View Poll Results: Being a homosexual
Oh ya! i suport! 251 91.94%
ew... 22 8.06%
Voters: 273. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools

Vivian
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!!!
100.20
Vivian is offline
 
#251
Old 12-11-2009, 09:10 PM

Aawh haha that's good.
Well then, don't get married for a long time, some old people get married and that's awesome.

I'm not really sure what's going on with California (I'm Canadian) but I know they had gay marriage and then I was watching Ellen and they voted yes on 8 or something (I dunno) and now are they going to get rid of it again? Better not.
Obama likes gay marriage, maybe that'll help things out.

JFKaito
Dead Account Holder
0.72
Send a message via MSN to JFKaito
JFKaito is offline
 
#252
Old 12-11-2009, 09:19 PM

it better
if not ima move to the uk
its legal there

Philomel
ʘ‿ʘ
3576.36
Philomel is offline
 
#253
Old 12-11-2009, 10:03 PM

Much as I agree with the rest of your post, Vivian, Brown did not do his research when writing his books. He essentially took bits and pieces completely out of context as he needed them in order to support his (admittedly fictional) story. He gets many things completely wrong, and misrepresents others. For instance, his repeated references to the books that were left out of the Bible (not taken out, but left out from the beginning) ignores that many of the books could not be authenticated. It had nothing to do with controversial ideas presented in the books, and everything to do with not wanting to include something in the Bible that was written by Bob a couple days beforehand to promote his views.

Again, I completely agree with everything else you said, I just don't think you should have included that bit because it could be seen as taking away from your post.

JFKaito
Dead Account Holder
0.72
Send a message via MSN to JFKaito
JFKaito is offline
 
#254
Old 12-11-2009, 10:09 PM

ROOR
hi skellieton lady

una
God's own anti-SOB machine.
12907.69
Send a message via MSN to una
una is offline
 
#255
Old 12-11-2009, 11:07 PM

The bible suggests many different types of 'evils'. The problem is that Christianity tends to gloss over these evils because they are outdated and nonsensical i.e it is a sin to eat fish, do not wear clothes made out of wool/linen. Arguable these odd quotes could be intended for deeper interpretation and analysis by the reader but then the type of reader we are discussing is taking biblical text at face value. So these references to certain evils in the bible are ignored yet other references to aspects such as homosexuality are considered legitimate claims. It feels like people are cherry picking what they want to believe in based on convenience; 'I won't stone those people for taking the lord's name in vain but I'll persecute those homosexuals.'

Keyori
Stalked by BellyButton
90.57
Keyori is offline
 
#256
Old 12-12-2009, 12:15 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philomel View Post
Much as I agree with the rest of your post, Vivian, Brown did not do his research when writing his books. He essentially took bits and pieces completely out of context as he needed them in order to support his (admittedly fictional) story. He gets many things completely wrong, and misrepresents others. For instance, his repeated references to the books that were left out of the Bible (not taken out, but left out from the beginning) ignores that many of the books could not be authenticated. It had nothing to do with controversial ideas presented in the books, and everything to do with not wanting to include something in the Bible that was written by Bob a couple days beforehand to promote his views.

Again, I completely agree with everything else you said, I just don't think you should have included that bit because it could be seen as taking away from your post.
You covered what I was going to say about Brown :)

Vivian
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!!!
100.20
Vivian is offline
 
#257
Old 12-12-2009, 04:06 AM

Well I suppose that's true. :3
I was always wondering how he could have gotten all of that information, so I was trying to look into it a little myself.
At the beginning of Angels and Demons it says that all of the historical documents and lalala was all completely true, but the storyline was fictional, so I wasn't really sure about all of that.

I've been discussing the books with a co-worker I have and she bought a book, I don't remember the title, but it was something about the holy grail and where all of that came from and it looks back at other facts..it really sucks that I can't think of the title or the author or else I'd tell you. D:
Then there's the gnostic gospels.

JFKaito
Dead Account Holder
0.72
Send a message via MSN to JFKaito
JFKaito is offline
 
#258
Old 12-12-2009, 04:38 AM

i wanna see the movieeeeee O_O

Philomel
ʘ‿ʘ
3576.36
Philomel is offline
 
#259
Old 12-12-2009, 03:53 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivian View Post
Well I suppose that's true. :3
I was always wondering how he could have gotten all of that information, so I was trying to look into it a little myself.
At the beginning of Angels and Demons it says that all of the historical documents and lalala was all completely true, but the storyline was fictional, so I wasn't really sure about all of that.

I've been discussing the books with a co-worker I have and she bought a book, I don't remember the title, but it was something about the holy grail and where all of that came from and it looks back at other facts..it really sucks that I can't think of the title or the author or else I'd tell you. D:
Then there's the gnostic gospels.
He does use some historical backing, no one's disputing that. However, he does it in order to support a fictional story, a novel, and so distorts many things in order to support his plotline.

There are many books discussing the Holy Grail. The one you're thinking of might be Holy Blood, Holy Grail. However, most of those books start with a premise and try to prove that premise, rather than taking the evidence as a whole and forming a theory based on that evidence.

As for the Gnostic Gospels, there's a lot of issues with those. Mostly what I mentioned earlier -- they cannot be verified. The only one I can think of that was taken out because of subject matter is the one which mentions Jesus pushing a young boy off a roof to his death so he could then resurrect him and prove his miracle-working abilities to a doubting crowd. But then, not even the New Age, anti-Catholic Christians would accept such a story. And you must realize that the Catholic Church did not cover up the Gnostic Gospels. They're still very much around, they just aren't in the Bible most Christians use.

Gnostic Gospels - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Enjoy.

Sizzla
Gangsta Biatch
3568.79
Send a message via AIM to Sizzla
Sizzla is offline
 
#260
Old 12-13-2009, 07:43 PM

JFKaito, this isn't a general chat thread. If you and Vivian want to chat, please make a thread over in Nations. :yes: Let's please keep this on-topic. Thank you!

Librus
⊙ω⊙
341.33
Librus is offline
 
#261
Old 12-14-2009, 06:11 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFKaito View Post
i wanna see the movieeeeee O_O
It's called Prayers For Bobby. I can send you a link to watch it online if you PM me about it. :)

portraitinblack
⊙ω⊙
848.10
portraitinblack is offline
 
#262
Old 12-19-2009, 11:32 PM

This thread is a bit far in, buuuut...

I don't think being gay is a sin. I'm not really religious (/at all/), so I don't know if it actually says that it is a sin anywhere, but like I read in another post, if you believe in God: He loves everyone, He is forgiving, so on so forth.

That said, I'm not really sure you're born gay. I like to think of it as you being born neutral. You don't have a preference for girls, or guys. The human body is complex, and I'll admit that it's possible you could be born gay, but I do prefer the being born neutral idea. Due to the circumstances you're raised, the environment you're around, or just the different aspects of your personality and personal traits you develop, influence your own preference.

I mean, at the age of two, do you know you're gay? I somehow don't think so, though again I suppose I could be wrong. You don't think about stuff like that usually, you just... like what you like, and that's it. And because you're too young to understand what being gay would even mean when you're born, you personally can't know that you've been gay since you were born. Gay since you were aware of liking people in any way, maybe, but not since the moment you came out of the womb. So, until science proves otherwise... I think it's your environment that helps decide.

Examples:
A woman who was raped by a man might then become attracted to women, feeling safer around them.

A woman who surrounds herself with female friends might become attracted to them, because it can be dangerously easy to fall for a friend.

A man who feels inadequate in any way, might become attracted to men because he fears some women would mock him, or not want him.

(I have a friend who is gay, and he's rather short and small in general, seems very young for his age. He's finally reached my height. Anyway, he could be an example of someone who might feel inadequate for not really growing the way other guys have, and feel attracted to other men.)

I'm not saying these are why people are gay, or the only factors, they're just examples I thought up on the spot about how your environment, or the situation you are in, could influence such a decision. Some people might feel like they've been gay for their entire lives, because that's all that they can remember.

As for gay marriage, I consider that a union between two people who love each other. PEOPLE, not specified by gender, so therefore not restricted to only a man and a woman.

Draciolus
(っ◕‿◕)&...
183.75
Draciolus is offline
 
#263
Old 12-20-2009, 08:54 AM

I would have to agree with portrait. Ive got quite a few friends who are gay, some who liked(or thought they liked) girls, and then realised that girls just didnt do it for them. While others, they never liked girls. So as for the question of being born that way or not, I would have to say most likely not. And it being a sin? No, its their life, let them live it as they see. Who is to decide what is a sin or not?(Sorry to anyone who is religious, but thats my view on it...again, dont mean to step on your toes..or religion in this case). Honestly, I would be happy to see them alow gay marriage, then when those friends of mine that are gay end up wanting to tie the knot with someone, I dont need to travel to who knows where just to celebrate their day.

portraitinblack
⊙ω⊙
848.10
portraitinblack is offline
 
#264
Old 12-20-2009, 12:58 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Draciolus View Post
I would have to agree with portrait. Ive got quite a few friends who are gay, some who liked(or thought they liked) girls, and then realised that girls just didnt do it for them. While others, they never liked girls. So as for the question of being born that way or not, I would have to say most likely not. And it being a sin? No, its their life, let them live it as they see. Who is to decide what is a sin or not?(Sorry to anyone who is religious, but thats my view on it...again, dont mean to step on your toes..or religion in this case). Honestly, I would be happy to see them alow gay marriage, then when those friends of mine that are gay end up wanting to tie the knot with someone, I dont need to travel to who knows where just to celebrate their day.

They allow it already in Canada, which is where I live. ...then again, Canada allows pretty much anything these days, so maybe it's not a good thing? Haha. If you've ever seen/heard of the movie "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry", they got married in Canada. (I don't know if there are parts of Canada where it's forbidden though.)

Kyle
*^_^*
10.03
Kyle is offline
 
#265
Old 12-22-2009, 06:30 AM

i find nothing wrong with homosexuality, i mean i have been in love with a man myself, it's the same relationship that i've had with all of my girlfriends just, he's a dude, it's not a sin, it shouldn't be illigal why people think it should is beyond me, i have gay friends who are in love and who have been together and loyal to each other alot longer then alot of my hetero sexual friend couples, and i don't think it's fair for anyone to look at them and tell them it's wrong, that's another thing i don't like about religions, they are mostly all so judgemental towards people who are homo sexual or towards people like me who have long hair and face piercings, i wish the whole world wasn't against homo sexuality, gay haters should be out there trying to stop the use of heroin or something, and stop wasting their life trying to make others miserable.

portraitinblack
⊙ω⊙
848.10
portraitinblack is offline
 
#266
Old 12-22-2009, 03:54 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle View Post
i find nothing wrong with homosexuality, i mean i have been in love with a man myself, it's the same relationship that i've had with all of my girlfriends just, he's a dude, it's not a sin, it shouldn't be illigal why people think it should is beyond me, i have gay friends who are in love and who have been together and loyal to each other alot longer then alot of my hetero sexual friend couples, and i don't think it's fair for anyone to look at them and tell them it's wrong, that's another thing i don't like about religions, they are mostly all so judgemental towards people who are homo sexual or towards people like me who have long hair and face piercings, i wish the whole world wasn't against homo sexuality, gay haters should be out there trying to stop the use of heroin or something, and stop wasting their life trying to make others miserable.
I like how you mentioned drugs in this, because there's just so much worse stuff out there than homosexuality. If people put this much energy and effort into those other problems, imagine how much better off we'd all be! Instead, people are stuck being a bit backward and thinking that we should just follow these rules about the human heart, and we were built more complex than that.

