Holyfield deserves a reward

[KaL-EL]

People so quick to say christians this or christians that..but in reality NO RELIGION supports gay relations.

Also people who say animals are gay too are dumb. You propose that ****sexual behaviour and relationships in animals makes it ‘right’ for the same things in humans, but animals also practice rape, murder, incest, theft, physical abuse, and cannibalism. With this same 'logical' reasoning, we should accept and condone these sorts of things as a ‘natural' behavior as well.

[CubanGuyNYC]

My bad man, i'm at a philly airport so i dont have the best connection. Go to Matthew around chapter 19 when the pharisees are asking about divorce

Okay, here it is, Matthew 19:3-6 (NIV):

3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason? 4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that the Creator 'made them male and female,' 5 and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate."

This biblical quote addresses divorce, and only divorce. Despite what some may infer, because Jesus is only talking about men and women, it doesn't imply anything about ****sexuality.

As far as I know, Christ never specifically addressed ****sexuality. If anyone can correct me on this, I would welcome it. Please refer me to the proper book and verse.

[LacedUp]

So you are saying that I can call you a ****** because I know the difference between a right and a priviledge and you can't because you called the right to free speech a privilege.

I didn't call you an atheist, but if I had, my guess would be that you are just plain stupid. You use all the same arguments an atheist uses to dimminish the credibility of the bible yet at the same time claim to be a christian. Which by definition means you live by the bible.

If you are the a christian then you are supposed to live by the bible and not believe what is only convenient to you.

Freedom of speech may be a right under the American constitution. However, no right can be given to any one person by a constitution or government, because it is in fact something that is granted to you (definition of privilege). A right is a birth right, i.e. the right to life. You have been granted the freedom of speech, however, if you were living in Saudi Arabia - that may not necessarily be the case. A human right is a human right regardless of where you are in the world.

Now, though freedom of speech is included in the human rights, it is by far the most disputed one. For example, ever heard of Slander? Libel? Court contempt? I'm an educated journalist with speciality in media law, don't try to make it out like I am not the one who knows what he's talking about.

Maybe you should look of the definition of privilege. And then tell me I'm just plain stupid.

Oh really, says you? There are many interpretations of the bible, priests around the world live and preech different morals. We have protestants, catholics, lutherans, jehovas witnesses, baptists, orthodox. Are you in such position to know all the ins and outs of each religion, that you can clarify to me that by not believing in discriminating against other people, I am not a Christian. In fact, there are about 30 thousand or more Christian denominations. Do you know them all? Or are you just saying because I don't believe in what you believe in, I am not Christian.

My guess it's the latter. In case you didn't know, the bible contradicts itself many times over on this topic exactly.

[LacedUp]

People so quick to say christians this or christians that..but in reality NO RELIGION supports gay relations.

Also people who say animals are gay too are dumb. You propose that ****sexual behaviour and relationships in animals makes it ‘right’ for the same things in humans, but animals also practice rape, murder, incest, theft, physical abuse, and cannibalism. With this same 'logical' reasoning, we should accept and condone these sorts of things as a ‘natural' behavior as well.

How can something be unnatural when the natural world is doing the exact same thing?

Jesus some people.

[CubanGuyNYC]

People so quick to say christians this or christians that..but in reality NO RELIGION supports gay relations.

Also people who say animals are gay too are dumb. You propose that ****sexual behaviour and relationships in animals makes it ‘right’ for the same things in humans, but animals also practice rape, murder, incest, theft, physical abuse, and cannibalism. With this same 'logical' reasoning, we should accept and condone these sorts of things as a ‘natural' behavior as well.

I don't know if no religion supports gay relations, but I know that Judaism, Christianity and Islam do not. Of course, they all share the same roots. Could it be that ****sexuality has been scorned because it is unusual and doesn't promote procreation, among other things?

[Humean]

First of all, you wouldn't be In my house, I have a feeling we wouldn't hit It off to well. Second, I don't care where Holyfield was, he Is entitled to his beliefs and opinions wheather you or I agree or disagree with him. The problem Is we live In a society that Is soft, where we cannot express our opinions, or speak freely, because people like yourself might end up getting there feelings hurt or maybe get offended. You are probably young, and everyone on your high school football team got playing time regardless of how good they actually were. You probably got a ribbon for finishing In eighth place. That's not how the real world works, grow up. As far as promoting being gay It happens all the time, when a gay activist group decides to hold a rally or march up and down past your house, they have the freedom of speech to PROMOTE being gay, just as a person that Is not gay has the freedom of speech to PROMOTE being straight. I have a right to oppose there lifestyle just as they have the right to oppose mine.

