Gay man sues Bible publishers......

[olafberserker]

wwmg(wimga)d

Carry on. Tell us how evil medicine and homosexuals are.  Then when you have the time mix in what a great coach Matty Goukas is and how the Magic were fortunate to get by the great Toronto Raptors.  For dessert how about a helping of how the Rays can't compete in the AL East

Well, I agree with him about medicine. Inept is a better word. How about those babies in Texas who were
given blood thinner instead of saline? But that's another thread. The greed angle is also something
separate.

If I'm not mistaken that was human error.

[ufojoe]

OK, Esco and Guru, I'd love to see your response to JG's post that I copied and pasted.

Guru ignored it last time. Maybe this time he'll try to respond to JG's words.

[olafberserker]

OK, Esco and Guru, I'd love to see your response to JG's post that I copied and pasted.

Guru ignored it last time. Maybe this time he'll try to respond to JG's words.

Hope you don't mind reading esco's essay.

[escobar]

Because regarding medicine it's fact, it kills people. No argument can be made against a fact. If homosexuality isn't a choice, we would probably know about it by now. You clearly don't have enough evidence backing up your stance as FACT so at this point it's still (very) debatable. You might say, "well where are your facts proving homosexuality is a choice", and once again I will say that to me it is common sense, I have nature on my side. A man and a woman rely on each other to create life, that's about as factual as it gets. As I've said before, just because some scientists have created new ways of forming life doesn't mean jack to me. Scientists at this point can probably create whatever the hell they want. It doesn't mean it's natural or that it's supposed to happen. Likewise, just because a very small percentage (VERY small) of people who have ever lived on this planet choose to lead a gay lifestyle it doesn't mean it's natural or right. I brought up "scat" type sex before, how about incest? What if a certain segment of society felt strong urges from childhood to have sex with their brother/sister? Where do the "rights" stop, Joe? At what point have things gone to far? Are we to accept everyone and every idea just because we don't want to leave anyone out or hurt anyone's feelings? Because I gotta tell ya, with the ideas I've seen that some people have for sexual "fun", it kinda scares me to imagine what's next. And what's even scarier is that there are people like you who are gonna be there to say it's their "right".

Many of us have already argued this over and over so I'm not going to do it again. There are multiple
threads on it.

The point JG made is this:

Do you think that if you were born with an attraction to women but were put in a specific environment (two
fathers?) that you might change your preference from women to men? Oh heck, let me just copy and paste
what JG asked Guru on this matter and you can respond. Guru never did.

You have to understand that as a christian homosexuality is a sin. What JG was basically asking BG to do was contradict his own beliefs. Very simple logic, if you are a christian who believes whole heartedly in the bible, you believe that :

1. homosexuality is a sin
2. God is the creator of life
3. God would never create a homosexual human being because as clearly outlined above homosexuality is a sin

Now there is one alternative that may or may not be true. Let's say long ago there was a man who for whatever reason decided he was going to sleep with a man. It was a clear conscious decision, not an inherited trait. His first wife cheated on him, his next gave him the clap, whatever, point is he hates women. So the dude goes out and gets him some man butt. Let's say some kind of change occurs in him over time, change that wouldn't have taken place had he not chosen to go the route he did. Later on he has a son or a daughter and a little bit of that "change" (keeping it real simple here) is passed on to them. The cycle repeats itself many many times until we've reached 2008. Now if in fact it's ever proven that some people are born gay, IMO my simplistic theory would be a good place to start. As others have said God is a perfect being without sin, the Bible states homosexuality is a sin so no logical argument can be made that God would create a homosexual human being. However, God also gave us all free will, so it's plausible that with that free will, over a long period of time, man has become something God never intended.

So IMO IF people are born gay it would have more to do with man making some awful decisions than it would be anything else. There are really just too many ways to look at things like this, it's a very difficult subject to debate which is why these topics tend to go the longest on these boards. If anyone had any absolute answers there would be nothing to debate. I just go with what I believe and use common sense regarding topics that none of us will ever figure out for sure, such as homosexuality. If my common sense is different than yours, so be it.

[BucsGuru]

For the last time Joe,

NO, I do not buy into the concept that people are born gay, nor do I think that it is remotely possible.

Are people born with a physical sexual deformity or malformation, in which their physical trait and hormones are not a match?  The asnwer is yes.  But a man will know at some point he is a man and a woman will at some point know they are a woman due to puberty.  It is after a man with such a deformity decides to continue to call himself Steve, when he was actually born Stephanie that is the issue.  
The overwhelming majority of homosexuals use the "I'm born this way" excuse so people will accept their abhorent behavior.  Have homosexuals have a hormone test and let's determine whether they are predisposed to be male/female.  

Joe, it's a lifestyle choice.  

If someone says black, you say white.....that my friend is your nature.

[escobar]

OK, Esco and Guru, I'd love to see your response to JG's post that I copied and pasted.

Guru ignored it last time. Maybe this time he'll try to respond to JG's words.

Hope you don't mind reading esco's essay.

What is with you commenting on the length of my posts? Should I throw out a bunch of one liners like you to up my post count? Is there an unwritten rule around here that states some kind of ratio of long posts to short ones that I'm unaware of? Please, tell me how I can be a more olaf-friendly PR poster, I'll gladly change my ways.


wwmg(wimga)d

[olafberserker]

Because regarding medicine it's fact, it kills people. No argument can be made against a fact. If homosexuality isn't a choice, we would probably know about it by now. You clearly don't have enough evidence backing up your stance as FACT so at this point it's still (very) debatable. You might say, "well where are your facts proving homosexuality is a choice", and once again I will say that to me it is common sense, I have nature on my side. A man and a woman rely on each other to create life, that's about as factual as it gets. As I've said before, just because some scientists have created new ways of forming life doesn't mean jack to me. Scientists at this point can probably create whatever the hell they want. It doesn't mean it's natural or that it's supposed to happen. Likewise, just because a very small percentage (VERY small) of people who have ever lived on this planet choose to lead a gay lifestyle it doesn't mean it's natural or right. I brought up "scat" type sex before, how about incest? What if a certain segment of society felt strong urges from childhood to have sex with their brother/sister? Where do the "rights" stop, Joe? At what point have things gone to far? Are we to accept everyone and every idea just because we don't want to leave anyone out or hurt anyone's feelings? Because I gotta tell ya, with the ideas I've seen that some people have for sexual "fun", it kinda scares me to imagine what's next. And what's even scarier is that there are people like you who are gonna be there to say it's their "right".

Many of us have already argued this over and over so I'm not going to do it again. There are multiple
threads on it.

The point JG made is this:

Do you think that if you were born with an attraction to women but were put in a specific environment (two
fathers?) that you might change your preference from women to men? Oh heck, let me just copy and paste
what JG asked Guru on this matter and you can respond. Guru never did.

You have to understand that as a christian homosexuality is a sin. What JG was basically asking BG to do was contradict his own beliefs. Very simple logic, if you are a christian who believes whole heartedly in the bible, you believe that :

1. homosexuality is a sin
2. God is the creator of life
3. God would never create a homosexual human being because as clearly outlined above homosexuality is a sin

Now there is one alternative that may or may not be true. Let's say long ago there was a man who for whatever reason decided he was going to sleep with a man. It was a clear conscious decision, not an inherited trait. His first wife cheated on him, his next gave him the clap, whatever, point is he hates women. So the dude goes out and gets him some man butt. Let's say some kind of change occurs in him over time, change that wouldn't have taken place had he not chosen to go the route he did. Later on he has a son or a daughter and a little bit of that "change" (keeping it real simple here) is passed on to them. The cycle repeats itself many many times until we've reached 2008. Now if in fact it's ever proven that some people are born gay, IMO my simplistic theory would be a good place to start. As others have said God is a perfect being without sin, the Bible states homosexuality is a sin so no logical argument can be made that God would create a homosexual human being. However, God also gave us all free will, so it's plausible that with that free will, over a long period of time, man has become something God never intended.

So IMO IF people are born gay it would have more to do with man making some awful decisions than it would be anything else. There are really just too many ways to look at things like this, it's a very difficult subject to debate which is why these topics tend to go the longest on these boards. If anyone had any absolute answers there would be nothing to debate. I just go with what I believe and use common sense regarding topics that none of us will ever figure out for sure, such as homosexuality. If my common sense is different than yours, so be it.

Joe could you give the cliff note version of this when you finish reading it.  I'm busy reading Matt Goukas' autobiography.

[olafberserker]

OK, Esco and Guru, I'd love to see your response to JG's post that I copied and pasted.

Guru ignored it last time. Maybe this time he'll try to respond to JG's words.

Hope you don't mind reading esco's essay.

 Please, tell me how I can be a more olaf-friendly PR poster, I'll gladly change my ways.


wwmg(wimga)d

leave

[escobar]

OK, Esco and Guru, I'd love to see your response to JG's post that I copied and pasted.

Guru ignored it last time. Maybe this time he'll try to respond to JG's words.

Hope you don't mind reading esco's essay.

 Please, tell me how I can be a more olaf-friendly PR poster, I'll gladly change my ways.


wwmg(wimga)d

leave

If I followed arguments as poorly as you I'd want those inciting the arguments to leave as well.

[olafberserker]

OK, Esco and Guru, I'd love to see your response to JG's post that I copied and pasted.

Guru ignored it last time. Maybe this time he'll try to respond to JG's words.

Hope you don't mind reading esco's essay.

 Please, tell me how I can be a more olaf-friendly PR poster, I'll gladly change my ways.


wwmg(wimga)d

leave

If I followed arguments as poorly as you I'd want those inciting the arguments to leave as well.

Nice try.  Is there a stance that you've taken in which you didn't end up looking like a fool?  lol

[escobar]

Oh and btw olaf, I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said the Rays couldn't compete this season. Go ahead and dig that one up for me after you get done with the autobiography, thanks.

[escobar]

OK, Esco and Guru, I'd love to see your response to JG's post that I copied and pasted.

Guru ignored it last time. Maybe this time he'll try to respond to JG's words.

Hope you don't mind reading esco's essay.

 Please, tell me how I can be a more olaf-friendly PR poster, I'll gladly change my ways.


wwmg(wimga)d

leave

If I followed arguments as poorly as you I'd want those inciting the arguments to leave as well.

Nice try. Is there a stance that you've taken in which you didn't end up looking like a fool? lol

As I've said, you aren't exactly stellar at following an argument, so YOU labeling me a fool is hardly an insult.

In fact I believe it's a good thing.


wwmg(wimga)d

[olafberserker]

Oh and btw olaf, I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said the Rays couldn't compete this season. Go ahead and dig that one up for me after you get done with the autobiography, thanks.

Nice try.  You called those saying they had proven they could compete idiots.  Close enough.  It's the All Star break.  Ready to admit you were wrong or are you going to respond with an essay about how you know more than the "knowledgable" fans.

[olafberserker]

OK, Esco and Guru, I'd love to see your response to JG's post that I copied and pasted.

Guru ignored it last time. Maybe this time he'll try to respond to JG's words.

Hope you don't mind reading esco's essay.

 Please, tell me how I can be a more olaf-friendly PR poster, I'll gladly change my ways.


wwmg(wimga)d

leave

If I followed arguments as poorly as you I'd want those inciting the arguments to leave as well.

Nice try. Is there a stance that you've taken in which you didn't end up looking like a fool? lol

As I've said, you aren't exactly stellar at following an argument, so YOU labeling me a fool is hardly an insult.

In fact I believe it's a good thing.


wwmg(wimga)d

care to explain.  you're due for another essay

[escobar]

Oh and btw olaf, I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said the Rays couldn't compete this season. Go ahead and dig that one up for me after you get done with the autobiography, thanks.

Nice try.  You called those saying they had proven they could compete idiots.  Close enough.  It's the All Star break.  Ready to admit you were wrong or are you going to respond with an essay about how you know more than the "knowledgable" fans.

Two things. First, my comment came after the first month of the season, which of course followed almost a decade of last place baseball. Any logical person will tell you that it takes longer than one month of (at the time) barely above .500 baseball to PROVE you are now a winning team. The timing of my post was pretty important, the fact that you left it out tells me how "strong" you believe your argument to be.

Second, recently I posted that the Rays have now convinced me they are a legit team and anyone who disputes that is an idiot. You responded to that post olaf, so clearly you knew about it. Yet again, the fact that you felt the need to pose a question that had already been answered (which you already knew) shows me how weak you are at debating topics on these boards.

And "close enough"? Are you kidding. "Close enough" is another way of saying you whiffed and puked up some nonsense before checking the facts. Get a grip.


wwmg(wimga)d