🚀 go-pugleaf

Neill wrote:
> "KenStahl" <ktsahl@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:C2lCh.2042$P75.1866@fe200.usenetserver.com...
> 
>>   wrote:
>>
>>>"KenStahl" <ktsahl@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:KYHBh.17465$M16.5669@fe49.usenetserver.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Neill wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>><breecher@lycos.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:6m02t2taae04usbbq1jok09n6ocoqdosc4@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 12 Feb 2007 15:54:40 -0800, theodoric3@lycos.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Rove is the perfect example of a degenerate Chamber of Commerce
>>>>>>supporter. Anything for cheap labor, to hell with the future of
>>>>>>America. (And this chubby neo-con was "outed" a year ago as
>>>>>>a "rump ranger")
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Max
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You can't have it both ways, non-sexually speaking, of course. Either
>>>
>>>sodomy
>>>
>>>
>>>>>is an issue, or it isn't.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I sure hope that isn't true. It would give gays a bad name.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Have it your way, sin IS an issue!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>It isn't a "sin". You happen to believe that because you have aligned
>>yourself with a religion that has defined homosexuality as a sin.
> 
> 
> I expect moslems would call them "infidels", no matter, they would still be
> beheaded.
> 
> 
> 
>>But on
>>an objective basis there really is no basis for declaring it a sin.
> 
> 
> Sin doesn't exist without a standard. So yes, on a lowered standard basis,
> you're correct, but it's not objective. Here's fifty cent for your word,
> though.
> 
> 
>>You
>>religious nutters have to get over the assumption that just because you
>>"believe" something that the issue is settled.
> 
> 
> It's settled with regards to the standard for truth, god's word.
> 
> 
>>It isn't. I was born
>>straight and I have always been straight, but I have at least enough
>>compassion and understanding of other people that I am not offended by
>>someone being gay unless they are targeting children - which is
>>something I happen to find offensive.
> 
> 
> Then it's not even your fight, yet you're the one name calling. Get your
> facts straight. The sodomite movement has and will continue to target
> children, which is the reason they want accepted legal status, so they can
> march into our schools and demand equal time. Yet, you want to keep
> religious views out of schools. So nutters like myself will continue to
> fight nutters like you.
> 
> 

You only fantasize that they have such desires because without some 
fantasy like that you don't have a basis for your hatred. You certainly 
cannot prove it is true. I'll grant that there are a certain percentage 
of gays that do target children, but then again there are plenty of 
straight pedophiles as well and until you can come up with a solution 
for fathers raping daughters - which happens in alarming numbers but is 
kept quiet because it is a "family matter" - then you are just making 
noise about some personal pet peeve or because you had some type of 
homosexual experience in your own past that disgusts you. I'm not saying 
it isn't normal to have such a reaction, because to straights it is not 
a welcome experience, but I simply maintain that if gays want to have 
relationships with each other that's fine as long as they don't target 
children or someone who is not gay.