RE: One thing I find encouraging on here!
August 20, 2014 at 4:29 pm
(This post was last modified: August 20, 2014 at 4:35 pm by Fidel_Castronaut.)
(August 20, 2014 at 4:22 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:(August 20, 2014 at 4:05 pm)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: Yet here you are. Funny how people don't consider it worth considering tend to be the most vocal opponents.
Did I start this thread? I was simply responding to the non-sequitur in the OP, “we do not talk about this much therefore Christians must now agree with us.”
Congrats.
(August 20, 2014 at 4:22 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:Quote: Also weird how you don't 'get' what homosexuality is.
Now you’re committing the fallacy of equivocation, I said I do not understand what “being gay” means, I understand what homosexuality is. The two are not the same though.
Ok.
(August 20, 2014 at 4:22 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:Quote: Are you ok? I get it and I'm not even gay.
Then what does it mean to “be gay”?
Why don't you ask a person who is gay? What does being straight mean?
(August 20, 2014 at 4:22 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:Quote: Nobody really cares what your moral objections to a cock in the arse are, stat.
They seem to care when I vote in accordance with those moral convictions.
Well more fool them then, I guess.
(August 20, 2014 at 4:22 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:Quote: Or indeed a fist in the pussy. Or indeed beyond that whatever people get up to in the privacy of their own consensual relationship.
Whoa whoa whoa! Why consensual? Why private? Who are you to morally judge public or non-consensual relationships?
Do you support pedophilia? Bestiality? Incest? Rape? As long as they are done in the privacy of a relationship right? If you have an issue with any of these things then I suggest you just “deal with it”. Your arguments sound kind of absurd when they are used back on you don’t they?
Why not consensual? Why not private?
I don't judge people on their private, consensual relationships, as I made clear.
Think you'll find the person that does, is you.
I'm not responding to your pathetic attempt at a false equivocation strawman fallacy. That's really too low, even for you. I mean, consensual rape? Do you come across that type of contradiction often?
But just remember; cock in the arse. If you don't like, don't try it. But please, do carry on spinning your wheels about how terrible it is that a man can put his hard, erect penis inside the anus of another man and find it pleasurable. All that juicy cum, dripping out inside of him. If it gets them off, then good for them. More power to them.