(October 16, 2013 at 12:01 am)Lion IRC Wrote:(October 15, 2013 at 10:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: You equate homosexuality with murder, rape, and paedophila...
No. Read carefully. I equated them with the human population on this planet continuing to grow apace.
It's your logical fallacy pal. Own it.
...homosexuality must not be bad or else the human race wouldnt be where we are now.
(October 15, 2013 at 10:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ...You understand that homosexuality isn't inherently harmful, correct?
No - I contest that claim. So do the stats about partner-on-partner violence, self harm, sexually transmitted disease...
(October 15, 2013 at 10:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: lol, that's EXACTLY the argument you made - the thread began with a definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and you immediately brought up procreation.
Go back and read my post. I said dont blame heterosexism on Christians. Blame Darwinian sexual selection.
(October 15, 2013 at 10:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: See, now THAT'S a strawman, since I never once suggested beastiality.
I think you need glasses. I did not accuse you. I asked you what you thought about pet brothels and animal consent.
Still waiting for your answer BTW.
*HINT* Look for the "?" at the end of the sentence.
(October 15, 2013 at 10:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ...Why do you lot always seem to resort to that - something to hide?Still waiting for your answer BTW.
*HINT* Look for the "?" at the end of the sentence.
(October 15, 2013 at 10:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: You're seriously equating helping hungry people with denying rights to gay people?
Make up your mind. You just got through telling me that what gay people do should be none of my business. Now you are asking me to consider the question. Do I ignore stuff that doesnt affect me or do I give it consideration and take a position?
That applies to every moral/ethical question - not JUST feeding the hungry or making changes to family law. Are you a humanist?
(October 15, 2013 at 10:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Yes, taxpayers should provide assistance to unmarried mums (those who need it, anyroad).You just argued that I should not stick my nose into stuff that doesnt affect me (SSM). Now you are saying I am a stake-holder in a womans pregnancy.hock:
Funny how all the things you name wrong about being gay coincide with being marginalized and discriminated against in society, and did you know that same arguments were used against the civil rights movement in the 60's?
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
