|
Beliefs
Sept 18, 2006 10:01:44 GMT -5
Post by NASH7777 on Sept 18, 2006 10:01:44 GMT -5
Share your beliefs or talk about others' ~~~~ I believe in everything....but nothing contradicts....?!... But how does that work right? Quite easily actually.
First there is either nothing in existence or there is everything in existence. Obviously since there's something there must be everything. This is also supported by thinking something exists makes it exist, it's just that it's existance isn't relative to our existance. It's a simple concept similiar to the computer game of life. Let's say we have an endless grid and fill it and it gets complex enough to create life. The frames go on and the life does stuff etc... and we stop the program. Just because we don't continue the program doesn't mean that it doesn't in theory. That life has to keep the laws of it's world and continue in it's own sense. Thus the everything theory.
Everything theory allows for every possible combination of every possible outcome to be in existence, so in this part of everything there is absolute truth but we have no way of confirming it. The everything theory is also scopeless so it can extend beyond the scope of God or Gods, therefore people's religions can be correct in a part of a bigger picture. Some part of everything has a god that creates things this way and whatnot.
In conclusion it doesn't matter all that much and ultimately the theory can't be argued with or disporved because it is "scopeless" in nature, and to me it just makes sense!
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 18, 2006 17:16:06 GMT -5
Post by Bigfoot on Sept 18, 2006 17:16:06 GMT -5
To be completely honest, while I am sick of these type of topics, I will post my opinion on it. I don't think life is as simple of a thing to ever figure out as to why we are here, whats our purpose, bla bla bla.
But what I do believe is that there may have been some smart as hell poeple that lived before recorded history that came up with the concept of religion. Put fear into the future generations of consequences that may follow after sins. I aint saying anything remotely deep when I say this, but I think that maybe man created God, not the other way around.
I used to believe God existed as a kid, and I guess I kind of do still maybe to keep me in shape. But I guess that now that I have grown up, that I put everything into my own context. And no its not because of something like "If God were here, he'd fix everything, bla bla bla." I think statements like that are completely stupid. Its almost like they are just mad because they believed in him so much, then bam, someone died, or they get raped, etc. Taking your anger to try and provoke something that may not even exist is stupid.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 18, 2006 19:57:02 GMT -5
Post by Neo Samurai on Sept 18, 2006 19:57:02 GMT -5
I also don't like these conversial topics (politics, religion, etc.). I don't really like to reveal my political view and religious beliefs too much because I think they might be too...radical. So, I'm kind of just gonna keep my mouth shut. Religion does play a role in my life, though. It's more along the lines of "don't hurt other people" rather than "this is wrong, don't do it." I just think it's dumb when people don't do certain things just because their religion tells them not to. People should consider others over whether or not they're going to get punished in the afterlife or what not. Well, I guess I kind of put in more than I thought I would. I'm done.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 18, 2006 21:07:15 GMT -5
Post by The Smurf on Sept 18, 2006 21:07:15 GMT -5
i'm sure everyone knows my opinions on this kind of stuff by now. so i'll do like Neo and keep my mouth shut. -the smurf
|
|
kennyken
RPGM2 Helper
superboy teaser video is on youtube right now
Posts: 184
|
Beliefs
Sept 19, 2006 8:47:18 GMT -5
Post by kennyken on Sept 19, 2006 8:47:18 GMT -5
Man, I had a horrible experience discussing religion at the pavilion, so I'll just say that I am extremely sincere follower of Christ(for three years)and very conservative in my political views. I know at the core that I am just a sinner myself so when I look at someone, I try to see the person inside, like Jesus did with the Samaritan woman at the well, who went through five marriages, but I also believe what some misconstrue as hateful is actually loving. For example, It is extremely politically incorrect to say how dangerous the homosexual lifestyle is(mentally, physically,spiritually). If you tell a homosexual person of the destructiveness of the lifestyle he has chosen, you will be deemed a homophobe and as being hateful, but isn't it better to tell a child to get out of the street than keeping quiet, not wanting to hurt the child's feelings, Or the woman going into an abortion clinic, isn't it better to "love them both" by telling her she has options and that killing the life that grows inside her will likely have devastating psychological effects and quite possibly physical effects(like infertility) I know I probably offended half of you and that's why I dislike these topics, but I took a chance here. Just know, I'm not a professional writer so it's hard for me to convey my thoughts in the tone that I want.
I like it here very much and I don't want to jeopardize my enjoyment of this board and it's great members.
peace
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 19, 2006 11:03:53 GMT -5
Post by Doan the Nado on Sept 19, 2006 11:03:53 GMT -5
The problem with your "loving" remarks is that they are all based on either societal stereotypes or on your religion of choice. Of course someone who does not believe the same things you do would not view your remarks as being loving, since they don't agree with them whatsoever. The woman getting the abortion is doing so with the knowledge that the foster program is screwed up, that there is no way she can take care of that child at this point, that the physical risks of abortion are not much worse than the risks associated with carrying a child full term, and with the belief that she is not actually "killing the life", as there is a huge difference in opinion as to when life begins. In my mind, sending young men to Iraq and causing the deaths of thousands of even younger innocent civilians is surely murder, and I don't see how certain leaders can support practices like that and then say that abortion is wrong.
As for homosexuality being dangerous, it's not a whole lot more dangerous than heterosexuality these days. There's this whole perception of gays being highly promiscuous, which certainly leads to problems for both sexual orientations, but that is not the case with all gays (just as it is not the case with all college students). Additionally, the suicide risks involved (gays do have a higher suicide rate) are not due to the inherent nature of homosexuality, but instead to all the people who are telling them that their life is evil/dangerous, and making them feel as if they are a second-class member of society. Homosexuals are the Jews of the 21st century, just a group for politicians to point at in order to divert our attention from the real problem, and in another 50 years people will look back on our attitudes towards gays with the same disdain that people look back on the general populace of Nazi Germany.
And those are my beliefs, at least on those issues.
|
|
Valkysas
RPG Making Novice
Runs the Pav
Posts: 56
|
Beliefs
Sept 19, 2006 12:38:51 GMT -5
Post by Valkysas on Sept 19, 2006 12:38:51 GMT -5
awesome post, doan.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 20, 2006 8:18:43 GMT -5
Post by NASH7777 on Sept 20, 2006 8:18:43 GMT -5
Good job kennyken, Ves would be proud of ya I think. I've just applied too much logic to go beyond the scope of religion and even most science yet it still can't be properly argued against because it has the 1+ effect of always being able to go an argumentative degree higher than what a person says against it. My view still allows for christianity to be accurate, but says it's only one piece of the puzzle.
|
|
kennyken
RPGM2 Helper
superboy teaser video is on youtube right now
Posts: 184
|
Beliefs
Sept 20, 2006 14:59:18 GMT -5
Post by kennyken on Sept 20, 2006 14:59:18 GMT -5
Abortion involves killing because the zygote, which fulfills the criteria needed to establish the existence of biological life (including metabolism, development, the ability to react to stimuli, and cell reproduction), is indeed terminated.
ok, it might seem like I am picking on Homosexuals, but I have to be honest here. Here is some info from the Christian Research Institute about how dangerous the Homosexual lifestyle is.
(The following content is somewhat explicit(honest) I apologize if I made an error in judgement by posting this.)
A HEALTHY LIFESTYLE?
As noted above, those in the gay rights movement constantly assert that they are both normal and healthy individuals. We have already discussed the "normality" of homosexuality. The question of whether or not it is a healthy lifestyle can be addressed in two areas: promiscuity and actual sexual practices.
(1) Promiscuity. If one agrees with the assertion that being promiscuous is not healthy, from either an emotional or physical standpoint, then homosexuality as typically practiced must be termed extremely unhealthy. Homosexualities, an official publication of The Institute for Sex Research founded by Alfred Kinsey, Alan Bell, and Martin Weinberg, reported that only ten percent of male homosexuals could be termed as "relatively monogamous" or "relatively less promiscuous." Additional findings showed that 60 percent of male homosexuals had more than 250 lifetime sexual partners, and 28 percent of male homosexuals had more than 1,000 lifetime sexual partners. Another startling fact is that 79 percent admitted that more than half of their sexual partners were strangers.39
Just a few years after the publication of this report, Dr. William Foege, the director of the Centers for Disease Control, stated: "The average AIDS victim has had 60 different sexual partners in the past twelve months."40 In contrast with this, "the average heterosexual male has — throughout his life — from five to nine sex partners."41
What about lesbian relationships? Are homosexual women less promiscuous than homosexual men? While less research has been done on lesbians, the data shows that they are much more monogamous than homosexual men. However, their relationships are still not very secure. Yvonne Zipter, a lesbian writing in Chicago's gay journal Windy City Times, in an article entitled "The Disposable Lesbian Relationship," notes that the "lasting lesbian relationship" is a "mythic entity."42
(2) Sexual Practices. A second item that cannot be avoided in a discussion of the health aspects of homosexuality is the actual sexual practices of homosexuals. Are these healthy? Once again, the vast preponderance of medical evidence is resoundingly negative.
Many different medical sources document the physical aberrancy of homosexual sexual practices. The following information comes from an article entitled "Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue." It was written by Dr. Bernard J. Klamecki, a proctologist (rectal specialist) for more than 30 years.
Dr. Klamecki states in this article that when he began his medical practice in 1960, only one percent of his patients were homosexuals. By 1988 this number had grown to 25 percent of his patients, the majority being referred by a local gay free clinic. The following material comes from one who is known and respected by the homosexual community, a medical professional who has care and compassion for all his patients and who donates a good deal of his time to their service.
I know well the medical and surgical pathology directly related to the sexual practices typical of active homosexuals, particularly anal intercourse (sodomy) and oral intercourse (fellatio)....
Sexual practices typical of homosexuals can affect the oral cavities, lungs, penis, prostate, bladder, anus, perianal areas outside of the rectum, rectum, colon, vagina, uterus, pelvic area, brain, skin, blood, immune system, and other body systems.... While none of the following practices is unique to homosexuals, they are nonetheless typical....
Most common is anal intercourse (sodomy)....Foreign objects are often used in order to produce a different erotic sensation or to instigate a more violent sexual activity (sadomasochism). Objects that I have removed from the rectum and lower bowel include corn cobs, light bulbs, vibrators, soda bottles, and varied wooden sticks.
"Fisting" is when a fisted hand is inserted into the rectum, sometimes as far as the elbow, which produces varied sexually exciting sensations, strongly linking eroticism with pain....
Oral intercourse (fellatio) is when the tongue is used to lick or tickle the outlet of the rectum for sexual excitement, arousing, or foreplay. Needless to say, bacteria may contaminate and infect the mouth. One other sexual practice is "Water Sports," in which urinating into the mouth or rectum is used as a sexual stimulant.
Physical damage to the rectum may occur because of some of these practices....There is an antinatural activity being performed when the rectum is the recipient of a penis or foreign object. Because of this activity, cracking of the tissue (fissuring), open sores (ulcers), boils (abscesses), and other infections can occur in the skin of the surrounding tissues....
