Forget about complaining about "my God", "my religion". I feel weakness on your part: you're reaching desperately for a straw man with which to cover your rear end.
In your article, you propose a pan-sexualist interpretation of "reality", implying a promiscuous outlook on life. I think that is evil because of the moral and physical damage that this world view brings with it: pleasure is implicitly chosen as a value superior to human life, which leads perforce to mass murder (STDs, abortion, trafficking in human beings and children, trading human organs, the destruction of families and youth, all self-perpetuating as more and more people become addicted to sex, yes, zombies of sex.)
No where does God come into this complaint. The evil of which I accuse this pansexualism and of which you too must be accused is not played out except here on earth. That your Theology or someone else's Theology also condemns pansexualism does not enter this conversation.
So I accuse you of pansexualism/Freudianism, and connect this with the wide spread destruction of human life and happiness on earth. Your reaching out to God makes me feel you're running away from the issue and covering your back with this STRAW MAN of "my God" and "my religion".
Do you think you could stay on theme? You're accused. Defend yourself or change, for the good of humanity, both yours and that of the rest of us.
sais the guy who tries to connect me with Freud with every other line...
now THAT's what i call a strawman...trying to connect your version of ethos (your religion) to a general standard about the entire planet.
People on earth have never been happy and more prosperous.
My position is the evolutionary theory. There are mountains of evidence.
"Freud" is all but tattooed on your forehead. It doesn't matter that you have not read Freud but absorbed his mindset uncritically from the environment.
Ideas have consequences. Promoting your sexualism, you promote social degradation with it. You know that STDs and the breakdown of the family, not to mention abortions are evil consequences that necessarily follow from what you "preach". You promote evil that leads to genocide, the destruction of a whole society. And that is a serious accusation I send against you.
God is your straw man, alright. Poor God.
Evolutionary theory?! Send me a few links to articles or books telling me what that means.
Evolution (materialistically understood) is dead. It's materialist as Freud was a materialist, so it's no surprise you are so "Freudian" (though not a psychoanalyst).
I wonder if "evolutionary theory" can support any morality at all. If a man is just a complicated life form deriving from (evolving from) pond scum, what's wrong with killing him or abusing him? How can random mutations produce something like a human person that is of absolute moral value, through a purely material process?
It can't. I want to see how any materialist theory can deal with that.
Reflect on this:
Is there any "evil" so evil that you can say that you would never, ever do it? Say, for example, could you say with all sincerity that cutting off an little child's head with a table knife is good? If in your heart, you cannot say for any reason, "that is a good act", then you are bumping into an absolute moral value in your heart/reason.
Now how can material alone, however evolved, account for this strong check within the human spirit? A global evolutionary theory cannot account for absolute moral value!
Yes, let's take a look at your "evolutionary theory"!
more strawman and ad-hominem. Do you hear yourself how dogmatic you are?
This is your opinion that has no basis whatsoever.
lol. How?
There is no objective morality other than what the environment equips us with depending on the given constituents of an ecosystem.
What if I told you to chose between your child and another and if you didn't do it I would kill your child? Don't bring extreme examples if you are not ready to handle them.
You are funny. I hope you are trolling (for your sake) :)