Hayzel
[MiniMee]
2501.90
Send a message via AIM to Hayzel Send a message via MSN to Hayzel
Hayzel is offline
 
#267
Old 12-29-2009, 05:08 AM

I am a Christian and I believe being gay, or having a sexual/couple relationship with another of the same sex is a sin.

Quote:
First of all why would it be a sin if your born that way.
Did you know there are genes associated with being an alcoholic? Many scientists believe the tendency of substance addiction also runs in families. Many people have genetic weakness' we were born with. If you were born with a tendency to like others of the same sex, I believe it is a weakness, but there is still a choice. One of my best friends was born with this "tendency" and fights the temptation to be with another man everyday because he too, believes it's a sin. But it was a tendency he was born with.

Quote:
Second off i know people are going to say that being gay is a choice and its a sin if chose to be so, but who would chose a life of ridicule and ass-kickings.
Why would anyone choose to be gothic? Why would anyone choose to be a Christian? Many people choose something even though they will be outcasted, persecuted, discriminated etc. Also, gays are not under as much persecution as they'd like you to think. Only a minority actually physically persecute the gays. I myself am against being gay, but I don't hate gays, nor would I treat them any differently than any other person. Many Christians fail to understand that a sin is a sin and that in God's eyes, lieing and being homosexual is still a sin and equally disgraceful.

Another thing is, Marriage started as a religious ceremony to celebrate the joining of two people. That is why people marry in CHURCHES. Marriage is the joining of a man and a woman, that is the definition. Even if gays wanted to get "married" they couldn't because they don't fit the definition to begin with. If they want to do something like that, then they can, just don't call it marriage, because guess what, it's not.

reddeath26
*^_^*
7776.88
Send a message via MSN to reddeath26
reddeath26 is offline
 
#268
Old 12-29-2009, 05:25 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Did you know there are genes associated with being an alcoholic? Many scientists believe the tendency of substance addiction also runs in families.
There are a great many myths which Sociobiologists would have you believe about the relationship between genetics and behaviour. This however does not make them true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
If you were born with a tendency to like others of the same sex, I believe it is a weakness, but there is still a choice. One of my best friends was born with this "tendency" and fights the temptation to be with another man everyday because he too, believes it's a sin. But it was a tendency he was born with.
The problem here is that people are not born with their sexual orientations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Another thing is, Marriage started as a religious ceremony to celebrate the joining of two people.
No it didn't.

Tutela de Xaoc
Sapient Rock
374.40
Send a message via AIM to Tutela de Xaoc Send a message via MSN to Tutela de Xaoc Send a message via Yahoo to Tutela de Xaoc
Tutela de Xaoc is offline
 
#269
Old 12-29-2009, 05:26 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
I am a Christian and I believe being gay, or having a sexual/couple relationship with another of the same sex is a sin.
Define sin, and the meaning behind sin or why sin exists. If you say because God says so, I ask you to prove the legitimacy of the Christian Doctrine you use to support your argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Did you know there are genes associated with being an alcoholic? Many scientists believe the tendency of substance addiction also runs in families. Many people have genetic weakness' we were born with. If you were born with a tendency to like others of the same sex, I believe it is a weakness, but there is still a choice. One of my best friends was born with this "tendency" and fights the temptation to be with another man everyday because he too, believes it's a sin. But it was a tendency he was born with.
Many scientists also believe that free will doesn't exist, what your point? If it is a weakness to be gay then you are claiming that they are a dead end to existence. Yet they have existed for just as long as straight humans have. Take the ancient Spartans for example. I argue that homosexuality is one of the many ways that humans have evolved to help control population. Why is being homosexual a sin?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Many Christians fail to understand that a sin is a sin and that in God's eyes, lieing and being homosexual is still a sin and equally disgraceful.
So is eating shell fish, and I believe any kind of pig meat. Also, make sure to sacrifice animals to your God at least on a weekly basis to make sure your God is pleased with you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Another thing is, Marriage started as a religious ceremony to celebrate the joining of two people. That is why people marry in CHURCHES. Marriage is the joining of a man and a woman, that is the definition. Even if gays wanted to get "married" they couldn't because they don't fit the definition to begin with. If they want to do something like that, then they can, just don't call it marriage, because guess what, it's not.
Marriage did not start as a religious ceremony. It started as a way to gain property through unions using the female being wed as a basis, hence the dowry that the father traditionally offers the son-in-law. Or is the dowry religiously influenced as well?
A marriage is simply, and always has been, an institution to unite two people to obtain legal benefits from the union in some way, shape, or form. Whether this be spiritual fulfillment, material possession, etc, it is only a union and does not just have to be limited to a man and a woman. Using your definition of marriage we could say a Father (man) can marry his daughter (woman). This is very obviously not normal practice and quite against the law. Therefore, your definition of marriage is flawed. Lastly, marriages performed in churches are not marriages unless obtaining said marriage certificate by the government. Marriage also, does not have to take place in a church and has not always taken place inside a church. Christianity is not as old as the age of humanity.

Hayzel
[MiniMee]
2501.90
Send a message via AIM to Hayzel Send a message via MSN to Hayzel
Hayzel is offline
 
#270
Old 12-29-2009, 05:39 AM

Quote:
Marriage did not start as a religious ceremony. It started as a way to gain property through unions using the female being wed as a basis, hence the dowry that the father traditionally offers the son-in-law. Or is the dowry religiously influenced as well?
A marriage is simply, and always has been, an institution to unite two people to obtain legal benefits from the union in some way, shape, or form. Whether this be spiritual fulfillment, material possession, etc, it is only a union and does not just have to be limited to a man and a woman. Using your definition of marriage we could say a Father (man) can marry his daughter (woman). This is very obviously not normal practice and quite against the law. Therefore, your definition of marriage is flawed. Lastly, marriages performed in churches are not marriages unless obtaining said marriage certificate by the government. Marriage also, does not have to take place in a church and has not always taken place inside a church. Christianity is not as old as the age of humanity.
The earliest records of marriage were religious ceremonies. Christianity was born from Judaism which has existed as far back as records can be proved. A father and daughter could technically get married yes and if you look it up, pretty much ALL dictionaries define marriage as the union between a man and a woman, not two people.

Quote:
Many scientists also believe that free will doesn't exist, what your point? If it is a weakness to be gay then you are claiming that they are a dead end to existence. Yet they have existed for just as long as straight humans have. Take the ancient Spartans for example. I argue that homosexuality is one of the many ways that humans have evolved to help control population. Why is being homosexual a sin?
Free will is a matter of philosophy, not science.

You are also indicating that weakness' cannot be overcome.

The Spartan society failed.

Homosexuality is a sin because the bible states that it is immoral and sexual immorality is a sin.

Quote:
Define sin, and the meaning behind sin or why sin exists. If you say because God says so, I ask you to prove the legitimacy of the Christian Doctrine you use to support your argument.
Sin is going against the law of God. Sin exists because humanity chose to disobey God.

I ask you to prove the illegitimacy of the Christian Doctrine to support your argument. The Bible was the MOST printed, ancient book and is still the most popular book in the world. Also, all morals come from religious teachings.

Quote:
So is eating shell fish, and I believe any kind of pig meat. Also, make sure to sacrifice animals to your God at least on a weekly basis to make sure your God is pleased with you.
Please do not confuse religions. These statements make it quite obvious you do not know what your talking about.

Tutela de Xaoc
Sapient Rock
374.40
Send a message via AIM to Tutela de Xaoc Send a message via MSN to Tutela de Xaoc Send a message via Yahoo to Tutela de Xaoc
Tutela de Xaoc is offline
 
#271
Old 12-29-2009, 06:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
The earliest records of marriage were religious ceremonies. Christianity was born from Judaism which has existed as far back as records can be proved. A father and daughter could technically get married yes and if you look it up, pretty much ALL dictionaries define marriage as the union between a man and a woman, not two people.
Here's a report on Mesopotamian Marriage. Mesopotamia is known to be the oldest known civilization to exist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Report on Marriage not related to the religions of the Abrahamic God
History Articles
Marriage in Ancient Mesopotamia and Babylonia
by Roberto Naranjo

As the bride approaches the ceremonial altar holding on to the arm of her father, the groom nervously takes a peek at the scene surrounding him. Not far away are the gifts, which shortly will be exchanged. Family members stand proudly around in a festive atmosphere. Is this taking place in upstate New York, a tropical garden in Miami, or a quaint old church in old Montreal? Perhaps, but it could well have happened somewhere in ancient Mesopotamia.

In western society some aspects of modern family relationships and composition can be traced to ancient Mesopotamia and Babylonia. Ideas such as the wedding, marriage, and divorce began developing then. Through innumerable legal documents from the Sumerian to the Seleucid period, we see the individual as father, son, brother, or husband. The root of these relationships started with a proposal, followed by the marriage contract, and ending with the wedding. The young Mesopotamian couple then chose where to live. In certain circumstances, the male had to decide whether to have another wife or a concubine. In no time, the newlyweds begot children. The father, as the head of the family, had complete authority over them. This authority extended to such matters as adoption and inheritance. How big the family unit got depended where in Mesopotamia it formed.

The family unit in Mesopotamia was small and restricted, although in certain regions of southern Babylonia clan like or even tribal organizations of some sort existed. In neo-Babylonian times, a measure of family consciousness appeared in the form of ancestral family names for identification purposes. The first step in creating a family unit, whether small or clan like, is of course the marriage. Ironically, for most of history, it left the prospective bride out of the decision-making process.

Marriage, regarded as a legal contract, and divorce as its breakup were similarly affected by official procedures. The future husband and his father-in-law agreed on a contract and if a divorce occurred, the father-in-law was entitled to satisfaction. The contract made between suitor and the father of the expected bride stipulated a price for the maiden's hand. She received the sum given to the father. If the marriage did not produce children then the price the groom had paid for his wife was returned to him upon on her death, if it had not been returned previously. Lack of children was not the only reason for returning the price paid for the wife; her death could create a refund.
What were you saying about marriage being a religious ceremony again?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Free will is a matter of philosophy, not science.
Free will is a matter of science as scientists argue that you are actually a slave to your brain based off of scientific findings. Regardless this is off topic and I will not discuss it anymore. It was only used to prove a point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
You are also indicating that weakness' cannot be overcome.

The Spartan society failed.
Are you seriously implying that Spartan society failed because they were homosexual? I hope you aren't for your own sake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Homosexuality is a sin because the bible states that it is immoral and sexual immorality is a sin.
Prove to me the Bible is correct before you use it as a legitimate excuse. The Bible is a brainwashing tool at best. It has so many illogical and contradictory evidence in itself that it could hardly be considered a true doctrine, but rather a book of fiction meant to entertain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Sin is going against the law of God. Sin exists because humanity chose to disobey God.
Sin exists because "God" supposedly made it possible for humans to disobey his request and therefore created sin before the humans even made the decision to disobey.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
I ask you to prove the illegitimacy of the Christian Doctrine to support your argument. The Bible was the MOST printed, ancient book and is still the most popular book in the world. Also, all morals come from religious teachings.
Okay, lets start with this. In the Book of Genesis, God created a tree with a fruit that gave the knowledge of good and evil to the one who consumed it. This knowledge of good and evil was already predetermined by this "God" for some reason. One can only guess his intentions. However, nonetheless, this good and evil were indeed created and the knowledge was stored in this particular fruit in this supposedly perfect Garden that was the opposite of this hazardous Earth we live in now. Adam and Eve chose to consume this particular fruit and gain the knowledge stored in it due to the convincing that a supposedly talking snake did. This convincing talking snake, being created by God and being known by God the whole time as God is omnipotent and omniscient. However, they consume this fruit nonetheless and lo and behold what is the first thing they think about?

OMGosh!! I'm Naked! I must get dressed as being naked is inappropriate. Why would being naked be an "evil" thing according to the knowledge stored in the fruit that God created? Would God be saying that being naked is evil? If so, why is it evil? Being naked is required to procreate and I distinctly remember God commanding Adam and Eve to "Be Fruitful and Go Multiply." How is this achievable without first being naked? Is it evil to procreate? If it is, why does God command it? One can only come to the conclusion that either God inherently supports evil acts, or that God is inconsistent in his decisions and is therefore flawed. Now, this is only the very first pages of your Christian Doctrine. This is why I do not consider your Bible a legitimate source as it is full of inconsistency and hypocrisy by the very being you choose to worship.

In my opinion, there is absolutely no reason why being naked in a perfect Garden along with all the other animals would be immoral or "evil" as the fruit had Adam and Eve believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Please do not confuse religions. These statements make it quite obvious you do not know what your talking about.
Please read the old testament. Since the old testament is the only place where it claims homosexuality is a sin, even if it can be interpreted that way, then you must gather all your other rules from the same place. You cannot just pick and choose which parts of the Bible to follow. That would be inconsistent and incorrect.

Hayzel
[MiniMee]
2501.90
Send a message via AIM to Hayzel Send a message via MSN to Hayzel
Hayzel is offline
 
#272
Old 12-29-2009, 06:43 AM

Quote:
Here's a report on Mesopotamian Marriage. Mesopotamia is known to be the oldest known civilization to exist.
Matter of opinion, not fact. And don't tell me that's it's proven because unless you were there I'm not taking your word for it.

Quote:
Are you seriously implying that Spartan society failed because they were homosexual? I hope you aren't for your own sake.
Your were using the Spartans as an example of how homosexuality helped the evolution of a society. I'm simply pointing out that it also failed as a society.

Quote:
Prove to me the Bible is correct before you use it as a legitimate excuse. The Bible is a brainwashing tool at best. It has so many illogical and contradictory evidence in itself that it could hardly be considered a true doctrine, but rather a book of fiction meant to entertain.
Try backing up your statements before you make them. Bible is a book of a religion of faith and you have no more evidence to disprove it than I have to prove it.

Quote:
Sin exists because "God" supposedly made it possible for humans to disobey his request and therefore created sin before the humans even made the decision to disobey.
Sin exists because God gave a choice. This isn't his fault, it's ours. But again, you go off topic.

Quote:
Okay, lets start with this. In the Book of Genesis, God created a tree with a fruit that gave the knowledge of good and evil to the one who consumed it. This knowledge of good and evil was already predetermined by this "God" for some reason. One can only guess his intentions. However, nonetheless, this good and evil were indeed created and the knowledge was stored in this particular fruit in this supposedly perfect Garden that was the opposite of this hazardous Earth we live in now. Adam and Eve chose to consume this particular fruit and gain the knowledge stored in it due to the convincing that a supposedly talking snake did. This convincing talking snake, being created by God and being known by God the whole time as God is omnipotent and omniscient. However, they consume this fruit nonetheless and lo and behold what is the first thing they think about?

OMGosh!! I'm Naked! I must get dressed as being naked is inappropriate. Why would being naked be an "evil" thing according to the knowledge stored in the fruit that God created? Would God be saying that being naked is evil? If so, why is it evil? Being naked is required to procreate and I distinctly remember God commanding Adam and Eve to "Be Fruitful and Go Multiply." How is this achievable without first being naked? Is it evil to procreate? If it is, why does God command it? One can only come to the conclusion that either God inherently supports evil acts, or that God is inconsistent in his decisions and is therefore flawed. Now, this is only the very first pages of your Christian Doctrine. This is why I do not consider your Bible a legitimate source as it is full of inconsistency and hypocrisy by the very being you choose to worship.

