20 Jun 16
Originally posted by FMFYou are certainly not ignoring your topic. What you're doing is driving the topic of your own agenda, which is to undermine, misrepresent and otherwise obfuscate.
How am I ignoring the topic? I have been tackling it head on throughout this thread. I have been plain spoken about my views and arguments. And I have confronted you about yours. How can I possibly be described as "dodging" the topic?
You're blind to it. Sorry, but it's true. But it's ok. I can handle it. 😉
20 Jun 16
Originally posted by josephwWhat do you mean by crime statistics?
None that appears to your senses.
But you are in denial of the evidence that clearly points to the health risks of a deviant sexual lifestyle. Not to mention the emotional and psychological trauma associated with it. As well as the crime statistics too.
-VR
Originally posted by josephwThere are health risks to just about everything but it does not make those activities morally wrong. There is emotional and psychological trauma attached to many human activities and it does not make those activities, in and of themselves, morally wrong.
But you are in denial of the evidence that clearly points to the health risks of a deviant sexual lifestyle. Not to mention the emotional and psychological trauma associated with it. As well as the crime statistics too.
A person - homosexual or heterosexual - deliberately or through willful negligence spreading disease or injury would be acting immorally I would say.
A person - homosexual or heterosexual - consciously causing emotional and psychological trauma would be acting immorally to my way of thinking.
A person - homosexual or heterosexual - deceiving others or making false promises would be acting immorally, I say.
Any homosexuals involved in adding to the crime statistics should be apprehended and punished in the same way as heterosexuals should be.
Originally posted by josephwMy "agenda", I suppose, is that I don't think homosexuality is immoral and I do not condemn homosexuals for being homosexuals. My "agenda" is that I am disagreeing with you because you think homosexuality is immoral and you have condemned homosexuals for being homosexuals on this thread.
You are certainly not ignoring your topic. What you're doing is driving the topic of your own agenda, which is to undermine, misrepresent and otherwise obfuscate.
20 Jun 16
Originally posted by FMFWho cares what you think? What do you actually know that's actually true?
My "agenda", I suppose, is that I don't think homosexuality is immoral and I do not condemn homosexuals for being homosexuals. My "agenda" is that I am disagreeing with you because you think homosexuality is immoral and you have condemned homosexuals for being homosexuals on this thread.
I have the impression that what you think you know is really just the opinions of others.
20 Jun 16
Originally posted by FMF"...and you have condemned homosexuals for being homosexuals on this thread."
My "agenda", I suppose, is that I don't think homosexuality is immoral and I do not condemn homosexuals for being homosexuals. My "agenda" is that I am disagreeing with you because you think homosexuality is immoral and you have condemned homosexuals for being homosexuals on this thread.
Have not. Homosexuals are people. I don't and can't ligitimately condemn a living soul. What? Are you ignorant or what?
But I can condemn the act.
Originally posted by josephwPeople only have to look back at page 7 to see that you are dissembling. They only have to read your comparison of homosexuals to murderers. They only have to read your suggestion that criminalizing homosexuality would be a "just" law to realize that you are now not being truthful about what you have explicitly said earlier on this thread.
Have not (condemned people). Homosexuals are people. I don't and can't ligitimately condemn a living soul. What? Are you ignorant or what?
But I can condemn the act.
