I'm not Hobbes you a-holes. Omega Supreme, give me a break. Arguing with a wall. First off, I'm not arguing. Second, I'm sorry that I have a problem with homosexuality. Third, I'll answer your damn question about what natural law is. See Question 94, Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica, and that is what I think natural law is. You're just as intolerant as you think I am you fiend. You obvioulsy didn't read a thing I wrote. I hope life treats you well because you have enraged me so much that all I can is just say something nice because I don't want to say somehting mean.
Well, if anything, he seems really obsessed with the actual sex act performed between people of the same gender. I mean obsessed. This often seems to be the case with people who are convinced homosexuality is "wrong." Just an impression. PS -- thx1138, I agree you are nothing like Hobbes. And don't call me an a-hole buddy. Don't go bear hunting with a twig. Savvy?
you can say what you got damn well please. you're enraged? whoop-de-friggin doo. say something mean? you already have. you've called me "unnatural". what do you expect? a f'ing cookie? i'll respond later to what you wrote (and yes, i have read it and yes, it's stupid. lol)... i'm going to lunch now.
twhy, wtf do you mean that you "aren't trying to bash gays"? you strike me as the type that would kick your child out onto the streets if she/he admitted to being a homosexual or as you would probably put it... a "bumf**ker". save this garbage for your council for conservative citizens farce. i don't know how you've all of a sudden become the dr. phil of gay relationships... i find it odd. i'd like to know how you've become an expert. you'd be suprised at the number of your straight buds that frequent areas where casual sex occurs. there's only gay casual sex? do any of your buds have their "guys night out"? what's up with the whole "swinger" thing? you seem really focused on the sexual part of homosexuality. i mean... really, really obsessed about it. is there something you'd like to talk about? here ya go, bud. http://www.divorcereform.org/rates.html marriage is already a problem. solve the problems that already exist before thinking of the so-called problems that may happen in the future. dude, you need to get laid. ... or do you do the large amount of chocolate thing? sounds like it. as long as you wrap up and take all other proper precautions go for it. but while in a long term relationship? no. if nobody had casual sex before marrying... could you imagine the divorce rates? have a nice day, twhy. and yes achebe, he does remind me from that onion article that i read a while ago. lol.
twhy, you made me stoop to that level. here's a summarization of your post: "all homosexuals do is have gay sex... ughhh! gross!"
Your reply doesn't even deserve a dignified response because you obviously didn't read what I had to say and you obviously read it wrong. But, since I'm a nice guy I will give you a dignified response. As far as homosexuality being something real, I'm still deciding on that. I don't really think it is, but I haven't completely made up my mind, based on one person I know who is probably gay, but is also Catholic so he does not practice. I have so much respect for that guy because he believes that it would comprimise his faith if he practiced as a homosexual (which includes but is not limited to sex) No the man is not unhappy either. He's brilliant and produces some of the best work in his field of quantam mechanics. I also love the fact that you give me quotes that I didn't say, and that you claim to get mad at me for thinking I know you so well when you turn around and do the same thing. You are obviously very shallow and can't finish reading an entire post that I make, and your understanding of love is also quite shallow. In this respect, I feel sorry for you. We obviously don't hold the same values, and your attempt to try and make me have your values is crap man, because thats certainly not what I'm trying to do to you. You live your own life man, I can only hope that you better understand my position on it. Do you think I'm going to change my idea that I think homosexuality is bad or unnatural, just because you make jokes about fundamentalists (which I'm not) and conservative caucases? You've completely misrepresented my view or charitable love between a man and a woman, which includes the act of sex but is not defined by the act. If you want to hold an intelligent discourse about the subject, I suggest you read more carefully and quit quoting me as things I don't say. Otherwise, good day to you sir.
Ok, the first part of your post is wrong because you misunderstood me. The second part of your post I'm too damn innocent to respond to because I don't even know what you are saying.... LArge amount of Chocalate, what the hell does that mean? Look at the divorce rates in Catholic couples, look at the divorce rates in couples that sleep together before marriage, and those that dont and then come back and try to even begin to make an argument because you will be surprised.
twhy77, I think this article was written just for you http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2009247
This is why this remains a topic that can't be discussed. If you have a view contrary to what is politically correct, you're a bigot homophobe. subatomic posts an article about sodomy laws...where in the world has this guy said he supports the government getting involved to make gay sex criminal? It's a topic that can rarely be discussed with any civility.
will you make up your mind... pretty please? now you're saying that you haven't come to a decision. read a few of your posts. it wasn't too long ago where you said this: "I'm saying I don't agree with them and I think its wrong." tell me where i've misquoted you and i'll be more than happy to apologize. i don't need you to have my values, nor do i want to force them upon you. first off, we haven't even talked about values. all you've talked about is sex, sex, sex. you haven't revealed any of your values other than being conservative (which is fine) and the fact that casual sex is disgusting. i'm in no positiion whatsoever to criticize another's values. how ridiculous would that be with me being african american and a homosexual? the reason that i'm arguing right now is being called "unnatural" without any other reason except for casual sex in the gay community. not all gays engage in casual sex. look at your friend for instance. would it be right for me to engage in a random sample of the guys in the jasper tragedy and come to the conclusion that all caucasians are racist? that's exactly what you did if you reread your posts. no, we don't hold the same values and i grateful for that. you not giving a damn for me means a lot coming from somebody that i don't know and really don't care to meet.
Well, it's tough. Has any civil dialogue started out with the following? "Look, don't take this the wrong way, but I really disapprove of a major part of who you are. I think a major part of your life is completely morally wrong. You may not hurt anyone else or affect me at all, but what you represent is reprehensible. I know you accept the way I live my life, but I cannot accept the way you live yours at all." Where do you go with that? I mean, I understand both sides, to an extent, but geez louise, civil dialogue is going to be tough. I still think outlaw is amazing in this respect.
I think it is impressive that twhy can have conversations with people that don't exist. I know I find it difficult to write letters to Santa Clause, since he doesn't exist. heb, that was damn funny. I think I have that same problem. Maybe twhy and I can go out to dinner and "discuss" the matter.
Absolutely it's a topic that can be discussed with civility -- just not with a bigoted, homophobic zealot. I haven't read the whole thread and I haven't read what subtomic posted, but this twhy is a bigoted homophobe by any standard. We've had civil discussions of homosexuality before on this board -- many of them. Manny Ramirez can attest to the fact that people can disagree and still be civil on this topic. But when someone comes on here, under the guise of compassionate conservatism, saying he's not trying to hate but all the while spewing the same arguments which have been used to justify bigotry towards gays and lesbians for years, you can bet it will turn uncivil.
MadMax, The article is as much about the mentality of the Texas Republican party (which has apparently been hijacked by 'theocrats') as it is about sodomy laws. I think twhy is providing quite a good example of that mindset (see his post with the statement"gay relationships are worse than hetero marriages"). That's why I posted the article. But I agree that it is only loosely connected with this discussion. BTW, there is no 'a' in my user name. It is a combination of my love of the bass guitar (sub), my first name (tom) and the usual reaction I get from women when I try to be charming (ic).
wow...i've called you subatomic a thousand times at least! i apparently have a real eye for detail. sorry about that!
