For the lulz. I'm worried about the butthurt this might cause. But guise it's all for the funnies. Credit to the artist.. IF MD COULD as US New Are you / serius
Click to expand

For the lulz

For the lulz. I'm worried about the butthurt this might cause. But guise it's all for the funnies. Credit to the artist.. IF MD COULD as US New Are you / serius

I'm worried about the butthurt this might cause. But guise it's all for the funnies. Credit to the artist.

Are you /
seriusly killing
people in my
That is
literally the FIRST
thing I tale you not
tn CID.
Do you realize
new old that heel:
Rtru dorfs think
same things may
have changed a
bit since it was
and why are you
still hating on gay
I snustin' r make
them that way if I
thought it was
Just be kind to
each other, ;
ifs new that hard
create a planet
at kittens he
keep mysret
ham needing
Jnne Flues: -is
  • Recommend tagsx
Views: 41243
Favorited: 139
Submitted: 11/29/2012
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to megooseta submit to reddit


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#14 - Brass (11/30/2012) [-]
I will find a use for this image.
#74 to #14 - itsmypenis **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#78 - hargleblarg (11/30/2012) [-]
I respect all religions, just don't try and convert me and all shall be fine.
User avatar #226 to #78 - BCfUnNyJuNkIe (11/30/2012) [-]
#123 to #78 - serotonin (11/30/2012) [-]
I dont respect all religions. If there was ``destroy scientology`` button i would push it so hard that my finger would snap

I juste realised that if I post comment a I will mess up acidjunk s idea so I will just repost his pic to keep his creation alive
User avatar #188 to #123 - windorigins (11/30/2012) [-]
This is an eternal dbate, I know...but, Scientology is not a religion. A cult at most.
#104 to #78 - acidjunk ONLINE (11/30/2012) [-]

trying to fit these faces together
#113 to #104 - nnightfire ONLINE (11/30/2012) [-]
Dear god what have I done
#143 to #113 - oishiine (11/30/2012) [-]
Oh god.
User avatar #121 to #113 - acidjunk ONLINE (11/30/2012) [-]
This looks awesome :D
#54 - amandatoddd **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#107 - AnonymousDonor (11/30/2012) [-]
pretty much this
#119 - BigSammy (11/30/2012) [-]
I need to find this planet of kittens.
I need to find this planet of kittens.
#4 - kallesmange (11/29/2012) [-]
and thus the planet "internet" was born
#42 - verticalvampire (11/30/2012) [-]
and so the internet was born
and so the internet was born
#33 - Myfoot (11/30/2012) [-]
I must find this planet, the people here are assholes.
User avatar #80 - antagonizer (11/30/2012) [-]
I don't want get involved with all the bitching at eachover, im an atheist but i believe that everyone is alowed their own opinions and beliefs so christians should bitch at atheist unless atheists attack christians AND vice versa.

But i do want to ask one question of the Christians on here.

i obviously do not believe any of the bible but my one great pet peeve from the bible is Noah Ark, do even christians believe this story and if so why?

Only down to earth Christians that can have a discussion and not a bitch fit need answer.
User avatar #158 to #80 - theexo (11/30/2012) [-]
it was probably highly exagerated, what probably happened was that his town got flooded and he got away on a boat with his family. or hell maybe it just rained really badly one day and Noah left assuming everyone died. or maybe the entire story is all ******** . who knows?
#83 to #80 - gigels (11/30/2012) [-]
I'm a christian and I no, I don't believe that Noah's ark really happened like that. I think that the bible is mostly symbolic and I just use it for guidance tho.
User avatar #85 to #80 - kippa (11/30/2012) [-]
I'm a catholic, only because I was baptised etc. when I was younger. I am in no way religious anymore as I don't believe in God. I think most of the stories in the Old Testament, Noah's Ark included, were meant to act as metaphors. I don't know exactly what they symbolise but I don't think they were supposed to be taken literally.
User avatar #86 to #80 - bec (11/30/2012) [-]
I agree with Gigels - my belief is that many parts of the Bible are symbolic and/or metaphorical - a guide to demonstrate how we can live moral lives, not a literal word-for-word truth.
#69 - reapsparrow (11/30/2012) [-]
my only answer
#71 to #69 - kennyroks (11/30/2012) [-]
i ******* love full metal alchemist
#176 - managercarl **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #116 - kinglobster (11/30/2012) [-]
"I'm gonna go create a planet of kittens [with blackjack, and hookers] to keep myself from flooding everything."
#209 - aceshot (11/30/2012) [-]
ITT: People who think homosexuality is a choice and try to show 			********		 facts about why its true. Cause who knows gay people better than straight people, right? Couldnt possibly be that I know myself better than somebody who can look up 			********		 on google.
ITT: People who think homosexuality is a choice and try to show ******** facts about why its true. Cause who knows gay people better than straight people, right? Couldnt possibly be that I know myself better than somebody who can look up ******** on google.
#106 - laughable (11/30/2012) [-]
a planet of cats can be assholes too
a planet of cats can be assholes too
#72 - anon (11/30/2012) [-]
Actually not killing each other is not the first thing "God" told the human but that he is the one god they must believe in. Not killing is like the sixth commandment.

Also "some things may have changer a bit since it was written" : if God is eternal, his truth is eternal, time does not do **** about it.

That's why it's stupid, but it's not because you're atheist you can say anything.
User avatar #22 - alexalive (11/30/2012) [-]
Anyone ever get the feeling that God created gay people as a test to common people, to gauge our compassion, willingness to accept, and capacity to love? And those that you degrade and judge are actually who will judge you, either saving or damning you based on what they experienced from you. Something to think about next time...
#23 to #22 - anon (11/30/2012) [-]
Reminds me of Matthew 7:3, Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? Also, God does not want homosexuals, but he wants people to actually be loving to them and try to change their mind and not judge them.
User avatar #40 to #22 - jokeface (11/30/2012) [-]
My theory is that He created them with an innate compulsion to be gay, but His intention is that those born with this compulsion choose to overpower it and refrain from homosexual relationships anyway. It may not seem fair to them, but it wouldn't be the first time God gave harder challenges to certain people.
#95 to #40 - anon (11/30/2012) [-]
I concur.
User avatar #173 - Theyneverknow (11/30/2012) [-]
It's the kind of Christians that think like this that I like
'Sure, I believe in the word of god and all that, but it's been a few thousand years since the bible was written, it's a little out of date don't you think?'
#31 - daddycool (11/30/2012) [-]
Yeah! Stop hating on rapists! God made them that way, why would He not want them to rape!? And pedophiles, too![/sarcasm]

That's a terrible, horrible argument.
User avatar #34 to #31 - satakas (11/30/2012) [-]
not being sarcastic: how could we compare gays with rapists and pedophiles?

have you ever heard of a logical fallacy, called "slippery slope"?
#35 to #34 - daddycool (11/30/2012) [-]
The comparison is simple.

1. They're all based upon sexuality.

2. They're all made by God.

Easy peasy. No slippery slope here, just understanding the common denominators.
User avatar #37 to #35 - trollwoopnazi (11/30/2012) [-]
I think the idea is that people are born neutral, and they can then go on to choose to commit crime, where as sexuality isn't a choice. Note, I am an agnostic, i'm just trying to understand.
#39 to #37 - daddycool (11/30/2012) [-]
I'm not suggesting that sexuality is a choice. I can accept the idea that sexuality is innate to a person and they simply have desires with no choice in the matter.

The problem comes when you ACT upon your desires. That is a choice. You see, despite what people like to say, sexual desire is not a "need" it's a "desire." You want to have sex, you don't need it.

Just as society expects pedophiles and rapists to keep it to themselves, perhaps the same should be expected of other sexualities.
#99 to #39 - audiolife (11/30/2012) [-]
You're right it's about ACTING upon your desires. And two adult men/women having sex in private has absolutely no relation to an adult man/women acting out there desire on a child that doesn't understand what's going on. You really don't understand math if those are what you call the "common denominators". With your reasoning, any from of sex would be bad, because they're both based on sexuality and made by God. If you don't think the aspect of consent matters you yourself might as well go rape some kids.
User avatar #115 to #99 - TastyBurger (11/30/2012) [-]
What he's saying is God made pedophiles and rapists that way. They are just as much of a sexuality as the others. A gay person was made by God to be gay. A rapist is made by God to rape. A pedophile was made by God to be attracted to children. And if they weren't born that way, God still created the reasons for them to become that way. God made someone that would sooner or later molest someone and because of that the molested person went on to have a sexuality problem that made them do the same.

It's kind of like the "act of God" clause that insurance companies like to rely on. When a tornado strikes and destroys your home, it was an "act of God". Technically, everything is God's will. From the hurricane to the drunk driver. If its all a part of his "plan" than everything is God's fault basically.
#213 to #115 - audiolife (11/30/2012) [-]
I understand what he's saying, but there is something morally wrong(fun fact: morals have absolutely no causative relation to religion) with performing a sexual act on an A) non-consenting person B) Someone who we have deemed incapable of giving consent (ie: children/minors). And there is not any evidence that Giving gay people equal and fair treatment is detrimental to society at all. Bottom line, adult consensual gay sex does not harm or infringe upon anyone's rights, rape/pedophilia does.
User avatar #234 to #213 - TastyBurger (12/01/2012) [-]
That's just picking and choosing what sexuality is and isn't okay. Morals are all subjective. It depends on the angle you're looking at it. Morals for Attila the Hun were probably pretty different to ours, but he isn't wrong because morals can't be wrong. It's just your opinion about whether or not something is good. To me, morals are no different than music taste or political choice. They're all an opinion.

Think about the death penalty. It's murdering to show murdering is wrong. But those people are still probably bad enough to deserve death. Or does anyone "deserve" death? Everything in the world is subjective. There is no right answer to anything.
#235 to #234 - audiolife (12/01/2012) [-]
Except that we as a civilized society understand that the most basic aspects of morality exhibited in animals are empathy and fairness. Did Attila the Hun think what he was doing was morally right? Probably not. Most mass murderers didn't concern themselves with the morality of what they were doing. We have agreed, in the UN at least, on what some basic human rights are. We have also agreed that infringing on the rights of others is bad. So it's not picking and choosing what sexuality is and isn't okay randomly or on a basis of what I like. It's about the act of rape fundamentally infringing upon someone else's rights and the fact that neither being homosexual or having consensual homosexual sex infringe do. For the record I don't agree with the death penalty for a couple reasons. One, it costs more money to keep people on death row than to keep them in prison for life. Two, though I would personally want to kill someone who murdered a love one of mine, I do not think that it is up to the government to kill people.
User avatar #236 to #235 - TastyBurger (12/01/2012) [-]
Look, I really don't care. I'm not getting into psychological/philosophical/political/moral debate here because my overall point is that no one is right. Everyone should shut the **** up, because there is no answer for anything. Only "answers" and opinions.
#212 to #99 - daddycool (11/30/2012) [-]
1. I'm not going to go rape some children because I don't find them sexually desirable and because I find the action morally terrifying.

2. Consent has nothing to do with it. Would you like to know why?

Because my argument was not that homosexuality and rape are morally equivalent. My argument is that his argument sucks. That by saying "gays are made that way by God, so God clearly wants them to act out their gay" you're effectively saying "rapists are made that way by God, so God clearly wants them to act out their rape."

I'm not making a moral judgement or argument here. I am preying upon your sense of what is justifiable, but only to go so far as to state that his justification is flawed and unethical.

Now, you would have understood this if you had tried to understand what I meant when I said in my first post "That's a terrible, horrible argument."

For the purposes of this conversation, I don't care about the morality of homosexuality OR rape. Not at all. The purpose of my argument is to shut down HIS argument, because it's backwards and if taken to its logical conclusion(which is what I've done above that you have so many problems with) leads to a horror show.
#221 to #212 - audiolife (11/30/2012) [-]
Except there is a fundamental difference between a homosexual person and a rapist. Rape is an act performed, anybody can be a rapist. Being homosexual has nothing to do with having gay sex. Anybody can have gay sex, in fact there was a straight married man in the news recently because he was a famous gay porn star. If you wanted to compare gay sex and rape you would have slightly better footing, but the OP wasn't talking about rape. You brought rape up and compared it to homosexuality, but like everyone has been saying CONSENT MATTERS HERE. Acting out your "gay" on another gay person who consents to it is completely and utterly distinct from acting out your urge to rape somebody. Whether you brought up the morals of it is irrelevant, because the moral issue does matter. The comic was more a referendum on the hateful language in the bible because society better understands basic humans rights and sexuality today than we did 1000's of years ago.
#225 to #221 - daddycool (11/30/2012) [-]
Ya know, I just realized that I could spend the next 5 hours trying to explain this very simple concept to you, going through the argument process little by little until you finally understand that I wasn't actually comparing rape and homosexuality in the way you describe.

Then I realized, you're just an idiot. And I don't have to justify myself to idiots.
#227 to #225 - audiolife (11/30/2012) [-]
Yeah man that's how you win an argument! Call the other guy an idiot, don't argue any of the points he made, just call him an idiot! You're assumption is that you can substitute rapist for homosexual in that statement and come to the same conclusion. But you can't! The God of the bible supposedly gave us free will, which means God did not make rapists into rapists, as rape is an act. Homosexuality is not a choice you ARE born that way, which would mean that God did make them that way. As an atheist what some fake "God" did literally means nothing to me and it does come down to an argument of which one infringes upon another humans rights.

Your argument could easily have been used by racists. Let's assume that a group of people hate black people. Somebody comes up to them and says, "Stop hating black people! God make them that way, why would he not want them to be black?" The racist group would probably find your post a great response to the not racist person. But it stills has the same pitfalls.
User avatar #302 to #227 - satakas (12/15/2012) [-]
you're wrong. not that I think, you're wrong, but you made a logical error

if god made homos, as you suggest, he couldn't have announced homosexual act to be a sin. thus, homosexuality has nothing to do with god-stuff (i have to mention, that i don't believe any of that bible-stuff anyways).

but coming back to the beginning of that thread....despite of banning homosexuality, i can't find any passage in the bible, that bans pedophilia! So, watch out for your li'l girls, all bible-heads, because here i come and you have NOTHING against me :P
User avatar #301 to #39 - satakas (12/15/2012) [-]
although true, but a little fallacy: there's no difference, what "people like to say". i like to say, that red sucks totally. my neighbor likes to say, that blue is disgusting. well...wait a moment, i'll go and burn my neighbor until this comment uploads...
User avatar #300 to #37 - satakas (12/15/2012) [-]
you think so? really?

OK! well, i think that red sucks and blue is way better!

User avatar #299 to #35 - satakas (12/15/2012) [-]
not sure, if serious or sarcastic
#161 to #35 - candidvres **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #41 to #31 - nucularwar (11/30/2012) [-]
yeah, except for the whole consent part
#2 - phagot **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)