Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,809 Year: 3,066/9,624 Month: 911/1,588 Week: 94/223 Day: 5/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheist evolutionists: How far will you allow yourselves of sexual perversities?
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 91 of 152 (524358)
09-16-2009 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by purpledawn
09-14-2009 2:42 PM


Re: Unbalanced Tolerance
im not going to go into who wrote what because its off topic here
purpledawn writes:
So the question remains. If Christianity claims that all sexual misconduct is equally disdainful and unacceptable, then why allow and even perform marriages of people who have divorced their mate for reasons other than fornication, but not allow homosexuals to live and marry without being harassed?
a widow can marry again and it is not considered adultery as can an innocent partner in a marriage (usually its only one who is unfaithful) the other is free to remarry.
so it really depends on the circumstances and if the church even knows all the circumstances of the ones getting married. I would suspect they probably dont. But overall, the church does not apply the bible
sure they claim it as their main text book but the facts speak otherwise. They do not apply the bible and havnt done so for a very long time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by purpledawn, posted 09-14-2009 2:42 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 92 of 152 (524367)
09-16-2009 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by mike the wiz
09-14-2009 6:18 AM


Re: No Contradiction, Logic, or Morality Here
When I was ten years old, I got to reading Genesis, and guess what - before any kind of worldly influences of any meaning, I understood Genesis.
You were a child, and you believed a story about a talking snake outwitting God.
I get the picture.
It is more comfortable to believe it was all a parable, and that we all go to heaven no matter what we do in life.
It's so much more comfortable for some people to believe that even though the Bible says that Jesus "gave himself as a ransom for all", that still means that the people whom they personally disapprove of are not in fact ransomed and will burn in Hell forever.
The message is sin.
Have you ever lied?
Have you ever stolen?
Have you ever cursed God or took His name in vain?
Have you ever commited adultery, even in your heart? Have you lusted ever before?
Have you ever been angry at your brother?
Yes, how about you?
Right.
So the difference between us, apparently, is that you believe, without evidence, that someone else has taken responsibility for your sins, whereas I accept responsibility for mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by mike the wiz, posted 09-14-2009 6:18 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 152 (524374)
09-16-2009 9:04 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by mike the wiz
09-14-2009 6:18 AM


Re: No Contradiction, Logic, or Morality Here
When I was ten years old, I got to reading Genesis, and guess what - before any kind of worldly influences of any meaning, I understood Genesis.
That's because presumably by age 10 you knew how to read English. As we all know about most children, they're quite taken in by fanciful and enchanted stories.
It's a matter of studying the bible, as a "whole" thing, and asking; "If God is behind this WHOLE thing, then what is his message?"
The message is sin.
Have you ever lied?
Have you ever stolen?
Have you ever cursed God or took His name in vain?
Have you ever commited adultery, even in your heart? Have you lusted ever before?
Have you ever been angry at your brother?
Nobody has ever gotten around the fact that they have all done wrong in life, and even though the bible tells us about a Holy God that cannot withstand sin, people still believe they can enter his presence and live.
It was God that imparted the sinful behavior to begin with. He doesn't make us sin directly, so the story goes, but deductive reasoning tells us he gives us the ability and even the desire to sin, then says if we would just follow him he'd make us clean. That is extortion.

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samual Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by mike the wiz, posted 09-14-2009 6:18 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
greyseal
Member (Idle past 3861 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 94 of 152 (529989)
10-11-2009 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Modulous
09-08-2009 2:05 PM


you may not want to read this
lol i obviously wasnt taking myself as seriously as you
Heh - maybe, but it's important to be clear about consent and 'not complaining' because the conversation so often turns to animals and children and clarifying that consent is different than...oh, too late.
I'm not going to finger-point (much) about the...not so recent acitivies...that have only recently come to light regarding certain practitioners and members of a certain sect of one of the biggest religions in the world and their moral indescretions and the activity keeping it out of the limelight...but if you're going to point and gasp about "sexual perversions", there's a whole world of difference between "safe, sane and legal" and, well, not.
However Peg's point does raise a very, very good point.
Certain activities carried a death sentence (or at least a sentence) for what could legally be called "masturbation with owned property" because the objects in question happened to be...of a different class.
For example (and yes, this is going to get somewhat beyond PG13 in the next few words - so stop reading now if you're squeamish) dead bodies and animals.
A body is legally property, it's certainly no longer a living person - and there was a legal case a while ago (I believe in the USA) where somebody was tried for...that (yuck! I can't express how much wrong that contains) and said person's defence was "this is my property".
Animals too have been considered legally objects, property, so why is there a legal issue with...that?
Personally...shudder...but still the question remains.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Modulous, posted 09-08-2009 2:05 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
Yrreg
Member (Idle past 4924 days)
Posts: 64
Joined: 11-21-2006


Message 95 of 152 (582295)
09-20-2010 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Dr Adequate
09-04-2009 5:12 PM


I have just been banned for good or for a period from that forum.
I have just been banned for good or for a period from that forum.
I will find that out when I next check in and try to post a message, after some months later.
And I never ever use any profanities there not so much as a f**k nor a s**t.
My impression is that they don't want anyone theist to continue to exchange ideas with atheists there who are the excessive predominant majority there, I dare say exclusive majority there (pun intended).
With that kind of an attitude they are exercising self-censorship.
What I read about this forum is that the owner-operator-founder is very tolerant and not quick to ban anyone or suspend anyone from personal pique or vindictive fervor.
Yrreg

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-04-2009 5:12 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Yrreg
Member (Idle past 4924 days)
Posts: 64
Joined: 11-21-2006


Message 96 of 152 (582305)
09-20-2010 6:41 PM


Well, even atheists set limits to what they can do in sex.
Well, even atheists set limits to what they can do in sex.
That is a sign that they don't really believe in total liberties in sex provided you can get away with it because no one knows about it or at least legally you don't get in trouble with the law.
But since atheists don't admit of any transcendental morality or decency for humanity, that is an inconsistency in their setting limits to sex.
In effect they do maintain a transcendental morality or decency for humanity.
For animals who do not have the same nature of man, there is no questioning morality and decency with them from us humans and to all appearances they do what their nature moves them to and they can do so, even though for us humans some behaviors of theirs can be for us humans immoral or indecent or perverse.
So, for human there is transcendence in man's nature.
And with animals and no condemnation on them at all, their nature does not include any component of transcendence.
Yrreg

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by frako, posted 09-20-2010 7:25 PM Yrreg has not replied
 Message 98 by Percy, posted 09-20-2010 7:25 PM Yrreg has not replied
 Message 99 by ringo, posted 09-20-2010 7:31 PM Yrreg has not replied
 Message 100 by jar, posted 09-20-2010 7:43 PM Yrreg has not replied
 Message 101 by Modulous, posted 09-20-2010 7:57 PM Yrreg has not replied
 Message 104 by dwise1, posted 09-20-2010 11:33 PM Yrreg has not replied
 Message 106 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-21-2010 2:54 AM Yrreg has not replied
 Message 107 by Larni, posted 09-21-2010 3:55 AM Yrreg has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 97 of 152 (582314)
09-20-2010 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Yrreg
09-20-2010 6:41 PM


Re: Well, even atheists set limits to what they can do in sex.
if all participants in the intercourse agree on it and none of them are minors they can do what ever they want to do, as long as they dont brake any laws or intrude on other peoples rights they can use industrial polishers to polish their you know whats its none of my business what they do in their bedroom.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Yrreg, posted 09-20-2010 6:41 PM Yrreg has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22390
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 98 of 152 (582315)
09-20-2010 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Yrreg
09-20-2010 6:41 PM


Re: Well, even atheists set limits to what they can do in sex.
Yrreg writes:
What I read about this forum is that the owner-operator-founder is very tolerant and not quick to ban anyone or suspend anyone from personal pique or vindictive fervor.
Plus I hear he's a total sucker for suck-ups!
That is a sign that they don't really believe in total liberties in sex provided you can get away with it because no one knows about it or at least legally you don't get in trouble with the law.
Apologies for not having read the thread, but what types of sex between consenting adults should be off limits, and why?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Yrreg, posted 09-20-2010 6:41 PM Yrreg has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 99 of 152 (582318)
09-20-2010 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Yrreg
09-20-2010 6:41 PM


Re: Well, even atheists set limits to what they can do in sex.
Yrreg writes:
But since atheists don't admit of any transcendental morality or decency for humanity, that is an inconsistency in their setting limits to sex.
Internalized morality is more effective than transcendental morality. Atheists and other sensible people know why they shouldn't do what they shouldn't do without having to consult with a flying spook. Theists are much more likely to look for loopholes in the letter of the law instead of abiding by the spirit of the law.

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Yrreg, posted 09-20-2010 6:41 PM Yrreg has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 100 of 152 (582320)
09-20-2010 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Yrreg
09-20-2010 6:41 PM


Re: Well, even atheists set limits to what they can do in sex.
But since atheists don't admit of any transcendental morality or decency for humanity, that is an inconsistency in their setting limits to sex.
No idea what a 'transcendental morality' is.
But morality is a social construct and has evolved over time. It continues to evolve. It is certainly better today then it was when Jesus would have been alive.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Yrreg, posted 09-20-2010 6:41 PM Yrreg has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 101 of 152 (582324)
09-20-2010 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Yrreg
09-20-2010 6:41 PM


atheists set limits to what they can do
Well, even atheists set limits to what they can do in sex.
I set my own personal limits for all activities. I won't do ass to mouth penis routines - but I'm fine if you want to.
Also - I don't drink alcohol.
That is a sign that they don't really believe in total liberties...
I don't believe in total liberties - I've not met any atheist who does.
But I do believe you should be free to do as you will so long as more important rights are not impinged on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Yrreg, posted 09-20-2010 6:41 PM Yrreg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by onifre, posted 09-20-2010 10:45 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(1)
Message 102 of 152 (582359)
09-20-2010 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Modulous
09-20-2010 7:57 PM


Re: atheists set limits to what they can do
Also - I don't drink alcohol.
That's because you don't do ass to mouth. If you did, you'd drink.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Modulous, posted 09-20-2010 7:57 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Theodoric, posted 09-20-2010 11:33 PM onifre has seen this message but not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 103 of 152 (582365)
09-20-2010 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by onifre
09-20-2010 10:45 PM


Re: atheists set limits to what they can do
That's because you don't do ass to mouth. If you did, you'd drink.
Probably tequila straight too. I think that would be the only way to get that taste out of your mouth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by onifre, posted 09-20-2010 10:45 PM onifre has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by dwise1, posted 09-20-2010 11:41 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 104 of 152 (582366)
09-20-2010 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Yrreg
09-20-2010 6:41 PM


Re: Well, even atheists set limits to what they can do in sex.
"transcendental morality"? What is that supposed to mean? Is it like transcendental medication? Do they give each of you your own personal mantra? I know they told you not to share your mantra with anybody, but that doesn't mean you can't tell anyone that you have one.
Now, given your truly lousy record for replying, I'll take a stab at what you mean. You're talking about morality imposed upon us externally by a supernatural entity. Sorry, no need for that. The gods have nothing whatsoever to do with morality. Whatever would make you think that they do?
Atheists are people, no different from theists. We have relationships of all kinds -- probably more normal relationships than theists do (judging, in part, by the wide range of weird ideas we see being forwarded all the time by theists). At the very least we have common decency and treat ourselves and others with common decency. Why shouldn't we? Some of our relationships are sexual and we want to treat our partners with the respect that they are due. Why would we want to do anything that would jeopardize the relationship? Your assumptions come through and they are weird!
I responded to your opening post in this topic and you have never replied to it. Here it is again:
dwise1 writes:
I get the idea from reading about the beliefs of atheist evolutionists ...
And just who created those writing that you've been reading? In short, what are your sources?
Seriously, what are your sources? Because they are seriously misleading you. If you keep using them it'll lead to a serious case of brain rot. Really, where are you getting your weird ideas from?
For one thing, your sources are what's making you obsess about sexual perversities. That obsession certainly seems to be a definite Christian thing, not at all an atheist thing. I've seem so many fundamentalists insist completely seriously that if their god did not exist, then they would have no personal responsibility at all and could do everything and anything they wanted to regardless of how sexually perverse -- indeed, the more perverse the better! I have also corresponded with a creation-science activist, Bill Morgan, who claims to have been an atheist, but he was only pretending to be one. Here is what he himself wrote on his pretend deconversion; pay especial attention to the last two paragraphs, plus I added bolding to a key statement:
quote:
In sixth grade, I remember seeing a big colorful book produced by Time-Life. It caught my eye, and I opened it up and was pleased to see big colorful drawings. One set of drawings really caught my eye. There was a series of animated drawings that went across two pages. On the far left was a very ape-like character walking on all fours and covered with hair. The character to his right was a little more upright, he had shorter arms, was starting to walk on two legs and had less hair. This progression continued for a few more drawings until at the far right side of the page there was this handsome fellow, a human being! This is called the ascent of man chart that nearly everyone is familiar with.
In sixth grade, I looked at that chart for a while, smirked, thought it was ridiculous, and went outside and played softball.
Eventually I made it to ninth grade. While in a Biology class, the teacher was teaching us about evolution and placed the same chart up on the wall. I still remember it. I sat there and studied that chart for a long time. It was on that very day that I recognized a major conflict existed between what this teacher was saying and what the Bible taught. Should I believe my science teacher, who is teaching man has ascended from ape-like animals, or do I believe mommy, daddy, and that book (the Bible) that says God made man instantly from the dust of the ground?" I reasoned that this teacher is a scientist after all, so this must be valid information.
I had a choice to make that millions of people world wide are faced with. Do I believe the Bible or what is taught as science (please note I did not call it science).
In ninth grade I chose to go with the science teacher, and considered myself to be an atheist for about 14 years. I took many more science classes in high school and in college (I am a Mechanical Engineer), and none of these classes changed my beliefs, if anything they reinforced my atheist beliefs.
I assume the majority of you are in college now. Do you understand my story? I am pretty certain you have had several hours of your education dedicated to the teaching of the Theory of Evolution. I would love to hear how this affected you. Has it done anything to your faith? It obliterated mine!
Question! Why in 6th grade did I think the drawings were ridiculous, but in 9th grade I believed them?
Was it because I was more intellectual? No. Was it because the Biology teacher explained it so convincingly? Not really. The real reason for my becoming an atheist in 9th grade can be summed up in one word...hormones. In 6th grade I did not have much temptation in my life. Perhaps my biggest sins were a lie here and there, throwing snowballs at the school bus and riding my minibike where I shouldn't.
But in 9th grade a whole new world opened up to me. The temptation of drinking, drugs and premarital sex presented themselves to me at exactly the same time I was being taught evolution. I knew the Bible said that being drunk and having sex outside of marriage was wrong, but here is my science teacher, telling me the origin of man is completely contradictory to what the Bible taught as the origin of man. I felt excited.....and decided the Theory of Evolution was for me, after all the Bible was scientifically wrong on the very first page!! I considered myself to be an atheist. As an atheist I no longer had to abide by any rules but my own. If I wanted to get drunk, no problem, if I wanted to try to have premarital sex no problem, I now belonged to the evolution "religion" (religion meaning a system of beliefs built on faith) that allowed me to sin without guilt.
It was not the data that made me an atheist, it was the conclusion, a belief that made me the judge of right and wrong. Those cartoon drawings of ape men did look sharp, but I wanted to believe them emotionally, more than I really believed them intellectually.
BTW, the reason why I know that he was only pretending is that he had told me that every night that he was an "atheist" he prayed to God. Whisky, Tango, Foxtrot, Oscar? No actual atheist would do that, but only a pretend atheist. If you know any Bible verse that says otherwise, do please quote it, book, chapter, and verse.
That's a major problem that your "transcendental morality" causes for believers: it presents them with a huge tempting loophole. They want to indulge in all kinds of depravity, but their religion teaches them that they cannot indulge themselves, unless they become atheists. So, like Bill, they pretend to be atheists just so they can indulge in depravity. So they think that depravity is part of the atheist condition. Such idiots!
Stop, think, discuss. Then maybe you can eventually stop being as bass-ackwards as your name.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Yrreg, posted 09-20-2010 6:41 PM Yrreg has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 105 of 152 (582367)
09-20-2010 11:41 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Theodoric
09-20-2010 11:33 PM


Re: atheists set limits to what they can do
Probably tequila straight too. I think that would be the only way to get that taste out of your mouth.
quote:
... Sabes que eres mexicano cuando...
. . .
4. Piensas que el Tequila cura la gripa y otras enfermedades.
(You know you're Mexican when you think that tequila cures the flu and other illnesses.)
Got that from my suegra (mother-in-law), so it must be true. That stuff does do wonders.
As for what it would do to that taste in your mouth, yo mismo prefiero tacos.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Theodoric, posted 09-20-2010 11:33 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024