If bigots didnt raise their brats to be hateful humans, Timmy wouldnt get picked on by his peers.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Originally posted by RazorbackDundee:
Adopting a child and raising them with two mothers or two fathers is not going to do any harm at all right?. They will go through school and not get picked on right? . Could add 100 other things but it is not worth it.
Dundee- a child needs to be loved unconditionally and in a safe environment. people who adopt, whether they are both mothers or both fathers, go through a lot to have a child. and they are often advised on educational pieces to help the child adjust.
going through our own issues having a baby, i am unfortunately drawn to the trash walking around who are parents. or soon to be parents. i see red. two years ago whiskey had to step in front of me because i saw an effing idiot smoking while her pregnant stomach was so obvious. do you think that kid is happy right now? or how about the kids who had a mother and a father but one of them bounced so now they have to step up and not be a kid anymore?
i'm not concerned about kids with gay parents. i'm more concerned about the ones who's names are bandit, or moon, or apple or any other idiotic "cool" name that will ensue teasing
Meh, if you want my honest opinion, 10 years ago, you'd probably right. However, I fully expect this to be normal in 10 years, so, looking forward, I don't see it being a big issue.Originally posted by RazorbackDundee:
Originally posted by HogGotti:
Good. Let people live their lives how they want, as long as it's not causing any harm.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Adopting a child and raising them with two mothers or two fathers is not going to do any harm at all right?. They will go through school and not get picked on right? . Could add 100 other things but it is not worth it.
Also PorkerPig bought up something very real. Where do we draw the line?. Is incest o.k.? Is having sex with animals O.K.? . Some do it , and it is taboo "right now" , however they do it in the privacy of their home right?.
I assure you that I rarely call anyone a name on here. Go through every single post I've ever made and you might find 2-3 where I've called someone a name.Originally posted by Insowniac:
Can you not have a discussion hhp. Seems like all you ever do is call people names.
NO.Originally posted by murp:
Lolly,
He is now. I'm so god dang sick hearing about homo's. This country
has serious issues that effect all 330 million people. Homo marriage
ain't one of em. Progressives won't be happy until they have destroyed
everything good and pure about our country. This country was founded on Judeo Christian Values!!!!
Period! End of story! Christian or not, these values jscd allowed
this country to adapt and become the most blessed in the history of
civilization! These people, judges, and vocal minority won't stop
until there is nothing left of egat once was. We aren't immuned from
destruction anymore than any other powerful empire before us. This
country is gone!
But, but, but, um, um, we want our country back.Originally posted by razorback9455:
NO.Originally posted by murp:
Lolly,
He is now. I'm so god dang sick hearing about homo's. This country
has serious issues that effect all 330 million people. Homo marriage
ain't one of em. Progressives won't be happy until they have destroyed
everything good and pure about our country. This country was founded on Judeo Christian Values!!!!
Period! End of story! Christian or not, these values jscd allowed
this country to adapt and become the most blessed in the history of
civilization! These people, judges, and vocal minority won't stop
until there is nothing left of egat once was. We aren't immuned from
destruction anymore than any other powerful empire before us. This
country is gone!
It was not. Just because youve been told that over and over during your
life by other people that were told that over and over during their
lives does not make it true.
As an example, Thomas Jefferson -
the man that wrote the declaration of independence and served as 3rd
president - was a deist. He also was a self proclaimed Epicurean.
Assuming you arent familiar with that, Epicurus was an ancient Greek
philosopher that created a philosophy of seeking pleasure (more so
mental than material) as lifes greatest purpose. The "pursuit of
happiness" in the DOI is a reference to Epicurean philosophy. The
philosophy, again one that one of the founders subscribed to, runs in
direct opposition to "Judeo Christian Values" because those values
preach, quite literally, the denial of pleasure in this life to gain
pleasure in the next.
If you would like to go to mountvernon.org
its also spelled out quite clearly that George Washington's religious
affiliation and beliefs are a point of contention. You know why thats
interesting? Because no matter what he believed, he obviously didnt
believe in pushing his beliefs on other people. If he had wanted to
found a country on Christian values, I imagine he would have been more
vocal and less ambiguous in his own beliefs.
