| Subject: Yes I am |
Author:
Duane
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 08/27/04 2:51am
In reply to:
Pastor Moorao
's message, "You are one silly man" on 08/25/04 10:37pm
Pastor Moorao:
>But you should know that evolutionism can cause
>homosexuality and it is a sin.
OK, so let's, for the sake of argument, assume one thing.
1) Homosexuality is bad. (somehow - it doesn't matter how. I'm conceding, for this argument, that it is)
Now, given this assumption, you'll have to clearly define what you mean by "evolutionism." I assume you mean one of the following, but I'm not sure which:
Pastor Moorao says Evolutionism is:
1) The belief in biological evolution
or
2) The fact of biological evolution
Since I'd guess that you don't believe in the fact that biological evolution occurs, I'm going to guess that #1 is the case.
So, as I understand it, your argument is the following:
"The fact that some people believe in biological evolution causes some people (which may or may not be the same people that believe in biological evolution) to act in a homosexual manner, which is bad. Therefore, the fact that some people believe that biological evolution occur is bad."
OK. Let's now assume, for a moment, that the enlightened ones have overwhelmed the earth, and that I'm the last living being that believes in biological evolution, flying in the face of all of God's Word, choosing to believe those dirty scientists and their filthy lies.
Am I the sole cause of all homosexuality?
What if everyone who acts in a homosexual manner actually doesn't believe in biological evolution? Is their homosexual behavior caused by some other group of people, simply because this other group of people believe certain things?
Or are you trying to say that people who don't believe in biological evolution probably won't act in a homosexual manner?
It's this last one that I'm inclined to believe. And, as a matter of fact, I think I might be inclined to agree with you about it! But, you've drawn a conclusion that our assumptions don't support.
Here's a lesson from clinical medicine - all the time we're looking for "associations" between a behavior or condition and a disease, in the hopes that we can figure out, or at least help prevent certain diseases.
You always hear things like, "Eating hot dogs with mustard has been linked with eye cancer!!!" or, "Watching television frequently has been shown to be associated with diabetes!" This would be like saying, "Homosexual behavior is somehow linked to the belief in biological evolution."
All these "links" or "associations" are saying is that people who do behavior X are statistically more likely to have condition Y. Showing an association does NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT mean that X causes Y.
It would clearly be absurd to say that the act of sitting in front of the television somehow is the direct cause of diabetes. Do the photons coming from the TV attack your pancreas so you can't produce insulin correctly? Do they fry your liver so it can no longer process sugar?
NO! But you could probably guess and (this is very important) OBJECTIVELY DEMONSTRATE that people who sit in front of a TV more are less active, and consume more junk food, which we KNOW (as in, "we know the actual biochemical mechanism that causes") can cause certain kinds of diabetes.
In the same way, I'd probably say that people who are homosexual are less likely to believe in Creationism, and more likely to believe in Evolutionism. But one does not "cause" the other. I'd guess that since belief in Creationism (i.e., rejection of Evolutionism) almost requires belief in a being who condemns homosexuality, people who engage in homosexual behavior would be less likely to choose to believe that their day-to-day existence is damning them to eternal metaphysical torture.
Your statement is logically inconstent, regardless of belief system.
Duane
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 