The freedom of speech is not, nor does it imply, the freedom to be heard. This is something that you and many others seem to be incapable of understanding. Now the relevance of where Holyfield was is that being told not to express particular opinions on someone elses property is not a violation of free speech. Now personally i'd have preferred that they had left Holyfield to continue expressing his opinion and to let it be challenged rather than have him told to stop making his argument but the stopping of him from expressing his views was nevertheless not a violation of his freedom of speech.

Now I am younger than you and clearly your advanced age on me has not incerased your capacity to argue because some of what you are saying is completely irrelevant to this argument.

As to the question of promotion. ****sexual activist groups are promoting, in the sense of advertising and publicizing their demands for respect, demands that they not be treated badly simply because they are sexually orientated towards their own sex. The sense of 'promotion' that I gather you mean is the sense of encouraging ****sexuality. That sense is not only not what ****sexual activist groups are doing but fundamentally they couldn't succeed in that even if they were. Sexual behaviour is something one chooses and in that sense it becomes a 'lifestyle' and you could certainly encourage a heterosexual person to have ****sexual sex and plenty of heterosexual people have had ****sexual experiences (although not usually under the encouragement of ****sexuals) but you cannot promote sexual orientation because it is not something that is chosen, nor is it something that can be acquired by any process of propaganda or such like.

Now nobody is saying that you or anyone else cannot believe what you believe about ****sexuality or verbalize your beliefs against ****sexuality or indeed even 'promote' heterosexuality, as astonishingly silly as that is. What you cannot do you is force others to listen to it nor can you engage in hate speech. Now hate speech is defined slightly differently in different countries but the general idea of it is that free expression no longer becomes a freedom but rather turns into a crime when what is expressed can be adequately contrued as inciting hatred, discrimination and violence against particular groups of people. Why are hate speech laws necessary? Well you just have to look at the effects that ignorance, and the hate that it can bear, can have upon minority and marginalized groups in society. I'm sure you are acquainted with the history of black people in various countries, mostly notably the US and South Africa, as well as Jews, women, ****sexuals, various ethnic groups and so on and so on.

What you call 'going soft' is what most intelligent people would call progress towards a more liberal, tolerant, and enlightened society. Now one thing you are right about though and that is we would not get along, I cannot stand bigots.

[Weltschmerz]

Who said I don't believe in the bible?

I said I don't take it word for word. You know who do though? Extremists.

"lack of knowledge of things" - Where have I showed lack of knowledge of 'things'? Please enlighten me. Anyways, God will praise you for discriminating other people. Keep believing it.

So you believe in some of the Bible, but not all of it. Sounds like you're a confused person. Make up your mind.

[ironmt]

Okay, here it is, Matthew 19:3-6 (NIV):

3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason? 4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that the Creator 'made them male and female,' 5 and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate."

This biblical quote addresses divorce, and only divorce. Despite what some may infer, because Jesus is only talking about men and women, it doesn't imply anything about ****sexuality.

As far as I know, Christ never specifically addressed ****sexuality. If anyone can correct me on this, I would welcome it. Please refer me to the proper book and verse.

That Is correct, Christ never specifically addressed ****sexuality but does the above scripture Imply Christ Intended a man to be with a man? You yourself In a previous post stated that the bible was against ****sexuality. So why are you trying to keep the argument alive? This Is getting somewhat ridiculous, we actually had someone claim to be a christian(lacedup) yet he made this comment, "By the way, I am Christian too. But I'm not stupid enough to take what an ancient book, written by man, said 1500 years ago., literally" Do you agree that you can make that type of statement and maintain the fact that you are a christian? Does that not seem to be a contradiction?

[radioraheem]

So you believe in some of the Bible, but not all of it. Sounds like you're a confused person. Make up your mind.

Glad I'm not the only one who sees the obvious confusion, ahahah.

[KaL-EL]

How can something be unnatural when the natural world is doing the exact same thing?

Jesus some people.

so then we should condone murder,rape,cannibalism,etc as natural behavior too because animals and humans both do it