Is It Wrong to Think Homosexuality is a Sin?

[Divine Wind]

Nothing, and that is the point. There is nothing convincing about it for me. My opinion on religion is not "ignorant." I've done a lot of studying into religion. I've read the Bible. I've been to church. I reject those teachings as BS. There is nothing to argue about. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine.

Except the case for religion is convincing.

Which religion? Judaism? Hinduism? Buddhism? Ancient writings are not necessarily religious.

They all have the same core values, but there is only one revealed religion. No other makes that claim.

A where thousands of died fighting to prove.

That has nothing to do with the other religions never making that claim.

Is that the requirement? They have to say so? Interesting.

 

[Syriusly]

i asked you the question that pre-refutes the line of reasoning you're attempting to follow.

its called saving TIME.

Does their existence, or non existence, DEOEND ON ME OR YOU KNOWING they exist, or dont?

That eliminates that line of reasoning before it even starts. Do i need to EXPLAIN THAT TOO?

If you don't know anything which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness, then intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe, right?

which means nothing.

knowing about something or not does not speak to its existence or not


dont you understand that?

It means that intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe.

uh, no it doesnt

it just means "that we currently know of"....not ultimately


thats an assertion, the thing you dont know is a flaw, in your reasoning capability.

Actually that is a fact, GT. You don't know of anything in the universe which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness.

No- just your opinion. Coupled with your faith.

 

[Divine Wind]

does its existence, or non existence.....depend on my knowledge of its existence or non existence?

Ummm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?

God would be the pinnacle of creation.

Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.

But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?

Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.

A favorite ploy by atheists. They claim to have rules, but will never prove what rules they live by or why they should live by any rules.

 

[Divine Wind]

I see a lot of hate, anger and unhappiness. That is what I see.

Yes. Why do you think that is? Are atheists any better at it than theists? Or vice versa? What is the fundamental problem, in your opinion?

 

[Divine Wind]

Your reading comprehension problem is not the result of any confusion on my part.

It is not my reading comprehension. You believe that as an atheist you can tell another who is a believer what they believe in according to 'your' precepts. In that alone you are the one that is confused.

No- again your reading comprehension is the problem.

As I said- and I am glad to stand by it- It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

For being gay.

Prove me wrong if you can.

Prove most posters who post negatively against gays despise gays. I'll give you a few days to collect your thoughts.....then never see you post any evidence. .

Please- if you want to challenge me- at least try to be honest enough to use my actual words- rather than make up things I have said.

Here is what I said:
It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

I challenged all of you to prove me wrong.

Off the top of my head- without evening straining- that includes Stevie the Racist, Tipsy- but I will be glad to share some of the posts of the members of USMB who have cheered the deaths of gays on, or who have suggested that the proper course for gays is to hope that they all die, or are killed- see my signature for that lovely sentiment from Tipsy.

You can't prove your own claim? No surprise there.

Naming a few posters who have said hateful things doesn't equate to such even vague terms like "sizable portion" or equating posting "negatively" with "despise".

Example: It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about Christians - despise Christians.

Now, like you said, "Prove me wrong".

Bump. Sorry, I must have missed your reply since I was working all day.

 

[featherlite]

This topic has been beat to hell and back. What outcome could come from this.
Unless your a christian or a gay person... you probably dont have an informed or experienced based opinion of either side.

 

[Syriusly]

It is not my reading comprehension. You believe that as an atheist you can tell another who is a believer what they believe in according to 'your' precepts. In that alone you are the one that is confused.

No- again your reading comprehension is the problem.

As I said- and I am glad to stand by it- It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

For being gay.

Prove me wrong if you can.

Prove most posters who post negatively against gays despise gays. I'll give you a few days to collect your thoughts.....then never see you post any evidence. .

Please- if you want to challenge me- at least try to be honest enough to use my actual words- rather than make up things I have said.

Here is what I said:
It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

I challenged all of you to prove me wrong.

Off the top of my head- without evening straining- that includes Stevie the Racist, Tipsy- but I will be glad to share some of the posts of the members of USMB who have cheered the deaths of gays on, or who have suggested that the proper course for gays is to hope that they all die, or are killed- see my signature for that lovely sentiment from Tipsy.

You can't prove your own claim? No surprise there.

Naming a few posters who have said hateful things doesn't equate to such even vague terms like "sizable portion" or equating posting "negatively" with "despise".

Example: It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about Christians - despise Christians.

Now, like you said, "Prove me wrong".

Bump. Sorry, I must have missed your reply since I was working all day.

Nope- frankly I have been busy and have forgotten.

It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

As I said- sizable portion hate gays.

Do you have any disagreement that when Tipsy said the one thing she found positive about ISIS was their killing gays- we can agree she 'despises' gays?

I want to make sure we can find any agreement here.

So I will go ahead and start compiling that list for you.

 

[Syriusly]

Ummm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?

God would be the pinnacle of creation.

Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.

But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?

Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.

A favorite ploy by atheists. They claim to have rules, but will never prove what rules they live by or why they should live by any rules.

Okay- show me all the atheists who claim to have rules?

Matter of fact- use me as an example- when have I claimed to have rules- but will never prove what rules I live by.

 

[Taz]

God would be the pinnacle of creation.

Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.

But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?

Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.

A favorite ploy by atheists. They claim to have rules, but will never prove what rules they live by or why they should live by any rules.

Okay- show me all the atheists who claim to have rules?

Matter of fact- use me as an example- when have I claimed to have rules- but will never prove what rules I live by.

Atheists live by the rule of law. Now you know.

 

[LittleNipper]

Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.

But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?

Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.

A favorite ploy by atheists. They claim to have rules, but will never prove what rules they live by or why they should live by any rules.

Okay- show me all the atheists who claim to have rules?

Matter of fact- use me as an example- when have I claimed to have rules- but will never prove what rules I live by.

Atheists live by the rule of law. Now you know.

The 10 Commandments?

 

[Divine Wind]

Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.

But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?

Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.

A favorite ploy by atheists. They claim to have rules, but will never prove what rules they live by or why they should live by any rules.

Okay- show me all the atheists who claim to have rules?

Matter of fact- use me as an example- when have I claimed to have rules- but will never prove what rules I live by.

Atheists live by the rule of law. Now you know.

Like Nazis? The rule of law was killing kikes. Are you good with that? During WWII, the rule of law was to imprison that Japanese? No problem for you there either?

 

[Divine Wind]

No- again your reading comprehension is the problem.

As I said- and I am glad to stand by it- It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

For being gay.

Prove me wrong if you can.

Prove most posters who post negatively against gays despise gays. I'll give you a few days to collect your thoughts.....then never see you post any evidence. .

Please- if you want to challenge me- at least try to be honest enough to use my actual words- rather than make up things I have said.

Here is what I said:
It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

I challenged all of you to prove me wrong.

Off the top of my head- without evening straining- that includes Stevie the Racist, Tipsy- but I will be glad to share some of the posts of the members of USMB who have cheered the deaths of gays on, or who have suggested that the proper course for gays is to hope that they all die, or are killed- see my signature for that lovely sentiment from Tipsy.

You can't prove your own claim? No surprise there.

Naming a few posters who have said hateful things doesn't equate to such even vague terms like "sizable portion" or equating posting "negatively" with "despise".

Example: It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about Christians - despise Christians.

Now, like you said, "Prove me wrong".

Bump. Sorry, I must have missed your reply since I was working all day.

Nope- frankly I have been busy and have forgotten.

It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

As I said- sizable portion hate gays.

Do you have any disagreement that when Tipsy said the one thing she found positive about ISIS was their killing gays- we can agree she 'despises' gays?

I want to make sure we can find any agreement here.

So I will go ahead and start compiling that list for you.

People hate. IMO, mostly out of fear. Still, you seem to relish attacking the religious without looking at the bigger picture. Why?

I know little about "Tipsy" and cannot vouch an informed opinion. I can vouch the opinion that killing anyone for anything is wrong. I'm against the death penalty. I'm also against laws condemning actions between consenting adults.

 

[Syriusly]

Prove most posters who post negatively against gays despise gays. I'll give you a few days to collect your thoughts.....then never see you post any evidence. .

Please- if you want to challenge me- at least try to be honest enough to use my actual words- rather than make up things I have said.

Here is what I said:
It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

I challenged all of you to prove me wrong.

Off the top of my head- without evening straining- that includes Stevie the Racist, Tipsy- but I will be glad to share some of the posts of the members of USMB who have cheered the deaths of gays on, or who have suggested that the proper course for gays is to hope that they all die, or are killed- see my signature for that lovely sentiment from Tipsy.

You can't prove your own claim? No surprise there.

Naming a few posters who have said hateful things doesn't equate to such even vague terms like "sizable portion" or equating posting "negatively" with "despise".

Example: It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about Christians - despise Christians.

Now, like you said, "Prove me wrong".

Bump. Sorry, I must have missed your reply since I was working all day.

Nope- frankly I have been busy and have forgotten.

It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

As I said- sizable portion hate gays.

Do you have any disagreement that when Tipsy said the one thing she found positive about ISIS was their killing gays- we can agree she 'despises' gays?

I want to make sure we can find any agreement here.

So I will go ahead and start compiling that list for you.

People hate. IMO, mostly out of fear. Still, you seem to relish attacking the religious without looking at the bigger picture. Why?.

Frankly I don't have a problem with 'the religious'- I have a problem with 'the religious' who want to tell Americans we should treat gays differently because of some fairy tale they believe in.

I would say about half of my friends are religious- mostly Christian, a few Buddhists and Muslims- I don't have a problem with any of them- nor do I attack their faith. And they are not telling everyone we know that gays should be thrown off of rooftops.

 

[Syriusly]

Prove most posters who post negatively against gays despise gays. I'll give you a few days to collect your thoughts.....then never see you post any evidence. .

Please- if you want to challenge me- at least try to be honest enough to use my actual words- rather than make up things I have said.

Here is what I said:
It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

I challenged all of you to prove me wrong.

Off the top of my head- without evening straining- that includes Stevie the Racist, Tipsy- but I will be glad to share some of the posts of the members of USMB who have cheered the deaths of gays on, or who have suggested that the proper course for gays is to hope that they all die, or are killed- see my signature for that lovely sentiment from Tipsy.

You can't prove your own claim? No surprise there.

Naming a few posters who have said hateful things doesn't equate to such even vague terms like "sizable portion" or equating posting "negatively" with "despise".

Example: It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about Christians - despise Christians.

Now, like you said, "Prove me wrong".

Bump. Sorry, I must have missed your reply since I was working all day.

Nope- frankly I have been busy and have forgotten.

It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

As I said- sizable portion hate gays.

Do you have any disagreement that when Tipsy said the one thing she found positive about ISIS was their killing gays- we can agree she 'despises' gays?

I want to make sure we can find any agreement here.

So I will go ahead and start compiling that list for you.

I know little about "Tipsy" and cannot vouch an informed opinion. I can vouch the opinion that killing anyone for anything is wrong. I'm against the death penalty. I'm also against laws condemning actions between consenting adults.

So you can't have an informed opinion about whether someone 'hates' gays when they say:

Throwing gays off rooftops was the only decent thing Isis ever did.

 

[Syriusly]

God would be the pinnacle of creation.

Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.

But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?

Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.

A favorite ploy by atheists. They claim to have rules, but will never prove what rules they live by or why they should live by any rules.

Okay- show me all the atheists who claim to have rules?

Matter of fact- use me as an example- when have I claimed to have rules- but will never prove what rules I live by.

Maybe I missed your response to this.....

 

[Divine Wind]

Please- if you want to challenge me- at least try to be honest enough to use my actual words- rather than make up things I have said.

Here is what I said:
It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

I challenged all of you to prove me wrong.

Off the top of my head- without evening straining- that includes Stevie the Racist, Tipsy- but I will be glad to share some of the posts of the members of USMB who have cheered the deaths of gays on, or who have suggested that the proper course for gays is to hope that they all die, or are killed- see my signature for that lovely sentiment from Tipsy.

You can't prove your own claim? No surprise there.

Naming a few posters who have said hateful things doesn't equate to such even vague terms like "sizable portion" or equating posting "negatively" with "despise".

Example: It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about Christians - despise Christians.

Now, like you said, "Prove me wrong".

Bump. Sorry, I must have missed your reply since I was working all day.

Nope- frankly I have been busy and have forgotten.

It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

As I said- sizable portion hate gays.

Do you have any disagreement that when Tipsy said the one thing she found positive about ISIS was their killing gays- we can agree she 'despises' gays?

I want to make sure we can find any agreement here.

So I will go ahead and start compiling that list for you.

I know little about "Tipsy" and cannot vouch an informed opinion. I can vouch the opinion that killing anyone for anything is wrong. I'm against the death penalty. I'm also against laws condemning actions between consenting adults.

So you can't have an informed opinion about whether someone 'hates' gays when they say:

Throwing gays off rooftops was the only decent thing Isis ever did.

Sure you can. Does an intelligent person question some asshole who gives a quote, but doesn't link the source? Your opinion, please.

 

[Divine Wind]

Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.

But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?

Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.

A favorite ploy by atheists. They claim to have rules, but will never prove what rules they live by or why they should live by any rules.

Okay- show me all the atheists who claim to have rules?

Matter of fact- use me as an example- when have I claimed to have rules- but will never prove what rules I live by.

Maybe I missed your response to this.....

Stalin and Mao were atheists and had rules.

 

[Divine Wind]

Please- if you want to challenge me- at least try to be honest enough to use my actual words- rather than make up things I have said.

Here is what I said:
It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

I challenged all of you to prove me wrong.

Off the top of my head- without evening straining- that includes Stevie the Racist, Tipsy- but I will be glad to share some of the posts of the members of USMB who have cheered the deaths of gays on, or who have suggested that the proper course for gays is to hope that they all die, or are killed- see my signature for that lovely sentiment from Tipsy.

You can't prove your own claim? No surprise there.

Naming a few posters who have said hateful things doesn't equate to such even vague terms like "sizable portion" or equating posting "negatively" with "despise".

Example: It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about Christians - despise Christians.

Now, like you said, "Prove me wrong".

Bump. Sorry, I must have missed your reply since I was working all day.

Nope- frankly I have been busy and have forgotten.

It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

As I said- sizable portion hate gays.

Do you have any disagreement that when Tipsy said the one thing she found positive about ISIS was their killing gays- we can agree she 'despises' gays?

I want to make sure we can find any agreement here.

So I will go ahead and start compiling that list for you.

People hate. IMO, mostly out of fear. Still, you seem to relish attacking the religious without looking at the bigger picture. Why?.

Frankly I don't have a problem with 'the religious'- I have a problem with 'the religious' who want to tell Americans we should treat gays differently because of some fairy tale they believe in.

I would say about half of my friends are religious- mostly Christian, a few Buddhists and Muslims- I don't have a problem with any of them- nor do I attack their faith. And they are not telling everyone we know that gays should be thrown off of rooftops.

We can agree on authoritarians. We can agree on assholes who seek to tell others what to believe.

Here's the thing: I see no difference between you and some of your friends than the biggest fucking religious asshole hypocrites on the planet.

Please tell me why I should side with you rather than some dipshit religious asshole.

 

[DGS49]

Every major world religion condemns male - on - male sodomy. Like it or not,

(1) homosexual "sex" is a biological adsurdity. The commingling of the digestive system and the reproductive system may induce orgasm, but it's still sticking your dick up another man's ass, and engaging in a grotesque parody of sexual intercourse.

(2) normal men are repulsed by the very idea of homosexual intercourse, in all its forms, even while similar acts with a woman (i.e., oral and anal sex) are considered quite desirable.

(3) no rational moralist believes that there is a human right to copulate with whomever is the object of one's desire, even if that person consents. (E.g., sibling, parent, someone else's spouse, etc.)

(4) traditional religious teachings - even assuming their is no "god" - merely codify the wisdom of a thousand generations. But that wisdom, in brief, is "hate the sin; love the sinner." But the sinner who sins proudly? The sinner who publicly asserts a right and intention to continue in sin indefinitely (aka "gay marriage"), maybe not.

 

[ChrisL]

Please- if you want to challenge me- at least try to be honest enough to use my actual words- rather than make up things I have said.

Here is what I said:
It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

I challenged all of you to prove me wrong.

Off the top of my head- without evening straining- that includes Stevie the Racist, Tipsy- but I will be glad to share some of the posts of the members of USMB who have cheered the deaths of gays on, or who have suggested that the proper course for gays is to hope that they all die, or are killed- see my signature for that lovely sentiment from Tipsy.

You can't prove your own claim? No surprise there.

Naming a few posters who have said hateful things doesn't equate to such even vague terms like "sizable portion" or equating posting "negatively" with "despise".

Example: It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about Christians - despise Christians.

Now, like you said, "Prove me wrong".

Bump. Sorry, I must have missed your reply since I was working all day.

Nope- frankly I have been busy and have forgotten.

It is quite clear that a sizable portion of the posters here at USMB who post negatively about gays- despise gays.

As I said- sizable portion hate gays.

Do you have any disagreement that when Tipsy said the one thing she found positive about ISIS was their killing gays- we can agree she 'despises' gays?

I want to make sure we can find any agreement here.

So I will go ahead and start compiling that list for you.

I know little about "Tipsy" and cannot vouch an informed opinion. I can vouch the opinion that killing anyone for anything is wrong. I'm against the death penalty. I'm also against laws condemning actions between consenting adults.

So you can't have an informed opinion about whether someone 'hates' gays when they say:

Throwing gays off rooftops was the only decent thing Isis ever did.

Well, to be fair, the poster was probably not being serious. People say all kinds of things around here, as you know. And I actually did take the time to follow the quote in your signature line, and she did add "not because they are gay but because they are obnoxious." So it is a bit disingenuous for you to exclude that important part of the quote, no?