Islam and sexuallity.

[Thumpalumpacus]

B.b.b.b.but..he totally put those assumptions into syntax and ran em -that makes them true! Highlights being the parity between sickness, economic crisis, and homosexuality. I think he should have added pedophilia as a conditional...just to be thorough.



(and maybe also asteroid strikes)

The rhombulatory miscalculation of his ephemeral cogitation has left him deliquescent with fervor ... probably trying to cover up.

[WinterHold]

Mister Agenda

Homosexuality doesn't seem to be the sort of thing that 'spreads'. It's consistently a small percentae of the population, even in cultures that are accepting of it. Your hyptothetical carries zero weight, but does serve as an example of the prediction that 'it's not natural' is a typical argument.

I contradict you in a point here : some animals are born gay, and do practice it. I'm not a biologist to judge, if that natural or considered a mutation. But I do know it sometimes comes since birth.

Aside from that, I saw it in the country I rose up in ; it spread in school in a huge manner to the degree of having a friend who got harassed, another colleague was raped. Put teenagers in a school without girls for 12 years, and see the result by yourself.

People aren't gay because they want to be gay. People aren't straight because they want to be straight. We are all what we are. I couldn't be attracted to men if I wanted to be. If I could, I would reckon that I am bisexual.

Makes sense. Despite the point I mentioned above making a small negation. I can't ignore what I saw.

Can you give an example of a homosexual act preventing other people from having babies? If it's no skin off anyone else's nose, how is it destructive? And, newsflash: gay people can have children if they want, without resorting to technology. They are not incapable of breeding, provided they are willing to make an exception to their general rule of only having sex with persons of the same sex as themselves. Until the last century, gay people having children was the rule, not the exception.

No I didn't mean other people ; I meant themselves, avoiding sex with women and disliking it does indeed reduce the chances of producing babies, I thought a majority for example has that general rule, and that's an assumption I made without thinking probably about it.

You're on firmer ground here, but more because of the betrayal of trust involved in my opinion. Still, not something over which to get stoned to death.

Ah mister agenda, stoning isn't in the Quran and you know my faith.
Stoning somebody to death for sex is a murder crime that the commuter should pay its price.

Though the picture of the infants dead and dumped in trash cans in thailand because daddy ran away and the mother is sadly poor, still haunts my head.

Lending at interest is one of the things that has made modern society possible. As all parties enter into agreement voluntarily, it is again no skin off anyone else's nose provided it does not descend into loansharking.

It would lead to an economical collapse. You don't need interest to grow your cash, Mister Agenda, and many people proved it over history. I call it greed that led the world to be monopolized by bankers.

Modern civilization was built because of peace, which oil's worth made possible ; interests yet led countries (even super powers) to have almost infinite debts (some dating to the 19th century. Wait for oil to end, and let's see how countries are going to face paying them while crippled by bankruptcy.

A hundred years ago, it was like that in the West as well.

Of course..eventually, you cannot "ground people", neither by societie's hammer nor government's shotgun, and of course not by religious extremism.

---

On a slightly related note...because I'm starting to think you'd be more inclined to critically examine your code than your position....it can't provide the function you're after as the solution handles variables (already explained as improperly defined, of course) as text blocks, rather than as propositions, and those text blocks, even if they were entered as propositions, would be irrelevant to the claim made (or, if you prefer, incapable of solving).

In summary, good concept...poor execution?

Oh well but it executes here !
please visit my website :
http://bytsnbytes.com

[Parkers Tan]

I'd suggest you go learn what "bigot" actually means, and take aboard the criticism, rather than reflexively reject it. Because you did indeed make an assload of uncharitable assumptions based on nothing but stereotypes which you seem to embrace.

It's anti-biased, bigot I mean, that's how I understand it. It's insulting to me, and a very big lie, since I do take religious criticism like a champ, yet calling me personally a "mental midget" gotta hit a string eh ?

And parkers, I don't have to turn the other cheek all the time, especially when it comes to personal insults like "mental midget", I mean I do have the right to respond to that.

I don't practice stereotyping, I had not gay friends but male-transexual friends -or at least transexual wannabes-, I used to refer to them with "she", and truly from the inside, viewed them as girls in men's bodies.

But, I have an opinion about the act, too.

[Regina]

I can't believe you're equating legalising homosexuality with the spread of rape. First of all nobody is saying rape is ok. Rape is a violation, consensual homosexual sex is not. Also since the message clearly didn't sink in earlier I repeat; the overwhelming majority of cases of sexual assault are commited by "heterosexual" men against women. Yes there are more heterosexual men than there are gay men, but to be honest cases of gay rape are probably still proportionally small to the number of gay people. You almost never hear about them.

Secondly we have 7 billion people in the world today and not enough resources to provide for even half of that number. We shouldn't be condemning people who (gay or straight, for whatever reason) are not having children. We should be encouraging less children for the sake of the future of our planet and the human race, for shame.

[robvalue]

I agree, what utter nonsense bullshit. Why do you have to spin such deceit to try and rationalize your bigotry?

If you really think homosexuality "spreads" you are ignorant, willfully or otherwise. Not that there is anything wrong with being homosexual anyway.

Having sex with a man doesn't mean someone is homosexual. If it happens in a certain situation, consensual or otherwise, it is not evidence that someone has "become gay". That is absurd.

[Regina]

It's that "exposure to gay people makes you gay" mentality.

It's a fallacy considering gay people exist. If being exposed to people of a particular sexuality made you that sexuality then everyone would be straight. Having straight (and homophobic) parents did nothing for me, just saying.

[robvalue]

Indeed. In this day and age with information freely available, there's no excuse for such ridiculous ignorance.