Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Is Homosexuality Normal?
14 views
Skip to first unread message
Jesse Not Matthew
May 23, 2012, 2:18:09 PM5/23/12
to
http://www.aim.org/publications/weekly_column/1999/12/02.htm
Why have the establishment media ignored the horrible murder of
13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising by two homosexual men in the little
town of Rogers, Arkansas? That is a question that was first
asked by The Washington Times on October 22, nearly a month
after the seventh- grader was found dead after he had been
brutally assaulted sexually by Davis Carpenter, 38, and his
lover, Joshua Brown, 22, on September 26.
The front-page story in the Times by Joyce Howard Price brought
the story, which had been on the front page of the Arkansas
Democrat-Gazette on three days, out of Arkansas. But a Nexis
search at the end of November found only a half dozen news
stories about it outside of Arkansas and a dozen editorials,
opinion columns and letters.
The contrast between the coverage of homosexuals murdering a
seventh-grader in Arkansas and straights murdering Matthew
Shepard, a homosexual college student in Wyoming, was striking.
The Washington Post printed over 80 stories about the Shepard
case since the murder last year. It has run one 59-word story
about the Dirkhising murder, on Saturday, October 30, and that
didn’t even appear in the edition that is widely distributed in
the greater Washington, D.C. area.
That was eight days after The Washington Times put the story on
page one, five days after Les Kinsolving, a Baltimore radio talk
show host, had asked White House spokesman Joe Lockhart if
President Clinton would comment on the Dirkhising murder as he
had on the Shepard case, and a day after the AP finally put the
story on the national wire. The Washington Post’s ombudsman
explained her paper’s failure to cover the story, saying, in
effect, that it doesn’t report murders outside the Washington
area unless, like the Shepard murder, the editors think they
teach a lesson or are exceptionally newsworthy.
Jonathan Gregg, a senior editor at Time, gave this explanation
in a column in Time Daily on line: "The reason the Dirkhising
story received so little play is because it offered no lessons.
Shepard’s murder touches on a host of complex and timely issues:
intolerance, society’s attitudes toward gays and the pressure to
conform, the use of violence as a means of confronting one’s
demons. Jesse Dirkhising’s death gives us nothing except the
depravity of two sick men. There is no lesson here, no moral of
tolerance, no hope to be gleaned in the punishment of the
perpetrators. To be somehow equated with these monsters would be
a bitter legacy indeed for Matthew Shepard."
Anyone who called Brown and Carpenter monsters before they
killed Jesse Dirkhising, would have been accused by other
homosexuals of gay-bashing. Practicing sadistic sex and seducing
young boys is not uncommon among homosexuals. Those who do so
are not labeled monsters and cast out. The day Jesse was killed,
the annual Folsom Street Leather Fair was being held in San
Francisco, celebrating sadomasochism with public demonstrations
of whippings and bondage. During the 1993 Gay Rights March on
Washington, a government auditorium was put at their disposal to
show the tools of "rough sex" like whips, chains, bondage
devices and electric cattle prods. There was also a large photo
of "fisting," a form of sodomy even more revolting than that
done to Jesse.
Seducing young boys is called "inter-generational sex" and is
promoted by the North American Man-Boy Love Association. In
1983, Cong. Gerry Studds was censured for having sex with a
young page. He wasn’t expelled from Congress, much less the gay
community.
Jesse’s murder came at bad time for the homosexuals who were
organizing a campaign to get every public school in the country
to teach children that homosexuality is normal. They were lining
up support from the teachers unions and national associations of
school administrators, psychologists, social workers and
pediatricians. On Nov. 23, they announced that booklets
proclaiming homosexuality normal would be sent to every school
district in the nation.
Stories describing the horrible things done to Jesse Dirkhising
could have aborted this ambitious project. Homosexuals are very
influential in the newsrooms of the establishment media these
days. If there was any debate about publicizing the Dirkhising
story, arguments like those in Jonathan Gregg’s Time on line
column prevailed.
Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
newspaper. That is why educators should be shown the police
reports on the Dirkhising murder and asked if what they describe
meets their definition of normal. The reports can be found on
Americansfortruth.org or obtained from AFT, PO Box 4552,
Washington, DC 20026.
Why have the establishment media ignored the horrible murder of
13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising by two homosexual men in the little
town of Rogers, Arkansas? That is a question that was first
asked by The Washington Times on October 22, nearly a month
after the seventh- grader was found dead after he had been
brutally assaulted sexually by Davis Carpenter, 38, and his
lover, Joshua Brown, 22, on September 26.
The front-page story in the Times by Joyce Howard Price brought
the story, which had been on the front page of the Arkansas
Democrat-Gazette on three days, out of Arkansas. But a Nexis
search at the end of November found only a half dozen news
stories about it outside of Arkansas and a dozen editorials,
opinion columns and letters.
The contrast between the coverage of homosexuals murdering a
seventh-grader in Arkansas and straights murdering Matthew
Shepard, a homosexual college student in Wyoming, was striking.
The Washington Post printed over 80 stories about the Shepard
case since the murder last year. It has run one 59-word story
about the Dirkhising murder, on Saturday, October 30, and that
didn’t even appear in the edition that is widely distributed in
the greater Washington, D.C. area.
That was eight days after The Washington Times put the story on
page one, five days after Les Kinsolving, a Baltimore radio talk
show host, had asked White House spokesman Joe Lockhart if
President Clinton would comment on the Dirkhising murder as he
had on the Shepard case, and a day after the AP finally put the
story on the national wire. The Washington Post’s ombudsman
explained her paper’s failure to cover the story, saying, in
effect, that it doesn’t report murders outside the Washington
area unless, like the Shepard murder, the editors think they
teach a lesson or are exceptionally newsworthy.
Jonathan Gregg, a senior editor at Time, gave this explanation
in a column in Time Daily on line: "The reason the Dirkhising
story received so little play is because it offered no lessons.
Shepard’s murder touches on a host of complex and timely issues:
intolerance, society’s attitudes toward gays and the pressure to
conform, the use of violence as a means of confronting one’s
demons. Jesse Dirkhising’s death gives us nothing except the
depravity of two sick men. There is no lesson here, no moral of
tolerance, no hope to be gleaned in the punishment of the
perpetrators. To be somehow equated with these monsters would be
a bitter legacy indeed for Matthew Shepard."
Anyone who called Brown and Carpenter monsters before they
killed Jesse Dirkhising, would have been accused by other
homosexuals of gay-bashing. Practicing sadistic sex and seducing
young boys is not uncommon among homosexuals. Those who do so
are not labeled monsters and cast out. The day Jesse was killed,
the annual Folsom Street Leather Fair was being held in San
Francisco, celebrating sadomasochism with public demonstrations
of whippings and bondage. During the 1993 Gay Rights March on
Washington, a government auditorium was put at their disposal to
show the tools of "rough sex" like whips, chains, bondage
devices and electric cattle prods. There was also a large photo
of "fisting," a form of sodomy even more revolting than that
done to Jesse.
Seducing young boys is called "inter-generational sex" and is
promoted by the North American Man-Boy Love Association. In
1983, Cong. Gerry Studds was censured for having sex with a
young page. He wasn’t expelled from Congress, much less the gay
community.
Jesse’s murder came at bad time for the homosexuals who were
organizing a campaign to get every public school in the country
to teach children that homosexuality is normal. They were lining
up support from the teachers unions and national associations of
school administrators, psychologists, social workers and
pediatricians. On Nov. 23, they announced that booklets
proclaiming homosexuality normal would be sent to every school
district in the nation.
Stories describing the horrible things done to Jesse Dirkhising
could have aborted this ambitious project. Homosexuals are very
influential in the newsrooms of the establishment media these
days. If there was any debate about publicizing the Dirkhising
story, arguments like those in Jonathan Gregg’s Time on line
column prevailed.
Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
newspaper. That is why educators should be shown the police
reports on the Dirkhising murder and asked if what they describe
meets their definition of normal. The reports can be found on
Americansfortruth.org or obtained from AFT, PO Box 4552,
Washington, DC 20026.
raven1
May 23, 2012, 6:33:19 PM5/23/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
<inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
wait, you already have. <snicker>
---
raven1
aa # 1096
EAC Vice President (President in charge of vice)
BAAWA Knight
<inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
wait, you already have. <snicker>
---
raven1
aa # 1096
EAC Vice President (President in charge of vice)
BAAWA Knight
James Riske
May 23, 2012, 7:13:55 PM5/23/12
to
On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
> <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>
Typical response from a despicable faggot who has no rebuttal to the facts.
> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
> <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>
People who naturally despise faggots are not really faggots themselves
just as people who naturally despise pedophiles are not really pedophiles.
--
Frodo: "Why do you do that?"
Sam: "What?"
Frodo: "Call him names? Run him down all the time."
Sam: "Because that's what he is Mister Frodo. There's naught left in him
but lies and deceit."
Martin Phipps
May 23, 2012, 7:51:17 PM5/23/12
to
No, it's not normal to be gay. It is also not normal to be seven feet
tall. Why do you care?
Martin
tall. Why do you care?
Martin
raven1
May 23, 2012, 8:17:04 PM5/23/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 19:13:55 -0400, James Riske
<james...@h0tmail.com> wrote:
>On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>> <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
>> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
>> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
>> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>>
>
>Typical response from a despicable faggot
I'm straight. I'm also not an obsessive loon about homosexuality. And
<james...@h0tmail.com> wrote:
>On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>> <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
>> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
>> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
>> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>>
>
>Typical response from a despicable faggot
you?
chibiabos
May 23, 2012, 8:43:14 PM5/23/12
to
In article <URSKL3WL4105...@reece.net.au>, Jesse Not Matthew
That's all you got? From twelve and a half years ago?
If that's the case, why have the "establishment media" stopped
reporting that the Jiji earthquake killed about 2,400 people in Taiwan
around the same time this kid was killed?
-chib
--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
<inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
> http://www.aim.org/publications/weekly_column/1999/12/02.htm
>
> Why have the establishment media ignored the horrible murder of
> 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising by two homosexual men in the little
> town of Rogers, Arkansas? That is a question that was first
> asked by The Washington Times on October 22, nearly a month
> after the seventh- grader was found dead after he had been
> brutally assaulted sexually by Davis Carpenter, 38, and his
> lover, Joshua Brown, 22, on September 26.
WTF. 1999?
> http://www.aim.org/publications/weekly_column/1999/12/02.htm
>
> Why have the establishment media ignored the horrible murder of
> 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising by two homosexual men in the little
> town of Rogers, Arkansas? That is a question that was first
> asked by The Washington Times on October 22, nearly a month
> after the seventh- grader was found dead after he had been
> brutally assaulted sexually by Davis Carpenter, 38, and his
> lover, Joshua Brown, 22, on September 26.
That's all you got? From twelve and a half years ago?
If that's the case, why have the "establishment media" stopped
reporting that the Jiji earthquake killed about 2,400 people in Taiwan
around the same time this kid was killed?
-chib
--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
kni...@baawa.com
May 23, 2012, 8:58:26 PM5/23/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
<inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>newspaper.
As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
<inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>newspaper.
know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
You commit intellectual suicide by using a couple stories about
gays and turning them into a Dog and Pony show to describe 'all' gay
people.
What is with assholes thinking one spoiled apple is a valid
argument?
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
Jeff M
May 23, 2012, 9:51:35 PM5/23/12
to
On 5/23/2012 6:13 PM, James Riske wrote:
> On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>> <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
>> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
>> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
>> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>>
> Typical response from a despicable faggot who has no rebuttal to the facts.
>
> People who naturally despise faggots are not really faggots themselves
> just as people who naturally despise pedophiles are not really pedophiles.
However, research proves that many people who are obsessively,
> On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>> <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
>> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
>> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
>> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>>
> Typical response from a despicable faggot who has no rebuttal to the facts.
>
> People who naturally despise faggots are not really faggots themselves
> just as people who naturally despise pedophiles are not really pedophiles.
neurotically anti-gay are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
homosexuals. Moreover, no one "naturally" despises homosexuals. Unlike
sexual orientation, bigotry is not innate; no one is born bigoted. You
have to be taught or twisted to hate.
But don't worry, your little secret is safe with us; we don't care if
you're gay, we're only concerned here with your hatred and stupidity,
which so often go together.
Barry OGrady
May 23, 2012, 10:47:08 PM5/23/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
><inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>>newspaper.
>
> As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
>know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
>ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
><inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>>newspaper.
>
> As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
>know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
>ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
> You commit intellectual suicide by using a couple stories about
>gays and turning them into a Dog and Pony show to describe 'all' gay
>people.
> What is with assholes thinking one spoiled apple is a valid
>argument?
>Warlord Steve
>BAAWA
=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
God is a spirit. 0% proof!
Barry OGrady
May 23, 2012, 10:52:55 PM5/23/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 20:51:35 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
wrote:
>On 5/23/2012 6:13 PM, James Riske wrote:
>> On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>>> <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
>>> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
>>> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
>>> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>>>
>> Typical response from a despicable faggot who has no rebuttal to the facts.
>>
>> People who naturally despise faggots are not really faggots themselves
>> just as people who naturally despise pedophiles are not really pedophiles.
>
>However, research proves that many people who are obsessively,
>neurotically anti-gay are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
>homosexuals.
Other research proves that many people who are obsessively,
neurotically anti-bigot are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
bigots.
>Moreover, no one "naturally" despises homosexuals.
Many people naturally find the homosexual lifestyle disgusting.
>Unlike sexual orientation, bigotry is not innate; no one is born bigoted.
>You have to be taught or twisted to hate.
How did you become a bigot?
>But don't worry, your little secret is safe with us; we don't care if
>you're gay, we're only concerned here with your hatred and stupidity,
>which so often go together.
Funny how the supposedly pro gat use gay as an insult.
wrote:
>On 5/23/2012 6:13 PM, James Riske wrote:
>> On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>>> <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
>>> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
>>> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
>>> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>>>
>> Typical response from a despicable faggot who has no rebuttal to the facts.
>>
>> People who naturally despise faggots are not really faggots themselves
>> just as people who naturally despise pedophiles are not really pedophiles.
>
>However, research proves that many people who are obsessively,
>neurotically anti-gay are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
>homosexuals.
neurotically anti-bigot are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
bigots.
>Moreover, no one "naturally" despises homosexuals.
>Unlike sexual orientation, bigotry is not innate; no one is born bigoted.
>You have to be taught or twisted to hate.
>But don't worry, your little secret is safe with us; we don't care if
>you're gay, we're only concerned here with your hatred and stupidity,
>which so often go together.
Mike Lovell
May 23, 2012, 11:02:12 PM5/23/12
to
On 2012-05-24, Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>>>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>>>newspaper.
>>
>> As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
>>know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
>>ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
>
> Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
Agreed, although can be misplaced.
>>>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>>>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>>>newspaper.
>>
>> As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
>>know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
>>ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
>
> Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>> You commit intellectual suicide by using a couple stories about
>>gays and turning them into a Dog and Pony show to describe 'all' gay
>>people.
>
> Children should be protected from all forms of deviancy.
This is a form of mental child abuse.
All children should have a secular upbringing, to avoid this amazing
coincidence where children follow their parents religion.
It was just luck of the draw that you ended up with the religion you
have.
This is on equal footing with trying to ensure, for example, your
children are gay.
> [...]
--
Jews, Christians & Muslims
The content of your posts will show how much you
really believe God is looking over your shoulder
Mike Lovell
May 23, 2012, 11:03:54 PM5/23/12
to
On 2012-05-24, Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> Many people naturally find the homosexual lifestyle disgusting.
You and me both, but I nobody is forcing either of us to do it, so what
business is it of yours?
What consenting adults get up to is entirely their choice.
Hating people for it would be odd.
kni...@baawa.com
May 23, 2012, 11:27:54 PM5/23/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
<ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>><inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>>>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>>>newspaper.
>>
>> As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
>>know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
>>ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
>
>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>
Protect children is nothing but a catch phrase for bigots and hate
<ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>><inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>>>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>>>newspaper.
>>
>> As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
>>know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
>>ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
>
>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>
groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
every time.
>> You commit intellectual suicide by using a couple stories about
>>gays and turning them into a Dog and Pony show to describe 'all' gay
>>people.
>
>Children should be protected from all forms of deviancy.
>
deviant.
>> What is with assholes thinking one spoiled apple is a valid
>>argument?
>
>You probably feel that way about religious people.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
RogerN
May 24, 2012, 12:05:50 AM5/24/12
to
wrote in message news:uv9rr7pee6sjbqqgn...@4ax.com...
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
><ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
><snip>
anti-science/pro political correct people like you. You can't argue the
truth of what he said so you make an attack claiming his truth is just a
catch phrase.
>>You probably feel that way about religious people.
>
> Religious people are all spoiled apples.
>
>Warlord Steve
>BAAWA
There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists, know
of any? For good reason many religious people think atheists are the
spoiled apples. Do you not know that it is scientific fact that
homosexuality is destructive to the health of those that engage in the act?
According to the Center for Disease Control, the 2% of the population that
are men that have sex with men account for 54% of new HIV infections. 54%
of the problem is with 2% of the population, should be 2% of the problem
with 2% of the population. Also studies show that children adopted and
raised by homosexuals are around 700% more likely to be homosexual. Science
has already studied genetics and on some genetically identical twins, they
have 1 that is homosexual and the other is heterosexual, that's with
identical genetics.
I do agree that homosexuals should not be picked on or singled out, but
telling them that their behavior is "OK" is like telling a kid that playing
in the street is "OK". Who loves the child, a parent that tells the child
to not play in the street or the neighbor kids that tell the child they
think it's OK for them to play in the street? God says homosexuality is
wrong, science proves that it is unhealthy, but (some) atheists and the
politically correct defy solid truth in favor of destructive behavior.
RogerN
The science to which I pinned my faith is bankrupt. Its counsels, which
should have established the millennium, have led directly to the suicide of
Europe. I believed them once. In their name I helped to destroy the faith of
millions of worshipers in the temples of a thousand creeds, and now they
look at me and witness the great tragedy of an atheist who has lost his
faith.
George Bernard Shaw
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
><ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>>
>>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>
> Protect children is nothing but a catch phrase for bigots and hate
>groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
>every time.
"Bigots" and "hate groups" are nothing but but a catch phrase for
>>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>
> Protect children is nothing but a catch phrase for bigots and hate
>groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
>every time.
anti-science/pro political correct people like you. You can't argue the
truth of what he said so you make an attack claiming his truth is just a
catch phrase.
>>You probably feel that way about religious people.
>
> Religious people are all spoiled apples.
>
>Warlord Steve
>BAAWA
of any? For good reason many religious people think atheists are the
spoiled apples. Do you not know that it is scientific fact that
homosexuality is destructive to the health of those that engage in the act?
According to the Center for Disease Control, the 2% of the population that
are men that have sex with men account for 54% of new HIV infections. 54%
of the problem is with 2% of the population, should be 2% of the problem
with 2% of the population. Also studies show that children adopted and
raised by homosexuals are around 700% more likely to be homosexual. Science
has already studied genetics and on some genetically identical twins, they
have 1 that is homosexual and the other is heterosexual, that's with
identical genetics.
I do agree that homosexuals should not be picked on or singled out, but
telling them that their behavior is "OK" is like telling a kid that playing
in the street is "OK". Who loves the child, a parent that tells the child
to not play in the street or the neighbor kids that tell the child they
think it's OK for them to play in the street? God says homosexuality is
wrong, science proves that it is unhealthy, but (some) atheists and the
politically correct defy solid truth in favor of destructive behavior.
RogerN
The science to which I pinned my faith is bankrupt. Its counsels, which
should have established the millennium, have led directly to the suicide of
Europe. I believed them once. In their name I helped to destroy the faith of
millions of worshipers in the temples of a thousand creeds, and now they
look at me and witness the great tragedy of an atheist who has lost his
faith.
George Bernard Shaw
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 1:55:52 AM5/24/12
to
On 5月24日, 上午10時47分, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
> >On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
> ><inva...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> >>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
> >>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
> >>newspaper.
>
> > As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
> >know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
> >ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
>
> Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>
> > You commit intellectual suicide by using a couple stories about
> >gays and turning them into a Dog and Pony show to describe 'all' gay
> >people.
>
> Children should be protected from all forms of deviancy.
Children need to be protected. There are people out there with mental
> On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
> >On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
> ><inva...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> >>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
> >>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
> >>newspaper.
>
> > As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
> >know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
> >ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
>
> Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>
> > You commit intellectual suicide by using a couple stories about
> >gays and turning them into a Dog and Pony show to describe 'all' gay
> >people.
>
> Children should be protected from all forms of deviancy.
disorders who want to turn your children into sickos like them.
People with mental disorders should be clearly identified as being
sick individuals who have deviated from sanity.
Therefore, religion should be banned so that future generations will
be protected from it.
Martin
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 2:01:37 AM5/24/12
to
On 5月24日, 上午9時51分, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote:
> On 5/23/2012 6:13 PM, James Riske wrote:
>
> > On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
> >> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
> >> <inva...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
> >> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
> >> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
> >> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>
> > Typical response from a despicable faggot who has no rebuttal to the facts.
>
> > People who naturally despise faggots are not really faggots themselves
> > just as people who naturally despise pedophiles are not really pedophiles.
>
> However, research proves that many people who are obsessively,
> neurotically anti-gay are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
> homosexuals. Moreover, no one "naturally" despises homosexuals. Unlike
> sexual orientation, bigotry is not innate; no one is born bigoted. You
> have to be taught or twisted to hate.
Well, yes and no. I think people are naturally uncomfortable around
> On 5/23/2012 6:13 PM, James Riske wrote:
>
> > On 5/23/12 6:33 PM, raven1 wrote:
> >> On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
> >> <inva...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> Is homosexuality normal? Sure. What's decidedly NOT normal is for
> >> people who would deny that they're gay to cross-post multiple articles
> >> obsessing over homosexuality. Anything you'd like to tell us? Oh,
> >> wait, you already have. <snicker>
>
> > Typical response from a despicable faggot who has no rebuttal to the facts.
>
> > People who naturally despise faggots are not really faggots themselves
> > just as people who naturally despise pedophiles are not really pedophiles.
>
> However, research proves that many people who are obsessively,
> neurotically anti-gay are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
> homosexuals. Moreover, no one "naturally" despises homosexuals. Unlike
> sexual orientation, bigotry is not innate; no one is born bigoted. You
> have to be taught or twisted to hate.
people who are different: black people, gay people, tall people, short
people. When we encounter people for the first time and identify them
as "strange" the natural tendency is to stare and point. I noticed
that when I went to the Philippines and again when I was in Korea:
little children stop, stare and point because they hadn't seen a white
person before.
But it is true that feeling uncomfortable does not necessarily mean
hatred. You would have to externalize your feelings and say "I feel
uncomfortable when these people are around so there must be something
wrong with THEM." No. Homophobia is real. Homophobia is normal.
But the problem is with us and not with homosexuals. And we don't
have to let it turn and become hatred.
Martin
Too_Many_Tools
May 24, 2012, 2:39:05 AM5/24/12
to
TMT
Too_Many_Tools
May 24, 2012, 2:47:17 AM5/24/12
to
On May 23, 11:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> wrote in messagenews:uv9rr7pee6sjbqqgn...@4ax.com...
It sounds like RogerN is a closet homosexual who is hiding behind
religion.
And God is shaking Her head in disgust.
TMT
> wrote in messagenews:uv9rr7pee6sjbqqgn...@4ax.com...
religion.
And God is shaking Her head in disgust.
TMT
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 4:34:47 AM5/24/12
to
On May 23, 9:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
Bullshit. If they are ex-atheists then they are not atheists and
> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
cannot be considered intelligent. There are a lot of very intelligent
atheists who are ex-theists. That is the truth.
> Also studies show that children adopted and
> raised by homosexuals are around 700% more likely to be homosexual.
> Science
> has already studied genetics and on some genetically identical twins, they
> have 1 that is homosexual and the other is heterosexual, that's with
> identical genetics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_biology#Twin_studies
> God says homosexuality is
> wrong.
Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
god because you are mentally ill.
Telling a child your god exists is like telling a child to go play in
the street. The child who believes in this imaginary god inevitably
grows up to be hateful and hurtful of others. This is not how people
should be. Religion should be eradicated for the good of mankind.
Luckily we have a way to eradicate education: it's called education.
Properly educated theists become atheists. The fact that there are
still theists in America reflects a failure of the education system.
> The science to which I pinned my faith is bankrupt. Its counsels, which
> should have established the millennium, have led directly to the suicide of
> Europe. I believed them once. In their name I helped to destroy the faith of
> millions of worshipers in the temples of a thousand creeds, and now they
> look at me and witness the great tragedy of an atheist who has lost his
> faith.
> George Bernard Shaw
the best you can do?
For the record, there's no such thing as "faith" in atheism. Atheism
represents not a belief but the lack of a belief in any supernatural
entity.
There is no excuse in this day and age for an intelligent person to
remain a theist.
Martin
Barry OGrady
May 24, 2012, 4:45:49 AM5/24/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 20:27:54 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
><ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>>><inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>>>>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>>>>newspaper.
>>>
>>> As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
>>>know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
>>>ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
>>
>>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>
> Protect children is nothing but a catch phrase for bigots and hate
>groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
>every time.
Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>> You commit intellectual suicide by using a couple stories about
>>>gays and turning them into a Dog and Pony show to describe 'all' gay
>>>people.
>>
>>Children should be protected from all forms of deviancy.
>>
> Translation... I want you to think like me. If you don't, you're
>deviant.
Children should be protected from you!
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
><ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:18:09 +0000 (UTC), Jesse Not Matthew
>>><inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Much of the behavior that homosexuals want children to believe
>>>>is normal is too revolting to be described in a family
>>>>newspaper.
>>>
>>> As an atheist I understand your hate and bigotry. Believers, you
>>>know the 'good god fearing good people' rail at us the same way an
>>>ignorant slug like you rails against gays.
>>
>>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>
> Protect children is nothing but a catch phrase for bigots and hate
>groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
>every time.
Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>> You commit intellectual suicide by using a couple stories about
>>>gays and turning them into a Dog and Pony show to describe 'all' gay
>>>people.
>>
>>Children should be protected from all forms of deviancy.
>>
> Translation... I want you to think like me. If you don't, you're
>deviant.
>>> What is with assholes thinking one spoiled apple is a valid
>>>argument?
>>
>>You probably feel that way about religious people.
>
> Religious people are all spoiled apples.
Barry OGrady
May 24, 2012, 4:51:40 AM5/24/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 23:05:50 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
wrote:
>wrote in message news:uv9rr7pee6sjbqqgn...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
>><ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>><snip>
>>>
>>>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>>
>> Protect children is nothing but a catch phrase for bigots and hate
>>groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
>>every time.
>
>"Bigots" and "hate groups" are nothing but but a catch phrase for
>anti-science/pro political correct people like you. You can't argue the
>truth of what he said so you make an attack claiming his truth is just a
>catch phrase.
>
>>>You probably feel that way about religious people.
>>
>> Religious people are all spoiled apples.
>>
>>Warlord Steve
>>BAAWA
>
>There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists, know
>of any?
They traded intelligence for mythology?
>For good reason many religious people think atheists are the
>spoiled apples. Do you not know that it is scientific fact that
>homosexuality is destructive to the health of those that engage in the act?
>According to the Center for Disease Control, the 2% of the population that
>are men that have sex with men account for 54% of new HIV infections. 54%
>of the problem is with 2% of the population, should be 2% of the problem
>with 2% of the population. Also studies show that children adopted and
>raised by homosexuals are around 700% more likely to be homosexual. Science
>has already studied genetics and on some genetically identical twins, they
>have 1 that is homosexual and the other is heterosexual, that's with
>identical genetics.
>
>I do agree that homosexuals should not be picked on or singled out, but
>telling them that their behavior is "OK" is like telling a kid that playing
>in the street is "OK". Who loves the child, a parent that tells the child
>to not play in the street or the neighbor kids that tell the child they
>think it's OK for them to play in the street?
God thinks its OK for children to play in the street.
>God says homosexuality is
>wrong, science proves that it is unhealthy, but (some) atheists and the
>politically correct defy solid truth in favor of destructive behavior.
God also says we should kill homosexuals and that we should love
everyone. We must lovingly kill homosexuals.
Its all very confusing. Fortunately the bible supports all points
of view.
>RogerN
wrote:
>wrote in message news:uv9rr7pee6sjbqqgn...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
>><ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:58:26 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>><snip>
>>>
>>>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>>
>> Protect children is nothing but a catch phrase for bigots and hate
>>groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
>>every time.
>
>"Bigots" and "hate groups" are nothing but but a catch phrase for
>anti-science/pro political correct people like you. You can't argue the
>truth of what he said so you make an attack claiming his truth is just a
>catch phrase.
>
>>>You probably feel that way about religious people.
>>
>> Religious people are all spoiled apples.
>>
>>Warlord Steve
>>BAAWA
>
>There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists, know
>of any?
>For good reason many religious people think atheists are the
>spoiled apples. Do you not know that it is scientific fact that
>homosexuality is destructive to the health of those that engage in the act?
>According to the Center for Disease Control, the 2% of the population that
>are men that have sex with men account for 54% of new HIV infections. 54%
>of the problem is with 2% of the population, should be 2% of the problem
>with 2% of the population. Also studies show that children adopted and
>raised by homosexuals are around 700% more likely to be homosexual. Science
>has already studied genetics and on some genetically identical twins, they
>have 1 that is homosexual and the other is heterosexual, that's with
>identical genetics.
>
>I do agree that homosexuals should not be picked on or singled out, but
>telling them that their behavior is "OK" is like telling a kid that playing
>in the street is "OK". Who loves the child, a parent that tells the child
>to not play in the street or the neighbor kids that tell the child they
>think it's OK for them to play in the street?
>God says homosexuality is
>wrong, science proves that it is unhealthy, but (some) atheists and the
>politically correct defy solid truth in favor of destructive behavior.
everyone. We must lovingly kill homosexuals.
Its all very confusing. Fortunately the bible supports all points
of view.
>RogerN
Barry OGrady
May 24, 2012, 4:57:57 AM5/24/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 22:55:52 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I take it you mean religion and homosexuality should be banned.
That would just drive them both underground. It would probably
be better to ban promotion of both and in the case of religion
believers should say things like "we believe" or "it is alleged"
rather than state their foolishness as though facts.
>Martin
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
That would just drive them both underground. It would probably
be better to ban promotion of both and in the case of religion
believers should say things like "we believe" or "it is alleged"
rather than state their foolishness as though facts.
>Martin
Stormin Mormon
May 24, 2012, 7:20:06 AM5/24/12
to
What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to be
celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Martin Phipps" <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e85ea71e-a049-49e1...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Martin Phipps" <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e85ea71e-a049-49e1...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
rangerssuck
May 24, 2012, 8:50:57 AM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 12:05 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> According to the Center for Disease Control, the 2% of the population that
> are men that have sex with men account for 54% of new HIV infections.
Perhaps if our society encouraged monogamy among homosexuals, the
> According to the Center for Disease Control, the 2% of the population that
> are men that have sex with men account for 54% of new HIV infections.
numbers would be different.
RogerN
May 24, 2012, 11:12:07 AM5/24/12
to
"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
news:d1c34586-5eea-4394...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>On May 23, 9:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>
>> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
>
>Bullshit. If they are ex-atheists then they are not atheists and
>cannot be considered intelligent. There are a lot of very intelligent
>atheists who are ex-theists. That is the truth.
They are not atheists and ex-atheists at the same time, they were once
atheists and then they learned that they were wrong. Atheists are future
ex-atheists that haven't learned that they are wrong yet, or have learned
and deny it.
>> Also studies show that children adopted and
>> raised by homosexuals are around 700% more likely to be homosexual.
>
>Cite.
http://borngay.procon.org/sourcefiles/TrayceHansen.pdf
"Pro-homosexual researchers frequently claim studies find "no differences"
between
children raised by homosexuals and heterosexuals. Amazingly, these claims
are
made in the abstracts of research studies that actually uncovered
differences
(Williams, 2000). The tendency to deny or downplay differences has been
noted by
pro-homosexual parenting researchers. After reviewing 21 studies, Stacey and
Biblarz (2001) concluded that in regards to gender, sexual behavior and
sexual
preference, homosexually parented children are different from heterosexually
parented children. But despite such findings, many continue to proclaim "no
differences" in order to galvanize support for homosexual access to
fertility services,
adoption, custody, and same-sex marriage. Encouraging support for a cause is
fine,
as long as the information being disseminated is true. But in this case, it
isn't."
...
"The preceding nine studies suggest that children raised by homosexual or
bisexual
parents are approximately 7 times more likely than the general population to
develop
a non-heterosexual sexual preference. These findings are not surprising.
Referring to
work by Ford and Beach, Amy Butler (2005) of the University of Iowa wrote,
"...
sexual behavior, including the gender of one's preferred sexual partner, is
largely
socially learned. Children are taught at an early age how to express their
sexual
urges by being rewarded for approved activities and punished for socially
disapproved
behavior." Obviously, non-heterosexual parents would be more accepting of
nonheterosexual
behavior on the part of their children. And, in fact, studies have revealed
that some lesbian mothers actually prefer that their daughters become
lesbian and
many of their daughters reportedly know it (Tasker and Golombok, 1997).
Butler
(2005) concludes, "Findings from anthropological and sociological research
and from
twin studies indicate that there is a substantial [emphasis mine]
environmental
component to whether a person takes a same-sex sexual partner...." Being
raised
by a parent who exhibits or endorses non-heterosexual behavior would
certainly be
considered a potent environmental force, and thus the fact that a
disproportionate
number of homosexually parented children develop same-sex attractions
shouldn't be
surprising to anyone.
Following their review of 21 studies, pro-homosexual parenting researchers
Stacey
and Biblarz (2001) concluded: "Children with lesbigay parents appear less
traditionally gender-typed and more likely to be open to homoerotic
relationships...The evidence, while scanty and underanalyzed, hints that
parental
sexual orientation is positively associated with the possibility that
children will be
more likely to attain a similar orientation." Ann Pelligrini, associate
Professor at NYU
put it more bluntly, "queer families are going to produce queer kids"
(Bronski, 2001).
When Stacey and Biblarz (2001) revealed that the "no difference" research
had
actually uncovered differences between children raised by homosexual and
heterosexual parents, Paula Ettlebrick of the National Gay and Lesbian Task
Force
said that they had "burst the bubble of one of the best kept community
secrets."
Keeping that secret has proven to be a wise strategy that has served the
homosexual community well, influencing both court decisions and public
opinion
(Clarke, 2002).
The purpose of this review is to ensure that research findings regarding
outcomes for
homosexually parented children are honestly and forthrightly revealed to the
public.
Although greatly flawed, the research studies we have to date suggest that
nonheterosexuals
are far more likely to raise non-heterosexual children than
heterosexuals. If long-standing sociopolitical opinions and legal
restrictions regarding
homosexual parenting are to be changed, it's only right it be done by a
fully informed
citizenry."
Need more?
http://borngay.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000028
"The American College of Pediatricians (ACP), a national organization of
pediatricians and other healthcare professionals, wrote the following
information in its Jan. 22, 2004 article "Homosexual Parenting: Is It Time
for Change?," published on its website ACPeds.org:
"Data on the long-term outcomes of children placed in homosexual
households is sparse and gives reason for concern. This research has
revealed that children reared in homosexual households are more likely to
experience sexual confusion, engage in risky sexual experimentation, and
later adopt a homosexual identity. This is concerning since adolescents and
young adults who adopt the homosexual lifestyle, are at increased risk for
mental health problems, including major depression, anxiety disorders,
conduct disorder, substance dependence, and especially suicidal ideation and
suicide attempts..."
And...
"Judith Stacey, PhD, Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis of the
Department of Sociology at New York University, and Timothy J. Biblarz, PhD,
Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Southern California,
wrote in an Apr. 2001 article, "(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents
Matter?" published by the American Sociological Review:
"The sexual orientation of parents appears to have a unique (although
not large) effect on children in the politically sensitive domain of
sexuality. The evidence, while scanty and underanalyzed, hints that parental
sexual orientation is positively associated with the possibility that
children will be more likely to attain a similar orientation - and theory
and common sense also support such a view. Children raised by lesbian
co-parents should and do seem to grow up more open to homoerotic
relationships. This may be partly due to genetic and family socialization
processes, but what sociologists refer to as 'contextual effects' not yet
investigated by psychologists may also be important...
We recognize the political dangers of pointing out that recent studies
indicate that a higher proportion of children with lesbigay [lesbian and
gay] parents are themselves apt to engage in homosexual activity. In a
homophobic world, anti-gay forces deploy such results to deny parents
custody of their children and to fuel backlash movements opposed to gay
rights. Nonetheless, we believe that denying this probability capitulates
to heterosexist ideology and is apt to prove counterproductive in the long
run. It is neither intellectually honest nor politically wise to base a
claim for justice on grounds that may prove falsifiable empirically.""
And...
"Paul D. Cameron, PhD, Chairman of the Family Research Institute, et al.
wrote in a May 2006 article, "Children of Homosexuals and Transsexuals More
Apt to be Homosexual," published in the Journal of Biosocial Science:
"Do the sexual inclinations of parents influence those of their
children? Of 77 adult children of homosexual parents who volunteered for
three different investigations, at least 23 (30%) were currently homosexual:
twelve (55%) of 22 daughters and three (21%) of fourteen sons of lesbians;
five (29%) of seventeen daughters and three (17%) of eighteen sons of gays;
none of six sons with both a gay and a lesbian parent. At least 25 (32%)
were currently heterosexual. Of the ten with transsexual parents, one of
nine daughters was currently lesbian, one was currently heterosexual, and
one was transsexual. The son's sexual preference was not reported. These
findings suggest that parents' sexual inclinations influence their
children's.""
>> Science
>> has already studied genetics and on some genetically identical twins,
>> they
>> have 1 that is homosexual and the other is heterosexual, that's with
>> identical genetics.
>
>And 52% of the time they are both gay.
That indicates genetics could definitely play a part, but what about
environment? Were these twins raised by the same parents? I wonder if
twins raised apart have the same 52% as those raised together, in other
words I'm wondering what effect their environment has to play.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_biology#Twin_studies
>
>> God says homosexuality is
>> wrong.
>
>Your imaginary god does not exist.
That's your assertion, prove it.
>You only believe in your imaginary
>god because you are mentally ill.
A definite statement about something you can't prove, "god does not exist"
indicates you are the one that is mentally ill.
>Telling a child your god exists is like telling a child to go play in
>the street. The child who believes in this imaginary god inevitably
>grows up to be hateful and hurtful of others. This is not how people
>should be. Religion should be eradicated for the good of mankind.
The opinion of one who has already demonstrated you are mentally ill.
>Luckily we have a way to eradicate education: it's called education.
>Properly educated theists become atheists. The fact that there are
>still theists in America reflects a failure of the education system.
Wrong yet again, need cites?
>> The science to which I pinned my faith is bankrupt. Its counsels, which
>> should have established the millennium, have led directly to the suicide
>> of
>> Europe. I believed them once. In their name I helped to destroy the faith
>> of
>> millions of worshipers in the temples of a thousand creeds, and now they
>> look at me and witness the great tragedy of an atheist who has lost his
>> faith.
>> George Bernard Shaw
>
>George Bernard Shaw, born 26 July 1856, died 2 November 1950. Is this
>the best you can do?
Certainly not, just one of many. But he makes the very true statement that
atheism is a faith based belief.
>For the record, there's no such thing as "faith" in atheism. Atheism
>represents not a belief but the lack of a belief in any supernatural
>entity.
Actually, you said above that "god does not exist", that is a statement of
faith since it cannot be proven.
>There is no excuse in this day and age for an intelligent person to
>remain a theist.
>
>Martin
Actually some of the most intelligent are ex-atheists. They were atheists,
and then they increased their knowledge.
Know any theists that know anything about evolution?
I have heard all kinds of things that atheists know so much about that
simply are not so. You get a group telling each other lies and you believe
each others lies because no one tells you otherwise or you simply refuse to
listen to what is true.
RogerN
news:d1c34586-5eea-4394...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>On May 23, 9:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>
>> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
>
>Bullshit. If they are ex-atheists then they are not atheists and
>cannot be considered intelligent. There are a lot of very intelligent
>atheists who are ex-theists. That is the truth.
atheists and then they learned that they were wrong. Atheists are future
ex-atheists that haven't learned that they are wrong yet, or have learned
and deny it.
>> Also studies show that children adopted and
>> raised by homosexuals are around 700% more likely to be homosexual.
>
>Cite.
"Pro-homosexual researchers frequently claim studies find "no differences"
between
children raised by homosexuals and heterosexuals. Amazingly, these claims
are
made in the abstracts of research studies that actually uncovered
differences
(Williams, 2000). The tendency to deny or downplay differences has been
noted by
pro-homosexual parenting researchers. After reviewing 21 studies, Stacey and
Biblarz (2001) concluded that in regards to gender, sexual behavior and
sexual
preference, homosexually parented children are different from heterosexually
parented children. But despite such findings, many continue to proclaim "no
differences" in order to galvanize support for homosexual access to
fertility services,
adoption, custody, and same-sex marriage. Encouraging support for a cause is
fine,
as long as the information being disseminated is true. But in this case, it
isn't."
...
"The preceding nine studies suggest that children raised by homosexual or
bisexual
parents are approximately 7 times more likely than the general population to
develop
a non-heterosexual sexual preference. These findings are not surprising.
Referring to
work by Ford and Beach, Amy Butler (2005) of the University of Iowa wrote,
"...
sexual behavior, including the gender of one's preferred sexual partner, is
largely
socially learned. Children are taught at an early age how to express their
sexual
urges by being rewarded for approved activities and punished for socially
disapproved
behavior." Obviously, non-heterosexual parents would be more accepting of
nonheterosexual
behavior on the part of their children. And, in fact, studies have revealed
that some lesbian mothers actually prefer that their daughters become
lesbian and
many of their daughters reportedly know it (Tasker and Golombok, 1997).
Butler
(2005) concludes, "Findings from anthropological and sociological research
and from
twin studies indicate that there is a substantial [emphasis mine]
environmental
component to whether a person takes a same-sex sexual partner...." Being
raised
by a parent who exhibits or endorses non-heterosexual behavior would
certainly be
considered a potent environmental force, and thus the fact that a
disproportionate
number of homosexually parented children develop same-sex attractions
shouldn't be
surprising to anyone.
