So, What Is It That The Anti-Gay Groups Actually Fear?

Aug 17, 2012 Full story: lezgetreal.com 18,015

What makes hate, well, hate? Given that today is something of a quiet news day, it may be nice to give ourselves a breather and think about some things.

Read more
First Prev
of 901
Next Last

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#19699 Feb 23, 2013
Which brings us full circle to your reminders about taking things in cuntext.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#19700 Feb 23, 2013
boooots wrote:
<quoted text>
Lacez, I keep confusing the sex (not that at my age sex is something that I am not always confused about) of you and Mylan. I keeep seeing Mylan as male, but I see others addressing her as a female. Same with you. Problem is that the many IDs of Patty keep me occupied, plus what sane person is on the internet while vacationing in Barbados, while his city, which often gets no snow all winter, has had lots of it since we left, that I really haven't concentrated on either of you to figure you out.
It's okay, I'm a guy, happily engaged to another guy.
boooots wrote:
I think you are Canadian, which has more advantages than I can remember. Though I suspect in la province (or is that le province) de Quebec you have more snow than we usually get in the tropical Niagara area.
A few things here, yes, I am Canadian, living in Quebec. I would implore you to not refer to it in the french way though, for the separatists here give me a headache and coddling the "quebecois" is slightly annoying, just as if I were to pretend I believe a god exists just for the highly religious people.
Also, yes, there are usually quite a few more feet of snow than in the rest of Canada.
It's actually snowing right at this moment and it'll drop perhaps a feet over the rest of the day/mayhap tomorrow.
boooots wrote:
Perhaps you might note that I am not fully awake, as it is 6:50 here and I have been up for an hour or so, listening or watching the periodic rain showers, which we have been having most days, usually not enough to affect our enjoyment. Last night and this morning, so far, they seem a little more frequent than most days.
Hopefully that doesn't develop into something worse...
boooots wrote:
Regarding Patty, my benevolent feelings for her are wearing very thin. She has to be the most non-Christian-like Christian, I have ever had the misfortune to know in my life, and most of the people in my life have been Christians.
Poe's law. Look it up on Google, this is how many fundamentalists act anyhow.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#19701 Feb 23, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for playing, but you forgot to mention this part:
"Some studies put the incidence of anal sex in the heterosexual population as low as 24 percent and some as high as 56 percent. Averaging those numbers, let&#65533;s say 38.8 percent of heterosexuals engage in anal sex. Ninety-six percent of Americans are straight. There are 190,000,000 adults between the ages of 18 and 65 in the United States, so that means 70,771,200 adults are engaging in heterosexual anal sex."
And, from Wikipedia:
"While anal sex is commonly associated with male homosexuality, research shows not all gay males engage in anal sex and that it is not uncommon in heterosexual relationships.[1][4][5][6] Types of anal sex can also be a part of lesbian sexual practices.[7]
Many people find anal sex pleasurable, and some may reach orgasm through anal penetration by stimulation of the prostate in men, indirect clitoral/G-Spot stimulation in women, and associated sensory nerves (especially the pudendal nerve).[3][8][9][10] However, many people find anal sex painful as well, sometimes extremely so,[11][12] which may be primarily due to psychological factors in some cases."
Your anal sex tirade is merely another failed effort to demonize gay men. In fact, you should be demonizing everyone who participates in anal sex. In other words, you should be an equal opportunity offender. But you aren't, Blance. you aren't.
I forgot nothing. I exposed a lie and your troll behavior.

Moreover, Savage fails to mention his stats on heterosexual sex are about those who have engaged in anal sex at least once. The number of heterosexuals who make it a practice are far lower.

Speaking the truth is not demonizing. Especially when it involves a harmful, unhealthy and demeaning behavior that all of society is still paying for.

If you want to equate gay couples with marriage, then everything is on the table.

If your cause is legitimate, what are you whining about???

