Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on December 13, 2013, 09:14:55 AM
-
The ongoing societal indoctrination is going to move in this direction. Lifestyle choices will eventually trump the First Amendment. At least that's my prediction.
Catholic School Sees Backlash After Firing Gay Teacher
Friday, 13 Dec 2013
The backlash has been sharp and swift for administrators at a Roman Catholic high school near Philadelphia who fired a gay teacher.
School officials say they had no choice but to fire Michael Griffin after he sought to marry his partner. They say he publicly violated his employment contract with Holy Ghost Preparatory School in Bensalem.
But thousands have protested the move through Facebook groups and petitions demanding that Griffin be rehired. Alumni have pledged to withhold financial support.
Some people say Griffin should have known he was jeopardizing his job by publicizing his plan to wed. Others worry the negative publicity is unfairly labeling the school as intolerant.
http://www.newsmax.com/US/gay-teacher-fired/2013/12/13/id/541725#ixzz2nNNFniJD
-
Here we go again. Another propaganda piece for the homosex mafia. For fucks sake, you worked at a Roman Catholic school, did you not think this might not go over well? What if this had been a midrasa or whatever the fuck the moosleims call their schools? think about that one. Would this outcry have occurred?
-
yeah, fuck the 4th amendment
-
So crosses in public places is out of the question.
And a private catholic school firing a homo is also a no no according to the idiots protesting.
So the end result is the destruction of the freedom of religion in public and in private.
So much for tolerance.
-
it's a catholic church... they don't condon homosexuals. DEAL WITH IT. take this pansy bullshit and go protest muslims who kill fags/lesbo's... christians.
-
people protesting this action are just exercising their right to free speech
we all love freedom here.....right?
-
people protesting this action are just exercising their right to free speech
we all love freedom here.....right?
well, since obama is president the answer is "no".
-
Do they fire heterosexuals who announce plans to marry? If not, they're discriminating against him.
They may have the right to refuse to perform the ceremony, but they shouldn't be allowed to fire him for it.
Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.
-
Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.
bwahaha TRUE!!!
-
Do they fire heterosexuals who announce plans to marry? If not, they're discriminating against him.
They may have the right to refuse to perform the ceremony, but they shouldn't be allowed to fire him for it.
Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.
yup ever notice how the majority are pedophiles too?
homo pedophiles are crafty bastards
-
yup ever notice how the majority are pedophiles too?
homo pedophiles are crafty bastards
source for this claim ?
-
source for this claim ?
common sense but
"Of all priests involved in the abuses, 80 to 90 per cent belong to this sexual orientation minority which is sexually engaged with adolescent boys between the ages of 11 and 17," said Tomasi. His statement is backed up by a report commissioned by the US bishops that found that in the overwhelming majority of cases the clergy involved were homosexuals, with 81 percent of victims being adolescent males
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2009/sep/09092910
-
now attack the website straw and deflect from the data
-
Do they fire heterosexuals who announce plans to marry? If not, they're discriminating against him.
They may have the right to refuse to perform the ceremony, but they shouldn't be allowed to fire him for it.
Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.
Religious organizations are allowed to discriminate.
-
common sense but
"Of all priests involved in the abuses, 80 to 90 per cent belong to this sexual orientation minority which is sexually engaged with adolescent boys between the ages of 11 and 17," said Tomasi. His statement is backed up by a report commissioned by the US bishops that found that in the overwhelming majority of cases the clergy involved were homosexuals, with 81 percent of victims being adolescent males
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2009/sep/09092910
:o
-
whats funny is the liberal left seem to love to hold these stories up when they happen to try and discredit the catholic church.
They dont realize they are also holding up the astounding dispropotionate number of those people who are homosexual pedophiles
-
common sense but
"Of all priests involved in the abuses, 80 to 90 per cent belong to this sexual orientation minority which is sexually engaged with adolescent boys between the ages of 11 and 17," said Tomasi. His statement is backed up by a report commissioned by the US bishops that found that in the overwhelming majority of cases the clergy involved were homosexuals, with 81 percent of victims being adolescent males
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2009/sep/09092910
sorry Tony
I forgot how profoundly stupid you are
what you have posted (and the rest of the article) does not in any way support the claim that the majority of those in the priesthood are pedophiles or even homosexuals
if you bothered to read the entire article you would know this
-
Do they fire heterosexuals who announce plans to marry? If not, they're discriminating
How? It's a PRIVATE Catholic school.
Their religious belief does not condone homosexuality and under the law they have every right to that belief.
-
yup ever notice how the majority are pedophiles too?
homo pedophiles are crafty bastards
I don't know about the majority being pedos, they do have a lot of them.
All pedos are crafty bastards, and I would bet society probably has more hetero pedos than homosexual ones, however the abuse of females in society is routinely not considered as horrific an abomination.
-
How? It's a PRIVATE Catholic school.
Their religious belief does not condone homosexuality and under the law they have every right to that belief.
Under the law, they may have the right to the belief, however, do they have the right to act on it under the law?
-
sorry Tony
I forgot how profoundly stupid you are
what you have posted (and the rest of the article) does not in any way support the claim that the majority of those in the priesthood are pedophiles or even homosexuals
if you bothered to read the entire article you would know this
LOL shit i knew that was your next tactic and didnt put it in there.
go ahead straw post the part of the article you think contradicts what I posted.
-
I don't know about the majority being pedos, they do have a lot of them.
All pedos are crafty bastards, and I would bet society probably has more hetero pedos than homosexual ones, however the abuse of females in society is routinely not considered as horrific an abomination.
I agree all pedos are crafty
and as those with odd sexual orientations only make up about 3% of the population, YEA I would agree that most pedos are hetero seeing as they have the other 97% of population to develop from....
You mean the abuse by females right?
-
LOL shit i knew that was your next tactic and didnt put it in there.
go ahead straw post the part of the article you think contradicts what I posted.
the person being quoted in the article is someone named Archbishop Silvano Tomasi and my opinion is that attempt to whitewash this scandal as being about homosexuals and not pedophiles is horseshit. He's just trying to shift the blame in an attempt to somehow make it not sound quite so bad.
you posted the following but clearly didn't even understand what he was saying and apparently didn't bother to read any further
"Of all priests involved in the abuses, 80 to 90 per cent belong to this sexual orientation minority which is sexually engaged with adolescent boys between the ages of 11 and 17," said Tomasi. His statement is backed up by a report commissioned by the US bishops that found that in the overwhelming majority of cases the clergy involved were homosexuals, with 81 percent of victims being adolescent males.
so clearly you didn't understand that this guy is claiming that, of all the priest who rape children, that he claims that 80-90% of them are actually just gay (or so therefore apparently not pedophiles). How this makes any difference when you have a adult raping a child I have no idea.
After that you either stopped reading or you would have seen this part
Tomasi, however, defended the Church's record, saying that "available research" showed that only 1.5 to 5 per cent of Catholic clergy had been implicated in abuse allegations, and suggesting that some of the focus ought to be shifted to other organizations that are plagued by accusations of sex abuse
so all I can guess is that you think 1.5 to 5% of a population = a majority
-
the person being quoted in the article is someone named Archbishop Silvano Tomasi and my opinion is that attempt to whitewash this scandal as being about homosexuals and not pedophiles is horseshit. He's just trying to shift the blame in an attempt to somehow make it not sound quite so bad.
you posted the following but clearly didn't even understand what he was saying and apparently didn't bother to read any further
so clearly you didn't understand that this guy is claiming that, of all the priest who rape children, that he claims that 80-90% of them are actually just gay (or so therefore apparently not pedophiles). How this makes any difference when you have a adult raping a child I have no idea.
After that you either stopped reading or you would have seen this part
so all I can guess is that you think 1.5 to 5% of a population = a majority
maybe you misunderstood and jumped to conclusions before responding to my first post...
My post was not about the entire population only the catholic church as that is what the post I was responding to was referecing.
If a person is sexually involved/attracted to underage people...THEYRE PEDOPHILES
-
maybe you misunderstood and jumped to conclusions before responding to my first post...
My post was not about the entire population only the catholic church as that is what the post I was responding to was referecing.
If a person is sexually involved/attracted to underage people...THEYRE PEDOPHILES
I made it pretty clear what I thought your claim was in this post and you didn't bother to challenge it at that point
sorry Tony
I forgot how profoundly stupid you are
what you have posted (and the rest of the article) does not in any way support the claim that the majority of those in the priesthood are pedophiles or even homosexuals
if you bothered to read the entire article you would know this
this is what you always do when you get caught - you pretend what you said wasn't really want you meant
-
I have absolutely no inclination to defend the Catholic Church, but last time I checked, Jesus was against homosexuality.
-
I have absolutely no inclination to defend the Catholic Church, but last time I checked, Jesus was against homosexuality.
can you post the quote from Jesus where he says this?
-
Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.
The post from jag I was responding to...
yup ever notice how the majority are pedophiles too?
homo pedophiles are crafty bastards
My post...
only a determined retard would come up with the conclusion you did
-
The post from jag I was responding to...
My post...
only a determined retard would come up with the conclusion you did
why didn't you challenge my summation of your argument the first time I made it ?
why did you claim that the majority of these priest were Pedophiles and try to support it with an article which is claiming that 80-90% of the priest doing the abuse are NOT pedophiles but rather just homosexuals (or did you misunderstand that claim in the article as well)?
at best, you statement is claiming that the majority of gay priest are pedophiles so why don't you show us some proof of that
-
why didn't you challenge my summation of your argument the first time I made it ?
why did you claim that the majority of these priest were Pedophiles and try to support it with an article which is claiming that 80-90% of the priest doing the abuse are NOT pedophiles but rather just homosexuals (or did you misunderstand that claim in the article as well)?
at best, you statement is claiming that the majority of gay priest are pedophiles so why don't you show us some proof of that
you asked me for a source and I gave you a source...youre the one who went full retard with it
No my statement along with my citation show that the majority of pedophiles within the church are gay.
for fuck sake, youre a dumb ass today
-
you asked me for a source and I gave you a source...youre the one who went full retard with it
No my statement along with my citation show that the majority of pedophiles within the church are gay.
for fuck sake, youre a dumb ass today
again, go read your source
it's claiming that 80-90% of the priest who commit these offense are NOT PEDOPHILES
if your claim is that the majority of gay priests are also pedophiles then show some proof of that claim
YOUR SOURCE claims that only 1.5% to 5% of all priest are implicated in the abuse so all you have to do is show that 1.5% to 5% of these priest constitute a majority of the priests who are also homosexual
here is a recent article claiming that ~ 58% of priest are gay so maybe you think that 1.5% to 5% of 58% is a majority
now if only 10% of priest are gay then the claim in your source that 1.5% to 5% are committing the acts would still not be a majority
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay
-
can you post the quote from Jesus where he says this?
Don't be a simpleton. The Bible, upon which Christ's teachings were based, is clear in its view of homosexuality. Jesus didn’t encourage his followers to accept any and all lifestyles. He taught that the way to salvation is open to “everyone exercising faith in him.” (John 3:16) Exercising faith in Jesus includes conforming to God’s moral code, which forbids certain types of conduct, including homosexuality.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, 10 thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.
Leviticus 18:22
“‘You must not lie down with a male in the same way that you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable act.
Romans 1:26, 27
That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error.
-
Don't be a simpleton. The Bible, upon which Christ's teachings were based, is clear in its view of homosexuality. Jesus didn’t encourage his followers to accept any and all lifestyles. He taught that the way to salvation is open to “everyone exercising faith in him.” (John 3:16) Exercising faith in Jesus includes conforming to God’s moral code, which forbids certain types of conduct, including homosexuality.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, 10 thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.
Leviticus 18:22
“‘You must not lie down with a male in the same way that you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable act.
Romans 1:26, 27
That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error.
you said Jesus was against homosexuality and the supposed words of Jesus are in the Bible so show me the quote from Jesus where he says this
-
you said Jesus was against homosexuality and the supposed words of Jesus are in the Bible so show me the quote from Jesus where he says this
As I stated, don't be a simpleton.
