Homosexuality and Evo, Creo, and ID

There have actually been several studies on this topic. I provided a few links below, but to summarize:There is a selection component for homosexuality when you factor in social constructs of species. So far as I understand, homosexuality exists in species that have a social component to their organizational makeup; i.e. they live and work in groups.The selective advantage of homosexuality can often be summed up by the 'Gay Uncle' notion. In a situation where a specific family has a gene or specific disposition to produce gay offspring, the likelihood of that offspring surviving increases because of the added benefit of having an additional male member of the group protecting a sibling's offspring. This can be expanded on to include the 'Lesbian Aunt' notion where a gay female member can assist in child rearing.An important notion to remember: homosexuality has been observed in species outside of the human race. Macaque monkeys are a good example. Which means it is both natural and must have some specific evolutionary advantage.Links:Evolution myths: Natural selection cannot explain homosexuality | New Scientisthttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...s/PMC1691850/pdf/15539346.pdfhttp://www.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/.../evo%20homosexual%20review.pdf

I would recommend you read the links I provided in my original message, here: Message 9Aside from the fact that homosexuality does not, in an of itself, stop anyone from reproducing, unless there is something wrong with their sexual organs, the point being made in those studies is that homosexuality has been observed in nature in animals that function in social groups. Which means that it provides a selective advantage.

So much for civil dialog. Are these continuous tantrums on your part really necessary? I am sorry, but this is the type of behavior I would expect from a five year old, not an adult.

And by that logic, the Muslim baker should not have to serve women or Jews. Because we wouldn't want to have him compromise his religious beliefs.And the Jehovah Witness doctor should not be forced to have to perform a blood transfusion on a dying patient. Wouldn't want to compromise their religious beliefs now would we?The cartwheels religious fundies perform to justify their nonsense is beyond embarrassing. And it is so easy to poke holes in their worldview, that I am beginning to think that the symbol for Christian Fundamentalism should not be a cross: it should be a brick of Swiss Cheese.

Says who? You?The fact that you make a statement like that outright without any equivocation demonstrates with total certainty that it is YOU that is being intolerant. And it is actually YOU that is attempting to push YOUR worldview onto everyone else. Not the other way around.Your persecution complex is not only unwarranted but demonstrably false. Ironically, not unlike your scientific views.

No True Scotsman Logical Fallacy"No true Scotsman is an informal fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim ("no Scotsman would do such a thing"), rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule ("no true Scotsman would do such a thing"). It can also be used to create unnecessary requirements."No true Scotsman - Wikipedia Bible Versus

quote:

---

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way." (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

---

quote:

---

"If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever." (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

---

quote:

---

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment." (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

---

Oh, and here are some New Testament examples for any Christian trying to play that old testament, new testament thing:

quote:

---

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ." (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

---

quote:

---

"Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them." (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

---

So actually, by the looks of it, the Christians who supported and advocated slavery were the ones in fact who were being true to their book.

What happens if the person is a hermaphrodite? Does that mean they can or can't get married? Or even better, if one goes for intrinsic classification, I guess the person can marry themself, right?