Defending the Truth

Originally Posted by Grace

Ok lets take a look at the "knowledge and wisdom", brought to us by homosexuality. You represent less than 5 % of the population, yet have HALF of all Aids cases in the world. Drug and alcohol addiction is ramped in homosexuality, along with violence and suicide. Yea, thanks for all the knowledge and wisdom.

Ever hear of Sodom and Gamorra?

Originally Posted by englishsunflower

Have you ever though that a lot of the drug and alcohol addiction as well as the violence and suicide maybe coused by people like you???? People that dehumanise gays and make then fill they have no place on this earth. You say your a follower of christ?????

Originally Posted by Grace

I have never dehumanised anyone. I tell people the truth though the words of the God of Israel. And that is we are all sinners in need of salvation and repentance. Its not my fault that people are offened by truth. Im BY FAR harder on myself, then Ive ever been to anyone, regarding repentance. Yes, Im a follower of Christ. Who had no problem telling people to "sin no more".

Originally Posted by englishsunflower

A popular Ajax teen who would have turned 14 tomorrow hanged himself at home after being viciously cyber-bullied by classmates about being gay, his stepmom says.
Sandria Gillard, 46, said Shaquille Wisdom was online with a friend being told "not to do it" minutes before he hung himself from the stairs of her Annable Lane home on Oct. 20.
"He was such a polite, well-behaved boy," Gillard said of the Ajax High School Grade 9 student. "I am confused and haven't been able to return to my home or sleep in my bed."
She and her family have been staying with a friend in Scarborough since Shaquille's death because they're too upset to return home.
Gillard said Shaquille's body was found by his sister, Adrienne, 26, who is still traumatized. "She's still depressed and can't eat properly," she wept yesterday. "I don't know if she will ever be the same again."

News of the death surfaced yesterday during National Bullying Awareness week, established to recognize the dangers kids face physically and on the Internet.
Gillard said Shaquille, who loved school and was a popular student, wanted to be a movie producer. His problems began after he told a trusted friend he was gay.
The friend told others at school and outed Shaquille in June on websites created by students for bullying.
"They began calling him names and sending him ugly e-mails," Gillard said. "He couldn't hide from them and he didn't let others know."
Gillard, who works as a presser for a dry cleaning company and said she is not computer literate, said she didn't find out until the Oct. 27 funeral that Shaquille was being tormented at school.
"Later I was told that a friend was telling him on the computer not to do it (commit suicide)," she sobbed. "I was also told boys were taunting him at school."
She also found out that students had written e-mails, threatening him and making fun of his sexuality.
She said Shaquille was stuffed into a garbage can by students at his school just days before he committed suicide. "I am confused and looking for some answers," Gillard said. "He was right before me on the computer and next thing he's dead."
Ajax High School principal Phil Matsushita said he'd heard rumours from students about the popular student-council member. "He didn't show any signs of being a victim,"Matsushita said yesterday.



From the News Toronto 22 nov.2007

Originally Posted by Grace

Thats all very sad, but it has nothing to do with me, nor the message I try to bring to people, which includes all people, not just gay people. Christ told us to spread his message to the whole world, and thats what I try to do. I dont bully anyone, nor do I threaten anyone. This is not even close to the same thing.

Originally Posted by englishsunflower

I knew you would put a BUT in your post to this.You can't just look at the post for what it is.It doesn't fit onto your agenda

this was your post right???

Originally Posted by Grace
Ok lets take a look at the "knowledge and wisdom", brought to us by homosexuality. You represent less than 5 % of the population, yet have HALF of all Aids cases in the world. Drug and alcohol addiction is ramped in homosexuality, along with violence and suicide. Yea, thanks for all the knowledge and wisdom.

If you can't see what I am trying to say maybe you need to go back and read your good book again.

things like this go on everyday but it just doesn't reach the news.Its doesn't matter if he was gay or not.It matters that becouse he was not like others he was looked down on by peers.What are we teaching out children? Can't you see that when you condem others becouse thay are not like you or make them fill they are less of a person that you are doing the same thing.We are not here to preach to others.We are here to hopefully make this world a little better for ALL.

Originally Posted by Grace

And like I said, people are bullied all the time, wether there gay, or not.

Originally Posted by englishsunflower

A popular Ajax teen who would have turned 14 tomorrow hanged himself at home after being viciously cyber-bullied by classmates about being gay, his stepmom says.
Sandria Gillard, 46, said Shaquille Wisdom was online with a friend being told "not to do it" minutes before he hung himself from the stairs of her Annable Lane home on Oct. 20.
"He was such a polite, well-behaved boy," Gillard said of the Ajax High School Grade 9 student. "I am confused and haven't been able to return to my home or sleep in my bed."
She and her family have been staying with a friend in Scarborough since Shaquille's death because they're too upset to return home.
Gillard said Shaquille's body was found by his sister, Adrienne, 26, who is still traumatized. "She's still depressed and can't eat properly," she wept yesterday. "I don't know if she will ever be the same again."

News of the death surfaced yesterday during National Bullying Awareness week, established to recognize the dangers kids face physically and on the Internet.
Gillard said Shaquille, who loved school and was a popular student, wanted to be a movie producer. His problems began after he told a trusted friend he was gay.
The friend told others at school and outed Shaquille in June on websites created by students for bullying.
"They began calling him names and sending him ugly e-mails," Gillard said. "He couldn't hide from them and he didn't let others know."
Gillard, who works as a presser for a dry cleaning company and said she is not computer literate, said she didn't find out until the Oct. 27 funeral that Shaquille was being tormented at school.
"Later I was told that a friend was telling him on the computer not to do it (commit suicide)," she sobbed. "I was also told boys were taunting him at school."
She also found out that students had written e-mails, threatening him and making fun of his sexuality.
She said Shaquille was stuffed into a garbage can by students at his school just days before he committed suicide. "I am confused and looking for some answers," Gillard said. "He was right before me on the computer and next thing he's dead."
Ajax High School principal Phil Matsushita said he'd heard rumours from students about the popular student-council member. "He didn't show any signs of being a victim,"Matsushita said yesterday.
From the News Toronto 22 nov.2007

Originally Posted by Katczinsky

And simply telling me that you have managed to fit homosexuality into you "world view" doesn't answer the question "why" posed in the part of the post you quoted for this answer. Sexual attraction to animals is in a zoophiles "world view" and i think that is f'd up. Just "saying" homosexuality is okay by you just make your moral relative explaining it in a logical manner would be much more enlightening. And calling something a fallacy or slippery slope with no justification is just as worthless as your "world view".

I have been accused of having a pompous tone before. I'll admit to amping it up a bit here. I have my reasons though.

I don't have to show anything, you've presented yourself fully capable of showing your own fallaciousness.

That's pretty typical. "I'm in a debate, but I don't have to debate my side because I called the other guy fallacious". You hold on to that idea fella. Even though if you would read back, one thing is correct about that sentence, you haven't shown anything. Telling someone something without a "why" isn't showing JACK. I can tell you that the sky is falling, but without any supporting ideas, it's bullshit. Like your last few posts.

Hmm, I think you're having a hard time concentrating. Love doesn't necessarily have to be reciprocated but in the context of our discussion (namely, marriage), it does.

Love doesn't have to be reciprocated, even in a marriage. Especially if you are gonna make the idea about marriage "relative" and a "civil rights" issue. You are limiting the argument to fit your ideas. Heterosexuality doesn't need any limits on it's argument.

Hence the inherent fallacy in your slippery slope irrationalities of zoophilia and pedophila. Love between two men is simply not analogous to a man's love for a tree, and it certainly doesn't bring us anything of worth in the debate of gay marriage.

And there's where you are incorrect. The concepts are all interrelated. Love starts at the single individual. In heterosexuality, the male's to a female has purpose, reason, and accommodation. When you complete the circle with the female, the natural cycle is as complete as the cycle of water from the ocean to the sky to the ground to the rivers and back to the ocean.

Any other attraction is a break in the natural system. Humans can CHOOSE to gratify their sexual urges with latex, bottles, ben wa balls etc, but only ONE orientation is indicated by nature and should be represented my the word "marriage". You can rationalize all day long. But any rationalization will fall short of the near perfection of heterosexuality.

No I'm pointing out that the homosexual union is abnormal and should not be considered "normal" as it relates to "marriage". That's not assigning value, that's stating a fact, just as the other deviant orientations have their own set of natural barriers why they shouldn't be included. We "assign value" to them as well and you would probably agree.

And your ignorance and intolerance is demonstrated by your assertion that I am "intolerant" of homosexuality. I've never stated that homosexuals shouldn't be able to do anything but call their union a "marriage", but I'm fine with any other legal recognition. You are fine to call that intolerant if you like, but to many gay people, that's just fine. But I guess I should expect that attitude from a relativist such as yourself. Everything is "relative" to your point of view with no real foundation in logic or fact. Sound very philosophical.
Definition of philosophy - Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means

I disagree, I understand your relativistic thinking on this subject quite clearly. It's quite transparent. In fact you share a lot with the homosexual crowd. I'm not surprised you agree with their point of view.

