>Just an observation, you have a problem with Rick's view on homosexuals, but I am also sure that Rick is also against murder, taking another man's wife, stealing, and also honoring his parents and a lot of other stuff you wouldn't agree with. Why aren't you upset with him for these beliefs? His view on homosexuals is no different than society just a few years ago if you think about it - so it's really unfair to attack Rick and "Christians" in general for this.

I wasn't attempting to discuss it from a religious point of view - but a social / philosophical one. The fact that he is unwilling to separate this from his religious views is not my fault .. so if he brings it into the discussion that this kind of discriminatory behavior is ok because its the christian thing to do, well then there you have it. Murder, stealing, etc are also socially unacceptable. I can assure you I don't disagree with everything the christian religion stands for.

>I could be wrong, but it sounds like to me a lot of your opinion on what you think "Christians" is all about comes from TV or reading something in the paper or online. These sources usually show a tiny tiny fringe (usually something "newsworthy" or must read byline) view of Christianity, and are not really what the average church or Christian in the pew is about.

I'm sorry but you are hugely incorrect here. I've studied this religion extensively, read the bible front to back more than once and have had plenty of time in all kinds of churches. One thing you are FOR SURE right about is what you see when it comes to TV news about Christianity (or pretty much any religion) is generally rather skewed. But even so there are supposed christian leaders out there like Pat Robertson that have a large following. Someone like that takes society the way it was in 1940 and think that we should all hold the same values and live the same was as we did then. Growing as a person, fine tuning your moral compass to adjust to the demands of living in a modern society - these things elude such people. In 1730 I'm sure many christians figured it was ok to own slaves - but guess what they grew and expanded their moral standards. Its not 1700 or 50AD - its 2013. There are billions of people on the planet and guess what, since we are all in such proximity of each other (for the most part of course, more so as time goes on) then we best make adjustments to be more accepting and tolerant of people different than ourselves. If not - well needless to say that is a potential disaster.

The Bible clearly approves of slavery in many passages, and it goes so far as to tell how to obtain slaves, how hard you can beat them, and when you can have sex with the female slaves. Now I'm going to assume that Rick does not accept this as ok behavior...so I have to admit that it baffles me that his justification for his views of homosexuals comes from the same text as this when clearly society is telling us not to discriminate against others because of their harmless lifestyles - which having nothing to do with anyone but them - is simply different than your own. Jumping up and down saying "god never changes" like he does is one thing - and ok if you buy into the whole god thing then perhaps he does not - but ever consider he grows as being just as we grow as people? If Rick thinks the whole world is going to end because god is pissed off at our tolerant and compassionate growth - then what is the alternative? Return to the way things used to be and get a few slaves to beat on?

Now I can already hear the wheels in Ricks brain spinning - so I will also point out that nowhere in the new testament will you find a condemnation of slavery, nor an updating of the Mosaic slave code. Instead you have stuff like Ephesians 6 where slaves are told to be “obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling”; and Philemon, where Paul sends back a runaway slave to his Christian owner. Jesus does not raise a word against the practice.

So where does this leave us? How about with a philosophical discussion. Well as you can see from the previous posts that is not possible for him because he claims the devil will not let him have such a talk, and then someone else tells me I'm closed minded. Riiiiiight.

In the meantime, we as humans still all have to live together as we're social animals - and frankly his viewpoints on this subject do not make the world a better place, they don't even leave it unaffected, they actually make it worse.

>>>>>>But how am I supposed to understand this when he refuses to explain it?
>>>>>He has explained it but from his point of view. You guys aren't talking at the
>>>>>same level, you're not coming at it from the same place at all and hence it's
>>>>>a monologue.
>>>>Not exactly - direct fair questions are not answered thus ending the dialogue.
>>>>In all fairness he has now explained the reason for doing so, but I have to admit
>>>>my skepticism when the reasoning is 'the devil wont let me".
>>>
>>>I can explain it to you, Victor, until I turn blue, but you won't be able to hear it. That's why I don't answer. Until you are looking to know the truth, it will forever elude you. Once you begin to seek the truth, you will find it. Until then you'll be trying to prove points and win arguments because your goals are there, and not on truth discovery, but rather arguing a personal belief.
>>>
>>>I will pray, and teach as best I can, and let God do His work in you, Victor.
>>
>>Yeah whatever dude. It's not the first time you've pulled the cop out with me when the discussion got difficult. The plain simple truth here is that you're stance towards gays and lesbians is discriminatory and bigoted. You can attempt to justify it with our religion all you want but that doesn't change the facts does it? If you don't want to admit then fine. If you think such behavior is acceptable in this day & age then you got a problem.