God is responsible for all the bad stuff that happens

[numinus]

I think you'll find if you take the time to review Mare much like myself just has seen no proof of what man made religious dogma states...

What part of 'proof' don't you understand, hmmm?

Oh, and why in heaven's name should one review mare to see proof of man-made religious dogma?

Your opinions have taken a radical turn south, I think.

and also understands all of the many ways man made religion often brought death & distruction throughout the ages in the name of one groups "god" over another, all positive there's was "the one & only".

That is what ideology often does -- and not necessarily a religious ideology.

One does not have to agree with someone's particular religious tales to be kind & understanding to people.

Neither does one have to belittle their beliefs -- as you have.

Fortunately you have no intellect nor power to say what someone else feels or what makes someone else happy or feel loved.

I don't need to have esp to have a firm grasp of human nature and its logical purpose.

Please peddle your nonsense someplace else.

With that 12 year old mentality of "Duh"... that's speaks to you weakness more than I ever could.

I simply have no intentions of suffering either your or mare's nonsense -- nor the cheek of a self-proclaimed agnostic who do not even have the sense to look up what agnosticism is.

Of course that is some sort of character flaw on my part -- as dr who succintly pointed out.

It simply means Mare and people of good will just want to be allowed to be themselves as they choose.

No one is stopping them.

Being trapped by the evangelistic you have not the ability to comprehend this thought. Your sole purpose is to convert people to your indoctrination or ridicule them for not going along.

I have the ability to comprehend lots of things -- including your pretend-agnosticism.

But the fact is your religious tale is not unique to what you believe to be absolute.

Of course. It is intuitive. Something that is purely invented wouldn't appeal to human comprehension intuitively, would it?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I see that Numbs is trying to make me the butt of his accusation of Jesus' commandment being "vague" when in fact he is the one who brought up all the sexual references and attributed them to Jesus. I never brought them up and I never interpreted Jesus' commandment except to say I thought it was good. All the rest of the nonsense in Numbs doing. He's lying about me and cannot provide a quote of any kind where I suggested that Jesus was talking about sex.

 

[numinus]

I see that Numbs is trying to make me the butt of his accusation of Jesus' commandment being "vague" when in fact he is the one who brought up all the sexual references and attributed them to Jesus. I never brought them up and I never interpreted Jesus' commandment except to say I thought it was good.

Nonsense.

You were the one who claimed that jesus' commandment of love needed no context, were you not?

Now you know exactly how absurd that turned out to be.

All the rest of the nonsense in Numbs doing. He's lying about me and cannot provide a quote of any kind where I suggested that Jesus was talking about sex.

Please, deny the above. Its not like you're fooling anyone with your lies anyway.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Nonsense.You were the one who claimed that jesus' commandment of love needed no context, were you not?Now you know exactly how absurd that turned out to be.Please, deny the above. Its not like you're fooling anyone with your lies anyway.

Only you need the context because without it you apparently aren't smart enough to figure out what everyone else sees very plainly. Too bad for you.

 

[Dr.Who]

The commandment of love is indeed clear -- although not necessarily what mare imagines it to be.

Everyone is a DISTINCT human being -- hence have distinct ideas on how to treat themselves. Some people like to fight, some people like to be left alone, some people require the company of others, etc. etc.

Inspite our distinctness -- WE SHARE A SINGLE NATURE. It is precisely this nature that drives human existence towards its purpose.

Human beings are alive hence ought to continue living according to that nature.

Human beings are imbued with free will hence ought to be free according to that nature.

Human beings are imbued with rational faculties hence ought to exercise that faculty according to that nature.

Human beings have dignity hence ought to live with dignity according to that nature.

Etc. etc. etc.

Yep. good enough

 

[Dr.Who]

Chreasters? I'm not familiar with that word.

A person who only attends church on Christmas and Easter. Usually of such shallow faith that it is really no faith at all. They are exactly the ones we see spouting off nonsense and thinking that they speak for Christianity when they know little to nothing of real Christianity. They represent a very large portion of America if not a vast majority. Even as far back as Alexis de Tocqueville in 1831 he described American Christianity as a hundred miles wide and an inch deep.

The evidence is pretty strong that homosexuals are born that way,

Not so much.


"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation.[76]

The main reasons cited include genetic and environmental factors, likely in combination.[77][78] Other factors that may play a role include prenatal hormone exposure, where hormones play a role in determining sexual orientation as they do with sex differentiation;[79][80] and prenatal stress on the mother.[81][82][83] The American Psychiatric Association has stated that, "to date there are no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological etiology for homosexuality. Similarly, no specific psychosocial or family dynamic cause for homosexuality has been identified, including histories of childhood sexual abuse".[29] Research into how sexual orientation may be determined by genetic or other prenatal factors plays a role in political and social debates about homosexuality, and also raises fears about genetic profiling and prenatal testing.[86]" The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that "sexual orientation probably is not determined by any one factor but by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality

that it is not a choice. That being the case, God, whoever or whatever we conceive god to be, made them that way. How can we say that god is wrong?

God may very well have made them that way. It does not mean that He meant for them to have promiscuous sex through glory holes in adult bookstores. Like anyone else they would be expected to live a life they think pleasing to God with careful thought and consideration.

Each gay person must walk his own path in finding God. If he genuinely and honestly finds reconciliation between a gay lifestyle and worship of God - great, then he is worshiping God. If he finds that he must alter his lifestyle to worship God then he would like the rest of us who also alter our lifestyles.

The worst part of all of this is that gay people who would otherwise worship God are driven away by both bigots among the Christian community and their own refusal to get beyond the messenger to the message.

 

[Dr.Who]

You have consistently obfuscated and weaseled around to find ways to say that gay people cannot enjoy the same rights and privileges that you do. Denying gay people equality is persecution. So which is it?

I have explained myself well. You prefer to twist what I say and it stops making sense for you.

The state has given certain priveleges to married couples that don't make sense. Those priveleges need to be stopped. An example would be: "spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home" I believe that any two people that own real estate together should have the same exemptions on property taxes both before and after death of one of the property owners.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I have explained myself well. You prefer to twist what I say and it stops making sense for you.

The state has given certain priveleges to married couples that don't make sense. Those priveleges need to be stopped. An example would be: "spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home" I believe that any two people that own real estate together should have the same exemptions on property taxes both before and after death of one of the property owners.

Twist, schmist. The laws will not be changed any time soon, and with that in mind all consenting adults should be able to enjoy the rights that you currently enjoy. All the rest of your tirade is pointless balderdash. The State has given those special rights to heterosexuals at the behest of the heterosexual majority and denied them to gay people on the basis of religious bigotry, that's the problem that should be addressed--not some pie-in-the-sky concept of denying rights to everyone equally.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Not so much.
"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation.[76]

The main reasons cited include genetic and environmental factors, likely in combination.[77][78] Other factors that may play a role include prenatal hormone exposure, where hormones play a role in determining sexual orientation as they do with sex differentiation;[79][80] and prenatal stress on the mother.[81][82][83] The American Psychiatric Association has stated that, "to date there are no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological etiology for homosexuality. Similarly, no specific psychosocial or family dynamic cause for homosexuality has been identified, including histories of childhood sexual abuse".[29] Research into how sexual orientation may be determined by genetic or other prenatal factors plays a role in political and social debates about homosexuality, and also raises fears about genetic profiling and prenatal testing.[86]" The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that "sexual orientation probably is not determined by any one factor but by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality

Anyone seriously intending to give evidence does not quote Wiki, it's not a reliable source. Please note that NO ONE KNOWS absolutely what the causes of homosexuality are, but the vast preponderance of real science in this century suggests it to be an innate quality. You won't look at real evidence that I have posted, so instead you rely on Wiki. Not much credibility there, Who.

God may very well have made them that way. It does not mean that He meant for them to have promiscuous sex through glory holes in adult bookstores. Like anyone else they would be expected to live a life they think pleasing to God with careful thought and consideration..

So Who is it this time taking one small segment of a population and implying that all members of that group do the same thing? You deny legal commited, loving relationships to gay people and try to impugn all of them with the actions of a few. How many gay women indulge as you have suggested? How many gays are responsible for the 50,000,000 abortions that Heterosexuals have had in this country? Your religious bigotry is less blatant that Num's, but it's just as powerful, and at least Nums is more honest about it.

 

[numinus]

Only you need the context because without it you apparently aren't smart enough to figure out what everyone else sees very plainly. Too bad for you.

Apparently, you have no idea how human reason works.

In mathematics, its called the domain.

In philosophy, including the natural sciences, its called assumptions.

In propositional logic, its called the proposition.

What true statement do you imagine needs no context, hmmm?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Apparently, you have no idea how human reason works. In mathematics, its called the domain. In philosophy, including the natural sciences, its called assumptions. In propositional logic, its called the proposition. What true statement do you imagine needs no context, hmmm?

I see how it works for you and Phillip Garrido, both religious nuts who can't understand simple, profound statements even 4 words long. Who do you have chained to your basement wall? Or are they in a shed out back?

 

[numinus]

Anyone seriously intending to give evidence does not quote Wiki, it's not a reliable source. Please note that NO ONE KNOWS absolutely what the causes of homosexuality are, but the vast preponderance of real science in this century suggests it to be an innate quality. You won't look at real evidence that I have posted, so instead you rely on Wiki. Not much credibility there, Who.

The human genome has already been mapped for quite some time and now we are doing the same for the great apes. This is no longer the subject of fanciful speculation. You need only identify the gene that supposedly causes homosexual behavior and all opinions to the contrary will abruptly cease.

Of all the alleged evidence you have provided to lend support to your claims -- YOU FAIL TO PROVIDE THE ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT MATTERS.

Honestly, you ought to just shut up about it until you do. Otherwise, you are only making a complete fool of yourself. Its not particularly good for mensa's reputation.

So Who is it this time taking one small segment of a population and implying that all members of that group do the same thing? You deny legal commited, loving relationships to gay people and try to impugn all of them with the actions of a few.

Nonsense.

No one can deny two consenting adults a 'legal commited, loving relationship' even if they wanted to. The logical implication of your absurd ideas is that a 'legal commited, loving relationship' is dependent on a marriage contract.

And you have, onece again, contradicted yourself.

Duh?

How many gay women indulge as you have suggested? How many gays are responsible for the 50,000,000 abortions that Heterosexuals have had in this country? Your religious bigotry is less blatant that Num's, but it's just as powerful, and at least Nums is more honest about it.

The reason that practicing gays do not commit abortions is exactly the SAME reason homosexual unions are NOT marriages.

There is really no denying natural law -- however tightly you roll your panties up in a knot.

Duh?

 

[numinus]

I see how it works for you and Phillip Garrido, both religious nuts who can't understand simple, profound statements even 4 words long. Who do you have chained to your basement wall? Or are they in a shed out back?

You know how it works and you still insist that the commandment of love is devoid of context, eh?

What part of the principle of excluded middle don't you understand, hmmm?

THERE IS NO THIRD POSSIBILITY.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

The human genome has already been mapped for quite some time and now we are doing the same for the great apes. This is no longer the subject of fanciful speculation. You need only identify the gene that supposedly causes homosexual behavior and all opinions to the contrary will abruptly cease.

I know you aren't as ignorant as your posts suggest. Many traits are not single gene dependent, some are complexes of genes working synergistically and we are nowhere near teasing out all those combinations. Your insistence on a sound byte genetic answer is a debating technique since you know better than that.

Of all the alleged evidence you have provided to lend support to your claims -- YOU FAIL TO PROVIDE THE ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT MATTERS.

Once again, you aren't as stupid as your post suggests, why keep up the pretense?

Nonsense. No one can deny two consenting adults a 'legal commited, loving relationship' even if they wanted to. The logical implication of your absurd ideas is that a 'legal commited, loving relationship' is dependent on a marriage contract.

And you have, once again, contradicted yourself.

Maybe where you are that's true, but in the US marriage is a legal contract as set forth in US law and a "legal" commited, loving relationship IS dependent on a marriage contract.

The reason that practicing gays do not commit abortions is exactly the SAME reason homosexual unions are NOT marriages.

Once again, your mouth precedes your brain. Lots of gay couples have children in the US, the difference is that--like hetero couples who use artificial means--gays don't abort their children because they work very hard to have them in the first place. Only heteros consider babies as a disposable product.

So which country do you live in, Nums? Have you ever been to the US?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

You know how it works and you still insist that the commandment of love is devoid of context, eh?

What part of the principle of excluded middle don't you understand, hmmm?

THERE IS NO THIRD POSSIBILITY.

You are the perfect Bible-beater, always proclaiming in CAPITALS what you say are the universal laws of Creation.

The fact that you have to have a bunch of nomadic, goatherder blather to help you understand Jesus' commandment is your failing and not one shared by all of us. Dr. Who seems to know what it means, I suspect Andy does too. I've asked a number of my Christian friends and acquaintances and all of them know what it means without reference to goatherder blather.

Are you really arguing that you can't love your own children without the Old Testament context to help you figure it out? You can't love your siblings without it? You can't love yourself? Well, okay, I can see why you wouldn't love yourself, but... what about other people? You've set up an argument that even YOU wouldn't support if you hadn't thought it up.