'you just know', that is not an argument, it is an opinion and not subject to debate
Oh fer chrissakes Don. We went through months of the same thing when you were "Stephen". Give it a rest. Like ignore it at least.
Looking L-A-M-E dude!
'you just know', that is not an argument, it is an opinion and not subject to debate
I am not debating the matter...I know what I know and that's good enough for me
Well, when you vote opposite of me, you are trying to impose your own brand of morality on me...and you most certainly did state that you "cannot legislate morality"- so quit your damned back sliding eh?
The stupid logic of your statements are inane with regards to abortion which kills a human being.
If you don't like slaves don't have one. If you don't like theft don't steal. See what I mean?...never mind I forgot who I was posting to.
PS I like cats too and I like the fact that you hate my avatar PPS I think your pathetic need to have two identities is well...pathetic.
I am only quoting one post, but I think this goes towards both yours and Don Q's.
The line can be drawn by determining which crime (or immoral act) has a victim. Stealing, somoen obviously loses their possessions. Murder, someone loses their life.
Gay marriage? No victim there. Buying alcohol on sundays (or having stores open on sundays)? No victim there.
I am only quoting one post, but I think this goes towards both yours and Don Q's.
The line can be drawn by determining which crime (or immoral act) has a victim. Stealing, somoen obviously loses their possessions. Murder, someone loses their life.
Gay marriage? No victim there. Buying alcohol on sundays (or having stores open on sundays)? No victim there.
Abortion-a major victim! I was married to the son of a homosexual...it fucked up his life. It also fucked up the life of his mother and younger brother. I understand it is a case by case scenario-but it too has its victims. Stealing a small thing from a mega rich person certainly does them no harm-and yet we can say it is still wrong. The fact of the matter is that social mores matter in a society...debating them with passion and conviction is good and right and worthy.
Abortion does indeed have a victim.
As for homosexuality, if there is a victim it is not due to them being gay it is due to the reaction by those who hate homosexuality so much. Tolerance would remove "victimhood" from being gay.
Theft is wrong regardless. How much they can afford to lose what was stolen doesn't have any bearing on it.
No, it is not from hating homosexuality-it is a flamboyant lifestyle that promotes a certain way of viewing the world through the lens of homosexuality. One can believe that homosexuality is wrong without hating homosexuals. My husband was subject to homosexual materials; parties; behaviors; and was molested at the age of 14 by his dad's homosexual friend. It is a lifestyle that overwhelms the life to the degree that it becomes the single identifier for homosexuals---they are "gay" before almost anything else. Perhaps that is the by-product of the political movement within their "community"-but nonetheless it is a fact.
I don't see that as any different from any hard partying lifestyle, from singles bar cruisers to wild bikers or whatever.
The behavior is not exclusive to the gay community.
Abortion-a major victim! I was married to the son of a homosexual...it fucked up his life. It also fucked up the life of his mother and younger brother. I understand it is a case by case scenario-but it too has its victims. Stealing a small thing from a mega rich person certainly does them no harm-and yet we can say it is still wrong. The fact of the matter is that social mores matter in a society...debating them with passion and conviction is good and right and worthy.
Not to nit-pick but wouldn't your father-in-law be considered bi-sexual?
No...he would not have considered himself that-though he had dated and married my ex mother-in-law and later a young Chinese woman he had met in Turkey (he did so to help her stay in the US). He was a classy, but flamboyant man. He even did theater in San Fran because he was talented musically and quite handsome. He was a world traveler and a lot of fun to be around...but his sexual life always had a dark side according to my ex husband. He was careless with regards to his two sons; having them around the homosexual party scene. My ex to this day struggles with what happened to him and to his brother. He's now 51 and I wish he could have put those demons to rest-but the whole thing crippled him emotionally and he has chosen to remain its victim-sad.
That's peculiar. If a heterosexual had sex with a guy he'd be considered bi-sexual so why is a homosexual having sex with a woman not considered bi-sexual? I find that strange.
Sorry to hear about your Ex. It must have been difficult for you. :-(
Not strange at all apple...it simply shows your naivete at the homosexual world. My ex father-in-law preferred men and considered himself gay. He was able to have sex with women. The sad part is more for my kids who have a father who will likely always be an emotional cripple.
I always thought the homosexual world was the same as everyone elses, just a difference in mates. Sort of like how some people prefer dogs to cats.
I guess you had to fill both roles for your children. It must not have been easy.
No, but percentage wise it is. When a group has a self identifier it presumes a lifestyle-remember I already acknowledged it is not always the case. We do not legislate and promote biker lifestyles or hard core partying lifestyles-they just simply exist. Live and let live...just don't create special laws based upon pc bs that claims it hurts no one.