So you think because I'm an atheist, I think nothing matters? I formed my OWN beliefs. I didn't decide to adopt some 2000 year year old religion that was pushed on me. Christianity is the exact same as any other religion that has ever existed. It is a set of principles based on what was more likely than not either a dream or a hallucination brought on by a form of epilepsy. I study the PHYSICAL universe as well as I can, and I form my opinions and beliefs based on what has been acknowledged as fact by the scientific community. I see no reason to attribute anything in this universe to god, seeing as if he ever existed, all he did was start this all in motion and leave, because nothing shows any signs of divine tampering. You say everything has to have a creator. Does god have a creator? You say god doesn't need one. Then why does the universe?

@Ben, yeah, I apologize for doing this in a topic that it only has slight relevance to....but hey, at least it hasn't degenerated to name calling....anyway, this is kind of on topic, and I thought it was funny.... a bunch of stuff Jack Thompson's dumb ass has done.

In July 2005, Thompson sent a letter to several politicians urging them to investigate The Sims 2, alleging that the game contained nudity accessible by entering special codes. Thompson called the nudity inappropriate for a game rated “T” for Teen, a rating which indicates suitability for anyone 13 and older. Manufacturer Electronic Arts dismissed the allegations, with vice president Jeff Brown explaining that game characters have “no anatomical detail” under their clothes, effectively resembling Barbie dolls. Although the game does display blurred-out patches over body regions when characters are naked, such as when taking a shower, Brown said that was for “humorous effect” and denied there was anything improper about the game. Nevertheless, a command that could be entered into the in-game console in order to disable the blur effect was removed from the game in an expansion. No official reason was given for the change.

In April 2007, only hours after the Virginia Tech shooting (and before Seung-Hui Cho was actually identified), Thompson claimed that the shooter had trained on the game Counter-Strike . According to Thompson, the game "drills you and gives you scenarios on how to kill them [and] gets you to kill them with your heart rate lower." He says that Seung-Hui "was in a hyper-reality situation in virtual reality." Though Seung-Hui had last been known to have played Counter-Strike in high school, four years prior to the shooting, Thompson asserts that "you don't drop it when you go to college, typically." Thompson claims that Seung-Hui's roommate's claim that Seung-Hui only used his computer to write fiction is incorrect because "Cho was able to go room to room calmly, efficiently, coolly killing people." Prior to being identified, Thompson attributed the "flat effect[sic] on [Seung-Hui's] face" and the efficiency of his attack to video game rehearsals of the shooting. However, a search warrant released, listing the items found in Cho's dorm room, did not contain any video games, and a Washington Post story cited by Thompson later removed a paragraph stating that Seung-Hui enjoyed violent video games in high school. Thompson continued to maintain that "this is not rocket science. When a kid who has never killed anyone in his life goes on a rampage and looks like the Terminator, he's a video gamer." Thompson also sent a letter to Bill Gates, saying, "Mr. Gates, your company is potentially legally liable (for) the harm done at Virginia Tech. Your game, a killing simulator, according to the news that used to be in the Post, trained him to enjoy killing and how to kill." However, Microsoft did not create Counter-Strike - they only published the Xbox version of the game. It should be noted that the only game of note in the official report was "Sonic the Hedgehog".

Thompson's "high-profile crusades" have made him an enemy of video game aficionados. On occasion, Thompson has sparred directly with the gaming industry and its fans. In 2005, he wrote an open letter to Entertainment Software Association president Doug Lowenstein, making what he described as a “a modest video game proposal” (an allusion to the title of Jonathan Swift's satirical essay, A Modest Proposal) to the video game industry: Thompson said he would donate $10,000 to a charity designated by Take-Two CEO Paul Eibeler if any video game company would create a game including the scenario he described in the letter. The scenario called for the main character, whose son was killed by a boy who played violent video games, to murder a number of industry executives (including one modeled on Eibeler) and go on a killing spree at the Electronic Entertainment Expo. Video game fans promptly began working to take Thompson up on his offer, resulting in the game I'm O.K - A Murder Simulator. Afterwards, he claimed that his proposal was satire, and as of September 2007, he has not made his proposed donation.

i'd say homosexuality is natrual because it happens in animals as well.   

Of course calling it a genetic "defect" wouldn't be wrong either.  It's a bit insulting but it does hurt a gay persons chances at having children, though modern options like adoption and the whole getting people pregnant without having sex thing seems to have "fixed" most of that.

So you could say my mind is more of a defect because I just don't want a kid period. 

Actually there are some things that we know exist that we can't see, smell, taste, touch or see.

Things we haven't directly observed because we can't but have observed by observing their effects.  Like Dark Energy... and some elements on the periodic table, though they may have gotten around to making all of the ones we haven't seen in labratories at this point.  I'm not sure.

Good point actually.....they actually managed to accidentally turn a whole huge batch of fruit flies totally gay while trying to genetically switch their eye color.

@Kasz216 - Doesn't seem like you're particularly trying to disagree with me, so I won't really attempt to argue. You've pretty much introduced the points from which I could form the arguments anyway. I'll just single out the point of dark matter and say that you could still categorize that as evidence picked up by the senses through instrumentation, with a little additional inferrence tacked on at the end. But because of that, we can't exactly prove the theory (and therefore don't exactly "know") since all we have is some evidence, though I have no personal reason to doubt it's validity either. There is still a great deal of mystery regarding dark matter. Cool subject though. But that we can know things other than what we can sense really only helps my case here.

@apostrovich - Yes, turned them gay by *altering their natural biology*. I hope they don't end up doing that to all the fruit flies of the world, or else there won't be any more baby fruit flies and they'll go extinct. Of course... who really needs 'em (damn things), but you get the point. I'll address the larger post tomorrow; don't have time tonight. (Just so you know, we've been going at it here pretty hard, but as much as I may not agree with your side here, it's been a fun debate and I don't hate ya or anything. Just thought it might be good to be clear on that. And I don't hate gays either, really, just don't agree with what they do. And find it pretty disgusting, to be honest; and I think you do to, since you at one point said you don't care what they do, but made sure to tack on a "as long as I don't have to see it.")

I don't find men having sex with men any more disgusting than sex between a man and a woman or between two women. Just because I don't personally want to watch two guys do it doesn't mean they don't have every right to do it. Even if they DID decide to do it in front of me, I have these things called eyes. If there happens to be something in front of me I don't want to watch, I can turn them the other way. Same deal with my neck. Gay sex between two men is no different to me than any other kind of sex anyone engages in except for the fact that they happen to want to do another guy. I don't see anyone rallying against anal sex, and that is easily as "unnatural" as homosexuality, and doesn't even require gay people.

@stof - I'm sorry, the problem is what exactly? (Was there a connotation of "find it disgusting" that's too harsh? I'll swap in "am grossed out by".) Or do I necessarily have to hate people that do what I disagree with, or that do what grosses me out? When people pick their nose and eat it it grosses me out, and hopefully that grosses you out too; am I wrong to be grossed out by anything in general? (Let me also be clear that I know several gay people and have never condemned them personally. That is, I don't merely not hate gay people, I'm also as kind toward them as I am anyone else.)

@apostrovich - Frankly, you could say what you do or do not find disgusting and be dishonest with us or yourself about it, and we wouldn't know unless you later contradicted yourself. Believe it or not, many straight people find gay sex gross. If this is news to you, then you need to get out more, really. But if you look at what you're saying carefully here, and let's do that... "Just because I don't personally want to watch two guys do it doesn't mean they don't have every right to do it." Interestingly enough, this statement is true. I agree that they have the right to do it. I've said this several times in fact, haven't I? But at the same time, you're confirming that you don't want to watch. Obviously it bothers you to see it, and not in the same way as sex between a man and a woman would. You won't use the word "disgusting" because it more clearly contradicts your argument, but in a subdued way you are displaying that reaction. My only mistake is being honest with myself about it.

Apostrovich: "So you think because I'm an atheist, I think nothing matters? I formed my OWN beliefs. I didn't decide to adopt some 2000 year year old religion that was pushed on me. Christianity is the exact same as any other religion that has ever existed. It is a set of principles based on what was more likely than not either a dream or a hallucination brought on by a form of epilepsy. I study the PHYSICAL universe as well as I can, and I form my opinions and beliefs based on what has been acknowledged as fact by the scientific community. I see no reason to attribute anything in this universe to god, seeing as if he ever existed, all he did was start this all in motion and leave, because nothing shows any signs of divine tampering. You say everything has to have a creator. Does god have a creator? You say god doesn't need one. Then why does the universe?"

I didn't say that you necessarily think nothing matters. But if you actually analyze your own belief of atheism, if you take it to it's final destination, you realize that that's the claim atheism makes. Christianity IS my own belief. Unlike many other religions which seem to be based mainly on synthetic tradition, Christianity is a personal faith, one that makes active sense. That's why it's still applicable today; it's timeless, because truth is truth and people are people are people regardless of when they're born. And any religion that is pushed on you cannot also involve a decision on your part. If you won't believe in Christianity by your own free will, having it pushed on you is a poor substitute. I'm not pushing anything on you. I'm making a case, and I think I've done a good job. But ultimately you decide, so... there you have it. If epilepsy is the origin of my faith, I wouldn't be able to stand my ground for half a second in any debate defending it, so lose that idea right away. Again, if you buy into the idea that science is the only way to learn, you're cutting yourself off. You don't find it odd that science is constantly learning new things that contradict old things they claimed were "fact"? If you take anything a scientist tells you as a guarantee, then I would argue that your faith is far more blind than mine.
You see no reason to attribute anything in this universe to God? I'm afraid if I start getting into this sub-topic, I'll never stop... Let me simply address your last point, then, of "wouldn't God need a creator" by linking you here: http://www.doesgodexist.org/Phamplets/WhoCreatedGod/WhoCreatedGod.html
Enjoy.

I don't want to watch ugly people have sex either, it's the same concept. I accept that my views may not be the same as theirs, as there are no universal rules regarding regarding sexual preference. It's right to them, and that's all that matters. Whatever makes them happy.