Gay marrage was never intended in the bible , Also for those who don't believe in the bible gay marrage also was forbidden in the U.S.A along time ago so shove it to those who say free country , We are talking about important things like The economy not your fucking fag ass life.
@BillyGoat67890 Try facts: Lakota chief Crazy Horse had one or two male spouse(s) and many other Native American nations also had what we now call same-sex marriages. Ethnographers have documented these and more. Examples: Omahas, Zapotecs, Mohaves, Crow, Ojibwas, Winnebagos, Yumas and Timucuas. Other cultures too. In 17th century Fukian Province China, same-sex marriages between gay men seem to have been common. And in West Africa, "woman marriage[s]" --practiced by many nations in the past.
@BillyGoat67890 a long time ago. Not anymore. And, guess what? People work on saturdays, eat shrimp and pork, wear clothes with two or more fabrics, people wearing glasses get married, and people who cheat are not lapidated anymore. All of those are condemned in the Bible, too. If you follow the Bible so closely, why don't you complain about all those other things, too?
Wow, i just read alot of these comments on here...people have so much hate in their life that they feel the need to inflict it in their views when being defensive... how the hell are 2 gay people getting married affecting your life?? SERIOUSLY?? Is it really going to stop u from doing what you're going to do on a day-to-day basis?? People are idiots!
It's not about whether or not you "approve" of or "disapprove" of homosexuality. The issue here is government and morality sure as hell was never meant to have ANY weight in the decision.
no homosexual has ever compared homosexuality to bestiality and have definitely NEVER justified bestiality in any argument. ridiculous false accusation.
@FinalJusticeMovement are *you* serious? I've heard the "animal argument" by anti-gay people comparing being gay to bestiality, no gay man has ever had a reason to even talk about bestiality as that is something not even comparable to being gay. It's only straight people who have ever compared that to being gay. ridicuous
--"Yes a "fag" USED to be considered a "cigarette". But we don't live back in the 1700's anymore, do we?"--
No, it didn't USED to mean that. It's still used today. Any Englishmen would tell you that and correct your lousy American English. and you NEVER said 1900s, that's a LIE.
@FinalJusticeMovement that's not true.. Brits use the word "fag" very freely without any hesitation as to what they are talking about, as that is an American phenomenon. And since "hate speech" tends to be accepted as part of freedom of speech, then it's perfectally fine with me if someone is punished for hate speech against any group of people. The "homosexualist agenda" of mine is brushing teeth, waking up, going to work, etc. the only homosexualist agenda is an equal rights agenda.
@FinalJusticeMovement no one preaches hate against straights. You are trying to make straight people the victim, when its the total opposite of reality. No one preaches hate against people who follow a "spiritual path" unless that person is enforcing their own spiritualities on others. never even heard of a feminist or "homosexualist" preach hate against men, unless it was a feminist that simply said they dislike BEING with men.. Destroying the concept of equality is the opposite of gay rights.
On the contrary, actually they don't preach hate against straights or heterosexuality whatsoever. There is no "gay agenda", only an equal rights agenda. Preaching against OTHER people's BIGOTRY of homosexuals does not equate to "preaching hate on straights". There is no reason to "normalize" it, it's already normal and has always been obvious to society.
@FinalJusticeMovement homosexuality isn't a deviant behavior, so yes it would be bigotry. No one said you HAVE to be gay(in fact, you cant force yourself to be gay, unless you're pretending to be gay). terrible analogy. Being gay is just a state of existence. Being an alcoholic is purely an addiction caused by your choice to drink alcohol. No one "does something" in order to be gay, there is no choice, there is no "practice". I can say the same about blacks. NO ONE is OBLIGATED to accept blacks!
@FinalJusticeMovement I never admitted to "hate speech". I said preaching against OTHER PEOPLE'S discrimination does not equate hate speech on the gay person's part. That's like saying if someone's religion is against black people, if a black person preaches against it, he is "spouting hate speech against that religion". There is no "Agenda" this has nothing to do with an "agenda". And no, they are not satanist. Now you're obviously off your rocker. Stop pretending straights are the victim.
And before you speak MORE ignorance... the "1700's" comment was PURELY an example. Clearly a more precise time would be the early to mid 1900's so please don't go trying to post another stupid statement about nonsense. Use some common sense and you might actually learn something.
@FinalOffering Talk about "Stupid statement about nonsense" you seem to be the one making them! English still say fag as "ciggerette" dumbass! How can you not know that? omg talk to any English person wow you ignorant bigot
@FinalOffering lol. No, I won. You thought people only said fag back in the 1700s. You fail. Everyone knows fag still mean cigarette in England(people who made the language) and even Australia. You were CAUGHT being ignorant and stupid while CALLING other people ignorant and stupid. you couldn't prove your point, I did. I won.
in fact even though I'm not gay, the real true meaning of "fag" is a cigarette (The English made English, not Americans who bastardized the language) so you still wouldn't have used it correctly, creeper! LOL
@DaFawky Oh you're gay. You just haven't admitted it to yourself yet. You fail with your point here as well. Yes a "fag" USED to be considered a "cigarette". But we don't live back in the 1700's anymore, do we? Words can change meaning and substance through time...if they didn't, how would we EVER grow/evolve? You want to stay a Neanderthal for the rest of your pathetic life, thats cool. But don't try to press your ignorant and boxed in thoughts on people that are furthering their knowledge.
@FinalOffering No, actually I'm not. No, you failure, it didn't USED to mean "cigarette". It is still used today by the English, the ones who MADE the language. They say it all the time, dumbass.
The only ignorant and boxed thoughts are YOURS. You judge relationships that have nothing to do with YOU anyway. Even if you "disapproved" of their gayness they would still be gay whether you like it or not.
@DaFawky Really? and your source or your information is....? You fail. I said the early to mid 1900's for the fag meaning cigarette. might I add periodically you fail to spell the word cigarette as well....fail. Actually the word fag originates back in the 1300's in England. Although speculation has it, it came from the French. Original meaning bundle of sticks. So your theory on where the word originates...fail. Your life, fail.
@FinalOffering LOL No you didn't. You clearly said 1700s, NOT 1900s. I see it right there on the comment! Fail troll.
My theory doesn't fail I know it also means bundle of sticks but in England where they made the language they call it cigarette. They do it TODAY. That's why I sent the video of "How to Roll A Fag" in that message cuz you were being such a stupid typical American. I don't need a source, just ask any British guy and he'll tell you it's used as cigarette just like in that video.
@FinalOffering its not always involved in homosexual relationships either. the point is both many straight and gay couples DO do that. yes ur a major creeper thinking what others do in bed when it doesnt involve u
They love each other. Theyre gay, no shit!*SHOCK!*
It dont matter if it was a guy holding another guy or girl holding a girl or girl. and if its so nasty to you then stop describing it in detail cuz u seem to really enjoy talking about it! & no u didnt use fag correctly, im not gay.
