Just pointing out that you are not honestly debating Matt – you are attacking him by character assassination.

This is pretty much a standard christian techinique, I realize – I’m surprised that you haven’t accused him of doing Satan’s work – but it is unlikely to work. Matt seems smarter that your average christian

Adam… the second portion of your sentence may be true for some, but I wouldn’t tell ND30 to go away. I’ve had disagreements with him plenty in the past, but every once and a while he says something useful.

I think that under all his rhetoric and name-calling toward liberal gays, there is some truth. Actually, a lot of truth. I just don’t think he is yet able to realize that people are working on the issues. As has already been said on the thread, gays are the ones who have most worked on HIV/AIDS issues (because no one else would).

I’m done debating ND30 on this issue, but I’m not going to cut him off either. As with his position on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, you’ll never know when he might say something that actually makes sense to you (even if you still don’t quite agree 100%).

I am pointing out, Patrick, that given your opposition to rebuking gays’ behavior, saying that you in fact rebuke gays’ behavior doesn’t make any sense.

I guess that commandment doesn’t apply to real christians like you.

Again, Patrick, you don’t believe in that commandment. You think the book from which it comes is nothing but myths and legends, you think the deity that gave it doesn’t exist, and you think the people who quote it and use it to judge other peoples’ behavior are no better than “ignorant desert tribesmen”.

Why, then, are you quoting it and trying to use it to judge other peoples’ behaviors?

>Hardly. You make it clear that you oppose rebuking gays’ behavior. Why, then, would anyone expect you to do something you oppose, like rebuking gays who spread HIV?

So because you “wouldn’t expect” it that makes it OK for you to accuse someone ? – it is a flat out lie.

And a slander – which you evidently consider to be funny. I guess that commandment doesn’t apply to real christians like you.

Luckily your slander is innocuous, since everyone will consider it’s source but I really don’t understand how Matt can tolerate associating with such deeply unethical people.

It must take a lot of guts doing those tours – talk about hanging out with slime

If I wanted to be your friend, I would bash Christians and ignore gay promiscuity and irresponsible behavior. But, in my opinion, it’s less important to bash Christians, who do not cause gay irresponsible behavior, than it is to deal with irresponsible gay behavior to stop the spread of a lethal disease that 25% of us already carry and that those 25% are working on spreading to those who don’t, including underage children.

Furthermore, I believe that demonstrating that being gay is not incompatible with Christianity can be done far more effectively by dealing with gays who use homosexuality as an excuse for antireligious bigotry than by using homosexuality as an excuse for attacking Christians.

This isn’t difficult. It simply requires one to shed the “enlightened” gay view that gays are always right and Christians are always wrong.

Hardly. You make it clear that you oppose rebuking gays’ behavior. Why, then, would anyone expect you to do something you oppose, like rebuking gays who spread HIV?

This idea that Gay=AIDs is a very tired old slander.

Let’s see; one in four gays is HIV-positive, versus less than one in one hundred of the general population.

Furthermore, of those one in four gays, a third of them regularly have unprotected sex, which is what spreads the disease, with people who are either negative or of unknown status, including underage teenagers.

Seems like gays are working to eliminate that last set of negatives and ensure that those gays coming up share their problem.

I doubt if you even realize how sladeroust that is

Again, Patrick, slander involves telling lies. You called my quoting referenceable statistics above “slander”, demonstrating that you have no concept of what “slander” means. Furthermore, your demonstrable behavior in this thread makes it clear that you would rather people get a lethal disease than criticize their behavior, since you consider any criticism of gay behavior to be “hateful”.

And your regular screams of “slander” make this particularly funny.

I’m sorry that your parent abused you, but that is pretty typical of christian households – no reason to take it out on other peorple.

Especially when one considers that gay parents dress up their children in fetish gear and dog collars and take them to sex fairs to “show off”.

>I have ZERO problem rebuking gay people who have HIV and then go have unprotected sex with underage teenagers.

That is a lie – as is your parrtern of insinuatong that because I object to christians demonizing gays, I have a problem “rebuking” people who spread HIV.

This idea that Gay=AIDs is a very tired old slander.

I’m sorry that your parent abused you, but that is pretty typical of christian households – no reason to take it out on other peorple.

as for the rest :
>Simply put, you would rather people get a lethal disease than risk one bit of unpopularity for criticizing their behavior

I doubt if you even realize how sladeroust that is – but everyone reading this knows that it is untrue character assassination – I can opnly hope that they realize how typically christain such character assasination is.

And hope that they have no problem risking unpopularity by rebuking your transparent lies

And yet, those “ignorant desert tribesmen” are running at an HIV rate of less than one percent, versus the technologically-advanced gays like yourself who know all about viruses, yet are running at twenty-five percent.

I believe “Physician, heal thyself” is most appropriate here.