I'll just leave this right here... [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : I'll just leave this right here...


Gunhaver
06-02-2012, 00:02
http://goodlawd.com/goodlawd-kid-sings-aint-no-homos-gonna-make-it-to-heaven-in-church-video/

I guess you gotta get to them before the critical thinking skills kick in. Those kids don't look old enough to even know what a homo is much less be passing judgment on them in song.

I find it interesting how the 'adults' jump up and cheer like a winning touchdown was just scored.

snowbird
06-02-2012, 14:00
The left (which includes the Nazis and the communists), and the Muslims agree: "Get them when they are young, before critical thinking skills kick in". Hasn't the left pretty much taken over our public education system, and isn't that why homosexuality is being glorified to young minds, while Christianity is being vilified? We need to take back our schools, culture, and country.


But maybe some prefer Dr. Muzamil Siddiqi's approach. He's with the Islamic Society of North America, and says, "Homosexuality is a moral disease, a sin and corruption. No person is born homosexual, just like no one is born a thief, a liar, or a murderer...there are many reasons why it is forbidden in Islam".

Al-Fatiha estimates that 4,000 homosexuals have been executed in Iran since 1979. How many homosexuals have been executed by Christians since 1979?

Why does our left never say anything against Islamic homophobia? Heck, leftist homosexuals march in anti-Israel parades in support of Islam, apparently unaware of what is written above. Lenin dubbed this type "useful idiots".

Gunhaver
06-02-2012, 19:29
The left (which includes the Nazis and the communists), and the Muslims agree: "Get them when they are young, before critical thinking skills kick in". Hasn't the left pretty much taken over our public education system, and isn't that why homosexuality is being glorified to young minds, while Christianity is being vilified? We need to take back our schools, culture, and country.


But maybe some prefer Dr. Muzamil Siddiqi's approach. He's with the Islamic Society of North America, and says, "Homosexuality is a moral disease, a sin and corruption. No person is born homosexual, just like no one is born a thief, a liar, or a murderer...there are many reasons why it is forbidden in Islam".

Al-Fatiha estimates that 4,000 homosexuals have been executed in Iran since 1979. How many homosexuals have been executed by Christians since 1979?

Why does our left never say anything against Islamic homophobia? Heck, leftist homosexuals march in anti-Israel parades in support of Islam, apparently unaware of what is written above. Lenin dubbed this type "useful idiots".

I posted a video of people cheering at the thought of others being excluded from heaven and teaching their children the same. Rejoicing at others being turned away by god? This is not what Christ taught. Funny that it's usually the atheists here that point that out the most but of course,

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1745/religious-knowledge-in-america-survey-atheists-agnostics-score-highest

Misdirection to worse atrocities in other parts of the world by even more cruel and ignorant people is no excuse and no defense.

Animal Mother
06-02-2012, 22:07
I posted a video of people cheering at the thought of others being excluded from heaven and teaching their children the same. Rejoicing at others being turned away by god? This is not what Christ taught. Funny that it's usually the atheists here that point that out the most but of course,

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1745/religious-knowledge-in-america-survey-atheists-agnostics-score-highest

Misdirection to worse atrocities in other parts of the world by even more cruel and ignorant people is no excuse and no defense.
To be fair, snowbird only knows how to comment in one way. If we were discussing the likelihood of the Bears winning the 2013 Super Bowl, somehow he'd turn it into a condemnation of Islam.

Blast
06-02-2012, 22:18
Do all atheists accept gays?
Must one be a Christian to reject the gay agenda?

The true answers will disappoint you "radical" atheists.

Gunhaver
06-02-2012, 22:25
Do all atheists accept gays?
Must one be a Christian to reject the gay agenda?

The true answers will disappoint you "radical" atheists.

On what grounds would an atheist have to reject gays?

They may find a reason, perhaps they just think it's icky, but there's no central church of atheism quoting some ancient atheist text telling them that's what they have to think.

BTW the "gay agenda" is to be treated the same as anybody else. Sorry if equality rubs you the wrong way.

Gun Shark
06-02-2012, 22:25
Do all atheists accept gays?
Must one be a Christian to reject the gay agenda?

The true answers will disappoint you "radical" atheists.

Since there are other reasons hat people disapprove of the gay community, I would say no.

Personally, I couldn't care less who or what someone is intimate with.



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Blast
06-02-2012, 22:51
On what grounds would an atheist have to reject gays?

They may find a reason, perhaps they just think it's icky, but there's no central church of atheism quoting some ancient atheist text telling them that's what they have to think.

BTW the "gay agenda" is to be treated the same as anybody else. Sorry if equality rubs you the wrong way.
As I've said a number of times, I know lots of atheists and most of them know gay is abnormal. And being that homosexuality is not a natural function, it is rejected on that basis by the majority of the world.
The gay agenda does not deserve equality because gaydom is abnormal and normal people know that and reject it. Except for some liberal atheist loonies. Why do you think so many states reject the gay marriage thing? Because the good normal people(majority) don't want it.
Don't like that? Too bad.
I've never accepted the gay thing, even during my agnostic years and never will.

Tilley
06-02-2012, 23:12
BTW the "gay agenda" is to be treated the same as anybody else. Sorry if equality rubs you the wrong way.

Where is the equality for pedophiles and "animal" lovers? And don't forget the sado-masochists too. perhaps if a person wants to do it, it should be okay? Immorality is in the eye of the beholder? One person's kink is another persons pleasure?

Sin is sin regardless of who does it. You reject God because God does not fit with your lifestyle. If you reject God now, you get to keep your wish later.

You give into your particular brand of sin as we all do. The difference is I know sin is wrong and I try to change with the help of the Holy Spirit. Gays try to justify their sin and say it is normal and remain in their sin.

We both struggle. Reach for the Author of Life and stop deceiving yourself.

G23Gen4TX
06-02-2012, 23:47
It's going to suck for those kids after the priest is done with them and they don't make it to heaven.

Animal Mother
06-02-2012, 23:58
As I've said a number of times, I know lots of atheists and most of them know gay is abnormal. I know a lot of Christians who accept homosexuals as equals worthy of the same rights and considerations that everyone else deserves.
And being that homosexuality is not a natural function, it is rejected on that basis by the majority of the world. You seem to be assuming a fact you've failed to prove.
The gay agenda does not deserve equality because gaydom is abnormal and normal people know that and reject it. Except for some liberal atheist loonies. Why do you think so many states reject the gay marriage thing? Because the good normal people(majority) don't want it. Or because of outdated religious beliefs and hysterical fearmongering.
Don't like that? Too bad. And will you feel the same way when same sex marriage is legalized?
I've never accepted the gay thing, even during my agnostic years and never will.Luckily you're not the arbiter of what is and isn't accepted.

Gunhaver
06-03-2012, 00:47
As I've said a number of times, I know lots of atheists and most of them know gay is abnormal.

So now abnormal is the measure of what's accepted? Maybe you need to review the meaning of that word. Traveling through the air or under the water is abnormal for humans in that we haven't been doing it for most of human history. Gay has been around a lot longer than that.

And being that homosexuality is not a natural function, it is rejected on that basis by the majority of the world.

Lame. Appeal to majority. The majority is often as wrong as anyone else so I don't see how that matters. Are you ready to go with total gun control like the rest of the world?

The gay agenda does not deserve equality because gaydom is abnormal and normal people know that and reject it. Except for some liberal atheist loonies. Why do you think so many states reject the gay marriage thing? Because the good normal people(majority) don't want it.
Don't like that? Too bad.

Too bad? It's cute how you say that like there's no choice, nothing can be done about it when...
It used to be illegal to even identify as gay.
Then it was only illegal to act on it with the sodomy laws. You had to get caught doing it.
Then the soddomy laws were struck down. Gayness for all!
Then slowly but surely more states started recognizing legal marriages. It's up to 8 now with 11 more recognizing civil unions and domestic partnerships AND,
Many are recognizing sexual orientation as a protected class.

Just what ground are you gaining here? Sounds like if it's "too bad" for anybody that doesn't like it, it's too bad for you.
I've never accepted the gay thing, even during my agnostic years and never will.

Then you're setting yourself to become increasingly more pissed off and disappointed in the coming years. I personally don't give a rat's butt if you accept it. You don't have to accept it. You just have to become outnumbered. And I hope it tears at every fiber of your being and drives you as insane as you constantly claim anyone who disagrees with you to be.


But I did leave you a spelling error in my reply just to cheer you up because I'm a nice guy and I know how you like that. Here's a hint: Butsecks.

Gunhaver
06-03-2012, 01:06
Where is the equality for pedophiles and "animal" lovers? And don't forget the sado-masochists too. perhaps if a person wants to do it, it should be okay? Immorality is in the eye of the beholder? One person's kink is another persons pleasure?

Sin is sin regardless of who does it. You reject God because God does not fit with your lifestyle. If you reject God now, you get to keep your wish later.

You give into your particular brand of sin as we all do. The difference is I know sin is wrong and I try to change with the help of the Holy Spirit. Gays try to justify their sin and say it is normal and remain in their sin.

We both struggle. Reach for the Author of Life and stop deceiving yourself.

The fail is strong with you guys today. News flash! That argument has been shot down. It doesn't apply. We're talking about a legal contract between 2 grownups here. Who are pedophiles and animal "lovers" (I think you meant to put the quotations around "lovers" unless you're referring to Furries in which case, still consenting adults) being denied entry into legal contracts with? Tell me this isn't the first time you have heard this argument.

Blast
06-03-2012, 02:39
Then you're setting yourself to become increasingly more pissed off and disappointed in the coming years. I personally don't give a rat's butt if you accept it. You don't have to accept it. You just have to become outnumbered. And I hope it tears at every fiber of your being and drives you as insane as you constantly claim anyone who disagrees with you to be.


But I did leave you a spelling error in my reply just to cheer you up because I'm a nice guy and I know how you like that. Here's a hint: Butsecks.
:laughabove: Not tearing at anything in me.
However, you appear a bit upset. :supergrin:
Though I reject gaydom, I tolerate it. But not to the point of equality.

Enjoy:supergrin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iEU04Gp_p1A

High-Gear
06-03-2012, 03:48
The left (which includes the Nazis and the communists), and the Muslims agree: "Get them when they are young, before critical thinking skills kick in" ".

WHAT? Nazis were Right Wing! I love how people try to equate any outgroup they dont like with Nazi's.

National Socialism (common English short form Nazism, German: Nationalsozialismus) was the ideology practiced by the Nazi Party and Nazi Germany.[1][2][3][4] It is a unique variety of fascism that incorporates biological racism and antisemitism.[5] Nazism was founded out of elements of the far-right racist völkisch German nationalist movement and the violent anti-communist Freikorps paramilitary culture.

The Nazis were also "Good Christian People".

The German census of May 1939 indicates that 54 percent of Germans considered themselves Protestant and 40 percent considered themselves Catholic, with only 3.5 percent claiming to be neo-pagan "believers in God," and 1.5 percent unbelievers. This census came more than six years into the Hitler era.

And btw. "Get em while they are young" is the practice of all religions. Does your religion allow children to grow up free of your instruction, until they have a logical mind and can choose for themselves? I bet your pews would be pretty empty if you did.


Equal rights for others does not take rights from you. It only makes it illegal for you to enforce your bigotry and hate on others!

snowbird
06-03-2012, 08:47
On what grounds would an atheist have to reject gays?


BTW the "gay agenda" is to be treated the same as anybody else. Sorry if equality rubs you the wrong way.

An ex-Soviet (and FYI, the Soviets were officially atheist, guilty of murdering millions of Christians) here at GT in 2009 very aptly put down today's 'liberals' by defining them as "communists who would have been kicked out of the Communist Party for cowardice AND SEXUAL PERVERSION". Does that sound to you as if all atheists accept gays?


The Bible says ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God (thus we all need to accept Jesus for salvation) -sorry if equality rubs you the wrong way.:)

As for your claim that the 'gay agenda' is purely for freedom, try convincing PFOX of that. PFOX is the Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays, who have felt on their hides, and thus fear, persecution from gay bullies. Gay bullies go after anyone who comes out as ex-gay, try to force them back into the closet, and then claim that ex-gays don't exist because there aren't any out in public. The pusillanimously left-leaning APA (American Psychological Association), in 1973, caved to gay bullies, changing the official designation of homosexuality from 'mental illness' to 'normal'. Then, in 2000, they wimped out again, officially opposing Reparative Therapy (which helps individuals overcome unwanted homosexual tendencies). That's like opposing Alcoholics Anonymous under pressure from the Drunkards Agenda.

Are homosexuals really for freedom? Then how come a mob of lesbians banged pots and pans, chanted, and danced in front of conservative author Ryan Sorba, forcing him to cut short his lecture, "The Born Gay Hoax", at Smith College? This isn't freedom, this is fascism, something today's left is all about. Forcing their agenda on others and ridiculing and intimidating anyone who disagrees or criticizes. Liberal fascists want truth and freedom to be subject to the whims of their thought police and rioters.

snowbird
06-03-2012, 08:49
Or because of outdated religious beliefs and hysterical fearmongering.

Is this your reason why homosexual couples can't have children?

snowbird
06-03-2012, 09:05
WHAT? Nazis were Right Wing!

This is the lie that the left has pushed in schools and media ever since Hitler turned on his erstwhile ally, Uncle Joe Stalin. The fact is, Hitler was a SOCIALIST atheist, just like Stalin, except for different colored uniforms on his goons.

Furthermore, according to The Pink Swastika (an interesting-sounding book that I haven't managed to get a hold of and read yet -just read reviews), all the top Nazis were sadistic butch-type homosexuals. Those unfortunate homosexuals whom they forced to wear pink triangles and die in concentration camps, were despised as sissies by the 'macho' ones in charge.

Left-dominated societies are dog-eat-dog hell-holes. The answer is turning to Jesus, accepting salvation from sin, and then living according to God's will.

High-Gear
06-03-2012, 09:22
This is the lie that the left has pushed in schools and media ever since Hitler turned on his erstwhile ally, Uncle Joe Stalin. The fact is, Hitler was a SOCIALIST atheist, just like Stalin, except for different colored uniforms on his goons.

Furthermore, according to The Pink Swastika (an interesting-sounding book that I haven't managed to get a hold of and read yet -just read reviews), all the top Nazis were sadistic butch-type homosexuals. Those unfortunate homosexuals whom they forced to wear pink triangles and die in concentration camps, were despised as sissies by the 'macho' ones in charge.

Left-dominated societies are dog-eat-dog hell-holes. The answer is turning to Jesus, accepting salvation from sin, and then living according to God's will.

It seems you suffer from rejecting reaity and substituting your own conspiracy theories. Please back away from the computer, take off your tin foil hat, and take a walk outside. Reality is soooo cool.



Btw. Butch gay guys in charge, oppressing the rights of other gay individuals...sounds like certain parts of the Republican Party.

snowbird
06-03-2012, 11:09
It seems you suffer from rejecting reaity and substituting your own conspiracy theories. Please back away from the computer, take off your tin foil hat, and take a walk outside. Reality is soooo cool.



Btw. Butch gay guys in charge, oppressing the rights of other gay individuals...sounds like certain parts of the Republican Party.

Look up 'ad hom'.

It's a type of logical fallacy.

High-Gear
06-03-2012, 11:57
Look up 'ad hom'.

It's a type of logical fallacy.

Ad hominem means to submit a personal attack in place of an argument. I.E. - He's homosexual erego his position is false.

You have provided no evidence for your wild accusations about conspiaries to change the historical view of Nazi's, and claim it is the liberal education system. I was not attacking you, I pointed out without evidence you are simply submitting your fairy tales in place of a legitimate argument.

If you truly believe these alternate versions of reality, I simply suggest unplugging for a while and finding other sources of information.

juggy4711
06-03-2012, 19:43
There is so much dis/misinformation in this thread I would not even know where to start.

Geko45
06-03-2012, 19:51
Left-dominated societies are dog-eat-dog hell-holes. The answer is turning to Jesus, accepting salvation from sin, and then living according to God's will.

Just as an FYI, this is a "false dichotomy" fallacy.

Blast
06-03-2012, 22:30
I know a lot of Christians who accept homosexuals as equals worthy of the same rights and considerations that everyone else deserves.
You seem to be assuming a fact you've failed to prove.
Or because of outdated religious beliefs and hysterical fearmongering.
And will you feel the same way when same sex marriage is legalized?
Luckily you're not the arbiter of what is and isn't accepted.
:yawn: Same old tactics.
FWIW...the proof is in legislation to not allow gay marriage and the public who voted it down.
The proof is in the majority who don't accept it.
Your inability to comprehend is your problem, not the general public.
Fear mongering is a tactic you atheists use all the time against believers. You imagine a threat that doesn't exist.

And homosexuality is not a natural function. It is an aberration. Trying to say that it is natural and that it happens all the time is completely wrong. To say that animals consciously engage in gay activity is ridiculous.
Any acts of animal male on male sexual activity is not a conscious act out of desire, but a chemical response caused by pheromones in the air. Such an affected animal will hump anything. I can show you videos of bulls humping tractors or even a farmer. Also a large dog trying to hump a cat.
Also I'm sure most everybody has experienced a dog humping their leg or have seen it.
Purely a scientific explanation that has nothing to do with conscious desire.
Understand the principles of Pavlov's dog.

Geko45
06-03-2012, 22:40
To say that animals consciously engage in gay activity is ridiculous.

This is just plain wrong. There have been plenty of observed cases of animals that only persued same sex mates and would even actively compete against their opposite gender counterparts to secure those mates.

Yes, even animals are sometimes born gay. It is an aberation, but only in the sense that it is rare. It's your backwards religion that assigns a moral judgement to it.

Tilley
06-03-2012, 22:58
It's your backwards religion that assigns a moral judgement to it.

This statement from you is expected. You despise God because your actions, words and thoughts are sinful. You feel guilty but you have no desire to change. Your actions condemn you and you lash out at God by lurking on a website with the express purpose of taking out your anger at Christians.

I rather like you because you have a pretty good sense of humor, but I have to straight with you (pardon the pun), and be honest with you:

God loves you, even with all that you have done. He still sees you as a child of His. He is waiting for you to come back.

Animal Mother
06-03-2012, 23:23
FWIW...the proof is in legislation to not allow gay marriage and the public who voted it down.
The proof is in the majority who don't accept it. The public voted down interracial marriage, even put prohibitions in some state constitutions and tried to create an amendment for the US Constitution to prevent it. Was that morally right?
Trying to say that it is natural and that it happens all the time is completely wrong. To say that animals consciously engage in gay activity is ridiculous. Except for the evidence to the contrary (http://phys.org/news164376975.html), I can see how you might believe this.
Any acts of animal male on male sexual activity is not a conscious act out of desire, but a chemical response caused by pheromones in the air. Such an affected animal will hump anything. I can show you videos of bulls humping tractors or even a farmer. Also a large dog trying to hump a cat.
Also I'm sure most everybody has experienced a dog humping their leg or have seen it.
Purely a scientific explanation that has nothing to do with conscious desire.
Understand the principles of Pavlov's dog.
Amazing that you've managed to figure all this out, where have your research and your conclusions been published?

Blast
06-04-2012, 02:29
The public voted down interracial marriage, even put prohibitions in some state constitutions and tried to create an amendment for the US Constitution to prevent it. Was that morally right?
Except for the evidence to the contrary (http://phys.org/news164376975.html), I can see how you might believe this.

Amazing that you've managed to figure all this out, where have your research and your conclusions been published?
Apples and oranges. Dispense with the diversionary nonsense.

Common knowledge that pheromones stimulate sexual response in animals. It is common knowledge that pheromones travel for miles on the wind, and that it only takes a few molecules to be effective. This is scientific fact.
Interesting when scientific facts conflict with your convictions, they are flawed somehow and you sling crap at the messenger.:upeyes:
I spent many years of my life with two German Sheperds, Max and Gretchen) male and female and have observed the males behavior when female in heat. Also when other female dogs in the neighborhood were in heat and the wind was right, I observed stimulated behavior in Max even when Gretchen was not in heat.
I don't need to publish my observations for them to be factual. Said observations are commonplace.
Animals only mate when chemically stimulated.
Humans mate by conscious desire.

Incidently, that article speaks of stress factors, confusion, and a cooperation for the benefit of a species. None are the result of conscious choice of sexual desire. and in the case of the albatross, that isn't sexual activity.

Gunhaver
06-04-2012, 02:46
Apples and oranges. Dispense with the diversionary nonsense.

