(April 21, 2016 at 2:24 am)AJW333 Wrote:

(April 21, 2016 at 2:17 am)pocaracas Wrote: Without the lobbying from Galileo and Tycho Brahe, the solar system would still feature the Earth at the center...

AJ, why don't you try to get your head out of the sand?

Not Catholic.  Don't follow the Church of Rome.

Totally not what I meant...

(April 21, 2016 at 12:55 am)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(April 20, 2016 at 10:51 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Based upon your knowledge and observation are American Southerners more likely to be anti-evolution than people from other regions and foreign countries?

I would say yes, due to the high number of people there who are "evangelical" and/or fundamentalist Christians in that region.

However, I do not have the data to tell you how we fare in comparison to other locales.

I suggest that the reason American Southerners discount evolution is because they are primarily racist.  If they were to accept evolution then it means that they are descendants of black people who came out of Africa.   By denying evolution they are able to maintain that white people are superior to blacks, therefore they can continue their discriminatory ways.

It may seem simplistic but 99.99% of the social problems in America are really racist based.

Countries with histories of racism and strong ethnic identities are most likely to be anti-evolution.  Evolution destroys their idea of being special.  [email=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution[/email]

That makes no sense.

Like zero sense.

(April 20, 2016 at 10:24 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(April 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm)AJW333 Wrote: The report doesn't say the exact opposite to what I am claiming. All I said was that the suicide rate in transsexuals was high and as a therapy, should be seriously questioned given the alarming suicide rate in post transitioned individuals. To simply blame the Christians is hopelessly flawed since a huge amount of grief is coming from non-religious people.

Yes, you were saying that the suicide rate was high, and that we should question transitioning as a therapy given this... while quoting from a study that links an inability to transition with a rise in the suicide rate. The claim that you made, is directly opposite to the conclusions in the report. Directly. Opposite.

Did you even read the report? Did you even read my post that you're quoting there? Because you just repeated the same faulty assertion as though I hadn't explicitly shown that that same assertion is the opposite of what was in the report.

How did you think you were going to get away with that?

OK, what do you make of this? A review of a hundred studies gives gender reassignment surgery the thumbs down,

"There is no conclusive evidence that sex change operations improve the lives of transsexuals, with many people remaining severely distressed and even suicidal after the operation, according to a medical review conducted exclusively for Guardian Weekend tomorrow.

The review of more than 100 international medical studies of post-operative transsexuals by the University of Birmingham's aggressive research intelligence facility (Arif) found no robust scientific evidence that gender reassignment surgery is clinically effective. " http://www.theguardian.com/society/2004/...ntalhealth

(April 21, 2016 at 2:25 am)pocaracas Wrote:

(April 21, 2016 at 2:24 am)AJW333 Wrote: Not Catholic.  Don't follow the Church of Rome.

Totally not what I meant...

What did you mean?

(April 21, 2016 at 2:50 am)Maelstrom Wrote: That makes no sense.

Like zero sense.

Just give it time.

Do you think it makes sense to believe a cosmic guy snapped you into existence?  Why do you believe in that fairy tale instead of others?

(April 21, 2016 at 2:54 am)AJW333 Wrote:

(April 21, 2016 at 2:25 am)pocaracas Wrote: Totally not what I meant...

What did you mean?

Simply that, sometimes, the minority manages to have credible data to back their claims.
And that makes changing people's minds so much easier.

(April 20, 2016 at 10:33 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(April 19, 2016 at 9:50 pm)AJW333 Wrote: Back to the point at hand, in Australia, less than 10% of the population are practicing Christians.

Do you seriously think you're going to get away with that one?

According to the latest census, sixty one percent of Australians are christian, not fucking ten percent.

Pay attention class! I said practicing Christians.

(April 20, 2016 at 10:33 am)Esquilax Wrote: Just to recap: you give a statistic based on nothing that is, at last count, dead wrong. You then go on to assume that no other religion is practiced in Australia, and I simply cannot understand why you'd do that in general, let alone in a multicultural country like Oz. And finally, you assume that the irreligious constitute the rest of the population, which again, is a completely unjustified and unfathomable leap.

You kinda fucked up on this one, son. Again.

The 61% Christian is one of those figures that bears no resemblance to the actual number of people who take their faith seriously and practice it daily. If a guy who was born Catholic, never goes to Church and doesn't believe in God, goes out and bashes a transsexual, is it reasonable to call that religious violence?

25% of Australia's population is Catholic. Of that, about 10-13% attend Mass each week. Of that number, a significant proportion would be bench-warmers. So you can see how the numbers of "fair-dinkum" Christians in this country is actually very low. Certainly nothing like 61%

(April 21, 2016 at 2:54 am)AJW333 Wrote:

(April 21, 2016 at 2:25 am)pocaracas Wrote: Totally not what I meant...

What did you mean?

Simply that the minority, backed by credible data, can be correct.
And that's the easiest way to change people's minds.

(April 21, 2016 at 3:01 am)pocaracas Wrote:

(April 21, 2016 at 2:54 am)AJW333 Wrote: What did you mean?

Simply that, sometimes, the minority manages to have credible data to back their claims.
And that makes changing people's minds so much easier.

Oh OK. Sure this is often the case with scientific breakthroughs, the discoverer is usually given a bunch of grief when he suggests changing the status quo. However, that said, there is a heap of junk science being put out there by people with an agenda. Just take a look at some of the fines dished out to drug companies in the last few years. Merck lied about the safety of Vioxx and it killed 27,000 people. This earned them a $850 million fine and $5 billion in compensation. Trust the science? Trust your doctor? Not in this case.

So, is there a downside to the LGBT agenda? Absolutely! This can be seen by the draconian penalties served to silence all dissent. If you were brought up being taught that genetics and sex organs were the determining factors for gender and you stick by that science, it could cost you everything you have,

"Did you call a transsexual person “he” or “she” when they preferred to be called “zhe?” According to a newly updated anti-discrimination law in New York City, you could be fined an eye-watering $250,000.
In the latest, astonishing act of draconian political correctness, the NYC Commission on Human Rights have updated a law on “Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Expression” to threaten staggering financial penalties against property owners who “misgender” employees or tenants.
Incidents that are deemed “wilful and malicious” will see property owners face up to $250,000 in fines, while standard violations of the law will result in a $125,000 fine. For small business owners, these sums are crippling.

It’s not as simple as referring to transmen “he” or transwomen as “she,” either. The legislation makes it clear that if an individual desires, property owners will have to make use of “zhe,” “hir” and any other preferred pronoun. From the updated legislation:" http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2015/12/27...anssexual/

Anyone who is an advocate of free speech and freedom of thought should be deeply disturbed by this Nazi like behaviour.