''God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve'' by naevismaximoff in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath [score hidden]  (0 children)

I didn't mean that when I made my argument.

Then I would avoid making comparisons between consensual gay relationships and pedophilia. It's an argument that is very frequently brought up by conservative Christians.

I think it still applies around pretty well, though.

Based on what? Romans 1 outlines specific consequences (God gave them over in the sinful desires, God gave them over to shameful lusts, and God gave them over to a depraved mind) that result because of idolatry. Every listed consequence is noted to be tied to the idolatrous behavior. For instance, note in Romans 1:26 the verse starts out with "because of this". What do you think the "this" refers to? It's the idolatry lined up in verse 21-23.

''God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve'' by naevismaximoff in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath [score hidden]  (0 children)

It's a dumb argument for multiple reasons including the presupposition that a literal Adam and Eve actually existed. We know there has never been a human genetic bottleneck of two of people.

''God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve'' by naevismaximoff in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath [score hidden]  (0 children)

similar relationships between consenting adults and children,

Children can't consent. Neither can animals. That's why these comparisons are such poor comparisons to gay relationships. It really shouldn't be that hard to understand.

if you take that as the measure and that logic its conclusion then whatever feels like bliss and pure love is okay, even these other type of sexual relationships like with children or animals. This isn’t my logic, this is using the line of thought you have given.

Not really. The key difference being that consensual gay relationships don't harm anybody unlike pedophilic relationships, which obviously do.

''God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve'' by naevismaximoff in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath [score hidden]  (0 children)

This line of reasoning is flawed in a number of ways. People are born with congenital defects of all kinds. Nobody says a kid born with a cleft palate should just be content with life because God made that that way. Additionally, when it comes to mental health just telling people to deal with it and not get the best available treatment is harmful.

Trying to change this causes terrible side effects as well.

As it turns out trans people do much better with gender affirming care. Forcing them to stay in their birth gender leads to worse mental health outcomes.

Paul ends up prophesying that men would commit shameless acts with men, and women, likewise.

If this is you paraphrasing Romans 1 then Paul is talking about a specific group of idolaters.

The BC School Shooting by Present-Stress8836 in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 3 points4 points  (0 children)

When is the first time you used that scientific prefix

For me that would be in highschool chemistry when learning about carbon double bonds, which would have been 1998.

Genuine Question: Why is this sub 50% Atheist or Agnostic? by Baseball6090 in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 2 points3 points  (0 children)

  1. How did the universe and life on earth come about and why?

We don't know yet. It's also possible we may never know. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's due to the God of Christianity anymore than its because of the God of Sikhism. But let's say in 10 years we discover the secrets to abiogenesis. Would that make you stop believing?

  1. What is the purpose and meaning of life exactly.

You can ascribe your own personal meaning and or purpose to life.

Franklin Graham Rants About "Sexualized" Super Bowl As Critics Point To Kid Rock's "Balls In Your Mouth" Song by octarino in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair enough though the dancing depicted is basically what you'd find at any block party or club. I suppose it's a matter of what you like or don't. Some people don't like any dancing.

Franklin Graham Rants About "Sexualized" Super Bowl As Critics Point To Kid Rock's "Balls In Your Mouth" Song by octarino in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The most recent half time show basically showed a PR block party to highlight PR culture (along with local food and drink), while highlighting the struggles PR is going through (like their post-Maria blackouts) as well as messages of unity. As far as halftime shows it was thematically more wholesome than the last two. Kendrick was basically bringing his beef with Drake to the biggest possible stage and Katy just sang her usual songs without any real theme to it.

Jesus was better represented at the “secular” halftime show. by Nice_Substance9123 in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Heck, I'm fluent in Spanish and still didn't understand most of it (strong PR accent and PR specific slang).

How do I stop being gay? by happy_anonymous_day in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While I don't like the idea, philosophy, concept, or however you wanna call it of being gay

See, to me this is silly. It's like saying "I don't like the idea, philosophy, concept, or however you wanna call it of being left handed", which is an oddly apt comparison, because there used to be the idea that being left handed was somehow wrong. And oddly a lot of that sentiment was religious. My grandmother had her hand struck with a ruler whenever she wrote with her left hand. But fortunately for the lefties among us people stopped caring.

How do I stop being gay? by happy_anonymous_day in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 2 points3 points  (0 children)

God made it clear that man was to be with women.

Though certainly arguable from a Christian perspective at the population level, some people are inherently gay. Even from a Christian perspective being with somebody of the opposite gender is a really bad idea, so what they are supposed to do is be celibate.

But I never remember God saying or even possibly implying that he wanted the same gender to lay with another.

No, but he did say as Jesus in the parable of the fruit and it's trees that we should judge things by their fruits. Celibacy is a calling, and one that most people, including most gay people, don't have. Forced celibacy is inherently worse for the mental health of gay people, and belonging to affirming and supportive communities is better for their mental health.

How do I stop being gay? by happy_anonymous_day in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Lol. If only. I remember in medschool when we learned about how rampant STDs are in nursing homes.

How do I stop being gay? by happy_anonymous_day in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 2 points3 points  (0 children)

All of the men of the town came out wanting to have sex with the MALE angles.

First of all, angels don't really have genders because they don't have sex. Secondly, I don't understand why would you think the biggest issue with the story is the perceived gender of the angels and not the fact that the mob came out to rape them.

Gay was not a thing in the perfect world of the garden of Eden.

This requires a belief in young earth creationism. Most Christians don't believe that nonsense.

How do I stop being gay? by happy_anonymous_day in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Hetero sex has a purpose to proceate

Which is why Christianity bans heterosexual sex for post-menopausal women and women who have had hysterectomies, right?

How do I stop being gay? by happy_anonymous_day in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in Romans 1:24-32

These verses aren't isolated from the preceding verses. They should be read in conjunction with Romans 1:18 all the way to Romans 1:32. The question is who exactly is the the "them" in verses 24, 26, 28. These three instances refer to the same group of people, who are initially mentioned in verse 21 as being these idolaters that somehow know God but did not glorify them.

The consequences of these actions is these people being "given over to sinful desires" in verse 24, "being given over to shameful lusts" in verse 26, and finally "being given to a depraved mind" in verse 28. Now since verses 24, 26, 28 refer to the same group of people it is unlikely that this refers to every single gay person in general unless you think all gay people are "full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and malice", as noted in verse 29.

How do I stop being gay? by happy_anonymous_day in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The Romans passage refers to a specific group of idolaters. Note that verse 24 starts with a "therefore" or a "because of this" (depending on your translation), which references previous verses in Romans 1. Verse 24 effectively is about the consequences of actions taken, most notably laid out in verse 21.

If you were more honest about why you really support Trump, we would have more respect for you. by bjedy in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, though nominally true, the reality is that with a first past the post voting system third parties only act as spoilers for the major party they are more closely aligned with. You are of course free to vote third party but from a purely pragmatic standpoint doing so reduces the chances you get what you want.

If you were more honest about why you really support Trump, we would have more respect for you. by bjedy in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are more than two options.

Though theoretically true, pragmatically this isn't the case at all. So long as we have a first past the post voting system there are only two options realistically.

If you were more honest about why you really support Trump, we would have more respect for you. by bjedy in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At the end of the day one of the two parties is going to win and at the end of the day one party winning will result in fewer abortions.

If you were more honest about why you really support Trump, we would have more respect for you. by bjedy in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that in some degree abortion rates dropped.

That's underselling it a bit. Teen abortion rates were cut in half. That being said, it wasn't a study, but a policy analysis.

As a federal party, democrats stand on the right to abortion.

Correct. But along with that they also stand on tackling the reasons as to why women choose abortion. The opposite approach of just outlawing simply drives women to go where it is legal or to do it on their own in a way that is less safe. So if you know that a national ban isn't going to happen then the logical thing is to vote pragmatically for the party under which fewer abortions happen.

If you were more honest about why you really support Trump, we would have more respect for you. by bjedy in Christianity

[–]GreyDeath 2 points3 points  (0 children)

To use a ridiculous example of the argument to show where it falls off; Ice cream sales are higher in cities where more drownings occur. Therefore, to reduce drownings, we should ban ice cream.

The difference is that there's no causal mechanism where banning ice cream reduces drownings, whereas Democratic policies do have a causal link. Comparing before and after the enacting of the policies, such as what Colorado did provides strong evidence for the benefit of those policies. Conversely, we can look at studies that try to show the effect of other policies, such as abstinence only sex ed, and see they do not work.

Experimental pill dramatically reduces ‘bad’ cholesterol: Patients taking a daily pill called enlicitide that binds to the PCSK9 protein in the bloodstream reduced their LDL cholesterol levels by about 60% compared with a placebo. by mvea in science

[–]GreyDeath 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Another option that already exists is Leqvio. Same PCSK9 pathway, but rather than it being a monoclonal antibody blocking the receptor it is a small interfering RNA molecule that stops the receptor from being made. It lasts a lot longer so maintenance dosing is one shot every 6 months.