Following their review of 21 studies, pro-homosexual parenting researchers
Stacey
and Biblarz (2001) concluded: "Children with lesbigay parents appear less
traditionally gender-typed and more likely to be open to homoerotic
relationships...The evidence, while scanty and underanalyzed, hints that
parental
sexual orientation is positively associated with the possibility that
children will be
more likely to attain a similar orientation." Ann Pelligrini, associate
Professor at NYU
put it more bluntly, "queer families are going to produce queer kids"
(Bronski, 2001).
When Stacey and Biblarz (2001) revealed that the "no difference" research
had
actually uncovered differences between children raised by homosexual and
heterosexual parents, Paula Ettlebrick of the National Gay and Lesbian Task
Force
said that they had "burst the bubble of one of the best kept community
secrets."
Keeping that secret has proven to be a wise strategy that has served the
homosexual community well, influencing both court decisions and public
opinion
(Clarke, 2002).
The purpose of this review is to ensure that research findings regarding
outcomes for
homosexually parented children are honestly and forthrightly revealed to the
public.
Although greatly flawed, the research studies we have to date suggest that
nonheterosexuals
are far more likely to raise non-heterosexual children than
heterosexuals. If long-standing sociopolitical opinions and legal
restrictions regarding
homosexual parenting are to be changed, it's only right it be done by a
fully informed
citizenry."
Need more?
http://borngay.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000028
"The American College of Pediatricians (ACP), a national organization of
pediatricians and other healthcare professionals, wrote the following
information in its Jan. 22, 2004 article "Homosexual Parenting: Is It Time
for Change?," published on its website ACPeds.org:
"Data on the long-term outcomes of children placed in homosexual
households is sparse and gives reason for concern. This research has
revealed that children reared in homosexual households are more likely to
experience sexual confusion, engage in risky sexual experimentation, and
later adopt a homosexual identity. This is concerning since adolescents and
young adults who adopt the homosexual lifestyle, are at increased risk for
mental health problems, including major depression, anxiety disorders,
conduct disorder, substance dependence, and especially suicidal ideation and
suicide attempts..."
And...
"Judith Stacey, PhD, Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis of the
Department of Sociology at New York University, and Timothy J. Biblarz, PhD,
Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Southern California,
wrote in an Apr. 2001 article, "(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents
Matter?" published by the American Sociological Review:
"The sexual orientation of parents appears to have a unique (although
not large) effect on children in the politically sensitive domain of
sexuality. The evidence, while scanty and underanalyzed, hints that parental
sexual orientation is positively associated with the possibility that
children will be more likely to attain a similar orientation - and theory
and common sense also support such a view. Children raised by lesbian
co-parents should and do seem to grow up more open to homoerotic
relationships. This may be partly due to genetic and family socialization
processes, but what sociologists refer to as 'contextual effects' not yet
investigated by psychologists may also be important...
We recognize the political dangers of pointing out that recent studies
indicate that a higher proportion of children with lesbigay [lesbian and
gay] parents are themselves apt to engage in homosexual activity. In a
homophobic world, anti-gay forces deploy such results to deny parents
custody of their children and to fuel backlash movements opposed to gay
rights. Nonetheless, we believe that denying this probability capitulates
to heterosexist ideology and is apt to prove counterproductive in the long
run. It is neither intellectually honest nor politically wise to base a
claim for justice on grounds that may prove falsifiable empirically.""
And...
"Paul D. Cameron, PhD, Chairman of the Family Research Institute, et al.
wrote in a May 2006 article, "Children of Homosexuals and Transsexuals More
Apt to be Homosexual," published in the Journal of Biosocial Science:
"Do the sexual inclinations of parents influence those of their
children? Of 77 adult children of homosexual parents who volunteered for
three different investigations, at least 23 (30%) were currently homosexual:
twelve (55%) of 22 daughters and three (21%) of fourteen sons of lesbians;
five (29%) of seventeen daughters and three (17%) of eighteen sons of gays;
none of six sons with both a gay and a lesbian parent. At least 25 (32%)
were currently heterosexual. Of the ten with transsexual parents, one of
nine daughters was currently lesbian, one was currently heterosexual, and
one was transsexual. The son's sexual preference was not reported. These
findings suggest that parents' sexual inclinations influence their
children's.""
>> Science
>> has already studied genetics and on some genetically identical twins,
>> they
>> have 1 that is homosexual and the other is heterosexual, that's with
>> identical genetics.
>
>And 52% of the time they are both gay.
environment? Were these twins raised by the same parents? I wonder if
twins raised apart have the same 52% as those raised together, in other
words I'm wondering what effect their environment has to play.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_biology#Twin_studies
>
>> God says homosexuality is
>> wrong.
>
>Your imaginary god does not exist.
>You only believe in your imaginary
>god because you are mentally ill.
indicates you are the one that is mentally ill.
>Telling a child your god exists is like telling a child to go play in
>the street. The child who believes in this imaginary god inevitably
>grows up to be hateful and hurtful of others. This is not how people
>should be. Religion should be eradicated for the good of mankind.
>Luckily we have a way to eradicate education: it's called education.
>Properly educated theists become atheists. The fact that there are
>still theists in America reflects a failure of the education system.
>> The science to which I pinned my faith is bankrupt. Its counsels, which
>> should have established the millennium, have led directly to the suicide
>> of
>> Europe. I believed them once. In their name I helped to destroy the faith
>> of
>> millions of worshipers in the temples of a thousand creeds, and now they
>> look at me and witness the great tragedy of an atheist who has lost his
>> faith.
>> George Bernard Shaw
>
>George Bernard Shaw, born 26 July 1856, died 2 November 1950. Is this
>the best you can do?
atheism is a faith based belief.
>For the record, there's no such thing as "faith" in atheism. Atheism
>represents not a belief but the lack of a belief in any supernatural
>entity.
faith since it cannot be proven.
>There is no excuse in this day and age for an intelligent person to
>remain a theist.
>
>Martin
and then they increased their knowledge.
Know any theists that know anything about evolution?
I have heard all kinds of things that atheists know so much about that
simply are not so. You get a group telling each other lies and you believe
each others lies because no one tells you otherwise or you simply refuse to
listen to what is true.
RogerN
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 11:21:43 AM5/24/12
to
them should be stopped. The homosexuals should be left alone.
Martin
Mike Lovell
May 24, 2012, 11:29:35 AM5/24/12
to
On 2012-05-24, RogerN <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> They are not atheists and ex-atheists at the same time, they were once
> atheists and then they learned that they were wrong. Atheists are future
> ex-atheists that haven't learned that they are wrong yet, or have learned
> and deny it.
Ah right I see,
> They are not atheists and ex-atheists at the same time, they were once
> atheists and then they learned that they were wrong. Atheists are future
> ex-atheists that haven't learned that they are wrong yet, or have learned
> and deny it.
Wrong about which religion, out of the thousands available?
We're both atheists to all the others, I just go one religion
further than you.
Think outside your little box.
RogerN
May 24, 2012, 11:38:35 AM5/24/12
to
"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
news:e94d5d99-cafa-47f7...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com...
><snip>
>> I take it you mean religion and homosexuality should be banned.
>
>No, I mean the sickos who want to turn our children into sickos like
>them should be stopped. The homosexuals should be left alone.
>
>Martin
Yeah, really, atheists shouldn't be allowed to raise children. They are too
>
>No, I mean the sickos who want to turn our children into sickos like
>them should be stopped. The homosexuals should be left alone.
>
>Martin
faith based, at least the ones that claim by faith "there is no god". I
also see you bought into the politically correct homosexual lies too, no
surprise.
RogerN
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 11:26:00 AM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 4:20 am, "Stormin Mormon"
men could watch gay daytime soaps in which gay men fall in love with
gay men and similar gay romantic movies in the evenings and then gay
porn after midnight. The rest of us could simply block the channel
because it wouldn't interest us but at least gay men would get want
they wanted, that is to be able to feel normal like everybody else.
What's wrong with that?
Martin
<cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to be
> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
I see your point but imagine if there were a cable network where gay
> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to be
> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
men could watch gay daytime soaps in which gay men fall in love with
gay men and similar gay romantic movies in the evenings and then gay
porn after midnight. The rest of us could simply block the channel
because it wouldn't interest us but at least gay men would get want
they wanted, that is to be able to feel normal like everybody else.
What's wrong with that?
Martin
Mike Lovell
May 24, 2012, 12:02:58 PM5/24/12
to
> Yeah, really, atheists shouldn't be allowed to raise children. They are too
> faith based, at least the ones that claim by faith "there is no god". I
> also see you bought into the politically correct homosexual lies too, no
> surprise.
faith based position on God(s)?
Atheists are fine then :-)
RogerN
May 24, 2012, 12:07:24 PM5/24/12
to
"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
news:a61b514d-d0d6-4a47...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
disgusted with the homosexual sin and would therefore block it, but they
wouldn't mind all the heterosexual sin. If they reject homosexuality on the
basis that it is Biblical "Sin" then they are being hypocrites when they
accept heterosexual "Sin", or other "Sin" that may not have anything to do
with sex. A Christian that will listen to someone singing cheating songs
should also be willing to listen to singing about homosexuality.
RogerN
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 12:17:28 PM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 8:12 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> news:d1c34586-5eea-4394...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On May 23, 9:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>
> >> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
>
> >Bullshit. If they are ex-atheists then they are not atheists and
> >cannot be considered intelligent. There are a lot of very intelligent
> >atheists who are ex-theists. That is the truth.
>
> They are not atheists and ex-atheists at the same time, they were once
> atheists and then they learned that they were wrong.
Belief in an imaginary god is not "learning". It's backsliding.
> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> news:d1c34586-5eea-4394...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On May 23, 9:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>
> >> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
>
> >Bullshit. If they are ex-atheists then they are not atheists and
> >cannot be considered intelligent. There are a lot of very intelligent
> >atheists who are ex-theists. That is the truth.
>
> They are not atheists and ex-atheists at the same time, they were once
> atheists and then they learned that they were wrong.
Education is the cure!
> Atheists are future
> ex-atheists that haven't learned that they are wrong yet, or have learned
> and deny it.
or have learned and deny it. The vast majority of theists know full
well that their religion is bullshit: that's why they talk about
"faith" and not "fact".
> >> Also studies show that children adopted and
> >> raised by homosexuals are around 700% more likely to be homosexual.
>
> >Cite.
>
> http://borngay.procon.org/sourcefiles/TrayceHansen.pdf
>
> "in fact, studies have revealed
> that some lesbian mothers actually prefer that their daughters become
> lesbian and
> many of their daughters reportedly know it (Tasker and Golombok, 1997).
That's not the same thing. You can't equate male homosexuality and
> that some lesbian mothers actually prefer that their daughters become
> lesbian and
> many of their daughters reportedly know it (Tasker and Golombok, 1997).
lesbianism: being a lesbian may very well be a choice; note that there
are much more women who are bi than men who are bi. Women are more
likely to go back and forth between being lesbian and being straight
whereas men are overwhelmingly either attracted to one gender or
another. (There was a study in Toronto a few years ago that confirmed
this: they had men who said they were bi watch both gay porn and
straight porn to see if each genre aroused subjets equally and found
that men tended to be either gay or straight regardless of how they
described themselves.) The fact is that if a man is gay he is not
going to be attracted to women any more than a man who was straight is
going to be attracted to men. If you were straight and not a gay man
in denial you would know this.
> Need more?
You haven't given me anything.
> http://borngay.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000028
>
> "The American College of Pediatricians (ACP), a national organization of
> pediatricians and other healthcare professionals, wrote the following
> information in its Jan. 22, 2004 article "Homosexual Parenting: Is It Time
> for Change?," published on its website ACPeds.org:
>
> "Data on the long-term outcomes of children placed in homosexual
> households is sparse and gives reason for concern. This research has
> revealed that children reared in homosexual households are more likely to
> experience sexual confusion, engage in risky sexual experimentation, and
> later adopt a homosexual identity. This is concerning since adolescents and
> young adults who adopt the homosexual lifestyle, are at increased risk for
> mental health problems, including major depression, anxiety disorders,
> conduct disorder, substance dependence, and especially suicidal ideation and
> suicide attempts..."
including lesbians again?
> And...
>
> " Children raised by lesbian
> co-parents should and do seem to grow up more open to homoerotic
> relationships."
That's not particularly shocking.
> " Children raised by lesbian
> co-parents should and do seem to grow up more open to homoerotic
> relationships."
>
> And...
>
> "Paul D. Cameron, PhD, Chairman of the Family Research Institute, et al.
> wrote in a May 2006 article, "Children of Homosexuals and Transsexuals More
> Apt to be Homosexual," published in the Journal of Biosocial Science:
>
> "Do the sexual inclinations of parents influence those of their
> children? Of 77 adult children of homosexual parents who volunteered for
> three different investigations, at least 23 (30%) were currently homosexual:
> twelve (55%) of 22 daughters and three (21%) of fourteen sons of lesbians;
> five (29%) of seventeen daughters and three (17%) of eighteen sons of gays;
> none of six sons with both a gay and a lesbian parent. At least 25 (32%)
> were currently heterosexual. Of the ten with transsexual parents, one of
> nine daughters was currently lesbian, one was currently heterosexual, and
> one was transsexual. The son's sexual preference was not reported. These
> findings suggest that parents' sexual inclinations influence their
> children's.""
to you that the general population may be suppressing homosexual
tendencies? Perhaps those 3 out of 18 might actually have been gay
and weren't influenced by their parents to be gay. Look at all the
guys who like watching anal sex videos. Even though they are watching
anal sex with women, they are still watching anal sex. A lot of guys
may very well be repressed gays. Most parents don't want their kids
to be gay so they subtly (or not so subtly) encourage their kids to be
straight.
> >> Science
> >> has already studied genetics and on some genetically identical twins,
> >> they
> >> have 1 that is homosexual and the other is heterosexual, that's with
> >> identical genetics.
>
> >And 52% of the time they are both gay.
>
> That indicates genetics could definitely play a part,
> but what about
> environment?
See above. It is far more likely for children who are gay to convince
themselves they are straight than for children who are straight to
convince themselves they are gay. There's also the matter of studies
that have shown a link to hormones and homosexuality. Of course, why
one twin brother would be gay and the other straight is mysterious.
