XOR Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 Is it just me or does it seem like Kerry is pulling all of these "plans" of his out of his ass just for the sake of getting a vote? For some reason it seems like he doesnt really know what the hell hes talking about and hes just saying these things just to make Bush look bad. I remember this one time I got a phone call and it was a recording of his voice saying to "Help me get Bush out of the white house!" like Bush was some evil emperor. It just seems like he has some kind of warpped view of reality. Maybe if he would explain how raising taxes on what he said in the debate was ".1%" of the American population and lower taxes of the middle class and still be able to pay for all of his "plans" and still lower the deficit by 50% Personally for me it would have made more sense if he either said he would not do anything and just keep taxes low or if he would raise everyone's taxes and his "plans" would be what we were paying for(not that his plans would work and if you have seen them you would understand what I mean) but no he wants to have his cake and eat it too... and im sure he has never really read the bible lol "gay people are gay because god made them that way" yeah right thats not what it even says in the bible you cant just make stuff up like that, thats stupid. dunno I dont think I could trust kerry even if he did win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostInSpace Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 Nope, it's not just you. Just look at his wife and her comments! I'm sorry but I just can't in my wildest nightmares see her as First Lady OMFG or Kerry as president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XOR Posted October 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 thats like the moral defunct america right there lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Schacher Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 It's not you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 quote:Originally posted by nomad: Reading the Bible to understand & define homosexuality ? Which one, the old or the new Testament ? Homosexual behavior isn't only limited to the human kind. More than 300 animal species have been observed and documented when displaying homosexual behavior, and I am not speaking about the less developped ones because these include even dolphins. On computer tomography scans, many homosexuals display an increased communication zone between the two hemispheres of the brain, similar to the physiological cerebral difference of women versus men. I find legitime that religious people attempt to mix their faith to a wide variety of subjects. However, when science irrevocably identifies a difference in neuronal tissues associated with a given particular behavior, I really don't see anymore which role may faith play, except subjectively interpret an information originated by pure physic devices relying on magnetic fields and/or particles emission/reception. For most of us, reality is one & absolute, and we take our physical size, our intrinsic nature & beliefs as reference. But reality is more than that. A wall may seem solid to you, but if you were an high-frequency photon or better, a neutrino, you would encounter only empty space. It's not because you are a human that high-energy photons and neutrinos don't exist. But you just don't think about it when hitting the wall. For most of us, reality is what we identify as existing in our individual way of interacting during our lives. Unfortunately, that's only a minimal share of the objective reality. That is scientific nonsense, and that homosexual study has been denounced by other scientists as unprovable in any way shape or form. Other scientists have done the SAME experiment, and can't come up with the same results. There is NO definitive study that has shown that Homosexuality is anything but a choice. Religions around the world have stated that homosexuality is a sin, that it is wrong. And most religions will also tell you that HUMANS are NOT animals, we are civilized and know right from wrong. I am not going to get into A discussion with you about homosexuality Nomad, because I find the whole practice offensive, as well as medically, 2 men having "relations" is a VERY bad thing, no matter what sexual couselors have told you. I know a number of homosexuals, and we get along fine, as long as I don't ask, and they don't tell. They need to stay in the closet. and quit trying to make their lifestyle choice acceptable, when it never will be. When a MINORITY can force it's beliefs as acceptable on a society that has traditionally looked down upon that behavior, then that society will soon end. It is no longer the society it once was, and is rushing towards it's own destruction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XOR Posted October 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 nomad, im not trying to tell you what to believe im just saying john kerry said in the debate that people are gay because thats how god made them since he used god then it is now a religious issue in which case it does not say in the bible (this is where we get all of our information on god) that god made people who are gay... and anyone who actually knows what is written in the bible and didnt already know that john kerry was an idiot surely do now >:] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shingen Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 quote:Originally posted by nomad: Homosexual behavior isn't only limited to the human kind. More than 300 animal species have been observed and documented when displaying homosexual behavior, and I am not speaking about the less developped ones because these include even dolphins. On computer tomography scans, many homosexuals display an increased communication zone between the two hemispheres of the brain, similar to the physiological cerebral difference of women versus men.I think that if you do enough research, you'll find that ANY sexual activity reproduces this very thing. I doubt that there is any web-link, but I remember reading a book some years ago, that said that persons engaging in bestiality and necrophilia were able to produce the same serotonin and endorphin levels as persons engaging in heterosexuality and homosexuality (how they measured this, I leave to your imaginations). However, if we follow through with your assumptions that humans are basically animals, then I'm sure that we can also agree on these points: Violence and bloodshed in protection and expansion of territory is acceptable. The strong should dominate the weak and the weak should die to make room for the young. All resources belong to the strong. The weak have no rights to anything except starvation and death. The strong (male) may spread his seed and impregnate any female that he can dominate. If there is a opposing male, violence and death are acceptable to maintain dominance of the female. Life is cheap. As long as the species survives, the individual is expendable. quote:I find legitime that religious people attempt to mix their faith to a wide variety of subjects. However, when science irrevocably identifies a difference in neuronal tissues associated with a given particular behavior, I really don't see anymore which role may faith play, except subjectively interpret an information originated by pure physic devices relying on magnetic fields and/or particles emission/reception. For most of us, reality is one & absolute, and we take our physical size, our intrinsic nature & beliefs as reference. But reality is more than that. A wall may seem solid to you, but if you were an high-frequency photon or better, a neutrino, you would encounter only empty space. It's not because you are a human that high-energy photons and neutrinos don't exist. But you just don't think about it when hitting the wall. For most of us, reality is what we identify as existing in our individual way of interacting during our lives. Unfortunately, that's only a minimal share of the objective reality. Some people believe that the universe is a hologram. That physical "reality" is an illusion created within the brain, and that REAL "reality" is nothing more then patterns of energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Schacher Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 The question of homosexuality in the Bible is first introduced by Moses' law in Leviticus. Read it for yourselves and then discuss what it says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfheart Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Shingen: then I'm sure that we can also agree on these points: Violence and bloodshed in protection and expansion of territory is acceptable. The strong should dominate the weak and the weak should die to make room for the young. All resources belong to the strong. The weak have no rights to anything except starvation and death. The strong (male) may spread his seed and impregnate any female that he can dominate. If there is a opposing male, violence and death are acceptable to maintain dominance of the female. Life is cheap. As long as the species survives, the individual is expendable. Makes perfect sense,but if started we should continue; there is nothing wrong in weak trying to survive by any means necessary-for example by taking the initiative. ones (society) defending its own ideals is as right as the others attacking for it.NO matter what that ideal is,as an idea is ultimate only for the ones who believe it(ones shouting louder wont change it). strength of an idea is strength of its believers, so if there are enough homos to make people recognize and accept homosexualism concept,its right, NO MATTER whether OTHER ANIMALS DO IT OR NOT(or no matter what any godly book writes about it ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shingen Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Wolfheart: strength of an idea is strength of its believers, so if there are enough homos to make people recognize and accept homosexualism concept,its right, NO MATTER whether OTHER ANIMALS DO IT OR NOT(or no matter what any godly book writes about it ). Yeah, you could also make the same rationalization for Pedophiles, Necrophiliacs, Sadists and Rapists as well. Are you willing to open Pandora's Box? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfheart Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Shingen: quote:Originally posted by Wolfheart: strength of an idea is strength of its believers, so if there are enough homos to make people recognize and accept homosexualism concept,its right, NO MATTER whether OTHER ANIMALS DO IT OR NOT(or no matter what any godly book writes about it ). Yeah, you could also make the same rationalization for Pedophiles, Necrophiliacs, Sadists and Rapists as well. Yes I do...I not talking about leaving those guys alone on the contrary anyone should do what they feel like, as its normal(ideas fight and die-just like their followers- and its not gonna stop),if you think homos,rapists ,whatever are your communities enemy(thus yours) you have every right to try to eleminate them.What I was trying to say was that I dont think we should determine their righteousness by looking to nature or books(i.e. "animals have homos,humans have homos so homos are right" argument is logical as "animals do not cook food,humans do so humans are wrong");history will prove them right or wrong(you know the saying "winners are always right"). quote:Are you willing to open Pandora's Box? Im not afraid of thinking,no matter where my thoughts will lead me to... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Schacher Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 quote:If the spirit of this text was to protect the moral integrity of human, then this only corresponds to impose an arbitrary opinion without any attempt to adress the causes of behavioral disorders and understand its implications & consequences in order to achieve tolerance. That's asking a lot from an ancient people. If you move onto Numbers and Deuteronomy, where the laws are repeated several times, I believe they also go into incestual relationships, e.g., sleeping with aunts, brothers' wives, mothers/fathers, etc. Also, Leviticus describes the Jewish dietary laws. All this leads me to agree with some of both of your points: 1) the Jewish dietary laws were certainly to protect the "physical human integrity" by documenting what was healthy to eat and what was not, and 2) the familial laws were meant to protect the "moral integrity of human" development. Today, people don't die from eating the foods that were forbidden in the Old Testament. I'd probably say that the foods described (pork, etc.) require thorough cooking in order to prevent salmonella, which may not have been known back then. Also, there were some ritual reasons for not eating certain foods, too. Regarding the laws on sexual activity (and they also include divorce and remarriage, inheritance, etc), one reason for having them in the Bible as forbidden activity is that they must have been rampant at the time and it was felt that there needed to be more structure in society in order to flourish. The biggest thing to consider when reading the old texts is that the total population was a fraction of what it is today, and the known territory was a fraction of today. Today's society can absorb alternate lifestyles in a way that the ancient societies could not. This is just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Wolfheart: quote:Originally posted by Shingen: quote:Originally posted by Wolfheart: strength of an idea is strength of its believers, so if there are enough homos to make people recognize and accept homosexualism concept,its right, NO MATTER whether OTHER ANIMALS DO IT OR NOT(or no matter what any godly book writes about it ). Yeah, you could also make the same rationalization for Pedophiles, Necrophiliacs, Sadists and Rapists as well. Yes I do...I not talking about leaving those guys alone on the contrary anyone should do what they feel like, as its normal(ideas fight and die-just like their followers- and its not gonna stop),if you think homos,rapists ,whatever are your communities enemy(thus yours) you have every right to try to eleminate them.What I was trying to say was that I dont think we should determine their righteousness by looking to nature or books(i.e. "animals have homos,humans have homos so homos are right" argument is logical as "animals do not cook food,humans do so humans are wrong");history will prove them right or wrong(you know the saying "winners are always right"). quote:Are you willing to open Pandora's Box? Im not afraid of thinking,no matter where my thoughts will lead me to... Thinking is one thing, DOING is something else altogether. Homosexuality has been always looked upon as something unnatural. Until recently that is. Human Beings are NOT animals, we know what is right, and what is wrong. 2% of the population, and that is giving it LOTS of leeway, it is more like 1%, is homosexual, why should society as a whole recognize the actions of that small a minority as something natural, or good? Why should the government condone such behavior. You have EVERY right to do it, but keep it private where it belongs, it is YOUR private life, I do not assail people with my sexual life, why should I be assailed with thier's? Why should they get special rights because of their sexual behavior, it is NOT like skin color or what sex you are. It is an abhorrent behavior that has been put into the closet by our society for 5000 years. These various shades of gray that I am seeing nowadays, is EXACTLY what destroyed the Roman empire. When wrongs become right, and right becmoes wrong, laws etc mean nothing, you end up with Anarchy. THere must be rules in a society, in order for it to exist peacefully etc. When a VOCAL minority becomes more important then the silent majority, then you have a MAJOR problem with that society. When 78% vote against Gay marriage, which is a special right BTW, and a Judge can turn around and cancel it with a word, the society has a problem. It is no longer a representative republic, but a dictatorship. When a minorities sexual behavior allows them rights, you have a major moral problem within that society. Not only that, but where does it end, if it is OK for 2 men to have sex, then what about a man and a boy? This is happening by the way, you know NAMBLA? They are trying to make the age of consent for boys 14. What about Necrophilia? will that become OK as well? How about sex with children, no matter what sex etc? Where will you draw the line? Will it end with Homosexuality? NO, it won't..... There must be a line drawn where that cosiety will not go, and that line was crossed a while ago, and