France wtf!?

[Skorm]

Person is too vague, a cockroach also has it's own personailty. What rights does it have lol?

More rights than some people unfortunately.

 

[Brandy]

If a thief did steal again, cutting his hand is bound to happen, because stealing (Kleptomania) is a mental illness that in Islam's view, the only treatment is cutting one hand of a thief.

That is so black and white, but I honestly expect nothing less from a man who gets his morals from a 1400+ years old book. What if that thief is a father who's desperately trying to feed his starving children?

What is the point of the story of Lot that is shared in all the Abrahamic religions? This habit of homosexuality, where you think it came from? I understand very well that I'm being harsh and sounds like an asshole, but should I lie to a religious part of the LGBTQ?

Yes, you do sound like an asshole. Homosexuality has been around longer than all religions combined. Ancient Rome, Greece and Mesopotamia, all accepted homosexuality. It is not only a sexual attraction, but also a romantic attraction. Homosexuality is, in other words, not just about ***. It's also about enjoying each other's company, going out to eat, meeting each other's families, working out together, travelling togehter, etc. They basically love each other. What sounds more harmful to you, what I just described or wishing these people death and/or pain? Because, to me, you are the problem here, not them.




Debating with you is such a f*cking drag. You constantly change your views and contradict yourself when you're cornered. Let's summarize so far, so I finally get this right:

Who suggested this idea of Parent 1 and Parent 2? What kind of people?

I don't think I need to explain this one, but I will nonetheless. I assume we both read the same article, we both know what group of people is the center of attention here. Trans people.

Definitely they are atheists.

Here you so confidently proclaim that all these trans are atheists.

All the problems we suffer for thousands of years were caused by some fanatic non-religious people.

Then you give non-religious people, atheists, the blame for "all the problems".

LGBTQ can be religious

However, you changed your mind and said that LGBTQ can be religious after all.

So what you've said so far is: All non-religious people (or atheists) have caused all the problems in the past millennium. This does not include all trans people, however, because you concluded that some of them could in fact be religious. Did I get that right?

You can't say, "No matter your interpretations of the holy texts (the Bible, the Quran, etc), you are still a theist". To you they are theist, but to true theists like Jews, Christians and Muslims, they are extremists misrepresenting God's words.

Here you confusingly claim that not all theists are theists, disagreeing with the official definition of theism. You imply that religious extremists, for example ISIS, are not theists, but atheists.

Where in this thread I ever defined anything? Don't put words I didn't say in my mouth.

And when I confronted you with this confusing definition of yours, you got defensive and told me you had never defined anything in this thread. However, you did.

I used ISIS as an example. I didn't deny them being theists.

Then you denied your previous refusal to call them theists, when you literally said in one of your previous posts, "To you they are theists, but not to us."

Okay, so according to you: You concluded that extremists like ISIS and al-Qaida are in fact theists. Is that correct?


To finish this, I want to go back to your first two statement. The first one:
"Who suggested this idea of Parent 1 and Parent 2? What kind of people? Definitely they are atheists."

Do you still agree with this statement of yours?
If yes, then what atheists are you talking about? Not trans people, because you agreed that not all of them are atheists.
If no, then why did you say it in the first place?


And then the second statement:
"All the problems we suffer for thousands of years were caused by some fanatic non-religious people."

Do you still agree with this statement of yours?
If yes, then what non-religious people are you talking about? You're obviously not talking about ISIS or al-Qaida, because you agreed that they are religious (or, in another word, theists).
If no, then why did you say it in the first place?

 

[Marin]

Liberals have been pushing for this for a while now. Might as well trademark the word "delusion" given how badly they insist on erasing basic differences between men and women rooted in biology.

Post automatically merged: Feb 18, 2019

What about all those people who doesn’t want to be defined as a person?

Pretty sure there are loonies out there who don't want to be defined as humans. Give em time, we'll get laws that they too will be comfortable with.

Dumb conservatives like me can go *family friendly filter* ourselves back into the stone age.

 

[Skorm]

Pretty sure there are loonies out there who don't want to be defined as humans. Give em time, we'll get laws that they too will be comfortable with.

