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.
I want to know what people thought of Jesus back then
majority if not everybody never heard of him
Quote:
I heard at the Creation Museum that he rode a brontosaurus onto the ark.
That thing must have been friggin huge!
besides attacking religious people and making yourself look foolish do you have a point?
Quote:
Also, too, I have no idea what you're on about.
If you say "people should have the right to have homosexual relations", I'm proving this statement o of yours wrong
Quote:
Originally Posted by Globe199
The world doesn't move backwards on human rights.
If the "world doesn't move backwards on human rights" and "not get punished for having homosexual relations is a human right".
than how come homosexuality was widely accepted in year 0 but not in 1900?
If the "world doesn't move backwards on human rights" and "not get punished for having homosexual relations is a human right".
than how come homosexuality was widely accepted in year 0 but not in 1900?
I have no idea what the views on homosexuality were in year 0 or 1900, and I deeply do not care.
If you can't see that the acceptance of gays is widening across the developed world, then this discussion is over. Hell, it's probably over anyway.
No, it's relevant. Your point is taken to mean that marriage equates with procreation. I'm telling you that it does not.
that's because you did not read the statement I was responding to
It was a response to the previous person who said
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
And yet, the same arguments advanced by social conservatives against interracial marriage are eerily similar to those arguments advanced today against same sex marriage.
now even if you have a problem with the argument I said, only a liar, or someone who failed kindergarten would ever say
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
And yet, the same arguments advanced by social conservatives against interracial marriage are eerily similar to those arguments advanced today against same sex marriage.
If you want to discus the pros and cons of the arguments for and against same gender "marriage" I'll do so after you admit that there is no comparison to interracial marriage.
If you don't agree to that the arguments used by same gender "marriage" and interracial marriage are different then I'll know that you are not interested in getting to the truth and are just a mindless drone or worse.
I have no idea what the views on homosexuality were in year 0 or 1900, and I deeply do not care.
If you can't see that the acceptance of gays is widening across the developed world, then this discussion is over. Hell, it's probably over anyway.
If in year 0 there was a very wide acceptance of homosexuality, but from year 300 -1914 there wasn't then how do you know that in a another 100 years things won't go back to the way they were from year 300 -1914?
was Ernst Röhm gay?
was he the head of the SA?
was Edmund Heines gay?
was he the deputy of the SA?
case closed
I'm not even discussing "people" like Hitler and Hess who there is a dispute about.
Case closed nothing.
Undoubtedly there were homosexuals in the ranks of Nazis. There are homosexuals in the ranks of every army. To cast the Nazis as a gay junta of sorts, however, is a game played by feeble minded bigots.
After all, there were plenty of Jewish collaborators, including Hitler himself, who many speculate was at least part Jewish.
Contrary to conventional views, Rigg reveals that a startlingly large number of German military men were classified by the Nazis as Jews or "partial-Jews" (Mischlinge), in the wake of racial laws first enacted in the mid-1930s. Rigg demonstrates that the actual number was much higher than previously thought--perhaps as many as 150,000 men, including decorated veterans and high-ranking officers, even generals and admirals.
Perhaps we can call the holocaust a "Jewish problem created by Jews, against Jews?" That would be stupid, right?
Keep burying your head in the sand, NY JEW.
I repeat RE: the Nazi theory:
Erik N. Jensen regards the authors' linkage of homosexuality and Nazism as the recurrence of a "pernicious myth", originating in 1930s attacks on Nazism by Socialists and Communists and "long since dispelled" by "serious scholarship".[5] Jensen sees the book as coming about in "the aftermath of an Oregon measure to repeal gay rights".[5] Dorthe Seifert cites it as a response to increasing awareness of Nazi persecution of homosexuals.[6] Christine L. Mueller argues that the historical record does not support Abrams' assertions.[7] Bob Moser, writing for the Southern Poverty Law Center, says the book was promoted by anti-gay groups and that historians agree its premise is "utterly false".[8]
Jonathan Zimmerman, an historian at New York University, wrote the claim that gay people helped bring Nazism to Germany "is a flat-out lie."[9] Zimmerman, points out that "Between 1933 and 1945, the Nazis arrested roughly 100,000 men as homosexuals. Most convicted gays were sent to prison; between 5,000 and 15,000 were interned in concentration camps, where they wore pink triangles to signify their supposed crime."[9] He further notes, "To win their release from the camps, some gays were forced to undergo castration. Others were mutilated or murdered in so-called medical experiments by Nazi doctors, who insisted that homosexuality was a disease that could be 'cured'."[9] In addition, "Hitler authorized an edict in 1941 prescribing the death penalty for SS and police members found guilty of gay activity.
If in year 0 there was a very wide acceptance of homosexuality, but from year 300 -1914 there wasn't then how do you know that in a another 100 years things won't go back to the way they were from year 300 -1914?
Yeah, and what happened when the Romans traded their pagan Gods with their lax views on sexuality for the middle eastern Judeo-Christian skydaddy?
Oh. That's right. Rome fell.
Coindence? In so much as today's conservatives believe homosexuality is a danger to society or civilization, we have the fall of the greatest empire of its time when openness was eschewed for chaste oppression.
Modern day examples that show an inverse relationship between the success of a country and the level of its sexual backwardness and hangups include the stark differences between any country in Europe v. the Middle East.
If in year 0 there was a very wide acceptance of homosexuality, but from year 300 -1914 there wasn't then how do you know that in a another 100 years things won't go back to the way they were from year 300 -1914?
I don't know. But I have a strong hunch that will not be the case. Slavery was once accepted in this country. Women can vote; a hundred years ago they could not. Capital punishment is no longer done in most western nations. We don't have colored water fountains anymore. Human rights advance within progressive cultures. No amount of wishing that isn't the case will make it not so. You are living in another dimension if you can't acknowledge the reality of this.
I'm done engaging you and your increasingly bizarre ramblings.
yes there is and your entire argument is a one huge fallacy.
Quote:
black man + White Woman = child
White man + black Woman = child
man + man = nothing
woman + woman = nothing
Please cite the law in which a child is a requisite of being married.
Oops. there is no such law.
So your "examples" above are ludicrous.
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.
