Mormon forum lights up over California gay change

[_bcspace]

I freely admit that #1 is my number one reason.

I bet you would have loved living under Taliban rule.

Incorrect. There is nothing in my personal philosophy that is against homosexuals marrying or punishing them for it.

[_guy sajer]

Frankly, I think you're more worried about the evidence I posted that the homosexual lifestyle is dangerous.

Frankly, I think you're trying to embiggen your position with "science" because you know your religious judgements are not cromulent in a free society.

I think you had to look up the word cromulent and found that you weren't as up-to-date on pop culture as you thought you were.

As for science, you'll accept it's word on evolution, but you won't accept it's word on the consequences of homosexuality. I seem to be twice the scientist you are.

Oh for heaven's sake, here's bcspace pretending to be a scientist again or to know crappola about science and scientific inquiry.

One thing's for sure, bcspace has quite an elevated opinion of himself.

One can expect a reference to "lazy research" any moment now.

[_bcspace]

One can expect a reference to "lazy research" any moment now.

Some research has to be done first before I can so pronounce.

[_GoodK]

Frankly, I think you're more worried about the evidence I posted that the homosexual lifestyle is dangerous.

Let's continue to respect these religious idiots. Let's pretend like their beliefs aren't dangerous.

Please, B.C, just focus on brainwashing your kids to think like you so they go gay and hate you later.

[_marg]

[quote="GoodK"]

Hi GoodK, do you think most people can easily overcome or do overcome their early religious indoctrination once they are mature enough to start thinking for themselves?

[_The Dude]

Biology = science

Psychology = not science

Agreed. Of course this prevents you from referring to much, if not all, of the counter "evidence" if you want to maintain intellectual honesty.

In my book, all the studies are different flavors of crap. And I only mentioned the counter evidence because it nullifies yours. Not because I bank on it. Yes, it's all crap in my book.

You are anti-gay because of your religion and I'm not because I'm not of your religion, and I don't think anybody but you should be subject to the dictates of your religion.

[_Chap]

Have partying gays celebrating the California win thought what lies underneath the mask of tolerance that conceals the harsh reality awaiting them as a consequence of this decision????

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39343

Now you are all in the real world with us straight guys and gals ... enjoy!

[_guy sajer]

Biology = science

Psychology = not science

Agreed. Of course this prevents you from referring to much, if not all, of the counter "evidence" if you want to maintain intellectual honesty.

In my book, all the studies are different flavors of crap. And I only mentioned the counter evidence because it nullifies yours. Not because I bank on it. Yes, it's all crap in my book.

You are anti-gay because of your religion and I'm not because I'm not of your religion, and I don't think anybody but you should be subject to the dictates of your religion.

I disagree, psychology IS science. But it is a social science and anyone with experience in social science research will (or should--not all social scientists are reflective) that social science research is almost always tentative. No study or small collection of studies is sufficient to decide an issue, given, among other reasons, the inability of social science to create laboratory conditions that control for the myriad of factors that influence outcomes (and hence the inevitably large error term representing random noise unaccounted for by the model). It is only AFTER a large enough number of credible studies have been done that one can get a sense of where the preponderance of evidence is pointing.

The assertion that social scientists can adequately and accurately explain complex systems and phenomena is largely hubris.

[_bcspace]

In my book, all the studies are different flavors of crap. And I only mentioned the counter evidence because it nullifies yours. Not because I bank on it. Yes, it's all crap in my book.

It's interesting that from psychology comes the strongest (most vocal) arguments for homosexuality yet you and I agree on the invalidity of such as a science. I don't believe you about all the studies being different flavors of crap because you agree with me that biology is a science. Notice that the gay gene theory has fallen flat.....

You are anti-gay because of your religion

That might have been true before I studied the issue scientifically.

and I'm not because I'm not of your religion,

Irrational.

and I don't think anybody but you should be subject to the dictates of your religion.

I agree. There is nothing in my personal philosophy that disallows another's agency unless it treads on someone else's.

[_skippy the dead]

What possesses someone who represents himself as a man of religion to say something so completely idiotic. To wit:

Bravo! If I were a Californian, I would be ready to take out their supreme court by gun point. It's pure tyranny.

Will no believer call them on this kind of violent horsesh*t?