Zap Branigan wrote:
…You probably don’t understand that, HH, because you did not serve your country (just like the guy you voted for president).
HH voted for Clinton?
Don’t be daft.
You know what I’m talking about.
Clinton, while not having served, did know the implications of the american war machine unleashed and it’s fury.
The other guy didn’t do both.
You don’t have to serve to recognize this. But some guys learn from that experience.
Headhunter then wrote:
Homosexuality is immoral because it is a choice made against either God or nature, depending on if you accept religion or science.
Yeah, right, because some guy who “accepts religion” and actually believes that stuff (Jesus, Allah, whatever) will then in turn start screwing his own gender?
(on a sidenote, HH, did you know that Mohamed Atta was a closet gay of the highest calibre. Had no girlfriend his whole life, never greeted them with a handshake -similar to Borat- and stressed in his last will that no women should be present at his funeral. Kind of frustrates a guy, doesn’t it?
Now that happens if you are gay and simultaneously truly believe in (a old mesopotamian) god. )
And why on earth would that be “scientifically” against nature? Please , no bullshit links to right nut christian fanatic sites. Honest explanations, please. [/quote]
You’re asking for serious explination of the “against nature” argument?
Its always the same:
Boys fuck girls and make babies. Duh! Anything else is against nature!
Of course, this is the same way black men fuck black women and make black babies… so for a black man to fuck an asian woman is against nature. Same with any other interracial relationship.
Keep in mind ALL the arguments against homosexuality were used against interracial relationships. All.
Nevermind that homosexuality has been shown to occur in plenty of species… to narrowminded bigots, its “against nature”.