PDA

View Full Version : The Personal Side of the Homosexual Debate



Pages : [1] 2

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 04:30 PM
We all know the theological/ scriptural reasons why homosexuality is sinful; it would be repetitious to start another thread on that topic from that perspective.

What about your own personal feelings?

For me, the idea of same sex attractions seems only understandable in the abstract. I mean to say, I always liked women as friends, share many same interests, but sexual attraction seems hard to comprehend. It feels naturally repulsive, not the fondness, but the physical encounter. I see no way anyone can socially condition me to have the same feeling towards women as I have, since about age 12, for boys/men.

I do not think it can be indoctrinated anymore than I could be trained to bay at the moon?

When I was young, homosexuals were called queer, which means odd, or abnormal, funny-odd. The British called them faggots, and cigarettes fags; later, faggot was the more familiar term in the USA, as well, more derogatory.

I cannot believe that this odd nature is not caused by a genetic, or abnormal biological components.

My reason for posting this is because I feel drowned out by the extremes of other posts on this topic, or it is well discussed as a religious topic.

I post this here so anyone may respond with their persona; view. Let’s leave the obvious religious aspect for a thread aimed at that frame of discussion. I also ask to leave the hard hateful responses to be left in he long-standing thread.

How you personally feel about homosexuality?

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 04:33 PM
We all know the theological/ scriptural reasons why homosexuality is sinful; it would be repetitious to start another thread on that topic from that perspective.

What about your own personal feelings?

For me, the idea of same sex attractions seems only understandable in the abstract. I mean to say, I always liked women as friends, share many same interests, but sexual attraction seems hard to comprehend. It feels naturally repulsive, not the fondness, but the physical encounter. I see no way anyone can socially condition me to have the same feeling towards women as I have, since about age 12, for boys/men.

I do not think it can be indoctrinated anymore than I could be trained to bay at the moon?

When I was young, homosexuals were called queer, which means odd, or abnormal, funny-odd. The British called them faggots, and cigarettes fags; later, faggot was the more familiar term in the USA, as well, more derogatory.

I cannot believe that this odd nature is not caused by a genetic, or abnormal biological components.

My reason for posting this is because I feel drowned out by the extremes of other posts on this topic, or it is well discussed as a religious topic.

I post this here so anyone may respond with their persona; view. Let’s leave the obvious religious aspect for a thread aimed at that frame of discussion. I also ask to leave the hard hateful responses to be left in he long-standing thread.

How you personally feel about homosexuality?


I believe it is an ultimate judgement from God against an unbelieving humanity.

resurrected
July 20th, 2014, 04:35 PM
How you personally feel about homosexuality?




about the same as i feel about any perversion of God's will

it disgusts me

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 04:37 PM
I believe it is an ultimate judgement from God against an unbelieving humanity.

Too religious. Start your own thread under religion if your response is limited to religion.

What feelings do you, as a person, have about homosexuality?
That is the topic.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 04:39 PM
about the same as i feel about any perversion of God's will

it disgusts me

Why besides God's law? Do you have any personal feelings about homosexuality, which are your own?

resurrected
July 20th, 2014, 04:39 PM
i don't think i can separate them kat :idunno:

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 04:43 PM
Too religious. Start your own thread under religion if your response is limited to religion.

What feelings do you, as a person, have about homosexuality?
That is the topic.

I am a Christian person. My opinions will reflect that; in fact, I cannot hide my faithful/scriptural opinions.

If you want to post non-religious tripe, why do you choose a Theology site?

glorydaz
July 20th, 2014, 04:43 PM
We all know the theological/ scriptural reasons why homosexuality is sinful; it would be repetitious to start another thread on that topic from that perspective.

What about your own personal feelings?

For me, the idea of same sex attractions seems only understandable in the abstract. I mean to say, I always liked women as friends, share many same interests, but sexual attraction seems hard to comprehend. It feels naturally repulsive, not the fondness, but the physical encounter. I see no way anyone can socially condition me to have the same feeling towards women as I have, since about age 12, for boys/men.

I do not think it can be indoctrinated anymore than I could be trained to bay at the moon?

When I was young, homosexuals were called queer, which means odd, or abnormal, funny-odd. The British called them faggots, and cigarettes fags; later, faggot was the more familiar term in the USA, as well, more derogatory.

I cannot believe that this odd nature is not caused by a genetic, or abnormal biological components.

My reason for posting this is because I feel drowned out by the extremes of other posts on this topic, or it is well discussed as a religious topic.

I post this here so anyone may respond with their persona; view. Let’s leave the obvious religious aspect for a thread aimed at that frame of discussion. I also ask to leave the hard hateful responses to be left in he long-standing thread.

How you personally feel about homosexuality?

Take a little kid and sexually abuse them, and you'll have your answer. I'm closely affiliated with a residential treatment center for such kids and, to them, such deviant behavior is "normal".

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 04:45 PM
i don't think i can separate them kat :idunno:

Maybe Kat can so do within her own psyche, but such ability does not say much about the affections of her heart.

glorydaz
July 20th, 2014, 04:46 PM
Maybe Kat can so do within her own psyche, but such ability does not say much about the affections of her heart.

Your holier-than-thou attitude says a lot about your heart. :chuckle:

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 04:46 PM
I am a Christian person. My opinions will reflect that; in fact, I cannot hide my faithful/scriptural opinions.

If you want to post non-religious tripe, why do you choose a Theology site?

This forum is not specifically religious, it is also unnecessary to call it tripe. That is why I did not post it under religion.

quip
July 20th, 2014, 04:48 PM
How you personally feel about homosexuality?



Not my cup o tea....but to each their own.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 04:55 PM
Take a little kid and sexually abuse them, and you'll have your answer. I'm closely affiliated with a residential treatment center for such kids and, to them, such deviant behavior is "normal".

I have been fairly close to those with this point, in criminal justice, forensic psychology.

I do not see, however, regardless of how much brutality I may have been exposed to, under such conditions, I would become physically excited by another women?

I do agree, under such conditions I may be a criminal, a killer, but to be changed to find women a sexual attraction, impossible.

Maybe I am so heterosexual, I am beyond the perception of a norm? That is the purpose of the thread. I do see some, where it may be possible, but, from my perspective, not a totally heterosexual person?

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 04:58 PM
Not my cup o tea....but to each their own.

Don’t you agree that, for you, it is unimaginable?

quip
July 20th, 2014, 05:00 PM
Don’t you agree that, for you, it is unimaginable?

More of a 'taste' thing....I've not the palette for it, so to speak.

glorydaz
July 20th, 2014, 05:00 PM
I have been fairly close to those with this point, in criminal justice, forensic psychology.

I do not see, however, regardless of how much brutality I may have been exposed to, under such conditions, I would become physically excited by another women?

I do agree, under such conditions I may be a criminal, a killer, but to be changed to find women a sexual attraction, impossible.

Maybe I am so heterosexual, I am beyond the perception of a norm? That is the purpose of the thread. I do see some, where it may be possible, but, from my perspective, not a totally heterosexual person?

Well, I lean toward thinking physical "excitement" is something that is easily faked....fake it til you make it. It's amazing how we can convince ourselves something is good in order to make ourselves feel good about ourselves. It's a survival mechanism for many folks, don't you think?

Town Heretic
July 20th, 2014, 05:03 PM
We all know the theological/ scriptural reasons why homosexuality is sinful; it would be repetitious to start another thread on that topic from that perspective.

What about your own personal feelings...
Sounds like we're on the same page. I don't understand the attraction and I suspect at least a goodly bit of it is biologically determined. But then, so are a lot of things that are bad for us one way or another. Our choices remain our choices and the consequence for them sits with us. I know that's not contrary to your notion either, but I wanted to say something more than "ditto".

:)

Lon
July 20th, 2014, 05:04 PM
Proverbs 22:6

quip
July 20th, 2014, 05:06 PM
Without exception, every single homosexual I know had been abused as children.

Drawing a (anecdotal) correlation or a cause?

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 05:10 PM
More of a 'taste' thing....I've not the palette for it, so to speak.

Oh no, big difference from me here! It is no matter of taste, it is a matter of the strongest human urge I have, being a sexual person, being attracted to a man.

Turn it around and it feels disgusting! I am so glad most men find in a woman with I find in a man, or life would be only a means to an end, no love, no family.

Easting is a matter of taste, I like beef better than chicken.

Town Heretic
July 20th, 2014, 05:11 PM
Without exception, every single homosexual I know had been abused as children.
While I don't have much experience with them, I knew a lesbian years ago who came out of a traumatic sexual experience and into that particular. But I also have a cousin who had a great home. His parents were terrific people and his older brother is as straight as an arrow, but this cousin...let's say it was about as surprising when he came out as snow in December in Colorado.

Rusha
July 20th, 2014, 05:11 PM
How you personally feel about homosexuality?

Neutral ... I treat them the same way I do as heterosexual depending on the individual and their character.

I don't understand the attraction. It's completely foreign to me. My own experience (as in realizing I was a heterosexual) and my interaction with homosexuals leads me to believe people are born gay.

Lon
July 20th, 2014, 05:13 PM
Drawing a (anecdotal) correlation or a cause?
Yep. I believe it.

Lon
July 20th, 2014, 05:14 PM
While I don't have much experience with them, I knew a lesbian years ago who came out of a traumatic sexual experience and into that particular. But I also have a cousin who had a great home. His parents were terrific people and his older brother is as straight as an arrow, but this cousin...let's say it was about as surprising when he came out as snow in December in Colorado.
Proverbs 22:6

quip
July 20th, 2014, 05:15 PM
Oh no, big difference from me here! It is no matter of taste, it is a matter of the strongest human urge I have, being a sexual person, being attracted to a man.

Turn it around and it feels disgusting! I am so glad most men find in a woman with I find in a man, or life would be only a means to an end, no love, no family.

Easting is a matter of taste, I like beef better than chicken.

Kind of interesting .... the visceral responses this issue evokes. I don't quite understand it...but your explanation seems valid.

Town Heretic
July 20th, 2014, 05:17 PM
Proverbs 22:6
I don't think that's about biology though. And I've known preachers kids who went a little wild for a time. :) Else, I don't know how to explain the older brother and I knew the family well in our formative years. Good people. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, only relating my experience with him doesn't line up with the abuse angle, though the girl's did.

quip
July 20th, 2014, 05:18 PM
Yep. I believe it.

:Plain:

glorydaz
July 20th, 2014, 05:19 PM
While I don't have much experience with them, I knew a lesbian years ago who came out of a traumatic sexual experience and into that particular. But I also have a cousin who had a great home. His parents were terrific people and his older brother is as straight as an arrow, but this cousin...let's say it was about as surprising when he came out as snow in December in Colorado.

I've had lots of experience with them, and none are really happy that I have seen....though they be "gay". They've all been adolescents trapped in adult bodies. IMO.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 05:19 PM
Sounds like we're on the same page. I don't understand the attraction and I suspect at least a goodly bit of it is biologically determined. .........

:)

First thank for actually responding to my post on how you feel, not other reasons. Yes, same here, I cannot imagine being attracted to my own sex, there is nothing attractive there. I do see beauty in women, in truth, most women know how attractive they are, but only a few what to bug other women with their beauty, rather, it is all a an aspect to attract the best suitor possible.
I did shorten your response because I what to address only your not understanding the attraction. The reason is afterthought, not a necessary reason, or excuse.

glorydaz
July 20th, 2014, 05:21 PM
I don't think that's about biology though. And I've known preachers kids who went a little wild for a time. :) Else, I don't know how to explain the older brother and I knew the family well in our formative years. Good people. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, only relating my experience with him doesn't line up with the abuse angle, though the girl's did.

Of course there is not often evidence of abuse. My own sister was abused by our step dad and she didn't tell anyone until she was in her 40's.

Lon
July 20th, 2014, 05:21 PM
Too religious. Start your own thread under religion if your response is limited to religion.

What feelings do you, as a person, have about homosexuality?
That is the topic.
This would assume religion is tangiential rather than soaked, dyed wool.

You may only get nominal or marginal Christians submitting replies to such an artificial separation. I'm not sure If I can say that less controversially or without an admonishing tenor, but such an artificial separation isn't meaningful to a good many of us on TOL. They are both the same thing.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 05:24 PM
Kind of interesting .... the visceral responses this issue evokes. I don't quite understand it...but your explanation seems valid.

Thanks. My point is not the glorification or heterosexuality, rather my own feeling as to how homosexuality would be impossible for me, even if I were abused by witches and castes spells upon.

For me, there is only two possibilities, alive and heterosexual, or dead/ bran dead and be nothing.

Lon
July 20th, 2014, 05:30 PM
Thanks. My point is not the glorification or heterosexuality, rather my own feeling as to how homosexuality would be impossible for me, even if I were abused by witches and castes spells upon.

For me, there is only two possibilities, alive and heterosexual, or dead/ bran dead and be nothing.
If you had a very negative placed in you, against males, at a young age, you may have built a life-long reaction. That's why we need to train children in the way they should go. I have serious problems with suggesting such is biological, especially when abuse is why some steps and -in-laws have this problem with thier children in my family.

However, without exception (none) every homosexual I know suffered child abuse (usually but not always sexual, nor always because of immediate family).

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 05:30 PM
Take a little kid and sexually abuse them, and you'll have your answer. I'm closely affiliated with a residential treatment center for such kids and, to them, such deviant behavior is "normal".

What causes homosexual desire?

If homosexual impulses are not inherited, what kinds of influences do cause strong homosexual desires? No one answer is acceptable to all researchers in the field. Important factors, however, seem to fall into four categories. As with so many other odd sexual proclivities, males appear especially susceptible:

1. Homosexual experience:
•any homosexual experience in childhood, especially if it is a first sexual experience or with an adult
•any homosexual contact with an adult, particularly with a relative or authority figure (in a random survey, 5% of adult homosexuals vs 0.8% of heterosexuals reported childhood sexual involvements with elementary or secondary school teachers (5).

2. Family abnormality, including the following:
•a dominant, possessive, or rejecting mother
•an absent, distant, or rejecting father
•a parent with homosexual proclivities, particularly one who molests a child of the same sex
•a sibling with homosexual tendencies, particularly one who molests a brother or sister
•the lack of a religious home environment
•divorce, which often leads to sexual problems for both the children and the adults
•parents who model unconventional sex roles
•condoning homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle– welcoming homosexuals (e.g., co-workers, friends) into the family circle

3. Unusual sexual experience, particularly in early childhood:
•precocious or excessive masturbation
•exposure to pornography in childhood
•depersonalized sex (e.g., group sex, sex with animals)
•or girls, sexual interaction with adult males

4. Cultural influences:
•a visible and socially approved homosexual sub-culture that invites curiosity and encourages exploration
•pro-homosexual sex education
•openly homosexual authority figures, such as teachers (4% of Kinsey's and 4% of FRI's gays reported that their first homosexual experience was with a teacher)
•societal and legal toleration of homosexual acts
•depictions of homosexuality as normal and/or desirable behavior
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3393262&postcount=17

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 05:32 PM
This would assume religion is tangiential rather than soaked, dyed wool.



I see your point. Yet hear me on this. Had you not experienced the boys all looking to the pretty girls in high school? Do Christians miss this? I did not miss it. I knew right from the start who the hunky boys were and also knew many girls felt the same. It was that time girls turned from exclusive girlish interest to one of competition!

This was all before I was able to understand my spiritual convictions, and church was convention. When that changed, much of my life changed, but my sexuality did not change, nor become subdued, not in the slightest!

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 05:35 PM
I've had lots of experience with them, and none are really happy that I have seen....though they be "gay". They've all been adolescents trapped in adult bodies. IMO.

This is what I think is at the heart of the issue. I think they have stunted sexual maturity level (the vast majority).

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 05:41 PM
What causes homosexual desire?


•pro-homosexual sex education


Sorry, NO amount of pro-homosexual sex education would have made me queer! Not possible, just would not work. Think what you want, I know how I feel. I LIKE MEN!

It would have been easier growing up of your pro-homosexual sex education worked on some girls, more chances for me!

I know not a one, back when times seemed more sane would have given up what a man has for a woman, for nothing but two wanting the same, and neither getting it.

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 05:44 PM
What I "feel" right now, is Ktoyou has started a thread to tell us all about how sexy she is with men.

Well, I could care less . . .

But do :carryon: femme fatale!

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 05:46 PM
What I "feel" right now, is Ktoyou has started a thread to tell us all about how sexy she is with men.

Well, I could care less . . .

:carryon: femme fatale!

:cigar:

Lon
July 20th, 2014, 05:46 PM
Sorry, NO amount of pro-homosexual sex education would have made me queer! Not possible, just would not work. Think what you want, I know how I feel. I LIKE MEN!

It would have been easier growing up of your pro-homosexual sex education worked on some girls, more chances for me!

I know not a one, back when times seemed more sane would have given up what a man has for a woman, for nothing but two wanting the same, and neither getting it.
That is the natural desire so of course it should be so, and the other should be foreign. But I do believe there is a lot of nurture going on too, especially if your mother and father loved one another well in front of you.

Lon
July 20th, 2014, 05:50 PM
Kind of interesting .... the visceral responses this issue evokes. I don't quite understand it...but your explanation seems valid.
I'm not sure it's gotten visceral....yet :chuckle:

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 05:50 PM
This is what I think is at the heart of the issue. I think they have stunted sexual maturity level (the vast majority).

Maybe you both are right? I do not claim to now why, only what I feel. Furthermore, I am gland I am old. and had to change it, would rather be born a bit earlier. Why?
All this 'common autism, like allergies, was not an issue back when. ad Until I went to college, I never knew anyone with allergies! Also, my sister, five years younger, in her HS yearbook, there are twice as many students wearing glasses as in my class yearbook! (note: contacts were not common then)
Why?
Glasses finally passed enough genes to surviving myopic persons to raise the rate of myopic offspring.

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 05:51 PM
That is the natural desire so of course it should be so, and the other should be foreign. But I do believe there is a lot of nurture going on too, especially if your mother and father loved one another well in front of you.

I think Lon makes a good point. I think the quality of the relationships we see in our parents and/or aunts and uncles gives us that template for future relationships in us. Many sexually confused people I have met have been stunted because they did not have mature healthy relationships from adults as role models.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:00 PM
I'm not sure it's gotten visceral....yet :chuckle:

I may close it if it does. The purpose is to show how strongly heterosexual most of us are, and that queers are just that, unusual.

I wonder, are many embarrassed to state factually the experience of heterosexuality?

God's greatest gift to man, the soul, yes, although that is what make us men(human)
God's greatest gift to man in nature is the love between a man and a woman. This is what becomes much of the commands: the BIG TEN, Adultery, do not Covet, your neighbor's wife.

God did not see His creation so twisted to command, do not commit homosexuality; it was too stupid, in the beginning.

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 06:03 PM
I may close it if it does. The purpose is to show how strongly heterosexual most of us are, and that queers are just that, unusual.

I wonder, are many embarrassed to state factually the experience of heterosexuality?

God's greatest gift to man, the soul, yes, although that is what make us men(human)
God's greatest gift to man in nature is the love between a man and a woman. This is what becomes much of the commands: the BIG TEN, Adultery, do not Covet, your neighbor's wife.

God did not see His creation so twisted to command, do not commit homosexuality; it was too stupid, in the beginning.


So now you go "religious" after scolding me for so being? :crackup:

Homosexuality is an ultimate judgement from God upon unbelieving humanity.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:03 PM
That is the natural desire so of course it should be so, and the other should be foreign. But I do believe there is a lot of nurture going on too, especially if your mother and father loved one another well in front of you.

Not sure I understand this one? My mother and father were very much in love, always were.

aikido7
July 20th, 2014, 06:04 PM
We all know the theological/ scriptural reasons why homosexuality is sinful; it would be repetitious to start another thread on that topic from that perspective.

What about your own personal feelings?

For me, the idea of same sex attractions seems only understandable in the abstract. I mean to say, I always liked women as friends, share many same interests, but sexual attraction seems hard to comprehend. It feels naturally repulsive, not the fondness, but the physical encounter. I see no way anyone can socially condition me to have the same feeling towards women as I have, since about age 12, for boys/men.

I do not think it can be indoctrinated anymore than I could be trained to bay at the moon?

When I was young, homosexuals were called queer, which means odd, or abnormal, funny-odd. The British called them faggots, and cigarettes fags; later, faggot was the more familiar term in the USA, as well, more derogatory.

I cannot believe that this odd nature is not caused by a genetic, or abnormal biological components.

My reason for posting this is because I feel drowned out by the extremes of other posts on this topic, or it is well discussed as a religious topic.

I post this here so anyone may respond with their persona; view. Let’s leave the obvious religious aspect for a thread aimed at that frame of discussion. I also ask to leave the hard hateful responses to be left in he long-standing thread.

How you personally feel about homosexuality?

Live and let live.

And let me eat shellfish at Red Lobster, even though it, too, is listed as an "abomination" in Leviticus. And I often wear clothing that contains more than one material. That is prohibited by Leviticus as well. Killing errant teenagers? Sorry, I'll pass on that one.

This hysterical preoccupation of believers with sex and sexuality is what is causing people (atheists, scientists, believers, humanists, former believers, those who claim to be "spiritual, not religious" and those who have never given religious faith consideration at all) in both Christianity and Islam to leave the church in droves.

The ancient formulations of dogma and theology are neither compelling or persuasive in today's global culture.

A recent world poll by Pew has disclosed more than 90% of Muslims are against the violence and terrorism a minority of the religion's people are engaging in. And according to the Christian polling group Barma, the fastest-growing demographic in Christianity is the "un-churched."

Most believers have no idea what the many objections to today's religions are, nor even know how to respond to them in a reasonable way.

jamie
July 20th, 2014, 06:04 PM
I'm indifferent to what consenting adults do behind closed doors. Nor do I feel homosexuality is contagious, meaning it's not going to be passed on to their kids if they have children by adoption.

For lesbians there is a bond of family from a social aspect, they are sisters. But for guys, not so much.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:11 PM
Live and let live.

And let me eat shellfish at Red Lobster,
OK, I feel personally stronger about sex, and my aim in the thread is more secular, as we all know the religious position.

Lighthouse
July 20th, 2014, 06:16 PM
For me it seems understandable why God opposes it; not simply because it goes against His design but because it is quite obviously born of a deviant mental state.

I do not understand how anyone can look at homosexuality and not recognize it as abnormal and aberrant.


For lesbians there is a bond of family from a social aspect, they are sisters. But for guys, not so much.
Are you saying 'mos can't be bros?

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:19 PM
I'm indifferent to what consenting adults do behind closed doors. Nor do I feel homosexuality is contagious, meaning it's not going to be passed on to their kids if they have children by adoption.

For lesbians there is a bond of family from a social aspect, they are sisters. But for guys, not so much.

Thank for the feedback, you may be right, you may know more than i do about this. For me, there can be no woman I would ever be content with, and I would rather be alone, (friendship not included) than to have to sleep with someone with the same sex body as me, it is just not sexual and seems repulsive.

I cannot see two women as lovers!

I might be able to see how a man might be made queer by being raped in prison, to the degree he loses all pride in his manhood and takes up a 'woman's stick'. Although I see this as disgusting and the result of loss of ego we had and still have in prisons.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 06:27 PM
Sorry, NO amount of pro-homosexual sex education would have made me queer! Not possible, just would not work. Think what you want, I know how I feel. I LIKE MEN!

You admitted in a latter post that your parents loved one another, hence you came from a loving home. Many of these children come from broken homes.

On a side note: I've always gotten the impression that you're some kind of clinical psychologist or perhaps a social worker. Could you tell us a little about your professional background?

jamie
July 20th, 2014, 06:28 PM
Are you saying 'mos can't be bros?


Guys don't tend to bond like women do. For many lesbians their family has rejected or disapproved of them so they bond with other women (other than their SO) as if they were sisters.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 06:33 PM
Guys don't tend to bond like women do. For many lesbians their family has rejected or disapproved of them so they bond with other women (other than their SO) as if they were sisters.

I can see that you're extremely ignorant on the subject (but since you made the ridiculous post about not caring what consenting adults do, that goes without saying).

Males that are sexually abused often times bond with someone of the same sex as well. Those that don't have a dominant father figure in their life will seek out male companionship, looking for that bond that they're missing in their life, a bond which often times turns sexual, especially if the mentor is a homosexual pedophile/pederast.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 06:34 PM
My personal feelings about homosexuality is that it's certainly not something I could 'choose' for myself. Not possible. Other than that I'm indifferent to it as what consenting adults do in private is their own business, regardless of how some would like it to be theirs...

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 06:36 PM
I can see that you're extremely ignorant on the subject (but since you made the ridiculous post about not caring what consenting adults do, that goes without saying).

Males that are sexually abused often times bond with someone of the same sex as well. Those that don't have a dominant father figure in their life will seek out male companionship, looking for that bond that they're missing in their life, a bond which often times turns sexual, especially if the mentor is a homosexual pedophile/pederast.

Connie, you don't even know what bisexuality is so it's a complete laugh for you to call somebody else 'ignorant'...

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:37 PM
You admitted in a latter post that your parents loved one another, hence you came from a loving home. Many of these children come from broken homes.

On a side note: I've always gotten the impression that you're some kind of clinical psychologist or perhaps a social worker. Could you tell us a little about your professional background?

I know about clinical psychology; however a forensic psychologist testifies for the court, in other words, speaks for the people as expert testimony, not the defendant.

I have not anything in common with a social worker! I am more a lawyer than any other profession, although I did work longest for the state of Texas as forensic psychologist.

As to your statement, i will admit I have seen the worst, i mean the absolute worst! I do agree the worst imaginable might have made me a criminal, but never a woman kisser, of you get my drift?

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 06:40 PM
Connie, you don't even know what bisexuality is so it's a complete laugh for you to call somebody else 'ignorant'...

For those of you that don't know what Art is talking about: He admitted in another thread that he likes to watch two homosexuals having sex. Today his "thing" is homosexual women.

Tell us a little bit about your childhood Art. Were you exposed to pornography? (hence his fixation with same sex porno). Inquiring minds need to know so that we can get you the help that you so desperately need.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 06:42 PM
I know about clinical psychology; however a forensic psychologist testifies for the court, in other words, speaks for the people as expert testimony, not the defendant.

I have not anything in common with a social worker! I am more a lawyer than any other profession, although I did work longest for the state of Texas as forensic psychologist.

As to your statement, i will admit I have seen the worst, i mean the absolute worst! I do agree the worst imaginable might have made me a criminal, but never a woman kisser, of you get my drift?

So you're a forensic psychologist? Please tell us what that entails.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:46 PM
My personal feelings about homosexuality is that it's certainly not something I could 'choose' for myself. Not possible. Other than that I'm indifferent to it as what consenting adults do in private is their own business, regardless of how some would like it to be theirs...
Agree with you on not closeable. Not indifferent, mainly as it conflicts with my religious beliefs. It also conflicts with my nature as a person.

One pint to this thread, most Christians, it goes without saying, disapprove og homosexuality, but it is more. i find it repulsive outside of religion, yet I do not hate it, I would not understand it, as I am totally heterosexual. Maybe more people than i realise, do have more bisexual tendency, thus religion plays the largest part.

For me, outside of my faith, i would be repulsed by it, but not hate it. I would rather not invest the energy to hate it because I am that distant from it. make sense?

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 06:48 PM
For those of you that don't know what Art is talking about: He admitted in another thread that he likes to watch two homosexuals having sex. Today his "thing" is homosexual women.

What I admitted to is one of the most common male heterosexual fantasies about, and it would solely be women that would be of any interest. Unlike yourself I'm actually honest about these things.


Tell us a little bit about your childhood Art. Were you exposed to pornography? (hence his fixation with same sex porno). Inquiring minds need to know so that we can get you the help that you so desperately need.

In my teens I found a stash of soft core magazines, playboy etc. By that point I already knew I found the opposite sex alluring so sorry Connie, no dice. It's hardly a 'fixation' to admit that which I have anyway and was originally brought up in that epic monolith of a soapbox you have going on elsewhere to address your own ignorance and double standards. If there's anyone who needs help - or carting off to the loony bin it's you...

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:49 PM
So you're a forensic psychologist? Please tell us what that entails.

It is not the thread topic, and many other members know all about what i did, where I went to school, and all the rest.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 06:53 PM
It is not the thread topic, and many other members know all about what i did, where I went to school, and all the rest.

I don't think you're educated on this subject and your posts show it.

I worked a vice detail years ago where I saw homosexual behavior up close. It's an absolutely filthy behavior and those that are involved in it are truly sick in the head. As evil as many of these people are (a good percent are child molesters, because they were molested as a child themselves), we need to show them compassion by legislating righteous laws and get them the help (and in some cases punishment) that they truly need.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:57 PM
..........

In my teens I found a stash of soft core magazines, playboy etc. By that point I already knew I found the opposite sex alluring............

Thanks, you point out one big difference between male sexuality and female sexuality. Men, we women know, like the objective view, while women are more a mixture, from being mainly subjective, to subjective-objective.

Test show women who state 'like his smile' are different from women who say, 'like his hunky shoulders'

We who are not made silly by the nodes of future present, do not mind you men liking our bods, not at all, that is why women clothes shop wear cosmetics, and are so concerned about looking young

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 06:59 PM
I don't think you're educated on this subject and your posts show it.



I really do not care, just do not be a pest.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
For those of you that don't know what Art is talking about: He admitted in another thread that he likes to watch two homosexuals having sex. Today his "thing" is homosexual women.


What I admitted to is one of the most common male heterosexual fantasies about, and it would solely be women that would be of any interest. Unlike yourself I'm actually honest about these things.

You were honest about enjoying watching an act of homosexuality (nothing to be proud of Art).


Quote:
Tell us a little bit about your childhood Art. Were you exposed to pornography? (hence his fixation with same sex porno). Inquiring minds need to know so that we can get you the help that you so desperately need.


In my teens I found a stash of soft core magazines, playboy etc. By that point I already knew I found the opposite sex alluring...

As long as the opposite sex was engaging in a act of homosexuality.

We'll get you and others like you the help you need. Hang in there for another decade if you can (the odds aren't in your favor though...see the B.A.R. obits as a reference).
http://70.90.168.99/olo/index.jsp

The 5 solas
July 20th, 2014, 07:01 PM
My brain cannot fathom the attraction of a man to another man. It just doesn't. I am put off by the idea of it and now that the media/news/movies, etc allows photographs of men kissing, images of a more sexual nature, I am always repulsed. Having said that, I try to look upon openly homosexual people with the knowledge that, but by the grace of God, there goes I. I prefer to see them as fellow human beings who are lost in their sin, which I think is the correct Christian response.

I think that homosexuality is sin and those who embrace it, need the Saviour, just like any other sin. I do believe there is something deeper here though than *just sin* because the Scriptures do say, 1 Cor 6:18, "Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body." It seems to affect our very inward being, as opposed to something like stealing...but this is true of all sexual immorality, not just homosexual behaviour, although I do believe it is an even further degradation.

Kat, you are very adamant that you cannot imagine yourself attracted to another female, no matter how much exposure you might get to liberal education etc. This is good but we must remember, that we are all not bent or weak towards the same sins. You may never think upon such a union and yet you might struggle with anger, stealing, slander, etc. I guess what I am trying to get at is....it might not always be obvious the reason why. Physically, we are usually attracted to the opposite sex. The size, strength, beauty...all just physical characteristics at first. Once we get to know the person, we find them attractive in other ways. It might not be physical at all, it could be what the gender represents. Safety, care, love, tenderness...things the one who is attracted might be missing in their life and trying to find a replacement for. We do that all the time, and yet know only God Himself can bring the peace and fulfillment we long for. How many have tried to find it in money, education, fame, etc.

I am one of those prissy girls who gets her nails done. I went to a new salon and spa because I had a gift certificate given to me for $200. I took someone with me, another Christian woman. She was booked for pedicure and massage and I was booked for gel nails and my brows. Well....there is a purpose to this story...lol. The person who approached us had long extensions of platinum blonde hair, 4 inch heels, leggings, a tunic styled top with multiple necklaces and bracelets, tons of make up and a very odd voice. My friend looked at me all disturbed and whispered, I am not going with that one. I said, okay.

I sat down across from this person at the manicure station and we started to chat. This *girl* was very well done up, but I knew it was a guy, not just dressed in drag but one in *transition*. The outfit that was worn, one could tell there were feminine endowments, shall we say. It was just a little while in that I noticed cutting scars across the wrists, very light but visible as the cuff bracelets moved to expose them.

Would the right thing to do be call this hurting person names, deride them, demand a different nail technician to care for me, be all offended and leave? I started to pray for this person, even as we sat there getting my nails done. This was a hurting and broken person, one who has clearly struggled for many years and has been brought to this place.

*She* is friends now with me on Facebook. She knows my Christian stance and also realizes that although I do not condone in any way the lifestyle that is being lived out, that I am still sharing the love of Christ. I want this person to know there is forgiveness at the cross, acceptance and unconditional love. That this person (what people would call the unlovable) can be loved by the Lord Jesus Christ.

Since so many on this board are against Calvinism and have preconceived and wrong views of us, I wish to say...I am Reformed, I do not know if this person is elect or not, but I do know it is my honour and duty as a Christian to extend the general gospel call to every human being that I am able to. That is living out the faith. I tell this story not to bring any glory to myself...but rather, I hope it illustrates what we can and should do as Believers. No matter how we *feel* about the sin, we are still to share the love of Christ with people, no matter what.

I covet your prayers for this person. Would it not be so God glorifying if this person was brought out of that lifestyle and embraced Jesus as Saviour and Lord.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 07:02 PM
I really do not care, just do not be a pest.

You started a thread and many us that haven't been a member of your fan club would like to know about your professional background.

Do you have any forensic psychological experience dealing with homosexual assaults or murders?

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 07:03 PM
Agree with you on not closeable. Not indifferent, mainly as it conflicts with my religious beliefs. It also conflicts with my nature as a person.

One pint to this thread, most Christians, it goes without saying, disapprove og homosexuality, but it is more. i find it repulsive outside of religion, yet I do not hate it, I would not understand it, as I am totally heterosexual. Maybe more people than i realise, do have more bisexual tendency, thus religion plays the largest part.

For me, outside of my faith, i would be repulsed by it, but not hate it. I would rather not invest the energy to hate it because I am that distant from it. make sense?

Well, I find any thought of intimacy with another man repulsive. It's not something I could possibly entertain as I'm completely heterosexual too. (Yes aCW, make note, I'm sure you already have)

Then again there's other things I would find detestable that others enjoy so my overall take on the subject is that through one reason or another it's something that's wired. I don't buy that all homosexual people are the way they are due to abuse or a non traditional family unit. There's far too many testimonies to the contrary so from a purely secular standpoint I don't have any personal interest in it, although I do argue on the subject where people like aCW does his 'thang'...

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 07:07 PM
Thanks, you point out one big difference between male sexuality and female sexuality. Men, we women know, like the objective view, while women are more a mixture, from being mainly subjective, to subjective-objective.

Test show women who state 'like his smile' are different from women who say, 'like his hunky shoulders'

We who are not made silly by the nodes of future present, do not mind you men liking our bods, not at all, that is why women clothes shop wear cosmetics, and are so concerned about looking young

I think men are certainly more wired to the overtly visual, hence why glamour magazines are predominantly aimed at heterosexual blokes.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 07:15 PM
You were honest about enjoying watching an act of homosexuality (nothing to be proud of Art).

Exclusively between attractive women and it could be simulated and more the erotic which would have the more appealing factor. I simply answered you honestly and I didn't say it was anything to be proud of anyway doofus.

You OTOH tried to make out that I - or anyone who admitted to such were homosexual themselves which was as laughable as it was ignorant and ludicrous.


As long as the opposite sex was engaging in a act of homosexuality.

Allow me to acquaint you with what should already be blindingly obvious. For a heterosexual male there is one constant underpinning factor in any sort of sexual proclivity or fantasy - that being there always being at least one member of the opposite sex involved...:duh:


We'll get you and others like you the help you need. Hang in there for another decade if you can (the odds aren't in your favor though...see the B.A.R. obits as a reference).


You'd need to 'cure' the majority of heterosexual mankind then. Frankly, the biggest help you could give is to grow a brain instead of that bunch of rocks you've got rattling around in that loony skull of yours...

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 07:16 PM
My brain cannot fathom the attraction of a man to another man. It just doesn't. I am put off by the idea of it and now that the media/news/movies, etc allows photographs of men kissing, images of a more sexual nature, I am always repulsed.

We totally agree

How many have tried to find it in money, education, fame, etc
Absolutely, it may seem i am thundering in my good nature when all i am sating IS my nature. My biggest stumbling block is money, high status, more, I cannot seem to focus on what should be paramount, when my own thought is my greatest ability is not psychology, or law, but investments, playing the stock market. it is as if i cannot ignore this and I never will spend the money, I think it is all for my kids, yet it is THE THING IN ITSELF!


I am one of those prissy girls who gets her nails done. I went to a new salon and spa because I had a gift certificate given to me for $200. I took someone with me, another Christian woman. She was booked for pedicure and massage and I was booked for gel nails and my brows. Well....there is a purpose to this story...lol. The person who approached us had long extensions of platinum blonde hair, 4 inch heels, leggings, a tunic styled top with multiple necklaces and bracelets, tons of make up and a very odd voice. My friend looked at me all disturbed and whispered, I am not going with that one. I said, okay.
I too was like that, but with age, the looks thing abated, yet I still notice the split second a man looks that way at me. I do not react more than a pleasant flirt, but it makes my day. ( Not as much as the stock market staying above 17000) :rotfl:


I sat down across from this person at the manicure station and we started to chat. This *girl* was very well done up, but I knew it was a guy
I did not see this part, oh I just don't know, why do I not see them? I think most homosexual men are sissies. I think some are what i would call punked out? I really think those without a medical reason are either secondary heterosexual narcissists, or super sissies. I guess I would self-censer?

jamie
July 20th, 2014, 07:24 PM
I can see that you're extremely ignorant on the subject...


Yeah, I'm extremely ignorant on all subjects. I don't know nuthin', I don't have nuthin', I don't want nuthin' ... so I'm perfectly happy.

And you? Why don't you tell me how smart you are? I might be really impressed.

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 07:25 PM
i am thundering in my good nature when all i am sating IS my nature. My biggest stumbling block is money, high status, more, I cannot seem to focus on what should be paramount, when my own thought is my greatest ability is not psychology, or law, but investments, playing the stock market. it is as if i cannot ignore this and I never will spend the money, I think it is all for my kids, yet it is THE THING IN ITSELF!


I too was like that, but with age, the looks thing abated, yet I still notice the split second a man looks that way at me. I do not react more than a pleasant flirt, but it makes my day. ( Not as much as the stock market staying above 17000) :rotfl:



Gads . . .

Is this thread all about Ktoyou's (aged) sexuality and wealth, or what?

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 07:27 PM
I think men are certainly more wired to the overtly visual, hence why glamour magazines are predominantly aimed at heterosexual blokes.

Right, yet not just visual, as women have as much of that. Men seek the perfect mate by her ability to reproduce. Women seek a man who best makes it possible.

I remember when 'Playgirl' came out with another, "viva" I think, and they both flopped. It was not we were not ready; women need so much more subjective than men.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 07:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
You were honest about enjoying watching an act of homosexuality (nothing to be proud of Art).


Exclusively between attractive women and it could be simulated and more the erotic which would have the more appealing factor. I simply answered you honestly and I didn't say it was anything to be proud of anyway doofus.

Why don't you put all of this foolishness of defending homosexuality behind you and find a nice young lady and marry her Art? Granted, the homosexual porno business will lose a major financial contributor, but with people like Christian Liberty, GFR7 and noguru out there, I'm sure they'll be just fine.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 07:34 PM
Why don't you put all of this foolishness of defending homosexuality behind you and find a nice young lady and marry her Art? Granted, the homosexual porno business will lose a major financial contributor, but with people like Christian Liberty, GFR7 and noguru out there, I'm sure they'll be just fine.

Well, considering I don't buy or give any sort of financial aid to pornography they'd hardly be missing anything oh gormless one. If I were it would be the heterosexual 'porno business' that would miss out as such is aimed at straight men, something which still doesn't compute for some unknown reason for you does it?
As for the rest, you know squat about my personal life and as I've explained before you ain't gonna either...don't bother sharing yours as I wouldn't believe a word of anything you had to say about it anyway.

The 5 solas
July 20th, 2014, 07:35 PM
Why don't you put all of this foolishness of defending homosexuality behind you and find a nice young lady and marry her Art? Granted, the homosexual porno business will lose a major financial contributor, but with people like Christian Liberty, GFR7 and noguru out there, I'm sure they'll be just fine.

Luke 18:9-14
9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 07:35 PM
Do you have any forensic psychological experience dealing with homosexual assaults or murders?

