Is Rick Santorum right to compare homosexuality to beastiality?

[John Dibble]

I merely object to adding insult to injury by making the absurd claim that you've killed them because they 'deserved' it - that they were 'bad' based on some objective moral.

You state that all people who believe in objective morality are ignorant and irrational - that sounds pretty objective to me. And it sounds to me that you think such people 'deserve' to be killed. Go feed yourself to a lion, hypocrite.

[Inmate Trump]

I think there are multiple reasons.  Some are religious, so are just natural in leaning (gays cannot reproduce, therefore it's not what nature had intended), and others don't want to give into a special interest group claiming they deserve rights just because they choose to be gay.

Yea...about the interest group thing...I don't think being bi makes me special.  Or at least no more special than any other person.  I don't deserve any extra, or special, rights just for being of a different sexual orientation--that's crazy.

[John Dibble]

I think there are multiple reasons.  Some are religious, so are just natural in leaning (gays cannot reproduce, therefore it's not what nature had intended), and others don't want to give into a special interest group claiming they deserve rights just because they choose to be gay.

Yea...about the interest group thing...I don't think being bi makes me special.  Or at least no more special than any other person.  I don't deserve any extra, or special, rights just for being of a different sexual orientation--that's crazy.

Are you against hate crime legislation?

[MissCatholic]

Since the religious on here use God and Jesus to protect their homophobia i have a question to ask you.

Jesus promotes love. So do you have a problem with a gay couple adopting a child?

Gay loving home or life in foster care?

[MODU]

Since the religious on here use God and Jesus to protect their homophobia i have a question to ask you.

Jesus promotes love. So do you have a problem with a gay couple adopting a child?

Gay loving home or life in foster care?

Yet the Bible also is against homosexuality.  You can't pick and choose the parts of the Bible you want to follow.

[MissCatholic]

Since the religious on here use God and Jesus to protect their homophobia i have a question to ask you.

Jesus promotes love. So do you have a problem with a gay couple adopting a child?

Gay loving home or life in foster care?

Yet the Bible also is against homosexuality.  You can't pick and choose the parts of the Bible you want to follow.

Gay loving home or child spending years in foster care?

[MODU]

Gay loving home or child spending years in foster care?

Nothing wrong with foster care.  My friends niece has been in Foster care ever since she was removed from her mothers care.  We do, however, need a bit more policing of foster parents to ensure only those that are able actually receive the kids.

[MissCatholic]

Gay loving home or child spending years in foster care?

Nothing wrong with foster care.  My friends niece has been in Foster care ever since she was removed from her mothers care.  We do, however, need a bit more policing of foster parents to ensure only those that are able actually receive the kids.

So you are against a gay loving home.

Why are you an independent? i have read nothing from you regarding what good the democrats have done or what is wrong with the republican party?

[MODU]

So you are against a gay loving home.

Why are you an independent? i have read nothing from you regarding what good the democrats have done or what is wrong with the republican party?

Because I vote for whom I feel does the better job.  There are some things which I do not like of the republicans but do from the democrats, and on other things, neither party addresses the key issues in my mind. 

But back to the topic, yes, I would have issues with a gay couple raising a foster child.  I view gay as a sexual orientation of choice, not a genetic predisposition.  Therefore, I would not view such an enviroment to be healthy for a child, even if both partners love the kid.

[MissCatholic]

So you are against a gay loving home.

Why are you an independent? i have read nothing from you regarding what good the democrats have done or what is wrong with the republican party?

Because I vote for whom I feel does the better job.  There are some things which I do not like of the republicans but do from the democrats, and on other things, neither party addresses the key issues in my mind. 

But back to the topic, yes, I would have issues with a gay couple raising a foster child.  I view gay as a sexual orientation of choice, not a genetic predisposition.  Therefore, I would not view such an enviroment to be healthy for a child, even if both partners love the kid.

- you dont like Mark Warner
- you like Rick Santorum
- you dont like Hillary Clinton
- you like George Bush
- you dont like democrats policies on education.
- you like not funding education at all.
- you dont like democrats policy on healthcare
- you like the way republicians increse healthcare.
- you dont like democrats policy on Iraq.
- you like Republicans policy on Bin Laden.
- you dont like democrat policy on taxes.
- you like Republicans given so much to the rich.

Name me three democrats that you would vote for in 2008 ahead of Republicans such as George Allen, Rick Santorum or John McCain
Name me three policies that the democrats are right on with you and the Reupblicans are wrong?

Patroit act?
Abortion?
Death Penalty?
Guns?
 
What would a democrat have to say to you to get them to vote for you. As you can tell i think you would rather shoot your grandmother than vote democrat!

