Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-12-2011, 09:01 AM #295
Angry_Birds
Money over *****es
 
Angry_Birds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fairfax, VA
Quote:
Originally Posted by $h@key J0nEZ View Post
So where is the quantifiable evidence that proves homosexuality is genetic and not a persons choice? Also if homosexuality is really genetic, why hasn't natural selection phased out the mutation over the millions of years of evolution that scientists claim to have occurred? Seeing how gays can't naturally reproduce.
Do you really want to to start this **** again? Did you choose to like women? Do you think these gay penguins at the NYC zoo made a conscious decision to be with the same sex? No, attraction is not something you can turn on and off. It's biologically wired into you.

the fact that anybody intelligent can even consider religion a valid alternative to science is astounding. By nature, science is constantly improving and encouraging people to debate and question (with the ultimate goal of improvinh our understanding). Religion's modus operandi is literally to "don't ask, just believe" a book that claims the world was created in six days, complete with a man, a woman, and a talking snake.
__________________
Hop your pretty *** up in this ****ing car
***** I'm out this world girl you know I'm a star
Angry_Birds is offline  
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 11-12-2011, 11:52 AM #296
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccupyST View Post
How about this: Answer the question and you get an e-cookie

To recap:

1.) Do you believe in equal rights for all humans? (Y/N)

2.) Do you believe in equal marriage? (Y/N)

1) No

I feel strongly enough about that to answer you.

Think carefully about what question 1 implies my dear.
Iamamartianchurch is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 01:00 PM #297
spracks21
Zap Rowsdower
 
spracks21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lincoln, NE
spracks21 plays in the PSP
spracks21 owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
spracks21 supports Team VICIOUS
spracks21 plays in the APPA D3 division
Does homosexuality have to be genetic for it to not be a choice? Some people like chocolate ice cream while others hate chocolate all together. Is there a gene for this? Do people choose to think chocolate tastes bad, or find it unappealing?
__________________
Aimless Factory
#21
spracks21 is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 02:15 PM #298
barrel roll
secedere
 
barrel roll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL/GA border
barrel roll is one of the top 500 posters on PbNation
barrel roll is Legendary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
All that tells me is Georges Lemaitre wasn't satisfied with the Catholic "answer" to creation. Although he may have still believed in the Christ story, I would argue that makes him more skeptical, less religious and his faith more based on his spirituality.
Did you miss the part where I told you there is no Catholic answer to creation, that what is written in the Genesis is symbolism (Jews believe this too)? Yea, I believe I said something to that effect. I gave you the avenue to argue if you wanted to be correct, but you turned the opposite direction to spite me.

1) The Catholic answer has always been "6 days of creation is an allegory". Don't believe? Look up St. Augustine of Hippo, 4th century. That guy also shaped psychology and philosophy as we know it today.

2) I don't understand why it is so difficult to believe that science and (certain) religion are not at war with each other.

3) I'm starting to view you in the same light as fundamentalists. They are cut from the same cloth as the anti-theists parading around calling themselves atheists. Please tell me that isn't true about you.
__________________
--- UNDRPRVLGD Goggle Straps n stuff ---
If this be treason, make the most of it.-Patrick Henry
I'm a damn veteran, I've got more rights and privileges than you do.
MQ2 rebuild kits, MP4 ram rebuilds, general 'cocker teching
Will soon be making super slick mid/half block bolts
barrel roll is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 03:00 PM #299
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
Can you argue that faith, by definition, does not require a suspension of critical thought and reason? Even if it is surrounding just a single situation, for example the Trinity.

The thing is, even if Catholicism views the creation story in the Bible as being an allegory, there is still the belief that God is behind it all. And I don't see how that doesn't lead inevitably to stopping in the search for deeper understanding. At some point, the answer will be "God did it" simply because we're unable to find an answer to the question "what caused the Big Bang?", not because we've actually found God.

I'm legitimately curious to hear your response to this, I'm not trying to be sarcastic or facetious.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.

