This one ought to light some fires...

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus
Congratulations to the individual for conquering sin and Satan.

I thought you were the guy who said you supported abortion if it mean less welfare brats?

 

[lordtyranus]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: lordtyranus
Congratulations to the individual for conquering sin and Satan.

I thought you were the guy who said you supported abortion if it mean less welfare brats?

What does that have to do with the topic?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: lordtyranus
Congratulations to the individual for conquering sin and Satan.

I thought you were the guy who said you supported abortion if it mean less welfare brats?

What does that have to do with the topic?

Well... typically people that congratulate people for conquering sin and satan are far-right radical religious types. But they don't typically justify abortion for "welfare brats." So I'm suggesting you're just posting nonsense.

 

[lordtyranus]

Hehe. How many people do you know who have congratulated people for conquering sin and satan to make such a broad statement? Does not being religious imply that you have no moral sense or right and wrong?

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
I find that most people who oppose gay marriages simply have no relationships with openly gay men and women, representing the viewpoint of someone with no real knowledge of the subject.

One of my very best friends is gay. He flew from AZ to PA for my wedding, so yeah, you can say we're close. We don't discuss his sexuality because we both know I don't agree with it, and it's his personal decision. See, what libs don't realize is that conservatives can separate the behavior from the person. I have lunch with this friend daily, and do stuff with him some weekends. He brought his "friend" to my 30th birthday party last month. I don't believe homosexuality is a valid lifestyle choice, but that's my opinion that I'm entitled to, as well as being homosexual is his decision. If given the opportunity to vote on gay marriage, I would vote against it. Yes, even though I have a friend who would vote for it.

I also can't stand smoking, and would support a measure to make it illegal to smoke in public places. But I don't hate all people who smoke.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus
Hehe. How many people do you know who have congratulated people for conquering sin and satan to make such a broad statement?

Sorry I don't catalog everything people say to me. Can't tell you.

Does not being religious imply that you have no moral sense or right and wrong?

No, it doesn't. Not being religious implies you wouldn't congratulate someone for conquering sin and satan.

 

[lordtyranus]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: lordtyranus
Hehe. How many people do you know who have congratulated people for conquering sin and satan to make such a broad statement?

Sorry I don't catalog everything people say to me. Can't tell you.

Does not being religious imply that you have no moral sense or right and wrong?

No, it doesn't. Not being religious implies you wouldn't congratulate someone for conquering sin and satan.

You don't believe valorous action deserves commendation? What exactly do you think you know about this radical religious right which you have described?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus

You don't believe valorous action deserves commendation?

I'm not sure it's valorous. And that's not really the point. The point is whether you were trolling (or attempting to be funny) or whether you meant it.

What exactly do you think you know about this radical religious right which you have described?

*gets out clinton thumb* Let's see: I know they're radical. I know they're religious. I know they're right-wing. Oh and I know they oppose abortion fervently even if someone is gangraped by a bunch of mentally retarded genetic degenerates.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus
Congratulations to the individual for conquering sin and Satan.

What's Satan got to do with anything? Did Satan make them gay?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Perry404
But you did assert as much. As i said any blind man can see that you have to look hard for homosexuality in the animal world yet you do not in the human world as it is so previlent. Science only needs to prove the obvious to the most helpless individuals. Should i find for you the documents to prove fire is hot? Get over the obvious and maybe you can learn something from the real debate and mind you this is a debate. I am not insisting anything beyond the obvious.

BWAHAHAHA.

This has to be the lamest reply in place of 'I don't really know and was simply pulling that claim out of my a55.' that I've ever seen posted in an online forum

Gold star for you dude. LOL. The pure transparent evasion and audacity of your reply is going to keep me chuckling all weekend.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

BWAHAHAHA.

This has to be the lamest reply in place of 'I don't really know and was simply pulling that claim out of my a55.' that I've ever seen posted in an online forum

Gold star for you dude. LOL. The pure transparent evasion and audacity of your reply is going to keep me chuckling all weekend.

Nice try. I don't think most people are as stupid as you would like to think. The facts are the facts and resorting to laughing like a 13yr old nyophyte won't make the obvious any more obvious than it already is.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Perry404
Nice try. I don't think most people are as stupid as you would like to think. The facts are the facts and resorting to laughing like a 13yr old nyophyte won't make the obvious any more obvious than it already is.

"Facts are facts."

Only in your mind. The reason you can't and are unwilling to substantiate your claim is because
it's not true.

Even the NG article I linked previously provided a small insight to the numbers, which you patently ignored, and then tried to write off National Geographic as some sort of schlocks, as if Percy404 has more credibility by the mere utterance of words from his mouth than National Geographic and their years of science study funding and archiving.

The article claimed that 75% of male Bonobos have been known to participate in homosexual activities (Far more prevalent than that observed in humans, contrary to your claim). You reject that with:

No, homosexual behavior is not unique in the animal world but in no species is it anywhere near as prevelent as in human beings and in those species where it does occure most often(although not nearly as much as in the human species) it is not homosexuality it is bisexuality.


The part about the frequency disparity between animals and humans is already wrong. As far as the second portion of yor claim - Bisexuality is not a sexual category unto itself. It's merely a term that means both heterosexual and homosexual behaviour. Bisexuality is still inclusive of homosexuality.

You base your numbers on what you personally observe. That's not evidence, that's anecdote. You should learn the difference between the two or else it doesn't give much creddence to your claim of "real debate."