Common knowledge that pheromones stimulate sexual response in animals. It is common knowledge that pheromones travel for miles on the wind, and that it only takes a few molecules to be effective. This is scientific fact.
Interesting when scientific facts conflict with your convictions, they are flawed somehow and you sling crap at the messenger.:upeyes:
I spent many years of my life with two German Sheperds, Max and Gretchen) male and female and have observed the males behavior when female in heat. Also when other female dogs in the neighborhood were in heat and the wind was right, I observed stimulated behavior in Max even when Gretchen was not in heat.
I don't need to publish my observations for them to be factual. Said observations are commonplace.
Animals only mate when chemically stimulated.
Humans mate by conscious desire.

Incidently, that article speaks of stress factors, confusion, and a cooperation for the benefit of a species. None are the result of conscious choice of sexual desire. and in the case of the albatross, that isn't sexual activity.

Sometimes I just love to read your posts and :rofl: my :eric: off when I think about that time you said you understood science better than I did.

Animal Mother
06-04-2012, 03:15
Apples and oranges. Dispense with the diversionary nonsense. Pointing out that you're simply wrong is diversionary? Interesting.
Common knowledge that pheromones stimulate sexual response in animals. It is common knowledge that pheromones travel for miles on the wind, and that it only takes a few molecules to be effective. This is scientific fact.
Interesting when scientific facts conflict with your convictions, they are flawed somehow and you sling crap at the messenger.:upeyes: I didn't "sling crap", I asked where these astonishing findings had been published. As "common" as the knowledge apparently is, it appears many scientists working in the field have missed it. I merely hope to share your findings with them.
I spent many years of my life with two German Sheperds, Max and Gretchen) male and female and have observed the males behavior when female in heat. Also when other female dogs in the neighborhood were in heat and the wind was right, I observed stimulated behavior in Max even when Gretchen was not in heat. Ah, so the whole of your argument is a single pair of dogs. You do understand that isn't exactly comprehensive, don't you?
I don't need to publish my observations for them to be factual. Said observations are commonplace.
Animals only mate when chemically stimulated.
Humans mate by conscious desire. Then how do you explain the observed pair bonding and child rearing behaviors between same sex animal pairs? Perhaps that knowledge is too "uncommon" for your folksy just-so stories. Darn those scientists and their observations.
Incidently, that article speaks of stress factors, confusion, and a cooperation for the benefit of a species. None are the result of conscious choice of sexual desire. and in the case of the albatross, that isn't sexual activity.No, it's same sex pairing, for life. In humans, we have a "common" name for that: Marriage.

Blast
06-04-2012, 04:27
Sometimes I just love to read your posts and :rofl: my :eric: off when I think about that time you said you understood science better than I did.
Enjoy making a fool of yourself?:wavey:

You must be into junk science or science fiction.:yawn:

Blast
06-04-2012, 05:02
Pointing out that you're simply wrong is diversionary? Interesting.
I didn't "sling crap", I asked where these astonishing findings had been published. As "common" as the knowledge apparently is, it appears many scientists working in the field have missed it. I merely hope to share your findings with them.
Ah, so the whole of your argument is a single pair of dogs. You do understand that isn't exactly comprehensive, don't you?
Then how do you explain the observed pair bonding and child rearing behaviors between same sex animal pairs? Perhaps that knowledge is too "uncommon" for your folksy just-so stories. Darn those scientists and their observations.
No, it's same sex pairing, for life. In humans, we have a "common" name for that: Marriage.

There he goes again.:supergrin:

As the article explained, the bonding pair is performing a survival technique. Lack of males to help rear young forces the bonding. It is not an emotional issue. It is not a sexual issue. Try to understand.
Other factors are as stated, confusion and stress which can cause all sorts of abnormal behavior.

I used the dog illustration as a simple example. It was something I've observed many times. This is a fact of all dogs and mammals as well.

http://www.hhmi.org/senses/d230.html

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/357

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/P/Pheromones.html#Sex_attractants

http://www.youramazingbrain.org/supersenses/pheromones.htm

http://www.livescience.com/3233-sexual-pheromones-myth-reality.html

dog make love to cat !!!!!!! - YouTube

Bunny Molests Cat - YouTube

Bull humps Farmer - YouTube

I suppose you think the above is normal and all nice and stuff.:upeyes:

Animal Mother
06-04-2012, 05:46
There he goes again.:supergrin: Odd, I was just thinking the same thing.
As the article explained, the bonding pair is performing a survival technique. Lack of males to help rear young forces the bonding. It is not an emotional issue. It is not a sexual issue. Try to understand. Didn't you previously say all such behavior was the result of pheromones? Let's check: "Any acts of animal male on male sexual activity is not a conscious act out of desire, but a chemical response caused by pheromones in the air. " Yep, it looks like that's what you said. But let's check that article again, "But that is very different from male bottlenose dolphins, who engage in same-sex interactions to facilitate group bonding" Well, maybe you know better than the experts in the field. Something I'm sure you'll demonstrate with reference to your work in the scientific literature.
Other factors are as stated, confusion and stress which can cause all sorts of abnormal behavior. We have your opinion, supported as it is by your declaring it so. Let's check the article again though, just for the sake of completeness. "Same-sex behaviors—courtship, mounting or parenting—are traits that may have been shaped by natural selection, a basic mechanism of evolution that occurs over successive generations," Bailey said. "But our review of studies also suggests that these same-sex behaviors might act as selective forces in and of themselves."
Hmmm. It really seems like they don't agree with you at all.

I used the dog illustration as a simple example. It was something I've observed many times. This is a fact of all dogs and mammals as well.

http://www.hhmi.org/senses/d230.html

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/357

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/P/Pheromones.html#Sex_attractants

http://www.youramazingbrain.org/supersenses/pheromones.htm

http://www.livescience.com/3233-sexual-pheromones-myth-reality.html

dog make love to cat !!!!!!! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpD3Y4_ZGuE&feature=related)

Bunny Molests Cat - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swHdjasjCKM&feature=related)

Bull humps Farmer - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qlIwtqi2lI)

I suppose you think the above is normal and all nice and stuff.:upeyes: Which of those articles and/or videos supports your contention, "Any acts of animal male on male sexual activity is not a conscious act out of desire, but a chemical response caused by pheromones in the air."?

Gunhaver
06-04-2012, 05:47
:laughabove: Not tearing at anything in me.
However, you appear a bit upset. :supergrin:
Though I reject gaydom, I tolerate it. But not to the point of equality.

Enjoy:supergrin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iEU04Gp_p1A

Yet you keep coming back here to try (poorly) to make the case that homosexuality is not a natural thing. Seems like you're not as apathetic about it as you'd like us to believe.

And I'm not upset about a thing. Your side has already lost this fight. It's just a matter of time.

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 07:02
:yawn: Same old tactics.
FWIW...the proof is in legislation to not allow gay marriage and the public who voted it down.
The proof is in the majority who don't accept it.
.

If everyone thought like you, we'd still own slaves. We do not live in a democracy, we live in a republic where the rights of the minority are protected from the majority.

If you dont like gay marriage, dont marry a gay person.

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 07:15
This statement from you is expected. You despise God because your actions, words and thoughts are sinful. You feel guilty but you have no desire to change. Your actions condemn you and you lash out at God by lurking on a website with the express purpose of taking out your anger at Christians.

This has nothing to do with the discussion, but since you brought it up.

Do you know how much you sound like the American Taliban right now? I dont give two sqirts about god, because I see no evidence for his existance. The same for allah, and thor, and wotan, etc. you should know how I feel, as you feel the same disregard for these gods.

ThisGod loves you, even with all that you have done. He still sees you as a child of His. He is waiting for you to come back.

Yet if you dont love him back...HE WILL SET YOU ON FIRE!!!!

Geko45
06-04-2012, 07:36
This statement from you is expected. You despise God because your actions, words and thoughts are sinful. You feel guilty but you have no desire to change. Your actions condemn you and you lash out at God by lurking on a website with the express purpose of taking out your anger at Christians.

No, this is all in your head, not mine. You are being presented with two contradictory ideas and you are attempting to resolve your own internal cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, you have people here that seem intelligent to you in their thoughts and words, but on the other you have your belief system in which you have invested a significant part of your life and personal identity. To abandon it would be a psychological scaring event. To admit that you have been wrong all this time is simply to much to bear. So instead, you assign to us this fiction of being rebellious, misbehaving children because that is easier for you to accept than the alternative.

snowbird
06-04-2012, 07:56
This is just plain wrong. There have been plenty of observed cases of animals that only persued same sex mates and would even actively compete against their opposite gender counterparts to secure those mates.

Yes, even animals are sometimes born gay.

Most atheists subscribe to Darwin's theories, so would you mind explaining to us how gay genes survive in the gene pool when only those genes which further survival and help propagate the species are supposed to get passed along? Thanks.

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 08:16
Most atheists subscribe to Darwin's theories, so would you mind explaining to us how gay genes survive in the gene pool when only those genes which further survival and help propagate the species are supposed to get passed along? Thanks.

You dont understand evolution by natural selection.

snowbird
06-04-2012, 08:20
I guess you gotta get to them before the critical thinking skills kick in.

Is this why the left promotes homosexuality and vilifies Christianity in our elementary schools?



I mean, if the kids weren't brainwashed before critical thinking skills kick in, do you really think they'd go a 'gay lifestyle' that:

-gives an average of 20 years less life expectancy?

-gives 14 times greater likelihood of committing suicide?

-gives 2 or 3 times greater likelihood of smoking?

-gives at least 4 or 5 times greater likelihood of becoming an alcoholic?

-gives over 10 times greater likelihood of using illicit drugs?

-gives 2 or 3 times greater likelihood of suffering from depression?

-makes up 76% of all AIDS cases?

-makes up 45% of all new HIV infections?

-yields higher risk of lung, liver, and anal cancer?

-and presents a higher rate of verbal and physical domestic abuse?

In light of these facts, and if kids had critical thinking skills, don't you think they'd agree with the Bible, that homosexuality is an abomination?

Try to be honest now (another thing the Bible promotes, and probably another reason why the left attacks Christianity).

snowbird
06-04-2012, 08:20
You dont understand evolution by natural selection.

Please enlighten me.

Animal Mother
06-04-2012, 09:03
I mean, if the kids weren't brainwashed before critical thinking skills kick in, do you really think they'd go a 'gay lifestyle' that:

In light of these facts, and if kids had critical thinking skills, don't you think they'd agree with the Bible, that homosexuality is an abomination?

Try to be honest now (another thing the Bible promotes, and probably another reason why the left attacks Christianity).

If only you were aware enough to realize the absurdity of going on about honest while repeating utterly discredited statistics.

Paul7
06-04-2012, 09:27
No, this is all in your head, not mine. You are being presented with two contradictory ideas and you are attempting to resolve your own internal cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, you have people here that seem intelligent to you in their thoughts and words, but on the other you have your belief system in which you have invested a significant part of your life and personal identity. To abandon it would be a psychological scaring event. To admit that you have been wrong all this time is simply to much to bear.

Could that be true of you?

snowbird
06-04-2012, 09:27
If only you were aware enough to realize the absurdity of going on about honest while repeating utterly discredited statistics.

Please cite when, where, how these statistics were 'discredited'.

Paul7
06-04-2012, 09:29
There he goes again.:supergrin:

As the article explained, the bonding pair is performing a survival technique. Lack of males to help rear young forces the bonding. It is not an emotional issue. It is not a sexual issue. Try to understand.
Other factors are as stated, confusion and stress which can cause all sorts of abnormal behavior.

I used the dog illustration as a simple example. It was something I've observed many times. This is a fact of all dogs and mammals as well.

http://www.hhmi.org/senses/d230.html

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/357

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/P/Pheromones.html#Sex_attractants

http://www.youramazingbrain.org/supersenses/pheromones.htm

http://www.livescience.com/3233-sexual-pheromones-myth-reality.html

dog make love to cat !!!!!!! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpD3Y4_ZGuE&feature=related)

Bunny Molests Cat - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swHdjasjCKM&feature=related)

Bull humps Farmer - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qlIwtqi2lI)

I suppose you think the above is normal and all nice and stuff.:upeyes:

I guess even the animal kingdom has 'diversity', LOL.

Paul7
06-04-2012, 09:29
Please cite when, where, how these statistics were 'discredited'.

The translation is that AM has dismissed the statistics because they go against his preconceived worldview.

void *
06-04-2012, 09:37
so would you mind explaining to us how gay genes survive in the gene pool when only those genes which further survival and help propagate the species are supposed to get passed along?

Would you mind explaining why you're characterizing evolution as 'only those genes which further survival and help propagate the species are supposed to get passed along' when you should know by now that is not actually the case?

The reality is, in a particular environment, traits which are detrimental to survival tend to get cut over time, traits which are neutral can be passed along, and traits which are beneficial tend to become more prominent in the gene pool. Recessive genes that provide benefit when not paired, yet are detrimental when reinforced, can survive as well (such as the gene which, when reinforced, causes sickle cell anemia, but when not reinforced, provides resistance to malaria), and genes which confer benefit on one individual but may be detrimental to *individual* offspring can survive as long as they provide a significant enough advantage. (For instance, say a gene or combination of genes provided the female of the species with enhanced fertility, but resulted in a small percentage of her offspring not reproducing. That gene or combination of genes might well spread through a population, despite being detrimental to a small percentage of individual offspring, on the mere force of it enabling the mother to have more offspring survive overall).

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 10:48
Is this why the left promotes homosexuality and vilifies Christianity in our elementary schools?


I mean, if the kids weren't brainwashed before critical thinking skills kick in, do you really think they'd go a 'gay lifestyle' that:

-gives an average of 20 years less life expectancy?

-gives 14 times greater likelihood of committing suicide?

-gives 2 or 3 times greater likelihood of smoking?

-gives at least 4 or 5 times greater likelihood of becoming an alcoholic?

-gives over 10 times greater likelihood of using illicit drugs?

