"Jesus would rather kill, not marry, gay people" - Franklin Graham

[Amarok]

First of all an adult is still their parents child (seeing how there is a designated age when kids become responsible adults), were clearly not talking about little kids.

Compared to the judo Christian god we would all be children 

Secondly, disobedience covers a broad range.

And none of that range equals exterminate a whole city because they allowed homosexuality .

---

First, I think that your substitution of “blacks” for sinners is nothing but  sophism. There is no reason for it  And it doesn’t make anything clearer.

Second, I don’t think that warning about the consequences of sin, or a judgement of sin that most Christians would use the word “promoting” I don’t think it’s anything to be happy about. I don’t think it’s appropiate anymore, than to say that you are promoting the actions of those in the account just before the destruction of the cities. I see atheists complain about God allowing evil, but then they also complain when he judges and removes it. They will complain no matter what, perhaps, because they think they should be God.

I don't see how your first point addresses the issue at all.  Don't like my substitution of words?  Fine. Graham still said the things that indicated God (and therefore Jesus) kills gay people as punishment.

Your second point makes no sense what so ever. Graham literally used the word "promote".  I didn't put it in there, he did. I said nothing about "most Christians", nor is this topic about that.  It is about what one particular Christian said and believes. Also, we don't complain about god allowing evil, we point out that it is a logical flaw in the claim of his supposed all goodness that means either he isn't all good, or he does not exist.

I notice that despite your wordy quibbling, you still support what he said, though.  You right here equate the evil referenced in the problem of evil (the murder of babies, wars, the deaths of innocents in natural disasters, suffering and illness of all sorts) to gayness. 

You are the perfect example of the loving Christian.  Well done.

There was  nothing wrong with your substantiate he just does not like the implications because they expose uncomfortable truths .And your right he did promote it as what else can one draw from the approval of annihilating a city that allowed  gays in it . And we can both point out the inconsistency and complain about gods apathy of evil were it counts . And your point is spot on he calls gayness evil what more does one need to say .