DeletedUser
I was a lead juror in a case where semen of the attacker was found on the underpants of the victim. The semen sample was taken from the underwear weeks after the incident was claimed to have occurred. We chose to unanimously find him guilty, due to there being absolutely no explanation as to how that semen could have gotten on the other person's underpants, except for the criminal charges brought before the court.
Evidence is evidence. Your arguments are invalid Peril, and it still goes back to the original false claim you repeatedly present, which is that a criminal act of sodomy translates to homosexuals being criminals. Simply stated, you're wrong. A man rapes a woman does not make all men rapists. An adult violates a child, does not make all adults predatory pedophiles. In both those examples, it doesn't even make 0.01% of them criminals. An act of non-consensual sodomy is rape, which is less than 0.01% of all instances. So, in your sweeping statement, you are calling all homosexuals as criminals, despite sodomy primarily being performed by heterosexuals, and the majority of criminal sodomy cases are men sodomizing women through an act of rape.
Your arguments are invalid. They were invalid the first time you brought it up, they are invalid now, and they will remain invalid despite your claims of being the victim in this debate. Stated fact, you are prejudice towards homosexuals and you will argue your case based on that erroneous premise.
Evidence is evidence. Your arguments are invalid Peril, and it still goes back to the original false claim you repeatedly present, which is that a criminal act of sodomy translates to homosexuals being criminals. Simply stated, you're wrong. A man rapes a woman does not make all men rapists. An adult violates a child, does not make all adults predatory pedophiles. In both those examples, it doesn't even make 0.01% of them criminals. An act of non-consensual sodomy is rape, which is less than 0.01% of all instances. So, in your sweeping statement, you are calling all homosexuals as criminals, despite sodomy primarily being performed by heterosexuals, and the majority of criminal sodomy cases are men sodomizing women through an act of rape.
Your arguments are invalid. They were invalid the first time you brought it up, they are invalid now, and they will remain invalid despite your claims of being the victim in this debate. Stated fact, you are prejudice towards homosexuals and you will argue your case based on that erroneous premise.