For those who believe that homosexuality is genetic (1 Viewer)

[moll.]

The relevancy is central to the argument! Otherwise it's just a case of quote mining whatever you want so that you can justify whatever you want, in the name of whatever you want.

And this is exactly what I've been saying all along!
It doesn't matter whether it's a communist interpreting the Manifesto for the execution of the aristocracy, a Darwinist taking the Origin of Species as evidence that Africans are animals or a Christian reading in the Bible that the murder of an ob-gyn is justified. In all of the cases, it is the practitioner and interpretor of the ideology that is at fault, not the ideology itself. They have all taken what they wanted from the text and used it how they have wanted.
You seem to think that while it's perfectly acceptable to blame scripture for religious violence, but it's not OK to blame any non-religious text for any negetive outcomes which have been blamed upon it.

Their may be counter orders, but you have missed my point. The Theory of Evolution is not a doctrine in the sense that it just a fact, a happening of life. It doesn't profess to know, or help you know, what you need to do to get into Heaven, it's merely something we discovered about our existence. Religious dogma explicitly condemns certain actions, and commands they be punished barbarically. Evolution does no such thing, and I don't see why you are drawing parallels between the two.

And you've missed my point. I'm saying that there is no explicit condemnation of anything in scripture, as almost any verse that condemns something can be countered by a verse seemingly at odds with it. If one were to genuinely read the Bible, the Tanakh or the Qur'an at face-value, you wouldn't actually be a violent fundemantalist, you'd simply be confused. After all, how is one supposed to condemn and shun the non-believers if one is also to love all of God's creatures?

I tell them they're wrong and provide reasons why when they start to shout out their religious drivel, condemning and condoning various actions for no other reason then because it's what God ordered.

And the rational, mature response is to continue to remain civilised and polite when dealing with them, not to mock their beliefs and sink to their level. Can you honestly say you do this?
Kudos, congratualtions and my respect if you do, but if you don't then you're little better than they are, regardless of whether science and logic is upon your side or not.

I do not believe evolution is a doctrine in the same sense that gravity is not a doctrine.

Atheism has no central dogma or practices that it commands - it is merely a belief by an individual that does not influence their actions. Or, you could subscribe to this ill-belief of Atheism as a doctrine: Atheist Doctrine - Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

A central dogma is not a defining trait for a religion. Need I point out that Buddhism, Hinduism and Shintoism have no central dogma. Neither do many nature-based religions.
I would also argue that the central practice of an atheist is to avoid worship of any higher power.
As for not influencing actions, you are clearly wrong there. Would being an atheist influence your decision to go to church? How about prayer?

 

[Durga]

And this is exactly what I've been saying all along!
It doesn't matter whether it's a communist interpreting the Manifesto for the execution of the aristocracy, a Darwinist taking the Origin of Species as evidence that Africans are animals or a Christian reading in the Bible that the murder of an ob-gyn is justified. In all of the cases, it is the practitioner and interpretor of the ideology that is at fault, not the ideology itself. They have all taken what they wanted from the text and used it how they have wanted.
You seem to think that while it's perfectly acceptable to blame scripture for religious violence, but it's not OK to blame any non-religious text for any negetive outcomes which have been blamed upon it.

And you've missed my point. I'm saying that there is no explicit condemnation of anything in scripture, as almost any verse that condemns something can be countered by a verse seemingly at odds with it. If one were to genuinely read the Bible, the Tanakh or the Qur'an at face-value, you wouldn't actually be a violent fundemantalist, you'd simply be confused. After all, how is one supposed to condemn and shun the non-believers if one is also to love all of God's creatures?

Ahh, but it does matter, because scripture explicitly claims to be a source of a morals. The Theory of Evolution does not. While yes, if you read the Bible or any other like it, at face value you would be confused, but only if you held each line to be 'equal' in a sense. It is nearly impossible to not assign more importance to something that God says directly, or Jesus says directly and what not. Therefore since these scriptures claim to be the direct source of morals, they are directly telling people how they should live their lives, and people following these hole-ridden texts, who fail to see through these basic fallacies, should be blamed for taking it upon themselves to injure and kill others in the name of their lord.

