'Gay' threats target Christians over same-sex 'marriage&#3

[M.Dancer]

Thank you for your lesson in etymology. Don't kid yourself though, it's not a lesson in logic or any physical law.

You shouldn't thank him. He's out to lunch as usual.

Etymology

The word sin derives from Old English synn, recorded in use as early as the 9th century.[1] The same root appears in several other Germanic languages, e.g. Old Norse synd, or German Sünde. There is presumably a Germanic root *sun(d)jō (literally "it is true").[2]

The Greek word hamartia (ἁμαρτία) is usually translated as sin in the New Testament. In Classical Greek, it means "to miss the mark" or "to miss the target" which was also used in Old English archery.[3] In Koine Greek, which was spoken in the time of the New Testament, however, this translation is not adequate.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin#Etymology

[GostHacked]

This is a perfect example of false logic.

How is it a perfect example of false logic?

So a person who changes their lifestyle is no longer themself? That's pretty bleak. You're essentially saying that a person has no reason or need to change. Sounds to me like you're the one who is condemning people, not me.

Change comes from within, and it has to be a willing change. No one can change them for them. This is what I am getting at. I am not condemning anyone here. I would not condemn a person to a lifestyle they know that is not for them. That inlcudes making them think they are straight. If a person is gay and is forced to me straight, then they will always ahve stress in their life, because they are not being true to themselves.

I know this will be a bad example but here goes .... I am agnostic/athiest. There is no way you can force me to beleive in a god. I cannot be put into that mold, I cannot be forced to beleive in a god. If you force me to, I won't think highly of you at all. So if you force me to beleive, then you are condemning me from living my life as I see fit. I live for myself and my family and friends.

Homosexuals are much more likely to commit suicide and engage in self-destructive behaviours

---Right... people who are led to believe they are homosexual end up engaging in high risk behaviour and are more likely to commit suicide.

Well show me the proof?

It is because people like you will never accept them for what they are. So when they try or forced to be something they are not, suicide can happen. That internal stress and struggle to be something you are not.

So they think they are gay simply because they feel "different"?

In a sense .. yes. They come to the realisation they are gay through discovery and growing up. This is what you don't understand. I think it comes down to being indoctrined into religion at a young age. Your beleifs had been forced upon you. You did not make up your own mind. And you seen to have a problem with that. You might have been forced and condemned to beleive in something that you actually don't beleive in.

How is a child supposed to understand sexual attraction, and that the fact that they feel "different" stems from the fact that they are homosexual rather than simply being overly sensitive to what their peers say?

Children don't understand it, but they do know something is different. So when they get older, they get more in tune with their selves and discover that they are gay. They just know they are different, but cannot really understand or define how they are different. This is why I say they end up discovering they are gay. Leave people to their own devices and everyone will be happy. And if it means that they condemn themselves, so be it. You cannot save them no matter what you do.

Some children find out about sex and sexuality at a young age. I found out about it when I was around 10. Got into my dad's magazine stash, this was before the Internet n all you know. I also knew where he stored the movies . I knew about sex at a young age, but the first time I actually had sex was when I was 18.

Kitcsh

Again, I am not unfamiliar with the concept of sin. I was raised in a catholic home, went to catholic school and church as a kid... I've even been baptised and had my first communion. It was only when I was about 16 or 17 that I decided for myself that I have faith in myself rather than in some god.

I had decided that as well. If I do not have faith in myself, how can I have faith in anything else?

[kengs333]

How is it a perfect example of false logic?

Figure it out for yourself.

Change comes from within, and it has to be a willing change. No one can change them for them. This is what I am getting at. I am not condemning anyone here. I would not condemn a person to a lifestyle they know that is not for them. That inlcudes making them think they are straight. If a person is gay and is forced to me straight, then they will always ahve stress in their life, because they are not being true to themselves.

What a complete load of bs.

I know this will be a bad example but here goes .... I am agnostic/athiest. There is no way you can force me to beleive in a god.

What if it was scientifically proven?

I cannot be put into that mold, I cannot be forced to beleive in a god. If you force me to, I won't think highly of you at all. So if you force me to beleive, then you are condemning me from living my life as I see fit. I live for myself and my family and friends.

