Christfags BTFO!!!!!

christfags BTFO!!!!!

Other urls found in this thread:

gotquestions.org/Sodom-and-Gomorrah.html
frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research
thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/25/biological-same-sex-parent-babies-could-be-a-reality-by-2017.html
frc.org/homosexuality
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X12000610 on the psychological impact of same-sex parenting.
nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/05/biggest-anti-gay-marriage-study-was-debunked.html
regnerusfallout.org/frequently-asked-questions
youtube.com/watch?v=mY8tx4huoqM&feature=youtu.be
regnerusfallout.org/the-story
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Doubles and ur a fag urself

Ok 1 more

Ok 1 more

Ok 1 more

Ok 1 more

Ok 1 more

I'll roll for you burger

I got you m8

Ok 1 more

>people breeding clearly isn't an issue anymore
good goy

Ok 1 more

OP, just....

...I mean at least pose an argument, don't just drop someone else's work and bail.

gotquestions.org/Sodom-and-Gomorrah.html

Ok 1 more

Reroll

Ok 1 more and fuck OP

I got it now

Jesus said a man is to leave his mother and father with his wife, not his butt buddy

Enjoy your AIDS and Anti-Depressants

Ok 1 more

TRUMPFAGS BTFO

Just kidding

Ok 1 more

Yay I did it

Liberals are the worst

Wrong, Romans was clear about homosexuality by describing it:

>24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

>26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

you fags suck (lel)

check em!

sick dubs kid but check these

Nice dubs bruh.

You tried buddy

>strawman arguments into circular reasoning
>all opposing arguments are now circular
>you win
>if anyone disagrees with you, they are petulant, uncivilized, bigoted caveman

Goodjob Bro
Jesus is proud

fag.

>Fruitful tree continues to proliferate, while the while the barren wood is thrown into the fire, so the same can be said for the man, and homosexuality

Thanks friends, it's truly the greatest achievment of my life.

You cannot control the will of KEK.

Praise KEK.

...

>Think we should live by biblical laws? Then you're a dickhead!

This is their ace in the hole. This is their primo rebuttal.

It's not even a fucking argument.

Wow dude nice dubs

You know at least 20% of Bernie supporters would vote Trump if Hillary is the democratic nominee, correct?

wow you can tell that the person who makes it is a fucking cuck, when you actually state your point they're oh boo hoo sorry yet still manager to act holier-than-thou

>have fun living your sexist, chauvinistic, judgemental, xenophobic lifestyle choice. The rest of culture will advance forward without you.

What does simply being homophobic have anything to do with sexism, being a chad, being judgemental, or against new things. I swear these fucking liberals just throw their buzzwords everywhere just to shame people when in reality they have no arguments, only empty insults.

Sin is a Judaeo-Christian concept. Liberals do not believe in sins because they lack morality. So this chart is being thrown in the trash where it belongs.

Okay then, try asking this same question to muslims and see what they think... oh wait they're a poor oppressed brown people that can do no wrong... idiot.

>1 post shill OP
Saged the fuck out

>Not using the KJV translation
Heathen

I just noticed our IDs make a familiar sentence.

WE

KEK VULT. The mighty one has spoken.

WUZ

It actually does disgust me (when it's guys) but I don't give one half of a rats black plague maggot infested asshole.

checked

>tfw and ID with "We" and another with "WUZ" but nothing resembling "Kangz" in this thread. Now we play the waiting game.

Roman Pagan orgies. Paul was triggered badly.

Where is "because they are mentally ill" and "they are deranged and jokes of men".

Kek, now wait of the Kangs

There were none, so it won't appear.

>jesus never uttered a word about same-sex relationships

Maybe because he was in one.

2000 years ago if you were 20+ years old and unmarried you are either a leper or a flaming homosexual.

The real argument should be that whatever the bible may say, it is of no relevance. Not at all. The state and the church should be separeted. If you don't want to have gays in your church suit yourself. But the state is a different thing

It kind of has a point. Do you want to live by biblical laws? It's like one of the shittiest versions of life

>look at old testament answer
>you think eating shellfish and pork are sinful? SEXIST

Eh, OT is for the kikes.

