Talk Elections

Santorum is the biggest nut in Washington. He cannot remain in office. His remarks constantly offend Americans and gives America a bad reputation abroad.

Imagine if you told a foreigner what Rick Santorum thinks about certain people. People would be shaking their heads and saying actually bush isnt bad compared to him.

no he isnt right.

but i give him credit for being open with his bigotry.  he has a lot of courage to do that.

there are a lot of soccer moms, and democrat voters who feel the way he does but theyd never mention it because it isnt pc.

your kidding right.

Sleeping with my dog is just the same as me sleeping with a girl?

You could consider both actions "not natural" since our bodies were designed to mate up with a member of the opposite sex.

Yes, I agree with him.  And you, as a Catholic, should be offended by homosexuality and any sexual immorality.

same here... Fags are filthier than dogs. Non-Human animals do not practice homosexuality like some members of our species do. so trying to mock mating with something incompatible, whether another man, or a duck is equally wrong.

Santorum is my hero in that aspect. What he thinks about Mexicans however, is a different story.

I do not agree with you.

Ok, so tell me WITH SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE why you do not agree with me!

Why do you need evidence for a personal opinion?
especially since you never bothered to present any evidence for yours before?

Let me get this straight: the poster who said "Fags are filthier than dogs" is asking for substantial evidence??????

Actually, they sometimes do. It happens a lot in rams, actually(as compared to other species, anyways).

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=6421

interesting.. this seems to support my claim that homosexuality is a mental disorder after all, not something that the affected person can control.

I knew there was a reason why I did not like St. Louis! 
()

LOL! :D

Is he right? That's entirely up to one's own moral standards and interpretations thereof. Personally I would insist not, but that is of course my own opinion. Does he have a right to compare the two? Unfortunately yes.

lol...you know, some people would call Mexicans filthy too.

this is just another thing to add the never-ending list of dumb things said/done by Rick Santorum.

Rick Santorum would feel right at home in Iran, where he would be able to execute gay men at his free will:

http://direland.typepad.com/direland/2005/07/iran_executes_2.html

Move to Iran, Rick! They need your help!

Thats his opinion and he is entitled to it.

Actually it is very common for animals to mate or at least attempt to with members of their same sex, not only rams, but penguins, north american wild buffalo (who have been documented as often fully penetrating other male buffalo) and dolphins. It's pretty common if you actually try to find out about sexuality in animals; there are books, numerous theses and articles about the subject in question. That should be the 'substancial proof' that you seem to demand Mexican States Rights. You just have to get up off your backside and look for it.

No. Homosexuality is a lot worse, obviously.

And they are easy to spot too:

()

()

()

()

A lot of animals also kill and eat their young, but that doesn't make it ok for humans to kill their own young....oh, wait a second....Sorry, I forgot you liberals believe abortion is alright also.

He came to the defense of one of his top aides who was openly gay. He's not a bigot.

that would be AWESOME if imposed in the American continent! especially Canada.

Consensual gay sex in any way, shape or form should be punishable by death. And opebo should be the executioner.

What the hell was he going to do fire him & get sued???  Please, he did the only thinh he could do without being major ramifications it doesn't mean he isn't a bigot.  His comments himself show what kind of person he really is.

So, tell me, why would a social conservative want to vote for Santorum if he associates with those who "openly" flaunt their shame as if it were their glory?  Doesn’t the bible teach that approving of someone’s sin is worse than the sin itself?

You're right. If you support and/or promote the sin, you are equally guilty. Anyone who supports gay rights is as guilty as the person who commits f****try. both should be halved by the sword.

beliefs have no place in politics. Hypocrisy is everywhere.

No. I believe you can fire someone for being a homosexual in most states.

again, I disagree with you...

John 8:7 "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone."

Can't a political campaign fire someone for any and every reason?

Wow the level of hate here is astonishing

I don't know if there's an exception for political campaigns or not, but we live in a very socialist country where you can't fire someone, for example, on the basis of race. Truly disgraceful how bad things have gotten in the "land of the free."

Don't know if you are being serious or not, but I don't agree with being able to fire someone on the basis of race.

Truly disgraceful how some people see nothing wrong with discrimination

Of course I'm being serious. You should be able to fire someone for any reason at all.

Perhaps, depending on the circumstance. But I don't think any people here support discrimination on the basis of race, and that isn't the point. The point is who gets to make that decision. An essential element of freedom is about being able to sort out right and wrong for yourself.

& so is not to be  fired just because of your race

with race I agree! but with homosexuality, it's different.

The bible doesn't say "Thou shalt not be black" but it does say "Thou shalt not sleep with mankind as with womankind, it is abomination"
The same Bible passage (Lev. 18) condemns homosexuality also condemns bestiality & incest.

The popinjay King of Sweden - a moral titmouse in the plumage of a peacock, who lives lavishly with his lazy, horny kids on Sweden's largest social security check - is King of Fags, King of Zoophiles, King of Pedophiles, and King of Incestuous Perverts.

()
although the king's daughter is a VERY HOT fine-ass bitch

Sweden had a priest arrested for speaking out against fags.

I said freedom. Not subjective happiness.

Wow you are so full of hate

Thats not subjective...

It is not hate. It's common sense.  Since when is christianity a hate group? since when is telling the truth hate speech?