Nuu, my outlaw country will never be reinforced with laws T_______T

 

[salamander uchiha]

That is so black and white, but I honestly expect nothing less from a man who gets his morals from a 1400+ years old book. What if that thief is a father who's desperately trying to feed his starving children?

This isn't my debate, but on this point I feel I have to clear up the issue. Necessity removes punishment, "the book" also mentions this. Even the application isn't for a person until certain conditions are fulfilled. Btw I think Arabian Luffy was being sarcastic as Sharia wouldn't apply to somebody who doesn't have a functioning rational faculty(a pre requisite to be considered accountable).

Anyway carry on with your discussion.

Ps. Religion also predates sodomy if you believe in God, because Adam predates cultures. The creator created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.

 

[Brandy]

This isn't my debate, but on this point I feel I have to clear up the issue. Necessity removes punishment, "the book" also mentions this. Even the application isn't for a person until certain conditions are fulfilled. Btw I think Arabian Luffy was being sarcastic as Sharia wouldn't apply to somebody who doesn't have a functioning rational faculty(a pre requisite to be considered accountable).

Thanks for clearing that up. However, cutting off limbs is still barbaric and such practices don't belong in the modern age.

 

[salamander uchiha]

Thanks for clearing that up. However, cutting off limbs is still barbaric and such practices don't belong in the modern age.

No problem. While you're entitled to your opinion I don't see it as barbaric, nor do others. I also believe rapists(provided conditions are fulfilled) should be executed, but others consider that wrong. Ultimately it goes back to where you derive what you consider right or wrong from.

 

[Marin]

Thanks for clearing that up. However, cutting off limbs is still barbaric and such practices don't belong in the modern age.

No problem. While you're entitled to your opinion I don't see it as barbaric, nor do others. I also believe rapists(provided conditions are fulfilled) should be executed, but others consider that wrong. Ultimately it goes back to where you derive what you consider right or wrong from.

I'm with @Brandy on this one. Punishing criminals should be done in such a way that something good ultimately comes from it (like labor or such). If you are going to commit to such purely vengeful practices at least make it proportionate to the crime. Mutilating someone for life for stealing something from a stand is downright barbaric and there's no going around it. Capital punishment is a bit different but it should not be allowed in case of rape simply because of how easy it is to abuse it.

Such severe punishments, however, will always lead to tons of abuse hence why you have a lot of innocent people dying from false accusations or agenda hiding behind the law. One example of that would be persecution of atheists, Christians and other groups that disagree with Islam in predominantly Muslim countries. Then there's an even more severe issue of persecuting LGBT people and even people who simply dress in a way that's not the norm. As a fan of alternative subcultures (emo in particular), I was disheartened to see tons of teens and young adults being publicly executed for dressing emo.

There's a reason why the most successful and advanced countries in the world (West) left behind such laws. They simply don't lead to a healthy society that is good to live in.

Having said that, how does this relate to the OP?

 

[Brandy]

I'm with @Brandy on this one. Punishing criminals should be done in such a way that something good ultimately comes from it (like labor or such). If you are going to commit to such purely vengeful practices at least make it proportionate to the crime. Mutilating someone for life for stealing something from a stand is downright barbaric and there's no going around it. Capital punishment is a bit different but it should not be allowed in case of rape simply because of how easy it is to abuse it.

Such severe punishments, however, will always lead to tons of abuse hence why you have a lot of innocent people dying from false accusations or agenda hiding behind the law. One example of that would be persecution of atheists, Christians and other groups that disagree with Islam in predominantly Muslim countries. Then there's an even more severe issue of persecuting LGBT people and even people who simply dress in a way that's not the norm. As a fan of alternative subcultures (emo in particular), I was disheartened to see tons of teens and young adults being publicly executed for dressing emo.

There's a reason why the most successful and advanced countries in the world (West) left behind such laws. They simply don't lead to a healthy society that is good to live in.

Basically this.

Having said that, how does this relate to the OP?

We talked about the new law, which turned into a topic of trans people, which turned into a topic of sin, which turned into a topic of religion, which vaguely turned into a topic of Islam, which then turned into this mess. You get it.

 

[Marin]

Basically this.


We talked about the new law, which turned into a topic of trans people, which turned into a topic of sin, which turned into a topic of religion, which vaguely turned into a topic of Islam, which then turned into this mess. You get it.

Beware of post deletion, closing of thread and infractions for off-topic discussions. lol

I'm all up for joining a discussion on all these topic though, just not in this thread. @salamander uchiha can make a new one if he wishes to discuss these things.

 

[salamander uchiha]

I'm with @Brandy on this one. Punishing criminals should be done in such a way that something good ultimately comes from it (like labor or such). If you are going to commit to such purely vengeful practices at least make it proportionate to the crime. Mutilating someone for life for stealing something from a stand is downright barbaric and there's no going around it. Capital punishment is a bit different but it should not be allowed in case of rape simply because of how easy it is to abuse it.

Nobody would lose their hand for shoplifting or taking from a stand, like I told Brandy the conditions for application are quite extreme. Even for rape etc under divine law, a claim of rape isn't enough, suspicion isn't enough, you need concrete evidence or a confession(unforced/uncoerced). Under scripture it's not that easy to apply the laws.

Such severe punishments, however, will always lead to tons of abuse hence why you have a lot of innocent people dying from false accusations or agenda hiding behind the law. One example of that would be persecution of atheists, Christians and other groups that disagree with Islam in predominantly Muslim countries. Then there's an even more severe issue of persecuting LGBT people and even people who simply dress in a way that's not the norm. As a fan of alternative subcultures (emo in particular), I was disheartened to see tons of teens and young adults being publicly executed for dressing emo.

You can't abuse extreme punishments because they have extreme conditions to be applied. Under European law you can be sent to prison for life on a high likely hood of having commitee a crime, under Islamic law only certainty is accepted or you walk free. Also the intent to commit a crime is not punishable like in the Western system, only once the crime is commited is it to be prosecuted. There's no room for the intention to change at that point. Another point, Sharia generally doesn't apply to non muslims as they don't believe in Islam. Malayasia has a multi court system, if your interested in how different faiths/people are dealt with its worth spending some time reading up on it.

There's a reason why the most successful and advanced countries in the world (West) left behind such laws. They simply don't lead to a healthy society that is good to live in.

I think your judging the application of law on Western standards. As I've outlined such laws don't work under the same looser standards in application. The West is heading towards decadence and the breakdown of society. Even the rise of extremists elements because the legal system, political system and economic system is corrupted. Ultimately the rule of man has led to the situation we're in.

Having said that, how does this relate to the OP?

It doesn't, I was only pointing out that Arabian Luffy was wrong on that point. I didn't want to interfere in their debate.

 

[Brandy]

Beware of post deletion, closing of thread and infractions for off-topic discussions. lol

I'm all up for joining a discussion on all these topic though, just not in this thread. @salamander uchiha can make a new one if he wishes to discuss these things.

We may as well take the fall like champs. lol

This whole thread is giving me a headache at this point. I already said what I wanted to say, so I'm out. ArabianLuffy can ramble on if he wants.

 

[salamander uchiha]

Beware of post deletion, closing of thread and infractions for off-topic discussions. lol

I'm all up for joining a discussion on all these topic though, just not in this thread. @salamander uchiha can make a new one if he wishes to discuss these things.

I'm not discussing it, the debates between Luffy and Brandy. I was staying on the original topic and have the French gone bonkers.

 

[Brandy]

I'm not discussing it, the debates between Luffy and Brandy. I was staying on the original topic and have the French gone bonkers.

Let's just act like the debate never happened, maybe the admins won't notice. lol

The French have always been a bit french fried to be honest.

 

[salamander uchiha]

Let's just act like the debate never happened, maybe the admins won't notice. lol

The French have always been a bit french fried to be honest.

Sure, but we'll be fine Ira(Avani) hasn't booked us yet

@bold

 

[ArabianLuffy]

I have to say that never in my life have I ever blamed any community, affiliation or group except this once. This is the first time I've ever did, blaming a community such as atheists. If you, Brandy got pissed off by my attitude, know that, that this is the same exact attitude been used against Muslim community by those who hate Islam for many years.

AND for first time in my life I stuck my nose in foreign affairs that has nothing to do with me and with my country. I'm a Muslim sunni from a Muslim sunni family and community. Everyone better not forget where I come from. What I believe in. What I see right and wrong.

For long years I've debated many people. Asking them to address a certain problem they don't like and to give examples. When they do, specially if it was about my religion, Islam, they misunderstand and yet still misjudge Islam laws. Asking for reform of Islam. I shudder at the thought that it comes so easy to them for asking Islam to be reformed, and it never stopped there. It went to even label Saudis as THE #1 EXTREMIST people in the world.

You see Brandy, religion is part of history and of all things, history is regarded sacred. It's dangerous to alter historical texts of religious books on such flimsy grounds. As much as we've been told in schools in Saudi Arabia that the Old Testament and the Bible have been twisted to suit certain purposes of high ups like leaders, kings or whatever.

Brandy, it's true that I said that an LGBTQ person can be religious, but you never addressed the story of Lot. You seem to avoid it, Brandy. The story of prophet Lot and his people. The people of Lot who killed stole and USED TO MATE THE SAME GENDER.

Is there a gay Muslim in my country, Saudi Arabia? YES, Brandy.
Is there a trans Muslim in my country Saudi Arabia? FUCKING YES, Brandy.

Ask a gay, lesbian, trans, Bi Muslim about the story of prophet Lot. It has been mentioned in the Old Testament, the Bible and Quran. I can tell you that no one of the LGBTQ claiming to be a follower of the Abrahamic religions will comment on that story, because God made it clear His position against killers, thieves and most of all, those who mate the same gender.

I won't be surprised that someday someone, some others would want to alter religious historical texts of the holy books such as the story of prophet Lot (which you avoided it twice if I counted)

Yes, homosexuality existed way before Islam and Christianity. Except Judaism was present back the time of prophet Lot, nephew of prophet Abraham, the prophet of Judaism.

 

[Brandy]

I have to say that never in my life have I ever blamed any community, affiliation or group except this once. This is the first time I've ever did, blaming a community such as atheists. If you, Brandy got pissed off by my attitude, know that, that this is the same exact attitude been used against Muslim community by those who hate Islam for many years.

AND for first time in my life I stuck my nose in foreign affairs that has nothing to do with me and with my country. I'm a Muslim sunni from a Muslim sunni family and community. Everyone better not forget where I come from. What I believe in. What I see right and wrong.

For long years I've debated many people. Asking them to address a certain problem they don't like and to give examples. When they do, specially if it was about my religion, Islam, they misunderstand and yet still misjudge Islam laws. Asking for reform of Islam. I shudder at the thought that it comes so easy to them for asking Islam to be reformed, and it never stopped there. It went to even label Saudis as THE #1 EXTREMIST people in the world.

You see Brandy, religion is part of history and of all things, history is regarded sacred. It's dangerous to alter historical texts of religious books on such flimsy grounds. As much as we've been told in schools in Saudi Arabia that the Old Testament and the Bible have been twisted to suit certain purposes of high ups like leaders, kings or whatever.

Brandy, it's true that I said that an LGBTQ person can be religious, but you never addressed the story of Lot. You seem to avoid it, Brandy. The story of prophet Lot and his people. The people of Lot who killed stole and USED TO MATE THE SAME GENDER.

Is there a gay Muslim in my country, Saudi Arabia? YES, Brandy.
Is there a trans Muslim in my country Saudi Arabia? FUCKING YES, Brandy.

Ask a gay, lesbian, trans, Bi Muslim about the story of prophet Lot. It has been mentioned in the Old Testament, the Bible and Quran. I can tell you that no one of the LGBTQ claiming to be a follower of the Abrahamic religions will comment on that story, because God made it clear His position against killers, thieves and most of all, those who mate the same gender.

I won't be surprised that someday someone, some others would want to alter religious historical texts of the holy books such as the story of prophet Lot (which you avoided it twice if I counted)

Yes, homosexuality existed way before Islam and Christianity. Except Judaism was present back the time of prophet Lot, nephew of prophet Abraham, the prophet of Judaism.

Good for you, buddy.

I will do you one last favor and address the story of Lut. Here we go: I didn't avoid commenting on it, I just don't give two f*cks about a fictional story from the Iron age, and neither should you. If that really is your argument against homosexuality, then there's no hope for you.

