Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Homosexuality isn't biological. First of all, there's no inheritance pattern, either of being dominant, recessive, or sex-linked. Also, even if it was, it would naturally extinguish itself, since homosexuality is -- and this is an uncomfortable truth -- an evolutionary dead end. Homosexuals "in the wild" can't procreate. So anyone who claims homosexuality is genetic also has to acknowledge that nature abhors it as much as it does the proverbial vacuum.
People are born with the inability to procreate fairly often. This would seem to be a dead end also but yet its not because it doesn't work the way you think it does.
People are born with the inability to procreate fairly often. This would seem to be a dead end also but yet its not because it doesn't work the way you think it does.
You're actually wrong. People aren't born with the inability to procreate "fairly often" and when they are their genes end there. But thanks for the input.
I will take conservatives seriously on this issue when you goes start talking about the groups that boycott pro gay marriage businesses.
Sure, except liberals don't actually boycott businesses like conservatives do. The way conservatives boycott businesses is that they stop shopping at the business. The way liberals do it is they run around to bakeries and then the government says "I'll take it from here" and they put the bakery out of business. That's not a boycott, but liberals pretend it is. And that's because liberalism is a lie.
Sure, except liberals don't actually boycott businesses like conservatives do. The way conservatives boycott businesses is that they stop shopping at the business. The way liberals do it is they run around to bakeries and then the government says "I'll take it from here" and they put the bakery out of business. That's not a boycott, but liberals pretend it is. And that's because liberalism is a lie.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 25 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,568 posts, read 16,552,753 times
Reputation: 6043
Quote:
Originally Posted by njquestions
Sure, except liberals don't actually boycott businesses like conservatives do. The way conservatives boycott businesses is that they stop shopping at the business. The way liberals do it is they run around to bakeries and then the government says "I'll take it from here" and they put the bakery out of business. That's not a boycott, but liberals pretend it is. And that's because liberalism is a lie.
You have a fundamental misunderstand of the law.
discrimination is illegal in most states against LGBT people, so yes, you are breaking the law when you will not serve someone because of their sexual orientation.
As for the boycott itself, it is the exact same thing. The article lays it out as an attack on the values of the individual, regardless of what form it takes.
So if you agree with the article, you are a hypocrite if you have ever supported a boycott of a liberal establishment on the grounds of their belief system
A part of me is wondering how many of the posters in this thread (and by extension, on this board) fit the "repressed single teenage male" demo.
The other part of me is wondering if they realize that they are being told to react a certain way to imaginary news. Do they know they are being used for the purposes of another?
Someone who really believes that gay people are "bullying Christians", a phrase so abstract that it specifies neither time nor place, really fits in well with the conservative mindset. Reality, facts, observation, and evidence have no place with them.
Finally, to "whiff" on something is to catch a scent. Did the OP mean "waffle"? Liberal gays-- as opposed to conservative gays?-- are failing to bullying Christians?
I know that the large portion of people here live in some small town in the middle of nowhere. Do yourselves a favor, get to civilization and talk to people. Experience first hand life and reality outside of the Fox News bubble.
Or, you know... Is there something else you'd like to tell us? Something we probably already know, but would make you feel so much better if you were to be true to yourself?
discrimination is illegal in most states against LGBT people, so yes, you are breaking the law when you will not serve someone because of their sexual orientation.
As for the boycott itself, it is the exact same thing. The article lays it out as an attack on the values of the individual, regardless of what form it takes.
So if you agree with the article, you are a hypocrite if you have ever supported a boycott of a liberal establishment on the grounds of their belief system
Looks like your liberal shield against logic and reality is at full strength.
A part of me is wondering how many of the posters in this thread (and by extension, on this board) fit the "repressed single teenage male" demo.
The other part of me is wondering if they realize that they are being told to react a certain way to imaginary news. Do they know they are being used for the purposes of another?
Someone who really believes that gay people are "bullying Christians", a phrase so abstract that it specifies neither time nor place, really fits in well with the conservative mindset. Reality, facts, observation, and evidence have no place with them.
Finally, to "whiff" on something is to catch a scent. Did the OP mean "waffle"? Liberal gays-- as opposed to conservative gays?-- are failing to bullying Christians?
I know that the large portion of people here live in some small town in the middle of nowhere. Do yourselves a favor, get to civilization and talk to people. Experience first hand life and reality outside of the Fox News bubble.
Or, you know... Is there something else you'd like to tell us? Something we probably already know, but would make you feel so much better if you were to be true to yourself?
I always find it amusing how many liberals argue by calling people homosexuals, which is what this guy did for 6 paragraphs.
I find it hard to believe that the author of the article is gay as she claims to be. She writes like Pat Robertson. For one thing, she speaks of gay people and Christians as if they are mutually exclusive. People can be both. And what is this nonsense about the people who disapproved of this conservative Christian couple's views being "fascists?" People who throw around political terms like "fascist" and "communist" should at least know their correct meaning, especially when they are journalists.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