You can google this
also if you would like. Benjamin Franklin on his religious views: "I
believe in one God, Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by
His Providence. That he ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable
Service we render to him, is doing Good to his other Children. That the
Soul of Man is immortal, and will be treated with Justice in another
Life respecting its Conduct in this ... As for Jesus of Nazareth ... I
think the system of Morals and Religion as he left them to us, the best
the World ever saw ... but I have ... some Doubts to his Divinity;
though' it is a Question I do not dogmatism upon, having never studied
it, and think it is needless to busy myself with it now, where I expect
soon an Opportunity of knowing the Truth with less Trouble."
He
may have looked to Jesus for answers on morality, but he didnt even
believe in his divinity. How are you going to help found a country on a
principle you dont believe in? Looking to Jesus for answers on morality
when not believing in his divinity is no different in looking to
philosophers for the same answer.
John Adams also rejected the
divinity of Christ and the holy trinity. Also available via google from
reputable websites that are not wikipedia.
Feel free to move to another oneOriginally posted by Treeclimber2:
This country has gone to sh!t over the last 30 years. Its no coincidence that it started happening once the nation became more "liberal".
Unfortunately, Tree climber is right.Originally posted by hpharri1994:
Feel free to move to another oneOriginally posted by Treeclimber2:
This country has gone to sh!t over the last 30 years. Its no coincidence that it started happening once the nation became more "liberal".
You completely fail at reading comprehension. Im not surprised. Also, no hate was being "spewed." I presented you with facts. Ignore them if you want. I find great solace in the fact that the world will continue to spin whether or not you and people like you want it to.Originally posted by murp:
Judeo Christian Values! Values! The values! The values!!! One more time, this country's values! Unlike that of every country in the Middle East which are founded and guided my Islamic principals! The values of Christ are what's being discussed here, not if he is the son of god! They don't have to be one in the same. You can believe that the teachings of the bible are productive for society without acknowledging Jesus Christ is your lord and savior! Anyone that believes the teachings of Jesus were a bad way for ones society to live are just in bad bad shape. I feel sorry for you. I don't return the hate you spew to believers.
You believe everything you just said. Cool. A lot of people don't. As for their being evidence of a creator, people will see what they want to see when they look at the facts, or lack thereof, so its all relative - its all faith on both ends. Why does your faith supersede someone elses?Originally posted by treestandhog:
The moral and ethical depravity of this world, this country, and this board is stunning.....just totally unbelievable. There is so much more evidence to suggest that we do indeed have a Creator than there isn't. And those who "want" to see and understand, can see prophecy being fulfilled the farther in time we go, and seemingly gaining momentum.
God created Adam.....then He created Eve. They had children. THAT was and IS God's plan for mankind. Look....I don't care if people choose to be gay....I don't agree with it nor like it...but it's their business....they will be the ones to pay the price. But marriage IS a religious institution, as God said a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his WIFE....and they twain shall be ONE FLESH...... and government should NOT intervene or interfere in any way, shape or form.
But raising children in these gay households is wrong....and it doesn't matter that 50% of marriages end in divorce or that children are given up for adoption for any reason. A wrong doesn't justify another wrong....and it isn't HATE. That's just a word ALL liberals throw out there when someone disagrees with them....it's become liberal political policy to call others who have views different from theirs "haters". It's just totally sad, mind-boggling, and dis-heartening at the direction our country and world society as a whole is heading. The ever growing social, ethical, moral perversion is staggering. We had so much promise, then we let it all slip away. Many of you may not believe in God...but that doesn't mean He doesn't exist....it's sad, and you will assuredly be judged one day soon.
You say there is much more evidence that we have a creator. Can you list any FACTS that support that claim?Originally posted by treestandhog:
The moral and ethical depravity of this world, this country, and this board is stunning.....just totally unbelievable. There is so much more evidence to suggest that we do indeed have a Creator than there isn't. And those who "want" to see and understand, can see prophecy being fulfilled the farther in time we go, and seemingly gaining momentum.
