• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Kirk Cameron Finally Weighs in on How Gays Will Destroy Civilization

So this money that these 3rd world people all get influences them to support gay rights?

That'll explain why 3rd world counties are so poor and have terrible records where it comes to gay rights.


Full of Global Village People?


:eek: I never knew!
And how exactly do your displays of bigotry influence equal rights anywhere in the world?
 
So what do we have here? A christian fundie who is true to the core of christian doctrines? Yes, seems like it.

Not really, seeing as he is a biblical literalist, and an old school guy, he has 2 huge inherent contradictions, summed up by 2 words.

Thricely damned.

There are two groups of people who are thricely damned ( to clarify, not able to get back in god's good graces after the act.) apostates, and homosexuals.

Kirk is an apostate, and he says he wants to save homosexuals.

Sorry Kurt, but if your being literal with this stuff, there is no reason to try and save them, no amount of god bothering after the fact can. By your own literal interpretation, its wasted breath.

But you know that Kirk and those like him are just going to skim over that inconvenient fact, while claiming that everything else is 100% literal and accurate.

So no, he isn't even being true to the wacky tripe he chooses to feed his brain with.
 
Again, you're confusing "class of people" with "class of behavior". I know you make no distinction, but he and I do.

The problem is, that is simply a way thought of by someone who didn't like being called a gay basher to deflect criticism.

Sure, you buy into it, but just because you have chosen to drink the Kool-aid, it doesn't suddenly make the mode of thought make any sense, nor deserve respect.

Honestly it boils down to knowing people being harmed when you see it. That is the true test of a moral person, to be able to see when one group is trying to keep another down ( or one person.), and fight agaisnt that. The very fact that christianity has made so many ways to confuse their members in regards to this premise, is grade a evidence of its manipulative and harmful nature. When you can convince someone that they can hate someones lifestyle but still not be hateful, you have officially neutered them of their ability to differentiate real right from wrong, and that is a scary ******* thought.
 
Same-sex marriages became legal in 2009 here in Sweden and since then homosexuals are still a small minority. Same-sex marriages are a tiny fraction of all marriages in total, and the amount weddings that take place in Churches is even smaller. Pedophilia is still illegal and polygamous marriages are not allowed. Child sacrifice and Satan worship is not that common.

What other harmful effects have people said would come from this? I mean these people are experts at playing off peoples emotions and spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt amongst fearful fools, so being painfully vague is their main strength.

You know what, when stripped away of all rationalizations, and whatnot, this is what i hear when i hear these kind of folks going on about homosexuality destroying society. Kirk, and his son analogy really cemented it in.

"Listen, i personally don't care if your gay, but the problem is , i want kids. I know you may not think you being gay, and open about it will effect this, but it does.

And the reason is as follows, if i have a kid, he or she might be gay. I can't deny this, i know it is a possibility.

Now, if you folks just stay in the closet, and we keep a 'don't ask don't tell' kind of philosophy, my kid is going to de-facto feel shameful about these attractions. And this is good for me, because i don't want to have to deal with this issue, my facts arn't that convincing, and the only way they will have any weight is if society in general treats homosexuality like a drug addiction, something that doesn't harm anyone else as long as it is kept under wraps.

The problem comes in, when society is doing what it is doing now, and accepting homosexuality as a legitimate part of life. You have to see the problems this makes for me.

First off, if my kid has no shame about it, they arn't even going to try and hide it. And come on, do you think the people i know and love are going to not give me **** over this? Do you understand the **** storm this will have, for me?

Second, if it is accepted, my reasons, well lets be honest here, they sound silly as hell. He will have me and my kind of people, on one side, saying stuff that only makes sense if you only have exposure to my social circles, and the rest of the world on the other. That just isn't a fair debate, and this is my child, i shouldn't have to compete for his mind space.

Third, if everyone were just to stick to this, the conversation wouldn't even come up. My kid could be as gay as he wanted, behind closed doors, remain a bachelor or single gal, come up with some excuses, and no conflict at all would happen. No awkward conversation at thanksgiving, no screaming match about bringing over his boyfriend, or her girlfriend at christmas, nothing. Heck, they could even just say they are good friends, then everyone wins.

In short, if we all just shut up about it, it will be easier for me to raise my kids the way i want. And i don't really hate the gays, seriously, i just don't want to have to deal with these kind of things. "
 
Slightly off topic. But was child pornography ever legal in Sweden? Something tells me that I read somewhere they were late to get it off the books.

For whatever reason you see it as being relevant: Child pornography was legal from 1971 to 1980. And no, having sex with children was not legal. The age of consent was (at least for heterosexuals) and still is 15.
 
My atheism came in stages. First I rejected a particular denomination, then I became a theist agnostic, then an agnostic, then an atheist. The demonination was because of two things; defining factor was that they had children between the ages of 3-12 chanting that they will go to hell if they don't come to that church. What had me blinking in disbelief, though, was their boasting of their missionary work. They really were way too proud of themselves for spreading the word of god. Visiting villages in 3rd world nations and convincing them that it was god's kindness that brought them, insisting that they should be thanking Jesus, it kind of felt like a weird place for Jesus to suddenly start caring.

The charity ChildFund used to be called "Christian Children's Fund". The name was changed partly because a "watchdog" group called MinistryWatch slammed them for only supplying hungry and suffering children with trivial things like food and shelter and medical care, rather than important things like the Gospel.

Because, you know, feeding the hungry and clothing the naked is just so un-Christian.
 
No it doesn't. I've argued in favour of gay marriage with people who are great people and very good parents.

You're right. I was in a bit of a rage (for as far as I'm able to do that).

For what it's worth, what makes someone a bad parent is when they don't let their children be gay or worse, try to "make" them hetero.

Please don't misconstrue this as me saying that "if you do those things, you'll automatically be a good parent", because there are plenty of things that can also make someone a bad parent, such as not taking your kid to a doctor, but, for instance, to a homoeopath.
 
You're right. I was in a bit of a rage (for as far as I'm able to do that).

For what it's worth, what makes someone a bad parent is when they don't let their children be gay or worse, try to "make" them hetero.

Please don't misconstrue this as me saying that "if you do those things, you'll automatically be a good parent", because there are plenty of things that can also make someone a bad parent, such as not taking your kid to a doctor, but, for instance, to a homoeopath.
Is that a deliberate typo? :D
 
For whatever reason you see it as being relevant: Child pornography was legal from 1971 to 1980. And no, having sex with children was not legal. The age of consent was (at least for heterosexuals) and still is 15.

I have this image of two old Swedish pedophiles talking about the golden age of kiddy porn.

I know it was 30 years ago but you have to wonder how such laws stayed on the books.
 
For what it's worth, what makes someone a bad parent is when they don't let their children be gay or worse, try to "make" them hetero.

Yeah I would agree with that. It's kind of like that with life, there is potential for disaster if one of their kids turned out to be gay.... but it's most likely a problem they may never have to deal with.
 
story of Adam and Eve

Link here. The author wrote, "And, finally, notice that Eve is not created, in this narrative, to make children with Adam; this story is about loneliness and love, not procreation and progeny. Indeed, Eve's femininity is not even essential to be what Hebrew calls an ezer kenegdo, and what antiquated King James English calls a 'help-meet': someone able to be with Adam on equal terms and be a companion to him."
 
I dunno how, but I know it will look like, Fa-Bu-lous !


:D

Hey, now. Don't sell the God of the Old Testament short. In the book of Exodus he spends a whole chapter (Ex 26) describing what kind of linen curtains that He wants. (He went with a blue, purple, and scarlet color scheme.)
 
What would you do? Force homosexuals to have sex and thus reproduce?

Odd question, I wouldn't do anything about homosexuals. I don't see why I should need to.

If you merely don't want them to act on their sexuality, but you don't force them to have children, they still won't reproduce, and you'll still have a "barely-to-non reproductive society".

So, what are you going to do?

:confused: Not sure how you're motivating that kind of question based on what I wrote.
 
Your post, while not intending to be so, is slightly irksome because there are many folks in the U.S. who believe that if we gave homosexuals equal rights 2 then that lifestyle choice3 would become more attractive to young adults and the numbers of homosexuals would dramatically climb and then birth rates would drop to dangerously low levels. These chuckleheads think that they have constructed a non-Biblical, yet logically-perfect argument against rights for homosexuals.

Hmm, well no that was not the intended point. I do not believe social pressure/enviroment 'creates' homosexuals. I believe nature does. The norm in society is and will probably always be a heterosexual one, and when/if there's a progressive increase of social cultivation of homosexuality (independant from the actual number of homosexuals) then there will be, expectadly, an increasive inverse reaction to that. I'm not sure if this is Cameron's motivation, but I think it is a shared one amongst those who make such statements.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom