Evolution vs. Creation

[Drew Smith]

Charles Idemi wrote:

For men(man) to men(man) marrying each other, there can never be procreation.

Some opposite-sex couples cannot produce children, or they choose not to. Does that mean that they are engaged in perversion?

[Drew Smith]

FREE SERVANT wrote:

There is only one way to have sex and not sin. The marriage bed is the only place that is not unclean or dirty and defiled in the sight of God.

So you're saying that it's wrong for a married couple to have sex in the back seat of a car? Or in their living room?

[Drew Smith]

anonymous wrote:

Marriage - not a right, not even mentioned in the Constitution.

Something doesn't have to be mentioned in the U.S. Constitution in order to be a right. And the U.S. Supreme Court has already declared marriage to be a right.

anonymous wrote:

Homosexuality - at best, described as a medical condition

Only if heterosexuality is also described as a medical condition.

anonymous wrote:

There would be great debate as to whether or not homosexuals are capable of assuming proper parental roles, but in the current state of debate, liberals would generate bogus statistics anyway.

In other words, because of your homophobia, you automatically reject any scientific study that shows that children raised by same-sex parents turn out just as well as those raised by opposite-sex parents.

anonymous wrote:

In both cases, these are litmus test issues where those disloyal to a party are forced into a financially punitive lifestyle, either by raising children they can't afford, or by heaping further financial burdens on the unmarried through unfairly taxing the minority to the benefit of the majority.

And the unmarried are "unfairly taxed" in what way?

And while we're at it, what do you think about the *topic* of this thread? Or are you just here to spout off your homophobia?

[Cybele]

Drew Smith wrote:

<quoted text>
For a god? How about something objective and unambiguous?

Describe what you think constitutes a God?

[FREE SERVANT]

Cybele wrote:

<quoted text>
I wrote something on my journal that is similar to what you're describing. I'm describing it as an artist's point of view:
The Art of Being
It was the beginning and the point of an isolated beam. It became a mark that spawned an imagination for life. It traveled and grew to become a vast area capable of sustaining the most fragile of nature yet palpable by design. An extension of illuminated beings. The bud of life began to unravel its core - the mind that is created in synchronized rhythm that which is life, and made known. An existence once more.
The Art of Structure
Seedlings began to sprout extended like strings that attached to one another, making all possible combinations. It became the blueprint for a system as the attachments were made firm and intact. Multiple systems replicated and adjoined in harmony creating each of its vibrations.
The Art Form
The vibrations of life filled the space in free and orderly movements. And each system was given a form, and the form had function. Tapping once, twice, and many more until the form created a pattern. The patterns became a cycle in a system. Thus, the cycle of life.

The Systems and Cycles and Patterns of nature are a motif to beauty.

[DanFromSmithvill e]

FREE SERVANT wrote:

<quoted text>People are free to do as they will and I am not the judge in the end, but I know who is and his word on this subject can be found in the Holy Bible.

Why don't you leave it at that. We know where you stand. You don't have to start making up lies and preaching those lies on here.

[DanFromSmithvill e]

FREE SERVANT wrote:

<quoted text>What?

What you said was funny. A lot of what you say is funny. We can't take it seriously anymore.

[Drew Smith]

For a god? How about something objective and unambiguous?

Cybele wrote:

Describe what you think constitutes a God?

I'm not the one claiming that one exists. The person making the claim needs to describe it.

[Cybele]

Drew Smith wrote:

<quoted text>
How does the "external agent" exist?

We won't know until you first understand how life came to be. Take it one step at a time.

[Cybele]

Drew Smith wrote:

For a god? How about something objective and unambiguous?
<quoted text>
I'm not the one claiming that one exists. The person making the claim needs to describe it.

How about if I say God is in all shape, size, and form.

[FREE SERVANT]

DanFromSmithville wrote:

<quoted text>What you said was funny. A lot of what you say is funny. We can't take it seriously anymore.

Then just forget the person saying it and think about what is being said.:)

[Drew Smith]

How does the "external agent" exist?

Cybele wrote:

We won't know until you first understand how life came to be.

Why would life coming to be *require* an "external agent"?

[Drew Smith]

I'm not the one claiming that one exists. The person making the claim needs to describe it.

Cybele wrote:

How about if I say God is in all shape, size, and form.

If I said that blizzblats come in all shapes, sizes, and forms, would you know any more about what a blizzblat *is* than you did before?

[Cybele]

Drew Smith wrote:

I'm not the one claiming that one exists. The person making the claim needs to describe it.
<quoted text>
If I said that blizzblats come in all shapes, sizes, and forms, would you know any more about what a blizzblat *is* than you did before?

With that kind of mentality you will not find the truth. You just want to be an antagonist. That can be self-destructing. So if that's the route you want to take, by all means, be it. No one is stopping you. You still fill the void of life.

[Cybele]

Disease in the mind is the apoptosis of life.

[Drew Smith]

If I said that blizzblats come in all shapes, sizes, and forms, would you know any more about what a blizzblat *is* than you did before?

Cybele wrote:

With that kind of mentality you will not find the truth.

In other words, to "find the truth", one must open the skull, discard the brain, and automatically accept any new age woo that comes along, despite a complete lack of objective, unambiguous evidence to support its claims.

Good luck with your belief in a "god" that you can't even figure out how to describe to someone.

[Charles Idemi]

sickofit wrote:

<quoted text>
Only in some states do same sex people have equal righst and freedom ...In most states the religous nazi fascist still hold freedom and equality out of reach.

Hmmm!
But come to think of it, how can people of the same sex be marriage partners?
That is ridiculous, how can they procreate or reproduce?

[Cybele]

Drew Smith wrote:

If I said that blizzblats come in all shapes, sizes, and forms, would you know any more about what a blizzblat *is* than you did before?
<quoted text>
In other words, to "find the truth", one must open the skull, discard the brain, and automatically accept any new age woo that comes along, despite a complete lack of objective, unambiguous evidence to support its claims.
Good luck with your belief in a "god" that you can't even figure out how to describe to someone.

Good luck with your religion of Scientism and keep worshiping your ego and alter-egos. LOL!

[Charles Idemi]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
As long as they have functioning genitalia, they can reproduce. I can't imagine why you would think they cannot.
Let me just jump ahead a bit...Yes, almost all primate species have demonstrated same sex sexual behavior, along with many, many other species.

So, you are saying that a man can impregnate a man and a woman can impregnate a woman?

[Charles Idemi]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
Why not?
Do you think that procreation only happens within the boundaries of marriage?]
May I ask you a side question?
Do you know what a gene is?

I do know what a gene is. Lets face the fact, it is improper for a man to go after a man, it is sexual perversion.