:think:
Perhaps we could estimate the :flamer: population by the number of mass murderers in a given year.
It's not OK to be a homosexual homicidal maniac....
Gay Mass Murder Trend
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps we could estimate the :flamer: population by the number of mass murderers in a given year.
It's not OK to be a homosexual homicidal maniac....
What of the more numerous hetero homicidal maniacs?
A free pass for keeping their sexuality directed at women?
Thunder's Muse
Well-known member
It's true. I've done heaps of reading on this subject and most serial killers are hetro, white males.
The sexual element of the killings has more to do with a sadistic nature than their sexual orientation.
:squint: Why would you say that?
Because for some the act of being homosexual seems to be a bigger deal than murder.
Why is the concern over mass murderers focus on the murderers sexuality rather than the actual crime and loss of innocent life?
BootkinMan
New member
BootkinMan
New member
If a homosexual kills 33 boys, and a "Christian" lied only once in his life - and both of them died that very night without repenting, will Jesus make any distinction between the two?
No, both are sinners.
The Bible does not make a distinction "here are the gay people" and "here are the straight people." The truth is that there are there only REPENTANT people and UNREPENTANT people.
God bless!
:squint: Where'd you get that from? The thread is accusing homosexuals of being more prone to homocidal tendencies, not being more prone to being homosexuals.
There are plenty of other threads you could start that could address what you want to derail this thread with. Fact remains that the focus of this thread is on murderers. A good point was raised by Pastor Enyart that homosexuality would be a key item toward profiling these sort of people more accurately.
Perhaps you could outline exactly what your problem would be if it were true that homosexuals were over-represented by murderers. You seem to have no problem with admitting that white males are over-represented. What's the difference when it comes to homos? :wave:
MrRadish
New member
What's the difference? I want to know.
Simply put, statistical evidence is a piece of information taken from, say, a study or a survey. For example, if I wanted to substantiate a point that smoking is linked to lung cancer, I'd provide a stat that might say something like "30% of smokers contract lung cancer during their lives, compared to a mere 5% of non-smokers". While this wouldn't prove my argument beyond dispute, it'd certainly help to back up my claim.
Anecdotal evidence, on the other hand, would be more along the lines of "My friend Bill used to smoke, and got lung cancer." Anecdotal evidence is seldom seen as sufficient to justify an argument. It can be used as an illustration of a point, but I could list all the individual cases of lung cancer in smokers that I wanted and it would do very little to further my point, largely because it can be countered in two very simple ways:
1. "Really? Well my friend Jim had been smoking since the age of 12 and was fit as a fiddle until the age of 86, when that bus ran him over."
2. "Prove that Bill wouldn't have got lung cancer anyway."
In this case, Bob's listed a dozen or so gay serial killers and seems to be under the impression that it proves his theory that homosexuality is linked to criminality. In actual fact it gives a very skewed picture, because of the hundreds of heterosexual serial killers, and the millions of non-murderous homosexuals. If he actually wanted to make a point that anyone but his own little cadre-cult-congregation would have even a modicum of respect for, he would have to produce a statistic from a reputable source that actually showed a trend for mass murder in homosexuals.
In this case the population under the microscope (serial killers) is small enough such that sampling is not necessary. By taking the "top" few and noting that they are homosexual is fairly conclusive even without regression analysis or considering too many other factors. Claiming that what has been presented is only "anecdotal" and thus irrelevant is entirely innacurate.
How do you respond to my question, Radish? What becomes so worthy of defending when homosexuality is claimed as a pre-cursor to serial killing? You do not seem to have any problem with white males being singled out as over-represented by the same. Why the double standard?
MrRadish
New member
There's nothing in the information given to indicate that these are the "top" few. If, indeed, these are the "top" few and not just a small selection of people from a long list of serial killers then I stand corrected, but like I said nothing in the OP appears to suggest this. Besides, it would be a lot more credible if rather than listing some gay serial killers Bob just did a quick number crunch with this list of serial killers and gave a stat, like what percentage of the top 100 serial killers were gay, for example.
Nothing as such. I accept and heartily agree with the fact that some homosexuals are complete gits, just like some heterosexuals are. What irritates me is the way Bob seems to be using this as a criticism of being homosexual.
Because I don't advocate executing people for being white males.
lain:
Quincy
New member
assuranceagent
New member
I don't doubt you. In fact, you may not know this, but I happen to be a heterosexual, white male, in the approximate age range you mentioned...
...and don't look now but I'm
Right
Behind
You!
Muahahahah!
We're concerned with both. The point of this thread is to show evidence that homos are psychologically warped.
Yes, because 3 verses show that not all sins are equal.
1.) Matthew 11:21-22 - Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you.
2.) Luke 12:47,48 - And that servant who knew his lord's will and did not prepare, nor did according to His will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he not knowing, and doing things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.
3.) John 19:11 - Jesus answered, You could have no authority against Me unless it were given to you from above. Therefore he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin."
Sitamun
New member
Then it has failed. All the "evidence" shows is that some humans are psychologically warped. Not even all the "gay" men on the initial list are homosexual, as far as I've been able to find. At best it's sloppy work, at worst is downright lying.
This is exactly my point. You leap to the defence of the homosexuals and suggest that their representation might be over-stated, but you do no such thing when people say white males are over-represented.
Why not? Why the double standard?
:squint:
Pastor Enyart regards homosexuality as a perversion in and of itself. Of course he is criticising homosexuals for being homosexuals. This is one very good reason why it's not OK to be gay.
:squint:Because I don't advocate executing people for being white males.
What does that mean?
Gerald
Resident Fiend
It's the "believe in your heart" part that's difficult...
PlastikBuddha
New member
More absurd nonesense. If you twist the meaning of the word "homosexual" to mean whatever you want it to mean (for instance including Charles Manson and pedophiles as homosexuals) you can play with the numbers and fool the gullible or those who want to find another reason to hate homosexuals, but I would expect Bob to be better than that. I disagree with him on most issues but I respect his zeal and his dedication and I must say I was deeply disappointed, if not exactly surprised, with him for this show. If you want to talk about the sin of homosexuality, fine, but don't spread fabricated tripe like this.
- Status