Not to mention condoning or actively ordering/facilitating the murder of children in response to insults (II Kings 2:23-24), the total extermination of a group of people (Joshua 6-8) and the enslavement of women and children (Deuteronomy 20:13-14)
Also, I have provided significant evidence of in-vitro sexuality determination that mac seems to have completely ignored...
According to mac, as long as the majority believe it, it's okay to base laws on religion.
The last time I had a pulse that was how democracy worked.
Ever heard of the phrase "tyranny of the majority"?
In a democracy, the majority rules. Our whole system of goverment of based on religion. Our founding fathers were very religious.
In a democracy, the majority rules. Our whole system of goverment of based on religion. Our founding fathers were very religious.
Yeah, we both know that there are protections for the minorities in the US and that they don't negate Democracy.
In a democracy, the majority rules.
Our whole system of goverment of based on religion.
Our founding fathers were very religious.
We are not a democracy, we are a representative republic. Democracy is nothing but mob rules, and is a bad form of government.
And our government is not based on religion at all, you are fooling yourself if you think it is, and our founding fathers were not as religious as you think.
Yeah, we both know that there are protections for the minorities in the US and that they don't negate Democracy.
I haven't intentionally ignored you...can you rehash it?
It has been proven that, in certain cases at least, there was a direct correlation between fraternal birth order and homosexuality, meaning that in these cases, sexuality was determined in-vitro. Again, I point you to fraternal birth order.
Link
Direct quote:
The fraternal birth order effect is the strongest known predictor of sexual orientation. According to several studies, each older brother increases a man's odds of developing a homosexual orientation by 28–48%.
Bogaert (2006) replicated the fraternal birth order effect on male sexual orientation, in a sample including both biological siblings and adopted siblings. Only the older biological brothers influenced sexual orientation; there was no effect of adopted siblings. Bogaert concluded that his finding strongly suggest a prenatal origin to the fraternal birth-order effect.
In a democracy, the majority rules. Our whole system of goverment of based on religion. Our founding fathers were very religious.
In this case the equal protection clause comes into play. imho.
I wouldn't go as far as to say our Founding Fathers weren't all that religious (they were all individuals, some were, some weren't, some supported the doctrine of secular government but still believed in the value of Christian ideals)
But clearly our Constitution had more to do with Lockean classical liberalism and the Roman Republic than anything else.
My argument, quoted for convenience:
Is it just me or is Mac and religion getting a smack down in this thread? More so than normal that is....
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.
Because it's unnecessary at this point. It's definitely something I counsel on a personal level though.
Everything I've read about fraternal birth order previously cites the influence of older brothers outside the womb. That would make it learned. This study claiming it to be prenatal influence is a one off, and appears to have some inconsistencies with it's methods.
I'm out-numbered, here, for sure. And religion seems to be getting the majority of attention in this thread.
We are not a democracy, we are a representative republic. Democracy is nothing but mob rules, and is a bad form of government.
And our government is not based on religion at all, you are fooling yourself if you think it is, and our founding fathers were not as religious as you think.
And the earth is not round.
And the earth is not round.
That's actually what a lot religious people argued after scientists disproved it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?