| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Steve Trellert" |
| Date: |
30 Jan 2008 09:03:46 PM |
| Object: |
Natural vs Unnatural |
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
.
|
|
| User: "Jim07D8" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 11:13:33 AM |
|
|
"Steve Trellert" <Vancanste@shaw.ca> said:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
Yes, Steve; three.
1. Fictional characters don't have moral intentions, and fictional
works do not have moral implications. The writers and readers of such
works, might.
2. Everything we do is natural, that is, part of nature, that is,
everything we do reflects a capability with which we are born.
3. Therefore, the word "natural" in a fictional work fails, on two
grounds, to carry moral weight.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris H. Fleming" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 03:50:31 AM |
|
|
On Jan 30, 10:03 pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
Everything that exists is natural.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 06:40:18 AM |
|
|
On Jan 30, 9:03=A0pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:=
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that=
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes=
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers)=
..
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did n=
ot
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
REPLY: God established moral laws to be followed so perversion to our
Nature doesnt come about like it has in our culture today. Its
whenever people want to do their own thing that they as well as
society enters the moral sewer which has had devastating
consequences. God is on our side and we need to be on his since he
establishes laws for our own protection. But alas...we think we know
better. Hardly.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 07:03:40 AM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
IlBeBauck@gmail.com wrote:
| On Jan 30, 9:03 pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
|> Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural
(eg:
|> homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
|> some questions regarding this:
|>
|> 1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
|> since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
|> pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise
that
|> potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one
wishes
|> to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
|> omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his
believers).
|>
|> 2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God
did not
|> give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
|> exploring these areas are unnatural.
|>
|> 3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
|> since that is its true function?
|>
|> Thoughts?
|
| REPLY: God established moral laws to be followed so perversion to our
| Nature doesnt come about like it has in our culture today. Its
| whenever people want to do their own thing that they as well as
| society enters the moral sewer which has had devastating
| consequences. God is on our side and we need to be on his since he
| establishes laws for our own protection. But alas...we think we know
| better. Hardly.
|
Why are you so afraid of death that you keep grasping at straws?
- --
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
A.A #1143 http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHoccpf+wl0F6+jvgRAiRzAJ9ekgoMZOBeFBhZNbNhjtl2de3dUACeOECa
DoSkdlCSbHo9Sp5OIJY6KhA=
=qrWU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 10:53:28 AM |
|
|
said the following on 1/31/2008 4:40 AM:
On Jan 30, 9:03 pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
REPLY: God established moral laws to be followed so perversion to our
Nature doesnt come about like it has in our culture today. Its
whenever people want to do their own thing that they as well as
society enters the moral sewer which has had devastating
consequences. God is on our side and we need to be on his since he
establishes laws for our own protection. But alas...we think we know
better. Hardly.
So, God is against things which are natural? He's for things that are
natural?
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 10:36:15 AM |
|
|
wrote:
On Jan 30, 9:03 pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed
unnatural (eg: homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did
not intend. But I have some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually
active since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age
to become pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be
there, otherwise that potentiality would have occured later in life.
Unless of course one wishes to concede that God makes mistakes...but
of course that does not fit the omnipotent, omniscience status he
has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God
did not give us the "natural" ability to breath in those
environments? Clearly exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for
reproduction since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
REPLY: God established moral laws to be followed
Where does your god say that 11yo old kids are not to have sex? Certain
sects of Christians and Muslims (among others) think it's acceptable i.e.
not opposed to some sky pixie's "moral law".
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SkyEyes" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 05:54:06 PM |
|
|
On Jan 31, 5:40=A0am, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com" <IlBeBa...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 30, 9:03=A0pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (e=
g:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I hav=
e
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually activ=
e
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise th=
at
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wish=
es
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the=
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believer=
s).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did=
not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
REPLY: =A0God established moral laws to be followed so perversion to our
Nature doesnt come about like it has in our culture today. =A0Its
whenever people want to do their own thing that they as well as
society enters the moral sewer which has had devastating
consequences. =A0God is on our side and we need to be on his since he
establishes laws for our own protection. =A0But alas...we think we know
better. =A0Hardly.
1. Oh, no you don't. You have to provide evidence that there's a god
before you can claim that he established any "moral laws." Got any?
