Once again we get the bigot word. Now just which group is attacking a person for voicing their opinion. If I recall the definition of bigot says some thing about not being tolerant of other opinions. From the insults from the homosexuals or the defenders of the perversion of homosexuality I would say this group fits the definition of bigots.jallman said:bigot or defender of the social disgrace of bigotry?
Unlike your inability to disprove my facts.shuamort said:There's a jump in logic there.
The only time heterosexuals refer to this is when they are talking about the perversion of homosexuality.shuamort said:Or why do straight people not call themselves heterosexuals.
Well this does not really hide what James is does it. If there is no shame in being homosexuals Why the need for the word gay? Just adds more evidence that homosexuality is a perversion because of the need to hide behind a name.shuamort said:Why do people named James go by "Jim"?
The only argument I have used is facts.shuamort said:Why do people named James go by "Jim"? Why is there more than one word for the same thing? If this is what you're using to buttress your argument is lexicon and vernacular, well, your argument is even sadder than I thought.
I would say that Army-of-God is sick by endorsing the assassination of abortion doctores. I am a far cry from Army-of-God because I stick to the legislative possess, instead of suicide bombing...oops, I mien, sniping those who I disagree with.
As for "my" ballot initiatives, Californians have been able to keep gay 'marriage off the books, so far, with ballot initiatives....and I don't live in California.
Once again we get the bigot word. Now just which group is attacking a person for voicing their opinion. If I recall the definition of bigot says some thing about not being tolerant of other opinions. From the insults from the homosexuals or the defenders of the perversion of homosexuality I would say this group fits the definition of bigots.
Originally Posted by shuamort
There's a jump in logic there.
Unlike your inability to disprove my facts.
The only time heterosexuals refer to this is when they are talking about the perversion of homosexuality.
Well this does not really hide what James is does it. If there is no shame in being homosexuals Why the need for the word gay? Just adds more evidence that homosexuality is a perversion because of the need to hide behind a name.
The only argument I have used is facts.
Fact, it is impossible for homosexuals to reproduce. This alone makes homosexuality a perversion of the laws of nature.
Fact, the one thing that does not happen in nature is homosexual reproduction.
Fact: Is it possible for homosexuals to reproduce? Yes. Artificial insemination. Sterile Females also can't have children. Using your retarded perversion of logic, this means they are immoral.
Fact: Is homosexuality a perversion of nature? Nope. Your argument is false on two accounts.
Fact, the one thing that does not happen in nature is homosexual reproduction.
"You force your religious nonsense on others without moral justification. Religions have no business in the affairs of anyone outside of that religion or beyond voluntary submission."
Opposing gay 'marriage is no more a forcing of religion then advancing gay 'marriage is. The ballot only records a "Yes" or "No". The ballot does not record religion, nor does it record a "why".
Ya, the day will come. My "fiction" spells that out as well.
As for the Term-Eliminator, I told you, I-do-not-live-in-California. Only Citizens of California can vote for the California Governor. I could not have voted for him if I wanted to. Oh, and my "party" is Independent, not Republican.
Besides, he will sign gay 'marriage into law once he is re-elected....just be patient (unless, of-coarse Demolition Man was more accurate then we thought and he Amends the Constitution, then runs for President).
DHard3006 said:Once again we get the bigot word. Now just which group is attacking a person for voicing their opinion. If I recall the definition of bigot says some thing about not being tolerant of other opinions. From the insults from the homosexuals or the defenders of the perversion of homosexuality I would say this group fits the definition of bigots.
Unlike your inability to disprove my facts.
The only time heterosexuals refer to this is when they are talking about the perversion of homosexuality.
Well this does not really hide what James is does it. If there is no shame in being homosexuals Why the need for the word gay? Just adds more evidence that homosexuality is a perversion because of the need to hide behind a name.
The only argument I have used is facts.
Fact, it is impossible for homosexuals to reproduce. This alone makes homosexuality a perversion of the laws of nature.
Fact, the one thing that does not happen in nature is homosexual reproduction.
jallman said:Facts? Facts? FACTS? The only fact where you are concerned is this...you have no place in this debate. Busta...uses facts. Mort...uses facts. Kelzie...she is the fact goddess. You are nothing more than a slimy repetition of the same hate rhetoric that causes these debates to spin out of control. And yes, you are a bigot in every sense of the word. You have no basis for your argument, no capability to argue your baseless argument, and are really, just a shadow of an intellect copying your posts from some tract literature handed out by a bigot group.
