The word God is not in THE American Constitution and they have 30% per capital more Christians than us. I'm not against anyone and except anyone, it just these Hypocrite do not.
How would do you reconcile the ‘rule of law with the ‘supremacy of God?’ They are contradictory to the freedom of religious beliefs and practices of many other kinds of God” Why not, pick a God, any God
It’s really important To our most fundamental values of Canadians. And I’m concerned when God is a foundation for authority. I can't be force to be a great repent-or , it leads to insanity.
Was your constitution drafted by people that were primarily of one religious persuasion? It was the differences in belief that kept god out of ours.
You cannot reconcile rule of law with rule by a make believe god. The two are incompatible.
No god can be a foundation for authority as there has never been a good indication there even IS a god. But when that foundation is a select few power mongers that have convinced the masses they speak with the voice of a god...well we see the results in the middle east. In Africa where gays are persecuted and killed. In Europe of the middle ages, when people were commonly tortured and killed or incarcerated because they knew things those few in power did not. Things like the earth was round or circled the sun.
agree, they do a good job at fooling us, well, much of the dirt will come out in the wash.
I thought Jesus was a bit of a rebel like me, helping the poor, healing people with cannabis. Although being an amateur shaman with vague statement, many Christians go hog wild with their own egos. Man !!! will gays, atheist or unbelievers ever get elected into high office , I’ll report the freak show in the meantime.
Here is a few other Constitution statements
Algeria "In the Name of God the Merciful and the Compassionate
Albania with faith in God and/or other universal values, ... We establish this Constitution
Australia blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown. ?
Argentina invoking the protection of God, source of all reason and justice: do ordain, decree, and establish this Constitution for the Argentine Nation.
Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law
promulgate, under the protection of God, this CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERATIVE REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL."
Iranian society based on Islamic principles and norms, which represent an honest aspiration of the Islamic Ummah
Ireland In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred, We, the people of Éire, humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial,
Kuwait In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful, We, Abdullah al-Salim al-Sabah, ... do hereby approve this Constitution and promulgate it.
Republic of Liberia: Acknowledging our devout gratitude to God for our existence as a Free, Sovereign and Independent State, and relying on His Divine Guidance for our survival as a Nation; .
"We, the Polish Nation – all citizens of the Republic, both those who believe in God as the source of truth, justice, good and beauty, as well as those not sharing such faith but respecting those universal values
Rwanda Trusting in God Almighty; ... Does establish and adopt this Constitution for the Republic of Rwanda
Tunisian people, free and sovereign, proclaim, by the Grace of God, the present Constitution."
Aren't you more concerned when God is left out of the Public square? What about the 100 million government sponsored murders in the past 100 years in the communist nations where God is excluded from public life?
Now why would excluding a mythological figure from government be of concern? It would seem that if anything it should be a relief; while other reasons will still apply, religion cannot be used to persecute anyone.
If you lived as a Christian believer in a communist country it would concern you, wouldn't it?
Probably as much as living as an atheist in a religion dominated country like Iraq, Israel or the US. Assuming, of course, that the communist country made an effort to deny religion; that is not actually a tenet of communism per se.
What makes America a tolerant nation are its Christian foundations. You're right in that throughout history Christianity was used as a tool for oppression in the hands of evil man. What sets America apart is although it was founded on Christian principles, Christianity was not the established religion. This is an important distinction because the US Constitution does not coerce its citizens to become Christians, it merely ensures that they are free to practice their religion free from government control.
I can hardly see that living in America or Israel as an atheist, bears any resemblance to living in China as a Christian. In fairly recent times Chinese Christians were sent to prison or killed for practicing their religion.
Wilderness, you can't really believe this propaganda, that's mainly propagated by the left, so that they can replace Christianity with their own sick worship of the state.
Sure! Christian foundations like hatred and fear of gays. Like requiring that everyone in the country worship as they do and follow their corrupt moral guidelines. The Christian foundation that requires all children be indoctrinated with the lies of the church. Sure thing - that all promotes lots of tolerance.
Chinese Christians are sent to prison - what happens to the professed atheist in Iraq? To the gay in Nigeria? And yes, governments persecute their people, but that has little to do with communism and much to do with the ruling class and how they view the political aspirations of those they persecute. Or whether they need a "goat", like Hitler did.
I am a Christian and I do not hate or fear gay people, but am I wrong when I sense your hate towards Christians?
Interesting that you reject what the bible says about gays. What else do you reject that is in the bible?
I don't reject what the bible says, I follow the commandment of love. I reject what fundamentalists in churchianity preach.
So you think homosexuality is a abomination that should be punishable by death. This is love? How so?
I never said that homosexuality should be punishable by death nor an abomination, If you continue to put words in my mouth, the discussion ends.
That is what the bible says - you said that you did not reject what the bible says - now you do reject it? Confused. Awesome that you reject what the bible says then. What else do you reject?
Hey, That law and punishment was given to God's chosen people. Israel, not the gentiles. A Gay person does not choose to be gay, He chooses the day he comes out of the closet.
Is your God against same sex and same sex among the thousands of other species of animals. He is also against most people on earth like nonbelievers and the other million gods. Dose that sound like an all loving God.
Defense of marriage or violation of rights? The gay marriage movement has steadily built momentum since 2000, when Vermont became the first state to legalize same-sex civil unions – legally recognized domestic partnerships given many of the benefits of marriage without actually being called marriage. Since then, four other states and the District of Columbia have passed laws allowing same-sex couples the right to obtain marriage licenses. In 2009, Vermont modified its civil unions law to allow for same-sex marriage as well.
All ready in Canada and 10 other countries SAME SEX marriage is on the books , it's futile to return back to the dark ages now.
@Castlepaloma 2Cor 5:18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them...
If you had read my previous posts, you would of learned that as a Christian, I have nothing against gay people or gay marriage. So why are you still barking at me?
You two are just here to pick a fight. We're done
As you wish.Sorry if asking questions bother you.
You should really switch to chronological view. Just viewing your posts, and who you are replying to, it appears you are letting multiple personalities within yourself argue with each other.
What would be more fun, although not less confusing to the observant hubber, is if you did like some and created multiple sock puppets for different personas and then argue with yourself that way.
Freedom of sex is a huge issue in the Constitution among many nations.
If some ones here has creates multiple sock puppets to play with him/her self. Please go and create your own master-debater thread for your own cheap thrills
That should do it, Emile
Can multiple personalty person marry themselves?
So making all people be Christian is okay, because the only alternative you can think of is not letting any people be Christian.
How about freedom or and from religion--is that not a preferable option to both?
I never heard a communism country at war say.
I kill in the name of atheists'
No group will take the killing world championship away from Religion
It is very convenient to take one sentence and use that as justification for lack of a full understanding. But, it's a little disingenuous. It begs the question of whether you are withholding information from yourself purposely, or not.
Atheistic regimes have, and do, target people specifically because of religion. Now, whether the leaders make the statement or they don't; their actions fall in line with that statement well enough to juxtapose their actions against the actions of those who use the name of God in order to justify violence.
Unless, we are going to get into the habit of claiming that if one thing wasn't said, then it doesn't count. In that case, we can say the following in defense of non violence among theists.
'The Bible never said to start a Spanish Inquisition; so therefor that was not violence in the name of God'
'The Bible never said to send hordes of Europeans swarming over the Middle East, so that was not violence in the name of God.'
'The Bible never said to use the word God in a constitution of any country, so those words are not inserted for biblical reasons.'
Do you simply like to stir the pot; or are you not capable of thinking through, in a rational manner, the accusations and claims that you make?
You say that no group will take the killing world championship from religion. Let's look at the history of the European imperialistic tendencies.
How many people do you think died as a direct result of Roman Imperialism?
Europe is responsible for the fact that the entire continent of Africa was enslaved and its resources raped.
It is estimated that 90% of the population of South and Central America died as a direct result of the Spanish attempt to divest the indigenous population of its riches.
5 Million people died in the Napoleonic wars.
It is estimated that 15 million people died during the course of the English attempt to rule the world through imperialism.
The Ottoman Empire was partitioned off into European hands. Europeans who immediately created unstable nation-states which have resulted in the Middle East problem we are seeing today.
If we are keeping tabs, I'd say Europe is the biggest problem the world has come across thus far.God appears to pale in comparison when considering blood lust for personal gain.
Its easier to use Religion as the tool, to kill a sub -human devil compared to knowing someone as human being, makes a big differences
The Elite World Government, controllers of our society, have great intelligence - but they have no wisdom. Intelligence without wisdom can be a very dangerous mindset, The hierarchical structure of RELIGION is the the greatest world conspiracy, that the major manipulators and controllers of humanity are the ones with the largest accumulation of wealth, the owners of the banks and multinational oil, pharmaceutical and food corporations etc. These are the people who run the world. These same people own and dominate the military, police and intelligence hierarchy and, of course, all the political pawns that society has been brainwashed into believing are the most powerful people in the world.
Once the individual has accepted the reality of this world power structure, they have just taken the first step toward freedom for themselves and for all of humanity. Religion is a tool to control and it has greedy power over the masses. There are 2200 business verses mention in the Bible, look at the story about the ten talents. The man with 10 talents (%) is given more than the person with only one talent, and so on.
Well, that's interesting. Since humanity has killed a whole lot more people for other reasons than religion. People don't need religion to view some as subhuman. I believe that was the justification behind the holocaust. It doesn't take a religion to make some feel they are superior and view others as sub human.
