And you see that's another problem, you claim these texts have so much depth and all that bullshit and yet the bible never clearly defines what sin is, how does god expect us then, to not sin? I can agree with your definition of sin but as I said, homosexuality does not fit in there.
1 John 3:4: Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.  That's not an explanation of what a sin is... The Bible defines sin at least in part as a violation of one of its prohibitions. It ultimately makes the claim that these actions a deviations from fundamental truth aka universal law. The question you seem to be asking, however, is a rational explanation for why certain actions are sin. Why certain actions are violations of universal law. That is not always an easy question to answer. It requires a full analysis of the impact of a sin across time. We must determine what consequences were avoided by avoiding the sin in the past, the impact of the sin in the present and project its consequences into the future. It should be an easy question to answer and the bible should answer it clearly, why would a god expect people to follow his laws when they are senseless and without logic? You know exactly what I'm asking and you are not able to provide evidence on why homosexuality is bad (pd: it's not). Even if it was bad that would still not be a good reason to kill them. The bible is garbage, just admit it already. |
|
|
|
It is all arbitrary.
If one truly embraces the view that it is all arbitrary then one might conclude that morals themselves are subjective constructs rather then objective truths. Then of course there is no such thing as sin. Every crime is morally permissible. Secular laws become arbitrary behavior constraints nothing more. On the other hand if one takes the position that objective morality exists then it follows that there is such a thing as sin. At a minimum it is objectively immoral behavior. And yet homosexuality is none of those, it is not a bad idea or harmful at all, it's like saying some people prefer blondes over brunettes, that's not harmful, it's just preference, so we can conclude that homosexuality should not be a sin and yet it is?
If you want to understand objectively why something is a sin you first have to define sin. Then you have to figure out a way to map that definition onto the behavior. We should start with something easy like adultery because most people intuitively agree that adultery is wrong. If we can't figure out objectively why something simple like adultery is a sin we are unlikely to succeed with something difficult like homosexuality. Do you have any objections to the definition of sin above? We need to reach at least a partial agreement on what sin is before we can hope to determine if an action constitutes sin. And you see that's another problem, you claim these texts have so much depth and all that bullshit and yet the bible never clearly defines what sin is, how does god expect us then, to not sin? I can agree with your definition of sin but as I said, homosexuality does not fit in there. 1 John 3:4: Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness. That's not an explanation of what a sin is, did you even read my post? |
|
|
|
It is all arbitrary.
If one truly embraces the view that it is all arbitrary then one might conclude that morals themselves are subjective constructs rather then objective truths. Then of course there is no such thing as sin. Every crime is morally permissible. Secular laws become arbitrary behavior constraints nothing more. On the other hand if one takes the position that objective morality exists then it follows that there is such a thing as sin. At a minimum it is objectively immoral behavior. And yet homosexuality is none of those, it is not a bad idea or harmful at all, it's like saying some people prefer blondes over brunettes, that's not harmful, it's just preference, so we can conclude that homosexuality should not be a sin and yet it is?
If you want to understand objectively why something is a sin you first have to define sin. Then you have to figure out a way to map that definition onto the behavior. We should start with something easy like adultery because most people intuitively agree that adultery is wrong. If we can't figure out objectively why something simple like adultery is a sin we are unlikely to succeed with something difficult like homosexuality. Do you have any objections to the definition of sin above? We need to reach at least a partial agreement on what sin is before we can hope to determine if an action constitutes sin. And you see that's another problem, you claim these texts have so much depth and all that bullshit and yet the bible never clearly defines what sin is, how does god expect us then, to not sin? I can agree with your definition of sin but as I said, homosexuality does not fit in there. |
|
|
|
You can do it by common sense, all of the planets and stars are round, and when you go up on a plane you can see the horizon curving like a ball.
1. A light in the sky is not the same as the Earth beneath your feet; that comparison is beyond apples and oranges. 2. The windows in an airplane are curved and cause a barrel distortion in the image you see. Yeah, nice argument, every window and camera is always distorted, rofl. Show me a flat airplane passenger window. Show me a wide angle lens that doesn't cause barrel distortion. I can show you pictures and videos of earth from space. You claim: 1. A giant mirrored dome above our heads. No pictures/videos of it 2. No pictures/videos of the flat earth 3. No pictures/videos of the holographic device that projects all the projections you claim are there. I assume a projection has a device somewhere that projects it |
|
|
|
Thus we have a broad outline of what sin is.
Sin is a bad idea or harmful deed something that leads to undesirable things happening to you. At a deeper level sin is not just a harmful deed, but a harmful deed that disrupts ones "life" with life defined as synonymous with ones connection to God. Sin is a disruption of this connection and thus sin is death. Sin is also folly for it is ultimately irrational to consciously choose self harm and death over life and self preservation. Finally sin is an opportunity to recognize our failings and understand the negative consequences of harmful deeds. Thus sin is also an opportunity to redeem ourselves by refining our nature and rejecting the sin.
We will not get very far in understanding why certain actions might be a sin without agreement on what a sin is so I will stop here for today.
And yet homosexuality is none of those, it is not a bad idea or harmful at all, it's like saying some people prefer blondes over brunettes, that's not harmful, it's just preference, so we can conclude that homosexuality should not be a sin and yet it is? |
|
|
|
You can do it by common sense, all of the planets and stars are round, and when you go up on a plane you can see the horizon curving like a ball.
1. A light in the sky is not the same as the Earth beneath your feet; that comparison is beyond apples and oranges. 2. The windows in an airplane are curved and cause a barrel distortion in the image you see. Yeah, nice argument, every window and camera is always distorted, rofl. |
|
|
|
Please do not do the same thing every time, stay calm. Previously all payments were made. The delay may be very normal.
I know that, I am just asking if this is the last week of our 3rd round. Anyways, thank you! Yep, 23-24th of this month would be the end and payment if it goes through. |
|
|
|
^^^ The same reason an electrical engineer does; because he describes mathematically how electromagnetism works. While the version of Maxwell's equations engineers use today are heavily modified by Jews (H. A. Lorentz directed by J. P. Morgan) to hide the aether and use a different form of calculus they're still based on his original work. Uncensored versions of Maxwell's treatise can be found on the net and in various university libraries.
How do you know he is not part of another conspiracy? You don't trust 99.99% of the scientists and experts who say the earth is round so how do you pick your sources exactly? 1. The Earth is round, it's a flat circle. 2. Science isn't about trust, Maxwell's work stands on its own and is based on derivation of physical phenomenon that can be tested. 3. If a (((scientist))) tells you the Earth is a spinning globe and we're stuck to its surface by a force that can't be proven (gravity), gives evidence for curvature where you have to make a huge assumption (Eratosthenes) and shows you experimental proof we're in motion that has other more reasonable explanations (Foucault), that's not science. 2. Einstein work stands on its own too. 3. When there are millions of pictures, thousands of videos and livestreams of earth from space and you claim they are all fake, that's not science, that's just a bullshit claim. |
|
|
|
^^^ The same reason an electrical engineer does; because he describes mathematically how electromagnetism works. While the version of Maxwell's equations engineers use today are heavily modified by Jews (H. A. Lorentz directed by J. P. Morgan) to hide the aether and use a different form of calculus they're still based on his original work. Uncensored versions of Maxwell's treatise can be found on the net and in various university libraries.
How do you know he is not part of another conspiracy? You don't trust 99.99% of the scientists and experts who say the earth is round so how do you pick your sources exactly? |
|
|
|
^^^ *sigh*
The dome is electrically polarized, it charges the ground (-) via induction and the displacement current flowing through the atmosphere results in Earth's magnetic field being produced. The electric field also acts on the atmosphere to create the ionosphere and an asymmetric field reaching to the ground resulting in the downward acceleration of objects more dense than the displaced atmosphere.
The domes immense electric field (+) also prevents anything from getting close to the Antarctic dome wall. At the North pole the induced magnetic field is so strong it ripped the nails out of the early explorers ships who got too close.
There's more regarding the North pole and the projection of the Sun, Moon, stars and planets onto the domes mirrored surface such as the aether drift that drives the sidereal rotation of these celestial objects. This drift can be measured and is frequently used by globalist shills to claim the Earth is in motion.
I hope this helps clear up some of the disinformation posted in the info-graphic above; the shills will do anything to discredit the dome. The controlled opposition shills are the worst and do the most damage hence The Flat Earth Society's existence.
In the example above (((they))) put the intense magnetic field in Antarctica in-place of the dome inverting the ture nature of things (Satan loves to invert things) now they're free to claim there's no dome and an edge with a vacuum "outer space" thereby removing a creator (required for a dome).
Where did you find that information about the Dome's magnetic fields...I read about that theory but hear that the first time. The dome is electrically polarized (most likely when the oxide layer was formed), the magnetic field (the same field a magnetic compass reads) is created by the flow of aether from from the diploes on the domes surface in the form of electric holes that form a displacement current that flows to the ground; essentially a giant charging capacitor. The aether twists as it flows forming solenoidal tubes or lines and this swirling motion creates a magnetic field perpendicular the flow. This can be notated as B=curl( A) where B is the magnetic field and A is the magnetic vector potential (aether surrounding the current flow). I found most of this information in Maxwell's treatise on E&M (uncensored version recommend). The Earth's electric field is common knowledge, Feynman speaks of it in his lectures however I don't recall the names the scientists who performed the balloon experiments that first documented this. Evidence of the dome can be seen in rainbows as the domes reflective oxide surface is a requirement for their production. Why do you trust ''Maxwell's treatise on E&M''?? |
|
|
|
No need to explain the Bible. It is self explanatory.
...
You don't need to explain it. You need to read it.
...
Hey for once we agree on something how about that. Nevertheless for the uninitiated I think an broad view of the overarching logical framework such as that found in Dennis Prager's book The Rational Bible or Jordan Peterson's online Biblical Lectures Series is a nice place to start for the skeptic. how do you argue that it was by men inspired by god and not just idiots?