We all know homosexual sex does not lead to reproduction...we all get that. We all get that you think homosexuality is a perversion. But when your thoughts become a defense for bigotry, I am sure we will all let you in on the development. In the meantime, get a new comment to parrot or STFU, bigot.
Kelzie said:Hello? What? Did I hear my name? And in connection with the word goddess nonetheless. I appreciate honesty in a man.
Yeah. And what he said.
Busta said:He said: "Kelzie...she is the fact goddess."
And that's a fact.
Kelzie said:Aww...you too? :lol:
I like this game. We can keep on playing allll night. Or at least for another 5 minutes cause I'm going to bed.
Since I have not made a false analogy, I have not shown ignorance.
It's not *my* ballot, It's the county's ballot (or the state's, depending on what is being voted on).
As I said, it only records "Yes" or "No". Nothing ells.
Our Founding Fathers got their concepts of such rights as "..life, liberty, or property..." from their faith. Just as they did not spell out their faith when they enumerated their personal beliefs in the Constitution, neither do I enumerate my personal beliefs when I vote.
My personal faith/religious beliefs become vallid when I vote on them.
There is nothing wrong with voting one's conscience.
"...nor are you allowed to legislate religious morality.
I can when I vote.
Ya, you did: "I guses that's what you get for hiring an actor Republitard as your governor..."; he could only be *my* Governor if I lived in California.
The Term-Eliminator is a Kennedy Democrat in Republican clothing. He Vetoed that last gay 'marriage law because he needs to keep up the gig and keep his job. Just be patient....
Your hate clouds your mind, go have a cookie....that always works for me.
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:False. The majority of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were plagarized by Thomas Jefferson and Madison. The true sources of the Declaration of Independence were the French Philosophes of the Enlightenment as well as the various French enlightend philosophers just as Voltair, Rousseau, and Montesqu. The primary theme of the French and American Enlightenments was rational secularaism and Deism. The Founding Fathers were largely Athiests and Deists, and the Deist moral code was not Christian, but Humanistic. Morality was derrived From Man's reason, not his emotions or his faith. Some people, however, were known as "Enlightened Chritians" who amalgamated Enlightenment secular philosphy with mainstream Christianity. Primarily, the Declaration's statements about "life, liberty, and happiness" did not come from faith at all, rather Appeal to Reason. In fact, the entire concept pursuit of happiness was a latter addition by Thomas Jeffersion due to the political pressures put on him by congress. The original word he used was "Property," not happines. Propety was the central tenet of Enlightenment ideology--secular ideology. Success came via the Virtue of Selfishness.
Busta said:You don't mind if I worship you, do you? Just a little bit....Jesus will understand, er, I mien, forgive me.
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:Note* Jefferson's Declaration that all men are created equal. This is an Enlightenment concept derrived from Deism and Secular Humanism. During the Enlightenment, philosophers believed that man's reason was a unifying trait, and via this trait, all men were morally equal. Their "creator" gave them this "reason" by which they could live their own, independent lives from him.
Creator is used instead of God because they were not Christians, nor did they believe in any active God. Creator = Nature. Deists believed in a God of Nature. They were not Theists. In fact, myriad Founding Fathers decried organized religion, especially Christianity--these are including, but not limited to:
1. Thomas Jefferson
2. James Madison
3. Thomas Paine
4. Ben Franklin
5. John Adams
Further, regardless of what the Delcaration of Independence said, the DoI is not the Constitution. The Federal COnstitution is a strictly Secular Document based off of the "wall of separation" which is a term coined and intended to exist by Thomas Jefferson himself, so don't tell me it doesn't exist. It is also widely known through Jefferson's Writings that he did not gain his morality from his faith. If you read his personal letters, he states just the opposite. Furthermore, quotes from John Adams thoroughly show that the Founding Fathers had no intention of creation the United States on christian grounds.
Adams Quote: ohn Adams (the second President of the United States)
Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli (June 7, 1797). Article 11 states:
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
From a letter to Charles Cushing (October 19, 1756):
“Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, ‘this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.’”
From a letter to Thomas Jefferson:
“I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved — the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!”
“...[the] Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”
Thomas Jefferson quotes:
[Befferson’s interpretation of the first amendment in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association (January 1, 1802):
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.” [/B]
Jefferson’s “The Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom”:
“Our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, more than on our opinions in physics and geometry....The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
So don't bullshit me with your "Fathers got their ideas from their faith" rhetoric. I have delt with it before.
And that's where we close 'em due to server issues. If someone wants to re-open another thread (*ahem* trainwreck *ahem*) feel free to go ahead and I'll place a link at the end of this one.Busta said:Holey crap...1,015 posts!
Biggest thread I've ever seen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?