Difference between revisions of "Talk:Essay:T-Shirt Wars in School"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 12: Line 12:
 
::::have the scientists identified a genetic reason? The reason is obvious. Romans 1:27[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
 
::::have the scientists identified a genetic reason? The reason is obvious. Romans 1:27[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
 
:::::It's kind of scary you can quote bible verses...--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 23:30, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
 
:::::It's kind of scary you can quote bible verses...--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 23:30, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
::::I am sorry that my knowledge of the Bible frightens you.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
 
::::::I think that if you were gay, Bohdan, you're views would be different. --<font color="#0000CC" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']]</font><sup><font color="00FFAA">[[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]]</font></sup> 23:31, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
 
::::::I think that if you were gay, Bohdan, you're views would be different. --<font color="#0000CC" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']]</font><sup><font color="00FFAA">[[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]]</font></sup> 23:31, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
 
::::::::I am deeply offended by your statement.  But it doesnt make sense.  If i was a Nazi, i would likely view them differently, but that doesnt make it right.  Their are many disgusting things that i were, i would sympathize.  If i was in the kkk i would view them differently[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
 
::::::::I am deeply offended by your statement.  But it doesnt make sense.  If i was a Nazi, i would likely view them differently, but that doesnt make it right.  Their are many disgusting things that i were, i would sympathize.  If i was in the kkk i would view them differently[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

Revision as of 03:40, April 27, 2007

Isn't that kinda like protesting people for being black?--Elamdri 21:42, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

No. Being black is not morally wrong.Bohdan

It was 50 years ago.--Elamdri 23:21, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Just as an interesting question, Bohdan... when the scientists identify a genetic reason for homosexuality, will your views change? Will other conservative groups change their views? How would these views change? --Hojimachongtalk 23:22, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

my views are based on the Word of God. They will never changeBohdan

Can God's word change?--StapleYour comments are welcomed! 23:26, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Why would God create a gay person, Bohdan? --Hojimachongtalk 23:27, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
have the scientists identified a genetic reason? The reason is obvious. Romans 1:27Bohdan
It's kind of scary you can quote bible verses...--Elamdri 23:30, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
I am sorry that my knowledge of the Bible frightens you.Bohdan
I think that if you were gay, Bohdan, you're views would be different. --Hojimachongtalk 23:31, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
I am deeply offended by your statement. But it doesnt make sense. If i was a Nazi, i would likely view them differently, but that doesnt make it right. Their are many disgusting things that i were, i would sympathize. If i was in the kkk i would view them differentlyBohdan
I have heard of some scientist linking homosexuality to smell.--StapleYour comments are welcomed! 23:32, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Well that was the point I was trying to make actually. But he did bring up the wrong objection, because 50 years ago being black was a sign of moral inferiority. I believe that it's only a matter of time before true homosexuality is genetically identified. However, I think that we'll always have the issue of latent homosexual curiosity, which is where I think most of the debate stems from anyway. I believe religious conservatives believe that all homosexuals are merely those who gave into curiosity. However, I think homosexual curiosity is an aspect of every human being, but being truly homosexual is also a separate condition of humanity.--Elamdri 23:27, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
But there is no "gay gene." The homosexual activists claim that a heterosexual can become a homosexual (of which there are examples), but a homosexual cannot become a heterosexual (of which there are examples).
The homosexual movement is really a belief system more than anything else. A big part of the movement, for example, is about censorship of opposition to it.--Aschlafly 23:34, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Yknow, it's interesting, I know a pair of fraternal sisters at my college, and one is gay and the other is straight. It's quite weird really. I would think though that if sexuality was more a social response, they would both be either gay or straight.--Elamdri 23:39, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Really? I totally just believe you, without citations or anything. Well, actually, I don't. links pl0x? --Hojimachongtalk 23:35, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Homosexuality is genetic? The liberal unholy grail. The truth is that much of what is homosexual sex - namely anal sex - causes disease. [1][2][3][4] That is what we know now and it is not some liberal pie in the sky unholy Grail to seek like homosexuality is supposedly genetic. Conservative 23:37, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Nobody's denying that it causes disease. The AIDS epidemic in Africa is due almost exclusively to straight sex/rape. But that doesn't mean that straight sex is bad, does it? Just because something could be dangerous doesn't mean it always is.--Hojimachongtalk 23:39, 26 April 2007 (EDT)