Yes, in prison sexual assault. I was pro requested segregation, and anti "the reproduction of the she-male. I mean against prisoners taking female hormones.

Based on one principle, equal time! I detested that for some, prison was a winter sex pleasure dome, while others lost their life, or what means in life.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 07:37 PM
Yes, in prison sexual assault. I was pro requested segration, emale and anti "the reproduction of the she-male. I mean against prosoners taking female hormones.

Based on one principle, equal time! I detested that for some, prison was a winter sex pleasure dome, while others lost their life, or what means in life.

I appreciate the information. When I reopen my thread (I had to close it because the boyz were getting all worked up talking about men in uniforms), I might have to call on you to tell some stories, as I'll be talking about homosexual violence.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 07:39 PM
Luke 18:9-14
9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Thank you Solas. I don't need a pastor anymore, your copy and pastes (taking Scripture out of context) is all I need.

Same time, same thread next Sunday?

The 5 solas
July 20th, 2014, 07:43 PM
Thank you Solas. I don't need a pastor anymore, your copy and pastes (taking Scripture out of context) is all I need.

Same time, same thread next Sunday?

You need Jesus from what I can see....and that Scripture is perfectly applied to you.

I copy and paste the Scriptures that I quote so there is no excuse to not read them. I sure hope you availed yourself of it.

I doubt you will have much dealing with me on here. As I am female, straight and do not get into the homo bashing threads that you seem to bask in.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 07:44 PM
ACW, It is somewhat confusing, as the real predators deny being homosexual. .
Some I would say are a class of homosexual, as they are sadists, who humiliate, and some go back to women, exclusively

We received parole reports, which is where you get the full story, inside and outside.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 07:46 PM
I doubt you will have much dealing with me on here. As I am female, straight and do not get into the homo bashing threads that you seem to bask in.

I get the feeling that if I were to go into one of the many threads where homosexuality is defended, I would see plenty of you T5s.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 07:49 PM
ACW, It is somewhat confusing, as the real predators deny being homosexual.

We see a lot of that here on TOL (denial).


Some I would say are a class of homosexual, as they are sadists, who humiliate, and some go back to women, exclusively

We received parole reports, which is where you get the full story, inside and outside.

Sadomasochism is a big part of the homosexual lifestyle. Like you said, we'd have to know the full story to thoroughly understand what goes through their minds and hence what has caused such sickening behavior.

Thanks.

csuguy
July 20th, 2014, 07:52 PM
I believe people's sexuality is more in their control than they think. Most of us are happy with whatever our choice is and don't think much about it - especially when your religion/culture is unacceptable of alternate, unnatural choices. I certainly would never give homosexuality the time of day.

However, I've known many bi-sexuals who have gone back and forth. The existence of Bi-sexuals demonstrates that we do, in fact, have a choice in this matter. For those who don't experience the social/religious/moral conflict with regards different sexual orientations - they feel free to experiment.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 07:52 PM
I appreciate the information. When I reopen my thread (I had to close it because the boyz were getting all worked up talking about men in uniforms), I might have to call on you to tell some stories, as I'll be talking about homosexual violence.

Actually the only talk of men in uniforms was regarding you and the likelihood that you never wore a cops outfit at all...something that most are in agreement on. The thought of you being an 'officer of the law' would be enough to give any criminal cause for celebration...

:Plain:

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 07:56 PM
Actually the only talk of men in uniforms was regarding you and the likelihood that you never wore a cops outfit at all...something that most are in agreement on. The thought of you being an 'officer of the law' would be enough to give any criminal cause for celebration...

:Plain:

I suppose I could have joined in on the fun and told some war stories, but then you boyz would have gone all crazy thinking about the homosexual national pastime:

Public restroom toilet stall hopping.

On that note:

It's been an experience as usual Art.

The 5 solas
July 20th, 2014, 08:00 PM
I get the feeling that if I were to go into one of the many threads where homosexuality is defended, I would see plenty of you T5s.

Hmm let's think about that.

I am a business owner so I have participated a little in, The Eradication of Christian Rights, thread. I do not believe we should be forced to accept contracts or jobs which go against our consciences.

I posted in the RIP Archie thread, where I said I was sad to see that happen to something which has been around since childhood and is now used as a tool to promote immorality.

Then just this last one which was a request for personal thoughts.

I actually choose to not even read most of those bashing threads. They are filled with hate and not uplifting in any manner.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 08:02 PM
I suppose I could have joined in on the fun and told some war stories, but then you boyz would have gone all crazy thinking about the homosexual national pastime:

Public restroom toilet stall hopping.

On that note:

It's been an experience as usual Art.

Hmm, I'll bet those war stories would have been just riiiiiiveting Connie...

Zn692n7gfDw

Seeing as we're all straight on that blog thread of yours there was no need to worry...

And hey, it's always an experience listening to you...:cloud9:

:e4e:

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 08:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I get the feeling that if I were to go into one of the many threads where homosexuality is defended, I would see plenty of you T5s.


Hmm let's think about that.

I am a business owner so I have participated a little in, The Eradication of Christian Rights, thread. I do not believe we should be forced to accept contracts or jobs which go against our consciences.

But you are forced. How's the decriminalization of homosexuality and the agenda that goes along with it working out for you Christian business owners?

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 08:08 PM
I believe people's sexuality is more in their control than they think. Most of us are happy with whatever our choice is and don't think much about it - especially when your religion/culture is unacceptable of alternate, unnatural choices. I certainly would never give homosexuality the time of day.

However, I've known many bi-sexuals who have gone back and forth. The existence of Bi-sexuals demonstrates that we do, in fact, have a choice in this matter. For those who don't experience the social/religious/moral conflict with regards different sexual orientations - they feel free to experiment.

Well, I'd have to differ even if simply from a purely personal perspective. I didn't 'choose' to be heterosexual. I simply am and there's no way I could make a conscious decision to be attracted to either both sexes or exclusively men. It's not in my control. It may not be that way for everyone but in my experience most admit to having no choice on a latent attraction - including bisexuals.

The 5 solas
July 20th, 2014, 08:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I get the feeling that if I were to go into one of the many threads where homosexuality is defended, I would see plenty of you T5s.



But you are forced. How's the decriminalization of homosexuality and the agenda that goes along with it working out for you Christian business owners?

That is the beauty of it. I have homosexual clients I most happily serve and who know I am a Christian. Their sexual orientation does not make them a less worthy patron to me...same as the slanderers, proud, self righteous, adulterers, drunks, liars, any manner of sinner.

The nature of my business allows me the freedom to do commerce without going against my conscience. If there ever comes the time, I will be sure to be wise in my dealings. I will not promote what I consider immoral lifestyles with my business, homosexual or otherwise. One day I might have to make the choice for my business or my God...I pray for the grace to make the right decision and not compromise my testimony for the sake of business.

Quincy
July 20th, 2014, 08:25 PM
I once tried my hand working at a call center and this place allowed same sex partners to be included with employee benefits. There were a lot of homosexuals working there and I have to say it was quite entertaining. There were so many hand gestures, lisps and so much sass I burst out laughing quite frequently. Maybe that's bad of me to find some homosexuals entertaining in that way, but I did.

Some of the smartest and most reasonable (and spiritual) people I've known have also been homosexuals, as well as a few family members. It doesn't seem different to me at all but that is probably because I don't think of them having sexual exploits. I don't think of anyone's sexual exploits. I think people that hear the word homosexual or heterosexual who immediately start imagining those sex acts...... to be weird.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 08:31 PM
I believe people's sexuality is more in their control than they think. Most of us are happy with whatever our choice is and don't think much about it - especially when your religion/culture is unacceptable of alternate, unnatural choices. I certainly would never give homosexuality the time of day.

However, I've known many bi-sexuals who have gone back and forth. The existence of Bi-sexuals demonstrates that we do, in fact, have a choice in this matter. For those who don't experience the social/religious/moral conflict with regards different sexual orientations - they feel free to experiment.

This is very insightful. I never thought as to how much it may be in my control. I do know the same sex idea seems meaningless, not erotic and I see the heterosexual as the accepted view.

I do not know, well, i really do not believe i have a choice, or if you contend so, then it would be well repressed by healthy repression.

On bisexuality, all i know is some I have hear of, a friend of a friend, had some goings on, and if memory serves me, it was a woman, which counters my first stance.

I think this was the picture; she was divorced, was not well sought by men, took to sharing her home and then admitted to the relationship being more than what seemed on the surface.

She did have conflict over her religious beliefs, while the other did not, and left. last i heard she lived alone. This was around 1990, in The Woodlands, Texas.

All i can say is that would not be an option for me.

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 08:32 PM
I once tried my hand working at a call center and this place allowed same sex partners to be included with employee benefits. There were a lot of homosexuals working there and I have to say it was quite entertaining. There were so many hand gestures, lisps and so much sass I burst out laughing quite frequently. Maybe that's bad of me to find some homosexuals entertaining in that way, but I did.

Some of the smartest and most reasonable (and spiritual) people I've known have also been homosexuals, as well as a few family members. It doesn't seem different to me at all but that is probably because I don't think of them having sexual exploits. I don't think of anyone's sexual exploits. I think people that hear the word homosexual or heterosexual who immediately start imagining those sex acts...... to be weird.

Ssshhhh. Don't tell ACW that his obsessive fixation on other peoples sexual exploits is weird, he thinks such a mentality is quite reasonable and healthy.

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 08:35 PM
This is very insightful. I never thought as to how much it may be in my control. I do know the same sex idea seems meaningless, not erotic and I see the heterosexual as the accepted view.

I do not know, well, i really do not believe i have a choice, or if you contend so, then it would be well repressed by healthy repression.

On bisexuality, all i know is some I have hear of, a friend of a friend, had some goings on, and if memory serves me, it was a woman, which counters my first stance.

I think this was the picture; she was divorced, was not well sought by men, took to sharing her home and then admitted to the relationship being more than what seemed on the surface.

She did have conflict over her religious beliefs, while the other did not, and left. last i heard she lived alone. This was around 1990, in The Woodlands, Texas.

All i can say is that would not be an option for me.

I do not think I really have a choice to be sexually attracted to anything other than the female gender. However, I think sexual confusion can some lead people to become comfortable with things that clarity would have helped them avoid.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 08:46 PM
I do not think I really have a choice to be sexually attracted to anything other than the female gender. However, I think sexual confusion can some lead people to become comfortable with things that clarity would have helped them avoid.

I agree, but regarding sexual confusion; wouldn't it be so basic? I think our bodies are so well designed for heterosexuality that any else would be a physical anomaly, and from this, a serious mental illness.

I remember when this was removed as a disorder. I did not agree and still do not agree.

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 08:52 PM
I agree, but regarding sexual confusion; wouldn't it be so basic? I think our bodies are so well designed for heterosexuality that any else would be a physical anomaly, and from this, a serious mental illness.

I remember when this was removed as a disorder. I did not agree and still do not agree.

When I was adolescent I use to get an erection from riding a bus. I think it was the vibrations or something. I am thinking that if that could happen to me, and you take a more confused mind, they might not realize that physical reaction alone that might seem like romantic arousal is not the same as it coming from the depths of one's soul.

csuguy
July 20th, 2014, 09:03 PM
Well, I'd have to differ even if simply from a purely personal perspective. I didn't 'choose' to be heterosexual. I simply am and there's no way I could make a conscious decision to be attracted to either both sexes or exclusively men. It's not in my control. It may not be that way for everyone but in my experience most admit to having no choice on a latent attraction - including bisexuals.

I agree that the specific traits we maybe attracted to are usually not conscious decisions, these are usually picked up subconciously - but would argue that they can be challenged by the conscious mind.

Heterosexual is the natural choice, obviously. But the existence of bi and homosexuals demonstrates that the natural choice doesn't win out in those who are willing to go against nature.

I can only guess as to how one might go from a heterosexual to a homosexual - being a straight virgin myself - but I suggest that it starts with a change in perspective on sex. If you engage in sex purely for pleasure, without commitment, then that opens the door to experimentation. You probably don't jump into homosexual relations immediately - but do group sex and such that slowly brings other men into your sex life until finally you venture to crossing the line into doing sexual acts with other men.

Like with drugs, I believe there are gateway activities that lead to ever more deprived sexual activities. It is a matter of the conscious becoming comfortable with things that it once outright rejected.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 09:04 PM
I agree, but regarding sexual confusion; wouldn't it be so basic? I think our bodies are so well designed for heterosexuality that any else would be a physical anomaly, and from this, a serious mental illness.

I remember when this was removed as a disorder. I did not agree and still do not agree.

One argument against that would be there being many a heterosexual practice that strays from the 'norm' so to speak. So would you construe that as a mental disorder?

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 09:07 PM
One argument against that would be there being many a heterosexual practice that strays from the 'norm' so to speak. So would you construe that as a mental disorder?

Yes. We all stray from the norm to some degree. But it is the degree that makes it notable to others.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 09:09 PM
Yes. We all stray from the norm to some degree. But it is the degree that makes it notable to others.

Then where would you draw the line as to what degree is notable?

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 09:15 PM
Then where would you draw the line as to what degree is notable?

Well I have always been relatively conservative, compared to those around me, in regard to sexual deviation from one on one romantic heterosexual relations, so I would draw the line where I am at obviously. But I think each person need answer that for themselves, as most people who remain in such a deviant state throughout their lives do not seem to have much contentment. This is something I did not notice when I was younger, because I did not have the benefit of experience.

The 5 solas
July 20th, 2014, 09:18 PM
Well I have always been relatively conservative, compared to those around me, in regard to sexual deviation from one on one romantic heterosexual relations, so I would draw the line where I am at obviously. But I think each person need answer that for themselves, as most people who remain in such a deviant state throughout their lives do not seem to have much contentment. This is something I did not notice when I was younger, because I did not have the benefit of experience.

For a married Christian couple....would anything they consent to do that is between just the two of them, be acceptable. I mean, who is deciding what is okay and what is not with regards to sexual activity between a consenting christian couple?

Quincy
July 20th, 2014, 09:19 PM
Ssshhhh. Don't tell ACW that his obsessive fixation on other peoples sexual exploits is weird, he thinks such a mentality is quite reasonable and healthy.

He also doesn't believe people change, for whatever queer reason :chuckle: .

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 09:22 PM
I agree that the specific traits we maybe attracted to are usually not conscious decisions, these are usually picked up subconciously - but would argue that they can be challenged by the conscious mind.

Heterosexual is the natural choice, obviously. But the existence of bi and homosexuals demonstrates that the natural choice doesn't win out in those who are willing to go against nature.

Except it wasn't a personal choice of mine to find the opposite sex attractive even as a child - let alone once puberty hit in. It was simply wired. Given that my parents were somewhat straight laced where it came to discussing sex I didn't even know what was going on or why I was sexually aroused by a picture of a beautiful scantily clad woman the first time it happened...

I really don't buy the argument that those who are bi or homosexual make any sort of actual 'choice' in general either. I think that's reaching...


I can only guess as to how one might go from a heterosexual to a homosexual - being a straight virgin myself - but I suggest that it starts with a change in perspective on sex. If you engage in sex purely for pleasure, without commitment, then that opens the door to experimentation. You probably don't jump into homosexual relations immediately - but do group sex and such that slowly brings other men into your sex life until finally you venture to crossing the line into doing sexual acts with other men.

Well, watching any sort of pornography where men are involved as well as women - be it soft or hard could potentially have that same effect if it could lead to a 'crossing the line' of sorts - yet for for the vast majority of straight men it doesn't lead to that at all. I don't think that argument works. Viewing sex as pleasurable doesn't alter ones attraction IMO.


Like with drugs, I believe there are gateway activities that lead to ever more deprived sexual activities. It is a matter of the conscious becoming comfortable with things that it once outright rejected.

For some that may be the case but I still don't buy that it could be supported in the main, or even that it would be a viable reason for suddenly being able to choose an attraction that simply wasn't there.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 09:26 PM
Well I have always been relatively conservative, compared to those around me, in regard to sexual deviation from one on one romantic heterosexual relations, so I would draw the line where I am at obviously. But I think each person need answer that for themselves, as most people who remain in such a deviant state throughout their lives do not seem to have much contentment. This is something I did not notice when I was younger, because I did not have the benefit of experience.

Well, there are plenty of heterosexual couples who engage in fairly common sexual practices that may not sit well with the more conservative so I was just trying to get a handle on where you were at.

:e4e:

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 09:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I get the feeling that if I were to go into one of the many threads where homosexuality is defended, I would see plenty of you T5s.

But you are forced. How's the decriminalization of homosexuality and the agenda that goes along with it working out for you Christian business owners?


That is the beauty of it. I have homosexual clients I most happily serve and who know I am a Christian. Their sexual orientation does not make them a less worthy patron to me...same as the slanderers, proud, self righteous, adulterers, drunks, liars, any manner of sinner.

No, engaging in buggery doesn't make them any less of a person, but being proud and unrepentant about it does.

One would think that a true Christian would stand up for God's Word and not only tell them that if they continue their destructive lifestyle, that they'll most likely die decades before they should, but more importantly if they don't repent, they'll spend eternity in damnation.

I guess money is more important to some...ahem..."Christians" than to others.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 09:30 PM
He also doesn't believe people change, for whatever queer reason :chuckle: .

People do change Quincy. You went from swinging both ways (the "B" in the LGBT acronym) to from what I understand, swinging the right way (heterosexuality).

noguru
July 20th, 2014, 09:33 PM
Well, there are plenty of heterosexual couples who engage in fairly common sexual practices that may not sit well with the more conservative so I was just trying to get a handle on where you were at.

:e4e:

Yup, I agree.

The 5 solas
July 20th, 2014, 09:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I get the feeling that if I were to go into one of the many threads where homosexuality is defended, I would see plenty of you T5s.

But you are forced. How's the decriminalization of homosexuality and the agenda that goes along with it working out for you Christian business owners?



No, engaging in buggery doesn't make them any less of a person, but being proud and unrepentant about it does.

One would think that a true Christian would stand up for God's Word and not only tell them that if they continue their destructive lifestyle, that they'll most likely die decades before they should, but more importantly if they don't repent, they'll spend eternity in damnation.

I guess money is more important to some...ahem..."Christians" than to others.

Apparently you did not read my long, initial post on this thread. Perhaps you should take a look. Not everyone blasts people with names and degrades them, breaking any opportunity to build a relationship to share Christ with them. Here it is : http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3978620&postcount=67

My clientele are all aware that I am a Christian, and yet the ones who are not, still come to me instead of going to an alternate business which features an unbelieving owner. I have had clients, who are not Christians, call me when they have had bad news to ask me to pray. I have been called into hospital rooms by clients and their family members when they have thought they were going to die. Apparently, trying to be a testimony and a witness for Christ instead of a self righteous pharisee seems to be working for me.

I tried to stand up for God's Word by quoting Scripture to you for your offense, but you didn't take the rebuke. What can a girl do? =)

Here it is again, just incase you want to read it this time.

Luke 18:9-14
9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 10:09 PM
One argument against that would be there being many a heterosexual practice that strays from the 'norm' so to speak. So would you construe that as a mental disorder?

In my opinion, if someone strays to the same sex then, maybe not 'mental' but wrong thinking, and unnatural. On the other hand, it may not be a mental disorder for a wealthy executive to take away a struggling younger man's wife; however there is a Commandment against adultery.

I think my main contention is, homosexuality is, from my perspective, quite odd and not truly sexual.

csuguy
July 20th, 2014, 10:11 PM
Except it wasn't a personal choice of mine to find the opposite sex attractive even as a child - let alone once puberty hit in. It was simply wired. Given that my parents were somewhat straight laced where it came to discussing sex I didn't even know what was going on or why I was sexually aroused by a picture of a beautiful scantily clad woman the first time it happened...

Part of that is nature, obviously. But nuture plays a role in who you are attracted to as well - on the subconcious level. For example: in our culture women of a lighter build, even up to be anorexic, are generally considered beautiful - while larger women are regarded as less attractive. In other cultures - large women are considered to be more attractive.

No - this is not an explicit choice, but it demonstrates that things aren't has hardwired as some like to think it is. And if it is a matter of changing the minds view of something - the conscious mind can override the subconscious if it so desires.


I really don't buy the argument that those who are bi or homosexual make any sort of actual 'choice' in general either. I think that's reaching...


Bi-sexuals are obviously making a choice in who they are attracted to. They switch between men and women partners at will - somedays prefering a man, others a woman. I know they do this as I have many bi friends. I also have a gay co-worker who in an earlier life was married to a Christian woman - but their religious views conflicted too much so they divorced (he's Wiccan)


Well, watching any sort of pornography where men are involved as well as women - be it soft or hard could potentially have that same effect if it could lead to a 'crossing the line' of sorts - yet for for the vast majority of straight men it doesn't lead to that at all. I don't think that argument works. Viewing sex as pleasurable doesn't alter ones attraction IMO.

First off, there is a definite difference between watching something and participating. Secondly, even with pornography you get the gateway effect. Many men have been caught on child-pornography charges because it came up in their search for 'normal' porn - and they clicked on it because they were curious. We don't know how many get interested in men because it isn't illegal - so there are no stats to draw from.

Thirdly, what I said wasn't that people view it as pleasurable (all do) - but that they view as it being purely about pleasure.


For some that may be the case but I still don't buy that it could be supported in the main, or even that it would be a viable reason for suddenly being able to choose an attraction that simply wasn't there.

Well there are no stats to draw from. For better or worse, no one has conducted such a study to my knowledge. However, I maintain that bi-sexuals and the bi-curious clearly demonstrate the ability to push our sexual boundaries, even against nature.

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 10:12 PM
homosexuality is, from my perspective, quite odd and not truly sexual.

Huh?

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 10:18 PM
AB,
I never did understand the interest some men have watching two women play sexual. I do not think most women get this? Tell you what, do a qualitative study: ask 100 women, at random, if she would like watching two men act sexual; if you find one of the hundred, I will wear a green hat!

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 10:23 PM
AB,
I never did understand the interest some men have watching two women play sexual. I do not think most women get this? Tell you what, do a qualitative study: ask 100 women, at random, if she would like watching two men act sexual; if you find one of the hundred, I will wear a green hat!

How does this post fit your OP?

IMO, it invites porn and I have reported it.

Quincy
July 20th, 2014, 10:25 PM
AB,
I never did understand the interest some men have watching two women play sexual. I do not think most women get this? Tell you what, do a qualitative study: ask 100 women, at random, if she would like watching two men act sexual; if you find one of the hundred, I will wear a green hat!

Think of the greek sirens mythology.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 10:41 PM
How does this post fit your OP?

IMO, it invites porn and I have reported it.

Wonderful. You bother them with such minor discussion. Why do you follow me around with so much criticism? Do you really need my attention so much?:alien:

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 10:45 PM
Think of the greek sirens mythology.

Your post was quite comprehensive, and you may know, controversial. Now with sensitive little Nang having fits over any attempt to get underneath the subject, imagine who she would take my attempt to respond thoroughly?

Maybe geek sirens mythology?:crackup:

Nang
July 20th, 2014, 10:56 PM
Wonderful. You bother them with such minor discussion. Why do you follow me around with so much criticism? Do you really need my attention so much?:alien:

Are you such a narcissist that you truly believe I follow you around?

If I agreed with all your posts, you would never think to ask such a question, but would relish my attention.

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 10:58 PM
AB,
I never did understand the interest some men have watching two women play sexual. I do not think most women get this? Tell you what, do a qualitative study: ask 100 women, at random, if she would like watching two men act sexual; if you find one of the hundred, I will wear a green hat!

Well, it's certainly more of a 'guy thing' to be sure where it comes to said. I would say it's because the female of the species is far more voluptuous physically than a man, hence the appeal...

Quincy
July 20th, 2014, 11:06 PM
:Plain:

Arthur, would you believe there are women who find being called voluptuous insulting?

and there's men that don't :chuckle: .


The world today :eek:

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 11:20 PM
Part of that is nature, obviously. But nuture plays a role in who you are attracted to as well - on the subconcious level. For example: in our culture women of a lighter build, even up to be anorexic, are generally considered beautiful - while larger women are regarded as less attractive. In other cultures - large women are considered to be more attractive.

Hmm, I think you're stretching it to include the anorexic. Women of a slim build may generally be held to be the more attractive but even in our Western culture there's many who prefer different builds, even if it doesn't go to being considerably overweight overall.


No - this is not an explicit choice, but it demonstrates that things aren't has hardwired as some like to think it is. And if it is a matter of changing the minds view of something - the conscious mind can override the subconscious if it so desires.

Really? Could you choose to fall in love with a piece of plastic? There's at least one poster on here who thinks it's possible for people to 'train' themselves to become romantically attached to inanimate objects. Ludicrous I know but he used a case of a woman marrying a Ferris wheel as a case in point. Did she consciously choose that or is there something outside of her control going on? I'd certainly say she needed help to be frank but how was she consciously making a decision to be so involved? For me you might as well say we can control our dreams here...


Bi-sexuals are obviously making a choice in who they are attracted to. They switch between men and women partners at will - somedays prefering a man, others a woman. I know they do this as I have many bi friends. I also have a gay co-worker who in an earlier life was married to a Christian woman - but their religious views conflicted too much so they divorced (he's Wiccan)

Why? What if they're just actually attracted to both sexes with no actual choice in the matter? Have you asked them whether they choose it or do you just presume?


First off, there is a definite difference between watching something and participating. Secondly, even with pornography you get the gateway effect. Many men have been caught on child-pornography charges because it came up in their search for 'normal' porn - and they clicked on it because they were curious. We don't know how many get interested in men because it isn't illegal - so there are no stats to draw from.

Um, you need to clarify this rather more as there is a HUGE difference between being 'curious' regarding adult sexuality than there is with a child. If an adult is curious about *child pornography* then there's something already disturbing in play at the outset...


Thirdly, what I said wasn't that people view it as pleasurable (all do) - but that they view as it being purely about pleasure.

Which would change an attraction how exactly? I like pizzas - but I couldn't 'choose' to like one with strawberry jam laden over it no matter how much I might 'try'...


Well there are no stats to draw from. For better or worse, no one has conducted such a study to my knowledge. However, I maintain that bi-sexuals and the bi-curious clearly demonstrate the ability to push our sexual boundaries, even against nature.

Or alternatively they may just happen to be attracted to both genders without any conscious choice in the matter?

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 11:25 PM
:Plain:

Arthur, would you believe there are women who find being called voluptuous insulting?

and there's men that don't :chuckle: .


The world today :eek:

Well, in fairness I was just trying to point out that the female form is generally regarded as the more aesthetically pleasing of the two genders...:eek:

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 11:31 PM
Well, it's certainly more of a 'guy thing' to be sure where it comes to said. I would say it's because the female of the species is far more voluptuous physically than a man, hence the appeal...

I think you a perceiving like a heterosexual man. Well where did I get that idea? :rotfl: naturally, sure. Women see men as much an attraction, although women differ more. Part is due to conditioning and part is natural proclivity.

aCultureWarrior
July 20th, 2014, 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

But you are forced. How's the decriminalization of homosexuality and the agenda that goes along with it working out for you Christian business owners?

No, engaging in buggery doesn't make them any less of a person, but being proud and unrepentant about it does.

One would think that a true Christian would stand up for God's Word and not only tell them that if they continue their destructive lifestyle, that they'll most likely die decades before they should, but more importantly if they don't repent, they'll spend eternity in damnation.

I guess money is more important to some...ahem..."Christians" than to others.


Apparently you did not read my long, initial post on this thread. Perhaps you should take a look. Not everyone blasts people with names and degrades them, breaking any opportunity to build a relationship to share Christ with them. Here it is : http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3978620&postcount=67

My clientele are all aware that I am a Christian, and yet the ones who are not, still come to me instead of going to an alternate business which features an unbelieving owner. I have had clients, who are not Christians, call me when they have had bad news to ask me to pray. I have been called into hospital rooms by clients and their family members when they have thought they were going to die. Apparently, trying to be a testimony and a witness for Christ instead of a self righteous pharisee seems to be working for me.

I tried to stand up for God's Word by quoting Scripture to you for your offense, but you didn't take the rebuke. What can a girl do? =)

Here it is again, just incase you want to read it this time.

Luke 18:9-14
9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

I see that you're extremely naïve when it comes to understanding the organized evil that we as Christians and others who stand for decency are faced with in today's world.

Review this 3 part thread and see how others like you have been bitten by those that they thought weren't snakes (florists, bakers, innkeepers, photographers).

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=101920

Keep spreading the gospel, but remember that faith without works is dead (righteous laws need to be returned to our society to help the morally confused).

I hope that you'll comment in my thread once I reopen it.

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 11:32 PM
Well, in fairness I was just trying to point out that the female form is generally regarded as the more aesthetically pleasing of the two genders...:eek:

Not too me :nono: way not!

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 11:43 PM
I think you a perceiving like a heterosexual man. Well where did I get that idea? :rotfl: naturally, sure. Women see men as much an attraction, although women differ more. Part is due to conditioning and part is natural proclivity.

Well, I think the differing is where the differences lie overall. I've not known many straight women who have any interest in male/male, but where it comes to straight blokes - female/female is as common as it gets...;)

Arthur Brain
July 20th, 2014, 11:45 PM
Not too me :nono: way not!

Fair enough. :eek:

Just to clarify I didn't actually mean from a sexual perspective but rather just in general...

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 11:49 PM
Fair enough. :eek:

Just to clarify I didn't actually mean from a sexual perspective but rather just in general...

think it can be argued both ways? Women may agree. mainly because many women feel that is an advantage.

:idunno:

Ktoyou
July 20th, 2014, 11:51 PM
Are you such a narcissist that you truly believe I follow you around?

If I agreed with all your posts, you would never think to ask such a question, but would relish my attention.

Not really, I think you are a bit wacky.

Goodnight

Arthur Brain
July 21st, 2014, 12:29 AM
think it can be argued both ways? Women may agree. mainly because many women feel that is an advantage.

:idunno:

Well, it could certainly be argued sure, but I think the general consensus is that women are the more aesthetically pleasing in form...

resurrected
July 21st, 2014, 12:35 AM
which is more aesthetically pleasing?

http://th04.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2010/200/3/6/Venus_de_Milo_by_walsrya.jpg


or


http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/73460000/jpg/_73460513_0h9pt2ho.jpg

Eeset
July 21st, 2014, 12:46 AM
Why are threads about sexuality getting lots of attention on TOL recently?

csuguy
July 21st, 2014, 12:48 AM
Really? Could you choose to fall in love with a piece of plastic? There's at least one poster on here who thinks it's possible for people to 'train' themselves to become romantically attached to inanimate objects. Ludicrous I know but he used a case of a woman marrying a Ferris wheel as a case in point. Did she consciously choose that or is there something outside of her control going on? I'd certainly say she needed help to be frank but how was she consciously making a decision to be so involved? For me you might as well say we can control our dreams here...

Perhaps you can - though I don't think anyone under normal circumstances would choose to do so. Under severe conditions (trapped on an island for an extended period of time for instance) who knows? Men get raped by other men in prison for lack of women.



Why? What if they're just actually attracted to both sexes with no actual choice in the matter? Have you asked them whether they choose it or do you just presume?

I suppose one could suppose there is a "straight" gene and a "homo" gene and these people just happened to get both - but there is no evidence for any such thing. In fact, a "homo" gene, if it did randomly occur, would necessarily become extinct very quickly.

So - for lack of any sensible reason to suppose that it is one's biological makeup that causes bisexuals to be attracted to both sexes - we return to nuture and one's will.


Um, you need to clarify this rather more as there is a HUGE difference between being 'curious' regarding adult sexuality than there is with a child. If an adult is curious about *child pornography* then there's something already disturbing in play at the outset...

There is a big difference in how we treat these subjects socially - however, there is no reason to think that internally anything different is going on. Many pedophiles live very normal lives - you wouldn't know unless you were informed.


Which would change an attraction how exactly? I like pizzas - but I couldn't 'choose' to like one with strawberry jam laden over it no matter how much I might 'try'...

A bad comparison. To adapt your comparison to the present discussion - in one case you are getting handed pizza by an attractive white woman, in the other you get handed pizza by a black man. You are racist (for the sake of the analogy) - and therefore refuse to take pizza from the black man. Of course this analogy is not perfect either - but it is more to the point. Either way you get the pleasure of pizza, only the source is different.


Or alternatively they may just happen to be attracted to both genders without any conscious choice in the matter?

What mechanism do you suppose is at work that could make one by nature - completely independent of choice or influence by nurture - attracted to both sexes? Or even just the same sex for that matter?

Remember - a "gay" gene would never prosper, for evolution is all about pro-creation.

Arthur Brain
July 21st, 2014, 01:22 AM
Perhaps you can - though I don't think anyone under normal circumstances would choose to do so. Under severe conditions (trapped on an island for an extended period of time for instance) who knows? Men get raped by other men in prison for lack of women.

Um, well no, there's no way I could get attracted to a piece of plastic, plasticine or any form of inanimate object. There's no way I could 'choose' to do so either. If there's extremity of condition attached then that renders conscious choice invalid anyway.


I suppose one could suppose there is a "straight" gene and a "homo" gene and these people just happened to get both - but there is no evidence for any such thing. In fact, a "homo" gene, if it did randomly occur, would necessarily become extinct very quickly.

There's no real evidence (unless you can provide some) that homo or bisexuality isn't actually a part of nature already.


So - for lack of any sensible reason to suppose that it is one's biological makeup that causes bisexuals to be attracted to both sexes - we return to nuture and one's will.

Well, how do you 'will' to enjoy a piece of music, be involved in a film, be attracted to anything? How is any of that and more an actual conscious choice on your part?


There is a big difference in how we treat these subjects socially - however, there is no reason to think that internally anything different is going on. Many pedophiles live very normal lives - you wouldn't know unless you were informed.

What exactly makes you think you're so informed?


A bad comparison. To adapt your comparison to the present discussion - in one case you are getting handed pizza by an attractive white woman, in the other you get handed pizza by a black man. You are racist (for the sake of the analogy) - and therefore refuse to take pizza from the black man. Of course this analogy is not perfect either - but it is more to the point. Either way you get the pleasure of pizza, only the source is different.

Um, it wouldn't matter to me who handed me a pizza with a load of jam on top of it. I'd be sending it back no matter who delivered it as there's no way I could possibly 'choose' to enjoy it. It seems to be you who is missing the point here.


What mechanism do you suppose is at work that could make one by nature - completely independent of choice or influence by nurture - attracted to both sexes? Or even just the same sex for that matter?

Okay, you tell me when you first started choosing to like girls and lets take the argument from there. Or, explain how you can start choosing to like men instead, or wallpaper or Ferris wheels and whatever. It seems to me you want to make this predominantly about 'choice' but yet don't want to admit to actually 'choosing' anything yourself.


Remember - a "gay" gene would never prosper, for evolution is all about pro-creation.

Yet there's evidence of it in nature, and it wouldn't need to be the main drive to stop procreation from happening anyway.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 01:29 AM
Why are threads about sexuality getting lots of attention on TOL recently?

Probably because we are sexual beings.

This thread has dialogue and the spewing venom has been kept at a record low from what I can tell.

Nick M
July 21st, 2014, 01:41 AM
it disgusts me

Nothing to add...this pretty much covers it. Even the brainless moron (Red77) (Arthur Brain) admits nobody would "choose such a thing". He says they are born this way, because nobody would choose such a thing.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 01:46 AM
I see that you're extremely naïve when it comes to understanding the organized evil that we as Christians and others who stand for decency are faced with in today's world.

I know it is there, not sure how naive that makes me.



Review this 3 part thread and see how others like you have been bitten by those that they thought weren't snakes (florists, bakers, innkeepers, photographers).

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=101920

I looked it over. I am so not interested in reading through that. People have lost their jobs and businesses, it is terrible. We have to take a stand as Christians though. We must be willing to lose everything for the sake of Christ.



Keep spreading the gospel, but remember that faith without works is dead (righteous laws need to be returned to our society to help the morally confused).

I have faith and works that flow out as evidence of my faith. Just because my works do not include name calling, attacking others and expecting a godless government to have laws in place which uphold true Biblical morals, does not mean I do not have works.

We are already on our way down the slippery slope and it is just getting worse. I believe that things will continue in this manner until the return of Christ. The only way we will see a change in direction is if there is a revival. I think that God has withdrawn His hand from North America. We see Christianity shrinking in influence and conversions here, but in other parts of the world, it is exploding and overall, it is growing. As North Americans, we are so self centred as to think we are the end all and the be all....we have reaped what we have sown.

Arthur Brain
July 21st, 2014, 01:53 AM
Nothing to add...this pretty much covers it. Even the brainless moron (Red77) (Arthur Brain) admits nobody would "choose such a thing". He says they are born this way, because nobody would choose such a thing.

Well hey, thanks for yet another amazing insight there Nick, although I do feel compelled to point out that heterosexuals don't normally say they 'choose' to feel attracted to the opposite sex, unless you did?

:think:

CatholicCrusader
July 21st, 2014, 03:27 AM
AA offers support and a support group, a place to talk with people who suffer from alcoholism. Its not a treatment or a cure, because there is no such thing. In this, alcoholism is like homosexuality. When an alcoholic feels like drinking they call their sponsor or talk with someone from their support group. And an alcoholic will tell you, once an alcoholic always an alcoholic, yet many stay clean and sober for years, even decades.

Homosexuals need the same thing. Not some shock therapy or drugs, but a support group. The truly tragic thing here is that liberals and democrats have lied and convinced people that there is nothing wrong with this disorder of same sex attraction, so there is no support groups for the ones that seek them.


Or IS there................... ? ? ?



Welcome to "Courage" - http://couragerc.org/


About Courage

Courage is an international apostolate of the Catholic Church, which ministers to persons with same-sex attractions.

Persons with homosexual desires have always been with us; however, until recent times, there has been little, if any, formal outreach from the Church in the way of support groups or information for such persons. Most were left to work out their path on their own. As a result, they found themselves listening to and accepting the secular society’s perspective and opting to act on their same-sex desires.

His Eminence, the late Terence Cardinal Cooke of New York, was aware of, and troubled by this situation. He knew that the individual dealing with same-sex attractions truly needed to experience the freedom of interior chastity and in that freedom find the steps necessary to living a fully Christian life in communion with God and others. He was concerned that many would not find this path and would be constantly trying to get their needs met in ways that ultimately do not satisfy the desires of the heart.

In response to this concern, he decided to form a spiritual support system which would assist men and women with same-sex attractions in living chaste lives in fellowship, truth and love. Knowing of Fr. John Harvey’s extensive ministry experience in this field, he invited him to come to his Archdiocese. With the help of the Rev. Benedict Groeschel, C.F.R., and others, Fr. Harvey began the Courage Apostolate with its first meeting in September, 1980 at the Shrine of Mother Seton in South Ferry.

With the endorsement of the Holy See, Courage now has more than 100 Chapters and contact people world-wide, over 1500 persons participating in its ListServs, and hundreds of persons per week receiving assistance from the main office and website. It has become a mainstream Catholic Apostolate helping thousands of men and women find peace through fellowship, prayer, and the Sacraments.


cA4gpJUpvpc#t=37

Nick M
July 21st, 2014, 04:22 AM
Well hey, thanks for yet another amazing insight there Nick, although I do feel compelled to point out that heterosexuals don't normally say they 'choose' to feel attracted to the opposite sex, unless you did?



Of course not. I don't choose to eat, but I choose to not eat concrete. In fact, the thought of it is repulsive. Take note all you homo lovers. He again admits being a homo is bad, because nobody would choose to be that way. He has said this many times.

Frank Ernest
July 21st, 2014, 04:28 AM
We all know the theological/ scriptural reasons why homosexuality is sinful; it would be repetitious to start another thread on that topic from that perspective.

What about your own personal feelings?

For me, the idea of same sex attractions seems only understandable in the abstract. I mean to say, I always liked women as friends, share many same interests, but sexual attraction seems hard to comprehend. It feels naturally repulsive, not the fondness, but the physical encounter. I see no way anyone can socially condition me to have the same feeling towards women as I have, since about age 12, for boys/men.

I do not think it can be indoctrinated anymore than I could be trained to bay at the moon?

When I was young, homosexuals were called queer, which means odd, or abnormal, funny-odd. The British called them faggots, and cigarettes fags; later, faggot was the more familiar term in the USA, as well, more derogatory.

I cannot believe that this odd nature is not caused by a genetic, or abnormal biological components.

My reason for posting this is because I feel drowned out by the extremes of other posts on this topic, or it is well discussed as a religious topic.

I post this here so anyone may respond with their persona; view. Let’s leave the obvious religious aspect for a thread aimed at that frame of discussion. I also ask to leave the hard hateful responses to be left in he long-standing thread.

How you personally feel about homosexuality?
Homosexual behavior among human beings is an aberration of nature.

CatholicCrusader
July 21st, 2014, 04:31 AM
Homosexual behavior among human beings is an aberration of nature.

Correct.

Consider this: What is the most base instinct of any species? It is procreation, which falls under the category of survival. As the saying goes, the birds do it and the bees do it.

Since procreation is the most base instinct for any species, it therefore follows that any human being who has an aversion to copulating with the opposite sex is suffering from some sort of disorder. Its unnatural as you noted.

PureX
July 21st, 2014, 04:44 AM
As with anything, the reality of homosexuality is both complex, and a matter of degrees. There will be some people who are born unequivocally homosexual. They will be as repulsed by the idea of heterosexual sex as many heterosexuals are repulsed by the idea of homosexual sex. There will be others who have been so damaged by sexual and identity abuse growing up that they have come to identify themselves with homosexuality even though they may not have been born into that inclination. And there are many, many folks who are variably bisexual in their natural inclinations.

My personal feeling is that we put far too much emphasis on sexual orientation in this country, mostly because we are so prone to using bias and bigotry as a mechanism of self-esteem and identity building through group affiliation. And it happens on every side of the issue. I have known plenty of gay people who are just as biased and bigoted as the most vile homophobe.

aCultureWarrior
July 21st, 2014, 04:44 AM
I looked it over. I am so not interested in reading through that. People have lost their jobs and businesses, it is terrible. We have to take a stand as Christians though. We must be willing to lose everything for the sake of Christ.

Be prepared to lose your freedom and even your life.


I have faith and works that flow out as evidence of my faith. Just because my works do not include name calling, attacking others and expecting a godless government to have laws in place which uphold true Biblical morals, does not mean I do not have works.

We are already on our way down the slippery slope and it is just getting worse. I believe that things will continue in this manner until the return of Christ. The only way we will see a change in direction is if there is a revival. I think that God has withdrawn His hand from North America. We see Christianity shrinking in influence and conversions here, but in other parts of the world, it is exploding and overall, it is growing. As North Americans, we are so self centred as to think we are the end all and the be all....we have reaped what we have sown.

How sad. So many good people fought and died for our freedoms and you're going to just sit back and let evil take over.

God expects more from His people. Hopefully someday you'll see that before it's too late.

aCultureWarrior
July 21st, 2014, 05:07 AM
There will be some people who are born unequivocally homosexual.

Obviously you didn't hear the news PureX:

Unequivocally, there is no "gay gene".

csuguy
July 21st, 2014, 06:31 AM
Um, well no, there's no way I could get attracted to a piece of plastic, plasticine or any form of inanimate object. There's no way I could 'choose' to do so either. If there's extremity of condition attached then that renders conscious choice invalid anyway.

More precisely - you could never see a situation where you would make such a choice - to make yourself attached to it. Whether you could or not you don't really know.

And extremity of condition doesn't necessarily invalidate conscious choice. Providing that the person has not gone insane or something, an extremity of condition merely forces one into making difficult decisions - a true test of character.



There's no real evidence (unless you can provide some) that homo or bisexuality isn't actually a part of nature already.

There's no evidence in favor of the idea that homosexuality is genetic, and the very idea contradicts the very basis from which it might be supposed to arise - so the position that it is not genetic/natural very clearly makes more sense.


Well, how do you 'will' to enjoy a piece of music, be involved in a film, be attracted to anything? How is any of that and more an actual conscious choice on your part?

I can get myself to enjoy a piece of music that I wouldn't normally listen to by learning to sing/play it. Example: I don't normally care for listening to instrumentals, but I can enjoy them if I learn to play them on the guitar. I can't choose to be involved in any film since it is up to other people who gets to be involved in the film - unless I'm the one creating it. This second one is a strawman.



What exactly makes you think you're so informed?

I think you misunderstood my statement. When I said you wouldn't know unless informed - I meant that you wouldn't know if some individual was a pedophile unless you were informed. For instance: think of the various priests who have been involved in such scandals. Do you think parents would have left their kids with them if it was obvious that these specific priests were pedophiles?



Um, it wouldn't matter to me who handed me a pizza with a load of jam on top of it. I'd be sending it back no matter who delivered it as there's no way I could possibly 'choose' to enjoy it. It seems to be you who is missing the point here.

First off, I didn't say pizza with jam - I said just pizza, whatever kind you love. Second off, I said you care who hands it to you for the sake of the analogy alone. Please pay attention.


Okay, you tell me when you first started choosing to like girls and lets take the argument from there. Or, explain how you can start choosing to like men instead, or wallpaper or Ferris wheels and whatever. It seems to me you want to make this predominantly about 'choice' but yet don't want to admit to actually 'choosing' anything yourself.

I never said it is all about choice, I've acknowledged that there are plenty of subconscious elements that come into play in this subject - I merely argue that the conscious plays more of a role than people like you are willing to acknowledge. My generic attraction to woman was not a choice - it was nature/nuture, though my specific taste in women is a reflection of my character and beliefs, which are subject to my choice. If I really wanted to - I could test my heterosexuality, but I view that as immoral and so I won't.

I've also already provided an argument for how one might go from a hetersexual to bi-sexual or even homosexual - by adopting a stance that sex is purely about pleasure and through progressive experimentation break down the psychological restraints surrounding the idea of homosexuality. Once you become comfortable with the ever more deprived acts you open up to the idea.


Yet there's evidence of it in nature, and it wouldn't need to be the main drive to stop procreation from happening anyway.

A gay gene would most certainly prevent procreation from happening if it existed, for the obvious reason.

PureX
July 21st, 2014, 07:23 AM
Obviously you didn't hear the news PureX:

Unequivocally, there is no "gay gene".That's because there is no such news. And there need not necessarily be one gene behind such a complex inclination as sexual attraction.

Quincy
July 21st, 2014, 07:36 AM
Well, in fairness I was just trying to point out that the female form is generally regarded as the more aesthetically pleasing of the two genders...:eek:

I know, my friend, I know. I just felt like it was a good place to point out real delusions or aberrations like anorexia, off topic as it may be.

Buzzword
July 21st, 2014, 08:35 AM
So apparently, way too many people around here aren't familiar with the fact that Argument From Incredulity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity#Argument_from_incredulit y.2FLack_of_imagination) is a FALLACY.
Your personal inability to understand something (including your disgust for it) does not make the thing irrational or aberrant.

Sexuality, like politics and other things we like to argue about with generalizations, exists on a set of spectra.
These include what gender we are attracted to, personality type attraction, body type attraction, age preference, etc etc.

Each of us operates somewhere on the gender-attraction spectrum between "homosexual" and "heterosexual".
We use the term "bisexual" to describe someone who is at about the halfway point on the spectrum, but that's merely one of a potentially infinite number of points.

For example, a man who is physically and emotionally only attracted to other men, yet also has an appreciation for the female form or for the unique emotional contribution his female friends make in his life.

Sexuality is so complex an aspect of human behavior that it would be impossible to assign terminology to every single individual set of spectra.

But too many people (especially on TOL) seem to forget (or deliberately ignore) the complexity of their own sexuality when speaking of others' sexuality in ridiculously simplistic terms.

I'm not just attracted to women.
I'm attracted to women who are curvy, more mature than I am, musically inclined, have long hair, have piercing eyes, love Classic Rock, and are willing to drive on road trips because I fall asleep easily during long car rides.
I will not be content with less.

On an unrelated note, I have just described my wife.

A gay friend of mine isn't just attracted to men.
He's attracted to men who enjoy sports, love to see live music, have starlight-blue eyes, make a point of not caring about fashion, and who can fill out a flannel shirt.

...and yes, I just called him and asked, and yes, he just described his boyfriend.

It isn't just because daddy didn't love (or loved too much in the wrong way) that boys grow up attracted to other boys.
And it isn't just because daddy cheated on mommy and mommy spent years talking about boys and men being evil that girls grow up attracted to other girls.
That it occasionally happens does not make it the universal cause.


Clearly too many people here cannot understand (or refuse to acknowledge) just how complex sexuality is, so rather than examine yourselves and acknowledge that everyone possesses the same complexity, you would rather throw ignorant blanket statements upon others (who by the way aren't even here to defend themselves) again and again in hopes of finding validation.

aCultureWarrior
July 21st, 2014, 08:39 AM
That's because there is no such news. And there need not necessarily be one gene behind such a complex inclination as sexual attraction.

If there is no 'gay gene', then what causes homosexual attraction?

What's important is that those who engage in homosexual behavior can change. We've seen it with 10's of thousands of "ex gays".

I would hope that you'd jump on board and congratulate them for leaving such a destructive lifestyle behind.

Sherman
July 21st, 2014, 08:40 AM
Too religious. Start your own thread under religion if your response is limited to religion.

What feelings do you, as a person, have about homosexuality?
That is the topic.
I have a natural hard wired revulsion toward it. I believe that is how God designed every human being.
Homosexuality is a dysfunctional addictive behavior as are many of the sexual sins out there. Once a person is snared, it is hard for them to extricate themselves.

noguru
July 21st, 2014, 08:45 AM
If there is no 'gay gene', then what causes homosexual attraction?

What's important is that those who engage in homosexual behavior can change. We've seen it with 10's of thousands of "ex gays".

I would hope that you'd jump on board and congratulate them for leaving such a destructive lifestyle behind.

For females, probably men like you, who are deceitful and overbearing on the surface but deep down inside cowardly and little in regard to understanding. :)

I do agree that they can change, but it takes something different than just repeating half truths and inaccuracies to do that. It takes a real effort at understanding and trying to be more accurate in reporting things.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 08:50 AM
Be prepared to lose your freedom and even your life.

We should all be prepared to do so, for the sake of Christ.
John 12:25




How sad. So many good people fought and died for our freedoms and you're going to just sit back and let evil take over.

God expects more from His people. Hopefully someday you'll see that before it's too late.

Honestly, are you brain dead? I am sorry but you seem thick as a brick. If you have actually read my posts and can sit there all pompous and say that I sit back and let evil take over, then you have cognitive issues.

I am an active Christian in my church, community, province, country and overseas in fact. Just because I am not self-righteously pointing my fingers at homosexuals or any other group of sinners, condemning them to hell, does not mean I am not fulfilling my role which God has called me to serve Him.

Our calling is not to sit piously on a throne of judgement. The Word of God and their own sin judges them already. We should be sharing the gospel with people, regardless of the nature of their sin and calling them to repentance.
2 Corinthians 5:20
"Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God."

I am not some bleeding heart either...come on, I am a Calvinist, you know the stereotype, the frozen chosen. :rotfl:
However, I understand, unlike you for some reason, that sharing the gospel and calling people to repentance is exactly what we should be doing as Christians. It is called, the great commission, ever heard of it?

We can do this in a variety of ways, which should not be sinful and disgrace the name of Christ, like being hateful, calling names, demeaning people,but rather, bring honour to Him. We can shout it from the rooftops, we can run ministries, we can do relational evangelism, which is what I do with those who are my clients. I have a business relationship with them and it makes sense that I extend that so I can share Christ with them in a loving manner.

It is not rocket science, buddy, you are picking on the wrong girl.

Quincy
July 21st, 2014, 08:52 AM
So apparently, way too many people around here aren't familiar with the fact that Argument From Incredulity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity#Argument_from_incredulit y.2FLack_of_imagination) is a FALLACY.
Your personal inability to understand something (including your disgust for it) does not make the thing irrational or aberrant.

Sexuality, like politics and other things we like to argue about with generalizations, exists on a set of spectra.
These include what gender we are attracted to, personality type attraction, body type attraction, age preference, etc etc.

Each of us operates somewhere on the gender-attraction spectrum between "homosexual" and "heterosexual".
We use the term "bisexual" to describe someone who is at about the halfway point on the spectrum, but that's merely one of a potentially infinite number of points.

For example, a man who is physically and emotionally only attracted to other men, yet also has an appreciation for the female form or for the unique emotional contribution his female friends make in his life.

Sexuality is so complex an aspect of human behavior that it would be impossible to assign terminology to every single individual set of spectra.

But too many people (especially on TOL) seem to forget (or deliberately ignore) the complexity of their own sexuality when speaking of others' sexuality in ridiculously simplistic terms.

I'm not just attracted to women.
I'm attracted to women who are curvy, more mature than I am, musically inclined, have long hair, have piercing eyes, love Classic Rock, and are willing to drive on road trips because I fall asleep easily during long car rides.
I will not be content with less.

On an unrelated note, I have just described my wife.

A gay friend of mine isn't just attracted to men.
He's attracted to men who enjoy sports, love to see live music, have starlight-blue eyes, make a point of not caring about fashion, and who can fill out a flannel shirt.

...and yes, I just called him and asked, and yes, he just described his boyfriend.

It isn't just because daddy didn't love (or loved too much in the wrong way) that boys grow up attracted to other boys.
And it isn't just because daddy cheated on mommy and mommy spent years talking about boys and men being evil that girls grow up attracted to other girls.
That it occasionally happens does not make it the universal cause.


Clearly too many people here cannot understand (or refuse to acknowledge) just how complex sexuality is, so rather than examine yourselves and acknowledge that everyone possesses the same complexity, you would rather throw ignorant blanket statements upon others (who by the way aren't even here to defend themselves) again and again in hopes of finding validation.

Nice post, buzzword. I've not really considered the complexity of human sexuality very much. Your post immediately makes me think that there must be a lot of people out there who have a narrow view of it. Of course if you have a limited view of it, you'll project that onto other people.

It plays to a concern of mine. People often say homosexuality is a mental illness or aberration. I don't believe it is, but let's just say it is for discussion's sake. Even if it is an illness, why single it out? How is being homosexual then any different than being schizophrenic? Should people who are different be labeled ill and given less rights by people who can't understand their condition? I'd so no.

noguru
July 21st, 2014, 08:56 AM
I have a natural hard wired revulsion toward it. I believe that is how God designed every human being.
Homosexuality is a dysfunctional addictive behavior as are many of the sexual sins out there. Once a person is snared, it is hard for them to extricate themselves.

I agree for the most part, but I am not sure if it is the vast majority or all in which it is hardwired. I think, as can be seen from all other areas of reality, there are anomalies and exceptions. From my experience as a bartender for several years, and hearing them speak, most cases of homosexuality are dysfunctional addictive behaviors that have gone completely out of control.

aCultureWarrior
July 21st, 2014, 08:56 AM
We should all be prepared to do so, for the sake of Christ.
John 12:25

Out of context verse dropping, how original.


Honestly, are you brain dead? I am sorry but you seem thick as a brick. If you have actually read my posts and can sit there all pompous and say that I sit back and let evil take over, then you have cognitive issues. ...

Our calling is not to sit piously on a throne of judgement. The Word of God and their own sin judges them already.

If we're not to righteously judge, then we shouldn't have laws, police officers to enforce them, or jailers to punish those that break them.

You certainly aren't an anarchist are you T5s? (Of course she isn't, she doesn't want laws that might effect her 'pet sin').

noguru
July 21st, 2014, 09:00 AM
We should all be prepared to do so, for the sake of Christ.
John 12:25




Honestly, are you brain dead? I am sorry but you seem thick as a brick. If you have actually read my posts and can sit there all pompous and say that I sit back and let evil take over, then you have cognitive issues.

I am an active Christian in my church, community, province, country and overseas in fact. Just because I am not self-righteously pointing my fingers at homosexuals or any other group of sinners, condemning them to hell, does not mean I am not fulfilling my role which God has called me to serve Him.

Our calling is not to sit piously on a throne of judgement. The Word of God and their own sin judges them already. We should be sharing the gospel with people, regardless of the nature of their sin and calling them to repentance.
2 Corinthians 5:20
"Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God."

I am not some bleeding heart either...come on, I am a Calvinist, you know the stereotype, the frozen chosen. :rotfl:
However, I understand, unlike you for some reason, that sharing the gospel and calling people to repentance is exactly what we should be doing as Christians. It is called, the great commission, ever heard of it?

We can do this in a variety of ways, which should not be sinful and disgrace the name of Christ, like being hateful, calling names, demeaning people,but rather, bring honour to Him. We can shout it from the rooftops, we can run ministries, we can do relational evangelism, which is what I do with those who are my clients. I have a business relationship with them and it makes sense that I extend that so I can share Christ with them in a loving manner.

It is not rocket science, buddy, you are picking on the wrong girl.

But you see to some here you are "being nicer than God".

PureX
July 21st, 2014, 09:06 AM
If there is no 'gay gene', then what causes homosexual attraction?Homosexuality is likely the result of a whole collection of genes, because sexual attraction is complex. It involves an attraction to certain shapes. To certain gestures. Too certain smells. To certain combinations of pheromones, and to phenomena we are likely not yet even aware of.

Predisposed inclinations towards these things will likely require a whole set of genetic coding, which is not unreasonable since of genetic codes are enormously long and complicated.


What's important is that those who engage in homosexual behavior can change. We've seen it with 10's of thousands of "ex gays"."Tens of thousands" is probably an exaggeration, but some people can choose to change their sexual behavior. That does not, however, change their orientation. it simply denies it in favor of a contrary behavior pattern. Also, it is very likely that they were not fully homosexual in inclination to begin with, but we're rather bisexual to some degree.

I would hope that you'd jump on board and congratulate them for leaving such a destructive lifestyle behind.There is nothing inherently destructive in being homosexual. And both homosexuality and heterosexuality can become a destructive lifestyle when sexuality is abused.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 09:07 AM
It plays to a concern of mine. People often say homosexuality is a mental illness or aberration. I don't believe it is, but let's just say it is for discussion's sake. Even if it is an illness, why single it out? How is being homosexual then any different than being schizophrenic? Should people who are different be labeled ill and given less rights by people who can't understand their condition? I'd so no.

Quincy, I think that for those who believe the Word of God to say that homosexuality is a sin (which it does in a number of places ) , then for them to consider it to be an illness is just not reasonable. Someone who is a schizophrenic is suffering because of a true medical issue, not a sin issue. I think that is the difference.

I also think that the reason homosexuality or any sexual sin gets a greater reaction is because what the Bible teaches about that too. 1 Corinthians 6:18, "Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body." There is something intrinsically more damaging about sexual sin.

Hopefully, that gives at least an insight into why Christians think in the manner they do. The craziness you see from some on this board, however, or those Westboro Baptist sorts, is just insanity. Their anger and hatred is not righteous anger. The way they express it is sinful and disgrace the name of Christ and are an embarrassment to all those who truly love and serve Jesus.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 09:07 AM
Out of context verse dropping, how original.



If we're not to righteously judge, then we shouldn't have laws, police officers to enforce them, or jailers to punish those that break them.

You certainly aren't an anarchist are you T5s? (Of course she isn't, she doesn't want laws that might effect her 'pet sin').

You are foolish. I never said we should not judge.. people misunderstand and misquote that all the time. We are called to judge, but not in the hateful manner you seem to get such a thrill out of.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 09:10 AM
But you see to some here you are "being nicer than God".

How can anyone who is trying to fulfill the great commission and trying to share the love of Christ by preaching the gospel, nicer than God? I do not even comprehend that, please explain.

Some here...are simply nuts. lol They damage the name of Christ with their words and actions.

noguru
July 21st, 2014, 09:17 AM
How can anyone who is trying to fulfill the great commission and trying to share the love of Christ by preaching the gospel, nicer than God? I do not even comprehend that, please explain.

Some here...are simply nuts. lol They damage the name of Christ with their words and actions.

I completely agree with you. It is absurd to assume we can be "nicer than God". First off we would need God's absolute knowledge in order to judge all other humans. Based on the minuscule amount of time we can observe them such an expectation is absurd. So to assume that "harsh" judgement can be lined up with God's is the epitome of arrogance, which is often used to cover ones own ignorance. As can be clearly seen with ACW.

This does not mean we cannot judge actions. It means that we should be very cautious about premature judgment, and that we should make every effort to understand. Rather than remain oblivious to realities that one might not like.

aCultureWarrior
July 21st, 2014, 09:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
If there is no 'gay gene', then what causes homosexual attraction?


Homosexuality is likely the result of a whole collection of genes, because sexual attraction is complex. It involves an attraction to certain shapes. To certain gestures. Too certain smells. To certain combinations of pheromones, and to phenomena we are likely not yet even aware of. Predisposed inclinations towards these things will likely require a whole set of genetic coding, which is not unreasonable since of genetic codes are enormously long and complicated.

(There's a certain "smell" that causes same sex perversion, that's a new one).

As shown in this link from Father's for Life, an overbearing mother can be one of the main factors as to why a boy has same sex attractions.

