Homosexuality

  • 216 Replies
  • 44177 Views
?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #90 on: February 08, 2008, 09:59:31 PM »
I'd say people don't like homosexuality, so they pick and choose their own quotes to make themselves feel better. Afterall, it also builds up an "us and them" system, with an enemy in your mind, your faith is that much stronger, fear and hate are powerful tools, the Church uses them well.

I still love it how the church hasn't actually "cured" anyone of homosexuality, at best, made them closet gays... ^_^
http://exgay.com/

AH... This was a fun thread. Yes, the OT is full of those, but that really isn't news is it?

To dispel any confusion for new member reading this: No, I would not kill my own son if he disobeyed me, or follow any of those dirty Jewish rules, really.

My question is why did you choose to resurrect such an old thread?
Lying is a sin, you know.

?

Pope Zera

  • 329
  • +0/-0
  • A Firm Believer in NOTHING
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #91 on: February 09, 2008, 12:12:06 AM »
no ur gay lol lol lol

?

[][][]

  • 554
  • +0/-1
  • Man of science.
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #92 on: February 09, 2008, 11:14:10 AM »

AH... This was a fun thread. Yes, the OT is full of those, but that really isn't news is it?

To dispel any confusion for new member reading this: No, I would not kill my own son if he disobeyed me, or follow any of those dirty Jewish rules, really.

My question is why did you choose to resurrect such an old thread?
Lying is a sin, you know.

?
The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us. -Some Frenchy

?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #93 on: February 09, 2008, 02:18:11 PM »
Why did you say you would kill your own son?

?

[][][]

  • 554
  • +0/-1
  • Man of science.
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #94 on: February 09, 2008, 06:02:04 PM »
Why did you say you would kill your own son?

Because I find it funny that by just saying things like that (the Bible is all true, atheists are evil, ect.) I send some members of this forum into a frothing rage, like mad dogs.
The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us. -Some Frenchy

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • +0/-0
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #95 on: February 09, 2008, 06:05:11 PM »
I'd say people don't like homosexuality, so they pick and choose their own quotes to make themselves feel better. Afterall, it also builds up an "us and them" system, with an enemy in your mind, your faith is that much stronger, fear and hate are powerful tools, the Church uses them well.

I still love it how the church hasn't actually "cured" anyone of homosexuality, at best, made them closet gays... ^_^
http://exgay.com/

Is that website supposed to be a counter example? 

?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #96 on: February 09, 2008, 06:09:25 PM »
So you were trolling with an extreme exaggeration of your own beliefs? I award you with the golden reel of trolling (ITS HEUG, lol).


Is that website supposed to be a counter example? 
Yes.

*

Benocrates

  • 3072
  • +0/-0
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #97 on: February 09, 2008, 06:10:42 PM »
Why did you say you would kill your own son?

Because I find it funny that by just saying things like that (the Bible is all true, atheists are evil, ect.) I send some members of this forum into a frothing rage, like mad dogs.

It's because people who have unshakable faith in biblical accuracy are horribly dangerous. Read my last post in the Machiavellian topic for further elaboration on why you are dangerous.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • +0/-0
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #98 on: February 09, 2008, 06:11:22 PM »
Is that website supposed to be a counter example? 
Yes.

Interesting.  Have you visited this website?  It actually directly supports what you quoted Brylian as saying about creating fear an hate in the mind.  He is decidedly NOT a "cured by the church" homosexual.  He goes on and on about casting what the Christian church had fed him for the last 20 years away and accepting himself for who he is. 

?

[][][]

  • 554
  • +0/-1
  • Man of science.
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #99 on: February 09, 2008, 06:15:10 PM »
To Althalus: Thank ye, I find my religious beliefs tend more toward the Deist viewpoint.

To Ben: Assuming much?
« Last Edit: February 09, 2008, 06:17:23 PM by [][][] »
The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us. -Some Frenchy

*

Benocrates

  • 3072
  • +0/-0
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #100 on: February 09, 2008, 06:16:50 PM »
I consider any unshakable biblical faith to be dangerous. If you have unshakable biblical faith then I believe you are too. If not, then you may not be dangerous.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

?

[][][]

  • 554
  • +0/-1
  • Man of science.
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #101 on: February 09, 2008, 06:25:45 PM »
I consider any unshakable biblical faith to be dangerous. If you have unshakable biblical faith then I believe you are too. If not, then you may not be dangerous.

That was not your original response, you pointed me to a thread that explained why I am so dangerous. To make this accusation, you had to assume that I had an unshakable belief in Biblical accuracy. Again, assuming much?
The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us. -Some Frenchy

*

Benocrates

  • 3072
  • +0/-0
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #102 on: February 09, 2008, 06:47:27 PM »
Fair enough. Consider my use of you in the broadest sense. My point is still valid that anyone who does have unshakable faith in the bible gets those who believe in reason pissed.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #103 on: February 09, 2008, 06:47:49 PM »
I never said that I agreed with them, only that there are people who believe that they have been cured of homosexuality. If you were to say that they have not been 'cured' because they still have homosexual desires, consider that very few 'cured' alcoholics have no desire to drink.

*

Benocrates

  • 3072
  • +0/-0
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #104 on: February 09, 2008, 06:55:18 PM »
I never said that I agreed with them, only that there are people who believe that they have been cured of homosexuality. If you were to say that they have not been 'cured' because they still have homosexual desires, consider that very few 'cured' alcoholics have no desire to drink.

That sense of the word cured I can subscribe to. To say a cure means a remedy to an unwanted urge. In this sense a priest can be cured of their sexual urge when it is worked on consciously until the urge is no longer strongly present or even present at all. In reference to the alcoholic analogy, from what I do know of alcoholism recreational use of alcohol is not possible after being "cured." It's not that after AA a person can go back to recreational drinking, it no longer is as strong of an urge but the urge to binge is still there.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

?

[][][]

  • 554
  • +0/-1
  • Man of science.
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #105 on: February 09, 2008, 06:59:01 PM »
Fair enough. Consider my use of you in the broadest sense. My point is still valid that anyone who does have unshakable faith in the bible gets those who believe in reason pissed.

I believe in reason.

I do not get pissed off by all Fundamentalists.

Take VenomFang for example (that youtube Fundamentalist). I think his videos are both pathetic and funny in ways, especially how he open comments to his videos for an hour and gets all of his friends to vote up his video and add nice comments, then closes them forever.

So... point invalidated?

I believe you would be more correct to say that believers in reason get pissed (rightly) when those things that are irrational are being taught to others as factual (such as ID in schools). Just because somone holds a rediculous opinion does not necissarily make me angry at them. Why do you get angered?

The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us. -Some Frenchy

*

Benocrates

  • 3072
  • +0/-0
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #106 on: February 09, 2008, 07:14:48 PM »
Fair enough. Consider my use of you in the broadest sense. My point is still valid that anyone who does have unshakable faith in the bible gets those who believe in reason pissed.

I believe in reason.

I do not get pissed off by all Fundamentalists.

Take VenomFang for example (that youtube Fundamentalist). I think his videos are both pathetic and funny in ways, especially how he open comments to his videos for an hour and gets all of his friends to vote up his video and add nice comments, then closes them forever.

So... point invalidated?

I believe you would be more correct to say that believers in reason get pissed (rightly) when those things that are irrational are being taught to others as factual (such as ID in schools). Just because somone holds a rediculous opinion does not necissarily make me angry at them. Why do you get angered?



I don't believe in crimes of thought, only crimes of action. I don't care what silly superstition or conspiracy theory you believe as long as it doesn't affect my life or anyone else's. When it is confined to an online forum it is incensing because it's an insulting view of the world and of reason. You can argue that in such a trivial forum it shouldn't provoke anger because it doesn't matter, but then why even bother talking about anything. When it comes into the public sphere with laws being founded on irrationality those with a belief in reason become rightly upset.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

?

[][][]

  • 554
  • +0/-1
  • Man of science.
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #107 on: February 09, 2008, 07:22:00 PM »
Fair enough. Consider my use of you in the broadest sense. My point is still valid that anyone who does have unshakable faith in the bible gets those who believe in reason pissed.

I believe in reason.

I do not get pissed off by all Fundamentalists.

Take VenomFang for example (that youtube Fundamentalist). I think his videos are both pathetic and funny in ways, especially how he open comments to his videos for an hour and gets all of his friends to vote up his video and add nice comments, then closes them forever.

So... point invalidated?

I believe you would be more correct to say that believers in reason get pissed (rightly) when those things that are irrational are being taught to others as factual (such as ID in schools). Just because somone holds a rediculous opinion does not necissarily make me angry at them. Why do you get angered?



I don't believe in crimes of thought, only crimes of action. I don't care what silly superstition or conspiracy theory you believe as long as it doesn't affect my life or anyone else's. When it is confined to an online forum it is incensing because it's an insulting view of the world and of reason. You can argue that in such a trivial forum it shouldn't provoke anger because it doesn't matter, but then why even bother talking about anything. When it comes into the public sphere with laws being founded on irrationality those with a belief in reason become rightly upset.

Well, then why did you not say that in the first place?

Saying that anyone that believes in reason should get pissed off at Fundamentalists is an awfully big generalization.

To be clear, I am in agreement with you about laws and such based from irrational views, but the distinction is that you are angered by the actions of those Fundamentalists themselves, I really think it is silly to be angry about an idea.
The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us. -Some Frenchy

*

Benocrates

  • 3072
  • +0/-0
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #108 on: February 09, 2008, 10:58:48 PM »
       Perhaps it is completely irrational to become angry at fundis even when they don't affect me. I do think that it is a completely emotional response that is ego driven. Fundamentalist religious irrationality undercuts everything I believe in to be self evident. I base my whole life on understanding things as reasonable (even emotion can be reasonably understood) and when there are people out there spreading irrationality as truth it is an insult to my worldview. I can see the counterpoint, that when fundis get angry at atheistic argument it should therefore be legitimate as well but I only partially agree.

     The problem with fundamentalist dogma is that it is unshakable, not open to debate. Perhaps that is why I am angry because I know I am powerless against this rhetorical nonsense. When even one fundie openly exclaims their surety it gives more and more credence to that worldview. I think that worldview is irrational and intellectually dishonest. I don't want to live in that kind of world so my anger lashes out in protest.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • +0/-0
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #109 on: February 09, 2008, 11:30:25 PM »
I never said that I agreed with them, only that there are people who believe that they have been cured of homosexuality. If you were to say that they have not been 'cured' because they still have homosexual desires, consider that very few 'cured' alcoholics have no desire to drink.
I never accused you of agreeing with anyone and I would confidently say this man has not been cured of homosexuality.  Did you read beyond the first few pages of that website? 

The original point by Brylian was that the church uses fear and hate as powerful tools to create internal conflict in the minds of homosexuals.  Exgay.com is a website devoted entirely to one man's personal struggle with his faith as a Christian and his undeniable homosexuality.  He decided to finally ignore what the church and others think he should be and instead be true to himself and accept himself for who he is.  He is cured of the internal struggle, but not of homosexuality.  Mr. Exgay is still a homosexual, which means he is not 'cured' (which i believe is not even possible to cure such a thing).  I think that puts his web-address in the ballpark of irony. 

I'm not trying to rag on you, I'm just illuminating the fact that your example does not agree with your argument. 

?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #110 on: February 10, 2008, 12:32:25 AM »
I never said that I agreed with them, only that there are people who believe that they have been cured of homosexuality. If you were to say that they have not been 'cured' because they still have homosexual desires, consider that very few 'cured' alcoholics have no desire to drink.
I never accused you of agreeing with anyone and I would confidently say this man has not been cured of homosexuality.  Did you read beyond the first few pages of that website? 

The original point by Brylian was that the church uses fear and hate as powerful tools to create internal conflict in the minds of homosexuals.  Exgay.com is a website devoted entirely to one man's personal struggle with his faith as a Christian and his undeniable homosexuality.  He decided to finally ignore what the church and others think he should be and instead be true to himself and accept himself for who he is.  He is cured of the internal struggle, but not of homosexuality.  Mr. Exgay is still a homosexual, which means he is not 'cured' (which i believe is not even possible to cure such a thing).  I think that puts his web-address in the ballpark of irony. 

I'm not trying to rag on you, I'm just illuminating the fact that your example does not agree with your argument. 
http://www.narth.com/

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • +0/-0
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #111 on: February 13, 2008, 10:49:27 PM »

?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #112 on: February 14, 2008, 12:44:32 AM »
Why?

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • +0/-0
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #113 on: February 14, 2008, 07:27:44 AM »
Any time a person tries to change someone else's life based on what is written in a work of science fiction, it makes me want to purge. 

?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #114 on: February 14, 2008, 11:48:35 PM »

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • +0/-0
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #115 on: February 15, 2008, 06:54:26 AM »
It's also an opinion to believe it is the inspired word of god, but I don't think we need to get into that right here. 

Let me change that statement:  Anytime a person wants to change another persons way of living it makes me want to purge. 

?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #116 on: February 15, 2008, 12:24:53 PM »
It's also an opinion to believe it is the inspired word of god, but I don't think we need to get into that right here.
They don't base their research in the bible.

Let me change that statement:  Anytime a person wants to change another persons way of living it makes me want to purge. 

"That meth will ruin your life and kill you, but thats alright."

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • +0/-0
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #117 on: February 17, 2008, 08:36:56 AM »
I guess I just sort of assumed they based their foundation on Christian morals.  I see now that NARTH uses the clients own choice as to whether or not they need treatment.  That is something I can support.  Your point is granted; that is evidence that a homosexual can be cured (assuming NARTH has had successful cases), but being 'cured' of such a thing is so subjective that the issue is very much still debatable. 

As for the second quote:  it's too much of a slippery slope.  I'm not saying people with drug addictions should not be helped, rather that they have to make a conscience decision that they do in fact need help.  But as soon as someone starts thinking "I know what's right for you", there is a serious problem.  They could take away my precious alcohol. 

?

Rationalizer

  • 24
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #118 on: February 19, 2008, 04:33:10 PM »
So the Bible says; "Thou shall not kill" but in reality the 10 commandments only apply in some circumstances; there are times when it's not a sin to break them?  Where does it say this in the bible?

No, the real translation is closer to thou shalt not murder.

There are circumstances where killing is fine. Unjustified killing though is not.

I presumed the comment at the bottom was in regards to what the Bible says, not a general statement about killing people.  If that assumption is wrong then I apologise.  The point is that if you take the Old Testament literally in regards to what it says about homosexuality, you have to take it literally when it says you should stone your children to death if they disobey your word.

Dedicated Theist; If you had children and they disobeyed your word, would you stone them to death?
It's cool. I generally just argue for whichever side seems to have the facts correct. Also i do believe in god, but i do not believe that the bible is 100% correct.

How can you believe in a perfect God, but not believe the Bible is 100% correct.  If the Bible is not perfect then God is not perfect, if God is not perfect, the He is not God.  The fact that there is a perfect God, proves the Bible is perfect.  The Bible does not contradict itself.  It is perfect.
I'm going to heaven, are you?

?

Althalus

  • 4062
  • +0/-0
Re: Homosexuality
« Reply #119 on: February 19, 2008, 04:37:45 PM »
Circular logic defined.