Pope: Catholics should ask gay people for forgiveness

[Ben Kenobi]

Because being a religious fanatic is a choice you make. Sexual orientation isn't a choice. You need to get a grip.

If the first amendment protects my right to practice my religion, I'm not quite sure why you believe it's an important distinction. Unless you are arguing that religion is not protected by the constitution (it is). That you are using the same rights that protect Christians as a club to persecute them underscores the fundamental weakness of your argument. Either rights are protected or they are not.

You have a right to your backwards opinions and thinking gay people should not have any sort of relationship. You truly are ignorant.

Again - you are stating that it is impossible to have a relationship period without sex.

Sexual orientation is entirely innate. This is proven by multiple investigations and studies in the last decade. Prove me wrong, Ben.

Then provide a definition. If you can't tell me what it is, you can't say that it's innate.

[Giancarlo]

No, Gian, it is standard procedure in debate to define one's terms. If I don't know what it is then how can I provide evidence that it has changed?



I'm sure. It still doesn't change the fact that you don't have a definition.



And? My point is that it is possible to have a relationship without having sex.

Wrong on all counts. It isn't necessary for me to provide a definition for a term that is already well known.

Your point on relationships is stupid and outdated. Not everyone lives in your view of the world. And why should I abstain from sex? You won't advocate me in getting married and you said I don't need to have sex. You're just ridiculously vile and heartless. I love my boyfriend more than you can imagine.

[Ben Kenobi]

I notice you didn't answer the question so I take it is purely the fact that you are unable to deal with his choices in life (and I don't mean his sexual orientation, but his decision to get married)

I suggest you check your PMs.

[Giancarlo]

If the first amendment protects my right to practice my religion, I'm not quite sure why you believe it's an important distinction. Unless you are arguing that religion is not protected by the constitution (it is). That you are using the same rights that protect Christians as a club to persecute them underscores the fundamental weakness of your argument. Either rights are protected or they are not.



Again - you are stating that it is impossible to have a relationship period without sex.



Then provide a definition. If you can't tell me what it is, you can't say that it's innate.

I never said it wasn't protected by the First Amendment. Stop it with that side tracking argument. You are free to believe whatever fairytale you want. There is no weakness in my argument.

Your argument has more holes than Swiss cheese.

I have already said it is innate. Debunk that. You can't. And don't expect me to define anything when you spout off without any proof of your own.

And what do you know about my relationship or me as a person? You have no right to even talk about that.

[Ben Kenobi]

Wrong on all counts. It isn't necessary for me to provide a definition for a term that is already well known.

Again, yes it is standard in a debate to provide one's definitions.

Your point on relationships is stupid and outdated.

Your argument is that you cannot have a relationship without sex. That is a terrible argument.

Not everyone lives in your view of the world. And why should I abstain from sex? You won't advocate me in getting married and you said I don't need to have sex. Your just ridiculously vile and heartless. I love my boyfriend more than you can imagine.

No, Gian. I am neither vile nor heartless. Why should you abstain? STDs are probably the biggest reason why. I'd be happy to go on futher.

I never said it wasn't protected by the First Amendment. Stop it with that side tracking argument. You are free to believe whatever fairytale you want. There is no weakness in my argument.

If you can fine someone for exercising their religion for 125k, that would not stop Christians from fining you. Either rights protect people or they do not.

I have already said it is innate. Debunk that. You can't. And don't expect me to define anything when you spout off without any proof of your own.

It's your argument that it is innate. I am not out of line in asking that you define the terms that you are using before we proceed.

I'm amused that this simple act terrifies you.

And what do you know about my relationship or me as a person? You have no right to even talk about that.

Actually, I do now, because you chose to tell me about your relationship.

[Giancarlo]

I don't need to follow your ridiculous and mindless standards. You do not set standards. You aren't even capable in having a debate without resorting to histrionics.

And my argument about relationships never stated that. Show me where I said it is impossible to have a relationship without sex. All I said is sex is part of my relationship. Stop being a know-it-all buffoon and respond to what I actually said.

STDs? Oh really? I don't think so. My boyfriend and I are healthy and we don't engage in risky sex. So please go on. I would like to hear it!

[Giancarlo]

You are incredibly vile, heartless and vindictive. Your form of argumentation is that of a child. Your ideas of sex are from a different decade. Not everybody lives to your standards and for good reason. Someone like you is unwell mentally and emotionally.

[Giancarlo]

Nothing terrifies me. I don't need to define anything because that isn't required here. We all know what sexual orientation means. You are just too mindless to understand that.

I am getting quite annoyed at your stupidity. Maybe I should just ignore you.

[Ben Kenobi]

Nothing terrifies me. I don't need to define anything because that isn't required here. We all know what sexual orientation means. You are just too mindless to understand that.

Gian, again it is standard in a debate to define ones terms. You're a political science major, presumably? I'm surprised that you don't know the basics of debate. In any case, you either provide it, or you do not. If you choose not, then you have no argument to underscore your beliefs other than you believe that it must be so.

[Giancarlo]

Gian, again it is standard in a debate to define ones terms. You're a political science major, presumably? I'm surprised that you don't know the basics of debate. In any case, you either provide it, or you do not. If you choose not, then you have no argument to underscore your beliefs other than you believe that it must be so.

You are not in any position to make demands nor are you in any position to define what is required. I have a very strong argument which you have failed miserably at countering. You have been a miserable failure in this entire thread. You posted blanket terms like "well I know a lot of people who changed". I am just starting to believe you are a charlatan who possesses no knowledge of any subject discussed here.

[Giancarlo]

And I am not presently a political science major. You cannot even get your verb tenses correct. I graduated several years ago.

[Ben Kenobi]

All I said is sex is part of my relationship. Stop being a know-it-all buffoon and respond to what I actually said.

And all I said is that you can have a relationship without sex, contrary to what you've stated at least three times now.

STDs? Oh really? I don't think so. My boyfriend and I are healthy and we don't engage in risky sex. So please go on. I would like to hear it!

You would do well to do what many choose not to do.

You are not in any position to make demands nor are you in any position to define what is required.

Every debate I've ever been in has defined terms before going on further. You can tell everyone how strong your argument must be, but that doesn't change that you're unwilling to actually define your terms.

Basic, basic stuff. Personally I think your unwillingness damages your defense more than anything I could ever say.

[Giancarlo]

And all I said is that you can have a relationship without sex, contrary to what you've stated at least three times now.



You would do well to do what many choose not to do.

All I said is I don't give a **** what you think. Isn't that obvious at this point?

Your second statement is that of an idiot. I am perfectly safe and healthy . Many Conservative Christians die early from heart attacks though.

I have been in an exclusive relationship for years.

[Giancarlo]

Basic stuff? Coming from a fool with no background in this subject and no idea what a debate is all about... Quite ironic. You have no clue what you are talking about. I asked you about those who have changed and to post corroboration. You never did. You are not in any position to make demands.

You don't need to define every single word in a debate. If you had an actual degree you would know that.

[Ben Kenobi]

All I said is I don't give a **** what you think. Isn't that obvious at this point?

You obviously do care enough to tell us all about it. I was amused by first you told us then you complained when I commented on it. Dude, if you don't want comments on it, don't tell people about it. Not hard.

Your second statement is that of an idiot. I am perfectly safe and healthy .

If it's so dumb why are you saying you're exclusive? You've essentially conceded all my points.

I asked you about those who have changed and to post corroboration

Changed what, their pants? Their shirt? That is why I asked you for your definition, which you have not yet provided.