Matt Cappotelli has a brain tumor

[Hawk 34 0]

I lose for mentioning Hitler? Hitler's a legend. But it's okay, continue on your path.

 

You compared a wrestler with a brain tumor to Hitler, and you meant it.

 

To even make, such a ludicrous and inaccurate comparison likely indicates a severe lack of a) intelligence b) sense of history and c) purpose.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

I said I don't think his morals are much better. And what exactly is the difference if he has a brain tumor? Stop trying to spin things. I'll spin them myself. I compared a wrestler who HATES FAGS to a dead german leader.

 

Edit: And I said under the condition that he hates homosexuals and says they're all going to hell, because I don't know him personally. If that is the case, then yes, he would be pro execution of homosexuals, and yes, that is comparable to Hitler. So neener, neener, neener.

 

Final Edit: Plus, I was obviously using an extreme example as to why I don't pity him. Hating a type of person is on the right path to doing what Hitler did, and if you don't think it is, you're the one who is a ball licker.

[Hawk 34 0]

I said I don't think his morals are much better. And what exactly is the difference if he has a brain tumor? Stop trying to spin things. I'll spin them myself. I compared a wrestler who HATES FAGS to a dead german leader.

 

Let's see...a strong christian minded young man supposedly (this is going by a questionable source) called out the gay performers in the OVW for their actions and stated his beliefs in their destiny....the other actually acted out on them in a very ugly and gruesome manner.

 

Yeah, totally relatable.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

Edit: And I said under the condition that he hates homosexuals and says they're all going to hell, because I don't know him personally. If that is the case, then yes, he would be pro execution of homosexuals, and yes, that is comparable to Hitler. So neener, neener, neener.

 

Final Edit: Plus, I was obviously using an extreme example as to why I don't pity him. Hating a type of person is on the right path to doing what Hitler did, and if you don't think it is, you're the one who is a ball licker.

 

Strong Christian minds are also responsible for killing loads of people throughout history, you know? Maybe not as directly, but they're like the girls who tease the fat girl until she developes an eating disorder.

[naiwf 0]

You're not questioning his morals. You're disagreeing with them. A strong Christian believes homosexuality is sinful, and thus doesn't take kindly to those they perceive to willingly commit sinful acts. You don't see it that way. Does that mean that every Christian should receive no pity if they develop a malignant brain tumor for believing something taught in their religion simply because you disagree with it?

[Twisted Intestine 0]

1) I didn't say he deserves no pity, I said he doesn't get my pity.

 

2) Not all Christians blindly follow the bible, and know that it's not all to be taken so literally and strictly.

 

What you just said is exactly like this; Arabic people believe the states are commiting sinful acts, and by bombing them, they'll achieve eternal life. Do they deserve no pity because you disagree with them?

 

It's all a matter of perspective, and yes, I know Matt himself hasn't killed anyone, but there are Christians who do. Religion in general can be a very bad thing when brought to such extremes.

[Hawk 34 0]

Edit: And I said under the condition that he hates homosexuals and says they're all going to hell, because I don't know him personally. If that is the case, then yes, he would be pro execution of homosexuals, and yes, that is comparable to Hitler. So neener, neener, neener.

 

Final Edit: Plus, I was obviously using an extreme example as to why I don't pity him. Hating a type of person is on the right path to doing what Hitler did, and if you don't think it is, you're the one who is a ball licker.

 

Strong Christian minds are also responsible for killing loads of people throughout history, you know? Maybe not as directly, but they're like the girls who tease the fat girl until she developes an eating disorder.

 

Stop, with the asinine analogies. You already exposed yourself as a clueless embarrassment to society.

 

You are lumping Matt Cappotelli into a group based off the words of an already questionable source. If you have your own personal vendetta against the christian minded sect, that's fine and dandy but until you have credible proof, don't compare Cappotelli to Hitler and save yourself the humilation of being a idiot.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

If he doesn't agree with their way of life, that's fine. But if he HATES them.. and tells them they're going to hell.. it's not his place to do that, and yes, I disagree whole heartedly with anyone telling anyone they're going to hell.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

Edit: And I said under the condition that he hates homosexuals and says they're all going to hell, because I don't know him personally. If that is the case, then yes, he would be pro execution of homosexuals, and yes, that is comparable to Hitler. So neener, neener, neener.

 

Final Edit: Plus, I was obviously using an extreme example as to why I don't pity him. Hating a type of person is on the right path to doing what Hitler did, and if you don't think it is, you're the one who is a ball licker.

 

Strong Christian minds are also responsible for killing loads of people throughout history, you know? Maybe not as directly, but they're like the girls who tease the fat girl until she developes an eating disorder.

 

Stop, with the asinine analogies. You already exposed yourself as a clueless embarrassment to society.

 

Right, because I disagree with you on the subject. I'm an embarrassment to society, because I disagree with homophobia, and think that it is related to Hitler.

 

LOOK AT THE FUCKING FACTS.

 

Homophobia is hating, or fearing a group of people. Nazis hated, or feared, a group of people. Just because it hasn't been taken to the next level, doesn't mean it doesn't come from the same roots.

[naiwf 0]

If he doesn't agree with their way of life, that's fine. But if he HATES them.. and tells them they're going to hell.. it's not his place to do that, and yes, I disagree whole heartedly with anyone telling anyone they're going to hell.

 

I don't hate gays, but I believe they're going to hell because that's part and parcel of the religion I believe in. It's pretty obvious you're not a Christian because the main selling point of the religion is that it is the only way to escape from eternal damnation. Whether they say it or not, every Christian believes that non-Christians, gays, those who commit suicide, etc are going to hell. What difference does it make if you say something or not if you believe it?

[Art Sandusky 0]

Hey guys who don't come down here often, stick around. We need more people to play with.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

If he doesn't agree with their way of life, that's fine. But if he HATES them.. and tells them they're going to hell.. it's not his place to do that, and yes, I disagree whole heartedly with anyone telling anyone they're going to hell.

 

I don't hate gays, but I believe they're going to hell because that's part and parcel of the religion I believe in. It's pretty obvious you're not a Christian because the main selling point of the religion is that it is the only way to escape from eternal damnation. Whether they say it or not, every Christian believes that non-Christians, gays, those who commit suicide, etc are going to hell. What difference does it make if you say something or not if you believe it?

 

Is it part of Christianity though? I'm just curious, I don't know for sure... Quote me something from the new testiment that states homosexuals will go to hell. I've always seen Jesus as tolerant and accepting.

 

and, being a Christian means believing in Christ. It doesn't mean you have to believe in a religion. Religion's put their own spins on things to suit their agendas, and I don't like that. I can call myself a Christian, and believe in my own version of Christ, as that's all he is to any other branch of Christianity -- their version.

[naiwf 0]

Read Romans 1:18-32. I got this next bit elsewhere, which you can either agree with or not, but it explains the idea behind why most Christians interpret homosexuality as a sin that will not grant one entrance into the Kingdom as it were.

 

If Christianity is true, then our bodies are not our own; they're rental property, designed by God and brought to life only with His energy, and only temporarily. This is a crucial point because it means there are two types of sin: sins against other men (punching a guy in the face) and sins against ourselves (drunkenness, gluttony, etc.) but that both are ultimately sins against God. This is why it's perfectly possible in Christianity to have real, substantial sins that do not hurt anyone but ourselves.

 

So taking the next step, Christians believe that, as the first pages of the Bible say, God specifically created humans as male and female for the purpose of joining them together in marriage, to complete each other spiritually. The sexual joining bonds them. In fact, if you read the creation accounts in Genesis (and references to them in the New Testament) you'll find that the act of sex is the marriage ceremony. That's important; this is not some arbitrary ceremonial rule; it's one of the basic foundations for humanity as a race.

 

Therefore to use sex otherwise is sin. That includes sex with somebody else's wife, sex with an animal, sex with inanimate objects, sex with people of the same sex.

 

At this point someone will say:

 

"I've read the Old Testament. If you buy that garbage about gays then you also have to sacrifice cattle and go through ceremonial food cleansing and raindances or whatever."

 

When Jesus arrived in the New Testament he did away with many of the Old Testament era ceremonies about clean and unclean foods (see Matthew 15:11), about sacrifice, and several others. You'll have to read the gospels (the first four books of the New Testament) to fully understand that. That's why, for instance, Christians don't judge foods as to whether or not they are Kosher. This is also why Christians just roll their eyes when non-Christians say "if every word of the Bible is true, then you have to sacrifice a bull and three pigeons every week!" The same Bible later does away with those rules, and for each of the old Jewish ceremonies that Christ did away with, we understand from the New Testament why it was done.

 

But when Jesus came he did not throw away marriage as a meaningless religious ceremony, he did not open the door for open sex in the name of "free love" or tolerance. If anything, he strengthened the old guidelines (Christ's stance on divorce actually stronger than had been practiced by the Jews, Matthew 5:31, John 4:16). If Christianity is right, then the new covenant with God as brought by Jesus (which we call Christianity), while doing away with animal sacrifices and many cleanliness ceremonies, did not by any indication do away with the rules regarding sex and gender.

 

"Wait a second. I have a gay friend who is also a Christian. Are you saying he's not really a Christian and that he's going to Hell?"

 

There are two wording mistakes we make when asking questions like this that really deserve correcting before we go any further. First, we tend to want to divide everything up into Hell or Not. As in, "are Mormons going to Hell? Are gays going to Hell? Are smokers going to Hell?" That's a poor way to look at it; the very core of Christianity is that we all sin. Only God knows who is deserving of Hell and who is not. That is why Christians are instructed not to judge; we don't know or understand anyone's temptations, trials, weaknesses or motivations except our own.

 

Only God knows and only God can judge. We are accurate to tell a person they are in danger of Hell -we all are- and we are right to say a certain action is sin if the Bible says it is. But there is never a good time to announce that a specific person or group is Hellbound.

 

Then there is another word problem that Christians often run into, that is, when we see someone sinning we say "they're not a Christian." That's also a bad and confusing way to do it and we need to correct it before going any further with this FAQ.

 

The truth is, by definition anyone who is a member of the religion, that is, believes Jesus was the son of God and forgives sins, etc., is technically a Christian. It's not useful to use "Christian" as a compliment to say someone is living in accordance with God's wishes; we don't truly know that about any individual. So if you see someone who confesses Christian beliefs and yet seems to sin every minute with abandon, it's much more accurate to say they seem to be a bad Christian or are struggling as a Christian than to say they're not a Christian. As in, they're still a member of the religion, but of course not everyone who proclaims himself to be a Christian will find his way into Heaven (see Matthew 7:22).

 

This applies here because my answer to whether a homosexual can be a Christian is "yes." But whether or not they can keep having regular homosexual sex and then get into Heaven is something only God knows, as we said above. If you don't understand that, simply replace the words "having homosexual sex" with "gambling" or "sleeping around" in that last sentence. The struggle against our old, chronic sins is one that all Christians face, gay or straight. On the other hand, if there are any homosexuals out there who want to be Christians, and if they tell themselves that homosexuality is perfectly natural and is the will of God, it's my opinion that they're not being honest with themselves and I think the Bible supports me on that.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

It's pretty obvious you're not a Christian because the main selling point of the religion is that it is the only way to escape from eternal damnation. Whether they say it or not, every Christian believes that non-Christians, gays, those who commit suicide, etc are going to hell.

 

That is why Christians are instructed not to judge; we don't know or understand anyone's temptations, trials, weaknesses or motivations except our own.

 

Only God knows and only God can judge. We are accurate to tell a person they are in danger of Hell -we all are- and we are right to say a certain action is sin if the Bible says it is. But there is never a good time to announce that a specific person or group is Hellbound.

 

The truth is, by definition anyone who is a member of the religion, that is, believes Jesus was the son of God and forgives sins, etc., is technically a Christian. It's not useful to use "Christian" as a compliment to say someone is living in accordance with God's wishes; we don't truly know that about any individual. So if you see someone who confesses Christian beliefs and yet seems to sin every minute with abandon, it's much more accurate to say they seem to be a bad Christian or are struggling as a Christian than to say they're not a Christian. As in, they're still a member of the religion, but of course not everyone who proclaims himself to be a Christian will find his way into Heaven (see Matthew 7:22).

 

This applies here because my answer to whether a homosexual can be a Christian is "yes." But whether or not they can keep having regular homosexual sex and then get into Heaven is something only God knows, as we said above.

 

You contradicted yourself there, but I digress. Obviously we're not all going to see the issue the same. There is a difference between what you believe in, and being a homophobe though. All I was trying to say from the start is that Homophobia, or any hatred towards people, is what leads to hate crimes, descrimination, and worse.

 

But.. he still doesn't get my pity, so ultimately, I'm the winner. Ohhhh, snap!

 

I'm going to bed.

[naiwf 0]

I'm glad I wasted my time trying to explain what your problem with his beliefs are when clearly you wanted a circular argument which led to you "winning". Unlike you, I don't see the point in being a Christian who doesn't feel pity for the plight of his fellow man, misguided or not.

[... 0]

Hey guys who don't come down here often, stick around. We need more people to play with.

Heh, they got real purty mouths.

[Slayer 0]

I like the fat one, more cushion for the pushin'

[Vyce 0]

You're not questioning his morals. You're disagreeing with them. A strong Christian believes homosexuality is sinful, and thus doesn't take kindly to those they perceive to willingly commit sinful acts. You don't see it that way. Does that mean that every Christian should receive no pity if they develop a malignant brain tumor for believing something taught in their religion simply because you disagree with it?

 

This whole argument between you and twizted reminds me of Loss and how out of his fucking mind he would get over perceived animus against homosexuality.

[Cowboy Battlenuts 0]

Good people are good people regardless. If you can't show a bigot sympathy than don't bother at all.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

I'm glad I wasted my time trying to explain what your problem with his beliefs are when clearly you wanted a circular argument which led to you "winning". Unlike you, I don't see the point in being a Christian who doesn't feel pity for the plight of his fellow man, misguided or not.

 

No, I got your point. I don't have a problem with his beliefs, he can believe what he wants. I have a problem with him vocalizing them, and making another man feel lesser, because he believes in something else. That's my main problem with some Christians - they believe that they're right, and feel it's their place to tell everyone else that they're wrong.

[haws bah gawd 0]

I'm glad I wasted my time trying to explain what your problem with his beliefs are when clearly you wanted a circular argument which led to you "winning". Unlike you, I don't see the point in being a Christian who doesn't feel pity for the plight of his fellow man, misguided or not.

 

No, I got your point. I don't have a problem with his beliefs, he can believe what he wants. I have a problem with him vocalizing them, and making another man feel lesser, because he believes in something else. That's my main problem with some Christians - they believe that they're right, and feel it's their place to tell everyone else that they're wrong.

 

But then again, arent you doing the same by telling Christians that they are wrong because you feel you are right? I'm not trying to piss you off or not respect your opinions, it's just a question.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

No.. there's a line there. I'm not saying that they're wrong.. I'm saying that they're wrong in telling other people they're wrong. It gets confusing because of that. Basically, they're wrong for trying to force their beliefs on others. I'm not trying to force my beliefs on anyone, they can think homosexuals are going to hell if they want.. I'm just saying they shouldn't descriminate in a hateful manner because of it. If that makes any sense.

 

Again, I'll use iraq as an example. I don't have a problem with them thinking Westerners are evil... but they shouldn't bomb us because of that.

 

In the perfect world no one would believe in anything. Things get bad when people take actions based on their beliefs.

[naiwf 0]

Where is the proof that Matt took action? Saying that he thought some gay guy(s) was/were going to hell is just stating something he genuinely believes. That's not discriminating against them, that's not physically taking any action towards them, and if it's a belief that the gay guy(s) don't share, it causes them no harm whatsoever. I fail to see how Hitler slaughtering millions and actual bombings which killed a few people I knew relate to a guy making a comment that caused no harm to anyone. The cause and effect relationship you're trying to make doesn't exist here.

[Sideburnious 0]

twiztedmind, take this advice: If you ever see yourself agreeing with FBTG again in the future, just don't post and infact, change your whole view in life. I realise where you were coming from, but you accidently backed up his absolute bullshit post about "Im glad he has cancer". He always makes a huge ass out of himself. Even he has abandoned the thread and left you to fend yourself. All the answers he gave were bullshit and unexplanitory. For someone who trains in OVW, I wonder how his comments and ideals would go down with the locker-room that appears to have been shaken up over Matt's condition. I'm sure the (other) gay dude that Matt made the comment about doesn't even wish cancer on him.

 

Basically, in the great words of Black Lushus:

wildpegasus and FromBeyondTheGrave are the drizzlin' shits...

[Guest FromBeyondTheGrave]

but you accidently backed up his absolute bullshit post about "Im glad he has cancer".

I never said I was glad he had cancer, fuckhead. I just don't have pity for someone who thinks I'm going to hell.

[naiwf 0]

the man doesn't deserve a cancerous tumor.

Karma.

 

Kinda looks like you think he deserves cancer, but that's just me.

[Guest FromBeyondTheGrave]

the man doesn't deserve a cancerous tumor.

Karma.

 

Kinda looks like you think he deserves cancer, but that's just me.

No, just bad things happen to bad people.

[naiwf 0]

So you think he's a bad person because he said gays go to hell. He thinks you're a bad person because you're gay. So should you be expecting cancer soon too?

[Rob Anybody 0]

If that's the case, then you're all going to get cancer for keeping up this discussion.

[Guest FromBeyondTheGrave]

So you think he's a bad person because he said gays go to hell. He thinks you're a bad person because you're gay. So should you be expecting cancer soon too?

No, because I never said I wanted Matt to get cancer. But now he has it, I have no pity for him.

 

And I'm bi, not gay.