Is someone actually able to define clear line of where is the difference between semiverbal, demiverbal, and hemiverbal and how do you know which one? Because inconsistent information and not enough detail examples of different possibilities. How much is struggle with speak, and what's difference between struggle speech and strouble with language and wich is it talking about eith verbal?
Can ask questions if you nit understand what I'm saying, abd i'll answer them better after some slep when cam focus more on type better 👍👍
Not gonna lie, after that last ask I was kind of expecting someone to ask this!
Side A and side B are two of three views of the morality of homosexuality. The third is side X.
Side X takes the view that LGBTQ+ in any form is an affront to God, wrong and sinful. This view is linked to things like conversion therapy, "pray the gay away," and the idea that even feeling homosexual desire is sinful. Some side X people consider anything aside from straight attraction to be wrong, including asexuality.
Side A (for Affirming) takes the complete opposite view. They believe the Bible, rightly interpreted, does not condemn homosexuality as we understand it in a modern context, but only condemns pederasty and power imbalances--so, an older man with a youth would be condemned, but two people of about the same life experience in a committed relationship would be okay.
Side B is the middle ground, as it were. This is the view that LGBTQ+ relationships are sinful, but the desires themselves are simply part of who we are. What makes it sinful or not is how we choose to act with those desires.
Side B Christians would describe themselves as gay or bi and simply choose not to have same-sex relationships. Sam Allberry, a British pastor, is a prominent example of a man who acknowledges his same-sex attraction and chooses to live celibate in obedience to Christ.
I would describe myself as a side B ally. I'm entirely straight, but I have multiple side B friends whom I support and love. I have a couple of side A friends, and while I disagree with them, I do believe they truly love the Lord.
As for side X, most of the circles I grew up in are side X. I strongly disagree with them and how they approach the LGBTQ+ community, but I know most of them simply have a strong desire for holiness and for obeying God.
If you wanna talk about any of these further, let me know!
Agnostics aren’t sure if God exists. Atheists are sure God doesn’t exist. Simple, right? *sigh* Except, no. That’s not what these terms mean.
Atheism and agnosticism are one of those situations where if you ask ten people what they mean, you’ll get twelve answers. Even in the atheist and agnostic community, people use these words in slightly different ways. Some definitions, however, are more useful than others for precisely articulating one’s position on the God question. Here’s the formulation that I find most useful.
The top diagram shows the common, less useful understanding of atheism and agnosticism: A single axis, with belief on one end and disbelief on the other, and uncertainty in the middle.
The bottom diagram shows a more useful understanding: Atheism and agnosticism describe two different things, and each concept forms a separate axis:
Agnosticism-Gnosticism: Being gnostic or agnostic concerns whether or not it is possible to have reliable knowledge about God’s existence. (Note that in this context, “gnostic” simply means “having knowledge” and has no connection to the mystery religions of antiquity sometimes referred to as Gnosticism.) A gnostic believes that it is possible to know, one way or the other. An agnostic believes that it is not possible to know, one way or the other.
Atheism-Theism: Being theistic or atheistic concerns whether or not one believes that God does exist. (Again, note that in this context, “theistic” simply means “believes in God” and is not related to this word’s use in discussions about e.g. theism vs. deism.)
Thus, it’s possible for a person to fall into any of the four resulting quadrants:
So an atheist may state that they lack any belief in God, or that there is no God. These are subtly different statements. It may seem like splitting hairs, but many attacks on atheism presume gnostic atheism, when in reality the vast majority of atheists are agnostic atheists.
Where do I fall?
Well, that depends what we mean by the word “God.” Many people, theists and atheists alike, act like this word’s meaning is self-evident. But the fact is, there are a number of different understandings of “God” and where I fall on this diagram depends on which one we’re using:
A God who does not intervene in the world at all, i.e. the “Divine Watchmaker” of Deism who “wound up” the universe and then abandoned it
Don’t know, don’t care. (This position is called apatheism.) This God has no relevance to our lives whatsoever. Why even call them God?
An invisible wizard who lives in the sky. An all-powerful being who directly intervenes in the world. He’ll help you find a good parking spot at the mall if you pray sincerely enough. He punishes sinners with misfortune. And he cares a great deal about whether or not you believe in him.
ROFL, yeah right. I’m very comfortable stating that this God absolutely does not exist (i.e. I’m a gnostic atheist). I didn’t believe in this God before, and I still don’t.
A God who intervenes in the world in subtle ways, such as by nudging someone’s heart in the right direction
By its very nature, this God would be impossible to prove one way or the other – so agnosticism is the only option. I’m gonna be perfectly honest – I want this God to exist. I really do. So that would make me an agnostic theist, yeah? Except for two little problems. First, how arrogant would I have to be to presume that just because I want something, that means it’s true? Who exactly do I think I am, that the very fabric of reality bows to my preferences?? And second, Occam’s Razor.
Occam’s Razor is the principle that between two possible explanations for something, the simplest answer (which still accounts for all the data) is more likely to be true. Technically, it’s the answer which requires the fewest new assumptions – that’s what “simplest” means here. For example, Ptolemy was able to account for the motion of the planets with a geocentric model, but Copernicus’s heliocentric model does the same thing while dispensing with all those epicycles.
So if someone changes their mind and does the right thing, maybe they changed their own mind, or maybe God nudged them in the right direction. But the second explanation requires extra assumptions – that God exists, and does that kind of thing. So according to Occam’s Razor, I shouldn’t accept the “God did it” explanation. It’s possible, but it’s not the most likely explanation.
So as much as I may want to be an agnostic theist to this God, I’m stuck at agnostic atheism.
So what God DO I believe in?
This post is getting long, so I’m gonna have to save that question for another one. Stay tuned!
the post of yours abt it is probably old by now, but i was wondering what "fake goth" and "4th wave" are? and by "antis" do you mean like fandom anti-shipping ppl?
The Fake Goth is a certain TWERF I do not publicly name, as she regularly searches for mentions of herself, viciously attacks trans women she sees attacking her, and I’ve caught her attention once before. She routinely does things like working with anti-queer hate groups to advance bathroom bills, and has interfered with at least one trans woman’s medical care directly and SWATted another.
“Fo/ur/th wa/ve n/ow” is the campaign she’s spearheading to portray trans-supportive doctors as predatory and abusing confused autistic kids by “tricking” them into thinking they’re trans.
By “Anti squad” I mean basically anybody whose approach to sexual ethics is to loudly accuse anybody who disagrees with them of sex crimes.
