There is nothing equal between deviance and normalcy.
Once again so-called "homosexuality", in all its deviant manifestations, has no biological or scientific basis and/or function.
Normalizing deviance is an embarrassment to human reason and intellect.
As for the Christian aspect I invite you to Christ, but cannot and will not accept the normalization of your lifestyle choice.
It must be horrifying to be born knowing that you're going to have some pervert violate your anus. Or were you born with a desire for sadistic behavior?
Bluntforce, that’s an extremely ignorant statement. Homosexuals aren’t the only ones who engage in anal sex; it’s regularly practiced between heterosexuals, too. And, not all homosexuals engage in anal sex in their sexual activities. There are very few differences between what homosexuals and heterosexuals do behind closed doors.
There are worlds of difference between what normal individuals do, by choice, for sexual intimacy and what sex(same) deviants can only do, by choice.
Okay, let's say you go to the doctor, and the doctor says you have cancer. You were born with it, and it has slowly been destroying your body over the years, and only now got to the point where it threatens your life.
The doctor offers a solution to the problem: Chemotherapy and radical lifestyle changes. "If you go through this therapy and change your lifestyle, you can beat the cancer. If not, you will probably die a painful, horrible death." But you say "No thanks, I was born this way. Cancer is who I am. It's how I identify. And how dare you threaten to kill me painfully and slowly just because of how I was born! I identify with my cancer! That's not very nice."
What is a doctor supposed to do at that point? The doctor loves and wants to help the patient, but the patient rejects that kind of "love" on the grounds that he thinks the doctor is threatening him with a long, painful death simply for being born that way.
The cancer patient assumes that cancer is good, and the doctor is bad for trying to remove it. How do you reason with somebody like that? Somebody wanting to keep their cancer because it makes them feel good and they identify with it and they think having cancer is fun and exciting and loving.
Should the doctor just let the patient die, and go along with the patient's delusional ideas about cancer?
Utopia, Um, not really. Besides vag sex, name some sexual things that homosexuals couples do for sexual intimacy that heterosexuals can’t and don’t do. Btw, ALL sexual activity is by choice.
"Vag sex", you say that like there's something wrong with it!
But, of course, you mean natural, reproductive sex and not intimacy, right?
Exactly, all deviant sex is nothing more than intimacy and masturbation.
Born with………………………if that helps you sleep at night. And if your parents were born with……..there would be no HarryPotter.
Marriage is a religious ceremony, not a government ceremony. You can blame government for hijacking marriage as the measurement for your government rights.
Utopia, I used the word "vag" only because the word police wouldn't let me use the full word. And no, I didn't mean reproductive sex since the majority of time heterosexuals are having vag sex, they aren't trying to reproduce, they just want intimacy, just like when homosexuals have sex. And vag sex isn't the only normal sexual activity, at least for most sexually active people. Again, there is very little difference in what goes on behind closed doors for both homosexuals and heterosexuals, and it can be normal or deviant in both cases.
First of all "sex" is defined as differentiation in organisms as male and female.
Secondly "sex" is defined as copulation, penis insertion into the vagina.
Anything else isn't sex, and isn't biological differentiated.
So you think Rubio was wrong to quote Jesus sermon on the Mount?
I guess he should have said go hate your neighbors cause so many do and call themselves Christians; it's really a stretch. But then that's what the Muslim terrorist did in Florida, eradicating the sinners.
I thought we Americans were better than that.
Oh, looky there, wonder of wonders, I got to say, "vagina".
Must be a biology versus BS thing.
Utopia, No BS. I wasn’t trying to use the word “vagina”; I was trying to use the word *******, which the word police won’t let me use, as you can see. The correct term isn't vagina sex; it's vaginal sex.
Equal rights?... Women can relieve themselves standing up but it does get messy.
My point is that --There are differences. Certain things work in an ordered sense with nature and others are disordered.
PS The BS that "they were born that way" has been refuted over & over. Were certain people born with a preference for animals? For rubber goods? For back & forth, male to female without thought or distinction? Seriously!
[-1] August 12, 2016 at 6:52pm
I wish you could see the irony in your post. Some of the things you have ignored: my point about other biblical sins you ignore in favor of seeking out justification for discrimination, my point about equality whether the laws are there or not, and most importantly, how these laws are for every business equally, and have nothing at all to do with religion. You seem completely unable to understand this, and just turn to petty insults to shift the focus. So again, no one is being forced. Christians are not being singled out or discriminated against at all. These laws regulate how businesses serve the public. Business owners agree to all these laws before they can open. They apply to everyone regardless of religion or belief. You don’t get to ignore the law just because you don’t like it, or just because you don’t like gays. If you don’t want to bake a cake for a gay wedding, don’t offer services to bake cakes for weddings. i haven’t heard of any Muslim owned business in America refusing to serve gays, but if they did, the laws would apply equally to them. And your state does have anti-discrimination laws, they are nationwide, but not all states include sexual orientation, again my point in inequality.
[-1] August 12, 2016 at 6:10pm
How are those laws discriminating against anyone? “Christians” who don’t want to serve gays must follow the laws just like any Muslim, atheist, or anyone else. Again, these laws have nothing to do with religion. These laws, like health laws, have their importance, and they apply to everyone equally, no matter if you want to follow them or not. Regardless of belief. You are trying to play the victim here, but all businesses are being treated the same. Also, I’m amused at how you keep ignoring most of my arguments. Very typical.
These laws apply to you now, just as they applied to bigots and racists 50 years ago who didn’t want to serve blacks because of their “religion”.
August 12, 2016 at 5:29pm
To be honest, I don’t care that much about anti-discrimination laws, I just want equality. There are laws that ban discrimination based on religion, race, gender, etc, so sexual orientation should be included. If those laws were all removed, we would still have equality, and that would be fine. I just have a problem with people trying to single out gays to discriminate against, and trying to claim it’s because of religion. God doesn’t support hatred and discrimination. But that’s a different argument.
August 12, 2016 at 5:25pm
No not really. Those laws that discriminate because of who someone loves and how they are born violate fundamental human rights. But I could also say that you must support someone who turns away a black person or Christian. You must support someone who refuses to keep a sanitary kitchen because that would violate their beliefs. They are all laws that regulate businesses, and you say that they should be able to ignore them based on beliefs. Otherwise you are a hypocrite and have no basis from which to argue.
[-2] August 12, 2016 at 4:54pm
I have never said anyone should be forced to participate in weddings, or any ceremony. (Btw, many gay people are also people of faith, it’s not an either/or). If you are referring to anti-discrimination laws, those are laws which regulate businesses, and have nothing to do with faith. Every business owner agrees to follow these and other laws which regulate this, food preparation, handicap accessibility, etc when they start the business. These laws also ensure that people can’t be discriminated against because of religion, race, etc. Christians and interracial couples also cent be turned away. No one is forced to participate, but if you own a business, you agree to follow the laws and regulations which govern business. Also, do you consider women speaking in church a sin? How about wearing mixed fiber clothing? These are also biblical “sins”. Not sure why so many people keep ignore the ones they don’t like and focus on the couple that have to do with gay people.
[-2] August 12, 2016 at 4:00pm
Those of us in the rainbow crowd certainly do support them, and certainly do wish to protect them anyway we can. Everyone should be able to come out at the time and manner of their choosing.
[-5] August 12, 2016 at 3:03pm
[-4] August 12, 2016 at 2:10pm
Consider a gay person who lives in a repressive country. They can’t date or even mention their sexual orientation in their own nation without fear of violence or arrest. Now imagine that they are traveling to a new country, a place much more accepting of gay people, and they know other gay people will be there too. They have an opportunity to arrange a meeting anonymously, to perhaps for the first time in their life, be open about who they are, and to meet other gay people. I don’t think this is surprising at all, nor do I think that there is no danger, or that they don’t care.
[-1] August 12, 2016 at 1:54pm
Perhaps you should move to that closet if you’re so sick of gay people. We aren’t going anywhere.
[-5] August 12, 2016 at 1:53pm
This story wasn’t about political parties. It was about an article which was exploitive of gay people, and potential very harmful to some of the athletes. This is about the writer, not the democrats or republicans.
HarryPotter - being serious here. If a gay athlete's life is in danger due to him being gay, why would he engage in internet dating platforms? The only answers I can think of is that his life is not in danger, or he doesn't care and therefore doesn't care if he's outed. Let me know what you think, thanks.
Consider a gay person who lives in a repressive country. They can't date or even mention their sexual orientation in their own nation without fear of violence or arrest. Now imagine that they are traveling to a new country, a place much more accepting of gay people, and they know other gay people will be there too. They have an opportunity to arrange a meeting anonymously, to perhaps for the first time in their life, be open about who they are, and to meet other gay people. I don't think this is surprising at all, nor do I think that there is no danger, or that they don't care.
Potter - Well argued, let's agree to disagree for the time being. Thanks.
If a Christian is in danger due to him being religious, why would he engage in religious activity?
The only answer I can think of is that his life is not in danger, or he doesn't care and therefore doesn't care if he's outed.
See why it doesn't work?
Blink - Christians in danger all over the world participate in religious activities. They understand their lives are in danger by doing so but they do it anyway because their love for Christ is greater than their love for themselves.
Your last comment shows how little you understand Christians. They do engage themselves in religious activity all the time in hostile environments, and suffer because of it. But they do so willingly, and proudly, because to do otherwise would be to deny God and Christ, something a real Christian is not willing to do.
Keep the false equivalence fallacies coming.
Sexual deviance and religious observances are two totally different precepts.
Why don't you tell us where a people do not have the right to reject sexual deviance?
You missed the point.
Your argument is: If something is dangerous because it can get you killed by others just for doing it then obviously you don't think that activity is "really" dangerous or you wouldn't do it.
All I did was show you that Christians also have that problem.
Should they stop being Christians just because it might get them killed? By your argument they aren't really in danger or they wouldn't be doing it right?
And you don't understand what I was talking about.
Christians do what they do because that is what they are, even if it might get them killed.
And in some places, homosexuals have the same problem, but the argument was made that if they were "really" in danger they wouldn't do it.
Well if Christians were "really" in danger they wouldn't engage in religious activity, right? Just following the argument here.
No kid, this is not false equivalence. People are persecuted for who and what they are in brutal and horrible ways. It happens to some groups more than others, the Jews for example, but it is happening or has happened to most groups at various times in history to lesser or greater extents.
Just because you're willfully ignorant and don't like gay people doesn't make the persecution of them any less of an issue.
I don't know about other social media because a friend uses Fakebook and they do have privacy settings so not just anyone can get on your page unless invited. The normal Fakebook page just gives perhaps a name and a little info (that which YOU put on there), so it's not like there isn't any privacy on Fakebook. I just choose to stay away from it all. This is about as "social" as I get.
If a gay person comes from a country that is repressive to the point of being in danger if it is known, then setting up encounters on a smartphone is a terrible, dangerous plan.
[-1] August 12, 2016 at 1:50pm
Because many athletes come from nations where it is illegal to be gay, where they could face prison or violence for who they love. That is the main issue. Also, coming out is a major life event, and every gay person deserves to choose when and how they do it.
HarryPotter – Aug. 12, 2016 at 1:50pm
‘They could face prison or violence for who they love’
Looking to ‘connect with people at the games’ has nothing to do with love.
“The story talked about how athletes use dating apps such as Bumble, Grindr, Jack’d, and Tinder to connect with people at the games. A reporter for the site said in the story that he got three dates in his first hour of trying"
 July 29, 2016 at 12:59pm
I have no problem seeing straight couples, not sure why you are saying this.
 July 29, 2016 at 12:58pm
It seemed to me that this was correcting a mistake and a general overview was all that was needed. But id be happy to provide more detail. What would you like sources and detail on?
 July 29, 2016 at 12:56pm
Of course there is a genetic link for sexual orientation. Google “gay genetics”. and I’m glad you support gay marriage. And as for antidiscrimination laws, these are just some of the many,many laws that regulate businesses, and that owners agree to and need to follow to run a business. There are also laws on handicap accessibility, food preparation regulations, etc. Ans those antidiscrimination laws also include age, gender, religion, etc. If someone doesn’t feel like they can own a business and serve a gay person, they don’t need to own the business.
And, no offense, but I don’t really care about your respect. But I do respect everyone. I just bring the truth here, I’m sorry if that bothers you.
 July 29, 2016 at 12:47pm
Yes you are correct. HIV is more prevalent worldwide among straight people, particularly in Africa. In the US, it is more prevalent among gay men. This is true, I have never said otherwise. And I’m glad you are finally realizing that straight people have higher rates of plenty other STDs. You have ignored that for a long time. And you are right, HIV kills more people than other STDs, though that is changing, the disease is not the death sentence it once was. I could also point out how gay men are less likely to be obese or have heart disease as they eat better and work out more overall. So gay men are less likely to die from Americas biggest killer. There is nothing wrong with being gay or gay intimacy. It has all the benefits and biological purpose of straight people and 99.999% of straight sex. Gay couples raise children, and intimacy is important for biological release, the closeness and trust between the couple, etc.
See above. You seem to have been misreading my posts.
Your numbers are off, but yes gay men have higher rates of some STDs, straight people have higher rates of others. You don’t just get to ignore half the data. You can also make up all the gross facts you want, but that won’t make them true (you really should research how HIV is spread, you are way off). And monogamous couples have no need for prep or condoms, gay or straight.
[-1] July 29, 2016 at 12:32pm
1 Corinthians 11:6
I am always happy to cite what I reference in my posts. And my point is that being gay is not a sin. You don’t get to say that being gay is sinful if you ignore all these other listed sins in the bible.
[-3] July 29, 2016 at 2:34am
And yet no one can show me a single place where I have lied. Funny how that works.
[-1] July 29, 2016 at 1:14am
Being gay is no more carnal or about flesh than being straight is. And I’ve challenged you to show me where I’ve ever lied and you came up short. So nice try.
 July 29, 2016 at 1:12am
Most people have no problems with gay people. White people are more commonly seen in ads, what’s the big deal when a black person is in an ad? But let me ask, why is seeing two men sitting next to one another disgusting to you? I can understand being grossed out by seeing certain sex, (sex is often pretty gross, gay and straight) but this is just two people.