sino:
@tintingz,

You have had many brothers here being concerned about you, what must have happened, what caused your disbelieve in Allah (SWT) and up till this thread, you haven't been coherent, your logic is all over the place, you can't answer questions posed to you in order to establish your convictions, you rather resort to mockery and ridicule. This portrays you in a very bad light. It is an open secret that your best answer to the cause and purpose of the universe and life is "I don't know" (You may wish to change the pronoun as you want), and that isn't a good point to argue from, one thing which "I don't know" should teach you is to be humble, quiet, open-minded and ready to learn! I have not seen a student in class, after not being capable to answer a question, starts to argue with another student who has been able to provide an answer. If the answer is not convincing to you, do you have a better one?!

Lol, I'm only pointing out the absurdity in believing in your God, no one knows what caused the universe, even religions are conflicting as what caused the universe.

You haven't provided evidence how Allah is the cause of the universe and not Brahma.

It's better to be Agnostic to that position than believing in some ancient mythologies.

Now, a good example of your incoherence and poor logic is the issue of empathy. You claimed empathy is responsible for morality, it is innate albeit subjective, you claimed that objective morality is what should be ideal, and I asked how would this be achieved knowing fully well that this empathy, as you claimed, is under the control of society. You gave me the UN as the answer, does this show you have a clue of what you are talking about?!

Omg!

Empathy is natural, it's nature, it evolve just like our intellects, how the society understand humans and it values in the past is different to our era. Slavery was seen as normal practice in the past even during your Prophets time, but humans keep evolving in intellects and the practice of slavery was later abolished, it's a criminal offenses to engage in slave trade in this era.

The UN and other consensus organizations are example of how we evolve in moral codes, there's nothing like UN in the past, so many wars were fought.

Again, still on empathy, I asked since it is still subjective, why should you fault anyone, since you have already made a case for homos, who is attracted to homosexuality, and I used your logic to also make a case for a murderer etc. But instead of answering this, you started defining empathy, hello! is empathy not responsible for morality again?! Okay, the murderer lacks empathy, Why? Is it not innate?! What happened to the society's control?! What I want you to tell me is what is the consequences of doing things with lack of empathy, if I can always get away with it?! Is it possible for someone with empathy to act otherwise?!

Ghost of cseazer!

Empathy is innate, society set laws and it changes from time to time, it's not stagnant like the laws in your holy book. Someone who murder lack empathy, it's a murder case.

Imagine you Time travel back to the stone age, observe how they behave and merge it with your intellects, that explain evolution.

Again, you based the shari'ah law on the subjective view of the homosexual, if we are to do this for all actions, we are only going to be following our desires, each individual would look at every action done to him with this subjectiveness, and there wouldn't be anything as morality talk more of objective morality! A student would look at the teacher as being immoral for failing him, regardless of what he had done! So how do you apply your empathy when you have limited it to yourself?!

Your pseudo-logic is alarming.

A teacher has empathy, a student has empathy, if the student fail, this means the student score is poor, this is a regulations set by the school which is known and agree by all students, why should the student feel the teacher is wicked when he knows he performed poorly? If the student is so sure he/she did well, there are provions set down to review examination scripts.

Now let's reverse it, the student put himself in the teacher's position, marking script and grading it, would it be justifiable to pass does who performed poorly, what standard is he portraying, it's even risky as he can loose his job. If a student reason this way then he's using his empathy.

Mind you, because I know you never reasoned my post with regards to Shari'ah law, I gave the adverse consequences of homosexuality to the family system and even humanity! I told you that since homosexuality isn't in the way we are designed to function, a true case of mental/psychological issue would be treated accordingly, but of course, that is not what you want to hear.

Where is it stated in the Quran to treat homosexuals as mental/psychological issue? The report of homosexuals killed in muslim countries, how did that happen?

FYI, the cause of homosexuality is not certainly known, it also has biological factors.

Scientists do not know what determines an individual's sexual orientation, but they theorize that it is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences, and do not view it as a choice. They favor biologically-based theories, which point to genetic factors, the early uterine environment, both, or the inclusion of genetic and social factors. Hypotheses for the impact of the post-natal social environment on sexual orientation, however, are weak, especially for males.
While some people believe that homosexual activity is unnatural, scientific research has shown that homosexuality is a normal and natural variation in human sexuality and is not in and of itself a source of negative psychological effects.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality

There are many natural phenomena that's not suppose to be part of our natural world, chaotic phenomena is still part of nature, there's nothing we can do about it.

"From the standpoints of individual health, public health and social order, participating in homosexual activity could be viewed as dangerous to society and incompatible with full health." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2762461

Lol, Paul Cameron made this report in the 80s which was criticized and debunked by Scientists, infact he's known to have errors and lies in his reports.

> http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron.html

> An APA spokesperson told The Boston Globe in 2005, "We are concerned about Dr. Cameron because we do believe that his methodology is weak."

> 1986 the American Sociological Association passed a resolution stating, “The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research.”This was based on a report from the ASA's Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Cameron

Next time know the background status and latest report of the person you use for your argument.

There are many studies that shows the above as well, and like I said, in Islam, death penalty is a preventive measure, it wasn't instituted to celebrate destroying lives, for the law was instituted to protect life, not only yours, but everyone, and also the family, hence the society and humanity in general, and it is never the responsibility of an individual, rather it is the responsibility of the State!

Lol, killing homosexuals is protecting lifes, what an irony!

The fact is that you do not actually understand Islam and what it represents, you are not open-minded enough to accept reasons other than what you already believe and continuously want to believe about God/Islam! You are here just to make fun of God, Islam and Muslims as well as other religions, you do not have anything better to offer anyone here, you obviously do not have any sense of morality to know that you do not go to people's house and start insulting the occupants without any tangible reason or worse, because you feel you can!

Someone that said his evidence is base on his beliefs is open-minded, right?

I'm simply presenting the absurdity of Religions and believing in a fairy master in the sky, if you find it as mockery that's your cup of tea.

You have also projected my position with so many fallacious statement, I can post them if you want.

Do not for a second think my responses are meant for you to believe in God, it is, after all, you choice! Islam does not force belief on anyone!

But then Hell exist to burn people eternally for thier choices your God caused... Contradictions upon contradictions.

sino:


Unfortunately, you are right! And I do think it is general too, it really speaks volume of the quality of youths we have in this country! May Allah assist us.

Ameen

tintingz:
Lol, I'm only pointing out the absurdity in believing in your God, no one knows what caused the universe, even religions are conflicting as what caused the universe.

You haven't provided evidence how Allah is the cause of the universe and not Brahma.

It's better to be Agnostic to that position than believing in some ancient mythologies.

Okay, you are right! Your better answer is that you do not have an answer! And I absolutely agree!

tintingz:

Omg!

Empathy is natural, it's nature, it evolve just like our intellects, how the society understand humans and it values in the past is different to our era. Slavery was seen as normal practice in the past even during your Prophets time, but humans keep evolving in intellects and the practice of slavery was later abolished, it's a criminal offenses to engage in slave trade in this era.

The UN and other consensus organizations are example of how we evolve in moral codes, there's nothing like UN in the past, so many wars were fought.

So the slave masters lacked empathy back then or their empathy was not fully developed?! While the slaves where indifferent, they accepted that being slaves is good and normal too?! Did the slave trade end due to sudden realization by the slave masters that they now have empathy?!

And after the establishment of the UN, the world is now at peace?! America, a member of the UN, invaded Iraq based on lies, killed millions of innocent and children, and the UN did what exactly?! I ask again, what would be the consequences for not towing the line of this consensus objective morality?! What happens if I can get away with murder or any other crime?! Can this consensus stop the evil that men do?! Since life is all about survival of the fittest, why should anyone care about what they do to survive?!

Bro, what you have just written here only give credence to the fact that those who control the society dictates what morality should be and not empathy!

tintingz:

Ghost of cseazer!

Empathy is innate, society set laws and it changes from time to time, it's not stagnant like the laws in your holy book. Someone who murder lack empathy, it's a murder case.

Imagine you Time travel back to the stone age, observe how they behave and merge it with your intellects, that explain evolution.

So you are saying in essence, that regardless of your innate personal empathy, which dictates your morality, the society can overrule it?! SO IF A SOCIETY SAYS THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS EVIL, WHY SHOULD YOU FAULT THEM?! Again, is it possible to act without empathy?! One would have thought that, the way you place emphasis on empathy, one can never go against it, it is all the same in everyone and it can never be influenced!

You have only been able to show that you follow what the society dictates as moral regardless of what you think/feel should be moral, and you should know that this moral dictates are majorly influenced by those who control the apparatus of the society! This would explain the slave trade and other social construct of the past!

tintingz:

Your pseudo-logic is alarming.

A teacher has empathy, a student has empathy, if the student fail, this means the student score is poor, this is a regulations set by the school which is known and agree by all students, why should the student feel the teacher is wicked when he knows he performed poorly? If the student is so sure he/she did well, there are provions set down to review examination scripts.

Now let's reverse it, the student put himself in the teacher's position, marking script and grading it, would it be justifiable to pass does who performed poorly, what standard is he portraying, it's even risky as he can loose his job. If a student reason this way then he's using his empathy.

Read carefully, there is a law in the land, legislated to help promote the family system, protect life and sustain humanity, the law has been able to establish the fact that what you do is not normal. You know fully well of this law, yet flaunt it. Why should you now feel the law is wicked?! If you are so sure what you are doing is normal, it shouldn't be difficult to prove! Is the male sexual organ meant for the anus?! What sort of evolution or progress would make you believe that you should use your head to walk?!

Now let's reverse it, you are to legislate laws to protect the family system, protect life and sustain humanity, would it be justifiable to allow those who pose danger to the afore-mentioned exhibit their abnormal activities in the society you want to protect?! Wouldn't it be reasonable to make such abnormal activity unattractive in the said society?!

tintingz:

Where is it stated in the Quran to treat homosexuals as mental/psychological issue? The report of homosexuals killed in muslim countries, how did that happen?

FYI, the cause of homosexuality is not certainly known, it also has biological factors.

Scientists do not know what determines an individual's sexual orientation, but they theorize that it is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences, and do not view it as a choice. They favor biologically-based theories, which point to genetic factors, the early uterine environment, both, or the inclusion of genetic and social factors. Hypotheses for the impact of the post-natal social environment on sexual orientation, however, are weak, especially for males.
While some people believe that homosexual activity is unnatural, scientific research has shown that homosexuality is a normal and natural variation in human sexuality and is not in and of itself a source of negative psychological effects.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality

There are many natural phenomena that's not suppose to be part of our natural world, chaotic phenomena is still part of nature, there's nothing we can do about it.

Islam establishes that one who is mentally disturbed is not responsible for their acts, hence no punishment is established on them, until they gain sanity. Mental health like any other health issues are treated by the professionals accordingly. Also, before anyone is killed by an Islamic State, incontrovertible evidence must be established!

