🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <NgVc2.2562$961....@server1.news.adelphia.net>, 
tabmok99....@damnspaz.com says...
> This is in reference to <MPG.10de24032...@news.demon.co.uk>, in
> which a one ma...@mhetherington.demon.co.uk (Mark) wrote:
> > In article <Z%Sc2.2527$961....@server1.news.adelphia.net>, 
> > tabmok99....@damnspaz.com says...
> > > This is in reference to <MPG.10dd4275...@news.demon.co.uk>, in
> >  which a
> > > one ma...@mhetherington.demon.co.uk (Mark) wrote:
> > > 
> > > So taking it a step further, we can safely say gay people in our society
> >  feel 
> > > imprisoned.  
> > 
> > Only by bigots such as yourself. 
> 
> You're missing the point.  Re-read the post and try to think what I had in 
> mind.

Why don't you just clarify? I'd hate to jump to the wrong conclusion 
here.

> > > It doesn't.  Genetic defects that affect appearance, or mind, I have no 
> > > problem with.  Ones that affect someone's behaviour patterns are different, 
> > > and it's important that people get treatment for it.  (And important that 
> > > someone find a treatment, if one doesn't exist.)
> > 
> > Why? Did you never hear of something called discrimination? It is when a 
> > person or persons discriminate against one or more other persons. We have 
> > it with race and with sex. There are also a multitude of other forms. 
> > Basically by picking on one small characteristic of a person and calling 
> > them unnatural is discrimination. If it is so unnatural how come there 
> > are so many instances of it?
> 
> How come there are so many instances of drug abuse, rape, and murder?
> Are these things okay also since there are so many instances of it?

And you were complaining about Alex comparing Apples with Oranges!

> It is also very annoying when someone puts homosexuality in the same
> class as race and sex.

Tough. :P

I do not see why we should make a distinction. Maybe you would tell me 
why you think I should.

> OK, but the option is there for you to get married in a courtroom by
> signing a paper.

So what. Why do we *have* to declare it as a contract. Marriage is 
supposed to be about the love between two people. Why does standing in a 
Church or any other establishment make it better? 

> > So we kill one species which puts another at risk so we fix it by killing 
> > them? Where do you draw the line? What if the first one was at the bottom 
> > of your personal favourite "the food chain" so we keep going all the way 
> > up to us? Maybe we should just start with the root of the problem and 
> > press the bloody button!
> 
> Can't argue with that.  You're right, let nature take care of it.  

Thank you :)

> I think God made us able to reason, and it's not just a dumb luck.

Sorry I forgot who I was talking to :P

Although, were you not earlier agreeing with "Origin of the Species"? Are 
you now saying that the millions of years of evolution were shaped by 
God's hand? Or maybe he just "blessed" us with when the first Homo 
Sapiens popped out of their apish parent's loins. ;)

> > > > > I mean superior - it's not better for the anyone if we blow the world
> > > > > up.  But it shows that we have come a lot farther than animals and we
> > > > > must be smarter if we can do these things.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes - because it *is* very *smart* to blow the world up!
> > > 
> > > We haven't blown it up yet, so nyeh! :P  Just the fact that we could if
> > 
> > But we *have* blown up *parts* and tested blowing up others. 
> > 
> > > we wanted shows that we are better, because animals *can't* (unless they
> > 
> > No it is just everyone who can, knows they won't live to tell the tale. 
> > It is fear that stops us launching not respect or brains.
> 
> Whatever it is that sops us, we are smart enough to get to that stage.

Fear is not commensurate with intelligence. An animal will run from fire 
because it is afraid. Would you claim them superior for realising the 
threat to their life? Why credit us with superiority cos we are too shit 
scared to use our creation?

> > > > Apes do not always eat with their hands. They may not have fashioned 
> > > > tools from base metals but the will use wooden implements that they will 
> > > > hand make into a useable extraction and/or eating tool for say honey.
> > > 
> > > Oh.  Well we still have beter silverware.
> > 
> > I am sure they would disagree. What good is an ornate fork for eating 
> > from a honeycomb?
> 
> You missed the point again.  Their silverware is very crude and primitive.

So is tribal cutlery. Are they inferior to us? :P

> 
> > > > Otters are very good plumbers!
> > > 
> > > What?
> > 
> > You know the creatures that live in rivers and build damns. They can also 
> > direct the water in such a way as to limit the potential of damage during 
> > floods etc. 
> 
> Great, but could they build a system of pipes that goes into their homes
> and release water with the turning of a knob?

Do they need one? If they did I am sure they could.

> > > But look how much we have advanced in the relatively short time we have
> > > spent on this planet - and look at how far, say, horses have come along.
> > > They have been here *longer*.  The fact that we have advanced so far in
> > > such a short amount of time shows that we are superior.  This doesn't
> > 
> > Or good at keeping others down. Look how far the aborigines had advanced 
> > before the discovery of Australia. Look today at the tribes in the 
> > deserts and jungles of the world. How advanced are they?
> 
> Those are a small percentage of the population when you look at the majority 
> of humankind.

So are we discriminating again? :P

> > > But ants and bees cannot think for themselves - except for the queen.
> > 
> > "Soldiers" will defend the nest without direction. It is their job. 
> > Workers work without the overseeing of every single task by the fat slug 
> > ruling them. They have enough free thought to carry out their task and 
> > ensure the future of their species and the protection of their home. They 
> > work together. 
> 
> They wrok together but they work as one - the queen bee is guiding them
> every step of the way.

They work to one aim as any group in any species. Look at a factory. 
Shits loadsa people ultimately working towards one aim for *one* overall 
boss/owner!

> > So how about
> > 
> > "Leviticus:20:16: And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down 
> > thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be 
> > put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
> > 
> > What does "thou shalt *kill*" imply? And does this not qualify the term 
> > put to death to mean kill?
> 
> But it doesn't mean murder.  There is a difference.

Murder is the "unlawful" taking of another persons life. Do you think if 
you went on a gay bashing spree and *killed* anyone you came across you 
would get away with it since in your belief it is not murder. Or do you 
think you would be pissing your pants in the chair while you fried having 
been convicted of Murder in the First Degree!

-- 
Mark