Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent. Full Story

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133865 Oct 29, 2012
No, the burden of proof falls upon the person who made the initial claim, and that burden has not yet been met. The initial claim is that the ratio of straights to gays (given as 20 to 1) is somehow relevant to the percentage of pedophiles who prey upon male victims. No such relevancy was provided. So the burden is still not met.
<quoted text>
No such study was presented.
Judge Moniters wrote:
That burden is on you, since you refuted the claim with your opinion.
No, I refuted the claim by pointing out that you had failed to make a supported case that "homosexual pedophiles" were actually gay (you know, the ones you're referring to in that 20 to 1 ratio?). I'm still waiting for you to meet your burden on that claim.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133866 Oct 29, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
Any positive mutation will not be passed on if procreation does not occur.
It will be passed on if it is carried by siblings but not expressed by them.

Basic evolution. Hard fact.(Ever heard of hemophilia, as an example?)
Dave Nelson wrote:
Recruitment is usually done of adolescent boys with raging hormones being seduced and then told they are queer.
Let us know when you produce a study of gay males that says that they weren't gay until they were "recruited".

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133867 Oct 29, 2012
Nope, the burden of proof is on the person claiming that homosexuality is a disorder.
<quoted text>
What evidence was that? Identify that evidence.
Judge Moniters wrote:
Wrong, the burden is on the gays who made the claim for the removal and reversal.
No, the burden falls upon those who claim that it is a disorder. If they fail to meet that burden, then it obviously doesn't belong in the DSM.

Got any evidence to support the "disorder" claim? No, I didn't think you did.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#133868 Oct 29, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>You have just ventured into the realm of pure absurdity. Based on your logic, heterosexuals, should they choose to have sex with an animal, would have a preference toward the opposite sex. Do you really think that's how it works?
Amusing. You reveal a lot about yourself with that one.

A female, gay or straight, would require the proper apparatus on the animal to get any physical stimulation from it. Not too many animals they can count on to give them a satisfactory cunnilingus session.

A straight male would be interested in available orifices, the first instinct being the one designed for such use. Less teeth, and the tail wouldn't be so much in the way.

This would require an animal of the opposite sex.

Now, Timmy and his gay buddies can go with either sex. All they have to do is lift that tail and have at that universal orifice they consider a sex organ. Don't even have to lift the tail with their buddies.

You guys are nasty.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#133869 Oct 29, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Careful! I called a dude "sweet" & now he calls me a colset(sic) gay...
;)
Boblbalblhba or whatever his name is just likes to hate people. I don't really care what he thinks of me :)
:)
:)

And, RR, you're not gay.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#133870 Oct 29, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Amusing. You reveal a lot about yourself with that one.
A female, gay or straight, would require the proper apparatus on the animal to get any physical stimulation from it. Not too many animals they can count on to give them a satisfactory cunnilingus session.
A straight male would be interested in available orifices, the first instinct being the one designed for such use. Less teeth, and the tail wouldn't be so much in the way.
This would require an animal of the opposite sex.
Now, Timmy and his gay buddies can go with either sex. All they have to do is lift that tail and have at that universal orifice they consider a sex organ. Don't even have to lift the tail with their buddies.
You guys are nasty.
Chimpanzees and bonobos both do oral sex (and everything else, barring S&M). Macaques females do mounted genital rubbing - so do birds, actually.

Once again, you've expressed gross ignorance.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#133871 Oct 29, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Amusing. You reveal a lot about yourself with that one.
A female, gay or straight, would require the proper apparatus on the animal to get any physical stimulation from it. Not too many animals they can count on to give them a satisfactory cunnilingus session.
A straight male would be interested in available orifices, the first instinct being the one designed for such use. Less teeth, and the tail wouldn't be so much in the way.
This would require an animal of the opposite sex.
Now, Timmy and his gay buddies can go with either sex. All they have to do is lift that tail and have at that universal orifice they consider a sex organ. Don't even have to lift the tail with their buddies.
You guys are nasty.
Obsessed much, Dave?

Try to get it out of your mind. Think of magnets, em, table saws.

Or take a cold shower.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#133872 Oct 29, 2012
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
Assholism
hahaha!

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#133873 Oct 29, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>And no evidence has been presented that homosexual orientation is a "disorder".

The burden of proof is on the person claiming that homosexual orientation (there is no evidence that it's a "choice") is a "disorder".

Got any such evidence?

No, I didn't think so.
Judge monitors is a hypocritical moron.

Nothing will penetrate that thick skull of his.

He just needs to spew hatred for gays because he gets a stiffy whenever he sees a good looking guy.

Probably never showered after gym class, either.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133874 Oct 29, 2012
Judge Moniters wrote:
BY the way, that was in the DSM-IV, page 678 I believe.
Page 678 is about medication-induced movement disorders.

Care to try again?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133875 Oct 29, 2012
Judge Moniters wrote:
Zen Master Doc wrote:
and the DSM records that 75% of GID children grow up to be homosexual.
It was the DSM-IV, page 678, I believe.
Nope.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133876 Oct 29, 2012
The claim at issue isn't merely that the ratio of straights to gays is 20 to 1, but that the ratio "is somehow relevant to the percentage of pedophiles who prey upon male victims."
<quoted text>
What study?
Judge Moniters wrote:
Try to read properly, the 20 to 1 ratio came from a study and it was presented at least three times.
Try to read properly, the 20 to 1 ratio of straights to gays isn't the issue.

Now, demonstrate how the 20 to 1 ratio of straights to gays (adults attracted to other adults) is relevant to the sexual preferences of pedophiles. That's the claim that I am challenging, and for which you have produced no evidence.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133877 Oct 29, 2012
Judge Moniters wrote:
By pure definition it is a mental disorder. You can't even get a gay to admit that it is mental.
Sexual orientation is mental.

What you have failed to demonstrate is that it is a "disorder".

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#133878 Oct 29, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Chimpanzees and bonobos both do oral sex (and everything else, barring S&M). Macaques females do mounted genital rubbing - so do birds, actually.
Once again, you've expressed gross ignorance.
I posted a link about bonobos yesterday. They don't do anal.

As far as the oral goes, what they do with each other is not necessarily what they would do with you.

The issue was human sex with animals.

Do you think Timmy would stick his thingy in a dog's mouth and have a good time?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133879 Oct 29, 2012
Nope, the burden of proof is on the person claiming that homosexuality is a disorder.
<quoted text>
What evidence was that? Identify that evidence.
Judge Moniters wrote:
That was the point, the APA never had evidence.
The point is that *you* have failed to produce any evidence that homosexuality is a disorder. You're not somehow excused by errors that the APA made in the past.
Judge Moniters wrote:
Also, what evidence do you have that conversion therapy is harmful.
I didn't claim that it was "harmful". I pointed out that there is no evidence presented that it is *effective*. Unless you present evidence that it is effective, then it is snake oil, and has no business being pushed.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133880 Oct 29, 2012
Clementia wrote:
transexual - homo and bi people who have sex change
No, a transsexual is someone who does not identify with their assigned sex.

They can be straight, gay, or bi.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133881 Oct 29, 2012
Judge Moniters wrote:
ALL PEOPLE are born heterogamous and thus heterosexual
What is your evidence that everyone is born heterosexual (sexually attracted to those of the opposite sex)?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#133882 Oct 29, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>Evidence?

Judge Moniters wrote, "You know the APA who supports pedophilia and claims that it is not a mental illness."

Evidence?
Evidence is the enemy of the fundy Christian.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133883 Oct 29, 2012
Judge Moniters wrote:
Homosexuality is indeed considered a mental disorder.
By whom, exactly, other than by those who profit by selling "reparative therapy" or by those with a particular religious agenda?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#133884 Oct 29, 2012
The rapid expansion is part of the Big Bang theory. So I don't know what you are referring to as "doubtful".
ChristineM wrote:
The big bang was the explosion postulated from the hubble diagram It is now seen more as a rapid and accelerating expansion from the outset. However the name is still used to keep consistency
You still haven't said what you consider to be "doubtful".

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 min pusherman_ 543,290
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 min Aura Mytha 740,723
Men and commitment 16 min Delilahblue 3
disturbing the priest 19 min pusherman_ 1
What Your Church Won't Tell You by Dave and Gar... (Apr '10) 26 min dirty white boy- 33,054
Why Iím no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 56 min Rosa_Winkel 441,344
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 95,562
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr HipGnosis 173,909
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 2 hr Dr_Zorderz 259,771
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 10 hr Joana 158

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••