Why can't some people understand that Evolution is not Atheism.

[FearGod]

Do you understand the difference between sexual gender and sexual orientation?

And if not, you are really unqualified to speak towards biological evolution.

i like your avatar
Yes,i dont like to speak about evolution,cant you say.i already stopped.

 

[cablescavenger]

We know that human is either female and male.
but there are gays,which are an aberrant cases.

ok. Just so you know.

I find this pretty offensive, so I am going to report this to the forum.

I don't believe we should allow such rubbish to stay online and misrepresent the people here.

 

[FearGod]

ok. Just so you know.

I find this pretty offensive, so I am going to report this to the forum.

Being an idiot isn't big and it isn't clever. I don't believe we should allow such rubbish to stay online and misrepresent the people here.

it is up to me how can i see the gay as well as it is up to you how you can see them,
that is the free speech of discussing our opinions.

For me as a man i see that a man to sleep with a gay is offensive,that is just my opinion,
and the others may found it a normal thing,so what the problem here.

And what do you mean by saying being an idiot,be brave enough to speak obviously and directly.

 

[FearGod]

Aberrant Sexuality by Lambert Dolphin

Aberrant means straying from the right or normal (natural) way, or deviating from the usual or natural type. The word is from the Latin, ab + errare meaning "to wander, to go astray." For the purposes of our discussion, from a Biblical standpoint what is normal and natural is (1) that which is according to creation, and (2) that which is consistent with the revelation of truth as given to us by God in the Bible. In a fallen world, it is not safe to say that what is common or popular is "normal." A moral consensus by experts in society is invalid if it contradicts the Bible. But we can not take our guidelines from "mother nature" either. Violence is found in nature, and sexual perversion among some of the animals---but these are not features of the creation as God intended it from the beginning. Nature has become corrupted by evil as has man (Rom. 8:19-23). When the Apostle Paul speaks of sexual activity that is contrary to nature, he is referring to behavior that has departed from the Creator's intentions when He made us. (Note: The specific term "contrary to nature" occurs in Romans 1:26 referring to Lesbian conduct, and in the following verse to refer to male homosexual activity.)............

Reference : Aberrant Sexuality

aberrosexual
Noun.
1. One that is sexually aberrant or that behaves in a sexually unnatural, abnormal, or untypical way
2. (Sociology) a person whose sexual behavior deviates from what is considered to be acceptable
3. (Psychology) a person who engages in behavior, conduct or practices considered aberrant or that deviates from what is natural, normal or typical. Such as homosexualism, bisexualism, zoophilism, lesbianism, necrophilism, sadomasochism, voyeurism, fetichism, scopophilism, etc.
Reference : http://www.urbandictionary.com/thesaurus.php?term=aberrant

So it is not me who is saying aberrant,but many resources in the web are making such
explanation for the meaning of aberrosexual.

 

[beerisit]

Aberrant Sexuality by Lambert Dolphin

Aberrant means straying from the right or normal (natural) way, or deviating from the usual or natural type. The word is from the Latin, ab + errare meaning "to wander, to go astray." For the purposes of our discussion, from a Biblical standpoint what is normal and natural is (1) that which is according to creation, and (2) that which is consistent with the revelation of truth as given to us by God in the Bible. In a fallen world, it is not safe to say that what is common or popular is "normal." A moral consensus by experts in society is invalid if it contradicts the Bible. But we can not take our guidelines from "mother nature" either. Violence is found in nature, and sexual perversion among some of the animals---but these are not features of the creation as God intended it from the beginning. Nature has become corrupted by evil as has man (Rom. 8:19-23). When the Apostle Paul speaks of sexual activity that is contrary to nature, he is referring to behavior that has departed from the Creator's intentions when He made us. (Note: The specific term "contrary to nature" occurs in Romans 1:26 referring to Lesbian conduct, and in the following verse to refer to male homosexual activity.)............

Reference : Aberrant Sexuality

aberrosexual
Noun.
1. One that is sexually aberrant or that behaves in a sexually unnatural, abnormal, or untypical way
2. (Sociology) a person whose sexual behavior deviates from what is considered to be acceptable
3. (Psychology) a person who engages in behavior, conduct or practices considered aberrant or that deviates from what is natural, normal or typical. Such as homosexualism, bisexualism, zoophilism, lesbianism, necrophilism, sadomasochism, voyeurism, fetichism, scopophilism, etc.
Reference : Urban Thesaurus: aberrant

So it is not me who is saying aberrant,but many resources in the web are making such
explanation for the meaning of aberrosexual.

So being Muslim is aberrant behaviour then, because for 70% of the population it's not normal?

 

[FearGod]

So being Muslim is aberrant behaviour then, because for 70% of the population it's not normal?

if you want to see it as an aberrant,then whats the problem,i think people dont realize what
is the freedom of speech,you can regard islam as an aberrant,and i can regardr atheism
as an aberrant.you are free to think and the others are free to accept it or refuse it,
that is the beauty of freedom,i am really shocked that you are acting like Puritans.

Also saying aberrant is not an insult,gays are okey and they are lovely and one of my best friends was
a gay and he was able to be a man,we cant blame them because that is the effect of nature,i dont have a good
idea about evolution,so i dont know why they are increasing or not extincted,maybe such changes need millions of years.

 

[beerisit]

Well you are certainly entitled to your opinion trruth.

 

[FearGod]

Well you are certainly entitled to your opinion trruth.

great,thats it exactly,if i have an opinion,its only mine
i am not asking or forcing anybody to have a belief on it
thats what we call freedom of speech.

 

[RubyEyes]

great,thats it exactly,if i have an opinion,its only mine
i am not asking or forcing anybody to have a belief on it
thats what we call freedom of speech.

You're entitled to have an opinion about gays, certainly. But if you make claims about us, debaters here (gay and non-gay) can certainly oppose them.

For example, I oppose your view that there's male, female and then gays who are aberrant. I find it slightly offensive because you're not making a justification for the claim, and you seem to exclude me from the "male" category to which I belong. It's not something which bothers me, though; it's as if somebody claimed I was a pineapple. You're free to believe it but if you're debating expect to be asked for justification, and if you're wrong expect correction.

In fact, as it was stated, it's quite a lie. Homosexuality is present in the natural world, human and non-human, and it's perfectly normal and natural. Human sexuality is evidently not synonym with human reproduction, and you seem to have missed this in calling it "aberrant".

 

[FearGod]

You're entitled to have an opinion about gays, certainly. But if you make claims about us, debaters here (gay and non-gay) can certainly oppose them.

For example, I oppose your view that there's male, female and then gays who are aberrant. I find it slightly offensive because you're not making a justification for the claim, and you seem to exclude me from the "male" category to which I belong. It's not something which bothers me, though; it's as if somebody claimed I was a pineapple. You're free to believe it but if you're debating expect to be asked for justification, and if you're wrong expect correction.

In fact, as it was stated, it's quite a lie. Homosexuality is present in the natural world, human and non-human, and it's perfectly normal and natural. Human sexuality is evidently not synonym with human reproduction, and you seem to have missed this in calling it "aberrant".

you are right at this point,then its offensive to call them as gays,because we exclude
them from the men,i mean we can still call them guys or men,and its up to them how
they want to behave,why to change them from guys to gays,isnt offensive.

i dont know if i have a problem in understanding the english words that it makes
the man looks different than the gay whereas they should be the same.

i hope you can explain that to me

 

[fantome profane]

i hope you can explain that to me

Why don't you start a new thread for this garbage.

 

[RubyEyes]

you are right at this point,then its offensive to call them as gays,because we exclude
them from the men,i mean we can still call them guys or men,and its up to them how
they want to behave,why to change them from guys to gays,isnt offensive.

i dont know if i have a problen in understanding the english words that it makes
the man looks different than the gay whereas they should be the same.

i hope you can explain that to me

Not what I said. There's no problem in calling gays gays. I'm gay and I don't mind. Because gays are men too. There are gay men, hetero men, bisexual men, pansexual men, asexual men, etc. We are all men regardless of our orientation. Men is about our biological sex, in humans for example it's in the Y-chromosome.

My objection was with you saying "men, women and gay" as if it consituted a separate category, which doesn't happen.

 

[cablescavenger]

Aberrant Sexuality by Lambert Dolphin

Aberrant means straying from the right or normal (natural) way, or deviating from the usual or natural type. The word is from the Latin, ab + errare meaning "to wander, to go astray." For the purposes of our discussion, from a Biblical standpoint what is normal and natural is (1) that which is according to creation, and (2) that which is consistent with the revelation of truth as given to us by God in the Bible. In a fallen world, it is not safe to say that what is common or popular is "normal." A moral consensus by experts in society is invalid if it contradicts the Bible. But we can not take our guidelines from "mother nature" either. Violence is found in nature, and sexual perversion among some of the animals---but these are not features of the creation as God intended it from the beginning. Nature has become corrupted by evil as has man (Rom. 8:19-23). When the Apostle Paul speaks of sexual activity that is contrary to nature, he is referring to behavior that has departed from the Creator's intentions when He made us. (Note: The specific term "contrary to nature" occurs in Romans 1:26 referring to Lesbian conduct, and in the following verse to refer to male homosexual activity.)............

Reference : Aberrant Sexuality

aberrosexual
Noun.
1. One that is sexually aberrant or that behaves in a sexually unnatural, abnormal, or untypical way
2. (Sociology) a person whose sexual behavior deviates from what is considered to be acceptable
3. (Psychology) a person who engages in behavior, conduct or practices considered aberrant or that deviates from what is natural, normal or typical. Such as homosexualism, bisexualism, zoophilism, lesbianism, necrophilism, sadomasochism, voyeurism, fetichism, scopophilism, etc.
Reference : Urban Thesaurus: aberrant

So it is not me who is saying aberrant,but many resources in the web are making such
explanation for the meaning of aberrosexual.

So using the wording of a religious bigot and a dictionary that is a parody justifies the manner in which you marginalise people?

What will you do if your kid turns out to be gay?

 

[fantome profane]

Please, I am asking you guys to take this to another thread. It is not even slightly relevant here.

 

[tumbleweed41]

MOD POST

All posters need to stay on topic.
If a member wants to discuss the topic of sexuality and the merits of homosexuality, they need to start a new thread.


Further off topic posts may result in thread closure.



​

 

[RubyEyes]

Please, I am asking you guys to take this to another thread. It is not even slightly relevant here.

Yes, you are right.

Trruth, if you really want to discuss all of this I see no problem in continuing on another thread.

On the thread topic, I'm both a God believer and an evolutionist. As such, I see no inherent contradiction and I don't categorize evolutionists as atheists. It simply has nothing to do. I don't think people who are coherent with modern scientifical evidence can believe in strict creationism, theist or not.

It has never been a problem for me because I've been brought up as a Christian and in school I've been taught about Darwin and modern synthesis and that has never brought me any headache. How life diversifies has nothing to do with the Creator of the universe.

 

[fschmidt]

My last post in this thread was lost in the noise. I wrote an article that I think is relevant to this thread explaining why God is needed for positive human evolution. Evolution and the Old Testament actually support each other.

 

[secret2]

My last post in this thread was lost in the noise. I wrote an article that I think is relevant to this thread explaining why God is needed for positive human evolution. Evolution and the Old Testament actually support each other.

No your article didn't explain why God is needed for positive human evolution (what the heck is positive evolution anyways?). If anything it only shows that under some circumstances collective hallucination and/or gullibility provides survival benefits, which is a point that I think nobody here would disagree.

 

[fschmidt]

No your article didn't explain why God is needed for positive human evolution (what the heck is positive evolution anyways?). If anything it only shows that under some circumstances collective hallucination and/or gullibility provides survival benefits, which is a point that I think nobody here would disagree.

Let me guess, secret2. I bet you are a liberal atheist. If I am wrong then I will respond to your post. If I am right, then I know that meaningful discussion is not possible.

 

[secret2]

Let me guess, secret2. I bet you are a liberal atheist. If I am wrong then I will respond to your post. If I am right, then I know that meaningful discussion is not possible.

You're wrong, I'm a libertarian misotheist, although I don't see how that has any bearing on the topic.