This can be determined by an analysis of the content. There is a tremendous depth to the text. You will of course disagree. However, for those willing to actually look into the issue with a degree of objectivity and seriousness the weightiness of the text quickly manifests. Well, let's see. Many times the bible commands people to kill other people but without ever explaining why it's wrong to be a homosexual, for example. Not even you can come up with a reason why it's a sin, your ''disability'' argument is garbage and a disability is not a sin anyways. If you can explain to me the depth there I will agree with you. |
|
|
|
If I were Swinburne, I would ask Oxford to return my tuition.
I don't find your attempts to refute his argument particularly compelling. This seems like a topic we are unlikely to agree on. So the bible is not divinely inspired.
At a minimum it was written by men inspired by God or the ideal of God. The utter insanity and self destruction embraced by individuals and societies that reject God hints at its fundamental truth regardless of the exact providence. ''At a minimum it was written by men inspired by God or the ideal of God.'' And you base that on what, exactly? You said it yourself, the bible was written in barbaric times. It doesn't seem that the people who wrote the bible knew any better, the laws are clearly barbaric too, so how do you argue that it was by men inspired by god and not just idiots? |
|
|
|
1. Homosexuals can be in loving relationships.
2. Homosexuals can procreate using donor eggs.
Enough said.
For a homosexual to reproduce requires impregnation of a female. This is logically more difficult and less likely to occur if you are homosexual than if you are heterosexual. Thus the argument that it is a disability above. ... Swimming by yourself around the world is not only 'more difficult' but impossible. We don't call people disabled because of that. Another example is flying from one continent to another. You and I are not disabled because we cannot jump in the air, move our hands and fly from Europe to America. We go online buy a ticket and go and fly to America or Europe. We have the technology to accomplish these tasks.Same for gay men and their desire to reproduce. They can pick the female they want to have a child with by selecting her from a catalog. It is hardly a disability. Straight men do it all the time. If I were Swinburne, I would ask Oxford to return my tuition. And we certainly do not need to kill them. His argument for that is that the bible was written in barbaric times? Well then, why anyone would listen to the bible? If the bible is divinely inspired and the only word of god, god would have known then and at any time that killing homosexuals is wrong, his morals do not change, ours do and it seems like we are in a time where our morals are better than god's. That or god doesn't exist, second option seems the best one. |
|
|
|
How can you be this blind, you are the one saying the bible is divinely inspired yet you don't agree with it, mind boggling. ''Tragedy, however, does not necessarily mean we should celebrate or normalize male homosexuality'' Yes we do, it happens, just like infertility or other disabilities.
''to avoid becoming a biological dead end. '' Not everyone wants children and having children is not necessarily a good thing.
''One possible reasons for this could be that these types promiscuity lead to cultural upheaval and decay '' No, the reason is clear, the minds of the people who wrote the bible were primitive and viewed homosexuality as wrong for no real reason, the bible is full of shit and you seem to agree with me so why do you still believe in it.
The importance of Biblical strictures should be understood in the context of the Biblical world. It was a barbaric place where adultery, kidnapping, rape, homosexual sex, paganism, pedophilia, human sacrifice, and various other things were run of the mill everyday occurrences. In that context Biblical law was a drastic and dramatic rectification one that led directly to our society today. We don't celebrate infertility or any other disability we mourn for those who suffer and work to find a cure. Given our rate of technological progress it seems possible that we will figure out the combination of chemical, genetic, and environmental factors that cause the inversion of the traditional sex drive within a generation or two. Hopefully a cure will shortly follow. So the bible is not divinely inspired. |
|
|
|
Bro, that comes not even close as a good argument to kill homosexuals or to view homosexuality as a sin. Someone infertile is also disabled then, should we kill them too? What about, I don't know, dudes who can't get erect, should we kill them too? If homosexuality was viewed as a disability in the bible, shouldn't god say, hey, let's try to fix them instead of JUST FUCKING MURDER THEM? Give me a fucking break. Never said it was an argument for killing anyone. It is just an argument why homosexuality could be looked at as "wrong" from a non biblical Darwinian perspective. The Bible is pretty severe when it comes to any form of sexual promiscuity. It advocates the death penalty for sex with animals, adultery, sex with a woman who is betrothed to someone else, sexual relations with your in-laws, kidnapping, and of course male on male homosexual sex. One possible reasons for this could be that these types promiscuity lead to cultural upheaval and decay as was argued by the author I quoted earlier: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1373864.msg37403331#msg37403331However, that argument is certainly not proof. I agree that the ideal solution when confronted with a biological aberrancy like infertility is to try and find a way to fix it. My own opinion is that the plight of the homosexual man is incredibly tragic. It's worse then infertility really because at least infertility is a fait accompli. Male homosexuality necessitates a constant battle with the self or other extreme measures if one wishes to avoid becoming a biological dead end. Tragedy, however, does not necessarily mean we should celebrate or normalize male homosexuality. Richard Swinburne makes a fairly good case why that is not the best way to go. How can you be this blind, you are the one saying the bible is divinely inspired yet you don't agree with it, mind boggling. ''Tragedy, however, does not necessarily mean we should celebrate or normalize male homosexuality'' Yes we do, it happens, just like infertility or other disabilities. ''to avoid becoming a biological dead end. '' Not everyone wants children and having children is not necessarily a good thing. ''One possible reasons for this could be that these types promiscuity lead to cultural upheaval and decay '' No, the reason is clear, the minds of the people who wrote the bible were primitive and viewed homosexuality as wrong for no real reason, the bible is full of shit and you seem to agree with me so why do you still believe in it. |
|
|
|
So I see 2 threads of why islam hates people or why people hate Islam. I dont see the point of such a mundane debate based on religion any debate for or against religion would be stupid. Either you are stupid to believe what a prophet / god / divine entity said or you are stupid enough to believe you can change the minds of the bleak minded people who follow such a prophet / god / divine entity.
But since its fun let me initiate my own brand of 'why do' topic.
WHY DO ATHEISTS (like me) HATE RELIGION ?
Seriously what has to happen in a person's life for them to seriously give up hope on the one true everlasting brand (of religion) which their ancestors have followed for generations.
Everyone has their own story even I have mine, so lets hear some of it.
I am an Islamic, even though I am not entirely devoted / forth, I still respect one's own decision, I respect other people's religions, I leave it to the person itself because it is not to be imposed on everyone because we are vary according to their beliefs, Now what do you do after you die / die? Do you think finished after death? I think not, I think after death is the beginning we start a real life,Hopefully you are given the best way. Amen .. Why don't you kill yourself then? Oh, wait, you guys are already doing it. Never mind. As friends of all people, we are giving you and others the chance to be saved like we will be. If we knew for a fact which of you would never be saved, we could save the ones who will be saved, and forget about jokers like you. Our job would be done a lot sooner. Since there still might be a chance for you, we continue to preach to you, and hope our preaching will save you this time. ''If we knew for a fact which of you would never be saved,'' Perhaps an omniscient god would know such thing, hmm, wait a second... ... wait a second. How could God give free will to people if He knew what they were going to do ahead of time? There you go, you disproved god, congratulations. It is indeed impossible to allow free will and be omniscient at the same time.  Oh, don't be so dense. Even you hide things from yourself at times. How do we know? We know it by the fact that you don't believe in God. I don't really see what your response has to do with mine. We are talking about being omniscient and free will at the same time, focus badecker. It seems like there is some sort of mechanism in your brain that switches everytime you read an argument that works against your god and so you either have to forget about it or talk about something else. It's your mechanism of defense lol Well, of course you don't understand. If you did, you would understand God all around you in nature. Look at this simple example. The little girl goes with Mom and Dad to the store. She wants to get Dad a birthday present for his birthday, as a surprise. Dad and Mom both realize this. So, by agreement with Mom, Dad takes off for a moment to a different department, so that Mom can help the little girl find and buy the surprise gift for Dad. Does Dad not know what is going on? Is he not aware of the items in the store? Yet he hides the info from himself so that he can be truly surprised when his birthday comes, and his daughter gives him his surprise gift. Inside you is a piece of free will that God has hidden from Himself. Why has He hidden this? Because He is hoping to be surprised by a sudden free will turn that you can make in faith towards Him. This is the thing that Abraham did. Abraham turned his little free will faith towards God, and God was surprised and pleased. Why was God surprised? Because He had hidden Abraham's free will from Himself. He rewarded Abraham for the change that Abraham made. Had God wanted, He could have easily focused in on Abraham to see what Abraham's free will was going to do. But He didn't, in part so that He could be overjoyed, so that he could have a reason to reward Abraham. God is great. God is wonderful. He loves having reason to reward people. And He rewards them with the things that they need in life, as well as with additional things that He makes excuses for Himself to give them... excuses made when he hides their free will from Himself so that He can be overjoyed by it later. So far you are a disappointment to God. But if you were to suddenly turn to Him, now that He has seen what the part of yourself that He has hidden from Himself is doing, He would be so overjoyed with you that He would reward you greatly. I expect that if you read this, you will understand. But I also expect that you will not even acknowledge that you understand. At this stage, if you even acknowledge that you understand, this would please God. So, at least do that much. Maybe God will reward you by adjusting your faith in such a way so that you can turn to Him and be saved. First and foremost that would still mean that everything is already dictated by god even if he ''hides the information for himself'' so my point still stands. There is no free will. ''Yet he hides the info from himself so that he can be truly surprised when his birthday comes'' He wouldn't be ''truly'' surprised if he knew beforehand lol. Every thing being dictated by God is absolutely correct. Your free will isn't a "thing." But that isn't the question. The question has to do with whether or not I can explain something to you when you will resist the explanation even when it makes sense. This means that the point is that you will be roasting in Hell because of your intentional resistance. The clarity of your failure is this. God is shown strongly throughout the universe, and so-called atheists even hold themselves up in god authority by stating that they have enough capability to suggest that God doesn't exist, making them to not be atheists, and proving that God exists even among the so-called atheists. All of this means that you folks are against God. The results will be apparent in the Judgment. ''Every thing being dictated by God is absolutely correct. Your free will isn't a "thing." But that isn't the question.'' That is actually the question, that's what I'm saying. If you agree that god dictates everything then there is no free will and we shouldn't be responsible for our actions. ''This means that the point is that you will be roasting in Hell because of your intentional resistance.'' Well it's not my resistance, it's god's resistance since he dictated everything. Your free will is not a thing dictated by God. Rather, it is a touch of God Himself in you. Everything else in your life is directed completely by God. He directs these things righteously, according to the amount of faith you have in Him. Your destruction is your choice. Because of Jesus, your salvation is your choice, as well. God only directs the course of your life according to what you choose in the tiny free will part of yourself that you have. How does a baby chose his faith in god, if the only free will you have is the ''faith'' you have in god, how does it start, do you start by believing automatically in god? I don't see how it works. FYI, Matthew 19:14: Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
The point is, when you are involved with your own being put together in the womb, such is all you know. It is marvelous to you. You have great faith in the Master Builder Who is putting you together in Mommy's tummy, because you are living with Him while He is working on you. It is only after your higher functions become active, especially after your birth, that you start to turn away, tempted by your own desires for other things. Then it doesn't work, if everyone believes in god but starts to turn away due to other things, it's not fair. I mean look at this example, someone born in a christian family vs someone born in a muslim country, the guy born in a muslim country will almost never turn to christianity because he is heavily influenced by everyone, not only his parents and family but virtually everyone in the country. The guy who is born in a christian family however has a very easy way to believe in god. So it is 500 times harder for the guy who was born in a muslim country to ever accept your god than it is for the guy who is born in a christian family and how do we know that the guy born in a christian family would have believed in god if he was born in a muslim country? It's not fair, if being here is a test of faith for god then it is not a fair test. There, there. Don't feel so sad. You are making me cry (sniffle). Is that an admission that you lost? |
|
|
|
You have no argument of why homosexuality is wrong.
Here an argument put forward by Richard Swinburne an emeritus professor of philosophy at the University of Oxford.
Why homosexuality is unacceptable: The disability argumenthttps://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/(1) Homosexuality is a preventable disability.
He defends (1) in two parts. Firstly, he considers homosexuality a disability because it is deprived of something which heterosexuality possesses. In his words:
"The first things to recognise is that homosexuality is a disability. For a homosexual is unable to enter into a loving relationship in which the love is as such procreative."
Secondly, he thinks this deprivation is preventable. He cites various studies which indicate homosexuality is due to both genetics and environmental factors. Swinburne writes:
"The consensus of the scientific community is that both genetic constitution and social factors interact to produce homosexuality. The social factors may include Freudian-type factors (over-involved mother and cold father causing male homosexuality, etc.) and the absence of gender-specific education and dress; but they will also surely include the acceptability of homosexual practice among peers and society more widely."
Thus, if we foster a climate which inhibits the development of homosexuality, Swinburne thinks fewer potential homosexuals will become actual homosexuals (and grow instead into heterosexuals).
(2) Disabilities ought to be prevented and cured.
Typically, Swinburne thinks we seek to reduce disabilities as far as we can. For instance, suppose we know a baby has a condition which will very likely result in his loss of limbs some years later. Soon after, someone discovers a medication which will significantly reduce the chances of him losing his limbs. We would administer that medication to the baby. On the flipside, if someone does what worsens the baby’s condition, it would seem a bad thing.
(3) Homosexuality ought to be prevented and cured.
Given (1) and (2), it follows that we should prevent and cure homosexuality. Thus Swinburne urges:
"So part of both prevention and cure (where that is now possible) must consist in deterring homosexuals from committing homosexual acts. Homosexuals can help to prevent the spread of homosexuality and help to cure others by setting an example of not indulging their inclinations and of seeking a cure."
Bro, that comes not even close as a good argument to kill homosexuals or to view homosexuality as a sin. Someone infertile is also disabled then, should we kill them too? What about, I don't know, dudes who can't get erect, should we kill them too? If homosexuality was viewed as a disability in the bible, shouldn't god say, hey, let's try to fix them instead of JUST FUCKING MURDER THEM? Give me a fucking break. God doesn't desire that people die. But if that is what it takes to cleanse the world of their evil, so be it. Coincube provided an alternative... change the evil in people to good. I don't view homosexuality as evil. You have no argument. His argument doesn't say homosexuals are evil, it says they can't have children. Plenty of people can't have children or wont have children, it's their choice. You still have not answer, why is homosexuality evil or a sin? Again, saying it's ''unnatural'' doesn't make it evil and you haven't defined unnatural. Just admit it, you don't like gay people and you want to kill them. Why do you keep on talking about killing homosexuals? Simply put them all on an island, and their whole lines will die out when they die of old age. The bible says it ''If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death'' Do you have any argument or are you going to admit that you lost? |
|
|
|
You have no argument of why homosexuality is wrong.
