The Human Rights
Twilight_Fox
Member Posts: 448
First of all, I must warn you, I am a very virulent person. I have the strong conviction that every single human should have the same right as long as they respect the life and integrity of everyone else, if they don’t, then my viewpoint is different and this is for another story. So if you think that some people are lesser human, you may be offended by my post. In fact this post is there to show you why I think that you may be the greater obstacle of ‘a world in peace’.
I will not attack any of you personally if you post in this topic, but yeah, the next part will be offensive. Please mature person only.
Since I had a ‘nice discussion’ about homosexual rights on another forum, let’s talk about homosexual rights, since it’s serve very well my vision. Sadly, all I saw in the ‘again argumentation’ was about god, fear and stupid. Then again, if you are again homosexual rights, you/your god/your weakling soul may be offended my position, but I can’t be sorry for that for evident reasons.
**************** ****************
I personally hate thousands of persons with furious rage an anger (What do you expect? I’m human), but I have absolutely nothing again homosexuals. As long as they respect the living thing around them, they can be whatever they want. In my opinion each persons have the right to do whatever they want with their life as long as they didn’t hurt anyone in the process. I have no religious beliefs, if ‘God’ exist, with my respect, he is a useless toxic scumbag. And then, of course, I have nothing again marriage and gay marriage.
In my opinion, people that are again the rights of women, minority or homosexual are a bunch of cowards or are simply simpleminded. I don’t give a damn if ‘my White Christian English Country ruled by a heterosexual man’ become a ‘Yellow Buddhism Arabic Country ruled by an homosexual women’ as long as they respect the rights (life and integrity) of everyone.
If you are unable to accept that some people live differently that you, then you are more than useless, you are a parasite. Fight your fears, get over your stress and your anxiety and stand for yourself (or stay out of the debate, you clearly need a brain). If ‘your god’ treat you to send you or your family or any man and women of peace to hell if they didn’t follow every line of their book, then your god is clearly evil and deserve the worst beating ever. If that how ‘your god’ think, I hope that he will stay ‘in heaven’ forever because if he come down, thousands of people here will be ready to light is ass (and count me in). Congratulation, you are the faithful follower of a retarded dictator.
If you think that this is an hateful post then you need to reconsider yourself and your beliefs, you are the accomplice of thousands dead, mutilation, rape, physique and psychological abuse. The worst of you, your hate and your intolerance only have the power to awake the worst of the peaceful one, their hate and their intolerance.
Please find you a mirror, look you in the glass, your attitude and beliefs make you the worst enemy of the peace and stability. Because of your selfness and your weakness for a stupid ‘ticket to heaven’ you are creating an ocean of suffering. If your god exist and really endorse ‘everything in the book’ as you do, he is clearly simpleminded or evil. I could add pages and pages on the subject but since you’re A) not enough intelligent to evolve
too scared to see the truth C) too selfish to take the chance I come to the conclusion that discussions will lead nowhere.
**************** ****************
Seriously, you are the greater obstacle of a world in peace. Your hypocrisy/stupidity know no limits and on top of that you want YOUR rights to be respected? Pathetic. Yeah, the whole thing is a catch 22, humans are complex like that.
I will not attack any of you personally if you post in this topic, but yeah, the next part will be offensive. Please mature person only.
Since I had a ‘nice discussion’ about homosexual rights on another forum, let’s talk about homosexual rights, since it’s serve very well my vision. Sadly, all I saw in the ‘again argumentation’ was about god, fear and stupid. Then again, if you are again homosexual rights, you/your god/your weakling soul may be offended my position, but I can’t be sorry for that for evident reasons.
**************** ****************
I personally hate thousands of persons with furious rage an anger (What do you expect? I’m human), but I have absolutely nothing again homosexuals. As long as they respect the living thing around them, they can be whatever they want. In my opinion each persons have the right to do whatever they want with their life as long as they didn’t hurt anyone in the process. I have no religious beliefs, if ‘God’ exist, with my respect, he is a useless toxic scumbag. And then, of course, I have nothing again marriage and gay marriage.
In my opinion, people that are again the rights of women, minority or homosexual are a bunch of cowards or are simply simpleminded. I don’t give a damn if ‘my White Christian English Country ruled by a heterosexual man’ become a ‘Yellow Buddhism Arabic Country ruled by an homosexual women’ as long as they respect the rights (life and integrity) of everyone.
If you are unable to accept that some people live differently that you, then you are more than useless, you are a parasite. Fight your fears, get over your stress and your anxiety and stand for yourself (or stay out of the debate, you clearly need a brain). If ‘your god’ treat you to send you or your family or any man and women of peace to hell if they didn’t follow every line of their book, then your god is clearly evil and deserve the worst beating ever. If that how ‘your god’ think, I hope that he will stay ‘in heaven’ forever because if he come down, thousands of people here will be ready to light is ass (and count me in). Congratulation, you are the faithful follower of a retarded dictator.
If you think that this is an hateful post then you need to reconsider yourself and your beliefs, you are the accomplice of thousands dead, mutilation, rape, physique and psychological abuse. The worst of you, your hate and your intolerance only have the power to awake the worst of the peaceful one, their hate and their intolerance.
Please find you a mirror, look you in the glass, your attitude and beliefs make you the worst enemy of the peace and stability. Because of your selfness and your weakness for a stupid ‘ticket to heaven’ you are creating an ocean of suffering. If your god exist and really endorse ‘everything in the book’ as you do, he is clearly simpleminded or evil. I could add pages and pages on the subject but since you’re A) not enough intelligent to evolve
too scared to see the truth C) too selfish to take the chance I come to the conclusion that discussions will lead nowhere.**************** ****************
Seriously, you are the greater obstacle of a world in peace. Your hypocrisy/stupidity know no limits and on top of that you want YOUR rights to be respected? Pathetic. Yeah, the whole thing is a catch 22, humans are complex like that.
0
Comments
Honestly Its bizarre to me that the right to marry/get marriage benefits for homosexuals is still an issue. I live in Canada and we legalised gay marriage 8 years ago (technically the courts effectively legalised it 10 years ago in parts of the country). Last I checked the sky hasn't fallen... *looks out window*... nope, still there.
This is a sensitive issue for a lot of people, on both sides of it, and we've had a number of threads attempted about this very topic.
However, the original post here is...incendiary, to say the least. If that trend continues, I'll have to close the thread.
(If you want my advice, I recommend tempering the accusations directed toward the people who disagree with you. Right now the post reads very much like troll-bait.)
Some may have to rethink themselves, they may not be as ‘good’ as they think. Their opinions and attitude create a lot of suffering and horror all around the globe. If their intolerance is motived by a ticket to heaven.. bah, if such thing exist, their final destination may surprise them.
[tempered]
[tempered even more]
Besides, in case of some religions, like Islam, no words can change a thing. Unfortunately, in some cultures people will remain untolerant and divided, and no invidual can change this. Capabilities of inviduals aren't infinite.
But as we see, the rules are archaic, let’s take the prostitution for example; Men and women have ‘needs’, if it’s was not about drugs and abuse, prostitution would be already legal, but there are only one right way to do it and some people are too hypocrite with themselves and the others to make it happen. Some men and women will ‘happily’ and willingly work in this industry if they had insurance, protection, supervision and recognition. We would have a lot less sexual offender in the streets if the whole thing were well implemented and supervised and these men/women (not the minor/drugs addict/desperate; we have to deal differently with those) would finally work with dignity.
But guess who you will find on your way? The same citizen, the same ‘good’ husbands and fathers that think that they are protecting their family with their intolerance.. but again, in my opinion, they are preventing the peace and order that will really protect everyone.
1st - Sexual desire is something that no religion can control, and since they can't control it, they will try to place guilt on it.
2nd - If two people wanna be together, no matter their gender, that's their business, and no one else's.
3rd - Here's a video of Wanda Sykes about gay marriage =D
Empirical evidence challenges the ideology of hetero = natural, anything else = unnatural. What's left is the emotional attachment people have to these ideas, which is something that will change as cultures change (which we've already witnessed occurring in the West). I give it about another generation. Because we live in a heteronormative society, heterosexuality is seen as the norm and anything else is viewed as deviant, so most people take no issue with the in-your-face heterosexuality that is ubiquitous in Western society. Because more and more people are "coming out," (and not leading secret lives, as was the norm in the past) some people find this to be an obnoxious display of one's sexual identity. Since you're not gay, you cannot know what it is like to be gay and to have lived a secret life in fear of being ostracized, discriminated against, and even harmed/killed. You cannot know what it must be like for homosexuals to feel like they can be themselves. This is their time to feel prideful, as they have accomplished much. As I mentioned above, homosexuality will lose its stigma over time and, therefore, one's sexuality will no longer be an issue. It'll be as relevant as someone today being openly hetero.
There is no homo or heterosexuality - only SEXUALITY . Attraction involves genetics, personal background, adrenaline, inteligence and affinity , which are all natural things.
1. We don't take our moral compass from animals and we do not require examples of same sex animal relationships to understand that homosexuality is not an abomination. This only seems to come up where you have people claiming "unnatural."
2. (And this is a personal perspective) Love and lust are separate; romantic feeling being love with the inclusion of lust.
Refuting the "naturalness" of animal homosexuality implies that it goes against what is best for the species' survival. In some cases, as the article mentions, homosexual behavior provides certain evolutionary advantages (which contradicts traditional Darwinian theory). Of all the arguments against homosexuality, I think it's safe to say that using science to back up one's argument is probably the least credible, given the evidence. Since arguments from a religious or moral (philosophical) perspective don't depend on empirical data, I would think they'd be more appealing explanations for those that believe homosexuality is wrong. I'm not sure why you interpreted my response as yelling. Just hoping to have a dialogue, that's all.
As a teacher we discuss about rights and responsibilities with the kids. Children need to learn that as adults we have responsibilities.
If people were given rights they demand more of everything it is only natural. A demand for a right for people to marry anyone is a little irrelevant to say the right for food and a safe bed to sleep... Yet criminals will demand TV in jail and so on and so on and so forth...
If it was spun the other way. Responsibilities would keep people aware of what they need to do and not what they should get. We would all have a human responsibility to treat those with a different lifestyle respectfully, for instance. Prison wardens would be responsible for the care and welfare of their prisoners. And thus moving to what is presently the topic, a responsibility to respect the marriage vows of others.
Rights would not come into it.
If you were against, you would then need to argue a case for why gay marriage would be irresponsible, i.e. why is it detrimental to you or others. Are there really people out there who are effected so deeply by this that they lose sleep if two people have found happiness, however they have found it?
Many institutions would not work if based on rights. Schools for instance! We will have kids demanding the right to dance on tables in seconds! No. Everyone has a responsibility of care to each other. Students have a responsibility to learn and behave. Teachers have a responsibility to care and nurture. And why shouldn't the main ethos of everyone having a responsibility of care to each other go beyond the playground? We should all take a little more responsibility for our lives and actions.
...
On the other hand you could just forget all that and go with the flow...
Every holes a goal! (Ask any golfer!)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
By myself i a bit of a paradox, i don't pick sides, i think, and based in what i see i evaluate and accept some statements as truth or not, until someone give an sensate argument (by my stantards) or proof enough to make me change my mind (changes that i try to my best to accept when they start to happen, fighting any hint of my ego or arrogance that bind me into a fallen assumption).
Today, for example, i see more black people taking advantage of the concept of racism to advance in life than racism itself, strengthening weak arguments for selfish interests because he's black, gay, Jewish... Many feminist complain for rights but reject the idea of share some duties that comes from those rights.
Prejudice exist? Of course it does and were it exist with strengh normally people can't even react (as some countries in Africa where be gay is a crime), but politically correct today became the sword of injustice, cutting through justice to please the eyes of our society for appearances and generate a superficial sentiment of fairness.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
My position is that we can change the world with an step ahead the other and by not saying to anyone how they should live but some points must be adressed first.
Equality isn't isonomy, the first make equal rights and the second make only equal, as a picture is better than a thousand words...
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Equality X Isonomy
So for example i hear many womans complaining about sexism and when i say they're right and they should have the "right/duty" of serve in the army compulsorily at 18 years as any men, some got even anger with me!
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
About homosexuality for example, i'm all for acceptance no one doubt that, i would defend if asked the rights of any homosexual to be with his/her lover, to adopt a children, to have an official register to proof and make official their condition. If i testify someone beating another person just for being gay, i would help the buy being beated if that wouldn't put me into a huge disadvantage spot where i could put myself in risk.
I assume that for a time, the concept of 2 mans kissing near me got myself a bit unconfortable, but with time i supress this feelings.
The huge problems today, is that people tend to exceeds limits when they have a chance for it, i'm from Brasil and we have here an event called gay parade (happens in more than one state), it's an event made to promote acceptance, but people tend to radicalize. More than once reports of naked people where registered on these events, of 2 people getting sex in the middle of the street, of a guy making a blowjob to another in the middle of the event.
Many times i saw fights bursting in reason of these indecent assault, later they will complain that they suffered prejudice, but in days of gay parade i saw more than once an homossexual hitting another person in the street with a hard flirt (nipping an ass, putting his hands on the other guy dick...) and more than once i saw those guys getting a punch in the face. Well deserved i have to say.
Gay parade was born as an manifest, but today is just a party, another day of carnival for gays, it loose the basic principles that created him, that's the truth. People don't even put on the agenda of these events rights to fight for, it's just go whimsy or not and dance, drink and therefore on...
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Let's not agree to disagree, let's agree AND disagree @Kitteh_On_A_Cloud
Agreed. Homossexualism isn't natural. Can someone tell me the benefit nature intented for 2 mans/womans to hit the other or be togheter? No? Then my answer is given. There's not a logical objective for the specie behind this pratice.
By the way, as a new information, seveal doctors today position themselfs to recognize homossexuality as something created by epigenetic changes disrupting the hormonal production in the body.
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/33773/title/Can-Epigenetics-Explain-Homosexuality-/
Ps: NO SCIENTIST CLAIM EPIGENETIC CHANGES TO BE DISEASE, just to let it clear (cos some journal articles to sell a bit more or get more attention in internet sometimes translate the scientific studies as this).
Totally Disagree. What define normal is society, and let's take in fact that we live into a globalized world, so do not except me to submit and recognize laws of governments exceeded.
In the past, with the strong influence of religion over the State, it was "natural" that it's prejudiced and biased position got some support from the Government. People were a lot more ignorant at that time.
Gay prejudice has it's place in the history but in our actual society to keep the prejudice is unjustified, the moral standard barriers that prevent homossexualism to be respected is already on the ground.
So, unless you're the kind of person that barely took the hands of your girlfriend/boyfriend, think that sex is only after marriage, that you shoudn't make sex for pleasure but only for reproduction among other characteristics, ok i understand why you think this way, but unfortunally i have to inform anyone that think this way that they're on the wrong century.
Ps: @Mortianna, in fact biology and evolution state that heterosexualism is natural and homosexualism is not (and i believe only those 2 exist, bissexualism is an existence between the 2, not a third option), an homossexualism society doesn't exist because it would make the specie end, natural evolution would see it done.
The old Grecian society and even roman empire easly accepted the idea of homosexualism, however this didn't made it Natural, just normal. To give continuation to the specie, heterosexualism was necessary in both societies, thus most of the people there were bissexual (or at least fulfilled their roles to the family by procreating).
Designing Nature, I have given humans free will and absolute freedom to do as they please; whether they want to engage in intercourse with females, males, goats, snails, bananas or any other creature or device, they are in no way forbidden to do that. Moreover, I normally encourage humans to engage in any sexual activities that are good for their well-being or beneficial to their population, whilst discouraging those activities that are harmful. As a matter of fact, I'd condemn an unemployed drunkard who fathered 6 children rather than a homosexually-inclined person who does his job and little or no harm. Wearing religious symbols or spending wee amounts of time in temples has no positive effect on my judgement whatsoever. Quite the contrary, actually.
Once, I did forbid certain actions. However, my commandments apply only to Jews and only to those who voluntarily follow Moses (much less than 1‰ of living Jewish population worldwide; persons who have fallen under sway of Talmud, Kabbalah, modern Israeli politics or other heresy are excluded from the focus group automatically). Therefore, if you do not belong to a very limited group, you are not expected to follow any rules other than the rules of Nature. And these you cannot violate and live with it - at least not for long. It's how I designed it. If something is easily possible within Nature, then it is allowed. If it's not, then it will lead to the death of you, sometimes crippling you or your offspring for long periods beforehand, so as to further visualise that the committed act is not allowed within Nature. Any other limitations, whether religious, political, social, moral or philosophical, are merely human inventions.
I probably should not express my views personally. After all, there are plenty of human individuals who claim "God has willed it!", "God said it!", "God made me do it!" etc. Though, if you do choose to listen to these voices, be aware that they never have any evidence of my doing. My evidence is the world you see *if* you are able to see, or the world you perceive by any other senses, have you them. Call it Nature as I do or call it Physics, Chemistry and millions of different things but notice that everything that occurs occurs in an orderly fashion. Or, at least, it attempts to occur so. That is a very complex yet simple system and it is my doing. I'm not an old bearded fellow in a dusty white toga, I'm not an elephant-headed and six-armed giant, I'm not made of spaghetti and I'm not void. I am all that, everything, and nothing, and beyond.
Let me give you all a few invaluable pieces of advice that, if used properly, will give you some insight in how Nature functions and perhaps enhance your journey through the universe:
✓ Look within and around.
Nature is a system that does not develop over time. Its complexity is immensely vast, but limited. Imagine that as "infinity minus one" - less than boundless, yet still incalculable. Nature is present everywhere (and nowhere, too), including you. Think of it as of a computer programme that by itself designed the very blueprint that was used to construct you from scratch (technically, from certain replicable parts but let's not indulge in biology) and that is responsible for sustaining your pre-existence (meaning what happens before you are created, how and why you are created), existence (roughly, everything that happens during your lifetime) and post-existence (what happens with your components when you die and what happens to them next). Now imagine that you, too, are a computer that has this same programme installed - however, in some sort of a 'trial version', where you have access to limited options. Now, the trial version is provided along with its source code. If you know the programming language it is written in, you know how everything functions. But you don't. However, you use the Nature programme every day and see it used literally everywhere. Looking within yourself and looking around at other creatures and other things you are able to decipher a small portion of the code. With time (around 200 years per specimen is easily achievable within Nature, although in current circumstances around 60-180 years have to be subtracted from that value due to negative affects I might describe another time) and practice (doing things, doing different things, doing different things differently) your understanding of the source code will deepen. Presently, human knowledge of Nature's source code is alarmingly low given their capabilities, as they erroneously continue to look for answers in places where none are to be found.
✓ Equality is the worst form of discrimination.
Within Nature, there is no equality whatsoever. Every drop (or atom, or subatomic particle, if you prefer scientific language) of water is utterly different. There is no two things that are the same. Everything changes continuously, and even if, for a moment, two things appear very, very similar, they are not equal and are merely approximately convergent. Diversity is one of the core rules of Nature and it never allows two things to be exactly equal in a given moment. Therefore, imposing artificial equality is utterly unnatural. Nature considers every single entity singularly. Furthermore, it considers every single component, no matter how small or insignificant, singularly. There are numerous examples in the very short history of humans how disastrous imposing equality is. I will not point them out as I still (insensibly) believe that humans do use their mental capabilities at rare times and can discover things by themselves. Find and analyse examples of past attempts at enforcing artificial equality and compare them to modern attempts. You will be amazed at how similar all these endeavours were - and are.
✓ Your choices matter.
Every day you make countless choices. Whether it is the decision to fart in an elevator, eat bacon, marry someone, take a bank loan, sustain life or drop a nuclear missile, the choices you make do have impact. Every single choice, no matter how silly or unimportant it would appear, has a viable impact on the whole universe. Consequences of decisions are normally completely irreversible, sometimes they are reversible partially. Some consequences are extremely hard to deal with. And, usually, the consequences of single persons' actions require all their successors to deal with them. Thus, do think through the things you do.
There is much more to Nature than these three simple tips. But I will leave the rest for you to discover yourselves. I'm being too benevolent anyway. Or cruel. Perhaps both. But that's just me.
~Dee
I don't believe that using automatic writing connects one to God. I think it connects one to one's own subconscious mind, and can lead to some very dangerous and self-destructive ideation, depending on who's doing it. In your case, you happen to have enough education in philosophy, science, world religions, and history of thought to be able to "speak for God" while actually making a lot of sense. Perhaps all the great "prophets" of history have used similar techniques. I see it as a kind of self-hypnosis that attempts to connect to "the divine", or some transcendent spiritual reality. People have been doing it throughout human history. Before this latest "New Age" prophetic technique was developed, spiritual people called it "prayer" and "meditation."
Your themes as one who attempts to "speak for God" follow the usual pattern. God has a droll, dry, and even self-deprecating sense of humor. God gives humans absolute free will. God tells humans that many of their choices are very self-destructive, but God doesn't care whether they do anything about it or not. Humans are absolutely free to listen to good sense or not, as they choose. There's really no "should" or "ought" to anything. Nature is what it is. You do "x", you get "y". You can choose any outcome you want, but don't complain when you do the "x" that gets you the wrong "y", and you do it over and over expecting a different outcome. Nature doesn't work that way.
My problem with the "speaking and writing for God" technique used to arrive at these ideas is that it amounts to a fallacious "appeal to authority". The author is attempting to have his or her ideas taken more seriously, and with less room for argument or revision, than if the author were taking credit for the ideas instead of attributing the ideas directly to "God".
So, how much does the "appeal to authority" affect the truth value of the ideas being presented? Just because I object to someone presenting me with ideas and claiming to be God, doesn't mean that what they say isn't true. I actually rather like God's personality and agree with what God has to say in a lot of these New Age style texts. However, I acknowledge that many, many people probably don't agree for whatever reason, and, so, granting for the sake of argument that everything that "God" consistently and thematically says in this particular school of thought is absolutely true, and something that humanity would be better off studying and following, I would then question the effectiveness of choosing this style of writing to persuade.
If both the author and the reader understand it as a kind of Socratic game being played, that can help create new and beneficial insights into human concerns and problems, then it might actually be a productive intellectual exercise. However, if one or both parties literally believe that "God" is speaking, as "God" is traditionally defined, with all the authority of truth that the name "God" implies, then I can see a dark side to this "game" that can wind up doing harm.
I like nice butts. Be they male or female, gay or straight or whatever. Whoever owns a nice butt is alright by me because they are nice and that's all that matters to me.
That will be all.
~Dee
[spoiler]@belgarathmth
What you say there is very interesting and gave me a lot of insight into how modern thought functions. For the intellectual pleasure, or at least exercise, of you and perhaps of another few, I will comment shortly where I see it fit. What I will say largely diverges from the original topic, yet the urge to expand upon some matters is an urge I will choose not to resist at this very moment. Therefore, persons uninterested in reading a lot of rather shoddy headology should just skip this post. Odd ritualistic practices and attempts at extra-conscious experiences are alien to me and, in many cases, I would normally denounce them. Though that is my personal opinion, and that of my Goddess is slightly different. As a whole, we allow; no discouragement and no encouragement, only judgement.
I also have absolutely no education in philosophy, science, world religions or history of thought as you would expect me to have, although I am slightly flattered by your assumption. It has to be noted, however, that I am relatively conscious of what happened, what happens and what will happen, so I might have cheated a bit here. I would not say that I have a sense of humour. I may appear humorous, albeit unintentionally. The fact that English is a language with a tradition of joking is another thing; I try to fit in this tradition as I were a native user of the tongue, even though it is rather obvious I am no native user of English.
I actively avoid influencing human choices. It saddens me, though, how much humans overuse the concepts of "good" and "wrong". While these concepts are not utterly useless, the phenomenon of their overuse ofttimes leads to illogical assumptions, e.g. that I, as God, should be "good", or that humans are generally "good". "Goodness" and "wrongness" are totally subjective, whilst the concepts that really run the universe are surprisingly... universal. Thus, unsurprisingly, universal reference to subjective concepts gives birth to contradictions and uncertainty.
Another thing I might want to clarify (or rather say again, just for the sake of saying it) is that there is much, much more to nature than an 'x' and a 'y'. As it is with things, there may be everything, there may be nothing, there may be a something and yet there are also things beyond. As you noticed, Nature does not function in terms of 'do x and you'll get y', thus human science, which often sees things in terms of 'x'-s and 'y'-s (or, in other words, 0s and 1s), has so much difficulty understanding it. You certainly possess the know-how of founding religions. I, however, am no religion and I never require blind belief - I make up provide(d) evidence if I see it necessary and I am open for all sorts of creative critique and constructive arguments. There is, though, a severe impairment to my means of expression, this being English: little can be explained with words. For that reason, I often refer to (rarely precise) analogies that have a (very slight) chance of hitting the right strings in the head of the recipient. Then, again, there are things which I simply cannot (or will not) explain. So, in a way, it might be difficult to argue with me, indeed. You can nearly separate "wrong" from "good" and also try to look beyond them. Furthermore, you question and doubt while understanding that you might not be entirely aware of all circumstances. You, as opposed to me, have education. Likely, a very good one, for that matter.
It will probably be unsurprising to you that it is not at all my intention to be persuasive, let alone persuasive effectively. Having granted humans free will, would it not be excessively blatant hypocrisy to fall back on persuading them to believe in something I would want them to believe? Some humans in the past liked to look at me as if I were an artist. Then some humans say things in lines of 'if you look at art, you are, in a way, impregnated with its message; it then dwells in you like a parasite, and affects you in ways subconscious'. Thus, it may be that I am simply manifesting myself here for the sheer art of manifesting myself. It may be that I treat this forum as a painter would treat a canvas, as a means of communicating something incommunicable otherwise. Or I might just be trolling. Whether one embraces art or denounces it, as well as the interpretation of said art, is strictly up to the beholder, and I'm obviously not meaning a species of eyeball-y floating spheres. Although, should such beholders want to look at what I do, they are in no way constrained. Other than possible missing eyesight, that is. Games are fun. Seldom do I play games; I'm more of a maker. And sometimes, I am game. And I am other things.
Am I God..? Well, I could be a software developer, who gained insight through countless hours of logical struggles with computer code. I could be an athlete who listens to his body, and through this achieved illumination. I could be a scholar who studies ancient scrolls filled with texts in forgotten languages, and learned many a thing from thinkers long gone. I could be a treasure hunter who discovered an artifact possessing power unexplainable, and thus became sensitive to what lies beyond science. I could be a neurosurgeon who cut the right tissue to no avail, and realised the complexity that is more complex than what he could comprehend. I could be a fighter who knows his limitations, and yet consciously exceeds them. I could be a youngster that feels the burden of eternity on his back, as if he were carrying all his ancestors, all his siblings and all his children. I could be all these things together, or none of them. I could be something else. But I can be everything, and nothing, and beyond. And only I am who I am. This has little to do with belief.
Speaking of which, belief is a curious thing, largely specific to humans. There was this shepherd, the son of a carpenter. He never claimed godhood. And yet, it was associated with him by believers. A similar fate met a son of a merchant who married an older woman. Then, again, there are these little girls in the mountains tall who the society believes to be goddesses incarnate. And there are many others, likely more obscure to most. What is believed is different from what is.
I am certainly not a good old 'traditional God'. I also know no truth; I discern right and wrong similarly to humans, based on evidence and subjective judgement. In a way, I am omnipresent, albeit not entirely. I am not omniscient. I do not know what was in the beginning, because I know little of the period before I happened. After the beginning, there was Chaos and the other stuff. Chaos still is. I, to an extent, am the other stuff. The remainder of the other stuff is the Goddess. I and my Goddess are technically one, but we are also separate. And we separate. Divide. Essentially, everything (and nothing, and beyond) is a division. It is important to notice that the divisions normally get more complex the further they get from the division between us. A percentage of all these divisions sort of harnesses Chaos. All creation (and also none of it, and beyond) is created from tiny bits of Chaos that is, in a way, controlled by us, although this is largely independent. Uh, I don't know what I'm doing. English is really no good when it comes to explaining the universe. It all probably sounds terribly New Age, whatever this New Age would be.
Anyway, I'm awfully divagating from the original topic. Sorry about that. Thank you for joining us in this extremely lengthy session of babbling. We are doing our best to satisfy your expectations from a pantheon. Enjoy your stay on Earth and send us opinions on the new ghouls we installed on your graveyards.
[spoiler]
@God, whoever you are, thank you for taking the time to create a lengthy response to my concerns. I certainly appreciate Your skill in writing and thinking, as well as Your courtesy in responding to a human seeker of You. But then again, You're omnipotent, so I suppose that one of the "powers" an omnipotent being would possess would be the power to think and write clearly, limitations of human language notwithstanding. And, I really couldn't be bothered with You if You weren't courteous and considerate of Your creatures, so I'm glad that You are courteous.
As far as being on-topic for this thread, I think it started with somebody ranting about "human rights", and then, through some convoluted twist of reasoning, as certain human individuals seem prone to do, turned into a rant about homosexuality. I think that Your initial response was an attempt to communicate that You don't care whether human beings are gay or not, and You explained why. You also included quite a few, what I would call "theological" insights about Your nature.
In any event, thank You for giving me a brief moment of Your attention.
It's an Off-Topic forum inasmuch as it's not related to Baldur's Gate. We still expect people to remain on-topic within threads.