• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Dad disowns his gay son in handwritten letter

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Look up the phrase "scientific theory" on Wikipedia and comprehend it's meaning. It's not just a "guess".
But it is true that science is based on guesses...on faith that these guesses are true. They are needed, for without them nothing can be done, but we have to be honest and say they are there.

Assumptions in formulating theories
An assumption is a statement that is accepted without evidence. For example, assumptions can be used as premises in a logical argument. Isaac Asimov described assumptions as follows:
...it is incorrect to speak of an assumption as either true or false, since there is no way of proving it to be either (If there were, it would no longer be an assumption). It is better to consider assumptions as either useful or useless, depending on whether deductions made from them corresponded to reality...Since we must start somewhere, we must have assumptions, but at least let us have as few assumptions as possible.[33]
 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
I don't really find that strange personally. Bisexuality is more common in women than in men (while homosexuality is more common in men), and "gay" women (or women that call themselves gay) are famous for sleeping with the enemy. I've been hit on by several lesbians myself..
I have to agree with this. Many "lesbians" will sleep with you, they just won't date you. I'm speaking from personal experience.
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,491
4,160
126
Because human sexuality is a continuum, not a binary condition. Attraction != behavior and vice-versa. There are many reasons people have sex, and sometimes those reasons have nothing to do with what gender they're inherently attracted to.

Of course, if you weren't so full of ignorance in these matters you'd understand that... and stop bringing up things that have been explained to you in numerous other threads.
Rob is fundamentally a liar. He can easily prove what he says. He can go and have sex with a man by choice. If he can he's actually gay and if he can't he doesn't have choice. What Rob wants to do is admire himself in the eyes of his god by pretending that he is good because he exercises choice to be straight and those bad people choose to be evil. He enjoys his egotistical self image, thus, in two ways. First off, he is going to live forever in heaven, and secondly, he is superior to gay people. This is all about self hating ego, the feeling of being so sinful in reality, that a delusion is required to feel OK. It is lying and moral cowardliness and the trap delusional religion depends on to lock people into a phony faith. Rob has been taught that any deviation from the garbage he was fed will mean he will wind up in hell. Sad, too, because where he is, IS hell. The mental illness he has is to be sick without any hope of repair because to get will he would have to go through hell, he would have to die to all his bull shit ego. What folk like Rob can't credence is that folk like me did that and found the real heaven. He can't know that he is transparent to people with real knowledge.

But the main thing is that while you can see he can't understand at all. This is why we say you can tell a bigot but you can't tell him much. But maybe, just maybe, he hungers for a deeper truth because he likes to debate. More likely, however, he just enjoys practicing and perfecting being sick. Powerfully inculcated states of denial create a condition like a crab with one giant claw. You have this one magnificent implement and you learn to love to use it. You don't get to savor your superior status unless you engage it.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,491
4,160
126
A stepdad killing the children, a female cutting off the head of her spouse and eating his body, and cannibalism are all quite present in animals. Just saying it is not a very good reason to say something should be allowed, as the same logic is then able to be applied to these things which should not be allowed.
Don't be absurd. The basis for why things should or should not be allowed is rooted in whose rights they affect. Your rights are not violated if some male wants to sleep with you if he just has that desire. Your rights are violated if somebody actually tries to eat you. What you are trying to do is to legislate reality to ban anything that disgusts you. This fundamental brain defect is a conservative trait. It is based on the linkage in childhood between some real world event and the gag reflex, a common way people are manipulated as children to behave, as in, conform to group standards or else, where the child is exposed to a dose of parental revulsion. We have to conform to this kind of manipulation to survive because as children we are totally dependent.

Sadly, it is very hard to overcome the gag reflex once oneself has been made its object. Nobody likes finding out that everything that disgusts them in the world is what they feel about themselves and repress.

This is why religion, real religion, asks for tolerance and forgiveness from God for others because the real forgiveness and tolerance we need is for ourselves. As long as you condemn others you will condemn yourself. This is what it means to be in hell.

So, my dear cybrsage, you live in an upside down world where everything that you judiciously attack as evil is who you really feel you are, and the greater the force and skill you apply to this endeavor the deeper your wrong-headedness becomes.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Don't be absurd. The basis for why things should or should not be allowed is rooted in whose rights they affect. Your rights are not violated if some male wants to sleep with you if he just has that desire. Your rights are violated if somebody actually tries to eat you. What you are trying to do is to legislate reality to ban anything that disgusts you. This fundamental brain defect is a conservative trait. It is based on the linkage in childhood between some real world event and the gag reflex, a common way people are manipulated as children to behave, as in, conform to group standards or else, where the child is exposed to a dose of parental revulsion. We have to conform to this kind of manipulation to survive because as children we are totally dependent.

Sadly, it is very hard to overcome the gag reflex once oneself has been made its object. Nobody likes finding out that everything that disgusts them in the world is what they feel about themselves and repress.

This is why religion, real religion, asks for tolerance and forgiveness from God for others because the real forgiveness and tolerance we need is for ourselves. As long as you condemn others you will condemn yourself. This is what it means to be in hell.

So, my dear cybrsage, you live in an upside down world where everything that you judiciously attack as evil is who you really feel you are, and the greater the force and skill you apply to this endeavor the deeper your wrong-headedness becomes.

You are railing against the wrong person, but the darkness in which you choose to live is preventing you from seeing that, since you cannot see in darkness. It is a flaw in your brain, some sort of defect, which makes you believe living in darkness is living in light. Those in the light can hear you flailing around in the darkness, but you cannot even see the light due to being in the darkness.

The sad thing is that, since your brain defect prevents you from knowing you are in darkness, you will not even attempt to leave the darkness, for you mistakingly believe that darkness is light. You can hear those in the light calling to you, if you stop deluding yourself, and you can leave your self imposed darkness at any time you choose. Self delusion, caused by a broken brain, is a hard thing to overcome, but I have hope you can do it.

One day, my other hope is you will find real religion and stop condemning others, as this condemns yourself as well.


You do know his position did not include any of what you claimed it contained, right? His position is simply if it is natural, it must not be bad. I was showing him that position is in error.
 
Last edited:

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,776
4
0
And that is why we invented computers, to make !@#$ legible.
Actually this is one of the very few handwritten notes I've been able to read, though with some effort. I hate handwriting.

As for the content...

this "father" is an absolute piece of shit, and a coward. Here he had an important choice-moment to either rise to a challenge, something out of his comfort zone, and be an important source of support for his son in what is no doubt a challenging time for that son, or be a cowardly little whiny piece of shit who can't handle any sort of adversity in his life.

This illustrates very clearly why it is so important for people to be informed of the scientific FACT that sexuality is not chosen.

Why would someone choose it if they had a father they knew or suspected would react this way? And if he has a father like this you can bet there are other people with that mindset in his life too.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Actually this is one of the very few handwritten notes I've been able to read, though with some effort. I hate handwriting.

As for the content...

this "father" is an absolute piece of shit, and a coward. Here he had an important choice-moment to either rise to a challenge, something out of his comfort zone, and be an important source of support for his son in what is no doubt a challenging time for that son, or be a cowardly little whiny piece of shit who can't handle any sort of adversity in his life.

This illustrates very clearly why it is so important for people to be informed of the scientific FACT that sexuality is not chosen.

Why would someone choose it if they had a father they knew or suspected would react this way? And if he has a father like this you can bet there are other people with that mindset in his life too.

Not saying he is choosing it, but many kids do things to purposefully piss off their parents as either a way to "test" them or as a way to get back at them for some perceived (real or not) slight from the past.


IMO, homosexuality is complex, and is like alcoholism in this regards. A person is genetically predisposed to a being homosexual (like alcoholics are predisposed to being alcoholics). Until one chooses to engage in a homosexual lifestyle (sex), then while one is still a homosexual (due to desires), that person has committed no sin. Same with a person who never drinks...a person predisposed to alcoholism never gets hooked on alcohol if they never actually have the first drink...and no sin is committed.

It is a very complex issue, what kind of person we are attracted to., partially genetic and partially social.

EDIT: IMO, many homosexuals throughout history (in the US at least) have wished they were straight if for no other reason than to not have the baggage that comes along with being gay. This is slowly changing (since the baggage is slowly being reduced). This shows who you are attracted to is certainly not just a choice. Who you have sex with is always a choice, but not who you are attracted to.
 
Last edited:

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,776
4
0
Not saying he is choosing it, but many kids do things to purposefully piss off their parents as either a way to "test" them or as a way to get back at them for some perceived (real or not) slight from the past.


IMO, homosexuality is complex, and is like alcoholism in this regards. A person is genetically predisposed to a being homosexual (like alcoholics are predisposed to being alcoholics). Until one chooses to engage in a homosexual lifestyle (sex), then while one is still a homosexual (due to desires), that person has committed no sin. Same with a person who never drinks...a person predisposed to alcoholism never gets hooked on alcohol if they never actually have the first drink...and no sin is committed.

It is a very complex issue, what kind of person we are attracted to., partially genetic and partially social.

EDIT: IMO, many homosexuals throughout history (in the US at least) have wished they were straight if for no other reason than to not have the baggage that comes along with being gay. This is slowly changing (since the baggage is slowly being reduced). This shows who you are attracted to is certainly not just a choice. Who you have sex with is always a choice, but not who you are attracted to.
There may be some truth in some of what you said there. I personally consider myself very predisposed to being an alcoholic because both of my grandfathers were, and I'm 100% Irish. Therefore, I have chosen to never start drinking in the first place.

I'm 32 and I have never even been buzzed.

I guess where we disagree is that I don't see why homosexuals should resist those urges, because I don't see the harm in it.

In fact it may help things since I believe we have a serious overpopulation problem.

As long as gay people aren't breaking into my house and tying me down and forcing me to watch them have sex... I don't see how it impacts me. I don't see anything inherently negative about it. It may be gross for me personally to imagine it, but it is gross for me to imagine old heterosexuals having sex, or really fat heterosexuals having sex, or really ugly heterosexuals having sex.

Doesn't mean it's WRONG. Or that I should be trying to discourage it.

And I think you're confusing people HIDING who they were with them not actually being it. Some hid it while still having gay sex, others hid it while not doing so... if you look around, you'll see no shortage of examples of just how horrible of things people can end up doing when they attempt to bottle up their sexual desires for years.

It always explodes in society's face later.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,491
4,160
126
You are railing against the wrong person, but the darkness in which you choose to live is preventing you from seeing that, since you cannot see in darkness. It is a flaw in your brain, some sort of defect, which makes you believe living in darkness is living in light. Those in the light can hear you flailing around in the darkness, but you cannot even see the light due to being in the darkness.

The sad thing is that, since your brain defect prevents you from knowing you are in darkness, you will not even attempt to leave the darkness, for you mistakingly believe that darkness is light. You can hear those in the light calling to you, if you stop deluding yourself, and you can leave your self imposed darkness at any time you choose. Self delusion, caused by a broken brain, is a hard thing to overcome, but I have hope you can do it.

One day, my other hope is you will find real religion and stop condemning others, as this condemns yourself as well.


You do know his position did not include any of what you claimed it contained, right? His position is simply if it is natural, it must not be bad. I was showing him that position is in error.
You showed him no such thing because your argument was a joke. I explained why it was a joke. You did nothing but blather. You did not take up and challenge my point. There are two classes of natural. What could be called natural and affects other people's rights, which is frowned on, and what is natural and does not affect other people's rights, which, regardless of how disgusted you are by it, is none of your business to regulate. Your argument is totally false. I have proved it to be. Your case got fucked because it was wrong. Sorry. Please, in the future, address my issue and don't waste your time clowning around. I see through you like a window pane.
 

kalster

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2002
7,355
6
81
Not saying he is choosing it, but many kids do things to purposefully piss off their parents as either a way to "test" them or as a way to get back at them for some perceived (real or not) slight from the past.


IMO, homosexuality is complex, and is like alcoholism in this regards. A person is genetically predisposed to a being homosexual (like alcoholics are predisposed to being alcoholics). Until one chooses to engage in a homosexual lifestyle (sex), then while one is still a homosexual (due to desires), that person has committed no sin. Same with a person who never drinks...a person predisposed to alcoholism never gets hooked on alcohol if they never actually have the first drink...and no sin is committed.

It is a very complex issue, what kind of person we are attracted to., partially genetic and partially social.

EDIT: IMO, many homosexuals throughout history (in the US at least) have wished they were straight if for no other reason than to not have the baggage that comes along with being gay. This is slowly changing (since the baggage is slowly being reduced). This shows who you are attracted to is certainly not just a choice. Who you have sex with is always a choice, but not who you are attracted to.

IMO sexuality is a personal thing. WTF are you (or the dipshit dad) to say its a sin. I guess you cant expect much from people who worship a place run by pedophile pieces of shit
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
IMO sexuality is a personal thing. WTF are you (or the dipshit dad) to say its a sin. I guess you cant expect much from people who worship a place run by pedophile pieces of shit

I will reply in small chunks, to prevent confusion.

IMO sexuality is a personal thing.
You are entitled to your opinion. I do agree with this, each person decides on his or her own actions. No one makes you have sex with anyone (rape being the obvious exception).

WTF are you (or the dipshit dad) to say its a sin.
I did not classify what is and is not sexual immorality. HaShem did this for us. I have never claimed it is of my own doing.

I guess you cant expect much from people who worship a place run by pedophile pieces of shit
I worship no place at all. That would be a form of idolitry. I worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of creation who brought all things into existance.

I also think you are trying to describe Catholicism. It has many faults, to be sure, but there is much good in it as well. I am not a Catholic.


His dad is a dipshit, on that we agree. He is judging the person instead of the sin, and that is a sin in own right (God said He is to judge us). He is to love his son regardless of what his son is doing, act as a guide to help his son, to be there for him through his entire life. He is to make sure his son knows he does not approve of his sinful lifestyle, though. The dad is not to accept sin as good, but he is also not to judge the sinner.

Most people fail in this part, for it is very difficult. Loving the sinner while hating the sin is very tough.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
You showed him no such thing because your argument was a joke. I explained why it was a joke. You did nothing but blather. You did not take up and challenge my point. There are two classes of natural. What could be called natural and affects other people's rights, which is frowned on, and what is natural and does not affect other people's rights, which, regardless of how disgusted you are by it, is none of your business to regulate. Your argument is totally false. I have proved it to be. Your case got fucked because it was wrong. Sorry. Please, in the future, address my issue and don't waste your time clowning around. I see through you like a window pane.

You keep pretending he had these limitations in his position. He may feel this way, but his stated position did not include them. Your adding them when they are not there is silly. Let him add them if he feels they are needed (which I suspect he will).

It is like saying pot should be legal because it does not hurt anyone. Having sex in public, or walking around town naked does not hurt anyone either, so anyone holding that line of reasoning has to also feel those laws should be removed.

I am simply showing a failed line of reasoning. Your need to push your flaws and faults onto others, due to the self imposed darkness in which you live, causes you to curse at others and claim success when you do not have it. You still believe you are thriving in the darkness, even going as far as to call the darkness in which you live the light, but like a plant kept in darkness, you are slowly withering away.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
...so to be clear, are you saying that a person can have "homosexual sex" and not be a homosexual?

In other words, a man can have homosexual sex, and be.... straight? Even if he choose to not ever sleep with women? How is that?
Yes. See prisons and college life for some prime examples.

So.. in theory, one can participate in gay activity and not be gay, and one can not participate in gay activity (just be attracted to same sex persons), and still be gay?
Yes. If this is somehow shocking to you or a totally unexpected revelation then I'd say you've led a very sheltered life, and have little insight into how things truly are.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
A stepdad killing the children, a female cutting off the head of her spouse and eating his body, and cannibalism are all quite present in animals. Just saying it is not a very good reason to say something should be allowed, as the same logic is then able to be applied to these things which should not be allowed.
The presence of homosexuality and homosexual sex in nature doesn't address whether or not it should be "allowed", it just says that it is not something we humans created or something that TV, mass media, and our culture has resulted in.

Allowing activities is a matter that's decided by the laws that we humans choose to create to govern themselves. Here in the US we operate under the general law that we're free so long as we do not directly intrude upon the freedom of someone else. This and our constitution and other laws makes homosexuality (the attraction) and homosexual sex between consenting adults things that are not illegal.
 
Last edited:

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
There may be some truth in some of what you said there. I personally consider myself very predisposed to being an alcoholic because both of my grandfathers were, and I'm 100% Irish. Therefore, I have chosen to never start drinking in the first place.

I'm 32 and I have never even been buzzed.

I guess where we disagree is that I don't see why homosexuals should resist those urges, because I don't see the harm in it.

In fact it may help things since I believe we have a serious overpopulation problem.

As long as gay people aren't breaking into my house and tying me down and forcing me to watch them have sex... I don't see how it impacts me. I don't see anything inherently negative about it. It may be gross for me personally to imagine it, but it is gross for me to imagine old heterosexuals having sex, or really fat heterosexuals having sex, or really ugly heterosexuals having sex.

Doesn't mean it's WRONG. Or that I should be trying to discourage it.

And I think you're confusing people HIDING who they were with them not actually being it. Some hid it while still having gay sex, others hid it while not doing so... if you look around, you'll see no shortage of examples of just how horrible of things people can end up doing when they attempt to bottle up their sexual desires for years.

It always explodes in society's face later.

I suspect you are right. I can talk in great detail about alcoholism, for I am a recoving alcoholic. 2 months shy of three years sober now, after a LONG time of not being sober. I count my blessings I am a high bottom drunk, so I did not have to lose everything. I wish I would have followed your path...my alcoholism started when I was 13 with my first taste of liquor. I did not realize I was broken until I found the fix. It made everything right with the world. I remember that day clearly, so profound was its effect. Since you have alcoholism in your family, you are doing the right thing to stay FAR away from alcohol.

I think our main difference is views is based on our views of what is and is not sexual immorality. I base mine on The Law of Moses, as given by God. This is the same law referenced when the First Council of Jerusalem said the Goyim (non-Jews) were not to be bound by The Law except in just a few things, one of which was to not engage in sexual immorality.

Herein lies a big problem, sexual immorality treats the various immoral things as all being just as bad as the others. So homosexuality is just as bad as premarital sex which is just as bad as extramarital sex which is just as bad as beastiality...but modern Christianity forgets this. This saddens me.

So while I no not know your source of what you consider to be sexual immorality (or it is based on your own look at the issues and not from an ourside source), but I can see it is different than mine.



As an aside, our conversation needs to be recorded as a way to have a friendly disagreement about such a contentious issue. :)
 
Last edited:

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
The presence of homosexuality and homosexual sex in nature doesn't address whether or not it should be "allowed", it just says that it is not something we humans created or something that TV, mass media, and our culture has resulted in.
Gotcha, and you are quite right.

Allowing activities is a matter that's decided by the laws that we humans choose to create to govern themselves. Here in the US we operate under the general law that we're free so long as we do not directly intrude upon the freedom of someone else. This and our constitution and other laws makes homosexuality (the attraction) and homosexual sex between consenting adults entirely permissible.
True, the laws certainly do, though I use the example of not allowing public nudity as showing we have laws which are based entirely on morality and have nothing to do with harming others. I support that law, btw.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,491
4,160
126
I will reply in small chunks, to prevent confusion.



You are entitled to your opinion. I do agree with this, each person decides on his or her own actions. No one makes you have sex with anyone (rape being the obvious exception).



I did not classify what is and is not sexual immorality. HaShem did this for us. I have never claimed it is of my own doing.



I worship no place at all. That would be a form of idolitry. I worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of creation who brought all things into existance.

I also think you are trying to describe Catholicism. It has many faults, to be sure, but there is much good in it as well. I am not a Catholic.


His dad is a dipshit, on that we agree. He is judging the person instead of the sin, and that is a sin in own right (God said He is to judge us). He is to love his son regardless of what his son is doing, act as a guide to help his son, to be there for him through his entire life. He is to make sure his son knows he does not approve of his sinful lifestyle, though. The dad is not to accept sin as good, but he is also not to judge the sinner.

Most people fail in this part, for it is very difficult. Loving the sinner while hating the sin is very tough.
What is really tough, impossible for the traditional religionists really, is to know the difference between what is a sin and what is not. To rely on a religious text to tell you is a sin, in my opinion. It is bigotry pure and simple. It has caused you to be blind to reality and become judgmental. You believe you know what is sin. In this way you have created evil out of the purity of existence. You have created and believe in something that does not exist. If the god you believe in exists there can only be perfection. How can a perfect god create evil. I know you have a clown act fable to cover that, a snake or some kind of apple and because you bought that you bought evil. You divided yourself against yourself. If you don't understand, it's OK.

To understand you'd have to drop all your sacred crap like I had to do and give up your comfortable illusions. You would have to enter a world in which you see that you actually know nothing. When you know nothing you don't cling to opinions.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
What is really tough, impossible for the traditional religionists really, is to know the difference between what is a sin and what is not. To rely on a religious text to tell you is a sin, in my opinion. It is bigotry pure and simple. It has caused you to be blind to reality and become judgmental. You believe you know what is sin. In this way you have created evil out of the purity of existence. You have created and believe in something that does not exist. If the god you believe in exists there can only be perfection. How can a perfect god create evil. I know you have a clown act fable to cover that, a snake or some kind of apple and because you bought that you bought evil. You divided yourself against yourself. If you don't understand, it's OK.

To understand you'd have to drop all your sacred crap like I had to do and give up your comfortable illusions. You would have to enter a world in which you see that you actually know nothing. When you know nothing you don't cling to opinions.

No thank you. I will not walk into darkness and join you in the slow withering effect it causes. Instead, I will continue to follow the Most High God.
 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,776
4
0
I suspect you are right. I can talk in great detail about alcoholism, for I am a recoving alcoholic. 2 months shy of three years sober now, after a LONG time of not being sober. I count my blessings I am a high bottom drunk, so I did not have to lose everything. I wish I would have followed your path...my alcoholism started when I was 13 with my first taste of liquor. I did not realize I was broken until I found the fix. It made everything right with the world. I remember that day clearly, so profound was its effect. Since you have alcoholism in your family, you are doing the right thing to stay FAR away from alcohol.

I think our main difference is views is based on our views of what is and is not sexual immorality. I base mine on The Law of Moses, as given by God. This is the same law referenced when the First Council of Jerusalem said the Goyim (non-Jews) were not to be bound by The Law except in just a few things, one of which was to not engage in sexual immorality.

Herein lies a big problem, sexual immorality treats the various immoral things as all being just as bad as the others. So homosexuality is just as bad as premarital sex which is just as bad as extramarital sex which is just as bad as beastiality...but modern Christianity forgets this. This saddens me.

So while I no not know your source of what you consider to be sexual immorality (or it is based on your own look at the issues and not from an ourside source), but I can see it is different than mine.

As an aside, our conversation needs to be recorded as a way to have a friendly disagreement about such a contentious issue. :)
Yea I'm an atheist so, that'd explain the disconnect.

To me sexuality is immoral only when someone is being harmed against their will, or taken advantage of to an excessive degree (such as when people prey upon the mentally disabled or children who cannot give proper consent)
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
True, the laws certainly do, though I use the example of not allowing public nudity as showing we have laws which are based entirely on morality and have nothing to do with harming others. I support that law, btw.
Public nudity can be rationally expressed as a "harm" to others, but I don't buy any of those rationalizations. I have no problem with public nudity, because I do not share your religious view that certain parts of the human body must be concealed; there is no inherent vulgarity or offense in the human ass, breast, or penis/testicles.

It's true that, thanks to ever-increasing food consumption and ever-decreasing physical activity, there are a lot of people (more and more every day, I'm afraid) that I never want to see naked, but I can't say I'd want the full force of law to make sure they never are naked in public.
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,491
4,160
126
No thank you. I will not walk into darkness and join you in the slow withering effect it causes. Instead, I will continue to follow the Most High God.
That's fine with me. It is typical for bigots to stay in the bigoted beliefs they were raised to believe. Almost all the only religions there are, and there are many, are religions that each enlightened and lucky participant just happened by some miracle to be born in. Hehehehe, it's just amazing how that works.

The important thing is that we see where your beliefs come from, the bigotry of religious texts, in other words, pure crap. If every bigot would only admit as you do that your opinions are just a religious faith having nothing to do with reality at all, the world would be able to more quickly move on. Thank you for that.

What you cannot do, of course, is prove that the homosexual act is a sin because it is only your belief based on texts that self claim to be correct. I jotted down on my napkin that homosexuality is OK, so I can effectively counter that point of view. My napkin has got to be worth as much as the supposed words of a god on high because they were written by somebody I trust more than a moldering ancient bigot, because I wrote them today and I was, after all, created in his image, no? And don't forget, you bring all the evil there is into the world by believing in it.

Oh my Beloved, every where I look it appears to be Thou!
 

Abraxas

Golden Member
Oct 26, 2004
1,056
0
0
As a note, cybr, given the father's behavior hinges on the accuracy of the Bible, this might be an appropriate (if not ideal) thread to discuss the Biblical accuracy issues from the Mars Rover thread.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Public nudity can be rationally expressed as a "harm" to others, but I don't buy any of those rationalizations. I have no problem with public nudity, because I do not share your religious view that certain parts of the human body must be concealed; there is no inherent vulgarity or offense in the human ass, breast, or penis/testicles.

It's true that, thanks to ever-increasing food consumption and ever-decreasing physical activity, there are a lot of people (more and more every day, I'm afraid) that I never want to see naked, but I can't say I'd want the full force of law to make sure they never are naked in public.
I agree with you that the rationalizations are bunk...and I agree with you for not wanting to see the vast majority of people naked. My moral code says to not see any of them naked, but the out of shape nature of most people helps keep that moral code intact. :)
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
As a note, cybr, given the father's behavior hinges on the accuracy of the Bible, this might be an appropriate (if not ideal) thread to discuss the Biblical accuracy issues from the Mars Rover thread.

Maybe, but it would be better for you to create a thread instead.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,491
4,160
126
Public nudity can be rationally expressed as a "harm" to others, but I don't buy any of those rationalizations. I have no problem with public nudity, because I do not share your religious view that certain parts of the human body must be concealed; there is no inherent vulgarity or offense in the human ass, breast, or penis/testicles.

It's true that, thanks to ever-increasing food consumption and ever-decreasing physical activity, there are a lot of people (more and more every day, I'm afraid) that I never want to see naked, but I can't say I'd want the full force of law to make sure they never are naked in public.
The story of the garden of eden is a story about how self reflection creates evil. No animal is ashamed of its body because it does not compare its body to a standard of perfection. Only humans create language and ideas by which they can criticize and compare. This is the delusion of duality, when a tree becomes a symbol instead of the self by reflection. This is the original sin, to think about something abstractly rather that apprehend it via being, when the total content of the mind is what we perceive via the senses, the perfect joy of being.

Once you have learned words and felt the emotional pain they can bring by having been shamed by them, you enter the world of the damned, who seek religious escape, some false delusion to hide their shame. So while I agree that we should not be ashamed of our bodies, I doubt you can practice that with perfection, because we all were given this mental disease. What you do not have is some religious bs notion that the body is sinful.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY