Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Solitary Man · 06-04-2008, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tigers!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

Now, Judas is one of the essential characters to the Jesus' story. Without Judas performing a homosexual act of kissing a man on the cheek

, Jesus wouldn't have been recognized for unknown reasons by the chiefs.

I never knew that the fathers of all those Maltese, Lebanese, Greek, Italian kids that I went to school with were homosexual. All that kissing when they met each other.
What about when brothers met and kissed each other on the cheek? Is that incest?
(Me thinks you have a fixation on homosexuality.)

I'm seconding that. Kissing on the cheek isn't considered homosexual, except by severe homophobes uncertain of their own masculinity. How many people would call the Godfather gay, just because every guy that comes to see him kisses him on the hand?

Half-Life · 06-04-2008, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tigers!

I never knew that the fathers of all those Maltese, Lebanese, Greek, Italian kids that I went to school with were homosexual. All that kissing when they met each other.
What about when brothers met and kissed each other on the cheek? Is that incest?
(Me thinks you have a fixation on homosexuality.)

I'm seconding that. Kissing on the cheek isn't considered homosexual, except by severe homophobes uncertain of their own masculinity. How many people would call the Godfather gay, just because every guy that comes to see him kisses him on the hand?

It was a joke. I guess people lose their sense of humor when they come here.

Atheos · 06-04-2008, 03:17 PM

Disregarding the attempt at humor, the statement Jesus makes in the story line is "it had been good for that man if he had not been born."

That's very different from "It would be better for everyone involved if Judas had not been born."

Just for a moment, assuming that there really was a god ready to send all of humanity to an eternity in hell and the only thing standing between us and that destiny was a human blood sacrifice, then I guess one could say it was overall better for everyone (else) that Judas was there to play his part.

Solitary Man · 06-04-2008, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

I'm seconding that. Kissing on the cheek isn't considered homosexual, except by severe homophobes uncertain of their own masculinity. How many people would call the Godfather gay, just because every guy that comes to see him kisses him on the hand?

It was a joke. I guess people lose their sense of humor when they come here.

No, no, I have a great sense of humor. You're just not funny.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-04-2008, 03:17 PM	#13
Atheos Talk Freethought Staff Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Heart of the Bible Belt Posts: 5,807	Disregarding the attempt at humor, the statement Jesus makes in the story line is "it had been good for that man if he had not been born." That's very different from "It would be better for everyone involved if Judas had not been born." Just for a moment, assuming that there really was a god ready to send all of humanity to an eternity in hell and the only thing standing between us and that destiny was a human blood sacrifice, then I guess one could say it was overall better for everyone (else) that Judas was there to play his part.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.