It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gay marriage is a threat to humanity, claims Pope

page: 18
23
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Lots of us simply try to live as good human beings without striving to emulate a fairy tale.



.I don't need to find consolation in anything other than leading a good life, respecting life, and not judging those around me.

Its a very easything to do, once you get beyond the arrogance that only you can be right.


i couldnt agree with these statements more, its not about emulating god, striving to be like him etc coz lets me honest that aint ever going to happen, if 'god' created man and animals etc he created them to be the way they are, their 'flaws' included, and iuse the term flaws loosely. i feel no need to worship an idol, i feel no need to praise in a building, i feel no need to conform to hypocritical views laid down by churches (any religious one for that matter). I strive to be a good person and lead a good honest life and i am thankful every day for any good fortunes i have, i make mistakes like any other, but i learn from them, i evolve as a person and i move on.

i think one of the main issues is that people are intolerant to religious views being thrust upon them, they are intolerant of sexual preferences or anything that doesnt conform to their own beliefs, the key here is to learn tolerance for other peoples choices in life, not only that but to be brave and not be scared of the unknown, this is were intolerance comes form on both sides of gay marriage or religious debates. I personally dont conform to many teachings of the catholic church and other religions however i respect the fact that other people do and i dont thrust my views upon them, i only wish other people would have that same respect.

im ranting again and straying on and off topic
apologies lol
edit on 13/1/12 by ronishia because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 02:55 AM
link   
To Captaintyinknots:

You make bold claims about the human condition. You do realise that your statements contradict man's historical understanding of metaphysics and theology..."Leading a good life" based on what standard of morality? Your own?
You speak of respecting life and of being non-judgemental yet in the same breath denounce the Judeo-Christian faith as being nothing more than a fairy-tale. I trust my intuition.


edit on 13-1-2012 by 1nOne because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-1-2012 by 1nOne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by rubbertramp
 


the catholic church, other churches and many on the right wing politically in the usa have made the same accusations over and over:

LGBT = a threat to humanity
LGBT = a threat to the family
LGBT = a threat to children

however i have yet to see any solid proof of any these 'threats' validity.

i both understand and support opposing LBGT-ness based on one's chosen system of belief and support living in any way one sees fit in order to live out a life based on one's belief system. if you're gay and want to go to gay camp and get the gay spanked out of you, feel free.

i do not support one system of faith trying to push their system onto those who do not 'believe'. i for one do NOT want to be saved thank you.

basically, it is behavior such as this that makes me look down on institutions such as the catholic church as machiavellian.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


By looking at the speech the Pope made to assembled diplomats, which was referenced in the OP, you will see that the Pope did not say that LGBT people were a threat to anything. Nor did he say that LGBT marriage was a threat to anything.

There are studies that raise questions about instability and violence in same-sex relationships, but the Pope only said that male-female families had pride of place in providing a fundamental educational setting. His only reference to "damage" was his belief that policies that weaken the family end up weakening mankind.

I don't see the problem here.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Animal
 


By looking at the speech the Pope made to assembled diplomats, which was referenced in the OP, you will see that the Pope did not say that LGBT people were a threat to anything. Nor did he say that LGBT marriage was a threat to anything.


From the source in the OP:



Gay marriage is one of several threats to the traditional family unit that undermines 'the future of humanity itself', Pope Benedict XVI warned yesterday.




'Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself. The family unit is fundamental for the educational process and for the development both of individuals and states.


Pretty straight forward. You would have to be exercising willful ignorance to believe that the Pope is not attacking same sex relationships here.



There are studies that raise questions about instability and violence in same-sex relationships...


I am considering performing a study that raises the question that the pope is actually a transgendered female of 100% Russian Jewish heritage. I am pretty sure my hypothesis will not be proven correct but I still feel like 'raising the question(s)' .

Like I said, there is no definitive proof that LGBT is bad for anything. There is a whole lot of speculating and trying to establish the 'idea' in the public mind but no real proof. There likely will never be any proof for obvious reasons.



...but the Pope only said that male-female families had pride of place in providing a fundamental educational setting. His only reference to "damage" was his belief that policies that weaken the family end up weakening mankind.

I don't see the problem here.


You don't see the problem imho because you are believer and supporter of the Catholic Church. Not a problem in and of itself however blindly supporting and defending the churches assault on the LGBT crowd, imho, is.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by kush89
reply to post by elpistolero1
 

case number one. according to the arguments they say homosexual is genetic but in which i agree but i also believe its also an environmental induced condition. here is my case: a child is born and adopted to two homosexual men. the child is a male by the way and straight(provided he didn't have the gay gene). through out his life growing up he will have to live listening to his "parent's" sex noises and will grow up in a house where homosexuality is promoted. my question is at will that boy at the time where is beginning to deal with his sexuality,wouldn't he rather more likely to chose homosexuality?


Current statistics and research that I've seen (please correct me if I'm wrong) children brought up in environments with homosexuals aren't any more likely to be gay than those brought up in a heterosexual environment.

If homosexuality is a threat to humanity, it's a pretty slow threat. Considering its been around for many many many hundreds of years, it's the universe's slowest moving bullet. That's all.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
clearly people are being brainwashed to believe homosexuality is normal.
instead of finding a way to cure it, people are being encouraged.
god didnt create gays,murderers,thiefs,etc.
it is the result of your own actions.
i dont hate gays but i dont approve homo acts.
society which approves of lust will certainly destroy itself.
lust whether its for power,money or pleasure..



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by deepankarm
clearly people are being brainwashed to believe homosexuality is normal.


really? how so?



instead of finding a way to cure it, people are being encouraged.


again, how are people being 'encouraged' to be gay?



i dont hate gays but i dont approve homo acts.


homo-sapiens are going to be sad you don't approve of them.

edit on 13-1-2012 by Animal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pinke

Originally posted by kush89
reply to post by elpistolero1
 

case number one. according to the arguments they say homosexual is genetic but in which i agree but i also believe its also an environmental induced condition. here is my case: a child is born and adopted to two homosexual men. the child is a male by the way and straight(provided he didn't have the gay gene). through out his life growing up he will have to live listening to his "parent's" sex noises and will grow up in a house where homosexuality is promoted. my question is at will that boy at the time where is beginning to deal with his sexuality,wouldn't he rather more likely to chose homosexuality?


Current statistics and research that I've seen (please correct me if I'm wrong) children brought up in environments with homosexuals aren't any more likely to be gay than those brought up in a heterosexual environment.

If homosexuality is a threat to humanity, it's a pretty slow threat. Considering its been around for many many many hundreds of years, it's the universe's slowest moving bullet. That's all.
it was present but wasnt approved.
these are different things.
we as humans have changed the meaning of sexual purpose.
now sex comes first or rather i say pleasure comes first.
sex has become an addiction just like drugs..
children are product of sex between a males and females.nature intends that children grow in presence of both sex.
you are denying a child, either mother or father. how sick is that??
for your lust,you are hell bent on changing the foundations of society.
you can brainwash the child to believe anything but it does'nt change the truth.
its a matter of common sense which isnt common nowadays...



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Animal

From the source in the OP:



Gay marriage is one of several threats to the traditional family unit that undermines 'the future of humanity itself', Pope Benedict XVI warned yesterday.



As you say, you are quoting the source from the OP, not the Pope. The author of the article is dragging his biases into his reporting and is certainly less than objective.

A more reasoned synopsis and commentary of the address would be that the Pope praised the nuclear family unit, said that the optimum family unit for a child is having a mother and father and this specific segment was a small part of a much larger discussion ranging from education to abortion to religious freedom.

It would be a tremendous help to anyone interested in the topic if the actual source was read and not just someones interpretation of it. Once again, here is a link to the actual address.

www.zenit.org...

Eric
edit on 13-1-2012 by EricD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by EricD
As you say, you are quoting the source from the OP, not the Pope. The author of the article is dragging his biases into his reporting and is certainly less than objective.

A more reasoned synopsis and commentary of the address would be that the Pope praised the nuclear family unit, said that the optimum family unit for a child is having a mother and father and this specific segment was a small part of a much larger discussion ranging from education to abortion to religious freedom.

It would be a tremendous help to anyone interested in the topic if the actual source was read and not just someones interpretation of it. Once again, here is a link to the actual address.

www.zenit.org...



Sorry but I see this as nothing more than another attempt to side step the issue at hand, the catholic church's stance on LGBT's legitimacy and rights. As you say, we should look at the pope's words separated from the article in order to fully understand the intention behind the pope's statement, which is as follows:


Among these, pride of place goes to the [1.] family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman. [2.] This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society.[3.] Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself.


So what I think is plain to deduce from the popes own words is that he is saying:

1. Family = the Marriage of a Man and Woman.
2. Such a Family is the 'Fundamental Cell of Society'.
3. Any Policy (Read LGBT Rights / Equality) Threatens Not Only Human Dignity but Apparently Our Survival As Well.

The pope continues:


The [1.] family unit is [2.]fundamental for the educational process and for the development both of individuals and States; hence there is a [3.]need for policies which promote the family and aid social cohesion and dialogue.


Again based upon [1.] from above we see the pope clearly saying:

1. Family = the Marriage of a Man and Woman.
2. The Family Unit (Man and Woman NO LGBT) is Fundamental For Proper Education, and the Development of Individuals and States.
3. We Need Governmental and Social Policies that Support Man + Woman and Suppress LGBT.

Based on the Catholic (and other churches) track record on gay rights this analysis should be no surprise to anyone.




edit on 13-1-2012 by Animal because: General Messiness. . . .



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Animal

Originally posted by deepankarm
clearly people are being brainwashed to believe homosexuality is normal.


really? how so?


again, how are people being 'encouraged' to be gay?



i dont hate gays but i dont approve homo acts.


homo-sapiens are going to be sad you don't approve of them.

edit on 13-1-2012 by Animal because: (no reason given)
it is being promoted by science,celebrities,media and government and so called 'proud' gays.
now first start with science.
scientists havent got a clue about the reasons of homosexuality than a person with basic common sense.their knowledge about genes is negligible as in the case of other things.but they are arrogant enough to say they are right.normal people will believe what the say.
if anything isnt proved,it should'nt be used as evidence.
infact, science cant find everything about anything.
second is the case of celebrities,those who follow them except rare ones are deluded.
they can do anything for cheap publicity.and when celebrities endorse anything,it becomes fashion.

now comes the government on whose hypocricy, i can write a book.
''everyone is equal''. its your basic right which is a joke.
its a philosophical concept not a scientific one.
in reality,all your rights are a joke.think about it if you have common sense.
now come the 'proud' gays.
actually they are being brainwashed and it is quite easy to do.they usually have low esteem due to social abuse.the trick for a coward is to tell him that he is brave.same applies to gays.they are told that their behaviour is better than others and hence they should be proud.
its simple as converting from one extreme to another.so we get to see pride parades.
Now media,they are the social trend setters.
and media is a tool of government and celebrities.
If someone is bombarded with lies,it will become the truth and there is nothing better than media in doing so.
And the most lethal weapons are spreading non-belief in God,mental scientists and todays culture.
now, we all know how to control masses.fear and confusion.
religions have used it for ages but now mental doctors are using them legally.
mind is the most vulnerable part.
now all mental docs have to do is create confusion in the mind.
they will just coin a new word,
like homophibia. one gets confused and doubt creeps in his mind depending upon strong you are mentally.
now since these mental docs are believed blindly to a certain extent, large majority will believe them in an instant.
now culture kicks in.
you will be abused by your peers using the same homophobic term.you will gradually lose confidence and will force your mind as you also have to follow the trend.
now its time for the major blow aka confusing you about god and morality.
the process is completed by emotional tool aka love,the most effective weapon of all times.
problem is present generation hasnt got a clue what it means except some rare souls.
MISSION ACCOPALISHED.you are now brainwashed.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by deepankarm
it was present but wasnt approved.


Many older cultures, including the much lauded (on ATS) Native Americans approved/approve homosexuality.


we as humans have changed the meaning of sexual purpose.
now sex comes first or rather i say pleasure comes first.
sex has become an addiction just like drugs..


If you were talking about the easy access to pornography these days I might agree, but this isn't a homosexual problem.

Regarding humans changing sexual purpose ... there are a large number of animals that have sex purely for pleasure, and what do you think humans did before we created civilization? It wasn't tennis.


you are denying a child, either mother or father. how sick is that??
for your lust,you are hell bent on changing the foundations of society.
you can brainwash the child to believe anything but it does'nt change the truth.


So my beliefs are brainwashing, and yours are .... .... .... ????

I'm not sure how you can turn this into a discussion about the foundations of society. It seems to me like conservatives want to turn every conversation into a blatant us vs them. Your very argument nullifies itself.

Homosexuals haven't destroyed humanity in the last 2000 years, ergo I don't see how it's an issue. Native Americans weren't attacked by a gang of maurading homosexuals. They were attacked by Americans who were 'hell bent' on changing the 'foundations of society'.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by deepankarm
 


Besides being incredibly hard to follow (read: work on layout and presentation of ideas), I found your post to be clearly one-sided.

Basically, what I hear you saying is that the media, celebrities and the government are all 'promoting' LGBT-ness though their support of such life styles.

While I do see such behavior (supporting LGBT) to a degree I would argue that the media and government (perhaps not celebrities - I pay little attention to those who fall into this category so it is hard to say) do more to demote, dehumanize, harass and hurt LGBT than they do to support it.

Taken as true and balancing the pro-LGBT with the anti-LGBT I would say the trend is actually the opposite of what I believe you to be saying.

In which case you really are quite mistaken.

No?




posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Pinke
 


1- i am not a part of western drama of con/lib/lab/dem, right,left.lol.
i am an Indian and i believe in 'unity in diversity'.
2-an uncivilized homo sapien is an animal.
'humanity' isnt exclusive to homo sapiens in my view. a dog can be more 'human' than a homo sapien.
3- stop taking examples of animals for your benefit. you would not want to follow majority of their habits. we evolved from them and i certainly want to be more human than become an animal again.
4- how much we know about genetics and animal behaviour?everything?
5-suppose your class is given a physics question and is told that getting the answer and using correct formulae isnt necessary.just do the question for fun and timepass.
what do you think will happen?
6-do you know what it means to change the definition of marriage? you think its just a piece of civil law?
you just dont know what it is as in society today,marriage is a broken institution.
7- if you are a gay then there isnt a point to argue but if you arent, then you are a one of billions of sex addicts.
do you know why there is much more support for gay acts than old times??
8- i differ only on principles of sex with gays and i treat them equally unless they want to argue about my disapproval of their ways.
9- i dont want to see discrimination.with advancement in tech and biology, we should focus on finding a way to change this behaviour if possible.but its too early to think that its uncurable as we dont know the exact reason.
10- i have watched the emergence of western civilization. though i envy your wealth and resources, i dont envy your declining society......
as Krishna said in Gita-
''only lucky men get a chance to fight a
righteous battle for morality, you should'nt put down your weapons''.
And i am not going to give up my morality for any pleasure....



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


Dear Animal,

I stepped away from the computer and wasn't able to provide you with the answer you deserve. There appears to be several areas of misunderstanding that I would like to clear up, and felt it best not to leave them hanging.

As has been pointed out, and as you seem to be realizing, the Pope didn't make the comment attributed to him by the reporter. Good, I'm glad that's out of the way.

So now, your position is, if i understand it, that the Pope's words lead to only one, inescapable, conclusion. Let's look at your first syllogism:

1) A family can only be the marriage of a man and a woman.
2) A man and woman marriage is the "fundamental cell" of society.
3) LGBT rights threatens human survival.

I, of course, take issue with premise 1) and the conclusion 3)

Some problem comes in with the definition of family. The Pope probably has a different definition from yours, so from the start you are talking about different things. Second, the Pope's statement "...education needs settings. Among these, pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and woman." He is specifically saying there are other settings, perhaps other forms of family? You may not think so, but it is easily possible. And, assume for a moment, that the "family" has one female head. Will you get a more diverse family by adding a man or another woman.