As I had pointed out, not until few decades ago, it is widely accepted that homosexuality is indeed a psychological/mental illness, but due to the society's "evolution" it is now being accepted, and pushed by those who control the society! They have employed all the apparatus to influence you, the reason you are bringing the above inconclusive theories! You sure know that it is wrong to put things where they do not belong, you do not have any excuses or advantages for this behaviour other than satisfying selfish desires! But since the society says it is normal (without conclusive science), you accept it. Even if it is proved to be genetic, is down syndrome not also genetic or any other genetic diseases?! What if scientist can prove psychopaths lack empathy due to genetics, or environmental factors, do we accept them as normal too?! And would it justify their actions?! And by the way, if someone lacks empathy, whose fault is it?!

tintingz:

Lol, Paul Cameron made this report in the 80s which was criticized and debunked by Scientists, infact he's known to have errors and lies in his reports.

> http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron.html

> An APA spokesperson told The Boston Globe in 2005, "We are concerned about Dr. Cameron because we do believe that his methodology is weak."

> 1986 the American Sociological Association passed a resolution stating, “The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research.”This was based on a report from the ASA's Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Cameron

Next time know the background status and latest report of the person you use for your argument.

The article I presented is still on a reputable peer reviewed journal, that one of the author was criticized doesn't affect the paper, else it would have been withdrawn! Also, there are other researches that corroborates the conclusion from that paper! When you understand what it means for your paper to be published on such platform, then you would come with a better response than the above!

From 2002-2011, the annual number of HIV diagnoses decreased in persons with infection attributed to injection drug use or to heterosexual contact (Table 1). Diagnoses attributed to male-to-male sexual contact remained stable overall, increasing among males aged 13-24, 45-54, and 55 years or older, and decreasing among males aged 35-44 years (Table 2). The largest change (132.5%; EAPC = 10.5) was observed among males aged 13-24 years.

Johnson AS, Hall HI, Hu X, Lansky A, Holtgrave DR, Mermin J. Trends in Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States, 2002-2011. JAMA. 2014;312(4):432–434. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.8534

An extensive study in the Netherlands undermines the assumption that homophobia is the cause of increased psychiatric illness among gays and lesbians. The Dutch have been considerably more accepting of same-sex relationships than other Western countries — as evidenced by the fact that they have recognized a legal right to same-sex marriage since December of 2000. Consequently, a high rate of psychiatric disease associated with homosexual behavior in the Netherlands cannot be attributed to social rejection and homophobia alone.

[b]The Dutch study, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry, did indeed find a high rate of psychiatric disease associated with same-sex behavior. Compared to controls who had no homosexual experience in the 12 months prior to the interview, males who had any homosexual contact within that time period were much more likely to experience major depression, bipolar disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia and obsessive compulsive disorder. Females with any homosexual contact within the previous 12 months were more often diagnosed with major depression, social phobia or alcohol dependence. In fact, those with a history of homosexual contact had higher rates of nearly all psychiatric pathologies measured in the study.5 The researchers found “that homosexuality is not only associated with mental health problems during adolescence and early adulthood, as has been suggested, but also in later life.”6 Researchers actually fear that methodological features of “the study might underestimate the differences between homosexual and heterosexual people.”[/b]

The Dutch researchers concluded, “this study offers evidence that homosexuality is associated with a higher prevalence of psychiatric disorders. The outcomes are in line with findings from earlier studies in which less rigorous designs have been employed.” The researchers offered no opinion as to whether homosexual behavior causes psychiatric disorders, or whether it is the result of psychiatric disorders.

Source

You may seek the criticism of all the authors of the above researches, be my guest!

tintingz:

Lol, killing homosexuals is protecting lifes, what an irony!

Someone that said his evidence is base on his beliefs is open-minded, right?

I'm simply presenting the absurdity of Religions and believing in a fairy master in the sky, if you find it as mockery that's your cup of tea.

You have also projected my position with so many fallacious statement, I can post them if you want.

But then Hell exist to burn people eternally for thier choices your God caused... Contradictions upon contradictions.

Why do you think stringent punishment are made for some crimes?! If you are a reasonable fellow, would you commit a crime when you know the consequences?! And if you do commit the crime, would you do such in the open?! Would the society not be safer?! Your answers explains the protection of life & lives!

What is evidence, and what is belief?

What is the purpose of being open-minded?!

"Let not men think there is no truth but in the sciences that they study or the books that they read. To prejudge other men’s notions before we
have looked into them is not to show their darkness but to put out our own eyes." (Locke, 1966, p. 38)

"Believing at the outset that a particular view is correct (or mistaken) is not inconsistent with a genuine desire for knowledge, provided that we regard the belief we hold as revisable in the light of emerging evidence, endeavor to ensure that the belief in question does not distort our inquiries, and remain prepared to adjust our initial opinion in accordance with the findings." (Hare, W. (2011), Helping open-mindedness flourish. Journal of Thought p.12)

Thus far, you are yet to provide evidences with enough merit for me to revise my beliefs, you yourself claimed to be agnostic about the fundamental questions posed earlier, you make mockery of my beliefs because you are unwilling to seek the truth about my evidences! Making mockery doesn't have any intellectual benefit, it only portrays you as being ignorant and closed-minded!

Projections?! please post them let us see!

You shouldn't be bothered about hell, let those who profess faith bother about such! But one thing you can never deny is that you are definitely responsible for your own decisions and actions!

sino:


Okay, you are right! Your better answer is that you do not have an answer! And I absolutely agree!

Neither your fairy book have answers.

So the slave masters lacked empathy back then or their empathy was not fully developed?! While the slaves where indifferent, they accepted that being slaves is good and normal too?! Did the slave trade end due to sudden realization by the slave masters that they now have empathy?!

Slavery is well practice and seen as normal in the past, even those who were taken as slaves had no choice than to submit to thier masters or suffer and killed, the people experienced slavery and it triggered thier empathy.

Slavery ended when humans started understanding themselves and value human life.

And after the establishment of the UN, the world is now at peace?! America, a member of the UN, invaded Iraq based on lies, killed millions of innocent and children, and the UN did what exactly?! I ask again, what would be the consequences for not towing the line of this consensus objective morality?! What happens if I can get away with murder or any other crime?! Can this consensus stop the evil that men do?! Since life is all about survival of the fittest, why should anyone care about what they do to survive?!

Wars are reduced when UN was created, after WW2 which result to many people killed, UN had to be created to stop it. So even when two countries are having grudges UN is there to settle it. If UN wasn't created what would have happen by now between US and North Korea?

UN and other consensus body can't eradicate the evil your God created, since your God is not capable stoping evil, it's left for we humans to do our best to control evil.

If you get away with any crime nothing or something may happen, life is unfair to us, we're not in a perfect world even good people suffer, and even after death good disbelievers will be thrown to hell by Allah, Muslims will be thrown to hell by Yahweh, so my friend the world is not fair to us even in your deluded afterlife, just deal with.

Bro, what you have just written here only give credence to the fact that those who control the society dictates what morality should be and not empathy!

Laws are set by legislators when the people are craving for it, or you forget the Abraham Lincoln's quote "Government for the people, by the people, of the people".

Although in the past during monarchy rule, the kings were seen as gods, they believe the kings have the absolute moral and judge but thanks to our early thinkers who open the way to enlightenment.

So you are saying in essence, that regardless of your innate personal empathy, which dictates your morality, the society can overrule it?! SO IF A SOCIETY SAYS THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS EVIL, WHY SHOULD YOU FAULT THEM?! Again, is it possible to act without empathy?! One would have thought that, the way you place emphasis on empathy, one can never go against it, it is all the same in everyone and it can never be influenced!

There are societies that still see homosexuality as evil and even kill them, these are mostly religious and African countries, developed countries are legalizing homosexuality because they are advanced.

Society make laws, society varies in laws, this is why I said morality is subjective in reality.

Morality is still something complex to us, there's even something called moral dilemma.

You have only been able to show that you follow what the society dictates as moral regardless of what you think/feel should be moral, and you should know that this moral dictates are majorly influenced by those who control the apparatus of the society! This would explain the slave trade and other social construct of the past!

I don't follow "all" what society dictate when it comes to morality, e.g I'm against the view of homosexuality in Nigeria law.

We have activist for reasons.

Read carefully, there is a law in the land, legislated to help promote the family system, protect life and sustain humanity, the law has been able to establish the fact that what you do is not normal. You know fully well of this law, yet flaunt it. Why should you now feel the law is wicked?! If you are so sure what you are doing is normal, it shouldn't be difficult to prove! Is the male sexual organ meant for the anus?! What sort of evolution or progress would make you believe that you should use your head to walk?!

We have activist that are against some laws, the Constitution legalized activism.

Nature does not mean all positive things, nature is both negative and positive, natural disasters are negative, some animals are negative, some region on earth are negative, diseases, defects are negative etc. Infact there are natural phenomena we don't even know it cause or function, so why is homosexuality not included? Science has shown homosexuality is Normal and natural and has no basis of negative psychological effect.

Now let's reverse it, you are to legislate laws to protect the family system, protect life and sustain humanity, would it be justifiable to allow those who pose danger to the afore-mentioned exhibit their abnormal activities in the society you want to protect?! Wouldn't it be reasonable to make such abnormal activity unattractive in the said society?!

As long as the actions are not harmful to the society, I have no problem with it.

Islam establishes that one who is mentally disturbed is not responsible for their acts, hence no punishment is established on them, until they gain sanity. Mental health like any other health issues are treated by the professionals accordingly. Also, before anyone is killed by an Islamic State, incontrovertible evidence must be established!

So can you tell me how apostates, homosexuality, adulterers are harmful and threats to the society, are they hurting you?

So where does the Quran and hadith states how to treat homosexuality, what caused it, why are Homosexual behavior among animals?

And the homosexuals that were killed in Muslim countries why are they not treated, why killing these humans?

As I had pointed out, not until few decades ago, it is widely accepted that homosexuality is indeed a psychological/mental illness, but due to the society's "evolution" it is now being accepted, and pushed by those who control the society! They have employed all the apparatus to influence you, the reason you are bringing the above inconclusive theories! You sure know that it is wrong to put things where they do not belong, you do not have any excuses or advantages for this behaviour other than satisfying selfish desires! But since the society says it is normal (without conclusive science), you accept it. Even if it is proved to be genetic, is down syndrome not also genetic or any other genetic diseases?! What if scientist can prove psychopaths lack empathy due to genetics, or environmental factors, do we accept them as normal too?! And would it justify their actions?! And by the way, if someone lacks empathy, whose fault is it?!

Homosexuality was seen as mental illness in the past because the research were not properly done, I quoted that out in a link in my previous post.

Science have shown Homosexuality is normal and natural and doesn't have negative psychological effect.

The article I presented is still on a reputable peer reviewed journal, that one of the author was criticized doesn't affect the paper, else it would have been withdrawn! Also, there are other researches that corroborates the conclusion from that paper! When you understand what it means for your paper to be published on such platform, then you would come with a better response than the above!

From 2002-2011, the annual number of HIV diagnoses decreased in persons with infection attributed to injection drug use or to heterosexual contact (Table 1). Diagnoses attributed to male-to-male sexual contact remained stable overall, increasing among males aged 13-24, 45-54, and 55 years or older, and decreasing among males aged 35-44 years (Table 2). The largest change (132.5%; EAPC = 10.5) was observed among males aged 13-24 years.

All these are irrelevant, research changes and evolve, the person that made the claim Paul Cameron has been condemned, disown by the association of sociology committee for poor and weak methodology which he published, he's not a sociologist, what then is your argument?

An extensive study in the Netherlands undermines the assumption that homophobia is the cause of increased psychiatric illness among gays and lesbians. The Dutch have been considerably more accepting of same-sex relationships than other Western countries — as evidenced by the fact that they have recognized a legal right to same-sex marriage since December of 2000. Consequently, a high rate of psychiatric disease associated with homosexual behavior in the Netherlands cannot be attributed to social rejection and homophobia alone.

[b]The Dutch study, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry, did indeed find a high rate of psychiatric disease associated with same-sex behavior. Compared to controls who had no homosexual experience in the 12 months prior to the interview, males who had any homosexual contact within that time period were much more likely to experience major depression, bipolar disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia and obsessive compulsive disorder. Females with any homosexual contact within the previous 12 months were more often diagnosed with major depression, social phobia or alcohol dependence. In fact, those with a history of homosexual contact had higher rates of nearly all psychiatric pathologies measured in the study.5 The researchers found “that homosexuality is not only associated with mental health problems during adolescence and early adulthood, as has been suggested, but also in later life.”6 Researchers actually fear that methodological features of “the study might underestimate the differences between homosexual and heterosexual people.”[/b]

The Dutch researchers concluded, “this study offers evidence that homosexuality is associated with a higher prevalence of psychiatric disorders. The outcomes are in line with findings from earlier studies in which less rigorous designs have been employed.” The researchers offered no opinion as to whether homosexual behavior causes psychiatric disorders, or whether it is the result of psychiatric disorders.

Source

You may seek the criticism of all the authors of the above researches, be my guest!

The quote below is from an authorized world body.

Twenty two years ago, on May 17, the World Health Assembly removed homosexuality from the list of mental disorders when it approved a new version of the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10).

"Since homosexuality is not a disorder or a disease, it does not require a cure. There is no medical indication for changing sexual orientation," said PAHO Director Dr. Mirta Roses Periago.

The PAHO statement notes that there is a professional consensus that homosexuality is a natural variation of human sexuality and cannot be regarded as a pathological condition.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120523040848/http://new.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6803&Itemid=1926

Some diseases maybe linked mostly with homosexuals but research have change.

Why do you think stringent punishment are made for some crimes?! If you are a reasonable fellow, would you commit a crime when you know the consequences?! And if you do commit the crime, would you do such in the open?! Would the society not be safer?! Your answers explains the protection of life & lives!

We're talking about killing homosexuals, adulterers, apostates. Is killing them protection of life and saving life? Is this not irony?

What is evidence, and what is belief?

What is the purpose of being open-minded?!

"Let not men think there is no truth but in the sciences that they study or the books that they read. To prejudge other men’s notions before we
have looked into them is not to show their darkness but to put out our own eyes." (Locke, 1966, p. 38)

"Believing at the outset that a particular view is correct (or mistaken) is not inconsistent with a genuine desire for knowledge, provided that we regard the belief we hold as revisable in the light of emerging evidence, endeavor to ensure that the belief in question does not distort our inquiries, and remain prepared to adjust our initial opinion in accordance with the findings." (Hare, W. (2011), Helping open-mindedness flourish. Journal of Thought p.12)

Lol, what you posted is the opposite of your premise.

The underline made it clearer.

What you posted is like how Science predict and assume things then do findings about it.

You said evidence is base from your beliefs, this is not quite right! Evidence proves a belief or support a belief.

What's belief?

> Belief : an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.

> Belief is the state of mind in which a person thinks something to be the case with or without there being empirical evidence to prove that something is the case with factual certainty.

Belief is just a state of mind or opinion that something is true with or without evidence, if you base evidence from beliefs then anything can be true even without empirical evidence or when your evidence is not even an evidence or proof. E.g Superman exist because there are lots of comics, books about Superman, that's my evidence from my beliefs.

So how will someone with such belief be open minded?

Thus far, you are yet to provide evidences with enough merit for me to revise my beliefs, you yourself claimed to be agnostic about the fundamental questions posed earlier, you make mockery of my beliefs because you are unwilling to seek the truth about my evidences! Making mockery doesn't have any intellectual benefit, it only portrays you as being ignorant and closed-minded!

Can you provide evidence Allah exist being the creator and not Brahma?

Show me that Allah is the one outside the universe.

Projections?! please post them let us see!

Some of your projections against me are,

1. I don't have sense of morality
2. No one cares about my good deeds
3. I'm hopeless

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.

Tu quoque or the appeal to hypocrisy is an informal fallacy that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with its conclusion(s).

Ad hominem, short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

You shouldn't be bothered about hell, let those who profess faith bother about such! But one thing you can never deny is that you are definitely responsible for your own decisions and actions!

You should be bothered about Yahweh throwing you inside hell forever!

^^^

When God wants to punish someone He gives them respite and hardens their heart. You singled out NK as positive indication of UN creation while you ignored all the muslim countries they destroyed but same UN did nothing to stop it?. You are incredible really.

I didn't bother to reply your post on the other thread cuz we would be roaming around. The more you are engaged the more your misguidance aggravated. This is evidence of your pending destructive ideology.

Empiree:
^^^

When God wants to punish someone He gives them respite and hardens their heart.

Can you explain this further?

You singled out NK as positive indication of UN creation while you ignored all the muslim countries they destroyed but same UN did nothing to stop it?. You are incredible really.

I didn't bother to reply your post on the other thread cuz we would be roaming around. The more you are engaged the more your misguidance aggravated. This is evidence of your pending destructive ideology.

They destroyed all Muslim countries how?

Most wars, crisis in Muslims countries is as result of Religion ideology mixed with politics, UN are not ominipotent, they are not perfect, why not ask your perfect absolute good God why he didn't do anything about the evil he caused.

tintingz:
Can you explain this further?

They destroyed all Muslim countries how?

I am absolutely not obligated. It's self explanatory

Most wars, crisis in Muslims countries is as result of Religion ideology mixed with politics, UN are not ominipotent, they are not perfect, why not ask your perfect all-good God why he didn't do anything about the evil he caused.

oh now UN is not perfect when it comes to muslims. But perfect if they involved non-Muslims. You are noted

Empiree:
I am absolutely not obligated. It's self explanatory .

oh now UN is not perfect when it comes to muslims. But perfect if they involved non-Muslims. You are noted

UN have intervene in stopping many wars including some wars in Muslim countries, but most recent crisis still comes from Muslim countries.

It's not easy to end crisis influenced by Religion ideology, UN are not perfect, they also err.

tintingz:
UN have intervene in stopping many wars including some wars in Muslim countries, but most recent crisis still comes from Muslim countries.

It's not easy to end crisis influenced by Religion ideology, UN are not perfect, they also err.

Help yourself. It is only 2 mins. I am sure you don't know better than her for claiming religion(islam in your view) is the cause of ME problems.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7q-71J8Exw

Well, I have read through your responses, in order not to be going in circles, I have only selected your posts that needs my response...

tintingz:


Homosexuality was seen as mental illness in the past because the research were not properly done, I quoted that out in a link in my previous post.

Science have shown Homosexuality is normal and natural and doesn't have negative psychological effect.

Please provide the scientific evidence that shows that homosexuality is normal...

tintingz:

All these are irrelevant, research changes and evolve, the person that made the claim Paul Cameron has been condemned, disown by the association of sociology committee for poor and weak methodology which he published, he's not a sociologist, what then is your argument?

I'm sure you didn't read properly, go back to my quote and read the reference there! This isn't about Paul Cameron, but facts with regards to increase in HIV/AIDS amongst homosexuals, if that is not a risk to public health, I wonder what is...

tintingz:

The quote below is from an authorized world body.

Twenty two years ago, on May 17, the World Health Assembly removed homosexuality from the list of mental disorders when it approved a new version of the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10).

"Since homosexuality is not a disorder or a disease, it does not require a cure. There is no medical indication for changing sexual orientation," said PAHO Director Dr. Mirta Roses Periago.

The PAHO statement notes that there is a professional consensus that homosexuality is a natural variation of human sexuality and cannot be regarded as a pathological condition.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120523040848/http://new.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6803&Itemid=1926

Some diseases maybe linked mostly with homosexuals but research have change.

That a world organization says something doesn't make them right, I have asked you to provide the empirical evidence to support this claim, it is not about quoting stories, you need to bring the evidences!

tintingz:


Lol, what you posted is the opposite of your premise.

The underline made it clearer.

What you posted is like how Science predict and assume things then do findings about it.

You said evidence is base from your beliefs, this is not quite right! Evidence proves a belief or support a belief.

What's belief?

> Belief : an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.

> Belief is the state of mind in which a person thinks something to be the case with or without there being empirical evidence to prove that something is the case with factual certainty.

Belief is just a state of mind or opinion that something is true with or without evidence, if you base evidence from beliefs then anything can be true even without empirical evidence or when your evidence is not even an evidence or proof. E.g Superman exist because there are lots of comics, books about Superman, that's my evidence from my beliefs.

So how will someone with such belief be open minded?

First of all, I informed you that I provide evidence based on my beliefs, while defining (or explaining) belief above, you added that beliefs can be with or without evidence, so i ask you, if my belief (which is Islam), does have evidences (obviously, I did mention the Qur'an), then tell me why I cannot make such statement that my evidence is based on my beliefs?!

Secondly, you overlooked my first quote, that would have guided you in your response. Isn't it self defeating to use superman and COMIC books as an example?! Regardless, if I do belief that superman exist, and my evidences are the comic books or any book that states so, then what is expected of you, if truly you are open-minded is to study these evidences to ascertain the veracity!

Thirdly, the purpose of being open-minded is to get to the truth! You do not make mockery of other peoples' beliefs, using stereotypes and prejudiced opinions and wouldn't even try to understand the reasons put forward and then claim you are open-minded! You've already made up your mind about my beliefs!

Lastly, I'll quote again: "Let not men think there is no truth but in the sciences that they study or the books that they read. To prejudge other men’s notions before we have looked into them is not to show their darkness but to put out our own eyes." (Locke, 1966, p. 38)

tintingz:

Can you provide evidence Allah exist being the creator and not Brahma?

Show me that Allah is the one outside the universe.

I told you before, my responses are not meant for you to accept my beliefs! You have said my belief is absurd, ridiculous etc. You sure know better than I do so, what I want from you is the evidences for what caused the universe? what caused life? what is the purpose of life? what is after death? why are we here with intelligence?! Are we just to live and die?! Why?! Why is there good and bad?! Why does these negative things happen in this world?! Why is the world not fair to us?!

tintingz:

Some of your projections against me are,

1. I don't have sense of morality
2. No one cares about my good deeds
3. I'm hopeless

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.

Tu quoque or the appeal to hypocrisy is an informal fallacy that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with its conclusion(s).

Ad hominem, short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

This is really interesting....

1. "I don't have sense of morality"

I'm sure I said you do not have any standard of morality, and this was due to your responses...You claimed that morality in reality is subjective, and what is ideal should be objective morality...

Let me now turn the tables, this is what you wrote about me:

Lmao, I'm good and I know I'm good because I make use of my empathy which is natural innate in me, that's sincerity.

But you are only good because a book told you so and dictate to you how to be good lol , you're good because you fear wrath of Allah, you fear going to hell forever, your goodness is base on fear not natural/empathy.

The bold suggests that I do not have sense of morality except a book tells me, and this actually contradicts your assertions that empathy is innate! I sure asked, does the fact that I follow a standard of morality set by Islam, automatically means I do not have empathy?! By the way, research shows that religious people show empathy more than irreligious folks!

So who is projecting?!

2. "No one cares about my good deed"

Should this even be part of this list?!

Anyway, I only asked a question based on your responses, you claim to be good, and I asked why, who cares that you are good?! Remember, you claimed morality is subjective, you do not believe in an afterlife of a reward or punishment, hence your good deeds are only for your worldly self! If you do not donate your hard-earned money for charity, would the orphans and less privileged in the society sue you?! If you do donate, what do you gain from that?!

So what am I denying and what am I projecting?!

3. "I'm hopeless"

Why do you keep talking about the negative things happening in this world?! Does these negative things happening make sense to you? Do you have hope in seeing your loved ones after death?! What does death mean to you?! What are you living for?! Why are you here, living and not dead?

And thank you for the definitions, I'll keep them handy...But I'll advise that you read your own responses on here, and see where you have fallen into those fallacies, I've given you one already!

tintingz:

You should be bothered about Yahweh throwing you inside hell forever!

You see, Yahweh is God, and God revealed the Bible and the Qur'an! I believe in both books! Both talk about worshiping God alone! As I said, you shouldn't be bothered about such issues.

sino:
Well, I have read through your responses, in order not to be going in circles, I have only selected your posts that needs my response...

Please provide the scientific evidence that shows that homosexuality is normal...

WHO declared homosexuality is normal and natural with professional consensus. You still asking for evidence? Lol.

Here's from Wikipedia,

The field of psychology has extensively studied homosexuality as a human sexual orientation. The American Psychiatric Association listed homosexuality in the DSM-I in 1952, but almost immediately that classification came under scrutiny in research funded by the National Institute of Mental Health. That research and subsequent studies consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as anything other than a natural and normal sexual orientation that is a healthy and positive expression of human sexuality. As a result of this scientific research, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the DSM-II in 1973.

The longstanding consensus of scientific research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality.[3] There is now a large body of scientific evidence that indicates that being gay, lesbian, or bisexual is compatible with normal mental health and social adjustment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology

If you insist on evidence go and meet the professional scientific consensus that declared it normal and natural.

I'm sure you didn't read properly, go back to my quote and read the reference there! This isn't about Paul Cameron, but facts with regards to increase in HIV/AIDS amongst homosexuals, if that is not a risk to public health, I wonder what is...

Lol, are homosexuals the only risk to public health? Why are you cherry picking and being bias?

Are homosexuals the majority or minority?

So assuming they are risk to public health, will killing them solve the problem?

That a world organization says something doesn't make them right, I have asked you to provide the empirical evidence to support this claim, it is not about quoting stories, you need to bring the evidences!

If you have evidence to prove them wrong, why not visit the World health organization and demonstrate your evidence in front of professional world health scientists.

Abeg call me if you're going.

First of all, I informed you that I provide evidence based on my beliefs, while defining (or explaining) belief above, you added that beliefs can be with or without evidence, so i ask you, if my belief (which is Islam), does have evidences (obviously, I did mention the Qur'an), then tell me why I cannot make such statement that my evidence is based on my beliefs?!

Secondly, you overlooked my first quote, that would have guided you in your response. Isn't it self defeating to use superman and COMIC books as an example?! Regardless, if I do belief that superman exist, and my evidences are the comic books or any book that states so, then what is expected of you, if truly you are open-minded is to study these evidences to ascertain the veracity!

You believe Allah exist right, his evidence of existence is the Quran right? Ok, Superman exist, his evidence of his existence is the comic.

Take it or leave it, Superman exist base evidence from my belief.

Thirdly, the purpose of being open-minded is to get to the truth! You do not make mockery of other peoples' beliefs, using stereotypes and prejudiced opinions and wouldn't even try to understand the reasons put forward and then claim you are open-minded! You've already made up your mind about my beliefs!

Lastly, I'll quote again: "Let not men think there is no truth but in the sciences that they study or the books that they read. To prejudge other men’s notions before we have looked into them is not to show their darkness but to put out our own eyes." (Locke, 1966, p. 38)

Science deal with providing evidence, facts, theories to support belief, assumption, predictions.

I told you before, my responses are not meant for you to accept my beliefs! You have said my belief is absurd, ridiculous etc. You sure know better than I do so, what I want from you is the evidences for what caused the universe? what caused life? what is the purpose of life? what is after death? why are we here with intelligence?! Are we just to live and die?! Why?! Why is there good and bad?! Why does these negative things happen in this world?! Why is the world not fair to us?!

This is argument from ignorance.

I never claim I know better, you're pulling strawman.

Did Allah personally appear to you and tell you "oh I exist my pious slave"? Or you travel to the space, discover the universe has an outside then found Allah there?

But since your fairy book claim to have answers, why is there evil?

This is really interesting....

1. "I don't have sense of morality"

I'm sure I said you do not have any standard of morality, and this was due to your responses...You claimed that morality in reality is subjective, and what is ideal should be objective morality...

Let me now turn the tables, this is what you wrote about me:

My standard of morality is my empathy, your morality is from your ancient fairy book, they are subjective, whatever the case is your God is not the absolute moral!

So I ask is Morality objective or subjective?

The bold suggests that I do not have sense of morality except a book tells me, and this actually contradicts your assertions that empathy is innate! I sure asked, does the fact that I follow a standard of morality set by Islam, automatically means I do not have empathy?! By the way, research shows that religious people show empathy more than irreligious folks!

Everyones has empathy, even animals, some people tends not to use it meaning they lack the use of it, they make use of some ancient mythical book for thier morality.

I can also provide research that shows irreligious people are more compassionate than religious folks.

So who is projecting?!

The person who assume I'm hopless.

2. "No one cares about my good deed"

Should this even be part of this list?!

Anyway, I only asked a question based on your responses, you claim to be good, and I asked why, who cares that you are good?! Remember, you claimed morality is subjective, you do not believe in an afterlife of a reward or punishment, hence your good deeds are only for your worldly self! If you do not donate your hard-earned money for charity, would the orphans and less privileged in the society sue you?! If you do donate, what do you gain from that?!

So what am I denying and what am I projecting?!

So with this your pseudo-logic, do christians, Jews care you're good? Or do they believe you're going to thier version of paradise?

You don't even know me, how come you conclude no one cares, applaud, commend, appreciate my good deeds?

Dude you're projecting and pulling strawman.

3. "I'm hopeless"

Why do you keep talking about the negative things happening in this world?! Does these negative things happening make sense to you? Do you have hope in seeing your loved ones after death?! What does death mean to you?! What are you living for?! Why are you here, living and not dead?

The premise is why are there negative things when your God claim to be absolute perfectly all-good?

Why the paradox?

Your strawman is alarming.

You know what, tell me the purpose, meaningful, hope in being in paradise forever?

Do christians see your hope as true of false?

And thank you for the definitions, I'll keep them handy...But I'll advise that you read your own responses on here, and see where you have fallen into those fallacies, I've given you one already!

You see, Yahweh is God, and God revealed the Bible and the Qur'an! I believe in both books! Both talk about worshiping God alone! As I said, you shouldn't be bothered about such issues.

Lol, do you believe Yahweh has a son?

Or better still do you believe in this Yahweh below?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

Dear sino, salaam alaykum warahmatulah wabarokatuh dear brother. I will sincerely urge you to refrain from discussions like this. Talking with a person with a closed mindset is like giving a blind man a reading glass. It is of no use.

Dear brother, don't waste your time moving around circles with someone that is not sincere with his quest and just want to argue and argue. Like tbaba1234 once said, he is just trying to validate his disbelief and won't be objective no matter how many proofs and logic you use. It is one thing when questioning is borne out of reading and seeking the truth and it is another thing when it is borne of following whims and desires.

Akhee, if you think you have free time you wanna use, please kindly spend it with your hajia . If you can't (almost impossible ) , please write poems cos I have missed your poems. If your muse isn't flowing, please play games. That's more worthy than discussion with a close minded person that is just reading about fallacies and its types and barely comprehend what he reads.

My 2kobo

lanrexlan:
Dear sino, salaam alaykum warahmatulah wabarokatuh dear brother. I will sincerely urge you to refrain from discussions like this. Talking with a person with a closed mindset is like giving a blind man a reading glass. It is of no use.

Dear brother, don't waste your time moving around circles with someone that is not sincere with his quest and just want to argue and argue. Like tbaba1234 once said, he is just trying to validate his disbelief and won't be objective no matter how many proofs and logic you use. It is one thing when questioning is borne out of reading and seeking the truth and it is another thing when it is borne of following whims and desires.

Akhee, if you think you have free time you wanna use, please kindly spend it with your hajia . If you can't (almost impossible ) , please write poems cos I have missed your poems. If your muse isn't flowing, please play games. That's more worthy than discussion with a close minded person that is just reading about fallacies and its types and barely comprehend what he reads.

My 2kobo

Lol, the cheer leaders have arrive, the strawmanship.

And the person that said his evidence is from his belief is open-minded?

Like I believe all evidence of Superman existence is from Superman comic books, every other thing are false and irrelevant, yeah nice logic.

I'm highly disappointed at the dishonesty of Lanrexlan, someone I took as a brother, he is one of those that knows me well on Nairaland when I was a Muslim, a defender, apologist, a mujahid. All my post when I was a Muslim are in my profile as evidence, no one can deny it.

Now the question is if I'm not open-minded how come I became an atheist? How come I reason outside the closed walls(indoctrination)?

But ofcos the hypocrisy is obvious, non of you ask me if I'm open-minded when I was a Muslim but now that I'm not, the hypocrisy surfaced.

tintingz:
I'm highly disappointed at the dishonesty of Lanrexlan, someone I took as a brother, he is one of those that knows me well on Nairaland when I was a Muslim, a defender, apologist, a mujahid. All my post when I was a Muslim are in my profile as evidence, no one can deny it.

Now the question is if I'm not open-minded how come I became an atheist? I come I reason outside the closed walls(indoctrination)?

But ofcos the hypocrisy is obvious, non of you ask me if I'm open-minded when I was a Muslim but now that I'm not, the hypocrisy surfaced.

Dishonesty?! I took you as a brother Taye (and you are still my brother in humanity), if not I won't open a thread cos of you, questioning the reasons for your change in belief. Had it been I don't care about you, I won't have opened the thread nor chatted with you on whatsapp as regards to your belief. On that thread, you were in the discussion to win, to have the final say and you ended up making ridiculous claims.

But the problem is that, you just want to argue and argue, that is not a way of dialogue. You ridicule and mock, that is not the way of dialogue. One will end up wasting precious time and moving around circles.

Your questioning was borne out of whims and desires. You want to be free, you see Islam as a barrier restraining you from fulfling your desires and you are looking for a way out.
Then questioning began upon reading small books on philosophy. You began to ask why. Why do we have to pray 5 times a day? Why will agreed intimacy between two adults be a sin? And tons of why and why.


@Bold (indoctrination), that sums it up. You were a Muslim cos you were born into a Muslim family! You were practising Islam cos your parents are Muslims and that was the reason you were defending Islam then.

With due apology bro, you never tasted the sweetness of faith. You didn't understand Islam except from the fact that you were born muslim. You didn't search for Islam without the lens of your parents.


Guidance from Allah, may He uphold our feet upon Islam

tintingz:
Lol, the cheer leaders have arrive, the strawmanship.

And the person that said his evidence is from his belief is open-minded?

Like I believe all evidence of Superman existence is from Superman comic books, every other thing are false and irrelevant, yeah nice logic.

The evidences of Allah are scattered all over the place for you to see but you choose to ignore. In the heavens, the mountains, oceans flowing for millions of years and in your own self are evidences for the proof of the creator. But you choose to ignore them. Even if they give evidences brought to your face or the ones you can touch, you will still deny them cos you are seeking the evidences not to acknowledge the truth but to mock and ridicule. Firaun asked for evidences and he was given, yet he belied it even though he knew those evidences were the pure truth. Allah says in Surah An-Naml, Verse 14:
وَجَحَدُوا بِهَا وَاسْتَيْقَنَتْهَا أَنفُسُهُمْ ظُلْمًا وَعُلُوًّا فَانظُرْ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُفْسِدِينَ

And they belied them (those Ayat) wrongfully and arrogantly, though their ownselves were convinced thereof [i.e. those (Ayat) are from Allah, and Musa (Moses) is the Messenger of Allah in truth, but they disliked to obey Musa (Moses), and hated to believe in his Message of Monotheism]. So see what was the end of the Mufsidun (disbelievers, disobedient to Allah, evil-doers, liars.).

Even if signs and evidences of Allah are brought to your face, you won't acknowledge them unless you are sincere. You will end up calling them "tricks to deceive the gullible". You are not different from the men of old.


Quran says in Surah Al-Hijr, Verse 14-15:
وَلَوْ فَتَحْنَا عَلَيْهِم بَابًا مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ فَظَلُّوا فِيهِ يَعْرُجُونَ
And even if We opened to them a gate from the heaven and they were to continue ascending thereto,
لَقَالُوا إِنَّمَا سُكِّرَتْ أَبْصَارُنَا بَلْ نَحْنُ قَوْمٌ مَّسْحُورُونَ
They would surely say: "Our eyes have been (as if) dazzled. Nay, we are a people bewitched."

Surah Al-Anaam, Verse 7:
وَلَوْ نَزَّلْنَا عَلَيْكَ كِتَابًا فِي قِرْطَاسٍ فَلَمَسُوهُ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ لَقَالَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا إِنْ هَٰذَا إِلَّا سِحْرٌ مُّبِينٌ
And even if We had sent down unto you (O Muhammad SAW) a Message written on paper so that they could touch it with their hands, the disbelievers would have said: "This is nothing but obvious magic!"

So when you are ready to dialogue with the aim of knowing and being sincere with yourself, then discussions can be beneficial

lanrexlan:
The evidences of Allah are scattered all over the place for you to see but you choose to ignore. In the heavens, the mountains, oceans flowing for millions of years and in your own self are evidences for the proof of the creator. But you choose to ignore them. Even if they give evidences brought to your face or the ones you can touch, you will still deny them cos you are seeking the evidences not to acknowledge the truth but to mock and ridicule. Firaun asked for evidences and he was given, yet he belied it even though he knew those evidences were the pure truth. Allah says in Surah An-Naml, Verse 14:
وَجَحَدُوا بِهَا وَاسْتَيْقَنَتْهَا أَنفُسُهُمْ ظُلْمًا وَعُلُوًّا فَانظُرْ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُفْسِدِينَ

And they belied them (those Ayat) wrongfully and arrogantly, though their ownselves were convinced thereof [i.e. those (Ayat) are from Allah, and Musa (Moses) is the Messenger of Allah in truth, but they disliked to obey Musa (Moses), and hated to believe in his Message of Monotheism]. So see what was the end of the Mufsidun (disbelievers, disobedient to Allah, evil-doers, liars.).

Even if signs and evidences of Allah are brought to your face, you won't acknowledge them unless you are sincere. You will end up calling them "tricks to deceive the gullible". You are not different from the men of old.


Quran says in Surah Al-Hijr, Verse 14-15:
وَلَوْ فَتَحْنَا عَلَيْهِم بَابًا مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ فَظَلُّوا فِيهِ يَعْرُجُونَ
And even if We opened to them a gate from the heaven and they were to continue ascending thereto,
لَقَالُوا إِنَّمَا سُكِّرَتْ أَبْصَارُنَا بَلْ نَحْنُ قَوْمٌ مَّسْحُورُونَ
They would surely say: "Our eyes have been (as if) dazzled. Nay, we are a people bewitched."

Surah Al-Anaam, Verse 7:
وَلَوْ نَزَّلْنَا عَلَيْكَ كِتَابًا فِي قِرْطَاسٍ فَلَمَسُوهُ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ لَقَالَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا إِنْ هَٰذَا إِلَّا سِحْرٌ مُّبِينٌ
And even if We had sent down unto you (O Muhammad SAW) a Message written on paper so that they could touch it with their hands, the disbelievers would have said: "This is nothing but obvious magic!"

So when you are ready to dialogue with the aim of knowing and being sincere with yourself, then discussions can be beneficial

The problem in your post here is that you're appealing to ignorance, and it shows you being sentimental and not open-minded.

Did Allah personally appear to you he is responsible to all that or you just read it from an ancient book? Why is Brahma not the creator, do you believe Brahma is the true creator God of the cosmos?

lanrexlan:
Dishonesty?! I took you as a brother Taye (and you are still my brother in humanity), if not I won't open a thread cos of you, questioning the reasons for your change in belief. Had it been I don't care about you, I won't have opened the thread nor chatted with you on whatsapp as regards to your belief. On that thread, you were in the discussion to win, to have the final say and you ended up making ridiculous claims.

But the problem is that, you just want to argue and argue, that is not a way of dialogue. You ridicule and mock, that is not the way of dialogue. One will end up wasting precious time and moving around circles.

I Appreciate your care, but the thread came when I was no longer a Muslim.

And that's projection, I wasn't arguing to win or should I say you were also arguing to win? I think this is irrelevant, wether one want to win an argument or not, argument is argument and focus on the premises, the motive of the person shouldn't be the problem or it will result to ad hominem and strawman which will turn to non sequitur argument.

Your questioning was borne out of whims and desires. You want to be free, you see Islam as a barrier restraining you from fulfling your desires and you are looking for a way out.
Then questioning began upon reading small books on philosophy. You began to ask why. Why do we have to pray 5 times a day? Why will agreed intimacy between two adults be a sin? And tons of why and why.

Lol, the question is what is wrong to be free from dogmas? I thought there's freewill?

I'm looking for a way out? Are you not projecting this, kindly stop being fallacious when you have no idea of "how I found my way out".

@Bold (indoctrination), that sums it up. You were a Muslim cos you were born into a Muslim family! You were practising Islam cos your parents are Muslims and that was the reason you were defending Islam then.

Lol, you were a Muslim right from the imaginary heaven right? Dude we were all indoctrinated with Religion and cultures, if you were born in India there is high percentage you will be practicing Hindu, if you're born in China there's high percentage you're irreligious or a Buddhist or a Taoist, if you're born in Nigeria there is high percentage you're either christian or Muslim, traditionalist are minority.

So assume you're born in Hindu family, aren't you going to be defending Hinduism?

With due apology bro, you never tasted the sweetness of faith. You didn't understand Islam except from the fact that you were born muslim. You didn't search for Islam without the lens of your parents.

Another projection and fallacy, you were not there when I was doing research about Islam, how I spent my days reading Islamic books and watching debates with open mind, my family are very islamically devoted , this is the Religion I was taught from childhood, I understand the Religion perfectly!

If you actually don't spend all your days with someone, you don't project what you have no knowledge of, that's fallacy.

tintingz:
The problem in your post here is that you're appealing to ignorance, and it shows you being sentimental and not open-minded.

Did Allah personally appear to you he is responsible to all that or you just read it from an ancient book? Why is Brahma not the creator, do you believe Brahma is the true creator God of the cosmos?

There we go again, you just learnt about argumentum ad ignoratium and the rest. It is like you are getting fascinated by it

I believe Nana can't get pregnant and can't give birth. Then the question of whether she gave birth to twins or quadrupet is useless. You don't believe there's a creator, then the question whether it is Brahma or Allah or Olodumare is useless.

When you believe there's a creator of the universe, then debating His attributes and comparing different stories of creation will be relevant. Till then, it is totally useless...

Peace

tintingz:
Why is Brahma not the creator,

why not let Brahma speaks for himself?. Why should others speak on his behalf?. Where did he declare he's what they said he's?

do you believe Brahma is the true creator God of the cosmos?

In Hindu belief, they still believe Brahma has associates who are part of his Trinity like Christianity. So first all, go and figure out which of the Hindu gods is the creator before you bring your trash to Islam. Be sure you back it up with their scriptures and not what people say on his behalf.

If you search for Brahma, it is people speaking for him what they think he is or was. This is contrary to Allah who declared in the Tawrah, Injil and Quran saying "I am God besides Me there is none"

lanrexlan:
There we go again, you just learnt about argumentum ad ignoratium and the rest. It is like you are getting fascinated by it

This is fallacy, how did you know I just learn about the word? Dude there are things that are irrelevant in an argument, just focus on the premises.

I'm ready to always point out the type of fallacy you make, that's how I debate.

I believe Nana can't get pregnant and can't give birth. Then the question of whether she gave birth to twins or quadrupet is useless. You don't believe there's a creator, then the question whether it is Brahma or Allah or Olodumare is useless.

And who said the question is useless? Dude pulling strawman will make an argument non sequitur.

The question itself is not useless, believing these entities exist is useless since there's no evidence to prove thier existence, you can't prove Allah is the one outside the universe, if there's even an outside, the idea of God/s is conflicting and meaningless, so there's no reason believing God/s exist until it's proven. Maybe God should just show up and tell us he exist and save us the mystery, it will be better for we disbelievers that are hell bounds.

When you believe there's a creator of the universe, then debating His attributes and comparing different stories of creation will be relevant. Till then, it is totally useless...

Peace

Even if I assume there's a creator and you are unable to provide the evidence of this particular creator, what then is the point believing in a creator? Is there anything wrong being agnostic?

Empiree:
why not let Brahma speaks for himself?. Why should others speak on his behalf?. Where did he declare he's what they said he's?

Now you're getting it.

Hindu also have thier religious text (Vedas), just like you have Quran, both scriptures claim thier God exist.

So the question is, why are you speaking on Allah's behalf or better still why must a book be Allah's words?

In Hindu belief, they still believe Brahma has associates who are part of his Trinity like Christianity. So first all, go and figure out which of the Hindu gods is the creator before you bring your trash to Islam. Be sure you back it up with their scriptures and not what people say on his behalf.

If you search for Brahma, it is people speaking for him what they think he is or was. This is contrary to Allah who declared in the Tawrah, Injil and Quran saying "I am God besides Me there is none"

Like I said the Hindu religious text is call Vedas, Brahma is the creator God in Hinduism.

Brahma (Sanskrit: ब्रह्मा, IAST: Brahmā) is a creator god in Hinduism. He has four faces. Brahma is also known as Svayambhu (self-born), Vāgīśa (Lord of Speech), and the creator of the four Vedas, one from each of his mouths. Brahma was consort of Saraswati and he was father of Four Kumaras Narada and Daksha.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahma

Dude, kindly do proper research before making fallacious and bias statement.

tintingz:
Now you're getting it.

Hindu also have thier religious text (Vedas), just like you have Quran, both scriptures claim thier God exist.

So the question is, why are you speaking on Allah's behalf or better still why must a book be Allah's words?


Like I said the Hindu religious text is call Vedas, Brahma is the creator God in Hinduism.

Brahma (Sanskrit: ब्रह्मा, IAST: Brahmā) is a creator god in Hinduism. He has four faces. Brahma is also known as Svayambhu (self-born), Vāgīśa (Lord of Speech), and the creator of the four Vedas, one from each of his mouths. Brahma was consort of Saraswati and he was father of Four Kumaras Narada and Daksha.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahma

Dude, kindly do proper research before making fallacious and bias statement.

Good. You fell for my trap. Why are you quick to quote and support Hindu book while you questioned Islam?.

Actually your didn't even quote their religious text. You quoted wiki which is actually speaking for Brahma just like their book did.. See highlighted part?. The question is, if he was God how did they know he has many faces?. Who saw him and what is his name? Something seen can not be God. Hence, this refute your claim that Brahma is God.

I wanted you to quote Brahma himself calling himself God of the universe. But Wikipedia you cited appears to be 2nd or third party..

But look at this Quran verse. That's direct speech. But a god that is said to be creator yet has two other companions who are also gods alongsid him is nothing but counterfeit. You have just displayed the same tactic used by Christian evangelists and kufar all together. They would back one another and defend one another's gods and beliefs when they collectively attack Islam while they put aside their different beliefs.

It is clear that Islam is your problem.

Empiree:
Good. You fell for my trap. Why are you quick to quote and support Hindu book while you questioned Islam?.

Actually your didn't even quote their religious text. You quoted wiki which is actually speaking for Brahma just like their book did.. See highlighted part?. The question is, if he was God how did they know he has many faces?. Who saw him and what is his name? Something seen can not be God. Hence, this refute your claim that Brahma is God.

I'm not supporting Hinduism, I'm asking why do you think Brahma can't be the creator God, why Allah?, I'm pointing out the indoctrination and bias Religious people have towards thier ideas of God.

Stop pulling strawman, if you want to know about Brahma, go and read the Hinduism text.

I wanted you to quote Brahma himself calling himself God of the universe. But Wikipedia you cited appears to be 2nd or third party..

The Vedas is the speech or word of Brahma just like Quran is the word of Allah, go and read the vedas if you're interested in knowing Brahma. I quoted Wikipedia to brief you who Brahma is, reference is attached to it.

But look at this Quran verse. That's direct speech. But a god that is said to be creator yet has two other companions who are also gods alongsid him is nothing but counterfeit. You have just displayed the same tactic used by Christian evangelists and kufar all together. They would back one another and defend one another's gods and beliefs when they collectively attack Islam while they put aside their different beliefs.

It is clear that Islam is your problem.

This part is irrelevant in this argument, my premise is which God exist or is the creator, God having a son or four face or six hand or three head or jealous or sit on a throne in the sky etc does not mean they are not Gods, you can argument that with your fellow theists.

tintingz:


This part is irrelevant in this argument, my premise is which God exist or is the creator, God having a son or four face or six hand or three head or jealous or sit on a throne in the sky etc does not mean they are not Gods, you can argument that with your fellow theists.

Since you have atheist "aqeeda", it's pretty much irrelevant arguing over this. Yousef Khattab, a former Jewish revert to Islam said during interview with Dawkins, said:


"The Reason I Hate Atheists Is Because They Don't Know Right From Wrong. Everything Is Good To Them Except Truth"


Exactly what you are doing. You are calling muslims to embrace polytheistic philosophy. When you figure out which of the Hindu gods is the sole creator only then we may talk further.

Empiree:
Since you have atheist "aqeeda", it's pretty much irrelevant arguing over this. Yousef Khattab, a former Jewish revert to Islam said during interview with Dawkins, said:


"The Reason I Hate Atheists Is Because They Don't Know Right From Wrong. Everything Is Good To Them Except Truth"


Exactly what you are doing. You are calling muslims to embrace polytheistic philosophy. When you figure out which of the Hindu gods is the sole creator only then we may talk further.

Lol, Atheism position and definition is lack in belief in existence of God/s, it doesn't mean I can't attach every other beliefs. I can be a humanists, I can be a naturalists, I can adopt ideologies.

There are Atheists that believe in spirit and supernaturals but reject existence of God, tho minority, Buddhism, Jainism are more like an atheistic ideology hope you know that.

What's right and wrong are relative and subjective in reality, I've debate that with sinó, my stance is as long as your ideology is not negatively expressed or acts publicly, we are cool. Atheists are also bound to the laws of the land just like every other group, that doesn't mean the laws are all right, some laws are against human rights basically archaic laws, the reason protest is allowed and laws are amended.

What's right and wrong is a complex thing, we're still figuring it out, I base my morality on empathy, that's just me.

What's wrong for people to embrace polythiesm? Is there no choice anymore? Does being a polythiest mean one is bad or dangerous? Is being monotheistic automatically means one is good?

I think you're too glue to your beliefs that you are not ready to be open minded, you're only interested and bias about your ideology.

Brahma is the creator God in Hinduism, do you have any counter argument to that, can you mention any other creator God in Hinduism?

lanrexlan:
Dear sino, salaam alaykum warahmatulah wabarokatuh dear brother. I will sincerely urge you to refrain from discussions like this. Talking with a person with a closed mindset is like giving a blind man a reading glass. It is of no use.

Dear brother, don't waste your time moving around circles with someone that is not sincere with his quest and just want to argue and argue. Like tbaba1234 once said, he is just trying to validate his disbelief and won't be objective no matter how many proofs and logic you use. It is one thing when questioning is borne out of reading and seeking the truth and it is another thing when it is borne of following whims and desires.

Wa alaykum salam bro, eid mubarak.

Many thanks for your advice, honestly, I do know it is a waste of time trying to prove almost anything to tintingz, this is not the first time I am having a discussion with him, but sometimes, I just still have hope, Allah (SWT) is the one who changes the heart of man. I have tried to probe his present disposition and seek what really gives him the confidence in his disbelief. Unfortunately, he hasn't been able to make a reasonable case for himself, other than criticize, make mockery and insult religion and religious people. One thing I have come to appreciate about learning and knowledge is that, and this is borne by my constant interactions with professors from different fields, is intellectual humility.

lanrexlan:

Akhee, if you think you have free time you wanna use, please kindly spend it with your hajia . If you can't (almost impossible ) , please write poems cos I have missed your poems. If your muse isn't flowing, please play games. That's more worthy than discussion with a close minded person that is just reading about fallacies and its types and barely comprehend what he reads.

My 2kobo

Lol, no free time o, but your suggestions are on point, especially, the hajia part and I do not know what is drying my writing ink, I have been suspecting you , you now write better than I do , I need motivation and inspiration! By the way, I have been finding it difficult to play games these days o, I think I have game apathy!

tintingz:
WHO declared homosexuality is normal and natural with professional consensus. You still asking for evidence? Lol.

Here's from Wikipedia,

The field of psychology has extensively studied homosexuality as a human sexual orientation. The American Psychiatric Association listed homosexuality in the DSM-I in 1952, but almost immediately that classification came under scrutiny in research funded by the National Institute of Mental Health. That research and subsequent studies consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as anything other than a natural and normal sexual orientation that is a healthy and positive expression of human sexuality. As a result of this scientific research, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the DSM-II in 1973.

The longstanding consensus of scientific research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality.[3] There is now a large body of scientific evidence that indicates that being gay, lesbian, or bisexual is compatible with normal mental health and social adjustment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology

If you insist on evidence go and meet the professional scientific consensus that declared it normal and natural.

"The American Psychiatric Association and the APA provide the aforementioned studies as the scientific evidence that homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexual orientation. The APA noted that homosexuality per se implies no impairment in judgment, stability, reliability, or general social and vocational capabilities. Further, the APA urges all mental health professionals to take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with homosexual orientations (Glassgold et al. 2009, 23–24). The Amici Curiae Brief reiterates the same claim, and it supports the claim by citing the aforementioned literature which looked at “adjustment” and social functioning (Brief of Amici Curiae 2003, 11). [b]As has been shown, though, adjustment and social functioning are irrelevant to determining whether the sexual deviations are mental disorders. As a result, the scientific studies that only looked at measures of adjustment and social functioning draw erroneous conclusions and result in “false negatives” as Spitzer, Wakefield, Bieber, and others have noted. Unfortunately, fatally flawed reasoning has served as the basis for “rigorous” and “scientific evidence” supporting the claim that homosexuality is not a mental disorder but is rather a normal variant of human sexual orientation. One cannot conclude (with Alfred Kinsey) that a human behavior is normal simply because it is more common than previously assumed—otherwise all human behaviors, including serial killing, would have to be considered normal. One cannot conclude (with C.S. Ford and Frank A. Beach) that there is “nothing unnatural” about a behavior simply because it is observed in both humans and animals— otherwise cannibalism would have to be considered to be natural. Most importantly, One cannot conclude (with Evelyn Hooker, John C. Gonsiorek, the APA, the American Psychiatric Association, and others) that a mental condition is not disordered because it does not result in “maladjustment,” distress, or impairment in social functioning—otherwise, many mental disorders would have to be labeled erroneously as normal. The conclusions arrived at in the cited literature are not supported by the premises proposed to be scientific fact; the faulty works cannot be considered credible sources.[/b] It is always best to give others “the benefit of the doubt.” Maybe the APA and the American Psychiatric Association accidentally made catastrophic logical mistakes in the literature they cite as evidence supporting the claim that homosexuality (and other sexual deviances) is not a mental disorder; that scenario is quite possible. Still, one should not be naïve and ignore the potential for powerful organizations to perform advocacy science. There are major inconsistencies in logic as well as arbitrary applications of certain principles by those upheld as “authoritative” in identifying and diagnosing mental disorders. The present summary and analysis in this paper of the literature put forth as “rigorous” and “significant” empirical evidence uncovers major deficiencies—irrelevant, outdated, and absurd literature—and calls into question the credibility of the APA and the American Psychiatric Association’s discussion and identification of sexual disorders. Indeed, suspect anecdotes and antiquated data have been used in the debates surrounding homosexuality, but the evidence shows that even the authoritative sources on mental disorders are guilty of those charges.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771012/

tintingz:

Lol, are homosexuals the only risk to public health? Why are you cherry picking and being bias?

Are homosexuals the majority or minority?

So assuming they are risk to public health, will killing them solve the problem?

All risk to a healthy life and society are frowned against in Islam! A cancerous cell starts as a "minority" but after a while, it becomes a "majority" killing healthy cells and eventually killing the person.

Again, death sentence as established in the law of an Islamic State isn't meant to be a form of killing spree, but rather to deter people from committing such crimes that MAY lead to a death sentence!

tintingz:

If you have evidence to prove them wrong, why not visit the World health organization and demonstrate your evidence in front of professional world health scientists.

Abeg call me if you're going.

You believe to be true without evidence, because WHO (or professionals) says so?! Please quickly go to wiki to lookup your fallacy!

tintingz:

You believe Allah exist right, his evidence of existence is the Quran right? Ok, Superman exist, his evidence of his existence is the comic.

Take it or leave it, Superman exist base evidence from my belief.

Science deal with providing evidence, facts, theories to support belief, assumption, predictions.

And you failed to read the other part of my post that address your folly? That you claim superman exist based on evidence from a book is more reasonable than arguing "day and night" about non-existence of superman, which you believe is imaginary!

tintingz:

This is argument from ignorance.

I never claim I know better, you're pulling strawman.

Did Allah personally appear to you and tell you "oh I exist my pious slave"? Or you travel to the space, discover the universe has an outside then found Allah there?

But since your fairy book claim to have answers, why is there evil?

Since you do not know better, what possible guidance can you give anyone here?! I'm sure you still have access to the Qur'an, you may wish to open and read!

tintingz:

My standard of morality is my empathy, your morality is from your ancient fairy book, they are subjective, whatever the case is your God is not the absolute moral!

So I ask is Morality objective or subjective?

Everyones has empathy, even animals, some people tends not to use it meaning they lack the use of it, they make use of some ancient mythical book for thier morality.

I can also provide research that shows irreligious people are more compassionate than religious folks.

The person who assume I'm hopless.

It seems you do not know what psychological projection means...

Did I say you do not have any sense/standard of morality, because I didn't?! If your standard of morality is empathy, does it mean I do not have empathy?! If the standard definition of empathy correlates with what my "ancient fairy book" states viz. "You do not have faith until you love for your brother, what you love for yourself" then how does that translates to lack of empathy or even sense of morality on my part?! What informed you that I was projecting?!

tintingz:

So with this your pseudo-logic, do christians, Jews care you're good? Or do they believe you're going to thier version of paradise?

You don't even know me, how come you conclude no one cares, applaud, commend, appreciate my good deeds?

Dude you're projecting and pulling strawman.

Lol, I am projecting because I asked you who cares that you are good?! You shouldn't forget the reason for my question was your worry about being a good person and then going to hell! And also your claim that your morality is subjective, so tell me who cares that you are good, and why are you good, and what are the consequences for you not being good?!

tintingz:

The premise is why are there negative things when your God claim to be absolute perfectly all-good?

Why the paradox?

Your strawman is alarming.

You know what, tell me the purpose, meaningful, hope in being in paradise forever?

Do christians see your hope as true of false?

Nope, you can't ask me such questions, you have to prove that I am hopeless, the reason I am projecting hopelessness on you! Remember this is about my psychological projections! You do not see me ranting about how unfair life is, or complaining about death and earthquakes! You do not see me blame God and religion for all the atrocities happening in this world, why? because I understand the purpose of this worldly life and I am always hopeful for what is to come,for verily after difficulty comes ease!

tintingz:

Lol, do you believe Yahweh has a son?

Or better still do you believe in this Yahweh below?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

I told you I believe in the Bible and the Qur'an, both are from God! With regards to the differences (in the attributes and even religion), God had stated in the final revelation, that the differences would be addressed accordingly. Again, it shouldn't be one of your worries!

sino:


"The American Psychiatric Association and the APA provide the aforementioned studies as the scientific evidence that homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexual orientation. The APA noted that homosexuality per se implies no impairment in judgment, stability, reliability, or general social and vocational capabilities. Further, the APA urges all mental health professionals to take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with homosexual orientations (Glassgold et al. 2009, 23–24). The Amici Curiae Brief reiterates the same claim, and it supports the claim by citing the aforementioned literature which looked at “adjustment” and social functioning (Brief of Amici Curiae 2003, 11). [b]As has been shown, though, adjustment and social functioning are irrelevant to determining whether the sexual deviations are mental disorders. As a result, the scientific studies that only looked at measures of adjustment and social functioning draw erroneous conclusions and result in “false negatives” as Spitzer, Wakefield, Bieber, and others have noted. Unfortunately, fatally flawed reasoning has served as the basis for “rigorous” and “scientific evidence” supporting the claim that homosexuality is not a mental disorder but is rather a normal variant of human sexual orientation. One cannot conclude (with Alfred Kinsey) that a human behavior is normal simply because it is more common than previously assumed—otherwise all human behaviors, including serial killing, would have to be considered normal. One cannot conclude (with C.S. Ford and Frank A. Beach) that there is “nothing unnatural” about a behavior simply because it is observed in both humans and animals— otherwise cannibalism would have to be considered to be natural. Most importantly, One cannot conclude (with Evelyn Hooker, John C. Gonsiorek, the APA, the American Psychiatric Association, and others) that a mental condition is not disordered because it does not result in “maladjustment,” distress, or impairment in social functioning—otherwise, many mental disorders would have to be labeled erroneously as normal. The conclusions arrived at in the cited literature are not supported by the premises proposed to be scientific fact; the faulty works cannot be considered credible sources.[/b] It is always best to give others “the benefit of the doubt.” Maybe the APA and the American Psychiatric Association accidentally made catastrophic logical mistakes in the literature they cite as evidence supporting the claim that homosexuality (and other sexual deviances) is not a mental disorder; that scenario is quite possible. Still, one should not be naïve and ignore the potential for powerful organizations to perform advocacy science. There are major inconsistencies in logic as well as arbitrary applications of certain principles by those upheld as “authoritative” in identifying and diagnosing mental disorders. The present summary and analysis in this paper of the literature put forth as “rigorous” and “significant” empirical evidence uncovers major deficiencies—irrelevant, outdated, and absurd literature—and calls into question the credibility of the APA and the American Psychiatric Association’s discussion and identification of sexual disorders. Indeed, suspect anecdotes and antiquated data have been used in the debates surrounding homosexuality, but the evidence shows that even the authoritative sources on mental disorders are guilty of those charges.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771012/

There's already a professional consensus regards homosexuality which says it's not a mental disorder nor a disease, it's natural and part of sexual orientation variation.

The site NCBI post various jornals as thier articles, they collate researches.

This is from the same NCBI site that posted an article that tries to provide evidence for homosexuality being genetic and biological.

there are two lines of evidence that homosexuality is influenced by polymorphic genes: (i) twin studies indicate that there are both genetic and environmental factors that contribute to the expression of the homosexual phenotype (Pillard & Bailey 1998; Bailey et al. 1999; Dawood et al. 2000), and (ii) male homosexuality appears to be inherited more frequently from the matriline (Pillard et al. 1981, 1982; Pattatucci 1998; Camperio-Ciani et al. 2004), suggesting the existence of polymorphic, heritable maternal effects and/or polymorphic X-linked genes influencing male homosexuality.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1679896/

We don't certainly know the causes of homosexuality, there other natural phenomena we don't know thier causes and functions, researches shows homosexuality is natural.

All risk to a healthy life and society are frowned against in Islam! A cancerous cell starts as a "minority" but after a while, it becomes a "majority" killing healthy cells and eventually killing the person.

Again, death sentence as established in the law of an Islamic State isn't meant to be a form of killing spree, but rather to deter people from committing such crimes that MAY lead to a death sentence!

What does the Quran said about curing homosexuals, what's the treatment?

The gas, smoke, radiation, the noise population from your worship place, natural disasters etc are not risk to health life? Why are you hypocritical? HIV or diseases does not originate from homosexuals. Cheesus!

You believe to be true without evidence, because WHO (or professionals) says so?! Please quickly go to wiki to lookup your fallacy!

WHO deal with professional consensus in scientific research, there are evidences, theories regards homosexuals being natural, I believe them than your ancient mythical book that lack scientific approach.

I wonder why your God can't foreknow homosexuality will exist but instead of curing them or prevent it from existing, he wants them killed, what kind of homophobic anthropomorphic immoral God is that?

And you failed to read the other part of my post that address your folly? That you claim superman exist based on evidence from a book is more reasonable than arguing "day and night" about non-existence of superman, which you believe is imaginary!

Projection and non sequitur, who's arguing about Superman day and night, is that the premise of the argument?, do I look like someone who have faith in an imaginary master in the sky every single seconds?

The evidence of Superman existence is from the comic books just like the evidence of Allah is from the Quran. Superman exist, infact he saved the Earth for many years.

Since you do not know better, what possible guidance can you give anyone here?! I'm sure you still have access to the Qur'an, you may wish to open and read!

The Quran is no different from other fairytale books, they are like Arabia bed time stories. Flying donkey, splitting moon, birds dropping stones, splitting sea, stick turn to snake, global flood and many other mythologies.

It seems you do not know what psychological projection means...

Did I say you do not have any sense/standard of morality, because I didn't?! If your standard of morality is empathy, does it mean I do not have empathy?! If the standard definition of empathy correlates with what my "ancient fairy book" states viz. "You do not have faith until you love for your brother, what you love for yourself" then how does that translates to lack of empathy or even sense of morality on my part?! What informed you that I was projecting?!

Lol, I defined psychological projection to you yet you don't understand it.

You said I don't have sense or standard morality, while you project this Fallacy, you fail to accept the former in your ideology, meaning other religions sees you as someone who has no sense of morality, e.g majority christians sees your standard/sense of morality as meaningless, infact they believe the Quran is not moral.

Lol, I am projecting because I asked you who cares that you are good?! You shouldn't forget the reason for my question was your worry about being a good person and then going to hell! And also your claim that your morality is subjective, so tell me who cares that you are good, and why are you good, and what are the consequences for you not being good?!

Again reversing it, do Jews, christians, Hindus etc care about your good deeds?

Because Morality is subjective does not mean people can't be objective or have subjective veiw that you're good them.

> I can be good to someone and from his subjective view I'm good to him, he cares about my good deeds.

You made a fallacious statement, did I made mention of me that God should care about my good deeds? I was talking about "disbelievers", that was the premise of the argument but instead you started making ad hominem, projections and no sequitur fallacies!

Consequences of being bad? Bad people can get positive consequences, good people can get negative consequences, there is nothing accurate and fair here even in your afterlife your God will still purnish good disbelievers!

Nope, you can't ask me such questions, you have to prove that I am hopeless, the reason I am projecting hopelessness on you! Remember this is about my psychological projections! You do not see me ranting about how unfair life is, or complaining about death and earthquakes! You do not see me blame God and religion for all the atrocities happening in this world, why? because I understand the purpose of this worldly life and I am always hopeful for what is to come,for verily after difficulty comes ease!

Nope you don't understand the purpose of this world, you only understand the purposeless of imaginary wonderland paradise.

Your beloved Prophet cursed the unbelievers because the world is unfair, dude even your prophet rant, your God rants.

From my previous posts, I made mention I've hope in humanity, I've hope in the cosmos, I've hope in the food I eat, I've hope in every living species, I've hope in the future, I've hope in my family but then you started pulling strawman and non sequitur.

Well, other religions believe your hope is hopless, your afterlife will be doom, I didn't say it, that's the religious delusion.

I told you I believe in the Bible and the Qur'an, both are from God! With regards to the differences (in the attributes and even religion), God had stated in the final revelation, that the differences would be addressed accordingly. Again, it shouldn't be one of your worries!

Lol, Yahweh the cannanite deity is your God, the father of a Nazarene Jewish carpenter?

You didn't see the contradictions do you? Allah and Yahweh?

The Quran made false claims about Yahweh and the Jews.

tintingz:


There's already a professional consensus regards homosexuality which says it's not a mental disorder nor a disease, it's natural and part of sexual orientation variation.

The site NCBI post various jornals as thier articles, they collate researches.

This is from the same NCBI site that posted an article that tries to provide evidence for homosexuality being genetic and biological.

there are two lines of evidence that homosexuality is influenced by polymorphic genes: (i) twin studies indicate that there are both genetic and environmental factors that contribute to the expression of the homosexual phenotype (Pillard & Bailey 1998; Bailey et al. 1999; Dawood et al. 2000), and (ii) male homosexuality appears to be inherited more frequently from the matriline (Pillard et al. 1981, 1982; Pattatucci 1998; Camperio-Ciani et al. 2004), suggesting the existence of polymorphic, heritable maternal effects and/or polymorphic X-linked genes influencing male homosexuality.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1679896/

We don't certainly know the causes of homosexuality, there other natural phenomena we don't know thier causes and functions, researches shows homosexuality is natural.

The consensus was based on researches that are not substantive! Use your brain and just don't do follow follow! Go and read the full article I posted and bring a proper rebuttal and not this appeal to authority fallacy!

tintingz:

What does the Quran said about curing homosexuals, what's the treatment?

The gas, smoke, radiation, the noise population from your worship place, natural disasters etc are not risk to health life? Why are you hypocritical? HIV or diseases does not originate from homosexuals. Cheesus!

The Qur'an states that homosexuality is a sin, man is not made to have sex with another man, so also a woman and a woman. The ruling is to abstain from such activities...If you can't help yourself, due to mental/psychological disorders, you would be treated accordingly, but if you do this act because that is what you want to be doing, you would be sentenced accordingly!

tintingz:

WHO deal with professional consensus in scientific research, there are evidences, theories regards homosexuals being natural, I believe them than your ancient mythical book that lack scientific approach.

I wonder why your God can't foreknow homosexuality will exist but instead of curing them or prevent it from existing, he wants them killed, what kind of homophobic anthropomorphic immoral God is that?

You should help yourself and look at the evidences they are using, I have helped you since you couldn't provide them, so please read and bring appropriate rebuttals, not this "WHO says..."

FYI, I didn't quote the Qur'an for you, I quoted a journal!

tintingz:

Projection and non sequitur, who's arguing about Superman day and night, is that the premise of the argument?, do I look like someone who have faith in an imaginary master in the sky every single seconds?

The evidence of Superman existence is from the comic books just like the evidence of Allah is from the Quran. Superman exist, infact he saved the Earth for many years.

You have no faith in superman, but you want me to believe that superman exist?! How is that possible?! I have said that I am not interested in proving God to you. But I am amazed that you who do not believe in God would rather spend your time to argue about this non-existing God. You want to tell me my God doesn't exist?! Based on what evidence?! When I asked you for answers, you didn't have any, but you keep arguing! SMH!

tintingz:

The Quran is no different from other fairytale books, they are like Arabia bed time stories. Flying donkey, splitting moon, birds dropping stones, splitting sea, stick turn to snake, global flood and many other mythologies.

Okay.

tintingz:

Lol, I defined psychological projection to you yet you don't understand it.

You said I don't have sense or standard morality, while you project this Fallacy, you fail to accept the former in your ideology, meaning other religions sees you as someone who has no sense of morality, e.g majority christians sees your standard/sense of morality as meaningless, infact they believe the Quran is not moral.


Again reversing it, do Jews, christians, Hindus etc care about your good deeds?

Because Morality is subjective does not mean people can't be objective or have subjective veiw that you're good them.

> I can be good to someone and from his subjective view I'm good to him, he cares about my good deeds.

You made a fallacious statement, did I made mention of me that God should care about my good deeds? I was talking about "disbelievers", that was the premise of the argument but instead you started making ad hominem, projections and no sequitur fallacies!

Consequences of being bad? Bad people can get positive consequences, good people can get negative consequences, there is nothing accurate and fair here even in your afterlife your God will still purnish good disbelievers!

Nope you don't understand the purpose of this world, you only understand the purposeless of imaginary wonderland paradise.

Your beloved Prophet cursed the unbelievers because the world is unfair, dude even your prophet rant, your God rants.

From my previous posts, I made mention I've hope in humanity, I've hope in the cosmos, I've hope in the food I eat, I've hope in every living species, I've hope in the future, I've hope in my family but then you started pulling strawman and non sequitur.

Well, other religions believe your hope is hopless, your afterlife will be doom, I didn't say it, that's the religious delusion.

All what you have written does not in any way suggest my projections, rather you have just exposed more of your own projections and insecurities! I wonder when you became the spokesman for other faiths...You should read more on psychological projection, understand it well, come back and address my posts which you claimed are projections.

tintingz:

Lol, Yahweh the cannanite deity is your God, the father of a Nazarene Jewish carpenter?

You didn't see the contradictions do you? Allah and Yahweh?

The Quran made false claims about Yahweh and the Jews.

I have already addressed this, still, it is none of your concern!

sino:


The consensus was based on researches that are not substantive! Use your brain and just don't do follow follow! Go and read the full article I posted and bring a proper rebuttal and not this appeal to authority fallacy!

The article is subjective not a consensus and a professional research.

Appealing to authority is a fallacy yes.

There are evidences, theories pointing to homosexuality being natural and biological, I posted an article from the same site you used as your argument.

The Qur'an states that homosexuality is a sin, man is not made to have sex with another man, so also a woman and a woman. The ruling is to abstain from such activities...If you can't help yourself, due to mental/psychological disorders, you would be treated accordingly, but if you do this act because that is what you want to be doing, you would be sentenced accordingly!

There's no where the Quran state how to treat homosexuality, infact your God killed homosexuals(Sodom and Gomorrah story) instead of curing them, why is he not capable of not making homosexuality exist in the first place since he hate it?

The ominipotence paradox speaks loud.

You should help yourself and look at the evidences they are using, I have helped you since you couldn't provide them, so please read and bring appropriate rebuttals, not this "WHO says..."

FYI, I didn't quote the Qur'an for you, I quoted a journal!

There's something called scientific consensus where almost all Scientists come together to discuss about a subject, if the research presented by the journal as rebuttal which is a non-consensus research is valid, the Scientific consensus community will change/adjust the subject, so as at now the Scientific consensus regards to homosexuality declared it is natural and normal any other research without professional research is discarded just like how they discarded Paul Cameron methodology and even disown him for publishing it.

The same site that published the journal also published how homosexuality is biological.

WHO has pass through series of professional consensus scientific research for years regards homosexuality, they are authoritative body, they don't just declare things without evidences.

You have no faith in superman, but you want me to believe that superman exist?! How is that possible?! I have said that I am not interested in proving God to you. But I am amazed that you who do not believe in God would rather spend your time to argue about this non-existing God. You want to tell me my God doesn't exist?! Based on what evidence?! When I asked you for answers, you didn't have any, but you keep arguing! SMH!

Superman exist, the evidence is in the comic book, I'm not forcing you to believe in Superman, I'm telling you he exist just like your God, they both have evidence in thier books.

I believe they don't exist does not mean I can't argue about your non-existence God since your God is a public matter. You're not the one to tell me what to argue about and what not to.

Okay.


All what you have written does not in any way suggest my projections, rather you have just exposed more of your own projections and insecurities! I wonder when you became the spokesman for other faiths...You should read more on psychological projection, understand it well, come back and address my posts which you claimed are projections.

Lol, making example out of other faiths(dogmas) is well accepted in logic, it's called Reductio ad absurdum.

Dude you project I don't have sense of morality, people who don't share your ideology also believe you have no sense of morality. You're ignoring the same quality from the former statement. Thats psychological projection.

Another example of psychological projection is, a Theist project that athiests are poor because they don't believe in God, he forgot or ignore the same quality that there are theists that are poor.

I have already addressed this, still, it is none of your concern!

Yahweh, Allah are public matters, saying you believe in Yahweh and again Allah is ridiculous regards thier nature and origin.

sino:

Wa alaykum salam bro, eid mubarak.

Many thanks for your advice, honestly, I do know it is a waste of time trying to prove almost anything to tintingz, this is not the first time I am having a discussion with him, but sometimes, I just still have hope, Allah (SWT) is the one who changes the heart of man. I have tried to probe his present disposition and seek what really gives him the confidence in his disbelief. Unfortunately, he hasn't been able to make a reasonable case for himself, other than criticize, make mockery and insult religion and religious people. One thing I have come to appreciate about learning and knowledge is that, and this is borne by my constant interactions with professors from different fields, is intellectual humility.

Eid Mubarak in arrears bro That's common with most so called atheists. Insulting and making mockery of religions and religious people, jumping from one religious thread to another. It's pathetic.

They think they are more intelligent than people who profess faith cos they don't believe in the supernatural. They are most logical people on earth!

Exactly, intellectual humility. When someone thinks he already knows, there is no point trying to explain anything.

sino:

Lol, no free time o, but your suggestions are on point, especially, the hajia part and I do not know what is drying my writing ink, I have been suspecting you , you now write better than I do , I need motivation and inspiration! By the way, I have been finding it difficult to play games these days o, I think I have game apathy!

Lol We too will get hajia one day o . Write better than you ke?! You are still my boss, I learnt the rudiments of poetry from you faah.

Should we take a challenge for motivation and inspiration?!