He states that he does not believe in God but believes some parts of the Bible, especially the part that says being gay is a sin. He says he is not homophobic but suggests that gays should be segregated from society. He believes he is a (good) philosopher, yet he disrespects other people’s opinions and ethics…
Well, it is certainly possible to be homophobic for reasons that have nothing to do with religion.
(No, I am not saying that homophobia is good – I’m just saying that it isn’t always motivated by religious belief. Indeed, I think religious belief is likely to stem from something more fundamental about sexuality).
But “Sin” IS a religious concept. As is “Evil”. There are things that can be counter to the best interests of society (and no, I am not saying that homosexuality is, but it is easy to construe it being bad for society if you’re desperate to increase your numbers) – but that is a different concept than “Evil”. Earthquakes aren’t evil. Leprosy isn’t evil.
Indeed, even serial killers can be thought of as “diseased” rather than “evil”. That doesn’t mean you don’t protect society from them, but you also don’t spend time thinking about how they’ll roast in hell either.
Disrespecting other people’s opinions and ethics etc. is just a matter of being immature.
Anthropologically, it appears that there are times when homosexuality is bad for the species and other times when it is good. I remember seeing studies where the probability of being homosexual increased with birth order (that is, first born were least likely, second born were somewhat more probable, etc). We also know of multiple societies where homosexuals have roles that are integral to the function of society and heterosexuals don’t have those roles.
Are these patterns of evolution in genes? In society?
If I were you, I’d recommend he actually take a few courses in philosophy. Perhaps that will give him an idea of how the field traditionally works before he decides that he is the keeper of TRUTH.
Clearly he ain’t up to it yet.
Based on what you said…a really bad philosopher who only interests himself with his “enlightened” conversations and if he doesn’t take the Bible to heart then he has no right to pick and choose passages that condemn other people. The Bible is clear: either you believe or you don’t. There isn’t a gray area. He has a lot of growing up to do.
This person is so enthralled with his or her own ego that to give recognition to anyone who might be slightly different is an impossibility. It is either…be like me…or you are bad, wrong, immoral etc.
A true Christian will not behave in this manner. It is about a lot more than simply reading a few words from a book. It is a way of life. It is the acceptance that in the eyes of God, all people are of great value…even those we might disagree with.
In a word…this person is what I would refer to as an ego-maniac.
A dillweed butt-picking hypocrisy-fetishist.
Who’s that? Ron Paul?
I would categorise him as Closeted
and otherwise confused too.
A closet homo
As a typical christian.
not true … NO-ONE believes any of that RUBBISH in the ridiculous buybull
** I’m a bit worried about how well you “know” him !