Author Topic: Heil Intolerance (Read 11766 times)

capt. apathy · « **Reply #135 on:** July 31, 2003, 09:10:09 PM »

there are other forms of love thatn physical. but if that where the only choice, then I would rather he have as little sin (or imorality) in his life as possable.

if a pedaphile is only atracted to small chilren should we let him go ahead so he can avoid a 'life without love'

Sabre · « **Reply #136 on:** July 31, 2003, 09:28:11 PM »

Dowding wrote:

Quote

How anyone can equate, say, sex with a preteen girl in some Bangkok hell-hole or sex with a chicken with consensual sex between two adult men or women is absolutely beyond my understanding.

I don't believe I said anything about Bangkok or the conditions. We were talking about consensual relationships and allowing marriage. Pedophilia does not presuppose lack of consent on the part of the minor. Assume the physical relationship is consensual. Now the chicken might object (though my example was a goat). However, what about if the animal doesn't appear to mind? But obviously you must consider beastiality immoral. Good, we're moving you in the right direciton. Now address the others. Answer the question, then tell me why any of your answers are other than "Yes, marriage is okay."

Raubvogel · « **Reply #137 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:07:13 PM »

I'm still looking for someone to answer the Sparta question. Were the Spartans all born gay, or did they choose to be gay? I find it hard to believe that someone is just predisposed to homosexuality through genetics. Guess scientists need to start searching for the gay gene.

Frogm4n · « **Reply #138 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:24:08 PM »

hey rude jesus taught tolerance. i guess you defy your god. ooogyboogybooby thats some bad juju to be speaking bad about the ole masta' .

I dont think they know why some people choose homosexuality raub. All i know is that for some of them it isnt something they choose outright. People dont go "hmmm im 16 years old how can i increase the amount of times i get beat the **** up at school?"

and i dont think the catholic church has any credibility when it comes to condeming gays. They wont even condem child molestation.

fd ski · « **Reply #139 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:24:30 PM »

sabre, minor by definition cannot give a consent.
Neither can chicken or goat.
Your comparison is way out there.

Stringer · « **Reply #140 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:33:29 PM »

So did SOB start this thread to proclaim he was gay and thereby come out of the closet?

If so, Dowding's post on April 1st had much more flair, and to be honest, was much more convincing.

j/king!...but not about SOB!

capt. apathy · « **Reply #141 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:40:39 PM »

Quote

hey rude jesus taught tolerance. i guess you defy your god. ooogyboogybooby thats some bad juju to be speaking bad about the ole masta' .

as stated before tolorance of poeple who engage of immoral activities, and endorsment, or aproval of the acts themselves are completely different issue.

I haven't read a single post where anybody says they hate gays, or believe these people should be singled out for special punishment or whatever.

we just don't believe the act is moral and should not be incouraged or aproved of.

Jesus, taught forgiveness, of others not an every thing goes do whatever makes you feel good society.

Frogm4n · « **Reply #142 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:47:23 PM »

the way i see it is that it dosnt hurt me. if two guys want to go out and get married. whatever, who cares. We dont need more laws on the books as it is. If your god thinks its so bad let it come down and say " hay guys whats going on on this planet, oh snap stop that."

next thing you know the religous right will be trying to ban porn again.
"from my cold dead hands!"

funkedup · « **Reply #143 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:50:46 PM »

Quote

If two guys want to go out and get married. whatever, who cares. We dont need more laws on the books as it is.

Good point Frog. The goverment should get their hands completely out of marriage. Married people should have the same exact rights and laws as unmarried people. Marriage is a religious concept and should be defined by individual beliefs, not silly rules enacted by elected idiots.

Frogm4n · « **Reply #144 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:53:20 PM »

damn right funked.

i may be crazy socialist when it comes to a couple issues, but for the most part im crazy libertarian.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #145 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:57:23 PM »

God supposedly destroyed Sodom and Gemorrah, whats stopping him from destroying gays and their marriages?

He is the almighty, right?
-SW

Frogm4n · « **Reply #146 on:** July 31, 2003, 11:02:14 PM »

i got dibs on Zeus in a fight. although Odin does have a good left hand.

Toad · « **Reply #147 on:** July 31, 2003, 11:27:39 PM »

I think some of you are confusing "tolerance" and "approval".

Seems to me most of this thread focuses on that aspect.

They aren't necessarily the same thing.

Many people "tolerate" things they personally don't "approve".

Question is, is it toleration that is sought or outright approval here?

Sabre · « **Reply #148 on:** July 31, 2003, 11:33:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by fd ski
sabre, minor by definition cannot give a consent.
Neither can chicken or goat.
Your comparison is way out there.

Your could make the case for the chicken (though again, my inference was about a goat...what's this facination with chickens, btw?), Fd-ski, but remember, we do alot of things to our pets without their consent, so even that leaves wiggle room. However, your logic is flawed regarding the minor. The entire definition of "minor" is set by governemt, and is therefore a moral judgement enforced by government, the exact thing thing the gay marriage proponents are railing against. In some countries, age of consent is 12 years old. In one of those countries, there is a move to get that lowered to 10 years old. By "definition" of law, it was illegal for those two men in Texas to have sex in that hotel room.

And another thing, we sometimes trie minors as adults, so long as psychological testing confirms they understand the consequences of their actions as an adult. So, let's say they do a psych eval and determine Junior or Sissy understands as an adult? All clear to marry gramps! So I ask again: is it wrong to have laws preventing the different catagories I mentioned to be acknowledged via marriage, or are they deviants? Address all of them, please. You and others keep ignoring the incest and adultery question.

Frogm4n · « **Reply #149 on:** July 31, 2003, 11:39:22 PM »

toad has a point.

i dont approve of organized religion but im not going to try and pass a law banning it.

I dont approve of gays but i tolerate them.