- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobieone more question -
LOL, you gotta believe in me dude, i believe in you, it will come good, wait and see 🙂
if two men are only homosexual whilst engaging in homosexual sex, does this mean that they are not homosexual while in the state of getting married(presuming they are not having sex during the ceremony)?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThis isn't the real Robbie speaking... it's correctly punctuated! 🙂
Yes indeed, therefore seeing that the statement comes with a qualifier, that being, essentially or in essence and applying it to sexuality, it would therefore appear that being in a particular state is neither to be a heterosexual or a homosexual or not to be a heterosexual or a homosexual which is simply another way of saying that a potentiality exi ...[text shortened]... l or homosexual [b]in essence, but its a semantic argument and we are dealing with empirics.[/b]
1 edit
Originally posted by stellspalfiewhy you people need to make reference to my religion when making arguments is weak, real weak dude, hard to believe in you for that.
how does your new found existentialism fit with your religious views? my understanding is that the two dont fit together at all.
Originally posted by stellspalfiethey are in a state of getting married, if they practice homosexual acts, they are homosexuals.
one more question -
if two men are only homosexual whilst engaging in homosexual sex, does this mean that they are not homosexual while in the state of getting married(presuming they are not having sex during the ceremony)?
1 edit
Originally posted by stellspalfieActually i read Sartre when i was about seventeen to see what all the fuss was about, all that searching for the perfect moment, but the interesting thing is that you only respect intellectuals and academics, if a peasant farmer from Scotland makes a point you dismiss it as the words of a mad man, if it is cloaked in academic language with philosophical terms suddenly you are willing to give it credence, now that is hard to respect.
do i hear the faint sound of scotsman desperately thumbing through a copy of 'existentialism for dummies'.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobieif you have two sets of beliefs then they need to fit. otherwise you would be holding opposing values. so if you want to base your opinions on sexuality on existentialism and you also base your opinions on sexuality on your religious views its really important they dont clash or you have a problem.
why you people need to make reference to my religion when making arguments is weak, real weak dude, hard to believe in you for that.
you do have a problem because existentialism and being a jehovas witness dont fit. they clash........so its odd that you would use existentialism to form your opinion on sexuality.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobiei only respect intellectuals and academics? really??? i though that you only dealt with empirics? yet here you are making wild speculative comments, with out a shred of evidence. that, my friend is hard to respect.
Actually i read Sartre when i was about seventeen to see what all the fuss was about, all that searching for the perfect moment, but the interesting thing is that you only respect intellectuals and academics, if a peasant farmer from Scotland makes a point you dismiss it as the words of a mad man, if it is cloaked in academic language with philosophical terms suddenly you are willing to give it credence, now that is hard to respect.
Originally posted by stellspalfieI am an arteest, i claim artistic license, an arteest should not be forced to explain their work.
i only respect intellectuals and academics? really??? i though that you only dealt with empirics? yet here you are making wild speculative comments, with out a shred of evidence. that, my friend is hard to respect.
1 edit
Originally posted by stellspalfiedude i dont actually believe my own propaganda, you should know that by now.
if you have two sets of beliefs then they need to fit. otherwise you would be holding opposing values. so if you want to base your opinions on sexuality on existentialism and you also base your opinions on sexuality on your religious views its really important they dont clash or you have a problem.
you do have a problem because existentialism and bei ...[text shortened]... hey clash........so its odd that you would use existentialism to form your opinion on sexuality.