I've asked you that before, in other threads, as have other a.a.
regulars. So far you've come up with El Zippo in the way of evidence.
2. Are you not aware that homosexuality occurs in species other than
humans, and has been observed in nature, and that being the case,
cannot be termed "unnatural"?.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 06:10:15 PM |
|
|
In article <7578eab3-e5e5-4cb4-a8c7-1d2df44ad047@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> SkyEyes <skyeyes9@cox.net> writes:
On Jan 31, 5:40=A0am, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com" <IlBeBa...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 30, 9:03=A0pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (e=
g:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I hav=
e
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually activ=
e
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise th=
at
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wish=
es
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the=
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believer=
s).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did=
not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
REPLY: =A0God established moral laws to be followed so perversion to our
Nature doesnt come about like it has in our culture today. =A0Its
whenever people want to do their own thing that they as well as
society enters the moral sewer which has had devastating
consequences. =A0God is on our side and we need to be on his since he
establishes laws for our own protection. =A0But alas...we think we know
better. =A0Hardly.
1. Oh, no you don't. You have to provide evidence that there's a god
before you can claim that he established any "moral laws." Got any?
I've asked you that before, in other threads, as have other a.a.
regulars. So far you've come up with El Zippo in the way of evidence.
Hey, I'd settle for some evidence that we've entered "the moral sewer",
with the attendent "devestating consequences".
Me, I'd say that taken as a whole, our society is marginally
more moral than it was when I was a kid, back in the late Pleistocene.
2. Are you not aware that homosexuality occurs in species other than
humans, and has been observed in nature, and that being the case,
cannot be termed "unnatural"?.
Obviously the penguins too have forsaken God's established moral laws.
(no doubt that's why their home is melting and sliding out to sea)
-- cary
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
01 Feb 2008 12:38:23 AM |
|
|
On Jan 31, 7:40 am, "IlBeBa...@gmail.com" <IlBeBa...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 30, 9:03 pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
REPLY: God established moral laws to be followed so perversion to our
Nature
Which, by the way, was allegedly "created" by your "god". Sloppy
"god"...
doesnt come about like it has in our culture today. Its
whenever people want to do their own thing that they as well as
society enters the moral sewer which has had devastating
consequences.
Why is there about 10% of the population left-handed?
Olrik
God is on our side and we need to be on his since he
establishes laws for our own protection. But alas...we think we know
better. Hardly.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 12:10:05 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 04:40:18 -0800 (PST), "IlBeBauck@gmail.com"
<IlBeBauck@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 30, 9:03pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
REPLY: God established moral laws to be followed so perversion to our
Nature doesnt come about like it has in our culture today. Its
whenever people want to do their own thing that they as well as
society enters the moral sewer which has had devastating
consequences. God is on our side and we need to be on his since he
establishes laws for our own protection. But alas...we think we know
better. Hardly.
That doesn't answer any of the questions.
---
"Faith may not move mountains, but you should see what it does to skyscrapers..."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 09:20:16 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 04:40:18 -0800 (PST), "IlBeBauck@gmail.com"
<IlBeBauck@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 30, 9:03pm, "Steve Trellert" <Vancan...@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
REPLY: God established moral laws to be followed so perversion to our
Nature doesnt come about like it has in our culture today. Its
whenever people want to do their own thing that they as well as
society enters the moral sewer which has had devastating
consequences. God is on our side and we need to be on his since he
establishes laws for our own protection. But alas...we think we know
better. Hardly.
Where did you demonstrate this hypothetical God's existence in the
real world beyond your religion before rudely and stupidly presuming
it where you know it's merely somebody else's religious belief,
moron?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 07:20:50 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 04:40:18 -0800 in
e0b11e86-208d-43e2-92d6-c999bf5e74dd@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com,
"IlBeBauck@gmail.com" <IlBeBauck@gmail.com> wrote:
REPLY: God established moral laws
Who asked him?
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“It is one of the Christian delusions that Christianity
brought charity into the world. It did no such thing.
There were plenty of agencies for taking care of the
poor and helpless long before Christianity was heard
of, and even before Judaism. Both Christianity and
Judaism have converted charity into a sort of pious racket.”
- H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 07:20:28 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 +0000 in mUaoj.26661$4w.7617@pd7urf2no,
"Steve Trellert" <Vancanste@shaw.ca> wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural
(eg: homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But
I have some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually
active since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to
become pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there,
otherwise that potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of
course one wishes to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course
that does not fit the omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according
to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did
not give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments?
Clearly exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
4. Computers and the Internet are seriously unnatural. The religious
should stop using them immediately!
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"You know, I've gone to a lot of psychics, and they've told
me a lot of different things, but not one of them has ever
told me 'You are an undercover policewoman here to arrest me.'"
- New York City undercover policewoman
.
|
|
|
| User: "SkyEyes" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 05:55:24 PM |
|
|
On Jan 31, 6:20=A0am, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
4. Computers and the Internet are seriously unnatural. The religious
should stop using them immediately!
<Sigh> I wish.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 12:05:29 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 +0000, Steve Trellert wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
WRT item #3, Jared Diamond, in his book, "The Third Chimpanzee", points
out that in many primate species, it is obvious when the female is
ovulating, while in human females it is very difficult to tell. Ask
any good Catholic woman who is charting her basal body temperature and
examining her cervical mucus how easy it is to determine when ovulation
is occurring. If sex is strictly for reproduction, why would God make it
so hard to tell when having intercourse is most likely to result in
pregnancy? If you believe that God designed the female reproductive
system, it would seem that the "true function" of sex is something other
than making babies.
--
MarkA
(My OTHER sig line is clever)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 05:24:32 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:05:29 -0500, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 +0000, Steve Trellert wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
WRT item #3, Jared Diamond, in his book, "The Third Chimpanzee", points
out that in many primate species, it is obvious when the female is
ovulating, while in human females it is very difficult to tell. Ask
any good Catholic woman who is charting her basal body temperature and
examining her cervical mucus how easy it is to determine when ovulation
is occurring. If sex is strictly for reproduction, why would God make it
so hard to tell when having intercourse is most likely to result in
pregnancy? If you believe that God designed the female reproductive
system, it would seem that the "true function" of sex is something other
than making babies.
As a butt for schoolboy jokes?
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 05:47:43 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 09:54:32 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:05:29 -0500, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 +0000, Steve Trellert wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
WRT item #3, Jared Diamond, in his book, "The Third Chimpanzee", points
out that in many primate species, it is obvious when the female is
ovulating, while in human females it is very difficult to tell. Ask
any good Catholic woman who is charting her basal body temperature and
examining her cervical mucus how easy it is to determine when ovulation
is occurring. If sex is strictly for reproduction, why would God make it
so hard to tell when having intercourse is most likely to result in
pregnancy? If you believe that God designed the female reproductive
system, it would seem that the "true function" of sex is something other
than making babies.
As a butt for schoolboy jokes?
Must... not... point... out... Freudian... Slip...! ;-)
---
"Faith may not move mountains, but you should see what it does to skyscrapers..."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 11:01:09 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:47:43 -0500, raven1
<quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 09:54:32 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:05:29 -0500, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 +0000, Steve Trellert wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
WRT item #3, Jared Diamond, in his book, "The Third Chimpanzee", points
out that in many primate species, it is obvious when the female is
ovulating, while in human females it is very difficult to tell. Ask
any good Catholic woman who is charting her basal body temperature and
examining her cervical mucus how easy it is to determine when ovulation
is occurring. If sex is strictly for reproduction, why would God make it
so hard to tell when having intercourse is most likely to result in
pregnancy? If you believe that God designed the female reproductive
system, it would seem that the "true function" of sex is something other
than making babies.
As a butt for schoolboy jokes?
Must... not... point... out... Freudian... Slip...! ;-)
Not slip: but leap!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
01 Feb 2008 08:45:34 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 09:54:32 +1030, Michael Gray wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:05:29 -0500, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 +0000, Steve Trellert wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
WRT item #3, Jared Diamond, in his book, "The Third Chimpanzee", points
out that in many primate species, it is obvious when the female is
ovulating, while in human females it is very difficult to tell. Ask
any good Catholic woman who is charting her basal body temperature and
examining her cervical mucus how easy it is to determine when ovulation
is occurring. If sex is strictly for reproduction, why would God make it
so hard to tell when having intercourse is most likely to result in
pregnancy? If you believe that God designed the female reproductive
system, it would seem that the "true function" of sex is something other
than making babies.
As a butt for schoolboy jokes?
Snork! You said, "butt"!!
--
MarkA
(This space accidentally filled in)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
01 Feb 2008 09:30:22 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 21:45:34 -0500, MarkA <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 09:54:32 +1030, Michael Gray wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:05:29 -0500, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 +0000, Steve Trellert wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
WRT item #3, Jared Diamond, in his book, "The Third Chimpanzee", points
out that in many primate species, it is obvious when the female is
ovulating, while in human females it is very difficult to tell. Ask
any good Catholic woman who is charting her basal body temperature and
examining her cervical mucus how easy it is to determine when ovulation
is occurring. If sex is strictly for reproduction, why would God make it
so hard to tell when having intercourse is most likely to result in
pregnancy? If you believe that God designed the female reproductive
system, it would seem that the "true function" of sex is something other
than making babies.
As a butt for schoolboy jokes?
Snork! You said, "butt"!!
Don't tell teacher, or I'll be for it, you snitch!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "William Wingstedt" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
02 Feb 2008 09:11:32 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:05:29 -0500, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 +0000, Steve Trellert wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend. But I have
some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually active
since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to become
pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there, otherwise that
potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless of course one wishes
to concede that God makes mistakes...but of course that does not fit the
omnipotent, omniscience status he has (according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God did not
give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments? Clearly
exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for reproduction
since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
WRT item #3, Jared Diamond, in his book, "The Third Chimpanzee", points
out that in many primate species, it is obvious when the female is
ovulating, while in human females it is very difficult to tell. Ask
any good Catholic woman who is charting her basal body temperature and
examining her cervical mucus how easy it is to determine when ovulation
is occurring. If sex is strictly for reproduction, why would God make it
so hard to tell when having intercourse is most likely to result in
pregnancy? If you believe that God designed the female reproductive
system, it would seem that the "true function" of sex is something other
than making babies.
As a vector for the god to punish us with STD's?
--
MarkA
(My OTHER sig line is clever)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
30 Jan 2008 10:17:29 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 GMT, "Steve Trellert" <Vancanste@shaw.ca>
wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God
Which "god"?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Apostate" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
30 Jan 2008 11:57:57 PM |
|
|
In article <bui2q3hockbusks8jgaaaminc8irdqqjek@4ax.com>,
says...
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 GMT, "Steve Trellert" <Vancanste@shaw.ca>
wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God
Which "god"?
What god; which god.
I say to-mah-toe.
--
Apostate a.a. #1931
..sig currently undergoing maintenance
mail to X-reply-to
want a free or premium posting account with Teranews?
https://secure.usenetbilling.com/newbilling/manageaccount.cgi?referredby=1089312943
&action=Create+New+Account&vendor=teranews
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
31 Jan 2008 12:01:22 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 00:57:57 -0500, Apostate
<godless.*****@yeehaw.org.invalid> wrote:
In article <bui2q3hockbusks8jgaaaminc8irdqqjek@4ax.com>,
says...
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:03:46 GMT, "Steve Trellert" <Vancanste@shaw.ca>
wrote:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural (eg:
homosexuality etc) in terms of what God
Which "god"?
What god; which god.
I say to-mah-toe.
"What" implies "animate", which is a point to the delusion bastards.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural vs Unnatural |
30 Jan 2008 11:57:40 PM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, "Steve Trellert" <Vancanste@shaw.ca>
bloodied us up with this:
Religious people always tend to argue against things deemed unnatural
(eg: homosexuality etc) in terms of what God did or did not intend.
But I have some questions regarding this:
1. Does this imply that 11 or 12 year old Girls should be sexually
active since their reproductive systems now allow them at that age to
become pregnant? God's intention would certainly seem to be there,
otherwise that potentiality would have occured later in life. Unless
of course one wishes to concede that God makes mistakes...but of
course that does not fit the omnipotent, omniscience status he has
(according to most of his believers).
2. Perhaps humanity should not explore space or underwater since God
did not give us the "natural" ability to breath in those environments?
Clearly exploring these areas are unnatural.
3. Is sex also for pleasure or is its purpose strictly for
reproduction since that is its true function?
Thoughts?
Religion itself is unnatural.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