Last edited by Umami : 11-12-2011 at 03:38 PM.
Umami is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 04:05 PM #300
Pail Ail (Banned)
Bill Watterson
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post

The difference between a Christian scientist and an Atheistic scientist is the Atheistic scientist won't hesitate to ask any question they think they might be able to find an answer to, whereas the religious Christian scientist will only pursue science as far as they don't see it being in direct conflict with their faith.
What if the question leads to belief in a higher power for the Atheist (who claims a god can't be real). Look, your logic here sucks.

Quote:
I would call Hsilman skeptical... but then I wouldn't call him very religious, either. As religiosity increases, skepticism decreases. If you accept the Church's teachings on creation as complete, you're not likely to spend your time investigating the creation of the universe. To you, that question has already been answered/solved/spoken to. There are still plenty of areas of research your religion will let you explore without threat, but by accepting any answer or story ipse-dixit I don't consider you a true skeptic.
No true Scotsman fallacy, and Hsilman has called himself a Christian multiple times. Now you're differentiating between religious characteristics and spiritual ones, which seems to show me that this really is more complicated than you make it out to be. BTW, accepting the story can mean many, many things, or is there only one true interpretation for a skeptic like you?

Quote:
Edit: Also, I would like to mention that there are a lot of atheists I wouldn't consider skeptics either. In my mind, Atheism/Agnosticism is a necessary indicator but not sufficient to be a skeptic.
Then your dichotomy is false.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
All that tells me is Georges Lemaitre wasn't satisfied with the Catholic "answer" to creation. Although he may have still believed in the Christ story, I would argue that makes him more skeptical, less religious and his faith more based on his spirituality.
But your original dichotomy falls apart.
Pail Ail is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 04:17 PM #301
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
What if the question leads to belief in a higher power for the Atheist (who claims a god can't be real). Look, your logic here sucks.
I never claimed a god can't be real. Nice try, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
No true Scotsman fallacy, and Hsilman has called himself a Christian multiple times. Now you're differentiating between religious characteristics and spiritual ones, which seems to show me that this really is more complicated than you make it out to be. BTW, accepting the story can mean many, many things, or is there only one true interpretation for a skeptic like you?
I took care to not include spirituality. And of course there is not only one true interpretation... but you're making a HUGE logical leap if you're inferring that any interpretation is acceptable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
Then your dichotomy is false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
But your original dichotomy falls apart.
Let's take a look at my dichotomy:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
But seriously, the difference between someone with a scientific mindset and a religious one is nothing more than the acceptance that we don't have all the answers and may never have them and being okay with that and working to increase that knowledge, whereas the religious person is more comfortable accepting unsupported answets from their 'gut', religious institutions, or some booming voice in the sky and being satisfied.
Not once did I state that Christians were incapable of being scientific, nor that Atheists were somehow impervious to faith-based arguments. All this says is religious people are going to be more comfortable with a faith based argument, and are more likely to be satisfied when the question may still be unanswered.

I would also like to draw your attention to the bolded word.

di·chot·o·my/dīˈkätəmē/
Noun:
A division or contrast between two things that are or are represented as being opposed or entirely different.

I don't see my statement as a dichotomy.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.

Last edited by Umami : 11-12-2011 at 04:28 PM.
Umami is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 04:32 PM #302
Pail Ail (Banned)
Bill Watterson
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
I never claimed a god can't be real. Nice try, though.
And I never used you as my example. Nice try, though. Too.



Quote:
I took care to not include spirituality. And of course there is not only one true interpretation... but you're making a HUGE logical leap if you're inferring that any interpretation is acceptable.
Acceptable is a personal value. But, I wouldn't make that claim. But there are certainly more than enough interpretations that leave ample space for scientific inquiry rather than simple acceptance that if we can't find an answer one MUST ASSUME god did it (which is what you're saying, or if you aren't saying that, then I see no point at all).



Quote:
Let's take a look at my dichotomy:


Not once did I state that Christians were incapable of being scientific, nor that Atheists were somehow impervious to faith-based arguments. All this says is religious people are going to be more comfortable with a faith based argument, and are more likely to be satisfied when the question may still be unanswered.
But you don't really have any proof of that.

