Religion and Crohn's

Crohn's Disease Forum

Help Support Crohn's Disease Forum:

There are too many things I just don't agree with. And that's why I've chosen to live my life as a good person without a book and religion telling me how to be.

I have no issues with people and their different beliefs. People have different and/or conflicting opinions all the time. What I have issues with is when people attack others and expect them to change because they don't like what that religion is about. Also what I have an even bigger issue with is when people attack one religion for something like strict views on homosexuality when every other major organized religion feels the same way.
 
I agree Toni. Katie the problem with taking quotes like that is that it is easy to take it out of context. To understand that passage we must understand the history of that time, why it was written, and what is the context throughout the entire Bible.

Pax
 
Thats my point. The bible was written in a context in which, for that time, this is what they believed. How can such an old book still be used today for people to live their lives by? Its the same reason I don't see how America as a nation can still be ruled by the Constitution as it was written in the 1700s. But the constitution is able to be amended. The bible is not.
 
certainly an interesting thread to hear everyones opinions. People deal with things in different ways and usually it's due to their support groups that they have and the more support groups you have either friends, family, this forum or religion the better. All I can say is i'm glad to believe in God when faced with an illness as it is another aspect were I feel I can get 'help' from. I don't look at God and think damn why'd you give me crohn's, i look at him and say thank god you gave us knowledge of medicine to treat it, the ability to develop machines and tests to diagnose it and the drugs to treat it. But each to their own opinion.
 
certainly an interesting thread to hear everyones opinions. People deal with things in different ways and usually it's due to their support groups that they have and the more support groups you have either friends, family, this forum or religion the better. All I can say is i'm glad to believe in God when faced with an illness as it is another aspect were I feel I can get 'help' from. I don't look at God and think damn why'd you give me crohn's, i look at him and say thank god you gave us knowledge of medicine to treat it, the ability to develop machines and tests to diagnose it and the drugs to treat it. But each to their own opinion.

So you acknowledge that god gave it to you but thank him for the treatment of it?
 
So you acknowledge that god gave it to you but thank him for the treatment of it?

My own personal opinion is that hardships in life are given to us to help us develop and grow as people. I know ever since I've been diagnosed I have grown and learned a lot. I've been through both good times and bad and it's because of the bad times that make the good ones so much better and well appreciated and cherished.
 
Hiya Jeff

It wasn't me who mentioned the priests! I wouldn't dare!
go back and have a look

And Toni, I know the Bible off by heart, every word, and The Creed!
xxx
 
Last edited:
So you acknowledge that god gave it to you but thank him for the treatment of it?

I don't think god gave it to me I actually believe it was triggered by something I ate. I believe many illnesses stem from genetic malformation and / or lifestyle. I'm not saying all illnesses can be prevented and I certainly don't blame God. I do believe that medical advancements are developing all the time through research and I thank God for developing humans with the intellegence needed to do this.
 
'Religion is a monumental chapter in the history of human egotism." William James

In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty. Thomas Jefferson

I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death. George Carlin

A man without religion is like a horse without a bridle. Latin Proverb

Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day; give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish. Author Unknown
 
@ winemaker: Well if we're so primal, why do we clothe oursleves, why do we not live out doors or in caves etc? We have a mind and intelligence which surpasses anything in the animal world and with that comes responsibility.

The deprevation arguement doesn't really stand up (though your example is truly horrific, everyone would agree, it is totally despicable), we can all take examples, such as the 'typical' newspaper article highlighting someone on state benefits whos fathered a dozen children by a dozen mothers and doesn't contribute either in terms of fathering skill or money.

Do you disagree that we are primates and that sex is a primal urge? We clothe ourselves and don't live in caves because we are civilised. I didn't say we are SO primal, I simply stated that we're primates primal urges. just like "fight or flight" when faced with a particular conflict (instinct).

Perhaps if the deadbeat father of a dozen children by a dozen mothers should have worn a condom....
 
Last edited:
JRemember that the percentage of priests who have been charged with sexual crimes is extremely low at between 1 and 4 percent. Teachers on the other hand have a higher percentage of about 15 percent. Your statements about the priesthood are very hurtful to men who are going into the priesthood because of the call that we feel.

My statements are priesthood are not meant to be offensive, in fact it would be offensive to those who suffered such crimes if it were not mentioned. It's impossible to talk about religion and sex without bringing up with horror of child abuse around the world at the hands of priests.

By saying that only 1-4% of priests compared to 15% of teachers have been charged with child sex offences isn't relevant, it's like comparing someone who has murdered only 1-4 people with someone who has killed 15.

The fact is that these men are charged with the care and protection of children, so it's a big deal when they violate their trust so inhumanely. I went to a catholic school where 2 of my teachers (catholic) have been imprisoned for child sex offences with boys between the ages of 8-13 (another one is facing trial).

If child abuse was dealt with head on by the church, I'm sure many people would view the church in a different light.

Personally, I think it's wonderful that you are going to become a priest as you feel strongly enough to devote your life to your faith. I'm not having a go at priests, only the ones who have severely misused their calling. I feel precisely the same about teacher/family members who do the same religious or not.
 
Joan, I'm sorry. I'm having to use a different computer as mine is in the shop and it's coming up in a very strange way, so I thought you said it. Sorry

Winemaker: It felt very much that you were having a go at the priesthood and so I defended it. I don't exactly feel it's relevant to talk about sex offense in the light of this topic, especially in the way you put it, since you singled out the Catholic Church. Singling out groups will only cause trouble. The way it was written it seemed like you thought that there have been priests who were sexual offenders because they are/were celibate. I was adding that that is irrelevant because the statistics don't show celibacy to cause someone to be a sexual predator by adding the teacher statistic.

Pax
 
Jeff: No worries. I suppose I am talking about the catholic church as it was so widespread and publicised. I'm happy for anyone to bring up any other religious groups that commit such heinous offences. I understand many irreligious people also commit these crimes, but it's more of a shock when a religious leader is involved.

I don't know much about clerical celibacy and am curious to know if celibacy means that you have to refrain from having sexual thoughts and feelings as well as the act?
 
I Also what I have an even bigger issue with is when people attack one religion for something like strict views on homosexuality when every other major organized religion feels the same way.

I don't single out any one religion, I have a problem with any human being who has strict views on homosexuality. Mankind is made in "God's" image after all. Why can't religious groups be tolerant of everyone regardless of their sexual preference?

Do you have any gay friends? I do and they find it disgraceful that there are people out there who consider them or what they do to be evil.
 
I don't single out any one religion, I have a problem with any human being who has strict views on homosexuality. Mankind is made in "God's" image after all. Why can't religious groups be tolerant of everyone regardless of their sexual preference?

Do you have any gay friends? I do and they find it disgraceful that there are people out there who consider them or what they do to be evil.

Yes I do actually and I don't judge them. They know that my religious beliefs don't coincide with their lifestyle. I was raised to treat everyone equally. I also believe strongly in Jesus' teachings throughout the New Testament of love and compassion and being humble. You love everyone as you love yourself because they are your brothers and sisters through Christ. I was raised to dislike the sin, not the sinner because we are all sinners.

Yes we are all made in God's image. I, however, do not believe that certain people are born gay/lesbian. I think it is a choice whether it is conscious or subconscious. Again this is what I believe so if it is offensive, I apologize, it isn't meant to be.

However I do feel you are singling out Catholicism. I haven't heard you ask critical questions of athiests, agnostics, deists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, or other denominations of Christianity. You even admitted when talking to Jeff about the comments about the priests that you were.
 
"quote"
Who Wrote the Holy Bible? The short answer is the Holy Spirit. This is the answer the Bible gives, and it is also a confessional answer for Christians. This is also the reason why it is called the Holy Bible, the source is divine. The more involved answer is that various men (and perhaps a woman or two) recorded what God had said to them. The Letter to the Hebrews in the New Testament begins by declaring "In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days He has spoken to us by a Son?" (Heb 1:1-2a). The Son here, through whom God has spoken most clearly, is the life of Jesus of Nazareth who is the Christ (Greek for lord) or Messiah (Aramaic and Hebrew term for someone anointed to do a task).