And the conclusion doesn't follow at all. Allowing LGBTs to vote doesn't threaten human society. Nobody I know thinks that, and I'm reasonably certain the Pope doesn't

Your second, similar, syllogism falls for the same reasons, I've just mentioned. By calling it "pretty straight forward," I'm afraid your claiming a rigor for your syllogisms that just doesn't exist.

I said:

There are studies that raise questions about instability and violence in same-sex relationships...
I'm afraid that by simply saying that some studies can be mistaken, you are avoiding the issue raised. Would you have responded differently had I said "There are studies that show ...?" Forgive me for not being so direct.

You don't see the problem imho because you are believer and supporter of the Catholic Church. Not a problem in and of itself however blindly supporting and defending the churches assault on the LGBT crowd, imho, is.
You are quite correct that I am Catholic. But logic is the same regardless of your beliefs. Making this claim is dodging the question altogether by ad hominem attack. I hope you can do better.

Best wishes,
Charles1952



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Wow!!! I am gratified to see that at least two people out here get the point I was trying to make.


I've been trying to say this all along! Why are we so concerned with who people are having sex with?


Bingo. glad to hear it kaylaluv. I am not interested in your sex life or whom you are with ...no matter whom. I don't think it is a thing to be plastered all over the front pages. I think this should be your business..not mine.....nor anyone else's business.
I also think it is not a thing which should be merchandised or put on the evening news for all to see.

Glad you understand this.




1nOne

Glad to see you get the point as well.


Yes, Orangetom1999: my point exactly! We must focus on those qualities which distinguish us from the animals lest we become one. Perhaps the Pope could have explained it better.


When I see people on these boards trying to bring glory and recognition to themselves by their sexuality and sexual orientation..I ask myself what or where they got their education.

Once again I do not speak against sexuality ..I speak against the public education "non standard" where we try to define or glorify ourselves by our sexuality or sexual orientation. What I really find astonishing is that our political leadership has themselves become so stupid that they think no one out here will notice their ignorance. And this leadership is financing public education to insure many remain stupid and ignorant..like base animals.

This is leadership??? Or is it selling people down the drainpipe for votes and power??? Are many out here so far gone today that they no longer can tell the difference?? Even the difference in leadership???

Want an example of base animalistic behavior....??? Watch this.....!!!

Jerry!!! Jerry!!!! Jerry!!!!

I refer of course to the Jerry Springer show. What happens to this genre of programs when you remove the sex,, sexuality , and base animal behavior out of them?? You have no program. It does not take a genius to know this.

We are not here to become animals.

Also the nightly news formats also promote this kind of animalistic base behavior...I know this because even the nightly news has become tabloid like....Just like Jerry Springer....Phil Donahue...et al.
For they too...like politicians and the tabloid show... must make merchandise of people..particularly their sexuality..to keep up the ratings/votes/poll numbers.

I am not interested in such base animalistic behavior..from people who only have sex and sexuality as their identifying marker in life.

Thanks to all for their posts,
Orangetom



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Animal
 

As has been pointed out, and as you seem to be realizing, the Pope didn't make the comment attributed to him by the reporter. Good, I'm glad that's out of the way.


No, I disagree. I think the pope did quite clearly state that gay marriage is a threat to humanity as I quite clearly pointed out. You may continue to disagree however I suggest this is a result of your personal bias.


Originally posted by charles1952
So now, your position is, if i understand it, that the Pope's words lead to only one, inescapable, conclusion. Let's look at your first syllogism:

1) A family can only be the marriage of a man and a woman.
2) A man and woman marriage is the "fundamental cell" of society.
3) LGBT rights threatens human survival.


For the sake of clarity I will repost my first set of inferences here:


Originally posted by Animal
Among these, pride of place goes to the [1.] family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman. [2.] This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society.[3.] Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself.

So what I think is plain to deduce from the popes own words is that he is saying:

1. Family = the Marriage of a Man and Woman.
2. Such a Family is the 'Fundamental Cell of Society'.
3. Any Policy (Read LGBT Rights / Equality) Threatens Not Only Human Dignity but Apparently Our Survival As Well.



Originally posted by charles1952
I, of course, take issue with premise 1) and the conclusion 3)

Some problem comes in with the definition of family. The Pope probably has a different definition from yours, so from the start you are talking about different things.


Yes Charles the pope and I clearly have different definitions of family. In the above quoted text it is quite clear that the pope is saying that his definition of family equals a man and a woman. Do you dispute this? If not then how do you dispute inference #1?


Originally posted by charles1952
Second, the Pope's statement "...education needs settings. Among these, pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and woman." He is specifically saying there are other settings, perhaps other forms of family? You may not think so, but it is easily possible. And, assume for a moment, that the "family" has one female head. Will you get a more diverse family by adding a man or another woman.


Charles I see exactly what the pope is saying and it has nothing to do with the possibility of other types of family beyond that of the family comprised of a man+woman (the popes definition of a family) and I think that you know this.

The pope is saying "pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and woman".

He is clearly and undeniably framing his statement within the frame of the MAN + WOMAN family unit.

What is more he goes on to CLEARLY state:

Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself.


We have established that the pope has already clearly defined family in this speech as MAN + WOMAN so we can CLEARLY see the pope saying that any policy that undermines the MAN+WOMAN family unit is a threat to humanity. This is a clear assault on the equality and rights of LGBT community.


Originally posted by charles1952
And the conclusion doesn't follow at all. Allowing LGBTs to vote doesn't threaten human society. Nobody I know thinks that, and I'm reasonably certain the Pope doesn't.


We are not talking about the LGBT's ability to vote here, we are talking about how the pope, quite clearly, made the case that gay marriage threatens humanity.

...to be continued...


edit on 13-1-2012 by Animal because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-1-2012 by Animal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Animal
 

Your second, similar, syllogism falls for the same reasons, I've just mentioned. By calling it "pretty straight forward," I'm afraid your claiming a rigor for your syllogisms that just doesn't exist.


I stand by the assertion that in reading the pope's statement as meaning that 'gay marriage is a threat to humanity' is pretty straight forward. I think you don't see it either as a function of your bias as a chatholic or through willful ignorance as I can see you are not stupid.


Originally posted by charles1952
I said:

There are studies that raise questions about instability and violence in same-sex relationships...
I'm afraid that by simply saying that some studies can be mistaken, you are avoiding the issue raised. Would you have responded differently had I said "There are studies that show ...?" Forgive me for not being so direct.


My response was to demonstrate you can study ANYTHING and prove NOTHING. Making the statement that there are studies into the 'instability and violence in same-sex relationships' is attempting to present the notion as fact though providing only supposition in the absence of proof.

As I stated originally, there is no proof that LGBT causes any damage to children raised in same sex families or to humanity at large. The notion remains an ignorant assumption based on propaganda and fear.

Propaganda and fear exactly like the pope's statements that are currently in question.


Originally posted by Animal
You don't see the problem imho because you are believer and supporter of the Catholic Church. Not a problem in and of itself however blindly supporting and defending the churches assault on the LGBT crowd, imho, is.



Originally posted by Charles 1952
You are quite correct that I am Catholic. But logic is the same regardless of your beliefs. Making this claim is dodging the question altogether by ad hominem attack. I hope you can do better.

Best wishes,
Charles1952


I made a inference based on your posts and in no way attacked you or dodge the issue. I stand by all that I said as clearly critiquing the issue at hand in a clear and decisive manner and also by the notion that I in no way attacked belittled anyone. You being catholic is completely relevant imho.
edit on 13-1-2012 by Animal because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-1-2012 by Animal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Wow!!! I am gratified to see that at least two people out here get the point I was trying to make.


I've been trying to say this all along! Why are we so concerned with who people are having sex with?


Bingo. glad to hear it kaylaluv. I am not interested in your sex life or whom you are with ...no matter whom. I don't think it is a thing to be plastered all over the front pages. I think this should be your business..not mine.....nor anyone else's business.
I also think it is not a thing which should be merchandised or put on the evening news for all to see.

Glad you understand this.



Great! Then we are in agreement that a man should be able to marry a man, and a woman should be able to marry a woman, and both couples should be able to raise children in their homes, because what kind of sex they have in the privacy of their own bedroom doesn't matter!

I'm glad you understand this as well.







 
23
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join