The Fourth Factor

Please refrain from muddied waters, I am not refering to anything Catholic at this time. So we leave them to the curb.. Consider them Christian if you like. They are not what I am refering to here.
Lately some things have been happening on ATS. I'm sure I don't have to go into it.
I definetly don't feel right about any of the shizzle slinging that goes on here in these boards.
So now I come up with this idea for a thread.

The anamosity that exists between Atheists/ Evolutionists/ Agnostics and " fundies" (I guess is the
most recent handle for Christians ) most of the time serves
for great debate. Even though these dabates, can become overheated and cause
PEOPLE on either side to regress to less intelligent forms of communication.
I realise this is a problem, but I don't believe this to be anything out of the norm.

What I do see as being way over the top, in these debates, becomes
manifest with the addition of "The Fourth Factor".

Homosexuality is that fourth factor.

I could go on and give examples, reasons, do I have to?
I think I'll just save that.
Let me just say this instead.

I have no problem engaging an Atheist/ Evolutionist, in a debate about Gods
existance, what have you. Can't say I speak for anyone else but, to get into
a debate, with someone who is an Atheist/ Evolutionist and a homosexual?
With this as a disadvantage?
I must say, I would rather drink turpentine and take a wiss on a brush fire.

"I love Jesus Christ" When I say that people can guess with 99.99% accuracy
that I need a woman for a sexual pardner. In fact just taking a christian stance
makes it most evident.
I think you can see the disadvantage this puts" the fundie "at not knowing
wheather or not he is dealing with a person of the fourth factor. At the start of most all these debates that arise it being obvious who has taken" the fundie'
side of things.
So it is usually the other side stating their Agnosticism, atheism, Evolutionism.
I believe it would be considered polite to also let the other side know about sexual
preferance even though it is a nunya.
It is unfair to the course of any intelligent discussion/debate for one side to know something about the other that the other side, is left clueless about.

So if it dosn't get stated, expect me to ask.
In this little addition of manners, I think we can avoid the crust of what has been bringing a lot of us down.

What say you?

Soon to come, "The Fifth Factor"
Cheers











[edit on 5-12-2009 by randyvs]

I'm straight, ..... thats right ladies ( wink)


... However, you want homosexuals to disclose their sexual preference's to you while in debate, ... when you obviously harbour disdain for them.


what does it matter ? Randy, Randy, Randy, ..... put down that bible already, ... its blocking your view of god.

reply to post by IntastellaBurst

... when you obviously harbour disdain for them.

Why do you say this? Because I made a thread addressing what I see
as a problem.
No you are wrong I happen to think homosexuals can be very humerous
very informative people and I myself have had some very entertaining times around them.
As long as they know not cross certain lines, and they always do some
how, I have no problem being around them.

So I do like most. It is usually if they have a problem with me first
that we don't get along.
That is never because I was trying to change their ways or anything like that either.
I know better than that which is one of the reasons I thread.

Oh as a side note you didn't need to stste your preference.
Some how I knew.

For one thing i will know not to push certain buttons, or let the convo carry
so far or in a direction that would cause hard feelings.
It is just understanding whom I engage . Nothing else.

[edit on 5-12-2009 by randyvs]

reply to post by randyvs


I hate to be selfish and put in a tasteless plug but I think you'll find this relevant in a way. www.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't think it's homosexuality or ethnicity or anything like that that is being used to destroy religion. Religion is destroying itself....

reply to post by Agree2Disagree


Isn't that more of a declaration than a proposal?
Never the less I agree with your premise.
It seems to be one with no possible solution.

reply to post by randyvs


Right. So often times we think that battles/wars are external when often times they are indeed internal wars. We're doing it to ourselves and don't even realise it. Once we come to the realisation that these labels...even "homosexual" only cause us harm, then maybe, MAYBE, we can move on towards the height of awareness and accomplish the only goal set before us...

reply to post by Agree2Disagree


Well I mean to break down what you're saying, for me comes out to:

Terminology is the big problem. I'm sorry?

Homosexual = terminology

Gay = label

No I disagree. That's putting to much on it.

[edit on 5-12-2009 by randyvs]

reply to post by randyvs


It's not terminology, PERSE. It's...the action of using our words in order to create a separation...a divide...

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by randyvs

 

Right. So often times we think that battles/wars are external when often times they are indeed internal wars. We're doing it to ourselves and don't even realise it. Once we come to the realisation that these labels...even "homosexual" only cause us harm, then maybe, MAYBE, we can move on towards the height of awareness and accomplish the only goal set before us...

I agree.

We create the problem by separating our selves from others. People dont even have to be gay for us to create a aggressive opinion.

Its is very often our personal opinions and subjective knowledge that create the problems.

And its quite obvious that not every one share the same opinion. No every one has a problem with gays.

And i sure think God knows how to tackle the problem. God knows we cant chose what package we are to be borne with.

reply to post by spy66

... when you obviously harbour disdain for them.

With gay being a label and Homosexual the correct terminology it really dosn't apply here.

reply to post by Agree2Disagree



.. by saying that " So often times we think that battles/wars are external when often times they are indeed internal wars"

could you be implying that Randy is merely at war with his own homosexual tendency's ??? suppressed by his limited understand of " god's will"

With eternal damnation on one side, .... and sweet sweet man love pulling him towards the other ???

will the struggle ever end.

reply to post by IntastellaBurst


Ummm...nooo...that was not what I was implying. And also, I don't think that was appropriate....

reply to post by IntastellaBurst

and sweet sweet man love pulling him towards

That was so wrong look what you did to tut.

tut tut tut.

[edit on 5-12-2009 by randyvs]

Say, would you two like to come over some time, ... I have some hard lemonade over here ......

..... Yaawwn, .. its getting hot in here, ... are you hot ?? better take this off.



Still Randy, I don't see how knowing someone's sexual preference give's anyone an advantage in a discussion about religion, or anything for that matter.

I'm sure there are gay christians, so I dont really see belief's mixing with lifestyle.




[edit on 5-12-2009 by IntastellaBurst]

reply to post by IntastellaBurst

Still Randy, I don't see how knowing someone's sexual preference give's anyone an advantage in a discussion about religion, or anything for that matter

Ok I accept that as your opinion twice.

I disagree twice for the reasons stated.
What I suggest if you want to understand things better is go back to start.
Read and see that the word advantage is not being used anywhere.

A disadvantage is all that is mentioned. If you don't understand the difference we can't have a conversation.



[edit on 5-12-2009 by randyvs]

I'm with you Randy, ... I love the lord, .. in fact I'm gay, ... gay for god.

sometimes I imagine he's a hairy biker, and I'm just a bartender in a two bit town ..... when we meet eyes, ... to cut a long story short, .. it ends with us in the men's restroom, where he asks me to get on my knees to pray.

do you feel the same ?? .... Mr. Randy Watson

reply to post by IntastellaBurst


I completely mistook you. I thought you weren't receiving of God's glory!

reply to post by Agree2Disagree




aaaaahaha, ... congratulations A2D, ... you actually took a joke. And to think I would never see the day, ... my delicate spanish rose, you see ATS can be a fun place if you stray off of the defensive and realize people dont' make jokes at your expense, ... they make them for your entertainment, ... a way to spread love and joy, .. in our own unique way.

Originally posted by randyvs
So it is usually the other side stating their Agnosticism, atheism, Evolutionism.
I believe it would be considered polite to also let the other side know about sexual
preferance even though it is a nunya.
It is unfair to the course of any intelligent discussion/debate for one side to know something about the other that the other side, is left clueless about.
[edit on 5-12-2009 by randyvs]

Really, the problem with that would be that after stating every "other" factor people would make a differend stand in a conversation.

Oh... so you... uhm... gay.
So.. uhm... a gnostic here, you fithly unchristaian *&*^^
WHAT? A libertinian? God damn you man. Oh great, a socialist anarchist too?

See where that's going


Having said that - so few people able to take homosexual tinted conversation or any intelligent conversation for that matter, that it's of no importance

I'm still curious, Mr. Randy Watson, .... what is the fifth factor !!!