posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 07:55 PM
reply to post by Crakeur
I didn't mention homosexuality and pedophilia within the church but, thanks for pointing out the insane hypocrisy of the priests who pound that dais,
railing against homosexuality and then fondle the choir boys.
Of course you didn't, instead you hid behind sarcasm to imply that religion alone is guilty of atrocities, and that homosexuals are all just saints.
And of course, now you embrace gleefully the "fondle choir boys" argument and again implicitly arguing this is a sexual perversion, but will stop
short of homosexuality in terms of perversion. Apparently with you, it is okay to fondle choir males, but there has to be an age limit on it.
Amusingly, this goes right over your head.
there's no documented proof of this, nor is there documented proof of many of the historical figures who have been "outed"
There is no documented proof that Tom Cruise, or Tom Selleck are gay, but I have heard for years from gay men that both of these Tom's are gay. In
fact, again you engage in irony that seems to go right over your head as you use the term "outed", and I was just reading a few months ago how Perez
Hilton has decided to stop "outing" men who obviously deny, or are in denial, depending upon their truth, being gay. The whole "outing" thing is
not a straight phenomenon, it is a part of the gay culture, and it is a mean spirited bullying tactic just to further their "cause".
hitler killed plenty of gays which would be further proof that those that rail against homosexuality are either closeted or ignorantly following a bad
sequel written centuries ago.
This sentence follows the sentence that asserts there is not proof that such historical figures were "outed", and now you offer Hitler's
persecution of gays as proof to his own closeted homosexuality. Is the whole world gray to you, or just this issue?
Gay people are far less dangerous to society than the ignorance being displayed here and in the other anti-gay threads.
The biggest threat or danger I have seen in this thread - and I do not normally enter these gay threads, but it was a slow day yesterday - is the
insistence that "civil rights" are necessary for a special class of people. The rest has simply just been discussion, albeit heated at points,
about this issue. Funny how you find this discussion, and more specifically the posts of which you do not agree with as being dangerous to society.
until we, as humans, can look beyond our differences and learn to accept the fact that we must share this rock, we're doomed.
This plays as empty rhetoric given your gleeful willingness to mock religion the way you have.