PDA

View Full Version : Homosexuality is designed?



Pages : [1] 2

billwald
May 24th, 2005, 12:30 PM
The unnamed designer coded for random homosexual expression?

justchristian
May 24th, 2005, 12:40 PM
Being homosexual isnt a sin, acting on it (sexually) is.

billwald
May 24th, 2005, 12:57 PM
Begs the question. The unknown designer coded our DNA to insure that we would sin?

Justin (Wiccan)
May 24th, 2005, 01:00 PM
Being homosexual isnt a sin, acting on it (sexually) is.

Which is not really a response to the question posed in the OP.

It is an important point: the Bible says witches are to be killed, and makes no distinction over whether or not they cast spells. ;)

SteveG.
May 24th, 2005, 01:12 PM
Homosexual orientation is the result of complex social/psychological and no doubt genetic
influences. People who suffer from the affliction should be treated with the same respect we accord
anyone else. However, social and religious influences will largely dictate to what extent it is
tolerated in any given community. This is due to some extent I believe to the innate human evolutionary instinct to survive and produce progeny. That being said, it must be noted that
homosexual behavior is always a choice, whereas the orientation is not. This is where the deeper and more serious questions arise as to morality and faith. I agree with the previous poster that the chosen behavior is sin though the orientation itself isn't.

beanieboy
May 24th, 2005, 01:13 PM
I find it interesting that God is considered male, has no female counterpart, and is a designer.

Kind of makes you go hmmm.

justchristian
May 24th, 2005, 01:15 PM
If homosexuality is genetic then its not a sin. (that's what the OP is getting at)
I think its important to note much our genetic code (the faults) are due to the fall (handicaps, defects, disease etc)
So if acting homosexual (again sexually) is a sin then God would not have originally coded man this way.

justchristian
May 24th, 2005, 01:16 PM
God is considered male, has no female counterpart, and is a designer.

Actually concidering God male is quite an immature stance intellectually and spiritually.

Jukia
May 24th, 2005, 01:23 PM
I think its important to note much our genetic code (the faults) are due to the fall (handicaps, defects, disease etc)



And you know this how? A source other than the Bible or bob b, please. Thanks so much.

beanieboy
May 24th, 2005, 01:23 PM
Actually concidering God male is quite an immature stance intellectually and spiritually.

Really?
Most christians consider God male.

justchristian
May 24th, 2005, 01:26 PM
Assuming God created man in paradise and did not originally intend for us to live in a fallen world with physical ailments(in this case genetic) then it stands to reason these defects manifested themselves with the other consequences of the fall.

justchristian
May 24th, 2005, 01:27 PM
Really?
Most christians consider God male.

Then I would say most Christians are spiritually and intelectually immature.

Jukia
May 24th, 2005, 01:28 PM
Assuming God created man in paradise and did not originally intend for us to live in a fallen world with physical ailments(in this case genetic) then it stands to reason these defects manifested themselves with the other consequences of the fall.
Was this an attempt to answer my question? If it was then it fails cause you are giving
an answer based on the Bible. But thanks anyway.

justchristian
May 24th, 2005, 01:33 PM
Was this an attempt to answer my question? If it was then it fails cause you are giving
an answer based on the Bible. But thanks anyway.

How else would I? We are dealing with christian creation...there isnt exactly another source. All I am saying is that if you accept how God did not intend man to be homosexual from creation, and the fall changed us genetically, then there is no reason not to assume the homosexual "defect" manifested in the fall.

fool
May 24th, 2005, 01:55 PM
dosen't homosexuality appear in other species?
did all the animals fall from grace?
if so, what were they like before?

servent101
May 24th, 2005, 02:07 PM
All in all sin is trying to do something good - but falling short, or missing the target. The concept of sin as portrayed concerning homosexuality is simply a non-beneficial prognosis that more or less entraps a person to sin continually.

What is beneficial to all of us, is to live in harmony with the Universe, which takes every fiber of our being, with nothing held back - so lust is what? - lust is wanting to show and receive pleasure, but have we not been duped in believing that this activity of lusting will actually bring the pleasure we desire? I think so anyways, that lust is simply a distraction, something that keeps us from being able to focus and concentrate, and it also keeps us from viewing the opposite sex, or the same sex with pure intent. I personally do not make a big deal out of it though, and it is easy to get rid of if one is not inflicted with a guilt trip over one's lust. There are consequences to our behavior, consequences that cause us pain, and the pain is only there because if we cannot be motivated by good sense - what is the best, then we can either look around us and see other people doing certain things, and see what happens to them, or we can endure the pain ourselves, which is sometimes so severe that we do not recover, and we loose the "body" that we are presently in.

Anyways - yes God did make us this way, it is by Divine Design that if we do not seek a Spiritual Divine Connection with the "Cosmos" or God or some form of Spirituality that we seek something else, something less perfect, and that seeking something less perfect is missing the mark or falling short - other wise known as sin.

With Christ's Love

Servent101

beanieboy
May 24th, 2005, 02:23 PM
Then I would say most Christians are spiritually and intelectually immature.

I would have to agree with you :)

I was on a local board years ago. A woman kept saying, "God wants us to be happy, and she..."

The Christians responded: "God is NOT a female!! God is a HE. He is called Father!!"

I said, "Now, come on. You don't think that God has a penis, do you??"

They were offended that I would suggest such a thing, and I was reprimanded. But that is how we classify male and female - with sex organs. You look at the baby, and say, "It's a boy!"

I believe that the Creator is both male and female.

But patriarchal societies would never be subjected to anything female (not even God.)

And females are not considered just weak, but often, lesser than, men.
Matthew 1 doesn't mention a single woman.
The whole idea of female priests and pastors is still controversial.

People want to believe that God is male.

beanieboy
May 24th, 2005, 02:38 PM
The difficult concept of "design" is that simply because one cannot come up with a reason, one suggests that it was never meant to be.

What is the "design" of mosquitos? They make you itch, and suck your blood. Did God "design" them to annoy us?

What is the purpose of an infertile human? They certainly can't reproduce, so what is their purpose?
What is the purpose for those that go into the priesthood, and pledge celebacy? They can't reproduce, so why would they do such a thing?

If you look at it from a reproductive stance, gay people seem not part of the plan - nor do people who marry when they are too old to bear children, infertile people, etc.

But I believe that everyone still has something to contribute, and they are here for a reason.
One can't look at design from only one point of view.

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 02:46 PM
Being homosexual isnt a sin, acting on it (sexually) is.

It is doing the act of homosexual sex that makes you a homo just as the act of murdering someone makes you a murderer. :duh:

Resting in Him,
Clete

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 02:54 PM
I would have to agree with you :)

I was on a local board years ago. A woman kept saying, "God wants us to be happy, and she..."

The Christians responded: "God is NOT a female!! God is a HE. He is called Father!!"

I said, "Now, come on. You don't think that God has a penis, do you??"

They were offended that I would suggest such a thing, and I was reprimanded. But that is how we classify male and female - with sex organs. You look at the baby, and say, "It's a boy!"

I believe that the Creator is both male and female.

But patriarchal societies would never be subjected to anything female (not even God.)

And females are not considered just weak, but often, lesser than, men.
Matthew 1 doesn't mention a single woman.
The whole idea of female priests and pastors is still controversial.

People want to believe that God is male.
Gender is strictly physical characteristics.

God is always addressed as Father by Jesus. Father is always male in context.

Females are considered weak? By whose definition? Yours? If you say the bible, then you misinterpret those passages, as many men have done before you.....but if you think that God sees women as weak, try reading about the woman in Proverbs 31:10-31, or read the story of Ruth or Debra (in Judges). And what does Matthew 1 have to do with anything other than establish the patriarchial lineage of Christ?

God in essence is male. It is what it is....get over it!

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 03:23 PM
Gender is strictly physical characteristics.

God is always addressed as Father by Jesus. Father is always male in context. :thumb:


Females are considered weak? By whose definition? Yours? If you say the bible, then you misinterpret those passages, as many men have done before you.....but if you think that God sees women as weak, try reading about the woman in Proverbs 31:10-31, or read the story of Ruth or Debra (in Judges). And what does Matthew 1 have to do with anything other than establish the patriarchial lineage of Christ? Females are known to be the weaker sex.


God in essence is male. It is what it is....get over it!:thumb:

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 03:25 PM
Homosexuality and being a Homosexual is a sin. Homosexuals should be executed. Homosexuality is a perversion, and was not intended by God.

fool
May 24th, 2005, 03:35 PM
Homosexuality and being a Homosexual is a sin. Homosexuals should be executed. Homosexuality is a perversion, and was not intended by God.

will you cast the first stone?

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 03:41 PM
will you cast the first stone?
Will you shower with a roomful of them?

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 03:42 PM
will you cast the first stone?Would you like me to explain the passage to you?

fool
May 24th, 2005, 03:46 PM
Will you shower with a roomful of them?
how would I know if I did?
besides not wanting to shower with a room full certain people dosen't mean thet should be executed

fool
May 24th, 2005, 03:47 PM
Would you like me to explain the passage to you?

no just answer the question

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 03:48 PM
no just answer the questionYes. I would, with government mandate.

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 03:48 PM
how would I know if I did?
besides not wanting to shower with a room full certain people dosen't mean thet should be executed
I'd say you'd know as soon as you bent over to pick up the soap! :darwinsm:

Homos..... :vomit:

fool
May 24th, 2005, 03:49 PM
Yes. I would, with government mandate.
thank you for your response

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 03:51 PM
I'd say you'd know as soon as you bent over to pick up the soap! :darwinsm: :vomit: I did not need to hear that.... :vomit:

fool
May 24th, 2005, 03:51 PM
I'd say you'd know as soon as you bent over to pick up the soap! :darwinsm:

Homos..... :vomit:
homos creep me out to
but I see no reason to go executing them

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 03:53 PM
homo creep me out to
but I see no reason to go executing themLeviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 03:56 PM
homo creep me out to
but I see no reason to go executing them
I say, give them San Francisco.......and put a wall around the city....change the name to "The Republic of Sodom". :chuckle:

fool
May 24th, 2005, 03:57 PM
Leviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
I'm an atheiest remember?
I think your Bible was written by men
it hilds no special authority for me

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 03:58 PM
I say, give them San Francisco.......and put a wall around the city....change the name to "The Republic of Sodom". :chuckle:After Sodomy is criminalized, then a couple of cruise missles will do the rest of the job....

fool
May 24th, 2005, 03:59 PM
I say, give them San Francisco.......and put a wall around the city....change the name to "The Republic of Sodom". :chuckle:
I thought san fran was supposed to be a nice place
perhaps we should give them France

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 03:59 PM
I'm an atheiest remember?
I think your Bible was written by men
it hilds no special authority for meHomosexual behavior is destructive. It leads to death.

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 04:00 PM
I thought san fran was supposed to be a nice place
perhaps we should give them France
Even better! :thumb:

Come on now Dread....no upstaging! :chuckle:

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 04:01 PM
Homosexual behavior is destructive. It leads to death.
It undermines the family unit as well.

Justin (Wiccan)
May 24th, 2005, 04:02 PM
Will you shower with a roomful of them?

I have ... does that make a difference one way or another?

Justin

(Bluefeather Clan at an SCA event.)

fool
May 24th, 2005, 04:03 PM
Homosexual behavior is destructive. It leads to death.I'll go along with the destuctive part about sodomy
but what makes homosexuality deadly?

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 04:03 PM
I have ... does that make a difference one way or another?

Justin

(Bluefeather Clan at an SCA event.):shocked: I don't want to know about it.

fool
May 24th, 2005, 04:05 PM
:shocked: I don't want to know about it.
Is Justin(Wiccan) eligable for stoning?

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 04:06 PM
I have ... does that make a difference one way or another?

Justin

(Bluefeather Clan at an SCA event.)
:vomit:

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 04:06 PM
I'll go along with the destuctive part about sodomy
but what makes homosexuality deadly?You have heard of GMBS (I think that's what it was)? It was what they used to call AIDS.

JoyfulRook
May 24th, 2005, 04:07 PM
Is Justin(Wiccan) eligable for stoning?I don't think so.

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 04:07 PM
You have heard of GMBS (I think that's what it was)? It was what they used to call AIDS.
aka ......"Gay cancer"

fool
May 24th, 2005, 04:07 PM
It undermines the family unit as well.
perhaps their families
I don't see how it hurts mine

Justin (Wiccan)
May 24th, 2005, 04:08 PM
:shocked: I don't want to know about it.

DH, the most "scandalous" behavior I witnessed were some of the complaints about the quality of the coffee. (Believe me, the coffee deserved every word of it ... someone had left it percolating all night.) These people not only new I was a straight, they new me as a person, and not one of them would have dreamed of making a pass.

Of course, there's also the fact that my wife is known as somewhat posessive. :chuckle: She's a red-head ... and let me tell you, it's NOT false advertizing!

Justin (Wiccan)
May 24th, 2005, 04:10 PM
:vomit:

Robin, I've never had a harsh word for you before, but perhaps you should re-think your rather crude comment. These people would no more make love in public than you would with your husband.

fool
May 24th, 2005, 04:10 PM
aka ......"Gay cancer"
homo activity donen't cause AIDS

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 04:11 PM
perhaps their families
I don't see how it hurts mine
Oh...I see.........."as long as it doesn't affect me, then hey.....whatever floats their boat."

It's a moral decision....stand for something fool or you'll fall for anything!

fool
May 24th, 2005, 04:12 PM
It's a moral decision....stand for something fool or you'll fall for anything!
thats why I'm an atheiest
I don't just fall for anything

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 04:15 PM
homo activity donen't cause AIDS
No? Since when? Since it became PIC to point the finger at gays?

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 04:16 PM
thats why I'm an atheiest
I don't just fall for anything
sure you do.....
your wisdom comes from mortal men....not God.

But then again, your screen name is fool...........

fool
May 24th, 2005, 04:24 PM
sure you do.....
your wisdom comes from mortal men....not God.
.
so does yours

fool
May 24th, 2005, 04:27 PM
No? Since when? Since it became PIC to point the finger at gays?
since ever
AIDS is a virus
heteros get it to
people who've had tainted blood tranfusions
health care workers who've been stuck by needles
two homos who don't have it can homo it up their whole lives and not produce any AIDS

Justin (Wiccan)
May 24th, 2005, 04:35 PM
I've lost two people to AIDS--one a friend I met after infection, the other a hero I never met, but always admired. You've all heard of Ryan White, and I've no doubt that most of you have heard of Dr. Isaac Asimov. Both were infected by blood transfusion.

If HIV is a judgement against homosexuals--as many of you imply--then God's got some lousy aim.

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 04:38 PM
homo activity donen't cause AIDS



No? Since when? Since it became PIC to point the finger at gays?

The Human Imunnodefficiency Virus (which is a retrovirus) is spread when the virus comes in contact with a specific white blood cell called a T-cell. Small numbers of this T-cell are found in the blood and large numbers are found lining the rectum. They seem to be a defense against the types of bacteria that result from digestion of solid material.

HIV can be spread from intravenous drug use, blood transfusions, and any sexual activity. But it has a greater rate of infection amongst those who engage in anal sex, and a those who use intravenous needles. This is because of the greater likelihood of the virus being exposed to a T-Cell.

Interestingly enough there is quite a bit of evidence being compiled that suggests a link between retroviruses and horizontal gene transfer. Research is currently being done to see if this is related to the greater rates of cervical cancer found in women who have HPV and/or herpes.

I'm not quite sure how a direct relationship between "sinful" behavior and diseases caused by retroviruses can be supported.

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 04:44 PM
AIDS is not a "judgement from God" against homos any more than Lung Cancer is a judgement against smokers. AIDS is simply a natural consequence of a perverted lifestyle that almost certainly got started because some pevert thought it would be cool to have sex with a monkey. :vomit:
As for non-homos the chances of straight men (for example) of getting Breast Cancer (which does happen) is greater than their chances of getting AIDS.
Further, every single case of AIDS was caused directly or indirectly by contact with a homo. Either the infected person is a homo or they got blood (or some other body fluid) from a homo into their blood stream. NOT A SINGLE CASE OF AIDS HAS EVER BEEN DOCUMENTED TO HAVE BEEN CAUSED IN ANY OTHER WAY.
There can be no doubt about it, AIDS is a homo disease. Recriminalize homoism and execute those who violate the law against being a homo, and you will save thousands, perhaps millions of lives, not to mention a society.

Resting in Him,
Clete

fool
May 24th, 2005, 04:52 PM
AIDS is not a "judgement from God" against homos any more than Lung Cancer is a judgement against smokers. AIDS is simply a natural consequence of a perverted lifestyle that almost certainly got started because some pevert thought it would be cool to have sex with a monkey. :vomit:
As for non-homos the chances of straight men (for example) of getting Breast Cancer (which does happen) is greater than their chances of getting AIDS.
Further, every single case of AIDS was caused directly or indirectly by contact with a homo. Either the infected person is a homo or they got blood (or some other body fluid) from a homo into their blood stream. NOT A SINGLE CASE OF AIDS HAS EVER BEEN DOCUMENTED TO HAVE BEEN CAUSED IN ANY OTHER WAY.
There can be no doubt about it, AIDS is a homo disease. Recriminalize homoism and execute those who violate the law against being a homo, and you will save thousands, perhaps millions of lives, not to mention a society.

Resting in Him,
Clete
will you cast the first stone?

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 04:54 PM
AIDS is not a "judgement from God" against homos any more than Lung Cancer is a judgement against smokers. AIDS is simply a natural consequence of a perverted lifestyle that almost certainly got started because some pevert thought it would be cool to have sex with a monkey. :vomit:
As for non-homos the chances of straight men (for example) of getting Breast Cancer (which does happen) is greater than their chances of getting AIDS.
Further, every single case of AIDS was caused directly or indirectly by contact with a homo. Either the infected person is a homo or they got blood (or some other body fluid) from a homo into their blood stream. NOT A SINGLE CASE OF AIDS HAS EVER BEEN DOCUMENTED TO HAVE BEEN CAUSED IN ANY OTHER WAY.
There can be no doubt about it, AIDS is a homo disease. Recriminalize homoism and execute those who violate the law against being a homo, and you will save thousands, perhaps millions of lives, not to mention a society.

Resting in Him,
Clete

If your going to have the government in everyones bedroom, then you could just force them to use condoms or not have sex at all. This would cost the government less than execution, and it would save the lives of the millions of future victims of the disease. It would also allow all of you "fundamentalists" to beat these fags over the head with the Bible until it made an impression. ;)

Justin (Wiccan)
May 24th, 2005, 04:57 PM
AIDS is simply a natural consequence of a perverted lifestyle that almost certainly got started because some pevert thought it would be cool to have sex with a monkey.

Oh, please! HIV came into the human population sometime in the 1950s, probably from the Bush Meat trade.


Further, every single case of AIDS was caused directly or indirectly by contact with a homo. Either the infected person is a homo or they got blood (or some other body fluid) from a homo into their blood stream. NOT A SINGLE CASE OF AIDS HAS EVER BEEN DOCUMENTED TO HAVE BEEN CAUSED IN ANY OTHER WAY.

Clete, the "GaŽtan Dugas/Patient Zero" myth was debunked years ago when we found out just how long HIV can be carried asymptomatically. Read and be enlightened. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_myths_and_urban_legends)

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 04:59 PM
I'm not quite sure how a direct relationship between "sinful" behavior and diseases caused by retroviruses can be supported.
One way is to look at cultures which have laws against sodomy. The more strictly such laws are enforced the lower the occurance of AIDS in that culture.

Resting in Him,
Clete

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 05:05 PM
One way is to look at cultures which have laws against sodomy. The more strictly such laws are enforced the lower the occurance of AIDS in that culture.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Yes, and societies that didn't have cars, had no occurrences of death caused by automobile accidents. Currently those that have more public transporation available have fewer deaths from car accidents. I would go so far to say that if we outlawed personal transportation altogether we would lower occurences of death caused by transportation.

Which one of these do you think we should legislate?

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 05:06 PM
Oh, please! HIV came into the human population sometime in the 1950s, probably from the Bush Meat trade.
Several programs I've seen, including one NOVA program by PBS (very PC) which traced down the very first AIDS carrier, disagree with you.


Clete, the "GaŽtan Dugas/Patient Zero" myth was debunked years ago when we found out just how long HIV can be carried asymptomatically. Read and be enlightened. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_myths_and_urban_legends)
I never mentioned anything about a patient zero until this post. I think it has been repeatedly confirmed that HIV is a human form of the same well known virus found in monkey populations in Africa. And HIV isn't the first STD which finds its origins in animal population, including dogs, chickens, and sheep. This is why God commands that those who commit bestiality should be executed and the animal destroyed.

Resting in Him,
Clete

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 05:09 PM
Several programs I've seen, including one NOVA program by PBS (very PC) which traced down the very first AIDS carrier, disagree with you.


I never mentioned anything about a patient zero until this post. I think it has been repeated confirmed that HIV is a human form of the same well known virus found in monkey populations in Africa. And HIV isn't the first STD which finds its origins in animal population, including dogs, chickens, and sheep. This is why God commands that those who commit bestiality should be executed and the animal destroyed.

Resting in Him,
Clete

What should we do when a person is bitten by a mosquito carrying the West Nile virus?

Actually it is not the same virus. But it is very similar. The evidence suggest that a mutation of the simeon virus found a foot hold in human populations or visa verse. They are not sure how long AIDS has been around in isolated parts of Africa. There is some evidence that it existed many years before Europeans became concerned with the disease.

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 05:11 PM
Yes, and societies that didn't have cars, had no occurrences of death caused by automobile accidents. Currently those that have more public transporation available have fewer deaths from car accidents. I would go so far to say that if we outlawed personal transportation altogether we would lower occurences of death caused by transportation.

Which one of these do you think we should legislate?
Thank you for at least admitting that homos kill people.

Cars and various other forms a public transportation save far more lives than they destroy. With the advent of cars, people have much easier access to health care from much further distances than was conceivable before cars were invented. And the economic stimulus that cars provide increase a people's standard of living in more ways than can be counted which also dramatically increase both life expectancy and qualify of life. There is no comparison between the automobile and homos they are closer to being opposites than anything else, especially when comparing their impact on a society.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 05:12 PM
What should we do when a person is bitten by a mosquito carrying the West Nile virus?
Execute the mosquito immediately and as many of it's family members as we can find. :rolleyes:

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 05:18 PM
Actually it is not the same virus. But it is very similar. The evidence suggest that a mutation of the simeon virus found a foot hold in human populations or visa verse. They are not sure how long AIDS has been around in isolated parts of Africa. There is some evidence that it existed many years before Europeans became concerned with the disease.
I didn't say it was the same virus, I said it was a human form of the virus. It definately is not the exact same, I didn't mean to imply that it was.

Resting in Him,
Clete

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 05:24 PM
Thank you for at least admitting that homos kill people.
Cars and various other forms a public transportation save far more lives than they destroy.


Evidence please?

Also I admitted that public transporation was safer. I was referring to personal transportation vehicles.

So please limit your evidence to these.



With the advent of cars, people have much easier access to health care from much further distances than was conceivable before cars were invented.


Most of that has been from ambulances and EMT vehicles. This is not personal transportation. In fact lives are lost all the time by those bringing someone to the hospital as opposed to just calling an ambulance.



And the economic stimulus that cars provide increase a people's standard of living in more ways than can be counted which also dramatically increase both life expectancy and qualify of life. There is no comparison between the automobile and homos they are closer to being opposites than anything else, especially when comparing their impact on a society.

Well then could you imagine the economic stimulus to law enforcement and home surveilance if we monitored everybodies sex life?

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 05:32 PM
I didn't say it was the same virus, I said it was a human form of the virus. It definately is not the exact same, I didn't mean to imply that it was.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Well yes but there is no way to tell, because of the series of events involved, whether humans infected monkeys or monkeys infected humans. Or Whether the common ancestor of both forms or both forms have been around for thousands of years. Your use of this as evidence against homosexuality is not logicall.

And I thought a "fundamentalist" Christian such as yourself should be more logical than people from any other belief system. :idea:

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 05:36 PM
Evidence please?

Also I admitted that public transporation was safer. I was referring to personal transportation vehicles.

So please limit your evidence to these.
How about if I give evidence that you are stupid?


Most of that has been from ambulances and EMT vehicles. This is not personal transportation. In fact lives are lost all the time by those bringing someone to the hospital as opposed to just calling an ambulance.
Ambulances wouldn't exist if not for private stansportation. Neither would hospitals, or nearly all of the medical equipment that is in hospitals all of which is used by doctors who arrive at the hospital thanks to their personally owned cars and all of which were delievers in trucks which were driven by people who also got to their job via their own personal cars who can afford them because they have that job which wouldn't exist if the economy which was created by the personal automobile didn't exist.
This is the last time I will address this idiotic, off topic issue. It has exactly nothing to do with the thread and a comparison is not valid in any reasonable manner. I'm losing IQ points for even entertaining the argument.


Well then could you imagine the economic stimulus to law enforcement and home surveilance if we monitored everybodies sex life?
If you want to continue the discussion (which I don't think I do, so I won't mind if you bow out) then you will refrain from such idiotic nonsense in the future. It cracks me up how fast idiots like yourself resort to such stupidity once you run out of substance. :chuckle:

Resting in Him,
Clete

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 05:41 PM
How about if I give evidence that you are stupid?


Ambulances wouldn't exist if not for private stansportation. Neither would hospitals, or nearly all of the medical equipment that is in hospitals all of which is used by doctors who arrive at the hospital thanks to their personally owned cars and all of which were delievers in trucks which were driven by people who also got to their job via their own personal cars who can afford them because they have that job which wouldn't exist if the economy which was created by the personal automobile didn't exist.
This is the last time I will address this idiotic, off topic issue. It has exactly nothing to do with the thread and a comparison is not valid in any reasonable manner. I'm losing IQ points for even entertaining the argument.


If you want to continue the discussion (which I don't think I do, so I won't mind if you bow out) then you will refrain from such idiotic nonsense in the future. It cracks me up how fast idiots like yourself resort to such stupidity once you run out of substance. :chuckle:

Resting in Him,
Clete

Ah yes everything you offer is pure substance. And the things that I offer lack substance because you do not agree with me. I think your statments lack substance because you do not carry your own logic through when it undermines your argument. But you bring tangental ideas into the logic when it supports your argument.

Ah the double standard. :BRAVO:

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 05:45 PM
Well yes but there is no way to tell, because of the series of events involved, whether humans infected monkeys or monkeys infected humans. Or Whether the common ancestor of both forms or both forms have been around for thousands of years. Your use of this as evidence against homosexuality is not logicall. And I thought a "fundamentalist" Christian such as yourself should be more logical than people from any other belief system. :idea:
Look, I'm not making this stuff up as I go. I'm not employed by the CDC and I don't have a collection of monkey blood samples that I have personally tested to see if what I've been told is the truth. I can, however, read and I watch programs like NOVA and the Discovery channel I think that those folks who do work for the CDC know a bit more about it than you do. I don't beleive everything I read or hear but what I've heard on this issue seems pretty credible to me especially since these programs and magazines are all extremely politically correct and do not have a motive to lie about such things.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 05:47 PM
Ah yes everything you offer is pure substance. And the things that I offer lack substance because you do not agree with me. I think your statments lack substance because you do not carry your own logic through when it undermines your argument. But you bring tangental ideas into the logic when it supports your argument.

Ah the double standard. :BRAVO:

I respond in kind. What I have said that is not substantive prior to your idiotic nonsense?
Nothing!

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 05:49 PM
So, noguru.....AIDS debate aside, how can you support the idea that homosexuality is designed?

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 06:12 PM
Look, I'm not making this stuff up as I go. I'm not employed by the CDC and I don't have a collection of monkey blood samples that I have personally tested to see if what I've been told is the truth. I can, however, read and I watch programs like NOVA and the Discovery channel I think that those folks who do work for the CDC know a bit more about it than you do. I don't beleive everything I read or hear but what I've heard on this issue seems pretty credible to me especially since these programs and magazines are all extremely politically correct and do not have a motive to lie about such things.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Well I don't think the CDC has this sort of information. I have seen the speculations you posted circulating in various sources, and I have seen the educational TV programs on this issue, and I did not conclude the same as you from these same sources.

So who is closer to the truth?

You with your certainty about the origins of HIV. Or me with the idea that it is not as certain as you would have us believe.

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 06:18 PM
So, noguru.....AIDS debate aside, how can you support the idea that homosexuality is designed?

Well I don't support the idea "That homosexuality is designed.". I'm not sure how you got that idea. Is it just because I do not agree with Clete's certainty on the relationship of the origins of HIV, monkeys, and homosexuals? Or is it because I do not think that homosexual's should be executed?

I was just trying to clear up some misconceptions about the issue of HIV and its relationship to homosexual behavior. And of course, Clete will never admit that he is confused or uncertain, about the specific details of his "socio-political party's" propaganda.

At any rate, neither do I condone the practice. I have major objections to the lifestyle for other reasons than "It is the cause of HIV". But I don't think I would go so far as executing the sexually confused people involved. But perhaps I am being "Nicer than God", as many of the fundamentalists here would have me believe. :confused:

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 06:19 PM
I respond in kind. What I have said that is not substantive prior to your idiotic nonsense?
Nothing!

Everything, starting from your first response on this thread. :doh:

Clete
May 24th, 2005, 06:51 PM
Everything, starting from your first response on this thread. :doh:

Right! Onto the ignore list you go!

See ya! :wave2:

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 07:10 PM
Well I don't support the idea "That homosexuality is designed.". I'm not sure how you got that idea. Is it just because I do not agree with Clete's certainty on the relationship of the origins of HIV, monkeys, and homosexuals? Or is it because I do not think that homosexual's should be executed?

I was just trying to clear up some misconceptions about the issue of HIV and its relationship to homosexual behavior. And of course, Clete will never admit that he is confused or uncertain, about the specific details of his "socio-political party's" propaganda.

At any rate, neither do I condone the practice. I have major objections to the lifestyle for other reasons than "It is the cause of HIV". But I don't think I would go so far as executing the sexually confused people involved. But perhaps I am being "Nicer than God", as many of the fundamentalists here would have me believe. :confused:
How about that it advances the spread of HIV?

BTW...this thread is about the question of homosexuality .....was it designed? Not about HIV or AIDS, God's punishment or the death penalty.

Stick to the subject............

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 07:21 PM
How about that it advances the spread of HIV?

That is a problem. Do you think the solution is executing gays?


[QUOTE=Agape4Robin]
BTW...this thread is about the question of homosexuality .....was it designed? Not about HIV or AIDS, God's punishment or the death penalty.

Stick to the subject............

OK. But I wasn't the first to go off on a tangent from this topic. Sometimes tangental information can help clarify things. And the information I offered helps clarify the issues surrounding homosexuality and the spread of HIV. Something that you have just showed concern about in this thread.

Why don't you follow your own advice and stick to the topic as well, Robin? :kookoo:

Or do you hold to a double standard as well?

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 07:23 PM
[QUOTE=Agape4Robin]How about that it advances the spread of HIV?

That is a problem. Do you think the solution is executing gays?




OK. But I wasn't the first to go off on a tangent from this topic. Sometimes tangental information can help clarify things. And the information I offered helps clarify the issues surrounding homosexuality and the spread of HIV. Something that you have just showed concern about.

Why don't you follow your own advice and stick to the topic as well, Robin? :kookoo:
Great advice! :rolleyes:

Homosexuality.....designed by God or not?

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 07:34 PM
[QUOTE=noguru]
Great advice! :rolleyes:

Homosexuality.....designed by God or not?

I do not think that the kind of homosexuality practiced by the adult human homosexual culture was designed by God. Although, from my studies in behavioral biology I have seen much evidence that homosexual acts are not limited to the human species. However, this type of homosexuality among other species is more like some humans do when experimenting during adolescence.

Also, I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that homosexuality is genetically based. There may be circumstances where some of the factors involved are congenital.

justchristian
May 24th, 2005, 07:34 PM
Not. I've made my case (see page 1)

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 07:43 PM
Well then, we seem to be in agreement.....not designed by God.

Next!

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 07:47 PM
So robin, do you think that homosexuals should be executed?

Would your opinion on this change depending on the answer to the question of this thread?

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 07:49 PM
Well then, we seem to be in agreement.....not designed by God.

Next!

Do you only discuss things with people you don't agree with?

Or are your discussions only designed to convince people that do not agree with you?

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 07:52 PM
So robin, do you think that homosexuals should be executed?

Would your opinion on this change depending on the answer to the question of this thread?
Point one.....death? NO. I'll leave the judging to God in that respect. It's sad that homos who remain in the lifestyle don't realize the perfect will God has for them.....

Point two......what??!! :dizzy:

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 07:57 PM
Point one.....death? NO. I'll leave the judging to God in that respect. It's sad that homos who remain in the lifestyle don't realize the perfect will God has for them.....

Point two......what??!! :dizzy:

Well your answer to question one nullifies the logical significance of question two. See how easy the answer to some questions are when we leave them in the hands of God. If we had try to use empirical evidence to decide whether or not to execute gays based on the specifics of each case, judging them from our human perspective would get very confusing.

Again, we are in agreement.

Agape4Robin
May 24th, 2005, 07:59 PM
Well your answer to question one nullifies the logical significance of question two. See how easy some questions are when we leave them in the hands of God.

Again, we are in agreement.
:think: :chuckle:

noguru
May 24th, 2005, 09:51 PM
Right! Onto the ignore list you go!

See ya! :wave2:

Cool thanks. Can't take what you dish out, hah. :chuckle:

And I noticed you bad repped me also. You started the insults, I stayed within the bounds of politeness. You put me on the ignore list and bad repped me.

I guess one could say you're a sore loser.

SteveG.
May 24th, 2005, 10:19 PM
All humans are born with a proclivity toward "sin", that is, a propensity to do things that are selfish,
destructive,unproductive, etc. This proclivity includes a propensity for sexual deviation, e.g. homosexuality, bisexuality, etc. Human behavior is largely, and to an unknown extent, governed and/or influenced by our biology (read: brains/glands etc.) To what degree is alcoholism, drug addtiction, violent tendencies, envy, hate, and other "sins" controlled or influenced by our genetic make-up? We don't and may never fully know. But science has unveiled evidence that strongly supports a biological connection and influence in the area of human sexuality and other behaviors.
I've written all this to make the point that our human proclivities, be they soulish or biological or both in origin and expression, in and of themselves aren't "sinful". However, the acting out of the impulse, whatever the origin, is the responsibility of the individual and must eventually be answered for. This is how one can view the homosexual orientation as a product of our fallen, imperfect physical and spiritual natures but not be "sinful" in and of itself until it has been acted upon. Those of us of a sound mind have the ability to control or at least greatly modify our behaviors, regardless of nature or nuture. God no more "programmed" sexual deviation into our species than he "programmed" cancer, heart disease or dementia. All of these things are the unavoidable products of our physical and spiritual evolution.

Lighthouse
May 24th, 2005, 10:19 PM
I find it interesting that God is considered male, has no female counterpart, and is a designer.

Kind of makes you go hmmm.
:rolleyes:

Lighthouse
May 24th, 2005, 11:15 PM
Point one.....death? NO. I'll leave the judging to God in that respect.
You don't think God has already judged that they should be executed?

justchristian
May 24th, 2005, 11:21 PM
Just curious Lighthouse, what do you make of the whole let he who is without sin cast the first stone?

