Not to be insensitive but having any company that will go out of their way to cater to a specific ethnic, cultural, or other group is discrimination. If you really want to show yourself as a non-discriminate wouldn't you remove yourself from all forms of preferential treatment? Seriously people.
Apple may be catering their advertising to the gay market; that's hardly discrimination. It's not like they have to leave off "straight" features on their products to cater to the gay community.
the actual national average is around 6%. a very small minority that is making a huge fuss about themselves.
A few of you seem to be missing the point rather spectacularly (and possibly wilfully). Gay people only have to make a fuss when they're not treated the same as everyone else. Before they introduced Civil Partnerships (gay marriage, basically) in the UK, my estate would had passed to my brother instead of my partner when I died.
The gays made a fuss and a law was passed that meant we could get married and enjoy the same rights. So, hooray for making a fuss.
Secondly, Apple aren't 'going out of their way' to favour one group over another. What they *are* doing is making sure that their products and services are promoted equally to their customers and employees unlike, for example, United Airlines who, in the late 90s, tried to deny to their gay employees the same perks that were given to their straight employees. A big fuss was made and now United Airlines are totally gay friendly.
So, again, hooray for making a fuss. Not special treatment - equal treatment
Apple may be catering their advertising to the gay market; that's hardly discrimination. It's not like they have to leave off "straight" features on their products to cater to the gay community.
Well if it is discrimination for an organization to favor whites over any other race or heterosexuals over homosexuals then I'd say the opposite is logically true. Since when was a feature set the only service Apple offered?
Of course the official definition of discrimination involves the prejudice against a group based on race or other but I'm using it in the more casual way the media likes to use it.
A few of you seem to be missing the point rather spectacularly (and possibly wilfully). Gay people only have to make a fuss when they're not treated the same as everyone else. Before they introduced Civil Partnerships (gay marriage, basically) in the UK, my estate would had passed to my brother instead of my partner when I died.
The gays made a fuss and a law was passed that meant we could get married and enjoy the same rights. So, hooray for making a fuss.
So, again, hooray for making a fuss. Not special treatment - equal treatment
A few of you seem to be missing the point of marriage rather spectacularly (and possibly willfully).
I agree that there should be provisions for a single person to will their belongings to someone else. However, marriage by definition is between a man and a woman. Whether you want to look at this theistically or evolutionarily, marriage is between a man and a woman. Any single person gets 'no special treatment'/'equal treatment' as any other single, unmarried person.
A few of you seem to be missing the point rather spectacularly (and possibly wilfully). Gay people only have to make a fuss when they're not treated the same as everyone else. Before they introduced Civil Partnerships (gay marriage, basically) in the UK, my estate would had passed to my brother instead of my partner when I died.
The gays made a fuss and a law was passed that meant we could get married and enjoy the same rights. So, hooray for making a fuss.
Secondly, Apple aren't 'going out of their way' to favour one group over another. What they *are* doing is making sure that their products and services are promoted equally to their customers and employees unlike, for example, United Airlines who, in the late 90s, tried to deny to their gay employees the same perks that were given to their straight employees. A big fuss was made and now United Airlines are totally gay friendly.
So, again, hooray for making a fuss. Not special treatment - equal treatment
Boy we are bordering on opening a huge can o worms. Look, I'll let this go cause this is not the place for this debate. I wasn't speaking specifically towards Apple, my comments were more at companies in general.
I am not opposed to equal treatment, but I am opposed to preferential treatment. Where those boundaries lie I think is where the debate will rage on, as it should. Discourse is good for the world, so long as it remains reasonable & respectful.
A few of you seem to be missing the point rather spectacularly (and possibly wilfully). Gay people only have to make a fuss when they're not treated the same as everyone else. Before they introduced Civil Partnerships (gay marriage, basically) in the UK, my estate would had passed to my brother instead of my partner when I died.
The gays made a fuss and a law was passed that meant we could get married and enjoy the same rights. So, hooray for making a fuss.
Secondly, Apple aren't 'going out of their way' to favour one group over another. What they *are* doing is making sure that their products and services are promoted equally to their customers and employees unlike, for example, United Airlines who, in the late 90s, tried to deny to their gay employees the same perks that were given to their straight employees. A big fuss was made and now United Airlines are totally gay friendly.
So, again, hooray for making a fuss. Not special treatment - equal treatment
OK, now i have lost any and all respect for homos..... not one of you, and there seem to be alot of gays frequenting this board, has complained about the gay porn picture on post #76.
none of you feel this is inappropriate? gay porn, straight porn, on this site, nobody besides me thinks this is totally sick?
and you know why straight married couples have been favored by the state for eons? because they freakin procreate and sustain the population. i would like see just one gay or lesbian couple make a child with their partner!
I wouldn't quite put it that way, but I agree. I'm glad Apple has kept a fairly neutral stance on political issues. It's unwise for ANY company to have a bias over one political hot-bed over another. Especially, IMO, the gay movement.
Homosexuality is an obvious unnatural sexual preference folks (i.e. square peg in round hole analogy). The same reasoning that homosexuals are using could be applied to someone who may want to have a relationship with an animal or even an inanimate object or child. This general cultural focus on homosexual rights is ludicrous and irrational.
The gay group claiming Apple's sensibility to gays has a right to their view but I bet it's mostly because of Apple's neutral organizational stance on hot political issues that gives them a high level of integrity.
1. It's not GAY. It's HOMOSEXUAL or LESBIAN. Please stop the smokescreen.
2. Apple has done a good job of maintaining a neutral stance on this difficult subject. Keep it up. Taking a corporate stance can help almost no one, especially Apple.
3. It is sad that instead of courteously maintaining their silence about the subject, as Apple has done, they insist in pressing their lifestyle on the rest of the world as if it really were normal.
4. There is nothing wrong with being attracted, even sexually, to another person. The right or wrong comes in the actions in response to that attraction. Just as a heterosexual does not run around constantly boasting about his preference, I would prefer it if the same attitude would be taken by everyone.
I am not opposed to equal treatment, but I am opposed to preferential treatment. Where those boundaries lie I think is where the debate will rage on, as it should. Discourse is good for the world, so long as it remains reasonable & respectful.
I don't really see where gays are asking for preferential treatment here.
For example, when it comes to discrimination, it's possible to discriminate against heterosexuals for being heterosexual, but most of the time, it's the homosexuals that are discriminated against. It's legal to fire or not hire someone for their sexuality, and it's disproportionately done against gays.
It may seem like gays are getting preferential treatment for getting benefits for their live-in partners, but there is no legal equivalent to marriage that they're allowed to go into, unless they want to enter a heterosexual marriage. They are having to do with cohabitation agreements instead, being treated as a second class with regards to that form of legal recognition.
Then there's this accusation that gays would be ruining families if they're allowed to marry, which is absurd. Heterosexuals are ruining families at a stunning rate that gays can't possibly live up to that level of destruction.
1. It's not GAY. It's HOMOSEXUAL or LESBIAN. Please stop the smokescreen.
2. Apple has done a good job of maintaining a neutral stance on this difficult subject. Keep it up. Taking a corporate stance can help almost no one, especially Apple.
3. It is sad that instead of courteously maintaining their silence about the subject, as Apple has done, they insist in pressing their lifestyle on the rest of the world as if it really were normal.
4. There is nothing wrong with being attracted, even sexually, to another person. The right or wrong comes in the actions in response to that attraction. Just as a heterosexual does not run around constantly boasting about his preference, I would prefer it if the same attitude would be taken by everyone.
so...wait...
My holding hands with my girlfriend, or giving her a quick peck as we go our separate ways on campus, that's constant boasting? I mean, seriously, I go out in public and see hetero professions of love every day; weddings, romance movies, straight students on campus, etc.
and you know why straight married couples have been favored by the state for eons? because they freakin procreate and sustain the population. i would like see just one gay or lesbian couple make a child with their partner!
Palex I am with you. You gotta have kids before you are a proper citizen.
One group we should really discriminate against are the childless. These people say they are heterosexual. Pretend they are like you and me. And then go and not have babies. They CHOOSE to be that way. BURN IN HELL I say. It is clearly against God and Nature!
And some of them say "it's a medical condition. Boo hoo! My tadpoles can't swim straight". These freaks are just not trying. Who allows these sterile freaks to get married in the first place?
Funny isn't it how many so gay and lesbian people *do* have children. Lesbian next-door has three! Did no one explain the rules to them?
C.
(WARNING this post contains sarcasm)
And yes, posting porn on this forum was very inappropriate.
Funny isn't it how many so gay and lesbian people *do* have children. Lesbian next-door has three! Did no one explain the rules to them?
Maybe someone did, but she doesn't particularly care for the rules and chooses to do what she will.
In 5 more years I can star in a movie called "The 40-Year-Old Virgin." Sex is for marriage, and I am a man that has not yet met the right woman. God promises that trusting in him, in his love, and in his rules, will result in a better life than going our own way.
I don't really see where gays are asking for preferential treatment here.
For example, when it comes to discrimination, it's possible to discriminate against heterosexuals for being heterosexual, but most of the time, it's the homosexuals that are discriminated against. It's legal to fire or not hire someone for their sexuality, and it's disproportionately done against gays.
It may seem like gays are getting preferential treatment for getting benefits for their live-in partners, but there is no legal equivalent to marriage that they're allowed to go into, unless they want to enter a heterosexual marriage. They are having to do with cohabitation agreements instead, being treated as a second class with regards to that form of legal recognition.
Then there's this accusation that gays would be ruining families if they're allowed to marry, which is absurd. Heterosexuals are ruining families at a stunning rate that gays can't possibly live up to that level of destruction.
But this is where the debate lies, is it a genetic trait like race or is it a developed orientation (like what we like to eat or do we prefer brunettes over blonds). Then lets say you prove it is genetic, so is alcoholism & yet we wouldn't blink an eye if someone fired a person for having a drinking problem.
Look, I'm not trying to say that homosexual's are not discriminated against sometimes, but the level of over sensitivity this country has developed towards this issue is frightening. Laws are not the solution to every problem & in fact at times can do a vast amount of harm.
Add on to this matter the fact that many religious groups do not agree that homosexuality is acceptable in their ranks but now you want a law saying they aren't allowed to fire someone based on orientation. Congrats, you just violated separation of church & state, the government is now dictating religion.
I'm over simplifying a bit but I think you get the point.
In 5 more years I can star in a movie called "The 40-Year-Old Virgin." Sex is for marriage, and I am a man that has not yet met the right woman. God promises that trusting in him, in his love, and in his rules, will result in a better life than going our own way.
Not all urges need to be satisfied.
It's hard to believe you haven't found the right woman yet.
You should try hanging out at one of those funerals where religious fanatics carry signs that say "God Hates F*gs", you'll probably meet your soul-mate there.
Or maybe you're just a repressed homosexual? Or have a tiny d*ck?
If your dick is square then i recommend you stop using it to bookmark your Bible.
But seriously if you are struggling with meshing your faith and sexuality do yourself a favour and check out www.gaychristian.net
You are never truly alone in this world.
Yeah, been there done that. Has less to do with the difficulty meshing them. I don't buy the Christian/gay ok stuff. I simply accept that is the way i am attracted and it isn't a healthy way to express my sexuality. Has as much to do with conviction as it does with biblical words.
btw, very funny joke, but i was seriously more refering to the anatomical chemistry that male/female genitalia makes that male/male can't quite make (reproduction that is)
I don't mean to offend you guys. Hey, I hold my opinion and stand firm on it. But I understand, as a guy who used to date and all that, that moral decisions on this can't be proven as right and wrong. I understand and accept that some see it as right, and I send my best wishes to them. What Christian would I be if I agreed with a somewhat more obscure doctrine on homosexuality but forget Jesus' own words to love others as myself? Does that mean i have to agree with them? No, I love my mother and don't agree with everything she says, (I'm 20 now, not a kid) and she doesn't hate me for it. I have tonnes of gay friends, work with two closely, live at college with a few. They are great people. I care about them deeply. I chose not to muck with my dick and another guy, but that is just personal conviction between me and God. I have no right to push it on others.
And I don't. Sorry if you got that impression. My views regarding what God sees as in our best interest don't change the fact that I believe homosexuals deserve the same rights as straight people (marriage I am still a littl fuzzy on but don't hold it against me )
Just please keep that in mind, and I apologise if I offended anyone.
It's hard to believe you haven't found the right woman yet.
There aren't a whole lot of solid, born-again, God-seeking women out there. But it's really not about whether she's a statistical needle-in-a-haystack or not. I'm trusting God to arrange for us to meet at the right time.
Palex I am with you. You gotta have kids before you are a proper citizen.
One group we should really discriminate against are the childless. These people say they are heterosexual. Pretend they are like you and me. And then go and not have babies. They CHOOSE to be that way. BURN IN HELL I say. It is clearly against God and Nature!
And some of them say "it's a medical condition. Boo hoo! My tadpoles can't swim straight". These freaks are just not trying. Who allows these sterile freaks to get married in the first place?
Funny isn't it how many so gay and lesbian people *do* have children. Lesbian next-door has three! Did no one explain the rules to them?
C.
(WARNING this post contains sarcasm)
And yes, posting porn on this forum was very inappropriate.
I'm gonna be honest, I don't care if married people get special government treatment, my marriage was a vow before the God I believe in & I would actually love the government to get their hands out of it.
Now I see nothing wrong with government giving aid to people who have children because this encourages future generations. I also would like to see encouragement of single income households because it is equally important to the survival of this country that children are raised with the proper amount of focus & attention from a parent.
But wait, it's not that simple. Marriage is given special recognition by the government because of it's POTENTIAL to produce children, not it's success. Yes some people can't have children, but they don't know that at the time they get married!
At least if you are homosexual you still have the physical ability to conceive offspring in other ways, how insensitive of you to make casual mocking of people who've lost this ability all together for the sake of your point!
Comments
Not to be insensitive but having any company that will go out of their way to cater to a specific ethnic, cultural, or other group is discrimination. If you really want to show yourself as a non-discriminate wouldn't you remove yourself from all forms of preferential treatment? Seriously people.
Apple may be catering their advertising to the gay market; that's hardly discrimination. It's not like they have to leave off "straight" features on their products to cater to the gay community.
If your dick is square then i recommend you stop using it to bookmark your Bible.
But seriously if you are struggling with meshing your faith and sexuality do yourself a favour and check out www.gaychristian.net
You are never truly alone in this world.
I think we're getting off topic here, there are other forums more appropriate for this debate.
the actual national average is around 6%. a very small minority that is making a huge fuss about themselves.
A few of you seem to be missing the point rather spectacularly (and possibly wilfully). Gay people only have to make a fuss when they're not treated the same as everyone else. Before they introduced Civil Partnerships (gay marriage, basically) in the UK, my estate would had passed to my brother instead of my partner when I died.
The gays made a fuss and a law was passed that meant we could get married and enjoy the same rights. So, hooray for making a fuss.
Secondly, Apple aren't 'going out of their way' to favour one group over another. What they *are* doing is making sure that their products and services are promoted equally to their customers and employees unlike, for example, United Airlines who, in the late 90s, tried to deny to their gay employees the same perks that were given to their straight employees. A big fuss was made and now United Airlines are totally gay friendly.
So, again, hooray for making a fuss. Not special treatment - equal treatment
Apple may be catering their advertising to the gay market; that's hardly discrimination. It's not like they have to leave off "straight" features on their products to cater to the gay community.
Well if it is discrimination for an organization to favor whites over any other race or heterosexuals over homosexuals then I'd say the opposite is logically true. Since when was a feature set the only service Apple offered?
Of course the official definition of discrimination involves the prejudice against a group based on race or other but I'm using it in the more casual way the media likes to use it.
A few of you seem to be missing the point rather spectacularly (and possibly wilfully). Gay people only have to make a fuss when they're not treated the same as everyone else. Before they introduced Civil Partnerships (gay marriage, basically) in the UK, my estate would had passed to my brother instead of my partner when I died.
The gays made a fuss and a law was passed that meant we could get married and enjoy the same rights. So, hooray for making a fuss.
So, again, hooray for making a fuss. Not special treatment - equal treatment
A few of you seem to be missing the point of marriage rather spectacularly (and possibly willfully).
