View Poll Results: Who will still be standing

Voters
95. You may not vote on this poll
  • Roman Catholic Church

    15 15.79%
  • Southern Baptist Convention

    13 13.68%
  • United Methodist Church

    1 1.05%
  • Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

    8 8.42%
  • None will be standing

    24 25.26%
  • One or more will still be standing

    7 7.37%
  • All four will be standing

    8 8.42%
  • The dust will never settle

    19 20.00%
Page 163 of 206 FirstFirst ... 63113153161162163164165173 ... LastLast
Results 1,621 to 1,630 of 2060

Thread: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743:1845; 2006]

  1. #1621
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,558
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    I understand that YOU put homosexual behavior in the same playing field as skin color and gender. You don't get to do that.

    THIS normal (traditional marriage) happens to be right, so it needs to stay intact.

    Wrong. It's the non franchised mimicking the franchised, and complaining to the SC that they've been disenfranchised. My God how you love deceit. When-o-when will you people stop lying to the American people?

    Can I help it if what you post is largely ignorable?
    Amazing! You really cannot see how your justifications are exactly the kinds used by proponents of human slavery, women's innate subordinate role to men, genocide, and all the other horrors perpetuated by people of your mindset in the past.

    And you still haven't supported your original position regarding how you differentiate same-sex marriage as a demand for "special rights." Heterosexuals have a right to marry each other. Homosexuals want the right to marry each other. Denying them that right is clearly stating that heterosexuals have a special right homosexuals do not deserve to have. PERIOD!
    If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.

  2. #1622
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Amazing! You really cannot see how your justifications are exactly the kinds used by proponents of human slavery, women's innate subordinate role to men, genocide, and all the other horrors perpetuated by people of your mindset in the past.
    Behavior is not part of the equation. Now, if ALL homosexuals were born gay, then you might have a point. But since ALL homosexuals are not born gay, then you have no choice but to accept that it's a behavior issue, not genetics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    And you still haven't supported your original position regarding how you differentiate same-sex marriage as a demand for "special rights." Heterosexuals have a right to marry each other. Homosexuals want the right to marry each other. Denying them that right is clearly stating that heterosexuals have a special right homosexuals do not deserve to have. PERIOD!
    Marriage is between one man and one woman. That's the franchise. That's the way it was at the first marriage of time, and that's the way it was at the first marriage of this country. I want homosexuals to enjoy that same rights I have: to marry someone of the same sex.

  3. #1623
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Marriage is between one man and one woman. That's the franchise. That's the way it was at the first marriage of time, and that's the way it was at the first marriage of this country. I want homosexuals to enjoy that same rights I have: to marry someone of the same sex.
    SERIOUSLY you married some one of the same sex!

  4. #1624
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,558
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Behavior is not part of the equation. Now, if ALL homosexuals were born gay, then you might have a point. But since ALL homosexuals are not born gay, then you have no choice but to accept that it's a behavior issue.....
    Aside from the fact that is merely your opinion, which flies in the face of ALL evidence, it still has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue. (BTW, we don't know it is not genetics, or if it is hormonal changes in the womb, but science seems to indicate people ARE born gay).

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Marriage is between one man and one woman. That's the franchise. That's the way it was at the first marriage of time, and that's the way it was at the first marriage of this country.
    Again, that is a matter of personal faith, not necessarily a FACT. It is merely a justification for creating and maintaining a "special right" for the heterosexual members of our society.

    Furthermore, the "franchise" for men was the exclusive right to vote pre-19th Amendment. The right to freedom and all citizenship rights was the exclusive "franchise" of non-blacks pre-civil war. Both of these were also justified as "God-given" and "normal" social conditions. So, back to your original statement:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    I want homosexuals (and bisexuals for that matter) to have the same rights I have. Now they're getting more. Where's the justice in that?
    And my continued response:

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    If you want "homosexuals to have the same rights as you" then recognize there are no such things as "special rights;" and that everything you can do they should be allowed to do without objections.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 08-05-13 at 11:45 PM.
    If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.

  5. #1625
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    SERIOUSLY you married some one of the same sex!
    Typo, and you know it. Thanks Winston, for bringing this to high school locker room levels.

  6. #1626
    double secret probation AngryOldGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phx,Az
    Last Seen
    03-31-14 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,917

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    I found it mildly amusing

  7. #1627
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Aside from the fact that is merely your opinion,
    The only person here with an opinion, CA, is you. I've spoken with gays who once ran straight. This is no big mystery, and you're a complete liar if you think otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Again, that is a matter of personal faith, not necessarily a FACT.
    Once again, you have no idea what you're talking about. Chew on this tasty morsel below:

    Timeline of same-sex marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Furthermore, the "franchise" for men was the exclusive right to vote pre-19th Amendment. The right to freedom and all citizenship rights was the exclusive "franchise" of non-blacks pre-civil war. Both of these were also justified as "God-given" and "normal" social conditions.
    Once again, behavior does not get the same consideration as skin tone. Blacks + marriage = Good. Homosexuals + marriage = Bad. One man, one woman, one marriage. THAT is the franchise.

  8. #1628
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,558
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    The only person here with an opinion, CA, is you. I've spoken with gays who once ran straight. This is no big mystery, and you're a complete liar if you think otherwise.
    There is no such thing as a "gay who ran straight." If a person is now gay but claims he used to be "straight," then in fact he was a closet case afraid to act on his orientation until he was old enough to accept and deal with it. Who knows, maybe because they know of your aversion for gay people they say this to try to stay friends with you for some unknown reason. Straight men might experiment, but they do not turn gay. Period!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Once again, you have no idea what you're talking about. Chew on this tasty morsel below: Timeline of same-sex marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Once again, behavior does not get the same consideration as skin tone. Blacks + marriage = Good. Homosexuals + marriage = Bad. One man, one woman, one marriage. THAT is the franchise.
    Once again, your faux anecdotal evidence is B/S and proves nothing except you have no leg to stand on in your claim Homosexuality is merely a chosen "behavior." BTW, a franchise as you use the term is a license, making it a privilege when in fact it is a right. Are you trying to say you have no right to marry a person of the opposite sex? That this is a privilege that can be taken away from all heterosexuals somehow? In any case, however you label it, if you can do it and they cannot, you are granting yourself a special right to something.

    WTF does that timeline have to do with the price of rice in China? Meaning why do you think it means anything at all? Need I put up a timeline on Abolition, or a timeline on Women's Suffrage?

    All civil rights efforts start somewhere, usually once someone suffering the denial of rights gets up the courage to participate in the effort to gain recognition of them.

    In any case, you are still demanding a "special right" for heterosexuals when you refuse to allow homosexuals the same right. This runs contrary to your quoted statement supporting their access to ANY right you had. Yet you cling to your denial of this right to homosexuals while claiming it only exists for heterosexuals.

    Probably because you can't recognize prejudice and hypocracy.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 08-08-13 at 01:57 AM.
    If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.

  9. #1629
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    There is no such thing as a "gay who ran straight."
    How can you possibly know this, and not be all knowing? Are you, also, omniscient?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Once again, your faux anecdotal ....
    blah, blah, blah. "Faux". A favorite attack word among rabid liberals. That's my cue to shut this part of your blather, right down.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    WTF does that timeline have to do with the price of rice in China?
    Nothing. That's why I have to shut this part of your nonsense down, too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    All civil rights efforts start somewhere, usually once someone suffering the denial of rights gets up the courage to participate in the effort to gain recognition of them.
    Homosexuality is not skin tone. Homosexuality is not gender, therefore, homosexuals do not get the same consideration in this case. How many times must I drill that into your liberal skull?

  10. #1630
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,558
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which religion will stand its ground against the gay agenda? [W:743]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    How can you possibly know this, and not be all knowing? Are you, also, omniscient?
    I know this because there is no evidence (aside from anecdotal types like your "I know a couple of guys") which demonstrates any inherently straight male or female has ever "gone gay" by choice. How exactly does that work BTW? Two str8 guys are walking down the street and one says to the other: "Hey, I've suddenly developed a desire to give a guy oral sex, wanna go for it? and the other says "Wonderful idea, I never thought of that! Lets do and try anal too!" Then they both swear off women forever thanks to this "life-changing discovery?"

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    blah, blah, blah. "Faux". A favorite attack word among rabid liberals. That's my cue to shut this part of your blather, right down. Nothing. That's why I have to shut this part of your nonsense down, too.
    Actually I was trying to be polite instead of simply calling "B/S." Of course you react from weakness with a refusal to respond. You really have no argument except personal faith and prejudice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Homosexuality is not skin tone. Homosexuality is not gender, therefore, homosexuals do not get the same consideration in this case. How many times must I drill that into your liberal skull?
    And again with the refusal to see similarity in a civil rights issue. Stop harping on the "skin tone" thing as if that's your winning argument. You keep ignoring that white women were denied the right to vote simply because they were women and men didn't think politics was any of their business. You also ignore past treatment of religious minorities. Then of course, every cultural and ethnic minority like the Irish, Italians, Chinese, Vietnamese, etc. have gone through a period of social abuses and attempts to deny them rights until they fully integrated within society. There are dozens and dozens of similar historical civil rights issues all of which you'll try to claim are "not behaviors" which thereby allows you to justify retaining a special right you would deny homosexual couples.

    Labeling me a "liberal" ( I am not, nor am I a conservative; I have different views that run the range from one extreme to the other as well as moderate ones) in order to try to dismiss my viewpoint doesn't win you any points.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Wrong. It's normal thinking. It's how normal people think. It's how people who understand their biological functions, think. It's how people who aren't perverts, think. You get to marry the person you love and are attracted to because you are normal, in that respect.

    I want homosexuals (and bisexuals for that matter) to have the same rights I have. Now they're getting more. Where's the justice in that?
    Despite the fact the term "Normal" was shown to be relative using prior historical examples you persist in ignoring this seemingly out of pure spite. Worse, your argument for retaining a "special right" for heterosexuals is based on nothing more than personal prejudice. This demand to retain a special right for heterosexuals which you deny homosexuals simply proves from your own words you are a hypocrite.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 08-08-13 at 01:35 PM.
    If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •