Previous  1 ... 23  24  25  26  27  28  Next

Temper tantrum time.


Haha, meltdown.
I would never belittle a friend! Nope. Never said that, you did though.
You think I am above gays? Gee thanks.
Nope. I don't make fun of friends unless they do something really stupid. Wouldn't be much of a friend then would I? Is the meltdown over already?

Strong voice how? So now you get to contradict yourself or go back to my previous post. It is fun watching you squirm.
So it is selective? Well isn't that convenient. Back peddle time.

I'm not spinning anything. I am making an excellent comparison. You said that scilence can be attributed to agreement. So if muslim moderates say nothing about the 4 soldiers being killed by a muslim terrorist while giving candy to children, then they must agree right? This is from your words. You can't say it applies to one person and not the other. That my friend is a double standard.

   

This is actually hil-fking-larious.

   

It's interesting that insulting gay people is so absolutely inexcusable to you, yet insulting anyone who disagrees with you, in a very crude and obscene manner, is acceptable.

   

Getting a bit shrill.

So, gays (a term that has meant many things with different shadings, Gay Science is used to denote poetry for example) can be used as derisive, a complement, or just some stupid thing teenagers say from time to time without any thought at all. As far as the law goes, it's meaning is determined by its effect. There was recently a case where an individual was bullied for a sustained period of time. The victim was often refered to as Gay and taunted with this amongst more serious behavior. No one believed the tormented guy was gay. It was used quite apart from a belief about the individuals orientation. The effect of the taunting and the use of a protected group lead to the judges decision (if I'm remembering it right).

So, beyond this homosexuality may or not be genetic. The capacity of humans to be gay may be an integral part of our species and not just a tack on gene; remember our closest animal ancestors fuck like, well like Chimps. It's part of their social structure. You may be able to breed it out but you might end up with an illiterate Redneck.

Anywho, even if it's completely a choice it should still be covered. Religion is clearly a choice or at least that whole free will bit is rather important to some peoples notion of Christianity. Harping on Gay Rights because it's a choice just doesn't make sense. So, let's say it's a choice. So what?

   

Okay, you were talking about homosexuality in the first highlighted phrase, it's what you mean by the term "genetic trait". We know this becuase you specify that that genetic trait is homosexuality in the second highlighted phrase.

You don't say "if homosexuality is genetic".


Now, what I am saying is based on the ordinary rules of logic and the English language. If you want to claim to be speaking another language, some special language only known to SireJoe, and using a special set of rules of logic that are your own personal ones.

Black is not white. Anybody here can read what you post.


Aren't you up late on a school night?

   

Good point.

   

Actually I am

   

Actually that's the second half of my position I never got to because we ended up in bitter little disputes over two-bit issues.

Making it genetic or otherwise somehow organic and inevitable gains rhetorical ground because that makes it seem like it's impossible to argue against it, (although it just opens up 'curing' it by medical means).

On the other hand, if it's choice, it makes homosexuality seem vulnerable to the attack that it's something they could just stop doing. But it may actually be the stronger position, rhetorically, because there's no arguing with taste. As you point out, religion and matters of conscience are taken out of the realm of political debate, why shouldn't sexuality?

But as long as the gay community have friends like SireJoe, they're going to have problems.

   

They have Hedy "even as we speak" Fry. How much worse could it get?

   

As a last word to those who cannot comprehend. Never have I demeand gay people. If people wish to take it out of context, then so be it. I have no desire to argue with those who cannot see exact thing they are doing is a form of bigotry.

To little Jaime. I'll concede to you becuase this is not getting me or anyone else anywhere and I grow ever so tired of this crap thread. On a side note, if you read through my posts you will notice that I even say that I dont agree or disagree with it being genetic. But whatever you say, you win.

To grainy. Your beyond help. You have a very obvious hatred for gay people that will not change, so I have nothing more ever to say to you.

All I can say is, there are way to many people out there that discriminate against people based on absolutely stupid things. Being gay is just another of those things. Whether you do it knowingly, or whether you do it in ignorance, it is not right.

If your happy being bigots then so be it. Not going to change much in my life. So have at 'er.

   

Is that the Avro combined with the Brasco there? Maybe Avrosco?

   

[align=center][/align]

   

   

   

No kidding. I also hate lieberals, dippers, dual citizens, liars, eastern bastards, the CBC, pedophiles, Queerbecers and islamofascists. What the hell kind of Albertan would I be if I didn't? A British Columbian that's what.



Damn, that was easy. So much for standing up for principals.



if only



If you paid more attention to the 3R's instead of gay indoctrination then maybe you'd know the difference between your and you're, to and too, no and know, there and their etc. Nothing wrong with a typo here and there but you plainly are grammatically illiterate and a sad commentary on the education system.

   

Previous  1 ... 23  24  25  26  27  28  Next