Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Christian Forums is looking to bring on new moderators to the CF Staff Team! If you have been an active member of CF for at least three months with 200 posts during that time, you're eligible to apply! This is a great way to give back to CF and keep the forums running smoothly! If you're interested, you can submit your application here!
No black people arent in any way dysfucntional, same sex relations are. Can you not tell the difference between a black person and a same sex act?So...black people are dysfunctional?
To BigBadWlf,
Tough, these minority ideas are dysfunctional perverted and error, the ideas should be discriminated against, if the minority see themselves as having their identities in error then the message is God has much better plans for them to live life to the full.
Wait wait wait. I am supposed to provide thousands of references to legitimately published studies (as if I havent done so already in a half dozen threads) in order to be reasonable but when I ask those voting for choice to provide any actual evidence all I get is the faint sound of crickets chirping?I think you might have some great things to say on this topic, but you are handling it very poorly. You can't just type "All available evidence suggests..." and not back it up with citations or at least some credible examples. Really? All available evidence? If I brought that kind of statement to my university prof he would have thrown me out of the classroom.
Minorities are minorities weather that minority is left-handed people, Muslims or HispanicsTo BigBadWlf,
No black people arent in any way dysfucntional, same sex relations are. Can you not tell the difference between a black person and a same sex act?
man, BigBadWolf is catching it.
Wait wait wait. I am supposed to provide thousands of references to legitimately published studies (as if I havent done so already in a half dozen threads) in order to be reasonable but when I ask those voting for choice to provide any actual evidence all I get is the faint sound of crickets chirping?
There are thousands. Here are a couple pages.Well, if you want to be taken seriously - the usual requirement is minimum one or two references, yes. Moreover, non-biased references are bound to receive more respect.
It seems part of your battle is against those who hold biblical interpretations as absolutes, but you are also speaking in absolutes when you state things like, "all available evidence suggests [insert your point here.]"
The idea that all evidence is in your favour could only hold true if there are no other studies documented contrary to your argument. Is that your claim?
There are thousands. Here are a couple pages.
Now about comparable evidence for choice .? Im ready for a chorus of crickets
Actually it is a selection from a list I keep on the topic. Thank you very muchYou could copy and past the whole list you found, but it still doesn't add up to 'all available evidence.' Those are your words.
Since you didnt actually post any of these I am guessing you dont want to be taken seriouslyI quickly googled the words, "sexual orientation inborn" and in the first page of hits were references to research that counters your argument.
Actually it is a selection from a list I keep on the topic. Thank you very much
Since you didnt actually post any of these I am guessing you dont want to be taken seriously
Actually it is a selection from a list I keep on the topic. Thank you very much
Since you didn’t actually post any of these I am guessing you don’t want to be taken seriously
I also noted that royaltybyadoption claimed to have countering evidence but for some reason didnt feel like posting it.Wolf,
I think you are misunderstanding the point he is addressing. You have made an absolute statement therefore a single instance contrary to your statement makes your assumption invalid. Howerver, this statement would be more fitting: All available evidence to you suggest....
I'll continue later...
Respectfully,
William
From the tone of your reply I am left with the idea that you really didnt want any references to be given despite the fact you suggested that references be posted.You could copy and past the whole list you found, but it still doesn't add up to 'all available evidence.' Those are your words.
I quickly googled the words, "sexual orientation inborn" and in the first page of hits were references to research that counters your argument.
So, not all available evidence supports your claim. Some "research" supports your claim, and some does not.
In addition, just pasting in a list you found on someone else's site is not a compelling argument. Plenty of citations in that list are not directly related to your argument. And who are these people? What type of study? Are they just grad papers with statistics of survey results from a handful of test subjects?
Then you change your mind suggesting that despite the fact we are called to reason together Christians should ignore science, or more accurately we should ignore science that doesnt produce the results we want. That is hardly conductive to reasoning.And.... yeah -- you really need to use the bible in this forum if you want to prove a solid point.
From the tone of your reply I am left with the idea that you really didn’t want any references to be given despite the fact you suggested that references be posted.
So a long list of references was posted and for some reason that prompted you to go on what amounts to a personal attack. I notice that you didn’t show that any of the references provided were inadequate or being wrongly represented rather you complained about the fact thath the list (which you wanted) was posted in the first place.
And then,….
No minds were changed. Are you saying the bible is ignoring science?Then you change your mind suggesting that despite the fact we are called to reason together Christians should ignore science, or more accurately we should ignore science that doesn’t produce the results we want. That is hardly conductive to reasoning.
I believe you should speak to your above mentioned college professor about the dangers of using secondary sources.Dude,
You are now entering troll territory with your posting style. Why should I do your homework for you? You started it and didn't back it up.
This is not my argument. I'm starting to doubt your intentions on this topic. However this page is from the first page of google results. The forums won't let me post a proper link to the page so I this is it in it's entirety:
Latest Twin Study Confirms
Genetic Contribution To SSA Is Minor
As in previous studies, identical twins usually differ for SSA.
By N.E. Whitehead, Ph.D.
*snip*
I must note that you cut and pasted this essay without referencing its sourceAnd your lack of proper citations speaks for itself.
Wolf,
I think you are misunderstanding the point he is addressing. You have made an absolute statement therefore a single instance contrary to your statement makes your assumption invalid.
Well, if you want to be taken seriously - the usual requirement is minimum one or two references, yes. Moreover, non-biased references are bound to receive more respect.
And.... yeah -- you really need to use the bible in this forum if you want to prove a solid point.
I must note that you cut and pasted this essay without referencing its source
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?