Talking to a Jehovah's Witness

[RickD]

Aimforthehead wrote:

What would count as proof, if not hundreds (thousands, actually) of studies done on homosexual animals all coming to the same conclusion? Not to mention video proof...Afraid it doesn't get any proofier than that buddy. This is one of those things that you can't really intelligently refuse to accept.

Your point here is wrong, because it is based on a simple error. There are no such things as homosexual animals, because, by the definition of homosexuality, animals are excluded. Homosexuality is solely human by definition. Sometimes the simple answer is the best answer. Sometimes we tend to overcomplicate things, when we don't need to.

[Murray]

Animals also mate with other animals in certain environments. So tell me since this occurs in nature , and people who commit bestiality claim they do not have a choice, is it natural and ok for a man to have sexual relations with a dog?

Because by your flawed logic it is natural and fine.


And where do you get the idea we are all unintelligent and in high school. I would say at least 99% of people here are over 21, and I would say at least 75% of people here were militant atheist just like you. Perhaps if you actually cared at all about learning and using logic and reason in your debates we could actually progress somewhere.

However, The thing is, you are not an atheist who is here to debate our beliefs and perhaps learn about our religion; you come here simply to insult us and make invalid assumptions about us. How does that represent your belief system?


And where on earth do you get the idea that we ignore “your” definition of science? Neo is a theistic evolutionist (which I presume you did not look at before you called him un-unintelligent), and I believe in framework which borders very closely with theistic evolution. Why do you not go read about our different creation theories if you wish to debate us? Why not read up, then state some issues, then have us try to answer them to the best of our knowledge using science logic and reason. You have not done this once, you have simply come here, said animals are gay so humans can be then continued to insult us when we use logic to state otherwise.

[aimforthehead]

Aimforthehead wrote:

What would count as proof, if not hundreds (thousands, actually) of studies done on homosexual animals all coming to the same conclusion? Not to mention video proof...Afraid it doesn't get any proofier than that buddy. This is one of those things that you can't really intelligently refuse to accept.

Your point here is wrong, because it is based on a simple error. There are no such things as homosexual animals, because, by the definition of homosexuality, animals are excluded. Homosexuality is solely human by definition. Sometimes the simple answer is the best answer. Sometimes we tend to overcomplicate things, when we don't need to.

Yep, I'm out. Peace.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homosexuality

1
: the quality or state of being homosexual
2
: erotic activity with another of the same sex

[MarcusOfLycia]

Aimforthehead wrote:

What would count as proof, if not hundreds (thousands, actually) of studies done on homosexual animals all coming to the same conclusion? Not to mention video proof...Afraid it doesn't get any proofier than that buddy. This is one of those things that you can't really intelligently refuse to accept.

Your point here is wrong, because it is based on a simple error. There are no such things as homosexual animals, because, by the definition of homosexuality, animals are excluded. Homosexuality is solely human by definition. Sometimes the simple answer is the best answer. Sometimes we tend to overcomplicate things, when we don't need to.

Yep, I'm out. Peace.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homosexuality

1
: the quality or state of being homosexual
2
: erotic activity with another of the same sex

I'm fairly certain the way the term is used refers to higher order thinking that animals are not capable of. "Sex" and "erotic activity" are not the same thing. But I'm glad you've started using a dictionary. Now please refer to my post on the other thread where I quote the dictionary about the definition of a "theory".

[Murray]

^

[PaulSacramento]

I think he was trying to point out that the "homo" in Homosexual has nothing to do with the human genre.

[Murray]

I think he was trying to point out that the "homo" in Homosexual has nothing to do with the human genre.

I do not believe Rick ever said it did, however aimforthehead is so delusional and stuck on thinking of us as invisible whale worshipping idiots Im sure he might have thought that's what he was saying.

[PaulSacramento]

Well, he did say that :

There are no such things as homosexual animals, because, by the definition of homosexuality, animals are excluded. Homosexuality is solely human by definition. Sometimes the simple answer is the best answer. Sometimes we tend to overcomplicate things, when we don't need to.

And that seems to say that homosexuality is something that is only about humans and not animals, which is incorrect.
Homosexuality is any sexual act done between to of the same genders, regardless of species.

[Murray]

I still do not see where you got

I think he was trying to point out that the "homo" in Homosexual has nothing to do with the human genre.

From, Rick never said that it had anything to do with the word "homo"

And honestly if you want to debate rick about wether it applies to human and animals or just humans it's best to talk to ask him about it , not me

[StMonicaGuideMe]

Hmmm. This all seems so complicated. Whenever they show up at my door or interact with me on the street, I simply nod as they speak and when it's "my turn" I say "well, thank you for your time, but I'm Catholic".

And they leave me alone very quickly

[B. W.]

Hmmm. This all seems so complicated. Whenever they show up at my door or interact with me on the street, I simply nod as they speak and when it's "my turn" I say "well, thank you for your time, but I'm Catholic".

And they leave me alone very quickly

Good idea, I might try that one!

After all, the Nicene Creed
-
-
-

[StMonicaGuideMe]

Hmmm. This all seems so complicated. Whenever they show up at my door or interact with me on the street, I simply nod as they speak and when it's "my turn" I say "well, thank you for your time, but I'm Catholic".

And they leave me alone very quickly

Good idea, I might try that one!

After all, the Nicene Creed
-
-
-

Indeed

[secretfire6]

Well, he did say that :

There are no such things as homosexual animals, because, by the definition of homosexuality, animals are excluded. Homosexuality is solely human by definition. Sometimes the simple answer is the best answer. Sometimes we tend to overcomplicate things, when we don't need to.

And that seems to say that homosexuality is something that is only about humans and not animals, which is incorrect.
Homosexuality is any sexual act done between to of the same genders, regardless of species.

That's correct sir. Homo means 'same'. in the instance of names like homo habilis or homo erectus they mean 'same hand' and 'same upright' respectively. It is only because we are comparing them to us that the idea that they are human is expressed (same hand as us, walking upright like us). with homosexuality you are now comparing genders and nothing more. You would have to add if you are talking about people and whether they are male or female seperately.

[RickD]

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here. See for yourselves. Google "homosexual definition". Every site has homosexual, as referring to people, not animals. Then when you're done seeing homosexuality is a human condition, look up the definition of anthropomorphism, and you'll see why you're attributing homosexuality to animals.

[Callisto]

Hmmm. This all seems so complicated. Whenever they show up at my door or interact with me on the street, I simply nod as they speak and when it's "my turn" I say "well, thank you for your time, but I'm Catholic".

And they leave me alone very quickly

Good idea, I might try that one!

After all, the Nicene Creed
-
-
-

I see what you did there.

Had a Witness show up at our house a few weeks ago (and we live in the country, so you know he was getting desperate in town).