Mississippi passes religious 'Freedom' bill:

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
What complete Cadswallop. There is nothing which causes a person to engage in a specific type of sexual act. Anyone that has recourse to the faculty of conscience is a free moral agent and capable of any type of sexual act. Furthermore there is NO genetic predisposition which causation a person to behave in a particular way. why? because a predispo ...[text shortened]... that you are an automaton completely at the mercy of your genes and unable to act independently.

Ahh yes, Robert has his own fandango definition of what 'sexuality' is. Which is of course completey different to everybody else's standard definition.

Originally posted by josephw
If you know pedaphilia is immoral, and if you know homosexuality is immoral, then defend how you think those who practice those behaviors have the right to do so in the public arena.

It sounds a little bit like you are saying "you know homosexuality is immoral" to people who don't think it's immoral.

Originally posted by sonhouse
AND you (Robbie) have to answer the question as to why animals, which you would say don't have what we call morals, also have a portion that are gay, quite a number of species.

And in humans, it has been around 2 to 5% of the population for as long as we have history records, thousands of years and in some cultures, even codified.

There is no moralit ...[text shortened]... he morality is in the eyes of the beholder and that using religion as an excuse to discriminate.

the animals are gay argument is very old and hackneyed and equates human behaviour with animal. First of all animals act out of instinct. I once saw a dog attempt to make love to the end of a sofa, are we to assume that he knew what he was doing, that he had a preference for sofas and that he was planning on spawning armchairs? are we? well let us not talk nonsense. There are many types of animal behaviour if we attribute them to humans have disastrous consequences. We are not animals, we are humans.

Originally posted by josephw
No homosexual or pedophile has any such right to practice their immoral lifestyle, only a militant agenda to dismantle morality. It's apparent which side you're on.

[1] Pedophiles molesting children is illegal. Do you think homosexual acts should be illegal too? [2] Do you think people who oppose discrimination against homosexuals also support the right of pedophiles to molest children?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Ahh yes, Robert has his own fandango definition of what 'sexuality' is. Which is of course completey different to everybody else's standard definition.

Hey sup Proper Boofhead, long time no see! 😛

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the animals are gay argument is very old and hackneyed and equates human behaviour with animal. First of all animals act out of instinct. I once saw a dog attempt to make love to the end of a sofa, are we to assume that he knew what he was doing, that he had a preference for sofas and that he was planning on spawning armchairs? are we? well let us ...[text shortened]... at we attribute them to humans have disastrous consequences. We are not animals, we are humans.

Nope, wrong again. We're animals.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Homosexuality is not immoral.

The question was about paedophilia which is both immoral and illegal.

"Homosexuality is not immoral"

It's not up to you to deside what is moral or not.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Nope, wrong again. We're animals.

And behaving like animals too.

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"Homosexuality is not immoral"

It's not up to you to deside what is moral or not.[/b]

How did you decide that pedophiles molesting children is immoral?

Originally posted by josephw
You're playing word games because you have no moral grounds for your argument.

I am not 'playing word games' in any way shape or form. Do you even know what that phrase means?
I asked you a straight forward question and you failed to answer it.

If you know pedaphilia is immoral, and if you know homosexuality is immoral,
But I do not 'know that homosexuality is immoral'.

then defend how you think those who practice those behaviors have the right to do so in the public arena.
Many behaviours that are considered immoral are also legal. Something being immoral does not automatically remove your rights to practice it in the public arena. For example, I consider having an extra-marital affair to be immoral. I also do not support arresting anyone who practices it in the public arena.

No homosexual or pedophile has any such right to practice their immoral lifestyle, only a militant agenda to dismantle morality. It's apparent which side you're on.
It is apparent that you are unable to articulate why you believe either practice is immoral, and that you are quite seriously confused about rights.
In addition if you believe I have a 'militant agenda to dismantle morality' then you are confused about that too.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Nope, wrong again. We're animals.

Really? Ok how about if I go around hunting down and eating my rivals offspring like lets see a lion! Will I tell the police that Proper Knob said that I was just an animal and that in order for me to preserve my lineage i had to engage in infanticide like the lion that I am. I wonder what the judge will say when he sends me to prison when i base my defence on the idea that it was my animal instincts wot made me do it. Poor Robbie the lion he will say, its no place for you in a zoo but I have no choice, you broke the law. Wow we live in crazy times.!

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"Homosexuality is not immoral"

It's not up to you to deside what is moral or not.[/b]

Its unnatural the physiology of the human body makes this clear.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Provision should simply be made to allow those who do not wish to provide goods or services which transgress their religious beliefs and conscience to do so without fear of prosecution. So no I don't see how this can't and doesn't work in a heterogeneous society.

Religious beliefs, in so far as they are acted upon and therefore affect others, are personal preferences.

What is and isn't seen as "truth" regarding supernatural things are, objectively speaking, merely opinions. An affiliation to a church ~ or acting upon certain articles of faith ~ is not immutable.

You don't like homosexuality and you don't think you should be compelled to enter into business transactions with people who are homosexual.

If a business didn't want to enter into a business transaction with members of your religious group, and your group decided to sue the business for discriminating against its members, would you oppose such a move?

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"Homosexuality is not immoral"

It's not up to you to deside what is moral or not.[/b]

The fact is NOBODY should be deciding the morality of adult sexual preferences.

That should not even be in the morality equation.

Like I said, you and your ilk want CONTROL not moral decisions.

Originally posted by sonhouse
The fact is NOBODY should be deciding the morality of adult sexual preferences.

That should not even be in the morality equation.

Like I said, you and your ilk want CONTROL not moral decisions.

I think the only moral issues in sexual matters are whether there is informed consent and whether responsibility will be taken for any children that result from the sexual relationship.