Hantlers
Well-Known Member
Not a soul believes him...maybe it was some girl that he got to videotape him at the gym. Really cool move btw.
Reputation Comments, positive and negative
- Thread starter Stickler
- Start date
Not a soul believes him...maybe it was some girl that he got to videotape him at the gym. Really cool move btw.
You really have a lot of anger inside you for people with a different viewpoint than you.
Let it go, really, let it go.
This is for you and everyone you interact with.
I really find you to be a negative and offensive person, and you don't see me neg repping what you post because I disagree with you. In fairness I did neg rep a post in this same thread, partially because I didn't "agree" with the post, and partially in retaliation for your lame and angry neg rep.
It's interesting to me the things society thinks are harmless, but find out later that they were not harmless after all. Could this be one of those things?
Just me thinking out loud.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
Careful, he may call you a bully like he did me. He's just another Mormon bigot. Haters gonna hate. Btw, I love his electroshock comment. Cool!
Mormon bigot? Funny how so many of you call for "civil discussions" but then you just can't help yourselves.
tee-hee
kwb
Well-Known Member
I think the only thing more dangerous than two dudes that love each other is people that put so much effort into justifying bigotry.
So do those hooked up to electrodes and made to watch gay porn in efforts to 'cure' themselves.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
1976, dude. A lot of medical and psychological practices were stupid and ignorant. I'm glad you live in the past though, hater.
Just because BYU admitted to one instance of that does not mean that was the only time it was used. How many times does a thief thieve before caught? It's not the only kind of damaging aversion therapy that's been used, and probably is being used today still (obviously a subjective matter, I can't conceive of the levels of cognitive dissonance and depression that has to spring forth from being forced to focus on a core part of your being being evil and having to be eradicated). This is not exclusive to the LDS church, either.
That's all a rather secondary point. The primary point is let's not consider 'curing' homosexuality a viable option, homosexuality itself exists, has existed, and will continue to exist and that what two people want to do with each other isn't anyone else's business. I'm pretty sure you agree.
1- So you are saying that two dudes that love each other is dangerous? Have you changed your mind?
2- People that put effort into justifying bigotry? What do you mean by that, do you mean someone (*cough) that puts lots of effort into slamming.... say.... the LDS religion every change they get? Hello mirror, nice to meet you.
By the way I would re-read my posts you disagree with and see how intolerant they are.
Then re-read your posts and compare how intolerant they are. You at times swear and attack and put down my beliefs and opinions if you do not agree with them. How often do I put you down and rip on you because of what you believe. My posts are on the topic and are explanations as to what I believe and why, not in a way to demean or put down what someone else believes.
I think you throw around that word bigot as a smokescreen, but you just may want to think before throwing around words you don't really know the meaning of.
Last edited:
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
Bravo!
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Don't worry catratcho, I got ya covered!!
****.
****.
I don't think a belief in a deity is the same thing as being a homosexual and I have never said that those that are religious should be relegated as second-class citizens either. You seem like an otherwise decent person that has been put in a position to have to put forth great effort into defending a stance that you know is boorish and silly, those stances are an enemy to every good thing that our species has grown to become.
I think religion in general makes otherwise decent people take stances that they would find otherwise distasteful. That doesn't mean that all theists (including all Mormons, in case this isn't clear) subscribe to those things that they know in their heart to be wrong, nor does it mean that those that ultimately subscribe (like yourself) do so happily (seemingly unlike you, but seemingly like craig). It doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to drink at the same drinking fountain, sit at the front of the bus, vote, hold a job, join the military, or get married. Issues of race, and gender are the same as that of orientation, and I stand by the point I hoped to leave in short initially; the battle has already been won, civil rights will win as they should.
Topics like this - and this topic in particular - vex and tax me greatly, even having had the great fortune to not suffer from them personally (actual bigotry). In interest of stopping this bickering and for self-preservation I should stop here, but since the LDS church has commonly taken the wrong stance on at least two very significant social issues, I will be critical. If being critical of an organization for it's stances and what it leads people to believe is bigotry, even in specific instances, then we're all bigots.
My sense is that you know better than to take the stance you have here, but far be it for me to make that commentary.
Last edited:
Despite your use of what I call "the manipulation pattern" in your post(s), I will answer some of what you said.
I have not been "put" into any position. It may be your opinion that what I say, or my opinion, is boorish and silly. It is my opinion that you have some "equity" in this topic so you can't understand that someone may have a different opinion that they believe and have thought through thoroughly. If I don't believe it, I'm not going to say it. I'm not a parrot as you are implying, and have implied in other posts, and I find that sentiment to be offensive.
I think you blame religion for things you should not. If you don't like my opinion, blame me and not my religion. Yes, my religion plays a part in who I am, but I am not my "religion" so to speak. If I knew something in my heart was wrong as you say, I would not say it. There are some things I am thinking through, just as you I hope think through different issues that come up in life.
Again, it is your opinion that the LDS church has taken the "wrong" stance of an issue. That is your opinion, and I hope you can be "tolerant" of those with a different opinion.
FYI
In case you were wondering, there is a difference between standing for your own opinion, and being a bigot. I do not believe I am intolerant of you or your opinion even if I disagree. I do not treat homosexuals with hatred or intolerance. No, I do not believe my opinion that their marriage should not be legal has any hate behind it even if you think so. I can listen to and respect contrary opinions and beliefs without lashing out at them, and while at the same time disagreeing with them.
My point is, I don't agree with your definition of a bigot.
I believe more in protecting the sanctity of marriage as to my opinion and beliefs, and do not make my stance based on hurting any other person.
FYI, you tend to talk down to people. Not sure you care, but just letting you know.
If any "religion" refuses to defend it's belief in the public square, when squarely attacked and being called "wrong" by critics, it is actually going to lose the right to belief. The attack on the belief is itself hate, and bigotry, and intolerance.
Probably the same thing could be said of any "lifestyle choice".
Neither is exactly equivalent to people whose skin or ethnicity is under public attack, because they don't even have the option to "reform" their "defect". Similar in some respects, but not entirely.
If the GLBT movement is "human progress" and all the wonderful new age of reason and justice some imagine, the proponents need do nothing more than take the high ground morally, and explain it all to the masses why it's better.
I don't think it is, and if that were the nature of the discussion we could give reasons and ideals and tolerate each other good enough. Here in the SL area, some of the GLBT people had the sense to not just go whole hog on confrontation, and got up some civic projects to show the neighbors they mean to be respectful and decent folks. And in return there were a few gains in terms of some solid economic and human issues. Whatever I may think of the merits of these lifestyles, I agree that common decency ought to prevail.
I don't get very moved by genetic origin claims, but I do think the huge exposures to phytoestrogenics in plastic everyday items from tupperware to McDonald's clamshells, from the plastic lining on cans for drinks as well as plastic bottles, and all the rugs and carpets and clothing items in use today, as well as the "engineered" wood products used in houses. . . . . are all taking a toll on us, male and female. Probably related to a lot of our increasing problems like diabetes, ASD, cancer, and measureable changes in developmental physiology, and the extremes we're seeing in menopausal women as well.
Nevertheless, it would be my preference to state the case for choice, and encourage people to make efforts to both reform their shopping choices and lean into the idea of avoiding what I see as a very poor way to go in "lifestyle". I think it is intrinsically unhealthy and emotionally damaging.
Vive la differance.