spendius
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 11:06 am
@cicerone imposter,
I never mentioned people with religion who push the teachings of the Bible. The human race found religion. As some people still do.

Quote:
The bible is the only place that talks against homosexuality.


It is not. You are confusing also talking against homosexuality with talking against the promotion and encouragement of homosexuality. Heterosexuals are inhibited from talking about marital sodomy. The approved manuals and professional advice concerns itself, to a very large extent, with the missionary position.

If you knew more about these matters you would know that the Catholic Church protects women from the predations of men. That might be why the ladies in your family are devout. They might have an intuitive intelligence which gets knocked out of female college graduates by a masculinised education.

The Madonna and Child is the principle icon of modern Catholicism.

You are also confusing love with sexual relief for men.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 11:09 am
@spendius,
Nobody has to 'promote' sexuality or homosexuality; they are natural outcomes of nature.

You also wrote,
Quote:
You are also confusing love with sexual relief for men.


Only proves you have no idea about women sexuality. You are the one who is confused.
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 11:13 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
If you want to raise the boogeyman of tailor-made religion, you could do better than harp on Anglicanism...


The Anglican Church draws its congregation from all walks of life. A tailor-made religion is one which aims at a narrow socio-economic group. Usually a well-heeled one.

Do you accuse anyone who dissents from your stance of ranting? It's a bit easy isn't it? It's word magic and you have fallen for the spells you cast yourself.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 11:27 am
@spendius,
Quote:
A tailor-made religion is one which aims at a narrow socio-economic group. 

That looks like a tailor-made definition... Anyway Anglicanism was tailor-made for one single individual, the king of England, so he could **** (and behead) whoever he wanted. You can't make it narrower than that.
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 01:19 pm
@Olivier5,
There is no discussing anything at that level Olivier.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 02:26 pm
@spendius,
That's because what he says is spot on!
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:04 pm
@cicerone imposter,
He didn't say anything. The only thing it was spot on at was in saying nothing. You don't seriously think Henry had any difficulty getting a **** do you?

Why don't you read up a bit about the guy and the times?
Germlat
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:09 pm
@spendius,
That's actually the only fact based reply.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:19 pm
@spendius,
Thanks for conceding defeat
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:19 pm
@Germlat,
Seems you guys don't know why the Anglican church was started.

http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/denominations/anglican_history.htm
Olivier5
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:27 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Most people don't understand that "freedom of religion" should also be "freedom from religion" in politics.

Exactly. If the state mingles with religion(s), that may affect freedom of choice based on citizens' conscience in this matter. Basic stuff. Spendi is being his usual contrarian.
Wilso
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:30 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Nobody has to 'promote' sexuality or homosexuality; they are natural outcomes of nature.

You also wrote,
Quote:
You are also confusing love with sexual relief for men.


Only proves you have no idea about women sexuality. You are the one who is confused.


Better description would be jealous sexless loser.
0 Replies
 
Germlat
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:32 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I was agreeing with Oliver's last comment on the origin of the Anglican Church (tailor made for an individual).
Olivier5
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:33 pm
@Olivier5,
Quote:
if the state mingles with religion(s)

or vice-versa.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 03:34 pm
@Germlat,
okay. Mr. Green
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 05:11 pm
Tim re-posted this on Facebook - an old comment he made on David Cameron's labelling of the UK as a christian country.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t1.0-9/10294332_10152326240186826_6957583364360264227_n.png
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 05:15 pm
@hingehead,
According to polls, the US is a christian country - claimed by over 80% of our population, but look at all the bad things our country and citizens are responsible for in this world just makes one wonder.....

Maybe, claiming it as a christian country is the oxymoron.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 05:22 pm
@Olivier5,
Quote:
Thanks for conceding defeat


You're catching Apisaitis Olivier. It is tempting I admit.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 06:34 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Thanks for conceding defeat


Second time you've claimed a victory today, Olivier.

It is a bad habit...almost impossible to overcome.

People who claim victories in Internet forums are kidding themselves.

But it is fun to watch them do it...because it almost always means they are squirming. And there are few things as much fun as a debating opponent who squirms. Wink
Olivier5
 
  1  
Mon 21 Apr, 2014 07:25 pm
@spendius,
Whatever. Defend state religion if that's what you must do.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Atheism
  3. » Page 502
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 05/01/2024 at 08:17:01