Islam: Our Partners in Peace...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyfi

I did my time with you there 12 years ago. Maybe you should stick to Mtrys school of Cables and become one of his disciples again over Audioholics.

---

And yet, we're still waiting for that proof. After all, this is science, which is based on testable facts, not faith-based religion, right?

The next time I have a question, I think I'll send a PM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markw

When they are capable of reproducing on their own.

---

Now we must limit marriage to couples who will and are capable of reproducing. A young man returning from war without his testicles will not be allowed to marry because he cannot reproduce. A young woman who is infertile will need to remain a spinster. A person born with both genders who is always sterile cannot marry the opposite of whatever gender they choose for themselves. If a man due to prostate cancer has his testicles removed to lengthen his life will his marriage be annulled?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnMichael

Now we must limit marriage to couples who will and are capable of reproducing. A young man returning from war without his testicles will not be allowed to marry because he cannot reproduce. A young woman who is infertile will need to remain a spinster. A person born with both genders who is always sterile cannot marry the opposite of whatever gender they choose for themselves. If a man due to prostate cancer has his testicles removed to lengthen his life will his marriage be annulled?

---

It's logic like that that makes gays look stupid. They are the exception to the rule and don't skew the equation. It still maintains the natural ways of couples.

Now, when two people of the same sex can generate a child on their own, get back to me.
.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markw

It's logic like that that makes gays look stupid. They are the exception to the rule and don't skew the equation. It still maintains the natural ways of couples.

Now, when two people of the same sex can generate a child on their own, get back to me.
.

---

Be very careful who you are calling stupid. I was just following your logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnMichael

Be very careful who you are calling stupid. I was just following your logic.

---

Not very well, apparantly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn

The next time I have a question, I think I'll send a PM.

---

There's nothing wrong with asking questions... Unless AR changes its forum policies, then you should feel free to ask what you want in this section...

I'm not an atheist, yet I am annoyed that a great deal of organized religion is intolerant of persons questioning their beliefs... Or if you can ask the question, you need to be willing to accept the official answer given by the 'church' or risk having your membership revoked...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markw

It's logic like that that makes gays look stupid. They are the exception to the rule and don't skew the equation. It still maintains the natural ways of couples.

Now, when two people of the same sex can generate a child on their own, get back to me.
.

---

So it's all about reproduction Mark? My husband and I made a concious decision, before we got married, not to have children. As far as I know we are both perfectly capable of having children, we just choose not to. Do you think that we shouldn't have been allowed to marry?

I think that marriage is about love and commitment. If two people love each other and want to make a commitment to each other why shouldn't they be allowed to do so? The ability or desire to reproduce shouldn't have any bearing on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn

So it's all about reproduction Mark? My husband and I made a concious decision, before we got married, not to have children. As far as I know we are both perfectly capable of having children, we just choose not to. Do you think that we shouldn't have been allowed to marry?

I think that marriage is about love and commitment. If two people love each other and want to make a commitment to each other why shouldn't they be allowed to do so? The ability or desire to reproduce shouldn't have any bearing on it.

---

That's a part of it but it's more of a "mating" of two bloodlines to pass the best of their genes, and possibly beliefs, on to another generation, not to mention financial /political continuity. That's why marriage has traditionally been between a man and a woman, for all societies, since the beginning of time. That's the reason for the male/female pairing, not raw sex per se.

As for your "conscious decision", that's your choice but you don't know what you're missing, or missed. I'm glad to have raised three boys into fine men and now they are working on six grandkids, so far. Yes, it took a bit of sacrifice and a lot of work but it was worth it. There's more to life than money.

That's why marriage has traditionally been between a man and a woman, for all societies, since the beginning of time. That's the reason for the male/female pairing, not raw sex per se.