Names change. Governments change. People wax cold toward religion. The problems remain. The problems begin with us and are allowed to perpetuate because we look toward any cause that doesn't include ourselves in our search for answers.
Hitler was born and die a Catholic, the main support he got for the Holocaust was Christian German. The Nazi wore on their belt buckle
GOD IS WITH US. Much of my life's work has been studying world History and built many American native displayed in Museums also.
Are you saying their was no connection at all?
Are you serious? Is your knowledge of Nazi ideology, theology and Hitler himself really that limited, or do you just like blaming Christians for everything?
Blame Christians for everything, nay... that's not me that Satan's job.
The Christian Nazi's and the American rich Christians (predominately white) almost got their One World Order.
Wall Street rich and their criminal lawyers buddies have created a second wave of a depression. They manage to convince the public in the pass 35 years to take 7% less pay, mean wail the cost of living for homes food and transport has gone up almost 10 times.
My faith is in the collective consciousness of the people the true leader through out history. The super power of "American military and prison complex" Their abuse system is about to change by the other super power "Global Public Opinion". Like the Roman empire slaves, the people will over come again.
Just looked up the word Jerk, deceitful and taking advantage of.
Once was called a liar and an as-hole, both times they said they were joking. Once was call called a bully, I’ve confronted many bullies and trolls, regardless. How do you bully a bully God?
Interesting how you think 85% including Christian on hubpages Think castlepaloma is a jerk. First time ever been called a jerk online. Chris, Why are these 85% hubbers too cowardly, (including Chris) to confront me. Maybe because I don’t labels them bullies, liars, or jerks, or do they fear of being ban. No worries this thick skin, won’t ever ban anyone.
Christianity causes more harm than good, no worries again. Won’t throw out a generally good human animal with the polluted bath water.
If i'm a jerk based on true science, mythic OR even imaginable facts, then I’m learning something, if it’s true.
If 85% hubbers did not call me a jerk, then be brave and honest Chris, call me a jerk. Or is the real reason your inability to defend your blind faith, from my observation and questioning about Christianity. Many can disagree with me, yet can they be strong enough to stand on their own feet. Not against anyone yet the ethics for the sake of their group called "Us against them"will always be broken.
I’m clairvoyant like Jesus was, an ability to see events clearly outside of the normal. I can mystically see Jesus was a nice hu-man person. Yet Jesus did not sacrifice that much at being killed at age 33 because people hardly lived passed age 30 anyways. Jesus was really great back then, now it time to live in the present.
My faults, yes have a few, one of my downside I’ve tried too hard to understand Christian. From not handling frustration to the near point of being cynical. Cynical can be worst than depression, never want to be. Millions of fans approve my visual art, when it come to words of ultimate truth and universal out of one God then be jealous of the millions of other gods. I fail to understand them, do except them, unlike how they except me.
Over 30 years of pass prediction of world events have all come true, check these 15 years from now.
1. Religion will shrink and spiritual sided will grow.
2. Pot will be legal most places; the world’s best plant is illegal in every country.
3. Gays and other adult love will be almost totally legal.
4. The war of the classes will be won by the people. Less people will need to cheat on their taxes.
Now for the bad news, first there will be a war greater than world war 2, after that abuse, most everything will change for the better.
The teacher has arrive, my daughter is a master at the art of ignoring Religion. There is a little lying involve, like acting very nice, or act like a yes person. Start by leaving the religious side of the Hugpages. Ignore issue of gods guns and gays plus Sex sins and pot and most of all!!!
"Love the world more than Yahweh himself"
Having just seen what Julie went through on another forum for recommending a book to me, all I can say is, "Wow. Deja vu all over again."
I said, I said, I said.... I said that I was NOT calling you a jerk. I was trying to use an example of why the appeal to popularity you cited (that most of the people on earth would disagree with me about Christianity) was a fallacy. The concept is the same, although the general example was not. My bad.
A guy who says they have a thick skin and spends this much time responding in this fashion...does not have a thick skin.
I'm going to get banned again for this, but since you're imploring me to just come out and tell you I think you're a jerk, let me repeat, I DON'T THINK YOU'RE A JERK AND I DIDN'T CALL YOU A JERK. I have no problem telling people when I think they're jerks. Just ask A Troubled Man, getitrite, paradigm shift or Righteous Atheist or Encephaloidead. I don't think any of them are in any doubt as to my opinion of them. I doubt that any of them actually could correctly tell you WHY, but I'm sure they're all clear on WHAT.
Although it's not my intent, if this goes the way the last few times have gone, I'll see you all in seven days...
I wouldn't take Castle too seriously. His post may be an example of the fact that he lives somewhere where pot is legal and he was taking advantage of that fact when he typed that post.
Do love serious fun.
Most people already believes recreational pot should be legal and 88% believe it should be a legal medicine, just in America . Mark my words it's the next next gay marriage, it's the next wall to fall and be changed for the better..
Rarely get high, it;s just i believes in not filling half the prisons over drugs inmates or create ruin families lives, guns, wars and police states. The greatest winners are lawyers and Cartels and all those greedy synthetic corporations
What Medical value dose tobacco and alcohol have and Who is really acting like a big jerk?
I don't see where you've been called a jerk. But, I haven't read through the thread.
I think it is asinine that they have all but criminalized tobacco use and now they are whining to get marijuana legalized. I suppose the revenues went down and they need something else to tax.
I don't have a problem with marijuana. I used to smoke it sometimes. I just don't see any reason to put it on the same legal status as tobacco and alcohol. People aren't in jail because marijuana is illegal. They are in jail because they don't pony up money to the legal mafia the lawyers have become. The courts are a good old boy system that we the people aren't allowed to be a part of; except to contribute money to it.
Federal Bureau of Investigation show there were an estimated 1,552,432 arrests for drug-related crimes in 2012 – a slight uptick from the 1,531,251 drug arrests in 2011. Marijuana offenses accounted for 48.3 percent of all drug arrests, a slight reduction from 49.5 percent in 2011, which itself was the highest rate since before 1995.
Most marijuana-related arrests were for possession of the drug. By mere possession, there was one marijuana arrest every 48 seconds in 2012.
Yes. That is exactly what I'm saying. Religion didn't start WWII. I realize you desperately want to believe it is responsible. But that doesn't equate to truth.
Since you obviously aren't native American I have no idea what the other comment had to do with. I'm part native American, I've never built displays but i don't consider you a kindred spirit for having done so. I did once write a report on slavery. Does that mean I am also African American?
Your ancestry came out of Africa, just as it did for everyone in the world...
You do realize that doesn't make you native American? Probably not.
Daughter is half brown and I'm more brown inside than both of them.
They best represent nature as the only true religion
You're more brown inside than they are? That's too funny. It reminds me of when Bill Clinton tried to claim he was the first black president. That didn't go over well either.
He played the sax and liked ugly white women, that black enough for me.
I agree, but to claim that you're more brown than your Native American wife somehow doesn't seem like you're following your own advice.
Brown people are more of the people of the earth and spirit, as we are one with nature.
Just the way of thinking. Many white people can put me down, all they want, kind of a reverse racist for more of my kind of thinking. White people give more problems for thinking in natural enviromentaly than the people of color.
There's a line of thinking which believes a minority can't be labeled racist. Only the majority in power can be labeled that way. I don't agree with it. A racist is a racist.
If your avatar is indicative of your race, you get to be labeled a racist by the line of thinking I don't agree with. I'd label you a racist by your words; no matter what color you are. If you consider that a put down you might ponder why the statement was made. If you are capable of peering past your self imposed blinders of negativity.
What you said is in and of itself rather racist. But then to refute you is racist? Interesting. Sounds like the one who claims to "show others new ways of thinking" has closed off his own mind...
Not true, I'm always open, cultures make a lot more difference than our skin color. Culture has more to do in the way we think together.
It's Religious culture that believe they are above all others.
Interesting, since this was your last post White people give more problems for thinking in natural enviromentaly than the people of color.
While it's certainly true that there are people in 'religious culture' who believe that, it's at best disingenuous (and more often just a tad dishonest) to make it sound as if these are the only people who think that way.
Let me put it this way, saying that there is one group of people who think themselves above others as if they are to blame for things is very much saying that you are above that group, and usually above other groups as well.
That dose not mean I'm self racist or racist against white, toward my family, who are white, it's just fact. The brown people have greater concerns and better environmental records than whites
Premonition white countries like America leave the largest carbon foot print on the face of the earth. Russia and USA own 90% of the nuclear weapons on earth.
Nukes and Pollution is the two greatest threat to man kind
The brown people have greater concerns over environmental issues?
You mean like, say, India?
I'm beginning to think that you are a little racist yourself.
The most carbon usage, per capita. The top three are in nations you would probably label brown. What's up with that?
One other question. Are the nukes which are under the control of the US and Russian governments the nukes which pose the greatest threat to the world at the moment?
You are welcome to your prejudices. But, you should certainly ensure that your facts are straight. So your prejudices might have a chance of hiding behind facts.
China generates more CO2 emissions than any other country, when you look at the data of CO2 emissions per capita, nobody touches the United States. Surprising Canada as an environmentally-friendly country, they’re in the top ten in terms of overall emission
There is really a couple of small brown countries in the middle east that per capita push more than the USA..India is 1/10 of the USA and the the largest Brown country. When you look at the over all brown countries like Centro and South America and the native history, they are way cleaner.
It's why I live often in brown countries, own land and a house in Belize Santa Famalia the average age is over 90.
Okay, so then the next logical question would be, many of the countries you list have economies that are small compared to the US. If they had similar economies, would they produce similar amounts of co2 or would their natural 'brown peoples' green attitude mean they would emit far less no matter what?
I'm glad to hear that but it has nothing to do with the conversation in general or Emile's point specifically.
My daughter generation for first time in modern history will live a shorter life expectancy.
I want whites and christian to live longer too, what so racist about that?
They can fight over their afterlife, until the end of time, what do I care, it their bit-h.
My two top human mistake(rather than sins) is the nuke wars and the natural environment
Christian top sins pot(green) many sex sins, cheating on taxes.
Yet over population by xxxing the world is no concern at all.
Since I don't see what you see, please provide your data. And humans are not animals.
Here's the story of an eight year old student correcting a substitute teacher who believes in the Bible and also believes humans aren't animals.
http://chronicle.com/blogs/percolator/h … cher/32709
a) I asked Castlepaloma. I want to know what he thinks. I already know what you think.
b) The kid did not 'correct' the teacher. He stated his belief and stuck to it, which is great. But he did not explain it. The teacher should not have acted the way they did, but that does not in and of itself make the kid right.
c) That doesn't tell me what castle thinks at all. He seems to be on a slightly different path, or maybe not. But it's him I want to hear from.
The kid explained it was a fact based on what he learned about evolution. The kid was dead right. The teacher is dead wrong.
The kid was dead wrong. He was correct in saying it was what he had learned. To assert it as absolute truth is bias. And it's the height of irony that you are utilizing the example of someone who states their belief purely as such (which you happen to agree with) without intellectual argument or backup and stating that 'the kid was dead right.'
Which is what you've accused me of doing often. So it's not the act that bothers you, it's the impetus. If you agree with it, it's okay. Interesting.
It is a fact, hence the kid was dead right and the teacher was dead wrong, as are you. Look it up, it should be in just about any particular biology book.
Always telling when you start cherry picking the parts of my posts you respond to.
I've posted this before, but here's the chart:
Animals have DNA
Humans have DNA
Humans share some DNA with animals
Humans are animals
Animals were not created in God's image
Humans were created in God's image
Humans are not animals
The kid was too young to give a good explanation and the teacher was too haughty to give a good explanation. It's not about biology.
The kid knows more about reality and facts than the teacher and you put together. Yeah, it is biology. You are denying basic facts.
Btw, you should probably make yourself familiar with the term, 'cherry picking'
Cherry picking - when a specific piece of information is used in isolation. I don't care whether you call it cherry picking or selective editing, you pick the particular sentence you want to deal with and ignore the rest, even if the rest changes what you're responding to.
Do you do it all the time? No. In fact, when our conversations start, you don't do it. But the last few times we've started going around, there has always been a point where you take two or three paragraph postings and pick out one or two sentences that you specifically want to deal with.
And that ties in to that you obviously neither know nor care how much I actually know about biology.
No, it is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.
It is a claim that contradicts well known facts, that humans are indeed animals.
It is only when you make specific claims that go against well known facts.
No. I already knew all this about you, so I'm not technically learning anything.
How unfortunate. Does that mean you still believe humans aren't animals?
Ah, you missed the point again. And cherry picked the part to respond to, therefor ensuring that the missed point would not be picked up on by anyone who just happens to read your post.
You may be more clever than I give you credit for.
You're just making excuses, there is no missed point or cherry picking. You simply cannot field an argument that humans aren't animals.
Really? Because it seems to me that you're the one who can't field the argument. More to the point, I outline the reasoning I use and you respond with an ad hominem attack (something to the effect of "The kid knows more about biology than you and the teacher combined." That was ad hominem.) And when I say "It's not about biology" because my reason isn't about biology, you simply act like I have no argument and proceed as if you've won the debate. And then give a convoluted discussion about it that resolutely misses my point.
I'm not having any trouble sticking to the topic.
That is not true, I did not proceed like I'd won a debate, you are making stuff up because you said humans aren't animals, when clearly it is a fact that they are animals. You offer no reasoning for that denial whatsoever.
Perhaps you don't act as if you've won the debate, okay, I concede that. But I DID offer a reason for what I said. You just don't like it, so you act like it doesn't exist. Disagreeing with something is one thing, and if you disagree with it then that's fine. Acting as if it weren't given is another, and whether you truly believe I gave no reason because I stepped outside the parameters you seem to want to keep it in or you just don't like what I said and this is your way of dealing with it, it's still not true. I gave the reason. It's not biological. I don't dispute that humans share DNA with animals and are fairly close to some of them in those terms. But that is not my ultimate criteria for whether humans are 'just' animals or not.
Okay, but just because I did it doesn't let you off the hook. To say "Yeah, well he started it!" is just as much of a cop-out as anything else. You still responded to a statement I made with an ad hominem attack. That you did it doesn't excuse me, and that I did it does not excuse you.
You often reply with ad homs, I just simply ignore them.
You still didn't explain about "spirit and psyche", is that a cop-out, too?
You claim to ignore 'ad homs' and then whack me with an ad hom?
Well, if it's any consolation you certainly are no slouch in that department either.
We can assume that "God's image" is not a direct copy of God, which would mean God is not made of the same things as humans. But, most likely, if God's image is the same as mans image, then God would have a nose, mouth and ears. If God possessed these characteristics, then God has the same sense as man, hence He has a brain in which those senses are processed, just like humans, which would mean God is exactly the same as humans. If not, then why the image of nose, mouth and ears?
This would mean that not only humans are animals, but so is God.
If only an image, then God could be made of Titanium or Pixie Dust for all that matters. What's important is what materials God used to create humans. Since we see that animals are made with almost exactly all the same characteristics as humans, then they were made from the same materials.
This would mean humans are animals, by definition:
"Animals are eukaryotic and multicellular,which separates them from bacteria and most protists. They are heterotrophic, generally digesting food in an internal chamber, which separates them from plants and algae. They are also distinguished from plants, algae, and fungi by lacking rigid cell walls. All animals are motile, if only at certain life stages. In most animals, embryos pass through a blastula stage, which is a characteristic exclusive to animals."
I will admit that of all the times you managed to completely miss the point, this was by far the best thought-out.
The idea of what is meant by "God's image" has been debated by theologian and non-theologians for centuries. But the assumption that being 'in God's image' must, under any circumstances, mean that we look like God and therefor God is an animal too is not in any way a given. Although physical characteristics should not be ruled out as the meaning, or a meaning, the sense of our spirits or psyches being different from animals deserves more serious consideration than you gave it.
I rather be gay than Religious, Thank doG i'm happy and positive anyways.
Add up all the predominate brown countries per capita c02 and carbon foot prints. Then add up all the white predominate white countries.
Then add up a the nuclear weapons, military war budgets and prisons per- capita. Then tell me who is more natural and peaceful.
What country has militarily bases in 180 countries? Why is cannabis illegal in every country in the world when tobacco and alcohol is far more dangerous, what's healthy about that?
Smart 8 year old, wish most people were that smart. Happy to be half horse and half man. Sag.
That's fallacious though. Many of these countries don't have the budgets we do, that's true. If they did, I think it's pretty plain that most of them would have just as many nuclear weapons and armies. Most of them have a lot of prisons, and it would be a hard job to say that those prison systems are more fair or humane than western, 'white' ones. 'Brown' countries like Iran have nukes or are very close. And they are so not more natural and peaceful than us.
So again, the follow-up question is not asked. WHY does the US have military bases in so many countries? Because we are a militaristic and imperialistic country that forces 'lesser' nations to host us against their will? History says no. So again, that is a fallacious reason.
Like I told ED, although I am happy that the kid stuck to his guns, he didn't 'explain' anything. His 'correction' was not academic, in any sense of the word. The teacher should not have belittled the boy, but that does not mean the boy was right.
Besides, if you know the history, for all surrounding people groups, Centaurs are a real drag. They may be as natural as it gets but they are about as peaceful as riled-up killer bees.
I go back to what I said before. A lot of what you say sounds racially motivated. It's possible for a white person to be racially biased against whites.
"Why is cannabis illegal in every country in the world when tobacco and alcohol is far more dangerous, what's healthy about that?"
Perhaps because, in spite of claims from the potheads, it IS more dangerous than tobacco. I do not recall studies anywhere that looked at 30 year results of smoking even 20 joints per day...
But what does that have to do with brown countries?
America is 5% of the world's population with 25% of prisoner and half of the the World's war budget.
America the free, as free as the bible tells you so. If you make too many mistake, it's HELL, if most of our loves ones are in Hell.
How bad can Hell be?
That completely (and on purpose, it seems to me) sidesteps and ignores my point. I'm not contradicting your stated fact at all. What I'm saying is that if the 'natural and peaceful brown countries' had the same economy scale we do (even on a relative scale) that they would NOT continue to be 'natural and peaceful.' If you got different, I'm more than willing to listen and consider. But at this point, you seem to be taking what IS, and forcing it into what you think the REASON for it is. I don't think most of these countries are more 'natural and peaceful' than the US, they simply don't have the money to be otherwise. And your continued assertion that it has something to do with skin color is, at heart, racist.
I don't think you understand America any better than you understand the Bible, honestly. That statement is just not true, and if you watched the American news for real, you'd know that.
But as to your last question, if God exists, and hell is the ultimate separation from Him forever, then hell is the very worst thing that can be imagined.
Only two choices Hell or Heaven?
I do have faith in Up or Down and got a million other faiths too.
DNA is grounded nature fact, for all animals. Human in Gods images is man make thought.
What does that mean, you're 'more brown on the inside than both of them'?
My wife told everybody is pure white and convinced our daughter she was all white too. Its a huge lie, I know her entire family and not one them is over 4'foot -nine'' Everything about them is Aztec.
Since I studies and research brown people everywhere in the middle east, India and center and south America. and most of my art work for the pass 4 decade have been either fantasy or world history and built in many natural history museum and entertainment displays worldwide. Most of history event displays have been of Native American people.
You are more what you think and what you care about - than skin color or bloodline. When all the world race skin colors mixes, We will all be brown and I'm just thinking ahead of my time.
I think whatever is true will be reflected in nature, or at least won't contradict it. Whatever is true will best make sense of the world, universe, and humanity within it I think.
Emile, thanks for sharing this information. I think many are not aware of it and repeat what they hear perhaps, trusting their sources were being completely forthright.
If it is true loss of life and diminishing quality of life for some, we need to consider all things in that discussion. I don't often see this from people in these discussions, so thanks for that. I learned some also, or at the very least have some new things to research.
I wasn't attempting to lay blame. Only point out that the blame game is foolish.
We can't learn from our collective mistakes unless we stop pretending only others are responsible. Man's inhumanity toward Man crosses all boundaries of race and religion.
Man's inhumanity toward Man. Makes me think we should just blame men. That's a simple solution they couldn't put up a valid defense against. Considering history.
The Constitution of the United States forbids the establishment of a state religion, the banishment of a certain religion, and the state favoring one religion over another. The Founding Fathers (of the United States) knew about the travesties that took place in the name of religion in other portions of the world (including in Salem and Europe with the persecution of so-called Witchcraft), and they made sure to not let that take place in the United States.
HOWEVER... despite this, many state constitutions do mention a creator. ("God") For example, in my state of Indiana's Constitution:
"TO THE END, that justice be established, public order maintained, and liberty perpetuated; WE, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to >>*ALMIGHTY GOD*<< for the free exercise of the right to choose our own form of government (because that's not discrediting the people who fought the revolutionary war at all), do ordain this Constitution,"
So yeah... it's not like the United States doesn't mention some sort of divine creator within our laws.
The Bible does not say that homosexuality is punishable by death. It was a crime punishable by death (stoning) 5000 years ago because God did not want that abomination among his chosen people, Israel. That was done away with when Christ died on the Cross. (although homosexuality is still a sin and with be judged)
God created the orgasm. He created all the parts of men and women and fit them together for sex. He made the entire wonderful relationship between a man and a woman then designed the concept of marriage to safeguard it. He did not have to create this relationship, yet he did for us to enjoy and be fulfilled.
We then turn around and say "No, God. I'm going to stick my ***** up his *** and call that sex! F*** you!"
Don't you think He has a right to be angry?
God made rules on sexuality (ALL sexuality) to protect us. Because He wants us to be happy. You see the chaos in our lives and relationships when we break these rules. To have CONSEQUENCES when we break these rules IS LOVE.
If there were no consequences when someone steals, what would happen? People would just keep on stealing from each other and then might would make right. Our society would fall apart.
Taking your idea to its conclusion - there should be no consequences or rules for anything because that is not love.
If God doesn't like homosexuality, why does He create them Gay?
God does not create people gay.
Just because someone has an urge to have gay sex does not mean God created them that way.
If that were the case, we should let rapist go free because they had the urge to rape. God created them with the urge to rape.
I have urges to steal, rape, hit people etc. Does that mean I do it? Of course not. The same is with people who have urges to have sex with people of the same gender.
I notice you have no argument for the "God made rule for ALL sexuality". That is the basis of all of this. We don't want God to tell us what to do with ANY of our sexuality. I know because I've felt the same way.
If we can make God look like a monster who just punishes those poor 'ol gays who are just trying to get by in life, we can have a reason for our rejecting Him. Because hardly anyone wants to come out and just say, "God I hate you."
Unfortunately - it seems to be you telling us - not god.
Let me get this straight (pun)Your saying
The gays who are just slightly less populated on earth than the Catholic's population of our world.
(Not counting the 5000 species of animals who have been reported having same sex.)
Making Gays as bad or sinful as rapist, violent people and thieves.
To be a very nice Christian we must accept to love God above all. Yet God can turns around and hates gays. Is this right?
We know God threatens most of us on earth with fear anyways.
IF a god creates people, then he creates some of them gay.
IF a god creates people, then it created some of them so they like gay sex. It is not a choice.
Are you seriously equating sex with violently hurting people against their will? There IS a difference you know - one is a crime (and sin), one is not. (Hint - the one that hurts people against their will is criminal and sinful while the other is neither.)
We don't need to make the Christian god look like a monster - the writers of the bible have already done that quite convincingly.
Surprisingly you are correct. No God created humans. Very perceptive.
Again right. Very good, keep it up.
Um no. You see rape in non-consensual and sex is consensual. You were doing so well.
No because stealing and raping and hitting others is hurting people and consensual sex does not.
Atheists don't hate what's not there. However if homophobia is a problem for you than perhaps you should rethink the bible.
Wow, you guys are right about my logic. That is pretty stupid to equate consensual sex with rape etc.
Let me rephrase that. I may have urges to view porn, fornicate, masturbate, maybe even have urges toward other men, but I control myself. Just because I have an urge does not mean God created me that way.
I am NOT wrong in that just because you have an urge to do anything it means God created that way which was the logic previous commenters were using.
That is the fallacy behind nearly ever pro-gay argument: gays are like a different type of human. They are not. I know gays who go back and forth between sleeping with same-sex partners and opposite sex partners all the time. All sex is a choice. I have the urge to have sex every day but I can control whether or not I do. I know of a man who was married for 15 years or so and had 3 kids before he decided he was "gay" and ran away from his family with his boyfriend. (Imagine how that screwed up his kids) Everyone know that sex is a choice.
If God really hated gays he would destroy them the minute they sinned. Heck, if God hated any of us we would not even be here talking. Again, we want ANYTHING that gives us an excuse to make Him look like a monster.
Sure, we can control our urges. I get that. Some people are bi-sexual, some are homosexual and some are heterosexual. And we are not just talking about sex here my friend. Does it make sense that God would create some to only be attracted and to fall in love with people that he doesn't want them to? There people would never to fall in love and have a relationship. I for one am a happily married man to a women. I've seen lots of men naked and they do nothing for me at all. It makes sense that there are people that feel the same way but only towards there own sex. There are women who are not attracted to men and men who are not attracted to women both sexually and emotionally. If you are bisexual then that's your business. I don't care. As long as the sex is consensual it affects no one. If you are having fantasies about hurting people you may want to take to someone about that.
Oh and one more thing…
Can you please resist your urge to put double spaces between words. It's hard to read.
Not only do 98% men masturbate, it all started with an urge from what an assuming God created. Is it free from sin, if these men did not dump their seed upon the ground?
How about crossing swords?
Why did God put a man's G spot up their rectum? I can't even find a pirate woman to go up there for ultimate pleasure.
Oh my God!!!
I may of said too much there.
Masturbation coming from an urge that God created….so you are saying God should not have given us a sexual desire?? We are filled with urges of all kinds every minute of the day. Again we want to be able to do whatever we want without God telling us! You are even willing to admit (for the moment anyway) that God created us in an attempt to make an argument for rejecting Him.
Interesting. Wait - so what happens to homosexuals? Does your god punish them for being what they are? God made rules for ALL sexuality? LOL
by Susan Reid 4 years ago
Since when is America a "Christian" country? I challenge anyone to find a single mention of Jesus Christ in any of our founding documents."God" does not equal "Christ." I swear to God, yes. I swear to Jesus His son? No.One nation under God, ok. One nation under the...
by cjhunsinger 3 years ago
Where are the Christian Principles?It is widely held that America was Founded upon Christian Principles, but what exactly are those principles? It is also agreed that the Founding Principles of the US are found in The Bill of Rights. In reading, again, those Rights I find done that reflect any...
by MPChris 5 years ago
Do you think the Founding Fathers intended a Christian Nation?This question is in specific reference to two important pieces of legislative evidence. Both, the 1st Amendment and the Treaty of Tripoli (Article 11). Keep in mind that the Treaty was ratified by many of the original founding fathers,...
by cooldad 6 years ago
Were the founding fathers of this country Christians? I have always been under the impression that our country was founded by people who were escaping religious persecution. Why then, do so many people claim that this country was created under Christianity? I could be wrong, but I...
by Justin Aptaker 6 years ago
I America a "Christian Nation"? What does that term even mean?I often here that America is a "Christian Nation". Do you agree or disagree with this? And what, exactly, does that mean? Clearly, not nearly all Americans are Christians. Does this mean that a few of the first...
by Stump Parrish 7 years ago
I keep hearing that the lack of religion is what is wrong with this country. Tell me what good has come from the christian religion here in America. What advancement in our society is a direct benefit of christianity?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|