LGBT History Month

[Right Divider]

I'm sharp enough to recognize the usual, fundamentalist belief system after having been in a church that taught a lot of the very same stuff that you parrot. Unlike you, I'm sharp enough to avoid arrogant assumptions as you did but that's often par for the course with hard line religious zealots. They often equate lack of agreement with their zealotry with atheism. You weren't the first...

You certainly think that you are.

It's pretty much a descriptor for those who think they believe in the fundamentals of bible teaching. As a label it may be a bit derogatory as it's often associated with those who take so much literally in the bible that they can't entertain anything outside of dogma, hence hangups with evolution, homosexuality etc.

Yes, I've seen that your disbelief in virtually all of the Bible leads your to appear to be an atheist. Gee, I wonder why I thought that you were.

Hey, I won't refer to you as a fundamentalist anymore if it irks you although at least there was reason for it. You had none and still haven't for referring to me as an atheist.

Hogwash.

The starting place would be for you to answer as to whether you're in control of your attractions or not, a question you've been asked several times and haven't even attempted to give an honest response to.

No, the starting place is what we believe about the ORIGIN of human sexuality. The fact that you deny this and harp on your all important "question" speaks volumes about your fundamentalism.

 

[glorydaz]

Basic stuff in turn. If straight - no homosexual attraction - nothing to act on. If attracted to same sex - not straight.

Not quite. Everyone is straight unless a disruption of some sort takes place.

For many, it's all they know, having been abused from a young age.

For others, they were told they were a "fag" from a young age, and when in their vulnerable pubescent years, they were enticed by an older boy or man, they succumbed to pressure.

Others have already tried everything, and look to the dark side. The darker the better. Masochistic almost.


That's only a couple of examples, but there is simply no point in wasting any more time discussing this with you. You really aren't one to listen to what others try and tell you.

 

[Arthur Brain]

You certainly think that you are.

Years of experience...

Yes, I've seen that your disbelief in virtually all of the Bible leads your to appear to be an atheist. Gee, I wonder why I thought that you were.

Because you're a hard line religious zealot where doctrine and dogma so often trump objectivity and reason. There's no cognitive dissonance with accepting evolution and still having theistic belief by way of example. Not so for fundamentalists however.

Hogwash.

No, you had none. I even challenged you to find any quote of mine arguing against the existence of God or even belief itself. You didn't take it up and you'd have failed if you did.

No, the starting place is what we believe about the ORIGIN of human sexuality. The fact that you deny this and harp on your all important "question" speaks volumes about your fundamentalism.

Nope, and the fact that you still can't just give an honest answer to the question, whatever that might happen to be speaks even more volumes.

 

[Ktoyou]

You certainly think that you are.


Yes, I've seen that your disbelief in virtually all of the Bible leads your to appear to be an atheist. Gee, I wonder why I thought that you were.


Hogwash.


No, the starting place is what we believe about the ORIGIN of human sexuality. The fact that you deny this and harp on your all important "question" speaks volumes about your fundamentalism.

There is always fundamentalism, at least for most people. If one does not have the Biblical fundamentalism, then one becomes fundamentalist about all equal treatment and no prejudice, no moral righteousness, and making animals equal morally speaking to humans, but special because they are more innocent.

Eventually if asked, " if you could only save one drowning, a dog, or a human?" They will answer the dog. I have seen this as a poll question on another forum.

Best for old persons to be gone from this world before animals are treated better than human beings, as it is beginning now and it is apt!!

 

[Arthur Brain]

Not quite. Everyone is straight unless a disruption of some sort takes place.

For many, it's all they know, having been abused from a young age.

For others, they were told they were a "fag" from a young age, and when in their vulnerable pubescent years, they were enticed by an older boy or man, they succumbed to pressure.

Others have already tried everything, and look to the dark side. The darker the better. Masochistic almost.


That's only a couple of examples, but there is simply no point in wasting any more time discussing this with you. You really aren't one to listen to what others try and tell you.

Oh, for people like you there just has to be some sort of disruption to a person's life or an "event" or some such thing. It can't compute for you that there may just be people in the world who are bi or homosexual without such as it would contradict your belief system.

 

[glorydaz]

Oh, for people like you there just has to be some sort of disruption to a person's life or an "event" or some such thing. It can't compute for you that there may just be people in the world who are bi or homosexual without such as it would contradict your belief system.

Call me a realist. I'm fine with that.

I hate what dwelling in LALA land has done to you folks. That's you cross to bear.

 

[Arthur Brain]

There is always fundamentalism, at least for most people. If one does not have the Biblical fundamentalism, then one becomes fundamentalist about all equal treatment and no prejudice, no moral righteousness, and making animals equal morally speaking to humans, but special because they are more innocent.

Eventually if asked, " if you could only save one drowning, a dog, or a human?" They will answer the dog. I have seen this as a poll question on another forum.

Best for old persons to be gone from this world before animals are treated better than human beings, as it is beginning now and it is apt!!

I'm all for the ethical treatment of animals but if it was a choice between saving a person or any animal from drowning then it would be the person all of the time. Don't need to be a fundamentalist for that.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Call me a realist. I'm fine with that.

I hate what dwelling in LALA land has done to you folks. That's you cross to bear.

Well, it hasn't made me a loopy conspiracy theorist or a nut who equates some imaginary plight of Christians with the victims of the Holocaust so meh...

 

[Right Divider]

Years of experience...

Years of hypocrisy...

Because you're a hard line religious zealot where doctrine and dogma trump so often trump objectivity and reason. There's no cognitive dissonance with accepting evolution and still having theistic belief by way of example. Not so for fundamentalists however.

Libel and attempted guilt by association. Your false tricks are nothing new.

No, you had none. I even challenged you to find any quote of mine arguing against the existence of God or even belief itself. You didn't take it up and you'd have failed if you did.

I've seen your agreement with the atheists in other threads. I don't need to write a book about you.

Nope, and the fact that you still can't just give an honest answer to the question, whatever that might happen to be speaks even more volumes.

Once AGAIN, to the deaf, dumb and blind... I'm not going to answer that question until we can determine where YOU think that the ORIGIN of human sexuality came from. If you want to keep stonewalling, then I will be forced to conclude that you do not believe that God created one man and one woman as the Bible says that He did. No doubt you next move will be something about "not taking that literally".

 

[Ktoyou]

I'm all for the ethical treatment of animals but if it was a choice between saving a person or any animal from drowning then it would be the person all of the time. Don't need to be a fundamentalist for that.

but you are in the process of change, I can see it. We used to allow complete ownership of animals, like the BIBLE SAYS, FOR PEOPLE have dominion, AND IF THEY WANT TO BREED THEM, IT WAS A RATIONAL CHOICE, BUT NOW WE CALL THIS 'PUPPY MILLS' AS IF THE OWNERS WHEN GRINDING THEM UP, AND THEN THEY ARE ARRESTED AND THE BREED DOGS ARE MADE INTO A SYMBOL OF ANIMAL TRIUMPH; I have seen it on the local news here; it is the most common news program here. Dogs and cats are being worshiped everywhere in the US today.

Soon, you will have to go though an adoption to have a pet, and then if you do not take care of it perfectly, the law will treat you worse than a human killer and lock you away for life. It will soon be seen by a new generation, as worse than being a pedophile!

If I had to have a pet at this point in my life I would move to a more sane country like Japan where rational mind prevail. I would get an Akita.

 

[Arthur Brain]

but you are in the process of change, I can see it. We used to allow complete ownership of animals, like the BIBLE SAYS, FOR PEOPLE have dominion, AND IF THEY WANT TO BREED THEM, IT WAS A RATIONAL CHOICE, BUT NOW WE CALL THIS 'PUPPY MILLS' AS IF THE OWNERS WHEN GRINDING THEM UP, AND THEN THEY ARE ARRESTED AND THE BREED DOGS ARE MADE INTO A SYMBOL OF ANIMAL TRIUMPH; I have seen it on the local news here; it is the most common news program here. Dogs and cats are being worshiped everywhere in the US today.

Soon, you will have to go though an adoption to have a pet, and then if you do not take care of it perfectly, the law will treat you worse than a human killer and lock you away for life. It will soon be seen by a new generation, as worse than being a pedophile!

If I had to have a pet at this point in my life I would move to a more sane country like Japan where rational mind prevail. I would get an Akita.

Well, I adopted a stray cat and we have nothing bonkers like that over here. We have laws that govern the farming of animals and laws that require the ethical treatment of those killed for food along with ones prohibiting any sort of cruelty to any animal whether pet or otherwise. That's as it should be as far as I'm concerned. If I were to torture an animal then I'd deserve to get prosecuted for it. I'd still value a human life above that of an animal as per your example beforehand though.

 

[Ktoyou]

Well, I adopted a stray cat and we have nothing bonkers like that over here. We have laws that govern the farming of animals and laws that require the ethical treatment of those killed for food along with ones prohibiting any sort of cruelty to any animal whether pet or otherwise. That's as it should be as far as I'm concerned. If I were to torture an animal then I'd deserve to get prosecuted for it. I'd still value a human life above that of an animal as per your example beforehand though.

But here we have it so if one leave home a few day and a cat is found in the house not fed just a day, one goes to jail while the pet becomes a media celebrity

 

[Arthur Brain]

Years of hypocrisy...

No, years of experience and I was so glad to get away from such 'teaching'. I won't deny I'm guilty of hypocrisy in my life and if you're honest you'll admit the same.

Libel and attempted guilt by association. Your false tricks are nothing new.

