Satanism, and you.

[Swift]

Are you saying that people can decide to be gay?


Imagine some 12-year old kid waking up one morning, thinking to himself:

"Hmmmm, from now on I think I want to be gay."

Yes, homosexuality is a choice.

If you find that obsurd. I find it obsurd that one would regard animals as sacred and not adults.

 

[Grand Prix]

Yes, homosexuality is a choice.

If you find that obsurd. I find it obsurd that one would regard animals as sacred and not adults.

Of course I would prize a human over a pet.

Okay, so what do you think of people born with both male and female body parts then? Did they have a choice of having both female and male body structures when they were born?

 

[Swift]

Of course I would prize a human over a pet.

Okay, so what do you think of people born with both male and female body parts then? Did they have a choice of having both female and male body structures when they were born?

We've already been through this in the gay marriage thread.

 

[James2097]

Yes, homosexuality is a choice.

Frankly, no one would choose to be gay and thus be ridiculed and burnt at the stake.
You are wrong.

Bloody hell, even ancient greeks were more progressive in terms of accepting gays. You weren't a man unless you had victorious bum sex after the battle .

Gayness is not a choice, its not my opinion, its fact. The church has really pushed themselves into a really stupid corner with their position on this issue, not many people agree with the church on this here (Australia is pretty much in agreement the church is crazy, there are WAAY less hardcore christians here than in the states however).

Any finger pointing and demonising of perfectly respectable people is purely a problem with old fashioned religious ideas that have zero relevance to today's society. We've moved on from persecuting gays in Aus. I'm predicting it'll happen in America in about 30 years or so. 👍

 

[Saleen Man]

Are you saying that people can decide to be gay?


Imagine some 12-year old kid waking up one morning, thinking to himself:

"Hmmmm, from now on I think I want to be gay."

Did anyone read my posts on the last page? Please do, I want to hear what you people think.

 

[Swift]

Frankly, no one would choose to be gay and thus be ridiculed and burnt at the stake.
You are wrong.

Just like no one would CHOOSE christ and be burnt at the stake, eaten by lions or whatever. That argument has zero validation.

 

[TheCracker]

Just like no one would CHOOSE christ and be burnt at the stake, eaten by lions or whatever. That argument has zero validation.

So basically you're comparing the struggle that gay people are going through these days, to the struggle that early christians went through 2000 years ago?

So beliving in homosexuality is similar to beliving in christianity?

- i thought you were against homosexuals?

 

[Swift]

So basically you're comparing the struggle that gay people are going through these days, to the struggle that early christians went through 2000 years ago?

So beliving in homosexuality is similar to beliving in christianity?

- i thought you were against homosexuals?

He said no one would choose to be homosexual because it would bring persecution. That line of thought makes no sense. Christians know that they are going to be under persectution. And it wasn't just 2000 years ago either.

Anyway, what I'm saying is that just because people choose it doesn't mean they don't know the consequences of that choice.

OH, and I'm NOT against homosexuals. I'm against homosexuality. Just like I'm not against alcoholics but alcoholism.

 

[Flame-returns]

We need a gay on this thread, there should be about 50 in this forum why is there not a single one on ths thread???

I'm pretty sure Swift is wrong but I don't have anyone to back me up on this.

 

[PS]

no, God makes all people heterosexual. The sin of homosexuality is a choice like all other sin. Including the sin that I've commited.

Did you choose to be heterosexual?

Point proven.

 

[Swift]

Did you choose to be heterosexual?

Point proven.

No, it's NOT proven. Man, come on. YOu're not that dense. If God created all people, and then called homosexuality an abomination, how could he create gay people? See?!?!

Anyway, sin is sin. It's all equally ugly to God and I claim to be no better then anyone else. I simply have an understanding of God's grace and mercy that most on this board seem to not be interested in.

 

[Swift]

We need a gay on this thread, there should be about 50 in this forum why is there not a single one on ths thread???

I'm pretty sure Swift is wrong but I don't have anyone to back me up on this.

Check the gay marriage thread in THIS forum. You'll see their opinion on it very vividly.

 

[McLaren]

Satanism....man, when I or someone else told people they or I didn't believe in a religon, in high school, sooner or later, this is what we (and I was) classified as this.

Unfornately, people then didn't realize when I said I didn't worship anything, I meant I meant nothing....

Anyways, I was classified as person who did this, though I always thought people who did this were stupid. Then again, I thought alot of people were stupid in high school...and I was right sometimes.

 

[PS]

No, it's NOT proven. Man, come on. YOu're not that dense. If God created all people, and then called homosexuality an abomination, how could he create gay people? See?!?!

Anyway, sin is sin. It's all equally ugly to God and I claim to be no better then anyone else. I simply have an understanding of God's grace and mercy that most on this board seem to not be interested in.

Face it Swift, the bible isn't always right. You said that yourself. You also said sometimes you don't understand it.


Gays never chose to be gay, straits never chose to be strait. There may not be a proven gay gene (although some scientists have noticed similarities), or one that's been isolated, but there is definitely a biological factor that plays into it. Sexual orientation is not a result of the mind, it's a result of hormonal interraction.

 

[Kylehnat]

Satanism....man, when I or someone else told people they or I didn't believe in a religon, in high school, sooner or later, this is what we (and I was) classified as this.

I don't understand this either. I've been told by numerous people that I'm bad and I'll end up in hell for being an atheist.

The Simpsons can show us the way (as usual): "By rejecting God, [I've] tacitly accepted Satan."

I love their satirical skills

 

[Swift]

Face it Swift, the bible isn't always right. You said that yourself. You also said sometimes you don't understand it.


Gays never chose to be gay, straits never chose to be strait. There may not be a proven gay gene (although some scientists have noticed similarities), or one that's been isolated, but there is definitely a biological factor that plays into it. Sexual orientation is not a result of the mind, it's a result of hormonal interraction.

Just because I don't understand something doesn't make it wrong. There's plenty of things that you don't understand right now that aren't wrong, just beyond your current understanding.

Right, no proof at all for that except that you want to feel that eveyone has a choice. I go by a really old book and I'm just out of it. Amazing. The "If it feels good do it" attitude at its finest.

 

[McLaren]

I don't understand this either. I've been told by numerous people that I'm bad and I'll end up in hell for being an atheist.

The Simpsons can show us the way (as usual): "By rejecting God, [I've] tacitly accepted Satan."

I love their satirical skills

Those kind of people really tick me off when they say, "Your atheist, you're going to hell."

Obviously, stupid, if I don't believe in religons, why the **** are you telling me I'm going to hell?

It only shows how stupid these people are and don't really understand atheism.

 

[Grand Prix]

Swift: If I were to make people happy only because it made me happy, would I be selfish? For example, what if I only gave gifts to my family because I would sick with guilt if I didn't? Giving the presents to my family would be the only way to rid of my guilt, therefore would I be doing it only for my selfish needs?

 

[Swift]

Swift: If I were to make people happy only because it made me happy, would I be selfish? For example, what if I only gave gifts to my family because I would sick with guilt if I didn't? Giving the presents to my family would be the only way to rid of my guilt, therefore would I be doing it only for my selfish needs?

Yes, you would. Next question.

 

[PS]

Just because I don't understand something doesn't make it wrong. There's plenty of things that you don't understand right now that aren't wrong, just beyond your current understanding.

Right, no proof at all for that except that you want to feel that eveyone has a choice. I go by a really old book and I'm just out of it. Amazing. The "If it feels good do it" attitude at its finest.

Now that's just BS, and you know it. If it was just because "it felt good", one would assume they'd be doing it with girls too.

And I wasn't saying that because you don't understand it, it was wrong, I was saying you admitted to not understanding all of it and you might be wrong.

 

[PS]

Yes, you would. Next question.

WTF kind of logic is that? He enjoys helping (...or pleasuring...) and now it's selfish, only on the basis of his enjoyment?

So the Church really does like making people do things that they don't like.

Swift, man, you're really becomming quite difficult. I've seen some scary stuff come out of you the past day or so.

 

[Swift]

WTF kind of logic is that? He enjoys helping (...or pleasuring...) and now it's selfish, only on the basis of his enjoyment?

So the Church really does like making people do things that they don't like.

Swift, man, you're really becomming quite difficult. I've seen some scary stuff come out of you the past day or so.

He asked me if giving stuff to other people ONLY because it made him happy was selfish. It is. You should give things to others because they need it not just because it makes you feel good. I'm not saying that for 100% of the time. Like birthday presents for instance. But if the only thing that appeases your guilt is to get others presents, you're doing it for YOU not THEM. Hense, it's selfish. See?

 

[PS]

He asked me if giving stuff to other people ONLY because it made him happy was selfish. It is. YOu should give things to others because they need it. I'm not saying that for 100% of the time. Like birthday presents for instance. But if the only thing that appeases your guilt is to get others presents, you're doing it for YOU not THEM. Hense, it's selfish. See?

He only used guilt as an example, it applies to all forms of "giving for pleasure".

If you were to take great joy, and you're only doing it because you take great joy, would it be wrong to help the hurricane victims? Or donating to a homeless shelter?

How can it be wrong to do something benevolent if you're only doing it because it makes you feel good?

 

[Swift]

He only used guilt as an example, it applies to all forms of "giving for pleasure".

If you were to take great joy, and you're only doing it because you take great joy, would it be wrong to help the hurricane victims? Or donating to a homeless shelter?

How can it be wrong to do something benevolent if you're only doing it because it makes you feel good?

That's not how the question was stated. The question said if I do X only because is makes me feel good is that selfish. Well by definition yes. Just because you help others doesn't mean you don't have a selfish motive behind it.

Now, I give a lot. And I'm a big advocate of giving time and money to others. However, I don't do it so I can appease my conscience or to make me feel good. I do it because there is a need that goes beyond myself.

All those situations you stated are NEEDS that most likely go beyond my current needs. So I will and have given to such causes.

What Grand Prix was describing sounded more like Obsessive-Compuslive disorder to me.

Oh, sorry you find what I've been saying scary.

 

[PS]

That's not how the question was stated. The question said if I do X only because is makes me feel good is that selfish. Well by definition yes. Just because you help others doesn't mean you don't have a selfish motive behind it.

Now, I give a lot. And I'm a big advocate of giving time and money to others. However, I don't do it so I can appease my conscience or to make me feel good. I do it because there is a need that goes beyond myself.

I know what you're what you're doing, I get it all the time.

All those situations you stated are NEEDS that most likely go beyond my current needs. So I will and have given to such causes.

But would you have done it only because it made you feel good?

What Grand Prix was describing sounded more like Obsessive-Compuslive disorder to me.

I think it sounded more like some creepy fetish thing. >_<

But that's beside the point.

Oh, sorry you find what I've been saying scary.

I couldn't think of another word. Shocking, perhaps? Extreme? ...Strange? Illogical, even?

 

[Grand Prix]

So a doctor is a sinner if he takes pride in saving a patient, and a university professor is sinful if he feels glad he was able to help a student pass an exam?

 

[Swift]

So a doctor is a sinner if he takes pride in saving a patient, and a university professor is sinful if he feels glad he was able to help a student pass an exam?

No, and that's not what you said earlier. You said ONLY....

Of course it's fine for people to do their jobs and take pride in it. But if it is the only way to get anykind of peace of mind, then it's rather selfish. Wouldn't you say?

 

[Grand Prix]

No, and that's not what you said earlier. You said ONLY....

Of course it's fine for people to do their jobs and take pride in it. But if it is the only way to get anykind of peace of mind, then it's rather selfish. Wouldn't you say?

The first example was more theological. The second and third ones are more realist. Yes, I would say that if you did something only because it made you happy, you would be selfish. However, selfishness can be seen almost everywhere (in my case, at least). I drive the Lancia Stratos in GT4 because the sound of its engine makes me happy. I try to drive well in GT4 because I want to win. I listen to good music when I'm feeling down. I give X-mas presents to people because they expect me to.

Being happy, by my definition, is selfish. If you are happy you have it better off than sad people. Why don't you give away your happiness right now in an act of selfless-ness?

 

[PS]

The answer to it all is simple, really. Christianity is all about restraint, opression, and abstaining from everything that brings joy. It's gone way past discipline, it's just plain controlling now. And that's starting to shine through.


Satanism doesn't have that, because we all know those types of cultures create problems and someone will get pissed off some day and go on a killing spree.

 

[Swift]

The answer to it all is simple, really. Christianity is all about restraint, opression, and abstaining from everything that brings joy. It's gone way past discipline, it's just plain controlling now. And that's starting to shine through.

You are just about the most miseducated person I've ever seen post on these forums. Is Christianity about restraint. Yes, it actually took a good amount of restraint not to lash out at you and others for insulting America. Oppression, well that just shows that you don't understand the basic priniples of Christianity.

Abstaining from things that bring joy. If you're talking about drinking, drugs, sex outside of marriage and criminal acts I'll have to agree. If you're talking about rasing a family, playing sports, driving, fishing, hunting or the like then I'll strongly disagree.

What you don't seem to grasp is that when you're a christian, it's not about you. It's about Christ.

Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.

Mat 22:39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

That is what Christianity is about, loving God and loving people. That's not oppressive in the least. If you love people you won't violate their rights by taking their possesion or killing others for no reason. If you love others you give to them because you give. Not because if you don't you won't feel as good as if you did. Jesus himself said it's more blessed to give then to receive. So giving is a paramount issue in christianity.

So, can you show me how that's oppressive? I realize that there are some people that have taken these tenants and twisted them to fit their own agendas and plans. But how is what I was just talking about oppressive?