# Christians need to stop attacking gays!!



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

When ignorant pastors start saying shit like lets kill the fags and faggots will burn in hell, they arent doing much for their cause. Christians are supposed to be loving, kind, and caring. Even IF someone is commiting a sin, they are still human beings and deserve their respect. Killing someone is never the answer.. even a murderer will get what he has coming, but thats not up to us to judge one another.


----------



## Wordz (Jun 24, 2012)

They need to focus on the real problem. Muslims


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Wordz said:


> They need to focus on the real problem. Muslims


So fucked up.. actually the real problems are kids gettin pregnant and men dating 15 year old girls


----------



## XuOut (Jun 24, 2012)

Wordz said:


> They need to focus on the real problem. Muslims


Amen brother.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 24, 2012)

So Kaendar posts are non controversial thread, Makes valid points that pretty much everyone can agree with in principle and you guys troll the thread...


----------



## lokie (Jun 24, 2012)

I have not read all of the threads you have started, much less of the posts.

Have you declared you Muslim gayness?


----------



## Hemlock (Jun 24, 2012)

_Leviticus 18:22 - "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."_


----------



## Wordz (Jun 24, 2012)

Shannon Alexander said:


> So Kaendar posts are non controversial thread, Makes valid points that pretty much everyone can agree with in principle and you guys troll the thread...


that is correct. I don't think a muslim should be telling christians to act.


----------



## mexiblunt (Jun 24, 2012)

Should have been writen "Do not lay with a man as one lays with a woman: that is detestable" doesn't it then say they should be killed?


----------



## Hemlock (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> So fucked up.. actually the real problems are kids gettin pregnant and men dating 15 year old girls


Or could it be that musslum males fukin young boys in the ass.? HMMMMM


----------



## Doer (Jun 24, 2012)

mexiblunt said:


> Should have been writen "Do not lay with a man as one lays with a woman: that is detestable" doesn't it then say they should be killed?


You just quoting these old phobias, from the old testement, as scriptural fact (?oxymoron?) is what is detestable.


----------



## Doer (Jun 24, 2012)

Neal N. Blowme said:


> So you enjoy it when some guy sticks his hairy dick up your hairy ass? Yuuuucchhhh


So, you said in the other thread:
-------------------------------------------------




Originally Posted by *Doer*Well, what is your position on homo sex?
--------------------------------------------------
Live and let live.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

But, now you are going there with me? You do need a Cowboy Kiss.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Wordz said:


> that is correct. I don't think a muslim should be telling christians to act.


Im not a Muslim.. or a Christian


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Im not a Muslim.. or a Christian


But you are Neal N. Blowme.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 24, 2012)

Neal N. Blowme said:


> You must be smoking some weird stuff, man.


And you must be kaendar.. Why do you guys post at different times? Do you guys have to work around each others schedules?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Neal N. Blowme said:


> Why would you think I'm kaendar?


They are assholes.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> And you must be kaendar.. Why do you guys post at different times? Do you guys have to work around each others schedules?


Your a real class act. Grow the fuck up.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Cut.Throat. said:


> But you are Neal N. Blowme.


Ive actually come to the conclusion that you must be a new account made by someone that was previously banned.


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Ive actually come to the conclusion that you must be a new account made by someone that was previously banned.


If I was previously banned I'd be shoving it in everyone's faces.


----------



## BA142 (Jun 24, 2012)

I dislike Islam and Christianity equally. It's only fair


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 24, 2012)

I think gays should start attacking christians in sort of a preemptive kinda way. Gays could start with the believers who shout out their idiocy over the airwaves. Wipe'em out, right off the face of the earth. Then sit back and wait for any other gay bashing and then wipe them out too.

Kalender you are too kind to the undeserving on this forum. Speak with greater conviction and very soon you will see the tide of consensuses rising in agreement with your bold pronouncements. Call the dumb assess what they are and let the chips fall. Don't just live and let live, rule the roost; it's in you I can feel it in your words and thoughts. Your beautiful, sensitive, insightful words. Are you seeing anyone right now? I mean seeing anyone in a serious way, like dating or something? I'm interested.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

jessy koons said:


> I think gays should start attacking christians in sort of a preemptive kinda way. Gays could start with the believers who shout out their idiocy over the airwaves. Wipe'em out, right off the face of the earth. Then sit back and wait for any other gay bashing and then wipe them out too.
> 
> Kalender you are too kind to the undeserving on this forum. Speak with greater conviction and very soon you will see the tide of consensuses rising in agreement with your bold pronouncements. Call the dumb assess what they are and let the chips fall. Don't just live and let live, rule the roost; it's in you I can feel it in your words and thoughts. Your beautiful, sensitive, insightful words. Are you seeing anyone right now? I mean seeing anyone in a serious way, like dating or something? I'm interested.


Meh, if gays started on the offensive it would only give em a bad name. And regarding the second part of ur post, was that thoughtful sarcasm or??? btw im a guy.. im assuming you are as well "jessy"?


----------



## TogTokes (Jun 24, 2012)

For now on all these posts get an auto 1 star.... Anything gay or religious..


----------



## Geronimo420 (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> So fucked up.. actually the real problems are kids gettin pregnant and men dating 15 year old girls


a 45 year old man should be allowed 3 * 15 year old girls it work mathematically


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

one starred.


----------



## tyler.durden (Jun 24, 2012)

Neal N. Blowme said:


> I bet a lot of good people have been banned from this site. Looks to me like only the losers and morons are left.


Which are you?


----------



## Geronimo420 (Jun 24, 2012)

[FONT=Comic Sans MS, Arial]This guy walks into a bar and two steps in, he realizes it's a gay bar. "But what the heck," he says, "I really want a drink."

When the gay waiter approaches, he says to the customer, "What's the name of your penis?"

The customer says, "Look, I'm not into any of that. All I want is a drink."

The gay waiter says, "I'm sorry but I can't serve you until you tell me the name of your penis. Mine for instance is called 'Nike,' for the slogan, 'Just Do It.' That guy down at the end of the bar calls his 'Snickers,' because 'It really Satisfies."

The customer looks dumbfounded so the bartender tells him he will give him a second to think it over. The customer asks the man sitting to his left, who is sipping on a beer, "Hey bud, what's the name of your penis?"

The man looks back and says with a smile, "TIMEX."

The thirsty customer asks, "Why Timex?"

The fella proudly replies, "Cause it takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin!"

A little shaken, the customer turns to the fella on his right, who is sipping a fruity Margarita and says, "So, what do you call your penis?"

The man turns to him and proudly exclaims, "FORD, because 'Quality is Job 1.' " Then he adds, "Have you driven a Ford, lately?"

Even more shaken, the customer has to think for a moment before he comes up with a name for his penis. Finally, he turns to the bartender and exclaims, "The name of my penis is 'Secret.' Now give me my beer."

The bartender begins to pour the customer a beer, but with a puzzled look asks, "Why secret?"

The customer says, "Because it's STRONG ENOUGH FOR A MAN, BUT MADE FOR A WOMAN!" [/FONT]


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Neal N. Blowme said:


> So how are the gays going to wipe out the Christians? Many Christians are armed so I don't think that would be a good idea. Aren't queers frightened of loud bangs and bullets?


Proof he isnt me. I would never call anybody a queer.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

Neal N. Blowme said:


> I'm the rooster. All you hens are under my command.


they say you are what you eat.

so yeah, you're a cock alright.


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 24, 2012)

Neal N. Blowme said:


> You're pitiful, man. Honestly. I hope you haven't bred.


Ditto to you.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Your a real class act. Grow the fuck up.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 24, 2012)

Give us this day our daily bred. cn


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 24, 2012)

Neal N. Blowme said:


> That's funny, since you gave me so many likes today.


I like your posts because your idiocy makes me giggle.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

notice the disappearing posts.

see ya, blowme. or should i say jack fate? or is it windsblow?

don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 24, 2012)

[video=youtube;rHJoj9IqeKg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHJoj9IqeKg[/video]


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 24, 2012)

Not dead. A seriously-pruned Neal is still at it over in Politics. cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Not dead. A seriously-pruned Neal is still at it over in Politics. cn


Wat happened with his posts?


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> What happened with his posts?


I'm guessing they got moderated. Global mods can do that if they choose. cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> I'm guessing they got moderated. Global mods can do that if they choose. cn


Well I hope it wasnt just his. Other ppl in those threads deserve that as well.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 24, 2012)

There should be a "last words" thread where people that are about to be banned, get one last post before they're smacked with the ban hammer.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Well I hope it wasnt just his. Other ppl in those threads deserve that as well.


I hope they were just his since nobody else deserves that as well.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Well I hope it wasnt just his. Other ppl in those threads deserve that as well.


Tell me who and why. cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> There should be a "last words" thread where people that are about to be banned, get one last post before they're smacked with the ban hammer.


Banning is pointless tho in the long run. Anybody can just create endless accounts.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 24, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> There should be a "last words" thread where people that are about to be banned, get one last post before they're smacked with the ban hammer.


Unfortunately a ban can never be permanent because of the nature of the internet and because the admins choose to let people have their anonymity if they want. (something I agree with) There is also the idea that anyone can come back and participate if they are willing to play nice.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Tell me who and why. cn


Anybody that was involved in that childish flamewar calling eachother names and shit like 5th graders. I stopped commenting because I didnt want to be involved with such a dreadful thing and awful trolls.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Banning is pointless tho in the long run. Anybody can just create endless accounts.


It keeps the forums pretty moderated. Imagine if that me3 guy wasn't banned. That would be terrible.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Anybody that was involved in that childish flamewar calling eachother names and shit like 5th graders. I stopped commenting because I didnt want to be involved with such a dreadful thing and awful trolls.


That's a pretty halo you got there..


----------



## drolove (Jun 24, 2012)

GAYS need to stop being GAY!


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 24, 2012)

At least we can all take comfort in the fact that in 20 years, all these retards saying homosexuality is an abomination and denying them equal rights will be looked at just like the idiot racists of today who were calling black people niggers back in the day. 

Ignorant hate will die with you and your uneducated opinions, and I welcome the day it happens.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> At least we can all take comfort in the fact that in 20 years, all these retards saying homosexuality is an abomination and denying them equal rights will be looked at just like the idiot racists of today who were calling black people niggers back in the day.
> 
> Ignorant hate will die with you and your uneducated opinions, and I welcome the day it happens.


You cant really compare it to racism. People cannot help their skin color, and theres no debate about that.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You cant really compare it to racism. People cannot help their skin color, and theres no debate about that.


I suspect you'll argue with this, but people can't help their sexual orientation any more than they can help their skin color. 

Don't believe me? Try this... Can you 'decide' to be gay, right now? Go ahead, try it.... Are you gay yet? Did it work? Of course it didn't, right? Why then, would you believe that other people have this ability? 

Sexual orientation is no more a choice than skin color. The analogy is valid.


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You cant really compare it to racism. People cannot help their skin color, and theres no debate about that.


Michael Jackson disagrees. Disagreed I mean.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> I suspect you'll argue with this, but people can't help their sexual orientation any more than they can help their skin color.
> 
> Don't believe me? Try this... Can you 'decide' to be gay, right now? Go ahead, try it.... Are you gay yet? Did it work? Of course it didn't, right? Why then, would you believe that other people have this ability?
> 
> Sexual orientation is no more a choice than skin color. The analogy is valid.


There is no science to prove that yet, hence why I said this is still being debated. But there is no debate over whether people choose their skin color... except Michael Jackson I guess.

edit: If I wanted to of course I could go be gay.. you could too, but you choose not to. Its not that hard to be with and fuck another man.


----------



## eye exaggerate (Jun 24, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> I suspect you'll argue with this, but people can't help their sexual orientation any more than they can help their skin color.
> 
> Don't believe me? Try this... Can you 'decide' to be gay, right now? Go ahead, try it.... Are you gay yet? Did it work? Of course it didn't, right? Why then, would you believe that other people have this ability?
> 
> Sexual orientation is no more a choice than skin color. The analogy is valid.


...so, same kind of thing as religious people having genetic disposition toward belief?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

eye exaggerate said:


> ...so, same kind of thing as religious people having genetic disposition toward belief?


HA!!! A genetic disposition towards belief! Thats a good one.


----------



## eye exaggerate (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> HA!!! A genetic disposition towards belief! Thats a good one.


..this is the part where you slow down, re-read, accept all connotations, and re-post.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 24, 2012)

I have a credulous disposition toward genetics. Oh glorious threadjack. cn


----------



## eye exaggerate (Jun 24, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> I have a credulous disposition toward genetics. Oh glorious threadjack. cn


...very generous of you


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> There is no science to prove that yet, hence why I said this is still being debated. But there is no debate over whether people choose their skin color... except Michael Jackson I guess.
> 
> edit: If I wanted to of course I could go be gay.. you could too, but you choose not to. Its not that hard to be with and fuck another man.


Then you're gay? It worked?


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Proof he isnt me. I would never call anybody a queer.


Why not..? Some of them like it...

For just about every derogatory term I've ever heard gay people be called, I have seen some gay people that like it...


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> There is no science to prove that yet, hence why I said this is still being debated. But there is no debate over whether people choose their skin color... except Michael Jackson I guess.
> 
> edit: If I wanted to of course I could go be gay.. you could too, but you choose not to. Its not that hard to be with and fuck another man.


There's no science to prove your god. Are you atheist yet?


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Its not that hard to be with and fuck another man.


so that's what you meant by "open relationship".


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> Then you're gay? It worked?


No, im straight. I would not enjoy sexual relations with a man, but that doesnt mean its impossible. The same thing goes for anybody.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 24, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> Then you're gay? It worked?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Shannon Alexander said:


> Why not..? Some of them like it...
> 
> For just about every derogatory term I've ever heard gay people be called, I have seen some gay people that like it...


Its not because its derogatory, I just dont like that word. Its too old fashioned.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Its not that hard to be with and fuck another man.


when you start adding up the statements kaendar makes, a pattern emerges.

recall this gem from the failthread he started earlier.

*






Originally Posted by Kaendar 
I think you are the one that hates gays, thats why your trying so hard to attack me


​

*


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

UncleBuck said:


> when you start adding up the statements kaendar makes, a pattern emerges.
> 
> recall this gem from the failthread he started earlier.
> 
> ...


No, puppet master, you are very wrong. Now dont start polluting this thread with your hate.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 24, 2012)

Fair enough K...

It's always been my favourite Term for gay people that I've heard... Maybe because I don't see how it is offensive...


and Kaendar, UB is one of the resident trolls here. If you stick around you'll get used to him... If he didn't get a rise from you he wouldn't hang around your posts so much...


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> No, puppet master, you are very wrong. Now dont start polluting this thread with your hate.


are you sure there isn't anything you want to tell us?

i mean, you're putting out the signals so strongly that i must make you my sig less than 6 months away from an election, such is the awesomeness of your statements.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> *If I wanted to of course I could go be gay.. you could too, but you choose not to. Its not that hard to be with and fuck another man.*





Kaendar said:


> No, im straight. I would not enjoy sexual relations with a man, but that doesnt mean its impossible. The same thing goes for anybody.


I'm not sure you understand the concept of human sexuality. The act of having sex with a member of the same sex does not make one homosexual. You are not homosexual unless you experience sexual urges towards members of the same sex. It could possibly be defined as a homosexual act, but the person is not homosexual unless they experience the urge to actually have sex with the same sex. 

It is in fact consciously impossible to change your sexual orientation. You can't just one day say "I think I'm going to be homosexual today" and the next day change your mind. It doesn't work like that. This should be relatively easy to understand as you experience your own version of human sexuality every day. Use yourself as an example. If you believe it is possible, would you be experiencing the same urges a homosexual person would while observing the same sex? If not, it's not genuine homosexuality, you're just saying "yeah, I can change, see, right now I'm homosexual.... now I'm not.... now I am...". 

Go to your local community college and take some classes on human sexuality, they will educate you of the facts and leave you with a much better understanding than I can give you on an internet forum.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Shannon Alexander said:


> Fair enough K...
> 
> It's always been my favourite Term for gay people that I've heard... Maybe because I don't see how it is offensive...
> 
> ...


Ive been here long enough to experience his hate. He only defends certain groups of ppl when its convenient for him. I have to learn to stop feeding the trolls.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> I'm not sure you understand the concept of human sexuality. The act of having sex with a member of the same sex does not make one homosexual. You are not homosexual unless you experience sexual urges towards members of the same sex. It could possibly be defined as a homosexual act, but the person is not homosexual unless they experience the urge to actually have sex with the same sex.
> 
> It is in fact consciously impossible to change your sexual orientation. You can't just one day say "I think I'm going to be homosexual today" and the next day change your mind. It doesn't work like that. This should be relatively easy to understand as you experience your own version of human sexuality every day. Use yourself as an example. If you believe it is possible, would you be experiencing the same urges a homosexual person would while observing the same sex? If not, it's not genuine homosexuality, you're just saying "yeah, I can change, see, right now I'm homosexual.... now I'm not.... now I am...".
> 
> Go to your local community college and take some classes on human sexuality, they will educate you of the facts and leave you with a much better understanding than I can give you on an internet forum.


You have a point. Somewhat.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Ive been here long enough to experience his hate. He only defends certain groups of ppl when its convenient for him. I have to learn to stop feeding the trolls.


hate? i don't hate you. i fucking love you man. you are perhaps the greatest unintentional troll food ever.

witness my new signature.

if only it allowed me space to contrast those statements with your other gems, ones like "homosexual feelings is an anomaly!" and the mental disorder stuff, as well as a link to this study:

[h=3]Abstract[/h]The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression.* Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.*

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014

 you're the poster child for this study. the latent homosexuality really comes out in your comments. sigworthy.​


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 24, 2012)

I'm not sure reporting UB will do any good...

The ignore option works well and I was raised to not be a dobber...


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You sir, are an idiot. Do you not know the meaning of homophobia? Im clearly not afraid of gays if I fucking tattoo them!! I reported your ass so stfu!


homophobia doesn't just mean hate, ya know. maybe check the definition.

saying that homosexuality is a mental disorder falls under the umbrella of homophobia.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 24, 2012)

UncleBuck said:


> homophobia doesn't just mean hate, ya know. maybe check the definition.
> 
> saying that homosexuality is a mental disorder falls under the umbrella of homophobia.


No it doesnt, it falls under the category of a scientific theory.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> No it doesnt, it falls under the category of a scientific theory.


except scientists rejected that theory back in the 1970s. you're a little behind the times there. homosexuality is not listed in the DSM-IV as a mental disorder.

it's like saying the earth is still flat.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar, if you have something to say to me, don't PM it, post it on one of the threads.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 24, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You have a point. Somewhat.


It's a pretty solid point that I'd like to hear your take on. As pad brings up, there's more to sexual preference than you make it out to be. I could decide to have sex with a man, but it would not make me ANY more attracted to said man. Homosexuality is a sexual attraction to the same sex. Unless you actually had feeling of sexual attraction towards men, then went with women anyways, you can't even begin to call it a "choice". Even then, the validity of calling it "choice" is dubious.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 24, 2012)

UncleBuck said:


> homophobia doesn't just mean hate, ya know. maybe check the definition.
> 
> saying that homosexuality is a mental disorder falls under the umbrella of homophobia.


Belief that someone has a mental disorder, based solely on sexual preference, is many things. To be fair, it doesn't constitute homophobia on it's own.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 24, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Belief that someone has a mental disorder, based solely on sexual preference, is many things. To be fair, it doesn't constitute homophobia on it's own.


correct, you'd need one or two other things from under that umbrella before you could say for sure. ya know, like saying gays are just gay because they had a shitty childhood, another kaendar gem.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 24, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Belief that someone has a mental disorder, based solely on sexual preference, is many things. To be fair, it doesn't constitute homophobia on it's own.


The contention if I read it right is, however, that homosexuality as a category is a disorder. That is different enough to merit a stricter standard, since now we are (imo!) treading on thin ice over the deep, cold water of bigotry.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 24, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> The contention if I read it right is, however, that homosexuality as a category is a disorder. That is different enough to merit a stricter standard, since now we are (imo!) treading on thin ice over the deep, cold water of bigotry.


I do not think it is a disorder, if that's what you thought. I honestly don't see how someone could view it as anything other than a perfectly reasonable sexual preference.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 24, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> I do not think it is a disorder, if that's what you thought. I honestly don't see how someone could view it as anything other than a perfectly reasonable sexual preference.


I wasn't laying that at your feet. That was Kaendar's position as I understood it. cn


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 25, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> I wasn't laying that at your feet. That was Kaendar's position as I understood it. cn


Ah, yes. That's the vibe I got too. It's kind of a dangerous proposition to make. I've never met a gay couple and thought "Those are some mentally distressed individuals." The only reason I could imagine wanting to take that position, is to be able to dismiss their equal rights.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 25, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Ah, yes. That's the vibe I got too. It's kind of a dangerous proposition to make. I've never met a gay couple and thought "Those are some mentally distressed individuals." The only reason I could imagine wanting to take that position, is to be able to dismiss their equal rights.


for reference; 

crazy;

[youtube]wwugutICBc4[/youtube]

gay;

[youtube]sibR5mS0u8I[/youtube]


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Having a disorder does not mean you are crazy or act crazy. Thats very offensive.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Having a disorder does not mean you are crazy or act crazy. Thats very offensive.


So is accusing someone of having a mental disorder when they don't have one.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Having a disorder does not mean you are crazy or act crazy. Thats very offensive.


Having a disorder however means having something wrong. It follows inevitably that classifying homosexuality as a disorder is a subtle way of saying it is wrong. You already know that I do not share that opinion. cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Having a disorder however means having something wrong. It follows inevitably that classifying homosexuality as a disorder is a subtle way of saying it is wrong. You already know that I do not share that opinion. cn


I have ADD, thats genetic of course, and theres nothing wrong with that. It doesnt hinder my ability to function normally. Im not saying homosexuality is a mental disability or that people that are gay have any less value of people, im just saying maybe there is a scientific reason why they dont get with the opposite sex. I want all of you to leave the gay part out and think about what im saying. Can certain factors, stimuli and events during childhood effect ones actions as an adult??


----------



## Carne Seca (Jun 25, 2012)

Hemlock said:


> _Leviticus 18:22 - "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."_


Amazing how things actually look when taken in cultural context and with a correct translation:

Some English translations of this passage condemn both gay and lesbian sexual relationships. This is a mistranslation. It refers only to male-male sexual behavior.

This passage does not refer to gay sex generally, but only to a specific form of homosexual prostitution in Pagan temples. Much of Leviticus deals with the _Holiness Code_ which outlined ways in which the ancient Hebrews were to be set apart to God. Some fertility worship practices found in early Pagan cultures were specifically prohibited; ritual same-sex behavior in Pagan temples was one such practice.

Many would regard "_abomination_," "_enormous sin_", etc. as particularly poor translations of the original Hebrew word which really means "_ritually unclean_" within an ancient Israelite era. The Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (circa 3rd century BCE) translated "_to'ebah _" into Greek as "_bdelygma_," which meant ritual impurity. If the writer(s) of Leviticus had wished to refer to a moral violation, a sin, he would have used the Hebrew word _"zimah_." 

This verse says nothing about consensual same-sex activity today. It only condemns same-sex religious prostitution in Pagan temples.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh5.htm


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I have ADD, thats genetic of course, and theres nothing wrong with that. It doesnt hinder my ability to function normally. Im not saying homosexuality is a mental disability or that people that are gay have any less value of people, im just saying maybe there is a scientific reason why they dont get with the opposite sex. I want all of you to leave the gay part out and think about what im saying. Can certain factors, stimuli and events during childhood effect ones actions as an adult??


*dis·or·der*
noun
- a disturbance in physical or mental health or functions; malady or dysfunction: a mild stomach disorder. 

Being gay isn't a disturbance. It's not wrong at all. It's not a disorder. Maybe there's a reason gay people are gay, but it's definitely not a disorder.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I have ADD, thats genetic of course, and theres nothing wrong with that. It doesnt hinder my ability to function normally. Im not saying homosexuality is a mental disability or that people that are gay have any less value of people, im just saying maybe there is a scientific reason why they dont get with the opposite sex. I want all of you to leave the gay part out and think about what im saying. Can certain factors, stimuli and events during childhood effect ones actions as an adult??


Of course, environmental conditions have a big role in shaping an individual, but you must acknowledge, sexual orientation, while some individuals experiment with their sexuality in order to fully understand it, is a predominantly genetic, unconscious process, thereby elevating it of any conscious moral objections some individuals have. 

Not to mention, even if it was a conscious choice, why would it be wrong?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> *dis·or·der*
> noun
> - a disturbance in physical or mental health or functions; malady or dysfunction: a mild stomach disorder.
> 
> Being gay isn't a disturbance. It's not wrong at all. It's not a disorder. Maybe there's a reason gay people are gay, but it's definitely not a disorder.


You really need to think before you post shit sometimes.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> Of course, environmental conditions have a big role in shaping an individual, but you must acknowledge, sexual orientation, while some individuals experiment with their sexuality in order to fully understand it, is a predominantly genetic, unconscious process, thereby elevating it of any conscious moral objections some individuals have.
> 
> Not to mention, even if it was a conscious choice, why would it be wrong?


Well the question here isnt really whether its right or wrong, thats up to the individual. The question is how did they get that way.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Well the question here isnt really whether its right or wrong, thats up to the individual. The question is how did they get that way.


'Nature' would be my immediate response. They just 'are'. No different from you or me, and shouldn't be treated any different than you or me. 

I don't understand why there is any objection to homosexual marriage and I don't understand why if the objection isn't rational, it should be given equal consideration among rational arguments.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You really need to think before you post shit sometimes.


Take your own advice...































AND SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS!!!

jk (kinda).. What about my post is wrong?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> 'Nature' would be my immediate response. They just 'are'. No different from you or me, and shouldn't be treated any different than you or me.
> 
> I don't understand why there is any objection to homosexual marriage and I don't understand why if the objection isn't rational, it should be given equal consideration among rational arguments.


I mean to be honest, nobody treats it any worse than drugs, prostitution, teen pregnancy, alcohol abuse, cigarette smoking, etc. There are just some things that people think are wrong. You may not think that but for everyone like you there is 100 that disagree. Its a fucked up world. One very rational argument against gay marriage I can think of is that it creates a standard for equal love. If marriage between a man and a woman is equal, why isnt it legal for 2 men. If gay marriage is made legal, well than the same train of thought will start popping up from every wierd corner of every basement in America. Eventually people are gonna start saying things like why cant a 14 year old marry a 29 year old? Its love and all love is equal. Eventually its gonna be at the supreme court because it wont be fair to everyone else who has alternative versions of love. We can stick to what we have now, or open up Pandoras Box.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You really need to think before you post shit sometimes.


you really need to lay off the crack.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Eventually people are gonna start saying things like why cant a 14 year old marry a 29 year old?


because marriage is between consenting adult human beings.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I mean to be honest, nobody treats it any worse than drugs, prostitution, teen pregnancy, alcohol abuse, cigarette smoking, etc. There are just some things that people think are wrong. You may not think that but for everyone like you there is 100 that disagree. Its a fucked up world. One very rational argument against gay marriage I can think of is that it creates a standard for equal love. If marriage between a man and a woman is equal, why isnt it legal for 2 men. If gay marriage is made legal, well than the same train of thought will start popping up from every wierd corner of every basement in America. Eventually people are gonna start saying things like why cant a 14 year old marry a 29 year old? Its love and all love is equal. Eventually its gonna be at the supreme court because it wont be fair to everyone else who has alternative versions of love. We can stick to what we have now, or open up Pandoras Box.


People have every right to believe whatever they want is 'wrong', I have no contention with that. What I believe is a problem is, as already stated, when that contention comes into conflict with someone else's beliefs and their inherent right as a citizen of the United States of America to exercise that belief. 

For every 100 that disagree with me, the Supreme Court is there to oblige. 

'It creates a standard for equal love'. Why would the same train of thought between two consenting adults (those above the legal age of consent, 18 ) be any different if homosexual marriage was permitted? 

A 14 year old couldn't marry a 29 year old because they have not reached the age of legal consent. A 14 year old _couldn't_ give consent, if a 29 year old had any kind of intercourse with a 14 year old it would be considered statutory rape, and the parents of the minor would have legal grounds to press charges. 

In that case, it's not considered love, legally speaking. 

This line of reasoning is a slippery slope as inanimate objects, people under the age of legal consent, animals, or otherwise unconscious objects can't give legal consent, therefore, the analogy doesn't hold any water. Quite clearly. If homosexual marriage, that of two people of the same sex above the age of legal consent, were to be federally acknowledged, the other things you mentioned would not follow suit, logistically speaking. They would require a new set of moral standards yet to be defined and yet to be opposed under a equally as absurd set of moral standards.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> People have every right to believe whatever they want is 'wrong', I have no contention with that. What I believe is a problem is, as already stated, when that contention comes into conflict with someone else's beliefs and their inherent right as a citizen of the United States of America to exercise that belief.
> 
> For every 100 that disagree with me, the Supreme Court is there to oblige.
> 
> ...


But your wrong. In some states the age of consent is 16. You are proposing the law be changed to define marriage? Well whats to stop people trying to get the law changed for age of consent? Or trying legalize beasteality. People are gonna start causing a ruckus because the definition of marriage needs to be changed to include them as well.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> But *your* wrong. In some states the age of consent is 16. You are proposing the law be changed to define marriage? Well *whats* to stop people trying to get the law changed for age of consent? Or trying legalize *beasteality*. People are gonna start causing a ruckus because the definition of marriage needs to be changed to include them as well.


do you even know how to read, spelling bee champ? he already answered that question.

*

he other things you mentioned would not follow suit, logistically speaking. They would require a new set of moral standards


​




*
once people are OK with animal fucking, bestiality man-dog marriages can proceed. once people are OK with fucking 13 year olds, you can marry your 13 year old cousin.

now you are coupling calling homosexuality a mental disorder with disparaging and denying the rights of others. be proud, champ.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I mean to be honest, nobody treats it any worse than drugs, prostitution, teen pregnancy, alcohol abuse, cigarette smoking, etc. There are just some things that people think are wrong. You may not think that but for everyone like you there is 100 that disagree. Its a fucked up world. One very rational argument against gay marriage I can think of is that it creates a standard for equal love. If marriage between a man and a woman is equal, why isnt it legal for 2 men. If gay marriage is made legal, well than the same train of thought will start popping up from every wierd corner of every basement in America. Eventually people are gonna start saying things like why cant a 14 year old marry a 29 year old? Its love and all love is equal. Eventually its gonna be at the supreme court because it wont be fair to everyone else who has alternative versions of love. We can stick to what we have now, or open up Pandoras Box.


Because 14 year old people aren't considered to have the mental faculties to make those kind of decisions...


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> But your wrong. In some states the age of consent is 16. You are proposing the law be changed to define marriage? Well whats to stop people trying to get the law changed for age of consent? Or trying legalize beasteality. People are gonna start causing a ruckus because the definition of marriage needs to be changed to include them as well.


Allow the proceedings of the age of legal consent be scrutinized. We live in a representative republic, if the majority of people believe the age of consent should be lowered, and the majority of our elected politicians agree, lower the age of consent. If you disagree with this process, stop electing public officials who agree with lowering the age of consent. That's the entire idea behind the voting process.

I don't see how a rational argument could be waged for the legalization of beastiality, as animals can't give legal consent, as already acknowledged. 

There are rules to abide by before any kind of irrational precedent can be set for a specific type of legal marriage.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

You want rational argument? Secular?

_"Civil marriage should be recognized as only the union of one man and one woman. Only the union of a man and a woman may involve the unique physical act from which children are created, and children best flourish when raised by their biological mother and father who are united in marriage. The legal institution of marriage has historically been the societal mechanism channeling men and women into permanent, exclusive sexual relationships to insure that the partners who participate in the creation of the child provide both material and personal support to the child._

_There is a growing consensus in the social science literature that clearly establishes that children do best when they are raised by both biological parents who are married to each other..._

_Preserving the traditional institution of marriage need not eliminate any legal status for mutually supportive couples. Loving, committed relationships exist not only between same-sex couples, but also between many other individuals who are not sexually intimate. The civil institution of marriage should focus on insuring the well-being of children, but it is possible to create other legal arrangements to take care of the diversity of human relationships found in contemporary society. Creation of a reciprocal beneficiary status, like that found in Hawaii, is a viable and reasonable alternative to recognizing same-sex unions as marriage."
-Teresa Stanton

__"f society permits same-sex marriage, it also will have to allow other types of marriage. The legal logic is simple: If prohibiting same-sex marriage is discriminatory, then disallowing polygamous marriage, polyamorous marriage, or any other marital grouping will also be deemed discriminatory. The emotional and psychological ramifications of these assorted arrangements on the developing psyches and sexuality of children would be disastrous...

Certainly homosexual couples can be just as loving as heterosexual couples, but children require more than love. They need the distinctive qualities and the complementary natures of a male and female parent.

The accumulated wisdom of over 5,000 years has concluded that the ideal marital and parental configuration is composed of one man and one woman. Arrogantly disregarding such time-tested wisdom, and using children as guinea pigs in a radical experiment, is risky at best, and cataclysmic at worst.

Same-sex marriage definitely isn&#8217;t in the best interest of children. And although we empathize with those homosexuals who long to be married and parent children, we mustn&#8217;t allow our compassion for them to trump our compassion for children. In a contest between the desires of some homosexuals and the needs of all children, we can&#8217;t allow the children to lose."
-Tray Hansen


_


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You want rational argument? Secular?
> 
> _"Civil marriage should be recognized as only the union of one man and one woman. Only the union of a man and a woman may involve the unique physical act from which children are created, and children best flourish when raised by their biological mother and father who are united in marriage. The legal institution of marriage has historically been the societal mechanism channeling men and women into permanent, exclusive sexual relationships to insure that the partners who participate in the creation of the child provide both material and personal support to the child._
> 
> ...


_

dude you are such a fucking idiot that i find it hard to believe.

teresa stanton is a professor at a PRIVATE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY. she is a religious scholar. not secular.

besides, study after study shows that kids of gay couples OUTPERFORM other children on average.

take your religious bigotry and jam it up your backside, i know you're just dying to see what that feels like._


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

since debating is simply copying and pasting now...

_Compared with a group of control adolescents born to heterosexual parents with similar educational and financial backgrounds, the children of lesbian couples scored better on academic and social tests and lower on measures of rule-breaking and aggression.
_
_A previous study of same-sex parenting, based on long-term health data, also found no difference in the health of children in either group.
_
_&#8220;This confirms what most developmental scientists have suspected,&#8221; says Stephen Russell, a sociologist at the University of Arizona in Tucson. &#8220;Kids growing up with same-sex parents fare just as well as other kids.&#8221;_


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Social science has shown that children raised by their own biological mother and father, committed to one another in a lifelong marriage, are happier, healthier, and more prosperous than children in any other households.-Peter Sprigg

_"I'm a liberal Democrat. And I do not favor same-sex marriage. Do those positions sound contradictory? To me, they fit together...

All our scholarly instruments seem to agree: For healthy development, what a child needs more than anything else is the mother and father who together made the child, who love the child and love each other...

__Because I also believe with all my heart in the right of the child to the mother and father who made her, I believe that we as a society should seek to maintain and to strengthen the only human institution - marriage - that is specifically intended to safeguard that right and make it real for our children.

__Legalized same-sex marriage almost certainly benefits those same-sex couples who choose to marry, as well as the children being raised in those homes. But changing the meaning of marriage to accommodate homosexual orientation further and perhaps definitively undermines for all of us the very thing - the gift, the birthright - that is marriage's most distinctive contribution to human society. That's a change that, in the final analysis, I cannot support."__-David Blankerhorn

__"It is also argued by those advocating same-sex marriage, that excluding same-sex couples from marriage is the same act of discrimination as prohibiting interracial marriage, which has rightly been recognized as a serious breach of human rights. That argument is not correct. Because an interracial marriage between a man and a woman does symbolize the procreative relationship, its prohibition is based on racial discrimination which is wrong. In contrast, not extending the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples, is not based on the sexual orientation of the partners, but the absence of a feature of their relationship which is an essential feature of marriage.

In conclusion, society needs marriage to establish cultural meaning, symbolism and moral values around the inherently procreative relationship between a man and a woman, and thereby protect that relationship and the children who result from it. That is more necessary than in the past, when alternatives to sexual reproduction were not available. Redefining marriage to include same-sex couples would affect its cultural meaning and function and, in doing so, damage its ability and, thereby, society&#8217;s capacity, to protect the inherently procreative relationship and the children who result from it, whether those children&#8217;s&#8217; future sexual orientation proves to be homosexual or heterosexual."
-Margaret Somerville DLC_


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

UncleBuck said:


> since debating is simply copying and pasting now...
> 
> _Compared with a group of control adolescents born to heterosexual parents with similar educational and financial backgrounds, the children of lesbian couples scored better on academic and social tests and lower on measures of rule-breaking and aggression.
> _
> ...


The Sociologist in me is screaming

_This is because of the very unique and strong individuals who are able to sustain such a counter culture lifestyle with great success are also just as sucessful in the raising of children._


----------



## Chief Walkin Eagle (Jun 25, 2012)

Do gays go to heaven, Kaendar?


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Social science has shown that children raised by their own biological mother and father, committed to one another in a lifelong marriage, are happier, healthier, and more prosperous than children in any other households.-Peter Sprigg
> 
> _"I'm a liberal Democrat. And I do not favor same-sex marriage. Do those positions sound contradictory? To me, they fit together...
> 
> ...


margaret somerville is a theologian, shit for brains. In 2006, Somerville was nominated for membership in the Order of Canada by Carol Finlay, a professor at the Toronto School of Theology.

danid blankerhorn now supports same sex marriage, genius.

peter sprigg is a theologian and a closet homo judging by the looks of it. most people that spend their ives obsessing over gay strangers tend to be. 

Peter Sprigg earned a bachelor of arts degree summa cum laude from Drew University in Madison, New Jersey with a double major in political science and economics.[SUP][1][/SUP] He received his master of divinity degree cum laude from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Massachusetts in 1997.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP]
He worked as an actor and unit leader in Covenant Players, an international Christian drama ministry.[SUP][1]





[/SUP]


----------



## Chief Walkin Eagle (Jun 25, 2012)

Masters of divinity degree LOL.


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

[video=youtube_share;vxPRHXgYVlk]http://youtu.be/vxPRHXgYVlk[/video]


----------



## Chief Walkin Eagle (Jun 25, 2012)

Eh buddeh, fuck you! ... xD


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

_"The union of a man and woman is the most enduring human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith. Ages of experience have taught humanity that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society. Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society.

__Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all.

__Today, I call upon the Congress to promptly pass and to send to the states for ratification an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

__The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage.

__America's a free society which limits the role of government in the lives of our citizens. This commitment of freedom, however, does not require the redefinition of one of our most basic social institutions."
-George Bush (Yes I know GWB is an idiot. I threw this in there to be funny)

__"Marriage encourages the sexes to complement each others strengths and weaknesses. Even the most successful homosexual relationships, at best, only mimic marriage._

_Marriage is the union for the purpose of natural reproduction of the human race. Only a man and a woman can accomplish this. Even childless marriages are a social anchor for children._

_It is wrong to create fatherless or motherless families by design. Same-sex marriages have more to do with the desires of adults than the needs of children. Human experience and a vast body of social science research show that children do best in married, mother-father households..._

_Marriage laws are not discriminatory. Marriage is open to all adults, subject to age and blood relation parameters. As with any acquired status, the applicant must meet minimal requirements, which in terms of marriage, means finding an opposite-sex spouse._

_Same-sex couples incorrectly assert that they need marriage to gain certain legal rights, such as the right to visit one another in the hospital, but same-sex couples have had hospital visitation rights by New York State statute since 2004. Anyone, including homosexuals, can use legal instruments such as power of attorney, wills, etc. to share property, designate heirs, dictate hospital visitors and give authority for medical decisions."__-Steven Blanch

__"By redefining marriage to include same-sex couples, the meaning of marriage will be changed in ways that will loosen the already-impaired link between marriage and parenting; the intergenerational connections of marriage will become attenuated. The notion that marriage is merely a private matter - a 'common' that should be open to all - will grow, as the public commitments and expectations of marriage erode. The chaos of sexual irresponsibility (especially infidelity and promiscuity within marriage) will grow, and the moral expectations of the basic institution of society will fade as the sexual ethic of gay and lesbian lifestyles is embraced as marriage. Instability in marriages will increase as the pattern of transitory relationships of same-sex couples is included in the social understanding of what is marriage. Sexual segregation will increase and the historically gender-integrated public institution of marriage will be redefined to include sexual apartheid couples.

__Instrumentalization of marriage partners will result from the inclusion of the gay lifestyle as an accepted form of the public institution of marriage. The transformative power of including gay and lesbian relationships in the public understanding of marriage will alter the institution of marriage as never before."
-Lynn D Wardle

__I believe that same-sex couples should be entitled to the legal rights that married couples enjoy.... But, my friend, that is as far as I want to go. I define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Before you gay-rights folks land on me with both feet, I would like to remind you that I have been supportive of your movement for many years, have withstood a great deal of criticism in the process and have risked the wrath of some editors and publishers. I cannot support same-sex marriage, however, because it flies in the face of cultural and traditional family life as we have known it for centuries. And that's where I must draw the line. Sorry."_
_-Ann Landers_


----------



## Chief Walkin Eagle (Jun 25, 2012)

Do gays go to heaven, Kaendar?

(Pretending like theres some kind of judgement)


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> _"The union of a man and woman is the most enduring human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith. Ages of experience have taught humanity that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society. Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society.
> 
> __Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all.
> 
> ...


wtf are you quoting you brainwashed MOFO?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

I am a bisexual - I did not choose this sexuality, *nor was I born with it*. Over time I noticed I had an interest in the same sex, I struggled with it but I decided this is who I was. 
-Destinee Boyona PR for a gay rights group

"I gave a speech recently, an empowerment speech to a gay audience, and it included the line 'I&#8217;ve been straight and I&#8217;ve been gay, and gay is better.' And they tried to get me to change it, because they said it implies that homosexuality can be a choice. *And for me, it is a choice.
*-Cynthia Nixon

When you are confronted with the option of continuing to be gay or going straight, you choose to continue being gay. Granted, you may not have had much say in how you grew up and turned out when you hit puberty, but that doesn't mean you can't make the choice to change your lifestyle (especially if being gay hurts those who love you).

-Former Gay

P.S. It would be ludicrous for me to ask you to change into a lizard because that would require you to completely rewrite your genetic code. However, homosexuality can be confronted within the psychological aspects humanity, not rewriting genetic code, therefore you technically still have the choice.

Please, I'd really like to understand why you can't make the choice when I did.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Chief Walkin Eagle said:


> Do gays go to heaven, Kaendar?
> 
> (Pretending like theres some kind of judgement)


Yes, ... and no. Do people go to heaven when they commit suicide? No. Why? Because they died commiting a sin. This of course only applies if you believe in heaven or hell and god etc.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> wtf are you quoting you brainwashed MOFO?


Im providing arguments against gay marriage that do not cite religion as requested. And to anybody that brings up that some of these people have religious backgrounds, that still doesnt mean that they brought that into their case. Most americans have a religious background. Theres no getting around it.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

i do believe kaendar has gone off the deep end.

did he really just quote george bush for support? 

you're a joke, kaendar.


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Im providing arguments against gay marriage that do not cite religion as requested. And to anybody that brings up that some of these people have religious backgrounds, that still doesnt mean that they brought that into their case. Most americans have a religious background. Theres no getting around it.


How where those not inspired by the religious?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

At the end of the day I dont give a damn what you do behind your bedroom doors. IF there is judgement they will have to deal with it. I like to focus on my family, cultivating MJ, and getting money.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> How where those not inspired by the religious?


Can you go thru that and find one thing having to do with religion?


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Im providing arguments against gay marriage that do not cite religion as requested. And to anybody that brings up that some of these people have religious backgrounds, that still doesnt mean that they brought that into their case. Most americans have a religious background. Theres no getting around it.


these people with religious backgrounds are basing their arguments off religion, not science.

for example, when they assert that kids do worse under same sex couples, they are basing that on their religious beliefs and ignoring the science that contradicts them.

even a mentally handicapped wombat would not fail so hard, calendar.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Can you go thru that and find one thing having to do with religion?


can you go through and find one that actually takes science into account?


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> At the end of the day I dont give a damn what you do behind your bedroom doors. IF there is judgement they will have to deal with it. I like to focus on my family, cultivating MJ, and getting money.


Riddle me this: Florida, the dark ages I mean late 90's takes away a bunch of Foster Kids from a gay couple that no one else wanted hence Foster Kids from a gay couple for being GAY

WHY?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

And here is a girl that words it so nicely,,

A similar question was asked before but the poster also included a link to a document which stated scientists have never been able to find a "gay gene". Back in the 90s some scientists claimed they'd found it but were later humiliated for being unable to substantiate their claim with infallible scientific data.

I believe gay people aren't born gay and straight people aren't born straight. Something that to date can only be guessed at causes this trigger. I think different factors make different people gay. No scientist worth his salt will lay claim to knowing precisely what causes homosexuality. They will speculate and put forward theories, qualifying statements with "we think", "we assume", "found some evidence" etc. But unfortunately scientific fact is elusive. I personally wouldn't presume to know what makes a gay person gay. But I guess it would be a pretty difficult life given that it's a Heterosexual World. (And perhaps some would argue it's a White Heterosexual Man's World!).

I work with intersexed females. We know precisely what causes their specific birth defects. In spite of that, many of them feel guilty or ashamed of their condition. It's really quite sad.

I've managed to find this info from American Psychological Association. Hope it's useful to you.

'Gay' gene claim suddenly vanishes
American Psychological Association revises statement on homosexuality

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily 


A publication from the American Psychological Association includes an admission that there is no "gay" gene, according to a doctor who has written about the issue on the website of National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality. 

A. Dean Byrd, the past president of NARTH, confirmed that the statement from the American Psychological Association came in a brochure that updates what the APA has advocated for years. 

Specifically, in a brochure that first came out about 1998, the APA stated: "There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality." 

However, in the update: a brochure now called, "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality," the APA's position changed. 

The new statement says: 

"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles. ..."

Conclusion: It's not genetic, but so what? People will do what they want to do whether you like it or not. No one yet truly knows why it happens but it is definitely more than just simple 'choice'.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> Riddle me this: Florida, the dark ages I mean late 90's takes away a bunch of Foster Kids from a gay couple that no one else wanted hence Foster Kids from a gay couple for being GAY
> 
> WHY?


Idk.. I see no reason to do that if they were providing them with a good home.


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Idk.. I see no reason to do that if they were providing them with a good home.


They were. The ruling was because they were gay they were unfit.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> They were. The ruling was because they were gay they were unfit.


Well thats unfortunate. Im sure they were better parents than the originals, given that the kids were in the system and all. I would much rather my kid go to a loving gay home then be homeless or something


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> They were. The ruling was because they were gay they were unfit.


and people like kaendar help perpetuate this idiocy by saying they have mental disorders and need not be given the same rights as opposite sex couples because if we do, dogs will marry cats and pedophiles will run rampant.

and to top it all off, he cites religious scholars and george bush for backup.

kaendar deserves the double retarded wombat salute. one was not enough.


----------



## Chief Walkin Eagle (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Yes, ... and no. Do people go to heaven when they commit suicide? No. Why? Because they died commiting a sin. This of course only applies if you believe in heaven or hell and god etc.


Yes and no? Why would a gay go to heaven? Why would a gay go to hell?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Chief Walkin Eagle said:


> Yes and no? Why would a gay go to heaven? Why would a gay go to hell?


I just told you why. If you believe in that, lets just say hypothetically speaking, if you die commiting a sin you go to hell. Obviously most of the time thats the case with gays. But if they confess and repent before death, than everything will be forgiven and eternal life will be granted. Thats if you believe in that. Im just answering your question.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> ...if you die commiting a sin you go to hell. Obviously most of the time thats the case with gays. But if they confess and repent before death, than everything will be forgiven and eternal life will be granted.


i am rapidly running out of pictures of wombats to express your level of intellect in an easy to understand fashion.


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I just told you why. If you believe in that, lets just say hypothetically speaking, if you die commiting a sin you go to hell. Obviously most of the time thats the case with gays. But if they confess and repent before death, than everything will be forgiven and eternal life will be granted. Thats if you believe in that. Im just answering your question.


Do you believe that nonsense my catholic family swears by where you can sin to high heaven so long as a priest gives you your last rights before you pass?


----------



## Chief Walkin Eagle (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I just told you why. If you believe in that, lets just say hypothetically speaking, if you die commiting a sin you go to hell. Obviously most of the time thats the case with gays. But if they confess and repent before death, than everything will be forgiven and eternal life will be granted. Thats if you believe in that. Im just answering your question.


So if a gay says "Im sorry Lord that I like the genitals of the same sex, I have a mental disorder so I dont know any better". Thats the only way a gay would make it into heaven?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> Do you believe that nonsense my catholic family swears by where you can sin to high heaven so long as a priest gives you your last rights before you pass?


I said IF you believe it. And the Catholic church is all fucked up. A priest is not divine and has no powers to grant you forgiveness. Just like its idolatry to worship saints.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Chief Walkin Eagle said:


> So if a gay says "Im sorry Lord that I like the genitals of the same sex, I have a mental disorder so I dont know any better". Thats the only way a gay would make it into heaven?


No. Thats stupid. Its the same thing as using drugs or having non marital sex. You say im sorry for falling weak to temptation of _____ watever it is. Once again, this is IF you believe in that.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> No. Thats stupid. Its the same thing as using drugs or having non marital sex. You say im sorry for falling weak to temptation of _____ watever it is. Once again, this is IF you believe in that.


Non marital sex is not on the list of sexual immoralities... soooo...


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

kaendar, you are fucked in the head.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Shannon Alexander said:


> Non marital sex is not on the list of sexual immoralities... soooo...


Sex before marriage aka fornication is considered a sin.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 25, 2012)

Fornication comes from a term for sex with whores...


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> And here is a girl that words it so nicely,,
> 
> A similar question was asked before but the poster also included a link to a document which stated scientists have never been able to find a "gay gene". Back in the 90s some scientists claimed they'd found it but were later humiliated for being unable to substantiate their claim with infallible scientific data.
> 
> ...


I thought the APA had "no credibility man"?

What happened with that?



Kaendar said:


> *The APA has no credibility man*, they can be bought out.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> I thought the APA had "no credibility man"?
> 
> What happened with that?


the APA is science, so he does not believe in it when it comes to this issue. science is known to correct itself when wrong or premature, ideologue bigots like kaendar are known for the opposite, to fall back on religion to justify their views.

thus, when the APA says homosexuality is not a mental disorder and stands by it for decades, he says they have no credibility.

but when the APA finds out that a study they trusted had questionable methodology or flawed findings, he marches it out as a trump card.

this is confirmation bias in action.

fuck off, kaendar.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

kaendar ignores that his own copy and paste contradicts him (and is also misleading).

the APA's statement says genetics are a factor, yet the publisher of the article says "so it's not genetics". this is obviously misleading and biased. it does go on to say that it is more than just choice, as kaendar claims.

*

"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles. ..."

Conclusion: It's not genetic, but so what? People will do what they want to do whether you like it or not. No one yet truly knows why it happens but it is definitely more than just simple 'choice'.


​




*


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> I thought the APA had "no credibility man"?
> 
> What happened with that?


Because when they changed the original decision in 73, alot of insiders were saying they were very "influenced" into doing that. Basically they got bullied into making that decision.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 25, 2012)

As I'm certain you didn't take my previous advice of reading the writings of Solomon when it comes to animals and souls I doubt that providing you with a further biblical reference will do absolutely any good... But in the hope that you further educate yourself in the writings in the bible of which you keep speaking, I ask you to read Leviticus... I'm not going to provide you with the actual verse number as I believe you should get a deeper more intimate understanding of more than just one point... but for this discussion on sexual immorality I say Leviticus... 

I find it hard to take people seriously when they bring up the bible as a point of reference without having actually read the bible...

In Leviticus you will find the list of Sexual Immoralities as held by the Jewish people... As a warning for you so your brain doesn't shatter completely it does not mention pre marital sex at all...

I spent a month reading the bible just researching this very point...


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Because when they changed the original decision in 73, alot of insiders were saying they were very "influenced" into doing that. Basically they got bullied into making that decision.


or they just started basing their classifications off more valid studies and better science.

tell ya what, kaendar. you start copying and pasting evidence to support your theory, and for every one you post, i'll post 3 studies that show that homosexuality is not a mental disorder.

deal?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Why is thread going into this? Totally de railed by the same ppl as usual. RIU is like the family that can never have fun together because the few select cousins always get drunk and fuck up something. A thread in SSP never stays on topic.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

Shannon Alexander said:


> As I'm certain you didn't take my previous advice of reading the writings of Solomon when it comes to animals and souls I doubt that providing you with a further biblical reference will do absolutely no good... But in the hope that you further educate yourself in the writings in the bible of which you keep speaking, I ask you to read Leviticus... I'm not going to provide you with the actual verse number as I believe you should get a deeper more intimate understanding of more than just one point... but for this discussion on sexual immorality I say Leviticus...
> 
> I find it hard to take people seriously when they bring up the bible as a point of reference without having actually read the bible...
> 
> ...


I have read the bible, many times. I also have quite a study guides and picture reference books for it. As a teenager in church I never listened to what the pastor said, I always entertained myself by reading the bible. So reading the bible 2 hours every sunday and 1 hour every wednesday, I got thru it a few times. Also, im glad you mention Leviticus because it is the second most interesting book after Revelations. I know all about what your saying, but any pre marital sex is still considered fornication.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 25, 2012)

Because discussions evolve... New points come up... Then they get discussed and more new points come up etc...


----------



## Chief Walkin Eagle (Jun 25, 2012)

How to start an argument on the internet... 1) Post your opinion... 2) wait... Not that Im supporting you. Your opinions on homosexuals are fucking ridiculous.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I have read the bible, many times. I also have quite a study guides and picture reference books for it. As a teenager in church I never listened to what the pastor said, I always entertained myself by reading the bible. So reading the bible 2 hours every sunday and 1 hour every wednesday, I got thru it a few times. Also, im glad you mention Leviticus because it is the second most interesting book after Revelations. I know all about what your saying, but any pre marital sex is still considered fornication.


I've had conversations with Theologists that disagree with you... but hey... not all of them see it the same way... and I can only express my own views based on my understanding...

And Revelations is a horrid book to read... one of my least favourite parts of the bible after all that begatting that goes on early...


----------



## BustinScales510 (Jun 25, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> I thought the APA had "no credibility man"?
> 
> What happened with that?


YES! Mega thumbs up for not letting that sort of squirming hypocrisy go unnoticed


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar has inspired me to knock the dust off of my Bible... 

Because as far as my understand goes in the bible Fornication is in reference to unlawful sexual acts... that being the law as stated in Leviticus... which does not mention pre marital sex...


I may be wrong... But I'm going to do a real proper write up and post it on July the 25th...


----------



## PetFlora (Jun 25, 2012)

If Jesus was gay, would they still love him?


----------



## Barrelhse (Jun 25, 2012)

Those people aren't really christians. They're a group of ignorant people who band together and find things to hate. It's all based on stupidity and insecurity- fuck 'em all.


----------



## Doer (Jun 25, 2012)

PetFlora said:


> If Jesus was gay, would they still love him?



It is pretty easy to see that he probably was a libertine of all sorts and some of the stories that were censored, concerned certain men he would spend the night with. 

Remember, his main teachings started with, "You have heard that..., but now, I tell you this." He was against the church and was attempting to surplant the message of Fear, with Love. But, the best he got was an overlay, the New Test. If the old Test. had not been brought forward, the cult would have died. Peter made a name for himself by having the Roman women hang out with him, non-sexually, but to deny their husbands. Peter was a radical gay, using his warpped view of the Cult of Christ to mess with Rome. He suffered.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I mean to be honest, nobody treats it any worse than drugs, prostitution, teen pregnancy, alcohol abuse, cigarette smoking, etc. There are just some things that people think are wrong. You may not think that but for everyone like you there is 100 that disagree. Its a fucked up world. One very rational argument against gay marriage I can think of is that it creates a standard for equal love. If marriage between a man and a woman is equal, why isnt it legal for 2 men. If gay marriage is made legal, well than the same train of thought will start popping up from every wierd corner of every basement in America. Eventually people are gonna start saying things like why cant a 14 year old marry a 29 year old? Its love and all love is equal. Eventually its gonna be at the supreme court because it wont be fair to everyone else who has alternative versions of love. We can stick to what we have now, or open up Pandoras Box.


Two things.
1) You are deeply convinced that being gay is something basically wrong, unnatural. Look at your analogs: teen pregnancy through drug use/abuse. I do not share that view, and I also see your attempts to fit the square peg of the existence of gays, and a gay culture that demands moral parity, into the round hole of your certainty of their wrongness, with some distaste. I consider that an excellent example of _rationalization_, engaging in logical contortions to fit a concept that you *insist *be true into ... the rest of what we know. 

I won't persist in convincing you otherwise. I take no especial pleasure in a pursuit of futility. But I will oppose what i consider a prejudiced stance that creates and propagates real personal harm. 

2) The idea that allowing gays true moral parity (which is what i interpret the fuss about gay marriage to really be about - a formal acknowledgement on record that gay is allowed into the circle of Normal) is the start of a general unraveling of the soundness andor utility of the institution of marriage ... is an example of the logical fallacy known as Slippery Slope. "if we ban prayer from schools ... our grandchildren will worship Satan!" is a classic instance of this. 
Despite the emotional appeal of the argument, the world tends to be a more resilient place. 

From Wikipedia:


Slippery slope (thin edge of the wedge, camel's nose)  asserting that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact[SUP][66][/SUP] 
 cn


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You want rational argument? Secular?
> 
> _"Civil marriage should be recognized as only the union of one man and one woman. Only the union of a man and a woman may involve the unique physical act from which children are created, and children best flourish when raised by their biological mother and father who are united in marriage. The legal institution of marriage has historically been the societal mechanism channeling men and women into permanent, exclusive sexual relationships to insure that the partners who participate in the creation of the child provide both material and personal support to the child._
> 
> ...


_

Whenever you introduce quotes into a formal debate, you really *really *need to append the URL from which you C&Ped the text. Not doing so is like omitting the soap step while showering ... bad procedure. 
I asked you this repeatedly in a neighboring thread, and I will continue to do this until your either accept this point of rational hygiene ... or stop this bad practice of bringing in mystery text. There are rules for formal discourse. Final warning: play by them, or be ignored. cn_


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 25, 2012)

UncleBuck said:


> since debating is simply copying and pasting now...
> 
> _Compared with a group of control adolescents born to heterosexual parents with similar educational and financial backgrounds, the children of lesbian couples scored better on academic and social tests and lower on measures of rule-breaking and aggression.
> _
> ...


UB - same complaint. Please append URLs. cn


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 25, 2012)

Like this. First the text. Then a link.



> The reality is that marriage does not now, nor has it ever been a reflection of anyone's morality. At least, not in the way Christians mean the word. Instead, individuals' choices about sex and marriage have been dictated by the cultures in which they lived. There is a clear and undeniable pattern in history: with technological, environmental, or philosophical innovation comes changing expectations of sex and marriage.
> 
> To begin with, we must recognize that the "Traditional Marriage" espoused by today's Christian leaders has never existed. One man, one woman, brought together in holy love, sexually celibate until marriage, sexually monogamous for life, raising their biological children together? Any sociologist or anthropologist worth their salt would scoff at the notion. This version of marriage is a myth, pure and simple.
> 
> ...


http://www.examiner.com/article/marriage-sex-and-morality-and-how-the-christians-get-them-all-wrong

http://www.blainerobison.com/concerns/polygamy

http://www.examiner.com/article/biblical-christianity-101-marriage


----------



## Doer (Jun 25, 2012)

Come on, Buck. Help us out here. If you are going to C&P, please finish the job. I like to see where stuff comes from.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Because when they changed the original decision in 73, alot of insiders were saying they were very "influenced" into doing that. Basically they got bullied into making that decision.


wow..........


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Why is thread going into this? Totally de railed by the same ppl as usual. RIU is like the family that can never have fun together because the few select cousins always get drunk and fuck up something. A thread in SSP never stays on topic.


You are the drunk cousin here.


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

Doer said:


> It is pretty easy to see that he probably was a libertine of all sorts and some of the stories that were censored, concerned certain men he would spend the night with.
> 
> Remember, his main teachings started with, "You have heard that..., but now, I tell you this." He was against the church and was attempting to surplant the message of Fear, with Love. But, the best he got was an overlay, the New Test. If the old Test. had not been brought forward, the cult would have died. Peter made a name for himself by having the Roman women hang out with him, non-sexually, but to deny their husbands. Peter was a radical gay, using his warpped view of the Cult of Christ to mess with Rome. He suffered.


That is an interesting interpretation of the early church. Where do you find the Peter ref? In this theory is he messing with his Lovers or their wives?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Two things.
> 1) You are deeply convinced that being gay is something basically wrong, unnatural. Look at your analogs: teen pregnancy through drug use/abuse. I do not share that view, and I also see your attempts to fit the square peg of the existence of gays, and a gay culture that demands moral parity, into the round hole of your certainty of their wrongness, with some distaste. I consider that an excellent example of _rationalization_, engaging in logical contortions to fit a concept that you *insist *be true into ... the rest of what we know.
> 
> I won't persist in convincing you otherwise. I take no especial pleasure in a pursuit of futility. But I will oppose what i consider a prejudiced stance that creates and propagates real personal harm.
> ...


Neer, you seem fair so let me ask you this. What is so wrong with people having their own personal opinion on an issue? I mean people act like its a crime to have an opinion. And as far as the links go, they are quotes with the name of the person that said them. I didnt realize links would be necessary, what do you have to look at?


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Neer, you seem fair so let me ask you this. What is so wrong with people having their own personal opinion on an issue? I mean people act like its a crime to have an opinion. And as far as the links go, they are quotes with the name of the person that said them. I didnt realize links would be necessary, what do you have to look at?


It is when one forces a belief upon others..


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Neer, you seem fair so let me ask you this. What is so wrong with people having their own personal opinion on an issue? I mean people act like its a crime to have an opinion. And as far as the links go, they are quotes with the name of the person that said them. I didnt realize links would be necessary, what do you have to look at?


When you post an outside text document, you are no longer under the protection of personal opinion. You are participating in formal debate, which has rules. One of the rules is "provide a pedigree or genealogy for citations". This allows your interlocutors to check the soundness of the source.

Icontend that in this day of the Internet, the requirement is more necessary than ever. One can find text to support any position at all, from unremarkable to plainly nutsy. Posting something from a blog, which is an interpretation/editorialization/opinionation by its nature, is useless. Posting something from a propaganda site is worse than useless. The quality of the citation has much to do with the quality of the argument. cn

<addendum> Example. On another thread you posted text that you said was from "a secular site". But you did not provide the link. Since you have a record of not being forthcoming with the source bias of your C&Ps, i asked for the link. You ignored me repeatedly and until now. This is a clear example, to me, of two things: 
1) Concealment. You seem to know that the source won't stand scrutiny.
2) Contempt. There is no acceptable reason to ignore and then finesse a plain request. I notice that i have been treated thus, and it erodes my sympathy toward you.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> It is when one forces a belief upon others..


No one is trying to force a belief except for the anti-theists here. Im offering my opinion, which just gets slammed down and I get "dont believe in god!!" shoved down my throat.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> When you post a link, you are no longer under the protection of personal opinion. You are participating in formal debate, which has rules. One of the rules is "provide a pedigree or genealogy for citations". This allows your interlocutors to check the soundness of the source.
> 
> i contend that in this day of the Internet, the requirement is more necessary than ever. one can find text to support any position at all, from unremarkable to plainly nutsy. Posting something from a blog, which is an interpretation/editorialization/opinionation by its nature, is useless. Posting something from a propaganda site is worse than useless. The quality of the citation has much to do with the quality of the argument. cn
> 
> ...


Ok ill find a link.. but can you answer my question? What is soooo wrong about me having my own personal opinion as an American and a human being?

http://gaymarriage.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001607


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Ok ill find a link.. but can you answer my question? What is soooo wrong about me having my own personal opinion as an American and a human being?
> 
> http://gaymarriage.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001607


The question is fallacious. Did I ever say that having an opinion was wrong? You're accusing me by implication. I am fully within my rights to interpret that as hostile. cn


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Neer, you seem fair so let me ask you this. What is so wrong with people having their own personal opinion on an issue? I mean people act like its a crime to have an opinion. And as far as the links go, they are quotes with the name of the person that said them. I didnt realize links would be necessary, what do you have to look at?


I can go on a blog and voice an opinion that says something stupid like "dogs have the brain size as a bird". Toss in a few big words and voila.. Somebody like you will use it as proof. We need links to see if your quotes come from a trusted source.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 25, 2012)

Furthermore, procon is a digest site, and they gather text from everywhere. Imagine what would befall you if you used "Reader's Digest" as a citation in a college paper. 
If you want to be less sloppy (and if you want to protect yourself against the reasonable and damning charge of spin doctoring), find the source documents, with attribution. As UB has shown, the bits from procon, an ostensibly neutral site, were taken directly from sites that are not at all neutral. Don't open yourself to the charge of sneaking propaganda from a hatesite through a <cough!> back door. That won't do imo. cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> The question is fallacious. Did I ever say that having an opinion was wrong? You're accusing me by implication. I am fully within my rights to interpret that as hostile. cn


Remove any implication. Now read it.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Furthermore, procon is a digest site, and they gather text from everywhere. Imagine what would befall you if you used "Reader's Digest" as a citation in a college paper.
> If you want to be less sloppy (and if you want to protect yourself against the reasonable and damning charge of spin doctoring), find the source documents, with attribution. As UB has shown, the bits from procon, an ostensibly neutral site, were taken directly from sites that are not at all neutral. Don't open yourself to the charge of sneaking propaganda from a hatesite through a <cough!> back door. That won't do imo. cn


Yes but I quoted some very verifiable people. Senators and doctors that can easily be found. There was no back door propaganda here.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Remove any implication. Now read it.


Such disrespect. We're done. cn


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

anyone want to take bets on how long before kaendar is laughed off the site and/or starts his next in a series of sock puppets?


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Yes but I quoted some very verifiable people. Senators and doctors that can easily be found. There was no back door propaganda here.


you quoted theologists. professors at private catholic universities. and george fucking bush for fuck sake.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 25, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Such disrespect. We're done. cn


Break-ups can be so hard.. Come here neer .


(rebound!!)


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 25, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Such disrespect. We're done. cn


Disrespect? all im saying is to remove any thought that im implying anything towards you and then re think my question. Why cant everyone have their own beliefs? Its not hurting anybody


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 25, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Disrespect? all im saying is to remove any thought that im implying anything towards you and then re think my question. Why cant everyone have their own beliefs? Its not hurting anybody


your beliefs, when exercised into action, do hurt other people though. you are denying equal protection of the law to a class of people based on their sexual orientation.

that would be bad enough, but you top it off by cloaking yourself in this self righteous religious blanket and pretend that you're a tolerant person.

there are plenty of people on this board who feel the same way you do about gay marriage, but only you get mercilessly trolled. think about that.


----------



## ted bundy (Jun 27, 2012)

Goodnight everyone


----------



## Oscar Zeta Acosta (Jun 27, 2012)

Christians have the right to express an opinion on the subject, as with everyone else. If its someone's belief that it's honestly bad and will bring pain or hell to gay people then I'm sure they could understand that over people just being ignorant and homophobic.

The law governs our lives enough. Being able to make those choices and such should be down to every individual, and not pressured into some cattle grade of conformity .


----------



## Wordz (Jun 27, 2012)

Kaendar has skills.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 27, 2012)

Oscar Zeta Acosta said:


> Christians have the right to express an opinion on the subject, as with everyone else. If its someone's belief that it's honestly bad and will bring pain or hell to gay people then I'm sure they could understand that over people just being ignorant and homophobic.
> 
> The law governs our lives enough. Being able to make those choices and such should be down to every individual, and not pressured into some cattle grade of conformity .


They have that right, qualified as opinion. Lately some have begun dropping TruthBombs&#8482; presented as fact, and that degrades the enterprise to simple meme propagation, evangelism. That I find out of bounds. 
The loyal opposition, rationalists, are under the same obligation to present their views as opinion as well. cn


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 27, 2012)

Wordz said:


> Kaendar has skills.


[video=youtube;mGvdVXxFkY4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGvdVXxFkY4[/video]


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jun 27, 2012)

Oscar Zeta Acosta said:


> Christians have the right to express an opinion on the subject, as with everyone else. If its someone's belief that it's honestly bad and will bring pain or hell to gay people then I'm sure they could understand that over people just being ignorant and homophobic.
> 
> The law governs our lives enough. Being able to make those choices and such should be down to every individual, and not pressured into some cattle grade of conformity .


Looks like this needs some repeating.



MellowFarmer said:


> This is hands down the best most applicable metaphor - pass it on so we may all get along?
> 
> _Beliefs are like penises. I don't give a rat's ass if you want to worship it and talk about it to your friends just please Don't whip it out and wag it in our faces or our children's_


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 27, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Disrespect? all im saying is to remove any thought that im implying anything towards you and then re think my question. Why cant everyone have their own beliefs? Its not hurting anybody


I'm glad that you are here sticking up for gay people. I remember you telling me how much it hurt your feelings when those bullies called you a turd burglar and tried to touch down there. I'll held you and made it all better then I went deep in your ass just like I always do.


----------



## Doer (Jun 27, 2012)

How [email protected]!


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

Americans gotta "luv em" LOL


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

Dude folks that hate gays are secret closet gays .. this is well known
like the dude in the movie American Beauty LOL

do not let the hate crimes bring you down


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

padawanismyhoe said:


> hey bro you know your inbred right? inbred British Island gene pool.... "gotta luv it" no new genes have come into the British Gene Pool since people have lived there until the past 20 years and you all just beat em up and call em " Paki bastards"


Please learn to read posts correctly before you act impulsively and get yourself in a muddle, and learn to recognise humour

you're as in "you are" 
your .. as in something that belongs to you, a "possession"
your insult would of been better received if you had spelled "you're" correctly 

anyway do not hate, let it go 

peace brah


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

So now only is Kaendar a cop, he's also a peepee puffer?


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

poor little fella, throwing "your" rattle out of your pram will not solve anything


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

i suspect he is a banned user that has rejoined under a new id to vent his disgust LOL


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Who cares. He sucks and you can't trust him. I know that much.


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> Who cares. He sucks and you can't trust him. I know that much.


He sucks
you can't trust him

sounds like you know him well


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

padawanismyhoe said:


> whatever you do, just dont disagree or argue with him and youll be safe, i made the mistake of saying that all people are the same and he made sure 2 send me a PM telling me what a "stupid nigger" i am and sent me a picture of a black man hanging from a tree dead...a real picture....it was disgusting like somthing off Rotten.com or somthing. its disgusting that he gets away with it but i guess thats the nature of the world...... just be careful yall hes very hateful but hides it and only says really nasty shit in P/Ms so you cant prove it.


I'd believe this, except there's a couple people known for disagreeing with him that have been here for months. I see him fighting with them constantly. Yet, they're still here. So, pics, or it didn't happen,


----------



## Doer (Jun 28, 2012)

We only have one power in this village. We have no leaders, no posts to fill, no walls to defend. We don't lack for resourses. We stay warm and dry. Our families are safe.

We only have one problem. For that problem, in the real world, as a village we can administer punishment as a group. But, here we only have one power as a group. That is the power to ignore those that disturb the peace.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Doer said:


> We only have one power in this village. We have no leaders, no posts to fill, no walls to defend. We don't lack for resourses. We stay warm and dry. Our families are safe.
> 
> We only have one problem. For that problem, in the real world, as a village we can administer punishment as a group. But, here we only have one power as a group. That is the power to ignore those that disturb the peace.


How will you promote group identity/allegiance in the perfect model for a temporary hunting pack by otherwise obligate nomadic loners, like hungry tigers contemplating an elephant? I enjoy RIU, but truthfully, my sense of belonging to a cohesive hunting party is rather shallow. I wonder how the other "principals" feel. cn


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

Doer said:


> We only have one power in this village. We have no leaders, no posts to fill, no walls to defend. We don't lack for resourses. We stay warm and dry. Our families are safe.
> 
> We only have one problem. For that problem, in the real world, as a village we can administer punishment as a group. But, here we only have one power as a group. That is the power to ignore those that disturb the peace.


This is not a village. Nobody lives here, nobody depends on RUI for shelter nor do they depend it to keep their families in any way. It is fortunate that we do not lack resources when visiting RUI because the only resource available here is information and that is often of dubious value. 

There are leaders here and they have the only tangible power in an imaginary village and that is to lock the doors. This group power of ignorance is only valid if everybody in the group agreed to abide it. This rarely happens so all that is left for the individual is to build their own cocoon and hide from the disturbers of the peace.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> So now only is Kaendar a cop, he's also a peepee puffer?


I have no choice but to report you to a mod. I asked you to stop the libel and obviously you dont care.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> I'd believe this, except there's a couple people known for disagreeing with him that have been here for months. I see him fighting with them constantly. Yet, they're still here. So, pics, or it didn't happen,


Lmao how did I miss that post? Who is padawanismyhoe? Obvious sock puppet account.. and they didnt even spell ho right..


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I have no choice but to report you to a mod. I asked you to stop the libel and obviously you dont care.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


>


Thats real mature.. grow the fuck up. Im a snitch because I choose to handle shit with a mod like an adult rather than start cursing people out and acting a fool??


----------



## bigfattone420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Wordz said:


> They need to focus on the real problem. Muslims


 Muslims aren't any more problem than the so called christians..Not funny...
They need to focus on their own shortcommings & leave everyone else the puck alone!!!


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I have no choice but to report you to a mod. I asked you to stop the libel and obviously you dont care.


Don't be mad lil' puffer. I've got your back and the place a little lower too. Sometimes when people pick on you they are just shy and actually really like you. Everybody on this forum loves you so much, I hear so many comments about the way you conduct yourself and the influence you have here. Maybe you and I could take a little romantic trip to Venice and go swimming. Kidneystoner seems like a very nice person and probably meant no harm. Are you going to report me to the mods too? Please, I love feeling like an outlaw. I'm going to go and put on that little cowboy outfit that you love so much, you know with the rough chaps? TTFN honey


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

No one was cursing anyone. I have every right to tell people what my beliefs are. You're gonna 
make a great addition to the LAPD. Will you go run to the sargeant every time someone calls you a bad name? 
And guess what...if you DO get me suspended from the site, I'm not gonna go cry about it. 
My advice...don't be a cop because you seem like the type of guy to just curl up in a ball in fear. You can't confront anyone in your own. You'll be calling for backup for issuing a parking ticket.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> No one was cursing anyone. I have every right to tell people what my beliefs are. You're gonna
> make a great addition to the LAPD. Will you go run to the sargeant every time someone calls you a bad name?
> And guess what...if you DO get me suspended from the site, I'm not gonna go cry about it.
> My advice...don't be a cop because you seem like the type of guy to just curl up in a ball in fear. You can't confront anyone in your own. You'll be calling for backup for issuing a parking ticket.


I could tell you off.. as a matter of fact I could kick your ass. Im not trying to get banned or suspended from the site, thats the reason I talk to mods.


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I could tell you off.. *as a matter of fact I could kick your ass*. Im not trying to get banned or suspended from the site, thats the reason I talk to mods.


IRL threats. We got a Billy Badass here. Watch out.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Thats real mature.. grow the fuck up. Im a snitch because I choose to handle shit with a mod like an adult rather than start cursing people out and acting a fool??


You COULD choose to handle shit by ignoring it, hence taking back the 'power'.


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

get you suspended from the site lmao ... children play nicely now


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

jessy koons said:


> TTFN honey



Lol at ta ta for now


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Thats real mature.. grow the fuck up. Im a snitch because I choose to handle shit with a mod like an adult rather than start cursing people out and acting a fool??


??????????????Why so angry lover? You are an adult, only in a tiny, underdeveloped body that's all. Maybe somebody mistook you for a marionette. I think that resorting to ad hominem attacks are really mean and you should report them to daddy ASAP. I was called a fucking asshole and a dumbshit earlier today and I don't know why. They did a driveby insult and then left me in tears for most of the morning. I should report them to daddy but I think they have some much deeper feelings of insecurity. Oh well Kisses


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> as a matter of fact I could kick your ass.


Yeah? Well, My dad can beat up your dad. Fuckin really? You don't even know me tough guy. 
Maybe I should report you to the mods for threatening to kick my ass.


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

i know what could defuse this heated situation and calm the children down, no one needs to be suspended LOL

mr turtle !


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> You COULD choose to handle shit by ignoring it, hence taking back the 'power'.


I would have no problem ignoring him.. but the signature has got to go.


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I would have no problem ignoring him.. but the signature has got to go.


What's wrong with his sig?


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I would have no problem ignoring him.. but the signature has got to go.


Haha...why you crying? You did all this to yourself.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

FYI, that sig constitutes harassment.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I would have no problem ignoring him.. but the signature has got to go.


FIXED for ya. That's the best I can do. All I did was type what you made perfectly clear in the other thread


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> FIXED for ya. That's the best I can do. All I did was type what you made perfectly clear in the other thread


Still harassment. Find the quote where he indicates this, and use that. Can't be harassed by your own words.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

No problem...I'm on it.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> FYI, that sig constitutes harassment.


Now that is some good logic.


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 28, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> FYI, that sig constitutes harassment.


That makes me a sad panda.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> Still harassment. Find the quote where he indicates this, and use that. Can't be harassed by your own words.


I was about to type this very thing when I pressed the refresh button and WHAM! Beat me to it by 30 seconds.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> Still harassment. Find the quote where he indicates this, and use that. Can't be harassed by your own words.


That didn't work for UncleBuck. He quoted a few choice Kaendarities, and was directed to remove them. cn


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> That didn't work for UncleBuck. He quoted a few choice Kaendarities, and was directed to remove them. cn


Lol look at UncleBuck's sig now.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> That didn't work for UncleBuck. He quoted a few choice Kaendarities, and was directed to remove them. cn


Unless the original quotes were also removed, this is something I will take up with the powers that be, not that I have any influence other than my voice.


EDIT: This even counts if Kaendar himself removes the original text.


----------



## bigfattone420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Well the question here isnt really whether its right or wrong, thats up to the individual. The question is how did they get that way.


 Why would that even be a question? It just is ..Just like why are you the way you are...Why can't they just be People..Why they or their life must be psychoanalyze ? Pada is correct you need to go to some classes....jeez......


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I could tell you off.. as a matter of fact I could kick your ass. Im not trying to get banned or suspended from the site, thats the reason I talk to mods.


Oh lil' puffer don't get in an uproar. You can barely keep me out of your pants so don't get to thinking that you could actually man-handle someone, you silly. I only let you hold me down 'cause it makes my branch grow sooooo much bigger. Have you had the sutures removed yet, I can't wait, I'll be more gentle next time.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Done. Nothing was changed, that's word for word.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> Done. Nothing was changed, that's word for word.


If you encounter problems please inform me about it. I find this an interesting policy question. I will at least seek and relay the explanation.

And @ rest of the thread, lets remember that trash talk needs to be kept to PM's, or not at all. I think we can all understand the difference between criticism and things we would say on the playground.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

I think trouble is headed this way  ...I keep getting "likes" on this thread getting closer to the most recent posts...


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 28, 2012)

i tried to be nice and remove from my sig the quotes from kaendar where he talks about how easy it is to fuck a man, and how i am just attacking him because he is gay, leaving only my own words "kaendar is heterosexual". apparently, that was too controversial and the site admin removed it, clearly indicating that kaendar is homosexual and is bothered by false accusations like the one i made.

i like my new sig though and hope i can keep it.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> Done. Nothing was changed, that's word for word.


Thats more acceptable.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> I think trouble is headed this way  ...I keep getting "likes" on this thread getting closer to the most recent posts...





UncleBuck said:


> i tried to be nice and remove from my sig the quotes from kaendar where he talks about how easy it is to fuck a man, and how i am just attacking him because he is gay, leaving only my own words "kaendar is heterosexual". apparently, that was too controversial and the site admin removed it, clearly indicating that kaendar is homosexual and is bothered by false accusations like the one i made.
> 
> i like my new sig though and hope i can keep it.


Nailed It!


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> Nailed It!


I do hope he used the cautionary latex. cn


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Thats more acceptable.


why did you snitch on me for my sig where i tell people you're heterosexual? 

and why were you bothered by your own quote about how easy it is to fuck a man? i mean, you said it. were you harassing yourself?


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Thats more acceptable.


Translation...

"thanks for using lube, that time"


And by that, I solely mean I don't believe in the oppression of any kitties on this planet...








AND...By that, I mean thanks for using lube that time.....




*Translation...Acceptable, thanks for changing your sig.*


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Thats more acceptable.


I've missed you baby snuggs, These boys are playing mean with your feelings. I've made an appointment for us with a councilor that will help us both work through our self loathing tendencies. Everyone loves you and wants you to get better real soon. I'm going to upload a giant picture of my penis for you to enjoy if I can only figure out how work this damn thing. Wish me luck.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

UncleBuck said:


> why did you snitch on me for my sig where i tell people you're heterosexual?
> 
> and why were you bothered by your own quote about how easy it is to fuck a man? i mean, you said it. were you harassing yourself?


Yeah I don't get why he gets to say those things but doesn't like people to read them. Throws me off.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

jessy koons said:


> I've missed you baby snuggs, These boys are playing mean with your feelings. I've made an appointment for us with a councilor that will help us both work through our self loathing tendencies. Everyone loves you and wants you to get better real soon. I'm going to upload a giant picture of my penis for you to enjoy if I can only figure out how work this damn thing. Wish me luck.


Is Sonoma County a hint?


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

UncleBuck said:


> i tried to be nice and remove from my sig the quotes from kaendar where he talks about how easy it is to fuck a man, and how i am just attacking him because he is gay, leaving only my own words "kaendar is heterosexual". apparently, that was too controversial and the site admin removed it, clearly indicating that kaend is homosexual and is bothered by false accusations like the one i made.
> 
> i like my new sig though and hope i can keep it.


Hey cool, we have matching sigs!


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

I'm pursuing a future career in Kalender. 


Would this be an acceptable signature for everyone?


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> Is Sonoma County a hint?


Please explain.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

jessy koons said:


> Please explain.


Nevermind..lol....








I'm crazy.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

UncleBuck said:


> i tried to be nice and remove from my sig the quotes from kaendar where he talks about how easy it is to fuck a man, and how i am just attacking him because he is gay, leaving only my own words "kaendar is heterosexual". apparently, that was too controversial and the site admin removed it, clearly indicating that kaendar is homosexual and is bothered by false accusations like the one i made.
> 
> i like my new sig though and hope i can keep it.


So it was your words that were removed, and not a quote?

Any accusations made in a sig towards another user is harassment. The truth behind the accusation is irrelevant. However simply highlighting another's words is totally different. It still may be objectionable if the quote was misrepresented or posted simply for the sake of alarmism.

I am also missing the point as to why wanting to be a policeman is a bad thing. It scares me that such a bigot will ever gain any kind of authority, especially with the discretion we give police, but that point will be lost on anyone seeing the quote who wasn't already familiar with it. 

But anyway since Kaendar has no problem with the sig you will probably be able to keep it.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

jessy koons said:


> I'm pursuing a future career in Kalender.
> 
> 
> Would this be an acceptable signature for everyone?


Seems perfectly acceptable to me. Just make sure you spell his name right.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> Seems perfectly acceptable to me. Just make sure you spell his name* wrong*.



Would that work?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> I am also missing the point as to why wanting to be a policeman is a bad thing.


Me too. Im willing to put my life on the line for complete strangers and im labeled as the bad guy. Kids need to have more respect. You might call cops pigs but when assholes are breaking in your back door who do you call??


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Stop calling us kids. You don't know any of us. In fact I've had the same career for 17 years. 
YOU are the one trying to start a new career.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Me too. Im willing to put my life on the line for complete strangers and im labeled as the bad guy. Kids need to have more respect. You might call cops pigs but when assholes are breaking in your back door who do you call??


The clean up crew, cause I need a hacksaw, heavy duty garbage bags and a van to transport the pieces...


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Me too. Im willing to put my life on the line for complete strangers and im labeled as the bad guy. Kids need to have more respect. You might call cops pigs but when assholes are breaking in your back door who do you call??


I've met a LOT of cops, sometimes in friendly circumstances, and sometimes in not so friendly circumstances. My cousin even worked his way up to homocide detective. IMO, a very SMALL percentage actually want to help people, but 100% of them say that is why they joined the force. It's been my experience that most cops are control freaks, and just like weilding power over someone else. As if they were legally raping society by "Upholding the Law"


----------



## tyler.durden (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Me too. Im willing to put my life on the line for complete strangers and im labeled as the bad guy. Kids need to have more respect. You might call cops pigs but when assholes are breaking in your back door who do you call??


Certainly not the cops! Growers really don't get to call on LEO when something goes wrong, prohibition is an awful thing...


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> You might call cops pigs but when assholes are breaking in your back door who do you call??


Bad example. You think anyone on here would call the cops and have them come to there house, and invite them in? You REALLY are stupid huh?
I can see it now. "Yeah the crooks broke this window over here and came in through it. No, not that one. It's the one in my grow room."


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> I've met a LOT of cops, sometimes in friendly circumstances, and sometimes in not so friendly circumstances. My cousin even worked his way up to homocide detective. IMO, a very SMALL percentage actually want to help people, but 100% of them say that is why they joined the force. It's been my experience that most cops are control freaks, and just like weilding power over someone else. As if they were legally raping society by "Upholding the Law"


Look man, ive lived my whole life on the other side of the law. I used to gang bang, walk around looking for trouble, get into fights at school, run away from home, etc. I was always harassed by the police. Some were actually nice, and wanted to help, but alot of them are fuckin dicks that you just wanna stab in the throat. I live in South Central LA. One of the most well known ghettos in America. I have seen plenty of ppl beaten and harassed by the police.. hell, I even have a few cell phone videos. But the shit that pisses me off is that too many young kids are getting arrested and put in the system for petty shit, while the fat fucks calling the shots get away with it. I want to be an LAPD officer so that at least every call I respond to, the people there will have an equal chance at justice that other asshole cops probably wont give.


----------



## Red1966 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> When ignorant pastors start saying shit like lets kill the fags and faggots will burn in hell, they arent doing much for their cause. Christians are supposed to be loving, kind, and caring. Even IF someone is commiting a sin, they are still human beings and deserve their respect. Killing someone is never the answer.. even a murderer will get what he has coming, but thats not up to us to judge one another.


 You'll hate Iran.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

tyler.durden said:


> Certainly not the cops! Growers really don't get to call on LEO when something goes wrong, prohibition is an awful thing...


Here in LA the police get calls all the time for people breaking in and trying to steal weed or weed plants. Its legal here.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> Bad example. You think anyone on here would call the cops and have them come to there house, and invite them in? You REALLY are stupid huh?
> I can see it now. "Yeah the crooks broke this window over here and came in through it. No, not that one. It's the one in my grow room."


I told you before, its not my fault you dont live in a legal state. Here, the cops have to protect the growers from potential thieves and rippers. There are a few motorcycle cops that are on dispensary detail..


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Don't get me wrong, cops serve a purpose...Just not when they're harassing you for smelling like "dope"...Besides, don't these cops know that dope almost always means heroin or speed? Who calls weed "dope" anymore...

My girl and I got pulled over a few months ago...Cops were pulling their usual "I'm a tough guy, you should incriminate yourself" act, and we said we only smoked pot. So the cop said "A couple of weedheads, eh?" Really dude? Weedheads? Niiiiice. He then proceeded to ask me what that "baggy" was in my glove box...I said it's a spoon from a fast food place...He said "for cooking drugs?" And I pulled out the PLASTIC spoon wrapped in it's sanitary plastic wrapper and said "Yup"...He felt kinda stupid after that, cause his partner chuckled.


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Me too. Im willing to put my life on the line for complete strangers and im labeled as the bad guy. Kids need to have more respect. You might call cops pigs but when assholes are breaking in your back door who do you call??


Don't do it, Honey. That's crazy talk. You know that the injury to your leg will only let you walk in circles and you can't even see the Tiramisu on the plant in front of you. How are you going to tell if someone near you is a stranger or just a lamp post? Huh? Who are you going to call when I'm breaking in your back door? Nobody I hope...teeheehee


----------



## tyler.durden (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Here in LA the police get calls all the time for people breaking in and trying to steal weed or weed plants. Its legal here.


Yes, that's true if you have the requisite paperwork. Can't do that here in Chicago...


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Look man, ive lived my whole life on the other side of the law. I used to gang bang, walk around looking for trouble, get into fights at school, run away from home, etc. I was always harassed by the police. Some were actually nice, and wanted to help, but alot of them are fuckin dicks that you just wanna stab in the throat. I live in South Central LA. One of the most well known ghettos in America. I have seen plenty of ppl beaten and harassed by the police.. hell, I even have a few cell phone videos. But the shit that pisses me off is that too many young kids are getting arrested and put in the system for petty shit, while the fat fucks calling the shots get away with it. I want to be an LAPD officer so that at least every call I respond to, the people there will have an equal chance at justice that other asshole cops probably wont give.


Wake up. You'll be just like everyother one of them within your first year. If not, you will be singled out far worse than in this little thread. Then who ya gonna go cry too?


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Look man, ive lived my whole life on the other side of the law. I used to gang bang, walk around looking for trouble, get into fights at school, run away from home, etc. I was always harassed by the police. Some were actually nice, and wanted to help, but alot of them are fuckin dicks that you just wanna stab in the throat. I live in South Central LA. One of the most well known ghettos in America. I have seen plenty of ppl beaten and harassed by the police.. hell, I even have a few cell phone videos. But the shit that pisses me off is that too many young kids are getting arrested and put in the system for petty shit, while the fat fucks calling the shots get away with it. I want to be an LAPD officer so that at least every call I respond to, the people there will have an equal chance at justice that other asshole cops probably wont give.


I'm so very proud of you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

tyler.durden said:


> Yes, that's true if you have the requisite paperwork. Can't do that here in Chicago...


Well I dont live in Chicago so thats not a problem. Do you know how many police reports are filed here for stolen weed?


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

How old are you Kaendar...19, right?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> How old are you Kaendar...19, right?


No, im 20.


----------



## tyler.durden (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Well I dont live in Chicago so thats not a problem. Do you know how many police reports are filed here for stolen weed?


It's not a problem for _you_, it doesn't mean it's not a problem. It is a problem for folks in non-med States...


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Me too. Im willing to put my life on the line for complete strangers and im labeled as the bad guy. Kids need to have more respect. You might call cops pigs but when assholes are breaking in your back door who do you call??


Honestly, if someone kicks my back door in, police being called is secondary. You won't be there for minutes, at best, when the initiative is lost in seconds. If anything, the best service you could do is tell people to become more self-reliant.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Can't even drink legally, and you've gotten it all figured out, eh? You claim to have "grown up so fast" cause you were smart enough to spray your cum in some girl you're not married to, and you live in South Central. Good for you?! I think the more you grow up, the more you'll realize that you still have a lot more to learn about yourself, and life.


----------



## tyler.durden (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Honestly, if someone kicks my back door in, police being called is secondary. You won't be there for minutes, at best, when the initiative is lost in seconds. If anything, the best service you could do is tell people to become more self-reliant.


This helps quickly


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

tyler.durden said:


> This helps quickly


Agreed, but for purposes of a primary weapon for home defense, with little over-penetration concern; the 12-gauge wins every time. You'll never need to fire it. The sound of a shotgun being pumped in a quiet house will clear just about anything out. haha


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Agreed, but for purposes of a primary weapon for home defense, with little over-penetration concern; the 12-gauge wins every time. You'll never need to fire it. The sound of a shotgun being pumped in a quiet house will clear just about anything out. haha


Not to mention, there is less chance of a bullet going through a window or thin wall, and into your 12 y/o neighbors brain while they play in their front yard.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> Not to mention, there is less chance of a bullet going through a window or thin wall, and into your 12 y/o neighbors brain while they play in their front yard.


Birdshot, always a good decision.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> Not to mention, there is less chance of a bullet going through a window or thin wall, and into your 12 y/o neighbors brain while they play in their front yard.


Two minor objections.
1) My shotgun doesn't pump. The sound of a double being closed isn't much for intimidating.
2) The slug penetrates pretty well. 
cn


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Two minor objections.
> 1) My shotgun doesn't pump. The sound of a double being closed isn't much for intimidating.
> 2) The slug penetrates pretty well.
> cn


Slugs are collateral damage waiting to happen, in my opinion. Though if someone made some frangible slugs... I would totally use those in the house.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Two minor objections.
> 1) My shotgun doesn't pump. The sound of a double being closed isn't much for intimidating.
> 2) The slug penetrates pretty well.
> cn


I think a shotgun for home defense should contain 2 non-lethal rounds before the third round being a lethal...Dayum, 'neer, what do you need slugs for? Can't you just use your teeth and claws?


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Though, I have always wanted to get $1.80 in dimes, just on the off chance I get a young guns moment. 

[video=youtube;4e-M2eekzus]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e-M2eekzus[/video]


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> I think a shotgun for home defense should contain 2 non-lethal rounds before the third round being a lethal...Dayum, 'neer, what do you need slugs for? Can't you just use your teeth and claws?


lol. It's a range thing. And I can't load a third round into a boxlock double. cn


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> No, im 20.


Lol you are 20 and calling us kids? You need to stop typing. You get dumber Everytime. If you're 20, how young do you think we are since you are calling us kids. It makes since now that you are threatening to beat me up. You're 20 years old. Lol
What about when you are telling me to respect my elders? Lol, YOU ARE 29 YEARS OLD DUDE. You are only an elder to a high school kid. 
Just get lost. Please? I promise no one will miss you.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Though, I have always wanted to get $1.80 in dimes, just on the off chance I get a young guns moment.
> 
> [video=youtube;4e-M2eekzus]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e-M2eekzus[/video]


Isn't that the famous Doc Holliday load? Eight silver dimes in a stack? JUST the thing for the Zombie Apocalypse with a side of vampires. cn


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> lol. It's a range thing. And I can't load a third round into a boxlock double. cn


After a non-lethal round hits 'em, you'll have time to casually stroll to your gun safe, or wherever you keep your ammo, and take your time loading up some lethal rounds...


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 28, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> Lol you are 20 and calling us kids? You need to stop typing. You get dumber Everytime. If you're 20, how young do you think we are since you are calling us kids. It makes since now that you are threatening to beat me up. You're 20 years old. Lol
> What about when you are telling me to respect my elders? Lol, YOU ARE 29 YEARS OLD DUDE. You are only an elder to a high school kid.
> Just get lost. Please? I promise no one will miss you.


Hey man get off kalenders ass. I miss him already. Where is that little receptacle.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> Isn't that the famous Doc Holliday load? Eight silver dimes in a stack? JUST the thing for the Zombie Apocalypse with a side of vampires. cn


Back then, it would have been silver dimes. Nowadays, I'm better off rolling those up for later.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Bad move on telling people your age kaendar. People think it actually means something.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> lol. It's a range thing. And I can't load a third round into a boxlock double. cn


Get into cowboy shooting for a while, you will become a god at reloading that street howitzer.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

"I've got two guns. One for the each of ya"


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

It's not that age means something specifically. However he was telling people to respect their elders (referring to himself) and calling everyone kids. really? The stitches in his mom's vajayjay have barely had time to heal


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> Bad move on telling people your age kaendar. People think it actually means something.


As much as it pains me to say it, there is a certain perspective of the world that can only be gained with time and experience; mos of it seems to be time. I hate Matt Damon, but Good Will Hunting comes to mind. The part where Robin Williams' character goes on about how Matt's character could tell him all about the Mona Lisa, but he was sure Matt couldn't tell him about the experience of seeing it in person.


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> "I've got two guns. One for the each of ya"


I prefer knives... I have some training and what I would consider an alright understanding of the practical application of knives in a "Self Defense" situation...

Guns make me feel too powerful...


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> As much as it pains me to say it, there is a certain perspective of the world that can only be gained with time and experience; mos of it seems to be time. I hate Matt Damon, but Good Will Hunting comes to mind. The part where Robin Williams' character goes on about how Matt's character could tell him all about the Mona Lisa, but he was sure Matt couldn't tell him about the experience of seeing it in person.


Possibly a more bitter perspective. But that's not the point. I'm saying that if kaendar makes a good point, a few members will now just say he doesn't know any better due to his age. It happens to me all the time.. Even by that hypocrite kaendar.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> Possibly a more bitter perspective. But that's not the point. I'm saying that if kaendar makes a good point, a few members will now just say he doesn't know any better due to his age. It happens to me all the time.. Even by that hypocrite kaendar.


you might have had a point there if you weren't such a young'un.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> It happens to me all the time.. Even by that hypocrite kaendar.



That kid is full of win


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Shannon Alexander said:


> I prefer knives... I have some training and what I would consider an alright understanding of the practical application of knives in a "Self Defense" situation...
> 
> Guns make me feel too powerful...


There's an old saying, "Never bring a knife to a gunfight.", and it has persisted for a reason. I also disagree on the fundamental grounds that a knife puts you in arm's reach of an opponent. A pistol is for when your long gun goes dry, and a knife is a last resort.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> Possibly a more bitter perspective. But that's not the point. I'm saying that if kaendar makes a good point, a few members will now just say he doesn't know any better due to his age. It happens to me all the time.. Even by that hypocrite kaendar.


I disagree on the "more bitter" part, but that may just be my luck. People that automatically dismiss an idea because the presenter of said idea is "too young" , may be older, but are not wise. Humility is a big part of wisdom, in my opinion. To be fair though, kaendar made age the issue first.


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> Bad move on telling people your age kaendar. People think it actually means something.


well it kind of does, but i get your point, it's quite hard for young folk today, i see them wanting 
to get served alcohol and cigarettes in the store, and the checkout staff must insist on them presenting ID to prove their age
these days anyone that looks under 25 is getting asked for ID lol 
this does not help the tough image of said young men trying to buy booze with their lady friends .. 
i do pity them, at that moment they must feel like a little boy trying on daddies shoes wanting to grow up as fast as possible


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> Possibly a more bitter perspective. But that's not the point. I'm saying that if kaendar makes a good point, a few members will now just say he doesn't know any better due to his age. It happens to me all the time.. Even by that hypocrite kaendar.


I disagree on the "more bitter" part, but that may just be my luck. People that automatically dismiss an idea because the presenter of said idea is "too young" , may be older, but are not wise. Humility is a big part of wisdom, in my opinion. To be fair though, kaendar made age an issue first.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> I disagree on the "more bitter" part, but that may just be my luck. People that automatically dismiss an idea because the presenter of said idea is "too young" , may be older, but are not wise. Humility is a big part of wisdom, in my opinion. To be fair though, kaendar made age the issue first.


The way you worded it made me think that you meant wisdom comes with time. That's not true IMO. I know some real dumbasses that are much older than me. I think wisdom comes with logic and books. I don't believe a measurement gives you wisdom. 

But I was wrong. You clearly meant perspective (duh). In that case, I do agree. Perspectives change with age. 

I agree with the humility part. And how kaendar brought up the age issue first. 

I'm confusing myself by not making sense.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

skunkd0c said:


> well it kind of does, but i get your point, it's quite hard for young folk today, i see them wanting
> to get served alcohol and cigarettes in the store, and the checkout staff must insist on them presenting ID to prove their age
> these days anyone that looks under 25 is getting asked for ID lol
> this does not help the tough image of said young men trying to buy booze with their lady friends ..
> i do pity them, at that moment they must feel like a little boy trying on daddies shoes wanting to grow up as fast as possible


Good point. Age does matter when it comes to physical influences. Alcohol and cigs are very bad and should not be taken at a young age. Sex can lead to a baby and many young people aren't prepared for that. Simple things like death can be too much for a younger person. 

I stand corrected.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> The way you worded it made me think that you meant wisdom comes with time. That's not true IMO. I know some real dumbasses that are much older than me. I think wisdom comes with logic and books. I don't believe a measurement gives you wisdom.
> 
> But I was wrong. You clearly meant perspective (duh). In that case, I do agree. Perspectives change with age.
> 
> ...


To me, books bring knowledge. Wisdom can only truly come with a certain temperament, and a degree of "on the job training", if you will. Knowledge is your toolbox, wisdom is knowing which tool to use in order to best accomplish the job.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> To me, books bring knowledge. Wisdom can only truly come with a certain temperament, and a degree of "on the job training", if you will. Knowledge is your toolbox, wisdom is knowing which tool to use in order to best accomplish the job.


A 12 year old that helps his/her mother/father garden will gain much more wisdom on that subject than a 30 year old man/woman who has never helped in a garden. Wisdom comes with experiences not with age IMO. A younger person (like kaendar) may have far more experiences than an older person thus gaining much more wisdom much quicker. 

"knowledge is your toolbox, wisdom is knowing which tool to use.." I like that. Let me see if I can rep you.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> I disagree on the "more bitter" part, but that may just be my luck. People that automatically dismiss an idea because the presenter of said idea is "too young" , may be older, but are not wise. Humility is a big part of wisdom, in my opinion. To be fair though, kaendar made age an issue first.


There is something that clicks when you find out these particulars are teen-ish. One of the things that is so unsettling about hate rhetoric and blatant prejudice is the lack of understanding how a person could feel this way. So although we can't reject or excuse an opinion based purely on age, we can gain perspective. After all, we do not marvel over the ease in which children embrace Santa or imaginary friends. We do not call a bigot the 12y/o who thinks girls are icky. The older-teen mind an be in an odd place, developed enough to take on the world, but without the equipment to do it, and only the reference of childhood to draw from. This of course is no excuse for all the behavior that follows, the contempt for guidance, The defense of bad ideas, ect but like I said, it does offer perspective.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

But more experiences come with more age.. In that sense, I'm wrong again. 

My whole point is that young people have gone through many experiences too. More than you might think. And through those experiences, they have gained wisdom. With this wisdom, they can make accurate points and decisions that should not be belittled due to their age. 

Of course none of you guys were doing that (except for kaendar.. ironically). I was just thinking.


----------



## Doer (Jun 28, 2012)

And if we only had some age and experience clues in forum we could sort out better these attitudes.

If I'm discussing with 15 year olds pretenting to be 40, it is not the same as discussing with 40 year olds pretending to be 15.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

On this issue of guns, 12 guages are good but not really my style, I prefer a 10 guage semi auto.. I own a 12 guage but never even take it out of the closet. My weapon of choice happens to be my M92 Beretta. Something good if your into CC would be a Ruger .380 LCP... right now I also have a .22LR 1911 on layaway until January. Guns are the business. On the deal with the age, I assumed you must be a little kid because little kids are the only ones dumb enuf to go around calling all cops pigs and shit.

edit: Most 20 year olds are still playing video games in mommy and daddies basement. I live independently, have a career and can afford yearly vacations.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> On this issue of guns, 12 guages are good but not really my style, I prefer a 10 guage semi auto.. I own a 12 guage but never even take it out of the closet. My weapon of choice happens to be my M92 Beretta. Something good if your into CC would be a Ruger .380 LCP... right now I also have a .22LR 1911 on layaway until January. Guns are the business. On the deal with the age, I assumed you must be a little kid because little kids are the only ones dumb enuf to go around calling all cops pigs and shit.


Not all cops are pigs. Just the ones I've had to deal with.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> A 12 year old that helps his/her mother/father garden will gain much more wisdom on that subject than a 30 year old man/woman who has never helped in a garden. Wisdom comes with experiences not with age IMO. A younger person (like kaendar) may have far more experiences than an older person thus gaining much more wisdom much quicker.
> 
> "knowledge is your toolbox, wisdom is knowing which tool to use.." I like that. Let me see if I can rep you.


Yet, what happens when that lady's advice doesn't cover an issue you encounter? What happens if she was doing it wrong? What if someone gives you advice counter to your mentor's? That's where wisdom and knowledge diverge to me.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Yeah, i dunno who you think called cops pigs, sure as hell wasn't me.
back on topic


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> On this issue of guns, 12 guages are good but not really my style, I prefer a 10 guage semi auto.. I own a 12 guage but never even take it out of the closet. My weapon of choice happens to be my M92 Beretta. Something good if your into CC would be a Ruger .380 LCP... right now I also have a .22LR 1911 on layaway until January. Guns are the business. On the deal with the age, I assumed you must be a little kid because little kids are the only ones dumb enuf to go around calling all cops pigs and shit.
> 
> edit: Most 20 year olds are still playing video games in mommy and daddies basement. I live independently, have a career and can afford yearly vacations.


Why get a full on .22LR 1911? I'd get a real, as John Moses Browning intended it, 1911; then get a drop-in conversion.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Yes, back on topic, people should stop attacking homosexuals.


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> But more experiences come with more age.. In that sense, I'm wrong again.
> 
> My whole point is that young people have gone through many experiences too. More than you might think. And through those experiences, they have gained wisdom. With this wisdom, they can make accurate points and decisions that should not be belittled due to their age.
> 
> Of course none of you guys were doing that (except for kaendar.. ironically). I was just thinking.


without sounding too patronizing, to the younger fellows here

"i know this, i know how you think you are "smart" because i was your age once, but you have not been my age yet!"

it's hard to be told you "do not know anything" because you are young, 

do you honestly think i was not told the same thing when i was your age ?

adults are often patronizing to the younger generation, its not nice, but that is life sorry to say it
while you can accumulate a huge amount of knowledge and information at a young age 
you lack many of the experiences of life .. that only come with time and age, success and failure that will shape you
and your views in life .. people do change to some extent with time
you have more to learn, about yourself, and the world than you might imagine at the young age you are now

peace


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Why get a full on .22LR 1911? I'd get a real, as John Moses Browning intended it, 1911; then get a drop-in conversion.


.45 ammo is too big and too expensive. This is gonna be my fun gun. You can boxes of 100 .22lr for like 20 bucks


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

skunkd0c said:


> without sounding too patronizing, to the younger fellows here
> 
> "i know this, i know how you think you are "smart" because i was your age once, but you have not been my age yet!"
> 
> ...


I never said I was smart nor did I say I'm well experienced. I said that wisdom doesn't come with age. I still stand by that. It comes with experiences. 

I just think it's funny when older people say our views are wrong because of our age. 


But yes, peace dude.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Yet, what happens when that lady's advice doesn't cover an issue you encounter? What happens if she was doing it wrong? What if someone gives you advice counter to your mentor's? That's where wisdom and knowledge diverge to me.


What lady?

Doing what wrong? 

Then I'd take the advice for what it is. I'd think the advice through and decide if it's right or wrong.

I'm confused.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> Yes, back on topic, christians should stop attacking homosexuals.


I wonder what the point of this thread was. I mean we all know christians should stop attacking gays. Maybe the point of the thread was to make a plan to stop that attacks?


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> I wonder what the point of this thread was. I mean we all know christians should stop attacking gays. Maybe the point of the thread was to make a plan to stop that attacks?


The point of this thread was so that Christians could discuss other ways of going about business without attacking homosexuals and treating them like some forbidden demons..


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> What lady?
> 
> Doing what wrong?
> 
> ...


I was referring to your garden example. I picked one gender, because I hate the tedium of the constant "his/her" thing.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> The point of this thread was so that Christians could discuss other ways of going about business without attacking homosexuals and treating them like some forbidden demons..


How is declaring it some sort of mental deficiency going to do that? It just makes them all the easier to ignore.


----------



## Metasynth (Jun 28, 2012)

Disorder, not deficiency...Get your bigotry straight...


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Metasynth said:


> Disorder, not deficiency...Get your bigotry straight...


Once again, its not bigotry to say someone has a disorder. More than half of everybody has some kind of disorder, im sure they dont take it offensive to point that out. I have ADD, im not gonna call someone a bigot because they point that out.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> The way you worded it made me think that you meant wisdom comes with time. That's not true IMO. I know some real dumbasses that are much older than me. I think wisdom comes with logic and books. I don't believe a measurement gives you wisdom.
> 
> But I was wrong. You clearly meant perspective (duh). In that case, I do agree. Perspectives change with age.
> 
> ...


I would say knowledge comes with/from logic and books. Wisdom requires the scars that only experience can provide. My opinion. cn

<edit> but this was covered already.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> How is declaring it some sort of mental deficiency going to do that? It just makes them all the easier to ignore.


Youre wrong about this. If it was found that gays had a disorder, religions would be more forgiving because that would prove that its not entirely a conscious choice that is made. If being gay was proven to be a disorder, then gays would be alot more accepted by anybody.


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

Being gay isnt a disorder.. Its a choice/there born like that which people should be able to freely make.. Why do you care if that guy Justins gay?.. Your not the one getting fucked in the ass..


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> Being gay isnt a disorder.. Its a choice/there born like that which people should be able to freely make.. Why do you care if that guy Justins gay?.. Your not the one getting fucked in the ass..


What support do you have for your claim that being gay is a choice? cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> What support do you have for your claim that being gay is a choice? cn


I second this question. Im only proposing a theory, iCanadianGrower has presented an opinion as fact..


----------



## Scrotie Mcboogerballs (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> Being gay isnt a disorder.. Its a choice/there born like that which people should be able to freely make.. Why do you care if that guy Justins gay?.. Your not the one getting fucked in the ass..


It's not a choice. I have a friend that is gay. He put himself in a coma from a snowmobiling accident one time. Woke up, didn't remember a fucking thing from before the accident. You want to know what his sexual preference still was? Yup, men.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> The point of this thread was so that Christians could discuss other ways of going about business without attacking homosexuals and treating them like some forbidden demons..


But none of the christians here do that.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> I would say knowledge comes with/from logic and books. Wisdom requires the scars that only experience can provide. My opinion. cn
> 
> <edit> but this was covered already.


I agree.. Wisdom comes with experience.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Scrotie Mcboogerballs said:


> It's not a choice. I have a friend that is gay. He put himself in a coma from a snowmobiling accident one time. Woke up, didn't remember a fucking thing from before the accident. You want to know what his sexual preference still was? Yup, men.


There's no proof that shows being gay isn't a choice. Vice versa too.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Scrotie Mcboogerballs said:


> It's not a choice. I have a friend that is gay. He put himself in a coma from a snowmobiling accident one time. Woke up, didn't remember a fucking thing from before the accident. You want to know what his sexual preference still was? Yup, men.


Theres no proof to support that claim.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> But none of the christians here do that.


You obviously havent been getting the same PMs I have.


----------



## skunkd0c (Jun 28, 2012)

lol Christians are the new Muslims 
beware of all terrorists

we expelled most of the crazy christian fundamentalists from our country around 200 years ago
and they formed america LOL


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Once again, its not bigotry to say someone has a disorder. More than half of everybody has some kind of disorder, im sure they dont take it offensive to point that out. I have ADD, im not gonna call someone a bigot because they point that out.


"Ignorant of the implications" would be a better description of your position.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Theres no proof to support that claim.


Annnnnddddd... an equivalent amount of OBJECTIVE information to support yours? Still waiting....


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

It says choice/born like that.. may bad if i offended you.. Alls that i was saying was that its not a disorder.. A disorder eans there is something wrong with you.. Just because your gay doesnt mean that there is something wrong with you.. Otherwise being straight would be a disorder.. I apologize for the way i cam off previously


----------



## Scrotie Mcboogerballs (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Theres no proof to support that claim.


Your right. I should get him to make a youtube video just for you Kaender. . . . ? Jesus . . .


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> It says choice/born like that.. may bad if i offended you.. Alls that i was saying was that its not a disorder.. A disorder eans there is something wrong with you.. Just because your gay doesnt mean that there is something wrong with you.. Otherwise being straight would be a disorder.. I apologize for the way i cam off previously


I have ADD.. your saying theres something wrong with me? Like I said, alot of people have disorders and dont realize it.. people have misconceptions about how severe a disorder has to be..


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Scrotie Mcboogerballs said:


> Your right. I should get him to make a youtube video just for you Kaender. . . . ? Jesus . . .


You cant present opinion as fact around here unless you can prove its a fact. I learned the hard way and I guess you will too.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> It says choice/born like that.. may bad if i offended you.. Alls that i was saying was that its not a disorder.. A disorder eans there is something wrong with you.. Just because your gay doesnt mean that there is something wrong with you.. Otherwise being straight would be a disorder.. I apologize for the way i cam off previously


You simply misspoke. I think you meant to say 'preference' rather than choice. Just as some people have a preference for vanilla ice cream over chocolate, and it's their right to choose, or exercise their preference.


----------



## Scrotie Mcboogerballs (Jun 28, 2012)

You're a homosexual with ADD that wants to peruse a career in aw enforcement? I can't wait for those headlines in a couple of years. Theres nothing wrong with it. It's just soooooo funny. lmao


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

Yes ADD is a disorder.. and there is something wrong with you.. Theres no madication to help a gay person not be gay.. Being gay is not a disorder.. Otherwise they would have a pill for it


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

Yes thank you eisenberg preference, would have been a better choice of words


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> It says choice/born like that.. may bad if i offended you.. Alls that i was saying was that its not a disorder.. A disorder eans there is something wrong with you.. Just because your gay doesnt mean that there is something wrong with you.. Otherwise being straight would be a disorder.. I apologize for the way i cam off previously


I don't agree with the Kaendars aforementioned theory on Homosexuality being a disorder and Neither do psychiatrists...

But being straight can not be a disorder as that is how we as human beings create more little human beings...


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

ADD is Attention Defecit DISORDER.. LOL


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> Yes ADD is a disorder.. and there is something wrong with you.. Theres no madication to help a gay person not be gay.. Being gay is not a disorder.. Otherwise they would have a pill for it


Once again, you dont know that for sure. Im presenting a theory that might be true. And there are no medications to cure ADD.. saying they would have a pill for it made me lol.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Shannon Alexander said:


> I don't agree with the Kaendars aforementioned theory on Homosexuality being a disorder and Neither do psychiatrists...
> 
> But being straight can not be a disorder as that is how we as human beings create more little human beings...


It would explain alot.


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

Dude Its called ADD.. Attention Defecit DISORDER.. Nd noone says "Yeah this guys got HD.. Homosexual Disorder"


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> You simply misspoke. I think you meant to say 'preference" rather than choice. Just as some people have a preference for vanilla ice cream over chocolate, and it's their right to choose, or exercise their preference.


I prefer "orientation" to "preference" because "preference" is not value-neutral. It still provides a bolthole for moral tiering. cn


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Scrotie Mcboogerballs said:


> You're a homosexual with ADD that wants to peruse a career in aw enforcement? I can't wait for those headlines in a couple of years. Theres nothing wrong with it. It's just soooooo funny. lmao


Request backup. cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> Dude Its called ADD.. Attention Defecit DISORDER.. Nd noone says "Yeah this guys got HD.. Homosexual Disorder"


Obviously, because its still a theory.


----------



## bigfattone420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I have ADD.. your saying theres something wrong with me? Like I said, alot of people have disorders and dont realize it.. people have misconceptions about how severe a disorder has to be..



Bro i have to say the only disorder in this thread is your close minded thinking...And you aspire to be a police officer..Jah,God,If you don't beleive in,Spacegod,Nike shoe God,_______insert your God ...The only disorder i see is the one you see ,when you look into the mirror....Live life..Don't impose your idea/ideals of life on folks you have NO!!!!!! CLUE!!! ABOUT!!! Especially online in a forum...Where your ignorance staeps infront of your common sense...Nuff said.. ..Respect (when i jumped into this thread ,i actually thought you had a legitimate point(i gave you a like or 2/until i found out who you really are) ..Funny as i read /also saw you expose your personal predujuices.(if wrong i smoked a bigfattne,lol). Dam was i ever wrong..By the way answer me....Anyone in your family is gay? ( i won't go there)...Do you have people who disagree with you totally in your circle of friends??(just a hyopthetical question) .Your desire to be an officer of the law (not a thing wrong with that).But your narrow mindedness will be a hindrence to you and your partner on the beat..George Clinton(Paliment/Funkadelic say's"Free your mind, your ass will follow"..Free up my breathen!!


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> It would explain alot.


We do not accept answers simply because they make for easy explanations. It is true that explanatory power gives weight to a theory, but it must be accompanied by predictive power as well, not to mention replication, or else it does not even qualify as more than a hypothesis. 

When we start to explore the idea that homosexuality is a disorder, we can not make predictions that come true. IOW, we need to be able to say something like "if homosexuality is a disorder, then we should expect to see X". When we go looking for X, we do not find it. 'X' can and has been many things, and yet no one can clearly list an 'X' today, because when we add controls and make predictions, X disappears. There is no disorder ever listed that manifests itself in one single narrow aspect of the mind. We have no way in the lab, and no examples in nature, of reproducing homosexuals. No one on earth is able to make themselves homosexual through sheer willpower, and of course I am not simply talking about sexual behaviors or actions, I am talking about preference. If someone finds the idea of holdings hands with a man repulsive, how are they going to make themselves crave it, look forward to it, and feel empty without it? Anyone who says this is possible is not being genuine, or does not know the depths of true love.

The truth is when we do go looking, we can see nothing, other than the obvious preference, which sets homosexual development apart from any other type of sexual development. If we can't even point to an area and say the disorder lies here, or this is the criteria that constitutes a disorder, then how can you say it is one? 

It would be easy and make a lot of sense to conclude that homosexuality is a disorder, but we just don't see support for the idea in the real world. You can blame this on politics, bias, arrogance and bigotry all you want, but that does nothing to help you understand your opinion. It does nothing to bring you in tune with your environment. At the end of the day you are unable to demonstrate why homosexuality is a disorder, and reveal with your posts that you are not considering all the information. That may be good enough for your mind, it is not good enough for ours.


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

Whats a theory Homosexuality???


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> Whats a theory Homosexuality???


Pretty sure that's a practice, among other things ... cn


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> Whats a theory Homosexuality???


Well, one theory is that homosexual arise because they were sexually abused by a man as children or teens. Nothing crazy about this idea. But when we go looking at statistics, we see the majority of men molested as children grow up to be straight. In fact we see about the same instance of homosexuality among victims as we do with any random sampling of people. This is enough to abandon this particular theory.

That's not to say abuse does not complicate or pervert sexual development, but we can not conclude that it fundamentally reverses preference, it seems to have no effect.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> We do not accept answers simply because they make for easy explanations. It is true that explanatory power gives weight to a theory, but it must be accompanied by predictive power as well, not to mention replication, or else it does not even qualify as more than a hypothesis.
> 
> When we start to explore the idea that homosexuality is a disorder, we can not make predictions that come true. IOW, we need to be able to say something like "if homosexuality is a disorder, then we should expect to see X". When we go looking for X, we do not find it. 'X' can and has been many things, and yet no one can clearly list an 'X' today, because when we add controls and make predictions, X disappears. There is no disorder ever listed that manifests itself in one single narrow aspect of the mind. We have no way in the lab, and no examples in nature, of reproducing homosexuals. No one on earth is able to make themselves homosexual through sheer willpower, and of course I am not simply talking about sexual behaviors or actions, I am talking about preference. If someone finds the idea of holdings hands with a man repulsive, how are they going to make themselves crave it, look forward to it, and feel empty without it? Anyone who says this is possible is not being genuine, or does not know the depths of true love.
> 
> ...


If I was a psychiatrist with a university and thousands of dollars of funding for research, maybe I could come up with the answer. Until somebody does do the research necessary, this is simply "unknown". We can only make speculations on whether or not homosexuality is a choice or result of stimuli...


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

bigfattone420 said:


> Bro i have to say the only disorder in this thread is your close minded thinking...And you aspire to be a police officer..Jah,God,If you don't beleive in,Spacegod,Nike shoe God,_______insert your God ...The only disorder i see is the one you see ,when you look into the mirror....Live life..Don't impose your idea/ideals of life on folks you have NO!!!!!! CLUE!!! ABOUT!!! Especially online in a forum...Where your ignorance staeps infront of your common sense...Nuff said.. ..Respect (when i jumped into this thread ,i actually thought you had a legitimate point(i gave you a like or 2/until i found out who you really are) ..Funny as i read /also saw you expose your personal predujuices.(if wrong i smoked a bigfattne,lol). Dam was i ever wrong..By the way answer me....Anyone in your family is gay? ( i won't go there)...Do you have people who disagree with you totally in your circle of friends??(just a [/SIZE]hyopthetical question) .Your desire to be an officer of the law (not a thing wrong with that).But your narrow mindedness will be a hindrence to you and your partner on the beat..George Clinton(Paliment/Funkadelic say's"Free your mind, your ass will follow"..Free up my breathen!!


What are you talking about man? Im trying to explore something completely rational. And to answer your question.. no, nobody in my family is gay.. and I have gay ppl in "my circle of friends". I have nothing against gay ppl, I work with them, get high with them, and drink with them from time to time. The only type of people that I refuse to associate with are satanist and white supremacists.


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

You dont need to be a psychatrist.. There already out there.. Its not like theres no research on homosexuality which was stated above by eisenberg.. The fact is its not a disorder.. ADD is.. There not even near being parrellels to each other..


----------



## Cut.Throat. (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I have ADD.. your saying theres something wrong with me? Like I said, alot of people have disorders and dont realize it.. people have misconceptions about how severe a disorder has to be..


No such thing as ADD. Every person I've met who says they have ADD goes home and manages to play their XBOX or sit on their computer for 6+ hours. Eat less sugar.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> You dont need to be a psychatrist.. There already out there.. Its not like theres no research on homosexuality which was stated above by eisenberg.. The fact is its not a disorder.. ADD is.. There not even near being parrellels to each other..


Stop claiming speculations and opinions as facts.


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

You're doing the same thing and its not speculation.. if evidence was previously posted.. Your way to stubborn bro


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> If I was a psychiatrist with a university and thousands of dollars of funding for research, maybe I could come up with the answer. Until somebody does do the research necessary, this is simply "unknown". We can only make speculations on whether or not homosexuality is a choice or result of stimuli...


Lots of effort has been made, which is why lots of theories can be ruled out, including most of the ones you have proposed. But you are correct that it is both different and unexplained. You've yet to demonstrate that this has any significant impact which can qualify it as a disorder.

And this is where you will start thinking I am arrogant, but I will attempt this anyway. Do you know what an argument from ignorance is? It does not mean you are ignorant. It means a person has pointed to ignorance, or the fact that we lack knowledge, as support for a positive conclusion. When you point to an unknown, you can not use it to support your theory, just as I can't use it to support mine. So while you are right to say it is unexplained, you are wrong to use the non-explanation to suggest that with more research your theory would be proven true. It's just as possible future research will rule out disorders, as it has since we began looking.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> You're doing the same thing and its not speculation.. if evidence was previously posted.. Your way to stubborn bro


Im not doing the same thing, im offering my opinion and leaving it as an opinion. You are offering your opinion but claiming it as a fact. Can you prove that homosexuality is or is not a choice?


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 28, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> Lots of effort has been made, which is why lots of theories can be ruled out, including most of the ones you have proposed. But you are correct that it is both different and unexplained. You've yet to demonstrate that this has any significant impact which can qualify it as a disorder.
> 
> And this is where you will start thinking I am arrogant, but I will attempt this anyway. Do you know what an argument from ignorance is? It does not mean you are ignorant. It means a person has pointed to ignorance, or the fact that we lack knowledge, as support for a positive conclusion. When you point to an unknown, you can not use it to support your theory, just as I can't use it to support mine. So while you are right to say it is unexplained, you are wrong to use the non-explanation to suggest that with more research your theory would be proven true. It's just as possible future research will rule out disorders, as it has since we began looking.



And also, this is one of the things I was talking about. Argument from ignorance is an error in thinking, it keeps you from gaining an accurate understanding of the world. Our minds do not accept such easily demonstrable errors.


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

Its not the question of it being a choice or not.. most gay people tend to lean towards there sexual orientation, being pre-determined even as children some people have homosexual tendencies.. how would that be a conscious choice that pre-pubescent children could make


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> Its not the question of it being a choice or not.. most gay people tend to lean towards there sexual orientation, being pre-determined even as children some people have homosexual tendencies.. how would that be a conscious choice that pre-pubescent children could make


Earlier you claimed that it is a choice. That's the part I see as difficult to defend. cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> Its not the question of it being a choice or not.. most gay people tend to lean towards there sexual orientation, being pre-determined even as children some people have homosexual tendencies.. how would that be a conscious choice that pre-pubescent children could make


I personally dont think it is a conscious choice, I think its a subconscious development.


----------



## iCanadianGrower (Jun 28, 2012)

No i mispoke.. I said choice/born that way.. i simply misspoke whiich i apologized for in another post.. I fully believe homosexual people prefer there own sex over there other, and its not because of a disorder, thats just what they prefer.. Its not a disorder or a choice.. I apologize again for miss representing my opiniion earlier


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

iCanadianGrower said:


> No i mispoke.. I said choice/born that way.. i simply misspoke whiich i apologized for in another post.. I fully believe homosexual people prefer there own sex over there other, and its not because of a disorder, thats just what they prefer.. Its not a disorder or a choice.. I apologize again for miss representing my opiniion earlier


But you have to choose in order to make a preference. Saying is a preference is saying there are 2 or more choices but one (the preference) is more to your liking. So you are claiming its a choice.


----------



## Growman3001 (Jun 28, 2012)

Being gay is a choice, in my opinion anyways, but the question is, why is that choice made?


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Growman3001 said:


> Being gay is a choice, in my opinion anyways, but the question is, why is that choice made?


That would be begging the question. cn


----------



## Growman3001 (Jun 28, 2012)

cannabineer said:


> That would be begging the question. cn



Put a "hot" guy and a "hot" girl in front of a gay man, he will choose the "hot" guy. Choose as in you have the choice... He is not being forced, that's his choice...
The proof is in that alone thus im not "begging the question," just asking the question...


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 28, 2012)

Growman3001 said:


> Being gay is a choice, in my opinion anyways, but the question is, why is that choice made?


I dont think people just suddenly choose to be gay, maybe some but not most. I think your subconscious develops feelings of distaste for the same sex, all the while making you more open to ideas of sexual activity with the same sex, and eventually there is a conscious choice to act on those feelings. Why? Well I offered the ideas that its a developmental thing, changed from the norm by certain environmental stimuli and experiences thru childhood.


----------



## Growman3001 (Jun 28, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> *I dont think people just suddenly choose to be gay,* maybe some but not most. I think your subconscious develops feelings of distaste for the same sex, all the while making you more open to ideas of sexual activity with the same sex, and eventually there is a conscious choice to act on those feelings. Why? Well I offered the ideas that its a developmental thing, changed from the norm by certain environmental stimuli and experiences thru childhood.


I can agree with the bold and underlined. Correct me if I am wrong but what you are saying is that being gay is an eventual choice by developing ideas through learned behavior?


----------



## mindphuk (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> There's an old saying, "Never bring a knife to a gunfight.", and it has persisted for a reason. I also disagree on the fundamental grounds that a knife puts you in arm's reach of an opponent. A pistol is for when your long gun goes dry, and a knife is a last resort.


[video=youtube;ckz7EmDxhtU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckz7EmDxhtU[/video]


I was always taught, a pistol is what you use to fight your way to a long gun.


----------



## mindphuk (Jun 28, 2012)

People that call themselves Kaendar have a disorder. I have no evidence and can't prove it. I'm not saying it's a fact, just a theory of mine so no one can criticize it at all.


----------



## kpmarine (Jun 28, 2012)

mindphuk said:


> [video=youtube;ckz7EmDxhtU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckz7EmDxhtU[/video]
> 
> 
> I was always taught, a pistol is what you use to fight your way to a long gun.


This test isn't terribly fair. I would promise you that my Detonics would put 7 rounds into you at stabbing range. Ignoring his lack of a tactical stance. The other perk of a 1911 is that it's remarkably tough to push out of battery. You may stab me, but I'm going to drill you like a cheap whore. No posturing intended.


----------



## mindphuk (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> This test isn't terribly fair. I would promise you that my Detonics would put 7 rounds into you at stabbing range. Ignoring his lack of a tactical stance. The other perk of a 1911 is that it's remarkably tough to push out of battery. You may stab me, but I'm going to drill you like a cheap whore. No posturing intended.


Just FYI, I wasn't posting this because it's a good test, I just thought if it when you mentioned the old saying.


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> This test isn't terribly fair. I would promise you that my Detonics would put 7 rounds into you at stabbing range. Ignoring his lack of a tactical stance. The other perk of a 1911 is that it's remarkably tough to push out of battery. You may stab me, but I'm going to drill you like a cheap whore. No posturing intended.


My Series 80 against your Detonics for ... a tie. cn


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jun 28, 2012)

Growman3001 said:


> Put a "hot" guy and a "hot" girl in front of a gay man, he will choose the "hot" guy. Choose as in you have the choice... He is not being forced, that's his choice...
> The proof is in that alone thus im not "begging the question," just asking the question...


Are you straight? If so, do you constantly choose to be straight?


----------



## cannabineer (Jun 28, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> Are you straight? If so, do you constantly choose to be straight?


I like to bend over sometimes. cn


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 29, 2012)

Growman3001 said:


> Put a "hot" guy and a "hot" girl in front of a gay man, he will choose the "hot" guy. Choose as in you have the choice... He is not being forced, that's his choice...
> The proof is in that alone thus im not "begging the question," just asking the question...


What you are really saying is, being gay is a preference, which is not something anyone disputes. To wonder why is pertinent, but no more important than the why behind some people choosing to eat at Applebee's, or why some people prefer classical music, or why some people would rather not smoke weed. We do not ask people to defend these choices in any more than a casual way, and no one has demonstrated that A) Sexual preference is differentiated in any way from other preferences of taste, and B) Straight sexuality can be explained any better than homosexuality. It is okay to find it to be different, it is even okay to find it to be disgusting, but there is no evidence it is a disorder and no sound argument that it is amoral.


----------



## Doer (Jun 29, 2012)

I don't think any of us have much in the way of choice. We are without any conscious volition for a long time, and a mush mind for much longer than that. Everything I've read and everything I've discussed on the subject says that nature and nurture make these biases, not choice.


----------



## jessy koons (Jun 29, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Once again, its not bigotry to say someone has a disorder. More than half of everybody has some kind of disorder, im sure they dont take it offensive to point that out. I have ADD, im not gonna call someone a bigot because they point that out.


In your case lover ADD means *Another Deliciuous Dick*, yummy! The thought of see you naked holding a revolver in each hand drives me nuts. Come on big boy let's play.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 29, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Once again, its not bigotry to say someone has a disorder. More than half of everybody has some kind of disorder, im sure they dont take it offensive to point that out. I have ADD, im not gonna call someone a bigot because they point that out.


Do you think we call you a bigot simply because you say it is a disorder? There is nothing wrong with wondering, or even theorizing that it is a disorder. The bigotry comes when you resist good evidence and logic based arguments in favor of keeping your prejudice. We all are guilty of prejudice, doesn't make us bigots until we hold onto that view in the face of enlightened perspective. You defend your view with false arguments and backward thinking, and this is why we call you a bigot. Bigotry doesn't just depend on hateful or discriminating views, it must also be coupled with unreasonable stubbornness, unwillingness to let go. In these cases we virtually always learn that the original discrimination has other roots.

If you could back up what you say with support it would be a different story, But the things you have proposed so far have been refuted by decades of science, study and statistics. You ignore this information and double-down on your discrimination, making you a bigot.


----------



## Kaendar (Jun 29, 2012)

Heisenberg said:


> Do you think we call you a bigot simply because you say it is a disorder? There is nothing wrong with wondering, or even theorizing that it is a disorder. The bigotry comes when you resist good evidence and logic based arguments in favor of keeping your prejudice. We all are guilty of prejudice, doesn't make us bigots until we hold onto that view in the face of enlightened perspective. You defend your view with false arguments and backward thinking, and this is why we call you a bigot. Bigotry doesn't just depend on hateful or discriminating views, it must also be coupled with unreasonable stubbornness.
> 
> If you could back up what you say with support it would be a different story, But the things you have proposed so far have been refuted by decades of science, study and statistics. You ignore this information and double-down on your discrimination, making you a bigot.


How would a bigot act, in your opinion, around the people that he has a supposed prejudice against?


----------



## Shannon Alexander (Jun 29, 2012)

I act with nothing but respect and kindness to the people I am a natural bigot towards as I know that bigotry is wrong, mainly because I would not appreciate having people being a bigot towards me and also because I know that to get on in society I have to play by societies rules...


----------



## Heisenberg (Jun 29, 2012)

Shannon Alexander said:


> I act with nothing but respect and kindness to the people I am a natural bigot towards as I know that to get on in society I have to play by societies rules...


That makes you contentious of your prejudices, not a bigot. Bigotry is not natural, prejudice is.


----------



## 420IAMthatIAM (Jun 29, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> When ignorant pastors start saying shit like lets kill the fags and faggots will burn in hell, they arent doing much for their cause. Christians are supposed to be loving, kind, and caring. Even IF someone is commiting a sin, they are still human beings and deserve their respect. Killing someone is never the answer.. even a murderer will get what he has coming, but thats not up to us to judge one another.


hit the nail on the head;christians are to far out of wack....to get any real understanding of god they dont see that every person was made to be what they are..we all have our m o maybe when they talk of others they really are preaching to them sellves.


----------



## Doer (Jun 30, 2012)

The real problem I see is that folks tend to lump others into broad catagories and say, well we can't judge them, but only after the scathing rebuke.

We say on one hand that religion can't define God. The religion also says that. The religion says we have to praise and we have to praise something. So, let's praise what and how we were taught.

On the other hand there is hypocricy and greed that is part of everyone. Those that practice and those that rebuke. We are all greedy hypocritics, becuase we don't know ourselves and so we lie to I and us.

Religions are trying to do something about keeping the idea of Vast GOOD, in front of people. (so they mis-spelled that over the years, so what?)So, there are stories that mean one thing to thinking folks and another to the care less. Most in religion, in my experience, actually get this.

It is the main stream view. God is a concept of our highest aspirations. It's the hope and wish for mankind to be less violent. 

To me, to be saved, is to be saved from the mind cloud, that haunts and torments us, the true Satan. The only Satan.

And I do believe in GOOD. If you belive in that. Then perhaps we can just see religion as another stubbling attempt at good. Good does not screw this up, we do. 

So, how fun to sit afar and critique others out of pride. Just more of the tower of Babel. And those in the religion do the same. You can inagine a Sunday preacher really hitting a roll about RIU one morning.

The old axiom, if we point a finger we point 3 back at ourselves.


----------



## Winter Woman (Jul 2, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> When ignorant pastors start saying shit like lets kill the fags and faggots will burn in hell, they arent doing much for their cause. Christians are supposed to be loving, kind, and caring. Even IF someone is commiting a sin, they are still human beings and deserve their respect. Killing someone is never the answer.. even a murderer will get what he has coming, but thats not up to us to judge one another.


I believe that islam doesn't like gays either. For example:

_On Wednesday, the Taleban ordered the execution of three men for sodomy in the southern town of Kandahar, southern Afghanistan. They were ordered to be buried alive under a pile of stones and *a wall was pushed on top of them* by a tank._
_Their lives were to be spared if they survived for 30 minutes and were still alive when the stones were removed._
Simple and clear reason says that executing homosexuals is wrong today, but where do the Taliban get the punishment of pushing a wall on the guilty men? Also, the article reports that while the religious police were meting out a flogging on a woman for fornication, a speaker chanted, "Thanks to God that we are followers of God not of the West." This devout Muslim understands the deeper, spiritual conflict&#8212;two religious systems are at work.~

I think you should clean up your house first, before you throw stones.


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 2, 2012)

Winter Woman said:


> I believe that islam doesn't like gays either. For example:
> 
> _On Wednesday, the Taleban ordered the execution of three men for sodomy in the southern town of Kandahar, southern Afghanistan. They were ordered to be buried alive under a pile of stones and *a wall was pushed on top of them* by a tank._
> _Their lives were to be spared if they survived for 30 minutes and were still alive when the stones were removed._
> ...


I never said thats its right, im just saying that gays need to be treated as humans. Islam teaches the same thing, so does Judaism and most other religions. Btw, im not a muslim if thats what you think.


----------



## manitobafarmer (Jul 2, 2012)

I agree with your not, I have a best friend and hes gay he is so in love with his partner its unreal. too bad heterosexual couples couldnt all be like this? Also remember the movie Caliglia, i think was the name and its about the Bible and how so many people men and women slept with each other back so many millions of years ago.
I often wonder if its kids that are smarter or adults, put kids in a room from all different countries and they play with each other put adult politicians and they are planning war on each other.
why cant we all just get along and roll one up if you need to relax


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jul 2, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I never said thats its right, im just saying that gays need to be treated as humans. Islam teaches the same thing, so does Judaism and most other religions. Btw, im not a muslim if thats what you think.


As far as I know, Islam teaches homosexuality is a sin punishable by death. The execute you in extremist Islamic countries for engaging in it.


----------



## WyoGrow (Jul 2, 2012)

Some closet homo sat down with a pen and paper back in the day, made a few rules because he couldn't deal with the fact he really wanted to touch a pee pee, added it to a belief system, threw in a dash of 2000 years, shake and stir....... voopa modern homophobia.


----------



## Doer (Jul 3, 2012)

It's like shadowboxing. When a person changes his stance, constantly, but really there is nothing there.

And for Wyo, I have to say, that's not how homophobia began, exactly.  I'd say hpba began as a survival trait. In the tribe where that is rejected, all should be afraid if they are labeled with any taboo. You get ostricized. So, fear of being seen as gay, is the modern homophobe.

But, why the rejection in the first place? That's not survival, seems to me. I'm sure it's quite a leap of thought, to connect sex with producing babies. Sex happens, babies happens. sh-bh, sh-bh,sh-bh, sh-bh, sh-bh, sh-bh (epohs drifts by) sh=bh, sh=bh!!!! Woah!!

So, there is where it can split. When we realized to bonk with men and not women, doesn't get the job done for the tribe. I say, can split, because, obviously it doesn't always. To prefer men over women is not that common, and many, many societies just absorbed it.

Say, didn't then Plains Indians accept those that wanted to stay with the women, dress as the women, work as a woman? I think I read that somewhere.

Then, the Manfest Destiny of biblical homophobia, right?


----------



## WyoGrow (Jul 3, 2012)

By definition "survival mechanisms" don't require higher thought. They just happen in order to help us survive. It's a involuntary reaction. If you have to think about it then it is a behavior. It is a action. Homophobia is a action... not a reaction. If you show a baby gay porn it's isn't instinctively repulsed. But if you dunk a baby in water it will instinctively hold it's breath.... that is a survival mechanism. None of us are born with a chromosome that dictates that we instinctively hate homosexuals. It's a learned behavior.


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 3, 2012)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit
cn


----------



## Doer (Jul 3, 2012)

Totally agree. And to me it is such a wonder why some societies have been much rougher than others about this. I really don't care what others believe or not. I am interested in how and what and such. Where does it come from. It is just sex, after all.

So, maybe it is the strict, Dark Ages, approach to Western sex, in general. I mean, the position on the Missionary position itself displays the gay guilt of the church. If we just see the openness of childern and how they behave, I'd say Hate is learned, for sure.


----------



## missnu (Jul 3, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> When ignorant pastors start saying shit like lets kill the fags and faggots will burn in hell, they arent doing much for their cause. Christians are supposed to be loving, kind, and caring. Even IF someone is commiting a sin, they are still human beings and deserve their respect. Killing someone is never the answer.. even a murderer will get what he has coming, but thats not up to us to judge one another.


Who are you to say such a thing...

Why are you so freaking preoccupied with homosexuals and their burden? 

Why do you post saying it is a disorder and is wrong and unnatural, and now here you are making a damn post about how people shouldn't attack gays...

You sir are a Weirdo with a capital WEIRD! 

For real everytime I see one of you pro/anti-homo posts on the boards I just want to turn off my computer...nay, the whole internet! 
I don't have that ability though, but please stop making these posts...everyone is sick of you and your typing.


----------



## Doer (Jul 3, 2012)

Has it ever occured to folks that some people want to be the way they are acting. When we reply and question the purposeful weirdness, we aid in the acting out.


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 3, 2012)

Doer said:


> Has it ever occured to folks that some people want to be the way they are acting. When we reply and question the purposeful weirdness, we aid in the acting out.


In one word, trolls. cn


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 3, 2012)

missnu said:


> Who are you to say such a thing...
> 
> Why are you so freaking preoccupied with homosexuals and their burden?
> 
> ...


u got issues


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jul 3, 2012)

I don't think kaendar is a troll. I think he just has horrible views. You can see he puts more thought into his posts than trolls do. Yeah the thoughts aren't that great, but you can see he really means what he's saying. I think we just gotta keep swapping ideas and soon enough, everybody could come to an agreement.


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 3, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> I don't think kaendar is a troll. I think he just has horrible views. You can see he puts more thought into his posts than trolls do. Yeah the thoughts aren't that great, but you can see he really means what he's saying. I think we just gotta keep swapping ideas and soon enough, everybody could come to an agreement.


If I was a troll I wudnt spend most of my time hanging out in the outdoor growing section sharing my grows and giving grow advice.


----------



## WyoGrow (Jul 3, 2012)

Doer said:


> Totally agree. And to me it is such a wonder why some societies have been much rougher than others about this. I really don't care what others believe or not. I am interested in how and what and such. Where does it come from. It is just sex, after all.
> 
> So, maybe it is the strict, Dark Ages, approach to Western sex, in general. I mean, the position on the Missionary position itself displays the gay guilt of the church. If we just see the openness of childern and how they behave, I'd say Hate is learned, for sure.


Pre Victorian sex was fairly hedonistic. A good majority of our modern sexual hangups were introduced in the Victorian era.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jul 3, 2012)

No one wants grow advice from a teenager.


----------



## WyoGrow (Jul 3, 2012)

missnu said:


> Who are you to say such a thing...
> 
> Why are you so freaking preoccupied with homosexuals and their burden?
> 
> ...


Would really put a crease in his sheets to show him studies that strongly imply that bisexuality is the norm and that strict heterosexuality is a learned behavior. Most all animals that reproduce via sexual reproduction are driven by the need to mate with the opposite sex for procreation. But many higher intelligence animals are also prone to seek sexual gratification in any form just because it feels good.

It's not too hard to come up with any number of logical reasons why the are religious prohibitions against same sex sexual contact. Especially in primitive societies where the men go out for long periods of time to herd domesticated animals, forage and fight. In many cultures it was deemed acceptable for men gone from home for long period of time with nothing but other men to seek sexual release with one another. But once home it was the mans duty to produce as many children as possible. Back in that time tribes were always on the brink of dying out. So every child counted. The norm back then was also arrange marriage to build bonds between families who weren't getting along, to solidify social rank and to acquire wealth. The men who chose to engage in sex usually freely chose their partners. Not too much of a stretch to think that some of the men preferred to continue the same sex relationship when back home because they probably just didn't like the nagging hag their dad picked out for them to be married to. So to ensure that they went back and made children like a good man should. Why not make same sex contact a "sin" while looking the other way when away from home? What happens on the goat herding expedition stays on the goat herd expedition......


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 3, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> No one wants grow advice from a teenager.


Im sure they dont. I wouldnt.


----------



## WyoGrow (Jul 3, 2012)

In terms of the judeo-christian stance on homosexual relations. Well you just have to look at that religions early competition for followers. Many cultures back then not only tolerated bisexuality but embraced it as normal and healthy.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jul 3, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Im sure they dont. I wouldnt.



I swear I remeber someone asking you if you were 20, and you replied with "No, I'm 19". I just can't find the thread.


----------



## missnu (Jul 3, 2012)

there are later posts where he claims to be much older...I am not a fan and I am not the one with issues...I have read your threads and uhhhh....pretty awful fella...and you waffle all the time...you are against something, no wait you are for it. You have done it, no you just knew someone who did...I just don't get you and got a little tired of it...then making more accounts to do the same thing with but to support yourself with other names...if you have to make up a name to get someone on your side then that means you are the one on your side...


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jul 4, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> If I was a troll I wudnt spend most of my time hanging out in the outdoor growing section sharing my grows and giving grow advice.


You would if you were a smart troll


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 4, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> I swear I remeber someone asking you if you were 20, and you replied with "No, I'm 19". I just can't find the thread.


No, somebody said I was 19, and I told them that im 20.


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 4, 2012)

missnu said:


> there are later posts where he claims to be much older...I am not a fan and I am not the one with issues...I have read your threads and uhhhh....pretty awful fella...and you waffle all the time...you are against something, no wait you are for it. You have done it, no you just knew someone who did...I just don't get you and got a little tired of it...then making more accounts to do the same thing with but to support yourself with other names...if you have to make up a name to get someone on your side then that means you are the one on your side...


You have no clue what your talking about. And I dont have time to be making multiple accounts.. I have no need to do that. I never change my stance, ppl just get it wrong the first time and interpret shit their own way so I have to explain in simple easy to understand words how I feel on the subject.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jul 4, 2012)

I think kaendar is creating trolls but isn't one himself. I know his views aren't the best, but we all have bad beliefs and we're only here to share ideas and talk about pot.. So back off a little. Just saying.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jul 4, 2012)

I'd like a comprehensive explanation of Keandar's beliefs, if he'd be so inclined to offer one, just to get all the apparent confusion out of the way...


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jul 4, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> No, somebody said I was 19, and I told them that im 20.


Nice, you have some very intelligent views and I have faith you will grow into not having religious faith like most did.


----------



## Doer (Jul 4, 2012)

Pushing drops of mercury around is more fun and less slippery than talking with a person who flip-flops for fun.


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jul 4, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> No, somebody said I was 19, and I told them that im 20.





LOL, my bad. You are 20! I bet you couldn't wait to say you were no longer a wittle teenager.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jul 4, 2012)

KidneyStoner420 said:


> LOL, my bad. You are 20! I bet you couldn't wait to say you were no longer a wittle teenager.


How old are you?


----------



## heresSMOKEY (Jul 4, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> When ignorant pastors start saying shit like lets kill the fags and faggots will burn in hell, they arent doing much for their cause. Christians are supposed to be loving, kind, and caring. Even IF someone is commiting a sin, they are still human beings and deserve their respect. Killing someone is never the answer.. even a murderer will get what he has coming, but thats not up to us to judge one another.


especially now science has proved the universe was not created by a fake god, good old cern


----------



## KidneyStoner420 (Jul 4, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> How old are you?


Certainly old enough to know better. He's telling people to respect their elders and he's 20? Lol


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jul 4, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> Nice, you have some very intelligent views and I have faith you will grow into not having religious faith like most did.


"not having religious faith like most did".. There's alot more religious people than atheists. Most people still live with their faith.


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jul 4, 2012)

Hepheastus420 said:


> "not having religious faith like most did".. There's alot more religious people than atheists. Most people still live with their faith.


You then are a very fortunate minority who wasn't brainwashed as a kid back when you were putting teeth under your pillow or leaving cookies for Santa in your home with no chimney(guessing) It is a tough feat to break the mental gymnastics and go against your family, friends and community who all find lack of Faith terribly deviant and bad. My mother still prays for my soul and they give 10% of their hard earned cash over to the lying crooks! The thugs actually mail out donation envelopes with their names on them so they know who is skimping!


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 4, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> I'd like a comprehensive explanation of Keandar's beliefs, if he'd be so inclined to offer one, just to get all the apparent confusion out of the way...


Umm yea I wouldnt mind doin somethin like that. I wudnt know which sub forum to put it in tho


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 4, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> Nice, you have some very intelligent views and I have faith you will grow into not having religious faith like most did.


Im a believer in both science and religion equally. Im not a blind follower tho, I dont read all of the bible literally.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jul 4, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Im a believer in both science and religion equally. Im not a blind follower tho, I dont read all of the bible literally.


you just said the other day that people used to be hundreds of years old 

epic trolling by kaendar.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jul 4, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> You then are a very fortunate minority who wasn't brainwashed as a kid back when you were putting teeth under your pillow or leaving cookies for Santa in your home with no chimney(guessing) It is a tough feat to break the mental gymnastics and go against your family, friends and community who all find lack of Faith terribly deviant and bad. My mother still prays for my soul and they give 10% of their hard earned cash over to the lying crooks! The thugs actually mail out donation envelopes with their names on them so they know who is skimping!


I used to be religious not to long ago. I wasn't fortunate.

Still, there are alot more religious people than atheists. Which was my original point.


----------



## MellowFarmer (Jul 5, 2012)

UncleBuck:7668229 said:


> Kaendar said:
> 
> 
> > Im a believer in both science and religion equally. Im not a blind follower tho, I dont read all of the bible literally.
> ...


Science says they didn't?


----------



## kpmarine (Jul 5, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Im a believer in both science and religion equally. Im not a blind follower tho, I dont read all of the bible literally.


How do you take the bible less than literally? What is your means of deciding what was meant literally, and what was not? Could you give me an example of how you consider science and the bible conflict, and how you deal with that situation? For example: if the talking snake of Genesis is not meant literally, what was it's intended purpose? How do you decide that particular section is meant in a less-than-literal manner? 

Overall, I guess my issue with this is the fact that once you make the bible non-literal, it means you can interpret it however you want. That relegates it to the level of common literature in my mind. It cannot call itself the "inspired word of god", and maintain you get to interpret it how you wish. An omniscient god would know fully the inherent dangers of leaving his will open to interpretation. Giving yourself that loophole seems like an attempt at giving yourself an escape in all negative situations; it really does nothing to reinforce faith in an all-knowing, all-powerful god.

I know that seems like alot of questions, but I couldn't think of a better way to ask it.


----------



## UncleBuck (Jul 5, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> Science says they didn't?


the average age during biblical times was more like 25-40, not hundreds of years.

i can also tell you about how magnets work.


----------



## kpmarine (Jul 5, 2012)

MellowFarmer said:


> Science says they didn't?


Science sure doesn't indicate they did at all. You honestly expect me to believe that people commonly lived for centuries in the past, when our most advanced medicine hasn't pushed that average past a century now? It's just unreasonable to believe Methuselah lived for so long (900 years I believe it was?), while we are still pushing to reach 1/9 of that life expectancy.


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 5, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> Science sure doesn't indicate they did at all. You honestly expect me to believe that people commonly lived for centuries in the past, when our most advanced medicine hasn't pushed that average past a century now? It's just unreasonable to believe Methuselah lived for so long (900 years I believe it was?), while we are still pushing to reach 1/9 of that life expectancy.


I believe it. A life full of UV protection, very low amount of pathogens, no diseases, viruses, un healthy foods..


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jul 5, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I believe it. A life full of UV protection, very low amount of pathogens, no diseases, viruses, un healthy foods..


What _won't _you believe?

These types of beliefs, though you may not understand or realize it now, *harm people*. But I hope they make you feel good, because that's what's really important, isn't it?


----------



## Harrekin (Jul 5, 2012)

Anyone that believes in a "sky daddy" needs their head examined and shouldn't be allowed make public statements whilst being "incapacitated". 

Seriously? A dude on a cloud in a dress with a big white beard is watching out for you?

Yet they say gay people act irrationally? And then some of them go to mass to listen to child molestors talking about being a good person?

Bitch please.


----------



## kpmarine (Jul 5, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I believe it. A life full of UV protection, very low amount of pathogens, no diseases, viruses, un healthy foods..


So, you can prove that everyone was wearing sunblock, had no disease or viruses to contend with, and never ate badly? Where do you get this info, pray tell? Did the most basic forms of life (viruses and bacterium) just hop on a ship and leave for a while? Seriously, step back and read some of the stuff that you post.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jul 5, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> I believe it. A life full of UV protection, very low amount of pathogens, no diseases, viruses, un healthy foods..


So if I stay out of the sun, eat right and regularly disinfect my surroundings I will live to be 900?

This is one of those things that comes across as disingenuous. You can't really believe this thing you've said, right? You must be saying it just for the sake of opposition. We are unable to believe you are this dense. You are either being insincere or else you have an incredibly naive and uninformed view of the world.


----------



## Metasynth (Jul 5, 2012)

Kaendar likes to play Devils Advocate, seems he likes to argue points which he knows are insane because no one else will.


----------



## chrishydro (Jul 5, 2012)

I agree with so much that I offer up shelter to any Female Gay couples that need a place to hide.


Here Here.


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 5, 2012)

chrishydro said:


> I agree with so much that I offer up shelter to any Female Gay couples that need a place to hide.
> 
> 
> Here Here.


----------



## Doer (Jul 5, 2012)

Hey, it's Pat! Hi Pat. Hi Pat.


----------



## Squizz (Jul 7, 2012)

I'm Christian, and I have no problem with gays. Just don't hit on me, and we're all good. Gays are human beings too. They just happen to fall into a different category than me. I wouldn't hate a gay for being gay. Just like I wouldn't hate someone for their race or creed.


----------



## Kaendar (Jul 7, 2012)

kpmarine said:


> So, you can prove that everyone was wearing sunblock, had no disease or viruses to contend with, and never ate badly? Where do you get this info, pray tell? Did the most basic forms of life (viruses and bacterium) just hop on a ship and leave for a while? Seriously, step back and read some of the stuff that you post.


Lmao sunblock?? Remember that there was a firmament of water in the atmosphere, which is also another explanation for the great flood.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jul 7, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Lmao sunblock?? Remember that there was a firmament of water in the atmosphere, which is also another explanation for the great flood.


Nice try Kent Hovind


----------



## Heisenberg (Jul 7, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Lmao sunblock?? Remember that there was a firmament of water in the atmosphere, which is also another explanation for the great flood.



&#8220;Tell a devout Christian that his wife is cheating on him, or that frozen yogurt can make a man invisible, and he is likely to require as much evidence as anyone else, and to be persuaded only to the extent that you give it. Tell him that the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he seems to require no evidence what so ever.&#8221; 
&#8213; Sam Harris


----------



## Dr Kynes (Jul 7, 2012)

mohammedans like kaendar need to stop attacking everyone, including christians gays and jews. 

thread complete.


----------



## c3llblock (Jul 7, 2012)

Ah Dr clear ur inbox trying to msg u msg me when u do dat


----------



## kpmarine (Jul 7, 2012)

Kaendar said:


> Lmao sunblock?? Remember that there was a firmament of water in the atmosphere, which is also another explanation for the great flood.


Please explain exactly what that entails, where it went, and how it is now gone. The only meaning I knew of firmament was as a reference to the sky, more or less the same as "the heavens". I don't recall ever hearing people saying that it was some sort of strange water bubble.


----------



## Hepheastus420 (Jul 7, 2012)

Squizz said:


> I'm Christian, and I have no problem with gays. Just don't hit on me, and we're all good. Gays are human beings too. They just happen to fall into a different category than me. I wouldn't hate a gay for being gay. Just like I wouldn't hate someone for their race or creed.


"just don't hit on me".. I used to say that too. But I only meant it as "you got no chance with me".. But I've heard people add the "we're all good" part too. What does that mean? If a gay person hit on you, you wouldn't like him anymore? 

I've even heard people say "I'm fine with them, but if they hit in me, I'd beat their ass" (lol.. beating ass). I know you didn't take it that far, but it's going along the same line. 

I've had a gay person hit on me and I just said "no thanks".. It's just like if a girl you don't like hits on you.. Shrug it off.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jul 7, 2012)

Yeah same here, I don't get the hostility some people have about it. Maybe it's because they assumed you might be gay enough to hit on, who knows? 

I had a gay guy tell me I had a nice ass one time, and the extent of further thought lasted about 5 seconds "...oh, cool, thanks dude" and went on with what I was doing.

It's a lot harder to tell chicks you're not interested, imo


----------



## kpmarine (Jul 7, 2012)

Padawanbater2 said:


> Yeah same here, I don't get the hostility some people have about it. Maybe it's because they assumed you might be gay enough to hit on, who knows?
> 
> I had a gay guy tell me I had a nice ass one time, and the extent of further thought lasted about 5 seconds "...oh, cool, thanks dude" and went on with what I was doing.
> 
> It's a lot harder to tell chicks you're not interested, imo


If I was told by a gay guy that I had a nice ass, I would be happy. Not because I am gay, but because they seem to have really high standards.


----------



## Heisenberg (Jul 7, 2012)

Put your hands down my pants and I bet you'll feel nuts

[video=youtube;xat1GVnl8-k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xat1GVnl8-k[/video]


----------



## beardo (Jul 8, 2012)

*[h=2]Christians need to stop attacking gays!![/h]
^^^
That's not what the bible says...
*


----------



## tyler.durden (Jul 8, 2012)

beardo said:


> *Christians need to stop attacking gays!!
> 
> 
> ^^^
> ...


Yeah, but that's one of those metaphorical sections...


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Jul 8, 2012)

beardo said:


> *Christians need to stop attacking gays!!
> 
> 
> ^^^
> ...


Exactly. The. Problem.


----------



## Doer (Jul 8, 2012)

Metaphors need to stop attacking Metaphors. Can't all the Metaphors get along?


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 8, 2012)

Metaphors have been beating up similes for their lunch money since time immemorial. cn


----------



## Doer (Jul 8, 2012)

Yep, right up there with the other money winners. Allegory and Parable. AMP gets everybody amped up.


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 8, 2012)

Allegory _built _the Internet. Parable otoh couldn't even get party backing ... fable effort being the named culprit. cn


----------



## Doer (Jul 8, 2012)

Well, they all work against each other, no doubt.


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 8, 2012)

It's a war of the words, by proxy. cn


----------



## Doer (Jul 8, 2012)

Proxy! The dark witch of Law. Slave to Rumor. (I'll trade you a 2010 Rumor, for a recent Proxy)


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 8, 2012)

Those Rumors are awesome off the line but have famously squirrely wet-weather handling. Just try making a juicy Rumor go straight. 
As for the Proxy ... I am not sufficiently committed to alternative transport, combined with the fact that I live in synonym. cn


----------



## Doer (Jul 8, 2012)

Then, we will have to race them for pinks.


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 8, 2012)

I'll select the Rumor GTSi then. Meet me in Politics where both race and pinks provide endless mileage.  cn


----------



## Doer (Jul 8, 2012)

Race for pinks and shoot for Reds.


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 9, 2012)

Don't miss the Reds or you'll be singin the blues. cn


----------



## Doer (Jul 9, 2012)

Alrighty, downshift for torque, zoom zoom, what could it be. tee hee??? See you in the next hyper............


----------



## cannabineer (Jul 9, 2012)

The sounds made by competitors no. 3 and 4 are simply ... divine. cn

[video=youtube;XTT1_JZp2Sg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTT1_JZp2Sg[/video]


----------

