On the constitutionality of being Homosexual

Status
Not open for further replies.

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Redefining terms is the first page in the playbook for those wanting to overturn & corrupt society. We can't play that game.
And yet you routinely play that very game here, in fine hypocritical fashion.

Let me put this in a way that I'm certain you can understand: Stop using the word ":censoredsign:" and all of its derivatives, unless you are talking about twigs, wood, or the gathering of bundles thereof. If you are unable to use civil and polite terms in your discourse here in these forums, the thin ice you've been skating on for quite some time is likely to thaw completely. I suggest you use proper terms suitable for polite company, or invent a less annoying and offensive euphemism.

What do you think pedophiles will insist on being called?
I have no idea, and frankly don't care, since that has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. But whatever they come up with, I'm sure it'll **** you off to no end.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
And yet you routinely play that very game here, in fine hypocritical fashion.
I've redefined nothing.
. I suggest you use proper terms suitable for polite company, or invent a less annoying and offensive euphemism.
"DanFagorty?" Fogarty?
I have no idea, and frankly don't care, since that has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. But whatever they come up with, I'm sure it'll **** you off to no end.
It is absolutely relevant. That's the next step. I already saw one article on it a few weeks ago, something to the effect of child molesters saying, "We're next."
Homosexual sodomy is no more immoral than child molestation.
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
You can be sure that at some point they will come up with some BS terminology and the leftists, the ACLU and others will embrace it and endorse it just as they've done with affirmative action, pro choice and others.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
There may, MAY be a birth defect that causes mis-wiring that leads to confused affections.
Where you put your wiener is a choice.
Someone with confused affections deserves pity and help. Someone who puts their wiener where it doesn't belong deserves both societal approbation and ****ation.

Someone with confused wiring who can proclaim the opinions above, in the language chosen, deserves to be shunned by reasonably intelligent people.
As far as I'm concerned, you no longer exist.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
I've redefined nothing.
Now you're just destroying your credibility and rapidly bringing intelligent discourse to an end. You've redefined zygote and fetus to mean child and baby, and you've redefined murder to mean whatever suits your needs.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Someone with confused wiring who can proclaim the opinions above, in the language chosen, deserves to be shunned by reasonably intelligent people.
As far as I'm concerned, you no longer exist.

The difficulties of conceding the reality of such birth defective writing is in the ability to place blame on the electrician.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
The difficulties of conceding the reality of such birth defective writing is in the ability to place blame on the electrician.

First I thought 'writing' was a typo, meant to be 'wiring', but you know, it works either way, lol.
Agreed: the electrician apparently is not infallible, after all.
If there is an electrician,of course.
:rolleyes:
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
Someone with confused wiring who can proclaim the opinions above, in the language chosen, deserves to be shunned by reasonably intelligent people.
As far as I'm concerned, you no longer exist.
If that's the case, I'm glad that it happens with me on the correct side of a moral issue.
 

Maverick

Seasoned Expediter
Let us expose the right wing bigots as they are, while bringing the whole biblical thing into view with one verse from The Book (not pushing it, but let's get a clear picture from those who believe, along with those who do not....it matters not)

[3] And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
[4] They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
[5] Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
[6] This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
[7] So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
[8] And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
[9] And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
[10] When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
[11] She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

First of all, apparently those bigots whom attempted to challenge Christ with the law.....found we are no longer under the law, but grace. Secondly, notice how the woman calls Him LORD.....thus being free from her accusers in recognition of who Christ was.

Grace called a sinner to repentance, and an offer of forgiveness......"Go and sin no more" was all she had to do from there. Even the most righteous of men on this planet are chock full of sin, including this poster. But Christ never asked me to judge others, be a right wing bigot, or cast any stones.

I just call Him Lord and try to follow the examples and truths brought forth. The modern scribes and pharisees play a foolish game with religion because now, as then, it's an agenda pushed forward by those who presently cannot, and will not, call anyone Lord....but themselves.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
Now you're just destroying your credibility and rapidly bringing intelligent discourse to an end. You've redefined zygote and fetus to mean child and baby, and you've redefined murder to mean whatever suits your needs.

On a previous thread, I posted the definition of fetus and it agreed with me. You questioned if it was some user-editable dictionary, and I posted the source, that it was 2 respected, well-known publishers of reference materials.
Additionally, that life behind at conception can be inferred from scripture, scripture being inspired by the Lord and Giver of life. That being the case, that scripturally-inferred definition is automatically more dependable.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
The difficulties of conceding the reality of such birth defective writing is in the ability to place blame on the electrician.
I know you're familiar enough with scripture to know of the vast consequences of sin. All defects -- Down's Syndrome, Sickle Cell Anemia, everything -- can be traced back to it. So it's a problem of our faulty nature, not the Electrician's.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
I know you're familiar enough with scripture to know of the vast consequences of sin. All defects -- Down's Syndrome, Sickle Cell Anemia, everything -- can be traced back to it. So it's a problem of our faulty nature, not the Electrician's.

I'm familiar enough with scripture to know that (a), that's a very convenient interpretation, as since NO ONE is without sin, it can therefore be used to lay blame for anything and everything you like or don't like, and (b), it's an incorrect interpretation.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
On a previous thread, I posted the definition of fetus and it agreed with me. You questioned if it was some user-editable dictionary, and I posted the source, that it was 2 respected, well-known publishers of reference materials.
I wasn't convinced. If zygote, fetus, baby and child were all synonymous with each other, they'd all have the same recognized definitions. Yet they don't.

Additionally, that life behind at conception can be inferred from scripture, scripture being inspired by the Lord and Giver of life. That being the case, that scripturally-inferred definition is automatically more dependable.
As hard as it is to accept, there are contradictions in the scripture on that one. But regardless, not only can "life begins at conception" be inferred from the Bible, it can be explicitly seen in reality under the microscope. But not all life is human, and even human life isn't human until it's no longer a zygote or a fetus. Now, you may think otherwise, and you may believe it with all your might using whatever arguments you choose, and that's fine, but to that I say, look around and have a gander at the reality you live in.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
I'm familiar enough with scripture to know that (a), that's a very convenient interpretation, as since NO ONE is without sin, it can therefore be used to lay blame for anything and everything you like or don't like, and (b), it's an incorrect interpretation.

No, it's not an incorrect interpretation. It's orthodox doctrine. It's why man could marry close relatives millennia ago without consequence but it causes problems now. Right after the Garden of Eden, our genome hadn't been so corrupted by sin.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
I wasn't convinced. If zygote, fetus, baby and child were all synonymous with each other, they'd all have the same recognized definitions. Yet they don't.
...But not all life is human, and even human life isn't human until it's no longer a zygote or a fetus. Now, you may think otherwise, and you may believe it with all your might using whatever arguments you choose, and that's fine, but to that I say, look around and have a gander at the reality you live in.

Of course they wouldn't. There are clinical reasons to differentiate between stages of gestation. The argument that a zygote or fetus aren't human is absurd on its face.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Like I said, anything and everything. Did the okie-dokie, close-relative begattin' thing first happen before or after Adam and Eve? And who's sins did Jesus die for?
 
Last edited:

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
Like I said, anything and everything. Did the okie-dokie, close-relative begattin' thing first happen before or after Adam and Eve? And who's sins did Jesus die for?
The Elect. Everybody who's ever escaped hellfire had been saved by Christ, throughout all eternity.
As for your first question, I'd the account of Adam & Eve is literal, then it happened after them, just after them, before errors compounded in our genome.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
I won't even get into the documented deformities from ancient Egypt and China from three, four and five millennia ago.

So, all the bad things that happen to innocent unborn babies, like deformities and birth defects, are thanks to Adam and Eve, and Jesus dying on the cross was really just basically one of those feel-good, good-intentions things that was all symbolism without much substance that didn't do much good. Got it.
 
Last edited:

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
I won't even get into the documented deformities from ancient Egypt and China from three, four and five millennia ago.

So, all the bad things that happen to innocent unborn babies, like deformities and birth defects, are thanks to Adam and Eve, and Jesus dying on the cross was really just basically one of those feel-good, good-intentions things that was all symbolism without much substance that didn't do much good. Got it.
Any such thing you took from my post was an inference on your part.
Had Adam & Eve not sinned, no, there would be no deformities, birth defects, illnesses of any kind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top