Post deleted by User.
Christians: We Arent Trying To Condemn Anyone
christians: we arent trying to condemn anyone
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
You have to give me a few minutes, I'm still taking in that last statement.
I don't understand what is so difficult to take in about disagreeing with homosexuality but not hating homosexuals.
I believe it is against nature, science is actually in my favor on that one. I also cannot understand how a man can be attracted to another man that way and I can openly admit that I never will and shouldn't bother trying, since I will never be attracted to another man. The greatest fallacy here is a heterosexual expecting a homosexual to understand something they cannot, and vice versa.
Outside of homosexuality, they all have feelings, goals, ambitions, desires. They work jobs and pay taxes. They generally are nice people. Why do I have to hate the person, because I disagree with an act that I am not even taking part in anyway?
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Please explain to me why you want your selling point to be "well animals do it, so should humans." We can't truly delve into the mind of an animal, nor can you really rationalize something that isn't sentient. Define this homosexual activity they engage in, did you personally ask them if it was because they were homosexual. How about this, your question is absurd and any answer that comes from it will be absurd.
Last time I went to the zoo I saw two monkeys rubbing each other's penises. One monkey approached the other and touched the other monkey's penis several times until it became erect.
The first monkey began to rub it, and in the process grew flaccid. The second monkey then began to rub the first monkey's penis, too.
Two male monkeys engaging in a circlejerk. That's homosexual activity right there.
[+]
I don't always use my [+] function, but when I do, it's in regard to a level of anti-intellectualism that shouldn't be tolerated on a discussion forum. You know, a forum that uses rational argument in lieu of the antithetical denial of rationality to create an environment for learning.
[+]
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Powerslave said: »
There are plenty of creatures that bang another creature of the same sex, while this is not technically homosexuality, science is not with you on this one.
Sex isn't the science. Reproduction is.
Fair enough, point I was trying to get across though is your exact quote "It is against nature" is completely false, so my position on it still stands. I've seen it myself on field studies for class which isn't much of a credential but I can certainly attest that it is not against nature.
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Once again, you and I are conditioned to believe slavery is immoral and wrong.
I also am not immune to the fact that many things in the Bible now may not have originally been there for both copious translations and more nefarious reasons.
I also am not immune to the fact that many things in the Bible now may not have originally been there for both copious translations and more nefarious reasons.
Conditioned by who? If you're theist then this conditioning was created by the objective laws set down by God because we have no compass on morality without him.
Problem is, that slavery stuff was sanctioned by God in the OT. It also comes up in the NT if you happen to think the OT was just for the Jews.
Colossians 3:22
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.
Note the slaves bit. It's also 'Servants' depending on the translation but the masters bit doesn't change.
If you're going to insinuate that the Bible has been corrupted by outside forces then everything you believe could be put into question and that would completely undermine the text.
First of all, my faith is in God, not the Bible. At one point God dictated a perfect version and if I ever find it, we can have a debate as to what God really is saying.
Look at the Middle East, so many of those men think it is okay to oppress women and treat them as second rate. That's how they were raised, unfortunately. You are conditioned by everything. Where you live. When you live. Who you live with. Who you live next to. In this case God conditioned the Israelites to this. I am not going to pretend that I would feel the exact same way about it 2000, 4000 years ago when the Earth was a different place.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
You have to give me a few minutes, I'm still taking in that last statement.
I don't understand what is so difficult to take in about disagreeing with homosexuality but not hating homosexuals.
I believe it is against nature, science is actually in my favor on that one. I also cannot understand how a man can be attracted to another man that way and I can openly admit that I never will and shouldn't bother trying, since I will never be attracted to another man. The greatest fallacy here is a heterosexual expecting a homosexual to understand something they cannot, and vice versa.
Outside of homosexuality, they all have feelings, goals, ambitions, desires. They work jobs and pay taxes. They generally are nice people. Why do I have to hate the person, because I disagree with an act that I am not even taking part in anyway?
The other problem is that it defines heterosexual sex for pleasure as natural.
Dogs often hump eachother in a show of dominance which could be construed as homosexual behavior.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
I have no problem saying it, for the same reason people have no problem engaging in homosexuality, it's their belief. Just because a homosexual doesn't think homosexuality is wrong, doesn't mean they are right. It's a two way street, because you are going to tell me that just because I think homosexuality is wrong, doesn't mean I am right.
When we die, we either get to ask God ourselves or never have to worry about it again, cause this life was all we got.
Until then, I choose the high road, I disagree with homosexuality, but that doesn't mean I dislike homosexuals or find them appalling. In fact I count them among my friends. It's their life to live.
When we die, we either get to ask God ourselves or never have to worry about it again, cause this life was all we got.
Until then, I choose the high road, I disagree with homosexuality, but that doesn't mean I dislike homosexuals or find them appalling. In fact I count them among my friends. It's their life to live.
This part I can sorta agree with.
You consider not being gay or participating in homosexual acts as the high road. Is this not a case of judging someone else, rather than letting god be the judge?
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
You have to give me a few minutes, I'm still taking in that last statement.
I don't understand what is so difficult to take in about disagreeing with homosexuality but not hating homosexuals.
I believe it is against nature, science is actually in my favor on that one. I also cannot understand how a man can be attracted to another man that way and I can openly admit that I never will and shouldn't bother trying, since I will never be attracted to another man. The greatest fallacy here is a heterosexual expecting a homosexual to understand something they cannot, and vice versa.
Outside of homosexuality, they all have feelings, goals, ambitions, desires. They work jobs and pay taxes. They generally are nice people. Why do I have to hate the person, because I disagree with an act that I am not even taking part in anyway?
I don't condemn. Show me where I condemn. Show me where I said they were guaranteed a trip to hell for this. Since you cannot, I will point to you where I blatantly said that I believe homosexuals have a chance at forgiveness.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
I have no problem saying it, for the same reason people have no problem engaging in homosexuality, it's their belief. Just because a homosexual doesn't think homosexuality is wrong, doesn't mean they are right. It's a two way street, because you are going to tell me that just because I think homosexuality is wrong, doesn't mean I am right.
When we die, we either get to ask God ourselves or never have to worry about it again, cause this life was all we got.
Until then, I choose the high road, I disagree with homosexuality, but that doesn't mean I dislike homosexuals or find them appalling. In fact I count them among my friends. It's their life to live.
When we die, we either get to ask God ourselves or never have to worry about it again, cause this life was all we got.
Until then, I choose the high road, I disagree with homosexuality, but that doesn't mean I dislike homosexuals or find them appalling. In fact I count them among my friends. It's their life to live.
This part I can sorta agree with.
You consider not being gay or participating in homosexual acts as the high road. Is this not a case of judging someone else, rather than letting god be the judge?
I replied to it. I will bump my reply.
Jokes aside, stop wasting all of these peoples' time. Faith, and by extension, religion, isn't rational. Attempting to engage in rational discussion over the validity of something that is an inherent mockery of our critical faculties is not only an insult to the human intellect, but a gross misuse of the time of all those participating.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
[+]
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
I have no problem saying it, for the same reason people have no problem engaging in homosexuality, it's their belief. Just because a homosexual doesn't think homosexuality is wrong, doesn't mean they are right. It's a two way street, because you are going to tell me that just because I think homosexuality is wrong, doesn't mean I am right.
When we die, we either get to ask God ourselves or never have to worry about it again, cause this life was all we got.
Until then, I choose the high road, I disagree with homosexuality, but that doesn't mean I dislike homosexuals or find them appalling. In fact I count them among my friends. It's their life to live.
When we die, we either get to ask God ourselves or never have to worry about it again, cause this life was all we got.
Until then, I choose the high road, I disagree with homosexuality, but that doesn't mean I dislike homosexuals or find them appalling. In fact I count them among my friends. It's their life to live.
This part I can sorta agree with.
You consider not being gay or participating in homosexual acts as the high road. Is this not a case of judging someone else, rather than letting god be the judge?
That's not what I said at all. I consider not interfering with their personal choices and not choosing to wish ill will or animosity on them just because of those choices as the high road.
Bump.
You are disagreeing with a choice of sexual activity that is an integral part of many people's every day interactions. Stop trying to defend your bigotry. Either admit to being a bigot or change your ignorant as *** views.
[+]
Fenrir.Minjo said: »
Jokes aside, stop wasting all of these peoples' time. Faith, and by extension, religion, isn't rational. Attempting to engage in rational discussion over the validity of something that is an inherent mockery of our critical faculties is not only an insult to the human intellect, but a gross misuse of the time of all those participating.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
You are part of the problem. You call religion fake and imaginary and yet, you cannot, under your own empirical standards of evidence, possibly disprove God.
This is your fallacy, you don't admit to the possibility of being wrong. I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but there is always the possibility of me being wrong.
Until then, you should go away and think about what it would take for you to empirically prove me wrong.
Alternatively, you should go away until you can empirically prove yourself right. Oh wait.
[+]
Fenrir.Jinjo said: »
You are disagreeing with a choice of sexual activity that is an integral part of many people's every day interactions. Stop trying to defend your bigotry. Either admit to being a bigot or change your ignorant as *** views.
And now you know why you have no allies with-in faith.
Fenrir.Minjo said: »
Jokes aside, stop wasting all of these peoples' time. Faith, and by extension, religion, isn't rational. Attempting to engage in rational discussion over the validity of something that is an inherent mockery of our critical faculties is not only an insult to the human intellect, but a gross misuse of the time of all those participating.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
[+]
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Fenrir.Minjo said: »
Jokes aside, stop wasting all of these peoples' time. Faith, and by extension, religion, isn't rational. Attempting to engage in rational discussion over the validity of something that is an inherent mockery of our critical faculties is not only an insult to the human intellect, but a gross misuse of the time of all those participating.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
You are part of the problem. You call religion fake and imaginary and yet, you cannot, under your own empirical standards of evidence, possibly disprove God.
This is your fallacy, you don't admit to the possibility of being wrong. I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but there is always the possibility of me being wrong.
Until then, you should go away and think about what it would take for you to empirically prove me wrong.
Christopher.Hitchens said:
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
[+]
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
You have to give me a few minutes, I'm still taking in that last statement.
