Difference between revisions of "Talk:Heterosexuality"
From Conservapedia
AppliedFaith (Talk | contribs) (Why?) |
MountainDew (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Why were my good faith edits reverted without discussing them first? [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:10, 13 April 2007 (EDT) | Why were my good faith edits reverted without discussing them first? [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:10, 13 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | You're not going to convince me it was good faith. The Bible does NOT say that sex within marriage is bad. 1 Corinthians 7:5 [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 16:15, 14 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 20:15, April 14, 2007
empty sections
What's the point of all the empty section headings? I'm not sure whether to ask why they are there, or why they are not complete (e.g. there are not sections for "heterosexuality and the common cold" or "Heterosexuality and inanimate objects"). --Scott 04:47, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
- Bit weird isn't it? Is it a spoof?--British_cons (talk) 04:49, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
- I think the intention is to end up with an article as informative and well balanced as the one on homosexuality.
- JC did say "Content needs to be added. Its kinda science stuff I can't do it.". Unfortunately I don't know any better either.
- One can only assume content will be forthcoming.
- "Be strong and of good courage, and do it: fear not, nor be dismayed: for the LORD God, even my God, will be with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee, until thou hast finished all the work for the service of the house of the LORD." (1 Chronicles 28:20)
- BillyBoy 06:04, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
Why?
Why were my good faith edits reverted without discussing them first? AppliedFaith 16:10, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
You're not going to convince me it was good faith. The Bible does NOT say that sex within marriage is bad. 1 Corinthians 7:5 MountainDew 16:15, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