Here an argument put forward by Richard Swinburne an emeritus professor of philosophy at the University of Oxford.
Why homosexuality is unacceptable: The disability argumenthttps://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/(1) Homosexuality is a preventable disability.
He defends (1) in two parts. Firstly, he considers homosexuality a disability because it is deprived of something which heterosexuality possesses. In his words:
"The first things to recognise is that homosexuality is a disability. For a homosexual is unable to enter into a loving relationship in which the love is as such procreative."
Secondly, he thinks this deprivation is preventable. He cites various studies which indicate homosexuality is due to both genetics and environmental factors. Swinburne writes:
"The consensus of the scientific community is that both genetic constitution and social factors interact to produce homosexuality. The social factors may include Freudian-type factors (over-involved mother and cold father causing male homosexuality, etc.) and the absence of gender-specific education and dress; but they will also surely include the acceptability of homosexual practice among peers and society more widely."
Thus, if we foster a climate which inhibits the development of homosexuality, Swinburne thinks fewer potential homosexuals will become actual homosexuals (and grow instead into heterosexuals).
(2) Disabilities ought to be prevented and cured.
Typically, Swinburne thinks we seek to reduce disabilities as far as we can. For instance, suppose we know a baby has a condition which will very likely result in his loss of limbs some years later. Soon after, someone discovers a medication which will significantly reduce the chances of him losing his limbs. We would administer that medication to the baby. On the flipside, if someone does what worsens the baby’s condition, it would seem a bad thing.
(3) Homosexuality ought to be prevented and cured.
Given (1) and (2), it follows that we should prevent and cure homosexuality. Thus Swinburne urges:
"So part of both prevention and cure (where that is now possible) must consist in deterring homosexuals from committing homosexual acts. Homosexuals can help to prevent the spread of homosexuality and help to cure others by setting an example of not indulging their inclinations and of seeking a cure."
Bro, that comes not even close as a good argument to kill homosexuals or to view homosexuality as a sin. Someone infertile is also disabled then, should we kill them too? What about, I don't know, dudes who can't get erect, should we kill them too? If homosexuality was viewed as a disability in the bible, shouldn't god say, hey, let's try to fix them instead of JUST FUCKING MURDER THEM? Give me a fucking break. God doesn't desire that people die. But if that is what it takes to cleanse the world of their evil, so be it. Coincube provided an alternative... change the evil in people to good. I don't view homosexuality as evil. You have no argument. His argument doesn't say homosexuals are evil, it says they can't have children. Plenty of people can't have children or wont have children, it's their choice. You still have not answer, why is homosexuality evil or a sin? Again, saying it's ''unnatural'' doesn't make it evil and you haven't defined unnatural. Just admit it, you don't like gay people and you want to kill them. |
|
|
|
So I see 2 threads of why islam hates people or why people hate Islam. I dont see the point of such a mundane debate based on religion any debate for or against religion would be stupid. Either you are stupid to believe what a prophet / god / divine entity said or you are stupid enough to believe you can change the minds of the bleak minded people who follow such a prophet / god / divine entity.
But since its fun let me initiate my own brand of 'why do' topic.
WHY DO ATHEISTS (like me) HATE RELIGION ?
Seriously what has to happen in a person's life for them to seriously give up hope on the one true everlasting brand (of religion) which their ancestors have followed for generations.
Everyone has their own story even I have mine, so lets hear some of it.
I am an Islamic, even though I am not entirely devoted / forth, I still respect one's own decision, I respect other people's religions, I leave it to the person itself because it is not to be imposed on everyone because we are vary according to their beliefs, Now what do you do after you die / die? Do you think finished after death? I think not, I think after death is the beginning we start a real life,Hopefully you are given the best way. Amen .. Why don't you kill yourself then? Oh, wait, you guys are already doing it. Never mind. As friends of all people, we are giving you and others the chance to be saved like we will be. If we knew for a fact which of you would never be saved, we could save the ones who will be saved, and forget about jokers like you. Our job would be done a lot sooner. Since there still might be a chance for you, we continue to preach to you, and hope our preaching will save you this time. ''If we knew for a fact which of you would never be saved,'' Perhaps an omniscient god would know such thing, hmm, wait a second... ... wait a second. How could God give free will to people if He knew what they were going to do ahead of time? There you go, you disproved god, congratulations. It is indeed impossible to allow free will and be omniscient at the same time. Oh, don't be so dense. Even you hide things from yourself at times. How do we know? We know it by the fact that you don't believe in God. I don't really see what your response has to do with mine. We are talking about being omniscient and free will at the same time, focus badecker. It seems like there is some sort of mechanism in your brain that switches everytime you read an argument that works against your god and so you either have to forget about it or talk about something else. It's your mechanism of defense lol Well, of course you don't understand. If you did, you would understand God all around you in nature. Look at this simple example. The little girl goes with Mom and Dad to the store. She wants to get Dad a birthday present for his birthday, as a surprise. Dad and Mom both realize this. So, by agreement with Mom, Dad takes off for a moment to a different department, so that Mom can help the little girl find and buy the surprise gift for Dad. Does Dad not know what is going on? Is he not aware of the items in the store? Yet he hides the info from himself so that he can be truly surprised when his birthday comes, and his daughter gives him his surprise gift. Inside you is a piece of free will that God has hidden from Himself. Why has He hidden this? Because He is hoping to be surprised by a sudden free will turn that you can make in faith towards Him. This is the thing that Abraham did. Abraham turned his little free will faith towards God, and God was surprised and pleased. Why was God surprised? Because He had hidden Abraham's free will from Himself. He rewarded Abraham for the change that Abraham made. Had God wanted, He could have easily focused in on Abraham to see what Abraham's free will was going to do. But He didn't, in part so that He could be overjoyed, so that he could have a reason to reward Abraham. God is great. God is wonderful. He loves having reason to reward people. And He rewards them with the things that they need in life, as well as with additional things that He makes excuses for Himself to give them... excuses made when he hides their free will from Himself so that He can be overjoyed by it later. So far you are a disappointment to God. But if you were to suddenly turn to Him, now that He has seen what the part of yourself that He has hidden from Himself is doing, He would be so overjoyed with you that He would reward you greatly. I expect that if you read this, you will understand. But I also expect that you will not even acknowledge that you understand. At this stage, if you even acknowledge that you understand, this would please God. So, at least do that much. Maybe God will reward you by adjusting your faith in such a way so that you can turn to Him and be saved. First and foremost that would still mean that everything is already dictated by god even if he ''hides the information for himself'' so my point still stands. There is no free will. ''Yet he hides the info from himself so that he can be truly surprised when his birthday comes'' He wouldn't be ''truly'' surprised if he knew beforehand lol. Every thing being dictated by God is absolutely correct. Your free will isn't a "thing." But that isn't the question. The question has to do with whether or not I can explain something to you when you will resist the explanation even when it makes sense. This means that the point is that you will be roasting in Hell because of your intentional resistance. The clarity of your failure is this. God is shown strongly throughout the universe, and so-called atheists even hold themselves up in god authority by stating that they have enough capability to suggest that God doesn't exist, making them to not be atheists, and proving that God exists even among the so-called atheists. All of this means that you folks are against God. The results will be apparent in the Judgment. ''Every thing being dictated by God is absolutely correct. Your free will isn't a "thing." But that isn't the question.'' That is actually the question, that's what I'm saying. If you agree that god dictates everything then there is no free will and we shouldn't be responsible for our actions. ''This means that the point is that you will be roasting in Hell because of your intentional resistance.'' Well it's not my resistance, it's god's resistance since he dictated everything. Your free will is not a thing dictated by God. Rather, it is a touch of God Himself in you. Everything else in your life is directed completely by God. He directs these things righteously, according to the amount of faith you have in Him. Your destruction is your choice. Because of Jesus, your salvation is your choice, as well. God only directs the course of your life according to what you choose in the tiny free will part of yourself that you have. How does a baby chose his faith in god, if the only free will you have is the ''faith'' you have in god, how does it start, do you start by believing automatically in god? I don't see how it works. FYI, Matthew 19:14: Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
The point is, when you are involved with your own being put together in the womb, such is all you know. It is marvelous to you. You have great faith in the Master Builder Who is putting you together in Mommy's tummy, because you are living with Him while He is working on you. It is only after your higher functions become active, especially after your birth, that you start to turn away, tempted by your own desires for other things. Then it doesn't work, if everyone believes in god but starts to turn away due to other things, it's not fair. I mean look at this example, someone born in a christian family vs someone born in a muslim country, the guy born in a muslim country will almost never turn to christianity because he is heavily influenced by everyone, not only his parents and family but virtually everyone in the country. The guy who is born in a christian family however has a very easy way to believe in god. So it is 500 times harder for the guy who was born in a muslim country to ever accept your god than it is for the guy who is born in a christian family and how do we know that the guy born in a christian family would have believed in god if he was born in a muslim country? It's not fair, if being here is a test of faith for god then it is not a fair test. |
|
|
|
''Some people have the need to be slaves. You would take their freedom away? You are missing a lot about Bible slavery. Discrimination against homosexuals is right when it is done out of love. Why encourage them on their way to destruction in their homosexual sin by befriending them in it?'' The definition of a slave is that they don't have freedom, that's why they are called slaves in the first place. You can't argue that a slave chose to be a slave because then he wouldn't be a slave. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/slaveThe point isn't about slaves becoming slaves. The point is about free people volunteering to be slaves. Exodus 21:16: Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper's possession. See more at http://biblereasons.com/kidnapping/.
''It's the carrying out of those feelings in the form of homosexual acts that is wrong.'' I'm wondering badecker, do you ever question your beliefs? Why do you think that carrying those feelings in the form of homosexuality is wrong, is there any objective argument for that? I don't see what's wrong with it.
Everything in nature has a purpose. Even evolution says that. There is no purpose in homosexuality. Leviticus 20:13: If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Romans 1:26,27: Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. For additional Bible passages, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality#Romans_1:26-27.
''The thing you really need to do is to formally ask God to force you to become a believer in Him. Be serious, and ask it for real.'' I did when I was a believer and he didn't respond, so.. yeah.
At that time you didn't have all the Bible training that you have received just in this forum, alone. Be serious about it, and try it again. Of course, why would you want to? You are locked in to your own self-destruction, all the while blaming someone else. But... if you don't change, God Himself, in the judgment, will prove to you that it was you, not He. And here I thought that killing was wrong. ''You shall not murder.'' yet the bible tells you to kill other people all the time, amazing. ''Everything in nature has a purpose. Even evolution says that. There is no purpose in homosexuality.'' Quoting evolution? Evolution does not say that everything in nature has a purpose. You are ok with killing homosexuals just because of that? Psychopath indeed. You never answered what's wrong with it, tho. You just said everything in nature has a purpose. Should we also kill people that are born with problems because they are not part of a good evolution? Maybe we should start murdering everyone with defects, what the fuck is wrong with your mind? ''Be serious about it, and try it again'' I can't be more serious now than I was back then when I truly believed in god and he didn't answer. Relax. It's okay. Jesus still loves you. He took a lot worse from the guys who nailed Him to the cross. And He arose on the third day just to conquer all evil. Come on and place your trust in Him. His religion for you is the best... certainly a lot better than your own. You can do it, even though the diseases you have from your homosexuality are destroying you. Rather, destroy the homosexuality in yourself so that you live. It's called health and religion. Don't sell yourself so short. Jesus loves you. That's a good ignoring response, classic badecker. You didn't respond about the fact that the bible says killing is wrong and yet commands people to kill other people all the tim Does someone get diseases because he is a homosexual? Do you have any evidence for this? I don't think so. You don't have any idea why homosexuality is wrong, you just follow the book. Think for yourself for once. LOL. 11% of sheep is gay. BADecker and CoinCube better start teaching them that is wrong to be gay and how to un gay them. Otherwise all sheep societies around the world will collapse because of the influence of gay lifestyle on their communities. CoinCube can you muster some pseudo scientific study based on quotes from the Bible to show the ill effects of sheep gay acts on their herds and the sheep specie as a whole. Then move on to lions, and all other animals... Looking forward to your Bible wisdom on the subject. Show us a purpose in the act of homosexuality. Sex is for propagation. Homosexuality is useless, and has no place in nature or what in is right. The fact that it exists in animals shows the corruption in nature. The fact that nature isn't destroyed by it, shows that Jesus is upholding nature to give people a chance to repent and be saved. The fact that people die shows that people have a limited time to make up their minds about salvation. The fact that most animals don't live as long as people, shows that God gives people more time to repent, because eternal torment awaits them if they don't. Show us the purpose of having sex using a condom then, or masturbation or sticking up a finger up your butt. Why would I attempt that. There isn't any purpose for that stuff, except to attempt to thwart God. I'm surprised that you don't have the answers, since you are the one who is trying to thwart God. You are dense. Your argument is that homosexuality is wrong because it has no ''purpose'' however there are a ton of things without a ''purpose'' like those mentioned there and yet the bible doesn't tell people to kill other people if they stick a finger up their butt, does it? Anyhow, why would it be justified to kill people just because they are doing things without purpose? Psychopath.. There are a ton of things with no purpose, and there are a ton of wrong things, homosexuality among them, right? The idea of the Bible is Jesus salvation. That's why homosexuals are not destroyed immediately upon committing their sin. Most of the sin exists in the fact that non-homos are reasonably tolerant. Rather than kill the homos, they let them live without forcing them to change. If God tells us to do something in the Bible, that thing is justified. Even if you think Godly people, or even God Himself, are psychopaths, perhaps it is you who is the psychopath for not doing the thing that makes sense... obey God. God is the owner. He wants salvation for you, not destruction. That's why He gives you more time to repent. But you seem to only want destruction. Throw away your health through self-destruction, right. ''and there are a ton of wrong things, homosexuality among them, right?'' No, doing things without a reproductive purpose isn't wrong. - That's a judgment call, not necessarily a fact.''committing their sin.'' But you haven't answered why homosexuality is a sin, it's not because it doesn't have a ''purpose''. - I most certainly answered it, above. It's because God stated that it is a sin in the Bible, and I offered two examples; there are more. The purpose is to be happy just like masturbating or drinking coca cola. - God did not state that drinking Coca Cola or that masturbation are sins. But He DID state that the act of homosexuality is. Not everything needs to have a reproductive purpose. You have no argument of why homosexuality is wrong. So, you can't think for your yourself. It's wrong because the book tells you it's wrong. ''because it is an unnatural act'' hahahahaha define unnatural... Plenty of animals have homosexuality, how can it be unnatural? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
