Rath said:
mrstickball said:
stof said:
Mr. Stickball, I think you're one of the reasons so many people posting in this thread are angry about what they're seeing in that video.
you're defending abusing a teenager over his sexual preference based on what some people wrote in a book thousands of years ago, and yes, that is abuse no matter what way you slice it, even if the poor guy signed up for it.
While extremism can be the result of may isms: race, ideological, national... only religion is provided with inherently inflexible documentation to justify that extremism. You say that they're (and your) condemnations of homosexuality are justified by a very old book. That seems like a pretty good argument to toss out that book to me.
|
Stof,
How did these people abuse this teenager? What exactly about the video constitutes abuse?
I am sorry that my religion offends you, but I take it very seriously. You can argue that it's archaic, irrelevant, and useless, but I do not feel that way. I cannot in good faith take certain parts of the book and say 'Hey! Taking care of the poor is something I need to do!' and then throw out the part that says 'Don't be sexually immoral'. That's my opinion on my religion, and I'm entitled to it. My opinion on my religion effects no one but myself. If I am deluded, then that's my fault and no one elses.
Yet at the same time, I would like to challenge you and everyone else: Prove my religion wrong. We spend far more time and money on helping the poor, and offering services to the needy. Prove us wrong by doing right 
|
Where does the bible explicitly condemn homosexuality?
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm
|
Oh wow, that site looks loony. They draw so many unfound conclusions. David and Ashpenaz had a homosexual relationship. Right.....
