Peter BE cimp

So your saying I support the killing of gays, because that would be a direct insult to me and I'm pretty sure that's against the rules... And you might want to research what a Bible verse means before you use it in an argument. When the Bible says "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor", it means you can't tell them something that directly goes against what the Bible says is the law, so pretty much you can't lie about the Bible. The Bible does say that being gay is wrong, however, so I'm not sinning when I say it's wrong, and I'm not bearing false witness.

If I was to 'drop something personal', you'd have more trouble understanding it then you would feeling bad about it. But please, we're all good people just trying to get our points across, some of us just seem to have a little more trouble than others with their points, but that's all in their head, and there's nothing we can do about it.

Well how is your penis operating, if you don't mind me asking? And I was planing on using some form of logic (which will quickly be forced away by all you guys who fallow me around on this site) to help you first understand that being strait works better, and for you to understand that if your strait, you wont have to worry about what other people think about you (unless you already don't so you can ignore all of this). And then after that, maybe I would pray, and use the Bible to help you, however much all you "geniuses" don't like it. And I'm sure you'd happily "jump down the throat" of anyone or anything that you think is 'harmful' or 'ineffective', with more then just your words.

I don't know, but this might help... http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/C107/m107bpfruitdis.html It could be some type of bacteria that eats plastic; you said the bottle looked chewed on. Or maybe someone was trying to smuggle foreign microbes, hidden inside of hundreds of lemon juice bottles, into our country as some sort of, biohazardes terrorist attack.

Well obviously YOU can't, and I wasn't planning on it, but again, you can't get any help if you don't want to be helped. Also, I can only give you so much help until someone tries to jump down my throat, which apparently only takes one comment to happen.

If you honestly want help with it, and your devoted to it, then there is help you can get. Talk to people who know more about it than I do though. If you want help from me then I can give you as much help as I can, but it'll be harder to get a point across here with all the dogs on this site barking up my tree and humping my legs.

Is it better to ban someone because they're being stupid then to help them be smart? Why you no help people not be trolls? Then again, dogs can barely help themselves, and as a troll myself, I strive to get banned from websites and annoy the crap out of people. But John has a good point, if majority calleth, then majority rules. If a group of kids get annoyed with how obnoxious a teacher is being, then they have the right to over throw them and start their own class. ░░░░░▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄░░░░░░░ ░░░░░█░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░▀▀▄░░░░ ░░░░█░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░▒▒▒░░█░░░ ░░░█░░░░░░▄██▀▄▄░░░░░▄▄▄░░░░█░░ ░▄▀▒▄▄▄▒░█▀▀▀▀▄▄█░░░██▄▄█░░░░█░ █░▒█▒▄░▀▄▄▄▀░░░░░░░░█░░░▒▒▒▒▒░█ █░▒█░█▀▄▄░░░░░█▀░░░░▀▄░░▄▀▀▀▄▒█ ░█░▀▄░█▄░█▀▄▄░▀░▀▀░▄▄▀░░░░█░░█░ ░░█░░░▀▄▀█▄▄░█▀▀▀▄▄▄▄▀▀█▀██░█░░ ░░░█░░░░██░░▀█▄▄▄█▄▄█▄████░█░░░ ░░░░█░░░░▀▀▄░█░░░█░█▀██████░█░░ ░░░░░▀▄░░░░░▀▀▄▄▄█▄█▄█▄█▄▀░░█░░ ░░░░░░░▀▄▄░▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░▒░░░█░ ░░░░░░░░░░▀▀▄▄░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░█░ ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▀▄▄▄▄▄░░░░░░░░█░░

As a good christian, I'm always going to disagree with any proof you try to give me. Also as a high school student, none of you will ever win an argument with me because your point will never get across to me; I'll always find some fault in your argument whether it's correct or not. On another note, and I'm sorry John that I've been neglecting your question, no I don't think people like getting killed for their sexual orientation, but we're not the ones doing the killing. This may sound very American-self-centered, but it's they're choice to continue to be gay in a country that kills them for it, and/or continue to live in the country that kills them for their own decisions in life. If they honestly don't want to be killed for their lifestyle, but they don't want to leave their home-land, something's going to have to change, or they gonna die. Life is all about choice, but whether you make them or not is your problem. We are not dogs, we don't have tails, and we all have our own opinions; that being the case makes it more stupid of people who continue to be stubborn in the face of death/persecution. You can say that maybe the people should stop doing the persecuting in the first place, but who's going to listen to you? Especially after all of you've been arguing with a high school student who has shown more education and all together smartness (and I love to use that made up term) than a whole lot of the people that have tried and failed to make me look bad (pardon my cockiness). To be the mature adolescent here, I'm going to end this thread with saying that, what I've gotten out of this, and in the interest of the ORIGINAL QUESTION; you guys have your opinions, however much based on "facts", and I have mine, however much based on logic. I don't care about anything else anyone has to say, yall may continue to argue about this, just know that I was the one who started it, and now I'm finishing it. Let's see how many un-likes I can get from that, I'm aiming for 10.

And then I was like "cool story bro". Porn isn't humping everything, it's just humping people. I seriously meant humping everything, cause that's what dogs do. Unless by porn you mean watching dogs hump stuff, but I wont judge you. When a mommy and a daddy love each other very much, they don't go and try to have sex with a random guys leg... Are you guys comparing humans to dogs as a whole, or just yourselves? I like how much effort you guys are putting into this, it really shows what you care about in life.

To answer your question John, you must first answer mine; why do you engage in conversations that will never effect you in life? Along with that, why must you be so judgmental of other people's opinions?

Why do you engage in conversations that will never effect you in life? My final thing to say about this (mostly because this is getting me no where and it's getting boring), the thing that mostly confuses me about homosexuality, is that it doesn't work. Penises don't fit inside of penises, nor vaginas inside of vaginas. The Bible tells me it's wrong so obviously I'm going to be against it, but it also confuses me because it doesn't work, at all, what so ever. Monkeys do "gay" things to show domination, but in humans it's not like we're fighting for territory. Penguins do it because they're stupid and can't tell the difference between their own genders, but we're not that dumb (unless we are). Dogs do it because they're dumb and they just like humping stuff, but humans don't like to go around humping things, as far as I know. So why? Why do it if it doesn't make any sense to anything about your life?

If sexuality is a nature, then why does homosexuality exist, because it completely goes against the basic need for parents to ensure the survival of the next generation. You can all agree with me that in nature, the main thing that all parents want is to ensure the survival of their children, so they can grow up and have children and so on. Being gay, or lesbian, eliminates the ability to have your own natural kids (being gay eliminates it all together), so doesn't that go completely against the need to ensure the survival of the species, by making there no next generation? And again with that; if the nature of any parent is to make babies so they can make more babies, then homosexuality can never be "natural". Obviously it's not going to take a week, but if I really wanted to be gay, then I could become gay. It may take a while, but I, and anyone else that really wanted to, could do it. And that goes vise versa as well; if a gay person really thought that they shouldn't be gay, they could, and it may take a while, become not gay. If it's not a natural urge, but it's not a choice, then what makes people gay? I could say sin, but all of you would jump down my throat, so you tell me, what drives people to become gay?

Then what is the 60%? And no genius, I wasn't expecting a tail, but a defining chromosome might do. And to define it as a mental preference, or a preference in general, a choice is an act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities and a preference is a greater liking for one alternative over another or others. If you are gay, that means you prefer your gender over the opposite gender, and I'm sure someone can say 'there's so much more to it then that', but that's a true and over all definition. Thus making it a preference, and a preference is something you yourself agree to think of, and that's why I called it a mental preference. I forget exactly what the story was, but on the news was where I heard gays being compared to blacks. Just as a little side note, which also connects to this, are people born racist, or do they choose to be racist because an external source influenced them?

Why use a physical characteristic to help prove a mental preference? This is why I question why being black is compared to being gay. They didn't choose to be black, and they didn't choose to be left-handed (although you can change that though it takes a long time). Anyone that has any preferences over something else has chosen to like that thing better then something else (besides allergies). But even allergies isn't a perfect exception because I know people that love the food they're allergic to. It's true that you can think that you 'discovered' you were gay, but that means at one point or another you chose to think that way, and it's taken how ever long to realize that you like the decision you made.

How do you discover your sexual preference? Do you just one day have an 'AHA!' moment and say your gay? Also, if a person was taught to be strait, but then went against their teachers and became gay, doesn't that mean they chose to be gay over being strait? As for all those citations, none of them were exact; they were all undetermined, in that they are open for further research. Not to mention that the first three were all by the same people, so there are some biases there, and the fourth one has that last sentence that definitely leaves it up for debate. Also nothing I said had anything to do with math, so your correct, it's not math.

