The homophobic thread :>

[Vrede too]

When I was a little kid I thought you could catch autism from autistic kids like you could the flu, so I was real scared to be around them because I didn't want to become autistic. I finally asked my mom and she told me that that wasn't possible, so I felt a lot better afterwards about being around autistic kids.

Yesterday my patients included:

Suicidal
Paranoid Delusional (what a handful!)
Alcohol detox (well, drunk but wanting detox)
An imaginary allergic reaction

I told my boss that they were all contagious and that I would be going on psych disability.

[Vrede too]

I did go back and look through the thread; about 40 pages worth. His first post in this thread is on page 24 showing an 80ish, naked, tattooed woman; nothing obsessive about that. Other pictures I saw were of the Oriental girls(?) His posts in this thread mostly dealt with his Biblical beliefs that deal with homosexuality being unnatural and un-Godly; I found nothing that he wrote that was downright hateful or that hinged on obsession....

The immediate topic is Gay Pride parades, not his hatefulness. Whether in this topic, the religion one or other topics I'm pretty sure that Mr.B has posted as many or more pics from the parades than homerfobe and way way more than the rest of us put together. Seems a tad obsessive to me, especially for a supposed straight.

[Seth Milner]

I did go back and look through the thread; about 40 pages worth. His first post in this thread is on page 24 showing an 80ish, naked, tattooed woman; nothing obsessive about that. Other pictures I saw were of the Oriental girls(?) His posts in this thread mostly dealt with his Biblical beliefs that deal with homosexuality being unnatural and un-Godly; I found nothing that he wrote that was downright hateful or that hinged on obsession....

The immediate topic is Gay Pride parades, not his hatefulness. Whether in this topic, the religion one or other topics I'm pretty sure that Mr.B has posted as many or more pics from the parades than homerfobe and way way more than the rest of us put together. Seems a tad obsessive to me, especially for a supposed straight.

I could be wrong, but I believe all the GP parade pics were posted by homerfobe. I'm guessing that the reason none of you posted parade pics was because you knew homerfobe would have a field day with them.

[Vrede too]

I could be wrong, but I believe all the GP parade pics were posted by homerfobe.

You are wrong, Mr.B has done his share of searching, sharing and mocking.

I'm guessing that the reason none of you posted parade pics was because you knew homerfobe would have a field day with them.

Pffft, we use things like that to bait him and laugh at the results.

[Seth Milner]

I could be wrong, but I believe all the GP parade pics were posted by homerfobe.

You are wrong, Mr.B has done his share of searching, sharing and mocking.
I guess I overlooked them.

I'm guessing that the reason none of you posted parade pics was because you knew homerfobe would have a field day with them.

Pffft, we use things like that to bait him and laugh at the results.
What did you all use? I noticed by your replies throughout this thread you all were highly amused by his name-calling posts.

[Vrede too]

Almost anything gay related was sure to get a reaction, at times for Mr.B, too.

[bannination]

Oh, god, I am so sorry Seth, I did not mean to edit your comment. I really screwed up. (page 128)

[O Really]

I read nothing of the sort in Mr.B's posts. (see below) Mr.B expressed his opinions based on what he believed the Bible spoke of. The accusations thrown at him, as above and in the thread, are made-up opinions of him because he wouldn't bend, or as he put it, would not compromise his Biblical beliefs. Just curious, what do homosexuals do in their bedrooms if homerfobe and Mr.B were imagining? I'm not getting any deeper into the subject of homosexuality; I'm curious to know why someone who has differing beliefs or opinions, in any subject matter, are treated like shit.

[/quote]
It doesn't matter where somebody gets their belief from. It's the expression of that belief in current time that gets addressed. If you look at my post on it, I don't mention religion. I start with his oft-used term "not natcheral" and related comments that portray homosexual people as less than human. Whether he got that idea from his religion or from some StormFront website, I don't care. It's the same point of view as Homo. Also, beliefs don't trump fact, not matter their source. A person setting forth a ridiculous belief is likely to be ridiculed. Maybe not by you. Maybe you would happily accept somebody's viewpoint that fishing causes gayness as long as it was a religious belief, but I wouldn't.

Homo and Mr.B were imagining what gay people do in their bedrooms because they (or at least Mr.B) admitted not ever discussing it with any real gay people, nor seeing any of the activity. So they don't know, and thus they imagined. In any case, they defined the entire person solely by their imagination of their sexual practices, without regard to how they spent the other 99% of their lives. I wonder if they'd like their entire life judged on their bedroom performances. Can't get it up? Total life failure! Don't hire that guy - he's an early ejaculator.

