This question sounds like a joke, but it's really not

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]Recently there has been large scale national debate about what constitutes marriage. Is marriage to be between a man and a woman, or can it be between two people of the same sex? Many religious organizations have said that homosexuality is evil, and gay marriage is an abomination of God. They say that you should only marry or have intimate relationships with the person of the opposite sex.

So my question is: What is the church's opinion of hermaphrodites?

Since they have both male and female genitalia they are technically both sexes. Sometimes genetic testing doesn't help to determine what sex they are. A hermaphrodite can have cells with two X chromosomes and other cells have an X and a Y chromosome.

What do religious organizations think of this? If they are born this way doesn't that mean God chose to make them both sexes? Or neither sex, depending on your opinion.

Do these people have the right to marry then? And is this a clue that God may not care about what your sexual orientaion is?[/QUOTE]

Pastor Brock's response to AngusBeef123: Scott, concerning your question on hermaphrodites, people who were born with blurred sexual distinction (both male and female genitalia). These people will have to choose to be one or the other, and then resist the temptation to be the opposite. We all have to resist temptation and they must do so as well. Your thinking proves to be flawed, if not corrupt. You stated in defense of the queer movement, and I quote: If a person cannot identify fully with either sex how do they know where they fit in. What is God's plan for these innocent people. If this physical ambiguity is a natural occurrence why can't a persons sexual orientation be just as ambiguous? Could Homosexuality be as natural. I think so. Well Scott, I think not. You make a major mistake in your assumption that these hermaphrodites are a "natural occurrence." There has been 300 of these people born in the last 250 years, Now Scott, that's not what one would call a natural occurrence. By definition it is a queer thing. Queer: Differing from the usual or normal. Scott , when you attach Homosexuality to hermaphrodites in an effort to prove homosexuality to be normal, you do yourself great harm. Also, you should be able to see that comparing the homosexual to a Hermaphrodite is not a fit comparison. One is born into their condition while the other, the homosexual, chooses his. Now I'm sure you will say the homosexual is born that way. However, there is and never has been an once of evidence to support this claim. There is no "homosexual gene" there are only homosexuals in jeans. The statistics stated that homosexual teachers were 8 to 10 times more likely to sexually involve themselves with students than non homosexual teachers. This came firm the family institute and was printed in Psychology today 1996. Scott, forgiveness of sins comes only when one repents and turns from their sin.

I cant tell if you kidding or not

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]I cant tell if you kidding or not[/QUOTE]

does it really matter one way or the other, I mean I could say I was kidding and explain why or vice-versa, and really it wouldn't matter whether I was kidding or not, so why explain it. It's a post. Posts aren't god. I'm god...

AMEN PASTOR BROCK!!!!
I mean.... Brock god of confusing wisdom...

[QUOTE=DillingerEscape]AMEN PASTOR BROCK!!!!
I mean.... Brock god of confusing wisdom...[/QUOTE]

Did you ever happen to think that there might be other people who think the way I do? That reality is being changed out from under us, replaced, renewed, all the time... only we don't know it? Only the true thinker i.e. me knows it, and those who know me know as well that they do not know that which is not knowing. If that's true, I guess we're lucky not knowing it. This is confusing enough.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]Pastor Brock's response to AngusBeef123: Scott, concerning your question on hermaphrodites, people who were born with blurred sexual distinction (both male and female genitalia). These people will have to choose to be one or the other, and then resist the temptation to be the opposite. We all have to resist temptation and they must do so as well. Your thinking proves to be flawed, if not corrupt.[/QUOTE]

So they can just choose to be a man or a woman even though their anatomy and genes are both sexes? Wouldn't that mean that a man can CHOOSE be a woman? Or a woman choosing to be a woman? How is that different from a person choosing what sexual orientation they are?

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]You stated in defense of the queer movement, and I quote: If a person cannot identify fully with either sex how do they know where they fit in.[/QUOTE]

I never said that. A quote is supposed to be an exact wording of what another person says.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]What is God's plan for these innocent people. If this physical ambiguity is a natural occurrence why can't a persons sexual orientation be just as ambiguous? Could Homosexuality be as natural. I think so. Well Scott, I think not. You make a major mistake in your assumption that these hermaphrodites are a "natural occurrence." There has been 300 of these people born in the last 250 years, Now Scott, that's not what one would call a natural occurrence.[/QUOTE]

Just because it doesn't happen often, that doesn't mean that it's not natural.
It's a genetic mutation. Genetic mutations can cause a person to be born with an extra finger, have respiratory problems, or be a hermaphrodite.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]By definition it is a queer thing. Queer: Differing from the usual or normal. Scott , when you attach Homosexuality to hermaphrodites in an effort to prove homosexuality to be normal, you do yourself great harm .[/QUOTE]

Great harm? How?

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]The statistics stated that homosexual teachers were 8 to 10 times more likely to sexually involve themselves with students than non homosexual teachers. This came firm the family institute and was printed in Psychology today 1996.[/QUOTE]

What the hell does that have to do with anything?

I wish Twypdryre and Ozymandias were here for a more intelligent debate.

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]Recently there has been large scale national debate about what constitutes marriage. Is marriage to be between a man and a woman, or can it be between two people of the same sex? Many religious organizations have said that homosexuality is evil, and gay marriage is an abomination of God. They say that you should only marry or have intimate relationships with the person of the opposite sex.

So my question is: What is the church's opinion of hermaphrodites?

Since they have both male and female genitalia they are technically both sexes. Sometimes genetic testing doesn't help to determine what sex they are. A hermaphrodite can have cells with two X chromosomes and other cells have an X and a Y chromosome.

What do religious organizations think of this? If they are born this way doesn't that mean God chose to make them both sexes? Or neither sex, depending on your opinion.

Do these people have the right to marry then? And is this a clue that God may not care about what your sexual orientaion is?[/QUOTE]
interesting question. where do hermaphrodites fit in the grand scheme of the religiously inundated? i'll probably draw mostly on Roman Catholocism, as they usually are the major voice when it comes to matters of christianity and matters of state.
here's one example i found, it seems that science helps religion explain things, only when it's a convenient argument for religion:

i've seen this example explained by many people of the religious persuasion. but this still doesn't explain what hermaphrodites are supposed to do. it just gives you a few examples of how they might be produced.
here's a passage on androgyne, hermaphroditic persons, and how they have been historically handled by the catholic church:

it's quickly possed over, but he does point out that historically hermaphrodites were given up to the church to raise, or kill. catholicism is full of superstition, only they call it "faith". so you can see how the church treated hermaphroditism historically. but what about now?

you might call this a logical disection of catholic belief. what i mean by this is if you take the basic rules for marriage or even sexual contact or desire as posed by the church, these are the logical conclusions you should come to. the catholic church is very adamant in that the only persons who are to have sexual contact are heterosexuals, and persons who are to get married should have sexual contact. obviously the church doesn't condone hermaphroditic marriage, at least not any more than marriage of a person with a another person who has been gender-reassigned. of course, what they don't know they probably won't ask.

now, i know this isn't a lot of information. that's because there isn't a lot of information. it seems that the catholic church, and the pope, haven't taken a solid stance on hermaphrodites. this could be for several reasons. a) it's not very common, and isn't something they feel they should address due to it's very few numbers. they view it as a genetic malfunction, and isn't something that needs to be addressed, just as a person with 6 fingers or a person with an underdeveloped arm etc. c) they just don't want to stir up more controversy, and feel that it's covered by their stance on homosexuality.
to sum this up, it seems that there is no definate stance, but at the same time due to their already taken stance on homosexuality (since hermaphrodites are essentially both sexes, no matter who they have sex with it's partially homosexual) i doubt the church takes a favorable stance on marriage of hermpahrodites, or even sexual relations for hermaphrodites.

hope that helped you out angus.

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]So they can just choose to be a man or a woman even though their anatomy and genes are both sexes? Wouldn't that mean that a man can CHOOSE be a woman? Or a woman choosing to be a woman? How is that different from a person choosing what sexual orientation they are?

I never said that. A quote is supposed to be an exact wording of what another person says.

Just because it doesn't happen often, that doesn't mean that it's not natural.
It's a genetic mutation. Genetic mutations can cause a person to be born with an extra finger, have respiratory problems, or be a hermaphrodite.

Great harm? How?

What the hell does that have to do with anything?

I wish Twypdryre and Ozymandias were here for a more intelligent debate.[/QUOTE]

You asked for the church's opinion of hermaphrodite's. I gave it to you. It's not my opinion. It's the church's. It's your own damn fault for asking a question about hermaphrodites.

Oh, and if you call me stupid again, I'll have to say you picked me out, which you did, and insulted me, which you did, and violated board policy and need to be banned as a result... have a nice day

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]You asked for the church's opinion of hermaphrodite's. I gave it to you. It's not my opinion. It's the church's. It's your own damn fault for asking a question about hermaphrodites.

Oh, and if you call me stupid again, I'll have to say you picked me out, which you did, and insulted me, which you did, and violated board policy and need to be banned as a result... have a nice day ;)[/QUOTE]
how did you come across that "church's opinion" of hermaphrodites?

sounded to me more like it was your own opinion. and the board policy doesn't work that way brock. he didn't single you out, actually he just expressed his own opinion that your opinion is rather unintelligent.
he won't get banned for that.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]You asked for the church's opinion of hermaphrodite's. I gave it to you. It's not my opinion. It's the church's. It's your own damn fault for asking a question about hermaphrodites.

Oh, and if you call me stupid again, I'll have to say you picked me out, which you did, and insulted me, which you did, and violated board policy and need to be banned as a result... have a nice day ;)[/QUOTE]

I never called you stupid. I never called you anything at all. I think your mad because your just now realizing how half-cocked your ramblings are.

I think that the reason the church doesnt take a clear opinion of hermaphrodites is that the church just doesnt want to talk about sex. It's an evil, dirty, shameful thing. Your sexual organs are evil, and the idea that a person could have both kinds is even more evil.

It's just one of those thing thats "not nice to talk about." so they dont.

and thanks for backing me up trypdwyre

This is a very interesting question Angus. I think there might be a more in-depth response of what the catholic church's position is, is just a matter of finding it. Since i saw somewhere they keep making statements about conflicting things with their beliefs like: homosexualism, UFOs, etc.

But it might be good to not only research that one but other religions as well, specially those who believe in a "creator" for a god.

As for the mutation or chromosome abnormality is:

XXY - Klinefelter Syndrome: Male with slowly degenerating testes, enlarged breasts; one Barr body per cell.

Genetic testing does help to know what sex they are on other abnormalities since they usually have one organ more developed than others, but that doesn't help entirely defining the sex, since it could be a woman with something similar to a penis or a man with large breasts.

anytime angus. the vatican's lack of public opinion on the matter is actually rather startling. it seems that the vatican, despite their opinions being controversial or not, has tried to speak out on every matter that would be affected by their moral standings. i'm unsure as to if the matter is even widespread, or carries enough numbers to draw attention from the vatican. it's definately something i will be looking into even more, and i'll let you know if i come across anything else.

[QUOTE=Xk3zofrenik]This is a very interesting question Angus. I think there might be a more in-depth response of what the catholic church's position is, is just a matter of finding it. Since i saw somewhere they keep making statements about conflicting things with their beliefs like: homosexualism, UFOs, etc.

But it might be good to not only research that one but other religions as well, specially those who believe in a "creator" for a god.[/QUOTE]
good point. definately check out other religions. i used catholocism due to it's general out-spokenness on matters of inter-personal realtionships.
most asian religions tend to be more accepting of natural and mutational occurances in humans, and tend to embrace such occurances, rather than demonize or domoralize such mutations. Islam adheres to stringent rules and laws, so i dobut hermaphrodism would be accepted in their culture, at least not openly accepted. and again most christian religions have a tendancy to demoralize mutations, but some are moer accepting than others. a lot of the nondenominational sects of christianity tend to be more accepting of things that orthodox or denominational sects are. this might be due more to a numbers game (nondenoms are trying to draw in more people to get their church going) than it is a true belief.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]

sounded to me more like it was your own opinion. and the board policy doesn't work that way brock. he didn't single you out, actually he just expressed his own opinion that your opinion is rather unintelligent.
he won't get banned for that.[/QUOTE]

So, me getting offended by personal remarks about my intelligence is not nearly as important as say, oh I don't know, Jane S. getting offended? Are you saying the rules about making offensive remarks ONLY pertains to some people? That the rules only apply to friends of mods? Is that how that works? Cause it seems to me that that is pretty hypocritical to ban one person for being offensive and not ban someone else for being offensive. Does this mean I can insult anyone I want to, whenever I want to, without fear of reprisal?

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]how did you come across that "church's opinion" of hermaphrodites?QUOTE]

[url]http://rds.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=church+opinion+on+hermaphrodite+pastor+bob/v=2/SID=e/l=WS1/R=2/H=0/*-http://www.darrelldumas.com/dear_darrell_dumas.htm[/url]

[url]http://www.darrelldumas.com/index.html[/url]

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]anytime angus. the vatican's lack of public opinion on the matter is actually rather startling. it seems that the vatican, despite their opinions being controversial or not, has tried to speak out on every matter that would be affected by their moral standings. i'm unsure as to if the matter is even widespread, or carries enough numbers to draw attention from the vatican. it's definately something i will be looking into even more, and i'll let you know if i come across anything else.[/QUOTE]
I have read somewhere and watched it on Discovery about the vatican making statements about the UFOs and other more science related material. Obviously is not the pope who makes those statement rather cardinal or some lesser being in their creed. That is why it's so hard to find, but there must be something.

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]I never called you stupid. I never called you anything at all. I think your mad because your just now realizing how half-cocked your ramblings are.

I think that the reason the church doesnt take a clear opinion of hermaphrodites is that the church just doesnt want to talk about sex. It's an evil, dirty, shameful thing. Your sexual organs are evil, and the idea that a person could have both kinds is even more evil.

It's just one of those thing thats "not nice to talk about." so they dont.[/QUOTE]

The church DOES take a clear opinionon hermaphrodites. They have the same policy for homo's as well. You are just demonizing the church because you are against religion. Christians or catholics or whatever DO NOT think that sexual organs are evil, or that a person with both kinds is evil. You are making that up. How is that for half-cocked?

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]and thanks for backing me up trypdwyre[/QUOTE]

count on trypd anytime anything is anti-Brock... he'll always be there... even if Brock is not allowed to post to defend himself... he'll even take Brock's quotes out of context to make it seem one way when in reality it is not that way... thanks for the heads up klopper...

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]So, me getting offended by personal remarks about my intelligence is not nearly as important as say, oh I don't know, Jane S. getting offended? Are you saying the rules about making offensive remarks ONLY pertains to some people? That the rules only apply to friends of mods? Is that how that works? Cause it seems to me that that is pretty hypocritical to ban one person for being offensive and not ban someone else for being offensive. Does this mean I can insult anyone I want to, whenever I want to, without fear of reprisal?[/QUOTE]
it means that they're both opinions brock. your opinion is no more important than his is.
it's different than what happened with you fradulently using jane's name in a manner she didn't agree with because at that time you were asked to REMOVE it from your signature, which you didn't, you modified it. thereby violating the most important rule on this forum, you COMPLY with what a mod asks you to do, you do not ignore what a mod says.
and as he pointed out, he never called you stupid.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]count on trypd anytime anything is anti-Brock... he'll always be there... even if Brock is not allowed to post to defend himself... he'll even take Brock's quotes out of context to make it seem one way when in reality it is not that way... thanks for the heads up klopper...[/QUOTE]
aww brock, it's not just you, it's what you say.
of course i'm going to offer my help to angus if he asks for it. get over yourself brock. i'm not sorry at all for correcting your blatently wrong statement.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers][QUOTE=trypdwyre]how did you come across that "church's opinion" of hermaphrodites?QUOTE]

[url]http://rds.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=church+opinion+on+hermaphrodite+pastor+bob/v=2/SID=e/l=WS1/R=2/H=0/*-http://www.darrelldumas.com/dear_darrell_dumas.htm[/url]

[url]http://www.darrelldumas.com/index.html[/url][/QUOTE]
thanks.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]aww brock, it's not just you, it's what you say.
of course i'm going to offer my help to angus if he asks for it. get over yourself brock. i'm not sorry at all for correcting your blatently wrong statement.[/QUOTE]

my statement was not wrong nor blatantly so. I have proof that you are anti-Brock, in fact you posted a false statement slurring me in my absence. You took what I said and presented it inaccurately in a thread about me being gone. klopper showed me. that sort of blatant disregard for rules, regulations, not to mention saying offensive and untrue things about another cult member on your part shows exactly what sort of person you are, that you would insult someone after you banned them, then outright lie about what that person said, but this is why mods have some power, they can bend the rules to fit their needs...

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]The church DOES take a clear opinionon hermaphrodites. They have the same policy for homo's as well. You are just demonizing the church because you are against religion. Christians or catholics or whatever DO NOT think that sexual organs are evil, or that a person with both kinds is evil. You are making that up. How is that for half-cocked?[/QUOTE]

Well i guess he didn't include in his highly intellectual conversation: Rev. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire. Also known as the "gay" bishop.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]my statement was not wrong nor blatantly so. I have proof that you are anti-Brock, in fact you posted a false statement slurring me in my absence. You took what I said and presented it inaccurately in a thread about me being gone. klopper showed me. that sort of blatant disregard for rules, regulations, not to mention saying offensive and untrue things about another cult member on your part shows exactly what sort of person you are, that you would insult someone after you banned them, then outright lie about what that person said, but this is why mods have some power, they can bend the rules to fit their needs...[/QUOTE]
i quoted you word for word.
it was your statement, are you anti-brock?
i'm going to get into it with you again brock. it's destructive and really really pointless.
oh, and i didn't have anything to do with your banning, but i must say, you earned it.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]it means that they're both opinions brock. your opinion is no more important than his is.
it's different than what happened with you fradulently using jane's name in a manner she didn't agree with because at that time you were asked to REMOVE it from your signature, which you didn't, you modified it. thereby violating the most important rule on this forum, you COMPLY with what a mod asks you to do, you do not ignore what a mod says.
and as he pointed out, he never called you stupid.[/QUOTE]

I did not ignore what anyone said. I even private messaged back and forth with said mod and explained my reasoning as to why I would not comply. It was not blatant disregard for the rules or the authority around here. It was me explaining myself to someone who already made their mind up to ban me long before the sig in question even existed...

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]i quoted you word for word.
it was your statement, are you anti-brock?
i'm going to get into it with you again brock. it's destructive and really really pointless.
oh, and i didn't have anything to do with your banning, but i must say, you earned it.[/QUOTE]

out of context is not word-for-word. that would be like if I took your post and said that you said word for word "I'm detsructive Brock. I'm anti-Brock. I had to do with your banning, Brock." It's leaving words out and that's not what I said nor what you said. I didn't accuse you of anything. I was talking about mods and there is more than one to the best of my recollection. That's your opinion, that I earned it, but this is why you are anti-Brock, isn't it? Because you think I earned something you apparently thought I had coming... otherwise why would I deserve it, unless you believed it to be a good thing...

[QUOTE=Xk3zofrenik]Well i guess he didn't include in his highly intellectual conversation: Rev. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire. Also known as the "gay" bishop.[/QUOTE]

I'm quite sure any of us could find religious fanatics on the fringe of reason that could represent to us why "the church" is so bad. I personally think "the church" as a concept is bad, but I don't think bashing the entire catholic church is right just because they don't have any clear concept about people who make up a distinct minority of the world's population. Fuck the hermaphrodites. They don't get an opinion. They are not worthy of the church's approval...

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]out of context is not word-for-word. that would be like if I took your post and said that you said word for word "I'm detsructive Brock. I'm anti-Brock. I had to do with your banning, Brock." It's leaving words out and that's not what I said nor what you said. I didn't accuse you of anything. I was talking about mods and there is more than one to the best of my recollection. That's your opinion, that I earned it, but this is why you are anti-Brock, isn't it? Because you think I earned something you apparently thought I had coming... otherwise why would I deserve it, unless you believed it to be a good thing...[/QUOTE]
actually, it's not my opinion, it's the opinions of all the mods, since you seem to not be able to make that distinction, unless it so fits you.
you broke a rule, and failed to comply with a mod's request. you got banned, stop complaining about it. worse things have happened.
you're right then, i did take it out of the context of applying it to tuffy. i just pointed out that you have expressed feelings of that sentiment to persons who were in similar situations as the one posed earlier on in that thread.
now i highly suggest you get back with the topic of this thread, i would hate to actually have to edit this thread.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]actually, it's not my opinion, it's the opinions of all the mods, since you seem to not be able to make that distinction, unless it so fits you.
you broke a rule, and failed to comply with a mod's request. you got banned, stop complaining about it. worse things have happened.
you're right then, i did take it out of the context of applying it to tuffy. i just pointed out that you have expressed feelings of that sentiment to persons who were in similar situations as the one posed earlier on in that thread.
now i highly suggest you get back with the topic of this thread, i would hate to actually have to edit this thread.[/QUOTE]

so if it IS in fact ALL the mods, then why did you, like you just said earlier, have nothing to do with my banning, mr. mod? That makes no sense using logic. All mods agreed that I should be banned, so you are different how?

You just said I broke a rule then failed to comply with a mod, right? NOW... what rule was that... oh yeah, the offensive remark rule... sort of like being called unintelligent, which I find highly offensive... SO, that means that you are right. He cannot get banned for breaking a rule... since apparently I was not banned for breaking that rule... but I was banned for failing to comply with a mod, SO withthat said, if I officially complain about an offensive remark made against me, then he needs to retract it or else? Is that how that works? So where's my apology for the offensive remark? I demand a mod pm and get him to comply or else...

thanks again, mr. mod for taking my official complaint about said offensive remarks. I sure hope he complies with your pm to him about retracting said offensive remarks about my intelligence. if not, ban his ass... OR is this the ultimate test? Have I just proven that I was wrongfully banned since you don't act when the same exact thing is done to me?

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]The church DOES take a clear opinionon hermaphrodites. They have the same policy for homo's as well.[/QUOTE]

The church believes homosexuality is imoral. Does that mean that being a hermaphrodite is imoral? It's imoral to be the way you were born?

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]You are just demonizing the church because you are against religion.[/QUOTE]

I am?! Thats news to me.
Criticizing the church isn't being anti-religious, it's just questioning some of the church's policies.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]Christians or catholics or whatever DO NOT think that sexual organs are evil, or that a person with both kinds is evil. You are making that up. How is that for half-cocked?[/QUOTE]

Okay. I'll give you that one. Your right, catholics do not believe sexual organs are evil. But I meant that as a joke.
And I still stand by my statement that the church is reluctant to talk about anything sexual. The Church will go on and on about sexual themes in movies, TV, and music, but they dont as often talk about gratuitous violence, which is much worse. They talk about violence in the media sometimes, but they are much more likely to be outraged by sex.

They just treat sex like it is the most imoral thing in the world.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]so if it IS in fact ALL the mods, then why did you, like you just said earlier, have nothing to do with my banning, mr. mod? That makes no sense using logic. All mods agreed that I should be banned, so you are different how?

You just said I broke a rule then failed to comply with a mod, right? NOW... what rule was that... oh yeah, the offensive remark rule... sort of like being called unintelligent, which I find highly offensive... SO, that means that you are right. He cannot get banned for breaking a rule... since apparently I was not banned for breaking that rule... but I was banned for failing to comply with a mod, SO withthat said, if I officially complain about an offensive remark made against me, then he needs to retract it or else? Is that how that works? So where's my apology for the offensive remark? I demand a mod pm and get him to comply or else...

thanks again, mr. mod for taking my official complaint about said offensive remarks. I sure hope he complies with your pm to him about retracting said offensive remarks about my intelligence. if not, ban his ass... OR is this the ultimate test? Have I just proven that I was wrongfully banned since you don't act when the same exact thing is done to me?[/QUOTE]
sorry brock, still not how it works. how is it that everyone else understands why what you did and what he's doing is so much different?
anyway, i didn't have anything to do with your banning. it wasn't my decision, i wasn't a part of the decision making process. but i support it fully based on what i was told by the other mods.
as for it being all the mods opinions to ban you, well, the mods don't just do something without thinking it through, despite what you might think of the mods.

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]The church believes homosexuality is imoral. Does that mean that being a hermaphrodite is imoral? It's imoral to be the way you were born?

I am?! Thats news to me.
Criticizing the church isn't being anti-religious, it's just questioning some of the church's policies.

Okay. I'll give you that one. Your right, catholics do not believe sexual organs are evil. But I meant that as a joke.
And I still stand by my statement that the church is reluctant to talk about anything sexual. The Church will go on and on about sexual themes in movies, TV, and music, but they dont as often talk about gratuitous violence, which is much worse. They talk about violence in the media sometimes, but they are much more likely to be outraged by sex.

They just treat sex like it is the most imoral thing in the world.[/QUOTE]

To the church, I would say yes, they do believe that being a hermaphrodite is immoral. I'll tell you why. Because it is a deviation from the norm. If the church believes in fairy tales like god and the devil, then they must believe in demonic possession and they do. Perhaps they think hermaphrodites are gods way of punishing people. Some kind of hellish spawn of sin or somthing. I don't know for sure, but I bet that's what the pope thinks about freaks of nature. Then again mother theresa helped out lepers and freaks with birth defects, so maybe they just look at everyone as god's children, Can't say for sure, since they won't ever release an opinion because they look at hermaphrodites the same as homosexuals yet they also don't believe homosinsuality is a gift people are born with, rather a perversion of the norm, whereas hermaphrodites are born freaks...

I assumed you are anti-religious since I can find no pro-church statements in this thread. It would seem you are niitpicking the catholic church in particular about some stupid tiny infraction where you think they should have an opinion or something... or maybe for some reason chicks with dicks are your obsession, who knows...

The church is reluctant to talk about sexual stuff. Absolutely. I only wish more people would promote obvious stuff like that more often...

I think you exaggerate the church treating sex as immoral. Maybe some of 'the church' does, but then again every hate group on the planet uses the bible inaccurately to represent their ideas, like the nazi's did...

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]sorry brock, still not how it works. how is it that everyone else understands why what you did and what he's doing is so much different?
anyway, i didn't have anything to do with your banning. it wasn't my decision, i wasn't a part of the decision making process. but i support it fully based on what i was told by the other mods.
as for it being all the mods opinions to ban you, well, the mods don't just do something without thinking it through, despite what you might think of the mods.[/QUOTE]

so you admit guilt. good for you. you had me banned for not complying to a request made by a mod, even though the request was irrational and had no meaning. it was merely a mod saying 'I am a mod, and jane s. is my bestest friend, and I will use the rules for my own opinion to ban you if you do not make my friend happy'. Whatever. I just wish you wouldn't pretend you don't show favoritism to some membersand not others. Here, I am banned for offending someone else, since that was the rule I supposedly violated, yet when I am offended it's somehow not the same. Wrong dude. It's exactly the same. Being offensive is being offensive. It doesn't matter what the exact words are. Me feeling offended by an insult is the same as Jane S. being offended by what she perceived as an insult, even though everyone knows it was not, but it is oh-so-convenient to spread false truth, so please, by all means, continue to spread your disease and pro-faulted rules propaganda. You know the system is faulted, yet you are too narrow-minded to admit it and do something to make it better. I pity you that...

if you want to respond to this please by all means, if not, it's sorta pointless to repeat what you already said when you lied and said that this is not how it works. Everyone now knows that you are a liar and will never admit to lying, which is fine, that's your right as a mod...

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]I'm quite sure any of us could find religious fanatics on the fringe of reason that could represent to us why "the church" is so bad. I personally think "the church" as a concept is bad, but I don't think bashing the entire catholic church is right just because they don't have any clear concept about people who make up a distinct minority of the world's population. Fuck the hermaphrodites. They don't get an opinion. They are not worthy of the church's approval...[/QUOTE]

I am not bashing the entire Catholic church, I am just questioning what there opinion is on the topic of sex and hermaphrodites.

And as for your "fuck the hermaphrodites" remark, they deserve the same equal treatment as everybody else, even though they are a very small minority.

And when you say they dont get an opinion and aren't worthy of the church's approval, you sound like somebody who really hates people who are different.

i agree with this whole-heartedly. in fact i had almost posted something similar in my first post, about a semi-puritanical influence on christianity and the vatican when it comes to deviations from "normal" physical and psychological development. puritans, among many other strict religious sects, believed that a child born with a deformity was a mark of some sin the mother and/or father committed. this is one of the resons that historically deformed children (think hunchbacks and other individuals of obvious birth defects) were given up to the church (to be their servants or to be put to death), as a sacrifice to pay for their sins. but like most religious thoughts and beliefs there is some bit of truth to their thinking, only they took it to the extreme. excessive drug use may cause birth defects, improper diet, horomonal changes (possibly even due to stress or constant fear) and the like can make subtle or even major changes in the development process of a fetus. this is thought to be the biological standpoint that religion drew from and made a piece of folklore (if you will permit the word) to teach, instruct, draw fear from their followers to ideally create the best enviroment for a child, sin being akin to some physical/psychological/horomonal problem, and the desired result is perfection, which is every religion's major goal, to achieve perfection.

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]I am not bashing the entire Catholic church, I am just questioning what there opinion is on the topic of sex and hermaphrodites.

And as for your "fuck the hermaphrodites" remark, they deserve the same equal treatment as everybody else, even though they are a very small minority.

And when you say they dont get an opinion and aren't worthy of the church's approval, you sound like somebody who really hates people who are different.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it would sound like hate to someone with no sense of humor. However to someone with humor, they would realize that hermaphrodites are funny the same way that midgets are funny the same way swedish people are funny, on and on... seriously, how many hermaphrodites do you think exist that the catholic church should waste their time writing up and having opinions about them? You think they should neglect their work in third world countries and with the poor and depressed and the truly sad people who need their prayers and help and sit around and make up rules about hermaphrodites? Sure, in theory, hermaphrodites are as important as you or I, but again, do you really think your employment, assuming you have a job, has hermaphrodite policies too? Isn't that a travesty? Why doesn't george bush talk more about his policies on hermaphrodites. The entire idea that the catholic church should adopt hermaphrodite policies is the exact same thing... ridiculous...

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]so you admit guilt. good for you. you had me banned for not complying to a request made by a mod, even though the request was irrational and had no meaning. it was merely a mod saying 'I am a mod, and jane s. is my bestest friend, and I will use the rules for my own opinion to ban you if you do not make my friend happy'. Whatever. I just wish you wouldn't pretend you don't show favoritism to some membersand not others. Here, I am banned for offending someone else, since that was the rule I supposedly violated, yet when I am offended it's somehow not the same. Wrong dude. It's exactly the same. Being offensive is being offensive. It doesn't matter what the exact words are. Me feeling offended by an insult is the same as Jane S. being offended by what she perceived as an insult, even though everyone knows it was not, but it is oh-so-convenient to spread false truth, so please, by all means, continue to spread your disease and pro-faulted rules propaganda. You know the system is faulted, yet you are too narrow-minded to admit it and do something to make it better. I pity you that...

if you want to respond to this please by all means, if not, it's sorta pointless to repeat what you already said when you lied and said that this is not how it works. Everyone now knows that you are a liar and will never admit to lying, which is fine, that's your right as a mod...[/QUOTE]
a mod said that jane's their best friend and that's why you were asked to remove the sig? no, sorry brock, not how it works. you can ask any of the mods involved, take it to the top, and you'll get the same response i gave you. it's not what the mod did, it's what you did. jane did nothing wrong in asking that it not be your signature considering you claimed (at first) that it was a quote from jane. the mods did nothing wrong in evaluating and deciding that jane's request was valid, and to proceed and ask you to remove it. you did nothing wrong by responding to the mod and asking about your position. the mods did nothing wrong in banning you for not complying with their request.
point out my flaws there brock. i haven't lied, i've only told things as they have appeared to me.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]a mod said that jane's their best friend and that's why you were asked to remove the sig? no, sorry brock, not how it works. you can ask any of the mods involved, take it to the top, and you'll get the same response i gave you. it's not what the mod did, it's what you did. jane did nothing wrong in asking that it not be your signature considering you claimed (at first) that it was a quote from jane. the mods did nothing wrong in evaluating and deciding that jane's request was valid, and to proceed and ask you to remove it. you did nothing wrong by responding to the mod and asking about your position. the mods did nothing wrong in banning you for not complying with their request.
point out my flaws there brock. i haven't lied, i've only told things as they have appeared to me.[/QUOTE]

I could have sworn that I was told I was in violation of the offensive remark rule which caused the whole thing to begin with. I remember that much. I remember it all revolved around how I had offended Jane S. which according to the rules has nothing to do with specifics about what was said, but rather that the statement was offensive, no matter what was said. There was no rule about fake sig's. There was no rule about misquoting people. There was no rule on any of that. That was merely interpretation that fit the needs of said mod at that moment, the need being to get rid of me. It was the system using a loophole in the system to carry out an injustice, but I'm not stupid... I know that the system never divulges guilt on such matters, even if they free a falsely-accused innocent man from banned bondage... I'm like that Hurricane guy that Denzel Washington played...

I just read an article in TIME the other day about hermaphrodites.

[url]http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040301-593551,00.html[/url]

[QUOTE]True hermaphrodites like Kelli are thought to be quite rare. But less extreme cases of intersexuality occur more often than you might think. One estimate from a scientific review published in 2000 is that they represent 0.2% to 2% of live births.[/QUOTE]

That's just one "estimate" from "[I]a[/I] scientific review" but hey, it's numbers right?

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]To the church, I would say yes, they do believe that being a hermaphrodite is immoral. I'll tell you why. Because it is a deviation from the norm.[/QUOTE]

So being a minority is evil? Does that mean people who are born especialy short are immoral. And people who come down with rare diseases are immoral? After all those are deviations from the norm. And I suppose being a child who is two different races is a deviation from the norm too. I guess that makes them immoral too.

Immorality can only come from something you CHOOSE to do. Nobody CHOOSES to be born a hermaphrodite, male, or female, thats just the way they are.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]If the church believes in fairy tales like god and the devil, then they must believe in demonic possession and they do. Perhaps they think hermaphrodites are gods way of punishing people. Some kind of hellish spawn of sin or somthing. I don't know for sure, but I bet that's what the pope thinks about freaks of nature. Then again mother theresa helped out lepers and freaks with birth defects, so maybe they just look at everyone as god's children, Can't say for sure, since they won't ever release an opinion because they look at hermaphrodites the same as homosexuals yet they also don't believe homosinsuality is a gift people are born with, rather a perversion of the norm, whereas hermaphrodites are born freaks...[/QUOTE]

You shouldnt label people becuase of the way they are born. Calling a hermaphrodite a "freak" is just as bad as calling a black guy a nigger or an asian person a chink.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]I assumed you are anti-religious since I can find no pro-church statements in this thread. It would seem you are niitpicking the catholic church in particular about some stupid tiny infraction where you think they should have an opinion or something...[/QUOTE]

I am asking what their opinion is because the church acts like it knows EVERYTHING. They are the voice of God and they have the "correct" opinion of everything.
So why dont they have an opinion on this?

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]or maybe for some reason chicks with dicks are your obsession, who knows...[/QUOTE]

Now its just getting sad Brock. If you don't agree with my opinions, thats fine, I started this thread specifically to hear other opinions. But don't do something as imature as starting personal attacks against me.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]The church is reluctant to talk about sexual stuff. Absolutely. I only wish more people would promote obvious stuff like that more often...[/QUOTE]

I think the world would be a better place if people were never afraid to talk about anything. People should be more open and honest. Nothing should be taboo.

finally.

BROCK PLEASE DONT BITCH ABOUT GETTING BANNED ANYMORE. IF IT PISSES YOU OFF START A NEW THREAD AND ILL BE HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR OPINION.

AND TRYPDWYRE PLEASE DO NOT EDIT THIS THREAD.

[QUOTE=angusbeef123]So being a minority is evil? Does that mean people who are born especialy short are immoral. And people who come down with rare diseases are immoral? After all those are deviations from the norm. And I suppose being a child who is two different races is a deviation from the norm too. I guess that makes them immoral too.

Immorality can only come from something you CHOOSE to do. Nobody CHOOSES to be born a hermaphrodite, male, or female, thats just the way they are.

You shouldnt label people becuase of the way they are born. Calling a hermaphrodite a "freak" is just as bad as calling a black guy a nigger or an asian person a chink.

I am asking what their opinion is because the church acts like it knows EVERYTHING. They are the voice of God and they have the "correct" opinion of everything.
So why dont they have an opinion on this?

Now its just getting sad Brock. If you don't agree with my opinions, thats fine, I started this thread specifically to hear other opinions. But don't do something as imature as starting personal attacks against me.

I think the world would be a better place if people were never afraid to talk about anything. People should be more open and honest. Nothing should be taboo.

finally.

BROCK PLEASE DONT BITCH ABOUT GETTING BANNED ANYMORE. IF IT PISSES YOU OFF START A NEW THREAD AND ILL BE HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR OPINION.

AND TRYPDWYRE PLEASE DO NOT EDIT THIS THREAD.[/QUOTE]

IT'S TOO BAD YOU'RE NOT A MOD AND I DON'T HAVE TO DO WHAT YOU SAY... AS IF IT DOES NOT TAKE TWO TO TANGO... BY THE WAY, YOU SEEM TO BE THE ONE BITCHING NOW ABOUT PERSONAL ATTACKS AFTER YOU PERSONALLY ATTACKED ME, BUT TRYPD SAYS WE CAN PERSONALLY ATTACK EACH OTHER AND NOT GET BANNED, SO ALL IS GOOD...

as for the rest of it, I already explained myself in a post you apparently did not read.You are just saying stuff over that i already said. I already said hermaphrodites are as important as anyone in theory. I already said that hermaprhodites did not choose and were born that way. You are arguing with yourself...

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]Yes, it would sound like hate to someone with no sense of humor. However to someone with humor, they would realize that hermaphrodites are funny the same way that midgets are funny the same way swedish people are funny, on and on... seriously, how many hermaphrodites do you think exist that the catholic church should waste their time writing up and having opinions about them? You think they should neglect their work in third world countries and with the poor and depressed and the truly sad people who need their prayers and help and sit around and make up rules about hermaphrodites? Sure, in theory, hermaphrodites are as important as you or I, but again, do you really think your employment, assuming you have a job, has hermaphrodite policies too? Isn't that a travesty? Why doesn't george bush talk more about his policies on hermaphrodites. The entire idea that the catholic church should adopt hermaphrodite policies is the exact same thing... ridiculous...[/QUOTE]

By the way, YOU ARE A FREAK...

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]IT'S TOO BAD YOU'RE NOT A MOD AND I DON'T HAVE TO DO WHAT YOU SAY... AS IF IT DOES NOT TAKE TWO TO TANGO...[/QUOTE]

No, you don't HAVE to do what I say, but I would appreciate it if you respected my wishes and stuck to the main topic. After all going on and on about something not related to the main topic is spamming and you can get banned for it. Check the forum guidelines.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]BY THE WAY, YOU SEEM TO BE THE ONE BITCHING NOW ABOUT PERSONAL ATTACKS AFTER YOU PERSONALLY ATTACKED ME, BUT TRYPD SAYS WE CAN PERSONALLY ATTACK EACH OTHER AND NOT GET BANNED, SO ALL IS GOOD...[/QUOTE]

I never made any coments about you personaly. You got pissed off cause I said the debate would be more intelligent if trypdwyre and ozymandias were here, and I said your comments (not you) were half-cocked, but I never said. anything about you.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]as for the rest of it, I already explained myself in a post you apparently did not read.You are just saying stuff over that i already said. I already said hermaphrodites are as important as anyone in theory. I already said that hermaprhodites did not choose and were born that way. You are arguing with yourself...[/QUOTE]

In theory...?

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]Yes, it would sound like hate to someone with no sense of humor. However to someone with humor, they would realize that hermaphrodites are funny the same way that midgets are funny the same way swedish people are funny, on and on......[/QUOTE]

They sure are funny! Funny the same way black people got funny lookin big lips, and funny the same way asian people got slanted eyes! yuk yuk yuk

Now I agree that sometimes people can be way to PC, but you have to learn to be at least a little bit sensitive.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]seriously, how many hermaphrodites do you think exist that the catholic church should waste their time writing up and having opinions about them? You think they should neglect their work in third world countries and with the poor and depressed and the truly sad people who need their prayers and help and sit around and make up rules about hermaphrodites?[/QUOTE]

Who said they have to drop everything for this? Who said anything about stoping their work and making this their top priority? They don't have to stop anything I just wanted to know what their opinion of hermaphrodites are, after all the Catholic Church has an opinion about everything else.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]Sure, in theory, hermaphrodites are as important as you or I, [/QUOTE]

What exactly do you mean by "in theory"?
"in theory" usually implies that something sounds like a good idea, but doesnt work in real life.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]...but again, do you really think your employment, assuming you have a job,...[/QUOTE]

That just made me laugh out loud.

[QUOTE=Brock Landers]...has hermaphrodite policies too? Isn't that a travesty? Why doesn't george bush talk more about his policies on hermaphrodites. The entire idea that the catholic church should adopt hermaphrodite policies is the exact same thing... ridiculous...[/QUOTE]

Who said anything about the presidents opinion? Though he does act like he knows a lot he doesnt pretend to know everything. But the Catholic Church does, and thats why I want to know their opinion on this.