And the rational, mature response is to continue to remain civilised and polite when dealing with them, not to mock their beliefs and sink to their level. Can you honestly say you do this?
Kudos, congratualtions and my respect if you do, but if you don't then you're little better than they are, regardless of whether science and logic is upon your side or not.

I cannot honestly say I do this, it's quite hard not to sometimes. Although I fail to see your point, this little 'micro-thread' if you'll call it that was about me stating that religious people are wrong with their views on religion.

A central dogma is not a defining trait for a religion. Need I point out that Buddhism, Hinduism and Shintoism have no central dogma. Neither do many nature-based religions.

The Theory of Evolution is definitely not a doctrine, the same way Einstein's Theory of Relativity is not. But my point is that atheism is not taught in a sense. There are no central principles to atheism. There is no central figure, and no authority on the matter (although some would hold Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennett as authorities). And Buddhism, Hinduism and Shintoism all have a central dogma, which is defined as:

dog·ma   [dawg-muh, dog-] Show IPA
–noun,plural-mas, -ma·ta  [-muh-tuh] Show IPA.
1.
a system of principles or tenets, as of a church.
2.
a specific tenet or doctrine authoritatively laid down, as by a church: the dogma of the Assumption.
3.
prescribed doctrine: political dogma.
4.
a settled or established opinion, belief, or principle.

What defines Buddhism from Shintoism if they both have no doctrine?

I would also argue that the central practice of an atheist is to avoid worship of any higher power. As for not influencing actions, you are clearly wrong there. Would being an atheist influence your decision to go to church? How about prayer?

The central practice of an atheist is certainly not to avoid worship of any higher power, because there is no central practice. Atheists do not worship a higher power because we do not think there is one. It's not so much consciously avoiding, more just not going because I see no reason too. It's sort of like saying part of the Church's doctrine is to consciously avoid going to a synagogue on Friday night and Saturday morning. It's not one of the teachings, they just see no reason to unless there is something happening.

Sorry, I was a bit too general in saying not influencing actions.

 

[HumanDichotomy]

In the end, I actually think that the whole 'biologically determined vs. choice' argument is a moot point. Though I do believe same-sex attraction stems from biology, I also believe that even if it doesn't, that's still not a basis for discrimination, etc. In a Western society we should value freedom of choice, and allow people to live life as they choose (where it doesn't knowingly harm others, of course).

As much as those who oppose homosexuality attempt to paint it otherwise, homosexuality does no harm. The 'harm' comes from a lack of understanding, from divisive lines drawn where there needn't be any, from certain groups' refusal to see same-sex relationships for what they are; loving, consensual relationships between two individuals.

If anything, the choice lies with those who oppose homosexuality, a choice about whether they can truly continue to make a fuss of this 'issue'.

 

[iNegro]

hehehehehe

i(dontlike)Negros neither.



they will be the next ones to go

=D

Nice trollin' thar sir. Sadly I'm White.

 

[Titburger]

In the end, I actually think that the whole 'biologically determined vs. choice' argument is a moot point. Though I do believe same-sex attraction stems from biology, I also believe that even if it doesn't, that's still not a basis for discrimination, etc. In a Western society we should value freedom of choice, and allow people to live life as they choose (where it doesn't knowingly harm others, of course).

As much as those who oppose homosexuality attempt to paint it otherwise, homosexuality does no harm. The 'harm' comes from a lack of understanding, from divisive lines drawn where there needn't be any, from certain groups' refusal to see same-sex relationships for what they are; loving, consensual relationships between two individuals.

If anything, the choice lies with those who oppose homosexuality, a choice about whether they can truly continue to make a fuss of this 'issue'.

This.

I really don't see how there can be anymore discussion on this 'issue' after this post.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

oh lets stop with all these homo threads.

we're here, we're queer. and they're use to it.

 

[jpkhoury]

it must be a genetic disorder of the body as it is an act that is unnatural to human behavour (penis>vagina not penis>penis) therefore as it is something that occurs out of the perimeters of Natural behaveour it becomes a wrongful act, highlighting that it is a disorder of the mind that must be cured tus more research into this deformity is needed

BTW Christians dont hate the people but the homo actions that they do

 

[Lolsmith]

No I am not. I have never supported the notion of outlawing homosexual unions. Refusing to accept them as equal to marriage and putting them on the marriage register, is not the same as refusing to accept them.

You're sailing the failboat, man.

 

[Durga]

it must be a genetic disorder of the body as it is an act that is unnatural to human behavour (penis>vagina not penis>penis) therefore as it is something that occurs out of the perimeters of Natural behaveour it becomes a wrongful act, highlighting that it is a disorder of the mind that must be cured tus more research into this deformity is needed

BTW Christians dont hate the people but the homo actions that they do

I could argue that typing on a computer is an unnatural act, and therefore a genetic disorder. Considering you think harmless genetic orders are so bad, how do you think we evolved to our current state?

 

[Scorch]

it must be a genetic disorder of the body as it is an act that is unnatural to human behavour (penis>vagina not penis>penis) therefore as it is something that occurs out of the perimeters of Natural behaveour it becomes a wrongful act, highlighting that it is a disorder of the mind that must be cured tus more research into this deformity is needed

If it is so unnatural, why did your God, in his omniscience and brilliance, design us so that pleasure can be derived from homosexual sex, hmm?

 

[supercalamari]

Buddhism is still just another religion with the unarguable principles, the closed mindedness, and the dream of living after death.

Actually, Buddhists dream of ending the cycle of life and entering Nirvana, which is essentially to not exist.

stop discussing why these people are fags (mental disease, to be interesting), and start discussing how these people can be saved/cured!!!!!

=D

You need saving from your own hatred.

I would call you a cunt but it seems you possess neither the warmth or depth

You're amazing

you need a cure? bend over and i'll save you.

You're amazing too

 

[supercalamari]

it must be a genetic disorder of the body as it is an act that is unnatural to human behavour (penis>vagina not penis>penis) therefore as it is something that occurs out of the perimeters of Natural behaveour it becomes a wrongful act, highlighting that it is a disorder of the mind that must be cured tus more research into this deformity is needed

BTW Christians dont hate the people but the homo actions that they do

Oh please. In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. The American Psychological Association Council of Representatives followed in 1975.

Also, define unnatural.

Also, define deformity.

Also, I have experienced more hate from 'Christians' then any other group since I came out. Account for this.

 

[Scorch]

Also, I have experienced more hate from 'Christians' then any other group since I came out. Account for this.

Lesbians are awesome.

 

[moll.]

Lesbians are awesome.

Unless she's ugly.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

Lesbians are awesome.

so are gays!

 

[Ampharos93]

hehehehehe

i(dontlike)Negros neither.



they will be the next ones to go

=D

i would hope to hell you're joking.. but currently, i feel sick. wtf is wrong with gays anyway? so you find it weird? i do too, but they deserve their rights!

and negros? really? good god. i hope you choke on your white supremacist words and rot into nothing you filthy filthy man.

 

[zaxmacks]

Whites are the most prosperous ethnicity of all time. Why is it so bad to have pride in that?

 

[Karlmarx]

Also, I have experienced more hate from 'Christians' then any other group since I came out. Account for this.

Christians cannot even prove that God exists. Don't worry about them. Lesbians are the best..


Religion is the opium of the masses.
Karl Marx - Hence, the Christian Fundamentalist, who sits in his shack in Alabama wondering where he can snigger at a nigger, should have little affect on you, if you see them from that light. Now, of course, thats a blind, one sided view of Christians, but I'm merely giving you the thumbs up for being an individual, and not taking shit from people who can't explain themselves.

Nuff Said.

 

[Ampharos93]

Whites are the most prosperous ethnicity of all time. Why is it so bad to have pride in that?

because they became prosperous by pillaging out and screwing up every other ethnicities cultures.

that's not what i'm arguing.. i'm arguing that it's wrong to want negros and homosexuals dead.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

because they became prosperous by pillaging out and screwing up every other ethnicities cultures.

that's not what i'm arguing.. i'm arguing that it's wrong to want negros and homosexuals dead.

who cares about homos

theyre so gheyyyy