[MODU]

*sigh*  If you want to play this childish game:

- you dont like Mark Warner - What I said is I do not like him more than Allan, especially as a VA governor, since he forced an unnecessary tax increase in the state after holding the congress 'hostage' for days on end . . . just to turn out that we have had a $1Bill surplus in tax revenue for the past two years.  And since VA cannot do refunds, they are forced to spend this money.  I have said that of the potential democratic candidates for 2008, he or Joe-mentum would be two democrats I could consider voting for.

- you like Rick Santorum - Never said that.

- you dont like Hillary Clinton - No, I don't, and I have said that . . . often. 

- you like George Bush - Yes, I do.

- you dont like democrats policies on education. - No, I don't.  I don't like Republican policies on education either, though they are the only ones that have tried to make a change in recent years.  The current public education system is based off of a poor model which needs to be scrapped and redone. 

- you like not funding education at all. - Never said that (you're getting as bad as Shira these accusations hun).  I have said that there are better ways to fund and manage public education, and have preached to potential and current college students on how to maximize the money being offered by scholarships to off-set their educational expenses.

- you dont like democrats policy on healthcare - No, I don't.  I'm against programs that create a welfare state.  I'm also against some of the Republican plans and policies on this as well.

- you like the way republicians increse healthcare. - Uh, no.  See above.  I was glad to see that there was an increase in funding, but it should only be for a short term until a revamp of the system is done.  Making it more difficult to sue doctors is one good step towards lowering medical expenses.

- you dont like democrats policy on Iraq. - No, I don't like the democrats who put our troops in harms way by insulting them and embolding our enemies by saying they deserve the protections granted under US laws (which are meant only for US citizens).

- you like Republicans policy on Bin Laden. - Yes.  I want him tired and hanged.

- you dont like democrat policy on taxes. - That is correct.  I'm against
raising taxes.

- you like Republicans given so much to the rich.  - *yawn*  Rhetoric (and poor grammar).  I'm for a fair tax system.  Like it or not, the "rich" carry the largest burden of the current tax system, and will continue to do so under any other form of flat or scaled system.

Name me three democrats that you would vote for in 2008 ahead of Republicans such as George Allen, Rick Santorum or John McCain
Name me three policies that the democrats are right on with you and the Reupblicans are wrong?  - I mentioned the two I currently would consider voting for above.  I would not vote for Santorum or McCain (I've said that numerous times as well). 

Patroit act? - For it, especially the provisitions that were already available under the war on drugs.

Abortion? - Against it except in cases or rape, incest, or threat to mothers life.  I've discussed this one in depth in the past.  Paid for a friend of mine to have one done since the doctors weren't sure if she'd survive.  She changed her mind at the last minute and has a healthy little boy today.  Additionally, my cousin, who has a heart condition, had to have an abortion to save her, since the strain on her body had already caused one heart attack.

Death Penalty? - For it.

Guns? - For strong restrictions (see the debated between me and Carl)
 
What would a democrat have to say to you to get them to vote for you. As you can tell i think you would rather shoot your grandmother than vote democrat! - hahaha . . . no, my Grandma is too nice for that.    As far as what a democrat has to say . . . the answer is nothing.  This is a big flaw which so many people have when it comes to voting for someone.  I don't want to "hear" what they can promise me or do for me.  I want to see action and integrety.  ACTA NON VERBA - "Deeds, not words."  This is where Hillary falls dreadfully short, and has no chance in hell to receive my vote.

Feel better now?  As you can see, I'm not Republican nor do I follow the Republican line.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Gay loving home or child spending years in foster care?

That's like asking "swinger loving home or foster care?"

[John Dibble]

Gay loving home or child spending years in foster care?

That's like asking "swinger loving home or foster care?"

No it isn't - a gay couple can be monogamous, and I have seen such couples.

[Inmate Trump]

That's like asking "swinger loving home or foster care?"

Oh dear....

[opebo]

I merely object to adding insult to injury by making the absurd claim that you've killed them because they 'deserved' it - that they were 'bad' based on some objective moral.

You state that all people who believe in objective morality are ignorant and irrational - that sounds pretty objective to me.

No, it is not a value judgement, merely an observation of fact.  I don't think it is 'bad' that they are irrational and ignorant, just that they are different.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I don't think they 'deserve' to be killed - I have never stated that.  I have only said that I want to see them killed.  No one 'deserves' anything, as that implies objective morality.

[opebo]

Gay loving home or child spending years in foster care?

That's like asking "swinger loving home or foster care?"

I'm sure most swingers (as well as gays) would make better parents than you, cultist. 

[Speed of Sound]

this is a very interesting conversation.

[Everett]

Gay loving home or child spending years in foster care?

That's like asking "swinger loving home or foster care?"

I'm sure most swingers (as well as gays) would make better parents than you, cultist. 

I'm sure the 'cultist' would make a better parent than you, prude.

[John Dibble]

I merely object to adding insult to injury by making the absurd claim that you've killed them because they 'deserved' it - that they were 'bad' based on some objective moral.

You state that all people who believe in objective morality are ignorant and irrational - that sounds pretty objective to me.

No, it is not a value judgement, merely an observation of fact.

No, it's an opinion - you judge them as ignorant and irrational, you are making a judgement of other people whether you like it or not.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If it isn't bad then why should they be fed to lions?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I don't think they 'deserve' to be killed - I have never stated that.  I have only said that I want to see them killed.  No one 'deserves' anything, as that implies objective morality.
[/quote]

Then you shouldn't advocate feeding them to lions - if they don't have it coming to them then why should it be done? You can't give bullsh**t about being practical, because lions are an inefficient way of killing large masses of people, so if you didn't feel they didn't deserve it you wouldn't advocate such a thing.

[opebo]

I merely object to adding insult to injury by making the absurd claim that you've killed them because they 'deserved' it - that they were 'bad' based on some objective moral.

You state that all people who believe in objective morality are ignorant and irrational - that sounds pretty objective to me.

No, it is not a value judgement, merely an observation of fact.

No, it's an opinion - you judge them as ignorant and irrational, you are making a judgement of other people whether you like it or not.

I'm merely observing that they think differently than me (or by my definition not at all).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If it isn't bad then why should they be fed to lions?[/quote]

For the convenience and safetly of those they presume to judge.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I don't think they 'deserve' to be killed - I have never stated that.  I have only said that I want to see them killed.  No one 'deserves' anything, as that implies objective morality.
[/quote]

Then you shouldn't advocate feeding them to lions - if they don't have it coming to them then why should it be done? You can't give bullsh**t about being practical, because lions are an inefficient way of killing large masses of people, so if you didn't feel they didn't deserve it you wouldn't advocate such a thing.
[/quote]

No, they don't 'deserve' it, it is merely practical and convenient for the rest of us.  The lion method is merely charming, historically significant, and symbolic, but one could use other methods.

[John Dibble]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I don't think they 'deserve' to be killed - I have never stated that.  I have only said that I want to see them killed.  No one 'deserves' anything, as that implies objective morality.

Then you shouldn't advocate feeding them to lions - if they don't have it coming to them then why should it be done? You can't give bullsh**t about being practical, because lions are an inefficient way of killing large masses of people, so if you didn't feel they didn't deserve it you wouldn't advocate such a thing.
[/quote]

No, they don't 'deserve' it, it is merely practical and convenient for the rest of us.  The lion method is merely charming, historically significant, and symbolic, but one could use other methods.
[/quote]

AS I SAID you can't bullsh**t me about being practical - feeding people to lions isn't a practical method of mass killing. You hate those people and you're an intolerant, judging bastard who thinks he's better than them - you are no better than Hitler, scum.

[Speed of Sound]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I don't think they 'deserve' to be killed - I have never stated that.  I have only said that I want to see them killed.  No one 'deserves' anything, as that implies objective morality.

Then you shouldn't advocate feeding them to lions - if they don't have it coming to them then why should it be done? You can't give bullsh**t about being practical, because lions are an inefficient way of killing large masses of people, so if you didn't feel they didn't deserve it you wouldn't advocate such a thing.

No, they don't 'deserve' it, it is merely practical and convenient for the rest of us.  The lion method is merely charming, historically significant, and symbolic, but one could use other methods.
[/quote]

AS I SAID you can't bullsh**t me about being practical - feeding people to lions isn't a practical method of mass killing.
[/quote]You mean there is a practical way of mass killing?

[Gabu]

I skimmed through about the last six pages and I think I can safely say that this thread should be murdered and then buried.

[Everett]

I skimmed through about the last six pages and I think I can safely say that this thread should be murdered and then buried.

All right; I've sent this guy to destroy the thread and then dig a hole in the ground for it afterwards.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No it isn't - a gay couple can be monogamous, and I have seen such couples.

Well, it could also be that the swinging couple is 5'5" and the homosexual couple is 5'10", but I was comparing homosexuals to swingers because they are both immoral - Monogamy doesn't equate to morality.

You could simply ask the question, "Immoral actity xyz or foster care?":

Admitted and unrepenting daily dog beating, loving couple or foster care?...Admitted and unrepenting bank robbing, loving couple or foster care?...Admitted and unrepenting habitual lying, loving couple or foster care?...Admitted and unrepenting cable tv descramming, loving couple or foster care?...Admitted and unrepenting Satan worshipping, loving couple or foster care?...etc, etc.

Besides, can two unmarried people adopt a child?  If a state says that two people are unfit to marry, how can a state allow them to adopt children?