God created Adam.....then He created Eve. They had children. THAT was and IS God's plan for mankind. Look....I don't care if people choose to be gay....I don't agree with it nor like it...but it's their business....they will be the ones to pay the price. But marriage IS a religious institution, as God said a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his WIFE....and they twain shall be ONE FLESH...... and government should NOT intervene or interfere in any way, shape or form.
But raising children in these gay households is wrong....and it doesn't matter that 50% of marriages end in divorce or that children are given up for adoption for any reason. A wrong doesn't justify another wrong....and it isn't HATE. That's just a word ALL liberals throw out there when someone disagrees with them....it's become liberal political policy to call others who have views different from theirs "haters". It's just totally sad, mind-boggling, and dis-heartening at the direction our country and world society as a whole is heading. The ever growing social, ethical, moral perversion is staggering. We had so much promise, then we let it all slip away. Many of you may not believe in God...but that doesn't mean He doesn't exist....it's sad, and you will assuredly be judged one day soon.
Right back at ya.Originally posted by hpharri1994:
RazorbackDundee, you are one of the stupidest people I've ever encountered.Originally posted by RazorbackDundee:
Originally posted by HogGotti:
Good. Let people live their lives how they want, as long as it's not causing any harm.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Adopting a child and raising them with two mothers or two fathers is not going to do any harm at all right?. They will go through school and not get picked on right? . Could add 100 other things but it is not worth it.
Also PorkerPig bought up something very real. Where do we draw the line?. Is incest o.k.? Is having sex with animals O.K.? . Some do it , and it is taboo "right now" , however they do it in the privacy of their home right?.
Churches are not compelled to marry anyone, including homosexuals. The law only regards governmental recognition of the marriage for legal reasons (transfer of property, etc...).Originally posted by pokerpig:
One question for the liberals out there. Which perverted lifestyles are ok and which are not in your book? The standard used by most liberals is that if it's two consenting adults engaging in homosexual behavior then it's ok. So why would you not be beating the drum to legalize incest. One poster even stated that people should be allowed to live their life as they see fit as long as they don't hurt anyone else, so is said poster in favor of incest? I could really care less about what adults do in the privacy of their bedroom, but to flaunt perverted behavior and drag it into the public domain and pretend it's "just a different lifestyle" and demand imagined constitutional rights because of said behavior, gets a little old, at least call it what it is. Hell, if homosexuals are so proud of their lifestyle why do they insist that they be called "gay" instead of homosexuals. I also thought we had separation of church and state in this country, and since marriage is a religious ceremony, how did we reach the point where the government decides what marriage is? I'll wait for the liberals to explain why they would be for homosexuality but not incest.
Actually, the evolved from a common ancestor dating back to primordial ooze.Originally posted by treestandhog:
The moral and ethical depravity of this world, this country, and this board is stunning.....just totally unbelievable. There is so much more evidence to suggest that we do indeed have a Creator than there isn't. And those who "want" to see and understand, can see prophecy being fulfilled the farther in time we go, and seemingly gaining momentum.
God created Adam.....then He created Eve. They had children. THAT was and IS God's plan for mankind. Look....I don't care if people choose to be gay....I don't agree with it nor like it...but it's their business....they will be the ones to pay the price. But marriage IS a religious institution, as God said a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his WIFE....and they twain shall be ONE FLESH...... and government should NOT intervene or interfere in any way, shape or form.
But raising children in these gay households is wrong....and it doesn't matter that 50% of marriages end in divorce or that children are given up for adoption for any reason. A wrong doesn't justify another wrong....and it isn't HATE. That's just a word ALL liberals throw out there when someone disagrees with them....it's become liberal political policy to call others who have views different from theirs "haters". It's just totally sad, mind-boggling, and dis-heartening at the direction our country and world society as a whole is heading. The ever growing social, ethical, moral perversion is staggering. We had so much promise, then we let it all slip away. Many of you may not believe in God...but that doesn't mean He doesn't exist....it's sad, and you will assuredly be judged one day soon.
I imagine you subscribe to bestiality also Mackey (prolly have it as your main porn source) . Also you mentioned "same for bigots Marrying"? . Are you really that freaking psychotic?. It is an opinion a person has and has zero to do with what the thread is about.Originally posted by ermackey:
Churches are not compelled to marry anyone, including homosexuals. The law only regards governmental recognition of the marriage for legal reasons (transfer of property, etc...).Originally posted by pokerpig:
One question for the liberals out there. Which perverted lifestyles are ok and which are not in your book? The standard used by most liberals is that if it's two consenting adults engaging in homosexual behavior then it's ok. So why would you not be beating the drum to legalize incest. One poster even stated that people should be allowed to live their life as they see fit as long as they don't hurt anyone else, so is said poster in favor of incest? I could really care less about what adults do in the privacy of their bedroom, but to flaunt perverted behavior and drag it into the public domain and pretend it's "just a different lifestyle" and demand imagined constitutional rights because of said behavior, gets a little old, at least call it what it is. Hell, if homosexuals are so proud of their lifestyle why do they insist that they be called "gay" instead of homosexuals. I also thought we had separation of church and state in this country, and since marriage is a religious ceremony, how did we reach the point where the government decides what marriage is? I'll wait for the liberals to explain why they would be for homosexuality but not incest.
While Incest is gross, I am for recognizing consensual incest marriages too, if it becomes and issue (I doubt it will). Same for consensual polygamy. Same for bigiots marrying. The 14th amendment is clear. Try reading it.
I understand why you believe it. You arent making a case for why anyone else should believe it or why it should be used to legislate, which is the real issue. You can not legislate for an entire country based on religion. If you want examples of how thats working out, look to countries like Iran.Originally posted by treestandhog:
Your right razorback9455....not everyone believes in the Bible. But you asked what evidence I had as to why I believed. And not believing in the Bible does not mean that it's not both real and true either. What's been written in the Bible IS being fulfilled as we speak.....and written over 2000 years ago. There are things in there that are beyond explanation.....unless there IS a God and the prophecy IS real. Like I said before.....if this all is real, then you, I, and everyone else on this earth have only two destination choices.....and the final days are coming soon. I truly hope you re-evaluate your beliefs, before it's too late.
Actually, no. Bestiality is probably not consensual for the animal. Not for incest either. Just don't think the government should get involved in peoples consensual sex lives.Originally posted by RazorbackDundee:
I imagine you subscribe to bestiality also Mackey (prolly have it as your main porn source) . Also you mentioned "same for bigots Marrying"? . Are you really that freaking psychotic?. It is an opinion a person has and has zero to do with what the thread is about.Originally posted by ermackey:
Churches are not compelled to marry anyone, including homosexuals. The law only regards governmental recognition of the marriage for legal reasons (transfer of property, etc...).Originally posted by pokerpig:
One question for the liberals out there. Which perverted lifestyles are ok and which are not in your book? The standard used by most liberals is that if it's two consenting adults engaging in homosexual behavior then it's ok. So why would you not be beating the drum to legalize incest. One poster even stated that people should be allowed to live their life as they see fit as long as they don't hurt anyone else, so is said poster in favor of incest? I could really care less about what adults do in the privacy of their bedroom, but to flaunt perverted behavior and drag it into the public domain and pretend it's "just a different lifestyle" and demand imagined constitutional rights because of said behavior, gets a little old, at least call it what it is. Hell, if homosexuals are so proud of their lifestyle why do they insist that they be called "gay" instead of homosexuals. I also thought we had separation of church and state in this country, and since marriage is a religious ceremony, how did we reach the point where the government decides what marriage is? I'll wait for the liberals to explain why they would be for homosexuality but not incest.
While Incest is gross, I am for recognizing consensual incest marriages too, if it becomes and issue (I doubt it will). Same for consensual polygamy. Same for bigiots marrying. The 14th amendment is clear. Try reading it.
I expect to see you either in the nut house or in prison in the near future as you are one sick puppy dude. You might wonder why so many on here call you a moron and an idiot etc etc etc etc , well head the advice and take a step back and look in the mirror.
Solid post. Pretty much where I stand as well.Originally posted by Method Ham:
II am Christian - a practicing Methodist who attends church every Sunday. I believe in the Bible, and Jesus Christ as my Lord and savior. I think Jesus loves homosexuals as much as you and me. I don't have a problem with homosexuals marrying. If it helps them solidify their commitment to each other, then so be it. It does have the added benefit of property transfer, health coverage, etc. I am not threatened by what they choose to do - it's their life not mine. If they don't make it into heaven, they'll have to deal with it, not me. Of course I wonder about all of the sin in my own life - will my sin be viewed more favorably than theirs? I don't know because I don't remember seeing a weighted list of sins in the Bible.
One thing I would encourage non- believers to keep in mind is that tree standhog does not represent the rest of us - only himself.
Wow man, you really need to get out and experience the world. Why do you call it a "perverted lifestyle? And let me ask you a question, when did you "choose" to like women? Or did it just come naturally to you? And why do you think gays "choose" to be that way? Is it because that's what you were taught growing up or what? I'll hang up and listen.....Originally posted by pokerpig:
One question for the liberals out there. Which perverted lifestyles are ok and which are not in your book? The standard used by most liberals is that if it's two consenting adults engaging in homosexual behavior then it's ok. So why would you not be beating the drum to legalize incest. One poster even stated that people should be allowed to live their life as they see fit as long as they don't hurt anyone else, so is said poster in favor of incest? I could really care less about what adults do in the privacy of their bedroom, but to flaunt perverted behavior and drag it into the public domain and pretend it's "just a different lifestyle" and demand imagined constitutional rights because of said behavior, gets a little old, at least call it what it is. Hell, if homosexuals are so proud of their lifestyle why do they insist that they be called "gay" instead of homosexuals. I also thought we had separation of church and state in this country, and since marriage is a religious ceremony, how did we reach the point where the government decides what marriage is? I'll wait for the liberals to explain why they would be for homosexuality but not incest.
I wish there were more like you....Originally posted by Method Ham:
II am Christian - a practicing Methodist who attends church every Sunday. I believe in the Bible, and Jesus Christ as my Lord and savior. I think Jesus loves homosexuals as much as you and me. I don't have a problem with homosexuals marrying. If it helps them solidify their commitment to each other, then so be it. It does have the added benefit of property transfer, health coverage, etc. I am not threatened by what they choose to do - it's their life not mine. If they don't make it into heaven, they'll have to deal with it, not me. Of course I wonder about all of the sin in my own life - will my sin be viewed more favorably than theirs? I don't know because I don't remember seeing a weighted list of sins in the Bible.
One thing I would encourage non- believers to keep in mind is that tree standhog does not represent the rest of us - only himself.
Originally posted by pokerpig:
One question for the liberals out there. Which perverted lifestyles are ok and which are not in your book? The standard used by most liberals is that if it's two consenting adults engaging in homosexual behavior then it's ok. So why would you not be beating the drum to legalize incest. One poster even stated that people should be allowed to live their life as they see fit as long as they don't hurt anyone else, so is said poster in favor of incest? I could really care less about what adults do in the privacy of their bedroom, but to flaunt perverted behavior and drag it into the public domain and pretend it's "just a different lifestyle" and demand imagined constitutional rights because of said behavior, gets a little old, at least call it what it is. Hell, if homosexuals are so proud of their lifestyle why do they insist that they be called "gay" instead of homosexuals. I also thought we had separation of church and state in this country, and since marriage is a religious ceremony, how did we reach the point where the government decides what marriage is?[/B] I'll wait for the liberals to explain why they would be for homosexuality but not incest.
I think you could probably stand to do a little research on what marriage in this country actually is.
Thanks for the sanity. I couldn't agree with you more.Originally posted by Method Ham:
II am Christian - a practicing Methodist who attends church every Sunday. I believe in the Bible, and Jesus Christ as my Lord and savior. I think Jesus loves homosexuals as much as you and me. I don't have a problem with homosexuals marrying. If it helps them solidify their commitment to each other, then so be it. It does have the added benefit of property transfer, health coverage, etc. I am not threatened by what they choose to do - it's their life not mine. If they don't make it into heaven, they'll have to deal with it, not me. Of course I wonder about all of the sin in my own life - will my sin be viewed more favorably than theirs? I don't know because I don't remember seeing a weighted list of sins in the Bible.
One thing I would encourage non- believers to keep in mind is that tree standhog does not represent the rest of us - only himself.