As to treating someone with different opinions like shit, it's not a matter of a different opinion. I love discussions with people with different opinions. And I didn't treat Mr.B like shit until he started his confusion of forum with real life.

[Vrede too]

Oh, god, I am so sorry Seth, I did not mean to edit your comment. I really screwed up. (page 128)

That used to happen sometimes to me. Then, it would be a pain to back page, copy and paste to restore the original.

[billy.pilgrim]

bb was real super pick and choosie about which parts of the bible he followed. he is a classic hypocrite

[O Really]

bb was real super pick and choosie about which parts of the bible he followed. he is a classic hypocrite

I don't think that's unusual. In fact I think it's universal. There are too many inconsistencies and contradictions to be able to follow it all. A lot of people use the Bible like it was I Ching. They don't necessarily take what it says as what it says, but simply apply some out of context content to a given situation. Taking the "abomination" of a "man lying with a man" out of the context of the rest of those rules, and choosing to ignore the others is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty.

[bannination]

Not following the entire bible is a necessity unless you want to wind up in prison. Wait, didn't I read somewhere that prisons have the most religious percentage of people? Hm....

[billy.pilgrim]

bb was real super pick and choosie about which parts of the bible he followed. he is a classic hypocrite

I don't think that's unusual. In fact I think it's universal. There are too many inconsistencies and contradictions to be able to follow it all. A lot of people use the Bible like it was I Ching. They don't necessarily take what it says as what it says, but simply apply some out of context content to a given situation. Taking the "abomination" of a "man lying with a man" out of the context of the rest of those rules, and choosing to ignore the others is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty.

as I said, christians are a bunch of hypocrites
remember the earth is only 6,000 years old, the god guy is a trickster and a liar, and genocide is really cool

[Seth Milner]

Taking the "abomination" of a "man lying with a man" out of the context of the rest of those rules, and choosing to ignore the others is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty.

What does it mean then, when it says man shall not lie with a man as he would a woman? How is that to be taken out of context when it's been there for centuries in black and white regardless how anyone feels about it? I'm not a Bible toting person, but I can read, and how is quoting a verse cherry-picking? :-0?>

as I said, christians are a bunch of hypocrites remember the earth is only 6,000 years old, the god guy is a trickster and a liar, and genocide is really cool

How can you justify grouping all believers in God together in one lump? In what way are all Christians hypocrites? Your hateful description of God is no different than homerfobe's description of homosexuals; and that sends you in a tizzy, yet you trash Mr.B for his religious beliefs.

[O Really]

Taking the "abomination" of a "man lying with a man" out of the context of the rest of those rules, and choosing to ignore the others is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty.

What does it mean then, when it says man shall not lie with a man as he would a woman? How is that to be taken out of context when it's been there for centuries in black and white regardless how anyone feels about it? I'm not a Bible toting person, but I can read, and how is quoting a verse cherry-picking? :-0?>

It's the same as selective editing, which I'm sure you understand. You could quote me saying, "I never eat pizza." and be correct. But you wouldn't be completely accurate unless you added the rest of the sentence which was, "except in NY or NJ." Makes a big difference.
In this case, the Leviticus reference starts with 20.8, "And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am the LORD which sanctify you."
Following is 20.9, "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him."
And 20.10, "And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death"
So 20.13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: t"hey shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them" is one of a sequence of statutes, which offer no opportunity to select or reject.

It cannot be taken outside the context in which it is written. And you can't forget that "put to death" part.

[Seth Milner]

Since I am not anyone to be debating a subject I am not qualified to debate, I swore I was not going to get embroiled in debating issues of religion or homosexuality, but you didn't answer the question "What does it (the Bible) mean, when it says man shall not lie with a man as he would a woman?" Surely you don't believe that was selective editing? About that death part; I've often wondered about that myself, but I believe I know the answer. In one of the cities I lived in, the local newspaper had a short column called "My Answer" by Billy Graham. I rarely read it, but for some reason this bit caught my eye one day. Someone wrote "If God told Adam and Eve not to eat of the fruit of the tree of life lest they die, why didn't God fulfill his promise when they disobeyed?" Billy Graham replied (the best I can recall) that he believed God did not mean a literal death, but would suffer all their days until they died, and that they would be judged accordingly. New Testament grace says that man will be judged according to his works (how he lived) and that man would die a literal death, but would be judged again at the Great White Throne. Those who denied God and lived wicked lives were cast into hell, according to Revelation 20.

12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

I am not much on preachers, but I honestly believe that Billy Graham is the epitome of earthly righteousness as I believe he truly is a man of God. You never heard of him being embroiled in a scandal or questionable activities, that's why I questioned billy.pilgrim's accusation that all Christians are hypocrites. In reference to the Leviticus scripture you referred to; although a popular argument is that those, along with the commandments, are Old Testament laws, the Bible, in the Book of Revelation, deals with those very things, along with homosexual activities. Those who decry those words or don't even believe in God or care what the Bible says have the right to believe what they wish, as do I, but I'm not going to curse and spew at someone because of what they believe.

All this being said, I've said all I want to about religion and homosexuality. I'm not a churchy guy and I neither condone or support homosexuality;
homosexual relations is something I want no part of; physically or politically. A decision on religion is still up in the air.

[O Really]

I am not much on preachers, but I honestly believe that Billy Graham is the epitome of earthly righteousness as I believe he truly is a man of God. You never heard of him being embroiled in a scandal or questionable activities, that's why I questioned billy.pilgrim's accusation that all Christians are hypocrites. .

I'd agree with you on the original Billy Graham. I had occasion to see him in person on what was expected at the time (about almost 15 years ago) to be his last hurrah. He came walking out, looking like he was on his last leg, but when he began to speak it was like he was infused with life and energy. And he wasn't into a lot of Hell and damnation, just a pretty simple story of salvation as he saw it. I don't think he was a hypocrite, and I think he had great insight. You can still read the column in the A-CT but I doubt he's actually writing it anymore. It's pretty cheesy most of the time.

But the thing is, the Bible is a standard of behaviour for only some people. You have those who give it lip service, but don't really follow it. You have those who make up their own interpretations. You have a few who are sincere scholars. For a lot of us, however, it has no more relevance on our life today than other documents like the Vedas, the Quran, or Greek mythology. So when somebody uses one of those documents to support their view on how laws in the US should be passed or applied, I tend to be a bit cynical and perhaps less than respectful of their opinion.

Regarding the Revelation quotes, however, you do know that a lot of hard core Biblical scholars think that the John who wrote it was 90-something years old, a prisoner in solitary on Patmos, and probably not entirely sane, right? Doesn't mean it's not real, but still...

[Vrede too]

Since I am not anyone to be debating a subject I am not qualified to debate, I swore I was not going to get embroiled in debating issues of religion or homosexuality, but you didn't answer the question "What does it (the Bible) mean, when it says man shall not lie with a man as he would a woman?" Surely you don't believe that was selective editing? ...

It's been explained to you several times. No one is denying that there are 5 or 6 anti-gay verses in the entirety of the Bible. The issue is when Mr.B or anyone else obsesses about them because they fit their modern bigotry while entirely ignoring mandates from the very same books that are given the very same weight because they don't fit their modern bigotry. Of course that's cherry picking.

[O Really]

Since I am not anyone to be debating a subject I am not qualified to debate, I swore I was not going to get embroiled in debating issues of religion or homosexuality, but you didn't answer the question "What does it (the Bible) mean, when it says man shall not lie with a man as he would a woman?" Surely you don't believe that was selective editing? ...

It's been explained to you several times. No one is denying that there are 5 or 6 anti-gay verses in the entirety of the Bible. The issue is when Mr.B or anyone else obsesses about them because they fit their modern bigotry while entirely ignoring mandates from the very same books that are given the very same weight because they don't fit their modern bigotry. Of course that's cherry picking.

And that's the core of the issue. "The Bible says it" really isn't relevant to anyone who is not a Bible believer. But if someone wants to take that as their argument, then it's certainly fair game to beat them over the head with what else "the Bible says."

[Seth Milner]

It's been explained to you several times.
How so?

No one is denying that there are 5 or 6 anti-gay verses in the entirety of the Bible.
They're not anti-gay verses; they're "anti-gay" in your mind. The way I read it, it's describing a sin against God; but you don't believe in Him anyway, so my point is useless.

The issue is when Mr.B or anyone else obsesses about them because they fit their modern bigotry while entirely ignoring mandates from the very same books that are given the very same weight because they don't fit their modern bigotry.
Mr. B was a Bible writer? Scripture dealing with homosexuality is bigotry? What other mandates doesn't fit modern bigotry? How does the words you use to reply to others differ in the form of bigotry? Do you always have to reply to others in an ostracizing manner when your ideas differ? Are you like that at work if someone disagrees with you? You fail the Four-Way Test, miserably.