Quote# 24528

[We all know the passage where Lot doesn't want men having sex with the angels, so he offers up his daughters.

If you use this passage as evidence that homosexuality is wrong, then do you also agree that prostiting your own daughters is right?

If not, how do you justify picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to believe and which parts to not believe?]

ok Lot did that bcuz he'd rather see his daughters have intercousre with a gurl than guy. who would u want to see. remeber this was a wise man and in God will. if he was doing any wrong dont u think God would of judged him along with the gays. and compared to prostitution today . i'll let u b the juj.
oh they werent angels the angels were the ones being bombarded by gay men to have intercourse. he offered his daughters u pto regular men with a lustful gay spirit in them

forgivenlife777, Yahoo! Answers 37 Comments [5/2/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 | bottom


i'll let u b the juj.

I have the desire to slap the holy hell out of you for that crap alone.

Of course we all know that homosexuality is the worst thing ever, and women don't have any real value as people, only as property, it was kind of a no-brainer for Lot.

5/2/2007 11:35:43 AM


remeber this was a wise man...

I always thought Lot came off as a jackass. Couldn't get along with Abraham, then he offered his daughters to be raped by the aforementioned mob, and eventually he was seduced by and impregnated his daughters. It's like he's the first piece of trailer trash in the Bible.

5/2/2007 11:49:20 AM

Adam & Steve

wtf r u tlkn abt??????!!!!!!!

5/2/2007 11:54:29 AM


Offering your daughters for gang-rape is better than homosexuality?

What kind of twisted value system is that?

5/2/2007 11:58:28 AM


Jebus wept. English, do you speak it, motherfucker?!

5/2/2007 1:19:08 PM


5/2/2007 2:38:38 PM

Mr Smith

So screwing your own daughter is ok, but woe betide any man that gets a blowjob from another man.

You would have to be stoned to understand the logic there.

5/2/2007 3:03:13 PM

Napoleon the Clown

I'm sorry, I don't listen to the opinions of illiterate fuckwits.

5/2/2007 3:17:48 PM


First, learn to spell(my first thought was WTF). Second, in which way is it different from \"prostitution today\"?, are you saying that women are so little valuable that they could be \"exchanged\" like goods in certain occasions?, what about the girls opinion and what they prefer?. Besides, if they were gay, Lot wouldn´t have offered his daughters. Of course, I would explain that this story of Sodom and Gomorrah has to do with HOSPITALITY, but, what the hell, I prefer critisising nearthentals like you, it´s funnier.

5/2/2007 3:25:10 PM

Madame Scarlet

\"he'd rather see his daughters have intercousre with a gurl than guy.\"

Are you saying Lot wanted to watch his daughters have hot, lesbian sex?

5/2/2007 4:33:58 PM


I'd rather go down fighting than watch any daughter of mine being raped by a mob.

5/2/2007 4:43:23 PM


Yet another fundie halfwit drawing inspiration from one of the more contemptible passages in the Bible.
I shouldn't be surprised.
The story of Lot is right up there with the story of Job. A hateful bit of Bronze Age \"morality\".

5/2/2007 5:03:42 PM


Learn to use a keyboard, you mindless text-messaging moron.

ps-I'd gladly turn you over to the angels for raping.

5/2/2007 5:41:37 PM

Brian X

k, lot wuz kinda a assh0le bcuz hed rather throw his dotters undr a buss. And u cant rite.

5/2/2007 6:01:56 PM


Another 13 year old, AOL user.

5/2/2007 6:19:47 PM


Wasn't Lot the caboose on that train?

5/2/2007 6:22:40 PM


This guy is not only a fundie, he is also seriously misreading the question and the bible passage.

Fundie content: \"Lot did the right thing because it prevented homosexuality at all cost\"

Misreading content #1: \"Lot rather saw his daughters have intercourse with a girl\" - That isn't in the question, nor in the bible. (1) Lot offered his daughters to men, not girls. (2) He did this to protect his guests.

Misreading content #2: \"They weren't angels, the angels were the ones being bombarded by gay men to have intercourse\" - The question never stated the attackers were angels, the question said pretty much exactly what the fundie is \"correcting\" it to.

And then spelling, and more fundie content...I think it is impossible to communicate with these people. Not only is their mind shrouded in the shadows of faith, they can't even read or spell properly.

5/2/2007 6:32:14 PM


I think my IQ just dropped from reading that post.

5/2/2007 8:12:37 PM

Old Viking

How long does it take to cultivate a writing style like yours?

5/2/2007 8:16:39 PM


txtng iz bd 4 ur spllng

5/2/2007 8:23:07 PM


Another fundie quoting from the Authorized Pull It Out of Your Ass Version of the Bible ...

5/2/2007 8:37:03 PM


My brain melted. x.x

5/2/2007 9:09:01 PM


he offered his daughters u pto regular men with a lustful gay spirit in them

Are you calling me a pto? Are you?!?

5/2/2007 10:01:39 PM

Angel Kaida

At the word \"juj,\" I am surprised that blood is not pouring from my eyes and ears.
Of course, the rest of this is crap too, but... JUJ?!

5/2/2007 10:26:58 PM


You know that story always wierded me out. How can you read that to children?

5/3/2007 1:03:24 AM

1 2 | top: comments page