Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kahuna

LGBT: Critical Mass?

Recommended Posts

Eagledad, they aren't lonely when they visit my home or when they're with the same circle of real friends that I have. This is because we don't reject them because of who they are. They are accepted fully just like everyone else and they know it and sense it in our interactions. That might explain why they seem 'lonely' around you. Or...it could be you're merely a poor judge of these things.

 

 

 

So, what is this 'normal' concept you mentioned in your comment? Is it the same 'normal' that everyone else sees, or is it a personal concept in your own mind?

 

 

 

And you also mentioned, "...some people consider the desire for a mate of the same sex as more mature than the desires of any other kind of relationship."

 

Huh? More mature? What do you mean by this, both parts, the 'mature' thing and the 'more' thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gee, if it takes a village to raise a child, then what's wrong with polygamy? There is a lot of credible evidence in the Bible to support it. After all the 12 Tribes of Israel were conceived by 2 wives and 2 concubines. Of course that's the Old Testament, but the New Testament only says the bishops should be of one wife.

 

Only in a country of "freedom of religion" is a territory required to abandon their religious practices in order to obtain statehood. (Utah)

 

Surely a country based on hypocrisy can always find ways to alienate various parts of it's culture.

I'm good with it as long as all parties freely choose to enter into that kind of relationship. Glad to see that we agree on this, surprised actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think polygamy will be an issue. If gay marriage is universally allowed, all adults now have an equal chance to choose a singular life partner so I don't think a man who want to marry a 12 year old or a woman who wants to marry a horse or polygamy or any other such nonsense will be an issue.
You're stereotyping, I don't recall commenting on gay marriage. My opinions are of the health and morality of homosexuality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eagledad, they aren't lonely when they visit my home or when they're with the same circle of real friends that I have. This is because we don't reject them because of who they are. They are accepted fully just like everyone else and they know it and sense it in our interactions. That might explain why they seem 'lonely' around you. Or...it could be you're merely a poor judge of these things.

 

 

 

So, what is this 'normal' concept you mentioned in your comment? Is it the same 'normal' that everyone else sees, or is it a personal concept in your own mind?

 

 

 

And you also mentioned, "...some people consider the desire for a mate of the same sex as more mature than the desires of any other kind of relationship."

 

Huh? More mature? What do you mean by this, both parts, the 'mature' thing and the 'more' thing?

I don't buy it Pack, just because folks don't agree that homosexuality is normal doesn't mean they aren't accepted and treated as equals in every other way. That's pretty self righteous thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eagledad, they aren't lonely when they visit my home or when they're with the same circle of real friends that I have. This is because we don't reject them because of who they are. They are accepted fully just like everyone else and they know it and sense it in our interactions. That might explain why they seem 'lonely' around you. Or...it could be you're merely a poor judge of these things.

 

 

 

So, what is this 'normal' concept you mentioned in your comment? Is it the same 'normal' that everyone else sees, or is it a personal concept in your own mind?

 

 

 

And you also mentioned, "...some people consider the desire for a mate of the same sex as more mature than the desires of any other kind of relationship."

 

Huh? More mature? What do you mean by this, both parts, the 'mature' thing and the 'more' thing?

So, let's see....a person considers another person to be abnormal and unhealthy because of who they are and then, somehow, believes that in all other aspects of life those 'abnormal, unhealthy' persons are accepted and treated as equals in every other way. Is that the argument you're making here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im saying that your self righteous to think that only your are capable of treating all people equally even when you don't agree with everything about them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Protecting the right of gay people to get married should be a conservative issue. You've go two people, in a committed relationship, who want to get married and raise a family together, taking equal responsibility for their children. This is what conservatives have campaigned for for many years.
I agree with everything you siad Moose, but it doesn't change anything I've said previously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eagledad, they aren't lonely when they visit my home or when they're with the same circle of real friends that I have. This is because we don't reject them because of who they are. They are accepted fully just like everyone else and they know it and sense it in our interactions. That might explain why they seem 'lonely' around you. Or...it could be you're merely a poor judge of these things.

 

 

 

So, what is this 'normal' concept you mentioned in your comment? Is it the same 'normal' that everyone else sees, or is it a personal concept in your own mind?

 

 

 

And you also mentioned, "...some people consider the desire for a mate of the same sex as more mature than the desires of any other kind of relationship."

 

Huh? More mature? What do you mean by this, both parts, the 'mature' thing and the 'more' thing?

Haven't you heard, "Love the sinner, hate the sin?" How is that rejection? Sounds a lot like acceptance, of the PERSON, to me. I'm sure you wouldn't approve of everything I do in my life.

 

Somewhere along the way we have let what 2% of the population is engaged in define "normal." It's an upside down world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gee, if it takes a village to raise a child, then what's wrong with polygamy? There is a lot of credible evidence in the Bible to support it. After all the 12 Tribes of Israel were conceived by 2 wives and 2 concubines. Of course that's the Old Testament, but the New Testament only says the bishops should be of one wife.

 

Only in a country of "freedom of religion" is a territory required to abandon their religious practices in order to obtain statehood. (Utah)

 

Surely a country based on hypocrisy can always find ways to alienate various parts of it's culture.

For me there is very little difference between polygamy and monogamy. Polygamy is defined as one too many wives, and sometimes that is also the definition of monogamy. :)

 

Seriously, I am not the normal "Christian" who's theology is influenced with a ton of man-made traditions. I am a Scripturalist. If it ain't in the Book, it ain't important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eagledad, they aren't lonely when they visit my home or when they're with the same circle of real friends that I have. This is because we don't reject them because of who they are. They are accepted fully just like everyone else and they know it and sense it in our interactions. That might explain why they seem 'lonely' around you. Or...it could be you're merely a poor judge of these things.

 

 

 

So, what is this 'normal' concept you mentioned in your comment? Is it the same 'normal' that everyone else sees, or is it a personal concept in your own mind?

 

 

 

And you also mentioned, "...some people consider the desire for a mate of the same sex as more mature than the desires of any other kind of relationship."

 

Huh? More mature? What do you mean by this, both parts, the 'mature' thing and the 'more' thing?

Brewmeister, I am referring to what Eagledad wrote in another comment, that his "opinions are of the health and morality of homosexuality." He didn't write "homosexual behavior", what he stated was about homosexuality and that IS about the person and not the so-called 'sin'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im saying that your self righteous to think that only your are capable of treating all people equally even when you don't agree with everything about them.

Whether or not I'm self-righteous has no bearing on the issue. And I didn't address that part of your accusation, BECAUSE it isn't relevant. You can think anything you want about me, I'm good with it. But that's twice, now, that you've tried to avoid the argument with a personal accusation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eagledad, they aren't lonely when they visit my home or when they're with the same circle of real friends that I have. This is because we don't reject them because of who they are. They are accepted fully just like everyone else and they know it and sense it in our interactions. That might explain why they seem 'lonely' around you. Or...it could be you're merely a poor judge of these things.

 

 

 

So, what is this 'normal' concept you mentioned in your comment? Is it the same 'normal' that everyone else sees, or is it a personal concept in your own mind?

 

 

 

And you also mentioned, "...some people consider the desire for a mate of the same sex as more mature than the desires of any other kind of relationship."

 

Huh? More mature? What do you mean by this, both parts, the 'mature' thing and the 'more' thing?

Parceling words doesn't change what you implied Pack. You can't have an honest discussion when accussing people of actions that you no nothing about. The best you can do is agree to disagree, but trying to discredit my words with hyberbole is bad acting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im saying that your self righteous to think that only your are capable of treating all people equally even when you don't agree with everything about them.

Hey, you were the one that made accusations of my personal relationships to counter my opinion, I think it's relevant that you can't particpate in a discussion without trying to attack someones character. It seems you just make up the rules as you go along in these discussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im saying that your self righteous to think that only your are capable of treating all people equally even when you don't agree with everything about them.

When you can't influence by debating a person's view point, the next step is always attacking the person. Somehow they believe one can discredit the other person's point of view by discrediting the validity of that person, The same hold true for the issue of homosexuality, race or any other forms of bigotry. Attack the person, not the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm left-handed - i.e. not normal Please don't hate or judge me for it. I was born to excel on a baseball field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...