In classical antiquity, writers such as Herodotus,[1] Plato,[2] Xenophon,[3] Athenaeus[4] and many others explored aspects of same-sex love in ancient Greece. The most widespread and socially significant form of same-sex sexual relations in ancient Greece was between adult men and adolescent boys, known as pederasty. (However, marriages in Ancient Greece between men and women were also age structured, with men in their 30s commonly taking wives in their early teens.) Though homosexual relationships between adult men did exist, at least one member of each of these relationships flouted social conventions by assuming a passive sexual role. It is unclear how such relations between women were regarded in the general society, but examples do exist as far back as the time of Sappho.[5]

The ancient Greeks did not conceive of sexual orientation as a social identifier, as Western societies have done for the past century. Greek society did not distinguish sexual desire or behavior by the gender of the participants, but rather by the role that each participant played in the sex act, that of active penetrator or passive penetrated.[5] This active/passive polarization corresponded with dominant and submissive social roles: the active (penetrative) role was associated with masculinity, higher social status, and adulthood, while the passive role was associated with femininity, lower social status, and youth.[5


Homosexuality was not frowned upon in Greece. The Theban army was composed of a Sacred Band, battalions of men with male lovers on the battlefield with them. The thought was they would fight harder to save and impress the one they loved.

Remember, Alexander had male lovers.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla, Roman general and dictator, had many relationships with other males.

Julius Caesar was called the Queen of Bithnyia by his political enemies in Rome because of the time he spent in Anatolia with the King of Bithnyia when he was younger.

Believe it. Also, Alexander and Julius Caesar are two of the most worshiped men in history.



Shall I post more?

And, where is Greece today?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markw

That's a part of it but it's more of a "mating" of two bloodlines to pass the best of their genes, and possibly beliefs, on to another generation, not to mention financial /political continuity. That's why marriage has traditionally been between a man and a woman, for all societies, since the beginning of time. That's the reason for the male/female pairing, not raw sex per se.

---

Did you ever stop to think why religions preach male/female marriage to have children as you say? Maybe it's the same reason they frown upon suicide.

If you pump out babies, and don't kill yourself, more money goes into the collection plate. And lately, lots of that money is going to lawyers defending priests who have homosexually raped the male youth of their own churches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyfi

Did you ever stop to think why religions preach male/female marriage to have children as you say? Maybe it's the same reason they frown upon suicide.

If you pump out babies, and don't kill yourself, more money goes into the collection plate. And lately, lots of that money is going to lawyers defending priests who have homosexually raped the male youth of their own churches.

---

HebephiliaFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
Hebephilia refers to the sexual preference for individuals in the early years of puberty (generally ages 11–14, though onset of puberty may vary). Girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11; boys at age 12 or 13. Hebephilia differs from ephebophilia, which refers to the sexual preference for individuals in later adolescence,[1] and from pedophilia, which refers to the sexual preference for prepubescent children.[2] While individuals with a sexual preference for adults (i.e., teleiophiles) may have some sexual interest in pubescent-aged individuals,[3] the term hebephilia is reserved for those who prefer pubescent-aged individuals over adults. The term was introduced by Glueck (1955),[4] who later credited it, without citation, to Paul Benedict.[5]

Debate is ongoing over whether hebephilia is a mental disorder, with Ray Blanchard and a number of his colleagues from CAMH arguing for its inclusion in the DSM-5.[6] The proposal has been criticized by Richard Green,[7] Allen Frances,[8] Michael First (DSM-IV editor),[8][9] Karen Franklin,[10] Charles Allen Moser,[11] William O'Donohue,[12] and other mental health professionals on various grounds. The current draft of the DSM-5, on which Blanchard serves as as Chair of the Paraphilias Sub-Work Group,[13] includes Blanchard's proposal.[14]






I think we need to be accurate on our terms. Homosexuals do not rape male youth. They are busy looking for a consenting adult who would love to have a loving relationship. There are many same sex couples who have loving, committed, supportive relationships. They have the same hopes and dreams as their straight counterparts.

Please do not confuse homosexuals with pedophiles or hebephiles.

[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible;360956]Mark, I have stayed clear of this argument, but your Neanderthal like perspective is pretty troubling. Marriage has been going on since the beginning of time, but so has rape, racism, and several other things. Considering the fact that the divorce rate sit firmly at 50%, one has to doubt whether this model is all that successful. All of my siblings have gone through a divorce, and I am the only one that didn't. We have 6 billion folks on this planet, so procreation has done its job, and is pretty much through as an excuse for keep things "as it is". Straight folks have done wonderful things with marriage(turns sarcasm button off). The institution is truly in a state of dysfunction, and at this point, it is not a beacon of light you are trying to make it.

* > Mr Peabody replied here> Uh, T-bone, either you weren't divorced because you were never married or your wife doesn't care if you are a straight up adulterer..... What's that you say P? What about the girl friend with the tattoo you kicked to the curb? Where she fit in with your model citizenship? You say you have kids that watch cartoons with you and on other posts your kids graduated top of the class at top colleges in the world, you need to take notes to your lies in order to keep yourself straight.

There are legal ramifications in any divorce, so that is a flimsy excuse for not allowing same sex marriage.

* > Mr Peabody replied here> We shouldn't allow it because marriage was never intended for same sex.

If even one person dies from a abortion clinic bombing, that is too many. Most prison rapes are done by those who consider themselves straight in society. Rape in prison is not about sexuality, it is about control. Unfortunately gays are victims of prison rapes far more than the are perpetrators.

* > Mr Peabody replied here> I agree that bombings and other violence is wrong and God would never approve nor does the Bible teach such things. Christians are to rebuke error in love and humility.

If it is such an aberration of nature, then why can you find it in nature so much? How many gays have to be created by God(man is his creation) and put on this earth before it becomes acceptable? There are millions of gays all over the world, and that is a lot of aberrations - is nature becoming dysfunctional? More and more are being born each day, so why does God let this happen if it is an aberration? Nobody on this planet who is gay wants to waste their time trying to convince you of anything, they have their lives to live.

* > Mr Peabody replied here> God created man but he did not make them gay.

Since you are not God, no one really has to accept anything just because you state it. Your proclamations are just your opinion, and that should be taken with a bag of salt. No where in the Bible does God or Jesus mention anything about homosexuality, so this is nothing more than the opinion of man, or laws created by man to control man.

* > Mr Peabody replied here> Better read that Bible again. Sounds like yours had some creative editing.

This I agree with.[/QUOTE

In addition, which is it Terry, on one hand you are the poster choir boy and here on this post you make the athist statement "bout homosexuality, so this is nothing more than the opinion of man, or laws created by man to control man". Funny statement for a self professed Christian on other threads. Again, better start taking some notes. Funny you call every one else liars when you can't back up what you say but you have more inconsistencies than any one else here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

______

---

If this is just a repost without being obvious what you have added it will be deleted. Take credit for your additions. No additions no duplicate post.

FA, Christians believe God is man's creator and as such there are things we as human will not understand while on this earth. Christians also believe that God will answer their prayers in accordance with His will. I can not answer why God allows some to die and some to live in a disaster. Why some live to a ripe old age while others don't get past their teens. Some of the latter has to do with man having free will, a world where greed and disregard of others runs rampid.

Hyfi, you are the one who claimed the Bible contradicted itself. I disagree it does whole heartedly.

Tithing is not binding today. Priests in the Old Testament had to come from the tribe of Levy. Other tribes were commanded to tithe 10% of whatever they did for a living to support the Levitical Priesthood. It was most likely rarely money, more likely grain, sheep, etc. Today in the NT Christians are told to take up a collection on the 1st day of the week to support their work. You will not find a corporate structured church in the Bible. Each congregation was autonomous. Christians are told to give as they have prospered and purpose in their heart. Matthew, Mark, Luke & John were with Jesus and witnessed to His life on earth. Again, I can't understand why you forward and hold true the fantasy you read over the Bible. If you put that much effort into reading and studying the Bible you'd find it coincides with secular history pretty well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnMichael

If this is just a repost without being obvious what you have added it will be deleted. Take credit for your additions. No additions no duplicate post.

