Nitramosma

Actually all it takes is one homosexual to stop being gay to disprove that statement. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1207729/posts Not to say this study isn't perfectly legitimate, but have they ever gone back and examined the people that they "cured" of their homosexuality maybe 15 or 20 years after. To my understanding, even if it isn't biological and it is rooted in childhood trauma (which is a theory I reject myself seeing as I was never sexually abused/molested) why try to change something that is so deeply a part of one's identity as sexual orientation. My best guess is that the best they can do is repress those desires, not change them, and ultimately repressed feelings/desires will come out one way or another. For all we know this "treatment" will turn all of its success stories into serial rapists 15-20 years down the line. Furthermore, for ever success they have, there are probably at least 10-20 failures. How are those men and women supposed to feel. What if someone truly does think that God hates them, and when they cannot change they end up committing suicide? Their death is on the hands of those who tried to change them...I bet the family could even ein a wrongful death lawsuit against the people who made them hate what they are. All I am saying is that even if they can change some of us to make us heterosexual, the risks to the others are too great. And who says all gays want to become straight? I would like to have a "normal" relationship, but if I have to go through years of psychotherapy, then I'd just as soon stay the way God made me.

Well...Um....Uh...I hope I never meet you. Lolz. But seriosly, whats the point in burning down their churches and assaulting them? They will only feel more self-righteous. I think that eventually being homosexual will become truly socially acceptable, and people like this church and goldphishies will just look like morons when they say stupid things like killing all the gays. I personally have been to an anti-gay rally (I like to know the enemy) and I thought all of their reasoning was stupid. "The Bible says its wrong" Old testament people get with the program. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is more along the line of Jesus' entire message. Besides if they have nothing better to spend their time on than crusades against the gays, then I fell sorry for them.

Murder, rape, suicide, genocide. Sounds like there are many things that are absolutely bad. Not to say everything is black and white, but to assert that nothing is absolutely good nor absolutely bad is more naive than his statement. And your views on someone's morality isn't what determines if they are good or bad. There are some things that are definitely wrong. There are many atrocities committed in the name of religion, but to use that to say that religion is 100% bad and wrong is just plain not true.

Family Guy, and its fat, stinkin' drunk. Where's my cookie?

Thats rather depressing. In all honesty I don't think I would make it more than 36 hours. Everything I looked forward to...gone. What could I do? I would probably find a gun and kill myself. Its just too depressing.

I was flipping through my old Nintendo Powers a while ago and guess what I found? In a 1994 episode (April or May I think) it was talking about this crazy Japanese game called Pocket Monsters. If I remember correctly it called it "gimicky(sp?)" and gave it only about a 4/10. Lol. Shows what Nintendo know about there old games, but back on subject, Pokemon is actually 13 years old. How crazy is that?

Actually the last thing you said conforms perfectly with what I've heard from most priests in the Catholic church and some other religious. You are pretty much under God guaranteed an eternal existence. If you have faith then you go to heaven and live with God for all eternity. Whereas if you lack faith or choose willingly to sin then you get an eternal existence completely separated from God. The talks of a fiery hell were mainly to convince people of the time not to sin. They are using it as a metaphor for the pain one should experience by being completely severed from God for all eternity. Not to say that hell doesn't exist, but I see it a more of a meaningless existence rather than an existence of fire and brimstone.

"You poisoned what?" OR "It's all fun and games until someon....."

Well, the serie's dieing which sounds good because it shouldn't have been so long, it should've been short and simple like Star Wars that's why it got high ratings and over 8 billion dollars sold in merchandise $ :thumbsup: $ Only the star wars movies saga was short. If you go by the number of star wars books there are more than 100 I believe with far more complex story lines than HP.

I believe that Harry/his scar is the last horcrux. Think about it. We know that Voldemort was still trying to achieve immortality when he heard the prophecy, so it is possible that he only had 6 made when he went to confront the Potters. What would be even more interesting is if there weren't actually 7 and that was just the number that Voldemort wanted to make but maybe he never finished. I am also fairly sure that Nagini( sp? Big V's snake) is a horcrux as well. I can't wait 3 and a half months. July 21st never seemed so far. :(

Good one. If you killed your parents (back in time), that would be like killing yourself before you were born!!! Both of you look at "John Titor" on wikipedia. If those theories are right, going back in time would send you into a slightly different time-line (but if the theoretical time machine "John" was talking about was improved, one could arrive in an identical time line (you create a new time line by going back into yours and changing it... ). So even if you go back into your original time line and do something, it will have no effect on you, since by changing your time line, you've split it in two.). By my reasoning, going back in time and killing your parents would have no effect, since than you would not be born, and if you werent born, you wouldnt go back in time to kill your parents, so theyed still be alive to have you. Got that? The way I figure it, if you go back in time and change anything, you create an alternate time line/universe/whatever you want to call it. Well the paradox of killing one's own parents would likely cause the universe of that time line to implode/be destroyed in some other cool manner, but the time line that you left when you went back in time would be fine, just you wouldn't exist in it.

Generally when I go out with friend we just get separate bills. I know it may seem like extra work for the servers, but thats why with large groups I always tip at least 20%.

I don't really have much scientific knowledge on evolution, but just from a modern standpoint, it seems like the vast majority of genetic abnormalities and mutations are not beneficial to the survival of the species, and most of the time mutations (at least in humans) cause them to be infertile, don't they? Another problem I have is that with almost every species we find fossil evidence of slight variations, but we never seem to find the "missing link" for any species. I have never really learned the difference between micro- and macro- evolution, so may information may be totally wrong, but there it is. EDIT: grr... hit submit when I meant preview. Continuing, I think macro-evolution is just as possible as any other scientific theory, but just from what I've seen the data doesn't necessarily support the argument.

The moon-lack of atmosphere/oxygen generally does not lead to to a long life. Seriously, probably anywhere hot- I can't stand heat over 75ÃÆââ¬Å¡ÃâúF and even that is uncomfortable for me. I would live in Alaska if I could find a good job for an electrical engineer there, you know once I finish college.

As part of my theology class last year, I did a miniature version of what you are doing Victor, but more from a standpoint of learning about the histories and general ideas of Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, and one other that I can't remember. It was an enlightening experience, but some ideas of Hinduism and Buddhism were way over my head no matter how hard I tried. I guess what I'm trying to say is I really respect that you put so much effort into learning about different faiths and I hope that when I have more time I will do the same.

You did say that your belief is a sort of mixture of many religions, did you not? I guess what I'm about to say applies to Bible-believing Christians only, but here goes... In 2 Corinthians (I think it's in that book) it says that those who practice homosexuality will not inherit the kingdom of God. And, since the Bible says that ALL scripture is God-breathed, God says that it is wrong. (I hope this post doesn't get me more enemies. That's what usually seems to happen when I post in the Off-Topic board...) Actually the quote is 1 Corinthians 6:19, it is a listing of grave sins for which you will not inherit the Kingdom of God. It includes boy prostitutes (boys in Greece who were supposed to, in society's eyes, have a sexual relationship with their tutors) and sodomites. But, and I know this may sound hypocritical from someone who claims to actually have faith in the Bible, I sincerely think that although it is God's word handed down to man, it may not be infallibly given/written. I mean Islamics take the Koran as being completely and totally 110% infallible and look at some of the quotes coming from it.

Actually it's quite confusing. See, I see homosexuality as a test not of whether or not you can pass it and become straight, but whether you can see and understand life, love, and the self. Essentially, the way to pass this test is to fail and not conform, I think God is testing your (and societies) understanding of life, love, and the self. It's not His law, he never expressed opinion either way, what is made is merely assumptions. That is rather confusing, but I really like your outlook on life. I think that is actually a rather true statement. Its not a test to see you conform to "God's will", but rather to see if you are able to come to grips with your sexuality and live life to the best of your ability with what you are given. You've truly given me a new perspective on what I used to see as a flaw in myself. Thank you.

I think that's just the church taking it for "face value". I doubt God nor Jesus have any opinion on it, this is why you have to dig deeper than the face value of the Bible, a lot of it is rubbish, and I include the majority of the Old Testament in that, but that isn't the point, the point is morals and the self, and being one with God, and FAITH, etc. This is how I fuse all the religions into one, when they're broken down, they all have basic core values. And the Church can justify homosexuality. I mean, who's to say God didn't make it as a test? And who's to say God supports people passing this test? I think you're right. I call myself a Catholic, but when you get down to it almost all religions profess helping other, living with good morals, self-control/help, and having faith in something. I too believe that a lot of the Bible has more symbolic meaning than literal meaning. The thing I disagree with you on is homosexuality as a test. I don't think God would condemn average people to a life of being stigmatized by society merely so He could see if they were faithful and would follow His laws. I guess more or less I just don't want it to be true, cause no one likes to feel like they have failed, and definitely not in the eyes of their own Lord. I suppose if that is true though, then I have failed and maybe I'm not worth of God...but thats what having faith is about. Knowing that you may be wrong, but you are loved anyway and you can always redeem yourself. EDIT: Upon reading this again it looks more like your reference to homosexuality as a test was more of a hypothetical. Sorry if you feel I put words in your mouth.

Ohh.. I see. I was really confused about that for a second.

*cough* Anti-Semitism, homosexuality, male priests only *cough* cough* I was unaware of rampant Anti-semitism in the church I agree with you on homosexuality, I did say eventually. I think once it becomes generally accepted that homosexuality is not a choice, the church will change its position, but as it stands right now most people view it as a "lifestyle choice". And as far as male priests go I consider them to be correct. It may sound irrational, as I can't see any real reason no to have female priests other than what the Bible says on it, but I consider a female priest on the same level as a male wet-nurse, it just can't happen.

Why is everyone saying that the main problem they have with religion is the requirement that we don't question God. News flash, ask any priest if its a sin to question why things are the way they are (in reference to the Bible, sacred Traditions, and the church Magesterium) and they will emphatically tell you that it is a good thing to question your religion. Note, I said question, not throw away aspects you disagree with. They will agree with you that we have minds able to think in a complex manner and free will so that we can question things that don't seem to make sense to us. I understand where it may seem like at time that we all accept everything at face value, but I guarantee you that I have at some point or another questioned almost every part of the Catholic religion and almost always I come to the conclusion that their position is right. However, in the event that I do disagree, that doesn't mean that I'm not a part of the church anymore, but merely that it is possible that the church is wrong on some things. Like others have brought up, the church did at one time support slavery, the church had a policy of not getting involved during the holocaust. They eventually realize they were wrong and usually correct themselves.

Its times like these I wish I had high speed internet. :(

Thats a common misconception and a load of rubbish. There are many primate species such as the Bonobo whose society is based entirely around sex. Well now I know. Grrr......discovery channel you lied to me!!!!

Name:Marty Age:18 Country:USA City/Town:That big one in Ohio Sports played/followed:Tae Kwon Do, Baseball, Soccer Music taste:Alternative rock, Classical Some favourite bands:Death Cab for Cutie, Ben Folds Five, Cactus 12, Relient K, The Minimum Requirements Instruments played: Baritone Belief Inclination: Catholic Hobbies/Other interests:Philosophy, Reading, Snowboarding, Bowling Ideal travel location: Probably Australia or Japan Future Aspirations/Career Aspirations:Electrical Engineer, but hoping to get into electronic prosthetics.

Saying that there are sources that say 9/11 couldnt of been done by muslim extremeists but its blatantly obvious that it was. The interesting part about the 9/11 attacks is that a recent random poll of I believe 5 Arab countries states that only 18 or 19% of Arab people polled believe that Arabs were responsible for the terrorist attacks on the WTC. In the end you'll always have those who disagree with the facts presented by those in charge.