In my opinion, there is absolutely no reason why being naked in a perfect Garden along with all the other animals would be immoral or "evil" as the fruit had Adam and Eve believe.
God created the universe, why should he have the power to define good and evil. If we are his creations and exist solely because he spoke us into existence, I think it's fair that he should create the rules of his world. The reference to realizing they were naked was simply an example. The felt ashamed because they were imperfect and tried to cover themselves. Your sarcasm comes across as childish though. Being Naked is not evil, they were ashamed as I said before.

You cannot take everything literally because the bible was not written originally in our language with our customs and mannerisms.

Quote:
Please read the old testament. Since the old testament is the only place where it claims homosexuality is a sin, even if it can be interpreted that way, then you must gather all your other rules from the same place. You cannot just pick and choose which parts of the Bible to follow. That would be inconsistent and incorrect.
I'm honestly surprised you know what's called, since you yourself have obviously never read it. And I don't. There were rules which the Isrealites were required to follow, and those continue to be the rules of Judaism. However, what is considered a sin is in Exodus, the ten commandments. If you read it, one of them is not commit a sexually immoral act, and those are outlined in a different place in the bible.

If you knew the bible, you would know these things.

Keyori
Stalked by BellyButton
90.57
Keyori is offline
 
#273
Old 12-29-2009, 06:43 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
I ask you to prove the illegitimacy of the Christian Doctrine to support your argument. The Bible was the MOST printed, ancient book and is still the most popular book in the world. Also, all morals come from religious teachings.
1) The burden of proof falls upon the person making the claim. You are asserting that the Christian doctrine is legitimate, so the burden of proof falls on you, not Tutela.

2) Popular =/= correct. Also, I should remind you that the Bible has been revised more times than you care to admit, and even the King James version contains errors and omissions. There was also a book before and after it, so you still need to show why the Bible is more legitimate than either.

3) You make the claim that all morals come from religious teachings, so again, the burden of proof falls upon you. Back it up.

Finally, I would like to refer you to this post where I have already demonstrated how the bible does not say ANYTHING relevant about homosexuality as we understand it today, using several relevant sources to back up my claims.

Last edited by Keyori; 12-29-2009 at 06:49 PM..

Kris
BEATLEMANIA
1434.02
Kris is offline
 
#274
Old 12-29-2009, 07:16 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hayzel View Post
Try backing up your statements before you make them. Bible is a book of a religion of faith and you have no more evidence to disprove it than I have to prove it.
Let's learn how debates work today! When someone is debating and they make a statement, for that statement to stand up in debate, it must first be proven.

For example, you say "homosexuality is wrong because the Bible tells me so".
You have something called the "burden of proof" laid upon you. A "burden of proof" is a term used in debates for someone who has to prove a statement that they made.

You claimed that, if the Bible says something is immoral, then it must be immoral. You now how have the burden of proof. It is now your turn to prove to us two things:

1) The Bible is infallible, the word of God, and it should be followed by every human being to live a good, moral life.
And
2) The US should prevent people from having rights based on an ancient holy book.

Please, do both of them. It should be interesting to see you do it, since no one has ever proven these things before.

mwahhaha
Jesus is super rad
1360.30
mwahhaha is offline
 
#275
Old 12-29-2009, 07:31 PM

Why are the only options in the poll so closeminded? It's either "Yes, I support it," or "I'm totally disgusted." While a great deal of people won't fit in either of those camps. What about "I don't care."

Anyways, I love homosexuals, but homosexuality is a sin. I view it as being on par with lieing. I'm not shocked by it. I'm not puking in my mouth or glaring at homosexuals or anything. That's my poll answer. . . were that available.

I'm a Christian, but I don't think it serves any point to argue with people who are so far from sharing the same belief system. I believe homosexuality is wrong because I'm a disciple of Jesus. I don't expect people who aren't to understand that or follow it. So I'm pretty undisturbed by the whole thing.

 



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
 

 
Forum Jump

no new posts