NT is for Whites and Christians.

I love bacon, I love pork, and almost every other follower of Jesus you'll ever know does too.

Just another way to put the jew down (the mudshit too!)

texas has a flag on here?

I keked and clapped loudly

>will advance forward without you
advance towards what?

ok

you guys are all fucking bigots

give me one reason why gays shouldn't be allowed to marry

and it can't be a fallacy or homophobic reason

make it a good one

Just a thought but I always wonder why they think that all change is positive.

frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research

Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):

Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69%; GF 57%)
Have lower educational attainment
Report less safety and security in their family of origin
Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
Are more likely to suffer from depression
Have been arrested more often
If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female

It's clearly sinful. OP up and says so. But so what, lots of stuff is sinful. Gay marriage legit? nope, that's as absurd as a man identifying as a woman, or women being equal to men. You can say it's true or it can be until you're blue in the face, the simple fact is that it is sinful as defined in the big book of sins. If you don't like the big book of sins then don't even use it in your argument. But then it isn't marriage either, as defined by the big book of sin. How is marriage defined in China, Japan, Nairobi, Innuit, or Pajeets? Do you have a flowchart for Shintoists? Daoists? Maybe one for neo paganists? When a gay married couple can fuck, get pregnant, and have children, then it will be marriage. Otherwise it isn't. Don't be stupid.

thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/25/biological-same-sex-parent-babies-could-be-a-reality-by-2017.html

THE OLD TESTAMENT DIDNT SAY MIXED FABRICS IS A SIN
ONLY WOOL FROM A SHEEP AND LINEN MIXED TOGETHER IS A SIN
POLYESTER AND COTTON IS FINE
PORK AND SHELLFISH ARE FORBIDDEN BECAUSE THE MIDDLE EASTERN ENVIRONMENT WASNT GOOD FOR THESE FOODS SO OBVIOUSLY THEYRE FORBIDDEN UNLESS YOU WANT FOOD POISONING

clearly a biased study

the "researchers" involved are obviously right wingers looking for a specific result

>I didn't read the article
It outlines the methodology rather clearly, what specifically do you think would have caused bias?

Oooh strawmen!

Anyone else noticed that even the most logical people have to resort to the most fallacious arguments against theists? I don't want gays to marry because I want to reserve the word for legal purposes to identify groups planning or having biological children.

No, adoption and IVF doesn't change shit.

Take your "union", listen to your humanist philosopher priest, have a ceremony in a nice park or hall if you can afford it, pay extra taxes like the dumbfuck you are for getting the government involved in your relationship, but don't call it marriage and don't expect a Catholic priest to approve.

Are we okay with this?

Good, stop calling my people homophobic.

It was also for ritual purity which marked the Israelites as the people that the messiah would be born into. Obviously we aren't waiting for the messiah to come for the first time, so there is no reason to uphold the ceremonial laws.

Now can you find a source that isn't biased and without propaganda?

>reason for bias??

frc.org/homosexuality

Like, give me a fucking break

If you don't live by Paul's teachings you're an ultra beta-Christcuck.

Lot of Jews and even Greek-SItalians allergic to shellfish.

FYI this is a good case that religions actually make more or less sense based on ethnic grounds, so unless you're inbred Jewish as fuck or have Sayyids all down your paternal line and Mirzas or Sayyids all down your maternal line, the Judeo-Christian religion for you is Catholicism.

French Gaulish have been eating pork for millennia without any ill effects, whether famine, sumptuariness, disease or even cannibalism. Why should it be forbidden for them?

/thread

The sociologist involved:

Mark Daniel Regnerus is a sociology professor at the University of Texas at Austin. His main fields of interest are sexual behavior, relationship dynamics, and RELIGION.

He's a christfag.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X12000610 on the psychological impact of same-sex parenting.

What about now? Same study minus the propaganda.

What is it about Christians that make them unable to conduct a scientifically sound study? Just point out something wrong with the methodology if it's so clearly biased.

>It's pretty for gays to want it to be called marriage, but not petty for me to be concerned about the phraseology

It's pretty normal for anyone to want to do what everyone else is able to do and not feel like a fucking freak doing it. That is, get married to someone you love and have kids with them if you choose so. And you haven't proven that gay parents affect children negatively in anyway. So, prove that to the world before you condemn marriage between men. By the way, marriage existed and exists outside of Christianity.

But marriage is a religious thing. Fags should be able to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes, but not in the streets or in the church. It's not up to me to judge them.

>Mark Regnerus
Again? He was btfo by other scientists. And you take his word seriously?

nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/05/biggest-anti-gay-marriage-study-was-debunked.html

Phraseology is far from "pretty" or petty when legal concepts are involved. Did you even read that post?

Pic related. Still valid until a study with a better sample population is conducted (lol it won't) and where the money comes from is still irrelevant to the results/conclusions.

Source? I'd love to BTFO libfags with this.

god this is makin me rage

Type out what you read at the bottom.

It's actually a bad graphic because the study was conducted also with two male parents, single male parents (rare as fuck, so butthurts use this singular fact to invalidate the whole study) and two female parents.

Actually all you can really conclude is that children generally grow up healthiest with both male and female live in role models. I doubt the sexual orientation of the parents matter, aka I'm ironically okay with transwomen/cismen raising children... Although it's still doubtfully their biological children so it's still unreasonable to treat them identically under family law.

Incentives need to be given to biological parenting. Deal. With. It.

You've gotta be kidding. New Family Structures Study is Mark fucking Regnerus, and he's been torn apart by other scientists who called out the bias in his studies.

regnerusfallout.org/frequently-asked-questions

He's a christfag and the people who cite it and support it are unscientific straw-grasping confirmation bias-seeking christfags. I'm a Trumpian all the fucking way but you dinosaurs are going extinct and I cannot wait.

youtube.com/watch?v=mY8tx4huoqM&feature=youtu.be
youtube.com/watch?v=mY8tx4huoqM&feature=youtu.be
youtube.com/watch?v=mY8tx4huoqM&feature=youtu.be

>muslim
>scared of trump winning

Makes sense he'll have to go back to Iran where he can't make shitty YouTube videos anymore

Ad
Hominem

Who the study came from does NOT invalidate the study.

Unless it's fucking Epstein talking about climate change, oh fuck you Prager.

>Ad hom
From a moral authoritarian christfag with his nose in other family's business, that's hilarious.

regnerusfallout.org/the-story

Are you ignoring the articles I've posted or does it matter who the study is coming from in this case? I can find a load of evidence if you're saying that doesn't matter.

>not wanting to live by new testament laws?
wut

yooooo did no one notice these trips???

KEKs messenger is here!

bruh....

>Only the respondents who said their biological parents did not remain married throughout their childhoods were asked if their mothers or fathers had ever had a same-sex romantic relationship. If the respondent claimed his or her mother had a same-sex relationship, that mother was termed a “lesbian mother”; if the respondent said his or her father had a same-sex relationship, that father was termed a “gay father.”

wew

I just don't give a fuck to be honest.

I use what studies and evidence I have on hand and until I've been shown to the contrary, I will continue believing the healthiest way for children to grow up is with both male and female biological parents that they can identify with on a cultural and ethnic basis. It still doesn't matter where this study comes from provided the methodology was as good as it could be, which it is until you find a way to source >100 single fathers. Oh wait, you can't, because there might not even be more than 100 single fathers in any given city in any western nation.

Are you literally ignoring my point that you're fallacious as fuck on the basis that I don't give a fuck if a racist, homophobic, likely sexist bigot funded a study that essentially proved something likely true?

How do their penises go inside each other?

You ignored them, huh? Didn't care what questions they asked to get that specific information for your neat little I-hate-fags graph to show all your friends?

Did you ignore this post?
How does that not come into factoring?

KANGS

Homosexuality is not a sin, the Church says the act of homosexuality, sodomy, is a sin. The Church actively protects homosexuals and invites them into the Church and do not believe they are any lesser, or bad people. However, the act of gay sex is a sin. This is because it goes against God's design, destroys the sanctity of marriage and fundementals of a family.

Furthermore, homosexual sex is not unifying nor procreative, which goes against the Church.

So fuck off.