When I started going to school and saw that girls are attractive, and that's the way my parents taught me to be. But my parents teaching me isn't a genetic part or me, nor is my thinking girls are pretty, it's just the way I grew up and my surrounding influences. My question was sorta why people compare gays to blacks (along with other things). Also, all the people that I know that are LGB chose it later in life when they started to think for themselves, not genetically when they were conceived.

I think this works for ethics, but I wanted to open a new discussion on this, and for future references, I'm not homophobic, I'm not racist, and I don't segregate against any religions. I've heard people try to connect being gay to being black, in that being gay, or having any sexual preference, is not a choice. That you are born gay and you can't change that, and that's people's arguments on why gay people shouldn't be segregated against (witch I think is extremely insulting to black people because they went into slavery, gays aren't even close to that). I want to know what people think, because personally, I think (and I'm pretty sure) that it's completely a choice to be gay or lesbian or bisexual or strait. My argument is that there are no defining characteristics about a gay person that make them gay (besides their own personal preference). But personal preference is not genetic, it doesn't have a specific DNA code, and you can't genetically and scientifically prove why someone likes one thing over another. You can use back ground information to prove why someone might like something, but you can't prove it exactly, and preferences always change. So what are some arguments against that (I'm open to criticism to the extent of the rules)?

All right, I refrain my previous comment on gays from this thread, so if anyone wants to discuss this then please make a new one on that topic (I might actually). Zapatos I was agreeing with you that it is insulting to make assumptions about people based on their group affiliation, but I was commenting that it wasn't a good connection to add in that the Irish are considered 'drunkards' (or the Poles are considered dumb or blacks considered lazy). I agree with your statements, but I disagree with some of your arguments.

Depending on who you are, Catholics never take The Bible literally and/or take The Bible too literally, because they have things about their religion that are not in any other religion that uses The Bible, but that's entirely based on personal belief. It is true that from a human view, all religion is is just personal chosen life-styles, and if you are religious, you believe that there is something driving you to be religious, whether it's a deity or a self knowledge or self enlightenment or you fill in the blank. However, you cannot say that since different Catholics have different personal beliefs makes them a non-existing religious group (and correct me if I misinterpreted that). If a Muslim, for instance, and not to sound discriminate, goes and joins a group of terrorist extremist Muslims, does that make him no longer a Muslim? It was a little wrong to connect someone being Irish to someone being Catholic, because it's like how people try to connect someone being gay to someone being black, it makes no sense (they didn't choose to be black, but they chose to be gay. They didn't choose to be Irish, but they chose to be catholic). BUT it is true that you can't disregard someone from part of a group of people just because of the personal decisions they make. It is insulting to them because you are taking away their identity because of their lifestyle. Sometimes this is necessary, however, because as most religions say, if someone is saying they are some religion, but never practice or preform any of the necessities of that religion, then they are lying to themselves. But as a general definition, it is insulting to say someone is not part of a religion because of their personal choices. Instead of just saying that they are wrong, however again, you can help them find out what they are doing incorrectly and try to help them to stop doing what they're doing wrong.

For Pwnies, false, the bit about homosexuals changed as well. It is true that the Bible advocated the killing of homosexuals and of disobedient children, how ever, this is because we ere in the Old Covenant. Again, this is because Jesus' died for out sins, and since He did, we are now under New Covenant, one that doesn't have such harsh punishments. In Luke 22:20 Jesus says "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood." The 10 commandments were a basic set of rules that were not subject to the fact that people were and are sinful, and correct me if I said that wrong, but what I mean is that since people in the Old Testament were not saved by Jesus' blood, they still needed to give sacrifices (which was part of the Old Covenant) and they needed to kill anyone that God told them to, i.e. cities, homosexuals, fallen children, ect. (which was also part of the Old Covenant). The 10 commandments were not part of the Old Covenant, and there for stayed active during the time of Jesus and after his death and resurrection. If you need proof of Jesus being resurrected, then I honestly can't give you a definite answer. However, I can give you proof of the Bible's historical accuracy, which I'm sure you can all look up when ever you want, but in the mean time, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Bible. Moontanman, please give me a religion that I can look into that has more prophecies that came true then the bibles. And finally, Moontman again, for your two questions at the bottom of your first comment, the first one, according to the Bible Jesus did walk the Earth during the time of His apostles, when he resurrected, and so far, the Bible has been correct about so many things, my thoughts are it would be foolish to discredit the rest. (Read that wiki page.) For the second question, please explain more what you mean. And finally for the slavery comment, that was because of people changing the words around, or leaving parts out of the Bible, so they could be justified. The Bible does say slaves do what your master says, but it also says masters be kind to your slaves. Not to mention that slaves back then weren't anything like the slaves we had here. Slaves back in Bible times had nothing to do with race, instead they chose to be slaves to have a place to live. America has been the only country to have slaves based on race. Slave owners would use the Bible verse Ephesians 6:5, "slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling", but would purposely leave out verses such as Colossians 4:1, "Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven."

Oh you means the bits in the Old Testament, when people weren't saved by Jesus' death on the cross. Yes I have read those bits, and I've read the New Testament, where people don't have to die for their sins. For an "expert" you don't know much about giving a full-proof argument. And for that very first comment Miss Pwnies, did you look up what the most persecuted religion was, or did you just go with the obvious second choice of Judaism? Because I include the early parts of Judaism when I say Christianity is persecuted (although when I first said it I meant now a days, not through out history). Judaism was what started Christianity, and if we were talking about all the persecution through out history, Christianity, including while it was Judaism, is more persecuted than just Judaism as we know it today. Finally, for Christians being sued, do you ever watch the news? Or do you just watch the faulty area based news? Because multiple times there have been news reports of so and so getting brought to court for not selling something to a gay person/couple. For instance: Jack Philips, the owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado, refused to give a wedding cake to a same-sex couple who wanted to celebrate their wedding. Jack Philips was brought to court and the ALJ ruled against Jack. http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2013/12/06/3035121/colorado-bakery-broke-law/# for the full story. Also, Barronelle Stutzman, a florist in Washington, was sued for refusing a gay couples wedding, saying that her belief in jesus did not allow her to provide flowers for the wedding. http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2013/04/10/washington-state-sues-florist-refusing-gay-couples-wedding for more. And one more Bakery... http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/01/21/christian-bakery-guilty-violating-civil-rights-lesbian-couple/ But I didn't post this to offend any of the gay community; although I disagree with your decision, I don't want to stone you for it (because we're not living in the New Testament!!!). I have many gay and lesbian friends that are very close to me, I think that it is very much your option to be gay or lesbian or bi, and I feel terrible for you when I see fellow Christians say the degrading things that they do; I'm not trying to be like them, I'm just trying to get my point across.

For proof, the Quran was started in 609 AD (or CE), and was finished 632 AD. By that time, I'm pretty sure everyone had finger prints, the first mountain tunnel was built and completed in the 6th century BC, people have always dumped their waste in rivers and oceans; people would use rivers as a toilette and a way to get rid of dead bodies. And also the Bible says the exact same thing; that the Israelites would have their own land. For the prosecution, they also must be the loudest in 3rd world countries because Christians in most of Africa and India and other third world countries are being persecuted as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians#Current_situation_.281989_to_present.29 Also what does being the loudest have anything to do with anything anyways? If religions aren't speaking up about their being persecuted, then it's obviously not as bad as they say it is. For Christians, it is that bad; we get sued for having our faith here in America, other Christians get beat, tortured, and killed in third world countries, and personally I'm constantly getting harassed by people who have no idea what they're talking about just so they can say they're "helping society" (granted I'm still in high school). I was being sarcastic when I called it my ignorance, but to answer your question, what's better for you; knowing that your government kills people because they say their secrets, or would you rather just not know about the secrets in the first place? Would you be happier if you knew that your government wasn't perfect, or that it can't really protect you as well as you think, or would you rather just not think about it at all? Although I was joking by calling it my ignorance, that ignorance helps me not to be worried or stressed out all the time. You might not be stressed out by knowing the flaws of this world, and personally I'm not either because it's all just sin, but other people are constantly paranoid about the government because they think it'll fail at anytime or it'll go on a population control killing spree. Finally, where in the Bible does it say to persecute others? I've been quoting the Bible, giving you specific verses, and I've been giving you versus from the Quran, so give me a specific verse that tells Christians to persecute people, maybe you're reading it wrong/taking it the wrong way.

All of the things you said are good arguments, and quite honestly we could be going back and forth at this for the rest of this site's existence, but for all the prophecies that haven't been fulfilled, if you believed in what the Bible says, you'd know that they haven't been fulfilled YET, and that they are going to in the future, before and when Jesus comes back. For the prophecies of other religions, mainly Islam, all of the prophecies that came true are either the same as Christian prophesies; the Quran says that Israel's people would be able to go back to their own land, . Or the prophesies were all ready coming true or all ready true by the time they were being prophesied; the Quran prophesied fingertips ("Their skins will bear witness against them as to what they have been doing" (41:21), pollution ("Corruption has spread on land and sea because of what men's hands have wrought" (30:42), and mountain tunnels ("And when the mountains are made to move." (81:4). And as a little side note, more Christian predictions have come true then any other religion's. For Christianity being the most persecuted religion, just Google "What is the most persecuted religion?". And for irreducible complexity, yes they are explainable, but that doesn't back up your argument. You can explain why something is what it is, for instance, you can explain why oranges are coloured orange, but you can't explain why oranges aren't blue, or purple. You can explain why gravity pulls you down, but you can't explain why it doesn't throw you out, and why it doesn't work in reverse. For my "argument of ignorance", my ignorance has given me hope in life, and a good set of rules to live by. Now I ask what do you live for, because I live for a better purpose, one that could easily make everyone happy if they'd listen to it. Before you comment back on this, please just think about my arguments. Research them, see how realistic they are, and find as many faults as you can, because the more you point out my flaws, they more I'll learn what I can fix. And please this time give more thought into your arguments. And also, for the Christians that persecute others, I try not to think of them as true Christians. The Bible says to live with love, witch they are not, so I don't accept them as my brothers and sisters, that my opinion though.

Explain to me what you mean by PRATT, and I'll give you a better response than this, but my evidence for God is the complexity of life, and how the stuff that was written in the Bible, mainly the Old Testament prophesies, came true. First, in the Bible, in Amos 9:15, Amos predicted that the Jew's would be restored as a nation and would never be uprooted again. This came true 1948 when the country Israel was created. Many times have the surrounding countries tried to take Israel back, but none have succeeded. Another prophesy that came true was that Ezekiel tells about the fall of the great city Tyre, claiming that the Lord “will cause many nations to come up against thee,” (Ezekiel 26, 27).This was fulfilled in 586-583 BC when Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, lays siege against the city. This was again fulfilled in the 370s BC when a king of Cyprus conquers the city. Later in 332 BC Alexander the Great conquers the city. Then in 315-316 BC Antigonus, who served under Alexander, attacks and conquers the city. In 1124 the city fell to the Crusaders. And then in 1219 the city fell to the Muslim armies of the Mameluke. One more that came true, in Mathew 24:9, Jesus says that His disciples will be persecuted and hated by the majority of peoples for fallowing him. According to BBC, Christianity is now the most persecuted religion in the world. And for the complexity of life, I think of how spiders make webs. How something so small it's barely visible could make such a complex and strong structure as a web; how, if it were put together any other way, it wouldn't work, because with spider silk glands, everything has to do exactly what it does to make the silk, and if one thing didn't work, none of it would work. All of the above things are plenty of proof for me and many other people that God exists.

The way you put your list together could be used in anything to prove anything. For example: Everything is made of atoms. All atoms are made of tiny electrical things. If 1 is true then rocks are made of atoms. If 1 is true then chicken nuggets are made of atoms. If 2 is true then microscopically, rocks and chicken nuggets are made of the same thing. If 1, 2, and 5 are true, then you can eat rocks, and they will be exactly like chicken nuggets. Although you tried to make the argument simple and strait forward, it was too generally put together, and there for unsuitable for the question at debate. There are no actual atheists, because to be an atheist is to believe there are/is no God or gods at all. However, people who say they're atheist, if they are to do anything, would have to think that they are their own god, because if you want to do something, there has to be a force to make you do it, whether that be a God type figure, giving you life and energy to do the thing, or your own taking in of energy and your brain controlling your body to do the thing, and, in that case, making you your own god, and making you not an atheist (what you would be called is beyond me). The analogy of the house was logical because the house exists in its own space. The house does not exist anywhere else then where it is, and everything that is physically in the house and everything that makes up the house exists where it is and no where else (unless you believe in alternate dimensions). With God existing outside of space-time and still existing, it's like how I exist outside of my house. Say my house is space-time, it is made of stuff and it has stuff inside of it. The stuff inside of it cannot be the stuff that makes the house, and vice-versa. I coexist with everything in my house, and with my house itself and everything that makes it up. I can go into my house and exist inside my house, not being part of my house, and not being part of the things in my house, and I can go outside my house and exist outside my house, without being part of my house. All though this is a very crud analogy, God coexists with space-time, but he is not part of space-time. God is not one of the components that make space-time, like how I am not one of the components that make up my house. I can be inside my house, and not be part of my house, and I can be outside my house. God can be inside space-time, without being part of it, and He can be outside of it as well, and still not be part of it.