Well said W, Scout, Celivia, it appears we're in the midst of an evolutionary change. When removing the old and being open to the new, there's always pain and suffering. It appears one of the immutable laws of this dimension, revolves around a static populace of all life and an evolving populace of all life.

Religion is static, with all static things, they never evolve. I believe this is throughout each species, having both components within their number. Humans have stepped out of the static and into intellectual evolution, but there's still those who refuse to take the evolutionary step out of the past.

So they resort to static techniques trying to stop evolution. Their inability to understand why it's so exciting not knowing what may lay ahead instead of clinging desperately to the past, means they lash out looking to blame. Religion's the last static hold on our evolution, once it's removed, we can have an ethics based future giving us all responsible freedom. ( good theory)

I spent many years within the church, as well as worked within a number of correctional facilities in the country. I've met many good homosexuals outside the church and many bad ones within it. I've never met a homosexual outside the church who's a paedophile, or one in jail. But within the church, many homosexual and heterosexual paedophiles, most practising. In jail, many paedophiles who follow god. Most paedophiles don't care which sex it is they defile, this is evidenced within all churches. So really these people have nothing to stand on but lies and indignation, with all the facts pointing away from them.

Choosing who I'd trust with my children between a member of the church and a homosexual, not the former. Not because of abuse, but because of elicit programming.

To all - some really interesting posts here. Scout if you start that religion let me know I might be interested. I probably treat responding to Philo's comments with some importance because I've seen first hand how easily that kind of logic can be accepted by some. Alchemist has probably seen his share of it too.

Part 2 of a response to Martin

“By trying to darken the entire history of Christianity” – not what I’m trying to do, rather have it seen in the appropriate light which includes some significant good and some significant wrong. I’d see it more as scrubbing that whitewash off that some of you insist on painting over the rot.

“out over those who seem not to have lost their way as completely as you.” – clearly not my perspective and the example of the more obvious Christian’s on this site is one which constantly reminds me how glad I am to have found my way.

Now about your earlier point regarding my interpretation of Philo’s comment on wasting genetic material. I don’t understand the Catholic position on that issue, I commented on the proposition Philo put forward which was in my view completely flawed. Perhaps you would care to put that proposition in a manner which actually holds up when examined.

R0ber

Ledingham, your last post gives me some hope that religious experience can inspire generosity, wisdom, and delight in the richness of the world we live in. It's a pity that so much of the self-avowedly religious dialogue in the public sphere seems to run counter to this spirit. I look forward to your future posts.

Well at last we have Scout demonstrating that homosexuals are a regressive gene - a throw back to the most primitive form of life an amoeba which can reproduce itself. Well perhaps homosexuals are a lower genetic form but I never thought Scout would go that low to prove it.

Scout when I see homosexuals actually reproducing themselves naturally then I must bow to the superior design of the Creator. Note however that amoeba clone themselves naturally without engaging with a partner. If a gay male could give birth to a copy of himself it would be much more facinating than virgin conception.

An amoeba reproduces itself as two basic substances are activated to form the new cell. Even at this level two differing genetic substances are reacting to form a new cell. The original amoeba or the new cell is not made up of a single gene.

Homosexual males of the sensitive type are very capable of normal reproduction their problem lies in attitudes developed from infancy about the opposite gender and dioriented affectionate attractions. Boys exhibiting sensitive emotions are immediately branded homosexual and are subconsciously programmed into that role, often by a dominant parent. However the majority of actual homosexual acts are committed by rather brazen bisexual males from what I have observed of all male workplaces.

R0bert

Do you think that Philo is ‘doing-a-Maximus’ here?

For those who don’t know, Maximus posts some very extreme comments from time to time and it turns out that he was conducting a major leg-pull (see link below).

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4657#48239

If the latest absurdity from Philo is simply his version of irony I doff my cap, if not, then all I can say is that Philo has done more for the cause of atheism than anyone I have ever encountered.

Cheers to all for having a gay old time!

Scout I've not demonstrated proficiency at spotting leg pullers on these threads. Philo might be but I doubt it. Whilst I'll give Philo credit for inciting some good chuckles and occasional belly laughs I suspect that he needs some "coaching" in his promotion of athiest/agnostic thinking.

I expect that we will see Martin giving Philo a blast for his straw man rebuttal of your comments.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

Cheers
R0bert