Jump to content


Photo

Is Coach Sandusky A H*mos*xual?


  • Please log in to reply
89 replies to this topic

#81 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 19 July 2015 - 09:18 PM

Thanks for your input Calypsis.  It's good to see at least one YEC doesn't want to execute homosexuals but I'm still more than a little disturbed that you're the only one that has said that.  I would certainly be interested to know why TeeJay takes something very different from the same scripture...

 

As for gays not liking your counsel, I hope you only give your counsel when asked for it rather than approaching people unsolicited.

 

I've been wanting to chime in on this. For starters, though I can't speak for TeeJay I doubt he "wants to execute homosexuals". Instead, he wants it to be a capital offense, there's a big difference. As a capital offense, you would have very few homosexuals to execute, as is shown in countries that have this law. Anyone with any shred of compassion would not want their son or daughter to grow up and decide (yes *decide*, as twin studies have proven) to be a homosexual since their life expectancy will dramatically shrink. In the case of men their life expectancy rivals that of a heroin addict. The homosexual murder rate, suicide rate, sexual disease rate, and drug use rate is dramatically higher than the normal population. The problem is, atheists and unfortunately many Christians fall into the role of Job's friends and question the logic of God, often times without really taking the time to understand the big picture. Instead, they think of the friend or family member they know who is a homosexual and couldn't fathom having the guy or gal executed. But wouldn't it be better if they weren't a homosexual in the first place? Why would anyone want to wish such a depressing and short-lived life on someone? I support homosexuality as a capital offense because God is smarter than I am and He knows it will save tons of lives and make people happier, not "gayer". It would keep the Sandusky's of the world away from kids who themselves (as studies show) because of the encounter become more susceptible to that lifestyle later in life. I, and I suspect TeeJay, supports it because we love the person enough to compel them to live a good, long life, instead of showing them "luv" while we walk them right over the cliff.

 

Regarding Piasan's "hate the sin but love the sinner", my view is that its overstated and not very scriptural, feel free to chime in on the thread I created on this here:

 

Cliché #2 - Love The Sinner, Hate The Sin

 

Fred



#82 Jambobskiwobski

Jambobskiwobski

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 125 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 36
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • UK

Posted 21 July 2015 - 05:54 AM

I've been wanting to chime in on this. For starters, though I can't speak for TeeJay I doubt he "wants to execute h*m*sexuals". Instead, he wants it to be a capital offense, there's a big difference.

There’s not much difference to the executed person

 

As a capital offense, you would have very few h*m*sexuals to execute, as is shown in countries that have this law.

Or you would have the same number of h*m*sexuals but they’re too afraid to admit it because they’ll get executed.

 

Anyone with any shred of compassion would not want their son or daughter to grow up and decide (yes *decide*, as twin studies have proven) to be a H*mos*xual since their life expectancy will dramatically shrink.

If you think it’s a choice, do you think you could choose to be H*mos*xual? (I am of course making the assumption that you are heterosexual).

 

In the case of men their life expectancy rivals that of a heroin addict.

I would love to see the evidence for that.

 

The H*mos*xual murder rate, suicide rate, S@xual disease rate, and drug use rate is dramatically higher than the normal population.

Ever thought that maybe, just maybe, much of that could be helped by accepting that some people are G*y and treating them as decent human beings rather than pushing them to the margins of society?  Don’t you think that if there was less hate against them, they wouldn’t be murdered so often?  Or be driven to suicide?  Surely you should clamp down on the murders, not the people at risk of being murdered.

 

Also, h*m*sexuals are part of the ‘normal’ population…

 

The problem is, atheists and unfortunately many Christians fall into the role of Job's friends and question the logic of God, often times without really taking the time to understand the big picture. Instead, they think of the friend or family member they know who is a H*mos*xual and couldn't fathom having the guy or gal executed.

Why would atheists simply accept the logic of a being that they don’t believe in?  That would be like you accepting the logic of Odin without questioning it.

 

Would you prefer your son/daughter were executed than be G*y?

 

But wouldn't it be better if they weren't a H*mos*xual in the first place?

Wouldn’t it be better if h*m*sexuals were treated like any other member of society?

 

Why would anyone want to wish such a depressing and short-lived life on someone?

So execute a few of them instead?