-
As I stated, don't be a simpleton.
a simpleton would be someone who claims jesus is against homosexuality but then can't provide a single quote from Jesus saying this
I assume you are aware that the bible contains the (alleged) words of jesus
you can even go find a red letter edition that puts his words in red text
have it champ and let me know when you find that quote
-
again, go read your source
it's claiming that 80-90% of the priest who commit these offense are NOT PEDOPHILES
if your claim is that the majority of gay priests are also pedophiles then show some proof of that claim
YOUR SOURCE claims that only 1.5% to 5% of all priest are implicated in the abuse so all you have to do is show that 1.5% to 5% of these priest constitute a majority of the priests who are also homosexual
here is a recent article claiming that ~ 58% of priest are gay so maybe you think that 1.5% to 5% of 58% is a majority
now if only 10% of priest are gay then the claim in your source that 1.5% to 5% are committing the acts would still not be a majority
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay
my source states that of the incidents of abuse by priest 80%-90% are on adolescent boys by males...
My statement was not about the entire population, but a specific group of individuals in response to a comment about the specific group of individuals.
-
my source states that of the incidents of abuse by priest 80%-90% are on adolescent boys by males...
My statement was not about the entire population, but a specific group of individuals in response to a comment about the specific group of individuals.
Is your statement in response to the last line in Jag's statement that "if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew."
Do they fire heterosexuals who announce plans to marry? If not, they're discriminating against him.
They may have the right to refuse to perform the ceremony, but they shouldn't be allowed to fire him for it.
Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.
yup ever notice how the majority are pedophiles too?
homo pedophiles are crafty bastards
-
Do they fire heterosexuals who announce plans to marry? If not, they're discriminating against him.
They may have the right to refuse to perform the ceremony, but they shouldn't be allowed to fire him for it.
Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.
I won't attempt for a moment to defend the Catholic Church, which is one of the most corrupt and hypocritical institutions in the history of the world. However, it is not uncommon for organizations to have morals clauses or codes of conduct to maintain membership or employment. Homosexuality is against the tenants of Christianity, of which I'm sure this teacher was well aware. If one knows the rules, but knowingly violates them, it should not come as any surprise when the infraction results in dismissal.
Nowadays "modern society" ventures to force alternative lifestyles into acceptance. If an institution does not condone such alternate lifestyles, no one is forcing anyone to be a member. They are free to seek out institutions that are more accepting of it. Instead though, it has become the norm to force an organization to bend to the will of such people, even if it means contradicting the very principles of its existence.
-
While discrimination and religious entities sounds like it should be an oxymoron, it's not...
It is also within their right to do so... People can choose to be a part of those religions or not.
If people choose to do so, then they are accepting the doctrine of the religion. Including their dislike of homosexuality if they have one.
If people don't like it, they should leave the church.
No one is forcing them to stay.
-
a simpleton would be someone who claims jesus is against homosexuality but then can't provide a single quote from Jesus saying this
I assume you are aware that the bible contains the (alleged) words of jesus
you can even go find a red letter edition that puts his words in red text
have it champ and let me know when you find that quote
I addressed the crux of your question very clearly. It is of little consequence to me that you choose to disregard it. You seem to be asserting that Jesus condoned and promoted homosexuality. Show me that quote, champ. Go quibble with someone else who is more apt to entertain your foolishness.
-
I addressed the crux of your question very clearly. It is of little consequence to me that you choose to disregard it. You seem to be asserting that Jesus condoned and promoted homosexuality. Show me that quote, champ. Go quibble with someone else who is more apt to entertain your foolishness.
LOL - how in the world do you get the idea that I'm asserting that Jesus promoted homosexuality
You're the one who said specifically that "Jesus was against homosexuality"
All I asked was that you provide the quote from Jesus where he said this
If there is no quote from Jesus then all you can say is that Jesus never spoke about homosexuality
Apparently in your world if one does not speak on a topic that must mean they are "promoting it"
-
I won't attempt for a moment to defend the Catholic Church, which is one of the most corrupt and hypocritical institutions in the history of the world. However, it is not uncommon for organizations to have morals clauses or codes of conduct to maintain membership or employment. Homosexuality is against the tenants of Christianity, of which I'm sure this teacher was well aware. If one knows the rules, but knowingly violates them, it should not come as any surprise when the infraction results in dismissal.
Nowadays "modern society" ventures to force alternative lifestyles into acceptance. If an institution does not condone such alternate lifestyles, no one is forcing anyone to be a member. They are free to seek out institutions that are more accepting of it. Instead though, it has become the norm to force an organization to bend to the will of such people, even if it means contradicting the very principles of its existence.
I would think the Catholic Church's long standing tradition of turning a blind eye and covering up predatory & criminal sexual abuse by its members is the biggest contradiction to whatever moral code or principles it claims to have. There's a reason Benedict stepped down, ...and it had nothing to do with old age or ill health.
-
Don't be a simpleton. The Bible, upon which Christ's teachings were based, is clear in its view of homosexuality. Jesus didn’t encourage his followers to accept any and all lifestyles. He taught that the way to salvation is open to “everyone exercising faith in him.” (John 3:16) Exercising faith in Jesus includes conforming to God’s moral code, which forbids certain types of conduct, including homosexuality.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, 10 thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.
Leviticus 18:22
“‘You must not lie down with a male in the same way that you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable act.
Romans 1:26, 27
That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error.
Or rich people:
Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."
Rich gays definetly go to hell :)
-
LOL - how in the world do you get the idea that I'm asserting that Jesus promoted homosexuality
You're the one who said specifically that "Jesus was against homosexuality"
All I asked was that you provide the quote from Jesus where he said this
If there is no quote from Jesus then all you can say is that Jesus never spoke about homosexuality
Apparently in your world if one does not speak on a topic that must mean they are "promoting it"
I'm not a believer but Jesus said he wasn't there to change the law but fulfill it thereby endorsing Old Testament views on homosexuality. He wouldn't have had to promote an anti-homosexual agenda because one was already firmly established in the Old Testament as a matter of doctrine.
-
Under the law, they may have the right to the belief, however, do they have the right to act on it under the law?
Of course they do.
-
I'm not a believer but Jesus said he wasn't there to change the law but fulfill it thereby endorsing Old Testament views on homosexuality. He wouldn't have had to promote an anti-homosexual agenda because one was already firmly established in the Old Testament as a matter of doctrine.
so your interpretation is that jesus lack of comment on homosexuality is tacit approval of statements in the Old Testament ?
do I understand your point of view correctly?
-
so your interpretation is that jesus lack of comment on homosexuality is tacit approval of statements in the Old Testament ?
do I understand your point of view correctly?
Yes, absolutely. He said that he would change nothing of the law before him. He was continuing the traditions and laws before him, of which the condemnation of homosexuality is one. He made no exceptions.
-
Yes, absolutely. He said that he would change nothing of the law before him. He was continuing the traditions and laws before him, of which the condemnation of homosexuality is one. He made no exceptions.
so if jesus didn't specifically comment on all the other crazy shit in the old testament then he must also support that to
correct?
-
so if jesus didn't specifically comment on all the other crazy shit in the old testament then he must also support that to
correct?
He said he supported the interpretation of the law and cultural practices written before him and had no intention of altering it. This is clearly approval. If it had been important enought to address I'm sure it would have come up.
-
He said he supported the interpretation of the law and cultural practices written before him and had no intention of altering it. This is clearly approval. If it had been important enought to address I'm sure it would have come up.
is that a yes to my question?
btw - can we also assume jesus fully supports everything in the new testament as well
-
is that a yes to my question?
btw - can we also assume jesus fully supports everything in the new testament as well
I think we can assume unless he addressed the issue directly that he supported everything.
-
now attack the website straw and deflect from the data
You are a fucking moron, your claim isn't backed up by anything you posted. Jesus you are fucking stupid. Who are you? who's gimmick/ coach's?
-
I think we can assume unless he addressed the issue directly that he supported everything.
fair enough
have you ever seen a christian with a tattoo or even a jesus tattoo?
that's forbidden in the bible yet I see that all the time
Leviticus 19:28
King James Version (KJV)
28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.
Have you ever heard of a christian getting a divorce? That's probably much more common than homosexuality (and by a large margin).
What is the punishment for adultery again?
Mark 10:11-12
New International Version (NIV)
11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
Of course this could go on for days and I know our christian posters will join in and explain why neither of these are a problem but two consenting adults engaged in homosexual sex is such a terrible thing
-
fair enough
have you ever seen a christian with a tattoo or even a jesus tattoo?
that's forbidden in the bible yet I see that all the time
Leviticus 19:28
King James Version (KJV)
28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.
Have you ever heard of a christian getting a divorce? That's probably much more common than homosexuality (and by a large margin).
What is the punishment for adultery again?
Mark 10:11-12
New International Version (NIV)
11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
Of course this could go on for days and I know our christian posters will join in and explain why neither of these are a problem but two consenting adults engaged in homosexual sex is such a terrible thing
Let me get this right. You're saying religious people pick and choose what parts of their religion they want to believe ;D
-
fair enough
have you ever seen a christian with a tattoo or even a jesus tattoo?
that's forbidden in the bible yet I see that all the time
Leviticus 19:28
King James Version (KJV)
28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.
Have you ever heard of a christian getting a divorce? That's probably much more common than homosexuality (and by a large margin).
What is the punishment for adultery again?
Mark 10:11-12
New International Version (NIV)
11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
Of course this could go on for days and I know our christian posters will join in and explain why neither of these are a problem but two consenting adults engaged in homosexual sex is such a terrible thing
The fact that these quotes have every been repeated more then once in history tells a sad story of the average intellect of a human. God says no tattoos, that his concern mostly. He built a torus shaped universe with amazing precision and beauty, but tattoes and fabric mixing are his primary concerns.
-
You are a fucking moron, your claim isn't backed up by anything you posted. Jesus you are fucking stupid. Who are you? who's gimmick/ coach's?
hahaha thank you moronic canadian, but it is very much so...
-
Moron homo should have known that a Catholic school which has bibles in it would not welcome him.
He is a fag and the law of God condemns homosexuality in fact in Leviticus homos are said to be put to death. Soo.. even if Catholics don't do that, they still will hate homosexuality and therefore he should have known better.
Go to a gay public school where they spoon feed homosexuality and other liberal non-sense.
We had two gay teachers in my catholic school, everyone suspected them by their manners, needless to say they molested boys and were caught.
We don't need homosexuals in society.
Here's mozart's lick the ass letter:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/05/mozart-dirty-letters_n_1651332.html
Filth of society that's been slowly creeping up on the world
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leck_mich_im_Arsch
Yeah, go to hell. They were at least hidden in their closets, now they are out and about spreading their filth. They have 'rights' to 'marry' (lol) and now want children too. Hell no.
-
Moron homo should have known that a Catholic school which has bibles in it would not welcome him.
He is a fag and the law of God condemns homosexuality in fact in Leviticus homos are said to be put to death. Soo.. even if Catholics don't do that, they still will hate homosexuality and therefore he should have known better.
Go to a gay public school where they spoon feed homosexuality and other liberal non-sense.
We had two gay teachers in my catholic school, everyone suspected them by their manners, needless to say they molested boys and were caught.
We don't need homosexuals in society.
Here's mozart's lick the ass letter:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/05/mozart-dirty-letters_n_1651332.html
Filth of society that's been slowly creeping up on the world
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leck_mich_im_Arsch
Yeah, go to hell. They were at least hidden in their closets, now they are out and about spreading their filth. They have 'rights' to 'marry' (lol) and now want children too. Hell no.
The fact that death is a punishment for doing something with another consenting adult that harms no one and is victimless, is absurd. Grow up, read some books, learn about shit, gayness exists in nature, many homo animals.
-
The fact that death is a punishment for doing something with another consenting adult that harms no one and is victimless, is absurd. Grow up, read some books, learn about shit, gayness exists in nature, many homo animals.
I don't agree with pretty much anything ahmed said, but what is your point here? Are you saying because animals exhibit this behavior that it's therefore normal behavior in humans?
-
The fact that death is a punishment for doing something with another consenting adult that harms no one and is victimless, is absurd. Grow up, read some books, learn about shit, gayness exists in nature, many homo animals.