the slippery slope speeds up. It happens EVERY time, not just sometimes, not just every once in a while, but ALWAYS. This is the middle of the end, not just the beginning, it is another indicator of a society in the last days of it's descendancy. We have crossed over the hill, and are speeding down the other side to our destruction. Europe has surpassed us in this regard, and is farther and closer to it's ultimate demise, and we will follow behind them. History sucks, because it tells us exactly what is happening. you see, it has happened before, and WILL happen again. History repeats itself because no one listened the first time. and we NEVER listen, we just keep on repeating the same mistakes, OVER, and OVER, and OVER again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XOR Posted October 24, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2004 it is because we are not wise enough to be free and yet we are... its sad so so sad oh well it we all inevitable anyways all physical things will decay eventually... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 24, 2004 Report Share Posted October 24, 2004 That reminds me Xor, the 2nd law of Thermodynamics sucks too!! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soback Posted October 24, 2004 Report Share Posted October 24, 2004 The Bible is like writen history. That's why it was written down, it says that if you do the things it tells you not to then it leads to a downfall, people read it but dismiss it as religuous mumbo jumbo, ok fine, how about other written history, well, people don't even pay attentionn to that, "what history, we have that? forget it, where's my government paycheck and what time is Jerry on tonight?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfheart Posted October 24, 2004 Report Share Posted October 24, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: You have EVERY right to do it, but keep it private where it belongs, it is YOUR private life, I do not assail people with my sexual life, why should I be assailed with thier's? Im not homo,I dunnu how you made that up,I just dont like people playing judges on such subjective concepts.just for the records quote: Human Beings are NOT animals, we know what is right, and what is wrong. Its your belief and you may stick to it as you like but RIGHT and WRONG are subjective(i.e.There are NO certain rights or wrongs only YOUR rights and wrongs) quote: They are trying to make the age of consent for boys 14 Im not aware of any solid definition of "boy",its just another artificial(and again subjective) definition. Nations need to die and new ones be found,this is whats making earth spin.If they didnt we would have serious problems.Humans change faster than laws-thats whats destroying nations and making new ones- all your arguments which you speak of as it was the ultimate truth will CHANGE(ironically new people like you will defend those new ideas blindly,and they will become ultimate truths of that age) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Zwycky Posted October 26, 2004 Report Share Posted October 26, 2004 Steve, while I respect your opinions on most issues, I find myself unable to agree with you here. It is true that the dietary and sacrificial/ritual laws of the covenant Moses introduced had built-in obsolescence, in that the covenant would be replaced with a new one (Jeremiah 31:31-34), which Jesus himself said he came to establish. (Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20) However, in doing so he didnÔÇÖt repeal the moral laws, instead strengthening them, even specifically the sexual ones (Matthew 5:27-32, Matthew 9:3-9, Luke 16:18). The bibleÔÇÖs message has always been at odds with the surrounding culture, even with the culture it came from (Matthew 23:37, the number of verses I could use to support this statement run well into triple figures), and even with ÔÇÿChristianÔÇÖ ones. If someone makes a strong moral stand, whether they are right or wrong, they will always be ridiculed and/or hated by at least some in every culture, it only varies as to which moral issues provoke the biggest reaction. Every culture has itÔÇÖs own favourite vices and double-standards, which they regard as minor and excusable, while they view those of other cultures as vile and detestable. The Bible sets a higher standard than them all, and people donÔÇÖt like having their faults exposed. The correctness of a statement or idea has nothing to do with how culturally acceptable it is. As an illustration, The Sawi tribe in New Guinea until recently (IÔÇÖm not sure if they still do) held up deceit as their highest virtue. Their all-time No.1 cultural hero was someone who took a long time cultivating a friendship with his neighbour, then ate him. When they were visited by a Christian Missionary, who tried to tell them about Jesus, ideas like love and forgiveness had no appeal to them, while the story of JudasÔÇÖs betrayal got them all excited, and he became their new No.1 hero for shrewdly penetrating JesusÔÇÖ trusted inner circle and then betraying him to an agonising and humiliating death. Does this mean that the Bible is wrong in saying that deceiving, betraying and murdering your neighbours is morally wrong? It was perfectly acceptable behaviour in that culture. Further, morality is never an isolated personal matter. Every moral choice you make has an impact on someone else, and will influence their future moral choices, which will influence other peopleÔÇÖs future moral choices and so on. The ripples go out much further than you realise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now