Well hey, sue me if you can make the case. I'd have more ammunition against you for categorically stating something that I'm not, an atheist. Nobody would win either but it's telling how vehemently you reacted to the above.

I've seen your agreement with the atheists in other threads. I don't need to write a book about you.

Which 'atheists' were they? You arrogantly assumed I was one so that's not much of an argument...and hey, even if they are then I've no problem agreeing with anyone if they're making a cogent and logical argument.

Once AGAIN, to the deaf, dumb and blind... I'm not going to answer that question until we can determine where YOU think that the ORIGIN of human sexuality came from. If you want to keep stonewalling, then I will be forced to conclude that you do not believe that God created one man and one woman as the Bible says that He did. No doubt you next move will be something about "not taking that literally".

You had ample opportunity to answer over the last few pages of this thread and this is the same stunt you pull time and again. Deflect and then insist the other person answers a question of yours and then "maybe" you'll answer in turn. Nothing doing.

 

[Arthur Brain]

But here we have it so if one leave home a few day and a cat is found in the house not fed just a day, one goes to jail while the pet becomes a media celebrity

Well, that's kinda crazy. Animal cruelty is taken seriously over here and I agree with that but it's reasoned...

 

[Right Divider]

You had ample opportunity to answer over the last few pages of this thread and this is the same stunt you pull time and again. Deflect and then insist the other person answers a question of yours and then "maybe" you'll answer in turn. Nothing doing.

So you won't commit to any ORIGIN of human sexuality, but you still vehemently insist that some people are stuck with unnatural attractions that are out of their control?

As I have said before, God does not force unnatural attractions on anyone.

 

[patrick jane]

No, years of experience and I was so glad to get away from such 'teaching'. I won't deny I'm guilty of hypocrisy in my life and if you're honest you'll admit the same.



Well hey, sue me if you can make the case. I'd have more ammunition against you for categorically stating something that I'm not, an atheist. Nobody would win either but it's telling how vehemently you reacted to the above.



Which 'atheists' were they? You arrogantly assumed I was one so that's not much of an argument...and hey, even if they are then I've no problem agreeing with anyone if they're making a cogent and logical argument.



You had ample opportunity to answer over the last few pages of this thread and this is the same stunt you pull time and again. Deflect and then insist the other person answers a question of yours and then "maybe" you'll answer in turn. Nothing doing.

You get peculiarly offended about being gay. You almost seem enraged at times, adamantly claiming you're straight in post after post. I'm glad your obsession with aCW has subsided momentarily, how embarrassing it was for you. Do you fear that you have gay tendencies? Or are you just braying?

 

[Arthur Brain]

So you won't commit to any ORIGIN of human sexuality, but you still vehemently insist that some people are stuck with unnatural attractions that are out of their control?

As I have said before, God does not force unnatural attractions on anyone.

Answer as to whether you're in control of yours and let's see where it goes, or don't. Up to you.

 

[Arthur Brain]

You get peculiarly offended about being gay. You almost seem enraged at times, adamantly claiming you're straight in post after post. I'm glad your obsession with aCW has subsided momentarily, how embarrassing it was for you. Do you fear that you have gay tendencies? Or are you just braying?

'Obsession with aCW'? Are you on crack? The guys a nut and so are you if you think the above. Geez, he's the one who thinks you have 478 aliases in case you forgot. No, I don't 'fear' I have gay tendencies as I don't have them and it's only religious crackpots who obsess over it. That answer your 'inquiry' dude?

:dizzy:

 

[Ktoyou]

Well, that's kinda crazy. Animal cruelty is taken seriously over here and I agree with that but it's reasoned...

Yes, if you see a stray puppy and deride to take it home, you are legally 'tied to the dog' meaning the dog has the same rights as a tenant, you cannot toss him out. If you decide not to keep the dog and you let him out in the country and drive away, if caught, you can be found responsible for all the shelter and medical costs for the dog's life. Best thing, never go near a stray dog or cat, or you own it and if you wish to get separated from it legally, you have to paly very expensive animal bills and all adoption costs.

It use to be, find a dog, ni wish to keep it all you had to do is take it to an animal shelter, and drop it off. These days, if you go to the animal shelter, they prejudge you as an animal abuser and if they believe so, it can be put on your permanent record and you might never get a job again, since many today in the USA think it worse thee=an being a sex offender.

Many persons take their lives everyday in the USA for making the mistake of picking up a dog or cat. Even hunting rabbits, if it turns out to be a pet, you can be sued.

 

[MrDante]

Not quite. Everyone is straight unless a disruption of some sort takes place.

A 'disruption' that no one can identify or find

For many, it's all they know, having been abused from a young age.

Even though the vast majority of gays and lesbians were not abused.

For others, they were told they were a "fag" from a young age, and when in their vulnerable pubescent years, they were enticed by an older boy or man, they succumbed to pressure.

they read the gay agenda's colorful brocures