Murder and incest exists amongst animals. So does eating their own poop and pee. We are not animals even though atheists want humans to believe that. It's a stupid argument to justify an action because animals do it.
I read books, a lot of books, but that does not mean I have to agree with you or you agree with me.
A capital punishment exists to deter others from corrupting society when the minority acts upon these behaviours. Of course a corrupted society that changes to the whims and desires as the wind blows, it may no longer be a minority if the corruption becomes wide spread. The people of Sodom and Gomora were very corrupt people and are well known for being the embodiment of homosexuality hence the term sodomite, although their corruption goes further than just homosexuality but they are well known for this practice.
Animals don't believe in capital punishment, they don't believe adultery is wrong, they do whatever they want, wherever they want, however they want and get away with it all. If they want to rape, they rape, if they want to kill, they kill, if they want to have sex with some random animal they do it out in the open, no one complains, no one says anything, anything goes.
-
Moron homo should have known that a Catholic school which has bibles in it would not welcome him.
LOL! Dude, they're Catholic! The Catholic Church has been the house of refuge for homosexuals over the centuries. Gay men received solace & comfort, and a refuge from the demands of society in the priesthood, while lesbians got the same from their convents. Why wouldn't he think he'd be welcomed with open arms. It has been a Catholic tradition over the centuries.
-
The fact that death is a punishment for doing something with another consenting adult that harms no one and is victimless, is absurd. Grow up, read some books, learn about shit, gayness exists in nature, many homo animals.
Well, since your devoid of any common sense, I expect your mind numbingly stupid self to start eating excrement like the koala bear or like lions kill the children of your next boyfriend before mating with him.
If you are going to claim that it's ok for faggotry to exist in humans because the same behavior might be seen in animals, then why stop there? IF animals is your sexual compass, your model, why stop at their sexual behavior?
Obviously animals, according to you, are on the same level as humans.
-
LOL! Dude, they're Catholic! The Catholic Church has been the house of refuge for homosexuals over the centuries. Gay men received solace & comfort, and a refuge from the demands of society in the priesthood, while lesbians got the same from their convents. Why wouldn't he think he'd be welcomed with open arms. It has been a Catholic tradition over the centuries.
You do know Ahmed believes all homosexual should be exterminated?
-
Here we go again. Another propaganda piece for the homosex mafia. For fucks sake, you worked at a Roman Catholic school, did you not think this might not go over well? What if this had been a midrasa or whatever the fuck the moosleims call their schools? think about that one. Would this outcry have occurred?
x 10
just a bunch of pathetic hypocrytes
-
I don't agree with pretty much anything ahmed said, but what is your point here? Are you saying because animals exhibit this behavior that it's therefore normal behavior in humans?
Well Beach Bum, first define what you mean by normal? if you mean occurring naturally then yes it is, it's uncommon out of all the species but so nearsightedness. It's natural by definition. Or do you mean common? normal has many meanings, but it fits the biological definition.
Now, on to my point, god is stupid. He hates homosexuality yet animals participate in it, 100's of species. If gayness is a choice, are these dogs for example choosing to be gay? is a donkey choosing to be gay? however, based on the teachings we know man is special (not as much as that talking snake, since extinct) thus animals participating in decision oriented behavior seems odd, why would god even allow this? seems stupid, are those animals going to hell?
Then reality... maybe we are animals, it's natural and there is no god thus the logical inconsistencies can be dissolved.
What the reality says is that it's naturally occuring in certain species, mammals mostly (we are mammals).
-
Well Beach Bum, first define what you mean by normal? if you mean occurring naturally then yes it is, it's uncommon out of all the species but so nearsightedness. It's natural by definition. Or do you mean common? normal has many meanings, but it fits the biological definition.
Now, on to my point, god is stupid. He hates homosexuality yet animals participate in it, 100's of species. If gayness is a choice, are these dogs for example choosing to be gay? is a donkey choosing to be gay? however, based on the teachings we know man is special (not as much as that talking snake, since extinct) thus animals participating in decision oriented behavior seems odd, why would god even allow this? seems stupid, are those animals going to hell?
Then reality... maybe we are animals, it's natural and there is no god thus the logical inconsistencies can be dissolved.
What the reality says is that it's naturally occuring in certain species, mammals mostly (we are mammals).
Incredibly simplistic reasoning. Homosexual sex is abnormal and unnatural. If it became the only form or sex for animals they would become extinct.
Lions engage in infanticide. Does that make infanticide normal behavior in humans? Of course not.
Animals and humans engage in a plethora of harmful behavior. Doesn't make the behavior normal.
-
Incredibly simplistic reasoning. Homosexual sex is abnormal and unnatural. If it became the only form or sex for animals they would become extinct.
Lions engage in infanticide. Does that make infanticide normal behavior in humans? Of course not.
Animals and humans engage in a plethora of harmful behavior. Doesn't make the behavior normal.
it has been considered normal human behavior in some cultures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide
-
I don't agree with pretty much anything ahmed said, but what is your point here? Are you saying because animals exhibit this behavior that it's therefore normal behavior in humans?
define normal, otherwise the conversation is meaningless.
-
it has been considered normal human behavior in some cultures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide
no he means like normal you know, things like right handedness, not that filthy choice those special can opener left handers made.
-
define normal, otherwise the conversation is meaningless.
anything that Bum finds acceptable is "normal" and anything that he doesn't personally find acceptable is abnormal
-
Lions engage in infanticide. Does that make infanticide normal behavior in humans? Of course not.
lions where made in their makers image
1 Samuel 15:3 God commands the death of helpless "suckling" infants. This literally means that the children god killed were still nursing.
Psalms 135:8 & 136:10 Here god is praised for slaughtering little babies.
Psalms 137:9 Here god commands that infants should be “dashed upon the rocks”.
god was in an infanticide stage in his youth.
-
Humans don't get much more "abnormal" than those with AB - blood type
These sick freaks are much more abnormal than even being gay
-
Private school bitches. They could ban all blacks and whites and I wouldn't give a shit.
-
Humans don't get much more "abnormal" than those with AB - blood type
These sick freaks are much more abnormal than even being gay
I have always said twilight is an ab blood type apologist movie, look at edward he reeks of it. What about jacob? why is he so dark? hemachromatosis? something is wrong, why is his face odd, it looks like he ran into a mirror and the mirror was covered in some form of strong adhesive thus "paneing" his face permenantly.
-
Two things. First, if they knew he was gay when they hired him what's the problem? Secondly, if they are receiving any tax dollars they have to follow the law.
-
Two things. First, if they knew he was gay when they hired him what's the problem? Secondly, if they are receiving any tax dollars they have to follow the law.
they thought he meant happy, turns out this was one big misunderstanding.
things got out of hand when he said pass me a fag. it's a communication thing. also, they aren't receiving your tax dollars per se, in a sense your money is certainly allocated in a lump fashion, not heterogeniusously spent in proportion sense.
-
they thought he meant happy, turns out this was one big misunderstanding.
things got out of hand when he said pass me a fag. it's a communication thing. also, they aren't receiving your tax dollars per se, in a sense your money is certainly allocated in a lump fashion, not heterogeniusously spent in proportion sense.
I meant any tax dollars.
-
I meant any tax dollars.
so you think it;s fine to dictact where tax dollars that aren't your's are going?not that you don;t care though.
-
so you think it;s fine to dictact where tax dollars that aren't your's are going?not that you don;t care though.
I think it's fair for institutions receiving tax dollars to comply with the law.
-
I find lawyers more thief-ish every year, some moral bs to steal cash.
-
I think it's fair for institutions receiving tax dollars to comply with the law.
so what about seperation of tax and state? did you not not read the constitution?
-
so what about seperation of tax and state? did you not not read the constitution?
Now that's a new one. Where can I find that in the Constitution?
-
so what about seperation of tax and state? did you not not read the constitution?
??? ??? ???
There is no facepalm picture that would suffice here.
-
so what about seperation of tax and state? did you not not read the constitution?
LOL!!
Moron.
-
Now that's a new one. Where can I find that in the Constitution?
;D
pretty sure abringus lincoin coined the term and it's in the consititution near the back.