Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just need some sort of scientific confirmation of the One Celled Pond Scum so i can have the same enormous faith you do in a personal theistic Creator not being required . Have you got any ?
And dont forget this : Could you list a few things I might deem moral, yet you would deem unethical , and why ? To keep it on topic, try and center your juxtapose around cohabitation . Thanks
1. Why cant you date someone for an extended period of time to get to know them better and to investigate your compatibility at handling challenges that occur ?
2. Would you be interested to know that the statistics show those who cohabitated first before marriage, have a higher divorce rate ?
3. If you have a deep respect for marriage and its concept, why would you want to do anything that dissends from that and is the exact opposite ?
4. If youre using CoHab at least in part, to discover your sexual compatibility....what will you do if/when that changes after your married ? Are you under the impression that the way things are during CoHab will in fact remain the same after youve taken a walk to the marriage alter ?
5. Are you ok with your Mate basing his/her love for you on how things feel to them at a particular time ?
6. Do u plan on adopting a greater level of commitment before the wedding ceremony , or, do you think youve maxed out in the current CoHab existence ?
My personal statistic is 0% divorce rate after co-habitating.
Marriage is not insulation against most of what you wrote above.
I support anyone's right to live how they choose, as long it doesn't hurt them or anyone else.
I just need some sort of scientific confirmation of the One Celled Pond Scum so i can have the same enormous faith you do in a personal theistic Creator not being required . Have you got any ?
And dont forget this : Could you list a few things I might deem moral, yet you would deem unethical , and why ? To keep it on topic, try and center your juxtapose around cohabitation . Thanks
Well, I can see that life exists, and there is plenty of evidence for evolution. Life's origins are murky, of course, but I think that eventually this will be resolved.
So, I can see that life exists, but I can't see any evidence that God exists. God would have to be far, far more complex than any life we see to have the sophistication to create life, yet you seem to think that God is exempt from the rules and can exist without having evolved from something else. Once you can convincingly explain how God could come to exist, then I may be willing to discuss life's origins.
Well, I can see that life exists, and there is plenty of evidence for evolution. Life's origins are murky, of course, but I think that eventually this will be resolved.
So, I can see that life exists, but I can't see any evidence that God exists. God would have to be far, far more complex than any life we see to have the sophistication to create life, yet you seem to think that God is exempt from the rules and can exist without having evolved from something else. Once you can convincingly explain how God could come to exist, then I may be willing to discuss life's origins.
If you really understood what is required for a living cell to come into existence from non living matter....and if you really understood the internal workings of a DNA molecule (comparable to that of a major citys infrastructure) , you would not make such flippant responses that blind/random/non purposed evolution did it.
Not only do u see that life exists...but you also see the vast order and complexity to things that you CAN see without a microscope , plus you can see the personal existing ; until you can convincingly explain how such non material entities such as intellect, reason, logic, love, abstract thought can come from a materialistic universe such as rocks, dirt, planets, hydrogen gas, etc... via a big explosion....then I may be willing to entertain your assertions.
My personal statistic is 0% divorce rate after co-habitating.
Marriage is not insulation against most of what you wrote above.
I support anyone's right to live how they choose, as long it doesn't hurt them or anyone else.
You didnt answer most of my questions.
It doesnt matter what your personal future projection divorce rate is after cohabitating ; if you and your partner are part of the human race, then, you fall into the statistics .
Marriage may not be problem free insulation , but it offers clear advantages and benefits versus the low-to-non commitment as found in CoHab with the back door left ajar.
People DO get hurt from a plethera of immoral lifestyles including but not limited to : Cohabitation, Casual Sex outside of marriage, Casual sex with others inside of marriage (swinging) , homosexuality , etc.... The enormous national STD Epidemic nullifies your philosophy of 'live as you like so long as nobody gets hurt' .
Why on earth are some of you trying to have a rational argument with 007.5? Can't you see that he/she is not open to a true discussion and will only continue to put forth his/her religious views as the be-all and end-all of the marriage discussion? Save your fingers the effort and just let it go. 007.5 is just here to preach. We don't have to listen.
If you really understood what is required for a living cell to come into existence from non living matter....and if you really understood the internal workings of a DNA molecule (comparable to that of a major citys infrastructure) , you would not make such flippant responses that blind/random/non purposed evolution did it.
Not only do u see that life exists...but you also see the vast order and complexity to things that you CAN see without a microscope , plus you can see the personal existing ; until you can convincingly explain how such non material entities such as intellect, reason, logic, love, abstract thought can come from a materialistic universe such as rocks, dirt, planets, hydrogen gas, etc... via a big explosion....then I may be willing to entertain your assertions.
You make the typical, narrow-minded arguments that I've seen repeatedly. You want to apply this "standard" of explanation to emergent phenomena of the objectively observable universe, yet fail to apply the same standards to the existence or emergence of what has to be even more inexplicable and unlikely - i.e., god. The universe works just as well with or without god, so I see no reason to resort to the "it must be magic" explanation.
You take god on faith, it seems, without any hard evidence. I accept the properties and phenomena of the universe on observation and their explanation based on repeatable experiment, and believe that the scientific method will eventually provide testable theories to explain what we may not yet fully understand.
Why on earth are some of you trying to have a rational argument with 007.5? Can't you see that he/she is not open to a true discussion and will only continue to put forth his/her religious views as the be-all and end-all of the marriage discussion? Save your fingers the effort and just let it go. 007.5 is just here to preach. We don't have to listen.
On the contrary , Ive always been wide open for discussion but without apology Im not going to side with an out of control Culture's philosophies which have brought much harm to people and continue to as can readily be seen. And it isnt 'religious views' which only govern my stand...it is just fundamental right from wrong as determined by actual consequences. Lastly, marriage goes way beyond what our Creator established...it has been upheld thruout the centuries because it strengthens a civil society and is the backbone of any nation. A Nation always degrades itself whenever self centeredness abounds thru hedonistic lifestyles such as Cohabitation and copulatory sex without a shred of meaning behind it.
You make the typical, narrow-minded arguments that I've seen repeatedly. You want to apply this "standard" of explanation to emergent phenomena of the objectively observable universe, yet fail to apply the same standards to the existence or emergence of what has to be even more inexplicable and unlikely - i.e., god. The universe works just as well with or without god, so I see no reason to resort to the "it must be magic" explanation.
You take god on faith, it seems, without any hard evidence. I accept the properties and phenomena of the universe on observation and their explanation based on repeatable experiment, and believe that the scientific method will eventually provide testable theories to explain what we may not yet fully understand.
Well, HOW the universe was made ....IS very narrow ! ..lol... A personal theistic Creator is the only rationale conclusion to a personal Cosmos operating on extreme razor edge precise Anthropics and Physics Constants which are held to as critical as 150th decimal place leeway for our Cosmos to be here so we can be here.
No, I dont take God 'on faith' because it has been scientifically established that there must be a high degree of personality (an Entity) responsible for whenever something personal exists ... lest you dont consider yourself very personal . Last time i checked, a Pet Rock or Dirt doesnt exhibit the personal in any manner . Even atheist guru Dawkins now sides with an intelligent/personal Entity for our Cosmos/Earth/First Life. So much for being a staunch 'Atheist' .What we are finding is, as Science continues with discovery, it is leading to the God of the Bible exactly as agnostic cofounder of NASA 's Goddard Institute, Dr. Robert Jastrow concluded in his book God and the Astronomer : 'All sciences are leading to Genesis 1:1 In the Beginning God made....'
I find it interesting that you assert Science hasnt reached complete understanding of our Universe...yet YOUVE reached complete understanding that a personal theistic Creator (Viz. God) doesnt exist --- which is a common adage and non sequitur among 'Atheists' .
Well, HOW the universe was made ....IS very narrow ! ..lol... A personal theistic Creator is the only rationale conclusion to a personal Cosmos operating on extreme razor edge precise Anthropics and Physics Constants which are held to as critical as 150th decimal place leeway for our Cosmos to be here so we can be here.
No, I dont take God 'on faith' because it has been scientifically established that there must be a high degree of personality (an Entity) responsible for whenever something personal exists ... lest you dont consider yourself very personal . Last time i checked, a Pet Rock or Dirt doesnt exhibit the personal in any manner . Even atheist guru Dawkins now sides with an intelligent/personal Entity for our Cosmos/Earth/First Life. So much for being a staunch 'Atheist' .What we are finding is, as Science continues with discovery, it is leading to the God of the Bible exactly as agnostic cofounder of NASA 's Goddard Institute, Dr. Robert Jastrow concluded in his book God and the Astronomer : 'All sciences are leading to Genesis 1:1 In the Beginning God made....'
I find it interesting that you assert Science hasnt reached complete understanding of our Universe...yet YOUVE reached complete understanding that a personal theistic Creator (Viz. God) doesnt exist --- which is a common adage and non sequitur among 'Atheists' .
I think your entire post is total nonsense, and you're distorting things outrageously, relying on distorted sources of information, or lying outright. Anyway, this sort of delusional nonsense belongs over in the Religion and Philosophy forum, as it's not about relationships and not on topic anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
