reply to post by LoneGunMan
posted on 19-11-2003 at 11:50 AM
why did he destroy Soddom and Gommorah?
And this story has what to do with being gay? Are you saying because it's in the bible, it makes it wrong?
Are you saying those of us, who are non-christian, are subject to your judgements and punishments?
Are you implying, even though I'm not gay, but I have absolutely no problem with same-sex marriages, that I too am to be punished because I believe
it's ok for gays to get married?
OMG, please use a better arguement for not supporting same sex marriage, or any other bytch you might have against anything. I would much rather hear
how you personally feel on the subject, not how someone else has programmed you to feel.
Think for yourself
The OP in this thread asks one question " If being gay is ok in the eyes of the lord then why did he destroy Soddom and Gommorah?" and gives the
entire page of
Genesis Chapter 19
The first response is very typical of those you see today here. First you see this is someone "who isn't gay himself" but just feels like jumping
in and getting all vitriolic while he jumps to various conclusions asking for clarification. He then assumes the poster really did say all the things
he read into that one question the OP asked and decides to berate the OP as if the OP really said them and follows it up with his criticism over the
statements the Op never made. Whats really Ironic is the suggestion the respondent makes to the op at the end saying "Think for yourself" When it
is clear the poster is doing all the OP's thinking. We see this tactic used back then as as it is today.
Nothing intelligent about it.
Then we have Politics,
2004 Stop the insanity.....Please! LadyV 17 156 12-10-2004 at 01:37 PM >by Durden
Bush: The addict Qlone 12 119 12-10-2004 at 01:23 PM
Bush, Pax Americana, and the loyalty of Christians sandge 2 24 12-10-2004 at 01:18 PM
Bush doing the double speek thing???? GrndLkNatv 6 57 12-10-2004 at 01:14 PM
Foreign influence:How many John Kerry supporters on ATS are actually non-americans? (Pages: 1 2 3 .. 6 ) onlyinmydreams 105 1437 12-10-2004 at 12:33
Bush Lied About the Draft (Pages: 1 2 3 ) deeprivergal 56 903 12-10-2004 at 12:25 PM
Is Bush "remote controlled"? (Pages: 1 2 3 )
This is a post by skeptic, again trying in earnest to give the members of ATS a reputation to live up to in one of many posts attempting to discourage
the undisciplined poster from going too far with their particular posting discipline.
Discussion and debate will remain focused on the issues, and representation of the respective party platforms and the stance of the candidates.
Through discussion, a complete analysis of the issues, influences, and factors of our current age will be examined and compared to which candidate
stands for which side (or sides) of each issue.
Any post that engages in an attack on another member, or one of the candidates will be removed and that member's access will be removed from this
special forum. - Skeptic Overlord"
So perhaps you are just more sensitive to what you see as the invasion. The only difference between the threads then and now are the names and even
they are sometimes the same even creating the same threads over and over again with similar response.
Back then, Gays were still looking for validation while creating threads that talk about the discovery of a gay gene with very similar posts made
after and the same action between creationists and evolutionist's with the very same results. By the end of the discussion we observe the
following, Birds evolving into birds, lions evolving into lions, e-coli evolving into e-coli and man evolving into man with all the same speculation
something else happened and neither of the two sides changing their positions.
The only thing people gain coming here is perhaps a lot of practice to augment their addiction to arguing with people and maybe a more colorful
vocabulary where you see many of them beginnig to use words like "assertion" "flawed" "logic" (everyones brand logic is superior to their
opponents) "disingenuous" "critical thinking" "Prima facie" "me thinks" "but I digress" "tripe" "intellectual dishonesty" and of course
the ignorance you deny is always the other guys.
The faithful are still blind and stupid back in 2004 as we see they are said to be the same today, the race card is used back then where the
opportunity presents itself to call someone racist in 2004 as it is today. Atheist's are still rude knowitalls who think their atheism gives them
some recently expressed genetic advantage in discusssions about science, Christians are still hypocrites and the butt end of most of the sarcastic
jokes or remarks and continue to undermine each others testimony with differen't biblical interpretations in the same threads. Gays back in 2004 as
you have already seen, called everyone that disagreed with them ignorant people full of hatred and bigotry.
You think the Republicans are the Birthers? Check out some of the older ATS threads where in not one but two elections the democrats made a big issue
out of McCains natural born status.
Its just a more populated version of 2004 so what you see back then is the same as now only some of the details may differ but the truth is always the
same. The ad-hom attacks and situational politics that go on are just more saturated.
We are all just the mirror of eachother with each of us signing off ATS smug as a bug in a rug thinking we owned the other guy and we love it.