 

I support h*m*s*xuality as a capital offense because God is smarter than I am and He knows it will save tons of lives and make people happier, not "gayer".

This would be the religious trying to enforce their beliefs on everyone else.  This is why the non-religious and LGBT groups have become more vocal in recent years.

And which specific parts of scripture make you support homosexualilty being a capital offense?

 

It would keep the Sandusky's of the world away from kids who themselves (as studies show) because of the encounter become more susceptible to that lifestyle later in life.

Why would it?  He would still have been a paedophile (which is illegal) and he still wouldn’t have willingly made that public.

 

I, and I suspect TeeJay, supports it because we love the person enough to compel them to live a good, long life, instead of showing them "luv" while we walk them right over the cliff.

By that rationale you should also support the death penalty for a whole variety of other issues.

How does you compelling somebody to do something sit with your God giving us free will?

 



#83 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 21 July 2015 - 07:02 AM

Jambobskiwobski, you've chosen to miss the entire point. If it is true that homosexuality is a choice (as they themselves admit) and not genetic (as science has proven), then serving up a deterrent from that lifestyle would save countless lives. The only way you can defend your point of view is to try to comfort yourself into the lie that its a choice - you would have to fly against overwhelming evidence, but that's only to be expected since you do the same thing with evolution and the big bang. Regarding murder and other violence, the evidence is overwhelming that its homosexuals against homosexuals, and unless you forget the top 6 serial killers in the US were all homosexuals (and that wacko female serial killer down in Florida was a lesbian). Regarding suicide, estimates are as high as 40% in attempted suicide, a rate that there is no way you could make a scientific case is mostly due to oppression (for example, Jews were not committing suicide and they were under far worse persecution). Societies that make the lifestyle more acceptable and remove stigmatisms have the opposite effect the liberals would have us believe, the situation only became far worse. You have to have your head buried deep in the sand to ignore this overwhelming evidence.

 

You asked about how I would treat my son? I know with a ton of confidence based on overwhelming evidence that a capital penalty would dramatically, by leaps and bounds, protect my son, and scores of other sons and daughters, from this destructive lifestyle. Your version of "love" would significantly increase the chance they enter this destructive lifestyle. Now on the same line of questioning, can you think of any parent who would ever think in their mind after their child is born, "I want him to grow up to be a homosexual" ? Finally, as others have mentioned on this forum, if you think the LGBT have become more vocal because of persecution, then why don't you treat yourself to a gay parade and report back here of what really goes on. 

 

Lev 20:13



#84 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 21 July 2015 - 07:20 AM

One other quick point to make. Like most here I know people who are homosexual. I don't look at them and think, "I want to kill him". Instead, I look at them and feel sorry for the fact that they live in a society that encouraged them into a bleak future and shortened life, and how different things would be if people would actually trust that God really knows what He is doing, and His desire is for everyone's well being.

 

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the Lord, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." - Jer 29:11



#85 Jambobskiwobski

Jambobskiwobski

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 125 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 36
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • UK

Posted 22 July 2015 - 05:48 AM

 

Jambobskiwobski, you've chosen to miss the entire point. If it is true that h*m*s*xuality is a choice (as they themselves admit) and not genetic (as science has proven), then serving up a deterrent from that lifestyle would save countless lives.

Your first link doesn’t say it’s a choice, it says people aren’t born G*y but become G*y due to factors after birth.  They are very different things.

 

I haven’t had a chance to read it properly but your second link seems to say pretty much the same thing as the first link.  Again, it does not say it is a choice.

 

Even if it is a choice (which you’ve provided no evidence to support), that doesn’t make executing or even outlawing h*m*sexuals right.  Making driving illegal or banning horse riding would save countless lives but nobody suggests making those punishable by death.

 

The only way you can defend your point of view is to try to comfort yourself into the lie that its a choice - you would have to fly against overwhelming evidence, but that's only to be expected since you do the same thing with evolution and the big bang.

Again, could you choose to be G*y? 

 

Even if it isn’t genetic, that doesn’t make it a choice.  I highly doubt liking rap music is genetic but however hard I try to like it I still find it load of rubbish.

