son comes out of the closet to his religous parents

Master Zik · Aug 29, 2014

Keko Jones said:
CoupeIt88 said:

No it's not a blanket statement, it's your preferred way of spinning what I said - and when I say spinning I mean an uncontrollable dizzy amount of spinning.

You obviously still don't understand the bigger picture.

It's cool tho, doesn't surprise me.

Click to expand...

sure ...

You took the opportunity to assert your none religious beliefs and call those that chose to believe ignorant and others barbaric ... But its cool .. I don't understand because u had a bigger message ...

LoL.....

These are all reaches and assumptions on your part. Only you brought up the word "barbaric" It's clear you're using loaded words to put in to others posts to make your stance seem like it's in the right.

So far seems only you and that person that repped you bought in to it though.

Keko Jones said:
Master Zik said:

No it did not.

He just chose to focus his post on the intolerant religious aspect.

Instead of jumping to conclusions you could've legitimately asked him to clarify instead of sarcastically accusing him.

Click to expand...

naw I'm good ... Although I was being a bit sarcastic I did ask a question, please do tell me you caught the ??? ... Smh ... Capt ....

I also just wanted to point out that this type of incident wouldnt only happen just because religious beliefs. There are people with no religious beliefs that would act same way. Like you stated he went out of his way to focus on the religion aspect and furthermore make a remark about Arab-Muslims being barbaric or extremist when this is not the case.

This is a blanket statement that lump all Arab Muslim in one group ... No different than saying a .... You know what .... Nevermind ...

But do please continue.

It was accusatory and sarcastic. Didn't seem like a real sincere question. Hence me saying "you could've legitimately asked him to clarify", you adding "????" doesn't change your tone or the intent.

Of course this wouldn't only happen just cuz of religious beliefs. NOBODY is saying that. You assumed this and then acted on your assumption. Point is this vid and topic does have religious angles to it. Only you created this imaginary argument where only religious ppl would have a problem with this and then argued against it as if anyone else is involved.

I didn't say he went out of his way. I said he chose to focus on that aspect of it. There's nothing wrong with that. He's talking about the ignorance and intolerance of some religious ppl. That he mentions Arab Muslims doesn't mean he's talking about all of them. He just highlighted the fact that there some that would have an even more intense and worse reaction to this situation. You just now decided to claim that he made a blanket statement about all Arab-Muslims and that they are barbaric and extremist which is another ASSumption on your part.

But please do stop while you're ahead.

osh kosh bosh · Aug 29, 2014

TVobach said:
Didn't watch the video, but looks like I got the idea of it...

Here's the thing...

I am a Christian. ANY "Christian" that looks at homosexuals and hates them/thinks less of them is so wrong. Sure, the Bible states that it is a sin to be homosexual...and I agree 100% with that and disagree with any person that is homosexual...notice I said DISAGREE not HATE.

While the Bible states that it is wrong to be homosexual, it also states you are to love your brother as yourself, it states to be full of grace, no one person is better than any other.

I will pray for not only that young man that come out of the closet to his parents, but his parents as well, because I believe they are sinning by hating their son just as much as their son. And I don't want this to sound like I am putting down a homosexual...like I said, I disagree with it, but I sin too...so I am no better than they are.

Ehhh I have a problem with this.

I am not particularly religious, but I grew up around it, and have uncles who can damn near quote huge chunks of the bible word for word, and I've read a couple books on theology, historicity of the bible.

This is all to say I have a slightly more detailed and academic understanding of the bible than most truly religious people and I just fundamentally disagree with the concept that unequivocally "THE BIBLE SAYS homosexuality is wrong"

The Bible ultimately is the WORD OF GOD, but it was still translated and re translated by living people, so you have to look at it in the context of, jewish life at that time.

So what does the bible really say about homosexuality?

You have leviticus; thats easy to shoot down, it's part of the holiness code, a set of ethics used to set the Israelites apart from their oppressors. Is it talking about sexual orientation or gay sex? never mind the fact that we toss out most of these levitcal rules in the new testament.

Then you have the stuff in genesis which pretty much any reputable scholar agree's that it refers to hospitality and justice rather than homosexuality.

So lets deal with the new testament, since no one follows the holiness code anymore.

"Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error."

Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites ect ect

What do these passages refer to really, what are they talking about?

Can you be certain that god is talking about two gay people falling in love getting married, or is it about orientation or is it just about the act of penetrative sex, or is it talking about child sex?

if its just about the act what is the purpose of those lines? Is it to tell Christians that being gay is inherently sinful and will be sent to hell?

or maybe just maybe, it's was a way for ancient jews, a nomadic and constantly oppressed people to separate themselves from oppressions. Remember, rape, including male on male rape was very common in ancient war, the jews lost a bunch of wars, they had no concept of sexual orientation they probably only knew of the rape, and pederasty that was common in roman culture. It would explain why lesbianism is never mentioned. engaging in gay behavior would have probably been seen as roman or Egyptian, basically a jewish person assimilating with roman/egyption ect culture, a nomadic people would look to aovid that at all costs probably.

I don't want to ramble, but UNLESS you have seriously and academically considered, what the bible says about homosexuality, from a theological perspective, read about it's origins, the context of culture of when it was written, the history, the translation of the word "abomination", and all the other historical stuff surrounding the bible, then DON'T use it to justify your own insecurities, or uncomfortable with gay people.

If you have done the reasearch and your still confident that the bible says that being gay is sinfull, then fine but most people don't.

osh kosh bosh · Aug 29, 2014

Cliff notes

- what the bible says about homosexuality is not clear and open to interpretation.

-UNLESS you have seriously and academically considered, what the bible says about homosexuality, from a theological perspective, read about it's origins, the context of culture of when it was written, the history, the translation of the word "abomination", and all the other historical stuff surrounding the bible, then DON'T use it to justify your own insecurities, or how uncomfortable with gay people.

- If you have done the reasearch and your still confident that the bible says that being gay is sinfull, then fine but most people don't.

keko jones · Aug 29, 2014

Master Zik said:
These are all reaches and assumptions on your part. Only you brought up the word "barbaric" It's clear you're using loaded words to put in to others posts to make your stance seem like it's in the right.

So far seems only you and that person that repped you bought in to it though.
It was accusatory and sarcastic. Didn't seem like a real sincere question. Hence me saying "you could've legitimately asked him to clarify", you adding "????" doesn't change your tone or the intent.

Of course this wouldn't only happen just cuz of religious beliefs. NOBODY is saying that. You assumed this and then acted on your assumption. Point is this vid and topic does have religious angles to it. Only you created this imaginary argument where only religious ppl would have a problem with this and then argued against it as if anyone else is involved.

I didn't say he went out of his way. I said he chose to focus on that aspect of it. There's nothing wrong with that. He's talking about the ignorance and intolerance of some religious ppl. That he mentions Arab Muslims doesn't mean he's talking about all of them. He just highlighted the fact that there some that would have an even more intense and worse reaction to this situation. You just now decided to claim that he made a blanket statement about all Arab-Muslims and that they are barbaric and extremist which is another ASSumption on your part.

But please do stop while you're ahead.

OK I'm going to stop ... If they were Arab Muslim he probably be dead .... That is not an extreme and depicting Muslims as barbaric or extremist??? ... I'm just reaching right??? ... Come on son.

Nobody is saying that but funny the wording seem yo indicate that "Just another reason why religion just continues to breed ignorance," ... Again might not be his intent but IMHO he is clearly targeting peoples beliefs/preference ....

You can't argue what he wrote ...

This reaction could have come from anyone ... Just not a religious type ... Getting killed could of have happen by anyone why even mentioned Arab Muslim is its not a generalization ... You have to be kidding me ...

But imma stop because you clearly got what he was saying and I didnt ... Even thought we are two different people reading the same **** .... Maybe you him?

Either way ... You continue to defend him but I still stand by what in saying ...

People say a general statment like that about black or Asians and there be fireworks up in here.

am1x90xnike · Aug 29, 2014

TimCity2000 said:
who would choose this?

and what does that even mean? that we secretly are attracted to women, but are gluttons for punishment / ridicule / lesser rights, so we pretend ("choose") to like men instead?

Wait what? It means you choose to blow a dude. You don't have to blow dudes, like the physical act. You can be attracted but never act. I'm attracted to Chloe Moertz, even if I got the chance and she was with it, I wouldn't do it because she's underaged. I'd choose to keep my penis in my pants.

It's funny, when it's homosexual, sex is some uncontrollable urge, like the thought of you just never blowing dudes seems ludicrous...but....you talk about pedophilia...they're sick...but...pedophilia was legal until, ****, jurisdictions.

What's the difference? both are having consensual sex (presumably) but it's somehow different, both sexual compulsions, both taboo (culturally) but ones a choice and the other is born that way. Don't get it.

Having/not having sex is a choice you make.

Unless, we are talking attraction...that's what makes one gay/straight is who they're attracted to.but, that would make sexuality a temperament notion for most, meaning you can be gay today but straight tommorrow as people's attractions change with time.

So, which is sex? An uncontrollable urge? A passing fancy? A calculated decision (my theory)? All of the above?

But, these thoughts are generally beyond NT so the question will go unanswered and the idea will be ridiculed and dismissed...hopefully a few will ponder my quandary, but I doubt well ever hear of them.

(Just in case you can't see what I'm asking, start with the question marks)

Master Zik · Aug 29, 2014

Wow son just presumed pedophiles have consensual sex. He fails to see the difference between THAT and consensual homosexual sex.

PEDOPHILES HAVE CONSENSUAL SEX?

PEDOPHILES!!!

PEDOPHILES????!!!!

People who are attracted to children have consensual sex with them? CHILDREN?!!!

Wow :smh:

I try to ignore dude's posts in certain threads but damn. I'd rather you go back talking about your friends being born alcoholics.

keko jones · Aug 29, 2014

Yeah I have to agree with Master on this ...

But I'm willing to bet dude is not talking about extremes like a 50 to a 4 y/o but something more like a 30 to a 16 y/o ... Just saying ... Still a bad situation because of the maturity level but in some countries totally legal.

jayzz · Aug 29, 2014

Master Zik said:
Wow son just presumed pedophiles have consensual sex. He fails to see the difference between THAT and consensual homosexual sex.

PEDOPHILES HAVE CONSENSUAL SEX?

PEDOPHILES!!!

PEDOPHILES????!!!!

People who are attracted to children have consensual sex with them? CHILDREN?!!!

Wow I try to ignore dude's posts in certain threads but damn. I'd rather you go back talking about your friends being born alcoholics.

View media item 1156753

Master Zik · Aug 29, 2014

When you just throw out pedophilia out there like that I can't give you the benefit of the doubt or even consider your main argument anymore if you were about to make a point. At that point I'm too appalled.

The pedophilia and bestiality type arguments whenever discussing homosexuals have that logical fallacy aspect to it and is just a specific type of ignorance I don't entertain.

deleted · Aug 29, 2014

Your sexuality isn't solely determined by the sexual acts you engage in.

There are people who abstain who identify as homosexuals.

am1x90xnike · Aug 29, 2014

Wait, a 17 year old can't have consensual sex with a 21 year old? I think Dwight Howard would have something to say about that.

Like, actual thought is missing on here.

Explain the logical fallacy. Or is that a buzz word to make you sound smart?

Master Zik · Aug 29, 2014

am1x90xnike said:
Wait, a 17 year old can't have consensual sex with a 21 year old? I think Dwight Howard would have something to say about that.

Like, actual thought is missing on here.

So you're admitting here with this example that you do not know what pedophilia is right?

At least this can be made clear now, right? Just admit it.

You're confusing what's illegal in some states for what constitutes pedophilia to support your argument. Go back to the drawing board.

Also reconsider who is missing actual thought here.

am1x90xnike · Aug 29, 2014

If you get caught having sex with an underaged girl you are a pedophile. You have to register, there's no debating that. And, in some states, a 21 year old who had sex with a 17 year is a pedo, that's a fact. Like, there's this thing called the law. It's written.

Master Zik · Aug 29, 2014

am1x90xnike said:
If you get caught having sex with an underaged girl you are a pedophile. You have to register, there's no debating that. And, in some states, a 21 year old who had sex with a 17 year is a pedo, that's a fact. Like, there's this thing called the law. It's written.

You register as a sex offender not a pedophile. Nobody anywhere registers as a pedophile :lol:

You're not clear on what's the actual law is are you? Now you're just making these assumptions based off memory of what you thought was the case but isn't.

keko jones · Aug 29, 2014

am1x90xnike said:
If you get caught having sex with an underaged girl you are a pedophile. You have to register, there's no debating that. And, in some states, a 21 year old who had sex with a 17 year is a pedo, that's a fact. Like, there's this thing called the law. It's written.

bruh .. Be quiet man .. I tried helping u by clearling up ur post but now you are going on a road that I can't follow.

Not all register sex offenders have sex with minors .. There are different types and just because you are a register sex offender does not mean u did a sexual act that hurt someone. Example .. I have to urinate and I hide behind the bushes to do it ... I just happen yo be that a kid saw me and the cops where called. Yes I can be arrested and charged as a sex offender.

am1x90xnike · Aug 29, 2014

Ok, because pedophile is not an actual legal but psychological term. You've won this strawman.

However, when most people think of pedophile they associate it with anyone under the age of consent, they are legally sex offenders but colloquially pedophiles. My arguments comes from the colloquial use of the term. Commenting on the taboo nature of sleeping with a 14 year old (which would not be pedophilia under the accepted psychological definition) and it's relation to the choices homosexuals make when they engage I'm sexual behavior.

Now, if you id as gay burg never commit a gay act, are you really gay?

Self-identification is less important than people think. You can think of yourself as a great person, but if I think you are a dbag, then, to me, you are a dbag. Both of us a right, just different perspectives.

Never said all sex offenders are pedophiles, said if your a pedophile you're a sex offender, read, re-read and don't assume.

jaysfiend23 · Aug 29, 2014

I hate over ply religious ppl in general so I'm not shucked by their reaction, I feel bad for the kid it's not an easy thing to do

pdino · Aug 29, 2014

I feel for the kid, I do.

80k to move out though? Made more in two days then many hard-working folks in tougher situations do in 2 years.

ain't right

Coupé It · Aug 29, 2014

keko jones
Listen up cause I'll only reply to you this once. Read and take it in. If you disagree, cool. Just don't spin it, don't add words to my mouth.

I absolutely meant what I said - "Religion breeds ignorance". I don't see how anyone can refute that, even the religious folks. Unless of course you're one of the naive ones with your finger in your *** :lol:

... Also very important going forward is, when I mean religion I mean man-made run religion as a whole.

Currently there are many countries in the middle-east whose government and laws are based on the Koran (Sharia Law). By that assessment alone and just a tiny bit of effort and research "Keko", you'd come to to realize that in many of those Islamic countries, home sexuality is legally punishable by death or imprisonment. So although I was making a witty funny comment about "if this is was an Arab family.." It's not far fetched to believe that a family, or the government (that should be there to protect a citizen), can actually imprison, torture, or kill that citizen.

It was not a dig, it's a fact. Now here is where my opinion comes in; the more religious, the more conservative, the more far out to the "right-wing" any community of religious people are (especially Christianity & Islam) - The more ignorant and arrogant they become. That breeds a new generation of ignorance especially when the government is involved. Human rights should not be defined by the ignorance of religion, it should be defined by freedom.

am1x90xnike · Aug 29, 2014

Atheists are so closed minded.

victor page · Aug 29, 2014

keko jones · Aug 29, 2014

^^^^ bruh just be quiet man .... You and your comments about my finger in *** are totally uncalled for and childish and thus diminishing your entire argument ....

Just listen to this ... You are blaming religion for what people do ... They do it because they are ignorant and choose to hide behind religion to do those things.

A good Christian or religious person would not condon homosexuality but would understand and not judge ...

Just to go back to your Arab comment ... You yourself said it .. Is the law regardless of religious beliefs the outcome of death would come from what's instill in them .. Just like Cuba back in the days and Jamaica ... Has nothing to do with religious beliefs .... We all know religion is a way to control the masses but not everyone that believes would have these views especially true believers ... Just ignorant people ...

jbc908 · Aug 29, 2014

son is an idiot, some things you leave off the internet, this is one of them.

jumpmanpro97 · Aug 29, 2014

if the mom knew since he was a little boy, I'm sure the dad knew too unless he was in denial about it.

Master Zik · Aug 29, 2014

am1x90xnike said:
Ok, because pedophile is not an actual legal but psychological term. You've won this strawman.

It was never a straw man. You simply do not know the difference between a pedophile and sex offender.

I made the mistake by assuming you did and actually meant to say pedophiles have consensual sex (but hey maybe you still mean that and think it makes some sense to you). Either way it was a ridiculous thing to say.

