Rosalind wrote:

I've never killed anyone and the Qu'ran has no influence on that decision. It also plainly states to murder non-believers, as well as murder being wrong. So how do you decide which parts are correct?

As I've said, non believing leads to all bad deeds.

"Animals grow up in wild savage places and yet rarely kill their own kind. Its this incredible thing called a conscience. Yeah, we all have one. Even animals seem to display some form of conscience.

I ask the same questions I asked Ahmed, you claim its due to upbringing."
Humans are not animals. Also, a more real example than animals. Back in the old times before religion or anything, people used to grow up fighters, where killing is totaly normal to them. Where's their conscience?

1) Language is also part of upbringing. So why do young babies not grow up and learn to speak a foreign language as a native tongue. Say, how many fluent French speakers are born in your city?

I dont see what's this got to do with our topic ? I mean, language is not sexual orientation if that's what you mean.

2) Don't be so vague as to say 'its upbringing.' What about the upbringing causes someone to become a homosexual?

As Ahmed said, gender confusion, not having a proper sexual education by parents. I myself, when I reached a certain age, my father explained the whole process to me told me this is right and this is wrong..

3) If its a fault of the parents, then why are twins not identical in personality as well as appearance?

Again, you're talking about personality, to each his own personality which a parent cant help. I have two brothers , I'am the only one who listens to metal, and am stubborn like kids; it's who I am. But sexual orientation is the same in the 3 of us, as as our knowledge that drinking isnt right, drugs and such -specialy at this age where me and my older bro always hang out with friends. The basics in life I mean are solid due to upbringing.

4) If they are under threat of possible death (shown by the link given by Will), such a severe punishment demonstrating the attitudes towards homosexuals, why are there any in that country? How can it be a fault of upbringing if everything in their society is so heavily geared towards punishing it that nobody in their right mind would choose to go against their religion, country and suffer severe punishment/death as a consequence?

That's the point, even as in a strict society as mentioned, certain parents arent very good at raising their enfants up. Also, the rather more important reason, is sexual opression -which seems to be happening in a lot of Arab countries these days due to lack of proper parenting and absence of religious value. Meaning, teens get a strong sexual desire at a certain age, when it cant be fullfild due to the country -most people arent adultery commiting type- alot resort to homosexuality as an only escape to release sexual desires, sad, but true.

Quotage failure there o_O

Ok:

1) You claim it to be entirely due to upbringing. Language is also entirely due to upbringing. Therefore, logically one can expect about as many homosexuals in your society as people learning a foreign language as their native tongue. Both are defying what is 'right' as it were. So now i've explained its relevance, please answer my question?

2) Gender confusion? We're talking about gay people here, not transsexuals. Most people discover their orientation VERY early on. I'm talking 11-13 here. I didn't get "the talk" until I was perhaps 14-15. Also, this is perhaps a more interesting point, I wasn't taught right and wrong as it were. As a general I was taught to think for myself. More specifics though, what should be talked about? In case you aren't aware, everyone in this country receives compulsory sex education at the age of 12 in schools.

3) Ok, then following on that: if parents are bad parents for doing this, why is it that all siblings do not share the same sexual orientation, irrespective of what that might be.

4) "Good" is debatable with different definitions. I disagree that being told homosexuals will be killed and sent to hell is 'good,' nor being told definite right and wrong without mention of actual independent thought is 'good.' But moving on, you haven't really answered my question. This has nothing to do with parents but the society. The society punishes them for their misdeeds, the religion tells them it is wrong, so why would people become homosexual and still show loyalty to both their country and their faith? (In other regards ofc).

Also, religion shouldn't be a factor. Most of the world are atheist, yet most of the world aren't gay.
Another also, Will is still a virgin (sorry) but I doubt he'd very well resort to bumming one of his school friends. Got sexual desires? Get a damn tissue.

Killing is wrong according to the Quran, it clearly states that in a couple of places. The "kill the unbelievers" quotes are taken out of context here. Most of the things in the Quran are addressed to Muhammad, who used to lead the army of Muslims against the non-Muslims in war. That's where you're supposed to kill the unbelievers. Not senselessly killing any non-Muslims you find. Now that that's out of the way...

Thomas, you're asking for any specific things parents do which may effect sexual orientation. Well, I'll try. I read an article (I can find it if you want) about a boy, who at the age of 2 started showing interest in the opposite sex. He liked to dress in sparkly clothing and high heels. After watching a Disney movie, he demanded to be named Aurora after the girl in the movie. His parents, out of love, let that happen and called him Aurora from that day on. It turned out that the father also had gender identity disorder and was planning to have a sex change. Clearly, the parents here were responsible for how the child turned out to be.

Sure, gender confusion is certainly not the same as homosexuality. But I believe they are strongly linked. Will said that we can see the signs of homosexuality early on. And I agree. What signs might they be? Just like the kind of things Aurora showed when he was a kid. It is important that we stay in the boundaries of male-female that society has set for us, because that's when heterosexual love (key to reproduction) is possible.

EDIT: found the link, interesting read:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,998007-3,00.html

Ahmedeus wrote:

Killing is wrong according to the Quran, it clearly states that in a couple of places. The "kill the unbelievers" quotes are taken out of context here. Most of the things in the Quran are addressed to Muhammad, who used to lead the army of Muslims against the non-Muslims in war. That's where you're supposed to kill the unbelievers. Not senselessly killing any non-Muslims you find. Now that that's out of the way...

