|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
 Posted - 02/10/2006 : 22:59:16 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: A man and a women raising children was the design intent of the basic structure of society and civilization.
Bill, does it occur to you that you skew things against homosexuals? A generalized "man and woman" was not the design of natural selection. Study some anthropology, both biological and cultural. In the vast majority of human societies, children have been raised by whole extended families, and the genetic father often doesn't play any role in his child's upbringing (either because his wife has cheated on him and so he raises another man's child thinking it is his own - this is EXTREMELY COMMON - or he knocks a woman up and then the relationship with her ends - also EXTREMELY COMMON).
Natural selection doesn't intend anything. You obviously don't know the first thing about biology or evolution. Natural selection says that if something doesn't successfully procreate, it is cut out of the gene pool. You keep acting like gays are some sort of threat to the survival of the human species, but if they were, natural selection would eliminate them from the gene pool without humans doing a damn thing. What you are advocating is social Darwinism - which is the idea that humans should help natural selection along. That is the sort of thought that Nazis and advocates of eugenics ascribed to. It is not the job of human beings to consciously plot to maximize the human population. It is the job of human beings to go about our lives it whatever way we are compelled. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/10/2006 23:01:24 |
 |
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 06:50:44 [Permalink]
|
Bill is a fundmentalist. He just isn't man baby! enough to come out and state for the record what religious sectcult he belongs to. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 07:22:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Scott...
God intended beavers to have flat tails. I know this because beavers have flat tails.
You also know your god intended some people to have mates of their own gender. You know this because some people have mates of their own gender. You sure did come up with a simple way to solve your own problem there, Bill. 
You also know your god intended some people to have mates of their own gender. You know this because some people have mates of their own gender. You sure did come up with a simple way to solve your own problem there, Bill.
Yours is an easy one gee. Homosexuality is a sovereign act of the will committed by one or more consenting individuals. The beaver having a flat tail is a physical trait, and the beaver has no say in the matter, which is designed by the original creating agent, weather that be NS, or the deity take your pick, gee...
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 07:26:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Bill wrote: Even if you subscribe to the evolutionists worldview, when you look at the naked fact that man and women were designed to fit together and the result is offspring you must succumb to the fact that this was the natural way that was design intended to advance civilization, weather you subscribe to a deity or natural selection as that designer and intended. Ths would make a gay couple raising chilren unnatural or agaisnt design intent, whatever worldview you subscibe to.
Why that is wrong biologically: Homosexuality/bisexuality is far too prevalent to be a malfunction. I have stated in several posts that there are reasons why a flexible sexual orientation can be an adaptive, evolutionary advantage, and one of those reasons was that the gene perpetuates itself when the gay person helps their siblings raise children. It is a bit like being a drone bee. Drones never produce their own offspring, but their genes are still carried on because they are closely related to the bees that do participate in direct reproduction, and the drones help those relatives survive.
Why that is wrong philosophically: Well for one, we don't base the law or even morality on what is “natural”. Nature isn't always nice. It is often ruthless. Human beings often try to transcend nature and develop values defined by our own experience of life, not values that will merely maximize the size of the human population. Especially now that there are over 6 billion of us and many starving to death! And for two, there are plenty of indications that nature intends mothers to raise their own children. Kids up for adoption have been given up by their parents. Their situation is already “unnatural”, at least how you are defining what is and isn't natural. Any adoptive parenting is an “unnatural” situation. What difference does it make if the adoptive parents are gay, straight, or bi, as long as they take good care of the kid?
Please, consider the plight of the Lofton-Croteau family, and tell me that there is any justice in laws that forbid gays from adopting children. Here are two men who adopted kids that no one else would take (babies with HIV), but because Florida outlaws gays adopting, these men had to be foster parents. That worked out perfectly fine (since nobody was going to adopt a kid with HIV) until one of their sons suddenly, at the age of ten, tested negative for HIV (which sometimes happens). Now a child might be taken away from the only family he has ever known. A family that has loved him and raised him as their own child.
Seriously, Bill, how can you possibly defend that Florida law?
Filthy wrote: On the one hand, it doesn't seem natural; on the other, gay couples of both genders have successfully raised children origionally belonging to one or the other prior to divorce. So, I'll abstain on that one.
Oh, come on, filthy! Are you telling me that we should ever be basing laws on what seems natural (and seriously, what the hell does that even mean? That 4-5% of the population is unnatural?), despite the fact that there is ZERO EVIDENCE that gays make worse parents than straights? I think you are allowing your being uncomfortable with gay men to interfere with your reasoning.
Filthy wrote: On the one hand, it doesn't seem natural
Oh, come on, filthy! Are you telling me that we should ever be basing laws on what seems natural (and seriously, what the hell does that even mean?
(bill)I give Filthy credit here. When he thinks he is right he does not back down, but when he sees a red flag he does not just toss it aside and tow the party line. So while Filthy's intellect told him to read more “studies,” his gut told him that some |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 08:07:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Scott...
Yours is an easy one gee. Homosexuality is a sovereign act of the will committed by one or more consenting individuals. The beaver having a flat tail is a physical trait, and the beaver has no say in the matter, which is designed by the original creating agent, weather that be NS, or the deity take your pick, gee...
Yours is an easy one, Bill. Humans do things that your god doesn't want them to do. The will of man is obviously greater than the will of your god.
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 08:20:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Scott...
Yours is an easy one gee. Homosexuality is a sovereign act of the will committed by one or more consenting individuals. The beaver having a flat tail is a physical trait, and the beaver has no say in the matter, which is designed by the original creating agent, weather that be NS, or the deity take your pick, gee...
Yours is an easy one, Bill. Humans do things that your god doesn't want them to do. The will of man is obviously greater than the will of your god.
Yeah maybe? Or maybe God has given man freewill gee... Let's him do as he chooses wheather right or wrong. Without the ability to do so man is not a sovereign agent. It was God's intent that man be a sovereign agent. I know this gee because man is a soverign agent. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 08:24:51 [Permalink]
|
I still wanna know why you care so much about hot, naked men having sex, getting married and rising successful families... or women, for all what matters.
The deity you chose to follow also intended to have some people be born with both genders or neither gender, Bill? What should hermaphrodites do? Shall they mate only with hermaphrodites?
I'm just curious.
Edit: Just saw that hermaphrodite has been considered a pejorative term - but I prefer it to 'intersexual'. No harm done. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
| Edited by - Siberia on 02/11/2006 08:26:38 |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 08:26:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Scott...
Yeah maybe? Or maybe God has given man freewill gee... Let's him do as he chooses wheather right or wrong. Without the ability to do so man is not a sovereign agent. It was God's intent that man be a sovereign agent. I know this gee because man is a soverign agent.
And humans, those sovereign agents, by your god's will, sometimes choose mates of their own gender, according to your god's will.
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 08:38:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Scott...
Yeah maybe? Or maybe God has given man freewill gee... Let's him do as he chooses wheather right or wrong. Without the ability to do so man is not a sovereign agent. It was God's intent that man be a sovereign agent. I know this gee because man is a soverign agent.
And humans, those sovereign agents, by your god's will, sometimes choose mates of their own gender, according to your god's will.
Of coarse this would be against God's intent and unnatural, but God created man as a sovereign being with the ability to choose to do right and wrong, rather then making us robots will no freewill. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 11:55:52 [Permalink]
|
Bill.
Since homosexuality occurs at a pretty steady rate and is always the product of male and female conception, how can you say that it's unnatural? If homosexuality negatively impacted the survival of the species it would have been selected out. And if God doesn't want there to be gays, why did God design the equipment to keep producing gays at a steady rate? The evidence is good, based on physical differences in the brain, that homosexuality is not a matter of choice. And while some people would like to keep things simple and say that you are either male or female, physical differences suggest that what we are seeing are really more than two genders.
My brother and I came from the same parents. Lived in the same house. We went to the same schools and had many of the same teachers and friends. And yet he is gay and I'm not. My brother was born gay. And just as I was drawn to female sex partners he was drawn to males. And not once did he ask me when I made the decision be straight. He understood that it isn't a choice even when he was a kid. Being gay to him is as natural to him as being straight is to me.