Christianity is not a hate group, I am a Christian.  But taking a few versuses out of something that was never meant to be taken word for word liiterally IS HATE.  You are COMPLETLEY FULL OF HATE.  Its so sad you don't see it

People who claim to be christian, yet support gay rights are lukewarm cowards. Modern day Pharisees. People who have gone a whoring after strange gods. Self-righteous hypocrites. They spend more time harrassing people who are preaching the Gospel than anything else, just like the Pharisees did to Jesus. They are second in evil only to the modern day Saduccees (i.e., bleeding heart liberals).

All in all, if you're claiming to be a Christian, but you deny what the Bible says about God and His hatred of all workers of iniquity, then you're dealing with the scripture in a whorish manner.

Bottom line is its better to live by the overall message of the bible "love thy neighbor" and "don't judge others" then to pick apart certain excerts of the bible ( that are different from the overall message) as excuses to live out your hatred.

Do you believe I should be killed 'by the sword', Mexican States Rights? I'm a practicing homosexual so go on. Do you believe I have no right to live anymore? I mean, god the taxes I pay to the government must be tainted money and a gay doctor friend of mine...eww those 4 lives he saved must not be worth living anymore becasue he..t...t..touched them!

you just don't get it do ya? do you think I'm really that extreme?

no wait... Maybe I am, but not as much as to slash them with a sword.
I am just saying that what you are practicing is wrong and still have time to change (IF you are really a homo, that is).

If not then I'm afraid irony does not come across well in the written word.

alright I apologize for my preaching against fags.

I'll try to be a little less explicit and rude next time.

Your a preacher without a flock :)

The level of rhetoric, especially from jmfsct and KillerPolo is a bit excessive. Can we tone it down?

Santorum neglects the obvious fact that heterosexuality is precisely as similar to beastiality as is homosexuality.

Although I was mentioned in another thread as one of the most tolerant posters, one thing I cannot tolerate is the promulgation of bigotry.

There's no need for that here.

I don't know what your deal is, KillerChicken, but you make me sick.  Whether you're for real or it's feigned hatred or to cause some controversy, no one wants to read it.

Does anyone else think this character is out of line here?

Hah, you are a tolerant? You are the biggest stuck up prick on this forum.

why wouldn't it be?

You really aren't any better than Santorum then, KillerPollo.

hahahahahahaha ;D ;D ;D ;D

Thank you, sir.  Good job elevating the debate.

Such an assessment by a mature and reasoned person as you means a lot to me!

Have a nice night, Phillip.

um no!!! you intolerate the "intolerants"
and i AM against homosexuals, but not that extreme as to say "Fags should die blahblahbalh!!!" if you don't know, don't talk! GROW UP! like many forummers have here!

I think I figured out what the Q stands for.

yeah! and look @ his age!

Did you not just say:

I think I figured out what the A stands for.

Wow, we're seeing Philip's immaturity rise again here. You and KillerPollo can stop being jackasses now.

um... i was being sarcastic about the sword thing, OK?
I am not that extreme, and what i say is not trolling, like opebo or NixonNow

All right, but you could stop saying things like that.

You say you hate homosexuals, and then you advocate killing them.  So the hatred is real, but wanting them to die is sarcasm?

I second. If anyone is that bored, feel free to take over for me here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=25782.new#new) instead of trolling homosexuals and Q. At least if you have plenty of pent-up anger and frustration, find a better way to burn off that excess energy. :P

I never said i promoted their killing. Also that was sarcasm. However, i DO dislike them (including those who support gay rights), but not kill them or do them any harm (Thou shalt not kill).

and Since when is hate something illegal? Have you heard of free speech here? what's the point of being in a free country if you cannot enjoy its freedoms?

Nevermind, prudes. I was thinking of this red Georgia avatar:


Both seem obsessed with talking about how 'tolerant' they are, though.

Jake, thank you for your attempts to bring reason to this argument.  I respect this especially considering I know how strongly you feel about this topic.

Mexican StatesRights - KillerPollo - whatever your name is: you preach religion yet make jokes about killing people?  Do you find that funny?  Sarcasm, was it?  Sounds to me like the same kind of "we should kill all of the ns" jokes - not serious, but hardly meant to parody their position.   I know you'd never act on it, but it's still hateful.  You seem so serious about homosexuality, yet one of the Ten Commandments - thou shalt not kill - seems to be ripe for the picking.

I suggest you read this (http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~linsch/gaybible.htm), KillerPollo.  You may not agree with it - fine - but at least consider possible alternative interpretations of the Bible and toning down your faux machismo about it - you don't have to be a damned crusader about everything you believe in.

Just because they are doing something you see as immoral does not mean you must hate them for it.  A true Christian would object, but understand, and attempt to argue to them their position.  A true Christian gentleman, too, would back down when asked.

"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." -Matt 19:19

Practice what you proselytise, gentlemen.

In the United States, you have every right to spew hate.  And I have every right to call you on it.

I think we've both exercised our rights.

I said i apologized for my intense hatred. i didnt know most of you people didnt crack down on gays as my community does in another forum i'm in

No, this is a place to discuss topics without having your race, sexual orientation, or religion attacked. If you don't want to follow those guidelines, leave.

And what forum would that be?  Free Republic (http://www.freerepublic.com/home.htm)?

how did you know?

this (http://billtedvader.ytmnd.com/) will quench the hate among us... Let there be peace now!

What a fun freeper forum that must be. Gay bashing.

Santorum Rocks  451 "I hate hate gays"
Freeper 69 "Yeah gays suck ..... cock"
The Rightous-Self  "I think all queers should die and be split by a sword"
Freeper 69 "Really, don't you think thats just extreme.  They shouldn't die. They face a fate worse than death anyway when God burns them in eternal flames"
The Rightous-Self  "No i don't think they should be killed by the sword I was being sarcastic, its just a joke."
TRoosevelt43 " You were joking about killing people isn't that a little sick"
Freeper 69 "Are you a fag, I mean that is a pretty gay comment, free speech"
TRoosevelt43 "Well if God is going to punish them anyway why should I care what they do."
Freeper 69 "Now you really sound like a fag"
The Rightous-Self "We can't stand by idle while the gays destroy society.  We must wipe gays out or God will wipe the US out like he wiped out Sodom and Gamorah"
Freeper 69 "Sodom is gay"
Santorum Rock 451 "I've been thinking I think maybe Beastiality is a little worse than Gay sex but gay sex with animals has to be the gayest thing of all."
RedStater "Isn't beastiality basically torturing animals, I mean you can't have mutual sex with animals, it is like rape.  Sure maybe some dogs don't mind ing those girls on the internet but their is a reason why they have to tie a donkeys legs"
Freeper 69 "You know a lot about animal sex, you must be a f****t"
TRoosevelt43 "I think you think about gays to much, you guys need to get laid and you might think about gay sex less"
Freeper 69 "I hope I'm not gay"
Freeper 69 "sh**t that was a typo I meant to type, I home I could kick a gay man's ass"

Are the conversations something like that.
Give it a break Nuevo Leon. I'm sure a lot of the people in those chat rooms would see you as a Latino as a bigger threat to the US then homosexuals because there have always been homosexuals in the US. They just want them to stay closeted, self-hating and usable.  Where as you as a Mexican male could come to the US, take welfare check and imgregnate white women.  There are no limits to hate. There is no safety zone.

The same thing goes for you khirkhib

Sorry! white girls are not my specialty...even girls of my own race arent. I prefer Japanese chicks over pretty much the rest.

btw
()
Does this look like I'm a stereotypical Latino? tell me!

Yeah, OK.  A case of mistaken identity.

But still, it's pretty unpleasant dealing with someone who you feel that you have to step gently around or risk being called some profanity.

What Jake? Same thing?


Who did I attack? Did I attack latinos? Did I attack homophobes?
Biggest assumption I made was assuming that many gay bashers also hate mexicans and I really don't think I am making a major leap of faith assuming that.  Hell if you want me to fill this site with vile I bet you I could find google a whole bunch of gay bashing groups that also bash racial minorities and a whole bunch of racist web pages that also bash gays.  So that couuld be your point.

So what was it? Same thing goes what?

Personal attacks as exhibited by your little fake "conversation". A blanket attack on people is as worse as his blanket attack on gays.

Mmmmm . . . Asians.  ;)  Where's Obeebop?  hahah

No, You do not share the Amerind features of many of your countrymen.  Thus, I presume that you are on the higher end of the Mexican socio-economic strata;)  You certainly don't look like you are from Oaxaca.

As for the Santorum question- No he was not.

You look more like a gay than a stereotypical gay-basher.

Oh so you want me to find examples of straw man arguements.
On this webpage because I'm sure nobody here is guilty of that.

I was trying to be funny and make a point but I will own up to my opinions, I played the characters of TRoosevelt and Redstater

1. I THINK IT IS SICK (NOT SARCASTIC) TO JOKE ABOUT KILLING A GROUP OF PEOPLE MERELY BECAUSE WHO THAT GROUP OF PEOPLE IS

2. I THINK THAT GOD IS LOVE AND I THINK THAT IT IS AROGANT, HERETICAL AND DANGEROUS FOR A PERSON OR GROUP TO CLAIM THEY KNOW THE MIND OF GOD, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT CONCERNS JUDGEMENT OVER ANOTHER GROUP.

3. I also think that many people that obsess with Gay Bashing are uncomfortable with there own sexual identity.

4. I also think that it is not wrong to be homosexual I think that it is very wrong to practice beastality and to equate the two is sick.  You can do whatever you want if your bedroom with a mutually consenting adult.  Animals can not have consentual sex and so beastiality should be considered animal torture.   And I could be wrong but I bet many of the people that would equate homosexuality to beastiality could also compare homosexuality to rape.  I think that it is sick for people to think that homosexuality even approached the vileness of rape and yet I bet there are gaybashers, maybe not on this forum, that would say that homosexuality was worse than rape.  Because RAPE can be one man one women.  

I used the conversation as a construct to get my point across and if apologize if it offended your taste.  But i think it helped articulate my point.

opebo doesn't have tastes.

Yeah opebo stop calling the gay-bashing mexican boy gay, just because he doesn't specialize in girls doesn't mean that he is gay.  Anyway there is no way that he could be gay he's into Japanese chicks.   Good luck with finding Japanese chicks in the Sonoran Desert MexicanStatesRights.

OK, let's see what you do if a Jew fires you for being Christian.  I'm sure you'll sit back and say "Well, that's what the boss says!"

Half of what conservatives preach they've never experienced. 

KillerPollo: Shut up

It is a shame that this thread is 6 pages long.

I wouldn't be happy with it(nobody is happy getting fired), but I would just move on and get a new job.

Wow, red herring and ad hominem in the same post.

Of course not - a dog can't consent, another man can.

I don't agree with anything Santorum says or does.

Agreed

So if Santorum said the sky is blue, you would disagree, because obviously it can't be true. Santorum said it!

I'd say it was more of a light turquoise...or even grey if it was rainy..........

Its a shame that Rick Santorum is an elected official!

I'm pretty sure a dog with an erect dick humping your leg is consenting.  Just put him over your mouth and give it a blow job already.  He consented.

What would you rather watch

a women sleeping with a women
or a women sleeping with her dog?

I don't invite people into my house, whether in person or over the tv or over the internet, to have sex.

Maybe you're frustrated because you're not wholly devoted to the word of God.

How i practice my faith is my buisness. As you dont know how i do this you have no right to tell me whether i am doing something wrong or not.

Then why are you "frustrated"?

shes probably frustrated with people like you. :P

Just because you choose the lesser of two evils means that one is not evil.  However, of the two, the two women would be more appealing.  Just as if you had two men up there or two consenting heterosexual 90-year olds . . . I'd still chose the two women.  (Of course, I'm not a voyer, so the odds of any of the above happening is fairly slim.)

Why didnt you ask me that question first before judging me with that filthy mind of yours.

I am frustrated as we have a President that has failed to fund any kind of education policy. We have personal debt climbing all the time. We then have a senate passing a bill to make it harder for people to get out of the holes they are in. We have 45 million people that dont have healthcare. We have people that defend the actions of this policy with 'healthcare isnt expensive' well why is it climbing then?

We live in a country that proves natural selection - survival of the fittest...yet the same people that promote this culture ban the theory from school classrooms.

I am frustratd with the direction of this country. i hope i am allowed to hold that view. And i am a democrat that is against abortion!

My filthy mind?!  Aren't you the one who asked:


---


parents are the number one factor in education, not government.  So be frustrated that there are so many parents who don't take an active interest in their kids education.

---


Since when is that news?  Most young adults have been taught by Hollywood and MTV that "if it feels good, do it."

---


Then if you feel so sorry for the people who have followed their greed into debt, then why don’t you sell all your possessions and use the money to pay off their debts?  Why do you insist on someone else picking up the bill instead of you paying off their debt?

Paul writing to the Romans “Let no debt remain outstanding”

---


I am self-employed and have four kids and a wife, and our monthly premium is $257/month.  How many of those 45 million have PlayStation and more than one TV?  How many of those 45 million have money to go to the movies?  How many of those 45 million have their priorities mixed up?

---


???

---


The direction of this country is a result of sin.  That is why there are so many single mothers perpetuating the cycle of poverty and ignorance.  That is why there are 2 million Americans behind bars.  That is why a good portion of the population is infected with STDs.

Your kidding me right? the country is in sin? are you pat robertson?

ok, so I dont live anywhere near the sonoran desert.

No, I am not Robertson, but I am not blind to the fact that:
--one out of four girls are molested
--2 million americans are behind bars
--STDs are common throughout the population
--teaching kids to remain virgin until marriage is mocked by the media
--media is pushing the approval of homosexuality
--a president can't call mass murderers "evil" without causing a media frenzy
--etc, etc, etc

Basically, most Americans have used their freedom to indulge their greed and sexual immorality.  

That is a very interesting way to put it, and if you think about it, it's possibly correct.  Both jmfcst and MissCatholic can see that a moral life is one where people are guided into making "the right decision."  Sin is a result of making the wrong decision.  While we wouldn't consider not paying your credit card bill on time a "sin," it is the wrong decision . . . just as taking drugs or speeding.  In return, you can consider being moral the same as being responsible.  And we definitely have a problem with people not being responsible in their lives in recent decades.  Personal debt can be stopped by making the right, responsible choices in life.  Do I need a sports car in order to commute to work, when an inexpensive sedan will cost half the price and be more fuel efficient?  Do I need the $400K home with all the bells and whistles when the $250K home can be cleaned up and achieve the same ends?

Yes, I would have to say our country has been living in "sin" for a long time, and it's time people start making the "moral" decisions in their lives.  Be fiscally responsible, live within your means, and don't participate in acts which will harm you or your family.  

Since Jeb Bush was elected, Child Molestation in Florida has increased by over 800%. Florida is now the paedophile state of America. Jessica Lunsford papers over the cracks of what the Republicans have failed to do.

I guess you havnt read my views on child molestation. I am pro death penalty. Child Molesters cant be cured. They should be killed within a month of conviction. Child Molestrers dont kill like murderers they kill as they frightened of getting caught.

2 million americans behind bars - well America has neglected millions of people. There are two ways out of a life of crime. Discipline and strong education. Bush has failed to fund NCLB. Majority of governors have scrapped the bill as its not funded.

Teaching kids to remain virgin is mocked by the media - we live in the 21st century. If you look at the facts of people that remain virgins, the marriage usually fails. Why that is i dont know. I support the notion but it is unrealistic. I enjoy sex yet i am not married. Can i not have something to enjoy in such a desperate world?

Media is pushing the approval of homosexuality- 100 years ago if you said blacks were integrated in our society many people would be outraged. If you look at the Greeks, many of them praciticed homosexuality. This idea that its modern is a myth. It started way before Jesus came down.

Your last point is not realy valid. We can all sit and cherry pick what bush has or hasnt done.

I will give you a list of what i dont like about the far right/this admin
- they promote the blowing up of abortion clinics.
- they ban charles darwin from science classes.
- they tell a man that he cant teach his child paganism.
- they change the state language from english to american
- bin laden doenst concern Bush.
- education isnt funded.
- healthcare isnt funded.
- stem cell research can save lifes.
- you can own a gun but is illegal to load it.
- you can close a base after a candidate has pledged it wont be closed if elected.

--one out of four girls are molested - Paedophiles are being allowed to do this

--2 million americans are behind bars - because they are not educated right, or taught morals

--STDs are common throughout the population - Unsafe sex (gay more frequent than straight) with strangers is very cmmon

--teaching kids to remain virgin until marriage is mocked by the media - The media KNOWS that there are desperate teenage virgins out there who want to feel something early

--media is pushing the approval of homosexuality - That's a main problem today! That is why a lot of posters here think it's OK to be gay, and believe they should be a protected class, like blacks.
They are also taught to believe that just because gayism involves consent, then it is OK. In other countries, the media is condemning people who speak out against homosexuality, or comparing it to other abnormal sexual orientations (ie zoophilia, paedophilia, incest, etc.)

--a president can't call mass murderers "evil" without causing a media frenzy - Media are the biggest liars. What happened to the "honest and truthful" press your American founding fathers proposed?

--etc, etc, etc - bla bla bla bla...

Basically, most Americans have used their freedom to indulge their greed and sexual immorality.  

Wow . . . I didn't know Jeb was the cause of pedophilia.  Burn Jeb.  Burn Jeb.

*shakes head sadly*   You're slipping to the Shira-side again, Miss. 

Can you give me one piece of legislation that jeb bush signed before Jessica Lunsford occured? Whether you agree with Bill O'Reilly or not, he said for over 5 years that Florida was a disaster area to raise your children. Yes you can blame judges. But you have to questin what the Republican state senate and the governor and legislature has done before this happened. It may be short-sighted to point the finger at Jeb. However it was an event waiting to happen and it did. Tragic!

God bless you Jessica and all the others that had to suffer.

I am one of the toughest people on the forum on child molesters. I fconvicted death within a month. Waste of human space.

Hardly any of the states have been aggressive on child molestors hun, so it's not a political party thing.  It's a "out of sight, out of mind" thing.  The reason why there has been increase political pressure on this issue lately is because of the public awareness of the events, not an increase.  For how much I hate them, you can thank cable news for that.


Oh hun, that's going easy on them.  I'm thinking of humane treatment first.  ;) 

Like I stated before, you’re frustrated because you’re not wholly dedicated to Christ.

Gal 5:19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

---


Apples and oranges - you could compare any sin to discrimination and say "why are adulterers, or murderers, or liars discriminated against? 100 years ago blacks were also discriminated against..."

1) White gentiles discriminating against blacks gentiles is NOT in agreement with the bible, old testament or new testament.  Even Jews discriminating against gentiles is forbidden in the new testament since Christ "has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility"

2) discriminating against homosexuality (calling it a sin) IS IN AGREEMENT with the bible.

So can you enjoy sex and be dedicated to Christ?
Does Christ have a problem with me owning a vibrator? I'm not having sex outside marriage with anyone?

I didn't know you meant having sex with one's self.

1 in 4? Where do you get your data? And Paedophiles aren't being allowed to do squat - it is illegal and the police do tons to crack down on it.


Actually, it's because we have a drug war that  makes 6/10 people in prison non-violent drug offenders. Over half of the prison population


Define "common". They are much less prevelant today than a decade or two ago.


I've never once seen the media mock waiting until marriage to have sex. ::)


It is ok to be gay, but they shouldn't be treated any different than the rest of us. Get over your obsession and just leave'm alone. Whether it's a sin or not doesn't matter - it's not your business what they do.


Right. "Most". Right... what country do you live in again? Do you come here often or are you just repeating what you've heard from other people?

In your case, I would say no.  You cannot claim to be "Catholic" yet practice sex out of wedlock.  But, that's a continuing trend with some "catholics" these days, or "holiday catholics" as my ex-lady friend would say.  Now, if you want to renounce your faith, then go right ahead.  8)

You have no right to claim she is less 'Catholic' based on such sweeping assumptions. In Scotland most Catholics are realists; they have sex out of wedlock, the use contraception some even have abortions, that is their personal choice. Sex and sexual health has nothing to do with religion it is a personal thing and no one has the legitimacy to question another persons 'religiousness' as a result. Some of the biggest moral preachers who spew out all the 'hosannas, holy holies and thou shalt nots' are some of the biggest hypocrites on the planet.

P.S I'm Catholic too.

So, was Jesus wrong to preach against sexual immorality?

Who said that, but it tends to be those who make the biggest issue about so called sexual immorality & homosexuals tend to go against the very theme of the bible & Jesus's overall teachings to "love thy neighbor" and "not to judge others"

His "overall teachings"?!  Jesus' teachings can be summed up in two words: faith and repentance.

So, you can single out love and judging others all you want, but if you refuse to repent of sin, you will perish.

"The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!" (spoken by Jesus Christ, Mark 1:14)

"But unless you repent, you too will all perish." (spoken by Jesus Christ, Luke 13:3,5)

Point being the overall teachings of the bible, the overall message to "love thy neighbor" and not to judge others are something that many of the hoiler than thou gay bashers & morality detectors don't live by

Yet you cannot pick and choose what you follow and still claim to be a follower.  As the Bible says, people are not to add OR take away from the teachings.  Saying you are a realist beause you enjoy having sex out of wedlock doesn't make it ok under the faith (hence my example of the 'holiday catholics.')

To the contrary, the point being the GREATEST COMMANDMENT of the bible is to "Love God" which is measured by your obedience to his commands, and the 2nd greatest commandment is to "Love your neighbor as yourself."

Mat 22:37-39 Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind."  This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself."

John 14:15 Jesus said, "If you love me you will obey my commandments."

You simply can not separate love from obedience.

OH SNAP!

many people who claim to follow religion are just a bunch of charlatans who are doing this for money. christians who commit abortions, are gay, or have sex out of wedlock may be religious, but not faithful.


You are probably thinking of John 3:16, which says no such thing. The word translated "world" in that verse (kosmos) NEVER means every individual of mankind who has ever lived (see, e.g., John 17:9). Romans 9:13 says that God hated Esau, and Psalm 5:5 says that God hates all WORKERS of iniquity. Other examples are Proverbs 6:16-19, Psalm 11:5, and Malachi 1:3. Given these verses, how can you say God loves everyone? Can you really say "God loves everyone" when God says "I hated Esau?" Does God love the people in hell?

Or, you are thinking of "God is love." God certainly is love, toward His elect (His children). But He certainly is not love toward the reprobate (children of the devil). That's why His elect go to heaven, and the reprobate go to hell. In Romans 9:13, which says "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated", Jacob is a representative of God's elect, while Esau is a representative of the reprobate. In Romans 1, the word "reprobate" is used to describe homosexuals. They are reprobate. God hates reprobates. Therefore, God hates homosexuals.

Furthermore, God specifically says that He ABHORS people who engage in sodomy (as well as other forms of sexual perversion): "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them...And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them." Leviticus 20:13,23. Understand?

God's hatred is one of His holy attributes, whereby He reveals Himself as having a fixed and immutable determination to punish the finally impenitent with eternal perdition. God's hatred is not like man's hatred. His hatred is holy, pure, unchanging, while man's hatred is a sinful, fickle emotion.


Yes. Does that mean to lie to him and tell him what he wants to hear? No. It means to tell him the truth, and warn him to flee from the wrath to come. As we are commanded in Leviticus 19:17, "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him." Here, loving your neighbour is defined as rebuking him, and not allowing sin to come upon him. The purest, most exalted form of love is to tell people the truth, especially about weighty matters such as life and death, sin, righteousness, judgment to come, Heaven and Hell.

PS: i did not use the word "fag". I am not trying to be rude, nor offend anyone.

Obviously!  The man (assuming he even existed) did nothing but go around making the absurd claim of the existence of an objective morality.  In other words he was essentially a madman, but more to the point politically a tyrant and an intolerant.  Imagine presuming to tell someone where to stick their member?  Feed him to the lions!

Opebo. are you a descendant of a citizen of Sodom and Gomorrah?

Yes, of course.

And I assume that you think that you, in all of your glory and power, are Jesus? You fit that description so nicely that I wasn't quite sure if you were talking about Jesus or yourself.

No, I deny the existence of objective morality, like any rational person, everett.

Also I would never presume to tell a person where he should stick his member, though I might in friendly fashion exhort him to enjoy sticking it wherever he likes.

If you deny the existence of an objective morality, then why do you so freely place value judgements on religion and people who disagree with your views?

And as long as it has something to do with sex, it's glory to God - oops, I mean opebo - in your book, so that doesn't necessarily count.

You poor simpleton, as I have repeated for your benefit about a thousand times by now - I do not object to their having stupid subjective preferences, what I object to is their claim that there is an objective morality.  In other words, go ahead and hate gays if you're an ignorant hick, but once you claim that they are objectively 'bad', I shall have to advocate feeding you to the lions.

So basically you want everyone who disagrees with you to be fed to the lions. Good job.

since when does hating gays = ignorant? LOLOLOLOL
Look at yourself. you advocate that anyone who opposes your whacked out points of view, to be fed to the lions.

No, you are again missing the distinction.  I fear you are incapable of understanding.

No, you have also misunderstood, but that is to be expected, as you are an ignorant.

And proud of being incapable of understanding your warped lack of logic that quite a few Atlasians are still puzzled over.

don't worry. according to yourself, me and opebo bring balance to the forums. right vs. left.

It is simple everett - I take great offense that one individual subjectivity would presume to judge another based on the fiction of objective morality.

ok. Killing is part of objective morality. Do you favor killing? oh wait... YOU DO!!! you advocate feeding ppl to the lions. OH YES!!

It's a shame this thread is not 6 pages long.

It is simple everett - I take great offense that one individual subjectivity would presume to judge another based on the fiction of objective morality.

ok. Killing is part of objective morality. Do you favor killing? oh wait... YOU DO!!! you advocate feeding ppl to the lions. OH YES!!

No, killing has nothing whatsoever to do with objective morality.  Objective morality is merely an excuse for killing.  I advocate killing people even though I don't believe in objective morality.  The only real reasons for killing are power reasons - either self defense or agression, but those blur together at the edges.  I have nothing against killing people for practical purposes, I merely object to adding insult to injury by making the absurd claim that you've killed them because they 'deserved' it - that they were 'bad' based on some objective moral.

While not exactly the same thing, both are forms of sexual activity that will fail to produce offspring.

So is heterosexual sex which finishes with an ejaculation anywhere but the vagina.

What makes certain people so against homosexuality?  Is it strictly based on ones religious views or is there something else there?

I don't understand why some people can't just accept that someone's different and move on, rather than staying so focused on one small aspect of someone else's life.

I think there are multiple reasons.  Some are religious, so are just natural in leaning (gays cannot reproduce, therefore it's not what nature had intended), and others don't want to give into a special interest group claiming they deserve rights just because they choose to be gay.

You state that all people who believe in objective morality are ignorant and irrational - that sounds pretty objective to me. And it sounds to me that you think such people 'deserve' to be killed. Go feed yourself to a lion, hypocrite.

Yea...about the interest group thing...I don't think being bi makes me special.  Or at least no more special than any other person.  I don't deserve any extra, or special, rights just for being of a different sexual orientation--that's crazy.

Are you against hate crime legislation?

Since the religious on here use God and Jesus to protect their homophobia i have a question to ask you.

Jesus promotes love. So do you have a problem with a gay couple adopting a child?

Gay loving home or life in foster care?

Yet the Bible also is against homosexuality.  You can't pick and choose the parts of the Bible you want to follow.

Gay loving home or child spending years in foster care?

Nothing wrong with foster care.  My friends niece has been in Foster care ever since she was removed from her mothers care.  We do, however, need a bit more policing of foster parents to ensure only those that are able actually receive the kids.

So you are against a gay loving home.

Why are you an independent? i have read nothing from you regarding what good the democrats have done or what is wrong with the republican party?

Because I vote for whom I feel does the better job.  There are some things which I do not like of the republicans but do from the democrats, and on other things, neither party addresses the key issues in my mind.  :)

But back to the topic, yes, I would have issues with a gay couple raising a foster child.  I view gay as a sexual orientation of choice, not a genetic predisposition.  Therefore, I would not view such an enviroment to be healthy for a child, even if both partners love the kid.

- you dont like Mark Warner
- you like Rick Santorum
- you dont like Hillary Clinton
- you like George Bush
- you dont like democrats policies on education.
- you like not funding education at all.
- you dont like democrats policy on healthcare
- you like the way republicians increse healthcare.
- you dont like democrats policy on Iraq.
- you like Republicans policy on Bin Laden.
- you dont like democrat policy on taxes.
- you like Republicans given so much to the rich.

Name me three democrats that you would vote for in 2008 ahead of Republicans such as George Allen, Rick Santorum or John McCain
Name me three policies that the democrats are right on with you and the Reupblicans are wrong?

Patroit act?
Abortion?
Death Penalty?
Guns?
 
What would a democrat have to say to you to get them to vote for you. As you can tell i think you would rather shoot your grandmother than vote democrat!

*sigh*  If you want to play this childish game:

- you dont like Mark Warner - What I said is I do not like him more than Allan, especially as a VA governor, since he forced an unnecessary tax increase in the state after holding the congress 'hostage' for days on end . . . just to turn out that we have had a $1Bill surplus in tax revenue for the past two years.  And since VA cannot do refunds, they are forced to spend this money.  I have said that of the potential democratic candidates for 2008, he or Joe-mentum would be two democrats I could consider voting for.

- you like Rick Santorum - Never said that.

- you dont like Hillary Clinton - No, I don't, and I have said that . . . often.  :)

- you like George Bush - Yes, I do.

- you dont like democrats policies on education. - No, I don't.  I don't like Republican policies on education either, though they are the only ones that have tried to make a change in recent years.  The current public education system is based off of a poor model which needs to be scrapped and redone. 

- you like not funding education at all. - Never said that (you're getting as bad as Shira these accusations hun).  I have said that there are better ways to fund and manage public education, and have preached to potential and current college students on how to maximize the money being offered by scholarships to off-set their educational expenses.

- you dont like democrats policy on healthcare - No, I don't.  I'm against programs that create a welfare state.  I'm also against some of the Republican plans and policies on this as well.

- you like the way republicians increse healthcare. - Uh, no.  See above.  I was glad to see that there was an increase in funding, but it should only be for a short term until a revamp of the system is done.  Making it more difficult to sue doctors is one good step towards lowering medical expenses.

- you dont like democrats policy on Iraq. - No, I don't like the democrats who put our troops in harms way by insulting them and embolding our enemies by saying they deserve the protections granted under US laws (which are meant only for US citizens).

- you like Republicans policy on Bin Laden. - Yes.  I want him tired and hanged.

- you dont like democrat policy on taxes. - That is correct.  I'm against
raising taxes.

- you like Republicans given so much to the rich.  - *yawn*  Rhetoric (and poor grammar).  I'm for a fair tax system.  Like it or not, the "rich" carry the largest burden of the current tax system, and will continue to do so under any other form of flat or scaled system.

Name me three democrats that you would vote for in 2008 ahead of Republicans such as George Allen, Rick Santorum or John McCain
Name me three policies that the democrats are right on with you and the Reupblicans are wrong?  - I mentioned the two I currently would consider voting for above.  I would not vote for Santorum or McCain (I've said that numerous times as well). 

Patroit act? - For it, especially the provisitions that were already available under the war on drugs.

Abortion? - Against it except in cases or rape, incest, or threat to mothers life.  I've discussed this one in depth in the past.  Paid for a friend of mine to have one done since the doctors weren't sure if she'd survive.  She changed her mind at the last minute and has a healthy little boy today.  Additionally, my cousin, who has a heart condition, had to have an abortion to save her, since the strain on her body had already caused one heart attack.

Death Penalty? - For it.

Guns? - For strong restrictions (see the debated between me and Carl)
 
What would a democrat have to say to you to get them to vote for you. As you can tell i think you would rather shoot your grandmother than vote democrat! - hahaha . . . no, my Grandma is too nice for that.  :)  As far as what a democrat has to say . . . the answer is nothing.  This is a big flaw which so many people have when it comes to voting for someone.  I don't want to "hear" what they can promise me or do for me.  I want to see action and integrety.  ACTA NON VERBA - "Deeds, not words."  This is where Hillary falls dreadfully short, and has no chance in hell to receive my vote.

Feel better now?  As you can see, I'm not Republican nor do I follow the Republican line.

That's like asking "swinger loving home or foster care?"

No it isn't - a gay couple can be monogamous, and I have seen such couples.

Oh dear....

No, it is not a value judgement, merely an observation of fact.  I don't think it is 'bad' that they are irrational and ignorant, just that they are different.


No, I don't think they 'deserve' to be killed - I have never stated that.  I have only said that I want to see them killed.  No one 'deserves' anything, as that implies objective morality.

I'm sure most swingers (as well as gays) would make better parents than you, cultist. 

this is a very interesting conversation.

I'm sure the 'cultist' would make a better parent than you, prude.

No, it's an opinion - you judge them as ignorant and irrational, you are making a judgement of other people whether you like it or not.


If it isn't bad then why should they be fed to lions?


Then you shouldn't advocate feeding them to lions - if they don't have it coming to them then why should it be done? You can't give bullsh**t about being practical, because lions are an inefficient way of killing large masses of people, so if you didn't feel they didn't deserve it you wouldn't advocate such a thing.

I'm merely observing that they think differently than me (or by my definition not at all).


For the convenience and safetly of those they presume to judge.


No, they don't 'deserve' it, it is merely practical and convenient for the rest of us.  The lion method is merely charming, historically significant, and symbolic, but one could use other methods.

AS I SAID you can't bullsh**t me about being practical - feeding people to lions isn't a practical method of mass killing. You hate those people and you're an intolerant, judging bastard who thinks he's better than them - you are no better than Hitler, scum.

You mean there is a practical way of mass killing? :o

I skimmed through about the last six pages and I think I can safely say that this thread should be murdered and then buried.

All right; I've sent this guy (http://www.petplanet.co.uk/petplanet/fun/postcards/breedpostcards/Rabs/lop_eared.jpg) to destroy the thread and then dig a hole in the ground for it afterwards.

Well, it could also be that the swinging couple is 5'5" and the homosexual couple is 5'10", but I was comparing homosexuals to swingers because they are both immoral - Monogamy doesn't equate to morality.

You could simply ask the question, "Immoral actity xyz or foster care?":

Admitted and unrepenting daily dog beating, loving couple or foster care?...Admitted and unrepenting bank robbing, loving couple or foster care?...Admitted and unrepenting habitual lying, loving couple or foster care?...Admitted and unrepenting cable tv descramming, loving couple or foster care?...Admitted and unrepenting Satan worshipping, loving couple or foster care?...etc, etc.

Besides, can two unmarried people adopt a child?  If a state says that two people are unfit to marry, how can a state allow them to adopt children?

He looks like quite the killer.

Unfortunately - feeding people to lions is cruel and inefficient(meaning it takes a long time to do). So, it's not practical in that sense. Now, I don't think there's any just way to kill masses of innocents, I just know that there are different methods and that some are costlier, more cruel, and more time consuming than others. If opebo had an honest wish to merely protect himself from Christians(who as far as I can tell mean him no harm, though the irrational idiot can't see that) he would simply wish to kill them quickly and wouldn't take any amusement out of it - instead he's a sick bastard who wants to have them eaten alive and take amusement out of it, which displays his obvious hatred and judgement against such people.

well, youre right in saying that its definetly not efficient. and i must say, i wouldnt particularly like being eaten by lions. you'd spare me, right Opebo? ??? :)

You shouldn't ask if he'd spare you - you should realize how disgusting he is instead and fight against such intolerance.

Yes, exactly; you should be very tolerant of his behavior by killing him. ;)

well, i must say that i dont see the justification in throwing everyone who believes in a certain faith in to be fed on by a large animal. i say either you do it to everyone or no-one, and i find that throwing us all into be eaten by animals seems like a bad idea. :)

however, we must be tolerant of his 'intolerance' towards those who arent tolerant to tolerant people :D im confused

First you fight intolerance with reason, and, should that intolerance turn violent you fight it with force. Opebo is, fortunately, a coward and is too afraid to risk his life over anything really, so reason is a sufficient weapon to at least ensure others do not become infected with such nonsense.

ooooohhhhhhh......i get it

This thread makes me hate the world.

You're right. So they are all comparable to beastiality.

I can hear it now: "Rick Santorum says oral sex is just as bad as bestiality!" ::)

What?!

Just Santorum being over-the-top again - I'm beginning to think he doth protest too much

Dave

YES! i finally found a place to put this! :D


()

How is this thread thirteen pages long?  :P

an argument broke out in the middle of this thread between Opebo and everyone else

Dunno - just think Santorum is good topic fodder. Folk either love him or hate him, which gives rise to passionate debate

I buck the trend though and tend to feel rather indifferent towards the guy

Dave

I might have known ;)

Dave

Most republicans do and say nothing. Have you ever heard the senators from Wyoming or Idaho speak?

Rick Santorum is trying to sell books to fund is campaign as he knows that hes in trouble in a moderate/blue state that hasnt voted for a republican nominee for president since 1988. So he needs the freaks to come out and vote.

I don't have time to read all this stuff. Much of which is funny intentional, some unintentionally, and a lot of it is jr. high school level debating.

So here's my question: in 13 pages, did anybody reference Hitler or Nazis? You know, just checking to see if Goodwin's Law held up (if you don't know that law of internet conversations, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodwin%27s_law.)

;-)

lol - you have woke up on the right side of the bed this morning.