homosexuality - hard-wired, not chosen

[Juan_Bottom]

Let me help you out here Coffee Cream. You know that big fairy tale place you Christians call heaven? You know how you're looking forward to going up there and whooping it up with all your "Glory Hallelujahs"? Well, when you try talking to these liberals you'll find that they are just as religiously nuts about bringing heaven to this earth.

You see, they don't really believe that people are bad. It's really society's fault for providing a bad environment which caused them to act bad (if they can bring themselves to actually saying the word "bad" or "evil"). So they go around trying to discover ways of pursuing utopia here on earth and eliminating any negative aspect of society in order to provide the perfect utopia where man can live in perfect harmony and his fullest potential. The vehicle they choose to try to force this utopia on us is a centralized government which controls the decision making process. Only the enlightened ones (sort of like your priests)can be trusted to make the decisions in our best interests.

I know it sounds like a pipe dream but they believe it. They are actually more committed to their lunacy than you are to yours. So my advice to you is, since they have insulated themselves from listening to anyone's opinions other than their own, just have fun with them. Once the flurry of insults have come your way, stand your ground and throw it right back at them. It's fun to watch them cry like a bunch of babies and say they're being flamed.

"We are marching on to Utopia!"

Let me help you out. You are a bigot and no one on CC likes you. Everytime you open you mouth poop comes out. Your mouth is full of poop.

No one respects you.

It's fun to watch them cry like a bunch of babies and say they're being flamed.

"We are marching on to Utopia!"

I'll give you one thing, you're right here. Utopia is CC without you. And that IS something to march for.

[radiojake]

I think its funny that bradley assumes that everyone on the 'leftwing' or 'liberal' is after a centralized government. All i've ever said is that i dislike and distrust capitalism. I've never said anything about the government looking after us, because that is never going to happen - if anything i probably lean towards anarchism more than anything else (though I try to not use this word loosely as many people do not understand what it actually means, and hence the word has lost a lot of it's true meaning)

[tzor]

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

Coffee, the passage you cited is in a letter of Paul to one of the Churches, the people of God who have been made into the body of Christ which is the Church. They have been called to a higher standard, a new life in Christ and not the old ways they may have had before. I don't really want to over literalize the meaning of translated words (you know about that old testament passage where the Hebrew word for poisoner wound up as witch) especially when doing so might make one in danger of missing the writer's point.

But let's go back for a moment. "Sexualy immoral" also includes hetrosexuals. Then consider the words of Jesus against divorce and what he told the woman at the well who had had "several husbands" and the man she was living with was not her real husband. How many of these so called "Christian" churches who harp about any minor sexually immoral behavior on the part of homosexuals, put a blind eye to the same practice among hetroexuals and couples who through civil divorce and remarrage are in fact living adulterous lives with people who, in the eyes of God, they are not married to?

[PLAYER57832]

You see, they don't really believe that people are bad. It's really society's fault for providing a bad environment which caused them to act bad (if they can bring themselves to actually saying the word "bad" or "evil").

Definitely not what I believe. Not even close.

Nor is it much like what a VERY large number of liberals of my acquaintance believe. (I did grow up in CA)

So they go around trying to discover ways of pursuing utopia

I a sense, so do you ... your view of what that means just happens to differ from my own.

here on earth and eliminating any negative aspect of society in order to provide the perfect utopia where man can live in perfect harmony and his fullest potential.

Really? That sounds like a definition of heavan, not Earth.

The vehicle they choose to try to force this utopia on us is a centralized government which controls the decision making process. Only the enlightened ones (sort of like your priests)can be trusted to make the decisions in our best interests.

Not even close.

Or, not close except in the sense that you, too, actually need/want a centralized government. AS you have stated in other threads, A government is needed to ensure decent national roads, to make treaties with other nations, direct wars. Though you may disagree on the details, you also seem to agree that rules are needed to reign in companies in ways that strict capilatism cannot. These ways range from limiting monopolies to ensuring that advertising is at least honest to establishing certain basic levels of safety. I would add in health care, but I know you completely disagree there. .. and there is already a whole thread on it.

The prime difference is not that liberals demand a centralized government and conservatives don't. The difference is in the exact places the government should control and how.

HOWEVER, the irony is that the real truth, the REAL workings are often quite far from the stereotypical sides. Even the most hard-core businessman, for example, tends to want airplane traffic regulated to at least some extent. Similarly, they tend to dislike monopolies (except, perhaps when they are the monopolozer)

I know it sounds like a pipe dream but they believe it.

No .. and believing it IS what anyone believes pretty much cuts off any chance of intelligent debate

They are actually more committed to their lunacy than you are to yours.

Well, everyone is committed to their own beliefs, but I am not sure that anyone's beliefs match your stereotypes ... or I should say that only a very small and frankly idiotic minority actually thinks in the ways you have described as general liberal thinking.

But this seems to be heading towards the "what government works" thread topics, and away from the topic of homosexuality.


To get back to the topic:

First, regarding the natural/unnatural ... homosexuality is found amongst animals that are trationally fully heterosexual. It is also found within every human society. So, it could hardly be considered "unnatural".

"Bad" or "good" are completely seperate from natural/unnatural and irrelevant to that distinction.

I have already said, but will reiterate, that homosexuality is almost certain a combination of natural causes (including base genetics, genetics modified by hormones; direct affects on brains & so forth by hormones, diet, any a myriad of other undefinable qualities), unnatural causes (influence of chemicals, other man-made infuences upon sperm/eggs, fertilized embryos, fetuses, infants, children and even grown individuals) AND environmental influences. To further complicate, one can "be" homosexual ... that is feel attracted to people of the other sex and not act upon those impulses.

The "act" part IS fully within a person's control. BUT, they question is whether it is necessary that they control that tendancy or not.

Because it's the natural way to have children and propagate our species. Men and women have evolved complimentary sexual anatomy. Nothing you can say will change that fact. Homosexuals attempt to deviate from that and create an caricature of what is real.

In the case that heterosexuals cannot have children they can still adopt and provide a mother/father family. Homosexuals cannot provide both a mother and father to the child. It is cruel to purposefully deny a child either a mother or a father.

What is truly cruel is that children languish in foster care ... for older kids often that means placement in juvenile detention centers because there is no other place for them ... when there are perfectly responsible adults, who just happen to be homosexual, willing to take them.

And, forget any ideas you have of harm from such placements. Studies have shown no greater tendancy for those children to become homosexual (the greatest fear) and LESS tendency for them to be otherwise abused.

Are children best with two parents, male and female? Of course, but by your argument children should not be left with single parents, either.

Sorry, in this you are just plain wrong.

[heavycola]

blah blah blah

lazy generalisations are fun!

You see, conservatives are as delusional as they are selfish. They have all been suckered by the american dream, which basically says you must clamber over your own grandmother, if necessary, to get where you need to be - and where you need to be is in a detached suburban villa, with two lexus cars in the garage, payments to make on three widescreen TVs and 2 spoiled brats they might see occasionally if they could afford not to work. They believe that anyone who needs help doesn't, by definition, deserve it, either because they could have worked harder or because god is punishing them. And they are all armed to the teeth, as is their god-given right, in case they come across any non-whites on the drive back from the tennis club.

[PLAYER57832]

Looks like you have allied yourself with a group of narrow minded and hateful individuals. Are you a Christian? That is for God to decide. According to my Bible, most specifically John 3:16, it won't depend on homosexuallity. But if you will take his name to your words, you had best be quite sure you are correct.

I am.

So you quote John 3:16 but ignore the verses that say,

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

I highlighted the applicable part.

Specifically, there is a HUGE difference between saying that an activity is godly and saying that we should be persecuting and excluding those who do certain activities. Did you happen to notice the very long list of attributes. If we excluded everyone who sinned.. our churches and heaven would be quite empty.

To further quote ... even the least sin can drive you from heavan ...

And, I am setting aside the very real debate within Christian scholarshipon whether that is actually an true translation.

If you wish to believe and to teach your children that acting in a homosexual manner is wrong ... along with pre-marital sex, etc. Fine. BUT, you go well beyond that and step over the bounds of acceptability by claiming that I cannot be a Christian simply because I feel homosexuality is at least partially biologically based and that it should be tolerated, that homosexuals should be treated much as any other sinner.. .that is, with love and forgiveness and understanding within the church. Outside the church, they should be treated much as anyone of any different faith ... they should be allowed to live as they will provided it does not harm us. And no, homosexuality does not harm us!