Thomas, you're asking for any specific things parents do which may effect sexual orientation. Well, I'll try. I read an article (I can find it if you want) about a boy, who at the age of 2 started showing interest in the opposite sex. He liked to dress in sparkly clothing and high heels. After watching a Disney movie, he demanded to be named Aurora after the girl in the movie. His parents, out of love, let that happen and called him Aurora from that day on. It turned out that the father also had gender identity disorder and was planning to have a sex change. Clearly, the parents here were responsible for how the child turned out to be.

Sure, gender confusion is certainly not the same as homosexuality. But I believe they are strongly linked. Will said that we can see the signs of homosexuality early on. And I agree. What signs might they be? Just like the kind of things Aurora showed when he was a kid. It is important that we stay in the boundaries of male-female that society has set for us, because that's when heterosexual love (key to reproduction) is possible.

EDIT: found the link, interesting read:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,998007-3,00.html

You're argument rests on one individual case of two bi-polar parents with an autistic child. Hardly a normal family to begin with. So a straight couple has a child who goes gaga for dresses. By blaming the father, you ignoring the convenient fact that he realised it after she did, AND assuming that the couple had talked explicitly about sex in front of them before the age of two. This dysfunctional family hardly explains the ~10% of people who are homosexual does it?

I love many of Hizaki and Sharon Den Adel's dresses. Does that make me gay now? Not to mention liking Disney films and wearing heels isn't that unusual if you've ever actually been around young children. They shouldn't have changed his name, but if you want to take as such, fine. Give me more evidence for my argument. By three - well before any education about sex - he was showing signs of being homosexual. So before any time to raise him BAM, gay. Thank you for agreeing that it couldn't possibly be the parenting

Oh unless your saying Disney should be banned for making kids gay, despite millions of kids everywhere watching their films with no effect in this manner. Basically, this example is related to a different case (and not homosexuality at all), about a family with a slew of psychological problems. Calling gender confusion twinned with homosexuality is like twinning 'sociopath' with a 'psychopath.' Just because they both have 'path' in the name doesn't mean they aren't completely different things.

Well to be fair psychopathy and sociopathy aren't completely different. They describe the same kind of behavior. They just assume different causes for that behavior.

Kamikaze wrote:

Well to be fair psychopathy and sociopathy aren't completely different. They describe the same kind of behavior. They just assume different causes for that behavior.

It was my understanding that a sociopath had difficulty in demonstrating empathy for another's situation, resulting in action of self-interest. A psychopath on the other hand is someone who yields satisfaction from anti-social behavior. They can both manifest in a similar way but are ultimately different psychological disorders, which was rather the comparison I was trying to make.

Technically neither exists right now. At least not in psychology. The way it was taught to me however is that sociopathy stems from negative social factors, whereas psychopathy stems mainly from biological ones. The current diagnosis is antisocial personality disorder, which describes similar behavior to the other two, but doesn't make any presumptions as to the cause.

Kamikaze wrote:

Technically neither exists right now. At least not in psychology. The way it was taught to me however is that sociopathy stems from negative social factors, whereas psychopathy stems mainly from biological ones. The current diagnosis is antisocial personality disorder, which describes similar behavior to the other two, but doesn't make any presumptions as to the cause.

Eh, catch-all term works quite well. There's meant to be a wide variety of causes for psychopathy anyway aren't there?

Bad analogy on my part then. My psychology knowledge is fairly limited - it sounds as though the difference between gender disorder and homosexuality is indeed greater than these two.

Ahmedeus wrote:

Sure, gender confusion is certainly not the same as homosexuality. But I believe they are strongly linked. Will said that we can see the signs of homosexuality early on. And I agree. What signs might they be? Just like the kind of things Aurora showed when he was a kid.

Gender identity and sexual orientation have nothing to do with each other. If they were you wouldn't see so many male-female transsexuals only attracted to women. In that case you brought up the kid simply felt like a girl, someone that young has no idea what sex is, this is case of transsexualism. Homosexuality doesn't manifest itself until puberty, when kids became sexually aware.

Rosalind wrote:

Quotage failure there o_O

Still cant get used to the quoting sysytem here. xD

Ok:

"1) You claim it to be entirely due to upbringing. Language is also entirely due to upbringing. Therefore, logically one can expect about as many homosexuals in your society as people learning a foreign language as their native tongue. Both are defying what is 'right' as it were. So now i've explained its relevance, please answer my question? "

Language is due to the environment the enfant is born in, not upbringing, I mean, if he was raised by parents who dont give a shit about him and basicaly dont talk to him, he would still speak their native language by only observing the surrounding people. And I decide what's correct according to my faith in god and my religion.

2) Gender confusion? We're talking about gay people here, not transsexuals. Most people discover their orientation VERY early on. I'm talking 11-13 here. I didn't get "the talk" until I was perhaps 14-15. Also, this is perhaps a more interesting point, I wasn't taught right and wrong as it were. As a general I was taught to think for myself. More specifics though, what should be talked about? In case you aren't aware, everyone in this country receives compulsory sex education at the age of 12 in schools.

Eh, at some situations, you cant think for yourself as a teen at that age. I once saw an episode of Seinfild I think or some comedy show at like 12 or 13, and the word gay was mentioned, I asked my parents what does that mean, they explained the whole term to me and told my why it's wrong and such, and it natural order of life to be attracted to women not men. Yeah, I know that people around Europe and America recieve that kind of education, but due to our nature and culture and religion here, it wouldnt be appropriate to show sex videos in classes.

3) Ok, then following on that: if parents are bad parents for doing this, why is it that all siblings do not share the same sexual orientation, irrespective of what that might be.

Simply, some think it over for themselved, and determine what's right and what's not. Not all people have the same degree of knowing good and bad.

4) "Good" is debatable with different definitions. I disagree that being told homosexuals will be killed and sent to hell is 'good,' nor being told definite right and wrong without mention of actual independent thought is 'good.' But moving on, you haven't really answered my question. This has nothing to do with parents but the society. The society punishes them for their misdeeds, the religion tells them it is wrong, so why would people become homosexual and still show loyalty to both their country and their faith? (In other regards ofc).

True. It's like disagreeing to being told that murderers would be killed and sent to hell- again not comparing both deeds, just making a point. Actually, Qu'ran is probably the most religion the urges us to think for ourselves, everything that is said is wrong in the Qu'ran is also mentioned why it's wrong. I dare you to find me a faithful Muslim that is homosexual and pracitces his teaching regularly, it just cant be. Society and god punished them maybe, but parent's carelessness is mainly responsible for that.

Also, religion shouldn't be a factor. Most of the world are atheist, yet most of the world aren't gay.
Another also, Will is still a virgin (sorry) but I doubt he'd very well resort to bumming one of his school friends. Got sexual desires? Get a damn tissue.

That's the whole point of this debate, when you embrace a religion -specialy Islam- it should be a factor of all aspects of life, Qu'ran has answered all questions a muslim could ask so we can follow it's leading and it organize our lives, why else would it be a religion if it didnt organize EVERY aspect of life ?
That's exactly the point, if he wanted to, he could easily do due to the absence of sexual boundaries in western societies, it's not abnormal for teens to have sex before marriage out there if I'am not mistaken, also the sight of half naked women is a usual meh to you. But in the Eastern world, you cant have sex before marriage, and in some -overly- strict societies, you cant watch tv or watch music videos where women are shown not in veil, hence the sexual opression some suffer from.

Ahmedeus wrote:

I never said anything about sin. Till now, I have made all my points about homosexuality without mention of God. You're assuming I believe that homosexuality is wrong BECAUSE my religion says so. Regardless of what my religion says, I will still believe that it is wrong unless proved otherwise.

I don't care if your friends are sinners or not. I don't care if they are honest or dishonest. Because even they might not fully know if they were conditioned to be that way or if they were born with it. They are unreliable because if someone says they are happy, you do not know their happiness. You only know about their happiness.

You know what the Bible says because other people told you what it says. Which, again means that you don't really know what it says.

I'm saying it's not a choice because that's very unlikely. I won't say impossible, because that hasn't been proven yet. But we do know that genes don't dictate behavior or sexual preference, they dictate your physical traits like height. There is no such thing as a "gay brain". That leaves us with either choice or mental conditioning.

It can happen if parents don't socialize their children well. A 2 year old may not know how to have sex, but as soon as they are born, they are either dressed in pink or blue, given either a doll or car. They are taught how they are supposed to behave as a male or female according to their society. Any slip ups by the parents during that time can cause gender confusion and homosexuality.

You are right, smoking is bad, and that is general knowledge. I started smoking when I was 13 to be cool and now I'm addicted. The point is, if you are doing something wrong, and you're aware of it, you try to change it. Regardless if it was forced upon you or you chose it. Besides, I never said anything about me being a perfect Muslim.

Religion of course has a part of it. The same reason that there are probably a larger ratio of more homophobic religious people to homophobic atheists. You don't need to mention it or even realise it do be true. Why else would you believe that it is wrong? There's no proof that it's not wrong just like there's no proof that murder is wrong. There's no black and white evidence with morals, only common sense, not sheepish following.

Rubbish. I've already said that I have a gay christian friend who frequently goes to church. You say he was conditioned? If he was brought up as christian for the beggining of his life surely he would be straight? I however was brought up in a completely open family. They've said repeatedly that they wouldn't care if I was gay at all and i've never been to church. Yet i'm not gay at all. Care to explain?

Also, you assume that I haven't read the bible or studied religion at all. Just try and forget that religious studies was compulsory for up until last year.

'I'm saying it's not a choice because that's very unlikely. I won't say impossible, because that hasn't been proven yet. But we do know that genes don't dictate behavior or sexual preference, they dictate your physical traits like height. There is no such thing as a "gay brain". That leaves us with either choice or mental conditioning.'

Genes do dictate behaviour! More scientific backing please Ahmed, you have none of it. A lot of what you and Mostafa are saying is completely false statements pulled out of the blue. There's huge amounts of evidence that behaviour can be determined by genes, yet you have no proof. Of course behaviour can also be linked to enviroment but yes there is proof that it is behavioural. Yes Ahmed, there is evidence that gay people have different brains that are determined before birth. I seriously suggest you do some research before so confidently proclaiming that these things are not true. That goes to both you and Mostafa.

It has nothing to do with how you're brought up. All boys my age when they were about three had action men and race cars and i've been good mates with my gay christian friend for a long long time so i've seen his house and his stuff. His brother is completely straight yet they were brought up in the same household. He plays rugby, he's a pretty tough guy actually, he has an obsession with football and has season tickets to Fulham. How is this gay behaviour? My brother wore and wears pink a lot of the time but trust me, i've caught him before nearly getting down to business. Everyone at puberty is 'confused', I wasn't for some reason (I was told it was a confusing and difficult time yet somehow experienced none of it, major anti-climax), it has nothing to do with sexuality. I've had moments of 'Am I gay?' but then quickly realised that if you're jizzing off to lesbian porn you probably aren't.

In the end religious people will make their own rules and try and relate it to whatever their laws are. Hardcore muslims believe that fighting for and dying for their god will make him happy but lighter muslims believe in peace yet both peace and violence are mentioned in all the holy books. Smoking is worse for your body than alcohol, do you believe they are both sins?

Rosalind wrote:

I've never killed anyone and the Qu'ran has no influence on that decision. It also plainly states to murder non-believers, as well as murder being wrong. So how do you decide which parts are correct?

Animals grow up in wild savage places and yet rarely kill their own kind. Its this incredible thing called a conscience. Yeah, we all have one. Even animals seem to display some form of conscience.

I ask the same questions I asked Ahmed, you claim its due to upbringing.

1) Language is also part of upbringing. So why do young babies not grow up and learn to speak a foreign language as a native tongue. Say, how many fluent French speakers are born in your city?

2) Don't be so vague as to say 'its upbringing.' What about the upbringing causes someone to become a homosexual?

3) If its a fault of the parents, then why are twins not identical in personality as well as appearance?

4) If they are under threat of possible death (shown by the link given by Will), such a severe punishment demonstrating the attitudes towards homosexuals, why are there any in that country? How can it be a fault of upbringing if everything in their society is so heavily geared towards punishing it that nobody in their right mind would choose to go against their religion, country and suffer severe punishment/death as a consequence?

I can't believe i'm actually bringing up a video game here but what the hell, it's explained pretty well in that.

In Assassin's creed (awesome game) you retrieve your ancestor's memories because they are passed down genetically. It's not far off that (or exactly the same). No you can't 'unlock' the memories but the instincts are passed on. How does an animal know that it has to drink water or it will die? It's just instinct passed along generations.

Rosalind wrote:

Quotage failure there o_O

Ok:

1) You claim it to be entirely due to upbringing. Language is also entirely due to upbringing. Therefore, logically one can expect about as many homosexuals in your society as people learning a foreign language as their native tongue. Both are defying what is 'right' as it were. So now i've explained its relevance, please answer my question?

2) Gender confusion? We're talking about gay people here, not transsexuals. Most people discover their orientation VERY early on. I'm talking 11-13 here. I didn't get "the talk" until I was perhaps 14-15. Also, this is perhaps a more interesting point, I wasn't taught right and wrong as it were. As a general I was taught to think for myself. More specifics though, what should be talked about? In case you aren't aware, everyone in this country receives compulsory sex education at the age of 12 in schools.

3) Ok, then following on that: if parents are bad parents for doing this, why is it that all siblings do not share the same sexual orientation, irrespective of what that might be.

4) "Good" is debatable with different definitions. I disagree that being told homosexuals will be killed and sent to hell is 'good,' nor being told definite right and wrong without mention of actual independent thought is 'good.' But moving on, you haven't really answered my question. This has nothing to do with parents but the society. The society punishes them for their misdeeds, the religion tells them it is wrong, so why would people become homosexual and still show loyalty to both their country and their faith? (In other regards ofc).

Also, religion shouldn't be a factor. Most of the world are atheist, yet most of the world aren't gay.
Another also, Will is still a virgin (sorry) but I doubt he'd very well resort to bumming one of his school friends. Got sexual desires? Get a damn tissue.

Long before mate, apparently I pulled a girl behind my shed when I was three years old. I was a fucking player at nursery, then I developed a concience . Of course that's just experimentation but I must have first knocked one off when I was 10-11.

Sorry for all the double/triple posts, it's hard to keep them all together.

Mostafa wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Quotage failure there o_O

Still cant get used to the quoting sysytem here. xD

Ok:

"1) You claim it to be entirely due to upbringing. Language is also entirely due to upbringing. Therefore, logically one can expect about as many homosexuals in your society as people learning a foreign language as their native tongue. Both are defying what is 'right' as it were. So now i've explained its relevance, please answer my question? "

Language is due to the environment the enfant is born in, not upbringing, I mean, if he was raised by parents who dont give a shit about him and basicaly dont talk to him, he would still speak their native language by only observing the surrounding people. And I decide what's correct according to my faith in god and my religion.

2) Gender confusion? We're talking about gay people here, not transsexuals. Most people discover their orientation VERY early on. I'm talking 11-13 here. I didn't get "the talk" until I was perhaps 14-15. Also, this is perhaps a more interesting point, I wasn't taught right and wrong as it were. As a general I was taught to think for myself. More specifics though, what should be talked about? In case you aren't aware, everyone in this country receives compulsory sex education at the age of 12 in schools.

Eh, at some situations, you cant think for yourself as a teen at that age. I once saw an episode of Seinfild I think or some comedy show at like 12 or 13, and the word gay was mentioned, I asked my parents what does that mean, they explained the whole term to me and told my why it's wrong and such, and it natural order of life to be attracted to women not men. Yeah, I know that people around Europe and America recieve that kind of education, but due to our nature and culture and religion here, it wouldnt be appropriate to show sex videos in classes.

3) Ok, then following on that: if parents are bad parents for doing this, why is it that all siblings do not share the same sexual orientation, irrespective of what that might be.

Simply, some think it over for themselved, and determine what's right and what's not. Not all people have the same degree of knowing good and bad.

4) "Good" is debatable with different definitions. I disagree that being told homosexuals will be killed and sent to hell is 'good,' nor being told definite right and wrong without mention of actual independent thought is 'good.' But moving on, you haven't really answered my question. This has nothing to do with parents but the society. The society punishes them for their misdeeds, the religion tells them it is wrong, so why would people become homosexual and still show loyalty to both their country and their faith? (In other regards ofc).

True. It's like disagreeing to being told that murderers would be killed and sent to hell- again not comparing both deeds, just making a point. Actually, Qu'ran is probably the most religion the urges us to think for ourselves, everything that is said is wrong in the Qu'ran is also mentioned why it's wrong. I dare you to find me a faithful Muslim that is homosexual and pracitces his teaching regularly, it just cant be. Society and god punished them maybe, but parent's carelessness is mainly responsible for that.

Also, religion shouldn't be a factor. Most of the world are atheist, yet most of the world aren't gay.
Another also, Will is still a virgin (sorry) but I doubt he'd very well resort to bumming one of his school friends. Got sexual desires? Get a damn tissue.

That's the whole point of this debate, when you embrace a religion -specialy Islam- it should be a factor of all aspects of life, Qu'ran has answered all questions a muslim could ask so we can follow it's leading and it organize our lives, why else would it be a religion if it didnt organize EVERY aspect of life ?
That's exactly the point, if he wanted to, he could easily do due to the absence of sexual boundaries in western societies, it's not abnormal for teens to have sex before marriage out there if I'am not mistaken, also the sight of half naked women is a usual meh to you. But in the Eastern world, you cant have sex before marriage, and in some -overly- strict societies, you cant watch tv or watch music videos where women are shown not in veil, hence the sexual opression some suffer from.

Rofl, I couldn't bum any of my school friends. While you may not think it, not all homosexuals are just lust maniacs. In the western world we are free to do pretty much whatever we want as long as it has no reprocussions to anyone else. That's essentially the moral fabric of our society. If we smoke then that's not a sin because it affects (unless you count second hand smoking) nobody but the smoker. If you murder than you are affecting many people and it's a serious no no. If I (hopefully) have sex this year I will not be sinning because no one is being negatively affected. of course the girl will love it, girls love my dick, they have to I feel bad instinctively if I hurt someone because i've upset that person, if I wack one off then I don't feel bad (just a little drowzy) because no one is affected.

Rosalind wrote:

Ziegenbartami wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Not to mention referring to the earth as flat, referring to man as the first creation of the earth, etc, etc).

Where in the Bible does God say the earth is flat?
Nor does it mention that man is the first creation of the earth (in fact, man's creation is one of the last things he does in the Creation story).

Of all the animals I meant. Yeah, light was first, and then planets yada yada. My point is that it contradicts every fossil ever discovered of pre-man existence, which is pretty much claiming everything in the natural history museum a hoax.

Looked up the flat thing, looks like I was wrong on that one. Still, lots of smaller inconsistencies to ponder.

Late in with this but...

According to the Bible, Earth is only 6000-7000 years old and people used to live for much longer, some over 900 years. Assuming this to be true, other species may have had much shorter lifespans than humans, so they died first and became fossilized first. Just because the fossil is older, does not mean the species is older. You need to consider all of the Christian creation story in relation to itself, not compare isolated parts directly to science, otherwise there is no way that it can hold up. I'm not saying you should believe it, but it isn't full of holes as you are suggesting.

Carbon dating is not as accurate as we are lead to believe. A science teacher told me loads of cases where age determining techniques have been found to be inaccurate:
A volcano was determined to be several million years old. It was later noticed that the volcano was not present on any maps more than about 100 years old, yet it was a rather distinct landmark. The scientists accepted that the volcano must be in fact very recently formed.
Large stalagmites and stalactites are thought to take thousands-millions of years to form, yet have been observed to form in only decades.
A whale corpse was once found buried in numerous layers of sediment, each layer shown to be formed at different times. The whale was positioned erect, balanced on its tail in such a manner that were not at least most of the layers of sediment formed at the same time, the whale would not have remained in such a position. Science has no answer for this, other than that the techniques used to determine the age of the layers are flawed.

Monkzum wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Quotage failure there o_O

Ok:

1) You claim it to be entirely due to upbringing. Language is also entirely due to upbringing. Therefore, logically one can expect about as many homosexuals in your society as people learning a foreign language as their native tongue. Both are defying what is 'right' as it were. So now i've explained its relevance, please answer my question?

2) Gender confusion? We're talking about gay people here, not transsexuals. Most people discover their orientation VERY early on. I'm talking 11-13 here. I didn't get "the talk" until I was perhaps 14-15. Also, this is perhaps a more interesting point, I wasn't taught right and wrong as it were. As a general I was taught to think for myself. More specifics though, what should be talked about? In case you aren't aware, everyone in this country receives compulsory sex education at the age of 12 in schools.

3) Ok, then following on that: if parents are bad parents for doing this, why is it that all siblings do not share the same sexual orientation, irrespective of what that might be.

4) "Good" is debatable with different definitions. I disagree that being told homosexuals will be killed and sent to hell is 'good,' nor being told definite right and wrong without mention of actual independent thought is 'good.' But moving on, you haven't really answered my question. This has nothing to do with parents but the society. The society punishes them for their misdeeds, the religion tells them it is wrong, so why would people become homosexual and still show loyalty to both their country and their faith? (In other regards ofc).

Also, religion shouldn't be a factor. Most of the world are atheist, yet most of the world aren't gay.
Another also, Will is still a virgin (sorry) but I doubt he'd very well resort to bumming one of his school friends. Got sexual desires? Get a damn tissue.

Long before mate, apparently I pulled a girl behind my shed when I was three years old. I was a fucking player at nursery, then I developed a concience . Of course that's just experimentation but I must have first knocked one off when I was 10-11.

Sorry for all the double/triple posts, it's hard to keep them all together.

Mostafa wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Quotage failure there o_O

Still cant get used to the quoting sysytem here. xD

Ok:

"1) You claim it to be entirely due to upbringing. Language is also entirely due to upbringing. Therefore, logically one can expect about as many homosexuals in your society as people learning a foreign language as their native tongue. Both are defying what is 'right' as it were. So now i've explained its relevance, please answer my question? "

Language is due to the environment the enfant is born in, not upbringing, I mean, if he was raised by parents who dont give a shit about him and basicaly dont talk to him, he would still speak their native language by only observing the surrounding people. And I decide what's correct according to my faith in god and my religion.

2) Gender confusion? We're talking about gay people here, not transsexuals. Most people discover their orientation VERY early on. I'm talking 11-13 here. I didn't get "the talk" until I was perhaps 14-15. Also, this is perhaps a more interesting point, I wasn't taught right and wrong as it were. As a general I was taught to think for myself. More specifics though, what should be talked about? In case you aren't aware, everyone in this country receives compulsory sex education at the age of 12 in schools.

Eh, at some situations, you cant think for yourself as a teen at that age. I once saw an episode of Seinfild I think or some comedy show at like 12 or 13, and the word gay was mentioned, I asked my parents what does that mean, they explained the whole term to me and told my why it's wrong and such, and it natural order of life to be attracted to women not men. Yeah, I know that people around Europe and America recieve that kind of education, but due to our nature and culture and religion here, it wouldnt be appropriate to show sex videos in classes.

3) Ok, then following on that: if parents are bad parents for doing this, why is it that all siblings do not share the same sexual orientation, irrespective of what that might be.

Simply, some think it over for themselved, and determine what's right and what's not. Not all people have the same degree of knowing good and bad.

4) "Good" is debatable with different definitions. I disagree that being told homosexuals will be killed and sent to hell is 'good,' nor being told definite right and wrong without mention of actual independent thought is 'good.' But moving on, you haven't really answered my question. This has nothing to do with parents but the society. The society punishes them for their misdeeds, the religion tells them it is wrong, so why would people become homosexual and still show loyalty to both their country and their faith? (In other regards ofc).

True. It's like disagreeing to being told that murderers would be killed and sent to hell- again not comparing both deeds, just making a point. Actually, Qu'ran is probably the most religion the urges us to think for ourselves, everything that is said is wrong in the Qu'ran is also mentioned why it's wrong. I dare you to find me a faithful Muslim that is homosexual and pracitces his teaching regularly, it just cant be. Society and god punished them maybe, but parent's carelessness is mainly responsible for that.

Also, religion shouldn't be a factor. Most of the world are atheist, yet most of the world aren't gay.
Another also, Will is still a virgin (sorry) but I doubt he'd very well resort to bumming one of his school friends. Got sexual desires? Get a damn tissue.

That's the whole point of this debate, when you embrace a religion -specialy Islam- it should be a factor of all aspects of life, Qu'ran has answered all questions a muslim could ask so we can follow it's leading and it organize our lives, why else would it be a religion if it didnt organize EVERY aspect of life ?
That's exactly the point, if he wanted to, he could easily do due to the absence of sexual boundaries in western societies, it's not abnormal for teens to have sex before marriage out there if I'am not mistaken, also the sight of half naked women is a usual meh to you. But in the Eastern world, you cant have sex before marriage, and in some -overly- strict societies, you cant watch tv or watch music videos where women are shown not in veil, hence the sexual opression some suffer from.

Rofl, I couldn't bum any of my school friends. While you may not think it, not all homosexuals are just lust maniacs. In the western world we are free to do pretty much whatever we want as long as it has no reprocussions to anyone else. That's essentially the moral fabric of our society. If we smoke then that's not a sin because it affects (unless you count second hand smoking) nobody but the smoker. If you murder than you are affecting many people and it's a serious no no. If I (hopefully) have sex this year I will not be sinning because no one is being negatively affected. of course the girl will love it, girls love my dick, they have to I feel bad instinctively if I hurt someone because i've upset that person, if I wack one off then I don't feel bad (just a little drowzy) because no one is affected.

Most religions consider knowingly causing yourself unnecessary harm to be a sin. Therefore, smoking could be considered a sin.

Neon_Knight_ wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Ziegenbartami wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Not to mention referring to the earth as flat, referring to man as the first creation of the earth, etc, etc).

Where in the Bible does God say the earth is flat?
Nor does it mention that man is the first creation of the earth (in fact, man's creation is one of the last things he does in the Creation story).

Of all the animals I meant. Yeah, light was first, and then planets yada yada. My point is that it contradicts every fossil ever discovered of pre-man existence, which is pretty much claiming everything in the natural history museum a hoax.

Looked up the flat thing, looks like I was wrong on that one. Still, lots of smaller inconsistencies to ponder.

Late in with this but...

According to the Bible, Earth is only 6000-7000 years old and people used to live for much longer, some over 900 years. Assuming this to be true, other species may have had much shorter lifespans than humans, so they died first and became fossilized first. Just because the fossil is older, does not mean the species is older. You need to consider all of the Christian creation story in relation to itself, not compare isolated parts directly to science, otherwise there is no way that it can hold up. I'm not saying you should believe it, but it isn't full of holes as you are suggesting.

Carbon dating is not as accurate as we are lead to believe. A science teacher told me loads of cases where age determining techniques have been found to be inaccurate:
A volcano was determined to be several million years old. It was later noticed that the volcano was not present on any maps more than about 100 years old, yet it was a rather distinct landmark. The scientists accepted that the volcano must be in fact very recently formed.
Large stalagmites and stalactites are thought to take thousands-millions of years to form, yet have been observed to form in only decades.
A whale corpse was once found buried in numerous layers of sediment, each layer shown to be formed at different times. The whale was positioned erect, balanced on its tail in such a manner that were not at least most of the layers of sediment formed at the same time, the whale would not have remained in such a position. Science has no answer for this, other than that the techniques used to determine the age of the layers are flawed.

Sorry but 40 million years (or whatever the hell it is) is a little different to 6000.

Monkzum wrote:

Neon_Knight_ wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Ziegenbartami wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Not to mention referring to the earth as flat, referring to man as the first creation of the earth, etc, etc).

Where in the Bible does God say the earth is flat?
Nor does it mention that man is the first creation of the earth (in fact, man's creation is one of the last things he does in the Creation story).

Of all the animals I meant. Yeah, light was first, and then planets yada yada. My point is that it contradicts every fossil ever discovered of pre-man existence, which is pretty much claiming everything in the natural history museum a hoax.

Looked up the flat thing, looks like I was wrong on that one. Still, lots of smaller inconsistencies to ponder.

Late in with this but...

According to the Bible, Earth is only 6000-7000 years old and people used to live for much longer, some over 900 years. Assuming this to be true, other species may have had much shorter lifespans than humans, so they died first and became fossilized first. Just because the fossil is older, does not mean the species is older. You need to consider all of the Christian creation story in relation to itself, not compare isolated parts directly to science, otherwise there is no way that it can hold up. I'm not saying you should believe it, but it isn't full of holes as you are suggesting.

Carbon dating is not as accurate as we are lead to believe. A science teacher told me loads of cases where age determining techniques have been found to be inaccurate:
A volcano was determined to be several million years old. It was later noticed that the volcano was not present on any maps more than about 100 years old, yet it was a rather distinct landmark. The scientists accepted that the volcano must be in fact very recently formed.
Large stalagmites and stalactites are thought to take thousands-millions of years to form, yet have been observed to form in only decades.
A whale corpse was once found buried in numerous layers of sediment, each layer shown to be formed at different times. The whale was positioned erect, balanced on its tail in such a manner that were not at least most of the layers of sediment formed at the same time, the whale would not have remained in such a position. Science has no answer for this, other than that the techniques used to determine the age of the layers are flawed.

Sorry but 40 million years (or whatever the hell it is) is a little different to 6000.

Very true. Millions of years is also very different to <100 years (volcano).
Where scientist got the ages from I really will never understand. Science is all about observation, yet when has a scientist observed a process occurring over millions of years? All scientists can do is compare things and attempt to determine which is oldest, not the actual age. Scientists have to make estimations based upon what they can observe, which means they must assume that the infinite variables have always been the same as they are at present. Yet scientists believe that the atmosphere and environment have changed dramatically over time. Temperature and atmospheric pressure have huge impact upon the rate of chemical reactions, and therefore upon the ageing process. It is believed that temperature fluctuates over time, between ice ages and global warming. Having never observed either event, how does a scientist make calculations based upon these variables?

Neon_Knight_ wrote:

Monkzum wrote:

Neon_Knight_ wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Ziegenbartami wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Not to mention referring to the earth as flat, referring to man as the first creation of the earth, etc, etc).

Where in the Bible does God say the earth is flat?
Nor does it mention that man is the first creation of the earth (in fact, man's creation is one of the last things he does in the Creation story).

Of all the animals I meant. Yeah, light was first, and then planets yada yada. My point is that it contradicts every fossil ever discovered of pre-man existence, which is pretty much claiming everything in the natural history museum a hoax.

Looked up the flat thing, looks like I was wrong on that one. Still, lots of smaller inconsistencies to ponder.

Late in with this but...