---

I thought so too initially... but he actually completely disagrees with Sir T in the body of the post...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajani

I thought so too initially... but he actually completely disagrees with Sir T in the body of the post...

---

I saw the differences and I was wondering why he did not take credit for his part of the post. He made it look like it was just a repost.

I thought the replies automatically had a different font. How are you supposed to show your replies?

I know you go behind and love to delete my posts JM, i wouldn't mind so much if you were fair and did that to other people. I guess I should be flattered you take that much interest or dislike to them. You say you know Markw by his statements as I know you by your actions. Too bad others on this forum don't know just what a weasel you are. Up to this point you've hidden your ways pretty well, be careful what you post in the open lest they may discover as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

I thought the replies automatically had a different font. How are you supposed to show your replies?

I know you go behind and love to delete my posts JM, i wouldn't mind so much if you were fair and did that to other people. I guess I should be flattered you take that much interest or dislike to them. You say you know Markw by his statements as I know you by your actions. Too bad others on this forum don't know just what a weasel you are. Up to this point you've hidden your ways pretty well, be careful what you post in the open lest they may discover as well.

---

No posts deleted my paranoid friend. No you are not that important or interesting. Many on AR have met me and know me. Weasel is one who makes accusations based on a perceived wrong. Time to let it go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnMichael

Please do not confuse homosexuals with pedophiles or hebephiles.

---

My apologies for the wrong choice of words. I have no problems with homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals or any other alternative lifestyle groups as long as it happens between 2 consenting individuals without the threats of whatever these priests feed the kids.

Male on Male is still homosexuality as much as it is pedophilia when a child is involved. I'm pretty sure the majority of the alter boys would choose differently if given a chance while some may already be orientated that way.

As for Mr P's statement that god did not create gays....get a grip. If god created EVERYTHING, than there are no exceptions.

It is pretty much a proven fact that people can be born in the wrong bodies. Many times at birth, because of multiple sex organs, a family has to make a choice as to which one goes and which one stays. It isn't always the right choice for the adult that child will become.

And I am not that confused when I read the story anymore because in my heart, although there is some historical evidence, it is still just a story, twisted and molded into what it is today and the people who wrote it, were not there at the time any of it happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajani

A fair point.. Religious discussions probably should be off limits as they lead to heated and usually nasty discussions...

---

Like I said at some point earlier, don't discuss religion or politics (or cables) if you want discussion to remain polite. This is because people abandon rationality when they get into these topics. Religion in particular is non-rational by definition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajani

...
Also, you make a very wrong assumption in concluding that no one sees the difference between questioning and the insulting that Feanor chose to do... In fact, FA already made it clear that she disagreed with Feanor...

---

Silly of me, but I draw a distinction between denigrating an idea or mode of thought on the one hand and personally insulting an individual on the other. I forget that people invest so heavily in their ideas, that they see attacks on them as attacks on their persons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajani

...
Or if you can ask the question, you need to be willing to accept the official answer given by the 'church' or risk having your membership revoked...

---

In politics this is called the "questioning the party line". E.g. when Newt Gingrich described the Republican's current health care proposal as "right-wing social engineering".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

FA, Christians believe God is man's creator and as such there are things we as human will not understand while on this earth. Christians also believe that God will answer their prayers in accordance with His will. I can not answer why God allows some to die and some to live in a disaster. Why some live to a ripe old age while others don't get past their teens. Some of the latter has to do with man having free will, a world where greed and disregard of others runs rampid.

---

Mr. P, Thanks for your response. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on the matter and I am going to leave things at that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feanor

In politics this is called the "questioning the party line". E.g. when Newt Gingrich described the Republican's current health care proposal as "right-wing social engineering".

---

LOL.... That is exactly what I was thinking.... Though I chose to leave out the politics... If you are too vocal in your dissent from the official position of the Church or Political party you will be booted...

Coming from a Catholic upbringing, I'm well aware that many active Catholics (and other denominations) merely keep quiet about the various ways they totally disagree with the official position(s) of their church(es)...