@DaFawky You "REALLY REALLY" don't have an argument and you "REALLY REALLY" are no match for my wit. Your points are that of a childs. Point blank, clearly homosexuality is NOT anatomically correct. Nor are the relationships healthy. At least what I've witnessed thus far. How often do you see homosexual relationships lasting 5, 10+ years? Hardly ever. Because homosexuality is a sickness and/or a misfire in the brain...something that can't truly ever be stable or sustained. Queer.
@FinalOffering actually I REALLY REALLY am match. Only your points are that of a child's.
They don't have to be anatomically correct, it's none of your business.
The relationships are perfectly healthy, no one is harmed in a consensual relationship.
I've actually seen MANY relationships of gays who have been together for 40+ years. Homosexuality isn't a sickness at all. Actually the American Psychological Association and American Psychiatric association confirmed this.
@DaFawky Oh I agree...just had a enlightening moment when I pictured a guy taking it up his ass then sucking the same dick that he just got penetrated with....afterwards holding the burly mans chest that did it. Just saying...NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT... <.<
@FinalOffering normally in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, you suck the cock, and THEN you put it in the ass. both straight and gay couples do that.
If the guy wanted to hold his burly man's chest, that's totally fine. AND? Does it effect you in any way, besides thinking of what they do in bed, which is kinda creepy?
Yes, there is NOTHING wrong with that. You are correct!
@DaFawky ... If you're going to argue fag- (probably one of the few times I've actually used that word in the correct context) Please have a meaningful argument. In both heterosexual AND homosexual relations, YES dick sucking is involved...(actually NOT always...) but where the problem lies is wth THE MAN SUCKING THE DICK! You're into suckin men off and you have the audacity to even imply im in any way shape or form "creepy"? You're fuckin confused.
@FinalOffering Well if yur going to argue creepo, you do the same. I actually have a meaningful argument, yur just arguing based on it being "nasty", which is immature& retarded. Theres nothing wrong with a guy doing it. There is no difference in the way the dick is sucked.
Yes, you really are creepy! Youre thinking of what two loving people do in bed which REALLY REALLY has nothing to do with you in any shape or form. That's creepy! Two consenting people having sex isn't! u seem real confused!
@PsychoGirlHere because then next it will be what if a person wants to marry and have sex with a dog what's to say it isn't that person's right and the dog is consenting then what's wrong with that. besides they need to be punished for giving the world aids by screwing a monkey.
@ColoradoRanger Because a dog can't actually consent because the dog can't even speak. Come on! I though that one was obvious! And how do you know that's how it happened?
@WTF1920 Hang in there. Remember that as recently as 1973, the Aborigine of Australia [the local darker-skinned people living there before the white man showed up] were legally classified as « plants/animals » !! It *will* get better, I promise!
California should be ashamed for voting yes on prop 8... America is not the most developed country in the world... u guys r still a bunch of ignorants
I live in Italy. Surely not the most developed country in the world, but Italians don't ever assume to be the greatest and most open-minded people of the world at least and this kind of thinking brings to changes and development... that's what lacks to America
The ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has its basis in biology, not bigotry," As many courts have recognized, the primary societal good advanced by this ancient institution is responsible procreation.
It takes a man and a woman to create children and thus create a family,
xdeep0...well isn't that nice of you to allow people their civil unions. Would you allow them to sit at the front of the bus or do you say they have to sit at the back? Just wondering what other rights you are going to allow.
xdeep0 are you mentally challenged? How does two legally consenting adults entering a marriage lead to that other stuff. You have a very warped mind. I feel sorry for you.
All the rights? Do you know how many contracts/legal fees are involved? Not to mention a Lawyer. And fuck society, they can all suck my dick, not tell me what to do.
Hey xdeep0 - you may not be aware of this, but the rest of us don't have to follow the antiquated rules of your Bronze Age religion. You go ahead and live by them if you want to, but leave the rest of the world alone, m'kay?
I don't know why I bother because I usually just click on the thumbs down to people like you. Obviously they can't have children, but it sure looks like their are millions of kids that need adopting from straight people.
first off the amazon has plenty of fucking children considering it's initial population there is a massive poverty issue in the amazon as well so they would all starve i just read a whole damn book about it secondly can you not see the thousands of kids who live in orphanages and have no place to go. there is an over-population problem in this world, otherwise people in China would be allowed more than one child. I guess that makes you the idiot.
not every married heterosexual couple wants babies! We have too many orphaned babies as it is! We can't even feed the ones we have on the planet this very second! Oh my god youre a moron! WE DONT NEED ANYMORE BABIES! WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THE NEEDY ONES (WHO HAVE NOTHING) WE ALREADY HAVE!
Sad thing is, you couldn't even comprehend what disgusting is. If you think that two men kissing is disgusting then you're just awfully insipid with no values whatsoever. And if you think it shouldn't be a parents responsibility to educate their children, obviously you lack an ability to decide what is right and what is wrong.
Dude who has a dick in the blender fetish, you're a sick motherfucker. I'd feel better being related to two dicked bearded bitch than trash like you. I have this odd belief in selective population control. I would like to begin the list with you, and any other useless trash with no redeeming value.
I think that we should outlaw divorces, then all the self-righteous idiots arguing the sanctity of marriage can never escape it. Defend the sanctity of marriage? What a joke!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
you no wat the hell is wrong with gay marriage ? A : you get a dick in your ass
B: People look down on you along with family
C: Takes away any pride of having a dick
if your fuckin gay you desever to have you dick chopped in a blender eat it shit it out eat the shit an trow it up and jizz on it ( o w8 you cant ) huh stick it up your new whole that you made by chopping off dick then die in a turbin
I am not gunna change who i am for some low life who hates gays! Love Is Love, and if you support love of any kind then you should be able to understand why two guys or gurls could be attracted to eachother. its not about their body, or what they have, its about love... why do straight people love eachother... its about the person... love! dont hate...
I am not gunna change who i am for some low life who hates gays! Love Is Love, and if you support love of any kind then you should be able to understand why two guys or gurls could be attracted to eachother. its not about their body, or what they have, its about love... why do straight people love eachother... its about the person... love! dont hate...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
whats wrong with gay marriage?
A: its taking away the freedom of religion to people who believe that homosexuality is wrong, more stds(i know, its not just gays, however they are one of the leading spreaders of stds), andits telling our children that its not morally corrupt to sleep with someone of the same sex which would soon lead into that its ok to sleep with your relative which would lead into bestiality etc.
There is no scientific evidence to support your claims that homosexuality leads to incest or beastiality.
