Completely agree with you. Its all about respect. As long as that condition is met, its irrational to hate anyone because of their sexuality or their feelings. Making it illegal is very crazy, almost to sociopathic. I honestly believe only sociopaths would want certain sexuality made illegal.
So, who are the sociopaths? lol.

There are two, but they are too scared to stand up and be seen I guess.

Sam, I know you've been back on the Forum for a little bit now, but I just wanted to say that I missed ya! It's good to have you back.

The actual statement I was trying to make was that 2 and 3 go to show that God was right about what He said in addition to proving the original premise (that homosexuality is wrong). Number 1 could stand on it's own but I also brought in 2 and 3 as furthur proof of both number 1 and the original premise. I think it may not have come across as well as I wanted.

Concerning the rape thing:
I didn't originally bring that up (nor did I intend to in this thread) so I wasn't really addressing that. If I had been I would have brought into play a list of reasons why that is wrong. My original premise is that homosexuality is wrong so I was merely showing the evidence for that. Ultimately, rape is kinda off topic because it doesn't really have anything to do with what I originally was showing evidence of.

__________________
Serious Quotes:


Funny But True Quotes
Those who argue for complete secularism are funny. They see what government does and then argue that we don't need it to start with prayer.

I hate to say it, but not everyone believes in your version of "God", or believes in at all. Plus, I wasn't aware "God" made such judgements anyway - I was under the impression he let us humans roam free over the planet making our own decisions. Why did he not say terrorism and killing others was bad, while we're at it?

Anyway, this has got nothing to do with religion is the point I am trying to make. Further, there's nothing "right" or "wrong" about homosexuality - it's a personal choice. That's all.

You have showed no evidence that homosexuality is wrong. You've showed a faith in the Bible as being the inerrant words of your God and you've showed faith in your own opinion that relationships are all about procreation. This has no value as far as evidence is concerned.

My point previously was that if this opinionated faith-driven polemic of yours is evidence that homosexuality is wrong then it is equally clear evidence for the righteousness of rape, simply because, 2., rape does not violate the "laws of biology", i.e. sexual compability of genders, and 3., "a child will be created if there are no physical defects and the prenancy is not prevented by birth control".

Therefore, if you take the parts in the Bible that actually does condone rape (such as carried out by the tribe of Benjamin in Judges 21 or as pretty much directly ordered by Moses in Numbers 31:18, again, I suppose, due to direct orders from the head chief himself, God Allmighty, in Deut. 20:14, etc. etc. ) then your number 1 says that "God has declared it to be right" and your number 2 and 3 will be evidence that your God was right. Therefore, rape is right by your standards of providing "evidence" of such things.

It's all very simple and not at all as distant from your kind of argumentation as you apparantly - and for good reasons - want it to be. In fact, I will call it downright equal to your kind of argumentation.

Anybody wanna' take a guess?

I've got a buck that says Dodge is one of 'em.

He'll say he's not, but I won't believe that...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Let's ask Dodge then ...

Dodge, what do you think?

What about incest? Rape? What it sounds like you and others would like to do is to crimilalize morality.

__________________
United We Stand.

That’s a frighteningly bad comparison.

If someone is a homosexual, it’s involving only one person: the person who’s a homosexual. Despite what you believe, a gay person who doesn’t engage in gay sex is still gay.

Incest and rape involve more than one person, and that second person is usually an very unwilling participant. Interesting, though, that you seem to equate homosexuality with rape and incest.

So, instead of throwing out ridiculously poor comparisons, why not just admit that you voted that it should be made a criminal offense, and stop dancing?

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

I can t believe any one would ask such a question. The answer is so obviously "no". Who on earth would say yes to such a daft question in this day and age?
Why are people in this discussion mentioning the bible and God? I don t understand what religion has to do with anything. God (or whoever) should have no effect on the law in an equal society where all people count. If people let the Bible/koran/torah completely control their lives and laws, society as we know it would not exist.

Now there are three, and I believe you, must be people who are somewhat well known here.

It actually ain't all that hard to take a couple of guesses as to who the three are. It probably speaks volumes for their "courage" in that they haven't had the balls to say so.

Actually, the more I think about it, it seems that the only reason people who believe that homosexuality should be a criminal offense is because they personally don't like it. Given that, I would like to propose some other things that should be criminalised, based on nothing more than the fact that I don't like it: how about obese people? They are obviously a blight on the scenic landscape, not to mention the $ they will cost me in getting health care, so I recommend we make obesity a criminal offense. I also don't like Scorpios (based on the fact that one of my former friends, and an ex were both of that star sign, and neither was a very nice person). Seeing as certain people on the Forum seek to judge all homosexuals by a few very small examples, then I will choose to follow their lead and judge all Scorpios by the actions of the few I've know. I also don't like people who can't enunciate their words properly (ala the guests and audience member of most of those tacky talk shows like Riki Lake, Springer, etc), so I think a failure to speak the English language phonetically correct should be criminalised also. It is after all a choice to speak that way. If they really wanted to they could learn to speak correctly and change their one (notice not-so-subtle ironic tongue in cheek here?). What about left-handed people? They are in the minority, and therefore are going against what thousands of years of human domination have taught - that right-handedness is the norm, and correct. Therefore, I think we should criminalise left-handedness. Again, people could learn to change if they really wanted to. What about the residents of South Carolina? They repeatedly voted in a walking corpse until he was over 100 years old into the US senate. Therefore, the intelligence quotient in the state can't be that high. Perhaps we should instead set a minimum IQ level and criminalise everyone below that? We'd certainly make for a more intelligent society.

I could go on, and on, but I think I've made my point. The "arguments" I made above are no more rational than the suggestion that homosexuality should be criminalised. Still, I've got $100 dollars that I know exactly who will try to suggest I'm wrong. Any takers? :P

No, no, and no. Haven't we learned about ignoring the constitution by now? Or are we going to tailor those inherit rights once more, for a set group of people?