Persistent anal-rectal sexual activity can lead to various pre-cancerous lesions such as Bowen's disease and Kaposi's sarcoma. Whenever tissues are traumatized, cracked, or abraded, they are vulnerable to bacterial infection.43
Dr. Klamecki then continues, discussing the various bacterial diseases and viral diseases he regularly encounters with his homosexual patients — the most prominent being AIDS (the current figure is that 70 percent of Americans with AIDS are male homosexuals or bisexuals). In addition, he asserts that up to 86 percent of homosexual males use various drugs to enhance and increase their sexual stimulation.44
Is the homosexual lifestyle a healthy one? The information presented above just scratches the surface showing the pathological nature of these sexual practices. Much more could be shared (e.g., the homosexual is three times more suicidal than the heterosexual; a recent study shows the life expectancy of homosexual men and women without AIDS being about 33 years shorter than that of the heterosexual; and so forth),45 but space will not permit it. I believe that any unbiased reader would have to admit that homosexuality is neither a healthy lifestyle nor a natural one.
***************** This is the kind of information that the secular liberal media will never give you.
I hope we can debate these kind of topics without dividing over it.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 20, 2006 16:46:38 GMT -5
Post by Bigfoot on Sept 20, 2006 16:46:38 GMT -5
Dude, what you say almost offends me. Its really ignorant how you speak about gays. I think that you may seem to forget that its a choice. Everyone has a set of preferences and thats what makes everyone different. And the fact that it comes from the Christian Institute proves that its a biased study, and you posting shows that you are very uncomfortable with that life style. So I ask you, why?
I myself aint gay, but my sister is, I have had friends and worked with poeple that are gay. They are all great, cool poeple to be around. And no, they aint suicidal.
But still, your entitled to your own opinion, and I respect that. But I just think that your post helps the discrimination that the poeple with a different sexual prefence than yours have endured for years.
|
|
kennyken
RPGM2 Helper
superboy teaser video is on youtube right now
Posts: 184
|
Beliefs
Sept 20, 2006 17:00:12 GMT -5
Post by kennyken on Sept 20, 2006 17:00:12 GMT -5
Bigfoot, I don't understand your post. What did I say about Gays, other than they lead a dangerous lifestyle?
I was supporting an earlier comment with valid scientific data. How is it hateful to speak the truth. Those facts are true. Thats the problem with political correctness, it throws common sense out the window.
How is it discrimination?
**************** "Liberal tolerance is a sham. Although portrayed by its advocates as an open, tolerant, and neutral perspective, it is a dogma whose proponents tolerate no rivals. Those of us who are concerned with presenting and defending our faith in a post-Christian culture must be aware of this sort of challenge, one that masquerades as open, tolerant, and liberating, but in reality is dogmatic, partisan, and coercive.
Although the Christian worldview is marginalized in our culture and considered dangerous by some, we cannot lose our confidence. After all, this is God’s universe, and He has made human beings in His image. We must be confident that when we unpack these undeniable notions that are “written on our hearts,” those who unreflectively and unthinkingly dismiss our case really do know the truth as well (Rom. 2:15). But this must be balanced with the knowledge that the human heart is incredibly wicked (Jer. 17:9). This tension will remain as long as we attempt to defend our faith in a culture hostile to the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus of Nazareth."
Francis J Beckwith
Listen, I want to have an intelligent, civil discussion, thats why I presented a defensible arguement and not mere dogmatic statements
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 20, 2006 23:51:25 GMT -5
Post by vespuleth on Sept 20, 2006 23:51:25 GMT -5
... *sigh* I avoid these topics. I hope everyone has noticed that by now. No one really cares what you believe; they care how you act. That's how I feel about it. I wish that everyone were that way, because I am sure that many people have no problem with me until they find out my position. I'm a christian. That's not in question. I've said it many times here and elsewhere. But I don't think that label is comprehensive. I'm not going to go into how or what I believe. I am going to address some of the irregularities in this topic. that's not true. I am going to address one major belief that I have; and that is that I believe every one should keep a journal that they write in consistently, and that everyone should see a counselor. I believe that very strongly. And use sunscreen. I guess that's three. ... there is not going to be a specific order to this... While I will agree that Homosexuals are disenfranchised, I think that this is highly inaccurate and mildly offensive. No one is actively trying to commit genoicide against the homosexual populous. You have a few religious fundamentalists telling them that they are going to hell, which may or may not exist in the views of popular society. Not the same as cooking them in furnaces. The Hell the Jews faced was immenent and real, it was a literal fire. What the Homosexuals face is emotional rejection; its a prejudice. Are they getting their rights infringed upon? Yes. Is it wrong? Yes. Is it the same? No. Not the same. Furthermore, if the Homosexuals are the Jews, then who are the Nazi Germans? That's right, the christians... now, this doesn't surprise me, because anti-christian sentiment has been a long time coming, and well deserved... but I think that anyone can, if they will put aside the prejudice (which it seems both secular and religious belief share), they will see that this just isn't true. It is like saying that Islam is an evil religion... which is also not true. Much like all religions, Islam (and Christianity) suffers from a small percentage of fundamentalists getting the largest portion of exposure. Christianity isn't Nazi Germany, and homosexuals aren't the Jews. That means that this amounts to propaganda... Interesting enough, you cannot commit genoicide against the homosexuals because they cannot perpetuate themselves (homosexual people don' t make more homosexual people; if you believe they do then you fall into the psychological definition of a homophobiac). It just happens that some people are homosexual and some people aren't. and on that note... this isn't what a homo'phobe' is. read above. now... on to address the issue of 'the christian way to deal with homosexual'... this is just the psuedo christian license to be hateful. as qwantz.com (yes, i'm quoting a dinosaur cartoon... leave me alone. discussion about beliefs are inherently comedic anyways, why not throw in some dinosaur philosophy while you're at it?) said, why is it that no one ever says 'I just don't love the same way you do? Are we really all loving the same way?' Are we? would you accept it if someone told you that they just weren't into your love? No; you'd tell them that they were wrong and your love was the only love. The same is true of everyone, because there is only one 'love' (I know the greeks have like 14 words for love... I think we all know I'm referring to altruistic love) We all love the same way. If your actions aren't recognized as loving, its probably because they aren't. this is mincing words. No good biologist argues that a zygote isn't alive, because there are too many good biologists that are also christians that have given the response you did. The debate is whether or not it is conscious/sentient/has a soul or whatever you want to call it. Science says that, depending on the research, sentience/consciousness is not obtained until well into childhood (as late as 6 according to some theories) and that some people never gain it (some mentally handicapped). Your typical Christian would like to say different. They would like to say that God is giving out souls at conception. This seems to create tons of problems. First, even without an abortion, a very small percentage of pregnancies actually come to term (some studies say as low as 6%) globally. This means that the vast majority of souls aren't ever 'living'. Furthermore, you have Christians (esspecially given the Pope's new edict, meaning that now the Roman Catholics are included in this line of thought) thinking that all the aborted babies go to heaven. hmmm... so 94% of heaven is filled with people who have never lived; possibly higher since of the 6% that do live, a small percentage will actually 'choose' christianity. This also creates problems for the Christian's need to proselytize (witness so boldly as they tend to be infamous for), because if the previous 'christian' conclusion is true, then it demonstrates that one need not 'accept Jesus' to go to heaven. After all, 94% of people are getting to heaven without. It almost seems a Christian should be in favor of abortion, as it guarantees another 'saved' soul. Now I'm being facetious. moving on... I'm not done yet... I have to go home to finishfor the sake of those who have already read this, I'm continuing in a second post. That way they don't have to look for changes.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 1:15:18 GMT -5
Post by vespuleth on Sept 21, 2006 1:15:18 GMT -5
unbiased readers read both sides of the arguement. Have you?
You seem pretty biased. You seem to have an agenda. This alone breaks down your credibility.
so what are you trying to justify here... I'm willing to be that your trying to justify why you think homosexuality is wrong. I don't know for sure, but I'm willing to bet you thought it was wrong long before you knew all of this. You cannot call it puruit of truth if you go out looking for evidence to a perspective.
Anyway, I'm done. I had other things to say, but its just not worth it.
I'm kind of sad you said this. I'm tired of the 'christian' populous pronouncing that homosexuality is different from anything else. It's just a different state of humanity, that's all. We are all in different states of humanity. sad, just sad.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 2:26:42 GMT -5
Post by Bigfoot on Sept 21, 2006 2:26:42 GMT -5
Bigfoot, I don't understand your post. What did I say about Gays, other than they lead a dangerous lifestyle? I was supporting an earlier comment with valid scientific data. How is it hateful to speak the truth. Those facts are true. Thats the problem with political correctness, it throws common sense out the window. Its easy now a days to call anything a fact if you just say "Its scientifically proven!", or just have some doctor, any doctor, say "This is the only product to use." or "These studies prove this as fact." Reminds me of a great line from Tommy Boy. "If you want me to take a in a box and mark it guarenteed, I will, I got spare time." I'm sorry but according to the studies of Robbie Jay Mattson (myself) the only harmful thing to come from homosexuality is the things poeple say about it. The fact that you presented this information proves that you have something more than just a concern about the homosexuality preference. Hell, many studies go against each other all the time anyways, you willing to call those facts as well?
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 3:26:44 GMT -5
Post by thetruecoolness on Sept 21, 2006 3:26:44 GMT -5
Well what are facts anyway. Interesting question if you really think about it. Are facts really more than socially accepted "truth", is it really possible to have an objective perception of something. Are not our senses already clouding the picture of reality we get, then our brains storage system is not really made to be that objective, as it is associative, where we store things with things similar to them.
Of course that would bring us to is their obejective truth, and can we know it if their is, and is it obtainable? Well using logic you can come to the conclusion there must be objective truth, cause to say there is no objective truth, is an objective truth, just like to say there is is one. The only other option is everything is false, also an objective (absolute) truth, and a paradox. And of course saying some things are false is an objective truth.
So in the end are facts really all that trustworthy, or are they "good enough" for some people.
Philosophy is fun. You learn not everything is not neccessarily as it appears to be. Proving anything to be absolutely anything is a fairly daunting task to the inquisitive mind.
So my thoughts, there is absolute truth out there somewhere but I feel we are too confined by our physical bodies to know anything more than it exists. Really it is impossible to experience something outside of our sensory limitations, and even then we still have how our brain works to contend with. So really everthing we do or think is in some sense subjective. Things maybe be practically objective, aka facts, if believed by a large enough population. But it is important to note facts are disputable.
And yes KennyKen when you present evidence against something from the people against it, then that evidence becomes highly suspect of bias. So though we may never be able to obtain absolute truth on any given subject, other than maybe the existence of absolute truth, we should strive to get as close as possible by hearing arguments from all sides. Especially those which are not out own. You can't really have a debate with a room of people who all think the same thing.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 5:59:06 GMT -5
Post by vespuleth on Sept 21, 2006 5:59:06 GMT -5
this looks very familiar to me ttc.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 7:34:52 GMT -5
Post by NASH7777 on Sept 21, 2006 7:34:52 GMT -5
sorry Ves I wasn't clear. I was referring to the admitting being a christian, defending it, and getting ridiculed about it at the Pav. I was ignoring the homosexual stuff. This topic was suppose to let me see where we all stand wether Christians or atheists or some new age thinking or what, and then to discuss about what they mean. I'm sure I didn't make the full of how everything works in my first post and I'm sure I will have questions for other people's beliefs on origin and why they like it or find it comforting. And obviously as soon as somebody makes this into a hate or anger topic it's locked, so keep it clean and respectful guys. Support don't attack.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 8:15:07 GMT -5
Post by blackbox on Sept 21, 2006 8:15:07 GMT -5
"What did I say about Gays, other than they lead a dangerous lifestyle?"
Lifestyle is a personal choice. Whether hetero or homosexual, there are always going to be those that have healthy ones and those that do not. A person's orientation isn't the cause, and I highly doubt it's even a factor. Promiscuity is just as rampant in heterosexuals. If you were to say promiscuous people lead a dangerous lifestyle, then you would be correct. To say that homosexuals as a group are highly promiscuous, and therefore live a dangerous lifestyle, is being ignorant. There are homosexuals out there that have never even slept with ANYONE. Why? Some homosexuals are Christian. They feel that they are called to a celibate lifestyle, and accept it. Is that a dangerous lifestyle? Of course not. Another portion of homosexuals (sorry I have no numbers. I haven't looked for this information because frankly, I don't see the value in mumbers from studies and statistics. They can be skewed and manipulated too easily) are virgins waiting for the person they feel is their one true love, and for legalized marriage. Yes, promiscuous homosexuals live a dangerous lifestyle. Yes, it is more dangerous to their health than heterosexuals simply by the design and layout of human anatomy. However, homosexuality is NOT a factor of promuscuity, and vice versa.
I know you have been getting a lot of criticism for your beliefs. I don't think you are being hateful, kennyken. Please don't be discouraged by the fact that so many people on the boards are arguing with you. As ves has suggested, read some information that actually argues with your point of view. I don't know if this is blasphemy or not, but try not to read things as a Christian. Use logic. No, the two are not mutually exclusive, but I've found that many times they get into conflict. Faith is a good thing, but not if it's blind faith. Take what you have been told and find a reason to believe it. A reason that stems from a source other than other people who believe it: your life experiences, history, logic, whatever.
One more thing, I'm not trying to shake your belief. I too was born and raised as a Christian. I followed the teachings as I would have a paretnal order. When I questioned it, I was usually given the answer "Because it's what God wants". That works for a child, but when I was in high school, maybe a bit before, not entirely sure, it just sounded like the same old "because I'm your mother/father, and I said so". I've since stopped believing for belief's sake. i have to admit, I'm much happier now. You may find your conviction reinforced, like my sister's. She went throuhg the same steps as I did, and ended up not only going back to Christianity, but now, she is in the process to becoming a nun. I guess what I'm trying to say is, it's fine trying to know and follow what God wants, but it's more important to know WHY God wants it.
I'd wish you luck, but I don't believe in luck. Instead, I'll just wish you well.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 13:12:28 GMT -5
Post by doyleman on Sept 21, 2006 13:12:28 GMT -5
I say my beliefs dont, and shouldn't, concern anyone.
My opinions, however, are something else.
My opinions on whether gays are dangerous or whatever's been said about them (in this topic) go towards a 'shame on you for saying that about them'. My uncle's gay, but he's a cool guy. I haven't a clue what makes them go that way, I personally dont care quiet much either. Each person is gifted with but one life, and with that life they are free to do whatever they please. I don't support murder, rape, robbing, etc. What I do support is people sticking with what they believe in, enforcing it upon themselves, and not trying to sway others into it, and them living their lives to the upmost.
I can't stand those who try pushing opinions, ideas, religions, beliefs, or anything of the sort onto another. If a person decides to use the same ideas or what not on their own terms, super, go them! They shouldn't have to change routes because others dont agree. A big example of this, that I can think of at the time, is peer pressure. I know many, many, many people who've fallen under it. It pisses me the hell off to know that my friends have fallen because some of their *friends* helped them right into drugs or what not.
However (I believe nash pointed this to me), is my not supporting what their doing contradicting what I speak of? Yes, in a matter of speaking, I spose. I have tried many times to help others stop some bad habits, and tried showing manners to others (little bros, mostly...), but if they persist, I give up. I try not to interfere with anothers mindset on his/her goals, beliefs, etc, because for all I know, those assets may be the world to them. I'm one person, with my own mindset, how am I spose to know what the rest think? I dont, so I try not to stop others from doing what they believe in, unless it's something harmful to themselves or potentially others.
Anyway, I can't quite think at the moment, as I'm tired *dogs bark at each other*, but perhaps I'll post more on this later.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 13:33:41 GMT -5
Post by BloodKnight on Sept 21, 2006 13:33:41 GMT -5
I will now make you all feel bad.
You're all wrong. Your belief systems are weak. Not only that, none of you will ever reach a level where your reality will work for you and your belief systems become infinitely flexible. I will always be the one who is 100% right. In that regard gays are people too, they lead no more dangerous a lifestyle than the average american. I was gay once(I pursued a beautiful man). But only once. And religion is evil. But only because it's so organized. Something else I wanted to say, um... oh yeah! Since everyone has their own perception, the concepts of right and wrong, winning and losing etc. are irrelevant, non-existant, you get the picture.
And, and... um... oh! Try to argue with me and you'll only prove your own ignorance.
Ah, I kid, I'm just playing with you guys.
or am I?
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 14:42:18 GMT -5
Post by Bigfoot on Sept 21, 2006 14:42:18 GMT -5
I will now make you all feel bad. You're all wrong. Your belief systems are weak. Not only that, none of you will ever reach a level where your reality will work for you and your belief systems become infinitely flexible. I will always be the one who is 100% right. In that regard gays are people too, they lead no more dangerous a lifestyle than the average american. I was gay once(I pursued a beautiful man). But only once. And religion is evil. But only because it's so organized. Something else I wanted to say, um... oh yeah! Since everyone has their own perception, the concepts of right and wrong, winning and losing etc. are irrelevant, non-existant, you get the picture. And, and... um... oh! Try to argue with me and you'll only prove your own ignorance. Ah, I kid, I'm just playing with you guys. or am I?Oh bloodknight, you little rascal! Com'ere you!
|
|
Valkysas
RPG Making Novice
Runs the Pav
Posts: 56
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 15:00:46 GMT -5
Post by Valkysas on Sept 21, 2006 15:00:46 GMT -5
"Christian Research Institute"
OF COURSE any "research" they do is going to make it seem like gay people are horrible and dangerous. They have an agenda, you know.
"I believe that any unbiased reader would have to admit that homosexuality is neither a healthy lifestyle nor a natural one. "
WRONG. homosexuality occurs in nature. there is nothing unhealthy about the "homosexual life style".
" reported that only ten percent of male homosexuals could be termed as "relatively monogamous" or "relatively less promiscuous."
Do you have any idea when kinsey did his research? do you realize how high promiscuity was for EVERYONE at the time?
|
|
kennyken
RPGM2 Helper
superboy teaser video is on youtube right now
Posts: 184
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 15:32:33 GMT -5
Post by kennyken on Sept 21, 2006 15:32:33 GMT -5
I think most of you misunderstood my post in your haste to be clever. The information that I posted from the christian research institute was only posted by them, it's not their personal survey, it's from numerous a secular sources. Heres a complete list of the notes from that article. 1 The quotations are from members of the studio audience on The Geraldo Show, "Can Gays and Lesbians Go Straight?" 11 June 1991. 2 James D. Mallory, "Homosexuality: Part III — A Psychiatrist's View," Christian Life, October 1977, 28. 3 June M. Reinisch, dir., The Kinsey Institute New Report on Sex (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990), 147. 4 Family Research Report (Family Research Institute, Washington, D.C.), 1. 5 Teen Connection, "Sexual Orientation" (Wisconsin Public Television), 19 May 1992. 6 Alfred C. Kinsey, et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (Philadelphia: Saunders Company, 1948). 7 See Abraham Maslow and James M. Sakoda, "Volunteer Error in the Kinsey Study," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 47 (April 1952), 259-62. 8 "The Ten Percent Solution, Part II," Peninsula 3:2 (October/November 1991), 7. Also see Judith A. Reisman and Edward W. Eichol, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud (Lafayette, LA: Huntington House Publishers, 1990), 23. 9 Kinsey, et. al., 216. 10 Maslow and Sakoda, 259-62. 11 Reinisch, 140. 12 Reisman and Eichol, 194. 13 lbid., 195. 14 Nightline, ABC News, 30 August 1991. 15 For those interested in the history leading up to the APA's 1973 removal of homosexuality from their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatric Disorders, see Ronald Bayer, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis (New York: Basic Books, 1981), 101-54; William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 24-39. 16 Bayer, 105-6. 17 Charles W. Socarides, Beyond Sexual Freedom (New York: Quadrangle Books, 1977), 87. Prior to the 1973 vote Dr. Socarides led the APA's task force studying homosexuality, which issued a report unanimously declaring homosexuality to be a disorder of psychosexual development. This report, considered to be too politically inflammatory, was shelved, only later being published as a "study group" report in 1974. 18 Charles W. Socarides in Robert Kronemeyer, Overcoming Homosexuality (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1980), 5. 19 "Sick Again? Psychiatrists Vote on Gays," Time, 20 February 1978, 102. 20 Stanton L. Jones, "Homosexuality According to Science," in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990), 107. 21 Dannemeyer, 40-41. 22 Charlene Crabb, "Are Some Men Born to Be Homosexual?" U. S. News & World Report, 9 September 1991, 58. 23 David Gelman, et al., "Born or Bred?" Newsweek, 24 February 1992, 48. 24 Simon LeVay on The Phil Donahue Show, "Genetically Gay: Born Gay or Become Gay?" 3 January 1992. 25 William H. Masters, Virginia E. Brown, and Robert Kolodny, Human Sexuality (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1982), 319. 26 Kronemeyer, 7. 27 Kim Painter, "A Biological Theory for Sexual Preference," USA Today, 1 January 1989, 4D. Also, see Alan P. Bell, et al., Sexual Preference (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1981), 221. While not believing that biology determines sexual preference, neither do they believe that the parents somehow caused it. Instead, they believe there is a causal relationship in children having early "gender identity" problems and their becoming homosexual. 28 Rick Notch, The Geraldo Show, 11 June 1991. 29 Richard Isay, quoted on 20/20, ABC News, 24 April 1992. 30 William H. Masters and Virginia E. Johnson, Homosexuality in Perspective (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1979), 333. Also, after a ten-year study of homosexuality they found that those desiring "conversion" to heterosexuality had only a 21 percent failure rate (p. 396). However, after making certain adjustments the conversion failure rate could be as high as 45 percent. 31 Reinisch, 143. 32 20/20, ABC News, 24 April 1992. 33 Kronemeyer, 141-67. 34 Darlene Bogle, "Healing from Lesbianism," in Yamamoto, 15. 35 lbid., 17. 36 Bob Davies, "The Exodus Story: The Growth of Ex-gay Ministry," in Yamamoto, 47-59. Also, see Kent Philpott, The Gay Theology (Plainfield, NJ: Logos International, 1977), 20-37. 37 Andrew Comiskey, Pursuing Sexual Wholeness: How Jesus Heals the Homosexual (Lake Mary, FL: Creation House, 1989). 38 Joanne Highley, L.I.F.E. Ministries, P.O. Box 353, New York, NY 10185. 39 Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, Homosexualities (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), 308. 40 Walter Isaacson, "Hunting for the Hidden Killers ," Time, 4 July 1983, 51. 