I am male. And i am heterosexual.
I find male homosexual behaviour kind of ugly.
Perhaps that's a better explanation ?
PS:That is not related to homosexuality itself nor does it have an effect on me liking or not liking homosexual people.
Could be true ... it keeps you from all the things that cause pleasure and might be dangerous like motorbiking, walking the street ending up in a gang war and so on ;)
Interestingly there is a study that says: Praying for the sick can increase their illness.
For me immorality depends on the harm you do to others without their consent.
If you sit on the toilet all day long with a playboy magazine and "pinp your ride" then thats not immoral. It may be unhealthy but its not immoral.
Well IF you believe in creationism then frankly what you write here is exactly what you do: you ignore the great majority of scientists telling you that creationism is not backed up by science while evolution is.
Apart of that i indeed think that it is not a good idea to take what someone has...
I do have a problem with male homosexual behaviour.
I don't have problems with homosexuals though.
I don't know if you can understand that instantly :)
I guess he will put you in hell for aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall eternety.
A place filled with all other homosexuals.
So basically paradise for you.
A nice guy it seems. ;)
If i believe in a multiverse, then i believe that there are several universes.
If i believe in God then i believe in some "being" sending us rules and telling us what to do.
The first has no effect on me or on life.
The second has.
There is a wonderful example for this.
You see in the 20th century (especially in the 80s) in islamic countries the clergy was rather afraid of the younger people fleeing from religion as modern life seemed to be so much better and religion outdated.
So they launched a campaign with the goal to...
I had mixed feelings about that too.
Because he does not write in a standard that fits the science that he so much loves. On the other hand he clearly stated often enough that this was not his intention as pure science simply is a bit too much for most (not in the intellectual aspect but rather...
I take that bait.
If you would do me a favour....
Since you claim it to be at least in part science (something that for me is already an impossibility but lets leave that aside) i would like to hear from you the explanation of how it happened.
I mean the "sciencepart" obviously has to have an...
You don't. You can't reasonably say that.
You can reasonably say it wrong.
There are some (few) other reasons like for example personal problems or leaving another religion with basically similar ideas. Apart of that not much comes to mind.
There are many difference but that doesn't mean this...
Frankly Your last statement is one that matters.
I would rephrase it thou..
"Although it requires not understanding the theory to reject its fundamental premises."
If you understood them, then you wouldnt reject it.
The mere fact that you want to leave it to the scientists more or less is an...
What you believe to be a "fancy" is none for them.
What you believe to be God is a fancy for them.
What you claim to be the giver of explanations is a book made by man for them.
And what you call "explanation" is none for anybody.
I don't think not understanding one another is limited to one topic. If you said that one or the other had no knowledge that would be a different thing. But not understanding each other is (for me) a fundamental flaw in communication that spreads accross more than just one topic.
I know islam...
I am not sure what you mean here ...
Basically i don't give a cent on the argument of authority. I don't read what "Y" said, i read arguments and compare evidence. I don't care for all these conspiracy theories. There mere fact that there are hundrets of creationist books shows what to think of...