dlazz;1555622 wrote:This thread is certainly serious business.

pmoney25;1555607 wrote:I love the sanctity of marriage argument when the same book people use to condemn
homosexuality has countless examples of Polygamy.

Why couldn't that part of the old testament be used today?

pmoney25;1555619 wrote:Not too mention the same people who are going crazy over this were the same ones smashing Dixie Chick records ten years ago for protesting the war.

SportsAndLady;1555627 wrote:What TV shows do you watch?

dlazz;1555638 wrote:I very rarely watch TV at all.

SportsAndLady;1555640 wrote:Hmm that's a tricky one.

I'm guessing you drive a Hyundai and have a cat

SportsAndLady;1555613 wrote:It's literally mind numbing to me that people, in 2013, can still believe that it is "wrong" or a "sin" to be a homosexual.

Bio-Hazzzzard;1555643 wrote:Why should the year of 2013 change a persons beliefs? Why should a human being balk at what they believe in simply to passify this modern age? I still believe in the same things I did in in past years, sin or no sin that shouldn't change based on a year in time.

SportsAndLady;1555646 wrote:With all the "science" out there...all the knowledge...all the information readily available to people...to think because a chick is banging a chick and not a guy is a "sin" is just incomprehensible.

I'm not saying 'don't be religious' I consider myself a catholic. But I don't believe that a) homosexuality is wrong and b) there's no such thing as different levels of sin. Just because you believe in a religion doesn't mean you have to believe in everything that religion's 5,000 year old book says.

Heretic;1555633 wrote:Well, expecting these people to be intelligent and non-hypocritical in their feelings would be too much to ask...

SportsAndLady;1555646 wrote:With all the "science" out there...all the knowledge...all the information readily available to people...to think because a chick is banging a chick and not a guy is a "sin" is just incomprehensible.

I'm not saying 'don't be religious' I consider myself a catholic. But I don't believe that a) homosexuality is wrong and b) there's no such thing as different levels of sin. Just because you believe in a religion doesn't mean you have to believe in everything that religion's 5,000 year old book says.

jmog;1555654 wrote:I have a few things to say...

1. For those who keep chirping on "he compared homosexuality to beastiality", come on, do a little research. He was quoting/paraphrasing 1 Corinthians Chaper 6, Verses 6-11 ([SUP]9 [/SUP]Don’t you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don’t fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, [SUP]10 [/SUP]or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God. [SUP]11 [/SUP]Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.)

He was not saying they were the "same" or saying that one leads to another, he was saying that in his opinion, and in the Bible's, they (along with all the other things he lists, not just those two) are sin. That's it, period.

2. He said in his opinion wanting another man's anus is illogical (to him). Please explain where that is "offensive" and "anti-gay" and makes him a bigot. If someone can seriously explain that without going on a Bible bashing rant, I would love to hear it.

3. Most of you are completely ignoring the rest of the article. Let me quote it for you. "We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

He is saying he has never treated anyone (read homosexual) any different, he loves them, just happens to think what they are doing is wrong.

4. Does A/E have a right to fire him? Absolutely, they can fire whomever they want.

5. Is Sarah Palin and others idiots for saying they are violating his First Amendment rights by firing him? Absolutely. No one is arresting or suing him for what his thoughts are, so his First Amendment rights were not violated. Just because one has the right to say/believe something doesn't mean there are zero repurcussions. One has to know in today's PC world, that any possible discussion about homosexuality that isn't all about 100% support for the LGBT community will have repurcussions (as in someone will get WAY overly offended...I was going to use butt hurt but figured that was too easy).

6. Lastly, I want to know where GLAAD was when Alec Baldwin called a homosexual photographer a "queen"? No backlash from them with him, just on the guy that says he believes homosexuality is a sin and to him, liking men's anus' is illogical. I would say the Baldwin incident is worse than what Phil had to say, but GLAAD didn't lash out at Mr. Baldwin did they?

isadore;1555660 wrote:Gosh a ruddies You do research, really
But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
7
Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?
8
Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.
9
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-Corinthians-Chapter-6/
　
　
But nothing about bestiality
, I guess only bigots see it there.
Oh on Mr. Baldwin
‘
Alec Baldwin on MSNBC Cancellation: GLAAD Spokesman and Andrew Sullivan ‘Killed’ His Show”
http://www.thewrap.com/alec-baldwin-msnbc-show-glaad-gay-slur-andrew-sullivan

jmog;1555667 wrote:Did you see the part where I said he was paraphrasing? I did not say he directly quoted. Sorry, but all the beastiality is a sin parts of the Bible is in the OT.

Also, your link said that Baldwin thought that GLAAD ended his show while GLAAD spokesmen said they did not. Try again.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2013/12/18/glaad-pounces-duck-dynasty-not-baldwin

http://twitchy.com/2013/12/18/selective-outrage-glaad-slams-phil-robertson-after-letting-alec-baldwin-slide/

isadore;1555671 wrote:Paraphrase “
: to restate something using other words.”
Gosh a ruddies when you move from talking critically about various human interaction, to sex outside our species that is not restating using other words.
Breitbart, lol. And Michelle Malkins “Twitchy” now there is quality non biased reporting.
Guess what his show got cancelled because of his anti gay comments. Phils homophobic and RACIST ravings only got him put on hiatus.

jmog;1555676 wrote:Please, quote exactly what part of Phil's statements were "homophobic".

jmog;1555656 wrote:1. You haven't quite yet explained why it's incomprehensible for someone to believe homsexuality is a sin.
2. I agree with you, and so does the Bible, that there's no such thing as different levels of sin. Varying levels of 'sin' is a man made concept. The Bible equates all sin equally, looking at a woman that is not you wife lustfully is just as bad as screwing a dude's anus. Sorry guys, it's true .

isadore;1555682 wrote:Gosh a ruddies
Lets see hating them so much he puts gays on the same level as crimials= slanderers, swindlers and practitioners of bestiality. A fearful hater if there ever was one.
Did I miss something or did you fail to defend Phil against the racist claim. Just because he raved on happy blacks were in the segregated Jim Crow South. What every Southern bigot claimed.
http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson


phobic-"having an intense fear or dislike of something."

se-alum;1555684 wrote:Actually the bible does mention varying levels of sin. The concept of a "sin is a sin" comes from the thought that every sin separates you from God, so in that respect "a sin is a sin" is true. However, there is reference to varying levels of punishment, which would insinuate that not all sin is equal. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is considered an eternal sin.