Is homosexuality a choice or is it genetic?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually much of this is dragged over from his posts on the Abortion thread and the Torture thread, where his posts have hewed to the religious line with amazing clarity for a person who denies religious influence. A point to remember here is that Pale has never come our and stated his religious underpinnings, he hasn't claimed agnosticism or atheism either. My position on him stands.

As the voume of scientific data continues to increase more and more religious people are beginning to accept it, but still doing exactly what Pale is by denying homosexual people rights on other pretenses.

Well...just in terms of PaleRider's arguments - and I'm thinking of the Abortion ones - I would disagree. I have to admit - when someone uses religion as a basis for argument, it totally negates the argument for me. I have no respect for it because usually it entails only a respect for some life.

Two other people who I debated with actually influenced my thinking:

One, an athiest, argued against abortion in much the same way PR did and one of his points, looked at from an ethical and athiest viewpoint was - we only have one life ever, and that's it. No after life, no second chances, etc.

The other, a Christian who was strong in his beliefs, believed that life was sacred and we did not have the right to take it. He was against abortion and he was also against the death penalty. So many people who argue against abortion for religious "life is sacred" reasons have no problem turning around and frying a condemned man. Interestingly this same person was also for civil unions for gays. He believed that God created this country for freedom for his people, the beauty of equality and free will (his words). He supported the government sponsored "civil union " but opposed to "gay marrage" because "marriage" is a religious function and religious freedom is a core American belief. The church should not be forced by the government to change their doctrine but the government is obligated to create equality in America for all.
I respected the points he made.

I actually respect PR's arguments much more not knowing his religious beliefs. Why? Because if I knew them, then I everything he said would be viewed through the lens of religion. His beliefs are actually irrelevent to the debate when you come right down to it because he is not using religion to make his point. (if that makes any sense :p )
 
Werbung:
You questioning my assesment of absurdity or my atheism?

I'm saying a person can claim to be anything or anyone on the internet. Certainly in arguments over one religion vs. another, being labeled an athiest would subliminally confer greater credibility and impartiality. However, the way you argue and your wording just doesn't seem very much like an athiest to me.
 
Actually much of this is dragged over from his posts on the Abortion thread and the Torture thread, where his posts have hewed to the religious line with amazing clarity for a person who denies religious influence. A point to remember here is that Pale has never come our and stated his religious underpinnings, he hasn't claimed agnosticism or atheism either. My position on him stands.

As the voume of scientific data continues to increase more and more religious people are beginning to accept it, but still doing exactly what Pale is by denying homosexual people rights on other pretenses.

Prove it mare. You keep talking but fail to corroborate anything. The fact is that when you are unable to effectively argue against anyone on practically any topic, your standard tactic is to claim that they are arguing from a religious point of view and claim victory as if you could win by simply pointing out such a thing.

If I were arguing from a religious point of view (which I am not) you would still need to defeat the ideas; not just point out where they come from. The fact that you believe that just pointing out a position is religious constitutes a win for you is clear and ugly evidence of your bigotry.

And you are a blatant, bald faced liar if you are claiming that you have caught me in any lies and have brought them forward. There have been lies brought forward, but they were your lies brought forward by me. As I pointed out early on mare, life is simple if you are honest. I don't need to twist and torture reason in order to defend my positions because I am not conflicted, therefore, unlike you, I don't need to lie.
 
I'm saying a person can claim to be anything or anyone on the internet. Certainly in arguments over one religion vs. another, being labeled an athiest would subliminally confer greater credibility and impartiality. However, the way you argue and your wording just doesn't seem very much like an athiest to me.


Based purely upon your silly belief that only religious people oppose gay marriage.
 
And you are obviously a confused bi-sexual as no self respecting gay man would pick that hat.
 
Pale, old sod, the reason that I quit posting on the Abortion thread was that I wasn't convincing you and you weren't convincing me. I know that you have an extremely low opinion of me and I have to admit that my opinion of you is even lower. So is there any point in us continuing to call each other names and excoriate one another? I mean it's fun and all, but not particularly profitable.

I know what you think of me and you know what I think of you, shall we leave it at that?
 
Fact: Anyone can say anything or claim to be anything on a messageboard. You simply don't debate much like an athiest. That is an observation.

I take as a compliment that I dont debate like Atheist
 
Pale, old sod, the reason that I quit posting on the Abortion thread was that I wasn't convincing you and you weren't convincing me. I know that you have an extremely low opinion of me and I have to admit that my opinion of you is even lower. So is there any point in us continuing to call each other names and excoriate one another? I mean it's fun and all, but not particularly profitable.

I know what you think of me and you know what I think of you, shall we leave it at that?


I see that you haven't brought forward any evidence at all that proves that you are not a liar.

My opinions of you are corroborated by evidence. Your opinions of me are the result of your bias as you never substantiated any of them.

But by all means, run away as fast as you can if that is what it will take for you to save face (as if it weren't too late for that already).
 
I see that you haven't brought forward any evidence at all that proves that you are not a liar.
You haven't brought forward any evidence to prove I am a liar OR that you are not. Touche.

My opinions of you are corroborated by evidence. Your opinions of me are the result of your bias as you never substantiated any of them.
Your opinions of me are based on your religious dogma, you haven't brought forward any proof of the stuff you claim. My opinions of you are based on your lies, your misogyny, your desire for torture, and your closet Christianity. Other than those things I guess you're okay, though a bit of a cold fish except for your hysteria around the killing of babies.

But by all means, run away as fast as you can if that is what it will take for you to save face (as if it weren't too late for that already).
Okay, if want to keep this up, I'll hang in there. But at least TRY to present something that wasn't dredged up from the bowels of the church.:D
 
Werbung:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top