What are your attitudes about Homosexuals?

[JoeB131]

Oh really? So tell me...WHY a life should be snuffed out because the mother "doesn't" want it? Don't give me the "it's her bawdee" bullshit either.

Tell me why the baby should not be born because the mother doesn't want the baby?

]

Because it is her body.

And because the kind of government you would need to monitor women to make sure they aren't snuffing out their fetuses would be pretty fucking oppressive.

I mean, you guys are whining and bitching because they are making bakers bake cakes, but you think nothing at all of making a woman have a baby a rapist put into her body?

Seriously?

 

[LockeJaw]

There is no gay gene...there is nothing these enablers can do about that but waste more money to find one. And that's all good....except homosexuals who want out of the lifestyle will be treated unfairly even more than they are now as long as we let the bullshitters in the media make lies "mainstream".

There are homos who aren't "gay" about being homosexual...libtards dismiss them like they do not exist.

ok little boy... thanks for your expertise.

lol

Show me the image of The mapped out gay gene, little girl. Lol

^ Still waiting little girl lol

 

[JoeB131]

No, it is not an oxymoron, many scientists in this nation are Christians, Jews, and of other monotheistic beliefs; I know a few in the field of biology. None went to "Talking State U" either.

YOu can't believe in Science and Magic Sky Pixies. Sorry, you just can't.

No YOU Can't, because you are psychologically scarred and highly prejudicial against anything that OTHER PEOPLE consider holy. Those other people include some of the greatest minds Humanity has ever produced.

Einstein, unarguably, a renowned Genuis, was a devout agnostic ,who lost his faith early in childhood. As he matured he bacame a "pantheist", and a adherant of Spinozism.
]

I'm not sure how one could be a "devout agnostic". Agnostics by their own definition, aren't really sure.

And, yes, I have a real prejudice against people who worship bits of marble and wood and think they are holy.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Oh really? So tell me...WHY a life should be snuffed out because the mother "doesn't" want it? Don't give me the "it's her bawdee" bullshit either.

Tell me why the baby should not be born because the mother doesn't want the baby?

I would not support aborting babies because they are gay if a gene was found that predisposed them to being gay. At that point when they prove the gay gene exists, as I have said numerous times, I would admit I am wrong & change my opinion of the whole thing. You see, Im not a moron like you.

By the way, you libtards are the ones who support abortion because some children will "become abused & unloved monsters" if they are born...you place the clinics in black & Latino neighborhoods because you're racists and eugencists of the worst kind.

Somehow, I don't think you'd stop being a homophobic asshole if someone found a 'gay gene".

I support abortion rights because I know it's a practical impossibility to make a woman have a baby she doesn't want.

The onus is on you to demonstrate that you have the absolute right to impose your beliefs on others and force a woman to bear an unwanted fetus.

Your beliefs and rights do not extend over others because each individual is free to exercise their own rights as they see fit.

If YOU don't want an abortion then don't have one. But if someone else wants one that is their individual right to make that choice and the Constitution upholds that right.

So until you overturn the Constitution you don't have a say in what other people do with their rights and freedoms.

Capiche?

 

[GreenBean]

There is no gay gene...there is nothing these enablers can do about that but waste more money to find one. And that's all good....except homosexuals who want out of the lifestyle will be treated unfairly even more than they are now as long as we let the bullshitters in the media make lies "mainstream".

There are homos who aren't "gay" about being homosexual...libtards dismiss them like they do not exist.

Actually, the gays don't want to look for the Gay Gene that bad.

Probably because if we ever found it, you Christian Funditards would suddenly love abortion.

I would not support aborting babies because they are gay if a gene was found that predisposed them to being gay. At that point when they prove the gay gene exists, as I have said numerous times, I would admit I am wrong & change my opinion of the whole thing. You see, Im not a moron like you.

By the way, you libtards are the ones who support abortion because some children will "become abused & unloved monsters" if they are born...you place the clinics in black & Latino neighborhoods because you're racists and eugencists of the worst kind.

Snuffing out gay fetuses, if they were to ever discover that nonexistant "missing link" [the so called gay gene ]- would be similar to snuffing out fetuses that are discovered to have Down Syndrome. If homosexuality is a genetic trait, which is highly unlikely, it is also a highly undesirable one - nobody wants a freak of nature, a mongoloid child or a queer one.

 

[LockeJaw]

I already told your dumb ass the "it's her body" defense won't cut it. We arrest folks & institutionalize people for attempting to commit suicide...why should we do that if "it's my bawdee" is a legitimate reason to kill a baby but not yourself?

If you support killing yourself, I suggest you do it asap. You're too stupid to live.

Oh really? So tell me...WHY a life should be snuffed out because the mother "doesn't" want it? Don't give me the "it's her bawdee" bullshit either.

Tell me why the baby should not be born because the mother doesn't want the baby?

]

Because it is her body.

And because the kind of government you would need to monitor women to make sure they aren't snuffing out their fetuses would be pretty fucking oppressive.

I mean, you guys are whining and bitching because they are making bakers bake cakes, but you think nothing at all of making a woman have a baby a rapist put into her body?

Seriously?

 

[GreenBean]

YOu can't believe in Science and Magic Sky Pixies. Sorry, you just can't.

No YOU Can't, because you are psychologically scarred and highly prejudicial against anything that OTHER PEOPLE consider holy. Those other people include some of the greatest minds Humanity has ever produced.

Einstein, unarguably, a renowned Genuis, was a devout agnostic ,who lost his faith early in childhood. As he matured he bacame a "pantheist", and a adherant of Spinozism.
]

I'm not sure how one could be a "devout agnostic". Agnostics by their own definition, aren't really sure.

And, yes, I have a real prejudice against people who worship bits of marble and wood and think they are holy.

Exactly Joe - it's an oxymoron .

They are not sure - but can't prove either way, so instead of adopting an unproven and unprovable belief, they stick to the facts - maybe there is a God , but maybe the glass is half empty.

And, yes, I have a real prejudice against people who worship bits of marble and wood and think they are holy.

Not everybody has the power of logical deduction that you do, and not everybody has the impetus to use that power. The overwhelming majority of Modern Christians are harmless , moral people - at times somewhat annoying, but harmless . Just as the overwhelming majority of queers are harmless people - just trying to cope with their perversion andget on with their lives.

My argument is with the Queer upper echelon.
Just as , your argument is probably more with the religous upper echelon, wwho perpetuate myths.

 

[September]

Lockejaw is obsessed with homosexuality. He just can't stop talkin' about it

 

[Seawytch]

What is perverted is bigotry and hate.

And, unlike being gay, it's a learned trait.

 

[JoeB131]

I already told your dumb ass the "it's her body" defense won't cut it. We arrest folks & institutionalize people for attempting to commit suicide...why should we do that if "it's my bawdee" is a legitimate reason to kill a baby but not yourself?

If you support killing yourself, I suggest you do it asap. You're too stupid to live.

]

Here's the problem with that argument.

We only have about 40,000 suicides a year.

So limiting them is containable.

We have a million abortions a year. Not containable in the least.

And while a suicidal person will probably get over what's bugging him in a couple days, a pregnant lady who doesn't want that baby won't.

Here's the thing. Banning abortion doesn't work. Doesn't work in the Philippines, where they have half a million abortions a year. Didn't work in Romania under the communists.

When your "victim" is the size of a kidney bean and can be flushed down a toilet, it's kind of hard to enforce the law.

 

[LockeJaw]

No it's not. Nice deflection though.

Oh really? So tell me...WHY a life should be snuffed out because the mother "doesn't" want it? Don't give me the "it's her bawdee" bullshit either.

Tell me why the baby should not be born because the mother doesn't want the baby?

Somehow, I don't think you'd stop being a homophobic asshole if someone found a 'gay gene".

I support abortion rights because I know it's a practical impossibility to make a woman have a baby she doesn't want.

The onus is on you to demonstrate that you have the absolute right to impose your beliefs on others and force a woman to bear an unwanted fetus.

Your beliefs and rights do not extend over others because each individual is free to exercise their own rights as they see fit.

If YOU don't want an abortion then don't have one. But if someone else wants one that is their individual right to make that choice and the Constitution upholds that right.

So until you overturn the Constitution you don't have a say in what other people do with their rights and freedoms.

Capiche?

 

[DriftingSand]

like most theocrats, you WANT to believe you know more about G-d's will. .

More likely you just don't want to hear what God's will is, pervert.

The Bible leaves no doubt what God thinks on the topic.

The BIble leaves no doubt what God thinks about eating Shellfish, but you guys aren't out there boycotting the Red Lobster.

Under the Old Covenant and in the Old Testament God commanded the Israelites (12 tribes of Israel) to abstain from shell fish and many other foods. Not so in the New Testament under the New Covenant.

Homosexuality, on the other hand, is condemned in both the Old and New Testaments. Will homosexuality send someone to hell? Not necessarily but all sinners are called to repent of their sins INCLUDING homosexuals. Rejection of Christ will earn you a free ticket to hell.

 

[Derideo_Te]

No it's not. Nice deflection though.

Oh really? So tell me...WHY a life should be snuffed out because the mother "doesn't" want it? Don't give me the "it's her bawdee" bullshit either.

Tell me why the baby should not be born because the mother doesn't want the baby?

The onus is on you to demonstrate that you have the absolute right to impose your beliefs on others and force a woman to bear an unwanted fetus.

Your beliefs and rights do not extend over others because each individual is free to exercise their own rights as they see fit.

If YOU don't want an abortion then don't have one. But if someone else wants one that is their individual right to make that choice and the Constitution upholds that right.

So until you overturn the Constitution you don't have a say in what other people do with their rights and freedoms.

Capiche?

Thank you for tacitly admitting that you cannot refute the Constitutional rights of others. Have a nice day.

 

[Derideo_Te]

More likely you just don't want to hear what God's will is, pervert.

The Bible leaves no doubt what God thinks on the topic.

The BIble leaves no doubt what God thinks about eating Shellfish, but you guys aren't out there boycotting the Red Lobster.

Under the Old Covenant and in the Old Testament God commanded the Israelites (12 tribes of Israel) to abstain from shell fish and many other foods. Not so in the New Testament under the New Covenant.

Homosexuality, on the other hand, is condemned in both the Old and New Testaments. Will homosexuality send someone to hell? Not necessarily but all sinners are called to repent of their sins INCLUDING homosexuals. Rejection of Christ will earn you a free ticket to hell.

Your religious beliefs are not a valid basis for denying your fellow gay Americans their Constitutional rights.

 

[DriftingSand]

Oh really? So tell me...WHY a life should be snuffed out because the mother "doesn't" want it? Don't give me the "it's her bawdee" bullshit either.

Tell me why the baby should not be born because the mother doesn't want the baby?

Somehow, I don't think you'd stop being a homophobic asshole if someone found a 'gay gene".

I support abortion rights because I know it's a practical impossibility to make a woman have a baby she doesn't want.

The onus is on you to demonstrate that you have the absolute right to impose your beliefs on others and force a woman to bear an unwanted fetus.

Your beliefs and rights do not extend over others because each individual is free to exercise their own rights as they see fit.

If YOU don't want an abortion then don't have one. But if someone else wants one that is their individual right to make that choice and the Constitution upholds that right.

So until you overturn the Constitution you don't have a say in what other people do with their rights and freedoms.

Capiche?

I believe in the rights of unborn women. I believe in the right of the fetus to "choose" life over death. But using your logic folks should be able to kill their "born" children if and when they become burdensome. Life is burdensome! That's a fact. When a woman spreads her legs in the heat of passion she agrees to the possible long term ramifications of her action. She acquiesced to the possibility of parenthood. It's at THAT point that she had the "right to choose." Don't want a baby? Close your legs.

 

[Seawytch]

Yes, a fun thing to throw out at bigots.

Is someone who goes against nature a naturephobe?

As gay people have existed in almost all known cultures, if not all, it is hardly "unnatural".

All would be correct. Even, like you said earlier, in countries that throw you in jail or kill you for being gay, gays still are born to straight parents every day. Gay is as "natural" or as "unnatural" as being red haired or left handed.

 

[Slyhunter]

Is someone who goes against nature a naturephobe?

As gay people have existed in almost all known cultures, if not all, it is hardly "unnatural".

All would be correct. Even, like you said earlier, in countries that throw you in jail or kill you for being gay, gays still are born to straight parents every day. Gay is as "natural" or as "unnatural" as being red haired or left handed.

all of which can someday be detected via DNA and then the parents can choose whether or not to abort the fetus. I bet they abort all the gay children.

 

[DriftingSand]

Is someone who goes against nature a naturephobe?

As gay people have existed in almost all known cultures, if not all, it is hardly "unnatural".

All would be correct. Even, like you said earlier, in countries that throw you in jail or kill you for being gay, gays still are born to straight parents every day. Gay is as "natural" or as "unnatural" as being red haired or left handed.

Had someone asked Jeffery Dahmer if he had a "choice" to have homosexual relations followed by murder he would likely say that "he didn't have a choice" and that "he was born with those tendencies." So was it okay for Jeffery Dahmer to do everything he believed he was "born to do" or should he have fought his "genetic tendency" to murder and struggled against it?

 

[Seawytch]

P.S. Oh and if the Lord's word was written by man, man could have written anything, but not just anything could have been written now, could it. The Lord's word says to replenish the Earth. Well if homosexuality was the Lord's true intention, why can't homosexual couples carry out such an order all on their own? Why are heterosexual couples the only kind of couples who can reproduce?

When MEN wrote the bible, there were not 7 billion people on the planet. There's been enough multiplying...

Gays are not sterile. We reproduce just fine. Are you aware that something like 15% of couples can't conceive naturally? Did god make them sterile like he made me gay? Why? Maybe god is intelligently designing after all.

 

[LockeJaw]

here is the problem with your argument. It's their body, who are you to say they should be stopped from killing themselves, it's their body.

What gives you the right to tell them what to do with their body just because "it's containable"?

I already told your dumb ass the "it's her body" defense won't cut it. We arrest folks & institutionalize people for attempting to commit suicide...why should we do that if "it's my bawdee" is a legitimate reason to kill a baby but not yourself?

If you support killing yourself, I suggest you do it asap. You're too stupid to live.

]

Here's the problem with that argument.

We only have about 40,000 suicides a year.

So limiting them is containable.

We have a million abortions a year. Not containable in the least.

And while a suicidal person will probably get over what's bugging him in a couple days, a pregnant lady who doesn't want that baby won't.

Here's the thing. Banning abortion doesn't work. Doesn't work in the Philippines, where they have half a million abortions a year. Didn't work in Romania under the communists.

When your "victim" is the size of a kidney bean and can be flushed down a toilet, it's kind of hard to enforce the law.