Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    665
    Gambini,

    Since you find incest immoral, then you should repulsed by the bible, right? The only way the population could have grown was through incest.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace - Jimi Hendrix


  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    TO THE CHILD, YOU IDIOT!!! If the child is in a COMA, then fondling a child does no physical OR emotional harm TO THE CHILD.
    So you are saying so long as a molester hides sufficiently hides his abuse of children, so even the children never know, then there is "no harm" done to the child?

    And you don't care if the molester harms his own self? That's not a moral issue to you?

    Wow. Your religion has taught you some wonderful moral values.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    Stop putting words in my mouth to make me sound like the QUACK when you and your wife are ON THE RECORD as saying there's nothing morally wrong with Joe getting a vasectomy and having consenting sex WITH HIS OWN MOTHER (not to mention Linda or Valerie having consenting sex with THEIR OWN MOTHERS )!!!
    Say what? You've been putting your words in my mouth from the beginning.

    I am not "on record" as saying anything about mother/son incest. That's your wet dream. Pervert.

    If you wanted to discuss my moral theory, you would be speaking of the UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES that make something right or wrong. But you won't do that because you have no concept of morality other than "my imaginary demon-gawd tells me through my ego what is right and wrong."

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    And IT'S NOT ILLEGAL TO HARM YOURSELF. For example, it's not illegal to smoke your brains out until you die of cancer. So saying it harms the molester doesn't work either. The fact of the matter is that the sexually immoral act *ITSELF* is morally wrong REGARDLESS of whether someone is harmed or not.
    Morality is not defined by societal laws. Grow a brain already.

    Harming your own integrity is immoral by definition because morality is integrity. That's why those words are synonyms. If you had integrity you would understand morality.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,886
    Quote Originally Posted by L67 View Post
    Gambini,

    Since you find incest immoral, then you should repulsed by the bible, right? The only way the population could have grown was through incest.
    Oh that's not a problem. Gambini will "special plead" his way right out of that blatant inconsistency.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    TO THE CHILD, YOU IDIOT!!! If the child is in a COMA, then fondling a child does no physical OR emotional harm TO THE CHILD. Stop putting words in my mouth to make me sound like the QUACK when you and your wife are ON THE RECORD as saying there's nothing morally wrong with Joe getting a vasectomy and having consenting sex WITH HIS OWN MOTHER (not to mention Linda or Valerie having consenting sex with THEIR OWN MOTHERS )!!!


    BINI
    You are a despicable liar Gambini, and the one who puts words in people mouths. You know that Richard and I have both said that relationships between consenting adults is not a moral issue, yet you continually say that we say "There is nothing morally wrong", when what we actually are doing is refusing to participate in your stupid scenario. When something is not a moral issue, it is neither morally wrong or morally right.

    Grow a brain or shut up, you are making a complete ass of yourself.
    Last edited by Rose; 08-12-2014 at 04:48 PM.
    Never trust anything you are afraid to question ~

    To know oneself is to know the universe...


    Live Fully...Love Extravagantly...For the sake of Goodness

    Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. Matt.10:16

    Come let us reason together...Isa.1:18
    ********************************
    My new Blog site: God and Butterfly

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Daytona
    Posts
    1,855
    Right on, L67, it's true that in the period prior to the Law (even prior to the Deluge), the population could not have grown w/o incest. Cain must've married his sister, but where no law is.. Rom 4:15 "Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression".
    Seeing Genesis as a Pre-Law Period, and the "cleansing of the blood", Joel 3:21, gives sanction for the crime of Cain too, IMO.
    Dux allows: "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out the matter". Pr25:2

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    269
    Quote Originally Posted by L67 View Post
    Gambini,

    Since you find incest immoral, then you should be repulsed by the bible, right? The only way the population could have grown was through incest.

    The answer to your question is found in GENETIC ENTROPY. The further we go back, the less mutation load the human family had built up in the genome. Once the genome mutated to a certain point, the risk of birth defects became greater and greater (thereby resulting in a divine decree against brother/sister marriages during the Mosaic period). Further, if God had created a multitude of couples (rather than beginning with a single couple), then there would be no one single human family. By starting with one couple, it makes us all one as a brotherhood of humanity and EMPHASIZES the brotherhood of humanity.


    And notice I'm talking about adults having consenting sex WITH THEIR OWN MOTHERS, which was NEVER sanctioned biblically and which is logically *ALLOWED* under ANY atheistic moral system (including yours). And now it's time to ask you a question in the spirit of universal brotherhood and discovery ...


    Do you believe it is morally wrong to have powerful sex with a DEAD goat??? If not, WHY???



    BINI
    Last edited by Gambini; 08-18-2014 at 01:25 PM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    269
    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    You are a despicable liar Gambini, and the one who puts words in people's mouths. You know that Richard and I have both said that relationships between consenting adults is not a moral issue, yet you continually say that we say "There is nothing morally wrong", when what we actually are doing is refusing to participate in your stupid scenario. When something is not a moral issue, it is neither morally wrong or morally right.

    So you're saying it's AMORAL??? Fine. So what I said IS PERFECTLY ACCURATE ...


    According to the atheistic moral system of Rose, there is nothing morally wrong with Gregory getting a vasectomy and having consenting sex WITH HIS OWN MOTHER because according to her, it's AMORAL (hence, it CAN'T be immoral). Further, there is nothing morally wrong with Becky or Barbara having consenting sex with THEIR OWN MOTHERS because according to Rose, it's AMORAL (hence, it CAN'T be immoral).



    BINI
    Last edited by Gambini; 08-12-2014 at 05:15 PM.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    Look at the title of this thread and there's your answer. The further we go back, the less mutation load the human family had built up in the genome. Once the genome mutated to a certain point, the risk of birth defects became greater and greater (thereby resulting in a divine decree against brother/sister marriages during the Mosaic period). Further, if God had created a multitude of couples (rather than beginning with a single couple), then there would be no one single human family. By starting with one couple, it makes us all one as a brotherhood of humanity and EMPHASIZES the brotherhood of humanity.
    Ha! I knew it. SPECIAL PLEADING!

    I was going to predict this specific excuse he made but decided to give him enough rope to hang himself.

    According to Gambini, morality is based on God's unchanging nature. Except when the situations change. Then the very same act that once was moral is now such a HORROR of IMMORALITY that he constantly repeats it in all caps.

    This is what he must do to rationalize the incoherent babble he thinks is the "Holy Word" of his EGO-GAWD (which is nothing but his own ego, magnified and projected). He is now promoting SITUATIONAL ETHICS, which change over time. He has no MORAL PRINCIPLES to guide his reasoning. By his explanation, the only reason incest is currently "immoral" is because it could cause birth defects. So now he can ask himself his favorite question: If a man had a vasectomy and his sister had her tubes tied, would it be immoral for them to have sex? If so, why? They wouldn't have any children, so his explanation fails.

    Gambini's answer shows that he has no concept of what makes something moral or immoral.

    Gambini cannot answer why there is anything actually immoral about incest. His only answer is "cuz my gawd changed his mind. It used to be moral, but then he said it was immoral because cuz it caused HARM" which just happens to be central to my moral theory. Ha. What a freaking brain dead loon.

    And of course his answer assumes that the genome was sufficiently "perfect" to allow incest until the time of Moses! That's nuts. That's no time at all on the evolutionary scale. Old strawbrain doesn't have half a clue what he's babbling about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    And notice I'm talking about adults having consenting sex WITH THEIR OWN MOTHERS, which was NEVER sanctioned biblically and which is logically *ALLOWED* under ANY atheistic moral system (including yours). And now it's time to ask you a question in the spirit of universal brotherhood and discovery ...
    It's not "allowed" if it would cause harm.

    This exposes the incoherence of your morality. You assert that HARMLESS things are immoral! Wow.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    Do you believe it is morally wrong to have powerful sex with a DEAD goat??? If not, WHY???
    HA! You always reveal your hand. All your ravings are driven by mindless irrational emotion. You always throw in words like "powerful sex with a DEAD goat", "passionate sex with your mother", "sex with a FILTHY dog." If anyone were to take your questions seriously, as if you were a real thinker, they would have to ask what you are trying to imply by the adjectives. Are saying that WEAK sex with a LIVE goat would be ok, or DISPASSIONATE sex with your mother, or sex with a CLEAN dog? If that's not what you meant, then it is obvious you threw in those emotionally laden terms to evoke mindless emotions and in a vain attempt to disable the minds of readers you hope to deceive. In other words, you write like a typical Christian fundamentalist whose heart and mind has been utterly corrupted by his FILTHY religion.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    So you're saying it's AMORAL??? Fine. So what I said IS PERFECTLY ACCURATE ...


    According to the atheistic moral system of Rose, there is nothing morally wrong with Gregory getting a vasectomy and having consenting sex WITH HIS OWN MOTHER because according to her, it's AMORAL (hence, it CAN'T be immoral). Further, there is nothing morally wrong with Becky or Barbara having consenting sex with THEIR OWN MOTHERS because according to Rose, it's AMORAL (hence, it CAN'T be immoral).



    BINI
    No, it is not perfectly accurate! Everything you say has a twisted and perverted spin to it, specifically for the sake of shock value. How pathetic and unchristian is that?

    You seem to be quite obsessed with people having sex with their mothers! What's up with that anyway?? Kinda weird don't you think??
    Never trust anything you are afraid to question ~

    To know oneself is to know the universe...


    Live Fully...Love Extravagantly...For the sake of Goodness

    Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. Matt.10:16

    Come let us reason together...Isa.1:18
    ********************************
    My new Blog site: God and Butterfly

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    According to the atheistic moral system of Rose, there is nothing morally wrong with Gregory getting a vasectomy and having consenting sex WITH HIS OWN MOTHER because according to her, it's AMORAL (hence, it CAN'T be immoral). Further, there is nothing morally wrong with Becky or Barbara having consenting sex with THEIR OWN MOTHERS because according to Rose, it's AMORAL (hence, it CAN'T be immoral).
    And according to your morals there is nothing intrinsically immoral about incest between brothers and sisters. You are a freaking joke Gamboner.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •