Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
101 online now:
dwise1 (1 member, 100 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,180 Year: 6,292/6,534 Month: 485/650 Week: 23/232 Day: 0/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Homosexuality and Evo, Creo, and ID
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6835
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


(1)
Message 46 of 1309 (722866)
03-25-2014 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Faith
03-25-2014 10:12 AM


A Cup Of Tea?
I, for one, understand your frustration here. I, also, think comparing human or mammalian homosexuality to bacterial or invertibrate asexual reproduction is far from appropriate given the discussion parameters. Even reptilian sex reversal, parthenogenesis and androgyny are inappropriate in this context.

I don't see how this got so far afield. I understood what you were saying and I think it appropriate. Purely homosexual acts cannot produce offspring. That does not mean that a human bisexual is limited to only the homosexual side of their orientation nor that homosexuals are incapable of producing offspring.

And how it came to jailing all non-productive couples is beyond anything I see you proposing, even as an extension of what I find to be your horribly biased and bigoted philosophy. I think the wheels just fell off over some assumed perceptions of what you were saying.

So, let it roll. Have a nice cup of tea and let the misperceptions subside.

As for the rest of the crowd, I think if you look carefully and objectively at these messages Faith was not headed in the direction you assumed and to which you reacted.

Sorry, fellas. I think you all took a wrong turn somewhere.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Faith, posted 03-25-2014 10:12 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Tangle, posted 03-25-2014 4:09 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

ramoss
Member
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 47 of 1309 (722872)
03-25-2014 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Faith
03-25-2014 7:27 AM


Well, you know

There is something known as a 'turkey baster'.

http://www.babymed.com/...-get-pregnant-turkey-baster-method


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 03-25-2014 7:27 AM Faith has not replied

ramoss
Member
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


(1)
Message 48 of 1309 (722873)
03-25-2014 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Faith
03-25-2014 9:51 AM


I am sure that typing in caps makes your response more accurate and honest.. in your mind at least.

It looks like 'I protest too much' to everyone else


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Faith, posted 03-25-2014 9:51 AM Faith has not replied

Tangle
Member
Posts: 8579
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 49 of 1309 (722874)
03-25-2014 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by AZPaul3
03-25-2014 2:44 PM


Re: A Cup Of Tea?
AZ writes:

Sorry, fellas. I think you all took a wrong turn somewhere.

I agree. Faith's meaning was fairly obvious but she left herself with just enough blood in the water to attract the sharks. I think we'd make more progress by offering a sticking plaster now and then.


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.

Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by AZPaul3, posted 03-25-2014 2:44 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 762 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 50 of 1309 (722876)
03-25-2014 4:13 PM


Thanks for the sanity of AZPaul and Tangle.

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Theodoric, posted 03-25-2014 4:25 PM Faith has replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7416
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 51 of 1309 (722878)
03-25-2014 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Faith
03-25-2014 4:13 PM


But your arguments on this thread are still fundamentally flawed and bigoted.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Faith, posted 03-25-2014 4:13 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 03-25-2014 4:35 PM Theodoric has replied
 Message 54 by AZPaul3, posted 03-25-2014 5:02 PM Theodoric has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 762 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 52 of 1309 (722880)
03-25-2014 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Theodoric
03-25-2014 4:25 PM


IDIOT!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Theodoric, posted 03-25-2014 4:25 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Theodoric, posted 03-25-2014 5:01 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 62 by Tangle, posted 03-25-2014 5:30 PM Faith has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7416
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 53 of 1309 (722886)
03-25-2014 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
03-25-2014 4:35 PM


Why are you wasting posts if you have nothing to contribute? You make all these claims of how you are abused here then you respond with this shit.

Grow the fuck up.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 03-25-2014 4:35 PM Faith has not replied

AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6835
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 54 of 1309 (722887)
03-25-2014 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Theodoric
03-25-2014 4:25 PM


But your arguments on this thread are still fundamentally flawed and bigoted.

I may regret this, Theo, but where? What arguments? That a human homosexual union cannot produce offspring from that act? That is the only argument I see Faith has made in this thread. Is that wrong?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Theodoric, posted 03-25-2014 4:25 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Theodoric, posted 03-25-2014 5:05 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7416
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 55 of 1309 (722888)
03-25-2014 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by AZPaul3
03-25-2014 5:02 PM


Yes it is but that argument is a strawman in the general context. Homosexuals can reproduce. That they cannot from the act is a strawman.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by AZPaul3, posted 03-25-2014 5:02 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Tangle, posted 03-25-2014 5:29 PM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 64 by AZPaul3, posted 03-25-2014 5:38 PM Theodoric has replied

lokiare
Member (Idle past 2968 days)
Posts: 69
Joined: 03-18-2014


Message 56 of 1309 (722894)
03-25-2014 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Phat
03-24-2014 3:06 PM


Re: Rights versus Responsibilities
lokiare writes:

Is homosexuality a choice or is it some biological process.

Both. As a believer, I think that homosexual gender attraction is not a choice. It is also not a sin. It just is.

Homosexual behavior, however, is a choice.

The debate centers on rights vs. responsibilities.

I can understand the secular argument that in essence says that no religion nor belief should legislate human morality. So in that context, and on behalf of a secular government, I advocate choice, consensus, and personal responsibility regarding behavior within society.

As a believer, I will say that I believe that many inborn traits of humanity....whatever they may be...are something we are born with, but have a responsibility to control.

If humans simply behaved according to biological urges, we wouldn't have that good of a society.

Do you have any proof that "... that homosexual gender attraction is not a choice.". Studies? surveys? anything to factually back this up and negate the link I posted that lists many studies showing it is environmental and choice based?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Phat, posted 03-24-2014 3:06 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2014 5:18 PM lokiare has not replied
 Message 58 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2014 5:23 PM lokiare has not replied
 Message 68 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-25-2014 5:46 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 89 by Phat, posted 03-25-2014 6:29 PM lokiare has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 723 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 57 of 1309 (722896)
03-25-2014 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:14 PM


Re: Rights versus Responsibilities
Do you have any proof that "... that homosexual gender attraction is not a choice.". ...

When did you choose to be heterosexual or did you always know?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:14 PM lokiare has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 723 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 58 of 1309 (722898)
03-25-2014 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:14 PM


Re: Rights versus Responsibilities
... negate the link I posted that lists many studies showing it is environmental and choice based?

We don't debate by citing websites here (see rules re posting bare links).

Perhaps you could cite the more salient points, and explain more what you mean by "environmental" ...

In biological terms "environmental" would mean chemicals and hormones that would affect fetal and childhood development - is this what you mean?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:14 PM lokiare has not replied

lokiare
Member (Idle past 2968 days)
Posts: 69
Joined: 03-18-2014


Message 59 of 1309 (722899)
03-25-2014 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Omnivorous
03-24-2014 3:10 PM


Re: Why are choices fair game?
lokiare writes:

If it is not a biological process and a result of choice and environment then it shouldn't be protected under the law any more than any other choice/environment option (like say vegetarianism).

As I recall, the Constitution goes to some lengths to protect my right to make my own choices.

I'd say that if meat folks began persecuting veggie folks (denying them equal access to marriage, housing, employment, etc.), then vegetarianism would need to be "protected under the law."

Could you explain why only those aspecst of human life that are seen as biologically determined should be protected against persecution and bigotry? Under your rubric, religious liberty would suffer considerable harm.

Actually no. Nice try to box me in, but it won't work. Lets go back to your statement about veggie folk being persecuted. Homosexuals think that being persecuted means being denied service (usually because of additional costs, and possibly religious belief). So they are pushing for laws that require everyone to serve them. As is recently seen in the law suits about the wedding cake service being denied to a homosexual couple and them suing to force the group to do it or pay restitution. So the equivalency would be for every restaurant to be required to have a vegetarian option or be considered to be persecuting vegetarians.

In fact its the religious freedoms that forcing those things would violate. Surely there are churches, housing, and places of employment that would likely not refuse service to homosexuals and even possibly cater to them. Why should everyone be forced to cater to something that is a choice. I see signs all over that say things like "firearms prohibited" and "no shirt, no service" can we then under the same assumptions start suing those people and throwing them in jail because they are 'infringing on our rights'? Of course not. That would be nonsense.

It also has to do with what people consider persecution and bigotry. I once went to a forum and expressed my dislike of all of the homosexual lobbying that was putting homosexual scenes in every show. I said something along the lines that I was not entertained by it anymore than someone who doesn't like scenes of romantic comedy in their serious political thrillers. Shortly after I was severely 'persecuted' for having an opinion.

The key thing to take away is that not liking something is not persecution or bigotry. The second thing is we have to get rid of all those signs and clauses in contracts that say "we can do these things without having a reason at all.".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Omnivorous, posted 03-24-2014 3:10 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-25-2014 5:41 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 74 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2014 5:58 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 76 by Omnivorous, posted 03-25-2014 6:00 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 83 by Taq, posted 03-25-2014 6:13 PM lokiare has not replied

lokiare
Member (Idle past 2968 days)
Posts: 69
Joined: 03-18-2014


(1)
Message 60 of 1309 (722902)
03-25-2014 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Coyote
03-24-2014 3:16 PM


Why are some religious folks so worried about homosexuality anyway?

What business is it of theirs/yours?

Because it is getting to the point where it is coming into direct conflict with the laws that protect the free exorcise of religion. A christian bakery is now being sued and threatened with criminal conduct for choosing not to serve a homosexual couple for example. So it actually is our business. You'll notice that we didn't really care until that point. We tried to convert them, but that was it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Coyote, posted 03-24-2014 3:16 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by AZPaul3, posted 03-25-2014 5:52 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 77 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2014 6:01 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 82 by frako, posted 03-25-2014 6:10 PM lokiare has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022