 

[ArabianLuffy]

Good for you, buddy.

I will do you one last favor and address the story of Lut. Here we go: I didn't avoid commenting on it, I just don't give two f*cks about a fictional story from the Iron age, and neither should you. If that really is your argument against homosexuality, then there's no hope for you.

You're telling me not to give a fuk about a story, because it's so ancient. That's your argument.

Let it sink in your dead brain, my dear. Homosexuality is a mental issue and can cause diseases on genetic level. You said it existed thousands of years ago, so it's OK. But a story that not only one religion tells it, but three religions and you call it fictional. What a great argument that I shouldn't believe a story, because it is from over 5 or 6 thousand years ago, but homosexuality as a practice between some humans for all pleasure is OK, despite the health problems that come from homosexuality. Let's throw from the window any scientific research about the threat of homosexuality. AWESOME! and being a "romantic attraction" or whatever won't make it right. Not ever.

but please try. Try and search the healthy benefits of homosexuality.

Accusing me of contradictory. Which is intellectual dishonest. No hope for me? It's OK.

If you don't give a fuk for what I say and believe, it's not your right to judge me.

Gender Pronouns
Remove words and replace them with something 1 and something 2?

What's next?
Alter Historical Texts.

Leave. This debate you have no snow ball chance in hell to prove me wrong.

 

[Marin]

You're telling me not to give a fuk about a story, because it's so ancient. That's your argument.

Actually, he's telling you not to care about the story because it's fictional. Ancient comes second.

Let it sink in your dead brain, my dear.

Idk about Islam's ethics but I don't think good obeying Muslims should trash talk like this?

Homosexuality is a mental issue and can cause diseases on genetic level. You said it existed thousands of years ago, so it's OK. But a story that not only one religion tells it, but three religions and you call it fictional.

It's 3 religions that all derive from one another. Judaism was the one to tell the story of Lot first. Christianity accepted it as a part of it's heritage and so did Islam. They're not 3 independent testimonies to a historical event. In fact, even if they were all independent it still wouldn't mean much since we do not know what the intent behind the story was. How do you know it's a real literal event and not a legend? How do you know it's not just a metaphor or blown out of proportion? How do you know the original author can be trusted? How do you even know who wrote down the story? (Note the story originated in oral form from an unknown author at an unknown time, earliest written version of the Hebrew Pentateuch are recognized as being compiled pretty late (around Babylonian exile.)

Just because some ancient text (or more of them) mention a story like this doesn't mean we ought to believe it. You may say it was divine revelation but why should an atheist or anyone who doesn't follow your religion believe that? What evidence or argument would you offer to persuade them into believing these things are actual historical events? You won't do that by using historical scholarship, that's for sure, since scholars consider such stories mostly mythical and at best reserve judgement until more concrete evidence is found.

What a great argument that I shouldn't believe a story, because it is from over 5 or 6 thousand years ago, but homosexuality as a practice between some humans for all pleasure is OK, despite the health problems that come from homosexuality. Let's throw from the window any scientific research about the threat of homosexuality. AWESOME! and being a "romantic attraction" or whatever won't make it right. Not ever.

I don't think there is much of a biological problem with homosexuality per se. Sure homosexual acts, such as unprotected **** *** is very dangerous but that's hardly a thing unique to homosexual intercourse. Speaking of that, homosexuality isn't unique to "some humans" but is found all over nature. You could say homosexuality has been here long before us and no, creationism doesn't get you out of this because we know evolution to be true, so you don't get to claim homosexuality is a human invention if that's what you're planning to do.

As a side note, what's wrong with a romantic attraction? Let's say two homosexual women love each other but do not engage in any sexual acts. Would that still be a crime/sin in your view? After all, we can't control who we love or are attracted to. (We can deny our feelings verbally, but in reality we'll still get fuzzy around the people we love.)

If you don't give a fuk for what I say and believe, it's not your right to judge me.

What he's saying is, he cares about the fact that you're judging other people who don't think or live like your religion demands (and are possibly in favor of harsh punishments against them). He may well have homosexual or atheist friends so he has every right to be concerned for their well-being when faced with an ideology that threatens to potentially kill them if they don't abandon their "sinful" ways.