 

Regarding murder and other violence, the evidence is overwhelming that its h*m*sexuals against h*m*sexuals, and unless you forget the top 6 serial killers in the US were all h*m*sexuals (and that wacko female serial killer down in Florida was a lesbian). 

Your link doesn’t say most violence against h*m*sexuals is by h*m*sexuals, it says h*m*sexuals are more likely to be the victim of domestic violence. 

 

Which serial killer list are you using?  Any list of top 6 US serial killers that excludes Ted Bundy or Gary Ridgeway (both heterosexual) isn’t much of a list. 

And picking out one lesbian serial killer doesn’t help your argument as there have been many heterosexual female serial killers.  (I’m sure one of the Mikes can tell you which fallacy that is

 

Regarding suicide, estimates are as high as 40% in attempted suicide, a rate that there is no way you could make a scientific case is mostly due to oppression (for example, Jews were not committing suicide and they were under far worse persecution).

That’s a very different type of oppression.  For example, Jews weren’t disowned by their own families for being Jews, yet h*m*sexuals are regularly disowned by their own families for being H*mos*xual.

 

Societies that make the lifestyle more acceptable and remove stigmatisms have the opposite effect the liberals would have us believe, the situation only became far worse. You have to have your head buried deep in the sand to ignore this overwhelming evidence.

I think you might have been watching too much Fox News…

 

You asked about how I would treat my son?

No, I asked if you would prefer your son/daughter to be executed than be H*mos*xual.  Would you?

 

I know with a ton of confidence based on overwhelming evidence that a capital penalty would dramatically, by leaps and bounds, protect my son, and scores of other sons and daughters, from this destructive lifestyle.

Or it would lead their execution.  Or it would lead to them enduring a life of pretending to not be who they are and having their own parent disgusted at you.

 

Your version of "love" would significantly increase the chance they enter this destructive lifestyle.

Especially with a parent that doesn’t accept them for who they are

 

Now on the same line of questioning, can you think of any parent who would ever think in their mind after their child is born, "I want him to grow up to be a H*mos*xual" ?

I wouldn’t, in the same way that I wouldn’t think ‘I want my child to be heterosexual’.  They should be who they are.

 

Finally, as others have mentioned on this forum, if you think the LGBT have become more vocal because of persecution, then why don't you treat yourself to a G*y parade and report back here of what really goes on. 

What may or not go on at a parade has no bearing on the reason for the parade.  The parades are there to show people they shouldn’t be ashamed of who they are.

 

Lev 20:13

So you also want capital punishment for (among other things) cursing a parent, adultery, S@xual relations with your father’s wife, S@xual relations with your daughter-in-law, marrying a woman and her mother (they all burn, right?), or S@xual relations with an animal (and the animal gets it too)?

 

 

 

And a question you didn’t answer:

How does you compelling somebody to do something sit with your God giving us free will?

 



#86 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 22 July 2015 - 05:07 PM

Jambobskiwobski, you've chosen to miss the entire point. If it is true that h*m*s*xuality is a choice (as they themselves admit) and not genetic (as science has proven), then serving up a deterrent from that lifestyle would save countless lives.

Your first link doesn’t say it’s a choice, it says people aren’t born gay but become gay due to factors after birth.  They are very different things.

 

I haven’t had a chance to read it properly but your second link seems to say pretty much the same thing as the first link.  Again, it does not say it is a choice.

 

Even if it is a choice (which you’ve provided no evidence to support), that doesn’t make executing or even outlawing homosexuals right.  Making driving illegal or banning horse riding would save countless lives but nobody suggests making those punishable by death.

 

Last I checked, driving and horseback riding are neither inherently dangerous nor a sin. Yes, there are factors after birth that make it more likely someone becomes a homosexual, such as being raped by an older man (its how homos reproduce). It still comes down to a choice whether or not you act on it. Same with adultery. You can be tempted, but temptation isn't a sin, its following through on it.

 

What type of evidence would demonstrate to you that a person chose to have homosexual sex?

 

 

 

Regarding murder and other violence, the evidence is overwhelming that its h*m*sexuals against h*m*sexuals, and unless you forget the top 6 serial killers in the US were all h*m*sexuals (and that wacko female serial killer down in Florida was a lesbian). 

Your link doesn’t say most violence against homosexuals is by homosexuals, it says homosexuals are more likely to be the victim of domestic violence. 

 

Which serial killer list are you using?  Any list of top 6 US serial killers that excludes Ted Bundy or Gary Ridgeway (both heterosexual) isn’t much of a list. 

And picking out one lesbian serial killer doesn’t help your argument as there have been many heterosexual female serial killers.  (I’m sure one of the Mikes can tell you which fallacy that is

 

It was an older list (early 90s) but it doesn't help your defense. So the 6 of the top 8 serial killers are homos, how does that help your cause given that homos make up only 2-3% of the population?

 

 

 

Regarding suicide, estimates are as high as 40% in attempted suicide, a rate that there is no way you could make a scientific case is mostly due to oppression (for example, Jews were not committing suicide and they were under far worse persecution).

That’s a very different type of oppression.  For example, Jews weren’t disowned by their own families for being Jews, yet homosexuals are regularly disowned by their own families for being homosexual.

 

I think I'd rather be disowned from my family than be starved to death or cooked, but that's just me.

 

 

 

Societies that make the lifestyle more acceptable and remove stigmatisms have the opposite effect the liberals would have us believe, the situation only became far worse. You have to have your head buried deep in the sand to ignore this overwhelming evidence.

I think you might have been watching too much Fox News…

 

I get my news mostly from the internet. It always amazes me the hypocrisy when liberals say this, since they are notorious for listening to brainwashing tripe from BBC, NPR, NBC, you name it.

 

 

 

You asked about how I would treat my son?

No, I asked if you would prefer your son/daughter to be executed than be homosexual.  Would you?

 

And you refuse to understand the argument so you erect the loaded question fallacy. I would only want my son executed if he chose to be a homo in a society with an effective capital deterrent already in place. That way at least scores of other kids would be saved. But you refuse to grant the point, there is no evidence you will ever accept that homosexuality is a destructive, deadly, evil lifestyle. 

 

 

 

I know with a ton of confidence based on overwhelming evidence that a capital penalty would dramatically, by leaps and bounds, protect my son, and scores of other sons and daughters, from this destructive lifestyle.

Or it would lead their execution. 

 

Then it should be easy for you to provide evidence to support your position that lives aren't saved, by checking countries that have a capital offense, then compare them to the obits in the US. There is a gay church in Denver where the pastor admitted half their members are dead. But keep burying your head in the sand.

 

Or it would lead to them enduring a life of pretending to not be who they are and having their own parent disgusted at you.

 

A parent who is disgusted with a son or daughter who does not engage in homosexuality is a sin on the parent. 

 

 

Your version of "love" would significantly increase the chance they enter this destructive lifestyle.

Especially with a parent that doesn’t accept them for who they are

 

Its your assumption that its "Who they are". So are all those former homos who left the lifestyle just living a lie? What evidence would you have for this? I again ask what evidence would ever convince you that its a lifestyle choice and not genetic?

 

Now on the same line of questioning, can you think of any parent who would ever think in their mind after their child is born, "I want him to grow up to be a H*mos*xual" ?

I wouldn’t, in the same way that I wouldn’t think ‘I want my child to be heterosexual’.  They should be who they are.

 

Finally, as others have mentioned on this forum, if you think the LGBT have become more vocal because of persecution, then why don't you treat yourself to a G*y parade and report back here of what really goes on. 

What may or not go on at a parade has no bearing on the reason for the parade.  The parades are there to show people they shouldn’t be ashamed of who they are.

 

Lev 20:13

So you also want capital punishment for (among other things) cursing a parent, adultery, sexual relations with your father’s wife, sexual relations with your daughter-in-law, marrying a woman and her mother (they all burn, right?), or sexual relations with an animal (and the animal gets it too)?

 

Yes, and BTW its not a child cursing a parent. Do you think a person who would stoop so low as to curse their parents is going to be a passive, non-violent citizen? Intersetingly, its the very example Jesus used to criticize the Pharasees: 

 

"Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? For God commanded, saying... `He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.' But you say..." Mat. 15:3-4

 

 

 

And a question you didn’t answer:

How does you compelling somebody to do something sit with your God giving us free will?

 

 

You have a very strange view of free will. If a person were to rape you or your sibling tonight, should that person be allowed to run free? 



#87 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Referent Police

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,085 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy
  • Age: 54
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Southern NY State

Posted 30 July 2015 - 01:40 PM

Jambobskiwobski, you've chosen to miss the entire point. If it is true that h*m*s*xuality is a choice (as they themselves admit) ... ...

.
From the link, the question posed to h*m*sexuals:

"Do you believe being G*y is strictly genetic?"

On what basis does anyone believe that all G*y people are either born that way or not born that way? What reason--point to anything you wish--should I NOT BELIEVE that some are and some are not genetic h*m*sexuals.

While it is true that h*m*sexuals are capable of choosing not to engage in h*m*s*xuality, that is far different from choosing toward which s@x one feels S@xual arousal.

What do I know? I'm not sure.

I've known more h*m*sexuals than I can remember and in disparate contexts: one was five-years as a clerk in an antiques shop in a town that was considered a "lesbian haven"--it made the cover of Time magazine in the mid-1990s. It was at this time that I first saw a woman with sideburns, learned the funtion of a "dental dam", and I learned never to address a costumer as "Sir" or "Ma-am", having called someone walking away from me "Sir" and, upon that person turning around, discovered he was a "she".

One question I'd like answered is: Given that a person's experiences can lead one to choosing h*m*s*xuality, how early in life can such experiences--whatever they may or may not be--lead one to make the choice later?

#88 Jambobskiwobski

Jambobskiwobski

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 125 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 36
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • UK

Posted 13 August 2015 - 05:54 AM

 

 

 

Last I checked, driving and horseback riding are neither inherently dangerous nor a sin.

Both driving and horseback riding are inherently dangerous (have you seen the stats?)  Your argument was that outlawing h*m*s*xuality would save lives, nothing to do with it being a sin.

 

Yes, there are factors after birth that make it more likely someone becomes a H*mos*xual, such as being raped by an older man (its how homos reproduce). It still comes down to a choice whether or not you act on it. Same with adultery. You can be tempted, but temptation isn't a sin, its following through on it.

You are only an adulterer if you act on it.  You are H*mos*xual if you are attracted to the same s@x, whether you act on it or not.  You could even commit a H*mos*xual act but not be H*mos*xual (i.e. there’s no attraction to the same s@x)

 

What type of evidence would demonstrate to you that a person chose to have H*mos*xual s@x?

Choosing to have H*mos*xual s@x is a choice but that is not what you’ve been arguing.  You’ve been arguing that h*m*s*xuality is a choice and so far you haven’t provided any evidence to support that.

 

 

It was an older list (early 90s) but it doesn't help your defense. So the 6 of the top 8 serial killers are homos, how does that help your cause given that homos make up only 2-3% of the population?

Bundy wasn’t on a list from the early 90’s?  Doesn’t sound like a reliable list.

You haven’t provided the list so your claim of ‘6 of the top 8’ is meaningless. 

 

 

I think I'd rather be disowned from my family than be starved to death or cooked, but that's just me.

But you don’t lose the will to live so readily if you’re being threatened but have the support of your family and friends. 

 

 

I get my news mostly from the internet. It always amazes me the hypocrisy when liberals say this, since they are notorious for listening to brainwashing tripe from BBC, NPR, NBC, you name it.

From Fox News on the internet?

 

 

And you refuse to understand the argument so you erect the loaded question fallacy. I would only want my son executed if he chose to be a homo in a society with an effective capital deterrent already in place. That way at least scores of other kids would be saved. But you refuse to grant the point, there is no evidence you will ever accept that h*m*s*xuality is a destructive, deadly, evil lifestyle. 

I understand the argument and I understand that you would be willing to see your son executed for being G*y.  That says a lot about you (and none of it is good)

 

 

Then it should be easy for you to provide evidence to support your position that lives aren't saved, by checking countries that have a capital offense, then compare them to the obits in the US. There is a G*y church in Denver where the pastor admitted half their members are dead. But keep burying your head in the sand.

Because countries where h*m*s*xuality is a capital offence are renowned for their free distribution of reliable records…

As for the Denver church, source? 

 

 

A parent who is disgusted with a son or daughter who does not engage in h*m*s*xuality is a sin on the parent. 

A parent who is disgusted with a son or daughter who does not engages in h*m*s*xuality is a sin on the not fit to be a parent. 

