Christianity; the World's Most Violently Persecuted Religion

[The Grand Nudger]

Nuts use the term unnatural to refer to anything that isn't the way their god wanted it - not with respect to any fact about nature.

[Thumpalumpacus]

[...] that's just homophobic bigotry, that bigotry however is a choice people make, as is the adherence to a religion.

Without trying to derail this thread, I just want to say that I'm not sure that adherence to a religion is a choice, insofar as adherents tend to be raised from youth in this or that religion before they're able to think through for themselves the ramifications.

I know I was indoctrinated, and that indoctrination was only broken because I saw the contradictions between my beliefs and the real world. At that point, sure, there's a choice to be made. But not everyone is confronted with circumstances which bring them to that point, and so remain in thrall to their indoctrination without having made any choice at all.

Conversions are a thing as well that we shouldn't ignore, but regarding theists, conversionists are, I suspect, a minority perhaps as small as atheists.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I note once again he has yet to demonstrate homosexuality is unnatural

There is plenty of research demonstrating that homosexuality occurs naturally among many species, thus by definition it is natural. The real irony of course, is the false equivalence that equates natural with good, and unnatural with bad, after all there is absolutely nothing natural about Christianity, it is entirely manmade...as are computers, and the internet, and he seems fine using those.

Humans make apartment complexes, or council flats, or whatever they're called outside the US or UK.

Bees make hives. Ants make hives. Rabbits make warrens. Humans make apartments. What is unnatural here? Is the unspoken premise here "if humans practice it, it's unnatural"?

I'm not arguing your main point of natural=good/unnatural=bad being a fallacy, I just think that we are ourselves part of nature, and that what we do is natural too. How are we defining "natural"? Non-human? If so, why?

[Nay_Sayer]

So you're saying people shouldn't judge you unless they know you.

Funny that. I'm still holding you to your homophobic remarks

I'm saying that people shouldn't make assumptions about the beliefs on others based upon the perceived color of their skin.

If you want to hold me to some "homophobic remarks" you will first have to demonstrate what remarks were homophobic.

Oh this is gonna be fun

[brewer]

That a small percentage of humans behave in an unnatural behavior does not make it "natural" in any moral or practical sense

You understand this is how we perceive a lot of christians and their beliefs, right?

[Thumpalumpacus]

That a small percentage of humans behave in an unnatural behavior does not make it "natural" in any moral or practical sense

You understand this is how we perceive a lot of christians and their beliefs, right?

I don't see bears building churches or rabbits lecturing each other about the indecency of polyamorous sex.

[Nay_Sayer]

Here we go, My comments in red:

The Bible doesn't condemn being gay, because the concept of being gay didn't exist yet. It doesn't say anything about "innate sexual desires."

Well that's just factually wrong Homosexuality is inherent in nature.

Romans 1-27: "Likewise, the men abandoned natural relations with women and burned with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error".

While not explicitly condemning, it is being called unnatural to lust after another man or woman.

To which you got called out on.

Which it is of course not

The human body - like all other mammals - is designed/develops to reproduce sexually; that is through a male and female combining sperm and egg.

Immediately shifting the goalposts to mammals and reproduction, That isn't what was discussed. Why?  Also, whoops! Homosexuality is present in mammals in nature too.

Protip: When you dip your toes into science or, honestly, anything that isn't Twitter reaction-farming type comments you end up looking like an idiot.

[TheWhiteMarten]

Stating that I believe certain things because "white" is in my name 

Oh I think we have some posts from you that are unequivocally racially biased, your name doesn't feature. Your claim that it's ok for poor people in slums to die from gun violence for example, and the objective evidence of the demographics of who lives in slums. Is it possible you still don't realise when you're making racist epithets?

Got it - so you are racist who hears "crime and violence" and immediately thinks of minorities.

To be fair, "lukewarm IQ" and "racism" are not too far apart in concept so it checks out.

[TheWhiteMarten]

Immediately shifting the goalposts to mammals and reproduction, That isn't what was discussed.

That an atheist doesn't know that sex and reproduction are connected - or that humans, who would be practicing homosexual behavior are mammals with specific sexual traits relating to that category - explains so much about the general biological education levels being dog water.

At least the other two aren't trying to be anything other than retarded and I can roll with that - it's silly and I think they are having fun too, I really hope they are anyways...

Don't take it seriously, that's just embarrassing - just enjoy being with the clique where you can say dead wrong stuff and get pats on the back for it.

[Silver]

*yawn*