I have a friend who was molested and raped repeatedly by her father, her 2 brothers, and 2 of her cousins, all of whom were and still are heterosexuals, including my friend.
Bestiality is a chosen sexual perversion. Most organisms attempt to breed only in their own population. Any deviance is due to defect or to choice.
Homosexuality doesn't lead down a "slippery slope."
We'll be celebrating 20 years together this summer and we can state from experience that our issues at home are precisely the same as the heterosexual relationships of our eight siblings.
I don't know if you're married, or not, but if you are, this milestone does more for the sanctity of marriage than most idiots who think they have to get married. Like the ones who get hitched in Vegas (while they're drunk) and divorced two years later in Reno, when the honeymoon's over. I just am amazed how many so called moral Christians continue to caste judgment on others. What's sad, they'll end up the parent of a gay child who lives a life in pure hell, or commits suicide.
Being gay can be either a choice of by being born gay. NAMBLA is a group of sick twisted pervs who through mental defect want to have young boys because they can not sustain a relationship with a woman OR a man. The desire comes not from homosexuality but from need to control or dominate someone weaker than they are. They would not succeed in this through an adult relationship, so the try through an adolecent one.
Homosexuals (like me) just want a healthy relationship with someone they love.
The notion of a black marrying a white used to be repulsive to you guys too. In the 60s you got interracial marriage banned in 17 states because of 'biblical principles'. Then the Supreme Court stepped in and reminded everyone this is a free country and nullified the bans. Many of the people who worked to get those bans in place, including Jerry Falwell, are dead. Bigots are a dying race.
Anyway, Does it say anywhere in the bible people of opposite color shouldnt get married?
The 60's.. I wasn't living yet, and I think most of those states you are talkin about were controled by those bigots the KKK and they are dead a long time ago.
Exactly. Just as you'll be dead one day too and the world will be a better place for it.
The bible has plenty of verses that they used. It condones slavery and beating slaves. The Tower of Babel describes how God separated the races. Moses was afraid to consummate his marriage to his black wife because he feared God's wrath.
The Bible does not specifically forbid many things that are sin. For example, the Roman Empire was an evil empire. It abused the people it conquered and yet God never called for its destruction or that of any other "evil government." God gives us spiritual principles to govern a believer's response to life's circumstances.
Yeah, maybe that's why God left out child molestation, probably the worst sin a person could commit - yet it wasn't mentioned. Yet it was mentioned that you can beat your slave so severely that he can't get up for two days and hey, that's okay because he's your property, lol. Great book for morals. Geez.
The Bible nowhere speaks specifically of child molestation. Instead both the Law of Moses and the New Testament deal with sexuality in broader terms. The law of the Jews condemns various incestuous relationships, which would include child molestation by a parent. (Leviticus 18) It also deals with rape (Deuteronomy 22), homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22), adultery (Leviticus 18:20), and sexual relations outside marriage (Deuteronomy 22).
All those topics could include improper sexual relations with a child or adult.
In the New Testament we find similar passages. Romans 1 talks against sexual sin 'against nature'. He also talks about adultery, and an implied condemnation of other sins including child molestation. The writer of Hebrews says the marriage bed should be undefiled (Hebrews 13:4), which would include this as well as adultery and fornication.
If it wasn't for your 'guideline for living in general' slavery would have been abolished sooner, women would have voted and had a say in who they married much sooner. The book stifles progress and freedom.
Exodus 21:20 "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property. - you can have your God that said stuff like this but I sure won't use his 'guideline for living in general'.
Yeah, but you could marry someone that hadn't even entered puberty yet and have sex with them - it was a common practice and it was child molestation which isn't addressed in the bible. Good Christian lawmakers had the age of consent set at 10 in many US states in 1900. This is why - an ancient desert tribes bad information.
But you don't think people should be gay evidently. Hopefully you'll marry a gay man who believes that too. Then you can come back and tell us how that went.
But why, when you live your "lifestyle" out in the open? That's not equal in any sense. If you can be open about your sexuality, so should anyone else be open about theirs. So your "keep it behind closed doors" argument fails as well.
Neither does a man and man or a woman and a woman destroy the moral fabric of society. Homosexuality does not lead to more crime, or rape, or murder, or theft, or tax evasion, or any other evil you can name, so how can it be so profoundly damaging to the moral fabric of society?
your religious outlook cannot be enforced on others who don't share it. If you would like to live in a country where your religious views and morality can be enforced on others, you'll need to either a) move to another nation or b) rewrite the constitution and the bill of rights.
Evolution teaches the survival of the fittest. Since homosexuals cannot reproduce offspring, they cannot continue in the fight for survival, and thus are an inferior "species." I'm sure that no homosexual would like to think of himself/herself in this manner, but their own philosophies would lead them to that conclusion. There is no denying it that their lifestyle contradicts the natural order of things.
National Geographic piece on homosexuality in animals.
"Over 400 species, among every animal group and from all over the world are now known to engage in homosexuality"
Apparently Nature contradicts your view of "the natural order of things". I'd go so far as to say your view must be wrong, but that's kind of obvious at this point.
Well I'm gay and I have asthma and poor vision. If I was an animal in the wild I might not survive long enough to reproduce anyway - even if I wasn't gay. In case you haven't noticed we aren't exactly surviving according to natural selection these days.
So do you want me to fuck with evolution by reproducing when I probably shouldn't have survived long enough to reproduce or do you want me to fuck with evolution by not reproducing because I'm gay? It's obviously your call pjfrog, since you and others like you are in charge of our species destiny.
I love it. So simple, so efficient.
CMurray1124 4 months ago
@dzpirate, You dont have the right to tell anyone what they can or can't do. Last I checked, your name isn't God. So fuck off idiot
MissLexiStyles 5 months ago
Gay marrage was never intended in the bible , Also for those who don't believe in the bible gay marrage also was forbidden in the U.S.A along time ago so shove it to those who say free country , We are talking about important things like The economy not your fucking fag ass life.
BillyGoat67890 5 months ago
@BillyGoat67890 Try facts: Lakota chief Crazy Horse had one or two male spouse(s) and many other Native American nations also had what we now call same-sex marriages. Ethnographers have documented these and more. Examples: Omahas, Zapotecs, Mohaves, Crow, Ojibwas, Winnebagos, Yumas and Timucuas. Other cultures too. In 17th century Fukian Province China, same-sex marriages between gay men seem to have been common. And in West Africa, "woman marriage[s]" --practiced by many nations in the past.
seahorse05 4 months ago
@BillyGoat67890 a long time ago. Not anymore. And, guess what? People work on saturdays, eat shrimp and pork, wear clothes with two or more fabrics, people wearing glasses get married, and people who cheat are not lapidated anymore. All of those are condemned in the Bible, too. If you follow the Bible so closely, why don't you complain about all those other things, too?
arturo85 2 months ago
Wow, i just read alot of these comments on here...people have so much hate in their life that they feel the need to inflict it in their views when being defensive... how the hell are 2 gay people getting married affecting your life?? SERIOUSLY?? Is it really going to stop u from doing what you're going to do on a day-to-day basis?? People are idiots!
MissLexiStyles 7 months ago
@MissLexiStyles
No one is more idiot than you, that shitty hole is meant for toilet not for sex, so keep your comments for yourself
dzpirate 5 months ago
It's not about whether or not you "approve" of or "disapprove" of homosexuality. The issue here is government and morality sure as hell was never meant to have ANY weight in the decision.
VictoryAH1014 7 months ago
I say straights and gays should have a civil war.........
raxeon 9 months ago
and yes being gay is a right (whether you may like to admit it or not, that's a fact).
DaFawky 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
and yes being gay is a right, (whether you may like to admit it or not, that's a fact.)
DaFawky 9 months ago
Comment removed
DaFawky 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
and yes it is a right, whether you may like it or not.
DaFawky 9 months ago
no homosexual has ever compared homosexuality to bestiality and have definitely NEVER justified bestiality in any argument. ridiculous false accusation.
DaFawky 9 months ago
Are you SERIOUS, Fawky?
You mean you've NEVER HEARD the "animal argument" before?
--The Final Justice
FinalJusticeMovement 9 months ago
@FinalJusticeMovement are *you* serious? I've heard the "animal argument" by anti-gay people comparing being gay to bestiality, no gay man has ever had a reason to even talk about bestiality as that is something not even comparable to being gay. It's only straight people who have ever compared that to being gay. ridicuous
DaFawky 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Latino wives alone and try to chat her rockmycity.info
marieyanaperera 1 year ago
they stole the rainbow from children, and now they want to steal marriage from normal people and i do mean normal people.
ColoradoRanger 1 year ago
Once again, you failed. Get over it.
and i quote:
--"Yes a "fag" USED to be considered a "cigarette". But we don't live back in the 1700's anymore, do we?"--
No, it didn't USED to mean that. It's still used today. Any Englishmen would tell you that and correct your lousy American English. and you NEVER said 1900s, that's a LIE.
DaFawky 1 year ago
DA FAWKY:
"No, [the word :"fag"] didn't USED to mean [cigarette]. It's still used today.
Any Englishmen would tell you that and correct your lousy American English..."
>> Perhaps so, Fawky.
But taking into consideration the Draconian nature of the homosexualist agenda,
the only time anyone in England can ever USE the word "fag" without being
persecuted (or more importantly - PROSECUTED) is if they HAVE a cigarette
on hand when speaking.
--The Final Justice
FinalJusticeMovement 9 months ago
@FinalJusticeMovement that's not true.. Brits use the word "fag" very freely without any hesitation as to what they are talking about, as that is an American phenomenon. And since "hate speech" tends to be accepted as part of freedom of speech, then it's perfectally fine with me if someone is punished for hate speech against any group of people. The "homosexualist agenda" of mine is brushing teeth, waking up, going to work, etc. the only homosexualist agenda is an equal rights agenda.
DaFawky 9 months ago
So, what do you say to people (namely, homosexuals and homosexualists)
who preach hate against heterosexuals and people who follow a spiritual
path, or feminists and homosexualists (again) who preach hate against men?
How can you suggest that the homosexualist agenda is an equal rights agenda
when its purpose is to completely DESTROY the concept of equality?
How is GENDER SEPARATISM equivalent to equality
Get REAL, Fawky.
--The Final Justice
FinalJusticeMovement 9 months ago
@FinalJusticeMovement no one preaches hate against straights. You are trying to make straight people the victim, when its the total opposite of reality. No one preaches hate against people who follow a "spiritual path" unless that person is enforcing their own spiritualities on others. never even heard of a feminist or "homosexualist" preach hate against men, unless it was a feminist that simply said they dislike BEING with men.. Destroying the concept of equality is the opposite of gay rights.
DaFawky 9 months ago
Wow, Fawk... You are SERIOUSLY misinformed, aren't you?
FAWKY:
"no one preaches hate against straights."
>> On the contrary. Homosexualists preach hate against not only straights
(who don't abide by their agenda, that is), but particularly against
heterosexuality. Otherwise, why would there be such a push to normalize
such a behavior down to kindergarten level.
(to be continued)
--The Final Justice
FinalJusticeMovement 9 months ago
@FinalJusticeMovement No, you are misinformed.
On the contrary, actually they don't preach hate against straights or heterosexuality whatsoever. There is no "gay agenda", only an equal rights agenda. Preaching against OTHER people's BIGOTRY of homosexuals does not equate to "preaching hate on straights". There is no reason to "normalize" it, it's already normal and has always been obvious to society.
DaFawky 9 months ago
Disapproval of homosexuality and other sexually deviant behavior
IS NOT the same thing as bigotry. To suggest such a thing would
be just like saying that you HAVE to drink alcohol otherwise you're
bigoted against alcoholics. Drinking yourself to death is a civil liberty,
and as such, NO ONE is OBLIGATED to drink or to accept disruptive
behavior by drunkards. As such, since homosexuality is a civil
LIBERTY (not necessarily a right), NO ONE is OBLIGATED to
practice or accept homosexuality!
--FJ
FinalJusticeMovement 9 months ago
@FinalJusticeMovement homosexuality isn't a deviant behavior, so yes it would be bigotry. No one said you HAVE to be gay(in fact, you cant force yourself to be gay, unless you're pretending to be gay). terrible analogy. Being gay is just a state of existence. Being an alcoholic is purely an addiction caused by your choice to drink alcohol. No one "does something" in order to be gay, there is no choice, there is no "practice". I can say the same about blacks. NO ONE is OBLIGATED to accept blacks!
DaFawky 9 months ago
FAWKY:
"No one preaches hate against people who follow a "spiritual path"
unless that person is enforcing their own spiritualities on others."
>> Well, if you admit to spouting hate speech against people who
impose their spirituality on you, how can you complain when the
people you hate retaliate in kind? Besides, homosexualists (who,
in essence, are Satanist) attack SPIRITUALITY and the GENERAL
DISAPPROVAL of their agenda, not any so-called "imposition".
(to be continued)
-The Final Justice
FinalJusticeMovement 9 months ago
@FinalJusticeMovement I never admitted to "hate speech". I said preaching against OTHER PEOPLE'S discrimination does not equate hate speech on the gay person's part. That's like saying if someone's religion is against black people, if a black person preaches against it, he is "spouting hate speech against that religion". There is no "Agenda" this has nothing to do with an "agenda". And no, they are not satanist. Now you're obviously off your rocker. Stop pretending straights are the victim.
DaFawky 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Maybe I should have been more specific, Fawky,
so I'll reiterate my earlier point --
"...the only time anyone in England can ever USE the word "fag"
(IN THIS DAY AND TIME) without being persecuted (or more importantly -
PROSECUTED) is if they HAVE a cigarette on hand when speaking."
I hope that was a little more clear for you.
--The Final Justice
FinalJusticeMovement 9 months ago
and that question would be the sourse FOR your information is... my keyboard- FAIL. Along with the word word "Originally" fail.
FinalOffering 1 year ago
And before you speak MORE ignorance... the "1700's" comment was PURELY an example. Clearly a more precise time would be the early to mid 1900's so please don't go trying to post another stupid statement about nonsense. Use some common sense and you might actually learn something.
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering Talk about "Stupid statement about nonsense" you seem to be the one making them! English still say fag as "ciggerette" dumbass! How can you not know that? omg talk to any English person wow you ignorant bigot
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky That it? Lol, I win.
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering lol. No, I won. You thought people only said fag back in the 1700s. You fail. Everyone knows fag still mean cigarette in England(people who made the language) and even Australia. You were CAUGHT being ignorant and stupid while CALLING other people ignorant and stupid. you couldn't prove your point, I did. I won.
DaFawky 1 year ago
in fact even though I'm not gay, the real true meaning of "fag" is a cigarette (The English made English, not Americans who bastardized the language) so you still wouldn't have used it correctly, creeper! LOL
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky Oh you're gay. You just haven't admitted it to yourself yet. You fail with your point here as well. Yes a "fag" USED to be considered a "cigarette". But we don't live back in the 1700's anymore, do we? Words can change meaning and substance through time...if they didn't, how would we EVER grow/evolve? You want to stay a Neanderthal for the rest of your pathetic life, thats cool. But don't try to press your ignorant and boxed in thoughts on people that are furthering their knowledge.
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering No, actually I'm not. No, you failure, it didn't USED to mean "cigarette". It is still used today by the English, the ones who MADE the language. They say it all the time, dumbass.
The only ignorant and boxed thoughts are YOURS. You judge relationships that have nothing to do with YOU anyway. Even if you "disapproved" of their gayness they would still be gay whether you like it or not.
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky Really? and your source or your information is....? You fail. I said the early to mid 1900's for the fag meaning cigarette. might I add periodically you fail to spell the word cigarette as well....fail. Actually the word fag originates back in the 1300's in England. Although speculation has it, it came from the French. Original meaning bundle of sticks. So your theory on where the word originates...fail. Your life, fail.
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering LOL No you didn't. You clearly said 1700s, NOT 1900s. I see it right there on the comment! Fail troll.
My theory doesn't fail I know it also means bundle of sticks but in England where they made the language they call it cigarette. They do it TODAY. That's why I sent the video of "How to Roll A Fag" in that message cuz you were being such a stupid typical American. I don't need a source, just ask any British guy and he'll tell you it's used as cigarette just like in that video.
DaFawky 1 year ago
@FinalOffering its not always involved in homosexual relationships either. the point is both many straight and gay couples DO do that. yes ur a major creeper thinking what others do in bed when it doesnt involve u
They love each other. Theyre gay, no shit!*SHOCK!*
It dont matter if it was a guy holding another guy or girl holding a girl or girl. and if its so nasty to you then stop describing it in detail cuz u seem to really enjoy talking about it! & no u didnt use fag correctly, im not gay.
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky You "REALLY REALLY" don't have an argument and you "REALLY REALLY" are no match for my wit. Your points are that of a childs. Point blank, clearly homosexuality is NOT anatomically correct. Nor are the relationships healthy. At least what I've witnessed thus far. How often do you see homosexual relationships lasting 5, 10+ years? Hardly ever. Because homosexuality is a sickness and/or a misfire in the brain...something that can't truly ever be stable or sustained. Queer.
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering actually I REALLY REALLY am match. Only your points are that of a child's.
They don't have to be anatomically correct, it's none of your business.
The relationships are perfectly healthy, no one is harmed in a consensual relationship.
I've actually seen MANY relationships of gays who have been together for 40+ years. Homosexuality isn't a sickness at all. Actually the American Psychological Association and American Psychiatric association confirmed this.
DaFawky 1 year ago
America is supposed to be the most free and progressive country in the world yet we don't have gay rights? What's up with that?
charliewaffles725 1 year ago
EVERYTHING IS WRONG WITH YOU FAGS!
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering not really...
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky Yep- nothing wrong with a dude suckin a dick...thanks for making me realize that!
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering You are very welcome. I'm glad you realized that, you know, since it has nothing to do with your personal life and everything :)
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky Oh I agree...just had a enlightening moment when I pictured a guy taking it up his ass then sucking the same dick that he just got penetrated with....afterwards holding the burly mans chest that did it. Just saying...NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT... <.<
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering normally in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, you suck the cock, and THEN you put it in the ass. both straight and gay couples do that.
If the guy wanted to hold his burly man's chest, that's totally fine. AND? Does it effect you in any way, besides thinking of what they do in bed, which is kinda creepy?
Yes, there is NOTHING wrong with that. You are correct!
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky ... If you're going to argue fag- (probably one of the few times I've actually used that word in the correct context) Please have a meaningful argument. In both heterosexual AND homosexual relations, YES dick sucking is involved...(actually NOT always...) but where the problem lies is wth THE MAN SUCKING THE DICK! You're into suckin men off and you have the audacity to even imply im in any way shape or form "creepy"? You're fuckin confused.
FinalOffering 1 year ago
@FinalOffering Well if yur going to argue creepo, you do the same. I actually have a meaningful argument, yur just arguing based on it being "nasty", which is immature& retarded. Theres nothing wrong with a guy doing it. There is no difference in the way the dick is sucked.
Yes, you really are creepy! Youre thinking of what two loving people do in bed which REALLY REALLY has nothing to do with you in any shape or form. That's creepy! Two consenting people having sex isn't! u seem real confused!
DaFawky 1 year ago
bring the thumbs down on!!!!!!
fecalmadder 2 years ago
the gay and lesbian agenda is in full force. heaven help us.
fecalmadder 2 years ago
fecalmadder... can I get a copy of the agenda?
eddyzello 2 years ago
Awesome. I love it. :)
carlybea 2 years ago
Hehe, nice one. Love it.
<3
truthisagun 2 years ago
It's almost 2010 and we (the USA) are still denying people the right to marry. I just can't fucking believe it, it's ridiculous.
In a free country, people should be able to live their lives THEIR WAY!
I tell this same thing to the gun grabbers. Don't like my guns? DON'T BUY ONE! Don't like gay marriage? THEN DON'T DO IT!