41 Kronemeyer, 32. 42 Yvonne Zipter, "The Disposable Lesbian Relationship," Windy City Times (Chicago), 25 December 1986, 18. 43 Bernard J. Klamecki, "Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue," in Yamamoto, 116-17. 44 lbid., 123, 119. 45 Paul Cameron, William L. Playfair, and Stephen Wellum, "The Homosexual Lifespan." Family Research Institute, 14 February 1992. ****************** So you see that the majority are secular sources and aren't agenda driven at all and neither am I. Truth is truth, I know that's hard to swallow in this post modern era of relativism and with the sad state of education(run by feminist and feminized males), things are only going to get worse. Here, read this ******** " Relativism, pluralism, and religious inclusivism are the planks in a creed that does not tolerate any rivals. Its high-minded commitment to “openness” prohibits the possibility that anything is absolutely good, true, and beautiful. This was the central thesis of Alan Bloom’s 1987 best seller, The Closing of the American Mind. Bloom writes: “The relativity of truth [for college students in American culture] is not a theoretical insight but a moral postulate, the condition of a free society, or so they see it.... The point is not to correct the mistakes and really be right; rather it is not to think you are right at all. The students, of course, cannot defend their opinion. It is something with which they have been indoctrinated....”1 According to Bloom, by dogmatically maintaining there is no truth, people who are relativists have become close-minded to the possibility of knowing the truth, if in fact it does exist. To understand what Bloom means, consider the following dialogue (based loosely on a real-life exchange) between a high school teacher and her student, Elizabeth:2 Teacher: Welcome, students. Since this is the first day of class, I want to lay down some ground rules. First, since no one has the truth, you should be open-minded to the opinions of your fellow students. Second....Elizabeth, do you have a question? Elizabeth: Yes, I do. If nobody has the truth, isn’t that a good reason for me not to listen to my fellow students? After all, if nobody has the truth, why should I waste my time listening to other people and their opinions. What would be the point? Only if somebody has the truth does it make sense to be open-minded. Don’t you agree?Teacher: No, I don’t. Are you claiming to know the truth? Isn’t that a bit arrogant and dogmatic? Elizabeth: Not at all. Rather, I think it’s dogmatic, as well as arrogant, to assert that there is not one person on earth who knows the truth. After all, have you met every person in the world and quizzed them exhaustively? If not, how can you make such a claim? Also, I believe it is actually the opposite of arrogance to say that I will alter my opinions to fit the truth whenever and wherever I find it. And if I happen to think that I have good reason to believe I do know the truth and would like to share it with you, why won’t you listen to me? Why would you automatically discredit my opinion before it is even uttered? I thought we were supposed to listen to everyone’s opinion. Teacher: This should prove to be an interesting semester. Another student: (blurts out): Ain’t that the truth. (the students laugh)" ********* You see, it's actually the one's who always trumpet tolerence and diversity that have the hidden agenda. It's impossible in their eyes that anyone could have a thoughtful, carefully wrought case against homosexuality. And notice, I didn't use any biblical quotes in my arguement, It wasn't even based on any theological pretense whatsoever. and Homophobia is just a made up word that the liberal left like to throw around. and heres a quote right from the horses mouth... [glow=red,2,300]Covey admits homosexual lifestyle is “dangerous,” needs “policing” February 25, 2005 BETWEEN THE LINES (homosexual newsweekly) Detroit, Michigan February 24, 2005 www.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=11952§ion=newsCovey admits homosexual lifestyle is “dangerous,” needs “policing” “It is time for our community to take a hard look at itself, and discuss the ways that we are allowing dangerous activity to destroy lives. Sexual freedom and choice is sacred in our community, but responsibility to ourselves and others is being ignored. Using speed along with Viagra and engaging in marathon unprotected sex is more than dysfunctional and suicidal behavior. It is selfish, hateful, and dangerous, and some day our community needs to wake up to these issues. If the gay community does not police itself, someone else may have to, and the price could be the very freedom we cherish.” Craig Covey Executive Director, Midwest AIDS Prevention Project and City Councilman, Ferndale, Michigan[/glow]***************** This is the standard I tried to convey in my first post in this thread. Share the truth in love. To share the truth, you have to care about the truth and about the person with whom you’re sharing. If your care for that person isn’t genuine and evident, chances are that the person will not hear what you’re saying. The point is to share the truth in love—with compassion and respect. And to share the truth, you’ve got to know the truth. God, the Author of truth, has a few things to say about homosexual behavior. For example, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (NIV) says, “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of God.” and why is it important? Why does the truth matter? There is a great physical danger in circulating the myth that homosexuals are not at a greater risk for contracting AIDS than heterosexuals. Of course, there are other risks for those who are involved in homosexuality: isolation, heartache, confusion, disillusionment, abandonment, etc. When you’re living outside of God’s will for your life—whether by experimenting with homosexuality or willfully embracing any other sin—you will feel the effects one way or another. And probably the biggest result of living a sinful life is not having peace with God. ********** I, in no way, hate someone who struggles with Homosexuality, and I hope this post doesn't come off that way.
|
|
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 16:09:45 GMT -5
Post by thetruecoolness on Sept 21, 2006 16:09:45 GMT -5
But if you read my post truth is not truth in the absolute sense. Truth as it is commonly used is majority belief for a specific society. Same thing with facts, though the facts may be regarded as truth (see previous sentence), these facts are then interpreted and this is where they cease to be objective, if they even were in the first place.