BTW, you wrote this:

whereas the religious person is more comfortable accepting unsupported answets from their 'gut', religious institutions, or some booming voice in the sky and being satisfied.

That's a lot different, but I'm glad you've modified your argument. I'd still like to see you accept that just because you're some sort of ultra-materialist anti-faith scientist doesn't mean that faith doesn't play a huge role in some aspect of their inquiry. Models have assumptions you know, and we both know those assumptions aren't always tested on the amount of truth they possess.
Pail Ail is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 04:48 PM #303
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
But you don't really have any proof of that.
Really? Are you comfortable with calling Jesus the son of God? I'm not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
Models have assumptions you know, and we both know those assumptions aren't always tested on the amount of truth they possess.
That's not true at all. If the assumptions can't be made, theory won't be verified by real world data.

And a scientific finding is always open to scrutiny (provided it has sufficient grounds). The same is not true of religion, because frankly, there's no way to scrutinize a baseless claim.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.

Last edited by Umami : 11-12-2011 at 05:16 PM.
Umami is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 06:08 PM #304
Treghc
 
 
Treghc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle
Treghc is a Supporting Member
Treghc is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Treghc is a Forum Captain
Quote:
Originally Posted by $h@key J0nEZ View Post
So where is the quantifiable evidence that proves god is real and not a person's choice?
Fixed.

I wish people would stick their reasoning across all volumes of its use. Hypocritical thinking should be one of the easiest things to spot by one's own self.

But, by the way, the data is there. It's from gays themselves. All you have to do is ask one:

"Did you choose to be gay?"

They will, 100% of the time, tell you that no, they didn't just make a choice. They followed their biological attraction of a sexual level to another human being, just as any heterosexual person does.

It's such childish thinking to simply ignore that evidence and defy the logic provided from the people themselves. It's direct evidence to point out that being gay is not a choice. Anyone who continues to make this argument that being gay is a choice could use an MRI.
__________________
“But men, they say a lot of foolish things. In the end, the only words I can find to believe in are mine." - Joe

Tarsier Slave


We are Sapien
Treghc is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 06:24 PM #305
OccupyST
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
Anyone who continues to make this argument that being gay is a choice could use an MRI.
OccupyST likes your status.

What kills me about this entire debate is that there's an actual homosexual in here that anyone could ask questions to, but instead recite passages of the bible.
OccupyST is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 08:01 PM #306
barrel roll
secedere
 
barrel roll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL/GA border
barrel roll is one of the top 500 posters on PbNation
barrel roll is Legendary
Umami - i'll get back to you with those replies. Out to diner/movie with the life partner, date night is important. Going to see J Edgar at 10.
__________________
--- UNDRPRVLGD Goggle Straps n stuff ---
If this be treason, make the most of it.-Patrick Henry
I'm a damn veteran, I've got more rights and privileges than you do.
MQ2 rebuild kits, MP4 ram rebuilds, general 'cocker teching
Will soon be making super slick mid/half block bolts
barrel roll is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 08:21 PM #307
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
I understand completely, no rush.

We might want to take it to PM's.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.
Umami is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 08:28 PM #308
SniperForce-Duffek
Delta Farce
 
SniperForce-Duffek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
SniperForce-Duffek plays in the APPA D5 division
I have no problems with gay people. Hell, if I had a gay friend I'd use him at a gay club to pick up some hot females.
__________________
Kick *** military apparel _ Mars Strategic

"May god have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't."
G.S.P
SniperForce-Duffek is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 08:42 PM #309
Pail Ail (Banned)
Bill Watterson
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
Really? Are you comfortable with calling Jesus the son of God? I'm not.
I meant you have no proof of the individual religious and irreligious person's intentions and values. Didn't mean to have it come off like that, I'm a moral skeptic to the core.



Quote:
That's not true at all. If the assumptions can't be made, theory won't be verified by real world data.
Ideally.