Lighthouse
May 25th, 2005, 01:00 AM
I see that those who brought the woman to Jesus were in sin in that exact moment by bringing her to Him, in the first place. Especially since they didn't bring the man, as well.

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 05:17 AM
will you cast the first stone?

I missed this yesterday!

Yes! If given the legal apportunity I wouldn't hesitate to participate in the execution of capital criminals, especially if that criminal had in some way victimized my family. That having been said however, with such laws in place, there would almost certainly never come the opportunity to do so. A death penalty with teeth is a remarkably effective deterant to crime.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 06:41 AM
Cool thanks. Can't take what you dish out, hah. :chuckle:

And I noticed you bad repped me also. You started the insults, I stayed within the bounds of politeness. You put me on the ignore list and bad repped me.

I guess one could say you're a sore loser.
Oh yes, "sore loser", the cry of all idiots who wouldn't know a sound argument if it bit them in the butt. You're so pathetic it's almost funny.

I give bad rep to those who are intellectually dishonest and/or stupid and/or whatever else I feel is deserving of bad rep, that's what rep points are about. You are as good an example of what makes TOL as agonizing as it is fun as anyone I can think of off the top of my head and so you get bad rep, and as much of it as I can give (which isn't enough in this case).

Also, I did indeed put you on my ignore list, or at least I thought I did, but I can still see your posts! :think:

I guess I'll have to try again! :wave2:

Resting in Him,
Clete

Granite
May 25th, 2005, 06:51 AM
I missed this yesterday!

Yes! If given the legal apportunity I wouldn't hesitate to participate in the execution of capital criminals, especially if that criminal had in some way victimized my family. That having been said however, with such laws in place, there would almost certainly never come the opportunity to do so. A death penalty with teeth is a remarkably effective deterant to crime.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Talk is cheap.

Although on the other hand personally participating in the execution of someone who's harmed my family would definitely not keep me up nights.

Granite
May 25th, 2005, 06:51 AM
Cool thanks. Can't take what you dish out, hah. :chuckle:

And I noticed you bad repped me also. You started the insults, I stayed within the bounds of politeness. You put me on the ignore list and bad repped me.

I guess one could say you're a sore loser.

Careful.

They're watching...:noid:

Greywolf
May 25th, 2005, 07:34 AM
Posted in error.

Caille
May 25th, 2005, 08:33 AM
I see that those who brought the woman to Jesus were in sin in that exact moment by bringing her to Him, in the first place. Especially since they didn't bring the man, as well.



So, in your little world, if they had brought the man also, Jesus would have been at the front of the line, chucking rocks at them?

JoyfulRook
May 25th, 2005, 08:36 AM
I find it interesting that God is considered male, has no female counterpart, and is a designer.

Kind of makes you go hmmm.Actually it kind of makes me go: Huh? Is this guy a homo or somthing?


Then I remmember that :beanboy: posted it.

beanieboy
May 25th, 2005, 08:39 AM
Actually it kind of makes me go: Huh? Is this guy a homo or somthing?


Then I remmember that :beanboy: posted it.

It was only meant as a joke.
And was probably out of line. "I'm thinking starsss, I'm thinking greens and blues...."
There are many a gay designer.

But it is curious, isn't it?
That there is a (in human terms) Heavenly Father, but no Heavenly Mother.
Well, Mary, but I don't know if that counts.

In Gen., God even creates a man, and after a while, the man is lonely, so he creates a woman.

But there is no procreation from God.
He creates with no female counterpart. There is no "female" aspect of God.
And the woman was in response to the man.
And Matthew 1 lists the lineology, but it's, again, all men, not a family tree.

I've never really understood that about Christianity.

JoyfulRook
May 25th, 2005, 08:43 AM
That there is a (in human terms) Heavenly Father, but no Heavenly Mother.
Well, Mary, but I don't know if that counts. Catholics are into that with Mary, but having a Queen of Heaven, is mostly pagan.

beanieboy
May 25th, 2005, 08:48 AM
Catholics are into that with Mary, but having a Queen of Heaven, is mostly pagan.

But why is that?
Why is there no "female" counterpart to God, if "one man/one woman is so sacred, and "there is no male or female in Christ"? If I'm not mistaken, there is no male/female sex in heaven.

So, why is God considered male?
Why is their no female complement to God?
Why did God start out with Adam, and not make Adam and Eve in a pair?

JoyfulRook
May 25th, 2005, 08:51 AM
But why is that?
Why is there no "female" counterpart to God, if "one man/one woman is so sacred, and "there is no male or female in Christ"? If I'm not mistaken, there is no male/female sex in heaven.

So, why is God considered male?
Why is their no female complement to God?
Why did God start out with Adam, and not make Adam and Eve in a pair?Adam was made in God's image. Then when Adam got lonely, God decided to make Eve, in slightly different image.

beanieboy
May 25th, 2005, 08:54 AM
Adam was made in God's image. Then when Adam got lonely, God decided to make Eve, in slightly different image.

But the original "design" was one man.

Interesting, no?

Then the design changes, to one man and one woman.

justchristian
May 25th, 2005, 11:37 AM
Genesis 1:27 So God created man (human being) in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.


God created human beings in his image, male and female. The image of God is male and female.

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 12:02 PM
Genesis 1:27 So God created man (human being) in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.


God created human beings in his image, male and female. The image of God is male and female.
This is incorrect. The image of God has little or nothing to do with gender except from a symbolic stand point. This error comes from a propensity to create God in our image rather than trying to understand that we are made in His. God has personality, intelligence, independent will, emotions, etc and God is spiritual and triune as well. It is in these ways that we are made in God's image. God is not physical He is a Spirit (Jesus has a physical body but that is a separate issue) and so gender in its literal physical sense is meaningless in reference to God. God is masculine but He is not a male, if you get my meaning. In other words, He is in a position of authority which all created things should and will submit themselves too just as a wife should submit herself to her husband.

Resting in Him,
Clete

P.S. I think you (Beanieboy) have asked a descent question but I resent the implication that God is somehow a homo. I will not continue this conversation if such a idea can even possibly be inferred by anything else you say on this thread. You complain that you don't get straight answers from Christians on this site and so I have tried to give you one but I will not tolerate such blasphemy, intentional or otherwise.

JoyfulRook
May 25th, 2005, 12:05 PM
P.S. I think you (Beanieboy) have asked a descent question but I resent the implication that God is somehow a homo. I will not continue this conversation if such a idea can even possibly be inferred by anything else you say on this thread. You complain that you don't get straight answers from Christians on this site and so I have tried to give you one but I will not tolerate such blasphemy, intentional or otherwise.That's the way I feel too.

nancy
May 25th, 2005, 12:06 PM
I don't know about finding "gay genes", but it is conceivable that a person would be inclined to homosexual behavior. This is obvious through hormones that physical makeup could. You could argue that a person could be inclined to be an alcoholic by nature and its only through the use of reason that you can overcome this weakness.

justchristian
May 25th, 2005, 12:07 PM
gender in its literal physical sense is meaningless in reference to God.

I agree but men and women (in general) are different beyond he physical. Wht do you think it means to be created in the image of God?

beanieboy
May 25th, 2005, 12:13 PM
I think it is our ability to love

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 12:14 PM
I agree but men and women (in general) are different beyond he physical. What do you think it means to be created in the image of God?

While it is true that men and women are different beyond the physical, it is also true that Eve was created from Adam and that those differences were likely either non-existent traits or were collectively present within Adam before Eve was made.
As for what I think it means to be created in the image of God, I answered that in the previous post. We are spiritual, triune (body, soul, spirit), emotional, intelligent, willful, etc.

Resting in Him,
Clete

JoyfulRook
May 25th, 2005, 12:25 PM
it is conceivable that a person would be inclined to homosexual behavior.We are all inclined to sinful behavior because of the lusts of the flesh.

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 12:36 PM
I don't know about finding "gay genes", but it is conceivable that a person would be inclined to homosexual behavior. This is obvious through hormones that physical makeup could. You could argue that a person could be inclined to be an alcoholic by nature and its only through the use of reason that you can overcome this weakness.

Is it "conceivable"? Sure, or else you couldn't have formulated the question. Does that happen? That would be a more germane question. I think the evidence clearly shows that it does not. There is exactly zero evidence that there is any genetic component to homoism. On the contrary, the evidence shows clearly that homoism is a result of the sexual abuse of children. In effect, homos reproduce by molesting children. Most homos do not molest children but nearly of them had been molested themselves before the age of eight by a member of the same sex. If there were no homos, there would be no child molestation and vise-versa (generally speaking). This is less true for fomos (female homos) than it is for regular homos but the point is, they aren't born that way. It is a perversion that destroys lives by the millions and it should be recriminalized as soon as possible.

Resting in Him,
Clete

beanieboy
May 25th, 2005, 12:39 PM
Is it "conceivable"? Sure, or else you couldn't have formulated the question. Does that happen? That would be a more germane question. I think the evidence clearly shows that it does not. There is exactly zero evidence that there is any genetic component to homoism. On the contrary, the evidence shows clearly that homoism is a result of the sexual abuse of children. In effect, homos reproduce by molesting children. Most homos do not molest children but nearly of them had been molested themselves before the age of eight by a member of the same sex. If there were no homos, there would be no child molestation and vise-versa (generally speaking). This is less true for fomos (female homos) than it is for regular homos but the point is, they aren't born that way. It is a perversion that destroys lives by the millions and it should be recriminalized as soon as possible.

Resting in Him,
Clete

I was never molested. Most people I know were never molested.
But that is your response to someone who was molested as a kid? Execution as an adult?

JoyfulRook
May 25th, 2005, 12:41 PM
But that is your response to someone who was molested as a kid?That's like executing the victim of a rape. Of course not. If they continued in homosexual behavior then they would be executed.

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 12:50 PM
I was never molested. Most people I know were never molested.
But that is your response to someone who was molested as a kid? Execution as an adult?

I very simply do not believe you, although I don't necessarily think you are lying. To make such a claim is essentially the same as an emphysema patient claiming that they were never exposed to cigarette smoke. Does it happen? Sure, but not very damn often. Chances are you were indeed molested and perhaps do not remember the assault.
Either way, most children who are molested do not become homos (thank God!). And so no, you don't punish a person for being a victim of a violent crime. The abuse only sets them up for falling into the homo lifestyle by confusing their minds and emotions at such a fragile and formative time in their lives. It is only if they choose to become a homo themselves that they should be executed. In other words, molestation is not a direct cause like flipping a switch causes electricity to flow through a light bulb. Molestation is merely the primary contributing factor.

Resting in Him,
Clete

noguru
May 25th, 2005, 04:02 PM
Oh yes, "sore loser", the cry of all idiots who wouldn't know a sound argument if it bit them in the butt. You're so pathetic it's almost funny.

So you say. I guess God will be the judge of that. Since I feel exactly the same about you.




I give bad rep to those who are intellectually dishonest and/or stupid and/or whatever else I feel is deserving of bad rep, that's what rep points are about. You are as good an example of what makes TOL as agonizing as it is fun as anyone I can think of off the top of my head and so you get bad rep, and as much of it as I can give (which isn't enough in this case).

So what is it am I intellectually dishonest, am I stupid, or is it that you just feel I am
deserving?

Well I haven't given you any bad rep points, because I respect the fact that you might disagree with me.

I know it must be agonizing to take yourself so seriously as a compensation for your lack of logical aptitude.



Also, I did indeed put you on my ignore list, or at least I thought I did, but I can still see your posts! :think:)

Actually putting me on your ignore list fits your character. Keep your head in the sand Clete. Then we can all see how cowardly and foolish you are.



I guess I'll have to try again! :wave2::)

So I guess your not going to show us your evidence that makes the CDC certain that HIV started from a gay person having sex with a monkey. :shocked:

Agape4Robin
May 25th, 2005, 04:10 PM
This is incorrect. The image of God has little or nothing to do with gender except from a symbolic stand point. This error comes from a propensity to create God in our image rather than trying to understand that we are made in His. God has personality, intelligence, independent will, emotions, etc and God is spiritual and triune as well. It is in these ways that we are made in God's image. God is not physical He is a Spirit (Jesus has a physical body but that is a separate issue) and so gender in its literal physical sense is meaningless in reference to God. God is masculine but He is not a male, if you get my meaning. In other words, He is in a position of authority which all created things should and will submit themselves too just as a wife should submit herself to her husband.

Resting in Him,
Clete

P.S. I think you (Beanieboy) have asked a descent question but I resent the implication that God is somehow a homo. I will not continue this conversation if such a idea can even possibly be inferred by anything else you say on this thread. You complain that you don't get straight answers from Christians on this site and so I have tried to give you one but I will not tolerate such blasphemy, intentional or otherwise.
Well said, Clete!!!! :BRAVO:
Just what I have tried to say. In everything there is order. For example, a lion is an animal, but it has power over the antelope. Wait....where am I going with this? :doh: Scratch that.
The order as God designed it goes like this; God, Man, woman, child. Or in a family order; God, husband, wife and children. In a (Godly) business; God, boss or senior, employee.
In a national (Godly) order; God, President, Legislators, judicials, then citizens. That's not exhaustive, but you get the idea.

Jukia
May 25th, 2005, 04:13 PM
Is it "conceivable"? Sure, or else you couldn't have formulated the question. Does that happen? That would be a more germane question. I think the evidence clearly shows that it does not. There is exactly zero evidence that there is any genetic component to homoism. On the contrary, the evidence shows clearly that homoism is a result of the sexual abuse of children. In effect, homos reproduce by molesting children. Most homos do not molest children but nearly of them had been molested themselves before the age of eight by a member of the same sex. If there were no homos, there would be no child molestation and vise-versa (generally speaking). This is less true for fomos (female homos) than it is for regular homos but the point is, they aren't born that way. It is a perversion that destroys lives by the millions and it should be recriminalized as soon as possible.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Got any citations to this "evidence"?

Jukia
May 25th, 2005, 04:15 PM
I'll bet that most kids who are molested wind up heterosexual, or to be consistent, hetero.

Agape4Robin
May 25th, 2005, 04:21 PM
I'll bet that most kids who are molested wind up heterosexual, or to be consistent, hetero.
:rolleyes: :nono:

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 05:04 PM
Got any citations to this "evidence"?

Yes.

Here is a old thread of mine with some info. (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16057)

I have more but its all in boxes and I don't have the time to dig through the attic to find them. They aren't difficult to find though. Most homo publications are proud to spout the evidence of their own perversion. You have to learn to look past the spin (which isn't difficult either) but the point is that if you want to find this sort of thing out, it isn't hard.

Resting in Him,
Clete

servent101
May 25th, 2005, 05:23 PM
This is worth repeating - there was no response - it is so important to understand this post
All in all sin is trying to do something good - but falling short, or missing the target. The concept of sin as portrayed concerning homosexuality is simply a non-beneficial prognosis that more or less entraps a person to sin continually.

What is beneficial to all of us, is to live in harmony with the Universe, which takes every fiber of our being, with nothing held back - so lust is what? - lust is wanting to show and receive pleasure, but have we not been duped in believing that this activity of lusting will actually bring the pleasure we desire? I think so anyways, that lust is simply a distraction, something that keeps us from being able to focus and concentrate, and it also keeps us from viewing the opposite sex, or the same sex with pure intent. I personally do not make a big deal out of it though, and it is easy to get rid of if one is not inflicted with a guilt trip over one's lust. There are consequences to our behavior, consequences that cause us pain, and the pain is only there because if we cannot be motivated by good sense - what is the best, then we can either look around us and see other people doing certain things, and see what happens to them, or we can endure the pain ourselves, which is sometimes so severe that we do not recover, and we loose the "body" that we are presently in.

Anyways - yes God did make us this way, it is by Divine Design that if we do not seek a Spiritual Divine Connection with the "Cosmos" or God or some form of Spirituality that we seek something else, something less perfect, and that seeking something less perfect is missing the mark or falling short - other wise known as sin.

With Christ's Love

Servent101

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 05:32 PM
I'll bet that most kids who are molested wind up heterosexual, or to be consistent, hetero.

Umm, I think I already said that. Yeah! Yeah I did! Here's the quote....

From post 123

Either way, most children who are molested do not become homos (thank God!). And so no, you don't punish a person for being a victim of a violent crime. The abuse only sets them up for falling into the homo lifestyle by confusing their minds and emotions at such a fragile and formative time in their lives.


Resting in Him,
Clete

Agape4Robin
May 25th, 2005, 05:43 PM
This is worth repeating - there was no response - it is so important to understand this post

With Christ's Love

Servent101
Servent 101........
Your quote from WW.....is laughable! How would she know Christ? She hasn't met Him! And for you to quote her.... :chuckle:

Perhaps you have not met Christ either? :think:

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 05:56 PM
Anyways - yes God did make us this way, it is by Divine Design that if we do not seek a Spiritual Divine Connection with the "Cosmos" or God or some form of Spirituality that we seek something else, something less perfect, and that seeking something less perfect is missing the mark or falling short - other wise known as sin.

Your thinking this worth repeating is what landed you the reputation you have.

I know I'm going to regret asking this question but here goes nothing...

By what authority do you make the above quoted definition of sin?
It certainly isn't Biblical. Did you just make this up yourself, did your god tell you, were you visited by hyper-intelligent, pan-dimensional beings that manifest in this existence as little white mice or what?

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete
May 25th, 2005, 05:59 PM
Servent 101........
Your quote from WW.....is laughable! How would she know Christ? She hasn't met Him! And for you to quote her.... :chuckle:

Perhaps you have not met Christ either? :think:

That quote was from Wickwoman! :doh:

No wonder! :hammer:

Lighthouse
May 26th, 2005, 03:01 AM
Clete-
Were most fomos molested by males? I know one who was.

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 05:50 AM
Clete-
Were most fomos molested by males? I know one who was.
No I don't think so. They usually had a father who was either absent for no good reason (i.e. he wasn't away at war or killed fighting a fire or anything like that, he just left because he was a slime ball) or was very emotionally distant and usually harshly abusive in other ways. Chances are the father had wanted a son and treated his daughter as much like a boy as possible and probably did things that made his daughter think that there was something wrong with being a girl and that it was her fault that she wasn't a boy.
I honestly don't remember what the deal is with the mothers of fomos but I seem to recall that there were major disfuctions happening in the mother-daughter relationship as well, I'll have to look it up. But no, I don't recall reading anything that said the fomos are usually victims of sexual abuse as children. Emotional abuse is present to be sure, but not necessarily sexual, at least not nearly to the degree that sexual abuse is present in the childhood of their male counterparts.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Nineveh
May 26th, 2005, 07:40 AM
In personal experience, that is what I have seen from fomos, dysfunctional families (no father, abusive mother). Within their fomo relationship itself, a high degree of emotional and physical abuse. In one instance there was a highly abusive preceding marriage/divorce at an extremely young age as well.

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 08:09 AM
In personal experience, that is what I have seen from fomos, dysfunctional families (no father, abusive mother). Within their fomo relationship itself, a high degree of emotional and physical abuse. In one instance there was a highly abusive preceding marriage/divorce at an extremely young age as well.
You really hit the nail on the head with this sentence.
I don't know if this is still the case but at one time domestic violence was the #1 killer of fomos. All the lezbos were killing each other off! Obviously there is a lot of anger and frustration in the hearts of fomos. It would be sad if they weren't such perverts.

On a personal note, I found it surprising to find out the degree to which women define their femininity based on their relationship with their father. As a father of two daughters myself, I found that to be a sobering thought and it brought a different light to my responsibilities as a father and a husband. It really is true that I strive to be a great daddy to my daughters by being a great husband to my wife. I think that one thing is a primary key issue in the proper raising of children. It is also an issue that goes overlooked all too often in this society.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Poly
May 26th, 2005, 08:27 AM
You really hit the nail on the head with this sentence.
I don't know if this is still the case but at one time domestic violence was the #1 killer of fomos. All the lezbos were killing each other off! Obviously there is a lot of anger and frustration in the hearts of fomos. It would be sad if they weren't such perverts.

On a personal note, I found it surprising to find out the degree to which women define their femininity based on their relationship with their father. As a father of two daughters myself, I found that to be a sobering thought and it brought a different light to my responsibilities as a father and a husband. It really is true that I strive to be a great daddy to my daughters by being a great husband to my wife. I think that one thing is a primary key issue in the proper raising of children. It is also an issue that goes overlooked all too often in this society.

Resting in Him,
Clete

POTD (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=770863#post770863)

fool
May 26th, 2005, 09:14 AM
what's a "fomo"?

Zakath
May 26th, 2005, 09:17 AM
what's a "fomo"?
I believe it's a nickname, popularized here, designating a female homosexual, i.e. a lesbian.

fool
May 26th, 2005, 09:19 AM
I believe it's a nickname, popularized here, designating a female homosexual, i.e. a lesbian.
thanks Zak the evolution was so smooth I missed the transitional type

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 09:23 AM
thanks Zak the evolution was so smooth I missed the transitional type

:chuckle: That's funny! :chuckle:

nancy
May 26th, 2005, 03:15 PM
Clete, the physical makup is just one factor that could be a cause of homosexuality. Of, course there are psychological and environmental factors as well, but we know hormones play into our sexual roles.

JoyfulRook
May 26th, 2005, 03:19 PM
Clete, the physical makup is just one factor that could be a cause of homosexuality. Of, course there are psychological and environmental factors as well, but we know hormones play into our sexual roles.Lust of the flesh is problem. Sin is the problem. Not physical makeup.

fool
May 26th, 2005, 03:29 PM
Lust of the flesh is problem. Sin is the problem. Not physical makeup.
I can understand lust
but how do you explain a male lusting after another male when the vast majority lust after females?
seems like some people are just wired diferent

JoyfulRook
May 26th, 2005, 03:34 PM
but how do you explain a male lusting after another male when the vast majority lust after females?
seems like some people are just wired diferentSin. People hate God. Whatever God says not to do, people do.

I mean, seriously. Who would actually want to have sex with an animal? It's disgusting! It's the flesh.

fool
May 26th, 2005, 03:40 PM
Sin. People hate God. Whatever God says not to do, people do.

I mean, seriously. Who would actually want to have sex with an animal? It's disgusting! It's the flesh.
I really don't think the homos are doing it to spite God
besides other species get "confused" to

Jukia
May 26th, 2005, 03:42 PM
Sin. People hate God. Whatever God says not to do, people do.

I mean, seriously. Who would actually want to have sex with an animal? It's disgusting! It's the flesh.

So I take it that all those people on here who claim to love God never sin. And those of us who do sin hate God by your definition? Must be nice to be perfect.

JoyfulRook
May 26th, 2005, 03:42 PM
besides other species get "confused" toNo. Not really.

fool
May 26th, 2005, 03:43 PM
No. Not really.
yes really

JoyfulRook
May 26th, 2005, 03:44 PM
So I take it that all those people on here who claim to love God never sin. I never said that.

And those of us who do sin hate God by your definition? No. Some people sin just to do something wrong.

Must be nice to be perfect.It is. :rolleyes:

JoyfulRook
May 26th, 2005, 03:44 PM
yes really:nono:

fool
May 26th, 2005, 03:51 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Homosexuality_in_animals
do animals hate God?
do animals sin?

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 05:18 PM
Clete, the physical makeup is just one factor that could be a cause of homosexuality. Of, course there are psychological and environmental factors as well, but we know hormones play into our sexual roles.
Our sexual identity is usually cemented in (for the most part) by the time we are 9 years old. This is why NABLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) has the slogan, "Sex before eight or it's too late!" Make no mistake about it, homo pedophiles know very well how to turn kids into homos and child molesters. They know, and they use that knowledge to their political advantage by intentionally trying to create as many of their perverted kind as they can so as to gain political power in hopes of making their perversion legal as the homos have already succeeded in doing.
Mark my words, the age of consent will be progressively lowered, first abroad and then in California and then in the rest of the nation. It will happen because there is simply nothing to stop it from happening. This country has now degraded to a point that it is no longer governed by a code of laws but by the whim of the majority. No law is permanent, including constitutional law and so there is simply nothing standing in the way of the pedophiles making it legal to have sex with anyone whom they can convince to give consent to it except for the current social stigma that is attached to the behavior, which can and will easily be eroded away in time.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Agape4Robin
May 26th, 2005, 05:28 PM
Our sexual identity is usually cemented in (for the most part) by the time we are 9 years old. This is why NABLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) has the slogan, "Sex before eight or it's too late!" Make no mistake about it, homo pedophiles know very well how to turn kids into homos and child molesters. They know, and they use that knowledge to their political advantage by intentionally trying to create as many of their perverted kind as they can so as to gain political power in hopes of making their perversion legal as the homos have already succeeded in doing.
Mark my words, the age of consent will be progressively lowered, first abroad and then in California and then in the rest of the nation. It will happen because there is simply nothing to stop it from happening. This country has now degraded to a point that it is no longer governed by a code of laws but by the whim of the majority. No law is permanent, including constitutional law and so there is simply nothing standing in the way of the pedophiles making it legal to have sex with anyone whom they can convince to give consent to it except for the current social stigma that is attached to the behavior, which can and will easily be eroded away in time.

Resting in Him,
Clete
:noway: :noid:

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 05:28 PM
Fool,

Homosexuality in animals is a myth; it does not happen, ever! There may be the occasional animal who is so set on having sex that he goes for the first thing he sees, but that isn't what homoism is. The animal is not attracted by members of the same gender and therefore seeks out such sexual encounters; that just simply does not happen in the animal kingdom. And even if it did, such animals could not reproduce and therefore such oddities would be weeded out naturally. But even given that, I don't believe that there has ever been a single case of an animal which consistently sought out sexual encounters with members of its same gender. Such behavior is definitely a myth propagated by homos who know intuitively that they are perverts and are looking for any reason at all to say that they are not.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Agape4Robin
May 26th, 2005, 05:30 PM
Fool,

Homosexuality in animals is a myth; it does not happen, ever! There may be the occasional animal who is so set on having sex that he goes for the first thing he sees, but that isn't what homoism is. The animal is not attracted by members of the same gender and therefore seeks out such sexual encounters; that just simply does not happen in the animal kingdom. And even if it did, such animals could not reproduce and therefore such oddities would be weeded out naturally. But even given that, I don't believe that there has ever been a single case of an animal which consistently sought out sexual encounters with members of its same gender. Such behavior is definitely a myth propagated by homos who know intuitively that they are perverts and are looking for any reason at all to say that they are not.

