skate - first off, my 7th comment was my opinion. apparantly if people have opinions different than yours, you consider them childish. well so be it, its hard to reason with people like that. and calling someone ignorant because they dont agree with you IS flaming, and just makes you sound ignorant. calling someone ignorant and being able to back it up is not flaming.
onward to Ace's rebuttul. finally back on topic. well, i guess not, this was about kerry, but this debate is much more interesting. btw - good rebuttal. finally, i get someone with intelligence in their comments who doesn't use only flaming to back their arguements.
"Yes, being intolerant to having an open mind to certain issues can be bad, as in your opinion about gays. People can be intolerant of a lot of things and be ok, like you mentioned, crime, and basically anything else that would be considered harmful towards another person or community. But being intolerant to the issue of "gays" is not a good thing. Your perfectly entitled to your opinion, but to be completely closeminded to other opinions on it will never teach you anything but hatred towards another group of people."
obviously in your opinion it is bad to be intolerant of faggots. and i am not completely closeminded. i have had plenty of time to form my own opinions, and this is the one i have. and who said i hate gays? you are using far to much guess work. maybe i do, maybe i dont. i suppose i hate the fact that they are faggots, but i dont hate the person, id like to see them recover. but i do hate them as long as they are faggots. okay, that was sort of contradictory....i hate the faggot, but i see the potential to recover. something like that. but, then again, i suppose your opinion is always right, so being intolerant of faggots is a bad thing. ah well.
Show me one place in history where repressing one person simply because of a race/geographical/religious/sexual characteristic has ever been good for humanity? More often than not repression of anyone leads to wars and eventually the end of the reason they were being repressed. Let me ask you your opinion on some more recent events in history where repression has reversed. What is your opinion on Women having EO with everything? Just over a century ago they had no rights, now look, do you consider that a bad thing? Then of course the repression and civil rights movement of the blacks.. Do you feel that wasn't possitive for mankind?"
race and sexuality are two different subjects. lets keep them separate.
"Show me one place in history where repressing one person simply because of a race/geographical/religious/sexual characteristic has ever been good for humanity?"
who said anything about one person? show me one place in history where NOT repressing someone for their sexual preferences has benefited humanity. raised taxes, lowers morality.
"Just a quick note on your comminism comment. Have you ever actually read how a communist government is supposed to work? Or have you gone just by world events to form your opinion. Comminism as a government if run and followed as is written is actually a pretty good system, the problem is, it doesnt seem to be one for humanity. Human nature just cant deal with it, but in nature, you will find many examples of simplified communism within many species and it works great.
"
this will be fun. true communism is impossible. in a true communist government, everybody is equal, if you needed a car, you would just pick one up off the street and take it. everything would belong to everyone. but pretty soon, someone with the biggest gun takes over, and its actually a dictatorship, but still known as communism. its just like anarchy is impossible. may be good, if it was possible for it to work. show me these examples of "animal communism" and ill consider your point to be somewhat legit. and how they work great. and how all that would apply to faggots.
"Rome... I always thought the fall of Rome was due to using lead in their aquaducts witch caused wide spread lead poisining. That caused all sorts of mental issues as well and physical and reproductive.... or maybe that was a different history I read about."
rome collapsed economically in on itself. there are many theories as to what caused their economy to collapse. in most, morality plays a small role.
"Lastly.. I draw the limit as staying within the species... there are many examples in nature of a certain percentage of seemingly "gay" examples within that species. It is part of nature, one that didn't just appear, and one that isnt going to go away. It is one that all people will have to accept and move on. Why would you think the next logical step from accepting gays as equals is to allowing beastiality? That's just sick dude."
thats the next logical step because we have sick people on this planet. faggots and....people who practice beastiality (not sure what they are called in one word). once faggots get their rights, the "beasts"
?? will want theirs.
actually, there are not any examples of gays in animal communities. some guy in an issue of readers digest about a year ago did a study on this, there was only one kind of small rodent or something like that that exhibited any behavior of homosexuality. its kind of fuzzy in my memory, but thats what it was. if i get the time, ill try to find the article. yeah, i know that sounds kind of cheap, and i apoligize, so bear with me.
if you do find any links proving there are faggots in the animal world, please, show me.
well, at least i can intelligently debate with someone here. id tell you the old forums i used to go to, where people did nothing but flame and really did not debate, but, well, i have some rather...embarrassing posts which would damamge my credibility.
they dont reflect me at all now, but im afraid that some of you would be all too happy to use these against me. ah well. when i went there, i wasnt to good at debate, lol. towards the end, i actually won a couple of the arguements. the rest just died out. thats what i meant when i said i never lost and arguement. of course, ive only been in 15 or so forum debates. so thats not saying much. but i didn't lie.
nemt - i hate to do this since you are the only person on my side, but they are right. forums are not a place to worry about grammer. i dont want to go over my posts and make sure every single thing i have typed makes me sound like i have an english major.
catcha - "At 17 you have yet to learn that the real world is very very much different than posting on the internet , try knocking a few doors with your views if you want some real debate/responce (sic) "
and what is THIS supposed to mean? and just how old are you? and be truthful, as i have. i think i can get a general idea from the way you type and act on these forums. id say mid twenties.
Author
Topic: John Kerry Latest Stupidity (Read 417 times)