The Right to Believe What One Wants

[Taz]

Well there are people that think, ultimately, homosexuality will ultimately cause damage to our society as a whole... of course that is opinion. yet, many are convinced of it.....

Of course, homosexuality will be whether it's legal or not, just, legalization will likely increase instances of it, as it becomes more accepted, people will view it as an option (if you have an open mind, I think anyone can enjoy sex with either sex). I do think most of us are programmed to desire one sex more than the other, that being said

Why are you convinced that gays will harm society? And do what exactly? Cause wars for no reason? Open fire on concertgoers? ... What exactly?

There is a natural reason only a man and a woman can produce a child

But what harm do gays do to society? Sort of like barren people, are they harming society or can they have something to add?

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

 

[Bonzi]

Well there are people that think, ultimately, homosexuality will ultimately cause damage to our society as a whole... of course that is opinion. yet, many are convinced of it.....

Of course, homosexuality will be whether it's legal or not, just, legalization will likely increase instances of it, as it becomes more accepted, people will view it as an option (if you have an open mind, I think anyone can enjoy sex with either sex). I do think most of us are programmed to desire one sex more than the other, that being said

Why are you convinced that gays will harm society? And do what exactly? Cause wars for no reason? Open fire on concertgoers? ... What exactly?

There is a natural reason only a man and a woman can produce a child

But what harm do gays do to society? Sort of like barren people, are they harming society or can they have something to add?

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Really, or what?

 

[Czernobog]

Well there are people that think, ultimately, homosexuality will ultimately cause damage to our society as a whole... of course that is opinion. yet, many are convinced of it.....

Of course, homosexuality will be whether it's legal or not, just, legalization will likely increase instances of it, as it becomes more accepted, people will view it as an option (if you have an open mind, I think anyone can enjoy sex with either sex). I do think most of us are programmed to desire one sex more than the other, that being said

Why are you convinced that gays will harm society? And do what exactly? Cause wars for no reason? Open fire on concertgoers? ... What exactly?

There is a natural reason only a man and a woman can produce a child

But what harm do gays do to society? Sort of like barren people, are they harming society or can they have something to add?

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Actually, that's not possible. You can't prove a negative. You know...Prove that you have never beaten your wife. that's why rational burden of proof lies on the person making the assertive claim. In this case, "Homosexuals threaten today's society."

 

[Taz]

Why are you convinced that gays will harm society? And do what exactly? Cause wars for no reason? Open fire on concertgoers? ... What exactly?

There is a natural reason only a man and a woman can produce a child

But what harm do gays do to society? Sort of like barren people, are they harming society or can they have something to add?

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Really, or what?

Or you'll be labelled as a fartsmoke blower for saying things that you can't back up.

 

[Taz]

Why are you convinced that gays will harm society? And do what exactly? Cause wars for no reason? Open fire on concertgoers? ... What exactly?

There is a natural reason only a man and a woman can produce a child

But what harm do gays do to society? Sort of like barren people, are they harming society or can they have something to add?

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Actually, that's not possible. You can't prove a negative. You know...Prove that you have never beaten your wife. that's why rational burden of proof lies on the person making the assertive claim. In this case, "Homosexuals threaten today's society."

Ya, I kinda wrote that wrong, I meant that she'd have to back up what she said.

 

[Bonzi]

There is a natural reason only a man and a woman can produce a child

But what harm do gays do to society? Sort of like barren people, are they harming society or can they have something to add?

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Really, or what?

Or you'll be labelled as a fartsmoke blower for saying things that you can't back up.

Well I don't care about what people here label me as, so.... time will tell who is right and who is wrong, though we probably won't be around to see it

 

[Taz]

But what harm do gays do to society? Sort of like barren people, are they harming society or can they have something to add?

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Really, or what?

Or you'll be labelled as a fartsmoke blower for saying things that you can't back up.

Well I don't care about what people here label me as, so.... time will tell who is right and who is wrong, though we probably won't be around to see it

You said that gays are harming society (now). So how are they doing that?

 

[Bonzi]

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Really, or what?

Or you'll be labelled as a fartsmoke blower for saying things that you can't back up.

Well I don't care about what people here label me as, so.... time will tell who is right and who is wrong, though we probably won't be around to see it

You said that gays are harming society (now). So how are they doing that?

I'm too lazy to go back and read where I said that
Honestly, I don't know if they are harming society "right now" unless that is a reason for spread of AIDS and other diseases (in greater numbers than was already the case....) That's pretty much all I have to say about it

 

[Taz]

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Really, or what?

Or you'll be labelled as a fartsmoke blower for saying things that you can't back up.

Well I don't care about what people here label me as, so.... time will tell who is right and who is wrong, though we probably won't be around to see it

You said that gays are harming society (now). So how are they doing that?

I'm too lazy to go back and read where I said that
Honestly, I don't know if they are harming society "right now" unless that is a reason for spread of AIDS and other diseases (in greater numbers than was already the case....) That's pretty much all I have to say about it

Your concession is duly noted.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Everyone has to Believe something ...Right here and Right now I believe
something is holding us prisoner

“We have a predator that came from the depths of the cosmos, and took over the rule of our lives. Human beings are its prisoners. The predator is our lord and master. It has rendered us docile; helpless. If we want to protest, it suppresses our protest. If we want to act independently, it demands that we don’t do so.”
They gave us their mind! Do you hear me? The predators give us their mind, which becomes our mind. The predators’ mind is baroque, contradictory, morose, filled with the fear of being discovered any minute now.”

 

[Czernobog]

Historically, accepted sexual perversion is one of the many causes of powerful downfalls

So you're saying that gays don't threaten today's society. Plus, you'd have to back that up.

Really, or what?

Or you'll be labelled as a fartsmoke blower for saying things that you can't back up.

Well I don't care about what people here label me as, so.... time will tell who is right and who is wrong, though we probably won't be around to see it

You said that gays are harming society (now). So how are they doing that?

I would ask you, rather, what demonstrable harm is the acceptance of homosexuality doing to society? Is there an increase to unhealthy sexual conduct since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to child molestation, and paedophilia marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to rape since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to homicide since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to crime, in general, since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to any socially destructive behaviour since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? And, bear in mind you cannot cite the increase of same sex marriage, as an increase in "socially destructive behaviour", unless you can directly link it to some breakdown in society.

Now, if you can demonstrate none of that, the your claim is entirely baseless, without merit, can be discounted unequivically.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I would ask you, rather, what demonstrable harm is the acceptance of homosexuality doing to society? Is there an increase to unhealthy sexual conduct since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to child molestation, and paedophilia marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to rape since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to homicide since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to crime, in general, since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to any socially destructive behaviour since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? And, bear in mind you cannot cite the increase of same sex marriage, as an increase in "socially destructive behaviour", unless you can directly link it to some breakdown in society.

Now, if you can demonstrate none of that, the your claim is entirely baseless, without merit, can be discounted unequivically.

All of the ills that you mention are a result of a rejection of God, a rejection of moral standards, and an acceptance of all manner of foul sexual perversions, of which Homosexuality is just one.

When society accepts and embraces immoral behavior, there are adverse consequences. How blind must one be not to see this?

 

[BreezeWood]

I would ask you, rather, what demonstrable harm is the acceptance of homosexuality doing to society? Is there an increase to unhealthy sexual conduct since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to child molestation, and paedophilia marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to rape since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to homicide since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to crime, in general, since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to any socially destructive behaviour since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? And, bear in mind you cannot cite the increase of same sex marriage, as an increase in "socially destructive behaviour", unless you can directly link it to some breakdown in society.

Now, if you can demonstrate none of that, the your claim is entirely baseless, without merit, can be discounted unequivically.

All of the ills that you mention are a result of a rejection of God, a rejection of moral standards, and an acceptance of all manner of foul sexual perversions, of which Homosexuality is just one.

When society accepts and embraces immoral behavior, there are adverse consequences. How blind must one be not to see this?

.

All of the ills that you mention are a result of a rejection of God

no, the rejection on moral principle is the 4th century christian bible, the basis for what ills you perceive and accommodate as your own manifested by your afiliated book rather than a representation of the Almighty.

 

[Czernobog]

I would ask you, rather, what demonstrable harm is the acceptance of homosexuality doing to society? Is there an increase to unhealthy sexual conduct since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to child molestation, and paedophilia marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to rape since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to homicide since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to crime, in general, since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? Is there an increase to any socially destructive behaviour since same sex marriage was recognised, that an be directly related through data to homosexuality? And, bear in mind you cannot cite the increase of same sex marriage, as an increase in "socially destructive behaviour", unless you can directly link it to some breakdown in society.

Now, if you can demonstrate none of that, the your claim is entirely baseless, without merit, can be discounted unequivically.

All of the ills that you mention are a result of a rejection of God, a rejection of moral standards, and an acceptance of all manner of foul sexual perversions, of which Homosexuality is just one.

When society accepts and embraces immoral behavior, there are adverse consequences. How blind must one be not to see this?

So, what you're saying is 'No, I can't provide any data to support the claim homosexuality represents an existential threat to society. But, I am fanatically religious, so I will keep claiming that it does, anyway,"

You are dismissed.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

When society accepts and embraces immoral behavior, there are adverse consequences. How blind must one be not to see this?

So, what you're saying is 'No, I can't provide any data to support the claim homosexuality represents an existential threat to society. But, I am fanatically religious, so I will keep claiming that it does, anyway,"

You are dismissed.

It is blindingly obvious, except to those who willfully refuse to see it. Moral decay only breeds more moral decay, which breeds all manner of other societal ills.

Religion has nothing to do with it.

 

[fncceo]

We just want them to quit using the government to enshrine their mythologies in the laws of the land, and we want them to quit indoctrinating young, impressionable children with their made-up bullshit.

It would be fair to say, they want precisely the same thing from you. It's amazing that each of you can't see just how identical you are.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

When society accepts and embraces immoral behavior, there are adverse consequences. How blind must one be not to see this?

So, what you're saying is 'No, I can't provide any data to support the claim homosexuality represents an existential threat to society. But, I am fanatically religious, so I will keep claiming that it does, anyway,"

You are dismissed.

It is blindingly obvious, except to those who willfully refuse to see it. Moral decay only breeds more moral decay, which breeds all manner of other societal ills.

Religion has nothing to do with it.

"Moral decay only breeds more moral decay"


Which includes the assumption that homosexuality is immoral.. By what authority do you claim this?

 

[Czernobog]

We just want them to quit using the government to enshrine their mythologies in the laws of the land, and we want them to quit indoctrinating young, impressionable children with their made-up bullshit.

It would be fair to say, they want precisely the same thing from you. It's amazing that each of you can't see just how identical you are.

Yeah, it is amazing how religious fanatics think that teaching demonstrable facts, science and critical thinking is "indoctrinating".

 

[fncceo]

We just want them to quit using the government to enshrine their mythologies in the laws of the land, and we want them to quit indoctrinating young, impressionable children with their made-up bullshit.

It would be fair to say, they want precisely the same thing from you. It's amazing that each of you can't see just how identical you are.

Yeah, it is amazing how religious fanatics think that teaching demonstrable facts, science and critical thinking is "indoctrinating".

The fact that evolution exists and is responsible for the development of all existing species of flora and fauna is pretty much incontrovertible.

The exact way organic life began on our world is still a matter of speculation. However, it has been demonstrated repeatedly that organic molecules can spontaneously occur.

Those two fact would make it very difficult to argue from a scientific perspective a literal interpretation of Genesis.

However, most of our theories on the origin of the Cosmos are very speculative and based on limited observation and there is much they don't explain about the nature of our Universe. I believe we may have better observations sometime in the far future. But, for now anyway, we're looking at the Universe from the perspective of an ant observing New York City from a hive in Central Park.

So, it's a little early to start telling people they're idiots, or morons, or any other pejoratives for their belief in a supernatural being when clearly that belief cannot be scientifically rejected.

When a religious person condemns you for not believing in G-d it's no difference than an areligious person castigating someone for their belief in G-d. Both attitudes are two faces of the same intolerant coin. There is plenty of room for both points of view or, as most people in the world have, a hybrid of the two concepts.

You're never going to have a productive discussion with people you label as idiots or morons.

 

[Czernobog]

We just want them to quit using the government to enshrine their mythologies in the laws of the land, and we want them to quit indoctrinating young, impressionable children with their made-up bullshit.

It would be fair to say, they want precisely the same thing from you. It's amazing that each of you can't see just how identical you are.

Yeah, it is amazing how religious fanatics think that teaching demonstrable facts, science and critical thinking is "indoctrinating".

The fact that evolution exists and is responsible for the development of all existing species of flora and fauna is pretty much incontrovertible.

The exact way organic life began on our world is still a matter of speculation. However, it has been demonstrated repeatedly that organic molecules can spontaneously occur.

Those two fact would make it very difficult to argue from a scientific perspective a literal interpretation of Genesis.

However, most of our theories on the origin of the Cosmos are very speculative and based on limited observation and there is much they don't explain about the nature of our Universe. I believe we may have better observations sometime in the far future. But, for now anyway, we're looking at the Universe from the perspective of an ant observing New York City from a hive in Central Park.

So, it's a little early to start telling people they're idiots, or morons, or any other pejoratives for their belief in a supernatural being when clearly that belief cannot be scientifically rejected.

When a religious person condemns you for not believing in G-d it's no difference than an areligious person castigating someone for their belief in G-d. Both attitudes are two faces of the same intolerant coin. There is plenty of room for both points of view or, as most people in the world have, a hybrid of the two concepts.

You're never going to have a productive discussion with people you label as idiots or morons.

Actually it's not the same. In fact, "There is no God" is the rational null-position from which scientific research begins. From that position, one looks for falsifiable evidence - objective, observable, verifiable evidence to would demonstrate the null position is false. Without the existence of such evidence there is no reason to abandon that position. If one cannot rationally abandon that position,then it is, in fact, irrational, and unintelligent to posit a claim that a deity for which there has been no rational evidence "created" the universe.

Now, theist circumvent this rational circumvent this rational conclusion by doing what you do, and claiming that this mythical God is "supernatural"; more accurately un-natural - something that is beyond nature. Doing so places God squarely in the realm of zombies, vampires, and ghosts. If one chooses to believe in such fantastic entities, one is certainly entitled to do so. However, do not pretend that such belief is rational, or has the same intrinsic intellectual value as rationally, and reasonably maintaining the, as yet, disproven null position of "There is no God".