…or, why hippies are idiots.
So I wrote a reply to a "we're killing the planet" blog, and part of it I decided to repost here:There are a bunch of idiots who think that everything should be peace - peace, peace, peace. No fighting, no violence, no killing - a utopia on Earth, as it were. Problem with that is, it's been tried. And it failed. There's a book I read once - "The Arcadians." A bunch of naturalists back in the nineteenth century decided to live in nature and be nonviolent - they failed. Within a couple of weeks, one was drinking (alcohol, not water) and they were all angry at each other. The settlement fell apart.Now, I'm not saying peace is bad - far from it. Peace is a good thing. It's just when people try to take the pie without paying the pieper that things get sticky. Humans are basically evil. And not in the "Ooh, we're killing trees! We're evil!" kind of way - in the "I'm going to kill you because I want your house" kind of way. There is NO WAY to have a perfectly peaceful earth. Those that only act in peace are trampled by those who act out of desire - just like the Vikings and those they raided. In order to keep the Vikings away, peace-loving villages without standing armies would basically give the vikings money in order to uphold that peace. Remember 9/11? The reason behind that horrible act? Why did the terrorists decide to fly a plane into the WTC? Why did they attack the United States? Were we doing something to them? Were we attacking them? No. We were being "peaceful." Holding "peace talks." Trying to negotiate for "peace." However, we happened to be supporting Israel - which was something these terrorists didn't like. So they walked onboard a bunch of planes, took them over, and killed thousands of Americans. We were being overly peaceful - and it cost us. But - and here's where things took a turn for the better - we didn't sit and take it. We stood up and fought back. We became active and vigilant in our defense against terrorism - and since that day, there have been no more World Trade Center disasters. Our current peace is preserved not through peacemongering, but through defensive war.In closing, there's a sentence that easily applies here: "Peace is good. Peace without war… is impossible."
ok, this is getting out of hand. Callllm down people.
->sjf: 1. I am not saying that we were attacked because we were trying to be peaceful - but rather that because we weren't prepared - because we were trying to negotiate with countries like Iraq and North Korea - those attacks succeeded. If we had taken a more militant/defensive/cautionary stance towards terror during that time, might we not have stopped the attacks?2. First, refrain from bad langauge or be removed.Second: yeah, Poland fought back. A couple thousand outdated mounted troops versus Germany's Blitzkrieg. And only then when Hitler was already within their borders. 3. Not what I'm saying, again. But during the Cold War, the US was in a standoff with the USSR. They both had standing armies and nuclear weapons. It was only fear of the other, and of nuclear war, that kept war from breaking out. Now, imagine if the US had suddenly scrapped its nukes and army in the name of peace. Or, even not going that far. What if it had tried to placate the soviet union? The thing about negotiating with a bully is that you always have to watch out for his fists.4. Sure, you can deny what the textbooks, teachers, college professors, media, etc. etc. all claim is true. But what about when you have to write tests on it? Why are these opinions taught as fact? And secondly, let me put this forward right now. I don't hate homosexuals. Just homosexualITY. Is that clear enough for you?->Serprex: 1. Not "homophobe." I don't think the people are evil - but the ACT definitely is a sin, and, even if not banned, should not be taught as truth.2. Sure, there are exceptions. But then there are the countries that conform to this rule. This should be an obvious point of human nature - placating an aggressor only works until that aggressor decides to break the rules.Ludamad: What I've been saying all along is that those who believe in peace without war to keep that peace are ASKING for those who don't like them to march all over them. Poland was a neutral country trying to stay out of the war. It cost them dearly when the Nazis ignored that fact.So you believe that homosexuals can happilly be in a heterosexual relationship?
I believe that homosexuality is a mental disorder on the same order as schizophrenia or add, and should be treated as such. It is not a valid method of reproduction; it cannot lead to children; and it is against God's laws. Would you say that someone who believes he is a dog should be encouraged in that belief? No. He should be treated for his mental problems. So should homosexuals.
A.D.D. doesn't exist. Period
Life is not about reproduction. That notion of thinking is so primitive. Life is about living. If someone wants to live that way, it's their right. Comparing that to thinking you are a dog is a worthless attempt to prove your point, since your comparison is one of such obvious difference in reasoning. If someone "thinks" they are homosexual, they are not hurting anyone, including themselves. If someone thinks they are a dog, it is quite potentially dangerous to those around that person, and scientifically, it is quite obvious that they are NOT A DOG, while science has no way to determine if someone is homosexual or not. Your comparison is null and void, and therefore your argument is worthless. I also would like to point out that it is a typical action to lash out against homosexuality when you are dealing with feelings related to it and do not want to admit it.Also, God actually never spoke out against homosexuality. Christians tend to believe that, but I challenge you to bring up any evidence to that. You've got a whole book of laws, parables, and prophecies, but I guarantee you, you will not find a verse that determines homosexuality to be a sin.
There is a close second to that, though, in that gay marriage is not real, since marriage is defined as the bond between a man and a woman.I'll also add to this that since many laws have been changed over the course of the bible, it can be deduced that since reproduction is now not a requirement of every family in order for the human race to survive, it is not necessary for that law to exist, and for all you know, even if it were a sin, it may not be one anymore. I don't believe gay marriage can ever exist because unlike life itself (as you implied), marriage was originally (and therefore still) intended for reproduction by the law of the Christian God.->sjf:
1. ADHD then. Mental disorders. 2. Neither christianity nor evolutionism supports homosexuality. The one, because it is stated in God's word that it is evil(see later for references), and the other, because evolution is based on survival, and homosexuality does nothing to further the survival of a species.3. Ohh, this is too easy… I can list THREE.A. Leviticus 18:22. "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."B. Leviticus 20:13. "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."C. Genesis 19: 1-26 (story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, whose fate was sealed when the men of Sodom tried to rape the visiting angels. It's a long passage, so I won't repeat it here, but here's a link: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis%2019&version=314. A sin is that which goes against God's law. You can read what God had to say on the subject of homosexuality in the above three passages. End of story.I apparently have ADD, but I don't take ritalin.
@SJF:
@flashback
The King James Version (the most widely accepted version of the bible in the world) correctly translated this to it's correct meaning,"abusers of themselves with mankind", which actually refers to rape, not homosexuality. I urge you to look to a church for one that has studied past the bible and to the old scriptures that never became part of it, or perhaps find someone that has studied into the meaning of the bible from it's original language. Many laws we believe in are debunked by those that read the bible's original text in full context.