Being a gay male does not make for an easy life in this culture. As a kid being gay subjects you to taunts by other kids for being a sissy or in these says, a fag. Or maybe a kid is not gay but somewhat effeminate, or a nerd or a geek and subjected to the same taunts suggesting that being gay is the worst thing a kid can be. (Some gays go undercover at that point to protect themselves. A few may eventually choose to become captain of the football team, even. What better way to fit in?) Later, they must deal with not getting the full benefits of equal protection under the law, because the asshole majority (or more and more so, an asshole minority that certain politicians must brownnose for votes while dictating a theocratic mindset) still think homosexuality is a choice, regardless of the evidence, which should include how difficult it is to be gay in this culture, that it is definitely not a choice.
And even the bible that the fundamentalists cite as proof of what God intended, God allows David, chosen by Him to do His bidding, to receive a pass.
quote:
1 Samuel 19:2
Jonathan ... delighted much in David.
quote:
2 Samuel 1:26
Very pleasant has thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of woman.
Oh well… Must protect us from all the other sodomites I guess.
Interestingly, there is only one verse in the bible that possibly pertains to female homosexuality. It seems that it's bad for woman to put on a man's clothing, Deuteronomy 22:5. Since even Christian fundamentalist women wear men's pants these days, I guess that particular abomination is not considered all that bad anymore. And since males seem to be doing most of the interpreting of what the bible is saying, and since male homosexuality is much more threatening to males than female homosexuality is, is it any wonder that even a strong fundamentalist Christian would give short shrift to the mortal dangers of being a lesbian? I'm not saying they don't consider it, but if you actually analyze the rhetoric, it would appear that their concentrating on male homosexuality is indeed homophobia and without much regard to what is in the bible, biblical citations not withstanding. Since the bible says so many things, almost any interpretation of it is bound to lead one into some sort of quagmire.
Bill, all your protestations about what is natural are ridiculous. If it occurs in the natural world it is natural.
Huma |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 14:13:26 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: Homosexuality is a sovereign act of the will committed by one or more consenting individuals. The beaver having a flat tail is a physical trait, and the beaver has no say in the matter, which is designed by the original creating agent, weather that be NS, or the deity take your pick, gee...
Twenty points for ignoring decades of psychological and biological research that overwhelming shows that having a homosexual or bisexual orientation is not a choice, it is a state of being.
Bill, that's ridiculous. You claim you are a straight man. Have you ever been attracted to other men? Not have sex with, attracted to. If not, you are straight. If so, you are at least bi.
I am a straight woman. I know this because though I've admitted that certain women are beautiful, I have never desired to engage in sexual acts with them. I've never had a crush on a woman. But the attraction I've felt toward certain men has often been so powerful it is dizzying. The feeling of love I have for my husband is even stronger. The reason I am so in favor of gay rights is because the thought of being not allowed to fully and freely live out my feelings of love and passion for other people who would return those feelings just horrified me. And that is exactly what society has done to homosexuals. Thankfully, we have been slowly but steadily remedying that injustice.
I recently officiated a sort of Romeo and Juliet wedding – where the parents disapproved of the union because of religious and race differences. Most people would agree that two young people in love not being able to celebrate their union with their family is tragic. During the reception, most everyone gave a little talk about the couple. The last person to give a talk was a woman, who broke into tears. She told of how she felt like she could relate to the married couple's pain of celebrating without their family because she had been dating another woman for 3 years. Bill, do you think this woman wanted to be in so much pain? Do you think she wanted to be looked at so differently by her own parents that she clearly loved? OF course not! Just like she didn't choose to fall in love with another woman, the married couple didn't choose to fall in love with someone their parents wouldn't approve of. The only choice is whether to stick with love despite adversary, or to fall into the shadows of loneliness, frustration, and despair.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 14:16:28 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: I give Filthy credit here. When he thinks he is right he does not back down, but when he sees a red flag he does not just toss it aside and tow the party line. So while Filthy's intellect told him to read more “studies,” his gut told him that something did not seem right here? (unnatural) Go with your gut Filthy.
Yeah, Filthy. Go with your gut. Not your brain or nothin'.
Bill, I've been in favor of gay rights ever since I was 12 and first heard about what homosexuality was. My response at that age was to shrug and say “Oh, people do that too? OK.” Given Filthy's age and gender, it is hardly surprising that his gut makes him uncomfortable with homosexuality. My dad isn't totally comfortable with it either. But my 25-year-old brother has had a gay male roommate, currently works at a gay bar as a waiter, and has other gay friends. My brother isn't the least bit uncomfortable with gay men. (And my brother is totally straight.) That's because my brother grew up in a different environment. Filthy's feelings say nothing about the natural condition of homosexuality, only about his social environment.
How telling it is that so many men are “uncomfortable” with male homosexuality, but they are just fine with lesbianism.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/11/2006 14:16:47 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 14:26:36 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: Man and women in hetero relationship raising children is the basic foundation of civilization and the intent of the creating agent, or the results of natural selection, take your pick.
So do you just pick and choose what responses you bother to read in this discussion? Man and woman raising children is NOT the basic foundation of civilization. The most common form of “marriage” in human history is polygamous – 1 man with multiple wives. Although there have even been societies where male children are raised by woman until they are 5 years old, and then raised by men, and then girl children are only raised by the women. There have also been cultures where children are raised by the mother and her family, and the fathers play no role after conception. The most common way of raising children has been for extended families to participate. In human history, maternal grandmothers have played a greater role in the upbringing of children than have the kids' own fathers! Jeez, Bill, if you are going to make such a claim, can you at least back it up with history!
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 14:28:11 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: Man and women in hetero relationship raising children is the basic foundation of civilization and the intent of the creating agent, or the results of natural selection, take your pick. Either way that makes it not only the main foundation of civilization, but the only foundation of civilization.
And once again you pick and choose what you will and won't respond to. NS has no “intent”.
two men raising a baby was not the original design intent of the creating agent, or the results of NS, and he was honest enough to say so. (emphasis mine.)
Actually, two men raising a baby and two women raising a baby is the result of natural selection. Anything that happens in nature is a result of natural selection, and women have and are raising babies and men have and are raising babies.
It was God's intent that man be a sovereign agent. I know this gee because man is a soverign agent.
If there is a God, it was God's intent that 4-5% of the human population have a homosexual orientation. I know this because 4-5% of the population has a homosexual orientation.
God created man as a sovereign being with the ability to choose to do right and wrong, rather then making us robots will no freewill.
Let's apply some logic to this Christian theological argument:
God has free will. (‘cause if he didn't, he'd be like a robot.)
God always does only good.
Therefore, God has a purely good nature.
Human beings have free will
Human beings sometimes do good and sometimes do bad.
Therefore, human beings do not have a purely good nature.
Why don't humans have a purely good nature so they have free will and always choose good, like God? Seems like a design flaw to me.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2006 : 16:45:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Oh, come on, filthy! Are you telling me that we should ever be basing laws on what seems natural (and seriously, what the hell does that even mean? That 4-5% of the population is unnatural?), despite the fact that there is ZERO EVIDENCE that gays make worse parents than straights? I think you are allowing your being uncomfortable with gay men to interfere with your reasoning.
Not at all. Perhaps I worded my statement poorly. I am a little unsure of it, is all. Actually, I believe that any home that is supportive and not abusive, and always works in the best interests of the child, is an acceptable one. Uncertain as I might be, I would rather see a child with a caring and stable, gay couple than one of the straight families that we read about all too often. And all too often, we read that the parents are super-Christians. I think that the real question is: how do you determine that a couple, gay, straight, or undecided, is a stable family unit, my own discomfort not withstanding?
Here's another for you, Bill, again using myself as an example: I was divorced in 1976 and never either remarried nor had any but the most casual of relationships with women. I didn't really have time for much of a steady love life because I had custody of my two very young daughters, and had a living to make. Now, they are getting their paybacks from their own children, and are doing quite well.
The question: As a single father who was forced to quit drinking for 17 years, was this a natural or perhaps a deity inspired family? And if so or if not, why?
Yes Dude, morels can be cultivated and spawn kits can be purchased. But as far as I know, they have never been successfully grown as commercial operation. As I am a little too lame to do a lot of running through the woods with a basket, but not too much so that I can't scratch around a shady garden, it seems ideal.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