Do you believe this is in the Bible or not? Does it make you feel good that you are basically taking the same position as people who hate God, Player?

hmmm. .. let's see some people who hate God like chocolate. I like chocolate. Yep, I see your point. I cannot like anything that people who hate God like ... yes, makes perfect sense!

You do realize that the people who are praising you right now say that the Bible is a fantasy book and have said some pretty horrendous things about God?

I know that I know baiting when I see it ... and I not all have said hateful things about God, though some have said hateful things about you.

Is it loving to not tell someone the truth about what the Bible says? A true friend or someone with compassion would speak the truth despite the consequences of what you might be labeled.

Which might be why I directed you to reread the Bible instead of declaring that you will not go to heavan.

You either believe the Bible or don't, but don't try to take one verse and spin it into an entire doctrine

[/quote].

I believe the Bible ... and as far as the "spin" ... well if you call terseness in an internet debate "spinning a whole doctrine" ... so be it.

The church has had various opinions about things since its inception. Aye .. prior to its inception. In fact, many suggest that Christ chose the apostles as much because of their different views and experiences in life as because of their agreements.

When you go from saying "this is what I believe ... and here is why" to "you cannot possibly think as you do".. then you go from truth to dogmatism.

Finally, yes, I have gotten rather dogmatic about one issue.. Creationism. BUT there is an extremely good reason. I DO happen to know that the arguments you ... and others have put forward so far are just plain false. The evidence is there. And, given how extremely critical the implications are I do get downright angry that there are so many pretended scientists who put forward what at least some simply MUST know are false. They can claim all they like that "the ends justify the means" ... but Christ stands for truth pure and simple.

Let me be clear, I WILL debate Evolution, WILL listen to criticism, BUT I WILL NOT allow somone to put forward as truth the idea that the flood "mixed up the layers" of fossils .. and other outright garbage that has been put forward as "criticism" of Evolution. The REAL TRUTH is that evolution (small "e"), meaning that species evolve from one another, change over time... is fact. The DETAILS of how this happen are theory. In most cases, though they are "theory" only in the very strictest sense. AND the FACT is that most CHRISTIANS ... not simply athiests & God haters.. and VIRTUALLY ALL JEWS .. including the Jews around at the time of Christ ... do not and DID NOT accept the narrow "Creationist" view. This idea of a new creation is a MODERN CHRISTIAN view, despite claims to the contrary.

To get back to the homosexuality issue. I already referred you to the Homosexual marriage thread to get my full view, but the short version is that I DON"T know if homosexuality is more sinful than any other act humans commit. By the Bible, anyone who does not believe in Christ will go to hell. That includes folks of other religions, who might be decent enough neighbors and contributors to society. I can say that I believe they will somehow come to Christ, believe and pray that happens, but I DO NOT KNOW. I know that it is my job to raise my children to love their God AND their neighbors, despite their neighbors sins. I DO know that I will not be harmed by living next door to or sharing pews with or letting my children be taught by homosexual individuals... and I am NOT talking hypothetically! I worry about a lot, but that is just not one of them.

I WOULD worry if someone were telling my children that they should be homosexuals ... first because my oldest is 7, but also because that is just not appropriate. I also don't want someone trying to convert them to Hinduism. Teaching them about Hunduism, teaching them things that will help them treat Hindus in a respectful, mannerly way ... absolutely, but convert ... that is a fine line that I won't cross with their children and I ask the same in return.

AND, if I seem a bit angry about all this, particularly your didactism, it is because the threats against my children right now do NOT come from Hindues or homosexuals or Buddhists... they come from a particular church in our area that quite actively recruits children into its programs and TELLS THOSE CHILDREN TO BELIEVE WHAT THEY SAY AND NOT THEIR PARENTS. I don't care how "loving" they pretend those actions are, they are anything but.

[dewey316]

I DON"T know if homosexuality is more sinful than any other act humans commit.

I would go a step further than you on this. Sin is sin is sin. There isn't worse sins, or better sins. There is only sin. Homosexuality is in my view, just that. The same as any sin, no better, no worse. We can have all the discussion in the world, about born that way, motives, right and wrong etc. It comes down to this. Fornication is a sin, homosexuality is a sin, lying is a sin. They are all the same. Sin seperates us from God, and without the sacrifice in Christs death, that seperation would be eternal. That is really what Christianity boils down to. You can't change the sinner, and what good does it do to change the action, if the heart isn't changed. Change the heart, the actions will change on their own, if the heart has been changed.

Player, there are a lot of things that I think we see differently, there are several that I agree with you. On most of this topic, I tend to think like you. I tried once to real the thread back to talking about the subject at hand. it didn't go there, so I guess we are now talking about the Christian view of homosexuality. I don't understand why there is such a debate about this among Christians, I don't think there should be. Would you let someone who was engaging in pre-marital sex into your church? I view this as the same. There is an expectation of accountability and change once that person has accepted Christ, I think the same goes for the homosexual. If that person is disrubtive, or trying to encourage other into sinning, or going against doctrine, then you can leadership needs to discuss that with the person, and if they are unwilling ot change, then maybe ask them to leave. But, there is no difference between homosexuality and any other sin. I feel that as Christians we are in the business of opening our doors to sinners of all sorts, not pushing them away.

[btownmeggy]

Player, there are a lot of things that I think we see differently, there are several that I agree with you.

She's a great gal, ain't she?

I was thinking the other day about how despicable certain people I encounter on here are. Just horrible, selfish, hatefully-minded bigoted jerks. And I asked, "Is it just because I disagree with them that I feel that way?" But... what about tzor with whom I certainly don't hold very much ideology in common? Or Player, whom I agree with in a lot of ways, but disagree with in some really important ways? But they're LOVELY, LOVELY people. And so I sat back happily, contented with my own fair-handed open-mind and tolerance.

[Juan_Bottom]

Player, there are a lot of things that I think we see differently, there are several that I agree with you.

She's a great gal, ain't she?

I was thinking the other day about how despicable certain people I encounter on here are. Just horrible, selfish, hatefully-minded bigoted jerks. And I asked, "Is it just because I disagree with them that I feel that way?" But... what about tzor with whom I certainly don't hold very much ideology in common? Or Player, whom I agree with in a lot of ways, but disagree with in some really important ways? But they're LOVELY, LOVELY people. And so I sat back happily, contented with my own fair-handed open-mind and tolerance.

Wow. Ditto.

[joecoolfrog]

Dewey

I actually have a certain sympathy with individuals who might not wish a gay person in their congregation or being married in their church, everybody has their own code of morality and it makes sense to wish to associate with those of a similar disposition. However this is not really the point, one may believe that homosexuality is a sin, may believe that it precludes entry to heaven, may even believe the practice of homosexuality disgusting but one should keep these beliefs in context. This means not discriminating against gays in society or encouraging others to do so, a person is generally best judged on his overall personality not because of one facet of it such as his sexual preference.

[tzor]

But... what about tzor with whom I certainly don't hold very much ideology in common? Or Player, whom I agree with in a lot of ways, but disagree with in some really important ways? But they're LOVELY, LOVELY people. And so I sat back happily, contented with my own fair-handed open-mind and tolerance.

You know at the rate this is going we are all going to get into one big virtual group hug.

Fortunately no one that I know is actually planning CONQUER * CLLUB * CON so it will remain at most only virtual.

But you're all lovely people. Even the mods. They are lovely people also!

So I'll buy everyone a round of virtual drinks. Good thing it's only virtual.

[dewey316]

Jones,

Yes it needs to be in context. As I said, in my post (I try to be as consistant as I can be, and try to type what I beleive, in a manner that is understandable), I view it the same as any other sin, it is no different in my eye. I work with, and am friends with homosexuals, I don't think of them any differently than I do my straight friends who are living with their significant others and are not married. It would be wrong for me to treat them anyone in any other way.

That doesn't mean though, that I need to bend my moral code, or that the church I attend, needs to bend its rules or code, for homosexuals. If my church were to allow a homosexual couple to be married at our church, I can say without a doubt, that I would be finding a new place to worship. Inside the church, there is an expectation, that when someone becomes a beleiver, they are going to try to avoid sinning, yes they will mess up, but there needs to be a repentant attitude towards that sin. Just like if someone were to have an affair, they need to be approched (see 1st Timothy for this). In much the same way, I see it very hard for someone who is homosexual to be repentant towards that sin, if they are still living as a homosexual. This is why I would not attend a church that allowed homosexuals to be married in the church. Now, if a homosexual wants to attend, great, I welcome them, like I welcome anyone else. If they come to the point of believing and being saved and are repentant of their sins, in my mind, they will want to also change their lifestyle. I am sure that before they were batized into the church, or made members, this would be discussed with the Pastor(s)/Elder(s).

You see, what you need to do as a Christian is seperate the sin from the person. I am called to treat everyone in the same manner, which is with love. It doesn't matter who that person is, or what they do, or how they live their life. But, at the same time, I do not have condone the action. I can say that something is a sin, that doesn't make me judgemental.

[jonesthecurl]

But... what about tzor with whom I certainly don't hold very much ideology in common? Or Player, whom I agree with in a lot of ways, but disagree with in some really important ways? But they're LOVELY, LOVELY people. And so I sat back happily, contented with my own fair-handed open-mind and tolerance.

You know at the rate this is going we are all going to get into one big virtual group hug.

Fortunately no one that I know is actually planning CONQUER * CLLUB * CON so it will remain at most only virtual.

But you're all lovely people. Even the mods. They are lovely people also!

So I'll buy everyone a round of virtual drinks. Good thing it's only virtual.

Can we have a virtual dance too? What about the "Gay Gordons"?

[heavycola]

I DON"T know if homosexuality is more sinful than any other act humans commit.

I would go a step further than you on this. Sin is sin is sin. There isn't worse sins, or better sins. There is only sin. .

Sin = one of the greatest mind-control tricks of all time.

[Neoteny]

I DON"T know if homosexuality is more sinful than any other act humans commit.

I would go a step further than you on this. Sin is sin is sin. There isn't worse sins, or better sins. There is only sin. .

Sin = one of the greatest mind-control tricks of all time.

He knows when you are sleeping
He knows when you're awake
He knows if you've been bad or good
So be good for goodness' sake

Santa's a rather creepy character, no?

[CoffeeCream]

I read tzor & player's posts and took some time to really think about what you both said. Really, I did actually sit down and ponder what you guys wrote.

My conclusions are:

1. That you are both still seeking the praise of other people here instead of listening to the Bible. Perhaps it makes you feel good to have atheists butter you up with flattering words. Trust me though, it's only temporary.

2. Warning people that the homosexual lifestyle is sin and destructive is not hateful or judgmental.

3. I need to go study the Bible more and learn how to show God's love in a different way. Obviously the way that I am articulating what I believe is being received as someone pointing their finger at other people and judging them. Part of that is my fault and part of that is your choice to interpret it that way.

4. I am no better than anyone else and if I came across that way it was unintended. Like I stated in point #3, there has to be a better way to communicate what the Bible says without sounding like I'm damning people. I've only been a Christian for awhile so I guess the best thing to do for now is go study and try to serve my fellow man. Perhaps by doing this, people will know my true intentions are only to warn and not condemn.

[got tonkaed]

cc...i think its pretty difficult to expect someone who is gay to interpret that message (especially with the connotations the words have) in the way in which you would like. Especially when you consider the amount of text spent on homosexuality in the bible, to come to the point where you can make a strong claim (as opposed to perhaps a weaker claim) about the lack of virtue of homosexual lifestyle, it is very difficult to put the words in a way that is possible to be perceived as nonjudgmental.

Consider what your aims likely are. It would seem (though perhaps i am being unfair) that you would like people to be brought closer to God and His Love. However, you are claiming that one cannot be anything other than heterosexual, even though as far as i remember the verses which do deal with sexuality, are not tied into the nature of Christs offer toward mankind of redemption (certainly not in the old testament - still only tangentially at best in the new testament).