So to repeat the first point God has spoken thorough prophets directly, and indirectly, through scribes, psalmists, and others who were under the influence of the Holy Spirit. The more involved answer is how were the works created when God spoke through these many people to produce the Bible? From a human point of view what did the original version look like? In fact was the original version of each book also the final version or did the books develop through the centuries until they reached a final form? What exactly was the process from the speaking of God in various and sundry ways of old or even in the life of Jesus that led step-by-step to the page of the Bible that someone is reading if they were to have a Bible open in front of them?

The first thing to note is that the Christian Bible is a library of at least 66 "books." The number 66 is the number of books for Protestants. However, for Roman Catholics and for the Eastern Orthodox Churches, there are additional books besides the 66 books they share with Protestants. The additional books are the books of the Old Testament Apocrypha.

For Jews there are only the 39 books in the Old Testament. Strictly speaking the Jews do not have an Old Testament so their collection of scriptural books is called the Hebrew Scriptures by Jews or some times the TaNaK. The TaNaK is an acronym that stands for Torah (Books of Moses), Nabi'im (Prophets?also spelled N'vi'im) and Kethubim (Writings?also spelled K'tu'vim).

The Holy Bible is therefore, a library of 39 Old Testament books (Jews only) and 27 New Testament or 66 books for all Christians. In addition Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians have a little over a dozen additional books they count as scripture which are called the books of the Apocrypha. With so many books to ask "Who wrote the Bible?" is tantamount to asking, who wrote the "library?"
"Unquote"

I believe in something.

I just don't believe that a book written by "someone" gives me my spirituality.

Lola
xxx
(ps, this forum is a good enough reason to know that there has to be something out there bringing kind caring people together, and not just technology).
 
Last edited:
"quote"

(ps, this forum is a good enough reason to know that there has to be something out there bringing kind caring people together, and not just technology).

I do not think a divine being brought us here together on this Crohn's forum. I think it's our curiosity of information and the availability of technology that did it.
 
Dont disagree regarding curiosity and technology and i never said i believed in a divine being or that a divine being is what brings people to this forum.

I am Spiritual not religious.

Technology and Curiosity may attract people to the forum, but it is not what keep people on here offering support, words of encouragement, compassion and kindness to each other.
 
However I do feel you are singling out Catholicism. I haven't heard you ask critical questions of athiests, agnostics, deists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, or other denominations of Christianity. You even admitted when talking to Jeff about the comments about the priests that you were.

Please re-read my posts, I've stated that I'm more than happy to discuss any other religion. I admitted to Jeff that I focussed on catholic priests when it came to child abuse for glaringly obvious reasons (it is so widespread and publicised). I'm more than happy to be enlightened about other religious figures from other faiths involved in such crimes, please do.

I haven't heard much about any other religions when it comes to child abuse. I know that gay muslim men are hung from traffic lights in Tehran, women are stoned to death for committing adultery and suicide bombers blow themselves up in the name of religion.

I tolerate all people, regardless of their sexual orientation unlike the pope who in 2008 said that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behaviour is just as important as saving the rainforests.

I'm not so sure about that. Mass deforestation and land clearing is as important as getting rid of gays and trannys? Doesn't sound very tolerant to me.

Inevitably, this has gone way off topic. Should this post be moved to the "anything goes" forum?
 
Yes we are all made in God's image. I, however, do not believe that certain people are born gay/lesbian. I think it is a choice whether it is conscious or subconscious. Again this is what I believe so if it is offensive, I apologize, it isn't meant to be.

Toni, I must say I admire your devotion. However, I must take issue with this statement. I went through 12 yrs of primary education with a boy who I am certain was born gay. From first grade on, he identified and played solely with the girls.

I defend members of this forum often against those who would accuse them of making up their symptoms. Who would want to have diarrhea, constant pain and the other EIMs associated with crohns. Likewise, who would choose a lifestyle that earned them ridicule and bigotry from their peers. There may be examples of people who are just willing to experiment and therefore have gay sex but I seriously don't think anyone would "choose" to be homosexual.
 
Toni, I must say I admire your devotion. However, I must take issue with this statement. I went through 12 yrs of primary education with a boy who I am certain was born gay. From first grade on, he identified and played solely with the girls.

I defend members of this forum often against those who would accuse them of making up their symptoms. Who would want to have diarrhea, constant pain and the other EIMs associated with crohns. Likewise, who would choose a lifestyle that earned them ridicule and bigotry from their peers. There may be examples of people who are just willing to experiment and therefore have gay sex but I seriously don't think anyone would "choose" to be homosexual.

Just because someone identified and soley played with the opposite sex rather than their own isn't a solid argument or evidence of someone being born gay/lesbian. When I was younger and even now I played with boys and almost all (if not all) of my very good friends are guys. Trust me, I like guys. I just don't get along with other girls usually.

ETA: Actually one of my few friends that is a girl is a lesbian and chose to be one because she grew to hate the opposite sex. So while you wouldn't think it to occur, it does.
 
Last edited:
No Toni I agree with you, but I could so easily spot the kids who I grew up with who I thought would, and eventually did become gay, and I mean from VERY early ages. BUT I must add that some who I thought would did not-(or not yet).

In the end it really is your choice if you want to get out of the closet or not and whether you want to keep living in denile or not. There are thousands of people who are gay or lesbian in their hearts but still keep to the social norm(boy marries girl) because of the pressure society puts on people who have come out about their true sexuality.

No offence intended to anyone! :)
 
Hi Toni

I really respect your opinions for such a young girl, very rare nowadays!
But you have to know that you're wrong about condoms not protecting against STIs!
Here in the UK we advocate the use of condoms to teenagers precisely for that reason, as well as unwanted pregnancies. My daughter is at UNI, she's 19, I know what it's gonna be like! Parties and sex! There's no doubt about it, it's all part of growing up! And one of the first things I bought her was a pack of condoms! She didn't bat an eyelid! This is because they have been taught Sex Educ in school (a Roman Catholic one too!)
My son is 16, and I know he's experimenting too, so I've bought him some too! This is being responsible for your actions, if you're gonna have sex, be responsible! I would be devastated if my son got a girl pregnant, or if my daughter got pregnant, after all the lessons I have taught them about safe sex.
And I have to agree with Katie, I lived with my husband for 10 years before I married him, and only then, would I agree. It's not about love! It's a business partnership, a mortgage, kids, love only plays a small part, commitment is the key, and trust.
I say this with respect, and I don't mean to offend anyone, but you've got a lot to learn, take this from an old bird who's been around the block a few times!
Peace xxx
if only my mam was like you...she wudn't even et me wear a liverpool jersey when i was younger because it had carlsberg on it!!
 
Just to throw my two cents in here...as if it matters lol..There is strong evidence that homosexual behavior in animals, which we are, is genetic in origin. This idea has been around for a long time but there is a lot of evidence pointing in that direction. So to think that people choose to be gay or to be hetro is something of a misnomer and a bit archaic. Just like most things religion has said is true like the world is the at center of the universe, we see new evidence daily, monthly, yearly, these ideas are just not true.
The church killed and imprisoned people for saying contrary things to its dogma not too long ago today the church attacks science on these "moral" issues, that once again are based on nothing of fact but of fear. Thank reason for winning out over that of fantasy!

There are great articles on the web and elsewhere that talk about homosexuality and genetic connections. Here are just a couple:


Article 1


Article 2

Article 3


Just because there is no absolute proof yet of anything in the scientific community does NOT mean that in the future there will be no proof either.

Coming from a place to argue that something does or does not exist because you say that science has not proven it is simply saying that the jury is still out and a solution to the issue at hand remains to be seen. It does not mean that the solution does not exist and will never be understood or realized.

Twenty years ago there were no drugs like Remicade or Humira. They exist now. If you were to speak with a GI back twenty years ago about the possibilities of the existence of such drugs a smart one would state that he/she does not know but it is possible that they could exist.

and no offense meant to anyone. I myself am not gay but have some gay friends. As with anything, if you don't try to cram your business in my face I don't mind taking a live and let live policy.
 
Last edited:
Just to throw my two cents in here...as if it matters lol..There is strong evidence that homosexual behavior in animals, which we are, is genetic in origin. This idea has been around for a long time but there is a lot of evidence pointing in that direction. So to think that people choose to be gay or to be hetro is something of a misnomer and a bit archaic. Just like most things religion has said is true like the world is the at center of the universe, we see new evidence daily, monthly, yearly, these ideas are just not true.
The church killed and imprisoned people for saying contrary things to its dogma not too long ago today the church attacks science on these "moral" issues, that once again are based on nothing of fact but of fear. Thank reason for winning out over that of fantasy!

There are great articles on the web and elsewhere that talk about homosexuality and genetic connections. Here are just a couple:


Article 1


Article 2

Article 3


Just because there is no absolute proof yet of anything in the scientific community does NOT mean that in the future there will be no proof either.

Coming from a place to argue that something does or does not exist because you say that science has not proven it is simply saying that the jury is still out and a solution to the issue at hand remains to be seen. It does not mean that the solution does not exist and will never be understood or realized.

Twenty years ago there were no drugs like Remicade or Humira. They exist now. If you were to speak with a GI back twenty years ago about the possibilities of the existence of such drugs a smart one would state that he/she does not know but it is possible that they could exist.

and no offense meant to anyone. I myself am not gay but have some gay friends. As with anything, if you don't try to cram your business in my face I don't mind taking a live and let live policy.

I have two issues with this.

#1 - You have to look at it from both sides. Just because we have science and technology doesn't mean that we will eventually find proof that being born gay/lesbian is real. In fact they might find that just the opposite is true and my opinion could be right.

#2 - You are assuming I think we are animals. I don't believe we're animals regardless of what science says. Our intellect is far more superior than any animal and we have many more capabilities. I also don't buy into El Nino or Global Warming. I think it's all a scam to steal our money. But that's a different issue for a different time.
 
Toni, i'm a zoology major at uni and believe me darling, we all are only that-animals. It is only our intellect and need to better ourselves that makes us differ from the rest of the animal kingdom. In my eyes, me and all other humans out there are no better than any animal. No offence but that was a very uninformed statement.

And as for global warming-just look around you darling. My other major is environmental management and boy can I go on for hours proving your statement wrong, but I wont, because i'm feeling quite sick tonight, and I dont want to hi-jack the thread. lol!!

Sleep tight!!xx
 
I notice that no one says anything about the devil. Does anyone one believe that there is a devil and he could be the one causing the bad things in life that happen?

I believe in the devil - he takes the form of PREDNISONE.
 
I don't think anyone would openly CHOOSE to be gay. I know a lot of people who would constantly ask themselves growing up "what is wrong with me?" "why can't I be like everyone else?" "why do I have these desires?"

Why would anyone CHOOSE to deal with the ridicule and condemnation? Have you seen how many homosexual teens have committed suicide recently? It's abhorrent. I know people have to be born gay. I have a friend now whom is gay and we almost dated in high school. He came out and said he was gay after we didn't work out... I think he was trying to tell himself he was straight by trying to date me... but it just didn't work. He knew he was gay, I knew he was gay... and now he has a partner he's been with for almost 4 years. I know he was born that way... I just know he was.... he wouldn't have chosen to be the way he is... he wanted to be straight, but he just isn't.
 
Toni, i'm a zoology major at uni and believe me darling, we all are only that-animals. It is only our intellect and need to better ourselves that makes us differ from the rest of the animal kingdom. In my eyes, me and all other humans out there are no better than any animal. No offence but that was a very uninformed statement.

And as for global warming-just look around you darling. My other major is environmental management and boy can I go on for hours proving your statement wrong, but I wont, because i'm feeling quite sick tonight, and I dont want to hi-jack the thread. lol!!

Sleep tight!!xx

It was not uninformed, that would imply that I said that out of ignorance. Science changes all the time, who's to say that in ten or twenty years they won't change their stance?

Alright, say global warming is true for the sake of the argument. Why is it that last year was one of the coldest winters we've ever had? It actually snowed in my sunny state of Florida in my hometown. It hasn't snowed since I was a little kid. I'm interested in what you have to say. Since it's off topic you can pm me if you prefer. :)
 
I don't think anyone would openly CHOOSE to be gay. I know a lot of people who would constantly ask themselves growing up "what is wrong with me?" "why can't I be like everyone else?" "why do I have these desires?"

Why would anyone CHOOSE to deal with the ridicule and condemnation? Have you seen how many homosexual teens have committed suicide recently? It's abhorrent. I know people have to be born gay. I have a friend now whom is gay and we almost dated in high school. He came out and said he was gay after we didn't work out... I think he was trying to tell himself he was straight by trying to date me... but it just didn't work. He knew he was gay, I knew he was gay... and now he has a partner he's been with for almost 4 years. I know he was born that way... I just know he was.... he wouldn't have chosen to be the way he is... he wanted to be straight, but he just isn't.

Not in my neck of the woods. We actually have a lot of gay teens and the ones that I know have all openly chosen to be. This country is very diverse. Like I said before, just because you wouldn't think that it would happen doesn't mean that it won't or doesn't occur. There really isn't any proof either way so it's a moot point analytically.
 
I have two issues with this.

#1 - You have to look at it from both sides. Just because we have science and technology doesn't mean that we will eventually find proof that being born gay/lesbian is real. In fact they might find that just the opposite is true and my opinion could be right.

#2 - You are assuming I think we are animals. I don't believe we're animals regardless of what science says. Our intellect is far more superior than any animal and we have many more capabilities. I also don't buy into El Nino or Global Warming. I think it's all a scam to steal our money. But that's a different issue for a different time.

Hi, I have looked at this from both sides. All I meant to say is that yes there is a possibility that homosexual people are the way they are because of genes. All the current evidence points in that direction. I myself, don't know. I do know that all the people that I have met who are gay and that I have spoken too in depth about who they are have said that they never chose to be gay. Never made a conscious decision to be with the same sex. They have told me that since they were little they knew something was different about them and how they found the same sex attractive in a ooolala way. Whether that is genetic or environment or both I don't know.

The other thing is I am using this definition to define what an animal is. The definition of animal is:

–noun
any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli: some classification schemes also include protozoa and certain other single-celled eukaryotes that have motility and animallike nutritional modes.

If you are using a more archaic definition like..."they are such animals" then yeah i understand where you are coming from.

I think also that we, as humans, underestimate the intelligence of our neighbors like dolphins, parrots, etc. on this planet though. We act more like a virus than an animal in the way we interact with our environment.

LOL at the global warming thing...and yeah there are a ton of scams going on with that and some environmental groups too..but that is just thieves seeing an opportunity to make a quick buck I don't think it proves or disproves the global warming thing.

I do understand the side you see on the gay thing. I personally can not see why someone would want to be gay. The only thing that makes sense to me is that there are a set of biological circumstances that must make them that way. I read a thing one time in something that said that hormones in the womb may create gay people too...and something to do with the order of birth...i think it said that the middle child and the last child are more likely to be gay than the first born...i can't remember but it had to do with hormone exposure in the mothers womb.
Again, i mean no offense to anyone.
 
"Homosexual behavior occurs in more than 450 different kinds of animals worldwide, and is found in every major geographic region and every major animal group. It should come as no surprise, then, that animal homosexuality is not a single, uniform phenomenon. Whether one is discussing the forms it takes, its frequency, or its relationship to heterosexual activity, same-sex behavior in animals exhibits every conceivable variation."
- 1999 Bruce Bagemihl Ph.D

And a more recent publication:

"Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, in the Apr. 21, 2007 article "Homosexuality and Bisexuality: Is Homosexuality Genetically Determined?" published on its website, explained:

"Religious conservatives often point to studies of identical twins who were separated at birth and raised independently. If one is gay, then the other twin is found to be gay only about 55% of the time. They reason that: since identical twins have the same genetic structure, then if homosexual orientation were determined by genes, 100% of the other twins would be gay... [This is] based upon a faulty or inadequate knowledge of the detailed workings of genetics. Genes have a property called penetrance, which is a measure of their effectiveness, or power...

The penetrance of the gene which causes Type 1 (early onset) diabetes is only 30%. So, if one identical twin has the allele that causes diabetes, then the other twin will have the same allele. Both will have a 30% chance of developing the disorder. Both twins will have the same genetic structure. But it may or may not be triggered by something in the environment, and cause diabetes. If one identical twin develops schizophrenia, the other twin has about a 48% chance of also developing the disorder. If one twin develops bipolar affective disorder, (formerly called manic depression) the other twin's chances are about 60% of having it as well...

We do not wish to imply that homosexuality is a disease. We are merely suggesting that the root cause of many diseases - and traits like left-handedness - are genetic. Most human sexuality researchers who are not religious conservatives regard homosexual orientation as a trait like left-handedness."
 
DRAS very cool fields of study. I can imagine that being where you live would be a plus given the diversity of life there. When i was little i was in a zoology program at the zoo here for a couple of summers. It was really fun because we got to go behind the scenes and see and feed the animals...a lot of them from Africa of course lol. We also got to pet the baby animals...like baby polar bears and a couple of cub tigers. I loved it.
 
Alright, say global warming is true for the sake of the argument. Why is it that last year was one of the coldest winters we've ever had? It actually snowed in my sunny state of Florida in my hometown. It hasn't snowed since I was a little kid. I'm interested in what you have to say. Since it's off topic you can pm me if you prefer. :)

To answer your question, here's a comment from my climate science lecturer at Curtin University Perth)

If global warming isn’t happening, how come 2010 is the hottest year on record? Similarly one could point to the hottest temperatures ever recorded in Asia, the heatwave in Russia, massive floods in Pakistan, today’s devastating monsoons in China, the heatwave in the US, droughts in Africa, more droughts in Europe etc. (and no these weren't punishments from God)

The cold temperatures and heavy snow falls of last year were nothing more than an unusual winter caused by quasi-cyclical changes in atmospheric conditions over the North Atlantic leading to strong anti-cyclonic conditions becoming established over the Arctic and feeding cold air down into the mid to upper latitudes of the northern hemisphere.

Such events happen fairly regularly and are pretty much inevitable. There are 15 such instances on in the weather record and last winters episode was the least severe of all of them. Ordinarily temperatures fall by about 2.5°C but this last time they fell by 1.4°C. Winter 09-10 wasn’t a record breaking event, it was the coldest in some parts of the northern hemisphere since 95-96 and the snowiest since 78-79. We will probably see another cold winter of comparable magnitude in about 15 years time.

There is no mechanism on this planet that allows for rapid gain or loss of heat. If it’s cold in one place then somewhere else will be correspondingly warm, and visa versa (heat distribution).

At the same time that parts of North America and Europe had cold conditions last winter, there were devastating heatwaves in Australia, the Winter Olympics in Vancouver were threatened with abandonment due to a lack of snow and in parts of Siberia temperatures were 30°C above the norm. When averaged out over the planet as a whole, the amount of heat present within the climatic systems was effectively balanced.

In fact, when you look at average global temperatures from one month to the next, or from one year to the next, there is very little difference in temperatures; it’s often less than 0.1°C and you have to go all the way back to June 1867 to find an instance when temperatures changed by more than 0.5°C from one month to the next.

Global warming is a very slow process, the average global temperature is increasing by 0.0177°C per year, a change so small that it’s virtually imperceptible from one year to the next and certainly nowhere near enough to eradicate cold winters. They’ve happened in the past and will happen again in the future.

Glen Whisson (climate scientist, Curtin University Perth)

(Also El Nino is a proven quasi periodic weather pattern, occurring around every 5 years. it's pretty easy to believe something is occurring if you can see it approximately every 3-7 years)
 
Here's what various religious leaders blamed the 2004 Asian tsunami on:

Tina M. of Holy Love Ministries in Elyria, OH widely distributed an article on the Internet, implying that God caused the tsunami as a response to the high abortion rate.

Anglican Dean of Sydney, Phillip Jensen, triggered the row after saying disasters are part of God's warning that judgment is coming

Imams in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, the country which suffered the greatest loss of life, blamed the tsunami on lay Muslims who were not meeting their obligation to pray five times a day and were following a materialistic lifestyle

Sheik Fawzan Al-Fawzan said that the tsunami was sent by God to punish South Asian countries because they allowed tourists to engage in immoral sexual activity.

Mohamed Faizeen, manager of the Centre for Islamic Studies in Colombo says a satellite picture taken seconds after the tsunami smashed into Sri Lanka’s west coast, “clearly spells out the name ‘Allah’ in Arabic.”

Sephardic chief rabbi Shlomo Amar said that the tragedy was "an expression of God's wrath with the world. The world is being punished for wrongdoing -- be it people's needless hatred of each other, lack of charity, moral turpitude."

(There are plenty of others who claim similar things, non of these claims are made by non-religious people)
 
I find the global warming topic very interesting. I agree in the warming of the earth but what's causing it I'm not 100% on. I haven't done enough research on it. I read somewhere that the average global temperature goes up before the co2 levels to follow not the other way around and that's how it's been for along time.
 
Here's a few more quotes from various religious leaders on other topics:


"Women are not given the right to instigate divorce because they are prone to emotional and irrational decision making. A husband, however, can divorce his wife at any time he so wishes." Iranian Ayatollah Ali Moghtadai, former head of Iran´s supreme court.

"AIDS is not just God´s punishment for homosexuals; it is God´s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals." American Jerry Falwell founder of the Thomas Road Baptist Church

"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians."American Pat Robertson who founded the Christian Coalition

"The earth is flat, and anyone who disputes this claim is an atheist who deserves to be punished." Saudi Arabian Sheik Abdel-Aziz Ibn Baaz, author of a Muslim religious edict written in 1993

"Sodomy is a graver sin than murder. - Unless there is life there can be no murder." American former Catholic priest David Trosch

Does anyone agree with these comments?

(While some people choose to become gay, many are born that way. You're not born religious).
 
I find the global warming topic very interesting. I agree in the warming of the earth but what's causing it I'm not 100% on. I haven't done enough research on it. I read somewhere that the average global temperature goes up before the co2 levels to follow not the other way around and that's how it's been for along time.

I agree with you 100%, there is so much research to be done. To believe it's all been fabricated as part of a global scam to make money is a bit far fetched. One explanation of the co2 lagging temperature increase is:

When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit. The warming causes the oceans to give up CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming AND rising temperature causes CO2 rise.
 
There is proof that over 450 species of animals are homosexual or have homosexual tendencies. You can't tell me they are choosing to be gay?
 
@Crohns08 Even if people choose to be gay, didn't "God" give us free will in order to make choices? If this is true, why do people choose to go become sinners? If it's because we are all born sinners, I urge you to go and hold a beautiful newborn baby and tell that child they are a sinner by nature.
 
@Crohns08 Even if people choose to be gay, didn't "God" give us free will in order to make choices? If this is true, why do people choose to go become sinners? If it's because we are all born sinners, I urge you to go and hold a beautiful newborn baby and tell that child they are a sinner by nature.

God did give us free will and I think sometimes people get free will mixed up with God's plan, like blaming him for all of the evil in the world. I believe that the devil is very real and tempts us all the time to do bad things. He even tempted Jesus before he died, unsuccessfully. Actually it is my belief that Jesus and the Virgin Mary are without sin. (Except for in Jesus' last moments when he took on the sins of the world and felt a temporary rift between himself and God. At that time he was heard saying, 'Father, why have you forsaken me?')

It's not that people always make the choice to sin. Sometimes we lie and do bad things but justify doing it as the greater good. Sometimes the right thing is the very hard thing to do and we don't have the will power to do it. Which really, when our people have become so lazy needing instant this or that, is that so hard to believe? I think it's a misnomer that God expects us to be perfect. However it doesn't mean we can go out and do whatever we want. When we sin, we must go and confess our sins in confession and ask for forgiveness. Afterwhich, we must go and repent for our sins. It has to be genuine though. You can't go out and do that wrong thing again knowingly and expect forgiveness.

Hope this helps. If there's something I didn't address, let me know :)
 
@Crohns08 I'm very confused. What is God's plan and what exactly does he have control of?

Here's an interesting excerpt from the secular thinker.

It has long been state that God is all knowing. However, this creates many problems with other supposed traits of God. For example, if God is all knowing, then he knows the past, present and future. If he knows the future, then he has had fore-knowledge of every disaster, tragedy, murder, rape, death, war, etc. that has ever occurred. Therefore, he always chose not to intervene and prevent these terrible things from happening. How can a god who supposedly loves all humans allow 8 year old girls to be raped and murdered?

If god is all knowing, then free will is merely an illusion. If he knows exactly what every person will ever do or think or say, then it has somehow already determined before these things happen. How can we make a choice when somewhere, it is already known what choice will be made?

Additionally, if god is all knowing, then life is utterly meaningless and without meaning. Christians pride themselves on their lives devoted to god and assert that without god, existence is meaningless. However, if their god truly is omniscient, then there is no purpose to life, and here is why: If god already knows everything about you before you are born, he already knows whether you are going to heaven or hell. He knows what "sins" you will commit and exactly when and how you will die. His mind is already made up before you even came into existence! Therefore, your life is merely god letting you postpone the consequences for his predetermined judgement, based on an existence which he already knew every single second of.
 
There is proof that over 450 species of animals are homosexual or have homosexual tendencies. You can't tell me they are choosing to be gay?

wow really? that is wild...you are talking about other animals besides the human right?

NVM read up the posts and saw what you said originally...that is wild though. Never heard that before.
 
Last edited:
@Crohns08 I'm very confused. What is God's plan and what exactly does he have control of?

Here's an interesting excerpt from the secular thinker.

It has long been state that God is all knowing. However, this creates many problems with other supposed traits of God. For example, if God is all knowing, then he knows the past, present and future. If he knows the future, then he has had fore-knowledge of every disaster, tragedy, murder, rape, death, war, etc. that has ever occurred. Therefore, he always chose not to intervene and prevent these terrible things from happening. How can a god who supposedly loves all humans allow 8 year old girls to be raped and murdered?

If god is all knowing, then free will is merely an illusion. If he knows exactly what every person will ever do or think or say, then it has somehow already determined before these things happen. How can we make a choice when somewhere, it is already known what choice will be made?

Additionally, if god is all knowing, then life is utterly meaningless and without meaning. Christians pride themselves on their lives devoted to god and assert that without god, existence is meaningless. However, if their god truly is omniscient, then there is no purpose to life, and here is why: If god already knows everything about you before you are born, he already knows whether you are going to heaven or hell. He knows what "sins" you will commit and exactly when and how you will die. His mind is already made up before you even came into existence! Therefore, your life is merely god letting you postpone the consequences for his predetermined judgement, based on an existence which he already knew every single second of.


I think though, that Christians believe that although god is all knowing and all seeing the human being has been given the right of free thought and action. Somewhere it does say that we shall never understand or know what god is all about ...we can not conceive of this nor do we have the capacity to understand him...hence the "god works in mysterious ways".

I really think that taken literally, the free will or determined destiny thing is a little too cut and dry. I believe in a nut shell that we are given free will and that even though god knows the outcomes of every possible avenue we choose that path may not be known..ah, o hell with it..its very hard to argue the other side. I am trying but logically it makes no sense.

If god is omniscient then this entity, by definition, 'knows' everything. If that is the case no matter if the perception of free will exists or not god knows the outcome and you are right. God knows and is postponing the inevitable; which could be considered by some, including myself, as cruel and unusual punishment.


Just for kicks: The idea of monotheism (the worship and belief in one god) came to the Jews by way of the Parsis also known as Zoroastrianism. Prior to the Parsis, there is no written form of monotheism in the known world in modern or ancient history.
 
I think though, that Christians believe that although god is all knowing and all seeing the human being has been given the right of free thought and action. Somewhere it does say that we shall never understand or know what god is all about ...we can not conceive of this nor do we have the capacity to understand him...hence the "god works in mysterious ways".

I really think that taken literally, the free will or determined destiny thing is a little too cut and dry. I believe in a nut shell that we are given free will and that even though god knows the outcomes of every possible avenue we choose that path may not be known..ah, o hell with it..its very hard to argue the other side. I am trying but logically it makes no sense.

If god is omniscient then this entity, by definition, 'knows' everything. If that is the case no matter if the perception of free will exists or not god knows the outcome and you are right. God knows and is postponing the inevitable; which could be considered by some, including myself, as cruel and unusual punishment.


Just for kicks: The idea of monotheism (the worship and belief in one god) came to the Jews by way of the Parsis also known as Zoroastrianism. Prior to the Parsis, there is no written form of monotheism in the known world in modern or ancient history.

It sure is hard to argue the other side logically. I certainly couldn't devote my life to something I don't have the capacity to understand. At least science is working on answers.

That's a interesting point about monotheism. Earlier, I gave the example of the ancient Greeks (what happened to their many gods)? At the time is wasn't called Greek Mythology. Perhaps one day, Christianity will be referred to as Christian Mythology.
 
There are a hell of a lot of things contributing to the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere but the whole reason for the majority of the excess is the burning of fossil fuels to create electricity, when oil, carbon, wood (any organic matter) is burned, it gives off energy(which we use to warm up water, which creates the steam used to create motion-which generates electricity) and water and CO2.

That said, CO2 is one of the reasons that earth can actually sustain life, without it and water vapour(which also contributes to the containment of heat energy) the earths average temperature would have been -19degrees celcius, but the excess of it, which is generated by the amazing ignorant human race is what causes global warming.

The other mistake people make is to think that global warming is only that, the warming of the planet, which is not completely true. Global warming starts out whith warming, but it actually leads to hectic climate changes (thus on Toni's remark about the coldest winters ever is actually because of global warming). Thats why I said your post was uninformed, cause you cant make statements without knowing the deeper detail behind a concept.

Again, no offence! lol andsorry about the long post, i'm just so passionate about this stuff. :Karl:
 
LYNX- That is so awesome!!!!!!!!! You should add me on facebook i've got a lot of pictures where i'm playing with lion cubs and elephants. It's a great direction to go in especially here and it's very fulfilling to know you are going to make a difference where it matters (someday). LOL!!
 
There are a hell of a lot of things contributing to the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere but the whole reason for the majority of the excess is the burning of fossil fuels to create electricity, when oil, carbon, wood (any organic matter) is burned, it gives off energy(which we use to warm up water, which creates the steam used to create motion-which generates electricity) and water and CO2.

That said, CO2 is one of the reasons that earth can actually sustain life, without it and water vapour(which also contributes to the containment of heat energy) the earths average temperature would have been -19degrees celcius, but the excess of it, which is generated by the amazing ignorant human race is what causes global warming.

The other mistake people make is to think that global warming is only that, the warming of the planet, which is not completely true. Global warming starts out whith warming, but it actually leads to hectic climate changes (thus on Toni's remark about the coldest winters ever is actually because of global warming). Thats why I said your post was uninformed, cause you cant make statements without knowing the deeper detail behind a concept.

Again, no offence! lol andsorry about the long post, i'm just so passionate about this stuff. :Karl:

I love a good voice of reason! :)
 
I love science too but you have to be just as careful with science as with anything else ...that is why I am a Skeptic...i finally found a philosophy that incorporates what I think into most of what they think too. Its wonderful. lol. I studied at length when I was younger all the different religions because I asked one question. Why am I supposed to be a Christian? Well this lead me to study everything out there and how those different things came into being, their history. I also, with the help of an exegetical theologist (a friend of mine was studying at a local seminary) looked at the origins of the modern Bible and all the influences that politics and economy had on the collection of books and what they meant for the faith itself. It was a very interesting journey to say the least. I came out the other end a Skeptic and not to just things in the realms of religion but on everything including science.

I have faith in science because science is something that can be duplicated and shown outside our experience. In other words, you can do the same experiments that a scientist conducted over 100 years ago and get the same results that they did. Thereby proving that what ever you did is valid. That is why it is such a touchstone to the very core of the question...WHY ARE WE HERE? In the long run that is ultimately what religion tries to answer and very much what science tries to answer too.