Quote:
And a scientific finding is always open to scrutiny (provided it has sufficient grounds). The same is not true of religion, because frankly, there's no way to scrutinize a baseless claim.
So the hundreds of different branches of Christianity aren't scrutinizing eachother, ever? Not even academic theologians?
Pail Ail is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 09:16 PM #310
Pail Ail (Banned)
Bill Watterson
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Also, semi-relevant:

"So the purpose of life is not in the far future, nor, as we so often imagine, around the next corner, but the whole of it is here and now, as fully as ever it will be on this planet. It is always a 'Now' that is in direct relation to eternity -- not a far future; always immediate experience of life that matters in the last resort -- not historical constructions based on abridged text-books or imagined visions of some posterity that is going to be the heir of all ages. And neither do I know of any mundane fulnesss of life which we could pretend to possess and which was not open to people in the age of Isaiah or Plato, Dante or Shakespeare. If atomic research should by some accident splinter and destroy this whole globe tomorrow, as we are told that some of the scientists have apprehended, I imagine it will hurt us no more than that 'death on the road' under the menace of which we pass every day of our lives. It will only put an end to a globe which we always knew was doomed to a bad end in any case...

"But supposing all this were to happen it would be an optical illusion to imagine that God's purposes in creation would thereby be cut off unfulfilled and the meaning of life uprooted as the the year A.D. 2,000 or 40,000 had a closer relation to eternity than 1949. Supposing the the time is to come -- as I always understood that it would -- when the world in any case will be no more than a whiff of smoke drifting in desolate skies, then those who rest their ultimate beliefs in progress are climbing a ladder which may be as vertical as they claim it to be, but which in reality is resting on nothing at all." -- Herbert Butterfield, Christianity and History, p. 66
Pail Ail is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 09:21 PM #311
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
So the hundreds of different branches of Christianity aren't scrutinizing eachother, ever? Not even academic theologians?
They may be trying, but that doesn't mean they're succeeding. I don't even know what progress in that field would look like.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
Also, semi-relevant:

"So the purpose of life is not in the far future, nor, as we so often imagine, around the next corner, but the whole of it is here and now, as fully as ever it will be on this planet. It is always a 'Now' that is in direct relation to eternity -- not a far future; always immediate experience of life that matters in the last resort -- not historical constructions based on abridged text-books or imagined visions of some posterity that is going to be the heir of all ages. And neither do I know of any mundane fulnesss of life which we could pretend to possess and which was not open to people in the age of Isaiah or Plato, Dante or Shakespeare. If atomic research should by some accident splinter and destroy this whole globe tomorrow, as we are told that some of the scientists have apprehended, I imagine it will hurt us no more than that 'death on the road' under the menace of which we pass every day of our lives. It will only put an end to a globe which we always knew was doomed to a bad end in any case...

"But supposing all this were to happen it would be an optical illusion to imagine that God's purposes in creation would thereby be cut off unfulfilled and the meaning of life uprooted as the the year A.D. 2,000 or 40,000 had a closer relation to eternity than 1949. Supposing the the time is to come -- as I always understood that it would -- when the world in any case will be no more than a whiff of smoke drifting in desolate skies, then those who rest their ultimate beliefs in progress are climbing a ladder which may be as vertical as they claim it to be, but which in reality is resting on nothing at all." -- Herbert Butterfield, Christianity and History, p. 66
So... the idea that God created the universe gives you purpose?
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.

Last edited by Umami : 11-12-2011 at 09:24 PM.
Umami is offline  
Old 11-12-2011, 10:01 PM #312
Pail Ail (Banned)
Bill Watterson
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
They may be trying, but that doesn't mean they're succeeding. I don't even know what progress in that field would look like.
If you don't know what it would look like how do you know they're failing?

Also, on what basis are they failing? What goals haven't they attained? What were the goals of some of the bigger movements/splits (if you know, idk much about religious history)?

Quote:
So... the idea that God created the universe gives you purpose?
I have no idea how you reached this conclusion at all. The quote is about progress as an ideal, as a concept. Not about what gives purpose to our lives.

"The greatest menace to our civilization is the conflict between giant organized systems of self-righteousness - each only too delighted to find that the other is wicked - each only too glad that the sins of the other give it pretext for still deeper hatred."



Also, Umami, could you please provide me with a quote or maybe an article or book where a Christian scientist says he doesn't have an answer to XYZ theoretical question, therefore God must be the answer. I've never seen it happen, but you said it's the difference between the skeptical and religious scientist.
Pail Ail is offline  
Old 11-13-2011, 12:15 AM #313
marcozombie
 
 
marcozombie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Tejas!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treghc View Post
Fixed.

I wish people would stick their reasoning across all volumes of its use. Hypocritical thinking should be one of the easiest things to spot by one's own self.

But, by the way, the data is there. It's from gays themselves. All you have to do is ask one:

"Did you choose to be gay?"

They will, 100% of the time, tell you that no, they didn't just make a choice. They followed their biological attraction of a sexual level to another human being, just as any heterosexual person does.

It's such childish thinking to simply ignore that evidence and defy the logic provided from the people themselves. It's direct evidence to point out that being gay is not a choice. Anyone who continues to make this argument that being gay is a choice could use an MRI.

What has always astounded me about the "gay is a choice" thing is: Why, with all the **** homosexuals have had to go through in the past, would anyone want to be gay? With all the gay bashing and violence, hatred, ignorance and bigotry (some of which has been on display on this thread), how could anyone make a case for WANTING to be gay. To CHOOSE it. It would be so much easier for homosexuals to shut up about their innate atractions (which cant be innate because they ARE a choice of course ), remain closeted, get married, procreate and live. Shouldn't that be enough to convince people that its not a choice? I just don't get it. Every single gay person/friend i know has had some crazy stuff happen to them as a result of their "choice." Wonder what they would say to me if i told them "hey queer, its easy, just stop being gay!" What would i counter with if they told me "hey breeder , it a choice, lets go to bed." I dunno, just some thoughts. Im tired. actually played some ball today.
__________________
I am for freedom of religion, & against all maneuvres to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another.]-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Elbridge Gerry, 1799http://abaddoncomic.com/

Last edited by marcozombie : 11-13-2011 at 12:21 AM.
marcozombie is offline  
Old 11-13-2011, 12:25 AM #314
Treghc
 
 
Treghc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle
Treghc is a Supporting Member
Treghc is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Treghc is a Forum Captain
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcozombie View Post
What has always astounded me about the "gay is a choice" thing is: Why, with all the **** homosexuals have had to go through in the past, would anyone want to be gay? With all the gay bashing and violence, hatred, ignorance and bigotry (some of which has been on display on this thread), how could anyone make a case for WANTING to be gay. To CHOOSE it. It would be so much easier for homosexuals to shut up about their innate atractions (which cant be innate because they ARE a choice of course ), remain closeted, get married, procreate and live. Shouldn't that be enough to convince people that its not a choice? I just don't get it.
Unfortunately, as portrayed by some here, some people either lack developmental growth within the brain, or they have been sucked in to a form of indoctrination that has slowly strengthened its hold enough to keep people from using very simple forms of logic and reasoning. We've seen, first hand through this forum, the antagonists of this debate deliberately ignore the very evidence they were claiming to not exist.

It's fascinating to me to see such psychopathy befold in front of you and me...
__________________
“But men, they say a lot of foolish things. In the end, the only words I can find to believe in are mine." - Joe

Tarsier Slave


We are Sapien
Treghc is offline  
Old 11-13-2011, 01:22 AM #315
OccupyST
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
If there was a pill that could make me straight, I'd take it tomorrow.

I'd take it only because it's a distraction in both a business and social sense. If anyone I meet already knows I'm gay before the introduction, I can tell immediately they're scanning my every mannerism/mood/behavioral pattern to confirm my "eccentricity".

If I know someone for a while and they then discover I'm gay, I can see it in their eyes for quite a while--they do some retrospective "all the clues pointed to it!" thing. Quite annoying.

Forget the fact that my personality and skill set were finely crafted through top tier schools, classical education, and formal obedience. That one little attribute, if known by someone I am talking to face to face, becomes a highlighted beacon. All behavioral patterns then reference a silly unavoidable plague haha.
OccupyST is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump