Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
It was provided as a starting point for someone arguing a generalised/simplistic point of view, such as yourself. There are references at the bottom of the wiki page. Where are your links in support of your claim?
I hope they are a minority, and their loudness doesn't influence.
Well I don't bump into those merkins on the internet or in real life so they're not my concern.
Yeah agreed. Look how quick the SJW mouthpieces have been to try and score political points over it all. If you disagree with us you're Nazis, oh and also now you all drive muscle cars into crowds of people.
To be clear, my revulsion for man-on-man action isn't a result of religion. There is plenty of stuff that Christianity forbids that I find very appealing. So you're barking up the wrong tree there.
I can't remember. But as you'll see in the post you quoted I edited my comments about not caring to state that I actually prefer it.
Thanks for your clairification. But it doesn't contradict my statement in the quote you included.
So without going back to read your post edits... it seems you are disowning your past preferences (i.e. the posts/times where you clearly did care).
I learn from books mate, not wikipedia. Am I to keep a catalogue of all the shit I've read to satisfy your demand for references? We know the ancients invented religious expression for everything. It is human nature and modern people are doing the same thing. Every moral element is now backed by some appeal to authority with religious overtones - democracy, equality, tolerance, diversity, etc, etc. All are put forward as inherently good and right and self-evident. If humans are doing it now you best believe they were doing it in ancient Greece and earlier.
No, admitting (as you just did) that you can't source support for your personal opinions/generalisation is just fine - and puts your attempts to reject the sourced statements of others in perspective.
Marriage-as-slavery aside, that's different to what I've read. Anything communal (e.g. marriage) was until very recently within the religious sphere.
Just satisfy yourself that their pain keeps us in fifth spot for another week.
Obviously not just homosexuals and lesbians trying to play the victim to shut down the debate.
Your position has always been that religion causes bigotry or whatever. My point is that you clearly have the causal relationship ass backwards. Religion can be used to justify bigotry but bigotry itself is inherent to the human condition. Hence why middle class SJWs like to discuss oppression and discrimination in every manner except social class. The exception of course being when they tried to claim solidarity with the poor during the recent we-are-the-99% attempt to overthrow the rich. #Occupy
No I definitely still care. As I said, I don't enjoy a discussion unless there is some disagreement. Therefore it behooves me to find the points of difference and focus on that.
Oh ok. I'll give you a source then. One I know for a fact you'll find satisfactory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage#History_of_marriage
Lol, clown.
Translation...
