Problems of homosexuality

[dunc289]

Nope. I don't care what that housing lady thinks of me nor anyone else. Well of course I care what they think of me, but not to the degree you are suggesting. I did not mean to come across as a wienie. I have pitched my fit, but housing did not seem to understand my logic. As for society looking out for me. Wasn't that my point. I am not going to get the same rights as a women or a gay man. That's just how it is. I am not asking for pity points on here, I am merely pointing out a problem of homosexuality. You know the topic of this thread. But I liked your response otherwise, it was funny.

Thank you,


I don't really know what all the fuss is about really.
If your church (not yours per se, but anyones), doesn't like gays, don't marry them there. But the state should extend equal rights to all.

A woman needs more protection from a man than you do because we do a lot of the raping around here, so she has a right to protection, but you do not have the right not to be irritated by an annoying roommate. Sorry.

Here's the thing though. If you ARE stuck with this guy for a year, the two of you are going to have to get along, otherwise life will be a nightmare. Be honest, he may not be thrilled to be sharing with you either. Find some way to get along.
Look on the bright side, he'll be bringing a lot more women into your life, and their defenses will be down. When they find out you, a fundie, don't judge his gayness, you are going to get mobbed in lots of lovely co-ed goodness.

BTW, are we saying that the problem with homosexuality is that flaming queens are a ridiculous caricature who put the gay rights movement back 30 years? If so, I agree.

[dunc289]

lets look at this rationally for a moment, leaving aside religion and personal opinion but lets consider the argument of genetic sexuality.


on this same grounds why not make pediphila legal? i mean its another form of sexuality right? why can't it be genetic? and what if it is? why should some people be allowed to sleep with others on the grounds that its genetic and others not? if nature made them that way then what could be wrong with it? i want someone to give me just 1 good argument as to why its ok for men to have sex with men and women to have sex with women if its genetic but its not ok for 40 year olds to have sex with 10 year olds? why is one "ok" and the other not?

Are you suggesting that a relationship between two consenting adults is somehow equivalent with a sexual relationship between a trusted adult and an unconsenting child?

The argument for gay rights has nothing to do with genetics, and everything to do with treating our fellow man with compassion.

Lastly, if god doesn't like homosexuality, why don't you all let him sort it out for you on judgement day. It is NOT for you to judge. It is for him.

[Tim-the-Hermit]

And often, the Christians weren't even doing it in the first place! Just in the fevered imaginations of some atheists ...

Well, well ...

Have you seen this truly disturbing act of "tolerance" by gay-rights activists? here Watch as they gang up on and rough up an elderly lady who was merely trying to peacefully exercise her right to free speech.

Now which side did the hate and anger come from here?

(ps - doesn't President Obama have the same opinion about marriage as that lady?)

I don't think there were any subtitles for that tape, Rian, but from what I could see I agree that was disturbing and I don't think that there was any doubt that they behaved very badly. However, just because some people behaved badly on one occasion does not mean that they were wrong in principle or that there is some sort of 'guilt by association' that spreads to others who hold similar views but express them less forcefully.

I googled Prop 8 and it seems that supporters (like the lady in the tape?) believe in withholding the equal right to a legal marriage from same-sex couples (please correct me if I'm wrong.) I don't know about you, but that sounds nasty and vindictive to me, advocating for discrimination. Why would somebody put time and energy into something which brings no benefit to themselves but deprives others of their equal rights?

I think 'free speech' is often quite overrated and can be abused. We can't shout 'fire' in a crowded building for obvious reasons and we should not easily be allowed to say racist or homophobic things either. I don't see anything wrong with being intolerant of intolerance.

[Penguin]

Hey,
Ok, I am sorry; people may not have had better cooking habits.

I doubt that, too.

But setting that aside for a moment, why not apply the logic you used before to homosexuality? Let's say it was prohibited before because it was "unsafe" or "unclean" in some way. It's neither of these things now, so why still prohibit it?

So, At the start of the "Church age" after the death and resurrection of Jesus, we are not bound by the Jewish laws, or the covenant made with Moses. He (God) then started a new covenant with gentiles though Jesus. -This is why women and children can worship in church.

... as long as they stay silent, right? At least the women, anyhow. And they must keep their hats and bonnets on.

As far as the "unreaped field" Christians still have ways of helping the poor. We don't all own farms but Christians have started a number of orphanages, abuse centers, pregnancy centers, and many other very helpful organizations. We also fund a good amount of food banks, children's programs, and addiction centers. The biggest two I can think of are Habitat for Humanity, and the Salvation Army. With that I do understand that MANY non-Christian people help!

And all that is great, but why not engage in this form of charity that God specifically commands? He wouldn't have been so specific if it wasn't important, would He?

And I realize that not everyone is a farmer; obviously, people who don't have fields at all can't leave the edges of their fields unreaped, but what about those who do?

Judging... I am NOT Judging you or anyone else.

Of course you are. You just did. Look:

Second, homosexuality is wrong, along with adultery, fornication, and all the philias

I don't know you and I have no reason to dislike you. Now, I believe in Jesus and I believe in what He did. I however am NOT perfect and I would never claim to be, but can dislike homosexuality or any other sexual relationship outside of marriage. I don't dislike the person but the act. Example: My son, I love him so much but if he bites someone I don't have to like what he did.

Right - so, you judge biting like you judge homosexuality. Personally, I think it's reasonable to judge a child's biting behaviour to be bad; I don't think it's reasonable to judge homosexuality the same way. I also don't think it's right for you to judge the behaviour of another adult who you don't even know the same way you would judge (and presumably correct) the behaviour of your own child.

Love: You are correct in the fact Christians should be the face of love because God is love. I understand we are not all loving, but I also understand we are NOT perfect.

I think you missed my point. Homosexuality is as much about following love as heterosexuality is. The Bible says that love - all love - comes from God. So, then, which is it? Is it the right thing to do for a person to follow homosexual love, or is the Bible wrong when it speaks of love?

If you like the idea of same sex marriage fine, who am I to tell you no. God gave you the ability to choose. If you choose to disobey him well, we all do it, we are human. Please remember we will all have to explain our choices to the Holy God one day. Jesus loves every single person he created including you and I, He wants you to know Him and love Him. He also understands that we are human that is why He died for us. I mean make your choices but you will someday have to live with them either forgiven in Heaven with Him, or in Hell without Him.

If we're bringing same-sex marriage into this, then I think the people against it will have a whole lot more to explain to their gods than those who support it. The rights of marriage are most critical in the difficult times of our lives like illness and death. Denying normal protections to couples and families basically amounts to kicking people when they're down. I see none of the love of Jesus in that sort of behaviour.

[darkumbra]

I am merely pointing out a problem of homosexuality.

It's NOT a problem of 'homosexuality' it's a problem with the fact that humans, all of us, that we live on a spectrum of sexuality. We're different.

A few questions back to you. If you were 'forced' via circumstances beyond your control to share a room with a woman for an extended period of time...

would you be able to control your carnal urges and stop yourself from 'violating' the woman every night? Every week? Throughout the entire situation?

Would you be deeply offended if she was afraid of you because you might not be able to control your beastly nature?

Would you be concerned about her 'raping' you while you were defenseless? Lusting after your hot bod as you came out of the shower and she was in the room?

Or do you think that the two of you would be able to come to a mutually agreeable civilized arrangement?

ps... one other question -- how many of your male friends are gay? I'll bet you that it's more than you think

[Penguin]

Have you seen this truly disturbing act of "tolerance" by gay-rights activists? here Watch as they gang up on and rough up an elderly lady who was merely trying to peacefully exercise her right to free speech.

Now which side did the hate and anger come from here?

What bearing does this have on the rights that a person is entitled to?

[NH Baritone]

Then settle in and get comfy, baby - I bet I'll change your opinion before you change mine! I have seen little to no reason to listen to you, although I've listened to many other atheists here and considered what they had to say.

Besides, didn't you have contempt for people who thought they had it all together and thought they were right and tried to push their opinions on others? Looks to me that that's what you're like. Your "work here is done"? Sheesh!

Why do you choose to start with the personal insults? It just drags the board down.

Gotcha!

[NH Baritone]

And often, the Christians weren't even doing it in the first place! Just in the fevered imaginations of some atheists ...

Well, well ...

Have you seen this truly disturbing act of "tolerance" by gay-rights activists? here Watch as they gang up on and rough up an elderly lady who was merely trying to peacefully exercise her right to free speech.

Now which side did the hate and anger come from here?

(ps - doesn't President Obama have the same opinion about marriage as that lady?)

I see many people exercising their rights to free speech. It appears she intruded upon an protest rally with a counter opinion. If I walked into your church and start railing against the pastor's message, I imagine I would be shouted down, too.

[NH Baritone]

Problems of homosexuality. Here’s a problem I am currently faced with...

This coming school year I will be entering my senior year in college. I have had a good friend as my roommate all throughout my college career; unfortunately he is leaving. I recently discovered that my new roommate is gay, and he isn’t just any normal gay, he may very well be the biggest flamer on campus. But whatever that’s not what I am here to debate. So now I am faced with this dilemma. I’m not asking what I should do, obviously I am not being forced into the situation and I could very well find somewhere else to live. What I would like to explore however is the rights of a women and why I am not granted the same. You may have already guessed where I am going. Imagine I am a women and I find out that my new roommate is a male. As soon as I discover this little mix up I march right down to housing and make known their error. They quickly apologize and promptly clear up the matter. That’s it, no fuss. And why I ask. What gives her the right to a non-male roommate? Well I suppose it would be because she doesn’t want those horrible creatures known as heterosexual human males looking at her in an undesirable manner, or maybe she wants to avoid seeing something she doesn’t want to see. I really can’t come up with any reasons beyond those. And then I say to myself: Well come to think of it those are the same reasons I don’t want a gay roommate (well and it would be awkward and I just don’t want to deal with it). So I have to ask. What is the difference between me and the women? She doesn’t want to live with a man because he might just want to stick his wiener in her and I don’t want to live with a gay roommate because he just might want to stick his wiener in my butt. What’s the difference? I don’t know. Perhaps someone will be able to clear this up for me.

So then I think well how is society supposed to adapt to the changing times? Clearly this is a problem for other things such as locker rooms and public bathrooms. Maybe we should abandon the whole sex thing altogether; just be unisex. Or maybe we could make gay bathrooms too. It’s really not fair, why should gay men be able to take showers with other straight men. I want to take showers in the women’s locker room! Why am I being discriminated against? (I am just trying to make a point, I wouldn’t want to actually do that; it would most certainly lead to places I don’t want to go). It seems to me homosexuality is destroying what I used to just accept as normal, natural. Does anyone else see where I am coming from or am I completely missing the mark?

My dear, you have been living among, showering among, and pooping among gay men your entire life. The only thing that has changed is that you now have awareness. What you used to think of as normal or natural was neither; it never has been and never will be. It was simply a case of mass delusion on the part of Western culture. Sound familiar? Congratulations on now achieving a more genuine perspective on reality.

[NH Baritone]

It appears that many among the religious want to return to a day when knowledge didn't exist. As above, knowledge that gay people were everywhere and that sexuality itself is complex. Elsewhere, knowledge that non-Christians are equal to Christians in their devotion to a different deity and adherence to a different theology. Or knowledge that science has already proved evolution and its use is furthering scientific, medical, & environmental understanding.

We're not just talking about doubts about what those facts mean. No, they prefer to deny that these are facts.

[mikedsjr]

It appears that many among the religious want to return to a day when knowledge didn't exist. As above, knowledge that gay people were everywhere and that sexuality itself is complex. Elsewhere, knowledge that non-Christians are equal to Christians in their devotion to a different deity and adherence to a different theology. Or knowledge that science has already proved evolution and its use is furthering scientific, medical, & environmental understanding.

We're not just talking about doubts about what those facts mean. No, they prefer to deny that these are facts.

(buzzer sounding)

Uh no. There is a bit of confusion here. There are certainly those who believe homosexuality is wrong and believe the earth is 6000 years old. There are probably even more of them than I care to think of. Then there are those who believe in science, God of the bible, the bible is inerrant & logical and that homosexuality is wrong. You like to throw all christians into the same bath water. Unfortunately it isn't possible. Certainly would love to be able to say all "christians" and Christians believed the same thing but it isn't possible when in America the anthem is "I have my rights to my opinion" or "My rights are being violated so i want you sue you".

Sexuality isn't complex. God made man and woman to be united as one. Sin makes sex complex. "I have my rights" makes sex complex.

Christians and non-christians are not the same. One is an idolater and bound for hell. The other is serving the one true and living God. Atheist just happen to be idolaters of mankind.

And science has not proved evolution, except micro-evolution. Christian scientist are working hard to form a testable and falsefiable alternative method to evolution using the bible and science together. They've gone before scientist and come away with understanding they need more detailed information to make it legit. They are still working on it. But they are doing a remarkable job.

[RONSATRON]

"Sexuality isn't complex. God made man and woman to be united as one. Sin makes sex complex. "I have my rights" makes sex complex."

Hi Mikedsjr,

Interesting post. If, however, god made man and woman to be united as one, then why does God 'make' some people homosexual?

[StillSearching]

Mike, I think you just put forth a shining example of NHB's point.

Sexuality isn't complex. God made man and woman to be united as one. Sin makes sex complex. "I have my rights" makes sex complex.

Sexuality IS complex. Study it a bit. Expand your knowledge outside of your own personal experience. You cannot truthfully state otherwise. There are biological factors, emotional factors, cultural factors, chemical factors, legal factors, and likely factors that we don't even know about yet. If you want to roll all of that into a big ball and call it sin, then you're being egregiously simple-minded.

Christians and non-christians are not the same. One is an idolater and bound for hell. The other is serving the one true and living God. Atheist just happen to be idolaters of mankind.

NHB's comment about christians and non-christians referred to their equal devotion and zeal for their respective religions. I'd like to see you walk into a mosque or synagogue and tell the worshipers that they are engaged in idolatry. That would be a hoot.

And science has not proved evolution, except micro-evolution.

(buzzer sounding) Macro and micro, they are one in the same on different scales, and it is proved to the extent that the vast majority of the scientific community accept them as true. We have some nice parting gifts for you. BTW, I'm curious, do believe in microeconomics but not in macroeconomics?

Christian scientist are working hard to form a testable and falsefiable alternative method to evolution using the bible and science together. They've gone before scientist and come away with understanding they need more detailed information to make it legit. They are still working on it. But they are doing a remarkable job.

Your wording of this belies your misunderstanding of science. If Christian scientists want to present an alternative theory to evolution, they first need to agree to abide by the same methods that science uses. Once they have done this, they may present their hypothesis to the scientific community, which will attempt to repeat and verify (or falsify) the process.

Furthermore, they don't need more detailed information to make it legitimate, they need more testable and verifiable information. I look forward to the day that Christian scientists scientifically prove the existence of a creator deity. If nothing else, it would put an end to the fruitless theological debate and allow us to get on with it. Also, I would have a few things to drop in his suggestion box.

On second thought, your post, while spectacularly lacking in understanding of the scientific method, does reveal some of the issues with the way Christian scientists are approaching this battle. They are indeed working hard to force an alternative method (faith, presupposition, granting legitimacy and authority to a non-scientific text) for science. The trouble with that is, it's like trying to come up with an alternative method for living. There is only one alternative, that being death, which by its very nature IS NOT living. In the same way, trying to fit the square peg of Christianity into the round hole of science is a non-starter. Once you force that fit, science ceases to be the very thing which you would seek to make Christianity a part of.

EDIT, to make a comment on the subject of this thread: How do explain the preponderance of homosexual behavior and asexual reproduction in the animal kingdom? God sure did allow for a lot of sexual complexity among His creation, above and beyond the whole traditional male/female thing. Considering He is all-powerful, he sure has allowed for a lot of variance outside of His will.

Oops, I forgot. It's our fault.

[mikedsjr]

RONS, That question is no different than "Why did God make people fat?". He didn't. And acting on something that you were born with doesn't mean that what you were born with is good. It means you have something in you that you have to battle.

SS,
1. I don't think you read it very closely. I said sex is complex because of sin. Sin is the cause of the complexity. What God designed isn't complex.
2. duly noted. (A true Christian is not striving to impose their beliefs on people who don't want to know the truth. However they will defend it. Hypothetically if a Muslim or anyone asked me if I thought that, then yes I would tell them the truth. A Priest went on Larry King and denied that the scripture says that and that irritated me to no end. Coward and heretic, he is.
3. They accept them as true is different than they are verifiable and factually true. Personally, I don't have a problem with evolution. And the closest I've seen to Macro are computer animations to how something would have changed through time. But that doesn't show a real world model. I would love to see more work in this area of demonstrating what the animal would look like, per se, and how it would act in the enviroment at any given time. There must be purpose to anything within the body. A esophagus, stomach, large intestine, small intestine, etc. etc. has purpose throughout the life of its developement if evolution is occuring as people say. You don't just have a creature with a mouth that one day grows a esophagus which then grows a stomach and on and on until one day the whole creature has one continuous in and out process. That's great that they want to prove to me how an eye developed. Wonderful! That tells me little about the rest of what happened. There is more to an eye. Same thing with eating. I guess some creature accidently developed a mutational hole that swallowed, digested and pooped out. Same thing with every single other thing that is part of the body. ....and the cycle continues. However, this is not what this is about here. So lets not continue evolution here.

4. Good God, Please Help this man! That's what they are working to do. Again lets don't make this an evolution thread.

5. Animals behavior has nothing to do with man who is made in the image of God. There is no sexual complexity in his creation at all. Only sinful man creating complexity via his own sin.

6. And yes. It is definitely our fault.

[StillSearching]

1. I don't think you read it very closely. I said sex is complex because of sin. Sin is the cause of the complexity. What God designed isn't complex.

So much for irreducible complexity. But you're right, let's not enter a battle over evolution on this thread. I will simply fire this parting shot: It makes little sense for you to reject something that you don't understand. You would say the same of me if I rejected Christianity without first gaining at least a working knowledge of it, would you not?

Back to sex. You have taken all of the things that I listed as factors in human sexuality and slapped a big SIN sticker on them. I find that to be intellectually dishonest, though your intellect seems to take a back seat to your faith. You've also reduced sex to merely a physical act, with a "right" way and a "wrong" way. I don't get the impression that you're married (correct me if I'm wrong) and I won't venture a guess as to whether your virginity is still intact. But I can tell you that for most people, sex and sexuality involves a great deal more goodness (things that I would have great difficulty categorizing as sin) than just intercourse for the purpose of procreation. Intimacy, fun, pleasure, comfort, just to name a few. These things, and all the other things that I mentioned in my previous post, make sex complex. And if you're God created us, then he created these things within us as well, so I hardly see how you could classify them as sin. Most of them involve concepts that can't be labeled (even loosely) as sinful.

Now I will grant you that sexuality comes with some peril and potential for bad consequences, and in these instances I can understand your use of the word sin, since it's such a simple concept and helps you to whittle down the issue so it doesn't consume too much of your brain power. While I disagree with your term and the style of your argument, we can agree that some sexual behavior needs to be controlled. Promiscuity is dangerous. Engaging in sex before gaining an understanding of its complexity and possible consequences and understanding your responsibility to yourself and your partner is dangerous. In my opinion, so is calling it all "sinful."

And your characterization of homosexuality as sinful is just plain wrong. I realize this is an impractical suggestion and not likely to occur, but I wish you would become friends with and really get to know just one gay couple. My wife and I are friends with several, and I can tell you that the last word I would use to describe their relationships is sinful. They are relationships comprised of two, consenting, intelligent, morally-sound people who love each other deeply, in the same way that I love my wife. They just happen to belong to the same sex. When you throw the word "sinful" at that, you imply that somehow these people had a choice in determining their sexual orientation, and if that's the case I have just one request for you. Please tell me about the precise moment in your life when you made the conscious choice to like women.

Animals behavior has nothing to do with man who is made in the image of God.

If you could tell me what exactly is meant by "made in the image of God" then I might make an attempt to entertain this ridiculous argument.

EDIT: If your statement is true, then how have psychologists used animals to gain knowledge that has helped them to understand human behavior?