you go and start a thread about it? :x

Yeah seriously.

If it's one thing OT lacks, it's threads about god.

[QUOTE="N-I-N"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="N-I-N"][QUOTE="TheFlush"][QUOTE="N-I-N"][QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"][QUOTE="N-I-N"]

But behind all that rubbish the sad truth remains; i just dont like to see men holding hands. I just dont.

Funky_Llama

Close your eyes? That or deal with it.

Oh yeah thats a great way to deal with something if its bothering you :roll:

Society isnt open minded enough to accept your relationship.

IM not open minded enough to accept your relationship.

Believe it or not, most people have a very low tolerance for those that are different. Hence the KKK , hence the black panthers, and hence all the wars in the east.

I would love to run around naked with an M4 rifle and fire at cats i see in the street. It wont necessarily hurt humanity either would it? but society is too NARROW MINDED to welcome such an art, much like society and I are too NARROW MINDED to welcome homo sexuality.

Always remember; what isnt the status quo, is in most cases always viewed negatively or with fear.

I don't understand, how could narrow-mindedness be a justification for homophobia? It's not the justification, it's the cause.

In many cases People are narrow minded for a reason, in this case, the reason for this is that homosexuality is , as i said before, a direct opposite notion to our most basic of biological purposes. THIS ISNT A GOOD THING. It isnt a good thing that should be supported or publicly accepted. In my opinion and in the opinion of many other people, otherwise we wouldnt be having this discussion right now.

:roll: NATURALISTIC FALLACY! DEAR GOD, GET THE ****ING POINT!

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

There is a distinct difference between the Two Testaments, you know. Nobody but ignoramuses "picks what they like;" much of the distinction is from the Two Testaments.

Enosh88

so **** what?

is it in the bible yes or no?

is the bible the word of god yes or no?

why is the part you like real and the part you don't like not?

Is it in the Bible? Yes.

Is the Bible the Word of God? Possibly.

Who said it was/wasn't real?

You obviously don't know much about what you're saying. Again, try to think of the differences in the Testaments.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Mcents"]is there a godBlood-Scribe

I don't know, why don't you go and start a thread about it? :x

Yeah seriously.

If it's one thing OT lacks, it's threads about god.

Yeah, I know... if there's one thing this forum needs, it's some good religious debate. :lol:

[QUOTE="Blood-Scribe"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Mcents"]is there a godFunky_Llama

I don't know, why don't you go and start a thread about it? :x

Yeah seriously.

If it's one thing OT lacks, it's threads about god.

Yeah, I know... if there's one thing this forum needs, it's some good religious debate. :lol:

I mean, we could really go somewhere with that. People would get enlightened, and we'd all be polite and respectful, and it's not like people would want to get into unnecessary disputes or anything.

It would be great. Seriously, someone should go make a thread devoted to discussion on god, right now.

Is it in the Bible? Yes.

Is the Bible the Word of God? Possibly.

Who said it was/wasn't real?

You obviously don't know much about what you're saying. Again, try to think of the differences in the Testaments.

Theokhoth

I don't get it, God saying in the old testament that he doens't like homesexuals is overruled beacose of the new testament? Then what the point of the old testament even being there? Just for **** and giggles?

Not all Christians think the Bible is the word of God.

Funky_Llama

then why belive in the fantasy of some random guy (or more of them) 2000 years ago? O.o

[QUOTE="N-I-N"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="N-I-N"]

dont know to be honest, but i think if such behaviour started to be viewed by everyone as "normal" or "okay" then i can guarantee you, we would see a surge in gay activity, as others try it out and experiment etc.

Just look at trends, years ago there were skinheads, everyone dressed the same had the same views, fast forward to 2008 we have the world acknowledged "emo's" "scene kids" etc and suddenly being Bisexual is widely regarded as something "cool" within these (RAPIDLY SPREADING) groups.

And honestly, i never thought id hear girls say they prefer boys who kiss other boys to boys that kiss girls.

