When the going gets rough, start bashing the Gays

[cybrsage]

Guys, I have a homoerotic desire for this cybrsage, so I stalk him around the forum, telling people not to talk to him. I am super jealous about it.

Please, there is plenty of me to go around. No need to be jealous.

 

[Infohawk]

No, you really don't get it.

I created a list of things which are wrong. Either you are being stupid on purpose, or you really are mentally disabled.

Here is that list again, since you have proven your attention span does not extend to more than one post at a time:

"If an act is wrong (extramarital sex, sex with minors, homosexual sex, etc), "

I got that part. The problem is when you tried to act like straight men not cheating on their wives is analogous to gay men never having sex with any men. They are not analogous. There's no reason for anyone to care about your list by the way. It's completely arbitrary.

 

[cybrsage]

They are only analogous is that they are both wrong. Again, stop being stupid on purpose.

The list is not arbitrary, and you know this...unless you are, once again, being stupid on purpose.

 

[Infohawk]

They are only analogous is that they are both wrong. Again, stop being stupid on purpose.

The list is not arbitrary, and you know this...unless you are, once again, being stupid on purpose.

If it's not arbitrary, what is it based on then?

 

[cybrsage]

You really don't know? That is not your fault, but a fault of society in general.

Leviticus 18

Forbidden Sexual Practices

1 Then the Lord said to Moses, 2 “Give the following instructions to the people of Israel. I am the Lord your God. 3 So do not act like the people in Egypt, where you used to live, or like the people of Canaan, where I am taking you. You must not imitate their way of life. 4 You must obey all my regulations and be careful to obey my decrees, for I am the Lord your God. 5 If you obey my decrees and my regulations, you will find life through them. I am the Lord.

6 “You must never have sexual relations with a close relative, for I am the Lord.
7 “Do not violate your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; you must not have sexual relations with her.
8 “Do not have sexual relations with any of your father’s wives, for this would violate your father.
9 “Do not have sexual relations with your sister or half sister, whether she is your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born into your household or someone else’s.
10 “Do not have sexual relations with your granddaughter, whether she is your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, for this would violate yourself.
11 “Do not have sexual relations with your stepsister, the daughter of any of your father’s wives, for she is your sister.
12 “Do not have sexual relations with your father’s sister, for she is your father’s close relative.
13 “Do not have sexual relations with your mother’s sister, for she is your mother’s close relative.
14 “Do not violate your uncle, your father’s brother, by having sexual relations with his wife, for she is your aunt.
15 “Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law; she is your son’s wife, so you must not have sexual relations with her.
16 “Do not have sexual relations with your brother’s wife, for this would violate your brother.
17 “Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. And do not take[a] her granddaughter, whether her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, and have sexual relations with her. They are close relatives, and this would be a wicked act.
18 “While your wife is living, do not marry her sister and have sexual relations with her, for they would be rivals.
19 “Do not have sexual relations with a woman during her period of menstrual impurity.
20 “Do not defile yourself by having sexual intercourse with your neighbor’s wife.
21 “Do not permit any of your children to be offered as a sacrifice to Molech, for you must not bring shame on the name of your God. I am the Lord.
22 “Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin.
23 “A man must not defile himself by having sex with an animal. And a woman must not offer herself to a male animal to have intercourse with it. This is a perverse act.
24 “Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, for the people I am driving out before you have defiled themselves in all these ways. 25 Because the entire land has become defiled, I am punishing the people who live there. I will cause the land to vomit them out. 26 You must obey all my decrees and regulations. You must not commit any of these detestable sins. This applies both to native-born Israelites and to the foreigners living among you.27 “All these detestable activities are practiced by the people of the land where I am taking you, and this is how the land has become defiled. 28 So do not defile the land and give it a reason to vomit you out, as it will vomit out the people who live there now. 29 Whoever commits any of these detestable sins will be cut off from the community of Israel. 30 So obey my instructions, and do not defile yourselves by committing any of these detestable practices that were committed by the people who lived in the land before you. I am the Lord your God.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+18&version=NLT

So not arbitrary...they have been known for a few thousand years.

 

[Infohawk]

You really don't know? That is not your fault, but a fault of society in general.

So not arbitrary...they have been known for a few thousand years.

The Old Testament is not authoritative to people who don't share your blind faith. In that sense it is arbitrary. That's why there's no point discussing anything with you. You are starting from a position of superstition and not logic or reason. That's what makes you a zealot.

 

[fskimospy]

You really don't know? That is not your fault, but a fault of society in general.


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+18&version=NLT

So not arbitrary...they have been known for a few thousand years.

Why is something being around a long time relevant as to whether or not it is arbitrary?

 

[J-Money]

You really don't know? That is not your fault, but a fault of society in general.

- retarded shit -

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+18&version=NLT

So not arbitrary...they have been known for a few thousand years.

After reading that I realized that religious people are a lot dumber than I thought. God has to keep repeating "I am the Lord" as if the religious zealots keep forgetting who is speaking.

"You can't have sex with relatives!"

"Why?"

"Because I am the Lord!"

"Not because it's gross?"

"NO! FOR I AM THE LORD"

 

[PingviN]

If the Bible says so, it must be true. After all, it's God's words.

 

[zsdersw]

Identity crisis and not being able to face the fact that they are gay causes a lot of the emotional issues with some gays.

The exception, not the rule. Even among those few who experience that, some would otherwise be mentally/emotionally impaired even if they weren't questioning their gender or sexuality.

 

[cybrsage]

After reading that I realized that religious people are a lot smarter than me.

"You can't have sex with relatives!"

"Why?"

"Because I am the Lord!"

"Not because it's gross?"

"NO! FOR I AM THE LORD"

You only say it is gross because your sister is not hot.

 

[cybrsage]

Why is something being around a long time relevant as to whether or not it is arbitrary?

The Old Testament is not authoritative to people who don't share your blind faith. In that sense it is arbitrary. That's why there's no point discussing anything with you. You are starting from a position of superstition and not logic or reason. That's what makes you a zealot.

Because it is not arbitrary. I suspect neither of you knows what the word actually means.

ar·bi·trar·y

   /ˈɑr

bɪˌtrɛr

i/ Show Spelled [ahr-bi-trer-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural -trar·ies.
adjective 1. subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arbitrary

It is the will of God, not any single individual.







And because I already know the next line of argument will be saying God is an individual:

in·di·vid·u·al

   /ˌɪn

dəˈvɪdʒ

u

əl/ Show Spelled[in-duh-vij-oo-uh

l] Show IPA
noun 1. a single human being, as distinguished from a group.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/individual

 

[cybrsage]

If the Bible says so, it must be true. After all, it's God's words.

Yep. You got it.

 

[PingviN]

Yep. You got it.

Sarcasm unable to penetrate you religious idiocy?

 

[silverpig]

Because it is not arbitrary. I suspect neither of you knows what the word actually means.

[/I]http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arbitrary

It is the will of God, not any single individual.

Try posting the entire definition.

4.
capricious; unreasonable; unsupported: an arbitrary demand for payment.

 

[fskimospy]

Because it is not arbitrary. I suspect neither of you knows what the word actually means.

[/I]http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arbitrary

It is the will of God, not any single individual.

LOL.

'Gay sex is immoral and wrong. But wait, before you accuse me of making an arbitrary distinction, rest assured that a book told me a bearded man in the sky said it was so, therefore it isn't arbitrary.'

Good job on reaching a new standard of stupid.

 

[fskimospy]

Try posting the entire definition.

4.
capricious; unreasonable; unsupported: an arbitrary demand for payment.

You'll start to notice this sort of thing is a theme with our good friend cybrsage.

 

[cybrsage]

Try posting the entire definition.

4.capricious; unreasonable; unsupported: an arbitrary demand for payment.

Why would I drop down to defintion way down the list when the top definition is applicable? That would be like saying the meaing of the word run ni "See spot run" means he has liquid coming out of his nose.

The rules are not capricious, unreasonable, or unsupported...which means that definition does not apply.

ca·pri·cious

   /kəˈprɪʃ

əs, -ˈpri

ʃəs/ Show Spelled[kuh-prish-uh

s, -pree-shuh

s] Show IPA
adjective 1. subject to, led by, or indicative of caprice or whim; erratic:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/capricious

These same rules have been static for a few thousand years...there is nothing erratic about it.

 

[cybrsage]

Sarcasm unable to penetrate you religious idiocy?

I was being nice and gave you the benefit of the doubt. I assumed you were not stupid. Are you claiming I was wrong, and I should have assumed you were stupid when I read your post?

 

[cybrsage]

...a bunch of stuff where I pretend I am witty and fail...

Are you still pretending these rules have not been around for a few thousand years?

Just admit you meant to use a different word, since you did not really understand the word you used, and move on with your life. No need to keep digging yourself deeper.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Are you still pretending these rules have not been around for a few thousand years?

Just admit you meant to use a different word, since you did not really understand the word you used, and move on with your life. No need to keep digging yourself deeper.

What does the age of a rule have to do with deeming it an appropriate rule? Hey women couldn't vote, or just about anything else, for a very long time. That must have been proper? Slavery was around longer than the bible. Can't be anything wrong with that?

 

[fskimospy]

Why would I drop down to defintion way down the list when the top definition is applicable? That would be like saying the meaing of the word run ni "See spot run" means he has liquid coming out of his nose.

Do you know how definitions work? You said that the decision was not arbitrary. That doesn't mean that if it fails to meet one of the definitions that it is not arbitrary, it means that it cannot meet any of the definitions. Obviously, by definition, (har) a word applies to something if the action is correctly described by any of the commonly accepted meanings, of which #4 clearly is.

English 101, brotha. Biblical prohibitions are most certainly arbitrary for people who know the entire definition of the word, not just cherry picked ones. That's why you need to do your research before you open your mouth.

(BTW, this is simply a 'your argument is facially invalid' statement here, it doesn't get into the manifest absurdity of your declaration that something is not arbitrary if the Bible tells you that's how it goes)

 

[fskimospy]

Are you still pretending these rules have not been around for a few thousand years?

Just admit you meant to use a different word, since you did not really understand the word you used, and move on with your life. No need to keep digging yourself deeper.

I have to admit, it takes a truly amazing amount of self delusion to be shown a dictionary definition of a word that applies, declare it invalid because you don't think it should count, and then try and talk shit to other people for not knowing a definition.

As I said before even for this board you're reaching new heights of stupidity.

HEY GUYS DEFINITIONS DON'T COUNT IF THEY ARE THE NUMBER FOUR ONE.

EDIT: Oh, and you still haven't told us how the age of something relates to whether or not it is arbitrary.

 

[cybrsage]

Do you know how definitions work? You said that the decision was not arbitrary. That doesn't mean that if it fails to meet one of the definitions that it is not arbitrary, it means that it cannot meet any of the definitions. Obviously, by definition, (har) a word applies to something if the action is correctly described by any of the commonly accepted meanings, of which #4 clearly is.

Why would I use a definition which is not true? Fine, we will pretend you meant number 4.

The rules are not capricious, unreasonable, or unsupported...which means that definition does not apply.

ca·pri·cious

   /kəˈprɪʃ

əs, -ˈpri

ʃəs/ http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html Show Spelled[kuh-prish-uh

s, -pree-shuh

s] Show IPA
adjective 1. subject to, led by, or indicative of caprice or whim; erratic:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/capricious

These same rules have been static for a few thousand years...there is nothing erratic about it.

So sure, we can act like you meant to use a different definition which ALSO does not apply. I just do not understand why you are arguing that you were using a defintion which shows you to be wrong. Why are you doing that?

 

[cybrsage]

EDIT: Oh, and you still haven't told us how the age of something relates to whether or not it is arbitrary.

Because the defintition is capricious. Capricious means erratic. When something has not changed for a few thousand years, it cannot be called erratic...it is stable.

I posted it twice...with this being the third time posted.