Homosexuals laughed at Christians for saying this would happen...
Jul 11, 2014 09:00:59 #
When Homosexuals lobbied for their "rights" as "just another sexual choice", Christians argued that if that's the case, then morality is relative and anything can be justified.
They laughed at such a thought.
Now...I guess there's nobody laughing.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10958728/Australian-judge-says-incest-may-no-longer-be-a-taboo.html
They laughed at such a thought.
Now...I guess there's nobody laughing.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10958728/Australian-judge-says-incest-may-no-longer-be-a-taboo.html
Jul 13, 2014 12:20:54 #
So we have sin, covering a sin. This sounds about right, for the immoral unsaved thought. After all the Scriptures tell us unsaved man, goes about doing what is considered right in his own eyes. Which is anything but right!.
Well dont look now but it will only get worse, its just beginning.
Well dont look now but it will only get worse, its just beginning.
Jul 22, 2014 15:59:58 #
rpavich wrote:
When Homosexuals lobbied for their "rights" as "just another sexual choice", Christians argued that if that's the case, then morality is relative and anything can be justified.
They laughed at such a thought.
Now...I guess there's nobody laughing.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10958728/Australian-judge-says-incest-may-no-longer-be-a-taboo.html
They laughed at such a thought.
Now...I guess there's nobody laughing.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10958728/Australian-judge-says-incest-may-no-longer-be-a-taboo.html
And what about people who sexual preference is for other species?
Jul 22, 2014 16:57:48 #
aammatj wrote:
And what about people who sexual preference is for other species?
Not quite yet...give it 5 years or so....
Jul 22, 2014 20:46:59 #
rpavich wrote:
Not quite yet...give it 5 years or so....
Sadly, you are right. So many people's mind are blinded from the truth, and can't see where this is leading.
Aug 11, 2014 06:01:09 #
Yes It will be marriage to animals and ok to have sex with children at this rate. :hunf:
Aug 13, 2014 20:38:36 #
taffthetooth wrote:
Yes It will be marriage to animals and ok to have sex with children at this rate. :hunf:
You're very sick
Aug 14, 2014 02:26:38 #
Frank T wrote:
You're very sick
Why would you say that? It was written in the context of the continual dumming down of the moral and ethical standards prevalent in the world today. Please try to understand the context.
Aug 14, 2014 02:53:19 #
Frank T wrote:
You're very sick
We'd agree, Frank, but the point is, that once the moral foundation of what's right and wrong is removed (God's law) and whatever makes a person happy or what they feel that their rights are is the "made up standard" then the logical question becomes...why not someone elses personal standard of what they think is right?
If marrying a dog makes someone happy...who's to remove that "right" from them?
If marrying your grandkid makes you happy...then who's to tell you that you cannot?
By the way....both have happened in the last few years and more is on the way...the American Psychariatric Association is already considering changing the classification of pedophilia from a "mental disorder" to a "sexual classification" ala homosexuality or transgenderism or whatever.
You have no basis for saying anything is sick, you have no unchanging moral standard to compare that behavior against, only changing opinion on what's "preferred" and what's not.
A great illustration of the philosophical bankruptcy of Godless worldviews.
Aug 27, 2014 13:20:07 #
RPavich. I feel bad for you. Give me a link on the APA please.
You're using the same arguments they used to prevent blacks and whites from marrying, and you're probably still against that.
Newsflash buddy, there are over 3,000 religious sects in the world, so that means that at least 2,999, if not all of them, are wrong in some way.
Lastly, i'm sure you quote leviticus and place your moral highground on your relgious beliefs.
Do you eatshellfish, do you weare poly-blends? I sure hope your camera strap isn't made of nylon, otherwise according to the bible you've sinned!
You're using the same arguments they used to prevent blacks and whites from marrying, and you're probably still against that.
Newsflash buddy, there are over 3,000 religious sects in the world, so that means that at least 2,999, if not all of them, are wrong in some way.
Lastly, i'm sure you quote leviticus and place your moral highground on your relgious beliefs.
Do you eatshellfish, do you weare poly-blends? I sure hope your camera strap isn't made of nylon, otherwise according to the bible you've sinned!
Aug 27, 2014 13:21:09 #
taffthetooth wrote:
Why would you say that? It was written in the context of the continual dumming down of the moral and ethical standards prevalent in the world today. Please try to understand the context.
Because comparing marriage to animals, and relations with children, to two consenting adults who love each other is sad and absurd.
Aug 27, 2014 13:21:34 #
Stef C wrote:
RPavich. I feel bad for you. Give me a link on t... (show quote)
Please...get a life and use better argument that these ok?
I don't have time to worry about it; just google "response to shellfish argument" and assume i said it.
Aug 27, 2014 13:22:44 #
rpavich wrote:
Please...get a life and use better argument that these ok?
I don't have time to worry about it; just google "response to shellfish argument" and assume i said it.
I don't have time to worry about it; just google "response to shellfish argument" and assume i said it.
Where's that link?
What's your justification for your moral highground. Why is it okay to pick and choose which old testament verses fuel your hatred and close mindedness? Are are you quoting "moral law" and completely dismissing the old testament?
Would you deny that there are same sex couples who are in love and treat each other better than many "traditional gender couples"? Why doesn't that matter? Which one is really immoral?
Or are you just so ashamed you've been a homosexual all your life, that you can't possibly do anything but self loathe!?
Aug 27, 2014 13:23:14 #
Stef C wrote:
Because comparing marriage to animals, and relations with children, to two consenting adults who love each other is sad and absurd.
No it isn't...not on any logical grounds.
The best you can do (without an absolute moral standard outside of changing opinion) is to say that you PREFER that it be different...a purely arbitrary standard you made up.
Aug 27, 2014 13:25:38 #
"a purely arbitrary standard you made up."
Just like "God's law" is a purely arbitrary standard someone made up and chalked it up to "divine intervention"
Lol.
Just like "God's law" is a purely arbitrary standard someone made up and chalked it up to "divine intervention"
Lol.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.