Do you believe in God?

[DQuaN]

This guy is either a troll or, well, the AUP prevents me from saying what I really think of him.

I would put him on my ignore list if his nonsensical jibberish wasn't so hilarious!

 

[Carbonox]

And this debate originally started off so well...

 

[GBO Possum]

<snip>
A person who is straight like myself wouldn't believe homosexuality is fine.
<snip>

I "believe" nothing.

However, it is my opinion that "homosexuality is fine". And I'm straight.

Clearly, though, I am not "straight like you"! Bigotry is something that doesn't make me happy.

 

[Akmuq]

Until I see a Buck mounting another Buck, I'm not going to believe animals are gay.

Why so specific on the animal?

 

[orimarc]

In my opinion, if you like homosexuals, and you think it's ok to be homosexual, then you may be/may be considered a homosexual. A person who is straight like myself wouldn't believe homosexuality is fine. A person who is gay on the other hand...

I like race car drivers. I think it's ok to be race car driver. Does that make me a race car driver?

 

[Venny_]

No. I see the events of bible as just a guide to live life, not something that's actually happened.

 

[homeforsummer]

Why so specific on the animal?

He probably hunts them.

"Would you look at that... the majestic beauty of the (heterosexual, of course) natural world... its head would look great on my wall"

 

[DQuaN]

I have never seen a more appropriate time to use the Jackie Chan picture.

 

[BHRxRacer]

This guy is either a troll or, well, the AUP prevents me from saying what I really think of him.

I would put him on my ignore list if his nonsensical jibberish wasn't so hilarious!

I disagree with almost everything he said but why do you call him a troll? Is he doing it to spam and annoy people? If you don't like his opinion, argue.

Very strange behavior.

 

[GBO Possum]

No. I see the events of bible as just a guide to live life, not something that's actually happened.

There are probably better guides than this book.

For just one example, consider the way the bible deals with those second class humans called "women".

For more examples and analysis try http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/DarkBibleContents.htm

 

[DQuaN]

I disagree with almost everything he said but why do you call him a troll? Is he doing it to spam and annoy people? If you don't like his opinion, argue.

Very strange behavior.

Because there is no structure or logic to his argument. 75% of the site say homosexuality is fine so that means 75% of people here must be homo/atheist... wut.

 

[mistersafeway]

I disagree with almost everything he said but why do you call him a troll? Is he doing it to spam and annoy people? If you don't like his opinion, argue.

Very strange behavior.

Maybe you should have read after the word troll, the very next word is or. I think part of why people have been mentioning the possibility of this being trolling is because the alternative is that there really are still people who think like that, which is a horrible thought. Unfortunately, people do still think like that... it's almost enough to make me believe in The Bible, just so I can convince myself that Satan wrote it.

 

[BHRxRacer]

Because there is no structure or logic to his argument. 75% of the site say homosexuality is fine so that means 75% of people here must be homo/athiest... wut.

I'm not questioning the ridiculousness of his post. I'm just against the idea that anything you may find ridiculous = trolling. Some people believe in stupid ****. They don't share their opinion to annoy others, which is what trolling is.

Maybe you should have read after the word troll, the very next word is or. I think part of why people have been mentioning the possibility of this being trolling is because the alternative is that there really are still people who think like that, which is a horrible thought. Unfortunately, people do still think like that... it's almost enough to make me believe in The Bible, just so I can convince myself that Satan wrote it.

Maybe you're right but it's wrong to accuse someone of doing something they're not.



Anyway, is anyone interested to read what I believe in or am I going to get attacked from all directions as usual?

 

[DQuaN]

By all means.

However, if in our opinion your belief is bigoted and ancient, we wont attack you, but we will let you know that that's what we think.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Why so specific on the animal?

The real irony here is, he doesn't see God or anything of that sort directly yet believes in him because of a few people over centuries ago that wrote a book and a Pastor dictating it (which is fine). Yet you give the guy a few instances of documented scientific evidence of male on male animal action, and unless he sees it himself he wont believe it...

 

[TheCracker]

Anyway, is anyone interested to read what I believe in or am I going to get attacked from all directions as usual?

Depends on how ridiculous your views are.

 

[Akmuq]

The real irony here is, he doesn't see God or anything of that sort directly yet believes in him because of a few people over centuries ago that wrote a book and a Pastor dictating it (which is fine). Yet you give the guy a few instances of documented scientific evidence of male on male animal action, and unless he sees it himself he wont believe it...

Maybe he should follow his own advice and open his eyes.

 

[Spurgy 777]

Anyway, is anyone interested to read what I believe in or am I going to get attacked from all directions as usual?

Depends what you say

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Maybe he should follow his own advice and open his eyes.

Spiritual eyes?

 

[mistersafeway]

I'm not questioning the ridiculousness of his post. I'm just against the idea that anything you may find ridiculous = trolling. Some people believe in stupid ****. They don't share their opinion to annoy others, which is what trolling is.



Maybe you're right but it's wrong to accuse someone of doing something they're not.



Anyway, is anyone interested to read what I believe in or am I going to get attacked from all directions as usual?

Oh, like him accusing everyone who thinks homosexuals should have rights of being a homosexual? I guess you're right, that is wrong.

 

[BHRxRacer]

By all means.

However, if in our opinion your belief is bigoted and ancient, we wont attack you, but we will let you know that that's what we think.

I don't mind getting attacked. I live in the middle east, I'm used to being attacked for silly reasons What I mind is some of you people jumping to conclusions and filling any gaps. Or worse, calling me a troll.

Oh, like him accusing everyone who thinks homosexuals should have rights of being a homosexual? I guess you're right, that is wrong.

But two wrongs don't make a right, right?

 

[mistersafeway]

No, they don't, but his opinion is about 50 years out of date to most people. Hell, I've believed everybody has equal rights for nearly twenty years, and I'm 24. Say what you like about atheists/non theists, at least we're tolerant. And I don't think anybody was saying he's a troll seriously, more as a joke.

 

[LeMansAid]

Say what you like about atheists/non theists, at least we're tolerant.

How can you tell? The only thing the term atheist tells us is that a person does not believe in God/god/gods. The only thing non theist tells us is that a person actively disbelieves. Neither of those tell us anything at all about levels of tolerance.

 

[BHRxRacer]

No, they don't, but his opinion is about 50 years out of date to most people. Hell, I've believed everybody has equal rights for nearly twenty years, and I'm 24. Say what you like about atheists/non theists, at least we're tolerant. And I don't think anybody was saying he's a troll seriously, more as a joke.

And you prove your tolerance by not tolerating someone believing in god. Okay.

btw, look how old the belief "man can't fly" is now. I'm pretty sure 500 years ago people were using the same "If I can't prove/see it, it doesn't exist" logic. Look at all the planes now.

 

[Carbonox]

How can you tell? The only thing the term Atheist tells us is that a person does not believe in God/god/gods. The only thing Non Theist tells us is that a person actively disbelieves. Neither of those tell us anything at all about levels of tolerance.

Unlike organized religion, atheism has no pre-set moral code that gives them an excuse to be intolerant.

 

[DQuaN]

btw, look how old the belief "man can't fly" is now.

Brb. Gonna jump off my roof because apparently I can fly now...

 

[mistersafeway]

And you prove your tolerance by not tolerating someone believing in god. Okay.
btw, look how old the belief "man can't fly" is now. I'm pretty sure 500 years ago people were using the same "If I can't prove/see it, it doesn't exist" logic. Look at all the planes now.

And I said I don't tolerate someone believing in God where? I don't agree with people using religious belief as a reason to persecute others, whether based on said others religious beliefs or their personal lives. Apparently certain groups consider non-religious/homosexual people wide open for being considered evil just because we don't believe the same as them, so who's really intolerant?

 

[Imari]

I'm pretty sure 500 years ago people were using the same "If I can't prove/see it, it doesn't exist" logic. Look at all the planes now.

At the time, they were right. Man couldn't fly. The technology didn't exist.

Then planes were invented, and everyone who thought men couldn't fly said "Well, damn, we were wrong. Man can fly. Cool."

Is there some problem with this? That's exactly how every other thing in the known universe has been discovered. Either what someone thought was right, or what someone thought was wrong and they changed their mind when shown evidence of such.

 

[LeMansAid]

Unlike organized religion, atheism has no pre-set moral code that gives them an excuse to be intolerant.

I'm still not seeing how atheist equals tolerant, and that was what was said.

Suggesting that atheists have a monopoly on tolerance is about the same as religious people thinking they have a monopoly on morals.

 

[DQuaN]

At the time, they were right. Man couldn't fly. The technology didn't exist.

Then planes were invented, and everyone who thought men couldn't fly said "Well, damn, we were wrong. Man can fly. Cool."

Is there some problem with this? That's exactly how every other thing in the known universe has been discovered. Either what someone thought was right, or what someone thought was wrong and they changed their mind when shown evidence of such.

That's just it, man can't fly. Man can invent flying machines to carry them. But man can't fly.