Replies

RE: It’s a feel-good article that misses the point that, if you can’t prove that it can be a by-birth condition, you also can’t prove that it can never be a by-birth condition. If you claim that someone must submit proof for their theory, then it is not unreasonable that you should also bear the onus of providing proof for your theory that says their theory is bunk.

If I say and insist that MH370 is in an airport hangar in Pakistan and someone asks me where the evidence is of that, on WHOM is the burden of proof? Me or the questioner?

If I cannot show positive evidence that the plane even flew to Pakistan, why is the burden of proof that it did not fly to Pakistan on the one questioning my assertion?

If I say and insist that MH370 is in an airport hangar in Pakistan and someone asks me where the evidence is of that, on WHOM is the burden of proof? Me or the questioner? If I cannot show positive evidence that the plane even flew to Pakistan, why is the burden of proof that it did not fly to Pakistan on the one questioning my assertion?

Barring evidence one way or the other, it's a stalemate. If we don't know, then telling ourselves what makes us feel good/superior, etc., does not mean we are right. It seems that the Catholic/Christian folks who detest homosexuality in and of itself without regard to whether the homosexuals are the in-your-face perverts or of the more quiet and unassuming nature, have some need for it to be an absolute, across-the-board choice with no chance of any cases to be "natural by birth". If God can allow kids to be born with serious birth defects and a host of maladies, why can He not allow some folks to be born homosexual? Call it a sin if you like, but understand that no one is free from sin but by the body and blood of Christ and that any sin is grounds for the penalty of spiritual death, we have all been as disgusting in God's eyes, before being redeemed in Christ, as the worst perverted homosexual. We all wish to find some sort of moral/spiritual superiority and we delude ourselves with our "righteousness". We get diverted with the delusions to the point where we focus on them and neglect many opportunities to carry God's Word and the Good News of the Gospels. We get so delude that we think we are purveyors of God's opinion when we may have no idea if the folks we look down our noses at are saved or not. If they are saved, they are every bit as pure and holy in God's eyes as we are. If they are not saved, we need to try to carry the Good News, not the condemnations, if we are to do the only godly work we are capable of - carrying the message.

I maintain that, if you cannot provide proof for your side of the theory, it is hypocritical to demand proof from the other side.