> Were these twins raised by the same parents? I wonder if
> twins raised apart have the same 52% as those raised together, in other
> words I'm wondering what effect their environment has to play.
make a difference: twins raised separately are just as likely to be
both gay as twins raised together, although in the case of twins
raised separately there is obviously a very small sample size.
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_biology#Twin_studies
>
> >> God says homosexuality is
> >> wrong.
>
> >Your imaginary god does not exist.
>
> That's your assertion, prove it.
universe and (according to Genesis 1) created animals and then mankind
and (according to Genesis 2) created mankind and then animals doesn't
exist? This god who is supposedly all knowing and all powerful and
never makes a mistake who couldn't find Adam and Eve in the Garden of
Eden until it was too late? Who couldn't stop the Egyptian chariots
because they were "made of metal"? Who ended up creating a massive
flood so he could wipe out mankind and start again? The god who is
supposedly all loving who will condemn most of mankind to Hell simply
because they don't believe in him, including little children on tribal
villages that never even got to hear about him? The god that
supposedly has a plan for all of us and yet asks his followers to pray
to him everyday even though he is perfect and would never change his
mind because he's an all knowing god and he obviously would know
better? That god? You want me to improve that this imaginary
mythological creature doesn't exist? Really? Is that something I
really have to do? Do you seriously lack the intellectual ability to
recognize all by yourself that he doesn't exist? Seriously?
> >You only believe in your imaginary
> >god because you are mentally ill.
>
> A definite statement about something you can't prove, "god does not exist"
> indicates you are the one that is mentally ill.
and all benevolent to exist. If he is all powerful and all knowing
then he could create a perfect world in which there is no evil and no
suffering. The fact that evil and suffering exists would then imply
he is not altogether benevolent but then that would not be a god worth
worshiping. As it is obviously assumed by his followers that he is
benevolent it therefore follows that he cannot possibly exist. QED.
Now you are saying "God says homosexuality is wrong" but this gid does
not exist so you are believing in the existance of something that
clearly does not exist. Therefore you are mentally ill. Again, QED.
> >Telling a child your god exists is like telling a child to go play in
> >the street. The child who believes in this imaginary god inevitably
> >grows up to be hateful and hurtful of others. This is not how people
> >should be. Religion should be eradicated for the good of mankind.
>
> The opinion of one who has already demonstrated you are mentally ill.
ill. Exactly. But you should stop talking to yourself if you want
people to think you are sane.
> >Luckily we have a way to eradicate education: it's called education.
> >Properly educated theists become atheists. The fact that there are
> >still theists in America reflects a failure of the education system.
>
> Wrong yet again, need cites?
> >> The science to which I pinned my faith is bankrupt. Its counsels, which
> >> should have established the millennium, have led directly to the suicide
> >> of
> >> Europe. I believed them once. In their name I helped to destroy the faith
> >> of
> >> millions of worshipers in the temples of a thousand creeds, and now they
> >> look at me and witness the great tragedy of an atheist who has lost his
> >> faith.
> >> George Bernard Shaw
>
> >George Bernard Shaw, born 26 July 1856, died 2 November 1950. Is this
> >the best you can do?
>
> Certainly not, just one of many. But he makes the very true statement that
> atheism is a faith based belief.
> >For the record, there's no such thing as "faith" in atheism. Atheism
> >represents not a belief but the lack of a belief in any supernatural
> >entity.
>
> Actually, you said above that "god does not exist", that is a statement of
> faith since it cannot be proven.
> >There is no excuse in this day and age for an intelligent person to
> >remain a theist.
>
> Actually some of the most intelligent are ex-atheists. They were atheists,
> and then they increased their knowledge.
Theism is a mental illness. If there are voices in your head they are
> and then they increased their knowledge.
not adding to your "knowledge". It is all imaginary.
> Know any theists that know anything about evolution?
> I have heard all kinds of things that atheists know so much about that
> simply are not so.
figured out yet, namely that his god isn't real,
> You get a group telling each other lies and you believe
> each others lies because no one tells you otherwise or you simply refuse to
> listen to what is true.
Martin
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 12:26:04 PM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 9:07 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> news:a61b514d-d0d6-4a47...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On May 24, 4:20 am, "Stormin Mormon"
> ><cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to
> >> be
> >> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
>
> >I see your point but imagine if there were a cable network where gay
> >men could watch gay daytime soaps in which gay men fall in love with
> >gay men and similar gay romantic movies in the evenings and then gay
> >porn after midnight. The rest of us could simply block the channel
> >because it wouldn't interest us but at least gay men would get want
> >they wanted, that is to be able to feel normal like everybody else.
> >What's wrong with that?
>
> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> news:a61b514d-d0d6-4a47...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On May 24, 4:20 am, "Stormin Mormon"
> ><cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to
> >> be
> >> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
>
> >I see your point but imagine if there were a cable network where gay
> >men could watch gay daytime soaps in which gay men fall in love with
> >gay men and similar gay romantic movies in the evenings and then gay
> >porn after midnight. The rest of us could simply block the channel
> >because it wouldn't interest us but at least gay men would get want
> >they wanted, that is to be able to feel normal like everybody else.
> >What's wrong with that?
>
> Here is the problem with many that call themselves Christians... They are
> disgusted with the homosexual sin and would therefore block it, but they
> wouldn't mind all the heterosexual sin. If they reject homosexuality on the
> basis that it is Biblical "Sin" then they are being hypocrites when they
> accept heterosexual "Sin", or other "Sin" that may not have anything to do
> with sex. A Christian that will listen to someone singing cheating songs
> should also be willing to listen to singing about homosexuality.
Oh, wow, I wish Christians would wake up and come to see all sex as
> disgusted with the homosexual sin and would therefore block it, but they
> wouldn't mind all the heterosexual sin. If they reject homosexuality on the
> basis that it is Biblical "Sin" then they are being hypocrites when they
> accept heterosexual "Sin", or other "Sin" that may not have anything to do
> with sex. A Christian that will listen to someone singing cheating songs
> should also be willing to listen to singing about homosexuality.
sinful. Because they would disappear in one generation and we
wouldn't have to worry about them.
But, seriously, you're right: gay men shouldn't cheat on each other!
They should learn commitment! Dammit let's get those gay men to marry
each other so they can be monogamous like the rest of us!
Martin
Martin
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 12:21:59 PM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 8:38 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> news:e94d5d99-cafa-47f7...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On May 24, 1:57 am, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> ><snip>
> >> I take it you mean religion and homosexuality should be banned.
>
> >No, I mean the sickos who want to turn our children into sickos like
> >them should be stopped. The homosexuals should be left alone.
>
> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> news:e94d5d99-cafa-47f7...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com...
>
> >On May 24, 1:57 am, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> ><snip>
> >> I take it you mean religion and homosexuality should be banned.
>
> >No, I mean the sickos who want to turn our children into sickos like
> >them should be stopped. The homosexuals should be left alone.
>
> Yeah, really, atheists shouldn't be allowed to raise children.
How about Buddhists? Or Hindus? Or Muslims? Should they be allowed
to raise children? After all they don't believe in the same religion
as you.
Think outside your little box.
demonstrated such an ability yet.
Martin
William December Starr
May 24, 2012, 1:29:51 PM5/24/12
to
In article <XRovr.568$bR1...@news.usenetserver.com>,
-- wds
"Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> said:
> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they
> want to be celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the
> closet.
>
> Christopher A. Young
> Learn more about Jesus
Jesus would have vomited on your shoes.
> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they
> want to be celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the
> closet.
>
> Christopher A. Young
> Learn more about Jesus
-- wds
RogerN
May 24, 2012, 2:24:12 PM5/24/12
to
"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
news:e673449b-e564-4f23...@pa10g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>On May 24, 8:12 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>>
>> news:d1c34586-5eea-4394...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >On May 23, 9:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
>>
>> >Bullshit. If they are ex-atheists then they are not atheists and
>> >cannot be considered intelligent. There are a lot of very intelligent
>> >atheists who are ex-theists. That is the truth.
>>
>> They are not atheists and ex-atheists at the same time, they were once
>> atheists and then they learned that they were wrong.
>
>Belief in an imaginary god is not "learning". It's backsliding.
>Education is the cure!
>
the beginning of wisdom, some have yet to begin to be wise.
Here's a PHD Harvard Grad that learned that what he taught (because of what
he was taught) in biology contradicted what he taught in chemistry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s91-ABJ49ho
RogerN
Mike Lovell
May 24, 2012, 2:41:02 PM5/24/12
to
On 2012-05-24, RogerN <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true living God is
> the beginning of wisdom, some have yet to begin to be wise.
Great, now prove there is a living God
> the beginning of wisdom, some have yet to begin to be wise.
Otherwise, it's a faith position. No evidence, blind faith. Like all
religions.
ram...@truthonly.com.swordofbaal
May 24, 2012, 3:55:33 PM5/24/12
to
"James Riske" wrote in message news:5lgggl....@news.alt.net...
> People who naturally despise faggots are not really faggots themselves
> just as people who naturally despise pedophiles are not really pedophiles.
.................but cannot find anyone to do it.
Barry OGrady
May 24, 2012, 6:11:22 PM5/24/12
to
Homosexuality be treated the way the other fags are, by strict
regulation. Promotion of smoking is banned and adverts are
broadcast describing the harmful effects.
>The homosexuals should be left alone.
in the closet.
Dano
May 24, 2012, 6:42:53 PM5/24/12
to
"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
news:o5ctr7d0jrg6tki2b...@4ax.com...
========================================
Homosexuality has always been with us. It's simply another part of life.
It's found in other of "God's" creatures. If you believe in any "God" you
must logically accept that all forms of sexuality are also creations of this
deity. What is perverse...and deeply so...is the emphasis...the obsession
with the sexuality of others. THAT is what is truly twisted and offensive.
Just look at the violent extremes many are willing to take this to.
There have been many notable and famous (as well as infamous) homosexuals
throughout the entire recorded history of mankind. They were in ancient
Egypt...Greece...Rome as well as all through every culture we have records
for. To be foolish enough to think this life choice could be banned even if
any society were inclined to try is foolish and moronic. More children are
abused and misused by heterosexuals than homosexuals.
And not that it matters...but I myself am very straight. But you can't
insult me by claiming anything different. I just don't care.
news:o5ctr7d0jrg6tki2b...@4ax.com...
Homosexuality has always been with us. It's simply another part of life.
It's found in other of "God's" creatures. If you believe in any "God" you
must logically accept that all forms of sexuality are also creations of this
deity. What is perverse...and deeply so...is the emphasis...the obsession
with the sexuality of others. THAT is what is truly twisted and offensive.
Just look at the violent extremes many are willing to take this to.
There have been many notable and famous (as well as infamous) homosexuals
throughout the entire recorded history of mankind. They were in ancient
Egypt...Greece...Rome as well as all through every culture we have records
for. To be foolish enough to think this life choice could be banned even if
any society were inclined to try is foolish and moronic. More children are
abused and misused by heterosexuals than homosexuals.
And not that it matters...but I myself am very straight. But you can't
insult me by claiming anything different. I just don't care.
Martin Phipps
May 24, 2012, 6:53:25 PM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 11:24 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> news:e673449b-e564-4f23...@pa10g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 24, 8:12 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> >> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> >>news:d1c34586-5eea-4394...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >On May 23, 9:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
>
> >> >Bullshit. If they are ex-atheists then they are not atheists and
> >> >cannot be considered intelligent. There are a lot of very intelligent
> >> >atheists who are ex-theists. That is the truth.
>
> >> They are not atheists and ex-atheists at the same time, they were once
> >> atheists and then they learned that they were wrong.
>
> >Belief in an imaginary god is not "learning". It's backsliding.
> >Education is the cure!
>
> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true living God is
> the beginning of wisdom, some have yet to begin to be wise.
>
> Here's a PHD Harvard Grad that learned that what he taught (because of what
> he was taught) in biology contradicted what he taught in chemistry.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s91-ABJ49ho
I'm not going to watch a 38 minute speech. I have a life,
> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> news:e673449b-e564-4f23...@pa10g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 24, 8:12 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> >> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>
> >>news:d1c34586-5eea-4394...@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >On May 23, 9:05 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists,
>
> >> >Bullshit. If they are ex-atheists then they are not atheists and
> >> >cannot be considered intelligent. There are a lot of very intelligent
> >> >atheists who are ex-theists. That is the truth.
>
> >> They are not atheists and ex-atheists at the same time, they were once
> >> atheists and then they learned that they were wrong.
>
> >Belief in an imaginary god is not "learning". It's backsliding.
> >Education is the cure!
>
> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true living God is
> the beginning of wisdom, some have yet to begin to be wise.
>
> Here's a PHD Harvard Grad that learned that what he taught (because of what
> he was taught) in biology contradicted what he taught in chemistry.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s91-ABJ49ho
specifically a job. If you have nothing more to add, just say so.
Martin
Barry OGrady
May 24, 2012, 7:47:55 PM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 18:42:53 -0400, "Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
>news:o5ctr7d0jrg6tki2b...@4ax.com...
>
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 08:21:43 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
><martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On May 24, 1:57 am, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>> I take it you mean religion and homosexuality should be banned.
>>
>>No, I mean the sickos who want to turn our children into sickos like
>>them should be stopped.
I didn't write that.
>Banning homosexuality will only drive it underground.
>Homosexuality be treated the way the other fags are, by strict
>regulation. Promotion of smoking is banned and adverts are
>broadcast describing the harmful effects.
I agree but I said it first.
>>The homosexuals should be left alone.
I didn't write that.
>As long as they leave the children alone. That means keeping it
>in the closet.
I agree but I said it first.
>And not that it matters...but I myself am very straight. But you can't
>insult me by claiming anything different. I just don't care.
The important thing is that you agree with me even to the
extent of using my words to express your views.
I would accuse you of plagiarism but it is more of a
compliment.
wrote:
>"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
>news:o5ctr7d0jrg6tki2b...@4ax.com...
>
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 08:21:43 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
><martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On May 24, 1:57 am, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>> I take it you mean religion and homosexuality should be banned.
>>
>>No, I mean the sickos who want to turn our children into sickos like
>>them should be stopped.
>Banning homosexuality will only drive it underground.
>Homosexuality be treated the way the other fags are, by strict
>regulation. Promotion of smoking is banned and adverts are
>broadcast describing the harmful effects.
>>The homosexuals should be left alone.
>As long as they leave the children alone. That means keeping it
>in the closet.
>And not that it matters...but I myself am very straight. But you can't
>insult me by claiming anything different. I just don't care.
extent of using my words to express your views.
I would accuse you of plagiarism but it is more of a
compliment.
kni...@baawa.com
May 24, 2012, 8:32:59 PM5/24/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 23:05:50 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
wrote:
>wrote in message news:uv9rr7pee6sjbqqgn...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
>><snip>
wrote:
>wrote in message news:uv9rr7pee6sjbqqgn...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:47:08 +1000, Barry OGrady
>>>
>>>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>>
>>>Wanting to protect children is not hate and bigotry.
>>>
>> Protect children is nothing but a catch phrase for bigots and hate
>>groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
>>every time.
>
>"Bigots" and "hate groups" are nothing but but a catch phrase for
>anti-science/pro political correct people like you. You can't argue the
>truth of what he said so you make an attack claiming his truth is just a
>catch phrase.
>
Truth coming from a bigot? If you want to suck bigot cock and
>>groups. If you want to have legitimacy drag children into it. Works
>>every time.
>
>"Bigots" and "hate groups" are nothing but but a catch phrase for
>anti-science/pro political correct people like you. You can't argue the
>truth of what he said so you make an attack claiming his truth is just a
>catch phrase.
>
defend his hate, go ahead.
As an atheist, I am hardly anti-science and certainly not
politically correct by being one.
>There are a lot of very intelligent atheists that are now ex-atheists, know
>of any?
That's another catch phrase. Ex-atheists..... If you had one brain
cell you'd have a glimmer of what atheism is. There are no
ex-atheists. There only fakes and claims pushing superstitious
agendas.
>For good reason many religious people think atheists are the
>spoiled apples. Do you not know that it is scientific fact that
>homosexuality is destructive to the health of those that engage in the act?
population.
snip uncited blather.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
kni...@baawa.com
May 24, 2012, 8:38:14 PM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 18:45:49 +1000, Barry OGrady
Maybe so. I would certainly tell them gods don't exist.
But you miss my point. I reject a bigot telling how to raise my
children. The bigot wants you to think llike him and hate gays.
But you miss my point. I reject a bigot telling how to raise my
children. The bigot wants you to think llike him and hate gays.
RogerN
May 24, 2012, 11:38:50 PM5/24/12
to
"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
news:e3a934a5-6da1-46e3...@si8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
><snip>
>> >Belief in an imaginary god is not "learning". It's backsliding.
>> >Education is the cure!
>>
>> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true living God
>> is
>> the beginning of wisdom, some have yet to begin to be wise.
>>
>> Here's a PHD Harvard Grad that learned that what he taught (because of
>> what
>> he was taught) in biology contradicted what he taught in
>> chemistry.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s91-ABJ49ho
>
>I'm not going to watch a 38 minute speech. I have a life,
>specifically a job. If you have nothing more to add, just say so.
>
>Martin
His experience seems to be pretty much what many atheists describe. Being
>> >Education is the cure!
>>
>> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true living God
>> is
>> the beginning of wisdom, some have yet to begin to be wise.
>>
>> Here's a PHD Harvard Grad that learned that what he taught (because of
>> what
>> he was taught) in biology contradicted what he taught in
>> chemistry.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s91-ABJ49ho
>
>I'm not going to watch a 38 minute speech. I have a life,
>specifically a job. If you have nothing more to add, just say so.
>
>Martin
taught one thing at church, something else in school, and when he questioned
his church, they didn't have much of an answer for him. So it is pretty
much as you describe, education cured him of believing in God. So he gets
his PHD from Harvard, loves science, teaches evolution and chemistry, and is
firmly grounded as an atheist. Then a student points out a problem between
what he teaches about evolution versus what he teaches about chemistry.
What he blindly accepted as fact, what he was taught about how life began in
biology, how chemicals combined to form this first life, didn't agree with
what he was taught in chemistry class.
RogerN
Too_Many_Tools
May 25, 2012, 1:28:08 AM5/25/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
RogerN has nothing else to add.
And it still sounds like RogerN is a closet homosexual who is hiding
behind
religion.
And God is shaking Her head in disgust.
TMT
Martin Phipps
May 25, 2012, 9:34:42 AM5/25/12
to
made that clearer for layman such as yourself.
The fact is that scientists can synthesize DNA molecules. And if you
place the DNA molecules into a cell they are able to reproduce.
Scientists can create life from scratch. It's probably not a good
idea but it is something they can now do.
The problem is that to synthesize DNA you have to put energy in. It
is not an exothermic reaction. It's endothermic. So them the
question is: where did the energy come from to form the first DNA
molecules in nature? Well, not so fast: nature probably started with
RNA first because cells use RNA to synthesize DNA. But the problem is
still there. Scientists know that lightening would be enough to
create amino acids but what about nucleic acids? Basically you would
need a temperature gradient, say for example warm water from a hot
spring mixing with colder lake or ocean water: the warm water drives
the process by supplying heat via convection to the molecules in the
cool water. That would address the question of how an endothermic
process could occur spontaneously. And it would only have to happen
once because nucleic acids are very good at reproducing themselves.
Martin
Jeff M
May 25, 2012, 1:10:16 PM5/25/12
to
obligations as they please, feeling free to select those they personally
prefer, and reject others they don't like so much.
William December Starr
May 25, 2012, 2:13:22 PM5/25/12
to
In article <Jr-dnYxw9IJe4SPS...@earthlink.com>,
-- wds
"RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> said:
> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true
> living God is the beginning of wisdom,
How do you propose to tell one from the other?
> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true
> living God is the beginning of wisdom,
-- wds
William December Starr
May 25, 2012, 2:15:09 PM5/25/12
to
In article <o5ctr7d0jrg6tki2b...@4ax.com>,
-- wds
Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> said:
>> The homosexuals should be left alone.
>
> As long as they leave the children alone. That means keeping it
> in the closet.
Do you feel the same way about the heterosexuals? Why or why not?
>> The homosexuals should be left alone.
>
> As long as they leave the children alone. That means keeping it
> in the closet.
-- wds
The Starmaker
May 25, 2012, 2:42:59 PM5/25/12
to
William December Starr wrote:
>
> In article <o5ctr7d0jrg6tki2b...@4ax.com>,
> Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> said:
>
> >> The homosexuals should be left alone.
> >
> > As long as they leave the children alone. That means keeping it
> > in the closet.
But they don't leave the children alone...
>
> In article <o5ctr7d0jrg6tki2b...@4ax.com>,
> Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> said:
>
> >> The homosexuals should be left alone.
> >
> > As long as they leave the children alone. That means keeping it
> > in the closet.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/nyregion/ultra-orthodox-jews-shun-their-own-for-reporting-child-sexual-abuse.html?_r=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/19/nyregion/brooklyn-prosecutor-hynes-to-target-intimidation-in-ultra-orthodox-abuse-cases.html
The largest population of gays in the world is in the Jewish community...
and they feed on their own children..that's how they protect and insulate themselves..through intimidation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/nyregion/ultra-orthodox-jews-shun-their-own-for-reporting-child-sexual-abuse.html?_r=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/19/nyregion/brooklyn-prosecutor-hynes-to-target-intimidation-in-ultra-orthodox-abuse-cases.html
Drop the bomb
on all of them.
The Starmaker
Too_Many_Tools
May 25, 2012, 3:14:08 PM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 1:13 pm, wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
> In article <Jr-dnYxw9IJe4SPSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dn...@earthlink.com>,
Laugh..laugh..laugh...
Science always trumps religion.
God made it that way. ;<)
TMT
> In article <Jr-dnYxw9IJe4SPSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dn...@earthlink.com>,
> "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> said:
>
> > Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true
> > living God is the beginning of wisdom,
>
> How do you propose to tell one from the other?
>
> -- wds
Scientific deduction?
>
> > Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true
> > living God is the beginning of wisdom,
>
> How do you propose to tell one from the other?
>
> -- wds
Laugh..laugh..laugh...
Science always trumps religion.
God made it that way. ;<)
TMT
RogerN
May 25, 2012, 6:22:44 PM5/25/12
to
"William December Starr" wrote in message
news:jpoi42$fb3$1...@panix3.panix.com...
God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies come
true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false prophets. Many
prophecies from long before the time of Christ were fulfilled by Jesus. The
New Testament tells about Jesus but doesn't always tell about how these
things were in fulfillment of prophecy. I'm not sure if the writers of the
New Testament knew the things they wrote fulfilled Old Testament Prophecy or
not. If so, why didn't they point it out? If not, why did they write the
things they wrote?
The New Testament records that God confirmed his word with supernatural
signs and wonders, it also records that God does not change. So if you want
to know the real God then look for the one that confirms the Bible with
supernatural signs and wonders, "miracles".
RogerN
news:jpoi42$fb3$1...@panix3.panix.com...
true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false prophets. Many
prophecies from long before the time of Christ were fulfilled by Jesus. The
New Testament tells about Jesus but doesn't always tell about how these
things were in fulfillment of prophecy. I'm not sure if the writers of the
New Testament knew the things they wrote fulfilled Old Testament Prophecy or
not. If so, why didn't they point it out? If not, why did they write the
things they wrote?
The New Testament records that God confirmed his word with supernatural
signs and wonders, it also records that God does not change. So if you want
to know the real God then look for the one that confirms the Bible with
supernatural signs and wonders, "miracles".
RogerN
Barry OGrady
May 25, 2012, 6:41:15 PM5/25/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 17:22:44 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net>
wrote:
>"William December Starr" wrote in message
>news:jpoi42$fb3$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>>
>>In article <Jr-dnYxw9IJe4SPS...@earthlink.com>,
>>"RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> said:
>>
>>> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true
>>> living God is the beginning of wisdom,
>>
>>How do you propose to tell one from the other?
>>
>>-- wds
>
>God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies come
>true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false prophets.
That means a prophets are false.
>Many prophecies from long before the time of Christ were fulfilled by Jesus. The
>New Testament tells about Jesus but doesn't always tell about how these
>things were in fulfillment of prophecy. I'm not sure if the writers of the
>New Testament knew the things they wrote fulfilled Old Testament Prophecy or
>not. If so, why didn't they point it out? If not, why did they write the
>things they wrote?
>
>The New Testament records that God confirmed his word with supernatural
>signs and wonders, it also records that God does not change. So if you want
>to know the real God then look for the one that confirms the Bible with
>supernatural signs and wonders, "miracles".
None found. Thanks.
>RogerN
wrote:
>"William December Starr" wrote in message
>news:jpoi42$fb3$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>>
>>In article <Jr-dnYxw9IJe4SPS...@earthlink.com>,
>>"RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> said:
>>
>>> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true
>>> living God is the beginning of wisdom,
>>
>>How do you propose to tell one from the other?
>>
>>-- wds
>
>God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies come
>true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false prophets.
>Many prophecies from long before the time of Christ were fulfilled by Jesus. The
>New Testament tells about Jesus but doesn't always tell about how these
>things were in fulfillment of prophecy. I'm not sure if the writers of the
>New Testament knew the things they wrote fulfilled Old Testament Prophecy or
>not. If so, why didn't they point it out? If not, why did they write the
>things they wrote?
>
>The New Testament records that God confirmed his word with supernatural
>signs and wonders, it also records that God does not change. So if you want
>to know the real God then look for the one that confirms the Bible with
>supernatural signs and wonders, "miracles".
>RogerN
Too_Many_Tools
May 25, 2012, 6:50:50 PM5/25/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Also referred to as Republicans.
> - Show quoted text -
TMT
Too_Many_Tools
May 25, 2012, 6:50:14 PM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 5:22 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> "William December Starr" wrote in messagenews:jpoi42$fb3$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>
>
>
> >In article <Jr-dnYxw9IJe4SPSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dn...@earthlink.com>,
> "William December Starr" wrote in messagenews:jpoi42$fb3$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>
>
>
She only believes in results that can be proven and repeated.
When She tested RogerN, She has found him to be a fraud, a sham, an
agent for the Devil.
The results have been proven and repeated over and over again here on
Usenet.
TMT
Tom Gardner
May 25, 2012, 7:00:06 PM5/25/12
to
On 5/24/2012 7:20 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to be
> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
>
> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to be
> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
>
> Christopher A. Young
> Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
> Learn more about Jesus
> .
>
Only a small percentage of gays demand such, most are just sensible
people. It's only the far, far left gays that are assholes. (They are
assholes because they are far, far left, not because they are gay.)
RogerN
May 25, 2012, 7:33:12 PM5/25/12
to
"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
news:Jf2dnQYRudBnk13S...@giganews.com...
So true. I work with people I hear are gay, I don't even ask them because
it doesn't matter to me. Some lefttards accuse me of hating gays just
because I won't lie and say homosexuality is normal or other politically
correct lies.
RogerN
news:Jf2dnQYRudBnk13S...@giganews.com...
it doesn't matter to me. Some lefttards accuse me of hating gays just
because I won't lie and say homosexuality is normal or other politically
correct lies.
RogerN
RogerN
May 25, 2012, 7:48:40 PM5/25/12
to
"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
news:55b05e13-1520-4531...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
>
>> His experience seems to be pretty much what many atheists describe.
>> Being
>> taught one thing at church, something else in school, and when he
>> questioned
>> his church, they didn't have much of an answer for him. So it is pretty
>> much as you describe, education cured him of believing in God. So he
>> gets
>> his PHD from Harvard, loves science, teaches evolution and chemistry, and
>> is
>> firmly grounded as an atheist. Then a student points out a problem
>> between
>> what he teaches about evolution versus what he teaches about chemistry.
>> What he blindly accepted as fact, what he was taught about how life began
>> in
>> biology, how chemicals combined to form this first life, didn't agree
>> with
>> what he was taught in chemistry class.
>
>Oh, you're talking about biogenesis and not evolution. He should have
>made that clearer for layman such as yourself.
>
>The fact is that scientists can synthesize DNA molecules. And if you
>place the DNA molecules into a cell they are able to reproduce.
>Scientists can create life from scratch.
Not according to them:
>> His experience seems to be pretty much what many atheists describe.
>> Being
>> taught one thing at church, something else in school, and when he
>> questioned
>> his church, they didn't have much of an answer for him. So it is pretty
>> much as you describe, education cured him of believing in God. So he
>> gets
>> his PHD from Harvard, loves science, teaches evolution and chemistry, and
>> is
>> firmly grounded as an atheist. Then a student points out a problem
>> between
>> what he teaches about evolution versus what he teaches about chemistry.
