Search results

k. You win.

I dont think Iron is judging. He is merely trying to stop the legalistion of homosexual marriages. If he is passionate, as he sees soul decaying away, then so be it. But i dont think truly that he is judging or casting any stone. We are not saying cull all the homosexual in the house. His...

Ok I apologise. Its just that Syl is misquoting me and it isnt very nice. But surely one cannot disregard the all powerful conscience.

Yea misquoting me. Thats a good argument, to showcase, the idiocracy of Christianity.

Theres other cultures, that Christianity did not influence, like Asia. Thats why i said varying in religion and time. But then again, we should legalise murdering, to away social influences, especially that of religion, and be truly free?

So your saying that innately we shouldnt feel a disgust for murder, child sexuality, rape, thieving? And just say, that your example is valid, that by drinking seamen, this comprises of sexual practice. But the majority of the world, however varying in religion and time, does hold a system of...

Your missing the point. We never said we were good. No one is perfect, except Christ himself. That is a vital component of Christianity, that everyone is flawed. Humanity is flawed. And its only truth the death of a perfect person, we are alive, our sins are cleansed.

Interesting. So do you still believe that Darwinism is still prevalent in humanity today? How about the example of the physically disablled? They according to Darwinism, should die out and not have children etc... Yet they can live propersously and have children. All the traits of human...

Well, it seems they have. Murder was outlawed, since humans ever had consciousness? Thats surely evidence enough.

And ive just read that on the wiki page. But still, human have transcended beyond that darwinist model of survival. Everyone survives, not just the strong. And certainly, we are different from animals. Our consciouness, our conscience, imprints upon us morality, that says, dont have sex...

What, was it religions dictation of murder as a social taboo? Even tho, different cultures had different religions, yet these same "dictations" exist, passing time, through the prehistorics, to modern contemporary world. Surely it points to one thing.

What does that even mean? Theres not being a scientific paper that said, homosexual behvaiour is completely natural is good. There not being ANY rigorous scientific treatment of the subject. But then considerating it logically, homosexuality in animals leads to NO benefit, no continuation of...

No one here is actually promoting such acts. The hypocrisy here however, is staggering. No one can be truly free of their innate conscience. And its disgusting how these people, are using liberty to devaste our innate nature.

The effets were awesome, but the story line is too cliched. Its like a kids movie. Did anyone watch it in 3D? I was gona, but my friends were like "5$ extra, wth man". I heard 3D was pretty good.

Thats such a cop out. The rationality for the illegalisation of sex underage was due to undeveloped mind of teens as so forth, leading to irrational and consequently harmful descisions. If theres two kids, of underage, and assumed undermaturity, there is TWICE, the change of damage occuring...

Wheres the rigiours scientific treatment of this hypothesis. I see increased divorce rates, adultery aglore and the becoming of putrid fetishes (necrophilia). Not that there is a direct linkage between sex before marriages and these things. All of which are hypothics, nothing concrete.

Its true tho, there needs to be socialiogical studies of the effects of sex before marriage, pedophilia, etc... Otherwise, we are merely discussing hypothetical events, a construction of the mind.

But also strictly reasoning, we all shoudl accept that a majority of under 18s are unable to make decisions. It is better therefore for the economy, for goverment to stereotype that all under 18ths are unable to make rational decisions via a legislation then consider who is actually adult with...

And even you yourself said that you were against it. Why so? Even there might be cases where rationally it is ok?

But logic only goes so far. Take the case of the romantic period, the brilliant arts produced, that come from emtion, not some enlightened rationality. We should embrace our deep emtions and conscience, even if there might not be a perfect reason for it.