[tw]

Originally Posted by Jordon

There's no point in even trying to debate when you openly lie. For the THIRD TIME, I never said that. Read the thread again.

You may be surprised to learn that I am the only poster here who might support your position. I have not debated nor challenged anything in your posts. There was no assumption; just questions perfectly worded so that you can better clarify your previous posts. Clarification by breaking down questions into three simple categories. But again, you will not answer those questions with some assumption they are to attack you.

I posted questions - specifically - so that you could clarify your position. But instead you take offense to it? Do you fear to answer those questions or do you not want to answer them? Those questions asked because I haven't a clue (due to insufficient detail and supporting jusitifications) what you are trying to say.

I read every word you posted - at least three times. Those three questions would be exactly what you want to answer. Those questions take no position other than to offer oppurtunity to clarify what you have stated - to specifically define where those questions are wrong - and why.

Originally, I thought those questions could be your perfect oppurtunity to demonstrate to others that you said completely different from what they read. But a paranoia is implied in your replies. Why do you fear to correct what was asked?

You said, for example, that seven year olds should not be exposed "to it". What specifically is "it"? How to perform homosexuality or just that people of same sex love one another and live together? We are talking about brotherly love when we talk of dear friends, homosexual relationships, or marriage. They are all different examples of brotherly love. But you tell me. What, in detail, are you saying? Do you now oppose many versions of brotherly love - or maybe you don't? From what was posted - intentionally vague - I don't know which type of love you fear.

Why not answer the questions honestly and not assume those questions are to attack? Questions attack no one. Questions make no assumptions. They simply beg you to clarify your response. I have no idea what you mean by brotherly love because every post is vague, too short, and defensive.

You did not answer three questions - and worse - don't justify why. Without 'why' only encourages others to attack you.

There is nothing difficult in answering questions you still do not answer - and apparently fear to answer:
First legal marriage requirements. Are you saying that laws should make no distinction between same sex and opposite sex marriages? And obviously why or why not?

Second, religion. You stated that sacraments should be denied to same sex marriages. Is that correct (of course, reasons why are included)?

Third, education. You insist that children should never even be told that homosexual couples exist? It is simple human decency to not lie. Therefore will can defined simple human decency quantitatively with numbers or examples.

Stormieweather answers questions in her very first post. She wants to be understood. So she defined fundamental differences between 'knowledge of' verses 'knowledge of how to'. Three questions provided you oppurtunity to clarify - to make you position clear - thereby defuse criticism. Maybe you don't want me to support your position? Maybe you are trolling for attacks? That would explain why you don't answer simple questions.

Originally Posted by Jordan

... but it's pretting damning that you immediately assume that I'm a Christian ...

which they must do when you don't even answer 'set up to be friendly to you' questions; and don't provide supporting justifications. Your response are too typical of what Christian extremists do - which is why others could only make assumptions.

Originally Posted by jaguar

Jordon is one of those people who while holding a good mixed bag of the usual prejudices deep down, knows they're not acceptable and so attempts to wrap them up in various ways to make them less ugly

which is what anyone would assume if you cannot even answer three simple questions. They are simplified questions without any assumptions - worded to clarify your position. Jaguar would have no choice but make his assumption because you do not answer even my so simple three questions - that make not one assumption and might be posted by one who supports your opinion.

Originally Posted by twentycentshift

is it just me, or is anyone else having a hard time following what jordon is saying?

which is why I asked three simple questions so that jordon could defuse his critics. If you need to assume anything, jordon, understand my very specific and now clearest stated objective. Instead, do you see enemies everywhere? I asked a perfect softball question so that you could clarify your position in three parts. Instead even I am the enemy?