₦airaland Forum

AlvinPlantinga: Short answer, no , something cannot com out of nothing.

Long answer , "nothing" is not equivalent to empty space.Empty space is really not empty.It is made up of Cosmic rays,neutrinos , the gravitational field,space dust and a sea of virtual particles.

Nothing is not a sort of "thing" which exists,and stuff can pop out of it.Nothing in the literal sense is really nothing.

God is defined as a necessary existing being and therefore, he did not "grow" out of something, rather he always existed.there is no instance in which he did not exist in order to necessitate this "growth" from something.

Next question, can God create from nothing or ONLY from within his self?

buzugee: listen here dull007, the mole of a substance is the amount of that substance, equal to the quantity containing as many elementary units as there are atoms in .012 kg of carbon 12 isotope. hardly comparable to a molecule. what are ya ? the village id-iot ?

Just admit you were wrong.

bright007: ŵĥŷ in this age will someone still remain in perpetual ignorance.Its even in d lips of illiterates dat matter exist in 3 distinct states:gaseous,liquid and solid phase.Its sheer illiteracy to say air is nothing.Its just like saying bacteria and other microscopic organisms don't exist cos u cant see them with your eyes.

Well Done!

buzugee: CAN YOU SEE AIR ? YOU CANT. THEN IT IS NOTHING.

*puts my hands on my head*

[quote author=Tayo-D]@manny4life,

You keep getting yourself in a bind. There is nothing like a privilege right. Your right is something you have just by being a human being. What the government is constituted to do is to protect those rights and not grant them. That is why the constitution only gives the government enumerated powers. If anything at all, it is the people that limit the government and not the other way around. Just like driving, marriage is a privilege and it is given to you only if you meet certain criteria. Which is why we are not allowing 10 year olds to marry. If marriage was a right, then the government must be infringing on the rights of teens who are denied the privilege of that status because of the criteria the government wants. Are you getting the difference now?

Your rights are only limited to the extent that you begin to infringe on the rights of another. Laws are made to ensure you do not infringe on the rights of others. What the law does is protect the God-given rights, not issue them.[/quote]Marriage stems from the right to association and family life, consequently its a solemn agreement of matrimony between two persons. Its a human right and its an infringement on one's liberty if the State otherwise sets out to bar or restrict it.

State laws on marriage regularize and outline the processes, and also protects the rights of others; thus incest, pedophilia is prohibited. First the anticipated rights of a child in the marriage is a concern of the State, while pedophilia is to protect the person of the minor. Bestiality lacks the requisite consent.

The effect of the union is the reflection of the wishes of the married persons, such as that to be recognized as one.

The reluctance to accept/recognize gay marriages is cultural, not constitutional.

Isn't it worse to blindly follow the Europeans and discard it??

Its separates lawyers from regular businessmen, give the court that atomsphere of sobriety and trust. Items of the dressing are like badges signifying position, yrs of practices, level of judge, SAN etc.. It helps.

[quote author=Tayo-D]So why not extrapolate and apply that to the discussion, or better still apply it to Manny4life's outrageous assertion that rights are given to people by the State and not by their Creator.[/quote]"God" could have meant Nature

What amazes me most about the intelligent designer, is the inevitable consequence of being just another object of intelligent construct.

[quote author=Tayo-D]@manny4life,

You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. Below is taken from America's Declaration of Independence.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

You have rights based on your creation not on the benevolence of a government.[/quote]Its rhetoric which expresses that fundamental rights accrue by just being human. That its an inherent property of man.

Sagamite: Natural is an exclusive language of biology.

Normal is a language of ambiguity that can range from culture to biology.

I am sure there are several people/countries that regard polygamy, in[i]c[/i]est or adolescent-relationships as outside the "sophisticated", "cool", "funky" constitution and the modern idea of freedom.

Lesson: It is normal and healthy to use morality to devise laws. AND every country does it. So cut the BS of our ideology is more "sophisticated" and "modern" and "urban" and "progressive".

It is surprising how most of you come up with some pompous ideological rules to defend homosexuality, only to find out your own ideology breaks those rules.

Transgender is an expression of identity, you might consider it unnatural, but a person has such freedom.

Like medical care and plastic surgery, both aren't natural, right?

Sagamite: If something is natural and normal, you can't ban it and it shouldn't face morality rules. That is fundamental human rights.

If something is natural but abnormal, it is open to societal morality rules. Even though it is arguably human rights but might not be.

If something is unnatural but normal, it is open to societal morality rules. It is not human rights.

If something is unnatural and abnormal, it potentially should open the door to a psychiatrist's office. It is not human rights.

Morality rules are useful tools societies employ to make their society sane.

It is not rocket science, just simply making sense.

Your disagreement with gay rights rests on cultural perception. You are making use of languages such as "normal" "natural" "acceptable". Taboos is the exclusive language of culture and its overtly subjective. Deviant behaviour ranges from pedophilI.a to homosexuality, however in other cultures, pedophili.a, incest are SEEN as normal and acceptable, deviant behaviour goes from alcohol intake and sale, women performing masculine gender roles, tattoos, abortion, pacifism.

At the end of the day, you place culture/morality in its chameleon nature over the constitution and the modern idea of freedom.

Sagamite: What is the connection between homosexuals and blacks, women, palestines, jews, dalits?

BUT you are not direct! What are ur points??

Sagamite: But you can connect it with blacks, women, palestines, jews, dalits etc?

Joker!

Its necessary for you to be direct and state your points clearly. What is the connection btw homosexuality and bestiality??

Sagamite: What rubbish!

It is also easy for me to say:

The common ground between necrophilics, beastials, incestors, slaves, blacks and women has the failure to recognize then as humans and appreciate the necessary rights resulting from just being humans.

I'm sorry, but I can't connect the dots btw necrophilics, bestiality and incest with homosexuality?!!

Sagamite: No 1, I am not one of those in favour of sex education for kids pre-puberty. And even those post-puberty, I am only for the biological teaching, not sex education.

No 2, in most cases, it is just not sex education. It is indoctrination. It is promotion as a positive alternative. Not a neutral teaching. I abhor that for my child and I would not want to have my child miss education if I have to pull him/her out of the classes.

No 3, I would not wish my child to experiment with such disgust. Which is more likely if it taught as a positive as I said it would.




Watching men on TV kissing makes me retch and brings some bile to my throat. I will prefer I don't face that without having to restrict my TV viewing. I would rather restrict what is on my TV.

Secondly, it is also one of the promotional tools. Have you ever seen a Western programme where homosexuality is not shown in a positive light?




I disagree. Majority will kill to be raised in normal homes.

Secondly, you are missing the part of Kids that are allowed to be procreated into unnatural family units. What a hypocrisy by countries that claim to operate "in the best interest of the child". How is it in the best interest of the child to be created unnaturally and/or raised in unnatural families?




I don't compare deviancy and perversion to natural things.

What next? Necrophilics and bestials will be comparing themselves to blacks or women's rights?

The common ground between homosexuals, slaves, blacks and women has the failure to recognize then as humans and appreciate the necessary rights resulting from just being humans.

I don't think homosexuality can be compared with nudism, same scandal as comparing heterosexuality with nudism.

I think the subject - homosexuality - removes public concern, once there are consenting adults, under the constitution, they are guaranteed as anyone to full privacy rights, thus the question whether cultural factors are taken into consideration is irrelevant, whether the public finds its disgusting or unnatural is irrelevant, whether culture/history is against it is likewise irrelevant.
Every individual is permitted to define his identity, whether he feels gay or MSM or transsexual whatever he wants.

The article was dripping with malice. The writer felt CBN wasnt statutorily empowered to carry corporate responsibilities yet he felt the faulty donation didn't get to the "right" people which is ethnically defined.

The article omitted his experience in the banking sector, and presumed Sanusi was a bad teacher. Also be particularly interested in theology equals to fanaticism.

The North is badly impoverished and wretched with the highest level of illiteracy in the country, coupled with the intricacies of religion will result to fanaticism. Which everyone is suffering from.

Corrupt bankers have no case, including those with that publish free devotional. Remi's article is nothing but cheap bad xenophobic authorship

[quote author=big_sean]pls tell them there is separation of church and state over here.
Some people will find it hard to get used to that.
but that is how the US government was built to work[/quote]The Nigerian constitution guarantees it too.

dayokanu: I am with Obama on this

Even if I dont support their practices, I cant deny their rights

And some ppl yelling today. That was the same way anyone who supported women right, civil rights etc years back was viewed

Exactly, the substance being protected is the rights. Not whether u enjoy the acts.

analytical man: amazingly,obama is a great disappointment to america and generality of the world space.obama said he is a practising christian but his recent pronouncement on gay marriage has contradicted his firm belief in the word of God.as xtians,the word of God is our guide and finality to man's religionism.any body that goes against the word of God is summarily an antichrist.to this extent,i believe obama will soon meet his waterloo.[/color]

But the US and Nigeria are both multicultural nations! Not everyone is a Christian.

Besides religious beliefs are a big factor in the consideration gay rights

[quote author=~Bluetooth]I have not even talked about religion view here cuz it seems you want to make a point out of that.Technically,every society has a right to self-preservation even evolution trend has support the need of the continuity of life.Studies have even shown that homosexuality IS NOT genetical but as a result of environments people find themselves.
If people are not born gay/lesbians,how do they end up as one ? Since there is a possibility that gayism may affect normal human due to environmental factor.[/quote]I don't think any of such societal right u mentioned actually exists. Its oppressive and against the spirit of liberty to give such an imagined right above individual rights to freedom. The limit to human freedom is where it prevents another from exercising his own freedom.

Yes, everyone is a product of his environment, but everyone has the discretion to alter their personality in whatever manner they like. In line with civil freedom, everyone's judgment is deemed fit to exercise his rights

[quote author=~Bluetooth]The sanctity of marriage should not be abused to accomodate psychopaths.Anything sexu'al legal or illegal should be between a man and a woman not a man and a man or woman and a woman. [/quote]I understand Christian greviances and concern for the end of the world in propagating civil liberty and wider freedoms. BUT everyone is not a Christian, the Bible is not the constitution. The constitution allows a freedom of association, which includes marriage. Marriage in its barest form is an agreement.

Gay ppl who wish to congregate or marry are allowed to do so under the constitution.

SMH for Nigeria

logicboy: Karl Mark was right on many things about the society.

Religion is really the opium of the masses

Religion is a big influence in the manner in which ppl think. All that jazz and juju are distractions to a functioning society

[quote author=~Bluetooth]Agreement everytime as if they are better than other professions in Nigeria.To me,health service should be considered as essential services just like the police and military where unionism is prohibited.The essence of strike is to provide avenue to bargain for better welfare from government and the warring factions should be able to reach a compromise.
The state government cannot continue to allow the death of innocent souls who happen to bear the consequence of the strike while the doctors just insist on getting their own selfish demands implemented.It's insane ![/quote]that would be tyranny! Police should allowed under stringent rules to strike for better pay and conditions. Its no wonder its in this state.

Whether God had always existed, I wouldn't answer that yet, cos I would be derailing the thread. Just going to be relying on the OP's premise

Enigma: This is contradictory, my ol' good friend. I would say that by this, at best you are an agnostic - not quite an "atheist" (strictly speaking there is no such thing as an "atheist" anyway).

I have also pointed out before that I had noticed quite a number of Nairaland's self-proclaimed "atheists" subtly using style style to shift their positions to a form or other of agnosticism. I guess, we have done a good job of undermining the atheist positions afterall.

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't recall snthesis saying God has not always existed. Maybe he will clarify.

"I Am that I Am" is only one description. Even that matches your "Greater than the Greatest, Higher than the Highest" --- when you think about it carefully.

But then I also give you "The Beginning and The End"; "The First and The Last"; "The Alpha and The Omega".

Try also: "The One who IS, always WAS and IS still to come".

And try "The Almighty"

Yep, that indeed is your "Greater than the Greatest, Higher than the Highest".

If a man demonstrates to me that the Sun or a pen which he produces and mentions the natural benefits they give to him warrants their status as Gods and says they do exist; I can't deny that!

But I have always found the supernatural absurd which is what most religions are based on. Especially Abrahamic faiths.

"Greater than the Greatest, Higher than the highest" is more of a fallacy, because if there is a greatest, then nothing is greater than it! Just like the saying " immovable object is met with the irresistible force" but there would be no irresistible force with any immovable object around.

"I AM THAT I AM" every entity's identity rests on its character, thus its a universal trait.

I'm that I'm is a natural concept. Unlike "Greater than the Greatest, Higher than the Highest" which is supernatural.

Its dangerous to say all gods don't exist. I don't think supernatural gods exist. So still atheist.

Don't you think you and sthnesis have very different ideas on the subject God?? Because sthnesis insists God didn't always exist, and that he was caused at a particular time.

Its like non believers respect God more than his followers