Posts: 21362
-
Karma: 5,142
Uh... "THAT'S UNNATURAL" And "EATING MEAT IS OKAY" are FAR from analogous, Patty. Try again. A closer comparison to your "vegetarianophobe" comment would be, "You think homosexuality is okay? HOMOPHOBAPHOBE!"
I think you'll agree that neither makes much sense.
I'll say it one more time, "disagreement" with someone's sexual "preference" (I use the term loosely) is like "disagreement" with someone's skin colour. I might believe that being black is immoral because I think they're all descended from Cain and bear his mark like in the bible in the form of dark skin... I might not be afraid of them in the typical way, but there's still hate there, still racism.
I don't think the gay community gives two shits whether you "love" them or not, because you're all being a bunch of morally superior, condescending cocks who have no right to be. The monolithic church is one of the most irreligious bodies I can imagine. As a Bhuddist, I'm willing to bet Lauren has a better spiritual conception of religion than half of western civilization, and she doesn't even believe in a God.
Well, I do. And just because a book has been interpreted and reinterpreted to disfavour a minority group, just because a few stubborn, blind conservative groups refuse to acknowledge moral progress (I mean, the Pope still thinks that women's place is in the home), doesn't mean the idea of religious spirituality is inextricably interwoven with the marginalization of gays. It's just a cover story for hate, and the cover story is "we're real moral because we follow these arbitrary, unverifiable rules according to a moral system repeatedly disproved BY RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS." Sure, that makes tons of sense.
But none of this answers the question everyone really wants an answer to in here. So...
Lauren, how open are you to threesomes?