Is this a good anti-gay argument?

No.

File: 28DA3E61-BAC4-4A2D-8303-255778B2FEF2-260-0000006AE61BEB17_tmp.jpg (66KB, 661x662px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 661x662px

One must be careful with how they use their bodies energies...there be can be dangerous consequences...I've seen the destructive results of one whose energies were tainted at a young age...it's truly sad to watch them grow up...but also quite interesting..

One must be very wise to not be destroyed by their own energies

Sorry if this sounds kinda like Asian bull shit

File: IMG_4373.jpg (59KB, 576x640px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 576x640px

>>7368604
God is a woman and women created sex to curry and breed populations in servitude and in their favor. Sex outside of straight sex is a violation of 'God' for this reason as it does not serve women

>>7368645
Yes anon. Just spoon feed them

>>7368645
Who is that pic of?

It is not a 'good' argument, people do not have sex to procreate they do it because it is pleasurable. The propagation is a concept.

>>7368671
It's Caraposter shitposting Nikki again.

>>7368680
Nikki whom?

Sorry if the use of 'whom' makes me come off as autistic, it's only proper.

File: IMG_4341.jpg (184KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 900x1200px

>>7368671
Nicole Maines, alt-right transgirl who uses the fact that she transitioned early to dictate the idea of "biological gender roles" and the "importance" of tradionist upbringings to appease to appease to Breitbart readers. she used to write for Milo and Blaire but she's been freelancing after shuffling and rearranging at Breitbart after Bannon got chosen by Trump.

>>7368699
*traditionalist
Also didn't mean to say appease to twice

>>7368699
Thank you and have a good day or night.

>>7368604
>it is immoral
Who defines what is immoral?
Your make-believe deity?

>>7368699
>"alt-right transgirl who uses the fact that she transitioned early to dictate the idea of "biological gender roles" and the "importance" of tradionist upbringings to appease to appease to Breitbart readers. she used to write for Milo and Blaire but she's been freelancing after shuffling and rearranging at Breitbart after Bannon got chosen by Trump"
You are so funny, Caraposter ...

>>7368741
I already asked her something like that, she says that it doesn't matter if God is personal or impersonal because the rules are the same.

I told her I was gay and she did not desire to destroy me, this is tolerant for a spiritual/chaste person.

>>7368780
It wasn't a joke.

>>7368783
I feel guilty for making this thread because it surely angered someone. I am going to delete it now. I did not ask "her", I am her and I was posing an internal question (to myself) and wanted others reactions to help me understand I don't even mind noro0oergofaise'jf;vrhjNdf ;

>>7368832
AN ERROR WAS MADE: the post that I made (>>7368604) is too old to be deleted by me. Now it cannot be deleted, except by a moderator or the admin of 4chan.org.

>>7368783
>>7368832
>>7368848

This must be embarrassing for you...

Anyways riddle me this: If god is real then why did it create this confusion? you might argue that it is some counter-deity, but that is merely semantics. If god is the creator, then god also created evil and is therefore neither good nor evil. God must be impartial for morality to exist. So either god is impartial and nothing matters, or god is not god and just one of a myriad of gods that span an array of moralities... in which case nothing matters because by pleasing that god, you piss off another.

It is nonsense. The reason they all hated homosexuality and sexual immorality was because it broke down the stability of the hetro-normative family unit, which is the backbone of any civilization. We still live in a time where competing civilizations are attempting to out-breed one another. That is all it is, propaganda to ensure girls lay down for boys, and boys fuck babies into them. And that anyone outside of this definition of normal is dealt with harshly so as to enact a kind of self-censorship and automated adherence to social codes of conduct ruled by xenophobic fear and supposed divine repercussions.

>>7369059
Nice post, this is why I don't want to give my opinion anymore. For fear I do wrong to people over an opinion.

>>7368604
>muh opinions are actually GOD's opinions

Drink gasoline.

>>7369059

Litterally all these spiritual people get it wrong it's so frusterating. There's is only one absolute truth, and that is that reality is emergent from the mind. Once you accept that then you realize that you are actually god in a sort of way, except the ENTIRE POINT is to not have any powers. That means that the funny thing about life is that the whole point is that it's going to be pusposelessless.

>>7368604
God is not real, and God is not incorruptible. The real reason that certain religiousfags oppose homosexuality is because they think it's icky. IE they're bigots. I know calling them bigots is passe because the word "bigot" is overused, but it's true in this case, I am properly using the word.

Human nature dictates religion, not the other way around. They use religion as a justification for their own inner beliefs. Or to overcompensate for their own faggotry. Religion is an ideological tool to be used at a person's convenience.

>>7369325
I did it again

>>7368628
That person looks like they are being abused but are unmoved by it.

>>7369301
There's really no definitive way to prove that god does or does not exist.

>>7368604
Religion is literally a meme entity that seeks to propagate itself, it experiences selection pressures like any other ideology. The reason our contemporary ones (like the more strict forms of Christianity, Islam, Judaism) are so adamant against non-traditional kin groups is specifically because it is the most efficient way to propagate the ideology of the religion. The religion itself is seeking to continue it's existence by manipulating the populations behavior into empowering and perpetuating it

>>7368604
>A spiritual person cannot accept it because it is immoral

Her whole argument is literally "It's wrong because I think it is."

She accepted some arbitrary rules (fornication = immoral) and as a result she judges the world by applying them.

She only thinks being gay is bad because she decided to believe so. Her "argument" is just her opinion.

Is it a good or bad argument? Both.

It's bad because it's retarded.
It's goos because you can't prove her wrong simply because you are relying on different sets of rules. It's like trying to beat her at tip-tap-toe by playing monopoly

> Falling for the spiritual Jew.
> Being religious.
ISHYGDDT

>>7369079

I don't follow... but fear should never be a reason to hold back. It takes a special form of courage to face a hard truth.

>>7369220

Reality is subjective, all truths are versions of untruth. This might sound retarded, but I know you will understand. After all, it is essentially the same point. You can only live your existence, with your perception of reality. Why do you think placebo works? Power lies where people believe it lies. Note the key word believe. It is faith that grants power to things, not knowledge. Religion is a meme... a very old normie meme.

>>7369348

There are plenty of ways to prove that the gods of theology don't exist... though not a creator in general.

(op here) I hope God lets you know right from wrong because some of you are tempting me to reply but I don't want to say stuff as if I'm teaching people when I'm not perfect either.

Understand that religion and all philosophies and their creators can't be understood unless you are devoted to it. Similarly, you can't tell engineers what is right or wrong unless you are an engineer and know their math, maps and stuff.

>>7368604
Not really, greek literature introduced the idea that morality and god must be separate, and so any particular standards of a god are separate from what actual morality is. This was evidenced by the thought exercise of "what if god told you that killing all babies ever was good?" Well hopefully you can see there's a problem in that babymurdering would suddenly become moral and abortion would no longer be bad. The idea that morality could change on the whims or desires of whatever kind of god you ended up with (and who often threatens punishment in many religions) seemed too dark and less comforting than atheism, so greek philosophers accepted that a god is moral because that god follows morality, and not morality being dictated by god.

Now that we've got that out of the way, we can see that just because it's gods standard doesn't mean it's a particularly good one, other than you asking "Who are we to question a god?" Unfortunately that is exactly the kind of situation where the previous unacceptable morality comes from. If we cannot question the morality of a god, then we must accept whatever that god says. However god is separate from what is moral, so therefore it follows that when we as a society question the god's standard, we are considering that god is immoral.

Unless you are the type of person who wants to worship any god simply because they are a god, despite their immorality or cruelty, then hopefully this idea seems odd to you. Perhaps this is why old religions died out, society got rid of the immoral god and became more moral.

An example to solidify the argument vs abrahamic religions: If the gift god gave humans was free will so that we could sin, the choice to sin should be unique to humans. Other animals engage in homosexual relations with a prevalence of 33%, some of which are long-term relationships. If the animals are sinning, that is free will. We are no longer unique from animals. Why then did god choose humans?

>>7369703
You have not practiced all religions correctly then.

>>7368604
Considering it contradicts itself several times I guess it is complete bullshit. Spiritual people should learn about this thing called logic.

>By following it you'd have to adjust your standard to whatever your society accepts at the time
So the way we read spiritual texts hasn't changed either?
Which is why Christians obviously refuse to eat shrimp (Leviticus 11:10 "But anything in the seas or the rivers that has not fins and scales, of the swarming creatures in the waters and of the living creatures that are in the waters, is detestable to you.")

>The only other time people have sex is in perversion
This is not an argument against gay sex, this is an argument against sex (birth control = hell)

>spiritual people remain chaste
WRONG
According to the Quran, Muhammad had 11 wives and several concubines
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Muhammads_Wives_and_Concubines
Furthermore in Catholic Christianity only priests and nuns remain chaste, while Protestant and Anglican priests can marry. I could list several more religions where there is no need to remain chaste.

>Well it isn't wrong by normal peoples standards
Which is why gay people had to fight for their rights, which normal people refused to acknowledge

>>7368699
If you're gay or a tranny then you aren't alt right.

>>7369703
Ur such a newfag, eat shit

(op here) here is proof that religion is correct for the people who only accept proof (you guys are so hard headed i feel sorry for you all, seriously. It's like you're immune to wanting anything "spiritual")

Sometimes when I pray or meditate weird stuff happens. I'll hear voices, see inexplicable things, physical things will move by themselves (e.g. the blinds will shake on closed windows, the floor and walls will begin to shake)

I don't care for these phenomena but they used to scare me. This is "proof" you people want. You'll never understand spirituality with this logic, only through peace and love so all the people with opinions other than God are wrong.

Idkwhat I'm saying anymore, just stop replying to this thread or delete it. I think you're all where you should be and I won't try to change it, someday you'll see it my way.

P.S. This isn't to undermine anything bad people have done by abusing religion.

File: 228666F6-4B2C-4A1D-B3A6-AD16EAC1D9B1-212-000000CF4021A593_tmp.png (860KB, 841x720px) Image search: [Google]

860KB, 841x720px

>>7370133
>projecting
>admitting to having delusions similar to shroom affects
>how lonely you sound

*backs away slowly*

>>7370090
>Considering it contradicts itself several times I guess it is complete bullshit. Spiritual people should learn about this thing called logic.
It doesn't, you're using a different logic.

>So the way we read spiritual texts hasn't changed either?
Which is why Christians obviously refuse to eat shrimp (Leviticus 11:10 "But anything in the seas or the rivers that has not fins and scales, of the swarming creatures in the waters and of the living creatures that are in the waters, is detestable to you.")
That is just a diet. The best diet for a Christian to survive for a long time back then. God said not to eat rats, snakes, hawks, rabbits... But eat healthy food like milk, fruits, beef and vegetables etc..

>This is not an argument against gay sex, this is an argument against sex (birth control = hell)
Isn't this good news for you? NO RELIGION hates gays. They're just a consequence of being against sexual immorality. If sexual immorality was OKAY they would not be against it, but it is impossible to advance spiritually when you want sex with whatever you see.
>WRONG
>According to the Quran, Muhammad had 11 wives and several concubines
>Furthermore in Catholic Christianity only priests and nuns remain chaste, while Protestant and Anglican priests can marry. I could list several more religions where there is no need to remain chaste.
I DIDN'T READ THE QURAN. I only mentioned it because I read some quotes from Muhammad and they seemed the same as the bible, but of course every religion has external differences (e.g. Buddhism thinks there is no God yet they tend to follow Christianity in their practices, same for vice versa)

>Which is why gay people had to fight for their rights, which normal people refused to acknowledge

I'm not trying to undermine this. I'm conflicted between not replying or talking back about religion and probably would be best if I didn't reply since the world won't end if I ignore this thread.

>>7368604
>Is this a good anti-gay argument?

No.

Didn't read tho

>>7370133
Hey man, when shit starts moving on its own I'll give God another chance but he hasn't really done much for me personally.

>>7370145
Those examples get on the weird side but they're not delusions. I have better examples but I don't know how to prove that "God is real" when that question is illogical to me. It comes from being naive. I thought exactly the same.

Btw, I've been awake for a long time so I am only replying to help me stay alert and awake for something.

>>7370160
You clock like a child...off to bed...my little one...

>>7370166
I can't reply to this post >>7370158
because Idk what to say. You baited me into replying but I'm unable to anything of substance except argue. I should've never replied, I was baited. Congratulations! You got me to reveal my dumb thoughts over and over.

The logic starts with several false premises, but if we grant them all of that, then the logic is technically sound. So no, it isn't a good argument because a good argument should be founded in reality, not mythology.

(op here) I am never going to post idly on /lgbt/ again. This means unless I have a serious question (which I probably won't ever again) I will not post. This may be my last post on all of /lgbt/ forever. Night.

File: buddhist gods.jpg (119KB, 300x388px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 300x388px

>>7370150
Alright at least educate yourself about religion before claiming to be an expert
>a spiritual person (who practiced every religion)

>I DIDN'T READ THE QURAN
>who practiced every religion

>Buddhism thinks there is no God
see pic related
more examples: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrathful_deities

Well, homosexuality is a dangerous gateway to degenerate sex acts. Once one starts down the path of homosexual behavior, they will eventually start heading into casual sex hookups, bug chasing, and prostitution.

It is possible to be homosexual and have sex for pleasure etc. because god at a minimum allows it. What if I was an abrahamic determinist and knew i was going to hell? Then the spirituality and sexual immorality would not be incompatible etc.
This does read like an underage thread though.

>>7368604
>this is beautiful
People are biologically programmed to respond to this idea with nodding heads, because if they took it seriously as a discrete and arguable position, they'd soon see no reason in it. Creating new human lives is a thoroughly narcissistic and inconsiderate thing to do. Nothing about it is beautiful. It's just brainless nature.

>>7370187
You posted about god on an lgbt board, what do you expect? You're like one of those street preachers who wonders why nobody is seeing the truth. There's a time and a place for everything, and unfortunately, the 4chan /lgbt/ is not it.

>>7369388
>higher human nature ("God's morality") and these religions push the same ideas?
lolno

human nature is a fucking spook, all of humans are inherently animals so all of our activities are "human nature" by tautology

>If they're so similar it is possible that they are not propaganda but human nature itself (without the "evil" things like lying, lusting, pride, etc..).
If they're not propaganda then why do they function exactly like it? Why do they go out of their way to promote offspring creation if it wasn't for increasing their own power and influence?

>even if those 3 disappeared the human nature would still exist but it would be harder for people to be 'good' and not 'bad'.
i d e o l o g y as fuck, it's not that hard to know what's good or bad using rational deliberation, even religious people are completely capable of it (even if they think they get their morals from a book). Deciding what is preferable action has nothing to do with imposed religion

>In other words, they are just here to help people abandon a 'bad' human nature and embrace a 'good' nature.
They are there to modify humans behaviour to something which increases the religions power, that's all they are after. Religion is literally a memetic parasite that uses humans as host in the mission of increasing/consolidating power

>>7368783
>she did not desire to destroy me
outright lies.

>>7368604

>Good argument

>Religious

Pick one.

>>7370150
>NO RELIGION hates gays.
absolute bullshit.

>>7369059
>If god is the creator, then god also created evil
God didn't create evil. Humans did.

Basically God created humans and let them do whatever they wanted. But since humans are imperfect they "created" evil.

>Why doesn't God eradicate evil then?
Because the difference between human and the rest of God's creation is that humans have free will. The only way to forcefully delete evil would be to either destroy humanity or take the free will from them, which is basically the same thing.

>>7372325
>Humans did.
Ehh no humans are unable to create evil.
At most they discovered it.

In fact if evil exists because of humans creating it, then God cannot be fully good because God existed before humans.

>>7368604

She's probably addicted to H2O
Too bad she has no self control.

>>7368604
Love is immoral?

>>7370133
You might want to visit a professional and look for symptoms of psychosis or similar diagnoses. Hearing voices and seeing shit move that shouldn't be moving isn't a sign of divine communication, it's a sign of mental ilness. There are meds for this kind of stuff.

>>7372372
Humans are the ones who started being evil to each other. There was no evil before humans. Humans are capable of creating evil because they are intelligent and have free will, so they can create and experience malicious feelings.

>In fact if evil exists because of humans creating it, then God cannot be fully good because God existed before humans

I don't understand this phrase.

God created humans and gave them free will.
Humans became evil.

You could say that God indirectly created evil by making beings capable of creating it, but he only did so because there was no way to give humans free will otherwise. God is not impartial, that's why Hell exists -to punish evil people.

>>7372435
>there was no evil before humans

of course there was, there just wasn't a consciousness to interpret it as "evil"

>have free will
fucking kek

>actually thinking behaviours can be attributed labels of "good" and "evil" and not just sufficient at meeting their goals
please red some modern philosophy

>>7372435
>There was no evil before humans.
Then there could not have been good before humans either.

Since God is fully good and God existed before humans, evil too existed before humans.
There were just no evil acts committed yet, but that does not mean the seeds weren't there.

Unless you go by the principle that God, the highest good is literally everywhere at the same time at all times, and that "where there is good, there is no evil" in which case evil simply does not exist. But that's a different branch.

>>7372476
>Then there could not have been good before humans either
God's goodness and love were the reason why he created everything. God is only goodness because he's a perfect being. Humans are not, so they brought about evilness.

>>7370097
You're dumb as fuck.
Circumstances like that is why alt-right exists.
Enjoy hell faggot ;3

>>7372494
For good to exist evil must as well.
You cannot have one without the other.

That's not even getting to the point that humans are unable to create something out of nothing, and thus they cannot create evil out of nothing either.

>>7372542
>For good to exist evil must as well.
This is a false statement. Good an evil are opposites but they do not depend on the other to exist. That's just human's perception of it because they can only measure goodness when in contrast to evilness.

>That's not even getting to the point that humans are unable to create something out of nothing

Human's capacity of abstract thinking let them create evil. They started thinking "What if I take what's not mine" and things like that. They are capable of creating imaginary scenarios and taking them to the real world. When they did this, sometimes other humans suffered, and thus evil was created.

>>7372583
>just human's perception
>just

AYY LMAO

>>7372583
>This is a false statement.
It literally isn't.
You cannot see good and evil as seperate but opposite entities, it literally does not work that way.

>That's just human's perception of it because they can only measure goodness when in contrast to evilness.
That's literally fucked up reasoning, aside from being complete bogus made up for the sole purpose of not having to admit the need for a concept of evil because people don't want to answer the question of "why is there evil?"

>>7368604
Naw.
It requires you to accept that any sex outside of creating a child is bad.
>It doesn't even argue that point well.

>>7368604
Fornication is immoral in her opinion? So how do spiritual people even exist? Sounds like odd logic to me. Jesus the ol' "Birth is beautiful/Birth is a miracle" statement. Look people, I live in the bible belt and I can bring you to my local Wal-Mart and give you living proof that any two heteros can bring a child into this world. Its not special, its not a miracle, its consensual, unprotected sex between any two rando mother fuckers. Believe me. God in any form wants humans to be happy. Sex can be used for pleasure. Therefore sex/fornication is not always a perversion. No purpose in life because you can't perform previously mentioned fornication to recreate for beauty? Wow. A walking ouroboros IMO.

>>7368741
Also the other big issue with this argument against homosexuality or what seems like all sexual acts not intended to procreate. It's all whatever your personal preference of "God" is. Only one religion that I personally know of even thinks this still. They're protestants and Monty Python skewered them back in the fucking 70's/80's for their ridiculous beliefs about sex in the song, "Every Sperm Is Sacred". Classic and hilarious.

>>7368783
Bullshit. "God's" rules are not the same from religion to religion.

>did not desire to destroy me

Is your name Malala by chance?

>>7369059
Which in turn is weird that anyone could even say that procreation is the "backbone" of any society. Otherwise India would be the ideal or at the very least best in one aspect kind of country to live in. NO THANK YOU!

>>7372848
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

>>7369220
The thing is these people purposely get it wrong. They love to live in confusion and anything that can so easily be defined as negative. That's why Fox News does so well in America and probably the reason why Breitbart swooped in outta fucking nowhere to now having a seat right next to our dear President Elect.

>>7368604
>tfw I am male, have a boyfriend and dont do sex.
checkmate 'spiritual people'

>>7369591
More so, I think it's wrong because my God/Holy book tells me so.

>>7369703
Then do every person on the face of the earth a big favor, stick your head further into the rabbit hole and tell us when you find the rabbit. Before you die unlike all the other "devoted ones".

>>7370324
Fantastic logic. I should be dead by now then if there was any speck of truth to that.

>>7372906
So you're implying or presenting cognitive dissonance as this idea that because somebody tells another person what their beliefs should be and they choose to follow those beliefs that that somehow makes them a "God" or closer to a "God"? If any "God" is some special being then that sounds like this entity that was entirely perfect as almost every religion I've heard of say, then why would there ever be any internal imbalance with any one person's morals or beliefs? Why have so many wars over the millennia ever been fought in the name of any said "God"?

>>7370187
Good. You opinions they suck. Stop sucking up other peoples' dogma and come up with your own, and be ready for the dissent.

>>7368604
this argument completely falls flat when you remove spirituality

>>7368699
Gross.

>>7368604
I can't wait until humans evolve past believing in magic.

>>7368604
No. This is a good anti-gay-SEX argument.

>>7373546
Yeah, if you're partial to pointless self-aggrandizement and fairytales.

Interesting. So heterosexual members of her church who have sex for evil selfish pleasures are just as sinful as gays?
Then why do so many religious people take a stronger stance against gays?

>>7373527
It will NOT happen in our life time. Most people are content embracing a ridiculous fable to explain the unknown. Maybe in another 500yrs?

>>7373641
Fucking depressing that we're still savages after all of this advancement.

>>7373594
Because gays are icky, and ickyness is like... extra evil... Duh.

Why are you such loathing faggots all the time

no one cares who you fuck
just dont be faggots about everything

File: c8IDKpz.jpg (305KB, 1296x971px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 1296x971px

>>7373527
>>7373641
>>7373919
*tips fedora*

>>7373933
Oh right, anything but devout religious fanaticism is a meme now. Thanks 4chan.

In this moment, >>7373967 is euphoric. Not because of any phony god's blessing. But because, he is enlightened by his own intelligence.

File: fedorafaggot.jpg (42KB, 500x638px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x638px

>>7373967

>>7368604
It's not really a meaningful "anti-gay" argument, because it applies to the vast majority of people today, not just gays. And that's not even getting into the issues with the notion of an objective morality that comes from God.

>>7369348
That's true, but something does not "exist" in a meaningful sense unless its existence has some sort of effect on us.

>>7370097
That's what some in the alt-right say, but there are still some gays/trannies who consider themselves part of the movement.

>>7370133
Sounds more like you're willing to interpret things in a certain way because of pre-existing religious belief.

>>7370374
>What if I was an abrahamic determinist and knew i was going to hell?
Then you'd have no use for Abrahamic morality at all, as the whole point of Abrahamic morality is to avoid Hell. If you're guaranteed to go to hell, then your behavior will solely be dictated by its effects in the material world.

>>7368604
>It's not possible to be spiritual and sexually immoral
I beg to differ. Who says sex is immoral anyway? Why is raising a child together beautiful but expressing your love for one another in the most intimate and vulnerable way you can perversion? Fuck your friend. I can be religious and have sex with whoever I want without any conflict of faith.

>>7374417
Southern baptists, calvinist, etc. Morality? I was talking about theological adherence.

Bundle of confusion ITT

> my god, the universe is complete as you commanded. Colossal in its complexity, sublime in its simplicity.
> Good. Now we wait 14 billion years and tell some desert dwelling species on that planet what to do with their genitals.

>>7368604
Spirituality is made up and homosexuality is mostly attacked by abrahamic religions. It's incredibly pompous to say 'spiritual people do this' or 'spiritual people do that' like they get to be the arbitrator of what spirituality is.

If your beliefs make you hurt other people or support hurtful institutions then you are mentally ill and should seek help