I think your comment had at least one typo but I fixed it for you anyway. 

 

 

Its your assumption that its "Who they are".

 

So are all those former homos who left the lifestyle just living a lie?

Most likely.

 

 

What evidence would you have for this? I again ask what evidence would ever convince you that its a lifestyle choice and not genetic?

Can you choose to be G*y?  If not, it doesn’t sound much like a choice.

Again, provide some evidence that it’s a choice and I’ll look at it.  So far you haven’t done that.

 

 

Yes, and BTW its not a child cursing a parent. Do you think a person who would stoop so low as to curse their parents is going to be a passive, non-violent citizen?

So execute them, just in case? 

 

 

Intersetingly, its the very example Jesus used to criticize the Pharasees: 

 

"Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? For God commanded, saying... `He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.' But you say..." Mat. 15:3-4

And once again we see why religious beliefs should be kept out of the criminal justice system.  You seem to have a lot in common with the likes of ISIS…

 

 

You have a very strange view of free will. If a person were to rape you or your sibling tonight, should that person be allowed to run free? 

Fair point. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



#89 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 03 September 2015 - 03:41 PM

 

 

Last I checked, driving and horseback riding are neither inherently dangerous nor a sin.

Both driving and horseback riding are inherently dangerous (have you seen the stats?)  Your argument was that outlawing homosexuality would save lives, nothing to do with it being a sin.

 

 

This shows how often atheists will try to blur the meaning of a word to defend an argument. Neither driving nor horseback riding are inherently dangerous:

 

Dictionary - Dangerous: 1. full of danger or risk; causing danger; perilous; risky; hazardous; unsafe. 2. able or likely to cause physical injury.

 

Nobody with any common sense would say, “Fred, just so you know getting in that car (or on that horse) is a dangerous thing to do”. Are there risks, yes, pretty much with everything there is. You might be surprised how many people die falling out of bed, but no one is going to claim sleeping in a bed is “dangerous”. I’m not going to see any appreciable drop in my life expectancy for driving my whole life, nor is my sister who rides her horse probably more than I drive my car. Either of those are only dangerous if you aren’t experienced at it, or are drunk. Homosexuality on the other hand is extremely dangerous from the moment the person begins to engage in it.  One report by a homo-friendly group claims their life expectancy is up to 20 years less than average. So are you prepared to say that regularly driving a car or riding a horse reduces the life expectancy by 20 years? How are you going to spin that?

 

And once again we see why religious beliefs should be kept out of the criminal justice system.  You seem to have a lot in common with the likes of ISIS…

 

Instead of explaining why I’m wrong that countless people would be spared a miserable, shortened life if we did it God’s way, you instead resort to yet another really dumb analogy. I would ask you to explain how Isis follows biblical principles, but I would only get the usual twisting of scripture, from the same person who previously tried the brain dead analogy that driving and horseback riding are dangerous acts and on the same risk level and societal impact as engaging in homosexuality.

 

It would be nice that just once in a while an atheist would give an honest answer. For example: "You know, you're right, I don't like it but God’s way would indeed save many more lives as the evidence clearly and easily demonstrates. However, I still prefer to be (or support) a homosexual and don’t give a rat’s behind about what happens to me or others". Wouldn’t that be the intellectually honest answer?

 

Fred



#90 popoi

popoi

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 477 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 31
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Kentucky

Posted 06 October 2015 - 11:01 AM

Nobody with any common sense would say, “Fred, just so you know getting in that car (or on that horse) is a dangerous thing to do”.

Most likely not, because people don't process the risk of familiar things in the same way as things that are unfamiliar. Sitting inside a multiple-ton container of metal travelling at 70+ miles per hour is absolutely "able to cause physical injury". The only reason we can even begin to think of driving is only as safe as it is because we've spent an incredible amount of time and resources making it so.

h*m*s*xuality on the other hand is extremely dangerous from the moment the person begins to engage in it.  One report by a homo-friendly group claims their life expectancy is up to 20 years less than average. So are you prepared to say that regularly driving a car or riding a horse reduces the life expectancy by 20 years? How are you going to spin that?

Even assuming that statistic is correct, how much of that is a due to the danger inherent in h*m*s*xuality, and how much of it is due to dangers that could be prevented but aren't?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users