Now to defend my statements and maybe make you think some more about yours (or not this is your belief and you are entitled to it), I do agree there is an absolute truth, but I don't think we can obtain it, beyond the knowledge that it exists. This is nothing I have been indoctrinated with, this is by careful examination of how our brains work, and how information and thoughts are concieved and displayed. This is by realizing all information you recieve is first processes by your senses which are imprerfect, as can be proven in many instances. Then this reaches your brain which in itself has it's own imperfections. Then this data reaches your soul, or whatever controls your body. So in this shell it is impossible to think beyond it I believe. As you still lose memories you had right, those memories also eventually become clouded, further making a strong point that our thoughts are not constant and a lot of the times not even what we wanted to think originally. This is why witness testimony can not always be trusted, because our experience is not stored outside of our physical self but inside of it. This is why I believe we cannot transend our body's limitations while we are in them, since all our information is processed through it as it leaves and enters our soul (assuming that exists, and if it doesn't then we are further screwed at finding absolute things).
So would you argue that you can have perfect information, when it is gathered through a cloudy medium, and then translated back to that clouded medium through imperfect sources. It would be like sending data to a computer, but the computer makes errors recieving the data, and then errors sending it back out, but has no means to correct these errors. This is why I remain a skeptic of anything claimed to be absolute or perfect knowledge.
Also being exteme in your views makes them suspect, the key to many things is balance and I think it's also important for our relative truths to approach the absolute truth behind them. So I would encourage you to look for a report using those sources written by a secular person, a buddhist and a homosexual, before trying to present your belief as a fact. As a belief and an opinion it is justified to you, and may be to other people, this is how beliefs and opinions work. They are neither good nor bad, right or wrong.
So while you have a good argument against homosexuality, that argument can also be used against smoking, fast food, hell even being American these days. You find studies every day saying some new thing is bad for you, then sometimes a year, a decade, or even a century later you will find another study saying it's healthy for you. So I put to you, how do you know that this argument will stand the test of time? To which of course you can give the rebuttal How do you know it won't? And I think the answer lies in the fact that we live in a temporal world, so that makes absolutes almost impossible to come by, because to be absolute it has to have no beginning or end right, so then it is an infinite concept. So how can a finite being with finite thinking power come to know an infinite concept. You find an acceptable answer to that and I will applaud you (seriously).
So I still withhold calling this study fact until it has become reviewed by a non Christian research group, and there are other studies put out by other people using similar research. Remember even compilations of research still insert original research, and just because something is based on something else does not make it the same as that thing it is based on. So I would ask for this kind of cross inquiry on any opinion such as that before I choose to accept it. So while you do give a good argument as to why it is your opinion and belief, and that of quite a few, you have not given sufficient evidence that it should be a widely held one. Just as I have not as to why absolute truth must neccessarily be unobtainable, this is just my opinion and you can make of it what you will.
You should be happy people are finding flaws in your argument, as it will only strengthen your belief if you truly believe in your belief. The weakest argument possible, is one that has never been challenged.
And though you have made good points this "When you’re living outside of God’s will for your life—whether by experimenting with homosexuality or willfully embracing any other sin—you will feel the effects one way or another. And probably the biggest result of living a sinful life is not having peace with God." is nothing but an opinion, no one can prove that without being biased, since there is no widely accept God's will for your life, as not everyone believes the Bible is the word of God (I know I don't since it have been translated so many times, and there are many concepts that do not translate well if at all).
Also the root of this unhealthiness is promiscuity, and sodomy, not being homosexual. It is possible to be a monogamous homosexual, and never perform sodomy, in which case the lifestyle would be healthy between two healty minded people. Whether it would be for children they adopt is debatable. This is the problem with generalizations. We should look at why these problems occur. I think you and the researcher are jumping to conlusions and finding incorrect cause and effect. Most people choose socially devient practices because of problems they had growing up, and that is normally the cause of most of their mental and social deficiencies. So I think it is wrong to place all of this on the sheer fact of being homosexual. This is the problem I think most of us are having with your argument Kenny. It is not valid to imply cause and effect to just correlations and generalizations which is what this study appears to be. It would be like saying all Chritians are going to hell because most of them don't goto church or read the Bible like they should. The problem is not going to church, not being a Christian, just like there the problem is not being homosexual, it's being abused or neglected as a child, it's performing sodomy (which happend in heterosexual relationsships, sometimes to both partners), it's being promiscious. None of these are really implied by being homosexual in it's purist definition (since we want absolutes right). This is the problem with the research, incorrect appropriation of blame.
|
|
kennyken
RPGM2 Helper
superboy teaser video is on youtube right now
Posts: 184
|
Beliefs
Sept 21, 2006 16:16:28 GMT -5
Post by kennyken on Sept 21, 2006 16:16:28 GMT -5
well stated, but did you follow the link Covey admits homosexual lifestyle is “dangerous,” needs “policing” February 25, 2005 BETWEEN THE LINES (homosexual newsweekly) Detroit, Michigan February 24, 2005 www.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=11952§ion=newsCovey admits homosexual lifestyle is “dangerous,” needs “policing” “It is time for our community to take a hard look at itself, and discuss the ways that we are allowing dangerous activity to destroy lives. Sexual freedom and choice is sacred in our community, but responsibility to ourselves and others is being ignored. Using speed along with Viagra and engaging in marathon unprotected sex is more than dysfunctional and suicidal behavior. It is selfish, hateful, and dangerous, and some day our community needs to wake up to these issues. If the gay community does not police itself, someone else may have to, and the price could be the very freedom we cherish.” Craig Covey Executive Director, Midwest AIDS Prevention Project and City Councilman, Ferndale, Michigan click the link to read the full story, I can show you thousands of articles like that.
|
|