Tweet
Day of Sobriety.jpgUnstable RelationshipsSexual FluidityA Hollow Victory
-
Read my other blog posts at http://reasonablefaithknoxville.org -
Support, please?Originally posted by djbrock View PostThe first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him. -
See the original blog for the hyperlinks. I didn't realize they didn't paste into this. Another reason I don't like this approach. Better to just link to the original blog so there's only one thing to maintain. Sorry.Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostRead my other blog posts at http://reasonablefaithknoxville.orgComment
-
Not that interested.Originally posted by djbrock View Post
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.Comment
-
Comment
-
This is considered "argument by weblink", and is against forum rules. If you don't want to discuss your position, just say so.Originally posted by djbrock View Post
What constitutes a reasonable request is up to the sole discretion of the moderation team. Debates (points for your position) made via weblink are not allowed. Weblinks may be used when a substantive summary of the point being made is posted on the board with a link given for further information regarding your position. Remember responsive arguments are to be as personal as possible, not "cut and paste" dueling articles. This can be avoided by giving one's personal analysis along with an article, or just quoting the specifically relevant portions and showing relevance. An exception is granted for articles or other larger pieces posted to start a thread which may be posted in accordance with our copyright rules without further commentary from the thread starter.Last edited by Cow Poke; 07-27-2015, 11:16 PM.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.Comment
-
These things never happened. Snopes tries to find the origin of that rumor, but fails. The event referred to apparently happened in Feb 2014, which was long prior to the Supreme Court decision, and the original accounts contained no mention whatsoever of any creative behavior by gay activists... the idea that they were defiling the bible and/or throwing excrement appears to have come straight from the vivid imaginations of Christians who have creatively retold the story among themselves over the last year and a half and then subsequently time-shifted it.Originally posted by djbrock View Post
In your imagination.Usually support for the winning side increases after a Supreme Court ruling, but support for same-sex marriage has declined.
Science will fix that soon.
About 3.5% of all marriages are same-sex marriages according to government statistics in my country. That would seem reasonably on par with the general proportion of gay people within the general population, so they would seem to be marrying much like straight people.We will learn in the future how many homosexuals actually choose to marry.
It may not be all that many since unstable relationship status is a hallmark of the homosexual community.
Right, and all straight people are totally monogamous. You're hilarious.
Not true. Admittedly the data quality on the subject isn't particularly good.They go through many more sexual partners on average than their heterosexual counterparts.
Not true. Initial data suggests that gay marriages last longer on average.
Well there's your problem. Don't credulously believe things written by malicious lying jerk nutters.Much of the above is a brief summary of data from The Bible and Homosexual Practice by Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon
The fifty percent number is not too inaccurate for lifetime heterosexual divorce rates. It depends exactly what area you are considering. 30-40% is probably typically more accurate though.Think about all the flack that marriage has taken with the erroneous myth that fifty percent of all marriages end in divorce.
Gay marriage hasn't been legal long enough for us to have perfect data on homosexual divorce rates. However initial data shows that overall they are more stable than opposite sex marriages.by comparison to homosexual marriages it looks stellar!
False. The evidence points to a small amount of fluidity. A negligibly tiny fraction of men perceive their sexual orientation to change in their lives, while a much larger (but still small) fraction of women do.The evidence to date, however, points to considerable fluidity in a spectrum from heterosexual to homosexual.
Yes it does. The sexual orientation, including changes therein, could be totally biologically determined.
Which has been demonstrated to be primarily caused by social prejudice and stigma, which is why mental health organisations worldwide have campaigned for more support of gay people and gay rights.Homosexuals will still continue to have higher percentages of mental illness than heterosexuals.
It appears to be weighing on your mind quite a lot.The conscious fact that they are abnormal in society weighs on the mind.
Exactly, their relationships tend to do better overall due to greater similarity. Psychologists have found the best predictor of successful relationships is the degree of similarity between the partners, as this gives them a better level of understanding of each other which leads to increased empathy and better problem-solving during fights. Presumably it is for this reason that various studies have found gay couples to be happier on average than opposite sex couples.There is also the rarely-discussed psychological reality that two same-sex people are not opposites psychologically and emotionally.
The made-up pseudo-psychology notion of "complementarity" is hilarious.There is no real complementarity to counterbalance the other person. At the most, you get either a highly feminized male or a highly masculinized female in terms of body style, clothing, mannerisms, and make-up. These are attempts at supplying what is lacking in the complementarity but they are not and cannot truly reach that goal."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert EinsteinComment
-
You didn't ask me to discuss my position. You asked for the link. "Support, please" is not an invitation to discussion. I told you where to find it; you didn't want to do it; I happened across another one so I took the time to post it and the other one from the article for you. The appropriate response from you is "THANK YOU". Otherwise, be more careful about what you ask for because you got what you asked for PLUS one. Furthermore, this was not even the focus of the article. It was simply an aside and if you had read the article in its original setting you would see that all the support I offered was the one link which referenced three polls done after SCOTUS. Yet still *another* reason this is a silly way to do posts. With this kind of foolishness I will have have no truck. I am exiting this forum. It is an obvious waste of time if I have to put up with such silly rules and this kind of abuse from the moderation team. Goodbye.Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostLast edited by djbrock; 07-28-2015, 05:23 PM.Read my other blog posts at http://reasonablefaithknoxville.orgComment
-
No, I asked you to support your position.Originally posted by djbrock View Post
Wow, you're a snitty one! I really have no desire to interact with such juvenile responses.I told you where to find it; you didn't want to do it; I happened across another one so I took the time to post it and the other one from the article for you. The appropriate response from you is "THANK YOU". Otherwise, be more careful about what you ask for because you got what you asked for PLUS one.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.Comment
-
You don't have to. See my updated reply. With this kind of foolishness from the moderation team, I'm choosing to exit the forum. It is a waste of time.Read my other blog posts at http://reasonablefaithknoxville.orgComment
-
Actually, I apologize. I can see how my request for support could have been seen as asking for the links. My error.Originally posted by djbrock View PostThe first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.Comment
-
Unfortunately, I would say until a few months ago I was one of these people.Originally posted by djbrock View PostComment
-
Don't let the door hit you on the way out."Obama is not a brown-skinned, anti-war socialist who gives away free healthcare. You are thinking of Jesus." Episcopal Bishop of Arizona
I remember WinAce. Gone but not forgotten.Comment
-
Thank you. And hat tip to ApologiaPhoenix for directing me to this. The hatchet has been buried.Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostRead my other blog posts at http://reasonablefaithknoxville.orgComment
-
I can see both sides here honestly and since I have good relations with both people, I do want to try to give the benefit of the doubt to both.
I can see how Darris sees his position as giving support, and indeed it does. I can also see how it can seem the moderation at times can be subjective, and indeed it has to be. We're not perfect and we have to make judgment calls. We could say something ranging from a beauty pageant to a show like Chopped also is subjective, even if there is some objective criteria. It doesn't mean the people in charge don't have reasons for their viewpoint which may or may not be valid.
On the other hand, all of this is stated in campus decorum that is agreed to and I understand what CP is saying. We can't just have people posting web links constantly. Certain people might get more leeway in my section or in JPH's section. In the rest of the forum, not really. One needs at least a little bit of something to go with a link or else we're just blasting links at each other all day.
But I do uphold the moderation team (And I say this as one who sees the inside) is incredibly fair and lenient around here. The forum is indeed lightly moderated and has become a fun place for people of all persuasions to unite.Comment
Comment