Uhm.....Dude, sample pictures have watermarks too. So this guy has drawn to almost faulty conclusions. I say this because I once heard Dave say something along the lines of, "do people actually pay for this?"

Danny, this guy you're quoting seems rather obsessed-- With Dave in particular. Even I wouldn't bother to note dates to argue credibility. All he need to do is look at current arguments Dave made. Seeing as how he's not doing this.......Well.... And really, implying that because someone looks at porn makes him a hypocrite is WAY off base. Especially when it has to do with straight porn (and really, you couldn't conisder the stuff he posted real porn). You know even REALLY devout Catholics (like my family) don't have problems with nude models. And saying that bias would arrive from looking at pictures that would coincide with his sexuality is a stupid pursuit (in this type of argument none the less). It's way too broad an argument to be narrowed on one side of the sexual spectrum.

What's more, trying to argue all of this with uninformed views is beyond idiotic. This guy's not only presuming to know what is considered a sin in the Catholic/Christian eyes, but he's also presuming to know the intensity of the sins themselves. He's also perpetuating a stereotype that red blooded humans can't be just as easily attracted to others despite title of religion.

Tell your friend to do more research and stop trying to use pusillanimous flanking tactics to try and hurt the validity someone's opinion. It shows the beyond desparate acts of someone running out of solid arguments.

~~~

Dave, I'm sorry if I overstepped my grounds, but he might as well have been insulting me too.