I don't understand what is so difficult to take in about disagreeing with homosexuality but not hating homosexuals.
I believe it is against nature, science is actually in my favor on that one. I also cannot understand how a man can be attracted to another man that way and I can openly admit that I never will and shouldn't bother trying, since I will never be attracted to another man. The greatest fallacy here is a heterosexual expecting a homosexual to understand something they cannot, and vice versa.
Outside of homosexuality, they all have feelings, goals, ambitions, desires. They work jobs and pay taxes. They generally are nice people. Why do I have to hate the person, because I disagree with an act that I am not even taking part in anyway?
I don't condemn. Show me where I condemn. Show me where I said they were guaranteed a trip to hell for this. Since you cannot, I will point to you where I blatantly said that I believe homosexuals have a chance at forgiveness.
By saying saying that homosexuals must be forgiven of their sin of homosexuality in order to be considered for heaven.
That translate to homosexuality is a sin.
Right, you did say that god forbids it right?
I'll ask you again, Is homosexuality a sin?
[+]
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Fenrir.Minjo said: »
Jokes aside, stop wasting all of these peoples' time. Faith, and by extension, religion, isn't rational. Attempting to engage in rational discussion over the validity of something that is an inherent mockery of our critical faculties is not only an insult to the human intellect, but a gross misuse of the time of all those participating.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
Take your imaginary friend and walk, fly, float, or what have you away.
You are part of the problem. You call religion fake and imaginary and yet, you cannot, under your own empirical standards of evidence, possibly disprove God.
This is your fallacy, you don't admit to the possibility of being wrong. I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but there is always the possibility of me being wrong.
Until then, you should go away and think about what it would take for you to empirically prove me wrong.
The audacity it must take to accuse me of acting fallaciously. Here in the real world, rationality is guided largely in part by probability.
[+]
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
You are part of the problem. You call religion fake and imaginary and yet, you cannot, under your own empirical standards of evidence, possibly disprove God.
This is your fallacy, you don't admit to the possibility of being wrong. I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but there is always the possibility of me being wrong.
Until then, you should go away and think about what it would take for you to empirically prove me wrong.
This is your fallacy, you don't admit to the possibility of being wrong. I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but there is always the possibility of me being wrong.
Until then, you should go away and think about what it would take for you to empirically prove me wrong.
Someone doesn't understand how claims work! The claim is that God exists: the ball is in your court to prove he does exist before someone can reassess data to say "Nope, wrong."
You can't disprove Russel's Teapot, The Invisible Pink Unicorn, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, or The Dragon in my Garage. You can't disprove Garden Gnomes, you can't disprove Shoe Faeries, you can't disprove Nessie, you can't disprove Godzilla. What's your point?
In the absence of evidence, why the *** should we have any ounce of faith in something?
I admit the possibility of being wrong, but so long as there's no proof for any of that ***, the only logical stance is "Nope, no Gnomes. No God. No Unicorns."
Yes, I am aware. Because a book tells you that an aspect of a certain population that determines how they construct not only their sexual lives, but also friendships and family(families) is to be frowned upon.
[+]
But there is a godzilla D:<
Can you please address the cirle jerking monkeys?
[+]
It amazes me that some of you preach against hatred yet dole it out yourself too.
[+]
Quetzalcoatl.Xueye said: »
Can you please address the cirle jerking monkeys?
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Ragnarok.Evandis said: »
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
You have to give me a few minutes, I'm still taking in that last statement.
I don't understand what is so difficult to take in about disagreeing with homosexuality but not hating homosexuals.
I believe it is against nature, science is actually in my favor on that one. I also cannot understand how a man can be attracted to another man that way and I can openly admit that I never will and shouldn't bother trying, since I will never be attracted to another man. The greatest fallacy here is a heterosexual expecting a homosexual to understand something they cannot, and vice versa.
Outside of homosexuality, they all have feelings, goals, ambitions, desires. They work jobs and pay taxes. They generally are nice people. Why do I have to hate the person, because I disagree with an act that I am not even taking part in anyway?
I don't condemn. Show me where I condemn. Show me where I said they were guaranteed a trip to hell for this. Since you cannot, I will point to you where I blatantly said that I believe homosexuals have a chance at forgiveness.
By saying saying that homosexuals must be forgiven of their sin of homosexuality in order to be considered for heaven.
That translate to homosexuality is a sin.
Right, you did say that god forbids it right?
I'll ask you again, Is homosexuality a sin?
Yes, homosexuality is a sin.
However, you make it sound like homosexuals are given a raw deal in having to be forgiven for the sin of homosexuality.
I have to be forgiven for the sin of premarital sex. I have to be forgiven for the sin of having a child out of wedlock.
God forbids all that too and just like a homosexual, I have the possibility of being forgiven.
You make it sound like homosexuality is the only thing God calls a sin and that they are specifically being singled out with the word sin. They are not.
Outside of blasphemy, all sins can be forgiven, all sins are on the same level. We are all sinners, no matter what Westboro may believe.
Bismarck.Rharmony said: »
But there is a godzilla D:<
Homosexuality is not a sin. Move on.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2026 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.