Moving Forward in Oklahoma

[BadgeBunny]

Seriously???

I swear!! They had the quote up on the screen ... I can't find it now, of course ... My search foo is so paltry ...

Maybe but I do admit to a weakness for screwing with people's minds and trying to get them to think outside the box.

 

[ez bake]

OK EZ I will spell it out so that maybe you can understand. First of all remember we are talking the bible here. A book that was written a few hundred years after the fact and while it supposedly contains God's words, they have been interpreted by men and are not 100% God's word.

Second, if you take all of those things I posted,

Go forth and multiply.
No choking the chicken.
In some sects no contraception.
According to some sects, sex is only for having children.
Heck in a few parts of the world they ignore gays as long as they have a family and fathered children. (in some Muslim sects too)

Then it is only logical the powers of the church want their followers to have children. Most of those children will grow up to be followers of that religion too.

Now doesn't it make sense that the reason being gay is prohibited in the bible is because they wanted Christian men and women to have children thus making more Christians.

As for some of your other post about the bible not condemning being Gay, heck even cross dressing is condemned.

"The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. "

Some other quotes,

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, "

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. "

Now do you see what I have been trying to led you to?

You've almost got enough for Logical Fallacy Bingo (if we were playing blackout).

The real problem here is you are all over the map with your straw-grasping yet again (and yet again, you've avoided every one of my points/questions while I specifically address each one of yours). Stay vague and ambiguous and keep tap-dancing - that's how you win arguments in RickN's world (BTW, I love how everyone who has your back is giving character testimony as opposed to saying "That Rick, he really knows how to debate logically").

The problem is really 3 parts:

1.) You do or don't believe in the bible - pick a side. You've already used a bit of poison in the question, but here you go with a full-on loaded question. If the Bible has unscrupulous origins, then you can twist it's meanings to whatever you want them to be because it "is not 100% God's word" and is "Interpreted by men". If this is the case, then why are you trying to get into the theology of the Bible instead of just saying you don't believe in it? Several times, I've discussed/debated with intelligent Atheists who flat-out say this up front and I respect that - but they don't try and tell me about the theology (mostly because they don't care about it).

If you do believe, then you sound exactly like the evil church you're trying to tell everyone about. If you don't believe, then you're coming off as seriously stupid for even getting into the argument because again and again, you're flat out wrong about what you think the scriptures you're listing say. So that bible you don't believe in - I don't believe in that one either (because it clearly says something else in your world).

2.) You don't understand/comprehend the bible in the first place. I keep saying this, but you're trying to convince me otherwise by posting misinformation and just generally be wrong - it's like you're trying to convince me I'm wrong by proving me right. I've shown this to you each time, but you just keep dancing around that fact. Google is getting you into trouble not because you're not smart enough to comprehend what you're searching for, but because you're too lazy to do any serious studying to see what that thing you're bashing really says. Why actually take the time to comprehend what you're reading when you can post out of context mis-quotes and try to be funny?

This is getting tiring so I'm not going to keep addressing your mis-quotes and out-of-context tripe arguments. You're just going to keep dancing around anything I've said without acknowledging it and keep searching for more BS info that you don't understand and copy/paste it while spraying the entire debate with the diarrhea of logical fallacies.

Which brings me to my final point:
3.) You just flat out don't know how to discuss something logically. This is the real problem here. It's the same problem with your political debate technique, and I would wager it probably plagues pretty much all your debates/discussions in life. It's especially frustrating for someone who is attempting to keep things on track while debating with you. You don't honestly know how to address valid criticism. You can't concede that you might be wrong when proof is shown to you and you seriously think that as long as you keep sticking and moving, that you're "winning" (a'la Charlie Sheen). It's getting tiring to try and keep you on track, and I really took this farther than I thought I would (for your benefit), but that appears to be wasted effort.


Here are some things to avoid in the future (not that you're going to):
[Broken External Image]

 

[RickN]

OK EZ lets make this real simple for you by asking a couple of simple questions. Can you quote anywhere in the bible that says it is OK to be gay? In fact can you quote anywhere in the bible to back up your arguments?

For all your whining about how little I know about the bible you have only used the liberal debate tactic of screaming about how wrong I am and that I should just stop. You have yet to provide one single shred of evidence to back up your claims.

If you are correct and it is only the sex act that the bible condemns, why is that, when taken into account that it is so common in nature. Show proof of your point and not just whine that I am wrong.

 

[rebel-son]

OK EZ lets make this real simple for you by asking a couple of simple questions. Can you quote anywhere in the bible that says it is OK to be gay? In fact can you quote anywhere in the bible to back up your arguments?

For all your whining about how little I know about the bible you have only used the liberal debate tactic of screaming about how wrong I am and that I should just stop. You have yet to provide one single shred of evidence to back up your claims.

If you are correct and it is only the sex act that the bible condemns, why is that, when taken into account that it is so common in nature. Show proof of your point and not just whine that I am wrong.

What is this world coming to liberals on gun boards?

I dont know. I fear for our nation and our gun rights.

 

[JB Books]

What is this world coming to liberals on gun boards?

I dont know. I fear for our nation and our gun rights.

Liberals have as much right to be here as you do. The fact is that the ULTRA hard core conservatives are no better than ULTRA hard core liberals.

 

[ez bake]

OK EZ lets make this real simple for you by asking a couple of simple questions. Can you quote anywhere in the bible that says it is OK to be gay? In fact can you quote anywhere in the bible to back up your arguments?

For all your whining about how little I know about the bible you have only used the liberal debate tactic of screaming about how wrong I am and that I should just stop. You have yet to provide one single shred of evidence to back up your claims.

If you are correct and it is only the sex act that the bible condemns, why is that, when taken into account that it is so common in nature. Show proof of your point and not just whine that I am wrong.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

burden of proof
You said that the burden of proof lies not with the person making the claim, but with someone else to disprove.

The burden of proof lies with someone who is making a claim, and is not upon anyone else to disprove. The inability, or disinclination, to disprove a claim does not render that claim valid, nor give it any credence whatsoever. However it is important to note that we can never be certain of anything, and so we must assign value to any claim based on the available evidence, and to dismiss something on the basis that it hasn't been proven beyond all doubt is also fallacious reasoning.

tu quoque
You avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism.

Pronounced too-kwo-kwee. Literally translating as 'you too' this fallacy is also known as the appeal to hypocrisy. It is commonly employed as an effective red herring because it takes the heat off someone having to defend their argument, and instead shifts the focus back on to the person making the criticism.

Who made the claim about the bible? So I have to disprove your claim for your claim to be wrong?

This is idiotic - you've posted countless things that I have directly addressed. You're not reading anything I'm writing.

I've seriously lost respect for you man. I thought you were better than this.

 

[rebel-son]

Liberals have as much right to be here as you do. The fact is that the ULTRA hard core conservatives are no better than ULTRA hard core liberals.

Never said they did not, but that is not something you would expect to see on a gun board and as we have discussed in various threads liberalism in various ways has been undoing our country.

Ironically on just the issue of gay marriage lets not forget the same ones support gay marriage dont seem to think we have a right to own or carry a gun ( there are exceptions)

 

[0311]

Never said they did not, but that is not something you would expect to see on a gun board and as we have discussed in various threads liberalism in various ways has been undoing our country.

Ironically on just the issue of gay marriage lets not forget the same ones support gay marriage dont seem to think we have a right to own or carry a gun ( there are exceptions)

Reb Baby! Long time no see! What's going on man!?

 

[JB Books]

Never said they did not, but that is not something you would expect to see on a gun board and as we have discussed in various threads liberalism in various ways has been undoing our country.

Ironically on just the issue of gay marriage lets not forget the same ones support gay marriage dont seem to think we have a right to own or carry a gun ( there are exceptions)

Our gun rights would be a Hell of a lot more secure if the Republican Party would stay out of people's sex lives.

 

[rebel-son]

Reb Baby! Long time no see! What's going on man!?

Not much man. Another amnesty battle I have been making my calls to offices on and things like that. How about you