Creationism vs. Evolution

Incorrect. Since mutations are random it simply means that if natural selection were still the rule of the roost that they would be less likely to survive and pass on their genetic information. Thus, eliminating that genetic defect from the population's gene pool. That's survival of the fittest not evolution.

 

Here's another then. Hope you can accept this one.

The book Sex in America: A Definitive Survey, by authors Michael, Gagnon, Laumann, and Kolata, cites a study of homosexual male couples conducted by gay researchers.

The couples who participated had been together between 1 and 37 years.

Findings were as follows:

100% (all) of the couples experienced infidelity in their relationship within the first 5 years.
Couples who remained together past the 10-year mark were able to do so only by accepting the painful reality of infidelity in their relationship
More than 85 percent of the couples reported that their greatest relationship problems center on issues related to outside relationships.

NOTE: Data from the Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census shows that only 29% of gay/lesbian relationships last more than 7 years.

Study #2

A telephone survey conducted for Parade magazine revealed what was described as a “magnum order” of difference in the lifetime rate of infidelity among heterosexual couples, as compared to the rate of infidelity among homosexual couples.

Based on statistics from this study, which were mention in Parade magazine's article by M. Clements, entitled “Sex in America Today: A New National Survey Reveals How our Attitudes are Changing,” (Parade, August 7, 1994, pp. 4–6.), researchers concluded:

. . . even "committed" homosexual relationships display a fundamental incapacity for the faithfulness and commitment that is axiomatic to the institution of marriage.

Study #3

In a study of male homosexuality in Western Sexuality: Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times, M. Pollack found that

"few homosexual relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners.

Pollack concluded:

“Even in those homosexual relationships in which the partners consider themselves to be in a committed relationship, the meaning of ‘committed’ typically means something radically different than in heterosexual marriage.”

 

Pssssh, I think they're referring to people like tooter... So, we can't really compare that to straight relationships until they are likewise harassed and hated on. Of course relationships are going to be rough if you can't tell anyone else or constantly get harassed if you go out in public.


But just for kicks, here's a summary of a study that came up with opposite conclusion. Summary: gay couples are less likely to get divorced.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frederick-hertz/divorce-marriage-rates-fo_b_1085024.html

 

From your own statistic:
" It would be wonderful to proclaim that this shows that gay folks are more committed to their marriages than straight folks -- and given the recent rash of near instantaneous divorces (think Kardashian) this wouldn't seem that crazy. However, I suspect that this can be attributed to the types of couples getting married in these early years of same-sex marriage, and not a testament to the stability of lesbian and gay relationships"


Next.

 

Let's just say there is a greater chance of homosexual couples having marital problems vs hetrosexual couples

So what ?

What business is it of anyone else's but that particular couple ?

Stick to worrying about your own problems

 

So when I prove a point that people have argued and contested the response is 'so what, who cares?'

Doesn't seem like a valid argument to me.

 

What point ?

That same sex couples may have more realationship problems than hetrosexual couples ?

Even if that's true , so what ? I don't get it , what's your point ?

 

A relationship does not matter if your gay or straight.

Most relationships fail because someone starts to expect way more out of the other person, someone holds a high power job and cant turn off their authority, or someone just gets plain lazy and expects the other person to pick up their slack. One person find it funny to start arguments or wait till the other person makes a slight mistake and take it way out of proportion. Not to mention liars and cheaters who can not control them selves.

This happens if your in a gay relationship or straight relationship. /topic


evolution. The proof of a god is subjective at best.

 

Not really "next". The claim stated there is that they are less likely to get divorced than straight couples. Even if this dies down and they are no longer less likely to get divorced, who says it would be worse than strait couples as you have claimed. You have made some astounding claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. However as you have failed to produce proof for any of your claims I doubt this is any different. I am still waiting for pictures of your supposed meetings with Jesus.

 

I think that means he conceded your point.

I did renovation work on a homosexual hotel for about 6 years. (puts an end to the hateful secularist accusations of homophobia) The owner ended up having to give up the project and sell it because there was so much crime (drug use, dope dealing, violent assaults, murders).

Violating one moral code makes it easier to violate others.

 

No pics, the flash washed him out. All the evidence I have provided was quickly shot down because it was from an 'unreliable source' I don't know what else I can give you that you'd actually accept. The rock I posted for example, is that not a rock? I was told rocks take millions and billions of years to produce? Looked like a rock, felt like a rock to those that observed it? Is that not observational science? There is no observational science to prove your claim that the universe is billions of years old. There is no observational science that can create something out of nothing.

And even if you claim a vacuum CAN create matter eventually, which of I'm not mistaken they've proven, a vacuum is still something.

 

really? how would you know this?
(please don't refer me to Google)

 

A logical argument per chance?

 

holy crap...you uncorked that one...

we may never get that genie back in the bottle.