To our atheist friends

why is this lack of morality so dangerous, so insidious, because its based up
selfishness, that is why. Its 'my' own private affair, I can do what I like, its immoral
for anyone to coerce anyone in matters of sexuality, its my freedom! its me, me , me
me! Me;ism of the worst kind. Does the adulterer think of himself or his family when
he is committing adultery, no way, he's thinking about himself!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
It's only weak to you because you subscribe to some ancient Biblical fairy tale, as a result you find yourself staying up to 5:30am arguing with people you've never met trying to justify your beliefs to yourself.

I don't believe your Biblical crap Rob. I live in the 21st Century, as a result i don't need to subscribe to barbaric garbage that was writt tion. The sooner the fundamentalist mindset is gone the better.

Have a nice evening. 🙂

The sooner the fundamentalist mindset is gone the better.

on the contrary, the sooner this a-moral meism is gone the better for everyone
involved, I mean it, the horror is too much. too many broken families, to many broken
hearts, but its ok, 'eat and drink for tomorrow we may die! Me, me me me me!

thank you, I will and you too, but remember, stay clean!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so what.

it's the whole point of this discussion. it's too bad you don't even understand your own thesis.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
it's the whole point of this discussion. it's too bad you don't even understand your own thesis.

its too bad that i had to root out so much irrelevant drivel in order to hold a simple
question, set in its own parameters, up for examination.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
adultery can be two married couples so there is no break up, clearly you have no
recourse to any present day scientific data with which to back up your ludicrous claims,
shall we look at the data, shall we? It exactly this type of a-moral attitude served up
with side dishes of, 'it curbs our freedom' and 'its our own private affair', which has ...[text shortened]... avoury items like that really are personal and by all accounts are best
kept to themselves.

adultery can be two unmarried couples -- no family break up there so your argument is destroyed.

adultery can be married couples who come to an agreement to share themselves with other married couples (swingers). -- once again no family break up and your argument is completely demolished.

seriously, is that all you have? it's kind of pathetic that you're sticking to your defunct arguments like a broken record.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so that means we practice a morality which encourages their manifestation does it,
FAIL!

no. it means nasty things are natural and good things are natural. the what is "natural" argument is a nonstarter.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its too bad that i had to root out so much irrelevant drivel in order to hold a simple
question, set in its own parameters, up for examination.

you haven't done that. what you're doing is asking a question, getting a reply, not liking the reply and changing the question, getting a new reply, not liking the new reply and changing the question again.

you're crying foul when legitimate goals have been scored against you questions.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
adultery can be two unmarried couples -- no family break up there so your argument is destroyed.

adultery can be married couples who come to an agreement to share themselves with other married couples (swingers). -- once again no family break up and your argument is completely demolished.

seriously, is that all you have? it's kind of pathetic that you're sticking to your defunct arguments like a broken record.

its better than, its moral because i think it is.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
you haven't done that. what you're doing is asking a question, getting a reply, not liking the reply and changing the question, getting a new reply, not liking the new reply and changing the question again.

you're crying foul when legitimate goals have been scored against you questions.

more irrelevant drivel.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
you haven't done that. what you're doing is asking a question, getting a reply, not liking the reply and changing the question, getting a new reply, not liking the new reply and changing the question again.

you're crying foul when legitimate goals have been scored against you questions.

yes because 'i think it is', is really legitimate, unassailable logic, for sure,
incontrovertible proofs, rock solid.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes because 'i think it is', is really legitimate.

i know, that's the argument you've been using to justify your position all along. but you don't want to hold the same standards to anybody else.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
i know, that's the argument you've been using to justify your position all along. but you don't want to hold the same standards to anybody else.

wrong, i was not attempting to portray anything from my own originality!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
wrong, i was not attempting to portray anything from my own originality!

indeed. there is nothing original about your arguments.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its better than, its moral because i think it is.

In other words, it's wrong if a human says it is but if your god says it is, it's ok, it's immoral.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
wrong, i was not attempting to portray anything from my own originality!

Don't pay any attention to these atheists. I too believe there are
sexual acts that we should not do even if we have the freedom to
do them. I think I agree with you on more than you think I do.
The main disagreement I have with you is that you deny the Deity
of Christ and the resurrection of His body after three days and three
nights as He prophecied. I can not recognize you as a Christian as
long as you don't believe Christ.