Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-10-2013, 03:08 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:04 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 02:58 PM)nach_in Wrote:  does it matter? are you concocting some kind of ad hominem?

Ad hominem, like the one you leveled against me by claiming I was full of shit and couldn't realize there are people who are good and understanding?

Oh, that wasn't an ad hominem, that was a disrespectful way of saying you're so deluded you can't even begin to understand where you are wrong Smile

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like nach_in's post
18-10-2013, 03:15 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
What this thread now resembles to me:




[Image: 3d366d5c-72a0-4228-b835-f404c2970188_zps...1381867723]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cheapthrillseaker's post
18-10-2013, 03:18 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:02 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  You've got it backwards. There is currently encouragement from the church to oppose homosexuality, and punishment(threatened in the form of the afterlife) for those who DON'T oppose it. The debate is not whether a sexual preference should be considered 'the same.' The debate is whether the human fucking beings with a specific sexual preference should be treated like all other human beings.

This photographer opposed gay marriage and got sued. He was punished for his views.

http://[url=http://www.outsidethebeltway...y couples.[/url]

Now having been punished, he will conform, but deep down inside he will never accept homosexuality as being equivalent to heterosexuality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 03:23 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:18 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 03:02 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  You've got it backwards. There is currently encouragement from the church to oppose homosexuality, and punishment(threatened in the form of the afterlife) for those who DON'T oppose it. The debate is not whether a sexual preference should be considered 'the same.' The debate is whether the human fucking beings with a specific sexual preference should be treated like all other human beings.

This photographer opposed gay marriage and got sued. He was punished for his views.

http://[url=http://www.outsidethebeltway...y couples.[/url]

Now having been punished, he will conform, but deep down inside he will never accept homosexuality as being equivalent to heterosexuality.

so? there were many people in the world who died being wrong

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like nach_in's post
18-10-2013, 03:23 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:18 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Now having been punished, he will conform, but deep down inside he will never accept homosexuality as being equivalent to heterosexuality.

And that is as it should be. No one should control the thoughts of another. But society makes laws to try to govern peoples' *actions* so that everyone gets a reasonably fair deal.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 03:24 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:17 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 02:57 AM)Colourcraze Wrote:  Is there any specific reason as to why homosexuality is immoral other than "because the bible says so"? What harm does it do to society? Is it based in promiscuity/fornication? In which case, if homosexuals got married, and committed themselves to a monogomous relationship, is the marriage bed then undefiled? [/b]

That's for the Catholics and other Christians, Jews and Muslims to argue. Catholics have their natural law based argument, Jews would presumably say because Yahweh says so and Muslims would say because Allah says so. I don't know if there is a distinctly Protestant argument against homosexuality beyond an appeal to scripture (I haven't seen one).

Hopefully the Catholic guy with some expertise in Thomistic philosophy will return and provide the natual law argument.

My point is if you are are genuine about wanting a debate then stick to the fucking topic. The matter in question is "Is homosexuality immoral?" Not "Is the Catholic Church well-managed?", "Are there other more immoral matters the Catholic Church should be concerned about?", "Why are there so many pedophiles in the Catholic Church" etc. etc.

Is homosexuality immoral? Discuss like fucking intelligent adults and not like retards.

Chipster, you don't get to chose the topic to be debated. Read that again.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 03:26 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:08 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 03:06 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  If everyone on the planet suddenly became black, it wouldn't be catastrophic. If everyone on this planet suddenly became heterosexual, it wouldn't be catastrophic. However if everyone on the planet suddenly became homosexual, it would be catastrophic.

It is good for society if homosexuality isn't prevalent.

Totally disagree. Imagine if it happened over a few generations (to avoid the social disrupture of curent relationships.)

Third world poverty might be eradicated. There'd be no abortions, and no unwanted pregnancies.

People would still reproduce, but children, on average, would be more valued.

War would probably end.

The Vatican would collapse due to a lack of priests, and that could only be a good thing. Society doesn't need bullshit preached at it from the pulpit.

Generally speaking, I like gay people. They're usually polite and well behaved. They are often very creative, are more tolerant of others, and they look after their own health. I'm generalising, but I'd much rather live next door to a gay couple then strict Catholics. They're just much nicer people.

For society to continue to exist, people need to reproduce and do so at rate of about 2.1 children per couple. This is simple math and should not be in dispute. Given the choice, not even heterosexual couples reproduce at that rate(you can look at demographics of 1st world countries). Unfettered access to abortion and birth control are bigger threats to society then gay marriage.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 03:30 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:26 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 03:08 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Totally disagree. Imagine if it happened over a few generations (to avoid the social disrupture of curent relationships.)

Third world poverty might be eradicated. There'd be no abortions, and no unwanted pregnancies.

People would still reproduce, but children, on average, would be more valued.

War would probably end.

The Vatican would collapse due to a lack of priests, and that could only be a good thing. Society doesn't need bullshit preached at it from the pulpit.

Generally speaking, I like gay people. They're usually polite and well behaved. They are often very creative, are more tolerant of others, and they look after their own health. I'm generalising, but I'd much rather live next door to a gay couple then strict Catholics. They're just much nicer people.

For society to continue to exist, people need to reproduce and do so at rate of about 2.1 children per couple. This is simple math and should not be in dispute. Given the choice, not even heterosexual couples reproduce at that rate(you can look at demographics of 1st world countries). Unfettered access to abortion and birth control are bigger threats to society then gay marriage.

"threat", like killing all the ants in an anthill is a threat to the ant species

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 03:31 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:23 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 03:18 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Now having been punished, he will conform, but deep down inside he will never accept homosexuality as being equivalent to heterosexuality.

And that is as it should be. No one should control the thoughts of another. But society makes laws to try to govern peoples' *actions* so that everyone gets a reasonably fair deal.

The point is Guitar_nut's predicition:

Quote:My greatest joy is knowing that, in hindsight, future generations are going to take a massive poo all over the backwards thinking of the bigots, just they have for pretty much every group that chose to treat a segment of the population as "different."

You'd better buy an umbrella

Is probably going to be wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 03:34 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 03:18 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Now having been punished, he will conform, but deep down inside he will never accept homosexuality as being equivalent to heterosexuality.

Do you want to play this game? Would you like me to dig up some samples of homosexual persecution? Should we see who can make a bigger pile of injustices? My pile starts with the bible and goes all the way up to 2013. How about yours?

Better yet, let's measure the damage caused by this action.

1. A photographer is 'forced' to photograph a gay couple (for compensation, no less). He can no longer deny service to gay couples, although this is impossible to enforce as he can simply be 'not available' anytime he doesn't want to work a wedding. He does not have to like, or endorse, homosexuality. He simply cannot refuse them his service.

2. A man is told that, because of his sexual preference, he is sub-standard. He cannot marry. When his partner becomes ill, he cannot make medical decisions for him. When his partner dies, he cannot collect spousal benefits. When he dies, he is told he will go to hell. Large groups of his country's government are working to ensure he continues to be denied these rights, which infringe on nobody. The unhappily married couple down the street who cheat on each other, however, may enjoy all the privileges of their 'sacred' institution.

Your thinking is antique. It's outdated. The world is going to leave your mindset in the dust, and we will be the better for it.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like guitar_nut's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: