Religion debates on the internett. oh you family guy you.. This is just B.S. people look for any excuse to hate one an other, religion just happened to be the easiest. Honestly, no one had an argument against "this tag your it
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (82)
[ 82 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
User avatar #5 - sketchysketchist
Reply +25 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
This is just B.S. people look for any excuse to hate one an other, religion just happened to be the easiest.
Honestly, no one had an argument against "this is what god wants" until just recently.
User avatar #16 to #5 - seventh
Reply -8 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Isn't it ironic that that more and more people stray away from religion as science develops further?

Nah, we should never contest the "word of god" since it's absolutely true. Even if science has blatantly proved it otherwise.
User avatar #26 to #16 - sketchysketchist
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Dude the only reason religion exists is to give an answer to something we don't understand. But honestly, science isn't so different. If we don't understand something there are only theories we can use to explain things. Seriously, the big bang theory is the idea that nothing existed and that suddenly it did. Also, they say it could be possible to travel through time, it could be possible there are more than one universe, it could be possible the usiverse will squeeze in in itself, and and could be possible that there are aliens. Nothing is truly absolute.
Don't argue that religion's guesses aren't as educated as science's, religion was created years ago when we didn't know ****. If we knew then what we know now, religion would say god created the big bang and made it possible for our world to have matter, anti-matter, physics, and possible for the human mind to grow.
User avatar #49 to #26 - seventh
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
First of all, physics proves that it is physically impossible to travel through time. Secondly, Stephen Hawking has proved that a god was not necessary for the Big Bang to occur.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpb7NMR-XOo

Watch this when you have time. It's enlightening if you have an open mind.

Also, a scientific theory proven wrong does not result in death, chaos, or ostracization.

I don't mind the red thumbs. Goes to show how defensive theists get.
User avatar #61 to #49 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Actually I've seen a documentary by Stephen Hawking where he admits it is plausible to travel through time, via wormhole to go into the past, or using high amounts of gravity or going faster than the speed of light to make it into the future.

He said it wasn't necessary but he can't accept that he doesn't exist, because he can neither prove it or disprove it, since it can't really be tested.

Having an opinion in science is just as bad as having one with religion. Hawking mentioned that a few years ago you'd be shunned for believing in time travel or the possibility of aliens. The fact that some religions demand slaughter doesn't mean religion is bad, people write religion in a form that suits them best, permanently silencing anyone against them.

"Goes to show how defensive theists get." How do you know it's only theists thumbing you down? Takes a lot of faith doesn't it? For all you know some aetheists thumb you down because you're implying religion is wrong because people abuse it's power.
User avatar #66 to #61 - seventh
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
Herp derp, unicorns and big foot can exist because you can't prove against it.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I'd lean towards a theory that had some scientific backing than some ravings of random lunatics who wrote down whatever came into their imagination in what we now call the bible.
User avatar #67 to #66 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
Unicorns and Big foot don't exist because we've investigated them multiple times and found no prove. The only people that believe it are the one's getting fooled by the faulty man made evidence.

They weren't lunitics, they just didn't know anything about science during the time. I already said this before, all religions were created were to fill in the gaps we couldn't figure out yet, if they created in this decade they would involve more scientific support behind everything mentioned.
User avatar #68 to #67 - seventh
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
So you're saying unicorns and big foot don't exist because we have found no proof of them right? And that the only ones getting fooled are caused by man made evidence right?
User avatar #71 to #68 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
You can't compare creatures people have claimed to physically see and yet they've never been caught on film with and invisible entity that only seems to appear in people's subconscious.
User avatar #72 to #71 - seventh
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
That argument is so flawed I don't think a rebuttal is necessary.
User avatar #75 to #72 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
And there's the classic "Oh your argument is stupid because you're supporting religion and I'm right since I'm against it. But I'll pretend to be the bigger man by mentioning how I'm not going to bother arguing anymore."

Dude, I'm not really religious and I accept scientific truths, but I think it's plain stupid for someone to argue about how religion and science are too different and can't coexist.
#45 to #26 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
You just completely discredited your own beliefs, congrats. You really did hit the nail on the head, religion was created because we didn't know ****, and will continue to fill in the holes we haven't found the dirt to fill.

A few hundred years ago, people thought rainbows were created by god, now we know it's light being refracted from within water droplets in the air. Is it not ignorant to see this pattern, then completely disregard something we aren't sure about, only to put in its place something that has absolutely no evidence to support it at all?

You've also got the term "theory" screwed up, a scientific theory is much more different than the common usage of the word.
<pic related

Science does not guess, religion does. Science is based on tests, multiple tests. Observations of tests, nature, and more tests. If a new idea in science arises, it is beaten down until it is either proves to be true, false, or the best answer we can get right now. The big bang has much more evidence than you may think.

http://www.talkorigins . org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html#evidence
User avatar #62 to #45 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
I admit something's in the bible are wrong and really need to be updated.
However there's nothing wrong with religion and science coexisting.
Saying that religion existing slows down the progress of science would be like saying there can't be heterosexuality and homosexuality coexisting in this world.

Well in other words, science isn't always true, it's sometimes an estimation. But it all starts with a guess and it's tested out. Religion can't be tested because some jackass wrote it's wrong to test god in the bible, Which is what holds back both religion and science.

I know it has a lot of evidence. But it's just religion's concept with more detail, Everything was created by nothing.
User avatar #63 to #62 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
No, they can not coexist. What you call coexisting I call adapting. Your beliefs are proven wrong, thus you change your beliefs to fit modern times. This not only shows a lack of faith, but ignorance as well.

Religion does slow down progress. Think, if everyone on Earth who rejected evolution, the big bang, etc..., suddenly stopped believing that, there would be millions, maybe even billions, of people who would want to learn about the world, about nature, the universe, physics, science. People would stop wasting money donating to churches who use over half of their income to pay the preachers. More money would be available to pay for education, job preparation, all around making the standard of living higher. The wars in the Middle East would die off with no other reason to fight other than "just cause." People would become kinder to each other, with no hatred or segregation between groups of people.

Science does not start with a guess, it starts with an observation, then a question, then testing. Guessing is never allowed in science.

And no, someone writing, "Don't test god," in a book does not hold science back directly in the slightest, only indirectly by decreasing the amount of critical thinkers in the world.

Religions' concept is as follows:
There is a creator
There is a set of rules the creator wants us to follow
We must follow these rules
We must teach these rules to children
We must teach children about the creator

You are being quite naive by dumbing down the existence of the universe to just five simple words. There are a plethora of smaller details that are within a main idea, which those five words don't even describe. Science is extremely complicated, and "Everything came from nothing" insults it.
User avatar #70 to #63 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
In my opinion, religion is simply this, A high power created everything, anything bad you do will come back to haunt you, and you must continue to do good even if you seem to be punished for doing it.
Unfortunately, intelligent people abused this information and read into every little word. They used it tell people they need to pay the church for all this crap. Paying the church to clean them of sin, and that is why to this day religious people pay churches for baptisms and communions. Honestly, I'm not really for these rituals but the church does need some money.
So what if they pay preachers? You act like most of these people would send their money somewhere where it could be of some use. Honestly there aren't many people willing to give up the extra money they have left over to help someone because they'd rather buy something they could live without.

Wrong again buddy, science doesn't test a question, they also plan an answer. You know people **** with numbers to get the answers they want. That is why a while back some asshole made a false story of how vaccinations cause autism and people to this day still believe it. Do you think that maybe this happened with religion too? Some asshole who could actually afford a book back in medeval times telling everyone what the bible says and all the poor people who can't even read can't really argue with it?

Those are the rules I'll five you that, but honestly it takes a really ignorant person to see how evil that can be. That's like telling me that telling people that santa clause is real leads to good people who get mad when they don't get a free gift on christmas.


Honestly, science could be held back by anything. Seriously, if we create intelligent robots we'll have people arguing that this will lead to robot apocalypse because they saw it in a movie. It's fools that ruin science not faith.
User avatar #74 to #70 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
You've got the idea that because one scientist lies, that means everything else must be false. The thing about science is, there are a LOT of scientists. Some scientist lies about something? Another scientist will call him out for it. How do you think any progress is made at all?

Science isn't just something off in the corner, it interacts with our lives on a daily basis. One does not simply get science wrong. Specific details? Maybe, but we base our successes off of science so much, it's very hard to think that it could all be one big lie.

And it isn't like that at all. Santa doesn't lay down laws for you, he just says be good. "Good" is can be defined very differently among people. To some, "good" means ridiculing gay people for being sinners. For others, it means just being nice to everyone. Religion tells people to kill others who don't believe. That you should stone people who work on Sunday. Religion tells you that you are right, and that others are wrong, and not to even consider doubt. Religion tells you that if you don't believe, you're going to hell. Anyone who believes that is going to turn out messed up.

I'm sure you won't do me this favor, but please watch this video. It embodies everything I can't say. In turn, I'll listen/read any article you send me, as long as the video isn't over 20 minutes and the article under 3 pages.
http://www.youtube . com/watch?v=r6w2M50_Xdk
User avatar #76 to #74 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
You've got the idea that because one preacher lies, that means everything else is false. The thing about religion is there a lot of believers. Some preacher lies about something? A reasonable believer will call him out on it. How do you think people have managed to try to keep one an other good?

Dude, there's nothing wrong with religion. There's nothing wrong with it saying you're going to suffer damnation for being bad, because there are some really stupid people who won't listen to logic unless they're risking something. Kind of like how there are laws against killing people, yes many will be morally against killing a person but others will pull a gun out more swiftly because taking one's life doesn't have a consequence.

I'm serious when I say the bible needs to be updated to related more to people of this time. It needs to firmly state that you have to be good with people and not fear seeking knowledge and not judge people. I honestly believe anyone can go to heaven(If it exists, I'm still questioning this concept) even atheists. As long as they've truly been good and not being some asshole making this a hell on earn and using some ******** excuse to rationalize their choice.

I would watch this vid, but it'll have to wait until tommorrow. I really don't have time to watch vids today.
Unfortunately, I don't have articles or vids. Only logic and memory of some scientific things I've learned. Well if you have netflix, you can look up a discovery channel show by Stephen Hawking, where he discusses the possibility of aliens, time travel, and how the universe was created and how it could end.
Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking, it's a lot of theories but it really opens your eyes to how great this universe may be.

Of course I can only ask you that when you read or watch anything by any one extremely atheist with a grain of salt. Of lot of these people are full of themselves and think that them reading some science books make them a genius.
User avatar #77 to #76 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
Scientists base what they say off of facts, and yes, some lie and **** with the facts.
Preachers base what they say off feelings, and this is not even close to reliable. In my humble opinion, all preachers lie, at least about the existence of god.
There is no right or wrong in religion, and this is what makes it so dangerous. People will adapt their faiths, just as you have, to fit the times. You talk about consequences, what are the consequences for changing your faith? Is it fair to the people who died a 1,000 years ago that they roast in hell because they were gay, and now gay people can strut in to heaven without any problem? God is an all-knowing, all-powerful being, and he is certainly just. If he is these things, then his words stick throughout the centuries. And yes, it possible that some guy screwed up the original story, but what makes you believe the original story was true to being with? The dead sea scrolls? Any ancient writings? If so, they just found pieces of papyrus, which are most definitely authentic, stating that Jesus had a wife. Does this just automatically mean you're going to change everything you knew and thought about Jesus?

I'll actually list out some things that religion has done:
User avatar #78 to #77 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
Honor Killings
Killings for being gay
Killings for denouncing Islam
Suicide Bombing
9/11
The Holocaust
WWII (Hitler felt he was doing god's will)
Israel vs. Everyone else
Crusades
Inquisition
Colonization of Africa
Colonization of Americas
Destruction of native tribes in Africa
Destruction of native tribes in Americas
Islamic genocide of Hindus
Witch Trials


User avatar #79 to #78 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
Sacking of Magdeburg
30 Years War
Slaying of Huguenots (20,000 people)
Chmielnitzki massacres
Massacre of Sand Creek, Colorado 11/29/1864
Rwandan Massacres
Discouragement of contraceptives
Faith Healing (doesn't work)
Jihad
Muslim Conquests
Armenian Genocides
Threatened genocide against Baha'is in Iran
Conflicts in Southern Sudan
Uganda under kim jong (not good)
Massacre of Ibos in North Nigeria
User avatar #80 to #79 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
disowning
slavery
discrimination against homosexuals
discrimination against blacks
anti-interracial marriages
anti-same-sex marriages
God "talking" to people, telling them to kill others
Iraq War
War in Afghanistan
Israel vs. Iran
Iran vs. U.S.
North Korea as a whole
Sects of Buddhism that kill Christians
Beating of women
Women being forced to be inferior to men

I think I've made my point
User avatar #82 to #80 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
I get what you're saying, people did some really stupid things in the name of religion.
But none of these people actually did things their bible said to do.
Honestly, the same way some christians justify their homophobia is the same thing they did with their racism.
However, this doesn't mean all racists were christian or that all homophobes are christian.
These wars where one country takes over an other for religion, honestly these people wanted more land and more supplies, once again justifying it with religion.

You get the message? Religion doesn't make people do things, people do things and blame it on religion.
That'd be like blaming justin beiber because his fan girls are total bitches. It's not his fault.

But to answer your question about me changing my opinion on jesus. Yes and no.
Yes, I would accept he was married and had kids. But this doesn't change his story. He was a good person telling everyone that they should be good to, and to look at all the wrongs they've done before judging others. He could've killed billions of people, I'd still listen to his message even if he was an absolute hypocrite.

That's how I am though, I see the good, accept the bad, but I continue to follow the positive side of everything.
Hell, I'm willing to bet I can argue that Adolf Hitler was a better leader than any of the most recent presidents we had. And any one arguing against me will be shocked when they hear me point out that this guy helped germany out of their recession, he made jobs, he helped find scientific discoveries of how the brain and body works, and the list would probably go on. Yes he was a horrible person, but he did some good in this world and we take it for granted.


TL;DR A bad person could do good things, but only an idiot will ignore their wise words because they didn't live by them. And a bigger idiot to blame the leader for what his followers do.
User avatar #83 to #82 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/07/2012) [-]
I don't blame god, I blame the people. I also blame the excuse, which is religion.
And yes, the Bible does say to kill others for absolutely retarded reasons. Just as the Quran tells people to go to war with other people of different religions, or even sects of Islam.

You admire Jesus' teachings, not Jesus himself. Keep in mind though, he informed people on how to beat their slaves, and damned fig trees.

Your Hitler analogy is very clever, but not clever enough. Hitler did stimulate the economy, but only while he was in power. Look what happened to Germany after they lost the war, they got ****** in the ass by Russia, with only half of Berlin for the U.S. Germany was a total hell hole until the 1980's.

The bible clearly says homosexuality is wrong. It also says that there is a Light side and a Dark side. The Bible says Darkness is bad, so people with dark skin = bad. I understand why people are racist, homophobic, etc. Their holy book says so. Although it says many more things that no one today follows, they stick closer to the word than moderates.
User avatar #84 to #83 - sketchysketchist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/07/2012) [-]
Well I put more blame on people than religion for all the terrible things in this world. Honestly, who does something that everyone says is wrong just because a thousand year old book says so.

I have that in mind, but I keep saying this. You don't have to listen to everything they say. If your parents drink and smoke, and they tell you don't drink and smoke because it's bad for your health and they're a dangerous addiction, do you listen them or are they wrong because of the hypocrosy?

Well that's what happens when you lose a war, not when you believe in religion. May I inform you, the only reason anyone listened to hitler and the reason world war 2 stared was because everyone blamed germany for the first world war and made them pay every country for any war damages. Which was the U.N's choice of a fair punishment.


I never heard of that, but it could be possible you're just reading into it. Maybe darkness was just a symbol of evil and people used the metaphor to represent skin tone so they have an excuse to oppress others. I'm sure the bible never says anything about homosexuality, except the part about not laying with a man like you would your wife, but it's been said that that only meant you can't treat a man as if he was less than you, like how you treat women are less than you. So this supports sexism, but sexism was created since the beginning of time. Women being weaker couldn't handle hard work, so they did all the "women's" work.
Also I've heard, the earliest churches from Roman times supported homosexuality in the way that you can't have sex with women for fun and only for reproductive purposes, however you could choose to have sex with men as often as you wish.
#9 - corundum
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Seth MacFarlane, or whoever writes for his shows, are really, really ignorant about world history. That moment when Stewie and Brian travelled to an alternate universe where "Christianity never existed" and everything was more futuristic because everyone avoided the "Christian Dark Ages" is about as wrong as something can get. Firstly, Christianity was the only thing in Western Europe protecting science, history, and education during the actual Dark Ages and only actually repressed scientists during the Renaissance, and this was because the church's power was slipping and they were convinced everyone was trying to undermine them. Secondly, even if Christianity was responsible for repressing the sciences in Europe, other places like China, The Muslim Empire, Japan, and India were all huge contributors toward human advancement. He acts like European history is global history.
User avatar #21 to #9 - seventh
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
I wanted to stop reading after the first grammar mistake in your first sentence, but I gave you the benefit of doubt. The Christian Dark Ages was a period when scientists and free thinkers were scared ******** of religious persecution and strayed away from showing the world new ideas. It was not until the Age of Enlightenment that the scientists and free thinkers stopped caring about the orthodox religion of the world and created their own that did not constrict advancements that proved certain beliefs wrong. At this day and age when so much has been uncovered, religion is slowly becoming obsolete. Don't get me wrong, we have not uncovered all the secrets of the universe, but at least we're trying.
User avatar #22 to #21 - corundum
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
What you just described was a period of time around the fall of the Catholic church, which is exactly what I just described above. And then you just padded it with vague ********. Your sense of history ******* sucks.

The "whoever" in "whoever writes for his shows" was a plural pronoun. Singular noun + plural pronoun calls for a plural conjugated verb.
User avatar #42 to #9 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
And the Catholic Church started to lose power because people wouldn't shut the **** up. The fall of the Catholic Church could more or less be blamed on the Protestant Reformation. Up until that point, the Catholic Church held an iron grip on Europe, and anyone who spoke out was either forced to recant their beliefs, or was killed or tortured. While the Dark Ages were brought more by the Black Plague than anything else, the Church took control during a harsh time, and stayed in control for quite a while. While other regions in Asia developed, they did not hold the same importance as Europe. Western society is extremely European, most its ideas and sciences came from European groups and people. Many great scientists and thinks came from Europe, inspiring the Age of Enlightenment to occur. This was truly the age of science, and you can't deny that anyone who spoke out against the Church was dealt with in terrible ways.
User avatar #44 to #42 - corundum
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Yeah, no powerful organization likes that. But the Church itself kept Europe from being conquered by, say, foreign powers like the Muslim Empire or the Vikings. (This may or may not have helped. I mean, look at what the Mongols did to the Russians.) It held it together and personally promoted science, the arts, and other academic **** while nobody else had the money to (haha, church taxes).

What I mean to say is, they kept an iron grip on Europe but were really nearly the best thing struggling and primitive post-Roman Europe could ask for. They helped preserve old learning, just like the nice old Muslims were doing a thousand miles to the east. Europe then kicked it away once they were ready to start ******* up some damn injuns across the Atlantic Ocean.
User avatar #47 to #44 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
They claimed to support these things, but in all actuality, they didn't at all. Look what happened to Galileo, he had to recant what he had said about the Earth revolving around the sun, then was put under house arrest for the rest of his life. The Church promoted science that it agreed with, if you presented something they didn't like, you were out.

And the lesser of two evils does not make the former any better.
User avatar #55 to #47 - corundum
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
I never said it was the "lesser of two evils." I said it was a positive influence on the world, and was a lot better to those under its power than nearly any other ruling institution in the area.
User avatar #59 to #55 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
While they may have preserved much knowledge through the "Dark Ages", not many new discoveries came in. And when the Church started losing power, they destroyed many valuable texts in an effort to preserve power. This alone was quite detrimental to society.

No, they have not done "good" to the world. Many lives were lost in the name of god, cultures destroyed, whole races wiped or nearly wiped off the face of the Earth. The wars with Islam were not fought to preserve knowledge, but because it was a holy war, brought on by the uneasiness between Catholics and Muslims. In fact, the Catholics really brought on the Crusades, killing over 200,000 people in a 200 year period. The Church was on the offensive, not allowing religious tolerance or freedom in the countries it ruled in.

User avatar #64 to #59 - corundum
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
The Church struck out against the Turks because they threatened to take Constantinople, and because they sort of wanted Palestine for themselves.
User avatar #65 to #64 - cullenatorguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/02/2012) [-]
And how selfish of an act was that?
User avatar #51 to #47 - corundum
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
The church did actually support these things. Again, treating Galileo like **** was a result of him directly challenging them around the time of the protestant reformation.
User avatar #2 - hermaphrodites
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(09/30/2012) [-]
Unbelievable, there is always a reason to hate someone
#25 - Macnub
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Family Guy is simply making fun of the argument how religion kills people. Stupid people can be religious just like stupid people can have no opinion about it.
User avatar #27 to #25 - detenator
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Thank you Captain Obvious!
#34 - rummler
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
that moment when you realize that the old man took both of them down
#46 - crunked
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
#23 - ilikeafros
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
well put Family Guy, well put.
well put Family Guy, well put.
User avatar #24 to #23 - srskate
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Assyrians, nuff said.
User avatar #1 - relaxx
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(09/30/2012) [-]
Religious*
#13 - bobthebst
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Wow it's really hard to put the exact ******* words from the ******* program into a comic.

Well done you!
#3 - johnshepherd
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Actually, the religious objections to homosexuality have been around since long before then, dating back before 1200BC. The objections are most commonly attributed to Leviticus, written in the time of Moses, although other religious texts and many social stigmas had anti-homosexual contents.
User avatar #6 to #3 - RandomAnonGuy
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
Who brought up homosexuality? And did I reply to you a few posts earlier?
#7 to #6 - johnshepherd
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/01/2012) [-]
I'm fairly sure, although I could be wrong, that it said love, in the context of homosexuality. If I'm wrong, I should delete the post as irrelevant, so thanks for telling me;..