Evolution Hates Atheists.

[Nesslig20]

Well the idea of men and women having sex with each other and conceiving is actually a normal thing. God in the Bible expects this and it was certainly not shameful for a women to become pregnant in Judeo-Christian culture, unless it envolved breaking a vow of commitment or marriage.

Also, according to Judeo-Christian culture that if your brother died, his wife automatically becomes your wife.
Deuteronomy 25:5-6"When brothers live together and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the deceased shall not be married outside the family to a strange man. Her husband's brother shall go in to her and take her to himself as wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her. 6"It shall be that the firstborn whom she bears shall assume the name of his dead brother, so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel.
Its that a normal thing? I don't think so.

The commandment God gave to us, that we are to have sex and conceive actually predates the existence of Judeo-Christian culture.

Your only half right, it is true that promoting procreation has been promoted by various religions that are older than any Abrahamic religion. But there was no commandment of God, which is limited to the scriptural text of the Torah, that predate Judeo-Christian culture.

I only referenced Judeo-Christian culture to point out that this commandment is still reflected in their culture and that the fault you accuse them with which allows them to reproduce more than atheists are able to, is non sensical.

Atheists are able to reproduce just as much, but they often don't, since typically (not universally) atheists are generally more educated in sex education and are responsible using contraception while having sex. This is why unwanted pregnancies, including teenage pregnancies are more prevalent among the religious. And by extension, even abortion is more prevalent in that demographic.

Pointing out those flaws for what they are is not nonsensical at all.

You tried to paint a picture of millions of Christian men in America that are too stupid to know how to put a condom on

They are not too stupid, they are not educated enough to evaluate benefits of using condoms during sex and often indoctrination gets them to believe the exact opposite, that condoms don't work
http://www.prolife.com/condoms.html

and thus this is this reason women are less likely to procreate with Atheists. I am arguing that there are inherent flaws in secular ideas on sexuality which inhibit their ability to have children.

There is nothing that inhibits our ability to have children (since fertility is not an issue), we take counter measures to get children when we want them and that means we are more often prepared.

Your ramblings about how you wouldn't care if your kids were gay(If you had kids). And going on about how much you affirm abortion and how comfortable you feel using the women's restroom? and your affirmations on transexuallism are rather pointless. Everyone already knows.

[/quote]

You started rambling about those things, not me. So it is not pointless of me to address them.

 

[surreptitious57]

where can I find atheist that are critical thinkers

rational forums / philosophy forums / sceptic conventions

 

[MarsCydonia]

God in the Bible expects this and it was certainly not shameful for a women to become pregnant in Judeo-Christian culture, unless it envolved breaking a vow of commitment or marriage.

We do not expect better from a troll and bullshit peddler but you should expect better of us than to try to use such a blatant lie.

The truth is: the more "judeo-christian" heavy the culture, the more often that pregnancies were viewed as shameful for pregnant women.
*79 percent of evangelicals believe having a baby outside of marriage is morally wrong.
Google "unwed pregnant" and most of the first hits you'll find is about christians and what they should do about unwed expecting mothers. It is completely without surprise that the most religious states also have the most abortions.

So it is completely shameful in most judeo-christian cultures for a woman to become pregnant unless she is married. To say anything to the contrary is complete bullshit.

Compare this with the ideas people like you promote concerning sexuality. Is putting a vacuum hose in girls vagina and sucking out her unborn baby actually a normal part of human sexuality? Your idea of sexuality demands illustrative pamphlets to show male refugees how to butt-fuck each other, forcing women to share public restrooms with men and rewarding the acceptance of chemically altered females in male sporting events. And visa versa. (If I have misrepresented any of your beliefs, please show how)

What the ____ is wrong with you? Who says hose in vaginas has anything to do with sexuality, let alone promote it? Do you have any idea what sexuality is? What does refugees have to do with sexuality? What does restroom have to do with sexuality? Unless you are perverse sex-obssessed nutjob? Why bring it up if you're not?

Have you thought about discussing your obssession with a local mental health professional?

Also virtually all Atheists affirm homosexuality. No mother or father ever hopes that they have a gay son. The words "I hope he's gay!" has never left lips of any expecting mother of father. They might hope that there son will be successful in life, and marry a nice girl and they might hope to have grandchildren someday. But they will never hope for a son who engages in homosexual behavior.