Yes, quite really. And in any event, even if you were not the one to start it you don't seem to have any reproach from continuing on such a hijacking.

But that's not what you said....Maybe you ought to reflect...
"but in many instances you end up bringing gay issues into other topics"
I say sir again that YOU are a LIAR. And it is up to you to disprove said assertion. Or you can just be a liar. It's up to you. And remember you specifically said "many".

Obviously we're all sinners in this context at some points in our lives but I'm curious as to the instance that would render such an ad hominem (indeed, more fallacy from you) warranted in this discussion.

But you have been shown to be a liar here and now. I would say that some resemblance of integrity in what you say would be important to an "armchair philosopher" such as yourself. But you've been kicking that reputation in the ass pretty good here lately.

Other non-arguable topics is supposed to exclude the debate of gay marriage?
Quite interestingly I find debate in gay marriage with some, such as yourself, to be more unmovable and faithful in their convictions than any religious debate I may engage in. Even if a religious debate is non-arguable to which it usually is reduced to, I still engage in it because usually I gain at least some extent of value to which may be applicable in my quest of critical self-consciousness and reforming my metaphysical beliefs. One of the reasons why I usually so adamantly avoid topics such as gay marriage is because usually there is absolutely nothing valuable extractable from such discourse.

And a reason that I advise you to leave THIS debate is the same one that reflects my highlighted part of your statement...You won't sway me because there is NO circumstance that will present homosexuality in a light that totally fulfills the purpose of sexuality the way heterosexuality does. Viewed as a whole of humanity and life on the planet, there is no way you can come up with a reason for homosexuality to be called a "marriage". You can continue if you like...But I don't recommend it.

Congratulations that you find enjoyment in the suffering of others, because let me tell you I'm not enjoying this discussion in the least bit. I felt it imperative to respond because of some of the absurdities and misunderstandings you attacked with, some, that I felt just couldn't go unresponded to. But I guess I should thank you for testing my abilities to end worthless debate (or lack thereof) so that I may reform them.

In a debate forum, suffering might actually come up. But I don't see where not being married causes "suffering" though. It seems your hyperbole skills might need a bit of brushing up on as well.

Such as those who hold the indefensible position that animals (and apparently with you, trees) have a consciousness worthy of moral culpability and consent. Indeed, assigning intention behind nature is one of the most predictable and simultaneously folly of human perceptions.

There's that broken hyperbole muscle again. We don't assign any of that in animals or plants when we eat or use them for our goals, we make exception for women to abort obvious human life in the case of abortion, I don't see why, if we are gonna be relative, why a man shouldn't be able to marry another species in the name of "rights"....BULLSHIT
The folly of human perceptions is being told that homosexuality is a "natural human variation". That my dear sir is folly.

Which says nothing about cognitive maturity to the extent of consent and moral culpability.

You point? See above. That need not apply for animals. If we are gonna be relative, only in the case of harm should these laws apply. No proof of malicious intent or outcome from the "sexual orientation" of zoosexuality.

The natural end of procreation has sexual attraction, not marriage, as its means. Though, love can be independent of mere sexual attraction and vice-versa. Therefore love can play a entirely different biological reason for its existence. Surely, without love and a complete indifference to the conditions of other humans, the human race would not have survived just as it would not have survived had procreation not been of an interest.

I disagree, the natural beginning of procreation is attraction. Without attraction from one gender to the other, there is NO procreation under natural circumstances. And heterosexuality is the manifestation of that attraction. Any instinct that points that urge to partner with another person that is the same gender, not of reproductive age, or another species has an abnormal sexual attraction. The resultant "couple" should never be allowed to call that abnormal pairing a "marriage".

Love and procreation can exist without marriage, and vice versa. Marriage isn't a natural right endowed by the nature of our existences but is merely a man-made construct.

I agree that marriage is a man-made construct. But so is consent. The union of man and woman isn't. We have evolved in recent history to understand marriage and the union between one man and one woman is clear and distinct. We have also evolved to a point where we exclude child marriage in the equation using consent, IMHO "gay marriage" is a step backward in that evolution.

Yes, and when I said it, it was in sarcasm. I know it can be hard sometimes to pick out sarcasm in text, but surely, I thought the way I wrote it, it was obvious.