Wine: yes science can be exciting but here is something that has always struck me as a WOW factor when looking at the origins of the Universe. There are several theories as to how the universe came to be and what will eventually happen to it in the end. As you know the most common theory is the Big Bang Theory(good show too lol). My problem with removing a god or an entity from the picture entirely is ...what was around before the BIG BANG happened? What caused the Big Bang? My spiritual sides strongly says there is something greater and far more wise and knowing that anything you will ever understand out there. Not that it has anything at all to do with a religion that we are aware of now on this planet. Nor does it mean I would worship some alien intelligence because they had god like qualities. It just is a humbling factor I think. There is so much we do not know and we do not understand.

I always tell those who evangelize to me that I have a very comfortable relationship with god. This leaves them perplexed sometimes but most the time it gets them off my back. I am happy to believe that there is something other than mathematics or hard core science in the universe and that something may have a role in our lives that we are unaware of. As for the religions of this planet a little something I found interesting: The only religion on the planet that closely mirrors what science has so far proven to be the origins of our universe is Hinduism. The Samsara or circle of life, is very much the same as the Big Bang Theory in the way the universe was created and as it turns out it follows another theory very closely as to how the universe will end. So the Hindis came up with this about 5500 years ago and science has finally said through mathematics that Yeah, this is, with all probability what happened "in the beginning". I love science too...
Without it we would not be on these computers talking across the globe with one another. lol.

sorry for the long post...i know its a pain to read..
 
How can you choose to be gay? You are either attracted to your own sex, or you are not. You may choose to come out as gay, but that is something else entirely.
 
Guys I'm not really going to comment much more on the general theme but i just wanted to add this (especially after reading about homosexual tendancies apparently having been proven(!) to be present in animals), people are saying such and such is fact, its proven, scientists say so etc.

All good and well folks, but remember people get things wrong, at a time asbestos was thought to be the 'dream material' in construction as well as other industries, then they found out it was killing thousands and is essentially a ticking time bomb-years after. Now in no way am i saying scientists are always wrong etc, but just because of what some one person or group of people said, or how they think they've proved it, it CAN be wrong.

For instance, if science is ALWAYS so right in everything and dependable-then how come we all on here don't know exactly what causes CD or UC. And if i'd a pound for everytime i heard that too much of (insert food type here) can cause cancer, then the next week a report saying it prevents cancer! Also the source of such claims must be investigated too.

As i say i'm by no means belittling science here, it really interests me, but just cos some 'scientist' says something doesn't always mean its right. And too be honest the sheer thought that there is some way of getting into the mindset of an animal to investigate its gender preference is in my mind absurd. Maybe not to others, but when they've discovered a way to communicate with said animals and they can sit and tell us all about how they feel they've been born that way or chose that way, i'll maybe start to take that more seriously. Finally on the animal point, how about maybe the animals just aren't smart enough to know the other animal is the same gender?

I've never met anyone in life who has always been right (indeed probably most reading this will say i'm more wrong than others), but just cause someone has a degree and 30 years experience-still doesn't mean they're always right.

Again i stress i don't discredit the world of science, but always remember its humans telling us this and they may be wrong either by honest mistake, a lack of knowledge or perhaps it is intentional...
 
Liverpool, i'm sure that a scientist wouldn't just go, "Oh well they say cheese is bad for you, lets tell the world it causes cancer". When something is published as a fact then there had to be good logical reasoning, loads of experiments etc to come to the conclusion that its acurate. I'm not saying that there aren't people out there who would bullshit you about something just for the hell of it, but most of the time the guy who published it studied hard for his degree and would want to use his knowledge to help people to the best of his abilities.

Thats my opinion on the matter.
 
Hey Dras, i totally understand, but there are some things which may be able to be shown as undisputable 'fact', a lot of other things are quite frankly theories which some take as fact, even though they aren't really... just like the belief either way on God's existence.

Those who say he doesn't exist, show me the hard undisputable evidence (not opinion) that proves it ...and there is none. I accept others will turn that arguement around, but that to me says that for something such as saying animals can be gay is the same, someone can do all the research they want but there will be no 100% undisputable, undeniable, concrete evidence of which everyone would have to hold up their hands and accept.

I agree that 99.999999999999% of scientists believe what they come up with is correct, though as I say, those working in the research and development of asbestos materials realised that even though they initially thought they were 'right' they turned out to be very 'wrong'.

Thats why for example in medicine there is always new thinking, for instance a while back i saw a medical journal saying that contrary to previous belief, surgery for CD shouldn't be the last resort but instead could be more effective intially than tablets etc. What is 'right' today can be 'wrong' tomorrow morning.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but we also have to look at who funds some of the research carried out (not specifically talking about animals here but just in general), for instance: is research carried out, but initiated by say a drinks manufacturer, going to be 100% neutral if it has instigated it to counter opinion that it maybe causes harm? Perhaps it will be, but would it not be a duty to treat it with scepticism until other concrete proof from a neutral body has perhaps verified it? It would certainly be niaive of us to think that everything we are told is 100% right.

There will be people who believe everything someone in a white coat tells them, there will be people who will not believe a thing they say, and then there are people like myself (and i'm sure almost everyone) who probably accepts most due to our own thoughts/experience/belief, but will question other 'findings'.
 
Last edited:
Well said Liverpool! I would make further comments on recent posts but I'm not feeling well at the moment :(
 
So then to me, Liverpool and Crohns08 you guys are not open for any change of mind. All things that have been said as facts you both state as "yeah they may say that they are true now but that could change... so facts aren't facts"

I just don't know what anyone could say that you would agree with as fact. I mean none of the religious stuff has been proven as fact either, but you choose to believe that over something "more likely" to be fact because its scientific, provable, testable, and able to be reproduced.

I mean thats like me telling you that that grass isn't green because maybe one day they will decide to rename green to blue and it'll then be blue.

That thought process doesn't follow my line of thinking and the way that I go about forming beliefs and opinions... but I guess thats what makes everyone so diverse.
 
Hey Dras, i totally understand, but there are some things which may be able to be shown as undisputable 'fact', a lot of other things are quite frankly theories which some take as fact, even though they aren't really... just like the belief either way on God's existence.

Those who say he doesn't exist, show me the hard undisputable evidence (not opinion) that proves it ...and there is none. I accept others will turn that arguement around, but that to me says that for something such as saying animals can be gay is the same, someone can do all the research they want but there will be no 100% undisputable, undeniable, concrete evidence of which everyone would have to hold up their hands and accept.

I agree that 99.999999999999% of scientists believe what they come up with is correct, though as I say, those working in the research and development of asbestos materials realised that even though they initially thought they were 'right' they turned out to be very 'wrong'.

Thats why for example in medicine there is always new thinking, for instance a while back i saw a medical journal saying that contrary to previous belief, surgery for CD shouldn't be the last resort but instead could be more effective intially than tablets etc. What is 'right' today can be 'wrong' tomorrow morning.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but we also have to look at who funds some of the research carried out (not specifically talking about animals here but just in general), for instance: is research carried out, but initiated by say a drinks manufacturer, going to be 100% neutral if it has instigated it to counter opinion that it maybe causes harm? Perhaps it will be, but would it not be a duty to treat it with scepticism until other concrete proof from a neutral body has perhaps verified it? It would certainly be niaive of us to think that everything we are told is 100% right.

There will be people who believe everything someone in a white coat tells them, there will be people who will not believe a thing they say, and then there are people like myself (and i'm sure almost everyone) who probably accepts most due to our own thoughts/experience/belief, but will question other 'findings'.

Why should the burden of proof fall on the non-believer?

You say that "What can be right today can be wrong tomorrow morning", surely the same can be said about the bible's authors. At least science is doing its best to work out problems. Remember, the scientists who developed asbestos were proven wrong by other scientists (not god).

It would most certainly be naive of us to "think that everything we are told is 100% right" when it comes to scientists but, far more naive to believe what was written in 66 books over a period of 1400 to 1800 years by more than 40 different uneducated authors.

The process of scientific method makes sure that we are not just told something by a man in a white coat and meant to believe it. it can be broken down into these steps:

Ask a question
Do background research
Construct a Hypothesis
Test your hypothesis by doing experiments
Analyse your data and draw a conclusion
Communicate your results (through peer reviewed research papers)

Yes scientists get it wrong, but what other alternative is there to advancing humankind?
 
wow interesting thread, bean following it for a while just haven't come round to posting as things where heating up.

we have our beliefs, some based on science and evidence and others that are based on faith. i don't see why ppl who don't agree with others beliefs should have change so theirs fits in line with others. our beliefs our our own and they help us to deal with the things life throws at us, they give us comfort and answers when we struggle to understand. it would be unscientific to compare science based and faith based beliefs using scientific evidence (not that we can't debate :ysmile:)

science does get things wrong. it has a great system of improving and moving forward but this doesn't mean we take findings as fact as most scientific conclusions aren't and only show evidence which in turn gives rise to theories. as for proof, i have come very sceptical of that word lately, do we really have proof of anything, is enough evidence to change peoples assumptions enough to be justified as proof or does it have to much more than that or does it even exist?!!

(i love the stat about 450 species of animals that are gay, are they genetically born gay? i wonder how many species in the kingdom animalia there are)

wonderful thread even if it has gone off topic and out of hand at times.
 
@red1 No one should change their beliefs. How people deal with things is their decision. This is a healthy conversation with questions from both sides and I disagree that this has got out of hand at times. If one is passionate about their beliefs they should voice them.

Science does get things wrong, no one here disagrees with you, many great scientific discoveries were born out of error. Religion also gets things wrong (genocide, slavery, intolerance, suicide bombings, genital mutilation etc etc etc). The difference is that science is constantly adapting as the world advances, religion isn't.
 
Why should the burden of proof fall on the non-believer?

You say that "What can be right today can be wrong tomorrow morning", surely the same can be said about the bible's authors. At least science is doing its best to work out problems. Remember, the scientists who developed asbestos were proven wrong by other scientists (not god).

It would most certainly be naive of us to "think that everything we are told is 100% right" when it comes to scientists but, far more naive to believe what was written in 66 books over a period of 1400 to 1800 years by more than 40 different uneducated authors.

The process of scientific method makes sure that we are not just told something by a man in a white coat and meant to believe it. it can be broken down into these steps:

Ask a question
Do background research
Construct a Hypothesis
Test your hypothesis by doing experiments
Analyse your data and draw a conclusion
Communicate your results (through peer reviewed research papers)

Yes scientists get it wrong, but what other alternative is there to advancing humankind?

Lol! Everytime I read everyone's posts directed at me i'm already forming a reply in my head and then BOOM Winemaker just says it all. Thx! Just goes to show how much alike our brains and their thinking patterns are. High 5 buddy!

So ya, my reply is "What he said":thumright:
 
Lol! Everytime I read everyone's posts directed at me i'm already forming a reply in my head and then BOOM Winemaker just says it all. Thx! Just goes to show how much alike our brains and their thinking patterns are. High 5 buddy!

So ya, my reply is "What he said":thumright:

My brain has a crush on your brain
 
oh, is this the Crohnsforum?
Or Match.com?
Dras and Wine sitting in a tree.............lol
 
So then to me, Liverpool and Crohns08 you guys are not open for any change of mind. All things that have been said as facts you both state as "yeah they may say that they are true now but that could change... so facts aren't facts"

I just don't know what anyone could say that you would agree with as fact. I mean none of the religious stuff has been proven as fact either, but you choose to believe that over something "more likely" to be fact because its scientific, provable, testable, and able to be reproduced.

I mean thats like me telling you that that grass isn't green because maybe one day they will decide to rename green to blue and it'll then be blue.

That thought process doesn't follow my line of thinking and the way that I go about forming beliefs and opinions... but I guess thats what makes everyone so diverse.

That's not true. The homosexual behavior that you described happened in over 450 species of animals is dominance behavior. If you were to go to a dog forum or talk to animal behaviorists, I guarentee they would think it's a dominant aggressive behavior before they would even consider the likely hood of it being a sexual behavior.

Yes, but you're comparing apples to oranges. When there is no proof or the lack of technology to find that proof then you can't say, "Here's the facts." That's like saying diet cured crohn's disease for those that can put themselves into remission with diet. There's no proof either way.

I think what it comes down to is that it sounds that everyone is pretty set in their ways and truly believes what they believe, which is great! But what isn't great is debating the same thing for ten or more pages. It gets boring and old quite honestly, especially when not all of the facts and views are being taken in to perspective. It's why I'll continue to lurk in the thread unless someone directs something to me.
 
I think what it comes down to is that it sounds that everyone is pretty set in their ways and truly believes what they believe, which is great! But what isn't great is debating the same thing for ten or more pages. It gets boring and old quite honestly, especially when not all of the facts and views are being taken in to perspective. It's why I'll continue to lurk in the thread unless someone directs something to me.

I disagree that the same thing has been debated throughout this thread.
Here's brief overview of what's been discussed so far:

Losing/gaining faith
Disease
Evolution
Miracles
Karma
Child abuse
Natural disasters
Morality
Sin
The Devil
Acts carried out in the name of god
Free will
Embryonic stem cell research
Homosexuality
Condom use
Spirituality/faith
Climate Change
God's plan
Omniscience/omnipresence of god
Genetics/scientific research

I disagree that facts/views in this thread are not in perspective, just like I disagree that it's boring and old. Personally, it's exciting to see how people's views differ on a range of issues (and how radically they differ).
 
lol I think this whole debate has been fun. Thanks Wine and Chrons and others who have thrown their ideas out there for scrutiny and challenge. A lot of times now a days people have major cows...literally they birth them right in front of you, if you talk about things like this. Its fun to see people show respect and still be able to argue their points of view!
 
lol I think this whole debate has been fun. Thanks Wine and Chrons and others who have thrown their ideas out there for scrutiny and challenge. A lot of times now a days people have major cows...literally they birth them right in front of you, if you talk about things like this. Its fun to see people show respect and still be able to argue their points of view!

Thanks to you too. It's been fun! I was watching videos on youtube on religion/atheism and the comments/debates on those videos got way out of hand and sometimes downright threatening.
 
Last edited:
LOL! Joan, it's not like that. we're just very much alike intellectually. It's not often that you come across someone who thinks exactly the way you do. I think wine and I are going to become very good friends in the future. :)
 
I'm impressed that everyone could stay civil througout this whole discussion,

Just goes to show, us crohnies are pretty damn awesome!
 
It's nice to see a different topic here winemaker, and reading everyones peaceful and informative posts. I'll have to buy you a beer next time I'm in Perth :cheerss:

I'm somewhere between athiest/agnostic myself with friends all over the spectrum, but feel people should be free to practice whichever religion they want, with no influence or involvement from the government. Yes, that means I think the US & Australian govts should be secular, and not that politicians themselves should be, they are after all representatives of the population, we just need to give the population a real choice -- the two major parties in Australia are essentially the same in this respect, but our third party is very secular. I'll refrain from commenting on the relevance of heads of major religions in modern times, as I'm not sure I could do so politely. :devil:

I find it interesting that most people, religious or not, always seem to ignore the other religions that exist around the world, including our own countries, times have changed and we can't pretend that there's only one God being worshiped around the world. While I'm torn as to whether to support Richard Dawkins or not, I do find a lot of truth in a quote of his "We're all atheists, I just deny one more God than you do!"

To bring some relevance to the original post and this forum itself, there's an editorial Cancer control is a scientific marvel re Mary MacKillop, written by Ian Olver, medical oncologist and chief executive of Cancer Council Australia. I also do not see why the Australian Government spent $1.5 million of tax payer on the celebrations, as I doubt they'd do so for any other religion or movement. :yfaint:

Re global warming as discussed a few pages back, I'm not exactly a true scientist, but my understanding is the weather has been becoming more extreme over the years, both hot and cold, though the heat is presumably more extreme and easier to measure. In Australia we've had record heatwaves in South Australia (the hottest state), and record floods in Queensland (the wettest state), and a lot more of both around the country. I don't know how much of this is natural and how much is influenced by our emissions/etc, but think it naive to not want to do something to stop it regardless.

Stefan
 
Thank you Stefan,

Yes that's exactly it, global warming does cause temperature extremes. (Thus more and more intense hurracains(sp), storms, droughts, etc. occur now)

And by the way has anyone seen the pictures taken of glaciers all around the world from today and say, 30 years ago. If you compare them you would not believe how they have melted away. Has anyone seen how much the coastline of antarctica has shrunk?

I'd say there is more than enough proof of global warming.

Please excuse me, I am somewhat of a greenpeace hippy. lol
 
Nicely said Stefan, I'm with you 100%.

Dras: I'm also with you 100% (as usual)

Just think guys, with the polar ice caps melting, Jesus will have heaps more water to walk on when he comes back.
 
Just think guys, with the polar ice caps melting, Jesus will have heaps more water to walk on when he comes back.

I think that would offend a lot of people, which will lead to this thread unravelling. I think it better if you edit this one out buddy.
 
Any of you guys ever read the bible and consider such stories as "Jesus walking on the water" for their metaphorical value. Or perhaps when Paul was miraculously freed from bondage? Or Paul's miraculous rescue at sea? Or from Genesis, the story of the tower of Babel? I personally think "organized religion" has ruined the discussion of the bible. Each denomination has their own inflexible attitudes and it just doesn't sit well with me that any human or group of them should decide what I should think and do.
 
Any of you guys ever read the bible and consider such stories as "Jesus walking on the water" for their metaphorical value. Or perhaps when Paul was miraculously freed from bondage? Or Paul's miraculous rescue at sea? Or from Genesis, the story of the tower of Babel? I personally think "organized religion" has ruined the discussion of the bible. Each denomination has their own inflexible attitudes and it just doesn't sit well with me that any human or group of them should decide what I should think and do.

I could only ever consider such stories to be metaphorical. I think it's odd to take the bible literally, in fact, I find many stories from the major religions to be equally as perplexing as those from Scientology.

I think it's just as hard to believe a virgin can give birth as it is that Xenu, the dictator of the Galactic Confederacy brought billions of people to Earth in a spacecraft.
 
Each denomination has their own inflexible attitudes and it just doesn't sit well with me that any human or group of them should decide what I should think and do.

That's a pretty valid point, and thats something that never really sat well with me either. The church I went to as a kid for example, didn't approve of singing worship in English but only in Afrikaans (my first language). So what difference did it make what language you worshipped in?

My point is that it's the man made politics within religion that made me skeptical of the whole thing in the first place. At the end of the day, the bible and the koran and whatever else is open to anyone's interpretation and it's your personal decision what you want to take from it or not. No one can say for sure what it means. Once I sat in a church and the pastor was so hectically manipulating, toying with everyone's emotions, and I was like wow.... seriously???

Me, I think the stories are figurative and the hidden meanings behind them comes down to our everyday morals anyway, don't kill another, don't steal, love everyone as you love yourself, respect others....etc etc etc....
 
It's sad that i have been asked to edit out my comment, "with the polar ice caps melting, Jesus will have heaps more water to walk on when he comes back". I even apologised to anyone that it may have offended.

It is more far offensive when people say that condoms have tiny holes in them which transmit AIDS (personally I would like that comment edited out).

Sorry Jeff D, I will let you edit out my comment if you seriously think it's necessary but I won't do it.

A cartoon of the prophet Mohammed was published in a Danish newspaper and there was rioting in the street and death threats made to the illustrator/newspaper/tv networks by thousands of muslims around the world.

I wonder how many of you thought that was ridiculous?

Lighten up.
 
Okay, my opinion only of course..............:)

I see two issues here winemaker:

1. Religion is always going to be a subject that is going to bring out the passions in people and therefore the capacity to offend is greater. I reckon you already know that. ;)

2. One of my fears......nah that's not the right word, maybe hesitations in being on a world wide forum, and in doing so my guard is constantly up, is that I don't think humour necessarily transcends the different cultures even when we don't perceive ourselves to be that different. Haha maybe I'm being too cautious but I'm always wary of offending someone in this type environment!

As a general rule I think we Aussies are a pretty irreverent bunch, well I am anyway!
Dusty. :)
 
I think its funny from both sides.

If you are religious, you believe he walked on water, therefore him coming back to melted ice caps and having more water to walk on is funny.

If you aren't religious, its funny because it pokes fun at something you don't believe in.

Fairly straightforward in my opinion. But then again, when does that ever matter :)
 
Okay, my opinion only of course..............:)

I see two issues here winemaker:

1. Religion is always going to be a subject that is going to bring out the passions in people and therefore the capacity to offend is greater. I reckon you already know that. ;)

2. One of my fears......nah that's not the right word, maybe hesitations in being on a world wide forum, and in doing so my guard is constantly up, is that I don't think humour necessarily transcends the different cultures even when we don't perceive ourselves to be that different. Haha maybe I'm being too cautious but I'm always wary of offending someone in this type environment!

As a general rule I think we Aussies are a pretty irreverent bunch, well I am anyway!
Dusty. :)

If I'd have used profane language or made a rude insulting statement that was disrespectful, I would edit the comment out. I have already apologised sincerely if the comment offended anyone and I truly believe that's enough. I'm equally as passionate about religion, but it doesn't make me more prone to offence.

Previously, I posted comments from numerous religious leaders from all faiths, referring to the devastating 2004 Asian tsunami. Didn't anyone find it offensive when islamic leaders, Rabbis and priests claimed that it was caused by a lack of praying, immoral sexual activity, the coming judgement and a high abortion rate?

Or when Rev. Falwell said, "AIDS is not just God´s punishment for homosexuals; it is God´s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals".

Or Pat Robertson, "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians." (he also blamed the Haitian earthquake on a "pact with the devil")

The Pope claiming that condom use aggravates the spread of HIV/AIDS

the list goes on and on, why not remove these offensive comments?

I'm not sure if I can find more offensive comments than these. Perhaps to some, my comment about jesus walking on water is on par with these. I certainly hope not.

I don't want to and shouldn't have to walk on eggshells around people just because they disagree with me.

In my opinion, this thread has never got out of hand. It's remained civil and has been a good platform for everyone from all different persuasions to voice their beliefs.

If you truly think it's necessary to remove my comment, there's nothing I can do about it but, I urge you to really think if it's essential to do so. I didn't realise that such a statement would cause "many complaints".
 
Last edited:
If I'd have used profane language or made a rude insulting statement that was disrespectful, I would edit the comment out. I have already apologised sincerely if the comment offended anyone and I truly believe that's enough. I'm equally as passionate about religion, but it doesn't make me more prone to offence.

Previously, I posted comments from numerous religious leaders from all faiths, referring to the devastating 2004 Asian tsunami. Didn't anyone find it offensive when islamic leaders, Rabbis and priests claimed that it was caused by a lack of praying, immoral sexual activity, the coming judgement and a high abortion rate?

Or when Rev. Falwell said, "AIDS is not just God´s punishment for homosexuals; it is God´s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals".

Or Pat Robertson, "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians." (he also blamed the Haitian earthquake on a "pact with the devil")

The Pope claiming that condom use aggravates the spread of HIV/AIDS

the list goes on and on, why not remove these offensive comments?

I'm not sure if I can find more offensive comments than these. Perhaps to some, my comment about jesus walking on water is on par with these. I certainly hope not.

I don't want to and shouldn't have to walk on eggshells around people just because they disagree with me.

In my opinion, this thread has never got out of hand. It's remained civil and has been a good platform for everyone from all different persuasions to voice their beliefs.

If you truly think it's necessary to remove my comment, there's nothing I can do about it but, I urge you to really think if it's essential to do so. I didn't realise that such a statement would cause "many complaints".

Yes, but there's a difference between saying something on purpose that you know will offend people and saying something that you sincerely didn't think would offend anyone. What might be funny to you might not be funny to someone else. What might offend you, might not offend me. It's not about walking on eggshells, it's about being considerate of other's beliefs.
 
Back
Top