According to the Bible, Earth is only 6000-7000 years old and people used to live for much longer, some over 900 years. Assuming this to be true, other species may have had much shorter lifespans than humans, so they died first and became fossilized first. Just because the fossil is older, does not mean the species is older. You need to consider all of the Christian creation story in relation to itself, not compare isolated parts directly to science, otherwise there is no way that it can hold up. I'm not saying you should believe it, but it isn't full of holes as you are suggesting.

Carbon dating is not as accurate as we are lead to believe. A science teacher told me loads of cases where age determining techniques have been found to be inaccurate:
A volcano was determined to be several million years old. It was later noticed that the volcano was not present on any maps more than about 100 years old, yet it was a rather distinct landmark. The scientists accepted that the volcano must be in fact very recently formed.
Large stalagmites and stalactites are thought to take thousands-millions of years to form, yet have been observed to form in only decades.
A whale corpse was once found buried in numerous layers of sediment, each layer shown to be formed at different times. The whale was positioned erect, balanced on its tail in such a manner that were not at least most of the layers of sediment formed at the same time, the whale would not have remained in such a position. Science has no answer for this, other than that the techniques used to determine the age of the layers are flawed.

Sorry but 40 million years (or whatever the hell it is) is a little different to 6000.

Very true. Millions of years is also very different to <100 years (volcano).
Where scientist got the ages from I really will never understand. Science is all about observation, yet when has a scientist observed a process occurring over millions of years? All scientists can do is compare things and attempt to determine which is oldest, not the actual age. Scientists have to make estimations based upon what they can observe, which means they must assume that the infinite variables have always been the same as they are at present. Yet scientists believe that the atmosphere and environment have changed dramatically over time. Temperature and atmospheric pressure have huge impact upon the rate of chemical reactions, and therefore upon the ageing process. It is believed that temperature fluctuates over time, between ice ages and global warming. Having never observed either event, how does a scientist make calculations based upon these variables?

I don't know but the point is you're only pointing out anomolies. Scientists make mistakes but I guarentee you that 99.9% of the time they're accurate. I'm not entirely sure of what you're trying to get at here, are you seriously suggesting that the earth isn't millions of years old?

The answer is yes, God does exist....



There, I win.

Monkzum wrote:

I don't know but the point is you're only pointing out anomolies. Scientists make mistakes but I guarentee you that 99.9% of the time they're accurate. I'm not entirely sure of what you're trying to get at here, are you seriously suggesting that the earth isn't millions of years old?

Well to be fair the modern timeline of history relies heavily on the dating that Egyptologists do and over the years there have been major inconsistencies found in their research. However, whenever someone puts forth a different theory they are ruthlessly attacked by the academic world. Take for instance the case of the book Fingerprints of the Gods in it the authors perform a test on the Great Pyramid and find it to be much older than originally believed. They are told that the test must have been wrong so they perform it many more times, all giving the same result. At this point the academic world claims that the results are inconsequential since one of the authors does not have a PhD. and they are banned from doing any more research at the Great Pyramid. That doesn't sound like traditional science to me, but a means to prevent history from having to be re-written.

Bidley wrote:

The answer is yes, God does exist....



There, I win.

Who is that?

Hansi from Blind Guardian.

Kamikaze wrote:

Monkzum wrote:

I don't know but the point is you're only pointing out anomolies. Scientists make mistakes but I guarentee you that 99.9% of the time they're accurate. I'm not entirely sure of what you're trying to get at here, are you seriously suggesting that the earth isn't millions of years old?

Well to be fair the modern timeline of history relies heavily on the dating that Egyptologists do and over the years there have been major inconsistencies found in their research. However, whenever someone puts forth a different theory they are ruthlessly attacked by the academic world. Take for instance the case of the book Fingerprints of the Gods in it the authors perform a test on the Great Pyramid and find it to be much older than originally believed. They are told that the test must have been wrong so they perform it many more times, all giving the same result. At this point the academic world claims that the results are inconsequential since one of the authors does not have a PhD. and they are banned from doing any more research at the Great Pyramid. That doesn't sound like traditional science to me, but a means to prevent history from having to be re-written.

But such things don't even come close to disproving that the earth is millions of years old. Unless of course dinosaurs managed to evolve into birds in under 6000 years.

One must remember that the Bible and other books are written by Man. So, if the information contained within them is from a higher power one can assume that there will be certain things lost in translation. Not to mention that Jewish history was completely oral for centuries. Furthermore, the Old Testament wasn't written in all one sitting, but by many different people over hundreds of years, so if just one of them screws up it changes everything that comes after. There are plenty of places where errors can arise in the writing.

Also, while it's not exactly pertinent to what you said, I would like to direct your attention to the Ica Stones, which provide some compelling evidence regarding the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_Stones

Kamikaze wrote:

One must remember that the Bible and other books are written by Man. So, if the information contained within them is from a higher power one can assume that there will be certain things lost in translation. Not to mention that Jewish history was completely oral for centuries. Furthermore, the Old Testament wasn't written in all one sitting, but by many different people over hundreds of years, so if just one of them screws up it changes everything that comes after. There are plenty of places where errors can arise in the writing.

Also, while it's not exactly pertinent to what you said, I would like to direct your attention to the Ica Stones, which provide some compelling evidence regarding the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_Stones

Could you just clear up what you're actually trying to argue? It's a real pain the arse when you just start throwing random points at me with no real purpose.