Gay Marine’s homecoming kiss goes viral

[Rastko]

I don't want to hate anybody.Actually if i don't like something I just ignore it.
But I have some gay aquitances and always when I'm around them I have strange awkward feeling.
But when I've heard a rumour one gay guy likes me it was kinda flattering

By the way,that marine is a probably more manlier than half of keyboard holy warriors out there.

[Hevneren]

Suffering is a direct result of sin. After Jerusalem was cruelly destroyed by the Babylonians the prophet Jeremiah said that it was still God´s grace that they didn´t end up worse. As everyone has infinitely great sin in opposing God everyone experiences grace by not already being in eternal hell. Also, the creation was perfect in the beginning, but the earth´s soil was cursed because Adam sinned. Everything began to decay from that moment on.

So according to you and your god, human beings were created flawed (able to sin), but we're commanded to be perfect (never sin). You're merely repeating my point. If Adam was capable of sinning in the Bible, it means that Yahweh created Adam flawed, and since Yahweh is all-knowing he knew in advance that Adam would sin, and yet instead of creating Adam to be incapable of sinning, he decides to punish innocent babies because he created Adam to sin, knowing full well that he would. Does that make any sense?

God did not create us evil, but neutral. Adam decided for the evil and thus he and the humans after him became evil. It´s the spiritual inheritance if you want to put it that way, working just like in physical nature: elephant gets elephant babies, evil man gets evil babies. Not God created us evil, but we become evil through Adam and the natural law of inheritance.

First of all, as I've already explained, if Yahweh is all-knowing he would've known from the start that Adam would sin, thereby the whole argument of neutrality and choice is meaningless. Essentially, Yahweh created humanity knowing we would fail, and then he decides to punish us for how he created us.

Second of all, your perfect, absolute moral dictates that babies can be evil? What kind of an immoral, sick doctrine is that? Oh yeah, it's from the Bronze Age minds of people who worshiped a vengeful and spiteful god!

Punishing innocent babies isn't moral. It's about as immoral as it gets.

When babies suffer it isn´t different from adults, because sooner or later they would act evil, too. However, some say they will go to paradise because they have not yet acted according to their evil nature.

So, all human beings have an evil nature? We're born evil? Nobody is born evil!

The bible teaches humans are evil, that doesn´t mean they can´t do good things to some degree. Yet everything is defiled by the fact that all the apparently good things aren´t done in appreciation and honouring of God, which, as I have said, is the greatest sin, as it is sin against an eternally good being.

First of all, what's good about doing good deeds purely to worship and honour a god? Shouldn't good deeds be done because they are good? Shouldn't we help each other because it makes this world a better place? How selfish is it of your "eternally good" god to demand worship, rather than to tell us to love each other and be good to each other?

Second of all, your "eternally good" god created humans knowing full well we'd (in your opinion) have an evil nature. Thus, I'd say your god Yawheh is evil. Why would a good god create beings who he knew would sin, since he is all-knowing?

God made everything so it´s upon him to decide how to reconcile humans with him. Jesus, God, made this decision on his own, so who am I to critisize him? He can do whatever he wants with his creation. I think being thankful is a more appropriate reaction.

I see. He can do whatever he wants? We are nothing but puppets and toys for your god's amusement? And this is a god you call good? A selfish god who'd rather we worship him than do good deeds.

Something endlessly precious was paid for endlessly evil sin. Apparently that´s enough in God´s eyes and so it is in mine. I wouldn´t have any other chance, because no just judge would simply forgive infinitely great evil without something being paid for it and I have nothing infinitely great to pay..

Sorry, but I don't see anything just in a) punishing innocent babies and b) taking away the guilt of a crime from the criminal and punishing an innocent man for it instead. It's plain immoral to me.

[Hevneren]

Well, on a big scale, death does not mean much to God, what matters is the death of the soul. If there were any good people among those tribes, then God is just and they inherited the eternal life. That's how it is viewed in the eyes of God. But at that particular period those people would have to die for the rest of generations of humanity to have the chance to be saved on a big scale, it's not about just this short life. The murderer if not in this life, will get his punishment in the afterlife.

So, the suffering of innocent people on Earth is perfectly fine, just and moral in your opinion and in the eyes of Yahweh?

As I said those babies who are suffering will get their paradise, but the souls of those men kissing will be lost.

Why? What did these two men do wrong? All they've done was to love each other? How can love ever be evil?

This whole life is like a test in the eyes of God. You pass the test, you get the prize, if you don't pass, you are lost for God and that is what's painful for him.

That's a cynical way of looking at things. So, you go through your whole life doing whatever you can to win the prize of Heaven? Is that the only reason to be a good and righteous person? Doesn't it seem selfish to you to only do good because you will get something in return (Heaven) for it?

What if I decide to do good deeds but I don't believe in Yahweh and I don't expect a reward (Heaven) for my good deeds? Am I an evil person for doing good without the expectation of going to Heaven?

Well the sacrifice of Jesus, just shows God's endless love towards people.

I see it differently. I see the sacrifice of Jesus as cruel and unnecessary, and I think that if you've done something wrong you should pay for it yourself, rather than having someone else suffer for you.

I've done some (minor) wrong things, but if I could choose I wouldn't want an innocent person to suffer for the wrong things I've done. I would feel guilty and want to take the punishment - and responsibility - for my own actions. Only that way can I learn a lesson. How do I learn a lesson about doing the right thing if someone else is punished for my crimes?

[JamesSteal]

Step 1: Do something unpleasant or gross in public to disgust people
Step 2: Call them intolerant bigots or close-minded
Step 3: Seek to bring out more sexual perversions into public society
Step 4: Rinse and repeat

[Leliana]

You are assuming that everybody is naturally homosexual and it is only because of traditional morals and pressures that anyone willingly engages in heterosexual sex.

I'm not assuming that and you're implying something which is completely erroneous!

Heterosexuality is the natural norm, homosexuality is abnorm and a maldevelopment, an aberration. The reasons for the maldevelopment are under discussion but the effects are visible.

I don't hate homosexuals, I don't want them to burn at stakes and I respect them as people but I can't accept and don't endorse that homosexuals are treated as equal to heterosexual couples.

Homosexuals like you never stop to push their agenda and try to impose it on the normal population step by step, shifting the healthy ethics of a formerly healthy society to a skewed condition as time goes by.

I highly doubt that, and am confident that the overwhelming majority of this board can look to their own libidos for firm (or moist) evidence to the contrary.

A shabby trick, to misrepresent my statements to respond with something everything can agree with.

[Loddfafner]

Heterosexuality is the natural norm, homosexuality is abnorm and a maldevelopment, an aberration.

The natural norm is that most people are heterosexual, but not all. A healthy society should accommodate this reality rather than pretend it is otherwise.

[Benacer]

I'm not assuming that and you're implying something which is completely erroneous!

Heterosexuality is the natural norm, homosexuality is abnorm and a maldevelopment, an aberration. The reasons for the maldevelopment are under discussion but the effects are visible.

I don't hate homosexuals, I don't want them to burn at stakes and I respect them as people but I can't accept and don't endorse that homosexuals are treated as equal to heterosexual couples.

Homosexuals like you never stop to push their agenda and try to impose it on the normal population step by step, shifting the healthy ethics of a formerly healthy society to a skewed condition as time goes by.

A shabby trick, to misrepresent my statements to respond with something everything can agree with.

I can see what you mean with homosexuals trying to impose norms on the general populace. It is my view that the whole mistake lies on some homosexuals endorsing a certain minority status, which in the current society grants them privileges at the sake of demonizing the common man. That I will have to concur that is wrong.

However, I do believe that they should be treated fairly by everyone else as well. I don't think it is right to grant anyone the status of "protected minority", but homosexuals certainly do not deserve the label of "hated abnormals". I think they are a fact of nature and must be respected, seen as society sees heterosexual people. Homosexuality, in my opinion, shouldn't be promoted, but it shouldn't be condoned either. It must be respected.

[Supreme American]

The media care far more about such things than anyone else does. Who gives a shit?

[Arrow Cross]