I'm not running away from anything, you've proved everything in this thread that I wanted you to collectively.

SQ_Crazies wrote: I'm not running away from anything, you've proved everything in this thread that I wanted you to collectively.

Are you the new "Puppet Master"? lol

Stop pulling strings, dammit!!!

NNN wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: If you don't think that religion has messed up the world then I don't care to talk to you because you're brain washed.

If we were to go strictly by a body count, the two most evil rulers in history were Mao and Stalin; each is believed to have had upward of 50 million of their own people killed.

What religion were they? That's right: militant atheist. Stalin had more people killed in the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church alone than the combined body count of every Christian ruler in history, and he still had another 48 million or more to go in addition to that.

Stalin and Mao were both paranoid megalomaniacs who did everything they could to achieve and maintain their positions as the leaders of their respective countries. The personality traits that drove them to commit such heinous crimes while in power would have been just as evident had both been born and raised Christian or Jewish, Muslim or Hindu. The personality and psychological makeups of Mao and Stalin had far more to do with their actions than the fact that they were atheists.

3reppom wrote:

NNN wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: If you don't think that religion has messed up the world then I don't care to talk to you because you're brain washed.

If we were to go strictly by a body count, the two most evil rulers in history were Mao and Stalin; each is believed to have had upward of 50 million of their own people killed.

What religion were they? That's right: militant atheist. Stalin had more people killed in the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church alone than the combined body count of every Christian ruler in history, and he still had another 48 million or more to go in addition to that.

Stalin and Mao were both paranoid megalomaniacs who did everything they could to achieve and maintain their positions as the leaders of their respective countries. The personality traits that drove them to commit such heinous crimes while in power would have been just as evident had both been born and raised Christian or Jewish, Muslim or Hindu. The personality and psychological makeups of Mao and Stalin had far more to do with their actions than the fact that they were atheists.

This might make more sense if not for the fact that every communist leader in history (with the possible exceptions of Nagy, Kadar, and Gorbachev) has the blood of enormous numbers of innocent people on their hands. And there are plenty of paranoid megalomaniacs who have held power in non-communist countries who didn't resort to having all their enemies killed.

At some point, you have to look at the underlying ideology as being the basis for the behavior. Karl Marx was strongly anti-religion, and nearly every communist leader either grew up atheist or abandoned religion at an early age; again, Kadar and Nagy were the notable exceptions.

NNN wrote:

3reppom wrote:

NNN wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: If you don't think that religion has messed up the world then I don't care to talk to you because you're brain washed.

If we were to go strictly by a body count, the two most evil rulers in history were Mao and Stalin; each is believed to have had upward of 50 million of their own people killed.

What religion were they? That's right: militant atheist. Stalin had more people killed in the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church alone than the combined body count of every Christian ruler in history, and he still had another 48 million or more to go in addition to that.

Stalin and Mao were both paranoid megalomaniacs who did everything they could to achieve and maintain their positions as the leaders of their respective countries. The personality traits that drove them to commit such heinous crimes while in power would have been just as evident had both been born and raised Christian or Jewish, Muslim or Hindu. The personality and psychological makeups of Mao and Stalin had far more to do with their actions than the fact that they were atheists.

This might make more sense if not for the fact that every communist leader in history (with the possible exceptions of Nagy, Kadar, and Gorbachev) has the blood of enormous numbers of innocent people on their hands. And there are plenty of paranoid megalomaniacs who have held power in non-communist countries who didn't resort to having all their enemies killed.

At some point, you have to look at the underlying ideology as being the basis for the behavior. Karl Marx was strongly anti-religion, and nearly every communist leader either grew up atheist or abandoned religion at an early age; again, Kadar and Nagy were the notable exceptions.

I completely disagree about that point. The culpability of a given person's ideology for their behavior is minimal. An ideology is not a cause, but it can be put to use as a vehicle to affect change or revolution or whatever other buzzword that you choose to put in there by a person who wants the change to take place in the first place. That doesn't mean that the ideology itself is the source of the action. The person who employs the ideology to their own ends bears a much greater degree of responsibility for the end result than the ideology itself.

Use 9/11 as an example. 19 men developed a radically different idea of what Islam is and means and what their faith required of them. That ideology drove them to commit one of the most heinous acts of terrorism in the history of the United States. But the important question is does the entirety of Islam deserve the blame for what they did? Of course not, that ideology is not shared by the vast majority of the 1 billion Muslims on the planet, most of whom were as appalled by the act as the rest of the world was. It is very difficult to extrapolate the actions of individual men and place any degree of blame for those actions on their peers or people who shared similar beliefs.

Two men or women posses identical values systems, beliefs and ideas. Say that one of the men or woman employs those ideas and beliefs as the rational to commit murder. Does that make the second man or woman just as guilty as the first because they posses identical ideas, values and beliefs? Even though only one of them committed the act? How can you attach blame for the actions on the first onto the second who played no part in the act at all?

NNN wrote:

3reppom wrote:

NNN wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: If you don't think that religion has messed up the world then I don't care to talk to you because you're brain washed.

If we were to go strictly by a body count, the two most evil rulers in history were Mao and Stalin; each is believed to have had upward of 50 million of their own people killed.

What religion were they? That's right: militant atheist. Stalin had more people killed in the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church alone than the combined body count of every Christian ruler in history, and he still had another 48 million or more to go in addition to that.

Stalin and Mao were both paranoid megalomaniacs who did everything they could to achieve and maintain their positions as the leaders of their respective countries. The personality traits that drove them to commit such heinous crimes while in power would have been just as evident had both been born and raised Christian or Jewish, Muslim or Hindu. The personality and psychological makeups of Mao and Stalin had far more to do with their actions than the fact that they were atheists.

This might make more sense if not for the fact that every communist leader in history (with the possible exceptions of Nagy, Kadar, and Gorbachev) has the blood of enormous numbers of innocent people on their hands. And there are plenty of paranoid megalomaniacs who have held power in non-communist countries who didn't resort to having all their enemies killed.

At some point, you have to look at the underlying ideology as being the basis for the behavior. Karl Marx was strongly anti-religion, and nearly every communist leader either grew up atheist or abandoned religion at an early age; again, Kadar and Nagy were the notable exceptions.

I think the problem with this statement is that there has never been a communism that fits Marx definition. Stalin, Mao, etc. were all Totalitarianisms, not Communisms. They were brutal dictators as were Saddam Hussein (Muslim), Adolf Hitler (Catholic, according to some texts and wikipedia) and Fidel Castro (Roman Catholic, he claimed to be a non-believer and then started practicing recently according to wikipedia).

As said earlier, I don't think religion or non-religion had anything to do with these men being brutal dictators, it was their personalities.

IMO though, more people have been murdered in the name of religion (throughout history then anything else. More wars have been started over religion than anything else.

I am a believer, but I do not believe in any organized religion. I think all religions have their good points and all religions have their bad points. Man, throughout history, has distorted everything. JMO

FairwoodKing wrote: As far as Series62 is concerned, he lost all credibility when he insisted that homosexuality is a choice. This is a typical Christian attitude and it sucks. If sexuality is a choice, then when did any of you chose to be straight? You didn't chose. It is just something that happened. For us, being gay is just something that happens. It doesn't matter what the Bible says, being gay is as natural for me as being straight is for you.

A-No attempt made to gain credibility.
B-I know that homosexuality is a choice, as is your decision to have sex with men.
C-I was born a male, that's how God made me, that is when I became straight, I didn't have to choose that which was obvious.
D-If you had an erection at 5 years old looking at men, I thinking that some sort of sordid molestation was already happening to you.
E-What the Bible says and teaches does matter and a time will come when you will realize that.

FairwoodKing wrote: On a slightly different subject, there is one thing that even I do not understand about homosexuality. I could never comprehend why there are so many devout gay Christians. Christianity obviously does not want us, so why do so many of us want it? Some of my closest gay friends are Adventists. They follow the Old Testament (as well as New Testament) to the letter-- no pork, no shellfish, and they worship on Saturdays even though they are Christians. Yet they are sexually active gays who seem to have no conflict. I also have some gay Catholic friends who feel they are as religious as the most religious straight people. I have asked my friends about their beliefs, but I have never gotten a good answer. My friends, gay and straight, know I'm an atheist and they tend not to share their beliefs with me for fear of offending me, I guess. Or maybe they don't want me to offend them.

Anyone want to take a stab at this?

Christianity is man's acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. To become a Christian is to make a concerted effort to turn from living a sinful life. That is to say, we do not purposely live, doing that which we know to be wrong against God. Search the scriptures, Old and New Testament's (Romans 1:26-32), and you will find that it entails what sin is including homosexuality.

You can repent, seek the Lord's forgiveness and salvation. That does mean however that you have to truly turn from your sin, whatever it may be.

Those such as the ministers and congregation that "confess" Christ, yet openly live a life that is against God should really question their confession of Christ. They know their heart, and so does the Lord.

"Jesus answered him and said unto him, "If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."" John 14:23

"By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous." I John 5:2-3

This encouragement to obedience of God's word is given to "ALL" men.
As well, the discipline and punishment for disobedience is available to "ALL" men who deny God!

Know that there is no special rule against the homosexual as he is a sin before God as is the liar, envious, covetous and murderer.

Does it really matter if homosexuality is a choice or not. I personally believe some homosexuals are born gay, while others may choose to be gay, it doesn't really matter, they are still homosexuals. The government has no business to discriminate against anyone based on their sexuality, they are still Americans. Religion does have the right to discriminate but government doesn't. The government should not care whether they get married, or not, they are Americans and should have the right to marry whoever they feel, regardless of sexuality.

pkebker wrote: Does it really matter if homosexuality is a choice or not. ...

It doesn't matter at all to me personally whether it's a choice. It changes no part of my personal views on the subject.

ONE BOMB!!!

I just read where Mexico City is allowing same-sex marriage. I bet the Catholic Church really fought that. Here is the link:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/03/11/mexico.same.sex.marriage/index.html?iref=allsearch

Despite all the prejudice and discrimination, we are making progress.

B-I know that homosexuality is a choice, as is your decision to have sex with men.

How in the fuck would you know? You believe in the Bible, so you don't know anything.

Series62 wrote:

FairwoodKing wrote: As far as Series62 is concerned, he lost all credibility when he insisted that homosexuality is a choice. This is a typical Christian attitude and it sucks. If sexuality is a choice, then when did any of you chose to be straight? You didn't chose. It is just something that happened. For us, being gay is just something that happens. It doesn't matter what the Bible says, being gay is as natural for me as being straight is for you.

A-No attempt made to gain credibility.
B-I know that homosexuality is a choice, as is your decision to have sex with men.
C-I was born a male, that's how God made me, that is when I became straight, I didn't have to choose that which was obvious.
D-If you had an erection at 5 years old looking at men, I thinking that some sort of sordid molestation was already happening to you.
E-What the Bible says and teaches does matter and a time will come when you will realize that.

Do you realize how stupid you look when you write this garbage?

Don't worry about "A"...you never will have credibility and frankly look like a fool.

Regarding B--You KNOW homosexuality is a choice, even though gay men have told you that it isn't.

As for your letter D--Honestly, that might be the dumbest post I have ever read anywhere.

I seriously hope you're one of those who seek "shock" value on here. If not...wow. Very sad. Stay away from me and my family.

^^^^ Agreed, especially about letter D. I was never touched as a child. I was never molested. My sexuality came from within, not from outside factors.

So. Anyone who believes in the bible doesn't know anything?

Then believe this:

Deuteronomy 22: 13 A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin she shall be executed.

Devils Advocate wrote: Then believe this:

Deuteronomy 22: 13 A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin she shall be executed.

I rest my case.

This just went to stupid at 179mph.

I know you are Gay. . I Know God is unhappy with your sins. I know you made a choice to be gay. I know you are going to hell.. Probably a room reserved for Gays..

How do you know God is unhappy?

The little voice in his head told him so

The big voice at the front of the church told him so...

FairwoodKing wrote: How in the fuck would you know? You believe in the Bible, so you don't know anything.

I know that a good chunk of what's in science textbooks and forms the basis of scientific knowledge came from men who believed in the Bible.

Oh wait, I mean EVERYTHING IS BLACK AND WHITE! THERE'S NO MIDDLE GROUND ANYWHERE ON ANYTHING!

God doesn't like Gays.. Don't hate the messenger.