ofiba

He was being sarcastic.

Why? He didn't have a beer in his hand when he was about to be attacked. If he did, and he really is 16, there should be some heat on the Detroit beer venders and their ID checking methods.

I was wondering how Artest could see who threw the beer when he was laying down. The kid looked like he was just enjoying the mayhem and had no idea what was coming to him.

I didn't post a link to a church. I posted a link to a study that happened to be done by a religous group. I didn't say there was no bias. I was simply showing a study that showed that it is not fact that homosexuality is in born.

You compared homosexuals to fruit flies. I was simply making the point that trying to control an animal doesn't prove anything about homosexual humans. Also, why is it that whevever there is a homosexuality debate, the people that support homosexuality always make claims that the people that don't support it HATE homosexuals, and then maybe make a quick little jab about "our" God. You can disapprove of something and still not hate it. If your son was cheating on his wife, you probably would not support that action. Does that mean you would hate him? No. You would just rather them not do thatl. It is quite ironic that a person telling me be compassionate thinks it's kind to mock my faith simply because they do not believe the same thing. You showed a study that basically showed nothing. The people made a HUGE leap from fruit flies to homosexuals and even admitted that their study didn't prove anything.

I also read about a study where scientists altered a part of a rat's brain and made it very aggressive. If that rat killed another rat, would that prove that people can be natural born murderers? Just because you can manipulate an animal, that does not give evidence to say humans are born gay.

Care to show me a non-biased study that proves homosexuality is genetic?

The consenting adult argument only works for pedophilia, not incest or polygamy.

The problem with that is the word legally. Laws can change. Just like the voting age can drop from 21 to 18, there is nothing that says that with changing society the age of consent can drop from 18 to maybe 16. My question is a hypothetical one. IF society somehow came to accept pedophilia and made the act legal, would you support them getting married since you already admitted you think they are born with a predisposition to pedophilia?

I was saying that based on what I though AD's beliefs were. He said that he though pedophiles were predisposed to that behavior and I also thought he felt homosexuals were too.

I was asking if you think pedophiles and the object of their love (children) should or eventually allowed to get married as well since it seems to be on par with homosexuality. On the opinion, I guess I didn't have much basis for that other than the fact that you were in almost all the Presidential threads, but never seemed to voice who you would want as President, and always voiced who you DIDN'T think would be a good President. You may or may not have voiced that opinion and I apologize for making an assertment without a whole lot of reasoning behind it.

I do. I've got a Superbowl prediction riding on him playing.

IR means you can't play for the rest of the season doesn't it?? They didn't put him on IR because they thought he would be ready to play early, but he isn't. Can't it be just because a 30 something year old isn't going to heal as fast as a JP Losman? Do you think this is the only case of someone healing behind schedule? I'm sure you'd really appreciate it if someone implied that you were taking a few sick days off from work for no reason without actually knowing anything about your sickenss.

Gotta love the conspiracy theorists on this board. The NFL has an evil plot to keep the Bills down, Donahoe is simply setting this team up for a move out of the NFL, and now, Vincent is worried about a retirement plan?? I'm sure he doesn't have enough money to retire on....

Haha! No offense man, but to assume that this guy is ready to play and refuses play instead is crazy. You aren't really basing this on anything besides your desire to get him back out to help the team. I'm sure he loves watching the team lose and would rather just collect a check and sit on the bench with a completely healed leg. I hope you are just hoping he gets out there rather than actually think he is sitting out as long as possible just for fun.

I agree that the study I cited had its holes as well, like not being a random sample. If you think pedophiles are predisposed to their behavior like you think homosexuals are, do you think there should be equal rights for both, or just one? I not using my "slippery slope" argument, I am actually curious how you feel and why. For a guy that posts a lot, you seem to keep your opinions on issues to yourself and instead criticize others opinions.

AD, could you show me what you read that proves homosexuality is genetic? I don't believe there is any study that proves it. In fact, I have seen studies that show otherwise. I've seen a study that shows that a gay man's adopted brother is more likely to be gay than a blood brother. (this link explains it better- I am refering to the Bailey & Pillard: Twins and Other Brothers studyHomosexuality Study ) Wouldn't that prove otherwise? Also, the same study showed that a gay man's identical twin is only 50% likely to also be gay. Since twins share 100 percent of their genes, shouldn't that number also be 100%? Granted, this study alone does not necessarily prove or disprove anything, but it sure makes a good case for homosexuality not being in born. I would argue that it is more due to the environment in which they grew up and experiences in life, much like pedophiles.

You still haven't proven to me that homosexuals are born that way. If they aren't, they cannot be considered a minority group.

http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/arguecase.html These people argue both that they are born pedophiles and also that having sex with children actually helps the children. I bet there is as much proof that pedophiles are born like that as there is proof that homosexuals are born gay. Anyone care to prove me wrong?

But arguing that homosexuals is a "minority group" gives no reason to allow them to get married. I could throw 10 pedophiles in a group and call them a minority group. Does that mean we should give them equal marriage rights?

I like it. It teaches Losman to always be ready. We aren't close enough to the situation to know if this is even true, or if it is, why MM did it. There could have been plenty of understandable reasons he did it, so why even worry about it?

You shouldn't tell someone not insult you with a one liner, then insult them with a one liner.

I'm getting sick of writing this....but I must. What will you say if in 2020, people want to marry their siblings? Or get married to more than 1 person? Will you tell all the opposers to set their clocks ahead and let them do what they want? Do you think God made people to be rapists too?

Who starts the Superbowl this year? It's technically neither home nor road.

Joe there is quite a difference between the two. The act of a homosexual marriage is immoral in itself. A person who previously had premarital sex that wants to get married is completely different. Their act of marriage is independent of their previous actions. In your example, we would prevent a person from doing something moral just because they once did something immoral. Tell me where in the Bible it says that once people sin, they cannot be forgiven. People cannot be forgiven for their homosexuality if they are proud of and continue to do it. Allowing someone to get a homosexual marriage would be ENCOURAGING an immoral act. Tell me one law we have that encourages adultery or any immoral act for that matter. If we gave out federal grants for acts of adultery, I would certainly be opposed to it. Eliminating immoral acts from society is impossible, but encouraging them is not the answer. Since you say we should be free to have any belief, do you think polygamous marriages should be allowed in the United States? After all, they should have the freedom of choice to create their own rules of marriage right? Regarding working on Sunday. First of all, there is a difference between the country being governed by the Bible, and having our country's ideals centered around many morals of the Christian faith. While many of the founding fathers weren't devout Christians, it is hard to argue that the foundation of the country is not based around absolute morals seen in Christianity. But even if this country was governed strictly by the Bible, this should explain why work on Sunday would still be allowed.... As I explained in my first post..... "Many of the laws of the Old Testament dealt with the old covenant with God and his people. Many of those laws became not applicable when Jesus came along with the new covenant. Now you could argue that the Old Testament laws concerning homosexuality should be thrown out too, except there are also instances in the New Testament where homosexuality is condemned." The ceremonial laws of the Old Testament do not apply to Christians living under the new conenant. This site explains it pretty well. Should Christians Keep the Sabbath