It would seem that there is very little of a middle road for believers on this issue. Either you decide to make a big deal out of what amounts to a portion of a chapter of the bible, and claim that it takes a prominent stance toward an offer that otherwise seems to have no strings, or you soften your stance quite a bit. I dont think you can really take a middle line.

[suggs]

I dont think you can really take a middle line.

My world just fell apart. All the old certainties now count for naught.

[jonesthecurl]

I read tzor & player's posts and took some time to really think about what you both said. Really, I did actually sit down and ponder what you guys wrote.

My conclusions are:

1. That you are both still seeking the praise of other people here instead of listening to the Bible. Perhaps it makes you feel good to have atheists butter you up with flattering words. Trust me though, it's only temporary.

2. Warning people that the homosexual lifestyle is sin and destructive is not hateful or judgmental.

3. I need to go study the Bible more and learn how to show God's love in a different way. Obviously the way that I am articulating what I believe is being received as someone pointing their finger at other people and judging them. Part of that is my fault and part of that is your choice to interpret it that way.

4. I am no better than anyone else and if I came across that way it was unintended. Like I stated in point #3, there has to be a better way to communicate what the Bible says without sounding like I'm damning people. I've only been a Christian for awhile so I guess the best thing to do for now is go study and try to serve my fellow man. Perhaps by doing this, people will know my true intentions are only to warn and not condemn.

Good intentions there CC and I aapplaud your attempt. But you know who uses good intentions for paving stones...

[got tonkaed]

I dont think you can really take a middle line.

My world just fell apart. All the old certainties now count for naught.

well im a bit torn on this one, certainly i told him he could not be served best by taking a middle path, but does such a proclamation about a stance i am not taking, keep me from the safety of the middle path. I should necessarily conclude that it probably does not, though its possible that it may.

[Snorri1234]

I read tzor & player's posts and took some time to really think about what you both said. Really, I did actually sit down and ponder what you guys wrote.

My conclusions are:

1. That you are both still seeking the praise of other people here instead of listening to the Bible. Perhaps it makes you feel good to have atheists butter you up with flattering words. Trust me though, it's only temporary.

Awesome.
Instead of really thinking about what they actually said, you just decided to conclude they were just buttering up the arses of the atheists around here?

Obviously, they couldn't have a different opinion! That would be blasphemy! (Or Sparta, whatever.)

2. Warning people that the homosexual lifestyle is sin and destructive is not hateful or judgmental.

Telling people that homosexuality is dangerous for you when it's actually not is though.

3. I need to go study the Bible more and learn how to show God's love in a different way. Obviously the way that I am articulating what I believe is being received as someone pointing their finger at other people and judging them. Part of that is my fault and part of that is your choice to interpret it that way.

Condemning other people is always judgmental, whether you mean it that way or not. I mean, taking Jesus's lessons you could embrace your fellow person and tell them that while they are doing things your bible disagrees with it's up to God to judge them and you can't really say anything about it. If people want to be christian while being gay then more power to them, in the end you don't know what God will say about it.

You can try to point out that the bible says homosexuality is bad (allthough that's disputed), but that's all you should do without resorting to such words as "unnatural" and "detrimental". If you believe the bible says gaysex is bad, then by all means don't do it, but don't try to tell other people what to do.

[rocky mountain]

homosexuals are not really any better or worse than us. all sins are of equal size: they all end you up in the same place- hell. whether it is lying, killing, homosexuality, i believe they are all the same. we all sin. i lie sometimes, sometimes i don't honor my father and mother as well as i should... those are all sins. they are just as bad as any one else. the only difference is that homosexuals aren't usually cleansed of their sins, because you don't usually find gay chrisitans. i believe i am free of sin by God forgiving me and am going to heaven.
I'm not saying that homosexuality is good. its just as bad as any other sin. its not wise to be gay, just like its not wise to kill someone. being gay is more of a lifestyle though. its not really a one time thing. its non-stop for the rest of your life, unless you choose to become "straight" again. it kinda like some one lying every time they talk for their entire life.... in a way its a little worse, but in the end its all the same. i don't believe that one can be gay and christian at the same time...
hopefully this makes some sense...

[btownmeggy]

I read tzor & player's posts and took some time to really think about what you both said. Really, I did actually sit down and ponder what you guys wrote.

My conclusions are:

1. That you are both still seeking the praise of other people here instead of listening to the Bible. Perhaps it makes you feel good to have atheists butter you up with flattering words. Trust me though, it's only temporary.

How are they buttering up atheists? By calling homosexuality a sin? Atheists are not likely to flock to such an idea.

This thread was to be my example of how I disagree with both of them in serious ways (like... in regard to the opinions they express herein), but they're still kind, reasonable people that I can respect. They're just two examples that came to mind. There are many others here who fit the description.

I was not pointing you out as one of those despicable people by any means, CC! Sit down and compare (judge!?) yourself against jenos_ridan, please. ...See what I mean?

[Snorri1234]

Firstly, there is no such thing as an "unnatural" act.

Laying on the arrogant bullshit quite early, are we? Let's see, by Neutrino's logic every single act that one wants to commit is natural.

Obviously it is. Seeing as natural is that which results from nature and nature is everything we see around us it's not that hard to grasp. Lot's of things are perfectly natural. Rape for example is perfectly natural, often done by seagulls and black people.

Now, Bradley, can you linky me to these "laws of nature", and explain their relivance to this discussion? 'Cause the only things I've heard described as "laws of nature" are physical laws, which have little to nothing to do with the matter at hand.

No, I can't. Gravity doesn't keep objects from flying out into space, people don't get older, and homosexuals can have children. You win.

Homosexuals can have as many children as they want. They're still functioning human beings.

Or do you mean that they can't have children with eachother? Like old people, sterile couples and sometimes people with heriditary diseases?

Why? Because they don't exist. There are no firmly defined "laws of nature", as you envisage them, and if there were I can almost guarantee you that a large portion of the population would be violating them any any particular time.

Let's see now, they don't exist (stated as an absolute despite science),

I'd like to see this "science" you're talking about.

What's wrong with homosexuality?

It's unnatural

Back to the same argument again.

What does this have to do with nature?

Already been addressed numerous times but you've got your earplugs in. You jump from nature to morality then back to nature and then make some kind of determination that those are my words when it's you that is making the leap of illogic.

It would be swell if you could actually make some sense.

Nature cares not for your morals.

Nor for liberal bullshit or justifications for unnatural acts.

So you agree that gaysex is totally okay because Nature doesn't give a flying f*ck about whatever we do?

And what does your definition have to do with a "traditional" family?

Because it's the natural way to have children and propagate our species. Men and women have evolved complimentary sexual anatomy. Nothing you can say will change that fact. Homosexuals attempt to deviate from that and create an caricature of what is real.

What is actually real is that homosexuals are there. What is actually real is that marriage is just some social invention to make people stay together and have more kids. What is actually real is that most species seem to do quite well without such nonsense as "marriage" or "traditional". The simple fact of nature not giving a sodding f*ck about whatever we do and whomever we have sex with, kill, eat or write passionate sonnets about simply seems to escape your mind.

In the case that heterosexuals cannot have children they can still adopt and provide a mother/father family. Homosexuals cannot provide both a mother and father to the child. It is cruel to purposefully deny a child either a mother or a father.

It's also cruel to deny a child several moms, nannies or grandmothers. But then again "cruelty" is also pretty natural.

I give up. You're an imbecile. Go ahead and tell us that tribal societies flourished through spreading homosexuality and equating it with heterosexuality. It might not be true, but we'll all be entertained on the level that we might all possibly be living inside The Matrix.

HAY GUYS I AM BRADLEY AND I DID TOTALLY JUST IGNORE THE POINT THERE!!!>!!

[Snorri1234]

I read tzor & player's posts and took some time to really think about what you both said. Really, I did actually sit down and ponder what you guys wrote.

My conclusions are:

1. That you are both still seeking the praise of other people here instead of listening to the Bible. Perhaps it makes you feel good to have atheists butter you up with flattering words. Trust me though, it's only temporary.

How are they buttering up atheists? By calling homosexuality a sin? Atheists are not likely to flock to such an idea.

Yeah, I can't honestly say that I agree with them on homosexuality's nature or evilness. I just agree with them about noone needing to do anything about it.