-gives 2 or 3 times greater likelihood of suffering from depression?

-makes up 76% of all AIDS cases?

-makes up 45% of all new HIV infections?

-yields higher risk of lung, liver, and anal cancer?

-and presents a higher rate of verbal and physical domestic abuse?

In light of these facts, and if kids had critical thinking skills, don't you think they'd agree with the Bible, that homosexuality is an abomination?

Try to be honest now (another thing the Bible promotes, and probably another reason why the left attacks Christianity).

Public schools dont comment on Christianity. Being neutral is not opressing your religion. If they are villifying Christianity, please cite a source.


Please cite a source for your statistics. Even if they are true (which I Doubt) than it would reinforce the argument that homosexuality is not a choice, as no one would choose these dangers. Again I want to see your source.


You are all for religious freedom. The church of FSM commands all gay people to enter into marriage. If you stop them you are infringing on their religious rights. So either you care about religious liberty, or you are the christian taliban. Which is it?

Paul7
06-04-2012, 11:11
Public schools dont comment on Christianity. Being neutral is not opressing your religion. If they are villifying Christianity, please cite a source.

http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/issues/religiousfreedom/universitylife.aspx

I heard of another story a while back where a grade school student in CA was given an assignment to write about their favorite person. He wrote on Jesus, and was told by the teacher than Jesus wasn't a real person.

Please cite a source for your statistics. Even if they are true (which I Doubt) than it would reinforce the argument that homosexuality is not a choice, as no one would choose these dangers.

Is alcoholism or adultery not a choice?

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 11:28
http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/issues/religiousfreedom/universitylife.aspx

?

You provided a link to a Christian website which talks about colleges, and only cites anecdotal accounts such as how a student could not give a speech condemming gay marriage, or a student was told she should question her career path if she refused to counsel people with differing religious beliefs. Besides these are colleges where a person has a choice about attending, not an elementary school like you posted.

Where are elementary students being subjected to Christ bashing as you claimed? Where are your unbiased reports? Were there legal claims we could research?

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 11:30
[QUOTE=Paul7;19050145.



Is alcoholism or adultery not a choice?[/QUOTE]

Diversionary tactic. Show us the source for your previous statistics.

Paul7
06-04-2012, 13:44
You provided a link to a Christian website which talks about colleges,

They are public schools, which you brought up. Way to move the goalposts.

Paul7
06-04-2012, 13:44
Diversionary tactic. Show us the source for your previous statistics.

Why don't you ask the person who posted them? Here's a few in the meantime:

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html

Geko45
06-04-2012, 14:08
Could that be true of you?

No, as I have mentioned here before. I was a believer for a long time, I wanted to continue to believe. It would have been easier to stick with what I knew, but the evidence just didn't support it. After about a two year process of reviewing evidence and studying the bible, I came to the difficult conclusion that I had wasted quite a bit of my life trying to find meaning in a book that hade very little to offer.

So, to claim that I didn't confront my own cognitive dissonance just doesn't have merit. I confronted it, I worked through it and I resolved it. Perhaps I'm just completely and totally mistaken. I can't disprove that, but I can at least gaurantee you that I'm not holding onto my position while wrestling with lingering internal doubt.

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 15:02
They are public schools, which you brought up. Way to move the goalposts.

You stated the problem was groups going after the youth before they were old enough to reason, then gave examples from institutions of higher learning, (adult education). Talk about moving the goalposts.

Or maybe the issue is in college the kids can think for themselves and see your position is BS?

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 15:07
Why don't you ask the person who posted them? Here's a few in the meantime:

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html

Www.catholic education huh?
Do you have an unbiased source?
I suppose you'll quote Kent Hovind next.


UC Davis debunks the lifespan assertion.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron_obit.html

High-Gear
06-04-2012, 16:23
:

-gives an average of 20 years less life expectancy?

Poor research methodology. They used obituary notices from gay publications which were reporting deaths from AIDS. I guess you could say gay men with AIDS live 20 years less. Academically dishonest.:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron_obit.html.
-gives 14 times greater likelihood of committing suicide?

-gives 2 or 3 times greater likelihood of smoking?

-gives at least 4 or 5 times greater likelihood of becoming an alcoholic?

-gives over 10 times greater likelihood of using illicit drugs?

-gives 2 or 3 times greater likelihood of suffering from depression?

Yes the rates are higher. I've not found the same numbers, but the point is moot. As for suicide (and I imagine the others follow this trend) the research shows it increases when anti-gay laws are passed. There is a direct causal link between discrimination and he high suicide rates. It makes sense depression, and substance abuse would follow. Dont you get it, your bigotry is harming people.


-makes up 76% of all AIDS cases?

-makes up 45% of all new HIV infections?
the closest i could come to this number was a world health report from 1985 showing 72%. it is a moot point however as This is an issue of the lack of the need to use a barrier device for birth control, not a measue of morality.

-yields higher risk of lung, liver, and anal cancer?
true, but is a direct result of higher percent of smokers, and the HPV. If gay men smoked less and used a condom, or had the HPV vaccine this number would change.
http://www.yalemedicalgroup.org/stw/Page.asp?PageID=STW047998

-and presents a higher rate of verbal and physical domestic abuse?
this is info which supports your position, however it is based on self reporting, which is not completely reliable. I would postulate when faced with higher depression, substance abuse problems, one could also expect higher rates of domestic abuse.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14650663

At any rate, how does any of this support homosexuality is wrong? I think it demonstrates society's bigotry and discrimination takes an emotional toll on people who are in an out group. If it is so hard on them why do they continue to be homosexual? Because it is not a choice! The remedy for this is for society to be more accepting of others. Accomplish this and I bet you see the substance abuse and suicide numbers drop.

Tilley
06-04-2012, 18:15
No, as I have mentioned here before. I was a believer for a long time, I wanted to continue to believe. It would have been easier to stick with what I knew, but the evidence just didn't support it. After about a two year process of reviewing evidence and studying the bible, I came to the difficult conclusion that I had wasted quite a bit of my life trying to find meaning in a book that hade very little to offer.

So, to claim that I didn't confront my own cognitive dissonance just doesn't have merit. I confronted it, I worked through it and I resolved it. Perhaps I'm just completely and totally mistaken. I can't disprove that, but I can at least gaurantee you that I'm not holding onto my position while wrestling with lingering internal doubt.
So you walk around in the course of your day and think to yourself "I talk to God but I hear nothing back. I ask God for something, and nada...zero...zilch. Right? So you look at the Bible hoping to see something earth-shattering, and you see nothing. Finally you get frustrated and proclaim there is no God!

Sound familiar?

Geko45
06-04-2012, 20:13
So you walk around in the course of your day and think to yourself "I talk to God but I hear nothing back. I ask God for something, and nada...zero...zilch. Right? So you look at the Bible hoping to see something earth-shattering, and you see nothing. Finally you get frustrated and proclaim there is no God!

Sound familiar?

I understand why you need to oversimplify and mischaraterize my experience. It makes no difference to me what you think of it. You're only hurting yourself. Just don't force any of your "god's" rules on me and we'll get along just fine.

Tilley
06-04-2012, 21:07
I understand why you need to oversimplify and mischaraterize my experience. It makes no difference to me what you think of it. You're only hurting yourself. Just don't force any of your "god's" rules on me and we'll get along just fine.

So you understand me but I am unable to understand you? You are angry...I get it. The problem with you is you wanted God to come to you on your terms. Jump through your hoops. Yet you cant even get your wife or whoever to do that...but you figure God will?

He knocks at the door, but you have to let Him in.

Geko45
06-04-2012, 21:23
So you understand me but I am unable to understand you? You are angry...I get it. The problem with you is you wanted God to come to you on your terms. Jump through your hoops. Yet you cant even get your wife or whoever to do that...but you figure God will?

LOL! You really don't understand at all, do you?

High-Gear
06-05-2012, 03:23
LOL! You really don't understand at all, do you?

He has an emotional investment in his god. I saw a great video explaining one possibility why religious people get so upset when people deny their god. The reasoning goes something like this.

1) God did not create man, but rather Man created god as an answer to the unanswerable questions of the world.

2) When man created god, he did so in his own image. The Japanese gods looked Japanese, The Norse Gods had beards, and braided hair, and were fierce warriors, The greek gods looked greek and wore robes, etc.

3) These man made gods who were made in their own image hated the same people / things they hated, and loved the people / things they valued. This is why there are so many sects within each religion. God is made to fit what each person values, and like minded people gather together.

4) Because these gods are man made, they only exist in the minds of the religious person. When a religious person speaks to god, they are speaking to themselves. This is why they cant understand why you dont see what they see so clearly. When they want to share their god with you, they are sharing a part of themself with you.

Finally this brings us to...

5) When you reject their god, you are rejecting them. Much like a forelorned lover, that feeling of rejection hurts them emotionally. This is why they react very defensively(fine, you'll burn in hell!).


I don't know if this is accurate, but it is a very interesting possibility.

snowbird
06-05-2012, 06:36
The translation is that AM has dismissed the statistics because they go against his preconceived worldview.

AM's silence suggests that you're absolutely correct.

And High Gear seems to have at least tacitly admitted the reality that homosexuality is medically unsafe.

Now I pray that both accept the Lord Jesus as their personal savior.

Gunhaver
06-05-2012, 06:43
He has an emotional investment in his god. I saw a great video explaining one possibility why religious people get so upset when people deny their god. The reasoning goes something like this.

1) God did not create man, but rather Man created god as an answer to the unanswerable questions of the world.

2) When man created god, he did so in his own image. The Japanese gods looked Japanese, The Norse Gods had beards, and braided hair, and were fierce warriors, The greek gods looked greek and wore robes, etc.

3) These man made gods who were made in their own image hated the same people / things they hated, and loved the people / things they valued. This is why there are so many sects within each religion. God is made to fit what each person values, and like minded people gather together.

4) Because these gods are man made, they only exist in the minds of the religious person. When a religious person speaks to god, they are speaking to themselves. This is why they cant understand why you dont see what they see so clearly. When they want to share their god with you, they are sharing a part of themself with you.

Finally this brings us to...

5) When you reject their god, you are rejecting them. Much like a forelorned lover, that feeling of rejection hurts them emotionally. This is why they react very defensively(fine, you'll burn in hell!).


I don't know if this is accurate, but it is a very interesting possibility.

The Real God: An Epiphany - YouTube

High-Gear
06-05-2012, 06:55
AM's silence suggests that you're absolutely correct.

And High Gear seems to have at least tacitly admitted the reality that homosexuality is medically unsafe.

Now I pray that both accept the Lord Jesus as their personal savior.

No, I admitted smoking is unsafe. I also stated bigotry and hate cause people to suffer from depression, substance abuse, and suicidal ideation.

snowbird
06-05-2012, 07:29
No, I admitted smoking is unsafe. I also stated bigotry and hate cause people to suffer from depression, substance abuse, and suicidal ideation.

Homosexuals unquestionably suffer higher rates of STDs, and I can see where that would be depressing, possibly driving someone to drink.

But the hate and bigotry that you mentioned, would that be like when the left hates Christianity so much that they sue to get the Lord's Prayer kicked out of our public schools, then they ban the age-old custom of singing of Christmas carols in schools, and even try to ban the word Christmas, trying to substitute "Season's Greetings" and "Winter Solstice"?

High-Gear
06-05-2012, 07:58
Homosexuals unquestionably suffer higher rates of STDs, and I can see where that would be depressing, possibly driving someone to drink.

But the hate and bigotry that you mentioned, would that be like when the left hates Christianity so much that they sue to get the Lord's Prayer kicked out of our public schools, then they ban the age-old custom of singing of Christmas carols in schools, and even try to ban the word Christmas, trying to substitute "Season's Greetings" and "Winter Solstice"?


No hate here, just keeping religion in peoples homes and church where it belongs.

Why do you feel that you have the right to have the lords prayer in public schools? I bet you'd support a ban on teacher led muslim prayer in your childs school wouldnt you?

snowbird
06-05-2012, 08:33
. I bet you'd support a ban on teacher led muslim prayer in your childs school wouldnt you?

You got it, Pontiac.

But you wouldn't, presumably?

That suggests that you're okay with what Orhan Sircasi did in Germany yesterday. He's the 32 yr old Turkish Muslim who killed his 30 yr old wife in front of their 6 children, and cut her up into pieces. He fought off the police by lunging at them with the knife and swinging his wife's head like a club. Finally he shouted "Allahu akbar" and threw her head off the roof of the apartment building.

Our left is okay with Islam, and Islam is okay with wife-beating, female genital mutilation, and assorted other bits of misogyny (plus generally slaying 'infidels'). Additionally, Islam says kill apostates, like Muslims did yesterday in Tunisia with a Muslim convert to Christianity. They held him while someone with a knife to his throat hacked away until the beheading was complete, to the usual cries of "Allahu akbar!" Islam has now launched 18,995 deadly terror attacks since 9/11. Islam has been one of humanity's worst nightmares for 14 centuries and counting.

But now maybe you'll say you'd also be against Muslim prayers in our schools too, just teach them Atheism and they'll turn out okay. Well, look how well Atheists behaved in Communist Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist China, Cambodia, Cuba, etc:upeyes: Foul Atheist deeds have been another one of humanity's worst nightmares (Satan has worked through Mohammed, Marx, and many others).

High-Gear
06-05-2012, 09:39
You got it, Pontiac.

But you wouldn't, presumably?
).

You really dont get it do you? I would not want any religion, or lack there of taught in school. Religion shouldnt be addressed. I know it is hard for you to believe, but a conversation can be had which is not dependant on mention of religion, and still not forward an atheist agenda.

Leave it in church and the home. What is the problem with this?

Gunhaver
06-05-2012, 10:04
You got it, Pontiac.

But you wouldn't, presumably?

That suggests that you're okay with what Orhan Sircasi did in Germany yesterday. He's the 32 yr old Turkish Muslim who killed his 30 yr old wife in front of their 6 children, and cut her up into pieces. He fought off the police by lunging at them with the knife and swinging his wife's head like a club. Finally he shouted "Allahu akbar" and threw her head off the roof of the apartment building.

Our left is okay with Islam, and Islam is okay with wife-beating, female genital mutilation, and assorted other bits of misogyny (plus generally slaying 'infidels'). Additionally, Islam says kill apostates, like Muslims did yesterday in Tunisia with a Muslim convert to Christianity. They held him while someone with a knife to his throat hacked away until the beheading was complete, to the usual cries of "Allahu akbar!" Islam has now launched 18,995 deadly terror attacks since 9/11. Islam has been one of humanity's worst nightmares for 14 centuries and counting.

But now maybe you'll say you'd also be against Muslim prayers in our schools too, just teach them Atheism and they'll turn out okay. Well, look how well Atheists behaved in Communist Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist China, Cambodia, Cuba, etc:upeyes: Foul Atheist deeds have been another one of humanity's worst nightmares (Satan has worked through Mohammed, Marx, and many others).

I don't think Islam is evil. I think Islam has been used as justification to do evil things. I don't think Christianity is evil. I think Christianity has been used to justify evil things. I obviously don't think atheism is evil. I think atheism has been used to justify evil things.

When atrocities are committed in the name of Christianity you seem to want to redirect attention to Islam as if to say that they're so much worse because they happen to be the most brutal religion at this point in history. "Pay no attention to the fact that I'm robbing this bank, there's a woman being raped over there."

You two can have each other. You're already worshiping the same god anyway. Where atheism stands apart is that there's no mandate from ancient texts to do any of those things that communists did. No shuffling into church every Sunday to review who's better than whom and who has to be killed or beaten for what "sins". Only some leaders that wanted to be god and thought it would be best if their followers didn't already have a god of their own.

Atheism didn't give those leaders the ideas they had. It only offered a convenient stance from which to operate. You'll grasp at the straws of communism=atheism and vice versa no matter what's pointed out to you (really? Nazis? Still on that one eh?) because you need us to be like you which is why the constant claims that atheism is a religion.

Animal Mother
06-05-2012, 17:12
The translation is that AM has dismissed the statistics because they go against his preconceived worldview.No, that's your practice, not mine. I dismiss Cameron and co. because their work is poorly done and has been shown to be wrong by every independent assessment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Cameron#Criticism

Animal Mother
06-05-2012, 17:36
AM's silence suggests that you're absolutely correct. Or I'm surprised that any honest person would continue to cite Cameron's work as if it were valid. But then, I guess it's still the case that no honest person has.

Tilley
06-05-2012, 23:43
LOL! You really don't understand at all, do you?

Anthony rejected Theresa because Anthony is a homosexual.

Anthony is also an atheist.

Geko is also an atheist...:whistling:

Gunhaver
06-06-2012, 00:29
And High Gear seems to have at least tacitly admitted the reality that homosexuality is medically unsafe.



Irresponsible homosexuality is unsafe, same as irresponsible heterosexuality, irresponsible shooting sports and irresponsible driving. Which of those other things are you rallying to do away with based on the fact that some stupid people can't act responsibly? Why doesn't that thought process work for you when the left points out gun violence as a reason to ban guns?

And what about the always ignored by the anti-gays point that this is marriage and monogamy we're talking about here? If you were really concerned about the spread of STDs by homosexuals you'd be all for anything that further validates their relationship with one person and limits their number of sexual partners.

Kingarthurhk
06-06-2012, 00:31
The Real God: An Epiphany - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j8ZMMuu7MU)

That is about as accurate as the following:


Atheism is a mental illness.wmv - YouTube

High-Gear
06-06-2012, 01:05
That is about as accurate as the following:


Atheism is a mental illness.wmv - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM5x59h0ovQ)

That study had several problems with methodology.
I'll quote another persons statement and give a link to his site in the interest of saving time.

On a side note...can one not see other reasons the former soviet union would lead the world in suicide rates? Correlation does not equal causation.

quoted material.
http://www.skepticmoney.com/religious-affiliation-and-suicide-attempt/
@mike,
I give you and A for effort and a F for results. Did you read this study before you posted it? Others may view full document here. http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/161/12/2303
This in not a sample of the population at large. The starting set of people met,” DSM-III-R criteria for a current major depressive episode…” Your starting group is a small sub set of very depressed people. This type of diagnosis requires human interpretation and is subject to unintentional bias. Additionally, this is not a blind study (forget double blind) – that is the people collecting the data knew which person gave which answers. Another problem is that the some of the data is self reported. People are poor at giving self reported data. I imagine this could be worse if your are very depressed. I also could not find in the study how they decided who did or did not have a “religious affiliation”. These are all huge problems for this study.
In this sub group there is a material variation in personal networks (which could affect suicide rates – again – no control is provided) “Religiously affiliated subjects reported a more family-oriented social network, reflected in more time spent with first-degree relatives.”
I loved this little gem – “Therefore, it is possible that depressed patients who stated that they were atheists or had no religion had abandoned religion as a consequence of depression or hopelessness.”
So… When you are really depressed you may claim to not care about religion – DUH! When really depressed you are likely to not care about a lot of things.
Nice try Mike but you fail!

Woofie
06-06-2012, 07:43
Al-Fatiha estimates that 4,000 homosexuals have been executed in Iran since 1979. How many homosexuals have been executed by Christians since 1979?



Big difference between Iran and the US. We have laws in place to protect the minorities from christians such as yourself and Blast. Iran has no respect for civil liberties.

creaky
06-06-2012, 16:54
No, that's your practice, not mine. I dismiss Cameron and co. because their work is poorly done and has been shown to be wrong by every independent assessment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Cameron#Criticism

No, Paul7 is correct again. You reject it because the SPLC, the huffpo and various homoblogs reject it. You're like a pane of glass...

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

creaky
06-06-2012, 16:58
Or I'm surprised that any honest person would continue to cite Cameron's work as if it were valid. But then, I guess it's still the case that no honest person has.

Anyone cited by the SPLC as a hate group gets an automatic second look by creaky.

A bigger collection of charlatans, hucksters and fools are rarely found...

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Animal Mother
06-06-2012, 23:04
No, Paul7 is correct again. You reject it because the SPLC, the huffpo and various homoblogs reject it. You're like a pane of glass...

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engineOdd, I didn't mention any of those groups, apparently your psychic abilities continue to fail you. Of course, since the data doesn't actually support your position, you have no choice but to try and divert the conversation.

Animal Mother
06-06-2012, 23:05
Anyone cited by the SPLC as a hate group gets an automatic second look by creaky. creaky thinks the Klan is A-OK. Got it.
A bigger collection of charlatans, hucksters and fools are rarely found... Do you really want to compare the SPLC vs. evangelists in terms of population of charlatans hucksters and frauds? How many members of the SPLC have spent time in prison for fraud or tax evasion?