Smile.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#19702 Feb 23, 2013
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
It's okay, I'm a guy, happily engaged to another guy.
<quoted text>
A few things here, yes, I am Canadian, living in Quebec. I would implore you to not refer to it in the french way though, for the separatists here give me a headache and coddling the "quebecois" is slightly annoying, just as if I were to pretend I believe a god exists just for the highly religious people.
Also, yes, there are usually quite a few more feet of snow than in the rest of Canada.
It's actually snowing right at this moment and it'll drop perhaps a feet over the rest of the day/mayhap tomorrow.
<quoted text>
Hopefully that doesn't develop into something worse...
<quoted text>
Poe's law. Look it up on Google, this is how many fundamentalists act anyhow.
We have a couple from Montreal who spend part of the day at the same beach as we do (though we didn't get there today as every time we got ready to go, it started raining), and we usually at least greet them, and occasionally I use a couple French words from my 50 year old French classes. It has rained here almost every day since we arrived, sometimes only for a few seconds or minutes, but today seems to be one of the few where not getting wet on the way to or from the beach is not likely. We have about 700 metres walk mostly uphill on the return so we can't just run across the street or out of our beach house for a swim, we have to make it an actual effort. My wife is very seriously thinking of not coming to this apartment another year, though we like our landlord very much (though her son in the apartment below us is a pain), and it is an ideal location for the view, as we are just too darned old to be climbing uphill daily, or several times daily.

I think separatism is for the birds, as I wonder how they think they could survive as a country surrounded by Canada and the USA on who they would depend for trade, in order to remain viable, if viability were even possible. I have not really followed closely the whole separatism issue, but I think it is at best silly.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#19703 Feb 23, 2013
boooots wrote:
<quoted text>
We have a couple from Montreal who spend part of the day at the same beach as we do (though we didn't get there today as every time we got ready to go, it started raining), and we usually at least greet them, and occasionally I use a couple French words from my 50 year old French classes. It has rained here almost every day since we arrived, sometimes only for a few seconds or minutes, but today seems to be one of the few where not getting wet on the way to or from the beach is not likely. We have about 700 metres walk mostly uphill on the return so we can't just run across the street or out of our beach house for a swim, we have to make it an actual effort. My wife is very seriously thinking of not coming to this apartment another year, though we like our landlord very much (though her son in the apartment below us is a pain), and it is an ideal location for the view, as we are just too darned old to be climbing uphill daily, or several times daily.
I think separatism is for the birds, as I wonder how they think they could survive as a country surrounded by Canada and the USA on who they would depend for trade, in order to remain viable, if viability were even possible. I have not really followed closely the whole separatism issue, but I think it is at best silly.
Oh, most definitely.
Separating is by far the worst idea.
The people who believe it's a good idea don't think of any of the repercussions.
I mean, there's so much more to it...
-English companies will vacate Quebec
-Canada won't let Quebec use its currency
-Canada won't let Quebec use its army
-Quebec residents will move out of Quebec (anyone who isn't separatist) and the population will lower drastically
-People from Quebec will only be able to work in Quebec, having not the ability to speak in English, the business language

And so much more.
Separation is just plain stupid.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#19704 Feb 23, 2013
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
It's okay, I'm a guy, happily engaged to another guy.
<quoted text>
A few things here, yes, I am Canadian, living in Quebec. I would implore you to not refer to it in the french way though, for the separatists here give me a headache and coddling the "quebecois" is slightly annoying, just as if I were to pretend I believe a god exists just for the highly religious people.
Also, yes, there are usually quite a few more feet of snow than in the rest of Canada.
It's actually snowing right at this moment and it'll drop perhaps a feet over the rest of the day/mayhap tomorrow.
<quoted text>
Hopefully that doesn't develop into something worse...
<quoted text>
Poe's law. Look it up on Google, this is how many fundamentalists act anyhow.
I had to look up that law as I was not familiar with the term. It does apply to many of the posters on this site, as they tend to betray their sincerity by various remarks they make. I wonder sometimes if it applies to Patty, but unless we all have been hoodwinked, and she is a professional at always making the same errors purposely over a course of 60,000 posts, I kind of doubt that someone just acting could keep up the intensity as long as she has.

If she is smarter than she appears then the joke is on us, or at least me, but so far I have seen no evidence of much intelligence at all. She appears almost robotic to me.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#19705 Feb 23, 2013
Lacez wrote:
Poe's law. Look it up on Google, this is how many fundamentalists act anyhow.
By the way, congratulations on your engagement. I hope that you and your partner enjoy a long and happy life together.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#19706 Feb 23, 2013
KiMare wrote:
I feel no need to fully explain a supernatural book.
I don't blame you. I couldn't keep a straight face while trying to explain magic fruit, talking animals, resurrection, the formation of world languages at the base of a crumbled tower to Heaven, a year-long boat ride full of 2 of each predator and each prey from all around the world, dragons, satyrs and unicorns.

The "supernatural" isn't actually a THING, it's just the collection of stories of unproven and unprovable ideas, which haven't been, or CANNOT be, reconciled into the real world, known as Nature. "Explaining" it would require a vivid imagination, or a Hollywood-sized special-effects budget.
KiMare wrote:
The fact is, over the centuries, people who mocked the Bible were proved wrong time and time again.
I'd ask you to cite who these people were, and how they were proven wrong, but I'm still waiting on the LAST thing I asked for.
KiMare wrote:
You really need to ask yourself why that denial about something you 'dismiss' as garbage is such a passion for you.
Because it directly influences my life, in legislation borne from supernatural beliefs. Also, I find the subject of "belief" to be fascinating, why some people are so willing to be credulous and uncritical.
KiMare wrote:
The closest comparison to natural sex is anal sex for gays.
Who CARES? I reference your above sentence. Why is denial about something you dismiss as "default" such a passion for YOU? Are you trying to criminalize gay sex?
KiMare wrote:
Moreover, the closest union is when body, mind and spirit are united, not just two out of three.
Says you. I don't even know what "spirit" is, but I know I have no need of it. My partner and I unite to the level that WE require, which is exactly zero of your concern.
KiMare wrote:
AIDS alone has killed far more gays than any of the practices you listed.
I wonder what things would have been like, if gay people had not been forced to seek companionship in hiding and darkness, under threat of death. Or what FURTHER influence it might have had, if religion had not been so opposed to sexual education and access to protection.
KiMare wrote:
When you make statements about the Bible, I simply mock the bigotry.
It's "bigotry" to say that dragons don't exist, or that eating a fruit can't give you the knowledge of good and evil? Why isn't it "bigotry" for the Bible to say that these things ARE true?
KiMare wrote:
When you deny reality, I use scientific facts to mock that too.
See above statement. Reality: dragons and magic fruit DO NOT EXIST. Reality: gay people DO exist. I don't know WHAT scientific facts you have that deny any of that. I think you have to AGREE with my same reality.
KiMare wrote:
I see no clear conflict between the Bible and evolution.
Are you saying that you think that humanity DID develop from dirt and ribs, with frequent conversations with talking snakes? Evolution doesn't support that. How do you NOT see the conflict?
KiMare wrote:
My observation is that your confusion is a result of unresolved anger.
Ah yes, the old canard. Atheists are "angry" at fictional characters.
KiMare wrote:
you are denying that some defective mutations are repetitive.
Is that part of God's "intelligent" design? Like conjoined twins, or cancer? Maybe he should've read the instructions on his chemistry set before he used it.
KiMare wrote:
SCOTUS will overrule a scientific fact?
SCOTUS is likely to overrule senseless, needless discrimination. The Bible calls for gay people to be put to death, but Christians have ALREADY abandoned that dogma (among plenty of other useless nonsense from the book). Society is improving, but the Bible is not helping. Science tells us that gay people are real, and that they will CONTINUE to be real. Placing bans on their lives helps NO ONE.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#19707 Feb 23, 2013
boooots wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, congratulations on your engagement. I hope that you and your partner enjoy a long and happy life together.
Why, thank you!
We shall.
Though he annoys the hell out of me sometimes, I can't imagine life without him.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#19708 Feb 24, 2013
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't blame you. I couldn't keep a straight face while trying to explain magic fruit, talking animals, resurrection, the formation of world languages at the base of a crumbled tower to Heaven, a year-long boat ride full of 2 of each predator and each prey from all around the world, dragons, satyrs and unicorns.
The "supernatural" isn't actually a THING, it's just the collection of stories of unproven and unprovable ideas, which haven't been, or CANNOT be, reconciled into the real world, known as Nature. "Explaining" it would require a vivid imagination, or a Hollywood-sized special-effects budget.
<quoted text>
I'd ask you to cite who these people were, and how they were proven wrong, but I'm still waiting on the LAST thing I asked for.
<quoted text>
Because it directly influences my life, in legislation borne from supernatural beliefs. Also, I find the subject of "belief" to be fascinating, why some people are so willing to be credulous and uncritical.
<quoted text>
Who CARES? I reference your above sentence. Why is denial about something you dismiss as "default" such a passion for YOU? Are you trying to criminalize gay sex?
<quoted text>
Says you. I don't even know what "spirit" is, but I know I have no need of it. My partner and I unite to the level that WE require, which is exactly zero of your concern.
<quoted text>
I wonder what things would have been like, if gay people had not been forced to seek companionship in hiding and darkness, under threat of death. Or what FURTHER influence it might have had, if religion had not been so opposed to sexual education and access to protection.
<quoted text>
It's "bigotry" to say that dragons don't exist, or that eating a fruit can't give you the knowledge of good and evil? Why isn't it "bigotry" for the Bible to say that these things ARE true?
<quoted text>
See above statement. Reality: dragons and magic fruit DO NOT EXIST. Reality: gay people DO exist. I don't know WHAT scientific facts you have that deny any of that. I think you have to AGREE with my same reality.
<quoted text>

<quoted text>
Is that part of God's "intelligent" design? Like conjoined twins, or cancer? Maybe he should've read the instructions on his chemistry set before he used it.
<quoted text>
SCOTUS is likely to overrule senseless, needless discrimination. The Bible calls for gay people to be put to death, but Christians have ALREADY abandoned that dogma (among plenty of other useless nonsense from the book). Society is improving, but the Bible is not helping. Science tells us that gay people are real, and that they will CONTINUE to be real. Placing bans on their lives helps NO ONE.
It is that kind of hateful denial that makes discussion with you pointless. You verbalize a small portion of what the Bible contains with extreme demeaning distortion while ignoring the majority of what it says. While there are countless historical records from those times, you reserve your hate for one. One Book that happens to stand apart from every other book in existence for billions of people over the entire time it has existed. You aren't just peeing in the wind, that's a hurricane.

You focus your bigoted hate on a Book that only confirms what every single culture and major religion in history has already affirmed; homosexuality is abnormal. Even science confirms that diagnosis!

Moreover, look at your 'logic'? Selective facts and shifting like a truck driver when you get pinned down on an issue. Then you demand proof of a book of faith. How logical is that?

Admit it Edmond, your anger is rooted in knowing within yourself that you were given a short deck. Kicking at the light is only an attempt to divert from the darkness in your heart.

Smile.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#19709 Feb 24, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
If your cause is legitimate, what are you whining about???
Smile.
if your argument is so legitimate why do you have to rely on anal sex?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#19710 Feb 24, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
if your argument is so legitimate why do you have to rely on anal sex?
I don't. You forget countless other proofs. I do use it because it annoys a girl who thinks she is non-functioning vagina.

Smile.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#19711 Feb 24, 2013
KiMare wrote:
It is that kind of hateful denial that makes discussion with you pointless. You verbalize a small portion of what the Bible contains with extreme demeaning distortion while ignoring the majority of what it says.
If ANY portion of the Bible can be discounted as myth, then the WHOLE THING falls into question. It isn't "hateful" to recognize this; it's realistic. It's foolish NOT to see that a book so filled with glaring errors is untrustworthy.
KiMare wrote:
While there are countless historical records from those times, you reserve your hate for one.
You'll never understand what I'm saying, as long as you continue to miscategorize my rational analysis of the Bible as "hate". Neither do I "hate" The Lord of the Rings, but I don't pretend that its narrative is REAL. A magic garden with magic fruit trees is not a "historical record", because it did not happen.
KiMare wrote:
One Book that happens to stand apart from every other book in existence for billions of people over the entire time it has existed.
Do you ignore all the OTHER books that hold the SAME meaning for equal billions throughout history? Why have you picked the Bible as your favorite, and not the Quran? Do you believe those people are foolish, or misguided? Or do you believe that God is telling different stories to different people? SOMETHING is preventing you from objectively recognizing ALL these books as myths. Some inner cognitive dissonance prevents you from seeing that your favorite is no different from the rest.
KiMare wrote:
You focus your bigoted hate on a Book
Do you not understand that a BOOK cannot be the victim of bigotry? It's a stack of paper. Maybe this is the source of the dehumanizing effects of religion; the application of emotions and sentient qualities, which should be reserved for human beings, onto an inanimate object.
KiMare wrote:
that only confirms what every single culture and major religion in history has already affirmed; homosexuality is abnormal. Even science confirms that diagnosis!
LOTS of things are considered "abnormal". That doesn't mean that we go out of our way to make life more difficult for them! Look at all the ramps, and grip bars, and parking spaces that are in place for people with physical disabilities (deliberately given to them by a god, should one exist). Humans put laws in place to ensure that these people are treated equally. The Bible surely couldn't be counted on that. It expressely FORBADE people with such deformities from entering the temple. That kind of directed mistreatment is what's "abnormal". It's primitive.

Lots of things are considered "abnormal" in the Bible as well, yet Christians conveniently ignore nearly everything else. They MUST, in order to live a normal life where people enjoy shellfish, and wear blended fibers, and show off their haircuts and tattoos.
KiMare wrote:
Moreover, look at your 'logic'? Selective facts and shifting like a truck driver when you get pinned down on an issue. Then you demand proof of a book of faith. How logical is that?
Faith itself is illogical. You SHOULD demand proof. Reality gives it freely. Faith mocks the search for truth, by allowing personal hopes and wishes to substitute for facts.
KiMare wrote:
Admit it Edmond, your anger is rooted in knowing within yourself that you were given a short deck. Kicking at the light is only an attempt to divert from the darkness in your heart.
There is no "light" in the glee that many religious people take (yourself included, perhaps) in shoveling disadvantages onto people who were "given a short deck". Civilized people seek to level the playing field, making opportunity for all. They don't go pointing out "abnormalities", hoping to use them as an excuse to segregate and exclude and deny. If I do have anger, it's because the Bible is used as a tool for division, and for fostering the concept of "otherness".

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#19712 Feb 24, 2013
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
If ANY portion of the Bible can be discounted as myth, then the WHOLE THING falls into question. It isn't "hateful" to recognize this; it's realistic. It's foolish NOT to see that a book so filled with glaring errors is untrustworthy.
<quoted text>
You'll never understand what I'm saying, as long as you continue to miscategorize my rational analysis of the Bible as "hate". Neither do I "hate" The Lord of the Rings, but I don't pretend that its narrative is REAL. A magic garden with magic fruit trees is not a "historical record", because it did not happen.
<quoted text>
Do you ignore all the OTHER books that hold the SAME meaning for equal billions throughout history? Why have you picked the Bible as your favorite, and not the Quran? Do you believe those people are foolish, or misguided? Or do you believe that God is telling different stories to different people? SOMETHING is preventing you from objectively recognizing ALL these books as myths. Some inner cognitive dissonance prevents you from seeing that your favorite is no different from the rest.
<quoted text>
Do you not understand that a BOOK cannot be the victim of bigotry? It's a stack of paper. Maybe this is the source of the dehumanizing effects of religion; the application of emotions and sentient qualities, which should be reserved for human beings, onto an inanimate object.
<quoted text>
LOTS of things are considered "abnormal". That doesn't mean that we go out of our way to make life more difficult for them! Look at all the ramps, and grip bars, and parking spaces that are in place for people with physical disabilities (deliberately given to them by a god, should one exist). Humans put laws in place to ensure that these people are treated equally. The Bible surely couldn't be counted on that. It expressely FORBADE people with such deformities from entering the temple. That kind of directed mistreatment is what's "abnormal". It's primitive.
Lots of things are considered "abnormal" in the Bible as well, yet Christians conveniently ignore nearly everything else. They MUST, in order to live a normal life where people enjoy shellfish, and wear blended fibers, and show off their haircuts and tattoos.
<quoted text>
Faith itself is illogical. You SHOULD demand proof. Reality gives it freely. Faith mocks the search for truth, by allowing personal hopes and wishes to substitute for facts.
<quoted text>
There is no "light" in the glee that many religious people take (yourself included, perhaps) in shoveling disadvantages onto people who were "given a short deck". Civilized people seek to level the playing field, making opportunity for all. They don't go pointing out "abnormalities", hoping to use them as an excuse to segregate and exclude and deny. If I do have anger, it's because the Bible is used as a tool for division, and for fostering the concept of "otherness".
Just one point as an example;

Other ancient books hold equal impact historically? You call that a logical statement?

Read what you have written in the last two posts. The unmitigated negative castigation of people who devote their lives to being and doing good. All of that is negated because they happen to agree with science, gay sex is unnatural.

You are clearly indicating that you are not an unbiased critic of the Bible. The degree of your hostility clouds your reasoning.

You have the right to your opinion, but you don't have the right to discriminate against the facts.

Smile.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#19713 Feb 24, 2013
KiMare wrote:
Other ancient books hold equal impact historically? You call that a logical statement?
Of course! Why WOULDN'T it be? Are you just pulling my leg with all this? Having a laugh on the internet, being contrary with anyone who wants a serious conversation?

There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, by some estimates. Are you saying that's NOT a historical impact? Nearly a billion Hindus. More than 300 million Buddhists. These are just a few of the literally THOUSANDS of world religions, each of them as impassioned about their scriptures as Christians are about theirs.

What is your opinion of their religions? Are they just WRONG? Is God ANGRY at them for choosing the incorrect religion? Are they destined for Hell? Does that "divine" attitude translate into righteous justice?
KiMare wrote:
Read what you have written in the last two posts. The unmitigated negative castigation of people who devote their lives to being and doing good.
Things like raping children, and covering up the crimes? Hunting women suspected of witchcraft? Religion has no guarantees of producing good works, and is directly responsible for many outrageously BAD behaviors.

Doing good doesn't really count when it's done to curry favor with a god. Doing good should be done for the betterment of humanity, for its OWN sake. Secularism has the same potential for doing good, plenty of secular organizations promote good works, and it's done with NO thought of reward in a later life.

My "castigation" is rooted in the bafflement of people who reject sound, logical, critical thought. Why should a religion direct people to punish people for witchcraft, a completely fictional crime? Why should religious people seek to control civil legislation, with the goal of FORCING non-religious people to live according to religious tenets?

I believe that people should be free to worship as they please, but when their beliefs spill over into actions which influence and control the lives of others, THEN I have a problem. Religious freedom is NEVER a good excuse to expect OTHERS to live with religious obedience. If Hindus were trying to make laws which forced YOU to be vegetarian against your will, or if Muslims tried to enforce Sharia law onto you, wouldn't you "castigate" them?
KiMare wrote:
All of that is negated because they happen to agree with science, gay sex is unnatural.
No science says that! What science are you looking at? The findings of the AMA, which says, in part, "homosexuality and bisexuality are normal expressions of human sexuality and pose no inherent obstacle to leading a happy, healthy, and productive life"? Or the APA which proclaims "Both heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality"?

Do they agree with science, when they say that humanity developed from two fully evolved humans in a garden with magic fruit? In which phylum of botany does the tree of knowledge of good and evil reside? How does science explain a talking donkey? What do linguists have to say about the Tower of Babel?

Science does NOT agree with your claims.
KiMare wrote:
You are clearly indicating that you are not an unbiased critic of the Bible. The degree of your hostility clouds your reasoning.
How would you suggest I alter my bias, when considering dragons, unicorns or satyrs? Am I "hostile" when I say you could not reduce all wildlife down to 2 of each predator and each prey, and expect gazelles to repopulate faster than being eaten?
KiMare wrote:
You have the right to your opinion, but you don't have the right to discriminate against the facts.
Just as a book cannot experience bigotry, facts cannot experience discrimination. The Garden of Eden is NOT fact. Resurrection, pregnant virgins, and talking animals are NOT facts. Science supports NONE of this. How do you look at these claims, and attempt to call them scientifically accurate?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 901
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 min Sonoma Coma 17,682
News Pastor stands against same-sex marriage 4 min Auntie Theist 279
News David v Goliath analogy drawn in gay cake case ... 4 min Marcavage s Emission 7
News Indiana lawmakers send religious objection bill... 6 min barefoot2626 57
News 'Star Trek' star George Takei calls for Indiana... 7 min Fa-Foxy 11
News Indiana religious objections law slammed on soc... 16 min Sterkfontein Swar... 8
News Child of Lesbian Moms Says Same-Sex Marriage Is... 17 min Quest 506
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 55 min Chris Toal 30,816
News Lawmakers Consider Gay Discrimination Policies 6 hr Rainbow Kid 1,559
News Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 7 hr Brian_G 1,897
More from around the web