>> What he blindly accepted as fact, what he was taught about how life began
>> in
>> biology, how chemicals combined to form this first life, didn't agree
>> with
>> what he was taught in chemistry class.
>
>Oh, you're talking about biogenesis and not evolution. He should have
>made that clearer for layman such as yourself.
>
>The fact is that scientists can synthesize DNA molecules. And if you
>place the DNA molecules into a cell they are able to reproduce.
>Scientists can create life from scratch.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-21/health/venter.qa_1_synthetic-chromosome-genetic-code-synthetic-life?_s=PM:HEALTH
But I suppose no intelligent design was needed, right? Except for the
existing cell and the computer generated code from reverse engineering
life...
Where's that education you mentioned?
Think the director of the human genome project knows anything about
evolution?
You shouldn't be getting shown up by a theist layman. :-)
RogerN
kni...@baawa.com
May 25, 2012, 8:17:44 PM5/25/12
to
>The New Testament records that God confirmed his word with supernatural
>signs and wonders, it also records that God does not change. So if you want
>to know the real God then look for the one that confirms the Bible with
>supernatural signs and wonders, "miracles".
I guess the term 'circular reasoning' never popped up when you were
>signs and wonders, it also records that God does not change. So if you want
>to know the real God then look for the one that confirms the Bible with
>supernatural signs and wonders, "miracles".
being home schooled.
Lesson one.....
A use of reason in which the premises depends on or is equivalent
to the conclusion, a method of false logic by which "this is used to
prove that, and that is used to prove this"; also called circular
logic.
It means you only have your bible to 'prove' your superstition.
There are no evidences outside the bible to prove anything of a
supernatural nature.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
RogerN
May 25, 2012, 9:37:21 PM5/25/12
to
wrote in message news:0s70s7hums45idepp...@4ax.com...
Lesson one....
I wasn't referring to reports of miracles in the Bible.
Since there are no evidences of anything of a supernatural nature then you
too should be able to do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD8CmqXia2w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lpJiAG5Xzo&feature=relmfu
Don't forget the glass of stryknine, send video and an address so we can
send flowers.
Maybe the Christian old ladies are braver than atheist Warlords?
RogerN
I wasn't referring to reports of miracles in the Bible.
Since there are no evidences of anything of a supernatural nature then you
too should be able to do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD8CmqXia2w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lpJiAG5Xzo&feature=relmfu
Don't forget the glass of stryknine, send video and an address so we can
send flowers.
Maybe the Christian old ladies are braver than atheist Warlords?
RogerN
linuxgal
May 25, 2012, 10:11:18 PM5/25/12
to
RogerN wrote:
> God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies come
> true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false prophets. Many
> prophecies from long before the time of Christ were fulfilled by Jesus.
That's a cool trick. Just when you pick up a rock and get ready to
> God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies come
> true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false prophets. Many
> prophecies from long before the time of Christ were fulfilled by Jesus.
stone a prophet for being false, he can say, "Wait! Everything I said
will come true in four hundred years. You'll see!"
RogerN
May 25, 2012, 10:49:43 PM5/25/12
to
"linuxgal" wrote in message
news:ELmdnR0_P8DvoV3S...@giganews.com...
That's part of it, how can they know if it's a prophecy to be fulfilled
hundreds of years in the future? The distant future prophecies had to be
fulfilled in the near future, so they would know it was a true prophet, and
the distant future. For example, most of the end time prophecies have been
fulfilled in 70 AD by Nero. We expect a similar repeat of that fulfillment
plus the return of Jesus in the future.
Then there are prophecies like in Daniel that specified how many days from
the order to rebuild the temple until the messiah comes. They took the
dates, from the best of their ability, of the decree to rebuild plus the
number of days in Daniels prophecy, came up with a date. To the best they
can date it, that was the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey.
RogerN
news:ELmdnR0_P8DvoV3S...@giganews.com...
hundreds of years in the future? The distant future prophecies had to be
fulfilled in the near future, so they would know it was a true prophet, and
the distant future. For example, most of the end time prophecies have been
fulfilled in 70 AD by Nero. We expect a similar repeat of that fulfillment
plus the return of Jesus in the future.
Then there are prophecies like in Daniel that specified how many days from
the order to rebuild the temple until the messiah comes. They took the
dates, from the best of their ability, of the decree to rebuild plus the
number of days in Daniels prophecy, came up with a date. To the best they
can date it, that was the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey.
RogerN
Too_Many_Tools
May 25, 2012, 11:04:35 PM5/25/12
to
waiting on your answer about His Holy Thing.
Laugh..laugh..laugh...
TMT
linuxgal
May 25, 2012, 11:36:16 PM5/25/12
to
RogerN wrote:
> Then there are prophecies like in Daniel that specified how many days from
> the order to rebuild the temple until the messiah comes. They took the
> dates, from the best of their ability, of the decree to rebuild plus the
> number of days in Daniels prophecy, came up with a date. To the best they
> can date it, that was the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey.
Daniel was a classic "prophesy" written after the fact.
> Then there are prophecies like in Daniel that specified how many days from
> the order to rebuild the temple until the messiah comes. They took the
> dates, from the best of their ability, of the decree to rebuild plus the
> number of days in Daniels prophecy, came up with a date. To the best they
> can date it, that was the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey.
linuxgal
May 25, 2012, 11:42:20 PM5/25/12
to
RogerN wrote:
> Then there are prophecies like in Daniel that specified how many days from
> the order to rebuild the temple until the messiah comes. They took the
> dates, from the best of their ability, of the decree to rebuild plus the
> number of days in Daniels prophecy, came up with a date. To the best they
> can date it, that was the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey.
Seleucus I Nicator founded anempire centered in Asia Minor that ruled
> Then there are prophecies like in Daniel that specified how many days from
> the order to rebuild the temple until the messiah comes. They took the
> dates, from the best of their ability, of the decree to rebuild plus the
> number of days in Daniels prophecy, came up with a date. To the best they
> can date it, that was the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey.
the lands conquered by Alexander from Thrace to India. As the Ptolemies
weakened, Palestine gradually fell under the rule of this Selucid Dynasty.
At this time many Jews began to adopt the ways of the Greek gentiles who
dominated them. They tried to covered the marks of their circumcision,
and built gymnasiums, and no longer observed the ordinances of the
Mosaic Law. With some support of these secularized Jews, Antiochus IV
Ephiphanes declared Judaism abolished, and dedicated the temple in
Jerusalem to Zeus.
AFTER this took place, the author of the book of Daniel described these
events as to take place in the "future" and the book was put forth as
the four hundred year old vision of one "Daniel".
Martin Phipps
May 26, 2012, 12:13:59 AM5/26/12
to
On May 25, 3:22 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> "William December Starr" wrote in messagenews:jpoi42$fb3$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>
>
>
> >In article <Jr-dnYxw9IJe4SPSnZ2dnUVZ_u-dn...@earthlink.com>,
> "William December Starr" wrote in messagenews:jpoi42$fb3$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>
>
>
> >"RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> said:
>
> >> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true
> >> living God is the beginning of wisdom,
>
> >How do you propose to tell one from the other?
>
> >-- wds
>
> God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies come
> true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false prophets. Many
> prophecies from long before the time of Christ were fulfilled by Jesus.
Except that Jesus never existed.
>
> >> Belief in an imaginary god is of no value, belief in the true
> >> living God is the beginning of wisdom,
>
> >How do you propose to tell one from the other?
>
> >-- wds
>
> God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies come
> true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false prophets. Many
> prophecies from long before the time of Christ were fulfilled by Jesus.
Martin
Martin Phipps
May 26, 2012, 12:18:40 AM5/26/12
to
>
> But I suppose no intelligent design was needed, right?
"We created a new cell. It's alive. But we didn't create life from
> But I suppose no intelligent design was needed, right?
scratch.
We created. as all life on this planet is. out of a living cell."
Martin
Martin Phipps
May 26, 2012, 12:24:40 AM5/26/12
to
On May 25, 7:49 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
> "linuxgal" wrote in message
>
> news:ELmdnR0_P8DvoV3S...@giganews.com...
>
> >RogerN wrote:
>
> >> God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies
> >> come true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false
> >> prophets. Many prophecies from long before the time of Christ were
> >> fulfilled by Jesus.
>
> >That's a cool trick. Just when you pick up a rock and get ready to stone a
> >prophet for being false, he can say, "Wait! Everything I said will come
> >true in four hundred years. You'll see!"
>
> That's part of it, how can they know if it's a prophecy to be fulfilled
> hundreds of years in the future? The distant future prophecies had to be
> fulfilled in the near future, so they would know it was a true prophet, and
> the distant future. For example, most of the end time prophecies have been
> fulfilled in 70 AD by Nero.
Except that most of the gospels were written after 70 AD and that
> "linuxgal" wrote in message
>
> news:ELmdnR0_P8DvoV3S...@giganews.com...
>
> >RogerN wrote:
>
> >> God's method has always been very simple, the prophet who's prophecies
> >> come true are the real prophets, those who's do not are the false
> >> prophets. Many prophecies from long before the time of Christ were
> >> fulfilled by Jesus.
>
> >That's a cool trick. Just when you pick up a rock and get ready to stone a
> >prophet for being false, he can say, "Wait! Everything I said will come
> >true in four hundred years. You'll see!"
>
> That's part of it, how can they know if it's a prophecy to be fulfilled
> hundreds of years in the future? The distant future prophecies had to be
> fulfilled in the near future, so they would know it was a true prophet, and
> the distant future. For example, most of the end time prophecies have been
> fulfilled in 70 AD by Nero.
"prophesy" could easily have been added to a later draft anyway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel#Dating
Martin
Barry OGrady
May 26, 2012, 1:01:12 AM5/26/12
to
>Martin
rangerssuck
May 26, 2012, 1:04:04 AM5/26/12
to
seon
May 26, 2012, 4:02:32 AM5/26/12
to
"RogerN" wrote in message
news:cYOdncB1pc8zi13S...@earthlink.com...
"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
news:Jf2dnQYRudBnk13S...@giganews.com...
>
>On 5/24/2012 7:20 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
>> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to
>> be
>> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
>>
not- GROW UP!
ram...@truthonly.com.swordofbaal
May 26, 2012, 4:16:40 AM5/26/12
to
"RogerN" wrote in message
news:O_edne13wPFe2V3S...@earthlink.com...
> Then there are prophecies like in Daniel that specified how many days from
> the order to rebuild the temple until the messiah comes. They took the
> dates, from the best of their ability, of the decree to rebuild plus the
> number of days in Daniels prophecy, came up with a date. To the best they
> can date it, that was the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey.
born or when he died.
Gunner Asch
May 26, 2012, 4:38:06 AM5/26/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:52:55 +1000, Barry OGrady
<ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>Other research proves that many people who are obsessively,
>neurotically anti-bigot are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
>bigots.
We see this everyday on Usenet in the writings of Leftwingers and
Liberals.
Gunner
--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".
<ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>Other research proves that many people who are obsessively,
>neurotically anti-bigot are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
>bigots.
We see this everyday on Usenet in the writings of Leftwingers and
Liberals.
Gunner
--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".
Gunner Asch
May 26, 2012, 4:41:39 AM5/26/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> God says homosexuality is
>> wrong.
>
>Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
>god because you are mentally ill.
Prove he doesnt exist.
Atheism, just another faith based religious belief system.
Shrug
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> God says homosexuality is
>> wrong.
>
>Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
>god because you are mentally ill.
Prove he doesnt exist.
Atheism, just another faith based religious belief system.
Shrug
Barry OGrady
May 26, 2012, 5:31:38 AM5/26/12
to
On Sat, 26 May 2012 18:02:32 +1000, "seon" <seo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"RogerN" wrote in message
>news:cYOdncB1pc8zi13S...@earthlink.com...
>
>"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
>news:Jf2dnQYRudBnk13S...@giganews.com...
>>
>"RogerN" wrote in message
>news:cYOdncB1pc8zi13S...@earthlink.com...
>
>"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
>news:Jf2dnQYRudBnk13S...@giganews.com...
>>
>>On 24/5/2012 7:20 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
>>> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to
>>> be
>>> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
>>>
>Homosexuality is perfectly normal but believing in childish fairy tales is
>not- GROW UP!
Homosexuality is far from normal.
>>> What it is with gays? Not enough to simply be accepted, now they want to
>>> be
>>> celebrated, and encouraged? Sheesh, go back to the closet.
>>>
>Homosexuality is perfectly normal but believing in childish fairy tales is
>not- GROW UP!
Barry OGrady
May 26, 2012, 5:34:57 AM5/26/12
to
On Sat, 26 May 2012 01:41:39 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
><martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> God says homosexuality is
>>> wrong.
>>
>>Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
>>god because you are mentally ill.
>
>Prove he doesnt exist.
The state of the world proves no deity exists that is both
good and powerful.
>Atheism, just another faith based religious belief system.
With churches and a holy book!
>Shrug
Faith based religious systems are loony tunes.
>Gunner
wrote:
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
><martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> God says homosexuality is
>>> wrong.
>>
>>Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
>>god because you are mentally ill.
>
>Prove he doesnt exist.
good and powerful.
>Atheism, just another faith based religious belief system.
>Shrug
Faith based religious systems are loony tunes.
>Gunner
seon
May 26, 2012, 6:08:07 AM5/26/12
to
"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
news:dm81s7h98bm3c1p9u...@4ax.com...
fuckwit and stop believing in fairy tales. The Bible is a book of mythology
and your God doesn't exist, stop using myths as an excuse to hate others.
seon
May 26, 2012, 6:09:06 AM5/26/12
to
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news:ji51s75gntgqki7ip...@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:52:55 +1000, Barry OGrady
<ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>Other research proves that many people who are obsessively,
>neurotically anti-bigot are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
>bigots.
>We see this everyday on Usenet in the writings of Leftwingers and
>Liberals.
of the troll who started this thread.
William December Starr
May 26, 2012, 6:14:36 AM5/26/12
to
[ Note the "Followup-To" line, please. ]
In article <cYOdncB1pc8zi13S...@earthlink.com>,
is by definition bad.
-- wds
In article <cYOdncB1pc8zi13S...@earthlink.com>,
"RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> said:
> So true. I work with people I hear are gay, I don't even ask them
> because it doesn't matter to me. Some lefttards accuse me of
> hating gays just because I won't lie and say homosexuality is
> normal or other politically correct lies.
I suspect it's more because you claim that that which is not normal
> So true. I work with people I hear are gay, I don't even ask them
> because it doesn't matter to me. Some lefttards accuse me of
> hating gays just because I won't lie and say homosexuality is
> normal or other politically correct lies.
is by definition bad.
-- wds
seon
May 26, 2012, 6:19:34 AM5/26/12
to
"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
news:dm81s7h98bm3c1p9u...@4ax.com...
And until you prove your made up religion, homosexuality IS normal.
Martin Phipps
May 26, 2012, 6:14:13 AM5/26/12
to
On May 26, 4:41 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
>
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
>
> <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> God says homosexuality is
> >> wrong.
>
> >Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
> >god because you are mentally ill.
>
> Prove he doesnt exist.
Asked and answered.
> >> God says homosexuality is
> >> wrong.
>
> >Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
> >god because you are mentally ill.
>
> Prove he doesnt exist.
Martin
seon
May 26, 2012, 6:24:44 AM5/26/12
to
"William December Starr" wrote in message
Bible says homosexuality is an "Abomination", the Koran tells Muslims to
hate, religion is one fucked up mythology. The sad fact is there never
really was a Jesus, maybe a 1st century rabbi but that's far from the
mythological figure in the Bible.
Barry OGrady
May 26, 2012, 6:28:51 AM5/26/12
to
seon
May 26, 2012, 6:34:58 AM5/26/12
to
"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
seon
May 26, 2012, 6:36:21 AM5/26/12
to
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> God says homosexuality is
>> wrong.
>
>Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
>god because you are mentally ill.
Prove he doesnt exist.
Atheism, just another faith based religious belief system.
Shrug
The burden of proof is not on the unbelievers, the burden of proof is on
those making the claim and since there is no proof for any God or Goddess,
fairy or unicorn I choose not to believe in them.
Barry OGrady
May 26, 2012, 6:45:59 AM5/26/12
to
>I'm a nut job?
You are.
Barry OGrady
May 26, 2012, 6:50:55 AM5/26/12
to
On Sat, 26 May 2012 20:36:21 +1000, "seon" <seo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
>news:po51s7l5cna415dp8...@4ax.com...
>
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
><martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
It can't be both.
>"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
>news:po51s7l5cna415dp8...@4ax.com...
>
>On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
><martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> God says homosexuality is
>>> wrong.
>>Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
>>god because you are mentally ill.
>Prove he doesnt exist.
The state of the world proves no God exists that is both good
and powerful.
>Atheism, just another faith based religious belief system.
>
>Shrug
>
>----------------------------------
>
>The burden of proof is not on the unbelievers, the burden of proof is on
>those making the claim and since there is no proof for any God or Goddess,
>fairy or unicorn I choose not to believe in them.
system?
William December Starr
May 26, 2012, 6:51:16 AM5/26/12
to
In article <WdednfLnI9i4L13S...@westnet.com.au>,
that God does not exist, as opposed to merely saying that nobody
knows one way or the other. And speaking as an agnostic I kind of
wish they'd stop it, because it just gives ammo to combative (read
"asshole") godders and makes everybody who _isn't_ a godder look a
bit dumb via guilt-by-association.
-- wds
"seon" <seo...@gmail.com> said:
> The burden of proof is not on the unbelievers, the burden of proof
> is on those making the claim and since there is no proof for any
> God or Goddess, fairy or unicorn I choose not to believe in them.
As a bit of an aside though, a lot of atheists _do_ make the claim
> The burden of proof is not on the unbelievers, the burden of proof
> is on those making the claim and since there is no proof for any
> God or Goddess, fairy or unicorn I choose not to believe in them.
that God does not exist, as opposed to merely saying that nobody
knows one way or the other. And speaking as an agnostic I kind of
wish they'd stop it, because it just gives ammo to combative (read
"asshole") godders and makes everybody who _isn't_ a godder look a
bit dumb via guilt-by-association.
-- wds
Martin Phipps
May 26, 2012, 7:33:27 AM5/26/12
to
On May 26, 3:51 am, wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
> In article <WdednfLnI9i4L13SnZ2dnUVZ_qWdn...@westnet.com.au>,
Why pretend that an all powerful, omniscient and benevolent god that
both created the universe and listens to their prayers is at all
plausible let alone possible? Why would you want to give them any
credibility? They wish to believe that faith is something we lack
whereas in reality sanity is something they lack. An agnostic is an
atheist who lacks the balls to come out and tell religious people that
their beliefs are nonsense. Until you do they will just continue to
at you with the belief they haven't converted you yet.
Martin
> In article <WdednfLnI9i4L13SnZ2dnUVZ_qWdn...@westnet.com.au>,
both created the universe and listens to their prayers is at all
plausible let alone possible? Why would you want to give them any
credibility? They wish to believe that faith is something we lack
whereas in reality sanity is something they lack. An agnostic is an
atheist who lacks the balls to come out and tell religious people that
their beliefs are nonsense. Until you do they will just continue to
at you with the belief they haven't converted you yet.
Martin
William December Starr
May 26, 2012, 8:04:00 AM5/26/12
to
In article
<a72c4a68-e312-411c...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
omniscient and benevolent -- the existence of suffering proves that.
I will not say, though, that no deity exists which is all-powerful,
omniscient and a gold-plated asshole that only _looks_ benevolent to
moral imbeciles who've managed to convince themselves that any and
all suffering that it's caused is wholly the fault of its victims.
I don't have any reason to believe that such a deity _does_ exist
(though it certainly would explain a lot), but it's not a
disprovable claim.
-- wds
<a72c4a68-e312-411c...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
Martin Phipps <martin...@yahoo.com> said:
> Why pretend that an all powerful, omniscient and benevolent god
> that both created the universe and listens to their prayers is at
> all plausible let alone possible? Why would you want to give them
> any credibility? They wish to believe that faith is something we
> lack whereas in reality sanity is something they lack. An
> agnostic is an atheist who lacks the balls to come out and tell
> religious people that their beliefs are nonsense. Until you do
> they will just continue to at you with the belief they haven't
> converted you yet.
I'll certainly say that no deity exists which is all-powerful,
> Why pretend that an all powerful, omniscient and benevolent god
> that both created the universe and listens to their prayers is at
> all plausible let alone possible? Why would you want to give them
> any credibility? They wish to believe that faith is something we
> lack whereas in reality sanity is something they lack. An
> agnostic is an atheist who lacks the balls to come out and tell
> religious people that their beliefs are nonsense. Until you do
> they will just continue to at you with the belief they haven't
> converted you yet.
omniscient and benevolent -- the existence of suffering proves that.
I will not say, though, that no deity exists which is all-powerful,
omniscient and a gold-plated asshole that only _looks_ benevolent to
moral imbeciles who've managed to convince themselves that any and
all suffering that it's caused is wholly the fault of its victims.
I don't have any reason to believe that such a deity _does_ exist
(though it certainly would explain a lot), but it's not a
disprovable claim.
-- wds
Barry OGrady
May 26, 2012, 8:56:01 AM5/26/12
to
Also it is obvious no deity exists that is both good and powerful.
>Martin
linuxgal
May 26, 2012, 8:53:49 AM5/26/12
to
before the mid-20th Century and human civilization smells like a monkey
house.
Mitchell Holman
May 26, 2012, 9:17:39 AM5/26/12
to
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:ji51s75gntgqki7ip...@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:52:55 +1000, Barry OGrady
> <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>>
>>Other research proves that many people who are obsessively,
>>neurotically anti-bigot are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
>>bigots.
>
> We see this everyday on Usenet in the writings of Leftwingers and
> Liberals.
>
And in the bizarre blatherings of conservatives.
"Gay pornography is the reason people choose the gay
lifestyle or what I call the deathstyle. If we got rid
of that, homosexuality would be gone within a matter
of months. This is one of only a few things I see eye
to eye on with the Taliban."
Rick Santorum, March 27 2012
news:ji51s75gntgqki7ip...@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 12:52:55 +1000, Barry OGrady
> <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>>
>>Other research proves that many people who are obsessively,
>>neurotically anti-bigot are often themselves closeted, self-loathing
>>bigots.
>
> We see this everyday on Usenet in the writings of Leftwingers and
> Liberals.
>
"Gay pornography is the reason people choose the gay
lifestyle or what I call the deathstyle. If we got rid
of that, homosexuality would be gone within a matter
of months. This is one of only a few things I see eye
to eye on with the Taliban."
Rick Santorum, March 27 2012
suzeeq
May 26, 2012, 9:28:15 AM5/26/12
to
RogerN
May 26, 2012, 10:25:37 AM5/26/12
to
"seon" wrote in message
news:45ydnY_uw74aNl3S...@westnet.com.au...
<snip>
assertions of things you can't prove, then claim others are the ones doing
the hating? Are you retarded or what?
You're the one that is wrong. Mythology doesn't have evidence in history as
being anything other than mythology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_significant_to_the_Bible
http://www.christianpost.com/news/archeologist-assembling-worlds-largest-biblical-artifacts-museum-71417/
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/category/daily/biblical-artifacts/
http://www.wnccoins.com/0006.htm
Now show any evidence for the flying spaghetti monster that is not a lie
made up by atheists.
Others that once believed as you do and found out they, like you, were
wrong. The difference is they admitted it when they were wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_atheists_and_agnostics
RogerN
news:45ydnY_uw74aNl3S...@westnet.com.au...
<snip>
>The flying Spaghetti Monster is 100% spirit, 0 % proof. Grow up you
>childish fuckwit and stop believing in fairy tales. The Bible is a book of
>mythology and your God doesn't exist, stop using myths as an excuse to hate
>others.
>
You start off calling people "childish fuckwit" then make unfounded
>childish fuckwit and stop believing in fairy tales. The Bible is a book of
>mythology and your God doesn't exist, stop using myths as an excuse to hate
>others.
>
assertions of things you can't prove, then claim others are the ones doing
the hating? Are you retarded or what?
You're the one that is wrong. Mythology doesn't have evidence in history as
being anything other than mythology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_significant_to_the_Bible
http://www.christianpost.com/news/archeologist-assembling-worlds-largest-biblical-artifacts-museum-71417/
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/category/daily/biblical-artifacts/
http://www.wnccoins.com/0006.htm
Now show any evidence for the flying spaghetti monster that is not a lie
made up by atheists.
Others that once believed as you do and found out they, like you, were
wrong. The difference is they admitted it when they were wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_atheists_and_agnostics
RogerN
Tom Gardner
May 26, 2012, 10:26:24 AM5/26/12
to
On 5/26/2012 4:41 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
> <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> God says homosexuality is
>>> wrong.
>>
>> Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
>> god because you are mentally ill.
>
> Prove he doesnt exist.
>
> Atheism, just another faith based religious belief system.
>
> Shrug
>
> Gunner
We know that their god truly *DOES* exist! And their god has none of
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 01:34:47 -0700 (PDT), Martin Phipps
> <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> God says homosexuality is
>>> wrong.
>>
>> Your imaginary god does not exist. You only believe in your imaginary
>> god because you are mentally ill.
>
> Prove he doesnt exist.
>
> Atheism, just another faith based religious belief system.
>
> Shrug
>
> Gunner
those pesky morals and rules to follow. Actually, it must be great to
belong to any of the Holy Leftist denominations where each member is his
own god and can do as he likes; lots of instant gratification and no
downside. What's not to like? I don't blame them one little bit.
RogerN
May 26, 2012, 10:33:20 AM5/26/12
to
"seon" wrote in message
news:TvWdnSE0K8HxMl3S...@westnet.com.au...
<snip>
>
>You mean religion? Yep, religion teaches people to hate and be bigots. The
>Bible says homosexuality is an "Abomination", the Koran tells Muslims to
>hate, religion is one fucked up mythology. The sad fact is there never
>really was a Jesus, maybe a 1st century rabbi but that's far from the
>mythological figure in the Bible.
>
Sad fact is you were lied to about the sad facts.
>You mean religion? Yep, religion teaches people to hate and be bigots. The
>Bible says homosexuality is an "Abomination", the Koran tells Muslims to
>hate, religion is one fucked up mythology. The sad fact is there never
>really was a Jesus, maybe a 1st century rabbi but that's far from the
>mythological figure in the Bible.
>
Two non-Christians, that don't believe in Jesus, one an atheist that was
lied to, the other is a historian.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUQMJR2BP1w
RogerN
Tom Gardner
May 26, 2012, 10:44:02 AM5/26/12
to
laws of their governments. But, believers in God are not to be
persecuted anymore than non-believers. Why should believers *prove*
God's existence any more than non-believers *prove God's non-existence?
Humans aren't capable of either, the argument is moot.
RogerN
May 26, 2012, 10:47:49 AM5/26/12
to
"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
news:80f3b312-ec60-4f6c...@ki5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>On May 25, 4:48 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>>
><snip>
>> >Scientists can create life from scratch.
>
>"We created a new cell. It's alive. But we didn't create life from
>scratch.
>We created. as all life on this planet is. out of a living cell."
>
>Martin
They have been working for on this for 15 years, reverse engineered life,
used computers to write a "program", loaded the "program" in a cell provided
by nature, and the cell executes the program. It took 15 years of work by
intelligent scientists in a laboratory using chemicals, computers, reverse
engineering, and an existing cell to do what you believe happened by chance
WITHOUT scientists, laboratories, computers, cells to reverse engineer, and
an existing cell, or an intelligent designer?
RogerN
news:80f3b312-ec60-4f6c...@ki5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>On May 25, 4:48 pm, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>> "Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>>
><snip>
>> >Scientists can create life from scratch.
>
>"We created a new cell. It's alive. But we didn't create life from
>scratch.
>We created. as all life on this planet is. out of a living cell."
>
>Martin
They have been working for on this for 15 years, reverse engineered life,
used computers to write a "program", loaded the "program" in a cell provided
by nature, and the cell executes the program. It took 15 years of work by
intelligent scientists in a laboratory using chemicals, computers, reverse
engineering, and an existing cell to do what you believe happened by chance
WITHOUT scientists, laboratories, computers, cells to reverse engineer, and
an existing cell, or an intelligent designer?
RogerN
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages