Brits bust American preacher for quoting Thessalonians

Liberal wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Liberal wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:John Kass at the Chicago Tribune worries about religious intolerance in this Brave New World of same sex marriage. And this from someone who supports civil unions. Crikers.

With the issue of same-sex marriage argued before the Supreme Court and raging elsewhere in America, a question:

Is it possible to be a traditional Christian or Muslim or Orthodox Jew — and hold to one’s faith on what constitutes marriage — and not be considered a bigot?

And is faith now a problem to be overcome, first marginalized by the state and then contained, so as not to get in the way of great changes to come?

Had to get his column from another site because the Tribune has a content wall in place. Hope the link works.

http://onlineathens.com/opinion/2013-03-27/kass-religious-tolerance-and-marriage-debate

Ask the people who were intolerant of bi-racial marriage based on their religion. They may hold the answer you're looking for.

Ooooh, and now the race card gets thrown. Damn, that's mighty thin gruel you are serving up today Lib. FYI gay marriage is nowhere equivalent to miscegenation. You insult the entire Civil Rights Movement and the gains achieved with that bullshit argument. Blacks have time and time again overwhelmingly supported traditional marriage amendments to state constitutions and initiatives/propositions like Prop 8 in California. Exit polls revealed that 70% of the black vote supported Prop 8 in 2008.

Hmmm. I never even mentioned the Civil Rights movement or the "blacks" as you call
them. I guess when it comes to race, the close-minded only believe in two of them. Very telling.

Skeptical wrote:

Freedom Forever wrote:Jesus never condemned homosexuality. RWB chap 3 ver 69  That is all you need to know.  Global warming is not mentioned in the Bible either. so It's not real.  

 IIRC RWB also stated same sex relationships were preferred by nature to continue the species! 

(even though we all know same sex couples cannot procreate no explanation has been put forth by RWb how or why nature prefers same sex relationships to continue the species)

Freedom Forever wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:
It is amazing that they can not see most people will never accept their perverted lifestyle as "normal" regardless of what legislation they can passed. They are sick and their deviant behavior will never be normalized.

We are arguing values and they continually redefine the debate as a rights issue. Nah! a civil rights issue.
I still love the; "How does gay marriage negatively impact your marriage". Answer; That's an irrelevant question. But it's one of their favorite talking points

BladeRunner wrote:Question for those that believe that gays are born that way.

What happens in the case of identical twins one is homosexual, one is not?

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Liberal wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Liberal wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:John Kass at the Chicago Tribune worries about religious intolerance in this Brave New World of same sex marriage. And this from someone who supports civil unions. Crikers.

With the issue of same-sex marriage argued before the Supreme Court and raging elsewhere in America, a question:

Is it possible to be a traditional Christian or Muslim or Orthodox Jew — and hold to one’s faith on what constitutes marriage — and not be considered a bigot?

And is faith now a problem to be overcome, first marginalized by the state and then contained, so as not to get in the way of great changes to come?

Had to get his column from another site because the Tribune has a content wall in place. Hope the link works.

http://onlineathens.com/opinion/2013-03-27/kass-religious-tolerance-and-marriage-debate

Ask the people who were intolerant of bi-racial marriage based on their religion. They may hold the answer you're looking for.

Ooooh, and now the race card gets thrown. Damn, that's mighty thin gruel you are serving up today Lib. FYI gay marriage is nowhere equivalent to miscegenation. You insult the entire Civil Rights Movement and the gains achieved with that bullshit argument. Blacks have time and time again overwhelmingly supported traditional marriage amendments to state constitutions and initiatives/propositions like Prop 8 in California. Exit polls revealed that 70% of the black vote supported Prop 8 in 2008.

Hmmm. I never even mentioned the Civil Rights movement or the "blacks" as you call
them. I guess when it comes to race, the close-minded only believe in two of them. Very telling.

You are an obtuse one aren't you? You drew a moral equivalence to gay marriage and miscegenation laws which were in effect during the Civil Rights movement of the 60's. In fact Loving vs Virginia which ended all laws prohibiting racially mixed marriages didn't happen until 1967. Your drawing of that moral equivalence is an insult to the Civil Rights Movement which did include all people of color. However it is obvious the intellectually feeble are incapable of grasping that fact.

BladeRunner wrote:Question for those that believe that gays are born that way.

What happens in the case of identical twins one is homosexual, one is not?

Liberal wrote:

Your subconscious need to appear intellectually superior has made you appear foolish yet again. Never once did I mention miscegenation, “blacks”, civil rights, etc, yet you can’t help but make my argument for me (which, by the way, has nothing to do with anything I’ve said in this discussion).

That method may appease the simple-minded (which I imagine is your goal).

Liberal wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:Question for those that believe that gays are born that way.

What happens in the case of identical twins one is homosexual, one is not?

One is gay and one isn't. How tough was that one? Did you really think that question was some sort of mind-blowing revelation?

BladeRunner wrote:

Liberal wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:Question for those that believe that gays are born that way.

What happens in the case of identical twins one is homosexual, one is not?

One is gay and one isn't. How tough was that one? Did you really think that question was some sort of mind-blowing revelation?

Think about it. Identical twins have the same DNA, don't they? How can one be born gay and the other not?

BladeRunner wrote:

Liberal wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:Question for those that believe that gays are born that way.

What happens in the case of identical twins one is homosexual, one is not?

One is gay and one isn't. How tough was that one? Did you really think that question was some sort of mind-blowing revelation?

Think about it. Identical twins have the same DNA, don't they? How can one be born gay and the other not?

Liberal wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:

Liberal wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:Question for those that believe that gays are born that way.

What happens in the case of identical twins one is homosexual, one is not?

One is gay and one isn't. How tough was that one? Did you really think that question was some sort of mind-blowing revelation?

Think about it. Identical twins have the same DNA, don't they? How can one be born gay and the other not?

If one identical twin gets cancer, does that mean the other one has cancer too? Think about it and error on the side of not retarded.

Liberal wrote:

Darth Cheney wrote:Because bi-racial is the same thing as one guy sticking his slong up another guys rear end. I doubt many bi-racial couples would be pleased with your little analogy.

You really are obsessed with anal sex, aren't you. I've truly never met anyone as fixated on anal sex as you are. A Psychologist's dream client if you ask me.

Liberal wrote:
Your subconscious need to appear intellectually superior has made you appear foolish yet again. Never once did I mention miscegenation, “blacks”, civil rights, etc, yet you can’t help but make my argument for me (which, by the way, has nothing to do with anything I’ve said in this discussion).

That method may appease the simple-minded (which I imagine is your goal).

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

You are an obtuse one aren't you? You drew a moral equivalence to gay marriage and miscegenation laws which were in effect during the Civil Rights movement of the 60's. In fact Loving vs Virginia which ended all laws prohibiting racially mixed marriages didn't happen until 1967. Your drawing of that moral equivalence is an insult to the Civil Rights Movement which did include all people of color. However it is obvious the intellectually feeble are incapable of grasping that fact.

Freedom Forever wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

You are an obtuse one aren't you? You drew a moral equivalence to gay marriage and miscegenation laws which were in effect during the Civil Rights movement of the 60's. In fact Loving vs Virginia which ended all laws prohibiting racially mixed marriages didn't happen until 1967. Your drawing of that moral equivalence is an insult to the Civil Rights Movement which did include all people of color. However it is obvious the intellectually feeble are incapable of grasping that fact.

 

Libtard/Raider Fan,  This is a perfect example of you having your ass handed to you on a platter.  See how it works?

BladeRunner wrote:

Liberal wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:Question for those that believe that gays are born that way.

What happens in the case of identical twins one is homosexual, one is not?

One is gay and one isn't. How tough was that one? Did you really think that question was some sort of mind-blowing revelation?

Think about it. Identical twins have the same DNA, don't they? How can one be born gay and the other not?

Freedom Forever wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

You are an obtuse one aren't you? You drew a moral equivalence to gay marriage and miscegenation laws which were in effect during the Civil Rights movement of the 60's. In fact Loving vs Virginia which ended all laws prohibiting racially mixed marriages didn't happen until 1967. Your drawing of that moral equivalence is an insult to the Civil Rights Movement which did include all people of color. However it is obvious the intellectually feeble are incapable of grasping that fact.

 

Libtard/Raider Fan,  This is a perfect example of you having your ass handed to you on a platter.  See how it works?

RedWhiteBlue wrote:

Freedom Forever wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

You are an obtuse one aren't you? You drew a moral equivalence to gay marriage and miscegenation laws which were in effect during the Civil Rights movement of the 60's. In fact Loving vs Virginia which ended all laws prohibiting racially mixed marriages didn't happen until 1967. Your drawing of that moral equivalence is an insult to the Civil Rights Movement which did include all people of color. However it is obvious the intellectually feeble are incapable of grasping that fact.

 

Libtard/Raider Fan,  This is a perfect example of you having your ass handed to you on a platter.  See how it works?

What? How so?
Gomezz went off on his own tangent (certainly not a first for him), that was inapplicable to anything liberal said. Looks like Gomezz was handing his own ass off to himself.

RedWhiteBlue wrote:Blade - are you attempting to equate DNA to genetics?
This forum is a hoot today.

Liberal wrote:

Freedom Forever wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

You are an obtuse one aren't you? You drew a moral equivalence to gay marriage and miscegenation laws which were in effect during the Civil Rights movement of the 60's. In fact Loving vs Virginia which ended all laws prohibiting racially mixed marriages didn't happen until 1967. Your drawing of that moral equivalence is an insult to the Civil Rights Movement which did include all people of color. However it is obvious the intellectually feeble are incapable of grasping that fact.

 

Libtard/Raider Fan,  This is a perfect example of you having your ass handed to you on a platter.  See how it works?

I already addressed that non-sense above. Although I'm not surprised that you missed it. By the way, what's with the whole Raider Fan thing and what does "Are you reply to yourself?" mean?