I believe in one stance, as a religious person: Don't hurt anybody.

You're not hurting anybody by being homosexual. Other people will try to hurt you, though, for no particular reason. Also, there is no scientific evidence as brain damage or abnormalities causing homosexuality. I don't even understand the conclusion of "Animals do it, that must mean it's a disease, and that means when humans do it, it's a brain disease too!".

On a related topic, I eat relatively kosher (no unkosher meats, no shellfish, no bugs, no meat and milk, and basically eat mostly fruits and vegetables and occasional fish, with the rare kosher meat here and there). I do so because I believe the tradition of Kosher is an important one, a symbolical control of the body, and also to avoid the diseases that are caused by those foods. I don't believe there is any merit in persecuting people because they are different.

If you follow the Bible in a literal fashion, go burn your polyester clothes (no cloth of two fabrics), get fringes on all your clothing, do not work, drive, or turn on appliances during the Sabbath (which is on SATURDAY). Eat kosher, IE, separate refrigerators for meat and milk products, which must all be kosher. Kosher dish-ware with designated milchig (Milk), and fleshig (Meats), and no cross use of these can be allowed. Pareve (neutral food items like fish, eggs, vegetables, fruits, and grain products) can be eaten along with meat or milk, but if Pareve dish-ware touches milchig or fleshig, it then becomes strictly for that food.

Also, you must wear prayer boxes (tefillin) during prayer, on the arms and heads. You must fast of Yom Kippur, from sundown before to Sundown after. You must construct a Sukkah during the Holiday of Sukkot, with an organic roof that allows you to see the sky. You must eat meals in there, and also must shake the Four Species (Etrog, a type of Citron, A bough of a Myrtle Tree, A Willow Branch, and a Date Palm frond) in a specific manner... etc. etc. etc.

And before you bring the old New Testament wiped out the old Testament, remember: "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. " - Yeshua Ben Yoseph (also known as Jesus Christ) - Matthew 5:17

In other words, we don't agree with you, so therefore we are wrong? I can't find the actual name of the fallacy, but it's similar Argumentum ad lazarum, except that it does not deal with wealth.

"Anyone who does not follow god is evil, and therefore, wrong about the inexistance of god."

You know, I'm amazed at the amount of stuff that ties right back to religion. I chose nature, because I think it has (I don't have anything to base my facts off, but I'm sure it's happened) happened naturally.

Well, even if [insert belief system of choice] is real, does that not by definition make it natural(as opposed to supernatural)?

Yeh but then they quote one of the apostles saying that when he died(after he said what you quoted) he created a new covenant, and then the apostle goes on to explain that covenant and never mentions jewish tradition.

Such blasphemy... well, when you do speak to God I'm sure you'll feel bad about this post. Sure, don't hate them for it I agree with that, but it is wrong. And when you have a divine plan and it crumbles at your feet from gay people you'll probably see. The "current" divine plan is not flawed. I would say being gay is part of the plan because everyone is born with their struggles and trials because the point of life is to be tested(for those who believe in God: which i do ) Saying it is divine and flawed in the same sentence is beyond ironic and is total hypocrisy... And do you even believe in God? Cause you make it sound like your anti-God or something...

Uh... problem is, it is all about God so you cannot have a full conversation on the matter without Him. Sure report it but there's nothing wrong with it, you have to cover the whole perspective of the argument or the argument is null and void...

As for my opinion on the initial topic, I believe that you can be born homosexual and you can decide for yourself. Studies show that there are prenadal indications of homosexual people. Girls ring fingers are predominately longer than their middle fingers. If a males ring finger is longer than his middle finger he has an 86% chance of being homosexual(from an actual study where they interviewed aprox. 15000 self proclaimed homosexual individuals). Also 76% of the males tested had counter-clockwise swirls in their hair. Does this mean if you have both of those you are gay? no but it just shows there are lots of factors. I also think that people who suffer from childhood trauma are more likely to be homosexual.

Thats my opinion anyways.

And you call what he said blasphemy? I'll have to take this one at a time.


Why is it wrong? Give me a better answer than "because it is" and I'll be very impressed.


What the fuck?


Give me a better reason for this than "because it can't be" and I'll once again be very impressed.


Wait, so it's part of god's plan, but it is wrong, but god's plans cannot be flawed? Do I have that all correct?


Why can something divine not be flawed? Once again, give me a better reason than "because it can't be" and I'll be very impressed.

First off, can I get something straight? Do you believe in God? And second off, I don't really have to give you any answers at all if I don't want to do I? hmmm... nope! but there is one matter I would like to touch on:

There was really no need to take that one step at a time if this was all you were going to say now did you? And another little flaw in your overly reiterated question, couldn't I just reverse that same question on you? Cause the thing about these debates is there isn't any set answer that can sway your perspective because if you don't believe in the bible then it's all opinion. And I honestly couldn't care less if I impress you, because I'm not a circus performer

Oh and one more thing:

uh... isn't all sin wrong? Yeah because he can't just protect us from everything or it defeats the purpose of life itself which is to learn and grow. If all sin was taken from the earth there wouldn't be a purpose, and that was Satan's plan if you did your homework. Therefore,supporting my point that sin and transgression are part of God's eternal plan. If all of your beliefs are built around this then you are sorely mistaken...

No, you couldn't reverse it on me, you are the one making the claim, not me.


No, there isn't a set answer, but you can make a decision that yields the most evidence. Which is what people are doing here, and if you start making claims and calling things people say blasphemous, I am perfectly in line to challenge you.


That is the "because it is" answer, thanks.

Hey how about you say something meaningful to the topic instead of just trying to shoot down other peoples opinions..... Your replies aren't even relevant to what I said.

Edit:
If you noticed there is supporting evidence which, from a "logical standpoint"(which seems to be your favor) makes it deeper than just a "because it is". I'm not like your mom saying "because I say so", I'm backing it up with statements that are actually relevant to the topic and relevant to my posts.

Oh also, I technically could reverse it on you because you are challenging my claim therefore you are reinforcing the opposite claim.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Oct 9 2007, 12:07 am by Jello-Jigglers.

It's called debate buddy. Anyone with eyes can see everything I'm saying here is just as meaningful as anything you are saying.


Where is said evidence? You've yet to provide any.


Congratulations. I would hope your statements are relevant to the topic, or else you'd just be spamming. I would also hope your statements are relevant to your posts, otherwise I don't know what the fuck you would be doing. (your statements are you posts... hello?)


Flat out lie. Me challenging your reasoning when I have yet to see any is clearly relevant to everything you said.

Ok you can challenge my posts but don't call me a liar. All of your posts are full of snide remarks with disdain dripping from your teeth. Sarcastic, and at best a waste of time to even read. Challenge away, but name calling is childish and should be left at the door. The graphic designated to this forum is a brain, denoting this for the intelligent and mentally mature, if you can't keep it real then you really shouldn't post here.

While reading Dapper's posts has gotten on my nerves a couple of times...
Those ones up there aren't bad.
If you want to talk about 'intelligent and mentally mature,' how about you stop question-dodging? Kinda ruins the whole point of debate.

As he already said, they are relevant. They're arguing against your position directly.
There are two major ways to establish a point - to present your own evidence, or to break down your opponents'. He's simply following the second of those two paths, as you are the one trying to claim things that cannot be tested, observed, or utilized meaningfully.

Firstly, not necesarily. Secondly, as I said, you're making claims that others have no way of finding on their own ( assuming copies of the Bible don't drop onto their heads from the sky ) . The 'opposite claim' is that these things that we have no reason to believe in aren't true. It may not be evidence, but it invalidates your claims, and if true, makes them unsuitable means for finding moral ground.

Only if you take his responses out of context.
If I respond to, 'Coffee is dark to the point of being effectively black,' and '2+2=3,' with the same statement of, "Evidence please," then the person I was asking that of quite well could give me evidence for coffee being effectively black. He wouldn't have evidence for the flawed addition, however.

Maybe you shouldn't lie if you don't want to be accused of it. Not to mention that whole second sentence is fabricated. I never name-called either, I called something you said a lie, and it was... You're the one dodging the questions and calling me unintelligent and mentally immature, however you may try to not say it directly (aka name calling). EzDay said everything else. He is one cool dude.

That statement was said exactly as I meant it. Nonetheless it wasn't name calling it was a statement with a relation to you attached... That statement is meant for all, not just you , and even as you may think everything I have been saying is directed towards you, you are mistaken. I mean that all of those people cracking jokes and simply detracting from the debate shouldn't post here. Now as I actually am speaking directly to you Dapperdan, you stating what I said was a "flat out lie" implies I am a flat out lier so who is the one indirectly calling names?..... Though I still wish to hear back from you because I'm actually enjoying this.

Personally, I think it's a mixture of both nature and nurture, much like Diabetes. People may or may not be born with more of an inquisition, a "family history" if you will, towards homosexuality, but a lot of the determining factors are in society as well. If you're at a disposition for diabetes, and you consume large amounts of sugar a lot, you're even more likely to develop diabetes. If you're good about your sugar intake, you are less likely to develop said disease. The same can be said about homosexuality. Some people might have this "chemical imbalance" that so many speak of. If brought up in a society that accepts gays (much like our current one), then they're much more likely to "develop" homosexuality than if they're in a society, a diet, that suppresses these feelings.

Wow. I make homosexuality sound like an epidemic.

It is. I think it is becoming more of a social norm to be gay so it is possible some people aspire to be gay. Whereas, before, it used to be unheard of or not popular so people would either hate it or, if they were gay, they would hide and surpress their true feelings.

No, it isn't. It implies nothing but the fact that you lied. It's spelled "Liar", btw.


This was direct towards me. You refered to me immediately at the beginning of your post with "you" (you certainly were telling me not to call you a liar, that is clear) and never changed whom you were directing your statements after that. You just continued saying "you" which means there is no way it could be intrepreteted in any other way. So, therefore, the following is all a load of crap, not to mention contradicting.


Then there's this:


No one else had posted in a while, and you had been replying directly to something I said. You can't just start refering to random people with pronouns when you've never even brought them up in the first place. This conversation is going nowhere, you give no reasoning to anything you say, the end. I'm done replying to you unless you say something I feel I haven't already addressed or may actually include some type of reasoning.

Wo chill out. All of which was an error on my end of the argument. I really didn't mean to call you names and the way I ordered the things I did, I can see now, really made it look like that. I didn't mean for you to take it so personal, would you like a personal apology? (note that I really am being serious without any hints of humor in these next lines)

I apologize for saying things that made you upset and I would like to publicly retract everything I have said. I now realize it isn't my job to say who gets to post in this forum or make judgments on people that have posted. I'm sorry.

I didn't take it personal necessarily, but I was simply making my point as to what actually happened. Nonetheless, I'm glad to see you can realize when you may be wrong, it is a great characteristic to have. Yes, you don't have the right to say who gets to post, and you probably shouldn't make judgements, but that wasn't the real issue. The real issue was the in which you did it and that you made flaws in your arguements a couple times. Glad this is settled. Usually, I would point out where I was wrong in this instance too, but I don't think I was that bad here.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Oct 10 2007, 10:24 pm by Dapperdan.

Guys. Stop with all the flaming. Take it to PM's. We don't care about it here.

Now: Anyone want to reply to my post posted earlier? I thought it was quite insightful.