What have you heard American Christians talk about more this last week, the existence of an adult website with 30+ million members that supports infidelity or homosexual marriage equality?
Planned Parenthood scandal.
Well, this week i have only spoken out about being saddened by the fact that there are millions seeking to betray their marriage via that site. I believe both(homosexuality), and any extramarital sex to be wrong biblically.
Well, in real life I haven't heard either, but on here, probably Ashley Madison, but not by a big percentage.
Neither. Don't know any Christians that talked any of it.
I know how hackers operate, so as soon as that database gets dumped I'm searching for everyone I know >:)
Then I'LL be holding information for ransom! Muahaha! ...maybe
I have heard both but not from Christians per se. What a bias in how this is worded.
I agree ^
Biased for sure, however on SOH I have had more conversations with people stating "I'm a Christian and homosexuality is wrong" type phrases than I ever have encountered in the real world....
Actually I have only hearing about Trump.
Actually I have little interest in either one.
and people thought committed gay marriage was going to destroy the sanctity of the institution....? 37m married people enrolled on a sight for adultery trumps that notion.
but I agree w/ the inference of the poll, there is no outrage from Christians equal to that of marriage equality.
Both are debased.
30m+ members, think any of em are christians?
Neither really. They're both symptoms of the same disease: sexual revolution, formerly known as libertinism.
Liberation from millennia of sexual repression =/= a disease. Sex is a basic biological function, nothing 'sacred' about it
one is homosexuality and is strictly condomed in the bible (Corinthians and Leviticus) and idk what ashley madison is
It's a website that arranges adulterous hookups.
There are far more passages condemning adultery and loose fornication, and they aren't debatable like those used against homosexuals.
Would homosexual relations not be a form of fornication?
Difference between committed relapsing and promiscuity.
Wow auto bomb.... committed relationship
The bible also states that a husband can beat his wife, a woman should be silent, and slaves should be submissive....
Just became aware of Ashley Madison today. What's with the name? Sorry no Christian involvement.
Never heard of Madison.
I've heard more in general about Ashley Madison, but I can't point out how many Christians were involved in the conversation...
Haven't heard them discuss either.
I haven't discussed nor heard discussed either topic except for on SOH. I for one believe both are sinful.
Which one is a choice and the other the way they were born?
Both actions are a choice.
Do you choose to be a heterosexual? Do you look at all people with the same sexual attraction?
Do you tell yourself, no no no, I can't go to town on that girl over there because that's not the right thing to do, even though I really, really want to?
RJ, you don't know me & I have a friend in crisis right now, so I don't have the time or energy to argue with you.
This isn't an argument.
The notion that a percentage of the population, everywhere on earth, that would choose to be marginalized, ostracized, and to be deemed evil, sinners, and unholy, by choice, is nonsense.
Really quickly & if you don't stop, I'm putting you on ignore!
All sex outside of a one man-one woman marriage is sin per the NT. You don't have to like it nor agree with it, because God gave you free will.
RJ's right though.
"if you don't stop I'll put you on ignore"... Bama, seems to an observer that RJ was just commenting on your thread/comment. You put it out there to be discussed.... 😏
God is not real... Homosexuality is found in every species... Homophobia is found in one...
Mel, the reason that I threatened to put RJ on ignore last night was because I was busy with a friend who was in the middle of a crisis. RJ & SM know me well enough to know where I stand and they've heard it all before they just wanted to pick a
fight which I didn't have the time nor energy to deal with last night. I'm actually about to turn in right now, so I won't be arguing this evening either.
Not afraid of homosexuality I'm not homophobic.
As I told RJ all sex outside of marriage is sin per the New Testament. You don't have to like it; you don't have to agree with it; you don't even have to believe in God. That's my point of view you can accept it or not.
Ahh that book where they changed it to fit the times... Sounds about right. Stupidity should be sinful
"Homosexuality is found in every species"
LOL! Look at all the gay animals out there!
Kscott....try using google sometime.
"Lots of animals engage in homosexual behaviour, but whether they are truly homosexual is another matter entirely"
You should read the title of the article, RJ.
Animals demonstrate many characteristics to show dominance. That is one of them. There
are also animals that eat their young, eat feces, and decapitate their mates post-coitus. Should we do this things too? I love how you like to say Christians pick and choose from the Bible, erroneously I might add, but can't see the irony when trying
to compare animal behavior to human behavior.
I know I've had to explain the animal thing to you before, so I don't know why you keep coming back for re-education.
Yeah, obviously it's much more complicated. Do they fall in love too, like humans do?
Some animals do use tools, like humans, but does that make them engineers?
Human sexuality is very complicated, as is much of psychology and sociology.
So, while animals do exhibit some characteristics of what might be considered homosexual behavior, full classification as such is a stretch. But it also means that these conditions are a part of the natural world, something some of you seem to ignore
And don't even get me started on plants. Yes plants.
What? You mean God made some plants either or, and others with the ability to switch? Oh my! How sinful.
And they're still animals. So, like the other examples I provided, we are not to behave just like they do. It's also odd how you'll champion Darwinian evolution but then ignore it's tenets here.
So, gays falling in love is the same as animals eating their young? Got it. Great equivalency there.
I'm not saying they're equivalent. Do you not see the hypocrisy of using animal behavior to justify human behavior, just not everything they do?
Well we did evolve from animals....
No, we didn't.
That's right god molded us from clay and blew Adam and he came alive. Shit how could I forget.. All the leading scientist agree this happened, oh wait that's evolution they agree on....
BamaGirl I wasn't trying to "pick a fight". If you actually believe that anybody would expose themselves to be ostracized and thought of as "unholy" and "sinners" by choice, you must not be very familiar with how people work.
"The notion that a percentage of the population, everywhere on earth, that would choose to be marginalized, ostracized, and to be deemed evil, sinners, and unholy, by choice, is nonsense."
^ RJ was extremely correct in this observation.
Lol, you mean how we all evolved from a rock? Yeah, that's totally more believable. The frauds and hoaxes committed to "prove" the theory of evolution are my favorite. So did it happen gradually or suddenly? I can't seem to keep up with which one
is the prevailing theory today.
Just a theory like gravity...
And please don't mix up hypothesis with theory.....
No, gravity can be observed, tested, and repeated. Don't confuse assumptions made upon ideology as equivalent to operational science. They're not even close. That old meme holds no water.
Feel free to read about evolution being observed....
Ummm, seriously? That's what you call observed evolution? So you don't really know what the theory of evolution is, do you? By the way, do you know that both dogs and foxes are canines? This is no surprise that they can behave like dogs. LOL!!
The. Why did tails change, skull structures, coloration... Hmm sounds like evolution....
Why are there tall people, short people, red haired people, blond people, green eyes, brown eyes, etc. It's called genetic variation. There are always limits though. It's why you never see a dog's lineage bear anything but more dogs. The fanciful
theory of evolution fantasizes that, it give enough time, it can happen. However, more than 70 years of genetic study has proven it cannot.
Well that has to do with genetics not evolution... But I can tell you struggle with an understanding science
OMG! I honestly don't have time to discuss this with you if you seriously think evolution occurs outside of genetics. Literally no one else has ever thought that way but you. Congratulations on the most ridiculous statement ever.
"you seriously think evolution occurs outside of genetics"
I used to think you were somewhat intelligent, but just misguided. I never thought you'd dive into this thread and completely prove me wrong.
So tell me, how does evolution proceed without genetics? (This should be phenomenal!)
Evolution is defined as change over time.
That is all.
Lots of things evolve. Geology and geography evolve. Atoms can evolve. Molecules evolve. Cultures evolve. Language...never mind. You're the genius.
The universe is really just 5,000 years old and nothing has changed. The illiterate goat herders in the Middle East got it right.
Science is useless.
When species go extinct, has the biota evolved even without any changes to genetics?
Now,do you want to discuss how natural selection is involved with biological evolution? Which does require a genetic component (except for prions, of course. You know, prions, right?).
What's amazing to me is that your "questions" have all been answered decades ago, yet you are totally unaware of that fact and insist on remaining ignorant.
In any case, I have to be in the lab early tomorrow. You know...worthless sciency stuff.
Let's be clear. Troll made the conversation specifically about the theory of evolution, aka "molecules to man evolution", which I, in return, specifically addressed twice. So, by now changing the topic to the general definition of "evolution" as
"change over time" is a disingenuous ploy in an attempt to get one over on me Sorry, to disappoint you. The entire Theory of Evolution rests solely on genetics via natural selection. Without it, no organism would evolve. However, the theory is left
wanting as there is no direct evidence to be found that supports it. It is built on a foundation of sand, perpetuated by those with a strong ideological viewpoint that naturalism is the only possible option. Science, however, could never prove
Creation. It's not within its scope of practice. Therefore scientists continue to falsify and/or misclassify much of the evidence they find. Piltdown, Nebraska, Java, Lucy, Archaeopteryx, etc...all frauds or misidentified. Just like Haeckel's
"ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny"....fraud. It's disturbing that these known frauds are still taught as fact to our children. Thank God people are now realizing that even scientists have agendas and that the peer review process, in general, lacks a
truly unbiased procedure for filtering out real science. The shift is coming my friend.
⬆⬆⬆ This Christian hadn't discussed either one. I've got better things to do. (although I do support gay marriage).
There's consistency in that (the underlying premise of the question seeming to be based on inconsistency. Of course, the only reason I know
What Ashley Madison is is a former friend of mine set up a false account in my name on it
You know that Ashley Madison has been in business for years, right?
But, no outrage. No shit them down movement. No end of the world as we know it speeches. One of the 10 commandments really isn't a big deal anymore.
But we can find some interpretation out of Leviticus, like, don't eat shrimp, and that's the big freakin' deal.
You don't seem to get how Christianity works. You don't force people to follow your ways, esp via man-made laws. The Ashley Madison reference here only supports your assertion of taxpayer money was used to run it or if Christians were forced to use
The gay marriage debate is more about private businesses being forced to provide services for the weddings, including pastoral services, against their religious beliefs. There's also the aspect of marriage being defined as the Union of 1 man and 1
woman. Have your civil union but don't call it a marriage. Get all the tax benefits from the govt you'd like. Frankly, the Gov't should not be involved in the affairs of two people making that choice anyway.
That's a pathetic attempt at turd polishing.
That's a pathetic attempt at a rebuttal