DNB
Christian
Are you trying to be oblivious?
My concern is the promotion of acts that lead to destruction.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Pray Away. (the gay)
- Thread starter Justanatheist
- Start date
My concern is the promotion of acts that lead to destruction.
DNB
Christian
I spoke of many things, predominantly my views were based on biological, and the resulting behavioral pattern, reasons.Well that is rather funny, given that you seem to get your views regarding sexual orientation from popular examples of such (go back to your post), apart from some religious text which you might swallow without thought - and not coming from actual evidence. Desperate? Look in the mirror, chum!
Why do you atheists always play the religious card, never, ever once have I brought that into the conversation worth mentioning?
Last edited:
Justanatheist
Well-Known Member
Justanatheist
Well-Known Member
DNB
Christian
looking forward to it.... ...a lot of your terminology is over my head, but we'll see what happens...Oh I’m a big fan of the first horn. Whenever we get into some philosophical tussle over the aseity-sovereignty paradox it just makes it that much easier on me
DNB
Christian
Earth to justanatheist, earth to justanatheist, please come in if you are there...?
Homophobia is common in gay men who are surrounded by a hating environment. It's a method used to prove to everyone they're not gay.
DNB
Christian
No, but they do represent your nonsense and inability to follow a conversation, well.
DNB
Christian
Your presuppositions are making you delirious, eh?
It’s a little paradox regarding the aseity of God (to exist a se is to exist without any dependency on anything else, to exist unto itself) and God’s sovereignty. I present the argument when someone makes claims that trigger the problem; wrong claims such as “God is the foundation of logic.”
Justanatheist
Well-Known Member
The interesting thing is that in the UK some of the views expressed and opinions offered would be getting perilously close to hate speech.This thread’s dangerously close to getting moderated, I suggest we all chill for a minute or it could hit everyone involved
Justanatheist
Well-Known Member
Interested in this, have you discussed this in other threads, could you point them out?
I have, though they are somewhat buried. The aseity-sovereignty paradox came up briefly in my Special Pleading and the Problem of Evil (Part 3) thread.
I could probably find it. Or I can just type a little ditty on the A-SP later today after I’ve had some sleep.
Is that the religious branch of biological and behavioural science, since I doubt you will find any of the natural sort who would entertain or support your views. Your religious bias is obvious. That is why it is brought into the argument. Without such, you might be more inclined to look at evidence impartially and without judgment, if that were possible. But like many, you are more likely not to be able to do so since religious dogma is perched on one shoulder telling you what to think.
Justanatheist
Well-Known Member
For the hard of understanding,
Furthermore, biology is not as straightforward as the proposal suggests. By some estimates, as many as one in 100 people have differences or disorders of sex development, such as hormonal conditions, genetic changes or anatomical ambiguities, some of which mean that their genitalia cannot clearly be classified as male or female. For most of the twentieth century, doctors would often surgically alter an infant’s ambiguous genitals to match whichever sex was easier, and expect the child to adapt. Frequently, they were wrong. A 2004 study tracked 14 genetically male children given female genitalia; 8 ended up identifying as male, and the surgical intervention caused them great distress (W. G. Reiner and J. P. Gearhart N. Engl. J. Med. 350, 333–341; 2004).
Even more scientifically complex is a mismatch between gender and the sex on a person’s birth certificate. Some evidence suggests that transgender identity has genetic or hormonal roots, but its exact biological correlates are unclear. Whatever the cause, organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics advise physicians to treat people according to their preferred gender, regardless of appearance or genetics.
The research and medical community now sees sex as more complex than male and female, and gender as a spectrum that includes transgender people and those who identify as neither male nor female.
US proposal for defining gender has no basis in science
Furthermore, biology is not as straightforward as the proposal suggests. By some estimates, as many as one in 100 people have differences or disorders of sex development, such as hormonal conditions, genetic changes or anatomical ambiguities, some of which mean that their genitalia cannot clearly be classified as male or female. For most of the twentieth century, doctors would often surgically alter an infant’s ambiguous genitals to match whichever sex was easier, and expect the child to adapt. Frequently, they were wrong. A 2004 study tracked 14 genetically male children given female genitalia; 8 ended up identifying as male, and the surgical intervention caused them great distress (W. G. Reiner and J. P. Gearhart N. Engl. J. Med. 350, 333–341; 2004).
Even more scientifically complex is a mismatch between gender and the sex on a person’s birth certificate. Some evidence suggests that transgender identity has genetic or hormonal roots, but its exact biological correlates are unclear. Whatever the cause, organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics advise physicians to treat people according to their preferred gender, regardless of appearance or genetics.
The research and medical community now sees sex as more complex than male and female, and gender as a spectrum that includes transgender people and those who identify as neither male nor female.
US proposal for defining gender has no basis in science
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
That's just it. The Old Testament laws try to boil things down in a black and white manner. Things that are not common are sinful. Things are to have certain criteria, and anything not adhering to that criteria is unclean. I guess it's easier than thinking.