Pages:
Author

Topic: Health and Religion - page 31. (Read 210900 times)

legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 19, 2018, 12:38:38 AM
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.
newbie
Activity: 46
Merit: 0
May 18, 2018, 07:35:00 PM
Nice article.  I did not know that being religious is linked to being a healthy person.  Well maybe because, those who believe in God knew that their body is God's temple.  Mostly religious people are those who were not into drinking, partying, and smoking.  They are happy people even if they are not into this kind of social perceptions. 

And yes, maybe there are atheist because they are those people who are so intelligent that they refuse to accept that God do exist.  They think they knew everything and questions those who believe to the existence of Supreme being as they say there are no proof to this claim.
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 18, 2018, 06:08:24 PM
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?
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 18, 2018, 05:47:26 PM

The same acts (adultery, kidnapping, rape, homosexual sex, paganism, pedophilia, human sacrifice) are done today and we manage with our secular laws.

Bible is a psychopath wet dream.  Put it away.  We don't need to stone adulterers, kill gays or people who work on Saturday.

Relax with your Bible propaganda.
...

Are you sure you shouldn't relax with your anti-Bible propaganda?

If you really want to understand the Bible and how to address your concerns I recommend a book dedicated to this topic as it is a deep one. The Rational Bible is currently near the top of the amazon bestseller lists and would be a good place to start.

The Rational Bible: Exodus

https://www.amazon.com/Rational-Bible-Exodus-Dennis-Prager/dp/1621577724
Quote
Why do so many people think the Bible, the most influential book in world history, is outdated? Why do our friends and neighbors – and sometimes we ourselves – dismiss the Bible as irrelevant, irrational, immoral, or all of these things? This explanation of the Book of Exodus, the second book of the Bible, will demonstrate that the Bible is not only powerfully relevant to today’s issues, but completely consistent with rational thought.

Do you think the Bible permitted the trans-Atlantic slave trade? You won’t after reading this book.

Do you struggle to love your parents? If you do, you need this book.

Do you doubt the existence of God because belief in God is “irrational?” This book will give you reason after reason to rethink your doubts.

The title of this commentary is, “The Rational Bible” because its approach is entirely reason-based. The reader is never asked to accept anything on faith alone. As Prager says, “If something I write does not make rational sense, I have not done my job.”

The Rational Bible is the fruit of Dennis Prager’s forty years of teaching the Bible to people of every faith, and no faith. On virtually every page, you will discover how the text relates to the contemporary world and to your life.

His goal: to change your mind – and then change your life.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 18, 2018, 01:21:11 PM
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.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 18, 2018, 01:00:31 PM
The War on Wisdom
https://www.creators.com/read/dennis-prager/05/18/the-war-on-wisdom
Quote from: Dennis Prager
There is more knowledge available today than ever before in history. But few would argue people are wiser than ever before.

On the contrary, many of us would argue that we are living in a particularly foolish time — a period that is largely wisdom-free, especially among those with the most knowledge: the best educated.

The fact that one of our two major political parties is advocating lowering the voting age to 16 is a good example of the absence of wisdom among a large segment of the adult population. What adult deems 16-year-olds capable of making a wise voting decision? The answer is an adult with the wisdom of a 16-year-old — "Hey, I'm no wiser than most 16-year-olds. Why should I have the vote and they not?"

America has been influenced and is now being largely led by members of the baby-boom generation. This is the generation that came up with the motto "Never trust anyone over 30," making it the first American generation to proclaim contempt for wisdom as a virtue.

The left in America is founded on the rejection of wisdom. It is possible to be on the left and be kind, honest in business, faithful to one's spouse, etc. But it is not possible to be wise if one subscribes to leftist (as opposed to liberal) ideas.

Last year, Amy Wax, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, co-authored an opinion piece in the Philadelphia Inquirer with a professor from the University of San Diego School of Law in which they wrote that the "bourgeois culture" and "bourgeois norms" that governed America from the end of World War II until the mid-1960s were good for America, and that their rejection has caused much of the social dysfunction that has characterized this country since the 1960s.

Those values included, in their words: "Get married before you have children and strive to stay married for their sake. Get the education you need for gainful employment, work hard, and avoid idleness. Go the extra mile for your employer or client. Be a patriot, ready to serve the country. Be neighborly, civic-minded, and charitable. Avoid coarse language in public. Be respectful of authority. Eschew substance abuse and crime."

Recognizing those norms as universally beneficial constitutes wisdom. Rejection of them constitutes a rejection of wisdom — i.e. foolishness.

Yet the left almost universally rejected the Wax piece, deeming it, as the left-wing National Lawyers Guild wrote, "an explicit and implicit endorsement of white supremacy," and questioning whether professor Wax should be allowed to continue teaching a required first-year course at Penn Law.

To equate getting married before having children, working hard and eschewing substance abuse and crime with "white supremacy" is to betray an absence of wisdom that is as depressing as it breathtaking. It is obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense that those values benefit anyone who adheres to them; they have nothing to do with race.

But almost every left-wing position (that differs from a liberal or conservative position) is bereft of wisdom.

Is the left-wing belief in the notion of "cultural appropriation" — such as the left's recent condemnation of a white girl for wearing a Chinese dress to her high school prom — wise? Or is it simply moronic?

Is the left-wing belief that there are more than two genders wise? Or is it objectively false, foolish and nihilistic?

Has the left-wing belief that children need (unearned) self-esteem turned out to be wise, or morally and psychologically destructive? To its credit, last year, the Guardian wrote a scathing exposé on the "lie" — its word — the self-esteem movement is based on and the narcissistic generation it created.

Is it wise to provide college students with "safe spaces" — with their hot chocolate, stuffed animals and puppy videos — in which to hide whenever a conservative speaker comes to their college? Or is it just ridiculous and infantilizing?

Is the left's rejection of many, if not most, great philosophical, literary and artistic works of wisdom on the grounds that they were written or created by white males wise? One example: The English department of the University of Pennsylvania, half of whose law school professors condemned Amy Wax and almost none of whose law professors defended her piece, removed a portrait of William Shakespeare (replacing it with that of a black lesbian poet).

Is multiculturalism, the idea that no culture is superior to another morally or in any other way wise? Isn't it the antithesis of wisdom, whose very premise is that certain ideas are morally superior to others, and certain literary or artistic works are superior to others?

And the veneration of feelings over truth, not to mention wisdom, is a cornerstone of leftism.

Here's one way to test my thesis: Ask left-wing friends what they have done to pass on wisdom to their children. Most will answer with a question: "What do you mean?" Then ask religious Jewish or Christian friends the same question. They won't answer with a question.
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 18, 2018, 06:52:33 AM

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.
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 18, 2018, 06:35:47 AM
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.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 18, 2018, 06:33:17 AM
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.
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 18, 2018, 05:11:07 AM
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 argument
https://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/

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://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.37403331
However, 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.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 18, 2018, 04:52:47 AM
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 argument
https://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/

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 of promiscuity lead to cultural upheaval and decay as was argued by the author I quoted earlier: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.37403331
However, 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.
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 18, 2018, 04:39:31 AM
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 argument

https://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/
Quote
(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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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?
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
May 18, 2018, 04:30:20 AM
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 argument

https://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/
Quote
(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.

Cool

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.

Cool
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 18, 2018, 04:17:11 AM
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 argument

https://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/
Quote
(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.

Cool

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.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
May 18, 2018, 03:47:15 AM
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 argument

https://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/
Quote
(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.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
May 18, 2018, 03:44:36 AM
''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/slave
The point isn't about slaves becoming slaves. The point is about free people volunteering to be slaves. Exodus 21:16:

''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:

''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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

''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.
God said the act of homosexuality is wrong. He explained it through His Bible writers. They even showed why, because it is an unnatural act.

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?

Animal failure is wrong because mankind plunged the whole world into sin when they ate the fruit in the Garden.

Cool
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 18, 2018, 03:41:42 AM
''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/slave
The point isn't about slaves becoming slaves. The point is about free people volunteering to be slaves. Exodus 21:16:

''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:

''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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

''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.
God said the act of homosexuality is wrong. He explained it through His Bible writers. They even showed why, because it is an unnatural act.

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?
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 18, 2018, 03:40:28 AM
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 argument

https://philodispatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/why-homosexuality-is-unacceptable-the-argument-from-disability/
Quote
(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.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
May 18, 2018, 03:24:35 AM
''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/slave
The point isn't about slaves becoming slaves. The point is about free people volunteering to be slaves. Exodus 21:16:

''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:

''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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

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.

Cool

''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.
God said the act of homosexuality is wrong. He explained it through His Bible writers. They even showed why, because it is an unnatural act.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 17, 2018, 10:19:45 PM

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.

That fact that it is not impossible is not relevant. It suffices that it is disadvantageous.

Demographic Profile of Same-Sex Parents
https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/FP/FP-12-15.pdf
Quote
About 1 in 6 (16%) same-sex couple households include children (biological, step, or adopted).

Male-male households (10%) are half as likely as female-female households (22%) to have children present (Figure 1).

In contrast, 41% of opposite-sex couple households have children present (not shown).

Pages:
Jump to: