By Resistting our Bigotry Gays Are Persecuting The Church says Italian Cardinal

reply to post by SevenBeans

the right to rear (adopt) children,
as opposed to rear end them.
like the churches have been known to do.

note PM Harper's apology for residential schools

Originally posted by Danbones
the right to rear children

They already have that right.

Originally posted by Danbones
as opposed to rear end them.
like the churches have been known to do.

Churches don't rear end boys, homosexual men have been known to though.

reply to post by SevenBeans

Same-sex marriages are currently granted by five of the 50 states, one federal district, and one Indian tribe:

Source

Five states. There are five states where same sex marriage is allowed here in the USA, the other 45 states deny homosexuals the right that heterosexual couples enjoy, the right to marry who they choose. The Federal Government here in the USA does not recognize ANY homosexual marriages. That is the right that is denied homosexuals. It is also denied to them in Italy, which is what the OP is about. Gays are standing up for themselves and this Cardinal in Italy is whining about it and playing the persecution card. When those who are discriminated against stand up that doesn't mean they are persecuting someone else.

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
Using your own logic, you are the same as a gay. Out of the norm.

My choice to wait to have sex was abnormal (and very smart and responsible by the way) but my sexual drive has not been misdirected/perverted toward the same gender, or little kids, or monkeys.

My sexual drive has always encouraged me to have sexual relations with adult human beings of the opposite gender, and it still does.

Your actual quote:

I never had a long term girlfriend in highschool because they wanted to have sex and I refused. I lost relationship after relationship in college over this too

You do know there are plenty of methods available engage in sex and make sure it is still safe right? Evidently not.


Do you refuse to cook because you could burn yourself? Of course not.

Using your own words (abnormal), you would be placed in the same category as gays.

If one of your children turn out to be gay, will you sit down and have the "your choice of sex partners are perverted, and as such, you are abnormal" talk with them?

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Five states. There are five states where same sex marriage is allowed here in the USA, the other 45 states deny homosexuals the right that heterosexual couples enjoy, the right to marry who they choose. The Federal Government here in the USA does not recognize ANY homosexual marriages. That is the right that is denied homosexuals. It is also denied to them in Italy, which is what the OP is about. Gays are standing up for themselves and this Cardinal in Italy is whining about it and playing the persecution card.

I'll say it one more time - the criteria for which marraiges are legally recognized apply to both gay and straight people.

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Churches don't rear end boys, homosexual men have been known to though.

Churches just hide their representatives that do in fact rear end boys. Hiding the crime is being in de facto support of it.

You are either trolling, or mentally unstable to the point where your fitness to be a parent if you even have kids must be called into question.

reply to post by SevenBeans


So. And blacks who couldn't drink from white water fountains had the same legal criteria applied to the them (the whites couldn't drink from the black fountain). That doesn't make it okay. If couples who are the same sex cannot get married they are being denied a right that everyone else has.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
You do know there are plenty of methods available engage in sex and make sure it is still safe right?

No such thing, I would not risk creating a child before I could provide them certain things (security, time, married parents).

STDs are a whole different matter, but the idea that a condom will always protect you is absurd.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
Do you refuse to cook because you could burn yourself?

No, because a burn isn't a very big deal. Getting an STD or creating a new life before you can provide them with everything they deserve is a big deal.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
Using your own words (abnormal), you would be placed in the same category as gays.

Didn't I already say that my choice was abnormal? Yes, both my choice and homosexuality are abnormal.

My choice is not a misdirection/perversion of the sexual drive.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
If one of your children turn out to be gay, will you sit down and have the "your choice of sex partners are perverted, and as such, you are abnormal" talk with them?

It isn't a choice first of all, and by definition, homosexuality is a misdirection/perversion of the sex drive. If they ask me what I think I will tell them the truth. It's apparent to most third graders anyway.

reply to post by SevenBeans

The cathoica and protestant churches deliberately took tax dollars to commit Genocide then and made a concerted effort to cover it up so yes they DO REAR END CHILDREN
they didn't even tell the parents about the dead children or even where they were buried.
read the apology or get the facts or something.

Florida expressly bans gay and lesbian people from adopting children,

It is sort of legal some places, but in many places it isn't.

Utah passed legislation to prohibit any unmarried person from adopting children. As gay marriage is not permitted in the state, this included a de facto prohibition against gay and lesbian people. In the rest of the states of the union, single gay and lesbian people may petition to adopt children, as a single adoption; that is, without any other person becoming the legal guardian.

www.ehow.com...
Read more: Gay Adoption Rules | eHow.com www.ehow.com...

Read more: Gay Adoption Rules | eHow.com www.ehow.com...

I'm going to assume you are a christian.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Danbones
the churches took tax dollars to commit chenocide and made a concerted effortto cover it up so yes they DO REAR END CHILDREN

Huh? A church did this? With what, it's steeple?

Originally posted by Danbones

Florida expressly bans gay and lesbian people from adopting children,

It is sort of legal some places, but in many places it isn't.

Nope, they tried but it was overturned. Gay people can adopt the same as I can in Florida.

Originally posted by Danbones
Utah passed legislation to prohibit any unmarried person from adopting children. As gay marriage is not permitted in the state, this included a de facto prohibition against gay and lesbian people. In the rest of the states of the union, single gay and lesbian people may petition to adopt children, as a single adoption; that is, without any other person becoming the legal guardian.

I can't jointly adopt with another male either, no discrimination.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
Condoms run at about a 98% effective rate. Couple that with a girl on the pill, and its pretty much a sure thing.

Why would I take a 2 % chance of creating a new life before I can care for one properly? Pills are forgotten, made less effective in combination with other medications etc. etc.

Condoms are virtually worthless at preventing the spread of some STDs.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
Which one of those problems did you run into?

The only problem I ran into is wanting to behave responsibly.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
At least you are honest enough to admit that you fit into the same category as gays.

Everyone is abnormal in some way or another, when everyone is part of a category, it isn't much of a category

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
So. And blacks who couldn't drink from white water fountains had the same legal criteria applied to the them (the whites couldn't drink from the black fountain). That doesn't make it okay. If couples who are the same sex cannot get married they are being denied a right that everyone else has.

States either recognize same gender marraiges or they don't, everyone has that right or no one has that right.

This isn't rocket science.

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
So. And blacks who couldn't drink from white water fountains had the same legal criteria applied to the them (the whites couldn't drink from the black fountain). That doesn't make it okay. If couples who are the same sex cannot get married they are being denied a right that everyone else has.

States either recognize same gender marraiges or they don't, everyone has that right or no one has that right.

This isn't rocket science.

Unfortunately that's just anti-gay rhetoric and doublethink.

It's implying that the failure to acknowledge a difference is giving equal rights to all. Freedom is slavery. War is peace. So on.

It's not different from not recognizing same race marriages. Everyone has that right, or no one does?

It's just a trick of a persons brain due to their eagerness to support their own ideology. Ultimately it doesn't matter, this thread is just another gaysplosion by this point. As far as the Church talks about being controlled by the homosexual community ... well clearly it isn't being because it's still pretty anti-gay. If you take a shot at a portion of a community they're going to bite back.

Face it, if the shoe was on the other foot and homosexual people were being called bigoted for attacking the Church where this Cardinal is from I think he would be waving a flag of victory.

Originally posted by Pinke
Unfortunately that's just anti-gay rhetoric and doublethink.

It's implying that the failure to acknowledge a difference is giving equal rights to all. Freedom is slavery. War is peace. So on.

It's not different from not recognizing same race marriages. Everyone has that right, or no one does?

It isn't anti-gay, it's just a fact.

It is different because an opposite gender relationship is a fundamentally different circumstance than a same gender relationship (not so with the race example). The government didn't attach legalities to traditional marraige for fun, they did it primarily to protect offspring from destitution in the case of divorce or the death of Mother or Father.

Originally posted by Pinke
It's just a trick of a persons brain due to their eagerness to support their own ideology. Ultimately it doesn't matter, this thread is just another gaysplosion by this point. As far as the Church talks about being controlled by the homosexual community ... well clearly it isn't being because it's still pretty anti-gay. If you take a shot at a portion of a community they're going to bite back.

Once again, the dynamic doesn't just effect the church it effects everyone (including kids). The problem is that anyone who doesn't believe homosexuality is perfectly normal and healthy is called anti-gay, or hateful, or ignorant or a bigot - this is a dishonest propoganda tactic designed to crush all expressions of dissent. Your comments and many others on this thread are a perfect example of what the Cardinal was referring to.

Originally posted by Pinke
Face it, if the shoe was on the other foot and homosexual people were being called bigoted for attacking the Church where this Cardinal is from I think he would be waving a flag of victory.

The Church calling something sinful is not bigotry... the Church says that we are all sinners, but it's only gay people screaming bigotry.

reply to post by SevenBeans


Originally posted by The Djin
Do you describe homosexuality as two men loving each other you know like Jesus loving his young men or do you only consider the anal sex bit as homosexuality ?

Noooo, it's a sexual preference/attraction for the same gender. I love lots of people of the same gender.

So by your book sexual attraction and love are two completely different things ?

The cardinal is aware of the cultural change that is happening in the world.
His religion is in danger of losing members and income. He has launched a proactive strike.

Originally posted by The Djin
This coming from a group of people( whose belief system curiously enough is based upon illegitimacy )
that give out books to little children that instruct gays be put to death !!!!!

I've never heard of such a thing. Do you have a link to show this? The Catholic Church puts out childrens books saying that homosexuals are supposed to be put to death?? Seriously ... gotta see that. Please post the info.

Originally posted by The Djin
So by your book sexual attraction and love are two completely different things ?

By definition they are different things.

Re FlyersFan

You wrote:

"I've never heard of such a thing. Do you have a link to show this? The Catholic Church puts out childrens books saying that homosexuals are supposed to be put to death?? Seriously ... gotta see that. Please post the info"

For one thing the citation you use doesn't say 'childrens books', but 'books to little children', which makes quite a difference. It hasn't gone so far, that the catholic church openly sponsor books with Billy the cuddly Bear, who is homophobic as well as cuddly.

Making all my two braincells work together (even if it hurts) I'll make the educated guess, that 'the books given out to little children' refer to one of the bibles.

Though many christians seeemingly are somewhat unfamiliar with said bible(s), they are nonetheless kind of expected to read it (it's one of those religious paradoxes nobody really understands, but being part of holiness it must be OK). That goes for little children also.

In the bible(s) it is clearly said, that homosexuals must be killed.

I believe, you can find a link to 'bible' on your own, if you google it. If you have problems with that, post again and you'll be helped.

Re SevenBeans

you have created quite a nice little tunnel-reality for yourself. Ofcourse it's none of my business if you privately have issues about sex, but as your attitude, in a public context, seems to have impaired your communication skills on the subject, I have a few comments on your very unique 'fact' presentation(s).

Apparently you are unaware of the difference between 'needs' and 'drives', and you mistake 'atypical' for 'perversion'. And from there you continue with, that sex needs procreation as a justification. As this weird postulate is in sharp contrast with practically all pragmatic experience (most mentally healthy people can enjoy sex for its own sake), and you describe yourself as agnostic (thus not using any doctrine as your source, there's no frowning divinity lurking), you must have some esoteric knowledge of 'natural order' (what is 'natural') with which to explain your extraordinary ideas on sex to us uninformed.

You also present some health-aspects of sex, which are rather out of proportion to the reality outside your tunnel-vision.

But really, your personal relationship to sex isn't that interesting, until you start combining it with your abysmal ignorance about the most simple aspects of democracy and how 'equal right' movements are an important and necessary part of liberal society.

No matter what your personal ideosyncrasies or phobias are, you profile yourself as fascistoid by suggesting any kind of 'pervers' qualities to any minority group or by suggesting extraordinary measures taken against it.

There are ofcourse situations involving more than 'consenting adults' in much context with minority groups. But the 'rigths' of such groups are countered by an equal amount of obligations.... the limits of individual freedom set up by liberal society. So for a start to legalize homosexual relationships can only be a problem for phobics and control freaks.

I am looking forward to see you repeating yourself with what you mistakenly consider 'basic' and obvious facts.