Atheism and homosexuality

Dec 5, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Conservapedia

Creationist scientists and creationist assert that the theory of evolution cannot account for the origin of gender and sexual reproduction.http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/136http://www.answersingenesis.org/pbs_nova/0928ep5.asp [[Creation Ministries International]] states: "Homosexual acts go against [[God]]'s original [[Intelligent design ... (more)

Comments (Page 31)

Showing posts 601 - 620 of3,865
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
CH2O2

Ovar, Portugal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#640
Jul 20, 2013
 
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
That's correlation, not causation.
Crows and parrots also both have beaks, but that doesn't cause homosexual activity among those birds.
<quoted text>
That is true. But, if there is a genetic component shared by sibillings that causes homossexuality, it constitutes an argument is favour of the hypothesis that homossexual behaviour can be favoured by natural selection.

[QUOTE who="Nuggin"]<quo ted text>
Which contradicts the statement that a gay man is no more likely to produce gay offspring how exactly?
Please notice I was not trying to argue against that statement. I was arguing against the statement that preceded.

You said:
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not a gene found in gay people.
You imply that homossexuality does not have a genetic component. My argument "...the sister of a homossexual man is more likely to produce homossexual offspring..." shows that, homossexuality does have a genetic component.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#641
Jul 21, 2013
 
LCN Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
Enjoy when you post as your protector
LOL
Lincoln left with nothing left to say after embarrassing himself.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#642
Jul 21, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Got anything that hasn't been addressed yet already?
Apparently not.
Its not my fault that you never learned what the burden of proof means and why its such an important part of the atheist position.

Don't blame atheists for being smarter than you dude.

Instead of talking about the moon landings, why don't you try to prove some of the cr*p that sh*ts out of your keyboard for once in your life?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#643
Jul 21, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Last I heard he wasn't born again. Nor was there any fundie BS in his post.
Oh by the way, lizard creatures are real too. Want evidence?
Nuggin's left testicle, ready as always to defend his sock puppet...

Tell us all again why we have to run around disproving the sh*t you guy go around lying about 24/7?

You never understood the burden of proof, STILL don't understand it, and are trying in vain to argue back when its been PROVEN that you are a STUPID INDIVIDUAL with no proof whatsoever.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#644
Jul 21, 2013
 
CH2O2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Homossexuality seems to exist in a huge list of animals. Many of them do have kin-bonding. Even when kin-bonding does not happen throughout life it is common during the stage when the young are dependent of the parents and their homossexual kin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_...
<quoted text>
But crows and parrots exhibit that behaviour. And many other animals do to.
<quoted text>
homossexuality seems to have many different causes. kin altruism is not the only one.
<quoted text>
That can be one of the reasons for homossexuality. But not the only one.
<quoted text>
That is not always the case. I am gay but I have no brothers. That could not possibly be the reason for my sexuality.
<quoted text>
I agree.
<quoted text>
It may not be a single gene but it definately has a genetic and hereditary component. Homossexuality in twin brothers (both brothers) is a lot more common than would be expected if it were not hereditary.
<quoted text>
But the sister of a homossexual man is more likely to produce homossexual offspring. Homossexuality does have a genetic component.
Thanks for showing Nuggin up to the be the ignorant savage that he is...

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#645
Jul 21, 2013
 
There's nothing wrong with homosexual or homosexuality but that doesn't mean we have to rewrite marriage laws.

.

There's nothing wrong with atheists or atheism but that doesn't mean we have to create a wall of separation between church and state.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#646
Jul 21, 2013
 
Brian_G wrote:
There's nothing wrong with homosexual or homosexuality but that doesn't mean we have to rewrite marriage laws.
.
There's nothing wrong with atheists or atheism but that doesn't mean we have to create a wall of separation between church and state.
There's nothing wrong with hatred and stupidity. It's natural.

We have to find a way to teach those who practice it a better way.

“Pepsi is better than coke”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

and better with rum

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#647
Jul 21, 2013
 
CH2O2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Homossexuality seems to exist in a huge list of animals. Many of them do have kin-bonding. Even when kin-bonding does not happen throughout life it is common during the stage when the young are dependent of the parents and their homossexual kin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_...
<quoted text>
But crows and parrots exhibit that behaviour. And many other animals do to.
<quoted text>
homossexuality seems to have many different causes. kin altruism is not the only one.
<quoted text>
That can be one of the reasons for homossexuality. But not the only one.
<quoted text>
That is not always the case. I am gay but I have no brothers. That could not possibly be the reason for my sexuality.
<quoted text>
I agree.
<quoted text>
It may not be a single gene but it definately has a genetic and hereditary component. Homossexuality in twin brothers (both brothers) is a lot more common than would be expected if it were not hereditary.
<quoted text>
But the sister of a homossexual man is more likely to produce homossexual offspring. Homossexuality does have a genetic component.
I suggest talking about same sex sexual behavior and not "homosexuality." Homosexuality is a part of how Western cultures construct, understand and experience sexuality. If you want to understand sexuality from a cross cultural point of view (in humans) or an evolutionary point of view (across species), we need to remove the cultural connotations.

“Pepsi is better than coke”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

and better with rum

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#648
Jul 21, 2013
 
Brian_G wrote:
There's nothing wrong with homosexual or homosexuality but that doesn't mean we have to rewrite marriage laws.
.
There's nothing wrong with atheists or atheism but that doesn't mean we have to create a wall of separation between church and state.
No, we need a separation between church and state b/c people are too easily influenced and corruptible.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Level 1

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#649
Jul 21, 2013
 
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we need a separation between church and state b/c people are too easily influenced and corruptible.
Hi "Hidding" long time no hear what you been up to.

“Sara for Fun (( M 2 F ))”

Level 1

Since: Aug 10

Bahrain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#650
Jul 21, 2013
 
I am a supporter of that makes a difference between the verdicts situation and the provisions of the church, the church has provisions since ancient times, and may not significantly more than what came where provided, and the indifference of the people and communities out, while the laws on personal status change as required by the need for change, so we find thata model is clear and explicit and the community accept it in the era of Moses are sodomites, there is no comparison whatsoever between made laws and the legislature, if the idea was by my personal opinion may differ from others, I do not mind!

“Formerly "Richard"”

Level 1

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#651
Jul 21, 2013
 
sarahomo wrote:
I am a supporter of that makes a difference between the verdicts situation and the provisions of the church, the church has provisions since ancient times, and may not significantly more than what came where provided, and the indifference of the people and communities out, while the laws on personal status change as required by the need for change, so we find thata model is clear and explicit and the community accept it in the era of Moses are sodomites, there is no comparison whatsoever between made laws and the legislature, if the idea was by my personal opinion may differ from others, I do not mind!
????

Level 2

Since: Jul 13

Lisbon, Portugal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#652
Jul 21, 2013
 
Brian_G wrote:
There's nothing wrong with homosexual or homosexuality...
I agree.
Brian_G wrote:
...but that doesn't mean we have to rewrite marriage laws.
We don't have to rewrite marriage laws. We can leave then as they are, exclusively between a man and a woman. We can continue to say same sex couples are inferior. We can continue to deny equal rights to same sex couples. We can continue to discriminate against same sex couples. But is that the right thing to do?
Brian_G wrote:
There's nothing wrong with atheists or atheism but that doesn't mean we have to create a wall of separation between church and state.
We don't have to separate church and state. Actually, we could have a theocratic government. Would you like to live under muslim law? Now imagine how atheists would feel under a theocracy.

Level 2

Since: Jul 13

Lisbon, Portugal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#654
Jul 21, 2013
 
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I suggest talking about same sex sexual behavior and not "homosexuality."
Semantics. Different words, same thing.
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Homosexuality is a part of how Western cultures construct, understand and experience sexuality.
Not really. Homosexuality is just one possible expression of sexuality. Homossexuality is not exclusive of western culture, it is present in every human culture since recorded history and probably even before that.
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want to understand sexuality from a cross cultural point of view (in humans)[...] we need to remove the cultural connotations.
If we wish to understand sexuality culturaly we need to remove culture? Contradiction in terms.
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want to understand sexuality from [...] an evolutionary point of view (across species)[...] we need to remove the cultural connotations.
I agree.

“Sara for Fun (( M 2 F ))”

Level 1

Since: Aug 10

Bahrain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#655
Jul 21, 2013
 
CH2O2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree.
<quoted text>
We don't have to rewrite marriage laws. We can leave then as they are, exclusively between a man and a woman. We can continue to say same sex couples are inferior. We can continue to deny equal rights to same sex couples. We can continue to discriminate against same sex couples. But is that the right thing to do?
<quoted text>
We don't have to separate church and state. Actually, we could have a theocratic government. Would you like to live under muslim law? Now imagine how atheists would feel under a theocracy.
Life will be worse over the years, live in a absolute servitude and extreme atheism,

Level 2

Since: Jul 13

Lisbon, Portugal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#656
Jul 21, 2013
 
sarahomo wrote:
<quoted text>Life will be worse over the years, live in a absolute servitude and extreme atheism,
You lost me.

Level 2

Since: Jul 13

Lisbon, Portugal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#657
Jul 21, 2013
 
It seems i've messes up the quotations. I'll try again:
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
That's correlation, not causation.
Crows and parrots also both have beaks, but that doesn't cause homosexual activity among those birds.
That is true. But, if there is a genetic component shared by sibillings that causes homossexuality, it constitutes an argument is favour of the hypothesis that homossexual behaviour can be favoured by natural selection.
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Which contradicts the statement that a gay man is no more likely to produce gay offspring how exactly?
Please notice I was not trying to argue against that statement. I was arguing against the preceding statement.

You said:
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not a gene found in gay people.
You imply that homossexuality does not have a genetic component. My argument "...the sister of a homossexual man is more likely to produce homossexual offspring..." shows that, homossexuality does have a genetic component.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#658
Jul 21, 2013
 
CH2O2 wrote:
You imply that homossexuality does not have a genetic component.
No. I didn't imply anything. I made a very simple and very clear statement:

Homosexuality is not caused by a gene found in gay people.

Therefore, there is no genetic test for homosexuality. There is no genetic cure for homosexuality. A homosexual is not going to pass along this gene to a child who will then become homosexual.

All very clear.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#659
Jul 21, 2013
 
Brian_G wrote:
There's nothing wrong with homosexual or homosexuality but that doesn't mean we have to rewrite marriage laws.
Brian G circa 1840:
There's nothing wrong with black people but that doesn't mean we have to rewrite the slavery laws.
There's nothing wrong with atheists or atheism but that doesn't mean we have to create a wall of separation between church and state.
Brian G circa 1776:
There's nothing wrong with freedom, but that doesn't mean that we have to put in a Bill of Rights.

The marriage laws are being made available to all adults. That's FREEDOM.

Protection FROM religion is far more important that protection OF religion.

You YOURSELF would complain endlessly if we applied even ONE religious rule from another religion to your life.

If US Currency said: "In Vishnu we trust", Christians would be burning down cities.

“Pepsi is better than coke”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

and better with rum

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#660
Jul 21, 2013
 
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi "Hidding" long time no hear what you been up to.
Hi Richhhhhardfs! How's it going?

I've been up to all kinds of things - and more :-p

You?

I hope you're well :)

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 601 - 620 of3,865
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••