I agree that there should be provisions for a single person to will their belongings to someone else. However, marriage by definition is between a man and a woman. Whether you want to look at this theistically or evolutionarily, marriage is between a man and a woman. Any single person gets 'no special treatment'/'equal treatment' as any other single, unmarried person.
A few of you seem to be missing the point rather spectacularly (and possibly wilfully). Gay people only have to make a fuss when they're not treated the same as everyone else. Before they introduced Civil Partnerships (gay marriage, basically) in the UK, my estate would had passed to my brother instead of my partner when I died.
The gays made a fuss and a law was passed that meant we could get married and enjoy the same rights. So, hooray for making a fuss.
Secondly, Apple aren't 'going out of their way' to favour one group over another. What they *are* doing is making sure that their products and services are promoted equally to their customers and employees unlike, for example, United Airlines who, in the late 90s, tried to deny to their gay employees the same perks that were given to their straight employees. A big fuss was made and now United Airlines are totally gay friendly.
So, again, hooray for making a fuss. Not special treatment - equal treatment
Boy we are bordering on opening a huge can o worms. Look, I'll let this go cause this is not the place for this debate. I wasn't speaking specifically towards Apple, my comments were more at companies in general.
I am not opposed to equal treatment, but I am opposed to preferential treatment. Where those boundaries lie I think is where the debate will rage on, as it should. Discourse is good for the world, so long as it remains reasonable & respectful.
A few of you seem to be missing the point rather spectacularly (and possibly wilfully). Gay people only have to make a fuss when they're not treated the same as everyone else. Before they introduced Civil Partnerships (gay marriage, basically) in the UK, my estate would had passed to my brother instead of my partner when I died.
The gays made a fuss and a law was passed that meant we could get married and enjoy the same rights. So, hooray for making a fuss.
Secondly, Apple aren't 'going out of their way' to favour one group over another. What they *are* doing is making sure that their products and services are promoted equally to their customers and employees unlike, for example, United Airlines who, in the late 90s, tried to deny to their gay employees the same perks that were given to their straight employees. A big fuss was made and now United Airlines are totally gay friendly.
So, again, hooray for making a fuss. Not special treatment - equal treatment
OK, now i have lost any and all respect for homos..... not one of you, and there seem to be alot of gays frequenting this board, has complained about the gay porn picture on post #76.
none of you feel this is inappropriate? gay porn, straight porn, on this site, nobody besides me thinks this is totally sick?
and you know why straight married couples have been favored by the state for eons? because they freakin procreate and sustain the population. i would like see just one gay or lesbian couple make a child with their partner!
the actual national average is around 6%. a very small minority that is making a huge fuss about themselves.
Like those black people. Always making a fuss.
Like those women who wanted a vote. Always making a fuss.
Or those Jews who objected to being gassed. Always making a fuss.
Why oh why do these oppressed minorities moan and gripe so?
C.
I wouldn't quite put it that way, but I agree. I'm glad Apple has kept a fairly neutral stance on political issues. It's unwise for ANY company to have a bias over one political hot-bed over another. Especially, IMO, the gay movement.
Homosexuality is an obvious unnatural sexual preference folks (i.e. square peg in round hole analogy). The same reasoning that homosexuals are using could be applied to someone who may want to have a relationship with an animal or even an inanimate object or child. This general cultural focus on homosexual rights is ludicrous and irrational.
The gay group claiming Apple's sensibility to gays has a right to their view but I bet it's mostly because of Apple's neutral organizational stance on hot political issues that gives them a high level of integrity.
1. It's not GAY. It's HOMOSEXUAL or LESBIAN. Please stop the smokescreen.
2. Apple has done a good job of maintaining a neutral stance on this difficult subject. Keep it up. Taking a corporate stance can help almost no one, especially Apple.
3. It is sad that instead of courteously maintaining their silence about the subject, as Apple has done, they insist in pressing their lifestyle on the rest of the world as if it really were normal.
4. There is nothing wrong with being attracted, even sexually, to another person. The right or wrong comes in the actions in response to that attraction. Just as a heterosexual does not run around constantly boasting about his preference, I would prefer it if the same attitude would be taken by everyone.
I am not opposed to equal treatment, but I am opposed to preferential treatment. Where those boundaries lie I think is where the debate will rage on, as it should. Discourse is good for the world, so long as it remains reasonable & respectful.
I don't really see where gays are asking for preferential treatment here.
For example, when it comes to discrimination, it's possible to discriminate against heterosexuals for being heterosexual, but most of the time, it's the homosexuals that are discriminated against. It's legal to fire or not hire someone for their sexuality, and it's disproportionately done against gays.
It may seem like gays are getting preferential treatment for getting benefits for their live-in partners, but there is no legal equivalent to marriage that they're allowed to go into, unless they want to enter a heterosexual marriage. They are having to do with cohabitation agreements instead, being treated as a second class with regards to that form of legal recognition.
Then there's this accusation that gays would be ruining families if they're allowed to marry, which is absurd. Heterosexuals are ruining families at a stunning rate that gays can't possibly live up to that level of destruction.
1. It's not GAY. It's HOMOSEXUAL or LESBIAN. Please stop the smokescreen.
2. Apple has done a good job of maintaining a neutral stance on this difficult subject. Keep it up. Taking a corporate stance can help almost no one, especially Apple.
3. It is sad that instead of courteously maintaining their silence about the subject, as Apple has done, they insist in pressing their lifestyle on the rest of the world as if it really were normal.
4. There is nothing wrong with being attracted, even sexually, to another person. The right or wrong comes in the actions in response to that attraction. Just as a heterosexual does not run around constantly boasting about his preference, I would prefer it if the same attitude would be taken by everyone.
so...wait...
My holding hands with my girlfriend, or giving her a quick peck as we go our separate ways on campus, that's constant boasting? I mean, seriously, I go out in public and see hetero professions of love every day; weddings, romance movies, straight students on campus, etc.
and you know why straight married couples have been favored by the state for eons? because they freakin procreate and sustain the population. i would like see just one gay or lesbian couple make a child with their partner!
Palex I am with you. You gotta have kids before you are a proper citizen.
One group we should really discriminate against are the childless. These people say they are heterosexual. Pretend they are like you and me. And then go and not have babies. They CHOOSE to be that way. BURN IN HELL I say. It is clearly against God and Nature!
And some of them say "it's a medical condition. Boo hoo! My tadpoles can't swim straight". These freaks are just not trying. Who allows these sterile freaks to get married in the first place?
Funny isn't it how many so gay and lesbian people *do* have children. Lesbian next-door has three! Did no one explain the rules to them?
C.
(WARNING this post contains sarcasm)
And yes, posting porn on this forum was very inappropriate.
Funny isn't it how many so gay and lesbian people *do* have children. Lesbian next-door has three! Did no one explain the rules to them?
Maybe someone did, but she doesn't particularly care for the rules and chooses to do what she will.
In 5 more years I can star in a movie called "The 40-Year-Old Virgin." Sex is for marriage, and I am a man that has not yet met the right woman. God promises that trusting in him, in his love, and in his rules, will result in a better life than going our own way.
Not all urges need to be satisfied.
I don't really see where gays are asking for preferential treatment here.
For example, when it comes to discrimination, it's possible to discriminate against heterosexuals for being heterosexual, but most of the time, it's the homosexuals that are discriminated against. It's legal to fire or not hire someone for their sexuality, and it's disproportionately done against gays.
It may seem like gays are getting preferential treatment for getting benefits for their live-in partners, but there is no legal equivalent to marriage that they're allowed to go into, unless they want to enter a heterosexual marriage. They are having to do with cohabitation agreements instead, being treated as a second class with regards to that form of legal recognition.
Then there's this accusation that gays would be ruining families if they're allowed to marry, which is absurd. Heterosexuals are ruining families at a stunning rate that gays can't possibly live up to that level of destruction.
But this is where the debate lies, is it a genetic trait like race or is it a developed orientation (like what we like to eat or do we prefer brunettes over blonds). Then lets say you prove it is genetic, so is alcoholism & yet we wouldn't blink an eye if someone fired a person for having a drinking problem.
Look, I'm not trying to say that homosexual's are not discriminated against sometimes, but the level of over sensitivity this country has developed towards this issue is frightening. Laws are not the solution to every problem & in fact at times can do a vast amount of harm.
Add on to this matter the fact that many religious groups do not agree that homosexuality is acceptable in their ranks but now you want a law saying they aren't allowed to fire someone based on orientation. Congrats, you just violated separation of church & state, the government is now dictating religion.
I'm over simplifying a bit but I think you get the point.
In 5 more years I can star in a movie called "The 40-Year-Old Virgin." Sex is for marriage, and I am a man that has not yet met the right woman. God promises that trusting in him, in his love, and in his rules, will result in a better life than going our own way.
Not all urges need to be satisfied.
It's hard to believe you haven't found the right woman yet.
You should try hanging out at one of those funerals where religious fanatics carry signs that say "God Hates F*gs", you'll probably meet your soul-mate there.
Or maybe you're just a repressed homosexual? Or have a tiny d*ck?
If your dick is square then i recommend you stop using it to bookmark your Bible.
But seriously if you are struggling with meshing your faith and sexuality do yourself a favour and check out www.gaychristian.net
You are never truly alone in this world.
Yeah, been there done that. Has less to do with the difficulty meshing them. I don't buy the Christian/gay ok stuff. I simply accept that is the way i am attracted and it isn't a healthy way to express my sexuality. Has as much to do with conviction as it does with biblical words.
btw, very funny joke, but i was seriously more refering to the anatomical chemistry that male/female genitalia makes that male/male can't quite make (reproduction that is)
I don't mean to offend you guys. Hey, I hold my opinion and stand firm on it. But I understand, as a guy who used to date and all that, that moral decisions on this can't be proven as right and wrong. I understand and accept that some see it as right, and I send my best wishes to them. What Christian would I be if I agreed with a somewhat more obscure doctrine on homosexuality but forget Jesus' own words to love others as myself? Does that mean i have to agree with them? No, I love my mother and don't agree with everything she says, (I'm 20 now, not a kid) and she doesn't hate me for it. I have tonnes of gay friends, work with two closely, live at college with a few. They are great people. I care about them deeply. I chose not to muck with my dick and another guy, but that is just personal conviction between me and God. I have no right to push it on others.
And I don't. Sorry if you got that impression. My views regarding what God sees as in our best interest don't change the fact that I believe homosexuals deserve the same rights as straight people (marriage I am still a littl fuzzy on but don't hold it against me
Just please keep that in mind, and I apologise if I offended anyone.
I still don't see how that justifies what you did.
This thread is a cesspit and belongs (at best) in AO. Mostly it should get locked.
It's hard to believe you haven't found the right woman yet.
There aren't a whole lot of solid, born-again, God-seeking women out there. But it's really not about whether she's a statistical needle-in-a-haystack or not. I'm trusting God to arrange for us to meet at the right time.
This thread is a cesspit and belongs (at best) in AO. Mostly it should get locked.
i agree.
Palex I am with you. You gotta have kids before you are a proper citizen.
One group we should really discriminate against are the childless. These people say they are heterosexual. Pretend they are like you and me. And then go and not have babies. They CHOOSE to be that way. BURN IN HELL I say. It is clearly against God and Nature!
And some of them say "it's a medical condition. Boo hoo! My tadpoles can't swim straight". These freaks are just not trying. Who allows these sterile freaks to get married in the first place?
Funny isn't it how many so gay and lesbian people *do* have children. Lesbian next-door has three! Did no one explain the rules to them?
C.
(WARNING this post contains sarcasm)
And yes, posting porn on this forum was very inappropriate.
I'm gonna be honest, I don't care if married people get special government treatment, my marriage was a vow before the God I believe in & I would actually love the government to get their hands out of it.
Now I see nothing wrong with government giving aid to people who have children because this encourages future generations. I also would like to see encouragement of single income households because it is equally important to the survival of this country that children are raised with the proper amount of focus & attention from a parent.
But wait, it's not that simple. Marriage is given special recognition by the government because of it's POTENTIAL to produce children, not it's success. Yes some people can't have children, but they don't know that at the time they get married!
At least if you are homosexual you still have the physical ability to conceive offspring in other ways, how insensitive of you to make casual mocking of people who've lost this ability all together for the sake of your point!