Keep the laws out of peoples bedrooms...keep the laws out peoples gun cabinets...keep the laws off womans bodies. There, everyone wins.
WTF1920 2 years ago 28
@WTF1920 uh they can fuck in the bedroom all they want just don't take my religious term for marriage.
ColoradoRanger 1 year ago
@ColoradoRanger Getting married doesn't have to be at all religious. It just has benefits.
PsychoGirlHere 1 year ago
@ColoradoRanger Also why is it any of your business if they want to get married? In what way does it actually affect you?
PsychoGirlHere 1 year ago
@PsychoGirlHere because then next it will be what if a person wants to marry and have sex with a dog what's to say it isn't that person's right and the dog is consenting then what's wrong with that. besides they need to be punished for giving the world aids by screwing a monkey.
ColoradoRanger 1 year ago
@ColoradoRanger Because a dog can't actually consent because the dog can't even speak. Come on! I though that one was obvious! And how do you know that's how it happened?
PsychoGirlHere 1 year ago
@ColoradoRanger Lol You're a moron.
RaZorXwireXbabyX 1 year ago
@RaZorXwireXbabyX LOL I love how people compare homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia....I wish I was in Canada.
gaylolful 1 year ago
Lolful,
Homosexuals compare homosexuality to bestiality all the time!
They use it as a justification for BOTH acts.
Remember the "animal argument"?
--The Final Justice
FinalJusticeMovement 9 months ago
@WTF1920 Hang in there. Remember that as recently as 1973, the Aborigine of Australia [the local darker-skinned people living there before the white man showed up] were legally classified as « plants/animals » !! It *will* get better, I promise!
1104882221 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul on gay marriage (Dr. Paul says yes and even wins the Values Summit GOP Straw Poll!)
/watch?v=l1gzs27HswQ on gay marriage statement
/watch?v=ug1nZSI_fsA Values Straw Poll result conservation
Vote Ron Paul, President 2012! -- The anti-war candidate -- and champion of the Constitution!
vechorik 3 months ago
lol awsome job. I love it :-)
bobby472 2 years ago
I want to see one of these where they perform the Dutch oven?
keyboardplaya 2 years ago
this is why canada is ages ahead of the states!
anonymous6E6R6 2 years ago 10
Well, thanks for helping propagate the homophobic (and often racist, admittedly or not) = illiterate stereotype.
RoseEEOE 2 years ago
My and my ex from Dupont use to have arguments about that all the time the reality is that the bed was to small for bouth of us. but very nice ad.
panamanubian 2 years ago 2
What's The Meaning of The Video???? with the Gay Couple Sleeping together and Sharing Blanket???? PLEASE CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN TO ME ???
reddevilzz008 3 years ago
Straight couples do the same thing: hog the blanket.
vampirelady75 3 years ago 17
Well shoot... they just need a bigger blanket. That one clearly does not provide sufficient coverage.
Harpsiccord 3 years ago 3
aww that was so adorable, favorited it
destinyellaevans 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
gays have equal rights in California Family Code 297.5, yet they keep protesting for it?
gay marriage = sodomy = already legal.
sodomy = anal sex.
"Rimming", the practice of licking the anus. This frequently results in the ingestion of fecal matter, which leads
to intestinal diseases.
"Fisting", the act of shoving one's fist and arm up the anus of the sex partner.
accept this? teach this to kids? heck. no.
xdeep0 3 years ago
xdeep0.... who taught it to you? you seem to know alot about it. I guess practice has made you an expert.
eddyzello 3 years ago 6
you know what, do you teach kids about eating out
i dont think so
and you NEED to accept it, because its life,
and also, what do sex terms have to do with marriage,
your logic is ignorance , so shut up
icecold989 3 years ago
Straight couples do the same thing. You don't know enough to teach yourself to begin with.
Averalabyrinth 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this is the California Family Code. same rights. there is no reason to want the term "marriage". prop 8 has passed.
"297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights,
protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same
responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules,
government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources
of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses."
xdeep0 3 years ago
California should be ashamed for voting yes on prop 8... America is not the most developed country in the world... u guys r still a bunch of ignorants
Nakhel88 3 years ago 5
Which country do you live in because i wish to go to a place where people are more open minded.
Mjam7us 3 years ago
I live in Italy. Surely not the most developed country in the world, but Italians don't ever assume to be the greatest and most open-minded people of the world at least and this kind of thinking brings to changes and development... that's what lacks to America
Nakhel88 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has its basis in biology, not bigotry," As many courts have recognized, the primary societal good advanced by this ancient institution is responsible procreation.
It takes a man and a woman to create children and thus create a family,
Please Vote YES on prop 8.
toastershock 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
God says NO. get your civil unions but leave marriage alone.
Yes on 8. protect marriage.
xdeep0 3 years ago
xdeep0...well isn't that nice of you to allow people their civil unions. Would you allow them to sit at the front of the bus or do you say they have to sit at the back? Just wondering what other rights you are going to allow.
eddyzello 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
why do you want marriage when you have all the rights in a civil union by California Code 297.5?
other rights that should not be allowed by society:
the right to marry a 12 year old boy or girl.
the right to bestiality.
the right to incest.
however, these will gain ground when we legalize gay marriage.
xdeep0 3 years ago
xdeep0 are you mentally challenged? How does two legally consenting adults entering a marriage lead to that other stuff. You have a very warped mind. I feel sorry for you.
eddyzello 3 years ago 6
All the rights? Do you know how many contracts/legal fees are involved? Not to mention a Lawyer. And fuck society, they can all suck my dick, not tell me what to do.
KuroFox15 3 years ago 4
Hey xdeep0 - you may not be aware of this, but the rest of us don't have to follow the antiquated rules of your Bronze Age religion. You go ahead and live by them if you want to, but leave the rest of the world alone, m'kay?
jjk717 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
its wrong
mrmiller329 3 years ago
mrmiller... I know ... I mean they should be much more considerate of the blanket when you are sharing a bed.
chris9999942 3 years ago 10
This video is wonderful and I'm going to fav it.
razorslipped 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Can same sex marriage make babies?
GUALLACOL 3 years ago
I don't know why I bother because I usually just click on the thumbs down to people like you. Obviously they can't have children, but it sure looks like their are millions of kids that need adopting from straight people.
razorslipped 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
And I put two thumbs down to people like you because you are difying nature!!!
GUALLACOL 3 years ago
And you are denying love.
It's spelled defying.
razorslipped 3 years ago 5
Can ALL different sex marriages make babies?
osoascam 3 years ago 3
there is a slight over-population problem, why do they need to?
HIMDarling612 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
That is horse shit and you know it! There is plenty of room in this world. Check out the amazons you idiot!!
GUALLACOL 3 years ago
horse shit? really. are you stupid?
first off the amazon has plenty of fucking children considering it's initial population there is a massive poverty issue in the amazon as well so they would all starve i just read a whole damn book about it secondly can you not see the thousands of kids who live in orphanages and have no place to go. there is an over-population problem in this world, otherwise people in China would be allowed more than one child. I guess that makes you the idiot.
HIMDarling612 3 years ago 3
did you go to school?
just wondering....
cheerios8065 3 years ago
That is none of your fucking business, you sarcastic fuck!
GUALLACOL 3 years ago
Little defensive there. Did cheerios hit a nerve? XD
xseasonxchangex 3 years ago
Cheerios, should take a shower of milk.
GUALLACOL 3 years ago
aren't you clever.
cheerios8065 3 years ago
Keep making stupid remarks, cleverness is what you'll get!
GUALLACOL 3 years ago
Stop wondering, you retard!
GUALLACOL 3 years ago
not every married heterosexual couple wants babies! We have too many orphaned babies as it is! We can't even feed the ones we have on the planet this very second! Oh my god youre a moron! WE DONT NEED ANYMORE BABIES! WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THE NEEDY ONES (WHO HAVE NOTHING) WE ALREADY HAVE!
courtneypmbowie 3 years ago 5
Ok if you say so!! Go ahead and do it!!
GUALLACOL 3 years ago
So by your logic, heterosexuals who can't "make babies" due to medical reasons should not be allowed to get married either.
As for "against nature" - MANY species of animals display homosexual behavior, so it is completely natural.
But thanks for playing - here's the home version of our game.
jjk717 2 years ago
Sooooo... If animals kill and eat raw flesh, by your reasoning, gays can do it too, right???
GUALLACOL 2 years ago
And by your reasoning, only straight people can.
Logic fail.
jjk717 2 years ago
and by your stupid reasoning you are an IDIOT!!!!
GUALLACOL 2 years ago
@GUALLACOL why can't straights eat raw flesh? Why do I care what you do with your uncooked fish?
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky because straight people are not cannibals!
GUALLACOL 1 year ago
@GUALLACOL neither are gay people!
you didn't say cannibal, you said eating raw flesh, (fish, chicken, anything)
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky Its the same thing you idiot!
GUALLACOL 1 year ago
@GUALLACOL wow no it isn't you idiot. canibalism is eating your own species. fish and chicken isn't your own species...or is it? LOL
DaFawky 1 year ago
@DaFawky no shit! Really? WoW!!!
GUALLACOL 1 year ago
@GUALLACOL but you just said it was the same thing... it's not... why are you saying no shit?? you didn't know that... what an idiot,..
DaFawky 1 year ago
Does that rule out the fact that is a "contra-natura" behaviour?
zemmvr 2 years ago
@jjk717 many animals do kill and eat meat (uncooked), are you willing to do the same?
GUALLACOL 1 year ago
good videos,dude.5 stars
zygot27 3 years ago 3
Sad thing is, you couldn't even comprehend what disgusting is. If you think that two men kissing is disgusting then you're just awfully insipid with no values whatsoever. And if you think it shouldn't be a parents responsibility to educate their children, obviously you lack an ability to decide what is right and what is wrong.
takakupo 3 years ago 10
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ogod I hope America never turns out like this
Horus2299 3 years ago
That's cool =) Unfortunately there are no such kind of ads here in Germany -.-!
Karoely 3 years ago 4
Dude who has a dick in the blender fetish, you're a sick motherfucker. I'd feel better being related to two dicked bearded bitch than trash like you. I have this odd belief in selective population control. I would like to begin the list with you, and any other useless trash with no redeeming value.
I think that we should outlaw divorces, then all the self-righteous idiots arguing the sanctity of marriage can never escape it. Defend the sanctity of marriage? What a joke!
Calavan1969 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you no wat the hell is wrong with gay marriage ? A : you get a dick in your ass
B: People look down on you along with family
C: Takes away any pride of having a dick
if your fuckin gay you desever to have you dick chopped in a blender eat it shit it out eat the shit an trow it up and jizz on it ( o w8 you cant ) huh stick it up your new whole that you made by chopping off dick then die in a turbin
Kenny18short 3 years ago
I have nothing against gay marriage, it's about people!
How does religion explain animals being gay?
The work of Satan?
There is documented evidence of animals being Homosexual: just Google "gay animals".
poysm 3 years ago
Im gay! and i dont get why you hate,
I am not gunna change who i am for some low life who hates gays! Love Is Love, and if you support love of any kind then you should be able to understand why two guys or gurls could be attracted to eachother. its not about their body, or what they have, its about love... why do straight people love eachother... its about the person... love! dont hate...
braders101 3 years ago 5
Im gay! and i dont get why you hate,
I am not gunna change who i am for some low life who hates gays! Love Is Love, and if you support love of any kind then you should be able to understand why two guys or gurls could be attracted to eachother. its not about their body, or what they have, its about love... why do straight people love eachother... its about the person... love! dont hate...
braders101 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
whats wrong with gay marriage?
A: its taking away the freedom of religion to people who believe that homosexuality is wrong, more stds(i know, its not just gays, however they are one of the leading spreaders of stds), andits telling our children that its not morally corrupt to sleep with someone of the same sex which would soon lead into that its ok to sleep with your relative which would lead into bestiality etc.
equal marriage my fucking foot.
this is insane.
it needs to be illegal.
METALxAXE 3 years ago
There is no scientific evidence to support your claims that homosexuality leads to incest or beastiality.
I have a friend who was molested and raped repeatedly by her father, her 2 brothers, and 2 of her cousins, all of whom were and still are heterosexuals, including my friend.
Bestiality is a chosen sexual perversion. Most organisms attempt to breed only in their own population. Any deviance is due to defect or to choice.
Homosexuality doesn't lead down a "slippery slope."
musicalgeniusaxo 3 years ago 4
We'll be celebrating 20 years together this summer and we can state from experience that our issues at home are precisely the same as the heterosexual relationships of our eight siblings.
TwoTallGuys 3 years ago 9
Congratulations on the 20 years. That's a milestone these days. :)
7anya 3 years ago 4
I don't know if you're married, or not, but if you are, this milestone does more for the sanctity of marriage than most idiots who think they have to get married. Like the ones who get hitched in Vegas (while they're drunk) and divorced two years later in Reno, when the honeymoon's over. I just am amazed how many so called moral Christians continue to caste judgment on others. What's sad, they'll end up the parent of a gay child who lives a life in pure hell, or commits suicide.
Calavan1969 3 years ago 5
Being gay can be either a choice of by being born gay. NAMBLA is a group of sick twisted pervs who through mental defect want to have young boys because they can not sustain a relationship with a woman OR a man. The desire comes not from homosexuality but from need to control or dominate someone weaker than they are. They would not succeed in this through an adult relationship, so the try through an adolecent one.
Homosexuals (like me) just want a healthy relationship with someone they love.
lynnosburn 3 years ago 6
Ah man--I was waiting for the action to start!
elanzillotta 3 years ago
The very notion of two homosexuals getting married is repulsive and disgusting.
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
The notion of a black marrying a white used to be repulsive to you guys too. In the 60s you got interracial marriage banned in 17 states because of 'biblical principles'. Then the Supreme Court stepped in and reminded everyone this is a free country and nullified the bans. Many of the people who worked to get those bans in place, including Jerry Falwell, are dead. Bigots are a dying race.
guardian22222 4 years ago
Did I say I was a Bible thumper? NO!
Anyway, Does it say anywhere in the bible people of opposite color shouldnt get married?
The 60's.. I wasn't living yet, and I think most of those states you are talkin about were controled by those bigots the KKK and they are dead a long time ago.
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
Exactly. Just as you'll be dead one day too and the world will be a better place for it.
The bible has plenty of verses that they used. It condones slavery and beating slaves. The Tower of Babel describes how God separated the races. Moses was afraid to consummate his marriage to his black wife because he feared God's wrath.
guardian22222 4 years ago
The Bible does not specifically forbid many things that are sin. For example, the Roman Empire was an evil empire. It abused the people it conquered and yet God never called for its destruction or that of any other "evil government." God gives us spiritual principles to govern a believer's response to life's circumstances.
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
Yeah, maybe that's why God left out child molestation, probably the worst sin a person could commit - yet it wasn't mentioned. Yet it was mentioned that you can beat your slave so severely that he can't get up for two days and hey, that's okay because he's your property, lol. Great book for morals. Geez.
guardian22222 4 years ago
The Bible nowhere speaks specifically of child molestation. Instead both the Law of Moses and the New Testament deal with sexuality in broader terms. The law of the Jews condemns various incestuous relationships, which would include child molestation by a parent. (Leviticus 18) It also deals with rape (Deuteronomy 22), homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22), adultery (Leviticus 18:20), and sexual relations outside marriage (Deuteronomy 22).
below...
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
All those topics could include improper sexual relations with a child or adult.
In the New Testament we find similar passages. Romans 1 talks against sexual sin 'against nature'. He also talks about adultery, and an implied condemnation of other sins including child molestation. The writer of Hebrews says the marriage bed should be undefiled (Hebrews 13:4), which would include this as well as adultery and fornication.
below
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
In Ephesians (6:4) and Colossians (3:21) Paul addresses parent-child relationships, which would also rule out incest.
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
The Bible is not a book of rules for each possible situation, but is a guideline for living in general.
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
If it wasn't for your 'guideline for living in general' slavery would have been abolished sooner, women would have voted and had a say in who they married much sooner. The book stifles progress and freedom.
guardian22222 4 years ago
Exodus 21:20 "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property. - you can have your God that said stuff like this but I sure won't use his 'guideline for living in general'.
guardian22222 4 years ago
Yeah, but you could marry someone that hadn't even entered puberty yet and have sex with them - it was a common practice and it was child molestation which isn't addressed in the bible. Good Christian lawmakers had the age of consent set at 10 in many US states in 1900. This is why - an ancient desert tribes bad information.
guardian22222 4 years ago
In Genesis 19, rape and incest occur without any mention of it being wrong or even strange - so whatever.
guardian22222 4 years ago
But you don't think people should be gay evidently. Hopefully you'll marry a gay man who believes that too. Then you can come back and tell us how that went.
guardian22222 4 years ago
Gal. 7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.
pjfrog10 4 years ago
Arguments against: (all false)
a) "Natural Order"
b) "Tradition"
c) "Foundation of society"
d) "Religion"
a) see "homosexuality in animals"
b) Tradition: Prohibited interracial marriage, women were property, arranged marriage, and (long ago) polygamy. Traditions change
c) In Ancient Greece, love between men was considered more pure than love between a man and an "intellectually inferior" female. Buggering abounded.
d) Irrelevant if Freedom of Religion is upheld.
Any other arguments?
senselocke 4 years ago 2
But why, when you live your "lifestyle" out in the open? That's not equal in any sense. If you can be open about your sexuality, so should anyone else be open about theirs. So your "keep it behind closed doors" argument fails as well.
senselocke 4 years ago
Neither does a man and man or a woman and a woman destroy the moral fabric of society. Homosexuality does not lead to more crime, or rape, or murder, or theft, or tax evasion, or any other evil you can name, so how can it be so profoundly damaging to the moral fabric of society?
senselocke 4 years ago
your religious outlook cannot be enforced on others who don't share it. If you would like to live in a country where your religious views and morality can be enforced on others, you'll need to either a) move to another nation or b) rewrite the constitution and the bill of rights.
senselocke 4 years ago
In several countries around the world, where the age of consent is 13 or less the answer would be yes.
As to the argument itself, we are still talking about consenting adults, so it's invalid on that point as well.
senselocke 4 years ago
Evolution teaches the survival of the fittest. Since homosexuals cannot reproduce offspring, they cannot continue in the fight for survival, and thus are an inferior "species." I'm sure that no homosexual would like to think of himself/herself in this manner, but their own philosophies would lead them to that conclusion. There is no denying it that their lifestyle contradicts the natural order of things.
pjfrog10 4 years ago
watch?v=7RlTAyNI8WE
National Geographic piece on homosexuality in animals.
"Over 400 species, among every animal group and from all over the world are now known to engage in homosexuality"
Apparently Nature contradicts your view of "the natural order of things". I'd go so far as to say your view must be wrong, but that's kind of obvious at this point.
senselocke 4 years ago
look the gay smelly ole ape is tryin to talk logic...LOL!
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
Well I'm gay and I have asthma and poor vision. If I was an animal in the wild I might not survive long enough to reproduce anyway - even if I wasn't gay. In case you haven't noticed we aren't exactly surviving according to natural selection these days.
guardian22222 4 years ago
YEAH I wish gays would slowly die off..you know, become extinct.
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
Fortunately they're not dying off. Bigots are though.
guardian22222 4 years ago
Nah...we'll out survive the homos. LOL!!
sexyladybug19 4 years ago
So do you want me to fuck with evolution by reproducing when I probably shouldn't have survived long enough to reproduce or do you want me to fuck with evolution by not reproducing because I'm gay? It's obviously your call pjfrog, since you and others like you are in charge of our species destiny.
guardian22222 4 years ago
Keep sputtering and spitting angrily, Drake. Maybe you'll produce enough lubrication in order to slide out of that narrow mind of yours.
Harpsiccord 4 years ago
The fact that you need to pull that non-sequitor straight out of your bottom proves to me you have no argument. You lose at life.