[lightbringer]

Originally Posted by Agape4Robin

My first reaction to this post was: But then, after I composed myself, I realize that since you are a "wiccan", you are seriously misguided and blind. Since this is a Christian forum, I will remind you that God was the one who first ordained marriage. Gen 2:18¶And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Gen 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

God set the rules. Not man. if it were up to man alone, he would NOT be monogamous. Desire is an emotion that leads to lust. Lust is a selfish desire. God knew this and made a way for men and women to love and serve each other in the framework of love and commitment.

But in order to believe in your manner, first you must believe in the bible.

[Vaquero45]

Originally Posted by The Horn

And I like to ask this question to those who are opposed to gay marriage. Suppose you were a child. Which would you rather have as parents? A gay couple who were responsible and caring parents and
really took good care of you,or a straight couple who abused you physically and or sexually and neglected you? I don't know about you, but I'd prefer the gay couple.

I like to ask people who dont like fish this question.
Would you rather have a hot dog that tasted ok, or a pizza topped with crushed glass? I don't know about you, but this question makes no point.

[lightbringer]

Originally Posted by Vaquero45

I like to ask people who dont like fish this question.
Would you rather have a hot dog that tasted ok, or a pizza topped with crushed glass? I don't know about you, but this question makes no point.

Let's see, a child may have difficulty with that.

hmm, caring parents or abusive parents!?

Abusive parents or caring parents?!

Nope, a child would have no difficulty with that choice, wonder why the adults are?

[Vaquero45]

Originally Posted by lightbringer

Let's see, a child may have difficulty with that.

hmm, caring parents or abusive parents!?

Abusive parents or caring parents?!

Nope, a child would have no difficulty with that choice, wonder why the adults are?

The point of my post, and it is very sad that I have to spell it out, was that abusive straight parents have absolutely zero, zilch, nada, not a single tiny itty bitty microscopic thing to do with homos getting married.

[Green Goblin]

Originally Posted by Vaquero45

The point of my post, and it is very sad that I have to spell it out, was that abusive straight parents have absolutely zero, zilch, nada, not a single tiny itty bitty microscopic thing to do with homos getting married.

Actually, to be more correct, straight people IN GNERAL have absolutely zero, zilch, nada, not a single tiny itty bitty microscopic thing to do with homos getting married.

So this begs the question. Why do they feel they need to get involved in their lives?

[Vaquero45]

Originally Posted by Green Goblin

Actually, to be more correct, straight people IN GNERAL have absolutely zero, zilch, nada, not a single tiny itty bitty microscopic thing to do with homos getting married.

So this begs the question. Why do they feel they need to get involved in their lives?

But... but... what if a gay married couple abuses kids?



And, in your world view, (correct me if I'm wrong) laws, including marriage laws, are just a sort of concensus of a given society. The "standard" is popular subjective desire. We all get to be involved in each others lives by popular opinion, no? Do some of us not get a say? That's not fair. That'd be "wrong". Or would it? Do most people want it to be wrong?

[Punisher1984]

Originally Posted by Vaquero45

But... but... what if a gay married couple abuses kids?

How does one treat straight couples that abuse kids? Why should the treatment of kids in a homosexual family be treated any differently?

[Vaquero45]

Originally Posted by Punisher1984

How does one treat straight couples that abuse kids? Why should the treatment of kids in a homosexual family be treated any differently?

I resign.

You guys win. Green, Punisher, you'll make a beautiful couple.
Grats in advance.

[Green Goblin]

Originally Posted by Vaquero45

But... but... what if a gay married couple abuses kids?

Then take them away and arrest the couple. Same as with a hetero married couple that abuses their kids

Originally Posted by Vaquero45

And, in your world view, (correct me if I'm wrong) laws, including marriage laws, are just a sort of concensus of a given society. The "standard" is popular subjective desire. We all get to be involved in each others lives by popular opinion, no? Do some of us not get a say? That's not fair. That'd be "wrong". Or would it? Do most people want it to be wrong?

In my world view, a law has to facilitate a NEED for society. Why should gay marriage be legalized? Well, because it extends equal rights to a certain minority that have wanted them for years. Now, that's the pro of the law. Now, can you tell me what negative thing could possibly come from it? Because I still have yet to see it.

[Vaquero45]

Originally Posted by Green Goblin

Then take them away and arrest the couple. Same as with a hetero married couple that abuses their kids

You missed my point like punisher did. I don't care enough to try to explain it.

In my world view, a law has to facilitate a NEED for society. Why should gay marriage be legalized? Well, because it extends equal rights to a certain minority that have wanted them for years. Now, that's the pro of the law. Now, can you tell me what negative thing could possibly come from it? Because I still have yet to see it.

First you'll have to define "negative" with no objective standard which was what I was getting at.

And you have yet to give me any "lumps" your neg rep was silly.

[Arthur Brain]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

I never said it was a rule of thumb, you twit. I never said all rapists used that excuse. I only said the ones who did would have raped the woman no matter what she was doing, or wearing.

And if you don't think the people who rape persons they know aren't interested in causing fear and depression in the lives of their victims, you don't understand the idea behind domination and humiliation at all.

And then there are those who rape prostitutes. Many of them believe the whores should feel ashamed, and do not perceive that they do. So they rape them to make them feel shame.

Now, this may not be true in all cases, but it does happen. And that is all I ever said.

If you think I have once said otherwise you are a moron. The fact that you disagree with me has nothing to do with it. It's mostly about the fact that you are arguing against things I never said. The fact that you think I said them is what shows you to be a moron.

Lighthouse, I don't need to misquote you in order to point our your own fallacious reasoning. Read the quoted post of yours in post #91 and tell me how I'm twisting it or 'reading' it wrong. You do this so often it's not even funny. You are constantly caught out either through ignorance and your 'defence' is a complete sidestep or stupid little insults that a man of your supposed age would have long since matured from.

Here's a hint. Read what you actually post before submitting it, or at least edit it afterwards. You are no expert on rape or all motivations and intentions behind it.

[Uberpod1]

Originally Posted by Vaquero45

But... but... what if a gay married couple abuses kids?

In and of itself if gay marriage abuses kids, gay marriage should not be allowed, Just like if the God concept abuses kids, it should be shunned. What ifs are weak.

[And, in your world view, (correct me if I'm wrong) laws, including marriage laws, are just a sort of concensus of a given society. The "standard" is popular subjective desire. We all get to be involved in each others lives by popular opinion, no? Do some of us not get a say? That's not fair. That'd be "wrong". Or would it? Do most people want it to be wrong?

Human rights and higher notions of justice are far more important than a popularity contest.

[Lighthouse]

Originally Posted by Arthur Brain

Lighthouse, I don't need to misquote you in order to point our your own fallacious reasoning. Read the quoted post of yours in post #91 and tell me how I'm twisting it or 'reading' it wrong. You do this so often it's not even funny. You are constantly caught out either through ignorance and your 'defence' is a complete sidestep or stupid little insults that a man of your supposed age would have long since matured from.

Here's a hint. Read what you actually post before submitting it, or at least edit it afterwards. You are no expert on rape or all motivations and intentions behind it.

I never said you misquoted me, moron.

Sad thing is you're so convinced that I don't know what I'm talking about, but you don't really know that, do you? I mean, how much of an expert are you on rape? What do you know of the motivations or intentions behind it?

From what I see you're not even smart enough to know the end result. Of rape, or murder [which is where this discussion actually began].

As for post 91 lightbringer is on my ignore list. So I had to open his post to see what post of mine was quoted. And I noted he edited it.

His edit:

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

And if you honestly think that a rapist would not have raped a woman who was not acting in a way he interpreted as "asking for it" you're more of an idiot than I thought.

You are a flaming imbecile!

You are the dumbest of the dumb.

The original:

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

I apologize. I misread.


Moron.


I never said it was the entire story, did I? I only said it plays the biggest role. And if you honestly think that a rapist would not have raped a woman who was not acting in a way he interpreted as "asking for it" you're more of an idiot than I thought.


You are a flaming imbecile!

Not once have I said the similarities are all that exist or that there are no differences. Nor have I suggested it.

You are the dumbest of the dumb.

Now, I do not perceive his edit as changing what I mean in any way. So it's a non-issue.

However, I have to say something about his response to it, which will show why he's on my ignore list to begin with.

Originally Posted by lightbringer

A woman is standing in her kitchen cleaning, a man breaks in and rapes her...

A woman is jogging at noon, in a residential community...a man tackles her and rapes her..

A woman has a flat tire on her way home from work at 5 in the evening...a man stops and rapes her...

A woman is at work in a pharmacy restocking in the back storage area..a man comes in and rapes her...

Please explain how any of these women where asking for it?

Now put yourself in the place of these women (it does happen) and explain in what way did you entice the rapist?

You are right, there are some flaming imbeciles and some of the dumber than dumb in this discussion.

lightbringer responded as though I said these women were asking for it. Or at least that a rapist thought they were. My post, however, states that a rapist would rape women even if he did not think they were asking for it. My entire point has been that the excuse of "they were asking for it," is a lie.

So, lightbringer is on my ignore list because he is clearly an idiot.

[Agape4Robin]

Originally Posted by lightbringer

But in order to believe in your manner, first you must believe in the bible.

So, do you think that men made up the concept of marriage?

[Arthur Brain]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

I never said you misquoted me, moron.

Sad thing is you're so convinced that I don't know what I'm talking about, but you don't really know that, do you? I mean, how much of an expert are you on rape? What do you know of the motivations or intentions behind it?

You're yet to show that you have any knowledge on the matter as you constantly contradict yourself with each passing post. You've blatantly done it with this one which becomes evident later.

Parroting some subjective opinion as being fact, aka all rapists intend their victims to feel suicidal afterwards as motivation is grounded in what exactly? It's not that some may have this in mind thats in question, it's that you seem to "know" the whole psychology that surrounds the issue and it's annoying. I know someone close to me who's been raped. Do you also know how all rape victims react to the event?

From what I see you're not even smart enough to know the end result. Of rape, or murder [which is where this discussion actually began].

Uh, the end result of murder for the victim is death Lighthouse! I can only (hopefully) presume that you intended the consequences for the families and loved ones left behind. If not what [i]are[i] you talking about?

But please do explain just what specifically is the end result of rape in your opinion.

As for post 91 lightbringer is on my ignore list. So I had to open his post to see what post of mine was quoted. And I noted he edited it.

His edit:


The original:


Now, I do not perceive his edit as changing what I mean in any way. So it's a non-issue.

Yes, the edit didn't change the post in any meaningful way. You stated that all rapists perceive their victim as 'asking for it' and LB was an idiot if he didn't understand that

However, I have to say something about his response to it, which will show why he's on my ignore list to begin with.


lightbringer responded as though I said these women were asking for it. Or at least that a rapist thought they were. My post, however, states that a rapist would rape women even if he did not think they were asking for it. My entire point has been that the excuse of "they were asking for it," is a lie.

So, lightbringer is on my ignore list because he is clearly an idiot.

LB responded to what you said. That any rapist sees any woman as 'asking for it'. Then you say that even if he didn't he would still rape them. Is it any wonder you get so much flak for your posts? You've blatantly contradicted yourself as you cannot have both arguments!!!!

Sheesh