What does "affirm" mean exactly? Does is equate to "homosexuals should not be discriminated against"? I'm not a piece of shit, so why should I not think that homosexuals deserve equality?

And I've never heard "I hope he's straight" from the lips of any expecting mother and father either. You know what I have heard thought? "I hope he doesn't become brainwashed into becoming a christian growing-up" and when I see people like you, I understand that feeling all too well.

 

[Gnug215]

Welp...

This is all quickly veering off course.

Leroy, it's been established that your initial post was a useless one, since "evolution" isn't an entity, and also since evolution isn't some kind of religion or doctrine for atheists.
So... as so many of your syllogisms, the proposed conclusion (the irony) failed because of the initial premises.

Now what?

 

[leroy]

That is my line. I have to point out, repeatedly, that you commit the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. It not up to me to provide evidence against the statement, it is up to you to provide evidence that support your statement. Put up of shut up.

And before you are going to say that you already have, by referring to that previous link, I already addressed that.

again even your own sources prove that my statement is true, even your own sources prove that genes play some roll in determining religious believes

Is shifting the burden of proof, because I didn't start a post making any of such claims. Although here is one thing I found:
https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abs ... edFrom=PDF

from your own sources

genetic influences were small, accounting for only 10 percent of the variance. Rather, the effects of the social environment were much larger, greater than 50 percent

every single source that has been presented in this thread confirms that genes play a role in determining religious believes, .............if you disagree then you should provide sources that suggest otherwise.

 

[leroy]

Welp...

This is all quickly veering off course.

Leroy, it's been established that your initial post was a useless one, since "evolution" isn't an entity, and also since evolution isn't some kind of religion or doctrine for atheists.
So... as so many of your syllogisms, the proposed conclusion (the irony) failed because of the initial premises.

Now what?

in principle evolution is not suppose to be a religion nor a doctrine............but atheist treat evolution as such, atheist defend evolution with the same favor and emotion a fanatic Christian would defend the bible .

in this forum
every time someone presents an argument or an objection against evolution you react with anger and other emotions (in the same way a fanatic Christian would react if you attack the bible)

if you what to claim that evolution is a scientific theory, like electromagnetism, or gravity, you should treat evolution as such

 

[leroy]

Also virtually all Atheists affirm homosexuality. No mother or father ever hopes that they have a gay son. The words "I hope he's gay!" has never left lips of any expecting mother of father. They might hope that there son will be successful in life, and marry a nice girl and they might hope to have grandchildren someday. But they will never hope for a son who engages in homosexual behavior.

.

when the bible condemns homosexual behavior, it always do so in the context of rape, adultery, promiscuity etc. but as far as I am concerned (correct me if I am wrong) the bible doesn't condemn a stable and loving homosexual relation.

for example in ancient times (and even today in prison) to have sex with an other man, was a way of humiliating and submitting the other man, ...obviously this would be rape, and with good reasons the bible condemns these actions,

what are your thoughts on this?

 

[Bango Skank]

when the bible condemns homosexual behavior, it always do so in the context of rape, adultery, promiscuity etc. but as far as I am concerned (correct me if I am wrong) the bible doesn't condemn a stable and loving homosexual relation.

As far as i know bible doesnt talk about "stable and loving homosexual relation" between males, but sex between males is a crime that is dealt with execution. So i take you mean "stable and loving homosexual relation" has to be completely sexless relationship, which doesnt sound so loving to me.

for example in ancient times (and even today in prison) to have sex with an other man, was a way of humiliating and submitting the other man, ...obviously this would be rape, and with good reasons the bible condemns these actions,

Some cultures yes, in some cultures no. You seem to ignore the consent factor though.

 

[leroy]

when the bible condemns homosexual behavior, it always do so in the context of rape, adultery, promiscuity etc. but as far as I am concerned (correct me if I am wrong) the bible doesn't condemn a stable and loving homosexual relation.

As far as i know bible doesnt talk about "stable and loving homosexual relation" between males, but sex between males is a crime that is dealt with execution. So i take you mean "stable and loving homosexual relation" has to be completely sexless relationship, which doesnt sound so loving to me.

for example in ancient times (and even today in prison) to have sex with an other man, was a way of humiliating and submitting the other man, ...obviously this would be rape, and with good reasons the bible condemns these actions,

Some cultures yes, in some cultures no. You seem to ignore the consent factor though.

I have an honest question, I would be better if you where gay and not bisexual.....but anyway.


I personally feel phisical attraction to 16 to 20yo woman (I am 30) however

1 I will never ever rape a 16yo girl

2 I will never ever even try to have consensual sex with a 16yo girl

3 I am happily married with a woman my age,

4 I can leve the rest of my life with her, even if I never have sex with a 16yo, and It is not like I live inside a closet repressed and traumatized, because I am not fulfilling my sexual desires. I can be happy with my wife, even if I maintain hidden sexual desires for 16yo

5 if I ever cant deal with this sexual desires, I would ask for professional help,

...................


cant a gay man do the same thing I am doing, ? if you change 16yo for an other man....................cant a gay man be happy with a woman, even with if he has hidden sexual desires for other men?

and why is professional help a taboo in the homosexual community?

 

[Bango Skank]

I have an honest question, I would be better if you where gay and not bisexual.....but anyway.


I personally feel phisical attraction to 16 to 20yo woman (I am 30) however

1 I will never ever rape a 16yo girl

2 I will never ever even try to have consensual sex with a 16yo girl

3 I am happily married with a woman my age,

4 I can leve the rest of my life with her, even if I never have sex with a 16yo, and It is not like I live inside a closet repressed and traumatized, because I am not fulfilling my sexual desires. I can be happy with my wife, even if I maintain hidden sexual desires for 16yo

5 if I ever cant deal with this sexual desires, I would ask for professional help,

...................

isnt 16 still a legal age at least in some states in US? I personally would find this a bit weird, but i wouldnt label you a dirty pervert. To me, your mental age matters more than your physical.

cant a gay man do the same thing I am doing, ? if you change 16yo for an other man....................cant a gay man be happy with a woman, even with if he has hidden sexual desires for other men?

Hard to say, but id guess this situation only would occur if a gay man fears of hostility and violence from the culture he is in. So he have to pretend to be straight. At most he would regard woman a very good friend, but not have any sexual feelings towards her. There are some asexual relations too. But if you want to maximise your happiness, then why you would be with a woman if you are gay when there would not be a pressure from the others?

and why is professional help a taboo in the homosexual community?

Because it wont work and only does more harm than good. It cannot be fixed and will only make homosexuals hate themself and commit suicides. And why its such a big deal anyway? Straight couples have anal sex too sometimes.

 

[MarsCydonia]

in this forum
every time someone presents an argument or an objection against evolution you react with anger and other emotions (in the same way a fanatic Christian would react if you attack the bible)

Anger does not always arise out of fanatism Leroy...
Sometimes you get angry when you repeatedly deal with trolls, liars, and idiots and sometimes you get angry when you deal with a combination of the three.

 

[leroy]

I have an honest question, I would be better if you where gay and not bisexual.....but anyway.


I personally feel phisical attraction to 16 to 20yo woman (I am 30) however

1 I will never ever rape a 16yo girl

2 I will never ever even try to have consensual sex with a 16yo girl

3 I am happily married with a woman my age,

4 I can leve the rest of my life with her, even if I never have sex with a 16yo, and It is not like I live inside a closet repressed and traumatized, because I am not fulfilling my sexual desires. I can be happy with my wife, even if I maintain hidden sexual desires for 16yo

5 if I ever cant deal with this sexual desires, I would ask for professional help,

...................

isnt 16 still a legal age at least in some states in US? I personally would find this a bit weird, but i wouldnt label you a dirty pervert. To me, your mental age matters more than your physical.

cant a gay man do the same thing I am doing, ? if you change 16yo for an other man....................cant a gay man be happy with a woman, even with if he has hidden sexual desires for other men?

Hard to say, but id guess this situation only would occur if a gay man fears of hostility and violence from the culture he is in. So he have to pretend to be straight. At most he would regard woman a very good friend, but not have any sexual feelings towards her. There are some asexual relations too. But if you want to maximise your happiness, then why you would be with a woman if you are gay when there would not be a pressure from the others?

and why is professional help a taboo in the homosexual community?

Because it wont work and only does more harm than good. It cannot be fixed and will only make homosexuals hate themself and commit suicides. And why its such a big deal anyway? Straight couples have anal sex too sometimes.

do gay people find woman undesirable ? ..........I find it hard to believe, given that many of my gay friends claim to have had girlfriends and heterosexual sex in the past......

 

[Bango Skank]

do gay people find woman undesirable ? ..........I find it hard to believe, given that many of my gay friends claim to have had girlfriends and heterosexual sex in the past......

I'd say that they are lying. They really were bisexuals. I myself would claim to be straight when asked about 5 years ago, but i lied because i wouldnt want to make any enemies. Only about two years ago i began more open of my bisexuality.

EDIT: Bisexuality is kinda sliding scale. Some prefer women, some men and sometimes its balanced. For myself its slides time to time and what i have asked others they have the same.

 

[leroy]

in this forum
every time someone presents an argument or an objection against evolution you react with anger and other emotions (in the same way a fanatic Christian would react if you attack the bible)

Anger does not always arise out of fanatism Leroy...
Sometimes you get angry when you repeatedly deal with trolls, liars, and idiots and sometimes you get angry when you deal with a combination of the three.

That confirms my point.


the fact that you are willing to deal with trolls, liars, and idiots in defense of the theory of evolution, proves that you treat evolution like a religion. ................


would you participate in a 20 page conversation dealing with someone who denies the existence of dark matter?......................No

would you participate in a 20 page conversation dealing with someone who denies the existence of a universal common ancestor?............................yes


why ?


because you don't treat dark matter like a religion, you don't have emotional feelings for dark matter,




or to put it this way......


parents do not boycott schools when the teacher doesn't teaches about dark matter, teachers don't get fired for not teaching about dark matter. and no one gets offended when teachers don't teach students about dark matter.

 

[MarsCydonia]

That confirms my point.

the fact that you are willing to deal with trolls, liars, and idiots in defense of the theory of evolution, proves that you treat evolution like a religion. ................

would you participate in a 20 page conversation dealing with someone who denies the existence of dark matter?......................No

would you participate in a 20 page conversation dealing with someone who denies the existence of a universal common ancestor?............................yes

why ?

because you don't treat dark matter like a religion, you don't have emotional feelings for dark matter,

That's completely stupid.

 

[leroy]

do gay people find woman undesirable ? ..........I find it hard to believe, given that many of my gay friends claim to have had girlfriends and heterosexual sex in the past......

I'd say that they are lying. They really were bisexuals. I myself would claim to be straight when asked about 5 years ago, but i lied because i wouldnt want to make any enemies. Only about two years ago i began more open of my bisexuality.

EDIT: Bisexuality is kinda sliding scale. Some prefer women, some men and sometimes its balanced. For myself its slides time to time and what i have asked others they have the same.

maybe,

 

[Bango Skank]

maybe,

I see no other possibility for except the people you are talking about were in their teens and still experimenting their sexuality.

 

[Gnug215]

in principle evolution is not suppose to be a religion nor a doctrine............but atheist treat evolution as such, atheist defend evolution with the same favor and emotion a fanatic Christian would defend the bible .

in this forum
every time someone presents an argument or an objection against evolution you react with anger and other emotions (in the same way a fanatic Christian would react if you attack the bible)

if you what to claim that evolution is a scientific theory, like electromagnetism, or gravity, you should treat evolution as such

Wrong.

And you know why you're wrong? Because you are an ideologically driven person.
Basically, it comes down to the old saying: "The thief thinks everyone steals."

You are religious. You think religiously. And so you (wrongfully, of course) assume that everyone else thinks the same way, maybe just with different polarities.

How can we see you're wrong? Well, this time you've made the mistake of actually making a claim that can be falsified.

So do we ever see atheists defend other scientific theories like they defend evolution?

Yep.

See, many theists - creationists in particular - have always been so stupid and ignorant when it comes to science that they couldn't manage to not muddle their anti-evolution nonsense up to such a degree that they went way beyond biology.
Just look at Kent Hovind, and his "5 types of evoluion". The guy basically attacked 5 different scientific theories at once - and was obviously entirely wrong about all 5 - and got called out on it.
You see this every time you come on here with anti-scientific, ideologically driven nonsense: say something factually wrong, and we'll correct you on it. If you stubbornly insist on being right, in all your misguided, obvious ignorance, then sure, we'll get pissy about it. Not just because your obvious case of Dunning-Kruger is annoying and baffling, but also because your nonsense has real, negative consequences.

Every scientific area that theists clumsily dare wander into gets viciously defended by atheists - and by many others - who actually care about science for very tangible and significant reasons, not for faith-based reasons.

When atheists defend science and scientific reasons, it has real world implications.

Putting it simply:
If people stop believing in God, nothing happens.

If people stop believing in science, you'll die from a simple infection.

We're not defending our religion from ideological criticism, we're defending reality from stupidity.



So no, our areas do not compare. Stop trying to drag us down there.



Edit: Addition:
Evolution is usually the most defended by atheists, because it's the most attacked by theists.

You... created us.
So basically, whenever you and other theists find yourselves schooled on biology by some random atheist online, you only have yourself to blame.

 

[leroy]

Wrong.

And you know why you're wrong? Because you are an ideologically driven person.
Basically, it comes down to the old saying: "The thief thinks everyone steals."



See, many theists - creationists in particular - have always been so stupid and ignorant when it comes to science that they couldn't manage to not muddle their anti-evolution nonsense up to such a degree that they went way beyond biology.
Just look at Kent Hovind, and his "5 types of evoluion". The guy basically attacked 5 different scientific theories at once - and was obviously entirely wrong about all 5 - and got called out on it.
You see this every time you come on here with anti-scientific, ideologically driven nonsense: say something factually wrong, and we'll correct you on it. If you stubbornly insist on being right, in all your misguided, obvious ignorance, then sure, we'll get pissy about it. Not just because your obvious case of Dunning-Kruger is annoying and baffling, but also because your nonsense has real, negative consequences.

Every scientific area that theists clumsily dare wander into gets viciously defended by atheists - and by many others - who actually care about science for very tangible and significant reasons, not for faith-based reasons.

When atheists defend science and scientific reasons, it has real world implications.

this is not meant to be a personal attack to you nor anyone in particular. in general active evolutionists tend to react in the same way a fanatic creationists would react..

You are religious. You think religiously. And so you (wrongfully, of course) assume that everyone else thinks the same way, maybe just with different polarities.

How can we see you're wrong? Well, this time you've made the mistake of actually making a claim that can be falsified.

So do we ever see atheists defend other scientific theories like they defend evolution?

Yep.

just go to YouTube, a forum or to a blog, and look at how evolutionists react when someone presents and alternative theory, .............evolutionists get agree, and insult the individual who presented the theory. this is the kind of reaction that a fanatic would have.


you don't see these reaction when someone presents an alternative view to inflation, dark matter, the origin of pyramids, Americas discovery, etc.



what happens when a teacher when a science teacher doesn't teach his students about dark matter?.................nothing

what happens if a teacher presents an alternative model of the universe, that doesn't include inflation? ..............nothing



what happens when a teacher doesn't teach evolution, what happens if a teacher teaches an alternative theory......................everything happens, (at least in some cities)

So no, our areas do not compare. Stop trying to drag us down there.

again, not in principle, but in reality we do see evolution being defended with the same passion and fanaticism that a Christian would defend the bible. ..............of course not all Christians and not all evolutionists are fanatics.

Edit: Addition:
Evolution is usually the most defended by atheists, because it's the most attacked by theists.

You... created us.
So basically, whenever you and other theists find yourselves schooled on biology by some random atheist online, you only have yourself to blame.

[/quote]



that is my point, you are putting yourself at the same level of fanatic theists.


I personally grant evolution (well it depends on how you define it) and I am against both theist and atheist that treat evolution like a religion. .................evolution should be trated with thee same emotional indifference that someone would treat relativity, electromagnetism or inflation,


I am from Mexico, in Mexico evolution is not a controversial topic, I learned about evolution without even knowing that it was suppose to be controversial and that it was suppose to contradict the bible.,

In fact I remember that my biology teacher ran out time, and he only spend 30 minutes in the whole semester talking about evolution, and nobody interpreted this as a Christian conspiracy to teaching evolution in class.

In most places evolution is just an other topic in the science class, USA , forums, and YouTube seem to be the only places where evolution is suppose to be controversial

 

[Grumpy Santa]

cant a gay man do the same thing I am doing, ? if you change 16yo for an other man....................cant a gay man be happy with a woman, even with if he has hidden sexual desires for other men?

and why is professional help a taboo in the homosexual community?

Leroy, would you honestly be married to and living with someone you never had any physical or emotional attachment towards at all? I assume you and your wife would have fallen in love and got married, yes? What if, however, when you looked at her you felt absolutely nothing, no attraction, no desire. Would you still be married to her today?