Question

[Revolution911]

Originally posted by Spike the Kat
i think its wrong to hate gays
i think its write to hate what they are doing

many people say "hating gay people is like hating black people" but it is not.

being black is something you are born with
being gay is something you choose.you might have a desire to but still you have a choice. for example i am an angry person but i do it by choice i would love to not be and try but i just can't and in another sense i am black no matter how hard i try i will never be white. you could hate my actions but at the same time love me, ya know.

do you get wut i meen???

Its not really a choice...=/...I mean...sure you could SAY you're straight, but it doesent mean you're not attracted to men....(vice versa for females)

[coasterkrazy]

That's a good point Rev. There are probably people who have lived their whole lives being "straight" (being with the opposite sex, etc.), but are actually attracted to the same sex. There's nothing wrong with those people either - they may be naturally homosexual but want to be straight, so they act straight.

[Osmose]

Originally posted by Drighton

quote:

Originally posted by Osmose So you think you're rightous and tolerative if you say that you respect gays. But at the same time you say you'd stop talking to them if they made a move on you.

quote:

Originally posted by Osmose I loath gaybashers, but since I'm in no position or shape to stop any, I can only try and change the intolerant opinion of someone.

So am I tolerative or intolerant?

Does not toleration imply that you recognize and respect the rights, beliefs or practices of others?

You must've misread those or something. In the first one, if you quote the entire thing, I'm building up to saying that if you think you are tolerant for respecting gays but at the sime time not talking to someone who is gay, that you are not. In the second one I say that I am trying to change your intolerant opinon. They are both saying the same thing. I don't know why you're still trying to point out wording errors rather than facing the true issue.

Perhaps the wording is incorrect, but it portrays just the same. I'm not going to stand in the way of someone being gay. BUT, I'm not going to say that homosexuality is okay. Once again, I have no problem with the person, just the lifestyle.

I don't have a problem with you, personally. I think you're a pretty good programmer, one of few here at Charas. I just have a problem with your lifestyle. You base it on the bible and don't even think for yourself. You would rather follow the word of a being (rather, the words of men who say that they knew the words of this being) you have never seen than sit down and decide for yourself what you believe is right and what you believe is wrong.

Now, that doesn't mean I hate you, I just hate your lifestyle. There's such a difference.

As for the pedophilia side of the argument, the age a child can make an informed decision is dependant on what they have been taught about sex. A person could be 20 years old and not have been told about it, and they wouldn't be able to make the decisions.

I say that they are too young because our society generally teachers about intercourse at around age 12-16. Psychology has also shown that it isn't until puberty ends at the end of adolescence, 16-18, when a person's brain is fully capable of abstract thought and moral interpretation. In fact, one study conducted to see whether adolescents were capable of informed decisions showed that less than half of the 17-year-olds tested had reached a stage of formal operations thinking (Higgins-Trenk & Gaite, 1971). I'd say that around 18 is a good time to say that an individual can make an informed decision on whether to have sex or not. Which is what our society has also concluded.

coasterkrazy: Or, perhaps they're afraid of the prejudice of people and would rather just hide their homosexuality rather than deal with the treatment from others.

[Razor]

Yo Moose, perhaps you should add "but I respect your choice and opinions" just to make things nice. Unless you don't. Then don't.

[Osmose]

If I add that, then the argument loses it's whole point. "But I respect your values and opinions." "Then why are you even posting?" "...um, I don't know." "Then we don't even need to be talking."

[Drighton]

Originally posted by Osmose
You must've misread those or something. In the first one, if you quote the entire thing, I'm building up to saying that if you think you are tolerant for respecting gays but at the sime time not talking to someone who is gay, that you are not. In the second one I say that I am trying to change your intolerant opinon. They are both saying the same thing. I don't know why you're still trying to point out wording errors rather than facing the true issue.

Yeah, I did misread that. But it was in jest anyways.

I don't have a problem with you, personally. I think you're a pretty good programmer, one of few here at Charas. I just have a problem with your lifestyle. You base it on the bible and don't even think for yourself. You would rather follow the word of a being (rather, the words of men who say that they knew the words of this being) you have never seen than sit down and decide for yourself what you believe is right and what you believe is wrong.

Now, that doesn't mean I hate you, I just hate your lifestyle. There's such a difference.

I'm glad we can agree on that. However, believing in the Bible and thinking for one's self are two different matters. There are those who go to church, listen to what the speaker has to say (or sleeps through it, and is there just to say s/he went), and leave. All without even cracking open the good book. There are also those who hear what someone has to say, and then researches the topic, either finding scriptures to debunk that person's teachings, or scriptures to support them, or sometimes both, in which deeper study is required.

Now it is true that some people just accept what is said. A good majority of people know as much about the Bible as I do about politics. In casual conversation with my territory rep, she admitted to not knowing all the books in the Bible. Most people just don't pick it up and read it for themselves anymore. I guess I'm agreeing with you to a certain degree.

I'm going to leave the pedophelia thing alone. Perhaps now there isn't too much to debate about (not that I meant to start a debate about it), but the whole idea was that the future has yet to be determined and anything can happen which will challenge our stance on certain matters.

[Razor]

Originally posted by Osmose
If I add that, then the argument loses it's whole point. "But I respect your values and opinions." "Then why are you even posting?" "...um, I don't know." "Then we don't even need to be talking."

Good point

[MrMister]

Originally posted by Razor
Well, it's still impossible for 2 of every creature on the planet (baring in mind this was only set a few thousand years ago or something) to fit into such a small ark. Also, for the water to go above every mountain, the earth's temperature would sky rocket. And then there's the question, where did all that extra water come from and go to?

It takes place, like a million years ago, it was just written a few thousand years ago when it was told to someone by God.
And he spent like 40 years building the ark, you can't assume it was a 'such a small boat'. The extra water came from '40 days and 40 nights of rain'.

[SaiKar]

The flood story is interesting because so many cultures have a similar story about a global flood. It's something people that study mythology and value systems call a "proto myth" - if you ignore details like the name of the characters and specific numbers (such as the construction of the ark and the time it rained) then the story is almost completely the same in many cultures.

This sort of thing interests people and there has been a lot of excavations and soil sampling around the Mediteranean to the point where there is an actual theory that the entire thing flooded and covered a lot of the European and Asian landmass, or at least the parts closer to the sea where civilization was beginning to take off. Of course, no one can prove anything, but it's a cute little theory.

[Midnight9795]

*cough* Just let the topic ride the waves, stop attempting to stop the current because it's just to strong...*cough*

I have no problem with a person who is gay, bi, straight, tie, or a lesbian. They are all human beings who should get the same respect they give you. And to claim that God's law is correct is kinda strange, being as there is more then one god since there are many a reiligon. There are so many that it's impossible to say this is so. So meh..*eats topic* <.<;; *flees from sai'kar*

[Osmose]

I'm glad we can agree on that.

I was being sarcastic and can't tell if you were being sarcastic as well.