Do I need to quote you claiming to need a sound argument that gay people were not evil immoral sexual aberrations, that should be purged etc.?
Feel that way about straight people do you?:rolleyes:
Way to spectacularly miss the point yet again. No one is telling you to deny that aspect of who you are, yet for all the false piety and talk of love and tolerance, Bahai's can't reciprocate, but have to perpetuate archaic religious bigotries like homophobia.
This asinine comment still gets a massive so what, since being gay is part of who a person is, why does it need to have any overarching purpose beyond the common decency of letting people live their lives as equals, when they harm no one. Except of course imaginary deities, and the fragile...
Can I have that in a coherent English sentence? How does being gay represent a threat to gay people, when firstly gay people can and do procreate and secondly straight people have gay children? Do at least try to to understand the simple stuff.
All human morality is subjective, we each ultimately have moral authority, if we choose to relinquish this and blindly follow dogma or doctrine then we cease to be moral.
I don't know who they are, but they're clearly spectacularly ignorant idiots, and you'd do well to ignore them. Since straight people have gay children.
Maybe homophobia is a threat to bigotry, as they should all eventually die of embarrassment?
Nope, it's an irrelevant false dichotomy, as we are not faced with a choice between gay and straight people.
You can hardly deny gay people exist, while simultaneously decrying them as immoral? Though given the contradictions you've espoused thus far maybe you can?
In other news water is...
Claiming gay people are evil, immoral, sexual aberrations who should deny their very nature isn't loving, maybe love means something different to Bahai's?
It's also hard to imagine anyone can fail to see the danger in such a closed minded mindset. Literally nothing attributed that deity can be wrong or immoral, that's a terrifying delusion.
I know, it was utterly meaningless claim, without a mother and a father heterosexual people could not exist, so what was again the only cogent response to his assertion.
No, as that is just senseless gibberish. Why don't you try for once addressing what is said, rather then using the same tired old whataboutism you think is a compelling response.
The deity people imagine to be real can and often does reflect all manner of their own prejudices. This is...
I don't care about your duplicitous semantics, prejudice is amply defined in any dictionary, and the poster I responded to has espoused prejudice against gay people, as have you, as does your religion.
Then your response was absurdly irrelevant to my post obviously, as that was precisely the...
Of course it does, you clearly don't know what the word means. Societies make laws predicated on what we consider to be right and wrong behaviours and actions.