He needs not care about your views on certain stories which may be true or not. He's concerned with how dangerous something is to him and his loved ones. So yeah, why should he care about the totality of your views? Some people may not want to learn about your views but simply want you to leave them alone and let them live their life.

Leave. This debate you have no snow ball chance in hell to prove me wrong.

Again, I'm not sure about your religion, but I know plenty which would call this kind of arrogance and militant behavior a sin. Should we call for severe punishments for what we perceive to be a sin on your part?

 

[Brandy]

@Marin, we're basically talking to a brick wall right now.

I have to say that never in my life have I ever blamed any community, affiliation or group except this once. This is the first time I've ever did, blaming a community such as atheists. If you, Brandy got pissed off by my attitude, know that, that this is the same exact attitude been used against Muslim community by those who hate Islam for many years.

There have been five ISIS-directed attacks in Europe since 2014, killing 188 people in total and injuring many more. It doesn't matter what they actually are, they claim to be Muslims. If these same terrorists ever claimed to be Jews or Christians, these religions would also have their reputations tarnished. Also, if the tables were turned, and Muslims were attacked by terrorists who claimed to be atheists, you would react the same way.

Terrorism isn't the only reason why Muslims get bad looks from Western countries. Sharia Law is based on a 1400+ years old fictional book, women don't have the same rights in most, if not all, Muslim-dominated areas, and your harsh punishments (for example beheadings and amputations) are nothing less than barbaric.

In the end, I find it absolutely hilarious how you decide to play the victim card here. Atheists have been persecuted in the Middle East for centuries, and even today. "Punishments for being an atheist can range from the denial of certain rights, such as the ability to travel or seek medical treatment, to physical sanctions, including flogging and the death penalty - as in Saudi Arabia." In your own country, Saudi Arabia, atheism is punishable by death, and you call yourself the victim? It's insane and delusional.

Everyone better not forget where I come from. What I believe in. What I see right and wrong.

Where you come from: Saudi Arabia, one of the least free countries in the world.​

What you believe in: You base your beliefs on a book of fiction from the Medieval Age.​

What you see as right: The Sharia Law, cutting off limbs for theft, and capital punishment for being non-religious.​

What you see as wrong: Two people of the same gender being in love.​

For long years I've debated many people. Asking them to address a certain problem they don't like and to give examples. When they do, specially if it was about my religion, Islam, they misunderstand and yet still misjudge Islam laws. Asking for reform of Islam. I shudder at the thought that it comes so easy to them for asking Islam to be reformed, and it never stopped there. It went to even label Saudis as THE #1 EXTREMIST people in the world.

Here are some of the reasons why:

- The legal system of Saudi Arabia is based on Sharia, Islamic law derived from the Quran and the Sunnah.​

​

- Saudi Arabia engages in capital punishment, including public executions by beheading. The death penalty can be imposed for a wide range of offences including murder, rape, armed robbery, repeated drug use, apostasy, adultery, witchcraft and sorcery and can be carried out by beheading with a sword, stoning or firing squad, followed by crucifixion.​

​

- Saudi women face discrimination in many aspects of their lives, such as the justice system, and under the male guardianship system are effectively treated as legal minors. Women make up 5% of the workforce in Saudi Arabia, the lowest proportion in the world. ​

​

- LGBT rights in Saudi Arabia are unrecognized. Homosexuality is frequently a taboo subject in Saudi Arabian society and is punished with imprisonment, corporal punishment and capital punishment.​

​

- Free expression is surpressed in Saudi Arabia. Journalists and citizens alike have been punished for expressing their discontent with the Muslim regime. ​

You see Brandy, religion is part of history and of all things, history is regarded sacred. It's dangerous to alter historical texts of religious books on such flimsy grounds. As much as we've been told in schools in Saudi Arabia that the Old Testament and the Bible have been twisted to suit certain purposes of high ups like leaders, kings or whatever.

No one is actively trying to rewrite the Quran, we just don't want you to base your laws on it.

Brandy, it's true that I said that an LGBTQ person can be religious, but you never addressed the story of Lot. You seem to avoid it, Brandy. The story of prophet Lot and his people. The people of Lot who killed stole and USED TO MATE THE SAME GENDER.

I can also point to stories from the Iron Age, like stories from Greek Mythology, where the gods Eros, Himeros and Pothos are sometimes considered patrons of homosexual love between males. Eros is also part of a triad of gods that played roles in homosexual relationships, along with Heracles and Hermes, who bestowed qualities of beauty, loyalty, and strength, onto male lovers. In the poetry of Sappho, Aphrodite is identified as the patron of lesbians.

According to Book XII of Ovid's Metamorphoses, the Lapith hero of Thessaly, Caeneus, was a transgender man. He was originally known as Caenis, daughter of Atrax.

So how are these stories less valid than stories from the Abrahamic religions? The answer is: they're not. All these stories are thousands of years old, passed down from generation to generation in oral form, before finally written down by mostly unknown authors. How are any of these stories in any way credible? The answer is, again: they're not.

Is there a gay Muslim in my country, Saudi Arabia? YES, Brandy.
Is there a trans Muslim in my country Saudi Arabia? FUCKING YES, Brandy.

There is a vast number of homosexuals in every country, Saudi Arabia is no exception. Except that, in your country, homosexuals and trans people are persecuted.

Ask a gay, lesbian, trans, Bi Muslim about the story of prophet Lot. It has been mentioned in the Old Testament, the Bible and Quran. I can tell you that no one of the LGBTQ claiming to be a follower of the Abrahamic religions will comment on that story, because God made it clear His position against killers, thieves and most of all, those who mate the same gender.

Because anyone in their right mind won't use the story of Lut as an argument against homosexuals.

I won't be surprised that someday someone, some others would want to alter religious historical texts of the holy books such as the story of prophet Lot (which you avoided it twice if I counted)

Again, the vast majority doesn't want to change any of the holy books.

Yes, homosexuality existed way before Islam and Christianity. Except Judaism was present back the time of prophet Lot, nephew of prophet Abraham, the prophet of Judaism.

Homosexuality has existed longer than humans have, I can't believe I have to explain this to someone at your age.

Let it sink in your dead brain, my dear. Homosexuality is a mental issue and can cause diseases on genetic level.

First of all, this is just not true and I want to see your sources. Secondly, genetic diseases are only transmitted from parent to offspring - and since homosexual couples can't have kids on their own, this shouldn't be a problem at all.

But a story that not only one religion tells it, but three religions and you call it fictional. What a great argument that I shouldn't believe a story, because it is from over 5 or 6 thousand years ago [...]

I agree with everything @Marin said on this matter.

Let's throw from the window any scientific research about the threat of homosexuality.

What threat exactly? Homosexuals, like all people, sometimes tend to have unprotected ***, then they risk getting sick. You don't get sick. I don't get sick. They get sick. They don't pass down their sickness to their kids, because they can't have kids. Where is the threat exactly?

Try and search the healthy benefits of homosexuality.

Unprotected intercourse is in general unhealthy, it's not unique to homosexual intercourse.

Accusing me of contradictory. Which is intellectual dishonest.

But you are contradicting yourself. All the time. You can't throw the ball back at me and call me intellectual dishonest, when you're the one who can't hold your ground in a debate.

Leave. This debate you have no snow ball chance in hell to prove me wrong.

This is, without any doubt, the laziest argument a religious person can make. "The Holy Book is my argument and you can't prove it wrong". You're right, I can't - and you can't prove it right.

But let's humor the idea for a bit. Since you have the Bible, the Quran and the Torah on your side, I choose the seven books of Harry Potter to form my own religion.

The Prophet Joanne Rowling, more commonly known as J. K. Rowling, was chosen as the messenger of God and wrote down God's revelations in seven different books. These stories tell us about a secret world beyond ours, the world of different magical creatures, such as gnomes, giants, witches and wizards. The young Prophet, Harry Potter, survived a horrible and cowardly assassination attempt by the evil Voldemort, sent by the Devil himself. In the end, many years later, in the name of God, the Prophet Harry Potter defeated this evil and brought peace to the world once again.

This is all real, because these seven books told me that. "You have no snow ball chance in hell to prove me wrong", as you would put it.