but what i was responding to was your claims of schraf's marriage being "not a marriage" because she didn't have or want kids.
Listen, I can understand a man and a woman wanting to be together for the rest of their lives.
I will be honest, and say I can not understand two men or woman wanting to be together. I just don't get it, and it has not been explained to me in a way that I can get it. That is what I am in search of.
But ever here the expression, lets get married and have kids?
Lets just leave out the kids part, because we don't want any, we are too busy with ourselves, and our careers.
Is it a marriage?
I don't know, I am confused, honestly.
but it's still not there. i'd think if it was so important, he'd have said it.
Wiping your ass after you shit is important, but he didn't explain that one either, maybe all Christians should stop wiping.
It was common place for the time. You can't study the bible, or reach for verses, unless you try to understand the times.
no couple has the responsibility to bone just so some unthought of kid can get a chance to come into this messed up world.
I agree, are you professing that gay marriage is the answer?
says you. except that you keep contradicting yourself. i'm sure i'll come across a few examples in this post.
BS. Don;t make claims unless you are going to back them up. Show me, and give me a chance to defend myself. I would love for you to show inconsistancy, then I could make an effort to change it.
the island of thera, 2nd century rome, and i've heard rumors
rumors? lol
No really, Jesus was gay, really. He had 12 lovers, yea thats the ticket.
Come on, its just another example of how gay people are trying to change the history books, to increase the subtlty of the gradual.
Your approach to this sucks. Take some lessons from beberry.
that's nice. so your very heart taught you to hate people who are different and religion just made you not feel guilty about it. there's a first, religion making someone NOT feel guilty.
Cute, but that is not how I see it.
Ok, you got me, I am really an evil person, all Christians are evil.
You are forgiven too, just like me.
and did you know that single people can adopt children?
No really? duh.
Please explain to the peanut gallery why that is allowed.
so it's ok to choose not to have children by being loving and responsible and preventing them? well that knocks out how many pages of argument with schraf? and by using that word choose, you do realize that you have to accept abortion. it is a choice to not have a child you cannot care for (willing or able. either one.).
That is a whole other subject, having sex without having a child.
Since thats how we evolved, what gives us the right to have sex, without expecting a baby afterwards?
It's common f-ing sense. You know it, I know it, everyone here in this forum knows it, if you screw, there is a chance that a baby will pop out. What gives the right to screw without expecting it?
I know, lets cut our balls off, then we won't have babies. Going against the very thing that got us here.
Please try to understand how open I am about this. I put down the very thing I did, and that was get a vasectomy. But I did father 3 kids. however, there is some regret about it. I do feel selfish about it to an extent.
I just wanted to have sex without having a baby. I want to screw, and screw over and over again, without having anymore rugrats to take care of.
I was only thinking of myself.
it's speculation, but not unfounded. what should we base our morals on? we can't base it on religion because it's never proven and it isn't guaranteed to stay here. we can't base our morals on tradition since it isn't proven and it obviously hasn't stayed here. how about founding our morals on something good and solid like the constitution or the declaration of independence? i mean. they're philosophical tradition so i guess they're out too. maybe we should just let W tell us what to do with out bodies. yeah. that's a great idea.
So where does your moral base come from?
I am sure it comes from some of what you just put down.
WTF does W have to do with any of this?
but you think that gay people shouldn't be gay.
I didn't say that, I said I don't understand it.
I understand how black people became black, but I don't understand how gay people got gay.
Also witnessing people turn from gay to straight leaves me to wonder. But I am limited to how much I could possibly understand about it.
Also witnessing people turn from straight to gay, after a bad experience in life, leads me to believe that it could purely be an emotional thing, not a pyhsical one.
call her selfish because she doesn't want to squeeze out a squalling brat that will die of starvation someday.
Die of starvation?
Please, maybe her child was going to be the one to solve the world hunger problem.
oh sure our technology has allowed us to make more food than the earth would otherwise support but you just said
I don't think we should base our morals on technology either, since technology is never proven, and isn't guaranteed to stay here.
Feeding starving children is not a moral based on technology. It's using technology to support a moral that is already in place. That moral is to help the needy.
Nice try at twisting my words.
What came first, the moral or the technology? (chilcken or egg?)
™ Version 4.2