Commenting on the taboo nature of sleeping with a 14 year old (which would not be pedophilia under the accepted psychological definition) and it's relation to the choices homosexuals make when they engage I'm sexual behavior.

Kinda seems you still don't know what constitutes a pedophile by saying stuff like this.

If you're 5 years older or more and have sex with a 14 yr old, if you find yourself specifically attracted to prepubescent children and are at least 16, you are a pedophile. I don't know where you got the idea that having sex with a 14 yr old isn't considered pedophilia strictly based off the person being 14. That's not how it works.

Go watch a few eps of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit man :smh:

Keko Jones said:
Master Zik said:

These are all reaches and assumptions on your part. Only you brought up the word "barbaric" It's clear you're using loaded words to put in to others posts to make your stance seem like it's in the right.

So far seems only you and that person that repped you bought in to it though.
It was accusatory and sarcastic. Didn't seem like a real sincere question. Hence me saying "you could've legitimately asked him to clarify", you adding "????" doesn't change your tone or the intent.

Of course this wouldn't only happen just cuz of religious beliefs. NOBODY is saying that. You assumed this and then acted on your assumption. Point is this vid and topic does have religious angles to it. Only you created this imaginary argument where only religious ppl would have a problem with this and then argued against it as if anyone else is involved.

I didn't say he went out of his way. I said he chose to focus on that aspect of it. There's nothing wrong with that. He's talking about the ignorance and intolerance of some religious ppl. That he mentions Arab Muslims doesn't mean he's talking about all of them. He just highlighted the fact that there some that would have an even more intense and worse reaction to this situation. You just now decided to claim that he made a blanket statement about all Arab-Muslims and that they are barbaric and extremist which is another ASSumption on your part.

But please do stop while you're ahead.

Click to expand...

OK I'm going to stop ... If they were Arab Muslim he probably be dead .... That is not an extreme and depicting Muslims as barbaric or extremist??? ... I'm just reaching right??? ... Come on son.

How many gay Arabic-Muslim ppl have been killed for being gay within that region? It only takes one.

Nobody is saying that but funny the wording seem yo indicate that "Just another reason why religion just continues to breed ignorance," ... Again might not be his intent but IMHO he is clearly targeting peoples beliefs/preference ....

Well that's to me is a separate true statement that could be applied to more than this situation. I don't see how you see him saying religions breeds ignorance and automatically start saying he's implying a religion is barbaric and extremist. He said religion breeds ignorance not Islam.

You can't argue what he wrote ...

I'm not arguing what he wrote. I'm arguing your assumptions of his posts and now I guess your interpretations of his posts.

This reaction could have come from anyone ... Just not a religious type ... Getting killed could of have happen by anyone why even mentioned Arab Muslim is its not a generalization ... You have to be kidding me ...

Nobody is arguing this. Nobody said this couldn't happen. Only you are pretending as if that was implied. Reading Couplett88's posts on this the only other thing you could really assume he implied would be that this reaction is typical among religious families not that only religious ppl react in this way. You keep focusing on specifics never mentioned. You're making stuff up out of thin air to try to make it seem like he made a wide generalization on Islam being extremist and barbaric (loaded terms only used by you) to bolster your stance.

But imma stop because you clearly got what he was saying and I didnt ... Even thought we are two different people reading the same **** .... Maybe you him?

Not everyone's comprehension levels are on the same level so two ppl reading the same thing aren't guaranteed to get the same exact meaning. This isn't math.

At the very least though. I'm not gonna read a few statements and then automatically assume the worst especially when widespread generalizations weren't used. It'd be better to just ask the person to clarify but all you did was reply with sarcasm. Could've been worse.

Either way ... You continue to defend him but I still stand by what in saying ...

I'm not even defending him. I'm defending what was said. It's you that wants to accuse the person as if you knew what he meant beyond what was posted.

People say a general statment like that about black or Asians and there be fireworks up in here.

Maybe you on the wrong side of history.

Search

son comes out of the closet to his religous parents

Master Zik

osh kosh bosh

osh kosh bosh

keko jones

am1x90xnike

Master Zik

keko jones

jayzz

Master Zik

deleted

am1x90xnike

Master Zik

am1x90xnike

Master Zik

keko jones

am1x90xnike

jaysfiend23

pdino

Coupé It

am1x90xnike

victor page

keko jones

jbc908

jumpmanpro97

Master Zik

Similar threads

Share this page