Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-12-2013, 11:50 AM
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
(20-12-2013 07:58 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(18-12-2013 02:17 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  Where to begin.

First of all, this notion that you have where no god means evolution? Shitcan that right now. Evolution is not automatically arrived at without the existence of a god. Rather, evolution is evaluated through examining extensive evidence exhibited in existence.

Second. I will repeat myself. You. Do. Not. Understand. Evolution. And after all the times we've had this discussion, it's obvious that you never will, so while I'll address my comments to you, I'm actually speaking to anyone else who might be reading this thread. While we might find an evolutionary chain of causation leading to the instincts (eg empathy) that form the underlying basis of human morality, evolution does not dictate morality in the sense that you think it does. Evolutionary theory is explanatory, descriptive, and predictive. It is not prescriptive or proscriptive. It tells us how things happened, what happened, and what is likely to happen. It does not tell us what to do and what not to do. You are confusing eugenics with genetics, Social Darwinism with real Darwinism, which is a common and low equivocation put forward by the most wretchedly disingenuous leaders of right-wing Christianity and the cretinous suckers who believe their lies. (I'll refrain from speculating on which category you fall in.) Knowing that certain behaviors will result in higher or lower populations does not tell us to pursue one behavior or the other. By your logic, knowing that gravity makes people fall would create a moral imperative to push people off of cliffs.

Third, there's a difference between "life-affirming" and "maximized output". "Life affirming" does not condone, say, forcible copulation (ie rape) of women at every potentially fertile moment to produce as many babies as possible. (Nor would your maximization logic actually reject additional, same-sex copulation under those circumstances.) You completely ignore issues of quality of life, memetic reproduction, societal structure, kinship, and attempt to reduce the entirety of healthy human existence and sexual activity to a single variable.

Finally, why do I object to the "repudiation" of homosexuality? Well, repudiation is a very interesting word, and my objection depends on the nature of your repudiation. Not counting a form of divorce, it means basically "refusing to accept". Well if that's all you're doing, I have no objection at all. DON'T accept it. Cover your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears, and go "LALALALALA!" in attempt to drown out the sound of a society that has the gall to actually disagree with you. Become a hermit locked in your house, never emerging. More power to you! If you want help in that, I'll happily glue your lock shut. But when you do more than simply refuse to accept it; when you become an agent of oppression; when you and your socially conservative ilk salivate at the notion of regressing society to the age of Stonewall beatings and Inquisitorial burnings for homosexuality but discover to your dismay that the civilized world no longer tolerates your brand of religious bigotry wielding a bloody sword and calling it virtue; when in your despair you opt for a rearguard of stalled incrementalism; when you call the bullying of gay teenagers freedom of religion for the bullies; when you call the beating of a child who shows the slightest imagined homosexual trait to be good parenting; when you call the denial of the right to be at a loved one's hospital bedside a defense of marriage; when you call exclusion from the military of an able-bodied soldier willing and able to defend the country patriotism; when you channel your money and missionary efforts into engineering the lifelong imprisonment of homosexuals in developing nations like Uganda (oops, wait, your conservative Christianity was aiming for the death penalty... missed it by THAT much); when you not-so-secretly dream of expanding your persecution to infidels and heathens, other races and the other sex, to every other category that is other than you; when, in short, you bring your lies, falsehoods, hatreds and other symptoms of your faith into the public domain and attempt to distort society with them; why then, I'll be there, objecting most strongly, and seeking to block you at every turn.

PS: What is "designed" evolution? That sounds almost like a contradiction in terms.

You tried, and did not, refute what I wrote, but I appreciate the effort. Nor did anyone else even try.

The best "response" was "should we abandoned the infertile and mentally disabled also, then?"

The evolutionary answer is a resounding yes. Not the CHRISTIAN answer. The evolutionary, HONEST answer.

My point is we all have subjective ideas in part and logically formed opinions in part. Without God if we are evolved, you must admit evolution speaks AGAINST homosexuality and that you are adding a subjective opinion to go against evolutionary impetus.

Say all you want that I don't understand evolution. I darn well understand propagation and its necessity and you are all being disingenous here.

On evolution alone without your imagined positivist ethics there is every reason to repudiate homosexuality. Stop being dishonest, atheists.

PJ,

That makes no sense. What is an evolutionary answer? Do you think evolution speaks or understand questions?

But even if there was an "evolutionary answer", what makes you think it should be "yes"?

Do you think we are in danger of extinction because of infertile people or homosexuals? It does not looks like. Actually, the accelerating overpopulation should, from an evolutionary point of view, suggest us to promote unions for homosexuals and all people who cannot have children, so that we can optimize resources consumption and guarantee long term survival.

But, of course, all this is nonsensical. There is not such a thing as an evolutionary answer, since evolution by natural selection is, by definition, unguided and unconscious.


Ciao

- viole
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes viole's post
20-12-2013, 11:59 AM
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
If we accept PJs twisted logic, then wealth and gender equality are intrinsically wrong. Rich people tend to have less children than poor people, educated and working women tend to have less (if any) children. That clearly means that we MUST judge them as evolutionary EVIL people and must condemn them to Darwinian HELL!!1!eleven!!

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like nach_in's post
20-12-2013, 12:01 PM
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
(20-12-2013 10:29 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  
(20-12-2013 07:58 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You tried, and did not, refute what I wrote, but I appreciate the effort. Nor did anyone else even try.

The best "response" was "should we abandoned the infertile and mentally disabled also, then?"

The evolutionary answer is a resounding yes. Not the CHRISTIAN answer. The evolutionary, HONEST answer.

My point is we all have subjective ideas in part and logically formed opinions in part. Without God if we are evolved, you must admit evolution speaks AGAINST homosexuality and that you are adding a subjective opinion to go against evolutionary impetus.

Say all you want that I don't understand evolution. I darn well understand propagation and its necessity and you are all being disingenous here.

On evolution alone without your imagined positivist ethics there is every reason to repudiate homosexuality. Stop being dishonest, atheists.

You keep doing this. Not just in this thread, but pretty much anywhere the subject comes up. You keep asserting that evolutionary theory says something which it does not actually say. Evolution does not say we should abandon the infirm or mentally disabled. It makes no statement at all about what we should or shouldn't do. It is neither prescriptive nor proscriptive. Your assertion to the contrary is the principle dishonesty at work in this thread.



THIS

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 12:03 PM (This post was last modified: 20-12-2013 12:22 PM by grizzlysnake.)
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
(18-12-2013 11:54 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  If there is no god, than we should all look to/hope for survivability-enhancing opportunities that are naturally evolving. Since a homosexual homo sapiens pair cannot reproduce, we should consider the repudiation of homosexuality natural and life-affirming. In fact, designed evolution should enhance any anti-homosexual stance.

Discuss. Thanks.
Your statement falls flat on the first sentence. If there wasn't this "idea" of god we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you didn't have this idea of god there would be nothing preventing you from joining us in the modern world and doing real research. You see, this idea of your god, that is the one you perpetuate since many Christians and other theists don't have any objections to homosexuals or evolution. That is the real issue here. You use god as an excuse to not learn from the modern world and fail to see that many things in your bible are just not applicable to the modern world. They applied only to a specific culture and society in the distant past. Sure, take the good things with you but not the ones that are abhorrent like the treatment of anyone who is not Christian or infringes on the rights of humanity of the modern world. Would you stone your children if they misbehave? Would you have slaves and beat them? I would say you most certainly wouldn't. Why is that? Did you find those things undesirable? Can you see that we also find them undesirable? That is what you will see us arguing about, the things that are abhorrent to us like the statements you make about homosexuals. There is always hope to change. If you want to look for your god for strength then so be it. Don't be shocked if we don't agree with ancient practices. I hope you can see through this barrier of yours. Many theists overlook the absurd and arcane practices and are willing participants of the modern world and see what science has to offer them Where ever it might lead. Give it a chance.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like grizzlysnake's post
20-12-2013, 12:10 PM
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
PJ, what were you hoping to accomplish by posting this thread, exactly? Were you just curious about our opinions on the matter? Or are you just looking for some excuse to feel superior in your beliefs?

Is there something we offer you that fellow Christians do not?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 12:17 PM
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
(20-12-2013 12:10 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  PJ, what were you hoping to accomplish by posting this thread, exactly? Were you just curious about our opinions on the matter? Or are you just looking for some excuse to feel superior in your beliefs?

Is there something we offer you that fellow Christians do not?



*raises hand* I know the answer: PJ doesn't hope to accomplish ANYthing here or in other threads except to keep his proselytizing, bullshitting, time-wasting, theist-troll, ankle biting, knee gnawing, trouble-making voice heard.......over and over....

He picks subjects he KNOWS people have already commented on and tries to push everyone's buttons.........


and he should be ignored or laughed at or at the most given funny pics as sarcasm for his existence here atall.

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WitchSabrina's post
20-12-2013, 12:19 PM
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
(18-12-2013 11:54 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  If there is no god, than we should all look to/hope for survivability-enhancing opportunities that are naturally evolving. Since a homosexual homo sapiens pair cannot reproduce, we should consider the repudiation of homosexuality natural and life-affirming. In fact, designed evolution should enhance any anti-homosexual stance.

Discuss. Thanks.

I got a discussion for ya: don't ever post your image. It'll get photoshopped with you bent over by a big black Jesus. Dodgy

Made this thread a little while back called "homophobe" as I am not homosexual. I don't get it, I think it's icky; I was wondering what is the impetus for a straight guy like me to defend such behavior. And here you go - like a sign from god - you are why. You and your asshole ilk.

I don't understand homosexuality, but I do understand love - I got a degree in that shit.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like houseofcantor's post
20-12-2013, 12:23 PM
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
(20-12-2013 10:29 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  Evolution does not say we should abandon the infirm or mentally disabled.

In most packs, such are culled from the herd; yet as a social species, we have learned the value of intellect and compassion. So between me and you, yes and no. Between us and PJ, of course, that fucker has no idea what he's talking about.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 05:19 PM (This post was last modified: 21-12-2013 02:17 AM by Reltzik.)
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
(20-12-2013 12:23 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(20-12-2013 10:29 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  Evolution does not say we should abandon the infirm or mentally disabled.

In most packs, such are culled from the herd; yet as a social species, we have learned the value of intellect and compassion. So between me and you, yes and no. Between us and PJ, of course, that fucker has no idea what he's talking about.

The fact that this is common in nature is consistent with, and predictable with, evolutionary theory. But that just says what is likely to happen, not what SHOULD happen. Evolution doesn't provide value-judgements, is my point.

EDIT: Okay, maybe you can phrase it as a "should" thing, but only in the predictive sense, like the weatherman saying "The rain should stop before midnight". Yeesh, English is a kluge.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Reltzik's post
20-12-2013, 08:15 PM
RE: Repudiating Homosexuality Is Wrong Because Why?
(20-12-2013 12:10 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  PJ, what were you hoping to accomplish by posting this thread, exactly? Were you just curious about our opinions on the matter? Or are you just looking for some excuse to feel superior in your beliefs?

Is there something we offer you that fellow Christians do not?

He can troll us. I'm done with him. It's obvious he doesn't care to engage in honest discussion, let alone learn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RobbyPants's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: