The End of Firefox

[LucyJr]

They give them rights...ok. They need rights. But childrens? Its crazy.

 

[invisible]

a while ago i watched an interesting documentary on prostitution from the perspective of prostitutes who chose to be prostitutes. at first i was uncomfortable with it because sometimes i have considered prostitution to be a sort of institutionalised rape but i realised that the prostitutes resented being treated as this amorphous mass of victims. they saw themselves as helping society to function by providing an escape valve for all those dark urges that society refuses to recognise. but anyway thats kind of separate issues.

i was very interested by something one of the prostitutes said. she was talking about her "clients" and how one man asked her to urinate on him while they were engaged in intercourse. she asked him why he wanted her to do that and he said, "because when a woman urinates is the only time you know she is not lying. when she talks to you she is lying, and when she has an orgasm with you she is lying, but when she urinates you know that she is not lying about it." the interviewer asked her what she thought of the man. "he is lost", she said. she said it with absolutely no judgment and i doubt she even believes in judgment. i thought a lot afterwards about what she said and i realised with some sadness that i believed in the truth of what she said. he was lost.

 

[cvp12gh5]

You give me allusive hints about my relationship with gay people, where you imply certain things, that I supposedly should recognise.
You didn't answered to my reply in which I asked you to voice what exactly are you accusing me with regard to gay people.

And now you reply me as if things are ok. I don't see how this is normal. That is why I thumbed down your post, not for other reasons.

You asked me in a previous post to give an example of you hating homosexuals and I quoted (and bolded) you, which I will do again:

"If hate means "to passionately or intensely dislike someone or something.", than yes, I do hate homosexuality. I'm a Christian, and I think homosexuality is sin. We are commanded in Bible to hate sin, but love the siners. So yes, I do hate homosexuality. But I have nothing against gay people. They are responsible for their values, decisions and lifes."

And I wrote under that:

"^^^ News Flash: Gay people are homosexuals. Therefore...".

The only "question" you asked in the post responding to this was:

"Therefore WHAT? SAY it, say what's on your mind!, so I can reply to you and end this non-sense.
I'm tired of your accusations, and reading beetwen lines words or affirmations that don't belong to me."

I was surprised that you asked "therefore WHAT?" Because it was clear. I thought maybe a language barrier thing? Wasn't sure. That is why I didn't respond. I would love to continue arguing with you just as much as I would like to continually slam my head up against a brick wall over and over again. Both would have the same effect...headache. And you did compare homosexuality to bestiality. That is horrible and hateful.
Jesus just called, Lucy Jr. He says he does NOT approve.

Plus, it is quite obvious to me that you were getting all worked up over this. Another reason I didn't respond. I didn't mind debating with you but my intention was not to get you upset. So I let it pass thinking you would cool off. But you obviously didn't. Must be a feeler thing? Don't know.

And reply to you as if things are okay? No, I replied because you asked another silly question that had a very simple answer.

And for the record, thumbs down make me smile. Thanks! I needed that.

 

[LucyJr]

You asked me in a previous post to give an example of you hating homosexuals and I quoted (and bolded) you, which I will do again:

"If hate means "to passionately or intensely dislike someone or something.", than yes, I do hate homosexuality. I'm a Christian, and I think homosexuality is sin. We are commanded in Bible to hate sin, but love the siners. So yes, I do hate homosexuality. But I have nothing against gay people. They are responsible for their values, decisions and lifes."

And I wrote under that:

"^^^ News Flash: Gay people are homosexuals. Therefore...".

The only "question" you asked in the post responding to this was:

"Therefore WHAT? SAY it, say what's on your mind!, so I can reply to you and end this non-sense.
I'm tired of your accusations, and reading beetwen lines words or affirmations that don't belong to me."

I was surprised that you asked "therefore WHAT?" Because it was clear. I thought maybe a language barrier thing? Wasn't sure. That is why I didn't respond. I would love to continue arguing with you just as much as I would like to continually slam my head up against a brick wall over and over again. Both would have the same effect...headache. And you did compare homosexuality to bestiality. That is horrible and hateful.

I don't have the style of thinking what people imply when they say "therefore...". Those points aren't helping me.
That's why, if you are a honest person, whith dignity, you would openly say to me exactly what is behind those points. I want it to be clear, not with ambiguities.

Jesus just called, Lucy Jr. He says he does NOT approve.

I agree.

Plus, it is quite obvious to me that you were getting all worked up over this. Another reason I didn't respond. I didn't mind debating with you but my intention was not to get you upset. So I let it pass thinking you would cool off. But you obviously didn't. Must be a feeler thing? Don't know.

No. I don't like people that are working with ambiguos hints and nasty implies, whithout ever actually voice them. You never know where you stand with them. Its always better to be clear and honest. This is what I'm asking from you, honesty, not three points.

And reply to you as if things are okay? No, I replied because you asked another silly question that had a very simple answer.

Ok.

And for the record, thumbs down make me smile. Thanks! I needed that.

Ok.

 

[cvp12gh5]

[MENTION=9401]LucyJr[/MENTION]

And for the record, to be VERY CLEAR, I find your "hate the sin, lover the sinner" line to be a crock of shit. It's like saying, "oh sure, I love you guys. It's just your disgusting, sinful ways I can't stand." It's deceitful.

You can continue to say it, but I'm going to continue to see through it.

 

[LucyJr]

[MENTION=9401]LucyJr[/MENTION]

And for the record, to be VERY CLEAR, I find your "hate the sin, lover the sinner" line to be a crock of shit. It's like saying, "oh sure, I love you guys. It's just your disgusting, sinful ways I can't stand." It's deceitful.

You can continue to say it, but I'm going to continue to see through it.

Finaly, you decided to do it. See, its better know. We can talk clearly, not debate three points.

I know homosexuality as a practice is sin. Sin is evil, and as a Christian I can not agree with sin.
But still as a Christian, I am commanded to love people, and that includes gay also.
I don't truly love people, but I am into that direction, and I'm fighting to get there, because I know its the the right thing to do.

If you see a contradiction in my position and what I do, so be it. I can only hope that in the future you will understand there is no contradiction.

 

[the]

New theories must be verified by tested theories, things that are known to work.

I am most interested in your thoughts on the following:

I could say exactly how I see things, who needs to explain to who, but probably people would get offended, so...

 

[sprinkles]

Homosexual Adoption Puts Children at Risk
Gary Glenn

The eight-member committee that concocted the American Academy of Pediatrics' endorsement of homosexual adoptions is lucky they can't be sued for political malpractice. When it comes to protecting children's health, their politically correct quackery clearly violates the admonition of the Hippocratic Oath: "First do no harm."

The scientific fact is that children's health is endangered if they are adopted into households in which the adults - as a direct consequence of their homosexual behavior -- experience dramatically higher risks of domestic violence, mental illness, life-threatening disease, substance abuse, and premature death by up to 20 years.

"The probability of violence occurring in a gay couple is mathematically double the probability of that in a heterosexual couple," write activists with the National Gay & Lesbian Domestic Violence Network.

The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that "people with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for psychiatric disorders" - including bipolar, obsessive-compulsive, and anxiety disorders, major depression, and substance abuse.

The Medical Institute of Sexual Health reports: "Homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as a result of their sexual practices. Women who have sex with women are at significantly increased risk of bacterial vaginosis, breast cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women."

The Institute reports that "significantly higher percentages of homosexual men and women abuse drugs, alcohol and tobacco than do heterosexuals."

Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology reports: "Life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men...nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."

Is it healthy for children to be adopted by adults whose lifestyle is characterized by promiscuity and the medical hazards of multiple sex partners?

A Detroit homosexual newsmagazine columnist last month wrote regarding his partner: "This is his first relationship, so he has not yet been ruined by all the heartache, lies, deceit, and game-playing that are the hallmark of gay relationships...A study I once read suggested that nine out of 10 gay men cheat on their lovers."

The Center for Disease Control warns that men who have sex with men "have large numbers of anonymous partners, which can result in rapid, extensive transmission of sexually transmitted diseases."

How will being adopted by adults involved in homosexual behavior affect the behavior of children themselves?

Associated Press reported last June that a "new study by two University of Southern California sociologists says children with lesbian or gay parents...are probably more likely to explore homosexual activity themselves...(and) grow up to be more open to homoerotic relations."

A major Australian newspaper reported Feb. 4th regarding a British sociologist's review of 144 academic papers on homosexual parenting: "Children raised by gay couples will suffer serious problems in later life, a study into parenting has found. The biggest investigation into same-sex parenting to be published in Europe claims children brought up by gay couples are more likely to experiment with homosexual behavior and be confused about their sexuality."

Which means children adopted by adults involved in homosexual behavior face not only second hand exposure to the risks of such behavior by their "parents," but are more likely to suffer first hand by engaging in the same high-risk behavior themselves.

Young people who model the homosexual behavior of their adopted "parents" face other risks.

The Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry published a study of 4,000 high school students by Harvard Medical School, which found that "gay-lesbian-bisexual youth report disproportionate risk for a variety of health risk and problem behaviors...engag(ing) in twice the mean number of risk behaviors as did the overall population."

"GLB orientation was associated with increased...use of cocaine (and other illegal) drugs. GLB youth were more likely to report using tobacco, marijuana, and cocaine before 13 years of age. Among sexual risk behaviors, sexual intercourse before 13 years of age, sexual intercourse with four or more partners...and sexual contact against one's will all were associated with GLB orientation."

Have you ever considered that because of conformity, and the stress of people like you, that it takes a person who cares less about conformity and norms to be an open homosexual, and thereby things will be statistically weighted as such?

Have you ever considered that this sort of thing happens because people like you are driving it to happen?

 

[LucyJr]

Have you ever considered that because of conformity, and the stress of people like you, that it takes a person who cares less about conformity and norms to be an open homosexual, and thereby things will be statistically weighted as such?

Have you ever considered that this sort of thing happens because people like you are driving it to happen?

You should raise the question to yourself, because you are the one who judges things by conformity or lack of it. Things like this happen because of people like you.

 

[LucyJr]

I am most interested in your thoughts on the following:

New theories must be verified by tested theories, things that are known to work.

 

[sprinkles]

You should raise the question to yourself, because you are the one who judges things by conformity or lack of it. Things like this happen because of people like you.

You are impossibly ignorant. I don't like you anymore.

I'll take my infraction or whatever happens now.

 

[the]

New theories must be verified by tested theories, things that are known to work.

That doesn't seem to follow from the part I've bolded.

 

[the]

You should raise the question to yourself, because you are the one who judges things by conformity or lack of it. Things like this happen because of people like you.

Wut

 

[LucyJr]

You are impossibly ignorant. I don't like you anymore.

I'll take my infraction or whatever happens now.

Man, I am the ignorant one?
You and others like you have only two lenses, kind of like binary stuffs: conformity vs lack of conformity, old vs new, traditional vs non traditional, conservative vs liberal, tolerance vs intolerance...and the line could go on. Its a two way street. Either your in the "old" side, either you are in the "new, eye opening" side.

I'm sory, I don't judge things by this very "efficient" perspective. This is what you are doing, so don't put me into your category, because you can only see two options.

 

[sprinkles]

Man, I am the ignorant one?
You and others like you have only two lenses, kind of like binary stuffs: conformity vs lack of conformity, old vs new, traditional vs non traditional, conservative vs liberal, tolerance vs intolerance...and the line could go on. Its a two way street. Either your in the "old" side, either you are in the "new, eye opening" side.

I'm sory, I don't judge things by this very "efficient" perspective. This is what you are doing, so don't put me into your category, because you can only see two options.

Excuse me? Excuse me??

I appreciate your kind advice.
I think contradicting views can never be 'equaly valid'. And most of the perspective that are in the world are contradictory to each other. So saying "there are so many other equally valid and important perspectives and beliefs out there", its not true. Truth is not in both two contradicting views. God either exist(Christianity), either it doesn't(Atheism).
So Truth is distinct and unique. Truth is not contradictory. Ideas are dangerous, worldviews are dangerous, because they have the potential (from our perspective) to be either true, either false. That's why, it is my position, that I have come to a understanding that to romanticise world and its dieversities of view its dangerous in itself.

But I may get another line of what you're trying to say to me.
Perhaps I am stuborn, overly opinionated, so much to the degree I don't fuly understand and listen to others views. I am what might be called intolerat and dogmatic, with "glasses for horses".
Ok, I do recognise that. I know I have to develop myself in this aspect (mature is the word).

But I think its incorrect that you guys, which clearly represent the majority, be so nervous on me for my intolerance. Its not correct at all. I'm arguing against the majority, and I know the risks of it. This thread is about a guy who is being threatened to be knoked out with his business because he is anti-guy...!
And I'm arguing for my position (which is not very popular), and I am the bad guy!
I always think of it this way: If we were living in 'the age of faith', in medieval times, how many of you would argue pro-guys, and how many of you and I would argue anti-guy?
Or what if we would be arguing in a Muslim country?.
Times and circumstances changes things alot. Some views are not accepted or rejected because of truthiness of falsity, but rather because the view must be accepted or rejected at a aparticular time. Its all about the context. Ideas rarely are adopted for their consistecy.

Excuse the fuck out of me??

 

[LucyJr]

Excuse me? Excuse me??



Excuse the fuck out of me??

Times and circumstances changes things alot. Some views are not accepted or rejected because of truthiness of falsity, but rather because the view must be accepted or rejected at a aparticular time. Its all about the context. Ideas rarely are adopted for their consistecy.

Hadn't I been enough clear?

 

[sprinkles]

Hadn't I been enough clear?

Yeah, go ahead and cherry pick that vague line to try and save face. SQUIRM! SQUIRM FOR ME! Squirm and suffer!

I think contradicting views can never be 'equaly valid'. And most of the perspective that are in the world are contradictory to each other. So saying "there are so many other equally valid and important perspectives and beliefs out there", its not true. Truth is not in both two contradicting views. God either exist(Christianity), either it doesn't(Atheism).
So Truth is distinct and unique. Truth is not contradictory. Ideas are dangerous, worldviews are dangerous, because they have the potential (from our perspective) to be either true, either false. That's why, it is my position, that I have come to a understanding that to romanticise world and its dieversities of view its dangerous in itself.

 

[say what]

Man, I am the ignorant one?
You and others like you have only two lenses, kind of like binary stuffs: conformity vs lack of conformity, old vs new, traditional vs non traditional, conservative vs liberal, tolerance vs intolerance...and the line could go on. Its a two way street. Either your in the "old" side, either you are in the "new, eye opening" side.

I'm sory, I don't judge things by this very "efficient" perspective. This is what you are doing, so don't put me into your category, because you can only see two options.

Don't you think this is a description of yourself?

 

[LucyJr]

Yeah, go ahead and cherry pick that vague line to try and save face. SQUIRM! SQUIRM FOR ME! Squirm and suffer!

Sprinkles, you can be so funny sometimes )))))
What should I understand from this?

Yeah, go ahead and cherry pick that vague line to try and save face. SQUIRM! SQUIRM FOR ME! Squirm and suffer!

Its hilarious. It makes me laugh )). And especially this:

Excuse me? Excuse me??



Excuse the fuck out of me??

)))))))

I said this:

Times and circumstances changes things alot. Some views are not accepted or rejected because of truthiness of falsity, but rather because the view must be accepted or rejected at a aparticular time. Its all about the context. Ideas rarely are adopted for their consistecy.

Because most ideas of adopted by their consistency, but by the very "profound" reasoning of "old vs new".
And you said this:

Have you ever considered that because of conformity, and the stress of people like you, that it takes a person who cares less about conformity and norms to be an open homosexual, and thereby things will be statistically weighted as such?

Have you ever considered that this sort of thing happens because people like you are driving it to happen?

Exactly the same reasoning, conformity or a lack of it. Funny that you accuse me of this, while contradicting yourself.
And I answer to you, for me its not about that. I don't try to hold to some kind of tradition here, or oppose to something new.

 

[sprinkles]

[MENTION=9401]LucyJr[/MENTION]

Oohoho laugh! Heheheee It's so funny! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Ishfetheth noighol dnyal sognothet!

Laugh. Laugh until you cry.