Wow... you're such a free thinker... too bad everything your say, do, or think is the result of influences direct and indirect.

It is because people like you will never accept them for what they are. So when they try or forced to be something they are not, suicide can happen. That internal stress and struggle to be something you are not.

Nope. The vast majority of Canadians have been duped into believing that homosexuality is normal, and they are still much more likely to commit suicide.

This is what you don't understand. I think it comes down to being indoctrined into religion at a young age. Your beleifs had been forced upon you. You did not make up your own mind. And you seen to have a problem with that. You might have been forced and condemned to beleive in something that you actually don't beleive in.

So you're saying that my belief system is something that I have been "indoctrinated" at a young age? Are you sure I wasn't born this way?

Children don't understand it, but they do know something is different. So when they get older, they get more in tune with their selves and discover that they are gay. They just know they are different, but cannot really understand or define how they are different. This is why I say they end up discovering they are gay. Leave people to their own devices and everyone will be happy. And if it means that they condemn themselves, so be it. You cannot save them no matter what you do.

So how exactly do we go from some vague sense that they are "different" to being gay without some sort of influence into translating this into being gay? Being "different" could mean anything...

Some children find out about sex and sexuality at a young age. I found out about it when I was around 10. Got into my dad's magazine stash, this was before the Internet n all you know. I also knew where he stored the movies . I knew about sex at a young age, but the first time I actually had sex was when I was 18.

Kitcsh

I had decided that as well. If I do not have faith in myself, how can I have faith in anything else?

So what if you found out about sex from a gay relative; what if you had found your uncle's stash of gay porn mags and your uncle told you it was perfectly normal? What if that gay uncle was an important person in your life, and had much influence over your young mind?

[M.Dancer]

Figure it out for yourself.

He doesn't know but he thought it made him sound smart.

[charter.rights]

So what if you found out about sex from a gay relative; what if you had found your uncle's stash of gay porn mags and your uncle told you it was perfectly normal? What if that gay uncle was an important person in your life, and had much influence over your young mind?

Did it change YOU? I mean your daddy and uncle must had had some close relationships in Kingston penn. right?

[M.Dancer]

So you're saying that my belief system is something that I have been "indoctrinated" at a young age? Are you sure I wasn't born this way?

Keng is correct here. He very well have been born with a gullible disposition.

[GostHacked]

He doesn't know but he thought it made him sound smart.

You are correct, I have no idea how this is false logic, and if Keng333 is going to call me on it, at least do it properly. Asking me to figure it out for myself won't help, because in my view, it is not false logic. But thanks for responding.

Keng333

What if it was scientifically proven?

We have been waiting thousands of years to prove or disprove God through scientific means. So, I am not worried about your 'what if' scenario. And it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that God exists, I will tell you first and straight up I was wrong. Since I have no scientific evidence of that, I will continue to not support the mythical creature called God.

Wow... you're such a free thinker... too bad everything your say, do, or think is the result of influences direct and indirect.

Thanks for the compliment. Sure there are influences, but you still have to make up your mind, and it seems you are trying to actually prove my piont.

So you're saying that my belief system is something that I have been "indoctrinated" at a young age? Are you sure I wasn't born this way?

This is actually a good point. So, I ask the question, were you born that way? If so, had you tried to change it? If so, why?

[Kitchener]

Its funny the left has problems doing as it preaches.

Did I not get the mail-out ballot by which some guy on an unknown blog was elected Grand Representative of the Left?

Gosh, how about this? It's funny how the right all belong to the Klan!

Or maybe not. Maybe the guy from my link is just one single, solitary crapstain who happens to be a Republican precinct delegate. And maybe the blogger cited in the OP is just one angry dude blogging in the hours after a slender majority decided he could not marry the person he loves.

Doesn't make satisfying Outrage Porn for Alta4ever, but it has the virtue of not being obviously dumb.

[RainbowTolerance]

No, its just you we can't tolerate.

That's priceless.

Because I am comfortable in my skin and with my sexuality, I'm not going to harass churches and little old ladies. I'm not going to hate them just because they don't agree with me. What some of my brothers and sisters in the gay movement have done is hypocritical! We march with our banners saying "DOWN WITH HATE" on the one hand, then another banner sails through the air next to that one saying "BURN THE CHURCHES" We are guilty of the very same hate that we claim religious people spew! This makes our cause look ridiculous and further relegates us to the fringes of society. Wise up my comrades!

[RainbowTolerance]

I am a proud gay man who is very much for the right to marry my man. But I think what you California protesters did to that poor defenseless elderly woman, knocking her cross down and stomping on it is SICK. I am ashamed to call myself a gay man! Doing things like that DOESN'T help our cause. It just makes us look like BULLIES and it will only turn people against our cause. We have to return to CIVILITY, not BARBARISM!

[kengs333]

Keng is correct here. He very well have been born with a gullible disposition.

No, if that was the case then I would have joined the Canadian Forces...

[kengs333]

I am a proud gay man who is very much for the right to marry my man. But I think what you California protesters did to that poor defenseless elderly woman, knocking her cross down and stomping on it is SICK. I am ashamed to call myself a gay man! Doing things like that DOESN'T help our cause. It just makes us look like BULLIES and it will only turn people against our cause. We have to return to CIVILITY, not BARBARISM!

Funny you should mention that; we lived in a civil society before sexual deviants started trying to drag it down by forcing their lifestyles on the rest of us. Also, domestic violence is more prevelant in "same-sex" relationships; the use of violence and other means of coercion to push your agenda does not come as a surprise.

[kengs333]

We have been waiting thousands of years to prove or disprove God through scientific means. So, I am not worried about your 'what if' scenario. And it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that God exists, I will tell you first and straight up I was wrong. Since I have no scientific evidence of that, I will continue to not support the mythical creature called God.

Actually, the best that science can come up with is that everything started with a "Big Bang," in other words at some point everything that that now exists was in a way "created"... Hmmmm...

So you want God proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but you will accept the argument that humans evolved from apes in Africa based on few fossilized bone fragments. Riiiight... Your inability to understand the existance of God is not different than passively staring at a page in a book written in a language that you don't understand while sitting in a room that is completely without light. Why should I accept your judgement on God, then?

This is actually a good point. So, I ask the question, were you born that way? If so, had you tried to change it? If so, why?

Answering questions with questions is useless.

[charter.rights]

Actually, the best that science can come up with is that everything started with a "Big Bang," in other words at some point everything that that now exists was in a way "created"... Hmmmm...

So you want God proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but you will accept the argument that humans evolved from apes in Africa based on few fossilized bone fragments. Riiiight... Your inability to understand the existance of God is not different than passively staring at a page in a book written in a language that you don't understand while sitting in a room that is completely without light. Why should I accept your judgement on God, then?

Answering questions with questions is useless.

The existence of God cannot stand lone without proof. And if someone as Omnipotent and Omniscient as God could create the world, and all the creatures in it, including man, I'm sure he could offer a reasonable explanation so that even scientists could understand it. The theory of evolution could also be the explanation God laid out for us, given that Adam and Atom were the same thing.

Edited November 13, 2008 by charter.rights

[marksman]

That explains why homosexuality was known to exist among high ranking Nazis.

I'm not religious, but I think the word nicely encapsulates what bad behaviour is. Many people invoke God yet are not religious.

Canada has never engaged in the persecution of any religion, but I think has come closest with Christianity.

The only thing worth noting about your post is that you completely avoided any response that would back up your point of view. As others have pointed out you're so far incapable of showing how homosexuality is evil. That puts you on par with the crazy drunks you sometimes hear yelling from street corners. You can upgrade your status by trying to post something other than nazi comments or your opinions that you try to disguise as facts.

Funny you should mention that; we lived in a civil society before sexual deviants started trying to drag it down by forcing their lifestyles on the rest of us. Also, domestic violence is more prevelant in "same-sex" relationships; the use of violence and other means of coercion to push your agenda does not come as a surprise.

Prove domestic violence is more prevalent in homosexual relationships. I'm not expecting an actual answer from you given your posts in this topic.

[GostHacked]

Actually, the best that science can come up with is that everything started with a "Big Bang," in other words at some point everything that that now exists was in a way "created"... Hmmmm...

See: Large Hadron Collider from CERN. Looking for the 'God Particle' otherwise known as the graviton. They want to simulate the beginning with a small big bang of their own. This particle accelorator has been in the works for over 20 years. Brilliant scientists from around the world are at this facility.

You also may want to look into String Theory and the possibility of multiple dimensions.

So you want God proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but you will accept the argument that humans evolved from apes in Africa based on few fossilized bone fragments. Riiiight...

Well it may turn out to be a dead end in terms of evidence, but at least it is physical evidence we can test. There has been no physical proof of the existence of God.

Your inability to understand the existance of God is not different than passively staring at a page in a book written in a language that you don't understand while sitting in a room that is completely without light.

I would not call it an inability. And when I read something in another language, and don't know what it means, I ask for an interpreter. Once who understands the language. Why? because he learned the language. A language is crafted over time and is constanly evolving.

Why should I accept your judgement on God, then?

You should'nt. If God is something you beleive in... then great. Who am I to tell you different in the end? By the same not, why would you force me to beleive in a God I consider non-existant anyways?

Answering questions with questions is useless.

Only if you never intend to look for the answers.

[M.Dancer]

So you want God proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but you will accept the argument that humans evolved from apes in Africa based on few fossilized bone fragments. Riiiight...

Except humans didn't evolve from apes. Humans and apes evolved from the same proginitor...that why apes and man are cousins, not father son....so indeed I accept that Humans evolved..and so did apes.

[Kitch]

Actually, the best that science can come up with is that everything started with a "Big Bang," in other words at some point everything that that now exists was in a way "created"... Hmmmm...

So you want God proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but you will accept the argument that humans evolved from apes in Africa based on few fossilized bone fragments. Riiiight... Your inability to understand the existance of God is not different than passively staring at a page in a book written in a language that you don't understand while sitting in a room that is completely without light. Why should I accept your judgement on God, then?

Answering questions with questions is useless.

Whether or not a god exists cannot be answered using scientific means. In science there is no such thing as 'proof', only, as Karl Popper said, conjectures and refutations. What that means is that we can disprove scientific hypotheses, but cannot prove them to be true.

The 'god hypothesis' is not scientific because there is no experiment that could be conducted, that I'm aware of, that could refute it. That doesn't say anything about the likelihood that a god exists, only that it cannot be evaluated scientifically.

The notion that humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor (thanks M.Dancer for the correction on evolutionary concept) is not simply based on fossil records; it's based on genomic analyses. DNA sequences change at certain rates in different regions of a species and in different regions of their genome. We can use this information to construct phylogenetic trees that indicate ancestral relationships. From some of these studies, researches have SUPPORTED, not proved, the hypothesis that we are closely related to chimpanzees.

In fact, because we believe that all life evolved from a single common ancestor, a scientist hypothesised that for this to be true, ALL life should have some sequence of DNA in common. And you know what? They found it! If anyone is interested I can go back into my university notes and find the names of the people involved and the gene sequences. What I'm trying to say, though, is that there is strong evidence that humans and other primates evolved from a common ancestor.

Hey Keng,

What would this world look like if everyone who disagreed on some issue just decided to stop talking to each other?

[charter.rights]

Whether or not a god exists cannot be answered using scientific means. In science there is no such thing as 'proof', only, as Karl Popper said, conjectures and refutations. What that means is that we can disprove scientific hypotheses, but cannot prove them to be true.

The 'god hypothesis' is not scientific because there is no experiment that could be conducted, that I'm aware of, that could refute it. That doesn't say anything about the likelihood that a god exists, only that it cannot be evaluated scientifically.

The notion that humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor (thanks M.Dancer for the correction on evolutionary concept) is not simply based on fossil records; it's based on genomic analyses. DNA sequences change at certain rates in different regions of a species and in different regions of their genome. We can use this information to construct phylogenetic trees that indicate ancestral relationships. From some of these studies, researches have SUPPORTED, not proved, the hypothesis that we are closely related to chimpanzees.

In fact, because we believe that all life evolved from a single common ancestor, a scientist hypothesised that for this to be true, ALL life should have some sequence of DNA in common. And you know what? They found it! If anyone is interested I can go back into my university notes and find the names of the people involved and the gene sequences. What I'm trying to say, though, is that there is strong evidence that humans and other primates evolved from a common ancestor.

Hey Keng,

What would this world look like if everyone who disagreed on some issue just decided to stop talking to each other?

You are using circular reasoning here my chum.

"In science there is no such thing as 'proof....only, as Karl Popper said, conjectures and refutations."

This applies to DNA as well. So to suggest that DNA proves that the "conjectures and refutations" of evolution are real becasue DNA proves it, is actually circular. "A proof is a proof because it is a proof!"

DNA research also fits into its own theoretical category. What we have is 10s of bits out of billions of DNA being examined and decisions made as to the what the billions represent. While there are trends in DNA profiling they do not provide concrete proof of anything and with every certification of DNA genealogy comes a margin of error. There is still too much that is unknown about DNA to believe it is proof of anything - including ancestry.

So the best we can do in science is to examine the theory being proselytized and weigh it out against other science that may support or dismiss the theory.

Dont wait for Kengs333 to respond mind you because he isn't interested in discussion or even debate. He is only interested in breaking opposition to his myths so that he doesn't find himself questioning them and eventually dismissing them as we have. Its a classic textbook case of egoism /egotism contrasted against a lazy and socially depressed reality.

Edited November 15, 2008 by charter.rights

[Kitch]

You are using circular reasoning here my chum.

"In science there is no such thing as 'proof....only, as Karl Popper said, conjectures and refutations."

This applies to DNA as well. So to suggest that DNA proves that the "conjectures and refutations" of evolution are real becasue DNA proves it, is actually circular. "A proof is a proof because it is a proof!"

DNA research also fits into its own theoretical category. What we have is 10s of bits out of billions of DNA being examined and decisions made as to the what the billions represent. While there are trends in DNA profiling they do not provide concrete proof of anything and with every certification of DNA genealogy comes a margin of error. There is still too much that is unknown about DNA to believe it is proof of anything - including ancestry.

So the best we can do in science is to examine the theory being proselytized and weigh it out against other science that may support or dismiss the theory.

Dont wait for Kengs333 to respond mind you because he isn't interested in discussion or even debate. He is only interested in breaking opposition to his myths so that he doesn't find himself questioning them and eventually dismissing them as we have. Its a classic textbook case of egoism /egotism contrasted against a lazy and socially depressed reality.

While I appreciate your attempt, chum, you need to read more carefully. Not once did I say anything about 'proof' other than claiming that it does not exist in science.

I did not use an example of molecular evolution to support Karl Popper's definition of science, nor did I use any words that indicate that I think these theories have been proved to be true. Really, I was responding to two different points made by different people in my post. One, that the existence of a god can be 'proved' scientifically, and two, that the theory of evolution is solely based on a fossil record. All that I was doing with my DNA examples was showing that there is more EVIDENCE than just the fossil record SUPPORTING the THEORY.

Take note of the words that I used:

"The notion that humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor (thanks M.Dancer for the correction on evolutionary concept) is not simply based on fossil records; it's based on genomic analyses. DNA sequences change at certain rates in different regions of a species and in different regions of their genome. We can use this information to construct phylogenetic trees that indicate ancestral relationships. From some of these studies, researches [this was supposed to be researchers] have SUPPORTED, not proved, the hypothesis that we are closely related to chimpanzees.

In fact, because we believe that all life evolved from a single common ancestor, a scientist hypothesised that for this to be true, ALL life should have some sequence of DNA in common. And you know what? They found it! If anyone is interested I can go back into my university notes and find the names of the people involved and the gene sequences. What I'm trying to say, though, is that there is strong evidence that humans and other primates evolved from a common ancestor."

Really though, who KNOWS if DNA really even exists? Nobody. Nobody has seen it. All that we have is evidence, direct and indirect, that it exists. But it doesn't do us much good to not carry on any research because we don't KNOW. I mean, it SOUNDS like you're saying that there isn't any use in using any information that isn't based on an absolute truth. I'm confident that's not what you're saying, but that's how it sounds.

Besides, the research that I'm talking about, in terms of genomic studies, is based on layers and layers and layers of well supported theories. That doesn't indicate truth, but indicates likelihoods.

[kengs333]

See: Large Hadron Collider from CERN. Looking for the 'God Particle' otherwise known as the graviton. They want to simulate the beginning with a small big bang of their own. This particle accelorator has been in the works for over 20 years. Brilliant scientists from around the world are at this facility.

The most "brilliant" scientists are in the end mere mortals, with only a very small fraction of the knowledge and wisdom of God.

You also may want to look into String Theory and the possibility of multiple dimensions.

Someday perhaps...

Well it may turn out to be a dead end in terms of evidence, but at least it is physical evidence we can test. There has been no physical proof of the existence of God.

Ummm... it's all around you.

I would not call it an inability. And when I read something in another language, and don't know what it means, I ask for an interpreter. Once who understands the language. Why? because he learned the language. A language is crafted over time and is constanly evolving.

So how does asking someone to explain the meaning a of a word make you understand the true meaning of an entire book that you can't even read because you're sitting in the dark. Before you can even begin to read, you need to turn on the light...

You should'nt. If God is something you beleive in... then great. Who am I to tell you different in the end? By the same not, why would you force me to beleive in a God I consider non-existant anyways?

Only if you never intend to look for the answers.

I'm not forcing you to believe, I'm just suggesting that you recognize the truth. Just because you deny something exists, doesn't mean that it's not there.

[charter.rights]

The relative fact is that YOU don't exist. You are but a theory in your own mind. And the God you have created lies there in that same empty space of thought, free from observation; he is your secret God and not the universal God of Creation. He cannot be proven because It does not exist anywhere else but in your personal thoughts.

The God of All, the "Is" can be proven. However, you would have to give up your devilish thoughts; you personal vendettas and your racist hate that you try to keep hidden along with the image of your Anti-Christ in your mind. Your belief that your are powerful is what binds you to the Devil and makes you mortal and a sinner. Your ego is your savior and it will die along with you when your time comes.

You do not know the Truth. For if you did your presence would invite Peace, Righteousness and Love. Instead all you bring is discord, chaos and disharmony - all of which are clear signs that you are of the devil and not of the God of All. Your hate brings the dry dust of choking and your burning eyes destroy relationships. Your lust sickens children and your gluttony starves the poor.

When you give up all that you have stolen from others (though you like to claim they gave it to you) and when you humble yourself before the weakest of women - only then - will you begin to see what the real God of Love is all about. You are not a pacifist but are nothing but a wolf in sheep's clothing waiting to slaughter the lamb.

Jezebel is your mother.

[kengs333]

From what I've been seeing and reading, there have been a number of attacks against people and churches because of this issue. Interesting how that doesn't make the news, but two women trying to get attention about a dispute over a parking space in Oshawa does...

[Sir Bandelot]

See: Large Hadron Collider from CERN. Looking for the 'God Particle' otherwise known as the graviton. They want to simulate the beginning with a small big bang of their own. This particle accelorator has been in the works for over 20 years. Brilliant scientists from around the world are at this facility.

FYI the "God Particle" you're referring to is actually called the Higgs Boson.

[g_bambino]

I am a proud gay man who is very much for the right to marry my man. But I think what you California protesters did to that poor defenseless elderly woman, knocking her cross down and stomping on it is SICK. I am ashamed to call myself a gay man! Doing things like that DOESN'T help our cause. It just makes us look like BULLIES and it will only turn people against our cause. We have to return to CIVILITY, not BARBARISM!

I appreciate your ability to note and admit the hypocricy. However, it strikes me that once something is turned into a "cause", it will inevitably be met with an opposing "cause". As I've never been able to see the point of the push for same-sex marriage (equality doesn't cut it, as there's no such thing as equality in life anyway, and doesn't anyone see the irony in people who insist on being different demanding to be treated the same?), it starts to look to me like SSM was made a cause with the full knowledge that it would act as a catlyst for yet another battle in the war of ideologies, in the same vein as the Christian right attempting to thwart the adoption of children by same-sex couples. The funny thing is, while both sides goad the other, they each claim to be the ultimate bastion of acceptance and tolerance! Oh, there's so many double standards it seems the whole thing is folding in on itself!