• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Indiana GOP passes law making it a crime for clergy to perform gay weddings

Papa bull said:
If there were bigots in a gay pride parade, they would be homosexuals, wouldn't they. Funny thing about homosexuals. They tell you they can't help it. They tell you it's this curse that they have no control over. That no one would choose to be gay. But talk about curing the condition of homosexuality and they want to scratch your eyes out. Now go figure, huh!?
Click to expand...
Nope. I've never heard a homosexual call their sexuality a curse. The curse is all the bigots trying to cure them of something that doesn't need curing. It would be like a psychotic movement trying to cure people of blue eyes. In that sense, people would not want to be born with blue eyes simply because they would not want to deal with the idiots trying to turn them brown. But that doesn't make blue eyes a curse.
 
windowdressing said:
who gives a #$%& what the Bible has to say about public policy ... practice your religion folks, but leave it out of the public arena and don't knock on my door telling me how much Jesus loves me ...
Click to expand...

Then I guess murder should be ok too then.... It's pretty explicit in the Bible about that, yet you don't seem to have a problem with that.
 
rocket88 said:
Indiana GOP passes law making it a crime for clergy to marry gays

Speaking of ****ting all over religious freedom ... I thought the GOP was all about that, guess not when it comes to gays.



Granted, not the most unbiased source in the world. However, don't you think that a religion should be free to perform a religious ceremony?
Click to expand...

well if this actually happened what a nonsensical paranoid waste of time, not to mention hugely hypocritical and unconstitutional if its a blanket ban.
 
Papa bull said:
If there were bigots in a gay pride parade, they would be homosexuals, wouldn't they. Funny thing about homosexuals. They tell you they can't help it. They tell you it's this curse that they have no control over. That no one would choose to be gay. But talk about curing the condition of homosexuality and they want to scratch your eyes out. Now go figure, huh!?
Click to expand...

So they have "Gay PRIDE" parades but they say it's a curse? I'd like to see your evidence for this. Homosexuality is an evolutionary benefit. Are you sure you aren't confusing your wishful thinking and the real world?
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Then I guess murder should be ok too then.... It's pretty explicit in the Bible about that, yet you don't seem to have a problem with that.
Click to expand...

What is your problem? Murder is a crime because the Bible says it is? Were it not for the Bible murder would not be a crime? Do you eat shrimp, how do you feel about putting adulterers to death?
 
windowdressing said:
What is your problem? Murder is a crime because the Bible says it is? Were it not for the Bible murder would not be a crime? Do you eat shrimp, how do you feel about putting adulterers to death?
Click to expand...

Well the first murder was with the first family, that God (of the Bible) actually created, and He made the rules about the murder, so yes.
 
Papa bull said:
Sounds pretty far fetched to me, too, and I don't even know you that well.
Click to expand...

Can you get them to stop? BTW, I just read your post on the gay pride parade, etc. ... What the hell is wrong with you, or are you just playing?
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Well the first murder was with the first family, that God (of the Bible) actually created, and He made the rules about the murder, so yes.
Click to expand...

David, even you have to wonder sometimes why people even try to engage you in an intelligent conversation ... What does the Bible say we should do with idiots?
 
davidtaylorjr said:
You actually brought up Leviticus, I just said the Bible calls homosexuality an abomination.
Click to expand...
And what passage calls it an abomination? Leviticus. Your dishonesty is unbelievable but at the same time expected.
 
windowdressing said:
Can you get them to stop? BTW, I just read your post on the gay pride parade, etc. ... What the hell is wrong with you, or are you just playing?
Click to expand...

If we're going to speculate on what Jesus would have done at a gay pride parade we can just say whatever we want. That's what happens anyway. ;)
 
Lakryte said:
Then I can use your argument and say "look to the new testament." Your hypocrisy still applies. :)
Click to expand...

Except it doesn't apply to the way you were trying to make it apply. Certain laws were fulfilled in the new testament, others were not.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Except it doesn't apply to the way you were trying to make it apply. Certain laws were fulfilled in the new testament, others were not.
Click to expand...
Your picking and choosing of those laws to suit your biased view is hypocrisy.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
So they have "Gay PRIDE" parades but they say it's a curse? I'd like to see your evidence for this. Homosexuality is an evolutionary benefit. Are you sure you aren't confusing your wishful thinking and the real world?
Click to expand...

The evolutionary benefit of homosexuals not passing on their genes to future generations, huh? I suppose if you want to go there, you can go there. But otherwise, there is no evolutionary befit. Someone should take you aside and tell you how evolution works.
 
Papa bull said:
If we're going to speculate on what Jesus would have done at a gay pride parade we can just say whatever we want. That's what happens anyway. ;)
Click to expand...

that's easy ... in catechism I was taught that he loved all of his children, so he would've been fine with his children and probably would've punished homophobes like you ... remember who wrote the Bible ... it was some guys claiming to know what God thought and otherwise expressing their views about things that reflected the norms of the time, not God ...
 
Papa bull said:
The evolutionary benefit of homosexuals not passing on their genes to future generations, huh? I suppose if you want to go there, you can go there. But otherwise, there is no evolutionary befit. Someone should take you aside and tell you how evolution works.
Click to expand...

maybe a creationist can take the poster aside for the lesson ...
 
Papa bull said:
The evolutionary benefit of homosexuals not passing on their genes to future generations, huh? I suppose if you want to go there, you can go there. But otherwise, there is no evolutionary befit. Someone should take you aside and tell you how evolution works.
Click to expand...
They wouldn't have to. Certain families would have a higher genetic likelihood of producing homosexual offspring. The argument is that families that produced such offspring were more likely to survive, because they would have more caretakers per child. Thus the child with the recessive homosexual trait would be more likely to survive and reproduce than the child without it.

Perhaps you should actually research genetics before pretending to know a thing or two about it. ;)
 
Papa bull said:
The evolutionary benefit of homosexuals not passing on their genes to future generations, huh? I suppose if you want to go there, you can go there. But otherwise, there is no evolutionary befit. Someone should take you aside and tell you how evolution works.
Click to expand...

Wow. Just wow. So you think homosexuals can't pass on their genes? Their sperm is just as viable as yours. Too, more males in the herd leads to more protection and more hunting / gathering.
 
Lakryte said:
They wouldn't have to. Certain families would have a higher genetic likelihood of producing homosexual offspring. The argument is that families that produced such offspring were more likely to survive, because they would have more caretakers per child. Thus the child with the recessive homosexual trait would be more likely to survive and reproduce than the child without it.

Perhaps you should actually research genetics before pretending to know a thing or two about it. ;)
Click to expand...

You probably believe that ****, don't you, LOL. I guess it would be what you want to believe, anyway.
 
Papa bull said:
You probably believe that ****, don't you, LOL. I guess it would be what you want to believe, anyway.
Click to expand...
Its just one of many theories, can't say I believe it fully or not. The point is you were wrong that homosexuals need to pass on their own genes in order for homosexuality to potentially be a benefit in the history of evolution. Sorry for humiliating you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom