Homosexuality

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,00:40)

I had in mind that the atheist prison population was 0.23% but I see it is fractionally lower than that.  Atheists comprise at least 12% of the general US population, but I suspect the rate is probably a lot higher even than that. At that difference in rates we should lock up all christians as a precaution, given their disproportionate rate of criminal conviction for imprisonable offenses. Of course I say we, but I am not American and I don't know the stats in my own country, NZ. You Americans should lock up christians as a precaution. Stuart

Even incarcerated athiests many times will claim a religion in prison when it gains them special privilages, such proscribed work days/hours, cartain physical items not normally offorded to general population, or even special meals.

In saying that, even that bears changes to the statistics.

[Constitutionalist]

As a member of the Department of Justice, I can safely say the majority of a population is not caring.

[Constitutionalist]

“Theists vs. Nontheists” In Prison Populations: A False Dichotomy
There is no sociologically valid basis for comparing “theists to nontheists” with regards to incarceration rates (or any other sociological measure) because “theists” do not constitute an identifiable social group. The fact that non-practicing (functionally nonreligious) people are highly over-represented among prisoners is a separate issue, apart from questions relating to belief and philosophical position.
To consider incarceration rates of “atheists” vs. “theists” is like comparing Hispanics to non-Hispanics. While it may be possible to group figures that way, it doesn't make a lot of sense to do so. Non-Hispanics are better broken down into Asians, African-Americans and Whites (if one doesn't further break them down by other factors such as age, education, etc.) Likewise, it makes no sense to group all non-atheists together, as if Amish, Muslims, Quakers, Baha'is, Hindus, Presbyterians, Orthodox Jews, Baptists, Deists, Lutherans, Unitarians, Rastafarians, Wiccans, etc., all exhibited similar behavior. Obviously some of these groups exhibit relatively little criminal behavior, while others would exhibit relatively more criminal behavior. Certain crimes are more prevalent among certain groups. 85% of Americans cite a specific religious affiliation. So if you combine figures for people of all religious affiliations you get essentially the same figure that you would get for the whole U.S. population. The figure would only be different if essentially all religious groups were skewed in one direction, which they are not.

A person's philosophical position about the existence of God is distinct from that person's ethical behavior. A person's position on this single point is not a predictor of ethical or criminal behavior, any more than a person's preference for country vs. rock music. Atheism does not necessarily equate to criminal or unethical behavior, just as a professed belief in God does not necessarily preclude criminal or unethical behavior.

One problem faced by some religious writers as well as some atheist writers who have tried to equate religious belief or atheism with criminal behavior (and probably a major reason why there is no empirical data to support either contention) is that a person's philosophical position on this one point is not the major factor in determining criminal behavior. Factors such as level of income, employment/non-employment, level of education, race, geographical region, age, sex, etc. are all tracked by the government and other organizations. All of these characteristics correlate more readily to criminal behavior. (GLBT status, on the other hand, has not been shown to correlate generally to incarceration rate, although it is highly correlated with pedophilia. According to gay researchers Karla Jay and Allen Young, 73 percent of the gay men they report having engaged in sex with boys 16 to 19 years of age or younger; 86 percent of convicted child molesters who molested boys describe themselves as homosexual or bisexual. See also: World Net Daily article; More)

There is no monolithic group of “theists.” This is a term that describes a philosophical position (as identified by atheists), not a self-identifying group of people. People may congregate with other Catholics, other Muslims, other hockey fans at a sports event, other Stephen King fans at a book club, other mothers at a play group, other gays at a bar, etc. but “theists” do not come together as a single group, and do not exhibit an identifiable pattern of social behavior. Likewise, atheists are not a monolithic group, and most atheists are not formally affiliated with any organization based on their atheism. Like theists, atheists are found among all races, ages, levels of income, religions, etc., and those factors are going to correlate far more readily to statistically predictable patterns of social behavior, including levels of incarceration.

http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html

[Stu]

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:43)

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,00:35) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:30) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,00:27) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,00:13) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 22 2009,11:04) Are human beings mostly caring, in your experience? Stuart Nope Well not in the U.S. anyway, Americans may give the appearence of caring till they fulfill the lusts of the flesh. 1 of every 15 persons (6.6%) will serve time in a prison during their lifetime. One in 100 U.S. adults are in prison or jail; One in 30 men aged 20-34 are incarcerated; One in 53 people in their 20's is incarcerated; Men are 10 times as likely to be incarcerated, compared to women. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm http://commonlaw.findlaw.com/2008/02/report-1-in-100.html http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm Oh, and that is only the statitistics of those who got caught and sentenced. That does not included those with good lawyers, or who will never get caught for what ever reasons. Oh and I forgot, 50% of all incarcerations are for VIOLENT crimes. I agree that all those christians and other religious folk who are committing crimes should be locked up if our safety depends on it. Are you saying that the 6.6% plus the ones who get away with violent crimes represents “most people” to you? Stuart What I am saying is you used the word “caring”, that word covers a broad area. Even a murderer can be “caring”. So I base “caring” as someone with clear conduct (ie good morals, religious or not), no lying, cheating, or stealing. All crimes and behavior can be set with those three principles of behavior. Therefore one could safely say 9/10 of the Americans cannot pass that litmus test. And I am basing this from lesser to greatest offense. No the majority is not caring.

I agree that you can call a murderer caring. So why have you conflated criminal activity with the question I asked you?

It is an interesting diversion, but not actually relevant.

Stuart

[Stu]

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:46)

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,00:40) I had in mind that the atheist prison population was 0.23% but I see it is fractionally lower than that.  Atheists comprise at least 12% of the general US population, but I suspect the rate is probably a lot higher even than that. At that difference in rates we should lock up all christians as a precaution, given their disproportionate rate of criminal conviction for imprisonable offenses. Of course I say we, but I am not American and I don't know the stats in my own country, NZ. You Americans should lock up christians as a precaution. Stuart Even incarcerated athiests many times will claim a religion in prison when it gains them special privilages, such proscribed work days/hours, cartain physical items not normally offorded to general population, or even special meals. In saying that, even that bears changes to the statistics.

So why is a department of government giving priveleges on the basis of religion?

Stuart

[Stu]

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:53)

“Theists vs. Nontheists” In Prison Populations: A False Dichotomy There is no sociologically valid basis for comparing “theists to nontheists” with regards to incarceration rates (or any other sociological measure) because “theists” do not constitute an identifiable social group. The fact that non-practicing (functionally nonreligious) people are highly over-represented among prisoners is a separate issue, apart from questions relating to belief and philosophical position. To consider incarceration rates of “atheists” vs. “theists” is like comparing Hispanics to non-Hispanics. While it may be possible to group figures that way, it doesn't make a lot of sense to do so. Non-Hispanics are better broken down into Asians, African-Americans and Whites (if one doesn't further break them down by other factors such as age, education, etc.) Likewise, it makes no sense to group all non-atheists together, as if Amish, Muslims, Quakers, Baha'is, Hindus, Presbyterians, Orthodox Jews, Baptists, Deists, Lutherans, Unitarians, Rastafarians, Wiccans, etc., all exhibited similar behavior. Obviously some of these groups exhibit relatively little criminal behavior, while others would exhibit relatively more criminal behavior. Certain crimes are more prevalent among certain groups. 85% of Americans cite a specific religious affiliation. So if you combine figures for people of all religious affiliations you get essentially the same figure that you would get for the whole U.S. population. The figure would only be different if essentially all religious groups were skewed in one direction, which they are not. A person's philosophical position about the existence of God is distinct from that person's ethical behavior. A person's position on this single point is not a predictor of ethical or criminal behavior, any more than a person's preference for country vs. rock music. Atheism does not necessarily equate to criminal or unethical behavior, just as a professed belief in God does not necessarily preclude criminal or unethical behavior. One problem faced by some religious writers as well as some atheist writers who have tried to equate religious belief or atheism with criminal behavior (and probably a major reason why there is no empirical data to support either contention) is that a person's philosophical position on this one point is not the major factor in determining criminal behavior. Factors such as level of income, employment/non-employment, level of education, race, geographical region, age, sex, etc. are all tracked by the government and other organizations. All of these characteristics correlate more readily to criminal behavior. (GLBT status, on the other hand, has not been shown to correlate generally to incarceration rate, although it is highly correlated with pedophilia. According to gay researchers Karla Jay and Allen Young, 73 percent of the gay men they report having engaged in sex with boys 16 to 19 years of age or younger; 86 percent of convicted child molesters who molested boys describe themselves as homosexual or bisexual. See also: World Net Daily article; More) There is no monolithic group of “theists.” This is a term that describes a philosophical position (as identified by atheists), not a self-identifying group of people. People may congregate with other Catholics, other Muslims, other hockey fans at a sports event, other Stephen King fans at a book club, other mothers at a play group, other gays at a bar, etc. but “theists” do not come together as a single group, and do not exhibit an identifiable pattern of social behavior. Likewise, atheists are not a monolithic group, and most atheists are not formally affiliated with any organization based on their atheism. Like theists, atheists are found among all races, ages, levels of income, religions, etc., and those factors are going to correlate far more readily to statistically predictable patterns of social behavior, including levels of incarceration. http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html

You have not explained the negative correlation between rates of incarceration and professed atheism.

By the way, if you only count pedophilia as gay men abusing boys then you will find a skewing of the figures towards gay men, won't you.

Stuart

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,02:59)

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:43) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,00:35) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:30) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,00:27) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,00:13) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 22 2009,11:04) Are human beings mostly caring, in your experience? Stuart Nope Well not in the U.S. anyway, Americans may give the appearence of caring till they fulfill the lusts of the flesh. 1 of every 15 persons (6.6%) will serve time in a prison during their lifetime. One in 100 U.S. adults are in prison or jail; One in 30 men aged 20-34 are incarcerated; One in 53 people in their 20's is incarcerated; Men are 10 times as likely to be incarcerated, compared to women. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm http://commonlaw.findlaw.com/2008/02/report-1-in-100.html http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm Oh, and that is only the statitistics of those who got caught and sentenced. That does not included those with good lawyers, or who will never get caught for what ever reasons. Oh and I forgot, 50% of all incarcerations are for VIOLENT crimes. I agree that all those christians and other religious folk who are committing crimes should be locked up if our safety depends on it. Are you saying that the 6.6% plus the ones who get away with violent crimes represents “most people” to you? Stuart What I am saying is you used the word “caring”, that word covers a broad area. Even a murderer can be “caring”. So I base “caring” as someone with clear conduct (ie good morals, religious or not), no lying, cheating, or stealing. All crimes and behavior can be set with those three principles of behavior. Therefore one could safely say 9/10 of the Americans cannot pass that litmus test. And I am basing this from lesser to greatest offense. No the majority is not caring. I agree that you can call a murderer caring.  So why have you conflated criminal activity with the question I asked you? It is an interesting diversion, but not actually relevant. Stuart

I answered your question, with a resounding “NO”.

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,03:01)

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:46) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,00:40) I had in mind that the atheist prison population was 0.23% but I see it is fractionally lower than that.  Atheists comprise at least 12% of the general US population, but I suspect the rate is probably a lot higher even than that. At that difference in rates we should lock up all christians as a precaution, given their disproportionate rate of criminal conviction for imprisonable offenses. Of course I say we, but I am not American and I don't know the stats in my own country, NZ. You Americans should lock up christians as a precaution. Stuart Even incarcerated athiests many times will claim a religion in prison when it gains them special privilages, such proscribed work days/hours, cartain physical items not normally offorded to general population, or even special meals. In saying that, even that bears changes to the statistics. So why is a department of government giving priveleges on the basis of religion? Stuart

Because an inmate has a Constitutional Right. If an inmate lost his Constitutional Rights upon entering prisons, he probably would receive alot less.

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,02:59)

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:43) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,00:35) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:30) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,00:27) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,00:13) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 22 2009,11:04) Are human beings mostly caring, in your experience? Stuart Nope Well not in the U.S. anyway, Americans may give the appearence of caring till they fulfill the lusts of the flesh. 1 of every 15 persons (6.6%) will serve time in a prison during their lifetime. One in 100 U.S. adults are in prison or jail; One in 30 men aged 20-34 are incarcerated; One in 53 people in their 20's is incarcerated; Men are 10 times as likely to be incarcerated, compared to women. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm http://commonlaw.findlaw.com/2008/02/report-1-in-100.html http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm Oh, and that is only the statitistics of those who got caught and sentenced. That does not included those with good lawyers, or who will never get caught for what ever reasons. Oh and I forgot, 50% of all incarcerations are for VIOLENT crimes. I agree that all those christians and other religious folk who are committing crimes should be locked up if our safety depends on it. Are you saying that the 6.6% plus the ones who get away with violent crimes represents “most people” to you? Stuart What I am saying is you used the word “caring”, that word covers a broad area. Even a murderer can be “caring”. So I base “caring” as someone with clear conduct (ie good morals, religious or not), no lying, cheating, or stealing. All crimes and behavior can be set with those three principles of behavior. Therefore one could safely say 9/10 of the Americans cannot pass that litmus test. And I am basing this from lesser to greatest offense. No the majority is not caring. I agree that you can call a murderer caring.  So why have you conflated criminal activity with the question I asked you? It is an interesting diversion, but not actually relevant. Stuart

I was using criminal nature as the example, criminals make up or are the byproduct of society. In fact they are society, so by utilizing them in a percentile bracket (because most countries to keep percentile figures to show data on criminal nature) I can show people in general are in fact inherently evil. That is society's nature. Countries do not have facts or figures on the percentage of people who are generally caring. It's not I deviation that I attempted, but I did attemptd to show society's moral conduct. people don't keep records on the good, but they always keep records on the bad. I am sure NZ does this as well.

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,03:06)

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:53) “Theists vs. Nontheists” In Prison Populations: A False Dichotomy There is no sociologically valid basis for comparing “theists to nontheists” with regards to incarceration rates (or any other sociological measure) because “theists” do not constitute an identifiable social group. The fact that non-practicing (functionally nonreligious) people are highly over-represented among prisoners is a separate issue, apart from questions relating to belief and philosophical position. To consider incarceration rates of “atheists” vs. “theists” is like comparing Hispanics to non-Hispanics. While it may be possible to group figures that way, it doesn't make a lot of sense to do so. Non-Hispanics are better broken down into Asians, African-Americans and Whites (if one doesn't further break them down by other factors such as age, education, etc.) Likewise, it makes no sense to group all non-atheists together, as if Amish, Muslims, Quakers, Baha'is, Hindus, Presbyterians, Orthodox Jews, Baptists, Deists, Lutherans, Unitarians, Rastafarians, Wiccans, etc., all exhibited similar behavior. Obviously some of these groups exhibit relatively little criminal behavior, while others would exhibit relatively more criminal behavior. Certain crimes are more prevalent among certain groups. 85% of Americans cite a specific religious affiliation. So if you combine figures for people of all religious affiliations you get essentially the same figure that you would get for the whole U.S. population. The figure would only be different if essentially all religious groups were skewed in one direction, which they are not. A person's philosophical position about the existence of God is distinct from that person's ethical behavior. A person's position on this single point is not a predictor of ethical or criminal behavior, any more than a person's preference for country vs. rock music. Atheism does not necessarily equate to criminal or unethical behavior, just as a professed belief in God does not necessarily preclude criminal or unethical behavior. One problem faced by some religious writers as well as some atheist writers who have tried to equate religious belief or atheism with criminal behavior (and probably a major reason why there is no empirical data to support either contention) is that a person's philosophical position on this one point is not the major factor in determining criminal behavior. Factors such as level of income, employment/non-employment, level of education, race, geographical region, age, sex, etc. are all tracked by the government and other organizations. All of these characteristics correlate more readily to criminal behavior. (GLBT status, on the other hand, has not been shown to correlate generally to incarceration rate, although it is highly correlated with pedophilia. According to gay researchers Karla Jay and Allen Young, 73 percent of the gay men they report having engaged in sex with boys 16 to 19 years of age or younger; 86 percent of convicted child molesters who molested boys describe themselves as homosexual or bisexual. See also: World Net Daily article; More) There is no monolithic group of “theists.” This is a term that describes a philosophical position (as identified by atheists), not a self-identifying group of people. People may congregate with other Catholics, other Muslims, other hockey fans at a sports event, other Stephen King fans at a book club, other mothers at a play group, other gays at a bar, etc. but “theists” do not come together as a single group, and do not exhibit an identifiable pattern of social behavior. Likewise, atheists are not a monolithic group, and most atheists are not formally affiliated with any organization based on their atheism. Like theists, atheists are found among all races, ages, levels of income, religions, etc., and those factors are going to correlate far more readily to statistically predictable patterns of social behavior, including levels of incarceration. http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html You have not explained the negative correlation between rates of incarceration and professed atheism. By the way, if you only count pedophilia as gay men abusing boys then you will find a skewing of the figures towards gay men, won't you. Stuart

This website does not take a stand for or against, it only showed the outcome of the statitistics of there research. Actually it leans more towards the athiest view if you read it.

[Constitutionalist]

Oh, and “You have not explained the negative correlation between rates of incarceration and professed atheism.” It was not my objective. Personally I don't care about atheism, athiest, to each his own. I am not anti athiest I am pro faith, you have the issue, not I.

[Stu]

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,23:22)

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,02:59) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:43) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,00:35) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,19:30) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,00:27) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,00:13) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 22 2009,11:04) Are human beings mostly caring, in your experience? Stuart Nope Well not in the U.S. anyway, Americans may give the appearence of caring till they fulfill the lusts of the flesh. 1 of every 15 persons (6.6%) will serve time in a prison during their lifetime. One in 100 U.S. adults are in prison or jail; One in 30 men aged 20-34 are incarcerated; One in 53 people in their 20's is incarcerated; Men are 10 times as likely to be incarcerated, compared to women. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm http://commonlaw.findlaw.com/2008/02/report-1-in-100.html http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm Oh, and that is only the statitistics of those who got caught and sentenced. That does not included those with good lawyers, or who will never get caught for what ever reasons. Oh and I forgot, 50% of all incarcerations are for VIOLENT crimes. I agree that all those christians and other religious folk who are committing crimes should be locked up if our safety depends on it. Are you saying that the 6.6% plus the ones who get away with violent crimes represents “most people” to you? Stuart What I am saying is you used the word “caring”, that word covers a broad area. Even a murderer can be “caring”. So I base “caring” as someone with clear conduct (ie good morals, religious or not), no lying, cheating, or stealing. All crimes and behavior can be set with those three principles of behavior. Therefore one could safely say 9/10 of the Americans cannot pass that litmus test. And I am basing this from lesser to greatest offense. No the majority is not caring. I agree that you can call a murderer caring.  So why have you conflated criminal activity with the question I asked you? It is an interesting diversion, but not actually relevant. Stuart I was using criminal nature as the example, criminals make up or are the byproduct of society. In fact they are society, so by utilizing them in a percentile bracket (because most countries to keep percentile figures to show data on criminal nature) I can show people in general are in fact inherently evil. That is society's nature. Countries do not have facts or figures on the percentage of people who are generally caring. It's not I deviation that I attempted, but I did attemptd to show society's moral conduct. people don't keep records on the good, but they always keep records on the bad. I am sure NZ does this as well.

Now you are making a statement that people are generally “inherently evil” because 6.6%, most of them religious, are locked up for criminal activity. And some of those are murderers that you could possibly describe as caring.

Can you sustain that there is a causal relationship between “evil” and imprisonment? You would have to be able to define what you mean by evil in order to begin to demonstrate such a relationship.

I assume in the case of convicted criminals this is your personal view and not that of the judiciary, who must hold at least a pretence of a belief in rehabilitation.

You are right that caring is a subjective judgement. That is why I asked you: I am interested to know your general attitude to humanity, so I can gauge whether your guarded initial response is confined to homosexuals, or whether your wider view is a miserable one of humanity. I think it may be that you are a pessimist, and I think you might not be were it not for your religious beliefs.

I am overwhelmingly surrounded by cheerful, caring people who contribute positively to the collective good, and I know of criminals who are rehabilitated and also contribute positively. Maybe I am just lucky.

Stuart

[Stu]

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,23:46)

Oh, and “You have not explained the negative correlation between rates of incarceration and professed atheism.” It was not my objective. Personally I don't care about atheism, athiest, to each his own. I am not anti athiest I am pro faith, you have the issue, not I.

So we have two issues here then.

Firstly I asked you if you thought that most of the gay people you know were pretty ordinary, caring people. You said they were no different to any other human being. Would it be fair for me then to conclude that at that stage, before you began on about pedophilia, that you would have rejected this poll statement:

“[they] Are potential predators commiting abominations fitting them for death”

because you say they are no different to any other human.

After that you seemed to negate that position by posting some data concerning rates of pedophilia, interpreted in a biased way by you.

So I am confused about what you believe now.

Flawed as the poll may be, which of the two options is closer to your position?

Secondly, you began answering the question about whether people are caring (my attempt to ascertain whether you were discriminating on the grounds of sexual orientation or just being a miserablist) by posting statistics about imprisonment.

Now you seem to be suggesting that that data CANNOT say anything about caring, which we do seem to agree is subjective.

Why did you post the data on rates of imprisonment by religious adherence? What was the point behind that?

Stuart

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (Stu @ Oct. 23 2009,05:00)

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 23 2009,23:46) Oh, and “You have not explained the negative correlation between rates of incarceration and professed atheism.” It was not my objective. Personally I don't care about atheism, athiest, to each his own. I am not anti athiest I am pro faith, you have the issue, not I. So we have two issues here then. Firstly I asked you if you thought that most of the gay people you know were pretty ordinary, caring people.  You said they were no different to any other human being.  Would it be fair for me then to conclude that at that stage, before you began on about pedophilia, that you would have rejected this poll statement: “[they] Are potential predators commiting abominations fitting them for death” because you say they are no different to any other human. After that you seemed to negate that position by posting some data concerning rates of pedophilia, interpreted in a biased way by you. So I am confused about what you believe now. Flawed as the poll may be, which of the two options is closer to your position? Secondly, you began answering the question about whether people are caring (my attempt to ascertain whether you were discriminating on the grounds of sexual orientation or just being a miserablist) by posting statistics about imprisonment. Now you seem to be suggesting that that data CANNOT say anything about caring, which we do seem to agree is subjective. Why did you post the data on rates of imprisonment by religious adherence?  What was the point behind that? Stuart

I did reject the poll statement as my very first response.

And yes gays are no different than any other human being, they are human.

That was an excerpt, and it was one short blurb about pedophilia, and it was not my statement (hence, the reason for the source given), it was theirs. I used the source to show that their was no difference between religionist and athiest and who was the better. It clearly showed neither was.

If God calls it an abomination, then it is.

Good thing I am not gay, one less abomination I need to worry about.

Wasn't my data, it was government data. Not to bias there. They dont take sides, not Constitutionally sound to do so, and they do it statistically through interviews, so if they gleened the pediphalia comments from talking to gays through there research then it is true to the reseach unless gays are liars. If it was research done by a religious organization then I would agree to some biasness. But it is not.

My answer to your poll is mankind is inherently evil, including gays, and it takes the grace of God to change that nature since mankind has failed to do so on its own.

Again, you find me good data on mankinds general disposition of being good, then I will accept it. Mankinds does not keep good morality statistics. But mankind does keep statistics on its evilness (prison statistics is a great source in comparision of the general public). The ratio is balanced and unprejudiced.

You just wish to prove that the gay is a poor dredge from society unfairly picked on. No differant than the blackman, handicapped, female, athiest etc.

I don't buy into your stuff.

[Stu]

Constitutionalist

Quote

I did reject the poll statement as my very first response.

Which is still not an answer, because there are two options.

Quote

And yes gays are no different than any other human being, they are human.

I am glad you have said this, because I think there are many here who harbour prejudice that would deny it!

Quote

I used the source to show that their was no difference between religionist and athiest and who was the better. It clearly showed neither was.

In terms of imprisonment rates, 0.209% atheist prison population versus at least 12% general atheist population demonstrates overwhelmingly that atheists commit fewer imprisonable crimes. Or are smarter at getting away with them…

Quote

If God calls it an abomination, then it is.

No, if your god calls anything an abomination, then the only conclusion you can draw is that your god THINKS that way. There is no “is” about it, or at least your should consider this from your correspondent’s point of view, that gods are Imaginary Friends. Then, it is just YOU (and others with the same religious views) who think it. No ethic is an absolute in the public sphere. Unless you just mean to play to the crowd here.

Quote

Good thing I am not gay, one less abomination I need to worry about.

That would be one fewer abomination to worry about. You can see that one of my abominations is occasional pedantry.

Quote

Wasn't my data, it was government data. Not to bias there. They dont take sides, not Constitutionally sound to do so, and they do it statistically through interviews, so if they gleened the pediphalia comments from talking to gays through there research then it is true to the reseach unless gays are liars. If it was research done by a religious organization then I would agree to some biasness. But it is not.

Yes but you did not mention heterosexual pedophilia. Just like a creationist you have ignored the half of the statistics that would be a counter to your view.

Quote

My answer to your poll is mankind is inherently evil, including gays, and it takes the grace of God to change that nature since mankind has failed to do so on its own.

OK. I acknowledge your opinion. I think you are miserable for holding it, and I would hate to think of anyone in charge of any large organisation that deals with people, whether they be in trouble or not, sharing such a pessimistic and frankly snake oil salesman-like view of humanity. You think that there is something inherently wrong with people that can only be fixed by the magic potion in your bottle. I reject that as patent nonsense.

Quote

Again, you find me good data on mankinds general disposition of being good, then I will accept it. Mankinds does not keep good morality statistics. But mankind does keep statistics on its evilness (prison statistics is a great source in comparision of the general public). The ratio is balanced and unprejudiced.

And you still have not defined ‘evil’ and demonstrated its relationship to prison stats. All you have really given is reactionary hot air and accompanied it with data that may or may not have any relevance.

Quote

You just wish to prove that the gay is a poor dredge from society unfairly picked on. No differant than the blackman, handicapped, female, athiest etc. I don't buy into your stuff.

No, I wish you to acknowledge that 6.6% of the population plus your personal jaundiced view distorted by the contents of your book of religious mythology does not constitute a good argument that humans are evil, whatever that means. AND on the specific subject of homosexuality it is completely true that christian homophobes DO pick on gays. While they are not the only ones or even the most significant group to do so, very few of the others who persecute gays have a book that they claim to be infallible on the subject of homosexuals deserving death.

I think it is pretty clear that all you can say is that humans are human, and that means that there is good and bad in the world, as defined by what you consider to be good and bad.

I consider christians preaching from a book that describes in its later half homosexuals as ‘worthy of death’ to be bad. They are the good people who are made to do evil by their religion, as the Steven Weinberg quote goes.

Stuart

[Constitutionalist]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34291794/ns/us_news-faith/

L.A. Episcopalians elect gay assistant bishop
Rev. Mary Glasspool still needs approval from national leaders

Progress or Abomination?

[terraricca]

hi ron
at theyr fruit you will recongnise my sheep,this ordination as theacher i wonder what is theachings will be ?

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 06 2009,10:35)

hi ron at theyr fruit you will recongnise my sheep,this ordination as theacher i wonder what is theachings will be ?

Yes it is something to meditate on.

[NickHassan]

Hi CON,
Why are the wicked activities of the whore of babylon relevant?

[followerofJesus]

hello Constitutionalist.

lets just stick to Biblical truths. read leviticus 18 verse 22. homosexuals working within the “church” is not a good thing, do not forget that the light and darkness can not mix,

we seem to be living an an age where people are preaching what has become known as the “comfortable gospel” where instead of exposing the lies and false truths we seem to be lax (if that is the right word) and there is things such as homosexual, priests etc… and gay weddings.

God specifically made it known that man is for woman and woman is for man. also focus on leviticus 18 verse 26-29

like take what NH said “Why are the wicked activities of the whore of babylon relevant?”
that could show the lax nature of which I speak. read Mark 16 verse 15, such nature could be out of ignoring Matthew 5 verse 13-16

NH do you not hink that homosexual within the church is an abomination? how could one simply ignore the influence religious leaders could have on people. not to mention the young who grow up with such negative inluences, unfortunately many believe that God will br okay with the wrong that they do. Although He has made his feelings clear on alot of things

Revelation 17 speaks of the whore of babylon, you might want to study verse 6. though let us try an disuss instead of argue

[Author]

Posts