Sure they don't. And nor do you need government recognition to know that you are a Christian. But if the government did refuse to recognise your religion and made it illegal, this would be an outrageous infringment on your rights. It's exactly the same here.Who is we? I have known and read about many couples over the years say that they don't need government sanction to believe that their marriage is real.
There's an awful lot of things I believe in that I don't push the government on.Well why are you not pushing the government to recognize such marriages? How about two brothers? or Three brothers?
Thank you for that admission that you can't prove anything you say. If you say "You can't prove anything either," then your meaning is that neither of us can prove what we say.You cant prove anything you say either.
Thank you for admitting that you can't prove the mind/spirit is not physical.What is your evidence that the mind is what the brain does? I admit I cant prove that the mind/spirit is nonphysical, but there is evidence it exists. Personal identity thru time and if transgenderism is real, these two phenomenon plus the points I made above are strong evidence that the mind is primarily not based on the physical. In addition, some NDEs have not been explained by purely physical processes. If the mind is based purely on the physical then how do we have free will?
Your evidence that the mind exists in a nonphysical form is not worth taking seriously. Personal identity through time? That isn't evidence of a nonphysical mind or spirit. Transgenderism being real? Thanks, I think, but how is saying that a person has a strong and consistent set of thoughts evidence for the existence of the spiritual? NDEs? People having dreams. So what?
You're mixing up the burden of proof. I don't need evidence. You're the one who claims the spiritual exists. So you prove it. Or, if you can't prove it, provide evidence for it.What is your evidence that the nonphysical mind doesn't exist?
In fact, there is. The laws of our society show that we have decided that such a right does exist. And now I am interested in uncovering your reasons for saying that this right should not be extended to gay people.There is no such right as I proved earlier.
I mean, I'm pretty sure I know that your reasons are purely religious. I'm just interested in helping you to see it.
Hmmm.No, just take that one little step in logic and you will know the cause of the universe.
IA: I don't know why the universe started.
Ed: Because God.
IA: How do you know?
Ed: Well, you just said you don't know. But I do.
IA: Prove it.
Ed: Well, you can't prove it wasn't God, so it must be.
IA: And your evidence?
Ed: I don't need any. It's just logic.
"Former". Christians now, are they? I imagine they grew up in a Christian society?Like former atheist cosmologists who never had any contact with Christians much less Christian apologists?
You might actually be close to grasping the truth here. We shall see.The same way I know my physical senses are reliable.
So, you can test your physical senses? Against the physical world, right? Your physical senses inform you that there is a wall in front of you, and you can reach out and touch it.
So, how do you test that your moral sense is accurate?
You're right. God may or may not be good.He doesn't have to be to give us a reliable moral conscience. He may or may not be good when He gives us the conscience. Or He may be good yet not prove it to us but rather He gives the moral conscience to us so we can make our own determination of whether He is good. And it turns out that is the case.
Since you have stated that it is God who says what is good and what is not, you have no way of knowing.
Upvote
0