You can be as Muslim as you like. I said it was out of their playbook. You being Muslim doesn't alter the fact that you sound exactly like the Westboro Baptist Church.

I'm from a Catholic family, and none of them feel comfortable with homosexuality. (Even though some family members claim to have that particular mental illness).

You probably just need a drink. :)

I don't drink. I thought you would have realised that.

Whoooosh. Look up mate.

Let's legalise paedophilia and rape, they're also natural

Colonel, you are allowed to have your point of view, but you aren't allowed to put your nose in other peoples lives. If a man wants to fuck another man in the ass when you aren't looking, thats up to the men. They enjoy it, you don't. Some people like marmite, some people despise it. Don't eat fucking marmite if you dont like it, and especially don't stop others from eating fucking marmite if they enjoy it. My question to you is, why is gayness wrong? I would like you to explain me your reasoning on why being gay should not happen. I dont want to hear something like "it says it in the bible" i want to hear logical reasoning. If all there doing is hurting themselves, why are you so opposed to it?

PS. Humans weren't built to do many things, including reading. Should we stop reading, even though we love to, just because its not natural?

Edited 4/3/2015 16:30:21

Also, if you look at the numbers, the younger generation is getting better and better, and more of us are getting into college and less are being religious. Eventually, all those old ignorant people teaching their kids to hate black people are going to die. Then us younger people will be the old ones teaching our kids better than the last. This has always gone on. Parent teaches kid, kid grows up to teach their kid, etcetera. Well in those generations of teaching a small amount of people think "this is total bullshit" and decide to teach their kids otherwise, thus cleansing the world of ignorance, one family at a time.

"Humans have never, and will never, be equal. Neo-Nazis, KKK and sympathisers even today especially in the former Confederate States of America convince their children that blacks are inferior."

Thats because people like you exist, to teach your children the despicable notion that homosexuality is wrong. In the future, your descendants will look back on our time and realise just as we do now, "Man, people were FUCKED UP back then"

*DROPS MIC*

Edited 4/3/2015 16:41:10

"Let's legalise paedophilia and rape, they're also natural"

Rape really has no place in this discussion, its a choice that someone makes and is totally unforgivable in any society...
The paedophile who resists his natural urges though? Is it evil be have paedophile desires?
It's treated just like homophosexuality used to be.
No-one im sure chooses to desire kids, just as no-one chooses to desire the same sex, its inbuilt at birth. The consequences of actually following through with those desires are obviously vastly different, but i dont see the distinction really between the two groups.
Why if being a paedophile (and not acting on it) is so evil are we so ready to accept homosexuals?

I can see what you mean. All it is is an opinion. Its ones opinion that small children are attractive. What decides the opinion is the way their brain is set up, and their past experiences along with their current beliefs. One person might have the desires of pedophilia, but is disgusted by the idea of it, so they push it away. Some people might be pressured into partaking in homosexual acts, even though they are disgusted by it. One might not choose the desire, but they definitely choose their actions. And that is the important part.

PS i think that guy was being sarcastic towards colonel, when saying it should be legal

Edited 4/3/2015 17:33:39

No I'm actually on his side, I don't support lgbt marriage

LGBT isn't hurting anyone, and the same arguments today were used in the 60's against african americans.

SHUT UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

In my opinion all those -phobia words are an oppressive mean to declare dissenters as being clinically insane, which they are not. That is manipulative and totalitarian and has nothing to do with tolerance whatsoever. Stalin did use that in his time declaring all those who were opposing socialism and his rule as being insane, if he did not kill them right away. Islam is doing that, declaring those people who leave Islam as being insane as a mean to not having to kill them right away.

The reasoning is the same on both occasions: Socialism and Islam respectively see themselves as the best or simply the correct way to live and anyone who opposes this cannot be right in their minds. And that kind of Stalinist society is the ultimate state we are heading to with this kind of cultural engineering, aka brainwash. I even heard the argument in these days, that leftist extremism cannot exist, because it is simply common sense. Treating any dissenters is not far off from that point of view. If we continue on this path, then in the future dissenters will be tucked off the streets and therapized, if not killed right away. And that will be named tolerance.

The use of the word "tolerance" itself in this context and used by these people, tagging dissenters with having phobias, is manipulative as well, as it is a mean to declare themselves as righteous, which they are not, but the opposite.

It is not worthy of freedom nor of an open society to declare dissenters as being clinically insane, that is of having phobias. And as long as we do not fight for our freedom, we do not deserve it. Everyone got a right to his own opinion without being outlawed or therapized for it, indeed, without any harassment whatsoever. This is for homosex-normalists and it is for those who call homosexuality a sin, both.

I tolerate the self-proclaimed "progressive" people in the actual sense of the word as I bear with their opinion painfully. They are voicing their mind and they must be able to say what they want to say freely, but I do not agree with them and I do not accept their attempt to brainwash, but call it by name.

Homosexuality is not love in the deeper meaning of the word. It is using a vase for hammering nails. That is not love to the vase nor to the nails or what these nails are made for. That is my opinion. Bear with it. Be tolerant.

This entire thread

The reasoning is the same on both occasions: Socialism and Islam respectively see themselves as the best or simply the correct way to live and anyone who opposes this cannot be right in their minds. And that kind of Stalinist society is the ultimate state we are heading to with this kind of cultural engineering, aka brainwash. I even heard the argument in these days, that leftist extremism cannot exist, because it is simply common sense. Treating any dissenters is not far off from that point of view. If we continue on this path, then in the future dissenters will be tucked off the streets and therapized, if not killed right away. And that will be named tolerance.

It seems you believe that the American society today (and to a lesser degree the Western European societies) is not being brainwashed. You are wrong.
Other than that, this paragraph contains many truths.

Salinist, Maoist and Facist societies were seeking to achieve what our democratic countries have achieved nowadays. As an example, he Nazis sought German domination of Europe. When genocide failed, they turned to the "EU".

Homosexuality is not a choice. Homosexuality is determined by experiences which happen in a person's life.
I myself do not treat anyone according to their beliefs, behaviour or history. I do not discriminate.
In my opinion homosexuals are in dire need of psychological help, and I will voice my opinion and advocate it if I see an opportunity to do so. However, I do not prevent others from voicing their opinions nor do I attack them for doing so. I think that's the main difference between Conservatives and Liberals. Conservatives are more open to letting others voice their opinions, and Liberals are less so. When someone voices an opinion which they deem not to be progressive, they demonise the person with such names as "homophobic", "xenophobic", "racialist", "fascist" and "bigot".
GET A LYFE!

To make it clear, one doesn't have to be mentally ill to dislike homosexuals. I, and probably many other people too, use the term "homophobia" as a colloquialism to describe the phenomenon, not because I actually think that the position necessitates a mental disorder.

Now that you have well established that declaring one's opponents as mentally unstable is a tactic used by totalitarian societies, let me point out that some christians in these recent LGBT threads have called homosexuality a mental illness. Keeping that in mind, do you think that Christianity could do a better job relating to sexual minorities?

Another thing that I would like to know from you is, how do you reconcile these substantially differing views in society? Should gays and Christians both just keep to themselves, avoiding contact with each other? How does that work if people are forced to associate with each other in the workplace, for instance?

Lastly, seeing that you criticize Islam, and rightly so, can you see weaknesses in your own religion? What do you think about Lot and his daugters, who engaged in incestuous sex? Seeing that the Bible did not condemn the act, do you agree with the Bible's position?

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+19%3A30-36&version=ESV

Now that you have well established that declaring one's opponents as mentally unstable is a tactic used by totalitarian societies, let me point out that some christians in these recent LGBT threads have called homosexuality a mental illness. Keeping that in mind, do you think that Christianity could do a better job relating to sexual minorities?

Actually, it might be equality in arms when the one side calls the other sinners while the other side calls the one side insane. Christians cannot step back from calling sin a sin, because it would not be love, if you refrain from warning the lamb on its way to the slaughter. Therefore it will eventually happen that they will be hated for and be called insane. Which you might take as a violation or sin against the god of western society, which is Ratio. Therefore there is equality in arms, indeed, as both calling the others of sinning against their respective god.

Another thing that I would like to know from you is, how do you reconcile these substantially differing views in society? Should gays and Christians both just keep to themselves, avoiding contact with each other? How does that work if people are forced to associate with each other in the workplace, for instance?

There cannot be reconciliation. Ours is a world under the rule of sin. There will be war. There will be strife. There will be opposing opinions. You cannot reconcile Christ and Belial. The enmity is too hard sworn on each other. Christ did put our sin on himself and literally killed sin with himself on the cross. Imagine that. That is hatred towards sin, but love to us.
BUT what you can do is bear with the other and take him as he is and tolerate him which means endure his opinion as painfully as it might be, while still leaving no doubt to your own position. Which is actually biblical teaching. Therefore working together is no problem in the Christian or biblical perspective.

Lastly, seeing that you criticize Islam, and rightly so, can you see weaknesses in your own religion? What do you think about Lot and his daugters, who engaged in incestuous sex? Seeing that the Bible did not condemn the act, do you agree with the Bible's position?

The bible might give report on this or that without letting judgement follow immediately which is some sort of sovereignty. The bible does not need to tell at that point what this means, because there is no doubt about what the Lord is thinking of this due to other explicit chapters like Leviticus 18 or even Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, if you understand it in all deep meaning like Jesus did. The love between parents and children is originally meant as one of being accepted as is without giving any performance and without having give and take equalling each other. The Lord even takes this ideal love of parents towards their children as being a showcase for his own love towards us. The breaking in of sexuality into this wholesome and sane situation does destroy that kind of love, but changes it into something about performance and about give or take, thereby snatching away the only safe haven. Therefore any kind of sexuality in that parent-children-situation is against love and therefore sin. No need to say on each and every instance.

Addition: You might glean the biblical position towards this happening as the bible does point out that Lot did not notice. The bible does point that out explicitly both times. Why is that, if not for excusing Lot?

Edited 4/4/2015 13:45:25

It's interesting that you brought up incest, because you could use arguments for incest marriage identical to those liberals use for gay marriage (it's just love, it isn't hurting anybody,, it happens in nature...) - however, liberals see incest as something backwards as opossed to gay marrriage which is something progressive to them.

One could even argue that incest is more normal, because you can still reproduce that way. However, incest is still rejected, simply because it's seen as weird by society, the same way like gays are being seen. In conclusion, I can tolerate gay or incest relationships, but I believe than marriage is a union of not-related man and woman.

As for that Bible story about Lot: nowhere in the Bible it says that incest is normal (correct me if I'm wrong), and keep in mind that it's from the Old Testament, parts of which aren't historical and probably never happened.