By the time the [Homosexual]-son has reached the preadolescent period, he has suffered a diffuse personality disorder. Maternal over-anxiety about health and injury, restriction of activities normative for the son's age and potential, interference with assertive behavior, demasculinizing attitudes, and interference with sexuality -- interpenetrating with paternal rejection, hostility, and lack of support -- produce an excessively fearful child, pathologically dependent upon his mother and beset by feelings of inadequacy, impotence, and self-contempt. He is reluctant to participate in boyhood activities thought to be physically injurious -- usually grossly overestimated. His peer group responds with humiliating name-calling and often with physical attack which timidity tends to invite among children... Thus he is deprived of important empathic interaction which peer groups provide.
http://www.fathersforlife.org/dale/childhood_of_homosexual_men_3.htm

In other words, these effeminate momma's boys take up sports like table tennis.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
What's important is that those who engage in homosexual behavior can change. We've seen it with 10's of thousands of "ex gays".


"Tens of thousands" is probably an exaggeration, but some people can choose to change their sexual behavior. That does not, however, change their orientation. it simply denies it in favor of a contrary behavior pattern. Also, it is very likely that they were not fully homosexual in inclination to begin with, but we're rather bisexual to some degree.

Have your homosexual allies found a 'bisexual gene' yet PureX, or have they even started looking?

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I would hope that you'd jump on board and congratulate them for leaving such a destructive lifestyle behind.


There is nothing inherently destructive in being homosexual. And both homosexuality and heterosexuality can become a destructive lifestyle when sexuality is abused.

Excellent point PureX, the anal sphincter muscle was MEANT to be used as an object of sex in addition to expelling human waste.

Once again, it's been an 'experience' chatting with you.

aCultureWarrior
July 21st, 2014, 09:23 AM
You are foolish. I never said we should not judge.. people misunderstand and misquote that all the time. We are called to judge, but not in the hateful manner you seem to get such a thrill out of.

Righteous laws are blind to hatred, they're legislated out of love for the morally confused. These laws help these lost souls find a better way, while if necessary, punishing them for their immoral and destructive behaviors.

Hopefully someday you'll understand that.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 09:25 AM
This does not mean we cannot judge actions. It means that we should be very cautious about premature judgment, and that we should make every effort to understand. Rather than remain oblivious to realities that one might not like.

Yes, and on this side of the grave...our judgement is not so we can point fingers and appease ourselves with self righteousness like so many do here. It is for the purpose of calling them to repentance. Showing them their sin, so they realize that is what it is, then showing them there is freedom and forgiveness in Christ.

If I was not a Christian....if I came onto this board when I was 18 and really searching for spiritual answers...I would have been so repelled by what I see here. I praise God that in His sovereignty, this is not where I came looking for answers, although I know there are people who do. I pray they can see through the haters and by the power of the Spirit the truth and the love of Christ will be revealed to them.

Quincy
July 21st, 2014, 09:27 AM
Quincy, I think that for those who believe the Word of God to say that homosexuality is a sin (which it does in a number of places ) , then for them to consider it to be an illness is just not reasonable. Someone who is a schizophrenic is suffering because of a true medical issue, not a sin issue. I think that is the difference.

I see that difference as well, from what I've interpreted from my own readings of the Bible. What I don't understand is how homosexuality is any worse than any other sin but your next segment helps with that some.


I also think that the reason homosexuality or any sexual sin gets a greater reaction is because what the Bible teaches about that too. 1 Corinthians 6:18, "Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body." There is something intrinsically more damaging about sexual sin.

Certainly, I mean look at what the plague or what AIDS has done to humanity. I think the issue here is with sexual promiscuity period, though. I might not fully understand it.


Hopefully, that gives at least an insight into why Christians think in the manner they do. The craziness you see from some on this board, however, or those Westboro Baptist sorts, is just insanity. Their anger and hatred is not righteous anger. The way they express it is sinful and disgrace the name of Christ and are an embarrassment to all those who truly love and serve Jesus.

It definitely helps, quite a bit :) . I totally understand this and I would never fault an honest Christian for standing by his/her principles. Some people are a bit crazy, indeed and I think they use a certain verse in the bible to point out how homosexuality should be a capital offense.

If you think about it, back when humanity was largely tribal based, the two most potentially dangerous COAs were spreading disease, which would do massive damage to the population count as well as not procreating. You can't keep a tribe going if the members aren't reproducing.

Herein lies the dilemma. Are the cultural precepts of those tribes static for their time or do they still apply today? Is every part of the bible still valid in 2014 given societal/medical/technological advances?

Stripe
July 21st, 2014, 09:34 AM
It's not OK to be gay.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 09:36 AM
Righteous laws are blind to hatred, they're legislated out of love for the morally confused. These laws help these lost souls find a better way, while if necessary, punishing them for their immoral and destructive behaviors.

Hopefully someday you'll understand that.

Stop and think about what you are saying. Please, if I am misunderstanding you, I will accept the corrective. It sounds like you are placing your hope in government and laws. Is this true?

Human laws are in place for our protection and for people to live in a civil manner amongst each other. We are told to obey our leaders, Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17, but if that is where your hope is, then it is misplaced.

I assume you are an American, I am Canadian, both of our countries have gone down the tubes morally. If we were to set our laws up as the standard of Christian living, in this day and age, we would be failures. Your president is a disgrace. He is so liberal, supporting homosexual marriages and abortions is only the start. You want to put your faith in laws that are flowing out of a government with this man at the helm? Have mercy on us all.

Voice the Christian stance, by all means. Try to slow the flow of the evil tide in a manner that brings glory to God instead of disgrace to the name of Christ. But meanwhile.....spend your time sharing the gospel! That is where the power is. That is what our calling is.

Stripe
July 21st, 2014, 09:41 AM
Kxpc6I_P5Ik

aCultureWarrior
July 21st, 2014, 09:47 AM
Stop and think about what you are saying. Please, if I am misunderstanding you, I will accept the corrective. It sounds like you are placing your hope in government and laws. Is this true?

If you had followed my thread at all, you would know that God ordained the civil magistrate as one of 3 institutions for the governance of man (the family and Church being the other two).

Unrighteous laws brought us 57 million dead unborn babies in a 41 year period. Unrighteous laws have children as young as 9 contracting AIDS because homosexuals are free to run loose like dogs in heat (my apologies to the K-9 world for such a comparison).
The list goes on and on.

God ordained government "hoping" that it would legislate righteously, and I'm doing my best to make certain that someday they do.


Human laws are in place for our protection and for people to live in a civil manner amongst each other. We are told to obey our leaders, Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17, but if that is where your hope is, then it is misplaced.

Romans 13:4


I assume you are an American, I am Canadian, both of our countries have gone down the tubes morally. If we were to set our laws up as the standard of Christian living, in this day and age, we would be failures. Your president is a disgrace. He is so liberal, supporting homosexual marriages and abortions is only the start. You want to put your faith in laws that are flowing out of a government with this man at the helm? Have mercy on us all.

Don't go badmouthing Rusha's and Town Heretics's President. Just because he's a baby murdering/sodomite loving (in fact he might possibly be a sodomite himself) Marxist, doesn't mean that you Canucks can judge him.


Voice the Christian stance, by all means. Try to slow the flow of the evil tide in a manner that brings glory to God instead of disgrace to the name of Christ. But meanwhile.....spend your time sharing the gospel! That is where the power is. That is what our calling is.

How's that working out for the 1.2 million unborn babies murdered (surgically) in the womb each year here in the US?

Buzzword
July 21st, 2014, 10:00 AM
Herein lies the dilemma. Are the cultural precepts of those tribes static for their time or do they still apply today? Is every part of the bible still valid in 2014 given societal/medical/technological advances?

And the answer is a very simple NO.

A tribe is constantly on the brink of extinction, so everyone must be included in the procreation process.
Including those men for whom the vagina is repulsive, and those women for whom the penis is disgusting.

Thus the reason for the so-called "recent outbreak" of homosexuality.
It is not recent nor is it an outbreak of anything but people being honest with themselves, and instead of fighting their inclinations or finding unhealthy outlets for them (pederasty, etc.), they are instead seeking loving, committed relationships with the people to whom they are attracted.

And because humanity in general no longer lives in a tribal society, there is no reason to constantly procreate.
Thus heterosexual married couples (like myself and my wife) are not required to have children.
And homosexual couples can form and stay together, in many cases forming a much more loving and committed relationship than their procreating heterosexual counterparts.
...and pick up the slack in providing loving homes for children created by the irresponsible coupling of heterosexuals.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 10:01 AM
is every part of the bible still valid in 2014 given societal/medical/technological advances?

The whole counsel of God is inspired, all pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ and redemption. The Bible is our source of faith and practice and should be used as such. It is not a medical book, it is not a tutor to us for technology but it is a guide to how to live our lives and relate to others around us, so societal guidelines...yes. The Bible and its teachings are timeless, not reserved for only some generations of humanity, but rather for all.

I believe in covenant theology. This means that the Bible is viewed as portraying two covenants. The *covenant of works* in Adam and the *covenant of grace* in Christ. We are not bound by the Jewish laws which are found in the OT, things like the food laws, ceremonial laws, etc. it is in that sense that we are no longer under law, but under grace. The Scriptures reveal Jesus to us and tell us how we should live lives that are pleasing to God.

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 10:09 AM
God ordained government "hoping" that it would legislate righteously, and I'm doing my best to make certain that someday they do.



It sounds like you are into Dominion Theology.
Might I suggest you have a misplaced hope.

Spend your time spreading the gospel,
telling people about their need for a Saviour,
and sharing the love of Christ with them.

Thank you for the exchange, it has been interesting.

Selaphiel
July 21st, 2014, 10:13 AM
I cannot comprehend this focus on homosexuality. My theory is that it is the easiest sin to despise, granting you the illusion of being holy as opposed to the gays.
Where are the threads that condemn adultery, ridiculous divorce rates (evangelicals being among the absolute worst when it comes to divorce), greed, aggression, hatred, pride and failing to care for the poor and the least of us?

That is what I see being taught in the sermon of the mount, yet no one seems to think that is worth commenting on or making threads about. Much easier to hate on the sin that does not affect us personally. Maybe, just maybe, we should focus on our own sin instead of spending such an absurd amount of time and energy focusing on the sins of others. Is homosexuality really what sticks out as the worst problem in the world today?

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 10:30 AM
I cannot comprehend this focus on homosexuality. My theory is that it is the easiest sin to despise, granting you the illusion of being holy as opposed to the gays.
Where are the threads that condemn adultery, ridiculous divorce rates (evangelicals being among the absolute worst when it comes to divorce), greed, aggression, hatred, pride and failing to care for the poor and the least of us?

That is what I see being taught in the sermon of the mount, yet no one seems to think that is worth commenting on or making threads about. Much easier to hate on the sin that does not affect us personally. Maybe, just maybe, we should focus on our own sin instead of spending such an absurd amount of time and energy focusing on the sins of others. Is homosexuality really what sticks out as the worst problem in the world today?

I have said that in my posts speckled throughout this thread. That it is not just homosexuality. I totally agree.

Buzzword
July 21st, 2014, 10:47 AM
I cannot comprehend this focus on homosexuality. My theory is that it is the easiest sin to despise, granting you the illusion of being holy as opposed to the gays.
Where are the threads that condemn adultery, ridiculous divorce rates (evangelicals being among the absolute worst when it comes to divorce), greed, aggression, hatred, pride and failing to care for the poor and the least of us?

That is what I see being taught in the sermon of the mount, yet no one seems to think that is worth commenting on or making threads about. Much easier to hate on the sin that does not affect us personally. Maybe, just maybe, we should focus on our own sin instead of spending such an absurd amount of time and energy focusing on the sins of others. Is homosexuality really what sticks out as the worst problem in the world today?

It's the old mote vs. beam conflict again.

Almost makes me yearn for the time when the minding of one's own business was the highest priority in this country.
Almost, because that let a lot of abuse and atrocity slide, but it would be nice if we could take the best part of that attitude and apply it here.

Stripe
July 21st, 2014, 11:08 AM
I cannot comprehend this focus on homosexuality. My theory is that it is the easiest sin to despise, granting you the illusion of being holy as opposed to the gays.
Where are the threads that condemn adultery, ridiculous divorce rates (evangelicals being among the absolute worst when it comes to divorce), greed, aggression, hatred, pride and failing to care for the poor and the least of us?That is what I see being taught in the sermon of the mount, yet no one seems to think that is worth commenting on or making threads about.Walking around with your eyes shut is dangerous. :nono:


Much easier to hate on the sin that does not affect us personally.What would you know?


Maybe, just maybe, we should focus on our own sin instead of spending such an absurd amount of time and energy focusing on the sins of others.Or perhaps we could resist sin being celebrated. :thumb:


Is homosexuality really what sticks out as the worst problem in the world today?No.

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 11:44 AM
I cannot comprehend this focus on homosexuality. My theory is that it is the easiest sin to despise, granting you the illusion of being holy as opposed to the gays.
Where are the threads that condemn adultery, ridiculous divorce rates (evangelicals being among the absolute worst when it comes to divorce), greed, aggression, hatred, pride and failing to care for the poor and the least of us?

That is what I see being taught in the sermon of the mount, yet no one seems to think that is worth commenting on or making threads about. Much easier to hate on the sin that does not affect us personally. Maybe, just maybe, we should focus on our own sin instead of spending such an absurd amount of time and energy focusing on the sins of others. Is homosexuality really what sticks out as the worst problem in the world today?

That is a good point, adultery is forbidden enough to be a Commandment, yet many more have committed adultery, are sorry, have repented, are free of the sin, through Christ, yet are reluctant to talk about?

Homosexuality is the sins of the other, the outsider, and is often perpetual.

Beyond that, not to suggest it is more important, homosexuality has more a personal affect. I mean having neighbours who may have committed adultery, or on the face, are divorced, they do not bother me; however, having homosexual neighbours would bother me.
It is not only a religious issue, but as well, a social issue.

It does little good to argue against homosexuality, with committed homosexuals on the bases of religion, yet does much good opposing the rights of marriage.

The reason, committed homosexuals are often irreligious, or opposed to religion, yet they have to understand many people find them distastful, or downright disgusting, not only on religious bases, but on a personal bases, and that is the topic of this thread.

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 11:51 AM
It's not OK to be gay.

I agree, on the other hand, I am not going to San Francisco with a sign stating, " It's not OK to be gay"

I agree, fully it is a sin, fully agree with that! At the same time, I know I dislike them beyond the fact their lifestyle is against my religion, or code of ethics. I find them odd, queer, and I admit this.

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 12:01 PM
Yes, and on this side of the grave...our judgement is not so we can point fingers and appease ourselves with self righteousness like so many do here. It is for the purpose of calling them to repentance. Showing them their sin, so they realize that is what it is, then showing them there is freedom and forgiveness in Christ.

If all you find wrong with homosexuals is the religious violation, fine, maybe admirable. but I cannot claim the same. I do not like them outside of their behaviour being sinful, and immoral.

That is I started the thread, as I see it all the faithful may hold homosexuality as sinful, yet I feel many also find homosexuality personally undesirable.

I do not dwell on the subject; my way to deal with it is to dismiss them as perverted kooks who need to live somewhere else. On the other hand, I do not wish them harm, they are people, and I think have human rights; when it comes down to the truth, I do not like them, yet will not use my faith as the only rational. I never use my faith as a rational.

PureX
July 21st, 2014, 12:05 PM
The problem with a blanket condemnation of homosexuality as sin is that real life doesn't reflect that kind of blanket righteousness. It's not always a sin to kill someone. It's not always a sin to take something away from someone else. It's not always a sin to deny someone information, or mislead them. And it's not always a sin to engage in sexual activity with someone. All of these things are sins, or not, depending on the spirit with which they are being engaged in.

Sadly, however, such absolute proclamations regarding the sinfulness of others makes for a very easy excuse to express one's own innate bigotry and need to feel morally righteous. And so this bias against homosexuals persists among those many Christians who feel the need to puff themselves up at the expense of others.

Buzzword
July 21st, 2014, 12:19 PM
The problem with a blanket condemnation of homosexuality as sin is that real life doesn't reflect that kind of blanket righteousness. It's not always a sin to kill someone. It's not always a sin to take something away from someone else. It's not always a sin to deny someone information, or mislead them. And it's not always a sin to engage in sexual activity with someone. All of these things are sins, or not, depending on the spirit with which they are being engaged in.

Small-minded extremists find this kind of nuanced position intolerable, because it forbids them from being able to use any prefabricated responses.


Sadly, however, such absolute proclamations regarding the sinfulness of others makes for a very easy excuse to express one's own innate bigotry and need to feel morally righteous. And so this bias against homosexuals persists among those many Christians who feel the need to puff themselves up at the expense of others.

This is the entirety of the issue, along with their need to control the private lives of others (...in order to feel superior).

moparguy
July 21st, 2014, 12:34 PM
We all know the theological/ scriptural reasons why homosexuality is sinful; it would be repetitious to start another thread on that topic from that perspective.

What about your own personal feelings?

That it's basically arrogant and breeds destruction because it's anarchistic.

To the extent that a person tries to justify it to themselves and to others, they have to proportionally squash their conscience.

Those who have been truly given over to that mindset, who seem to appear in the leadership of that movement, appear to have quite thoroughly seared their conscience. I am thankful that it seems there appear to be very few such; and annoyed that people don't seem to recognize the basic irrationality and destructiveness of these few people.

I suspect the below may mirror the way no small few of those who are on the leading edge of the leadership of this movement feel and think.

And you'll note, I'm not saying it's their agenda and I quoted the first line - as if saying this is just how you think and feel somehow lessens the monstrosity of it one iota.

Why even post it? Besides it being a part of the public domain, it's illustrative of a side of the insanely popular moral anarchist movement going on right now. It also fits quite well in the historical stream that this movement is in - this is nothing new; witness what happened under emperor hadrian, and pederasty, and all of those things, even in ancient days.


GAY REVOLUTIONARY

by Michael Swift

This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor.

We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of with men. Then go and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too, and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand the depth and feeling, the mind and body of another man.

All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men.

All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy.

If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead, puny bodies.

We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man; we shall make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas. The museums of the world will be filled only with paintings of graceful, naked lads.

Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable and de rigueur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule, devices which we are skilled in employing.

We will unmask the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals. You will be shocked and frightened when you find that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators,your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar, bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere; we have infiltrated your ranks. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.

There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less. Those who oppose us will be exiled.

We shall raise vast private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.

The family unit-spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence--will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.

All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.

The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society of homoeroticism will be indulgence in the Greek passion. Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.

"We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of the great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.

"We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.

Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.

http://library.gayhomeland.org/0017/EN/EN_Gay_Revolutionary.htm

Explosive? Absolutely.

Do I believe it represents the way all of the sexual anarchists think? No.

Do I believe it's the "homosexual agenda" ..? No. That roadmap is elsewhere, in the book, "after the ball."

I also believe that it is possible to be redeemed out of such: that there is a message of hope for those who wish to get out.

1 Corinthians 6:7-20
7The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters. 9Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And 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.

12“I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but I will not be mastered by anything. 13You say, “Food for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy them both.” The body, however, is not meant for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. 15Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.” 17But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit.c

18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. 19Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.

noguru
July 21st, 2014, 12:34 PM
Beyond that, not to suggest it is more important, homosexuality has more a personal affect. I mean having neighbours who may have committed adultery, or on the face, are divorced, they do not bother me; however, having homosexual neighbours would bother me.
It is not only a religious issue, but as well, a social issue.



While I agree with you here, I think this is relative. I would feel "more" comfortable with a homosexual couple as neighbors than I would with a murderer or child molester as a neighbor. Of course people like ACW think being homosexual necessarily means that person is also a child molester and murderer as well. I can't say I agree that all homosexuals are murderers and child molesters. Though I have met quite a few that could definitely be categorized as child molesters.

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 12:43 PM
Small-minded extremists find this kind of nuanced position intolerable, because it forbids them from being able to use any prefabricated responses.



This is the entirety of the issue, along with their need to control the private lives of others (...in order to feel superior).

Not sure about the fist part of what you said. I will address the find others lives, in fact, I rather find it helpful some help control mine.

Feeling superior, perhaps, on some ways, but in daily life I do not try to get that message across, and it is many limited to business, not personal life.

If you apply it to the topic,. homosexuality, yes, one may argue. I think, being heterosexual is more natural, more moral and superior.

I think you have to consider, would you rather receive a lie, or the truth where you disagree? What good is communicating without truth?

I do not like controlling people either, those who insist you live their way.

GFR7
July 21st, 2014, 12:53 PM
The problem with a blanket condemnation of homosexuality as sin is that real life doesn't reflect that kind of blanket righteousness. It's not always a sin to kill someone. It's not always a sin to take something away from someone else. It's not always a sin to deny someone information, or mislead them. And it's not always a sin to engage in sexual activity with someone. All of these things are sins, or not, depending on the spirit with which they are being engaged in.

Sadly, however, such absolute proclamations regarding the sinfulness of others makes for a very easy excuse to express one's own innate bigotry and need to feel morally righteous. And so this bias against homosexuals persists among those many Christians who feel the need to puff themselves up at the expense of others.I think Kierkegaard would agree with you.

Quincy
July 21st, 2014, 01:07 PM
I believe in covenant theology. This means that the Bible is viewed as portraying two covenants. The *covenant of works* in Adam and the *covenant of grace* in Christ. We are not bound by the Jewish laws which are found in the OT, things like the food laws, ceremonial laws, etc. it is in that sense that we are no longer under law, but under grace. The Scriptures reveal Jesus to us and tell us how we should live lives that are pleasing to God.

Where I live, Christians are mostly Restorationists, (what some would call Cambellites) so I'm familiar with the two covenant system. While they use covenant theology to preach a doctrine of autonomy and exclusivity, they are very charitable and helpful to people regardless of their faith or even lifestyle, in some cases so I get what you're saying.

If anything, being divisive and hateful accomplishes nothing except for feeding an unhealthy ego :e4e: .

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 01:09 PM
While I agree with you here, I think this is relative. I would feel "more" comfortable with a homosexual couple as neighbors than I would with a murderer or child molester as a neighbor. Of course people like ACW think being homosexual necessarily means that person is also a child molester and murderer as well. I can't say I agree that all homosexuals are murderers and child molesters. Though I have met quite a few that could definitely be categorized as child molesters.

The murder/ child molester is pretty extreme?

A picture helps:

Your neighbour is divorced, who lives with another family, each have a few kids, like the Brady bunch. Their children are well behaved, the couple are not married, but live the same as married, The city of Ladue, did not like them living there because they were not married. City officials told them, " get married, or get out." They did not want to marry, and the city was able to have then evicted!
You can find this online

Now same situation, but married, yet this time there is no parental discipline, the kids are making noise all night and when I complain, they speak to me in foul language and the patents do nothing.
This is a fiction.
I would rather live next to the Ladue couple, even though I think they live in sin, than the family of intolerable noisy brats.

A couple live in my neighbourhood, they are loose swingers. They have all kind of young adults in and out, coming and going all the time. I would not like them living near me.

OK, a homosexual couple have the same, the difference is all are same sex. I do not see that part, bit they wear scathingly clothes, often effeminate and act such, but what they do as far as disruption os about the same. I would dislike them more because I do not like seeing effeminate men parade around like loose women!
Two fictional accounts, but clearly illustrate my dislike of homosexuals. Why lie about it? No, I do not think they are child molesters, nor do I think they are criminals, to me they are upsetting, like the first case, and more disgusting.

One last example:
There is a home where two men live, they have few guests. A neighbour informs me, they are a couple of queers. They never bother me; I do not see then often, they keep their house nice. I am asked to sign a petition to have them evicted, as in the Ladue case, I would not like to be involved, they are not bothering me.

What do you think?

Quincy
July 21st, 2014, 01:11 PM
And because humanity in general no longer lives in a tribal society, there is no reason to constantly procreate.
Thus heterosexual married couples (like myself and my wife) are not required to have children.
And homosexual couples can form and stay together, in many cases forming a much more loving and committed relationship than their procreating heterosexual counterparts.
...and pick up the slack in providing loving homes for children created by the irresponsible coupling of heterosexuals.

Buzzword, do you believe on some subconscious level that sects of various religions still view themselves erroneously as being tribal and perhaps that accounts for some attitudes towards homosexuals?

If you are looking for converts, surely people who won't procreate will be seen as infamous individuals.

Lighthouse
July 21st, 2014, 01:24 PM
The problem with a blanket condemnation of homosexuality as sin is that real life doesn't reflect that kind of blanket righteousness. It's not always a sin to kill someone. It's not always a sin to take something away from someone else. It's not always a sin to deny someone information, or mislead them. And it's not always a sin to engage in sexual activity with someone. All of these things are sins, or not, depending on the spirit with which they are being engaged in.

Sadly, however, such absolute proclamations regarding the sinfulness of others makes for a very easy excuse to express one's own innate bigotry and need to feel morally righteous. And so this bias against homosexuals persists among those many Christians who feel the need to puff themselves up at the expense of others.
When is homosexuality not a sin?

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 01:25 PM
I do not like them outside of their behaviour being sinful, and immoral.

I do not like them, yet will not use my faith as the only rational. I never use my faith as a rational.

I understand what you are saying but then I can in turn say, I do not like brunettes because I am a blonde. I don't like artsies. I don't like thieves. I don't like adulterers. I don't like gossips. I don't like Arminians. I don't like basketball players. I sure don't like dispys and especially MAD dispys.

It makes no sense. It is wrong to say we do not like a group of people, as a whole. That is too much of a blanket statement. There are some homosexuals who you would not even know are homosexuals and you might enjoy their personalities very much. The same goes for any of the groups or characteristics that I put down there. I think MAD dispys are actually out to lunch, have totally erroneous doctrine but I am sure there are some out there somewhere that are very kind, nice and would make great friends, regardless of their theological errors.

When you say you do not use your faith as a rationale. That is interesting. I believe my faith, is my worldview and the lenses from which I look at everything through. My faith is what makes me rational, in fact. As a Christian, I rely on the logical and rational teachings of the Scriptures and keep my sometimes irrational emotions in check with them.

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 01:26 PM
Buzzword, do you believe on some subconscious level that sects of various religions still view themselves erroneously as being tribal and perhaps that accounts for some attitudes towards homosexuals?


I think it possible, but individual subconscious, not any collective unconscious, which I see as a Jungian error.

I believe culture is three generations deep. Given this and what is to the contrary, there has to be an individual sub conscious.

This will explain why some persons in their twenties think very different than those at age 70, yet some do not think much differently.

Stripe
July 21st, 2014, 01:36 PM
I am not going to San Francisco with a sign stating, " It's not OK to be gay".

So? :idunno:

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 01:39 PM
I understand what you are saying but then I can in turn say, I do not like brunettes because I am a blonde. I don't like artsies. I don't like thieves. I don't like adulterers. I don't like gossips. I don't like Arminians. I don't like basketball players. I sure don't like dispys and especially MAD dispys.

It makes no sense. It is wrong to say we do not like a group of people, as a whole. That is too much of a blanket statement. There are some homosexuals who you would not even know are homosexuals


It seem brunets vs blonds is solely a matter of taste. same with artists.

Conversely, not many like thieves. I do not approve of adultery, but have no hard feelings towards those divorced.

It seems like a slippery slope argument, I may not like the game, basketball, but it would be silly for me to dislike basketball players?

The homosexuals where I do not know they are homosexuals, I would find more accepting.

I am not trying to argue a position, or convince. To me that is boring. What I am doing is tell anyone respond here truthfully how I feel about this topic, without claims of logic, or being right.

I do think many hide their dislikes behind religion, and I think that is wrong. Being foolish, or illogical is just being human.

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 01:42 PM
So? :idunno:

So......................., what? :chew:

The 5 solas
July 21st, 2014, 01:42 PM
If anything, being divisive and hateful accomplishes nothing except for feeding an unhealthy ego :e4e: .

I know and totally agree. How they think that hateful and divisive behaviour is going to do anything for the cause of Christ is just insanity. It is the old, catch more flies with honey than vinegar, scenario. lol

Being kind does not mean one is condoning the sin. One can be very upfront about things and how it is presented makes all the difference.

Last summer I lost two acquaintances because of my stand on homosexuality. One was a fellow business woman, who could not wrap her mind around absolute truth and how I thought that homosexuality was wrong, period. We had many conversations about this and I explained how I would not be biased in my business dealings, how they have the right to protection like every other citizen, how I would never condone violence against them, etc, etc.
She was not having any of it. She felt that I was wrong and that it was not my place to think this. We remain business acquaintances but the relationship has definitely changed. I do not feel as free with her to be myself.

The other one was someone who had a grown son who was a homosexual. The very idea that someone would think their son was sinning in his life choice, drove this person to say they could not have dealings with me. It was irrational because, there was never any reason to discuss homosexuality in our relationship. It had nothing to do with what we needed to communicate about, but since this person took it on such a personal level, that could not be overcome. They chose to ask me one day, saying the suspicion was there because of my *religious convictions* but they wanted to make sure. Isn't that prejudice against me? lol

PureX
July 21st, 2014, 01:44 PM
I would dislike them more because I do not like seeing effeminate men parade around like loose women!

Why lie about it? No, I do not think they are child molesters, nor do I think they are criminals, to me they are upsetting, like the first case, and more disgusting.In all honesty, I would want to examine my own thinking to find out why I'm feeling that way. And I would likely conclude that the reason is because they are so 'deferent' from me. Which means they're unpredictable, and therefor somewhat threatening. And because it's difficult for me to empathize with them when I can't identify with their desires or their perspective on life.

But it's not their fault that I feel that way about them. Nor is it their responsibility to accommodate my fears. And with that I would have to make myself practice some rational thinking about them, so as to perhaps become less bothered by their strangeness.

S0ZO
July 21st, 2014, 01:46 PM
We all know the theological/ scriptural reasons why homosexuality is sinful; it would be repetitious to start another thread on that topic from that perspective.

What about your own personal feelings?

Why should personal feelings matter? :idunno:

Stripe
July 21st, 2014, 01:49 PM
So......................., what? :chew:

Why did you need to point out that you're not going to protest homosexuality?

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 01:53 PM
Why should personal feelings matter? :idunno:

Because, I do mot like queers for reason other than based on faith. I think many of them, usually the cross gender ones who parade around in skits clown makeup with beards make me nauseous.

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 01:56 PM
Why did you need to point out that you're not going to protest homosexuality?

Too old, heck, if I were not so determined, I would not get out if bed.

I would protest by voting against their marriage obsession, or similar, but I am not carrying any signs. or chanting 'down with homos':nono:

Ktoyou
July 21st, 2014, 02:07 PM
In all honesty, I would want to examine my own thinking to find out why I'm feeling that way.
That is what the thread is for, thanks for sharing.


And I would likely conclude that the reason [sic] for me, is because they are so 'deferent' from me. Which means they're unpredictable, and therefor somewhat threatening.

That would be true for you, if you say it is true. As for me, I do not think they are unpredictable, and more-so, they are not threatening.

It was, (I mean in my past) the other way around, we threatened them, and some were not queer, just odd balls. Some of the boys I knew way long ago, privileged class rich boys, football players, jocks, used to beat up these odd balls and the girls cheered them on and laughed. Now being old, I am truly sorry for that.

Stripe
July 22nd, 2014, 12:12 PM
Too old, heck, if I were not so determined, I would not get out if bed.I would protest by voting against their marriage obsession, or similar, but I am not carrying any signs. or chanting 'down with homos':nono:

And what would you say to someone who is so inclined?

aikido7
July 22nd, 2014, 12:42 PM
OK, I feel personally stronger about sex, and my aim in the thread is more secular, as we all know the religious position.Thanks for clarifying your position for me without personal attack.

When you say that "...we all know the religious position" I have a difference of opinion on that. People in the faith are often quick to label what they understand is "homosexuality" as an "abomination," they conveniently forget that many other actions (including eating shellfish at Red Lobster after church) are also labeled "abominations" in the Bible.

The concept of "being gay" is not found in the Bible (save for the relationship between David and Jonathan in the Hebrew Bible).
It actually had to do with either temple rites (prostitution) or else a way to express aggression between males. This is why a statue of a being with a large erection was sometimes found near the gate of ancient cities. It basically said, "Don't step out of line or we will &*%$ you!"

The actual and careful reading of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is not about homosexuality at all. It is all about the failure of people to welcome and be open to the stranger who comes to visit a town.

Christ's Word
July 22nd, 2014, 12:55 PM
The personal side for me involves listening to homosexuals in therapy describe in great detail how they destroy their bodies and ultimately their lives. It is an ongoing horror story.

Most people don't realize the males pop pills to relax their sphincter muscles before they commit their abominations. The addiction rate and alcoholism rates skyrocket with this type of lifestyle. The rates of diseases that are contracted because the colon does not have the immunity of a vagina are astronomical. So many that seem to have an opinion on the gay debate, are completely devoid of the facts and tragedies of the gay lifestyle. In fact being gay is not a lifestyle choice, it is indisputably a death sentence, and the odds say an early death.

The fact that a society would falsely sanction this as moral, and thereby enabling many who could have avoided these tragic outcomes to fall victim, is exactly the opposite of love and the epitome of sinful enablement.

Stripe
July 22nd, 2014, 12:57 PM
People in the faith are often quick to label what they understand is "homosexuality" as an "abomination," they conveniently forget that many other actions (including eating shellfish at Red Lobster after church) are also labeled "abominations" in the Bible.

Three fallacies.

That there is more than one thing labeled an abomination does nothing to deny the fact that homosexuality is called an abomination.

Two things can be called completely different things given context, even if the same word is used to describe them.

Eating shellfish anywhere after church is not called an abomination in the bible.

Would you like to try again?

Granite
July 22nd, 2014, 12:58 PM
Personally I have zero problem with it and no interest in it beyond protecting the civil rights of others.

resurrected
July 22nd, 2014, 12:58 PM
The personal side for me involves listening to homosexuals in therapy describe in great detail how they destroy their bodies and ultimately their lives. It is an ongoing horror story.

Most people don't realize the males pop pills to relax their sphincter muscles before they commit their abominations. The addiction rate and alcoholism rates skyrocket with this type of lifestyle. The rates of diseases that are contracted because the colon does not have the immunity of a vagina are astronomical. So many that seem to have an opinion on the gay debate, are completely devoid of the facts and tragedies of the gay lifestyle. In fact being gay is not a lifestyle choice, it is indisputably a death sentence, and the odds say an early death.

The fact that a society would falsely sanction this as moral, and thereby enabling many who could have avoided these tragic outcomes to fall victim, is exactly the opposite of love and the epitome of sinful enablement.

one might suspect that those inclined to behave in that manner might be suffering from a mental illness, eh?

Ktoyou
July 22nd, 2014, 01:58 PM
Homosexual behavior among human beings is an aberration of nature.

I fully agree, but wish to add, I think many hate it for reasons other than religion

Ktoyou
July 22nd, 2014, 02:11 PM
And what would you say to someone who is so inclined?

First, I find it hard to imagine a homosexual having close proximity to me, and if so, I think I would get away from the person. My thinking, if I had my hair done by a faggy acting man, I would not tip him, or return.
What good would it do to say anything? The person is only going to argue; it seems best to show them disapproval by action, rather than words.

resurrected
July 22nd, 2014, 02:13 PM
First, I find it hard to imagine a homosexual having close proximity to me, and if so, I think I would get away from the person. My thinking, if I had my hair done by a faggy acting man, I would not tip him, or return.
What good would it do to say anything? The person is only going to argue; it seems best to show them disapproval by action, rather than words.

:thumb:


now see if you can convince town of that :chuckle:

TracerBullet
July 22nd, 2014, 02:23 PM
First, I find it hard to imagine a homosexual having close proximity to me, and if so, I think I would get away from the person. My thinking, if I had my hair done by a faggy acting man, I would not tip him, or return.
What good would it do to say anything? The person is only going to argue; it seems best to show them disapproval by action, rather than words.

I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want to be around you that much either

Granite
July 22nd, 2014, 02:24 PM
First, I find it hard to imagine a homosexual having close proximity to me, and if so, I think I would get away from the person. My thinking, if I had my hair done by a faggy acting man, I would not tip him, or return.
What good would it do to say anything? The person is only going to argue; it seems best to show them disapproval by action, rather than words.

No, you'd just rather be rude by not tipping him. Charming.

TracerBullet
July 22nd, 2014, 02:34 PM
The personal side for me involves listening to homosexuals in therapy describe in great detail how they destroy their bodies and ultimately their lives. It is an ongoing horror story. how exactly are you privy to what is said in a therapy session?


Most people don't realize the males pop pills to relax their sphincter muscles before they commit their abominations. most don't realize it because it isn't true



The addiction rate and alcoholism rates skyrocket with this type of lifestyle. which is directly linked to living with discrimination, threats and rejection



The rates of diseases that are contracted because the colon does not have the immunity of a vagina are astronomical. all depends on how you play with the numbers.

One often overlooked aspect of the numbers game is that gays are significantly more likely to be tested for STD's than heterosexuals so they end up showing higher in statistics



So many that seem to have an opinion on the gay debate, are completely devoid of the facts and tragedies of the gay lifestyle. In fact being gay is not a lifestyle choice, it is indisputably a death sentence, and the odds say an early death. I think you are referring to the often told lie that gay men have a life expectancy of 42 years. this was something made up by Paul Cameron, a expelled from the APA because he was fabricating research data on homosexuals.


The fact that a society would falsely sanction this as moral, and thereby enabling many who could have avoided these tragic outcomes to fall victim, is exactly the opposite of love and the epitome of sinful enablement.

and discrimination is moral how exactly?

resurrected
July 22nd, 2014, 02:37 PM
... gays are significantly more likely to be tested for STD's than heterosexuals so they end up showing higher in statistics



:darwinsm:

wot a tard!


like saying that criminals tend to get arrested more often than honest people, so they ended up disproportionally represented in prison populations :chuckle:

Lon
July 22nd, 2014, 02:41 PM
No, you'd just rather be rude by not tipping him. Charming.
Ah, I see you are you're old 'charming' self, today.

:nono: When did "tipping (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratuity)" become mandatory in your mind? :doh:

Frank Ernest
July 22nd, 2014, 02:43 PM
I fully agree, but wish to add, I think many hate it for reasons other than religion
I believe the reason I stated would qualify.

Arthur Brain
July 22nd, 2014, 04:57 PM
Of course not. I don't choose to eat, but I choose to not eat concrete. In fact, the thought of it is repulsive. Take note all you homo lovers. He again admits being a homo is bad, because nobody would choose to be that way. He has said this many times.

Well, you do in fact choose to eat. Your body may release chemicals that encourage you to through feelings of hunger but it's up to you to actually consume. I'm not sure where you can quote me 'admitting' any such thing but by all means link to it.

Arthur Brain
July 22nd, 2014, 05:30 PM
More precisely - you could never see a situation where you would make such a choice - to make yourself attached to it. Whether you could or not you don't really know.

And extremity of condition doesn't necessarily invalidate conscious choice. Providing that the person has not gone insane or something, an extremity of condition merely forces one into making difficult decisions - a true test of character.

Well, I know that the thought of any kind of physical intimacy with another man repulses me, and that's not through conscious choice. So what else other than an extremity or severity of condition could change that?


There's no evidence in favor of the idea that homosexuality is genetic, and the very idea contradicts the very basis from which it might be supposed to arise - so the position that it is not genetic/natural very clearly makes more sense.

Well there is evidence in favour of it, even if you don't give it any credence.


I can get myself to enjoy a piece of music that I wouldn't normally listen to by learning to sing/play it. Example: I don't normally care for listening to instrumentals, but I can enjoy them if I learn to play them on the guitar. I can't choose to be involved in any film since it is up to other people who gets to be involved in the film - unless I'm the one creating it. This second one is a strawman.

But are you actually enjoying the music or is your enjoyment derived from emulating it? To put it another way, could you choose to enjoy listening to an atonal instrumental piece that you wouldn't be able to sing or duplicate?

Where it came to film I meant involved as engaged with characters, plot, narrative etc, so it wasn't a strawman.


I think you misunderstood my statement. When I said you wouldn't know unless informed - I meant that you wouldn't know if some individual was a pedophile unless you were informed. For instance: think of the various priests who have been involved in such scandals. Do you think parents would have left their kids with them if it was obvious that these specific priests were pedophiles?

Well, it happens. You misunderstood my meaning of 'involved' so I guess we're even...;)


First off, I didn't say pizza with jam - I said just pizza, whatever kind you love. Second off, I said you care who hands it to you for the sake of the analogy alone. Please pay attention.

There was a point as to why I used the analogy of a pizza with jam on it to begin with, that being not possible to enjoy. If I had the choice of having a normal pizza being delivered by a bloke or a beautiful woman then obviously I'd sooner the latter any day of the week.


I never said it is all about choice, I've acknowledged that there are plenty of subconscious elements that come into play in this subject - I merely argue that the conscious plays more of a role than people like you are willing to acknowledge. My generic attraction to woman was not a choice - it was nature/nuture, though my specific taste in women is a reflection of my character and beliefs, which are subject to my choice. If I really wanted to - I could test my heterosexuality, but I view that as immoral and so I won't.

While I acknowledge that there are elements that can influence the psyche - including an affect on sexuality I don't agree that an established sexuality is something that most people at least - can 'choose' to alter. It's not something I could test as it's inherently part of me.


I've also already provided an argument for how one might go from a hetersexual to bi-sexual or even homosexual - by adopting a stance that sex is purely about pleasure and through progressive experimentation break down the psychological restraints surrounding the idea of homosexuality. Once you become comfortable with the ever more deprived acts you open up to the idea.

Most people see sex as pleasurable so the argument that indulgence based on that notion alone can change an attraction/orientation is pretty weak to be honest.


A gay gene would most certainly prevent procreation from happening if it existed, for the obvious reason.

Only if it affected an overall population.

Stripe
July 22nd, 2014, 05:31 PM
First, I find it hard to imagine a homosexual having close proximity to me, and if so, I think I would get away from the person. My thinking, if I had my hair done by a faggy acting man, I would not tip him, or return. What good would it do to say anything? The person is only going to argue; it seems best to show them disapproval by action, rather than words.

:chuckle:

:thumb:

Angel4Truth
July 22nd, 2014, 05:33 PM
I cannot comprehend this focus on homosexuality. My theory is that it is the easiest sin to despise, granting you the illusion of being holy as opposed to the gays.
Where are the threads that condemn adultery, ridiculous divorce rates (evangelicals being among the absolute worst when it comes to divorce), greed, aggression, hatred, pride and failing to care for the poor and the least of us??

Where are there people having pride in those sins parades and demanding that you accept those things as ok before God?

PureX
July 22nd, 2014, 05:45 PM
I fully agree, but wish to add, I think many hate it for reasons other than religionWhat do you think those reasons are?

I think it's born in a fundamental fear of anything we don't understand. Because when we don't understand something, we can't feel in control of it.

TracerBullet
July 22nd, 2014, 07:13 PM
There's no evidence in favor of the idea that homosexuality is genetic, and the very idea contradicts the very basis from which it might be supposed to arise - so the position that it is not genetic/natural very clearly makes more sense. there is actually a good bit of evidence that sexual orientation is genetically influenced. the evidence is there in twin studies and familial studies.





I can get myself to enjoy a piece of music that I wouldn't normally listen to by learning to sing/play it. Example: I don't normally care for listening to instrumentals, but I can enjoy them if I learn to play them on the guitar. I can't choose to be involved in any film since it is up to other people who gets to be involved in the film - unless I'm the one creating it. This second one is a strawman. music isn't love






I never said it is all about choice, I've acknowledged that there are plenty of subconscious elements that come into play in this subject - I merely argue that the conscious plays more of a role than people like you are willing to acknowledge. My generic attraction to woman was not a choice - it was nature/nuture, though my specific taste in women is a reflection of my character and beliefs, which are subject to my choice. If I really wanted to - I could test my heterosexuality, but I view that as immoral and so I won't. so you have a genetic attraction to women but deny that gay men would have a genetic attraction to gay men






A gay gene would most certainly prevent procreation from happening if it existed, for the obvious reason.

first - no one says there is a gay gene except those trying to say sexual orientation is inborn. All evidence says that sexual orientation is the result of genetics, epigenetics and the prenatal environment

second -there are a lot of reasons why some human's don't procreate. that doesn't mean that their genetic material is faulty nor does it mean they aren't a part of human society and the raising of children.

aikido7
July 22nd, 2014, 07:24 PM
Three fallacies.

That there is more than one thing labeled an abomination does nothing to deny the fact that homosexuality is called an abomination.

Two things can be called completely different things given context, even if the same word is used to describe them.

Cherry-pickiing a context is human. A failure to find out what a biblical verse meant to the original authors can leave one with simplistic and baffling interpretations.


Eating shellfish anywhere after church is not called an abomination in the bible.You're right. It says nothing about eating "after church." The Bible only says that eating shellfsh period is "an abomination."


Would you like to try again?What we calll "homosexuality" was all about male aggression. Not love. The close and loving relationship of David and Jonathan in the Old Testament probably comes as close to a modern "gay" loving relationship as anything else in Scripture but it is not described in any specific way, other than to say they were both close and loved each other.

csuguy
July 22nd, 2014, 07:37 PM
there is actually a good bit of evidence that sexual orientation is genetically influenced. the evidence is there in twin studies and familial studies.

There's no solid evidence that homosexuality is genetic. Current studies can be interpreted any number of ways. Twins and familial studies can just as easily be interpreted to be a matter of nurture.



music isn't love

Love is a choice just as what kind of music you want to listen to. We have less direct control over lust I agree, but not no control. I wouldn't suggest that a homosexual could necessarily become a heterosexual, but they can choose to leave homosexuality behind.


so you have a genetic attraction to women but deny that gay men would have a genetic attraction to gay men

As discussed before, it is self-evident why we would naturally be heterosexual and why no homosexual gene would arise and persist across generations in nature. Evolution relies upon procreation - a homosexual gene would necessarily die off as soon as it evolved.

Furthermore, there are a great number of sexual variations out there beyond just straight and gay. There are bi-sexuals, pedophiles, some people are attracted to beastiality, etc. Are you gonna suggest each of these is its own gene?


first - no one says there is a gay gene except those trying to say sexual orientation is inborn. All evidence says that sexual orientation is the result of genetics, epigenetics and the prenatal environment

False - plenty of people are ready to say that homosexuality is a matter of genetics because they want to defend it as something beyond their control - a product of nature alone.


second -there are a lot of reasons why some human's don't procreate. that doesn't mean that their genetic material is faulty nor does it mean they aren't a part of human society and the raising of children.

Some don't procreate for good reasons, true. But a gene that prevents one from procreating - such as a from a lack of attraction to the opposite sex - is most certainly a defect.

Arthur Brain
July 22nd, 2014, 07:46 PM
Love is a choice just as what kind of music you want to listen to. We have less direct control over lust I agree, but not no control. I wouldn't suggest that a homosexual could necessarily become a heterosexual, but they can choose to leave homosexuality behind.


How is love a choice? Have you ever chosen to fall in love with someone? I haven't. I have absolute pitch where it comes to music but I didn't choose to have that either, nor is it in the realm of my control as to finding generic pop music bland, insipid and tediously boring to the ear. My only choice in the matter is to avoid it where I can.

Similarly the same would apply to lust. I may have a choice on whether to act on sexual desire but not what causes it.

resurrected
July 22nd, 2014, 07:49 PM
If I had the choice of having a normal pizza being delivered by a bloke or a beautiful woman then obviously I'd sooner the latter any day of the week.


the beautiful woman is more apt to get lost or stop to do her nails or fix her hair, figgering she'll get a tip anyways because she's a beautiful woman and most customers are retards like you

if you want your pizza delivered quickly and correctly, get it delivered by a guy

:think: or an ugly woman

quip
July 22nd, 2014, 07:50 PM
the beautiful woman is more apt to get lost or stop to do her nails or fix her hair, figgering she'll get a tip anyways because she's a beautiful woman and most customers are retards like you

if you want your pizza delivered quickly and correctly, get it delivered by a guy

:think: or an ugly woman

You're one class-act rez!

resurrected
July 22nd, 2014, 08:02 PM
:banana:

Ktoyou
July 22nd, 2014, 08:33 PM
there is actually a good bit of evidence that sexual orientation is genetically influenced. the evidence is there in twin studies and familial studies.
seen those










first - no one says there is a gay gene except those trying to say sexual orientation is inborn. All evidence says that sexual orientation is the result of genetics, epigenetics and the prenatal environment

second -there are a lot of reasons why some human's don't procreate. that doesn't mean that their genetic material is faulty nor does it mean they aren't a part of human society and the raising of children.
You seem to say no to genetics, then yes, and there really is no 'epigentics' there are phenotypes, relative to genotypes, and prenatal environment has been thought to be a factor.

Ktoyou
July 22nd, 2014, 08:35 PM
The main point I wanted to make is there are other reasons for disliking homos; many dislike homosexuals for reasons other than religion. Many do not like homos for 'personal' reasons.

Town Heretic
July 22nd, 2014, 08:59 PM
The main point I wanted to make is there are other reasons for disliking homos; many dislike homosexuals for reasons other than religion. Many do not like homos for 'personal' reasons.
It's completely understandable that most people are repelled, by degree, from that which is unlike them. An adaptation of what Trad would likely note as Plato's first law of affinity.

The 5 solas
July 22nd, 2014, 09:08 PM
the beautiful woman is more apt to get lost or stop to do her nails or fix her hair, figgering she'll get a tip anyways because she's a beautiful woman and most customers are retards like you

if you want your pizza delivered quickly and correctly, get it delivered by a guy

:think: or an ugly woman

Hey come on res....ugly women do their hair, get their nails done and get lost too!!

Your private message thingy is full it said, I could not send you a message in response...clear that out a bit!

Ktoyou
July 22nd, 2014, 09:11 PM
Yes, TH
I know being a homosexual is sinful, and do not doubt that is all, yet I think that is not there is all to it?

Christ's Word
July 22nd, 2014, 09:35 PM
how exactly are you privy to what is said in a therapy session?

most don't realize it because it isn't true


which is directly linked to living with discrimination, threats and rejection


all depends on how you play with the numbers.

One often overlooked aspect of the numbers game is that gays are significantly more likely to be tested for STD's than heterosexuals so they end up showing higher in statistics

I think you are referring to the often told lie that gay men have a life expectancy of 42 years. this was something made up by Paul Cameron, a expelled from the APA because he was fabricating research data on homosexuals.



and discrimination is moral how exactly?

It was once claimed by a famous Irishman that people like you use statistics like a drunk uses a light pole, for support, rather than enlightenment.

Look up poppers. Alkyl Nitrates. Over 50 percent of males that are homos have never had sex without using muscle relaxers. They are sold contraband at many businesses in the central west end (gay community in St. Louis)

I know because I have logged over 30,000 clinical hours treating addicts, criminals, and the sexually broken.

popperstogo.com play particular attention to the products called "RAM", "HARD WARE", and "Locker Room". You are a naive idiot.

Ktoyou
July 22nd, 2014, 09:39 PM
Not in Ladue

csuguy
July 22nd, 2014, 10:23 PM
How is love a choice? Have you ever chosen to fall in love with someone? I haven't.

First off, let me note that there are many definitions of love - and people freely switch between them. In debates such as these, defenders of homosexuality use "love" in place of "lust" - it sounds nicer and holds more of a rhetorical punch.

When I use the term, however, I'm using it more from a Christian perspective - agape. This kind of love is a choice - its the decision to make the well-being of others and your relationship to them something you value and act upon.

Now, as for lust, in my own life I have certainly found that my internal choices regarding women affect my attraction to them. I find many women attractive - but that doesn't equate to me lusting after them. If I decide that I don't want to pursue someone for whatever reason - such as they are going out with one of my friends - then that's that, I won't think of them that way. On the other hand, if I decide I want to pursue them, then my thoughts turn to them. So my conscious decisions most certainly play a big role in this matter.


I have absolute pitch where it comes to music but I didn't choose to have that either, nor is it in the realm of my control as to finding generic pop music bland, insipid and tediously boring to the ear. My only choice in the matter is to avoid it where I can.

Just because there are somethings you don't have control over (being born a man/woman, how old you are, etc) doesn't therefore serve as an argument that one doesn't have any control over their sexual orientation. Analogies don't serve as arguments - despite the fact that people continually try to use them as such.


Similarly the same would apply to lust. I may have a choice on whether to act on sexual desire but not what causes it.

See above - from personal experience I heartily disagree on this point.

Lighthouse
July 22nd, 2014, 10:28 PM
how exactly are you privy to what is said in a therapy session?
Did it seriously not occur to you that he's a therapist?


most don't realize it because it isn't true
Apparently TracerBullet is a queer. How else would he know?


and discrimination is moral how exactly?
Depends on the object of discrimination. would you call me immoral for discriminating against a murderer or a pedophile?


You're right. It says nothing about eating "after church." The Bible only says that eating shellfsh period is "an abomination."
Does it?


What we calll "homosexuality" was all about male aggression. Not love. The close and loving relationship of David and Jonathan in the Old Testament probably comes as close to a modern "gay" loving relationship as anything else in Scripture but it is not described in any specific way, other than to say they were both close and loved each other.
You're an idiot.

Ktoyou
July 22nd, 2014, 10:33 PM
First off, let me note that there are many definitions of love - and people freely switch between them. In debates such as these, defenders of homosexuality use "love" in place of "lust" - it sounds nicer and holds more of a rhetorical punch.

When I use the term, however, I'm using it more from a Christian perspective - agape. This kind of love is a choice - its the decision to make the well-being of others and your relationship to them something you value and act upon.

Now, as for lust, in my own life I have certainly found that my internal choices regarding women affect my attraction to them. I find many women attractive - but that doesn't equate to me lusting after them. If I decide that I don't want to pursue someone for whatever reason - such as they are going out with one of my friends - then that's that, I won't think of them that way. On the other hand, if I decide I want to pursue them, then my thoughts turn to them. So my conscious decisions most certainly play a big role in this matter.



Then you use self control, I see, and have done the same, yet to do feel the attraction, yet keep it in check?

Now, today, I would take a religious position on homos, but if I were really honest, I would say something not based on being a good Christian.

Although this is true, I am far more moved by the Spirit, because I do not hate people, even when I think they are sinful.

In an old fashion way to say it, the very idea, " kill a queer for Christ' is also repulsive to me.

Arthur Brain
July 22nd, 2014, 10:53 PM
First off, let me note that there are many definitions of love - and people freely switch between them. In debates such as these, defenders of homosexuality use "love" in place of "lust" - it sounds nicer and holds more of a rhetorical punch.

So it helps to clarify, because I've never known anyone make a conscious decision to fall in love, it just happens. I wasn't using love in place of lust at all as I know there's a complete difference between the two on any level.


When I use the term, however, I'm using it more from a Christian perspective - agape. This kind of love is a choice - its the decision to make the well-being of others and your relationship to them something you value and act upon.

Right, in much the same as someone may choose to be altruistic or selfish.


Now, as for lust, in my own life I have certainly found that my internal choices regarding women affect my attraction to them. I find many women attractive - but that doesn't equate to me lusting after them. If I decide that I don't want to pursue someone for whatever reason - such as they are going out with one of my friends - then that's that, I won't think of them that way. On the other hand, if I decide I want to pursue them, then my thoughts turn to them. So my conscious decisions most certainly play a big role in this matter.

Fair enough, but your attraction to someone is beyond your control right? How you act on it is something else entirely. I wouldn't even say finding a woman alluring necessarily equates to lust anyway depending.


Just because there are somethings you don't have control over (being born a man/woman, how old you are, etc) doesn't therefore serve as an argument that one doesn't have any control over their sexual orientation. Analogies don't serve as arguments - despite the fact that people continually try to use them as such.

Well, I don't have any control over my heterosexuality so why would I presume that anyone else has actual control over theirs? If analogies don't serve as arguments then that's pretty much all you've come up with in order to argue how a heterosexual person may somehow - through hedonism/orgies and the like - end up becoming bi or homosexual so it cuts both ways.


See above - from personal experience I heartily disagree on this point.

I'm talking about acting on lust - not attraction, there's a difference.

TracerBullet
July 22nd, 2014, 11:15 PM
There's no solid evidence that homosexuality is genetic. Current studies can be interpreted any number of ways. Twins and familial studies can just as easily be interpreted to be a matter of nurture.
you originally said:
"There's no evidence in favor of the idea that homosexuality is genetic"

and this remains wrong. there is a large body of evidence saying exactly that. there are plenty of attempts to dismiss evidence that sexual orientation is inborn but none of these attempts is coming form geneticists.


Love is a choice just as what kind of music you want to listen to. We have less direct control over lust I agree, but not no control. I wouldn't suggest that a homosexual could necessarily become a heterosexual, but they can choose to leave homosexuality behind."leave homosexuality behind" what a stupid statement. People are who they are.

we may choose the person we fall in love with but we don't get to choose the gender of who we fall in love with it just happens.



As discussed before, it is self-evident why we would naturally be heterosexual and why no homosexual gene would arise and persist across generations in nature. Evolution relies upon procreation - a homosexual gene would necessarily die off as soon as it evolved. you need to do some remedial reading on evolution and genetics.

not every member of a species procreates, very few male gorillas, elephants or wolves have the opportunity to have offspring. This is part of their species survival mechanisms. a common feature of these animals and with humans is their reliance on a social structure for survival.

the genes that seem to be responsible for homosexuality are apparently tied to genes for female fertility. Women with these genes tend to have more offspring leading to the distribution of those genes, these women also are more likely to give birth to gay males. In fact the greatest predictor of male homosexuality is the number of older biological brothers one has. (this holds true no matter if they are raised with biological families or adopted out). It is pretty easy to extrapolate how this would benefit humans, having non-reproducing members acts as a safety net for orphaned children and as a means of fostering out children if a mother is having to many to care for.


Furthermore, there are a great number of sexual variations out there beyond just straight and gay. There are bi-sexuals, pedophiles, some people are attracted to beastiality, etc. Are you gonna suggest each of these is its own gene?
Pedophiles are not equivalent of homosexuals.

further the evidence shows that pedophilia is the result of actual brain damage.
Peoppl, B.T. et al Association between brain structure and phenotypic characteristics in pedophilia 2013 j of pych research
Garcie J. A . Etiology of pedophilia from a neurodevelopmental perspective: markers and brain alterations 2009 Revista de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental (English Edition)
Schiffer, B. et al Structural brain abnormalities in the frontostriatal system and cerebellum in pedophilia 2007 j. of psych research




False - plenty of people are ready to say that homosexuality is a matter of genetics because they want to defend it as something beyond their control - a product of nature alone.
All evidence says that sexual orientation is the result of genetics, epigenetics and the prenatal environment



Some don't procreate for good reasons, true. But a gene that prevents one from procreating - such as a from a lack of attraction to the opposite sex - is most certainly a defect.

see above

resurrected
July 22nd, 2014, 11:15 PM
Have you ever chosen to fall in love with someone?


:think:



Hannibal Lecter: First principles, Clarice. Simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius. Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature? What does he do, this man you seek?
Clarice Starling: He kills women...
Hannibal Lecter: No. That is incidental. What is the first and principal thing he does? What needs does he serve by killing?
Clarice Starling: Anger, um, social acceptance, and, huh, sexual frustrations, sir...
Hannibal Lecter: No! He covets. That is his nature. And how do we begin to covet, Clarice? Do we seek out things to covet? Make an effort to answer now.
Clarice Starling: No. We just...
Hannibal Lecter: No. We begin by coveting what we see every day. Don't you feel eyes moving over your body, Clarice? And don't your eyes seek out the things you want?

TracerBullet
July 22nd, 2014, 11:19 PM
seen those

there are sure a lot of them









You seem to say no to genetics, then yes, and there really is no 'epigentics' there are phenotypes, relative to genotypes, and prenatal environment has been thought to be a factor.

did you read my post?

yes sexual orientation has a genetic factor. and yes it has a epigenetic factor and yes it has a prenatal environment factor.

epigentics (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp1bZEUgqVI)

resurrected
July 22nd, 2014, 11:21 PM
you're not trained as a scientist, are you?

TracerBullet
July 22nd, 2014, 11:21 PM
The main point I wanted to make is there are other reasons for disliking homos; many dislike homosexuals for reasons other than religion. Many do not like homos for 'personal' reasons.

just for fun try replacing your "homos" with the N-word

resurrected
July 22nd, 2014, 11:22 PM
"The main point I wanted to make is there are other reasons for disliking nerds; many dislike nerdsexuals for reasons other than religion. Many do not like nerds for 'personal' reasons."



:freak:




it wasn't all that much fun :idunno:

TracerBullet
July 22nd, 2014, 11:25 PM
It was once claimed by a famous Irishman that people like you use statistics like a drunk uses a light pole, for support, rather than enlightenment.

Look up poppers. Alkyl Nitrates. yeah they aren't pills


Over 50 percent of males that are homos have never had sex without using muscle relaxers. evidence?




I know because I have logged over 30,000 clinical hours treating addicts, criminals, and the sexually broken.

popperstogo.com play particular attention to the products called "RAM", "HARD WARE", and "Locker Room". You are a naive idiot.

“I am reminded of a colleague who reiterated "all my homosexual patients are quite sick" - to which I finally replied "so are all my heterosexual patients"” Earnest van der Haag