Okay, but that can be construed as a supplementary model to the more gradual model of evolution. Neither you nor I nor anyone here can legitimately determine the relative importance of these not-necessarily-mutually-exclusive theories in relation to one another. But I think most of us here can have a good chuckle at the "science" behind creationism. The bottom line here is that the earlier reference to the eye is an argument generally made by creationists regarding irreducible complexity. On that matter alone, Ken Miller blows the creationists out of the water: <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/K_HVrjKcvrU&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/K_HVrjKcvrU&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> And I do think we can agree on Miller's bona fides.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100409/ap_on_re_us/us_pope_church_abuse ... abused by this "organization" maybe? Funny how those who preach hate and intolerance are the ones unwilling to admit to their own hypocrisy.
No ... this friend was actually tortured in some secret satanic sect. I didn't ask him if there were religious peeps there from the Catholic order tho. I do know that there are very weird freakish rites and sects within many religious circles, fraternal organizations etc. Not sure where the hate and intolerance is. Recognition of deadly behavior and showing compassion whilst respecting free will is simply honorable. If you are alluding to that then fine ... if however you are falsely accusing and blaming then you err. I have a very very close friend who smokes. Very spiritual guy ... He knows smoking isn't very good for his lungs. I occasionally exhort and encourage him lovingly towards removing that dangerous behavior. [Maybe 5 times in 10 years] He is quick to acknowledge the truth, able to see what is important and realize I am in no way judging but lovingly sharing. He is fine with smoking and see's it as a low priority issue. We move on to more important issues. He doesn't manipulate others to smoke, nor preach they should smoke. He doesn't want his kids to smoke. He wouldn't rejoice at little children being subject to smoking. He doesn't force smokes into orifices of other people. I am sure if he felt that his smoking was killing others or making them sick ... he would quit.
You are intolerant of what you view as "deadly behavior". Whether homosexual or heterosexual, one can contract AIDS. It has to do with promiscuity, not sexuality - although promiscuity is often correlated to homosexual behavior. There a lot of promiscuis heterosexuals out there too... Do you see the difference? I view flying in an airplane as "deadly". Therefore, when I fly in an airplane, I am participating in an "improper" behaviour... right? Do you see the flaw in that logic? Driving a car while talking on a cell phone is also "deadly" behaviour... What you're doing is rationalizing your intolerance of a person's sexuality by claiming that their actions are deadly. Given your views, you have two options at this point: 1. Admit you're a bigot rather than try to rationalize what makes you uncomfortable. Nothing wrong with feeling uncomfortable about some else's choices... or 2. Accept others for what they are and move on because, frankly, who are you to judge? I'm sure I can point out 100 choices you made today that were "deadly". Mike
If you mean that I view homosexuality as deadly, errant, deviant, deceived, sick, and a cancer to society. Then yes ... I am intolerant of what is sick and demented and damaging to those people and the damage it brings on society and the children of that society. The proof of what that behavior produces and reaps is so evident that it is foolish to argue in the promotion or tolerance of it. Love of people is easily separated for me from their behavior. This is perhaps where you might be judging in error as though there is hate here. I really care about people. However ... If I saw some scumbag pedophile circling in on one of my children ... I would not hesitate to lay them out. Their self seeking judgment and predatory harm would produce an equal measure of corrective judgment. God in Heaven protects His Children in much the same manner. The sick predatorial nature of the evil behind the homosexual movement is ravaging this great nation and the judgments it is reaping are apt. It is like gravity. One reaps what they sow.
The parents that say they dont mind if their child is homosexual are lying. Sure after a few years of getting used to a homosexual child "they dont mind" but they have to alter their thinking and adjust their morals of right & wrong. Straight couples that get Hiv got it from having sex with bi-sexuals. Straight couples also shouldnt be having sex with many partners. If they waited til marriage, they wouldnt have that problem. Its also a sin to have sex outside of marriage, just like homosexuality is a sin, so you are getting nowhere with that argument. Oh wait..i forgot, im not allowed to use the bible so i guess i have to other secular logic for that case in who it hurts when straight people have sex out of marriage. In that case...do you have a daughter? If you do, or if you could imagine having a daughter, would it hurt you if she was banging a new guy every few months? Sure it would. You dont want your daughter to be a known slut. You want her to marry some nice guy and raise a family right. As for oral sex, saliva still contains Hiv. Straight men that like to have anal sex with women are the same people that get "flipped" when they meet a tranny in a bar and they dont know its a tranny. Speaking of being flipped, as any homosexual about their experiences with "flipping" a straight guy. Many will have a story. If the guy is straight and the homosexual can "flip" them, that is more proof that homosexuality is a choice.
I think the reason homosexuality really irks Christians is not because their fear of homosexuals, or bigotry, but the fact that homosexuals try to convince us that its not wrong. This is what makes the argument so prevelent today. Trying to force us to accept it as something that there is nothing wrong with. If there was a large group of people that had incest and tried to convince christians that there was nothing wrong with it, we would be having big fights about it too. If the world just recognized that homosexuality is wrong, we wouldnt be so vocal about their sins. We all have sins that we have done, but I never try to convince someone that some sin I have done is ok, just so I can feel comfortable to keep doing it.
how do you define sex. the bible says a man is made from the hands of god and that women is made from mans rib. there is nothing saying penis and breasts define male and female. that is mans understanding. so is the distinction of homosexual correct depending on how you define sex?
I agree with this statement. In my opinion the reason why aids is so much more prevalent in homosexuals, is because guys tend to be more promiscouos, and also because quite frankly guys tend to be alot more frugal when it comes to the use of condoms, where as women are much more protected. What hetero sexual guy among us has not taken the chance of banging some chick you just brought home from the bar without a dome? I know i have done it atleast a few times when i wanted to have sex but had no other option, however i have also been denied quite a few times solely because women are much less inclined to have unprotected sex. Thankfully this is the case as i have yet to contract an STD, however there have been times when i have been scared shitless going in to take an STD test the next day. Quite frankly in my opinion the reason homo sexuals have a higher rate of AIDS is because guys definately have a tendency to be much less careful in terms of protection, and also because guys are much more promiscous.