No one attacked her on her belifs.
We pointed out that she judges adidasss for his "sin" but fails to realize that something as little as her avatar and user title are venial sins according to the Catholic religion.

You can disagree with someone without judging them.I didn`t see her judging him I saw her wishing him well despite her beliefs.

And being a christian doesn`t mean having to live your life as a monk you know.

I know that.
But she wasn't completely accepting just because it is her belif that that is a sin, yet she completely fails to realize her own sin, that is displayed in her avatar. When I point it out to her, I am immature. Which is an easy way for her to say "I cant argue that"

This argument really doesnt need to sprout up again.

The bible is full of contradictions , religion is all down to personal interpretation. It`s not for you or me to say it`s wrong , it`s up to her because it`s her beliefs.

She doesn`t have to argue it , you might see it as wrong but they`re not your beliefs.

hahaha...no actually Richard, what you fail to realize is just why the Catholic church finds homosexuality unnatural and sinful. because homosexual sex does not produce children, according to the catholic dogma, all sex is sinful and wrong if it's not specifically intended for procreation. people who have sex out of wedlock and use protection, even married couples that have sex without the intent of having children ( oral sex included ) are sinners just as big as homosexuals. i'm assuming the girl is not a virgin which in fact WOULD make her a hypocrite.

the question of homosexuality being unnatural is debatable, what exists in nature cannot be unnatural, although the same can be applied to other " deviant" behavior, bottom line being, it's unnaturalness is defined by the social community and the opinion of the majority in a specific time frame. in ancient greece and amongst the native americans, homosexuality was perfectly natural. it became unnatural and undesirable after the condemnation of such behavior in the book of Leviticus. as for myself, i find the Bible to be a work of man, not God, thus susceptible to erroneous opinions and tied to the spirit of the time when it was created. i could go on on other "debatable" excerpts from the bible and their application to modern times but it would take too long.

sorry, i simply cannot tolerate ignorance. if she had any arguments about it she could have argued them, but i suspect her beliefs are based on prejudice alone without any real thought put into it and that's something i can't stand.

I've got your back anytime she says something man

The fact still remain she put aside her personal beliefs to wish you well.

I just think it was a shame that people couldn`t extend her the same courtesy

Vanilla' original statement^ (before the shitfest). :rolleyes:
Despite her belief's she wished him well.
Let's take that at face value.

i suppose you're right, it was big of her to acknowledge the magnitute of the moment, i just like getting into discussions about this because people usually don't have valid arguments to support their phobic stance. i still think that if she thought about it a bit harder ( instead of just regurgitating what others have told her ) she would come to a different conclusion. although to be fair, she did say she was not sure what to think about it all which leaves space for discussion no?

Do I sense a seperate thread entitled...'Homosexuality And The Church', in the making? ;)