Funky_Llama

I'm going to give you a bit of friendly advice here: 'When you're in a hole, stop digging'

Well, the way i see it, im just as right as the people defending the gays, if they can honestly think its a completely natural thing and should be widely accepted, i wonder will they consider other forms of "sexual deviances", if you will, to be as widely accepted and welcomed into modern day society as homosexuality? oh and publicly displayed infront of them/their children and their families mind you.

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

I find it upsetting that you refuse to acknowledge my question and instead keep throwing the word "NATURALISTIC FALLACY!" , in bold and caps lock no less, around like it is the be all end all of this debate.

So if i wanted to for example do something as odd and unnatural as raep your young children , then that would be OKAY? i dont think it would, but thats just me, i think it would be a tremendous disrespect to you and your family. Things that are percieved to be dangerous to our survival and to others around us are labelled as "wrong" or "bad", hell even junk food recieves BAD publicity.

Now i would love to see a world of pure anarchy where people run around doing whatever the hell they want, but i can safely say that i am in a minority that wants to see this happen, and until that happens, i will only consider the things that i enjoy right, and homosexuality isnt one of them, i think of it as an unnatural and unarousing sexual deviance, i do not like it, or want to see it. If sadomasochists can hold back on wearing their fetish gear to restaurants, then homosexuals can avoid holding hands in public.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

Theokhoth

Laughing. . . .so hard. . . . .sides hurt. . . .:lol:

I think both of you may have different definitions of naturalistic fallacy? Correct.

If I'm right, I think Theok is 'lolling' because in a previous thread you said morality was objective. I think, anyway.

I don't get it, God saying in the old testament that he doens't like homesexuals is overruled beacose of the new testament? Then what the point of the old testament even being there? Just for **** and giggles?

Enosh88

*Sigh*

This will take a long time to explain. First, do you know why there is an Old Testament in the first place?

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

MetalGear_Ninty

Laughing. . . .so hard. . . . .sides hurt. . . .:lol:

I think both of you may have different definitions of naturalistic fallacy? Correct.

If I'm right, I think Theok is 'lolling' because in a previous thread you said morality was objective. I think, anyway.

Oh no; in fact, it has nothing to do with that thread.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Blood-Scribe"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Mcents"]is there a godBlood-Scribe

I don't know, why don't you go and start a thread about it? :x

Yeah seriously.

If it's one thing OT lacks, it's threads about god.

Yeah, I know... if there's one thing this forum needs, it's some good religious debate. :lol:

I mean, we could really go somewhere with that. People would get enlightened, and we'd all be polite and respectful, and it's not like people would want to get into unnecessary disputes or anything.

It would be great.

I'd love that. And debates would totally not end up with both sides insulting each other while whining about the other side insulting them.

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

Theokhoth

Laughing. . . .so hard. . . . .sides hurt. . . .:lol:

I think both of you may have different definitions of naturalistic fallacy? Correct.

If I'm right, I think Theok is 'lolling' because in a previous thread you said morality was objective. I think, anyway.

Oh no, in fact, it has nothing to do with that thread.

*scratches chin* give me a clue!

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

Theokhoth

Laughing. . . .so hard. . . . .sides hurt. . . .:lol:

I think both of you may have different definitions of naturalistic fallacy? Correct.

If I'm right, I think Theok is 'lolling' because in a previous thread you said morality was objective. I think, anyway.

Oh no; in fact, it has nothing to do with that thread.

Then I guess the enigma remains. :shock:

I'd love that. And debates would totally not end up with both sides insulting each other while whining about the other side insulting them.

Funky_Llama

Actually, I think that only happens when Deity-slapper pays a visit. . .

*scratches chin* give me a clue!

Funky_Llama

I would, but it would take the thread into a whole new realm of Hell that nobody here wants to enter.

So I'll just continue torturing you.:twisted:

[QUOTE="N-I-N"] oh and publicly displayed infront of them/their children and their families mind you.karriston

They hold hands/they kiss.

That seems to be enough to sicken me, and your stereotypical God fearing uber christians.

[QUOTE="karriston"][QUOTE="N-I-N"] oh and publicly displayed infront of them/their children and their families mind you.N-I-N

They hold hands/they kiss.

That seems to be enough to sicken me, and your stereotypical God fearing uber christians.

Heterosexual couples do the same thing. . . .

[QUOTE="Enosh88"]

I don't get it, God saying in the old testament that he doens't like homesexuals is overruled beacose of the new testament? Then what the point of the old testament even being there? Just for **** and giggles?

Theokhoth

*Sigh*

This will take a long time to explain. First, do you know why there is an Old Testament in the first place?

no, you tell me.

I know it's the testament before the coming of jesus, why it's in the bible? beacose some random people at nicea (I think that was the place) decided to put it in (well atleast some parts of it)

So if i wanted to for example do something as odd and unnatural as raep your young children , then that would be OKAY? i dont think it would, but thats just me, i think it would be a tremendous disrespect to you and your family. Things that are percieved to be dangerous to our survival and to others around us are labelled as "wrong" or "bad", hell even junk food recieves BAD publicity.

Now i would love to see a world of pure anarchy where people run around doing whatever the hell they want, but i can safely say that i am in a minority that wants to see this happen, and until that happens, i will only consider the things that i enjoy right, and homosexuality isnt one of them, i think of it as an unnatural and unarousing sexual deviance, i do not like it, or want to see it. If sadomasochists can hold back on wearing their fetish gear to restaurants, then homosexuals can avoid holding hands in public.

N-I-N

The fact that you would compare homosexuality to pedophilia is just disgusting. And if homosexuals cannot hold hands in public, then heterosexuals cannot either.

[QUOTE="N-I-N"]

I find it upsetting that you refuse to acknowledge my question and instead keep throwing the word "NATURALISTIC FALLACY!" , in bold and caps lock no less, around like it is the be all end all of this debate.

So if i wanted to for example do something as odd and unnatural as raep your young children , then that would be OKAY? i dont think it would, but thats just me, i think it would be a tremendous disrespect to you and your family. Things that are percieved to be dangerous to our survival and to others around us are labelled as "wrong" or "bad", hell even junk food recieves BAD publicity.

Now i would love to see a world of pure anarchy where people run around doing whatever the hell they want, but i can safely say that i am in a minority that wants to see this happen, and until that happens, i will only consider the things that i enjoy right, and homosexuality isnt one of them, i think of it as an unnatural and unarousing sexual deviance, i do not like it, or want to see it. If sadomasochists can hold back on wearing their fetish gear to restaurants, then homosexuals can avoid holding hands in public.

mentalabc123

Is this a joke, or are you really this stupid and ignorant? I don't see how homosexuality is dangerous to the human race's survival. Babies can still be produced (artificial insemination and the like). And anyways, that scenario would never happen, and homosexuality is in human nature.

Good for you.

Just dont act liek all "oh noes teh narrow mindedness" when there are hate crimes commited against gays, because people fear what they cannot identify with, and no amount of forum discussion or gay parades can ever change that.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="N-I-N"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="N-I-N"]

dont know to be honest, but i think if such behaviour started to be viewed by everyone as "normal" or "okay" then i can guarantee you, we would see a surge in gay activity, as others try it out and experiment etc.

Just look at trends, years ago there were skinheads, everyone dressed the same had the same views, fast forward to 2008 we have the world acknowledged "emo's" "scene kids" etc and suddenly being Bisexual is widely regarded as something "cool" within these (RAPIDLY SPREADING) groups.

And honestly, i never thought id hear girls say they prefer boys who kiss other boys to boys that kiss girls.

N-I-N

I'm going to give you a bit of friendly advice here: 'When you're in a hole, stop digging'

Well, the way i see it, im just as right as the people defending the gays, if they can honestly think its a completely natural thing and should be widely accepted, i wonder will they consider other forms of "sexual deviances", if you will, to be as widely accepted and welcomed into modern day society as homosexuality? oh and publicly displayed infront of them/their children and their families mind you.

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

I find it upsetting that you refuse to acknowledge my question and instead keep throwing the word "NATURALISTIC FALLACY!" , in bold and caps lock no less, around like it is the be all end all of this debate.

So if i wanted to for example do something as odd and unnatural as raep your young children , then that would be OKAY? i dont think it would, but thats just me, i think it would be a tremendous disrespect to you and your family. Things that are percieved to be dangerous to our survival and to others around us are labelled as "wrong" or "bad", hell even junk food recieves BAD publicity.

Now i would love to see a world of pure anarchy where people run around doing whatever the hell they want, but i can safely say that i am in a minority that wants to see this happen, and until that happens, i will only consider the things that i enjoy right, and homosexuality isnt one of them, i think of it as an unnatural and unarousing sexual deviance, i do not like it, or want to see it. If sadomasochists can hold back on wearing their fetish gear to restaurants, then homosexuals can avoid holding hands in public.

Maybe if you'd get a clue I wouldn't have to...

You think rape is wrong simply because it's unnatural? For a start, rape has been observed among animals, so it is natural. I don't see you supporting it now though. Anyway, rape isn't considered wrong because it's unnatural, it's wrong because it's the forcible and almost invariably traumatic violation of another's dignity, privacy and right to self-ownership.

It has been observed among animals, so it is natural, and it does not arouse you or I, but arousal is subjective, and so for gays it is arousing. Oh, and yet again, the naturalistic fallacy (cue unexplained fits of laughter from Theokoth).

[QUOTE="mentalabc123"][QUOTE="N-I-N"]

I find it upsetting that you refuse to acknowledge my question and instead keep throwing the word "NATURALISTIC FALLACY!" , in bold and caps lock no less, around like it is the be all end all of this debate.

So if i wanted to for example do something as odd and unnatural as raep your young children , then that would be OKAY? i dont think it would, but thats just me, i think it would be a tremendous disrespect to you and your family. Things that are percieved to be dangerous to our survival and to others around us are labelled as "wrong" or "bad", hell even junk food recieves BAD publicity.

Now i would love to see a world of pure anarchy where people run around doing whatever the hell they want, but i can safely say that i am in a minority that wants to see this happen, and until that happens, i will only consider the things that i enjoy right, and homosexuality isnt one of them, i think of it as an unnatural and unarousing sexual deviance, i do not like it, or want to see it. If sadomasochists can hold back on wearing their fetish gear to restaurants, then homosexuals can avoid holding hands in public.

N-I-N

Is this a joke, or are you really this stupid and ignorant? I don't see how homosexuality is dangerous to the human race's survival. Babies can still be produced (artificial insemination and the like). And anyways, that scenario would never happen, and homosexuality is in human nature.

Good for you.

Just dont act liek all "oh noes teh narrow mindedness" when there are hate crimes commited against gays, because people fear what they cannot identify with, and no amount of forum discussion or gay parades can ever change that.

With your every post, I come closer to deciding that eugenics isn't so bad after all.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="N-I-N"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="N-I-N"]

dont know to be honest, but i think if such behaviour started to be viewed by everyone as "normal" or "okay" then i can guarantee you, we would see a surge in gay activity, as others try it out and experiment etc.

Just look at trends, years ago there were skinheads, everyone dressed the same had the same views, fast forward to 2008 we have the world acknowledged "emo's" "scene kids" etc and suddenly being Bisexual is widely regarded as something "cool" within these (RAPIDLY SPREADING) groups.

And honestly, i never thought id hear girls say they prefer boys who kiss other boys to boys that kiss girls.

N-I-N

I'm going to give you a bit of friendly advice here: 'When you're in a hole, stop digging'

Well, the way i see it, im just as right as the people defending the gays, if they can honestly think its a completely natural thing and should be widely accepted, i wonder will they consider other forms of "sexual deviances", if you will, to be as widely accepted and welcomed into modern day society as homosexuality? oh and publicly displayed infront of them/their children and their families mind you.

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

I find it upsetting that you refuse to acknowledge my question and instead keep throwing the word "NATURALISTIC FALLACY!" , in bold and caps lock no less, around like it is the be all end all of this debate.

So if i wanted to for example do something as odd and unnatural as raep your young children , then that would be OKAY? i dont think it would, but thats just me, i think it would be a tremendous disrespect to you and your family. Things that are percieved to be dangerous to our survival and to others around us are labelled as "wrong" or "bad", hell even junk food recieves BAD publicity.

Now i would love to see a world of pure anarchy where people run around doing whatever the hell they want, but i can safely say that i am in a minority that wants to see this happen, and until that happens, i will only consider the things that i enjoy right, and homosexuality isnt one of them, i think of it as an unnatural and unarousing sexual deviance, i do not like it, or want to see it. If sadomasochists can hold back on wearing their fetish gear to restaurants, then homosexuals can avoid holding hands in public.

You're equating homosexuality with pedophilia? Are you serious?

One is consensual and unharmful. The other is predatory, unconsensual and harmful.

Sadomasochism is a choice, it's consensual, and unharmful(unless asked to be that is). It's a better comparison, but wearing leather chaps and wielding a cat of nine tails is a material choice. Is it as material as holding hands? Is homosexuality not a natural occurance?

I take it you'd be against women leaving the kitchen and bedroom if you lived before the women's rights movement, because prior to that revolution, women "knew their place". Lots of men didn't like seeing women in the workplace, or women earning more money than them.

What society deems acceptable is malleable. It's constantly re-shaped and evolving.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

*scratches chin* give me a clue!

Theokhoth

I would, but it would take the thread into a whole new realm of Hell that nobody here wants to enter.

So I'll just continue torturing you.:twisted:

Awww! :cry:

Is the phrase only amusing when I use it?

no, you tell me.

I know it's the testament before the coming of jesus, why it's in the bible? beacose some random people at nicea (I think that was the place) decided to put it in (well atleast some parts of it)

Enosh88

The Old Testament began with the Old Covenant, which was a binding contract between God and humanity that was set in place when Abraham demonstrated his devotion by nearly sacrificing Isaac. With this Old Covenant came many rules to follow, such as sacrificing cattle to temporarily clear yourself of Original Sin. Among these many rules was the one about killing homosexuals.

Now, as you seem like a curious person, you wanna know why it's called the "Old" Covenant?:D

If you want to learn, then please keep your personal conjecture to yourself until the lesson is over.:)

[QUOTE="dog64"]

It can happen, but most kids today start having girlfriends or boyfriends from a pretty young age. If you were to tell someone that you've never had a girlfriend/boyfriend, most would probably think you're a little "strange".

And I believe a person who never gets married (or someone who isn't attracted to anyone) is another type of sexuality all together, asexuality.

J-man45

asexual means you can reproduce by yourself. I think you have that wrong.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

HELLO? NATURALISTIC FALLACY! Seriously, look it up, it's getting tired of having to point it out.
Stop assuming that natural = right and unnatural = wrong.

MetalGear_Ninty

Laughing. . . .so hard. . . . .sides hurt. . . .:lol:

I think both of you may have different definitions of naturalistic fallacy? Correct.

If I'm right, I think Theok is 'lolling' because in a previous thread you said morality was objective. I think, anyway.

Oh no; in fact, it has nothing to do with that thread.

Then I guess the enigma remains. :shock:

I'm going to be puzzling over this all night now...

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

*scratches chin* give me a clue!

Funky_Llama

I would, but it would take the thread into a whole new realm of Hell that nobody here wants to enter.

So I'll just continue torturing you.:twisted:

Awww! :cry:

Is the phrase only amusing when I use it?

Yes, but by all means, keep using it. Not only do I get a giggle, but you get a valid argument.:D

[QUOTE="N-I-N"]

So if i wanted to for example do something as odd and unnatural as raep your young children , then that would be OKAY? i dont think it would, but thats just me, i think it would be a tremendous disrespect to you and your family. Things that are percieved to be dangerous to our survival and to others around us are labelled as "wrong" or "bad", hell even junk food recieves BAD publicity.

Now i would love to see a world of pure anarchy where people run around doing whatever the hell they want, but i can safely say that i am in a minority that wants to see this happen, and until that happens, i will only consider the things that i enjoy right, and homosexuality isnt one of them, i think of it as an unnatural and unarousing sexual deviance, i do not like it, or want to see it. If sadomasochists can hold back on wearing their fetish gear to restaurants, then homosexuals can avoid holding hands in public.

Dark_Knight6

The fact that you would compare homosexuality to pedophilia is just disgusting. And if homosexuals cannot hold hands in public, then heterosexuals cannot either.

LMFAO, were going around in circles.

You think im disgusting, and my views are illogical.

I think Your disgusting, and your views are illogical.

the question is; when will you open your eyes and see that people will always hate what is different? its not going to change. it still hasnt changed.

Years ago black people were acknoweldged as "inferior citizens" . now they are apparently on the same level as any race.

Still they are feared and hated by a VERY large percentage of the world.

THings dont change, get it in your head.

unfortunate but true.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

*scratches chin* give me a clue!

Theokhoth

I would, but it would take the thread into a whole new realm of Hell that nobody here wants to enter.

So I'll just continue torturing you.:twisted:

Awww! :cry:

Is the phrase only amusing when I use it?

Yes, but by all means, keep using it. Not only do I get a giggle, but you get a valid argument.:D

*thinks* is this as a result of something I have said at some point in the past?

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="N-I-N"]

dont know to be honest, but i think if such behaviour started to be viewed by everyone as "normal" or "okay" then i can guarantee you, we would see a surge in gay activity, as others try it out and experiment etc.

Just look at trends, years ago there were skinheads, everyone dressed the same had the same views, fast forward to 2008 we have the world acknowledged "emo's" "scene kids" etc and suddenly being Bisexual is widely regarded as something "cool" within these (RAPIDLY SPREADING) groups.

And honestly, i never thought id hear girls say they prefer boys who kiss other boys to boys that kiss girls.

N-I-N

I'm going to give you a bit of friendly advice here: 'When you're in a hole, stop digging'

Well, the way i see it, im just as right as the people defending the gays, if they can honestly think its a completely natural thing and should be widely accepted, i wonder will they consider other forms of "sexual deviances", if you will, to be as widely accepted and welcomed into modern day society as homosexuality? oh and publicly displayed infront of them/their children and their families mind you.

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"][QUOTE="N-I-N"]

So if i wanted to for example do something as odd and unnatural as raep your young children , then that would be OKAY? i dont think it would, but thats just me, i think it would be a tremendous disrespect to you and your family. Things that are percieved to be dangerous to our survival and to others around us are labelled as "wrong" or "bad", hell even junk food recieves BAD publicity.

Now i would love to see a world of pure anarchy where people run around doing whatever the hell they want, but i can safely say that i am in a minority that wants to see this happen, and until that happens, i will only consider the things that i enjoy right, and homosexuality isnt one of them, i think of it as an unnatural and unarousing sexual deviance, i do not like it, or want to see it. If sadomasochists can hold back on wearing their fetish gear to restaurants, then homosexuals can avoid holding hands in public.

N-I-N

The fact that you would compare homosexuality to pedophilia is just disgusting. And if homosexuals cannot hold hands in public, then heterosexuals cannot either.

LMFAO, were going around in circles.

You think im disgusting, and my views are illogical.

I think Your disgusting, and your views are illogical.

the question is; when will you open your eyes and see that people will always hate what is different? its not going to change. it still hasnt changed.

Years ago black people were acknoweldged as "inferior citizens" . now they are apparently on the same level as any race.

Still they are feared and hated by a VERY large percentage of the world.

THings dont change, get it in your head.

unfortunate but true.

Yeah, but the difference is, you're wrong. You've consistently failed to prove that it's immoral. Your every comment is a big, steaming, fallacious pile of fail.

*thinks* is this as a result of something I have said at some point in the past?

Funky_Llama

Uh-huh.:D But not just you.:D

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

*scratches chin* give me a clue!

Theokhoth

I would, but it would take the thread into a whole new realm of Hell that nobody here wants to enter.

So I'll just continue torturing you.:twisted:

Awww! :cry:

Is the phrase only amusing when I use it?

Yes, but by all means, keep using it. Not only do I get a giggle, but you get a valid argument.:D

Has it got something do with actual Llamas?

Has it got something do with actual Llamas?

MetalGear_Ninty

>__> Uh. . . . . .no.