Resting in Him,
Clete
:BRAVO: :BRAVO: :BRAVO: :BRAVO:

Jukia
May 26th, 2005, 05:31 PM
Fool,

Homosexuality in animals is a myth; it does not happen, ever! There may be the occasional animal who is so set on having sex that he goes for the first thing he sees, but that isn't what homoism is. The animal is not attracted by members of the same gender and therefore seeks out such sexual encounters; that just simply does not happen in the animal kingdom. And even if it did, such animals could not reproduce and therefore such oddities would be weeded out naturally. But even given that, I don't believe that there has ever been a single case of an animal which consistently sought out sexual encounters with members of its same gender. Such behavior is definitely a myth propagated by homos who know intuitively that they are perverts and are looking for any reason at all to say that they are not.

Resting in Him,
Clete
Really? I have 3 dogs, 1 male 2 females, none neutered. We keep the male away from the females when they are in heat but on occasion the female not in heat will mount the female in heat. So explain that please, seems like behavior that could be called homosexual, does it not?

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 05:33 PM
Really? I have 3 dogs, 1 male 2 females, none neutered. We keep the male away from the females when they are in heat but on occasion the female not in heat will mount the female in heat. So explain that please, seems like behavior that could be called homosexual, does it not?
Do you really think that your dogs are sexually attracted to one another? Give me a break. :kookoo:

Jukia
May 26th, 2005, 05:34 PM
Do you really think that your dogs are sexually attracted to one another? Give me a break. :kookoo:
I am just reporting what I have seen. If the male was mounting the female in heat would you not consider Noah (the dog's name) attracted to Maggie (one of the females).

fool
May 26th, 2005, 05:44 PM
Fool,

Homosexuality in animals is a myth; it does not happen, ever! There may be the occasional animal who is so set on having sex that he goes for the first thing he sees, but that isn't what homoism is. The animal is not attracted by members of the same gender and therefore seeks out such sexual encounters; that just simply does not happen in the animal kingdom. And even if it did, such animals could not reproduce and therefore such oddities would be weeded out naturally. But even given that, I don't believe that there has ever been a single case of an animal which consistently sought out sexual encounters with members of its same gender. Such behavior is definitely a myth propagated by homos who know intuitively that they are perverts and are looking for any reason at all to say that they are not.

Resting in Him,
Clete
did you read the link ?
here it is again
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Homosexuality_in_animals

noguru
May 26th, 2005, 06:26 PM
Our sexual identity is usually cemented in (for the most part) by the time we are 9 years old. This is why NABLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) has the slogan, "Sex before eight or it's too late!" Make no mistake about it, homo pedophiles know very well how to turn kids into homos and child molesters. They know, and they use that knowledge to their political advantage by intentionally trying to create as many of their perverted kind as they can so as to gain political power in hopes of making their perversion legal as the homos have already succeeded in doing.
Mark my words, the age of consent will be progressively lowered, first abroad and then in California and then in the rest of the nation. It will happen because there is simply nothing to stop it from happening.


Just to dispel any notion that I am debating unfairly; Clete chose to ignore my posts. I did not choose to ignore his.

First off, pedophilia will never be accepted by the majority. Just as homosexuality is not. The reason that pedophilia is illegal is that pedopilia is using ones power over another (that of an adult over a child) for sexual contact. Homosexuality is not illegal because and only when it is between two consulting adults. What is also so disturbing, and the reason why pedophilia exacts harsher judgement and sentences than sexual harrasment, is that it is a decisively heinous abuse of a child which leaves livelong emotional scars.

As far as I know, there is no conclusive evidence that psychologically links homosexuality with pedophilia. There is however, a logical connection with sexual harrassment. At any rate, If the nation should choose to lower the consenting age for sex then it certainly would not fall below 16. As it already is in some states. Historically, this is actually a few years older than past accepted ages for marriage.

I wonder what makes Clete think that the nation will legislate lower and lower ages of sexual consent? I have neither heard nor seen any evidence that this is or will be a trend. And I think there is plenty stopping this from happening. Namely every reasonable adult in this country.



This country has now degraded to a point that it is no longer governed by a code of laws but by the whim of the majority. No law is permanent, including constitutional law and so there is simply nothing standing in the way of the pedophiles making it legal to have sex with anyone whom they can convince to give consent to it except for the current social stigma that is attached to the behavior, which can and will easily be eroded away in time.


The people decide the representatives to the executive, legislative and indirectly the judicial offices of this country. This is a form of democracy.

I believe that homosexuality is wrong but prosecuting it is a greater infringement on the two consenting adults right to privacy. This is only a change in the interpretation of the Constitution that has changed for the better. There have been other interpretational shifts and amendments that have occured since the start of this nation. Many changes to our laws, like giving the write to vote to people other than land owners, and considering blacks as people and not property..... have been apart of this shift in our socio-political paradigm.

I think that Clete would like to dipense of our current form of democracy, and replace it with a theocracy. In this theocracry the only people in power (the first class citizens of this country) would be those who share Clete's specific socio-religious and political paradigm.

noguru
May 26th, 2005, 06:42 PM
Fool,

Homosexuality in animals is a myth; it does not happen, ever! There may be the occasional animal who is so set on having sex that he goes for the first thing he sees, but that isn't what homoism is. The animal is not attracted by members of the same gender and therefore seeks out such sexual encounters; that just simply does not happen in the animal kingdom. And even if it did, such animals could not reproduce and therefore such oddities would be weeded out naturally. But even given that, I don't believe that there has ever been a single case of an animal which consistently sought out sexual encounters with members of its same gender. Such behavior is definitely a myth propagated by homos who know intuitively that they are perverts and are looking for any reason at all to say that they are not.

Resting in Him,
Clete

This paragraph is very misleading. Whether or not an act is hetero or homo is decided by the gender of the two involved. To claim that one knows for certain the mind set and motivation of an animal in regard to a sex act is bordering on delusional.

Also if a human was driven by the same motivation that Clete claims animals are driven by, then I am pretty sure that Clete would still consider that "homoism". Or at least it seems to qualify for the Biblical defintion (when a man lies with another man as a man lies with a woman). Which says nothing about motivation. It only describes the act.

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 06:58 PM
I am just reporting what I have seen. If the male was mounting the female in heat would you not consider Noah (the dog's name) attracted to Maggie (one of the females).
Not in the way I am attracted to my wife, no. This is rediculous. Your dogs are not enamoured with one another. They are driven by instinct to reproduce via sexual behavior it is not at all the same thing as lusting after someone.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 07:04 PM
did you read the link ?
here it is again
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Homosexuality_in_animals

Yes, I read the link. You are being lied too, fool; the odd (perhaps trained) behavior of a handful of captive birds not withstanding. The last paragraph is proof enough for me that they are lying; perhaps intentionally and at minimum they are propagating false information. The population of homos even in societies which accept them on the whole is nowhere even close to 10%. It's closer to 2% and no more than 4%. The 10% myth has been proven fallacious many times. Whoever wrote this article is either a homo or got his information from a homo or is just really poorly informed.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Agape4Robin
May 26th, 2005, 07:38 PM
I read the article too and almost laughed when it said that (paraphrasing here) "to a lesser extent Islam is against homos......." (compared to christianity and judaism)

Are you kidding me??!!!!!! They not only think its ok to kill a homo, they actually do it!!

fool
May 26th, 2005, 08:05 PM
Yes, I read the link. You are being lied too, fool; the odd (perhaps trained) behavior of a handful of captive birds not withstanding. The last paragraph is proof enough for me that they are lying; perhaps intentionally and at minimum they are propagating false information. The population of homos even in societies which accept them on the whole is nowhere even close to 10%. It's closer to 2% and no more than 4%. The 10% myth has been proven fallacious many times. Whoever wrote this article is either a homo or got his information from a homo or is just really poorly informed.

Resting in Him,
Clete
the article didn't talk about just birds
and even if "It's closer to 2% and no more than 4%" then the point still stands that it does manifest itself in other species.
and if you maintain that Wikipedia is "poorly informed" could you please direct me to a more "informed" encyclopedia?

fool
May 26th, 2005, 08:11 PM
I read the article too and almost laughed when it said that (paraphrasing here) "to a lesser extent Islam is against homos......." (compared to christianity and judaism)

Are you kidding me??!!!!!! They not only think its ok to kill a homo, they actually do it!!
You have not adressed the premise that homosexuality manifests itself in other species
you have only admited that different cultures deal with it in different ways
read the whole article about homosexuality and you will see that some cultures make allowence for it and seem no worse off.

noguru
May 26th, 2005, 08:43 PM
the article didn't talk about just birds
and even if "It's closer to 2% and no more than 4%" then the point still stands that it does manifest itself in other species.
and if you maintain that Wikipedia is "poorly informed" could you please direct me to a more "informed" encyclopedia?

How could he do that? He ignores anything that might shatter his view of reality. And he wants you to as well.

noguru
May 26th, 2005, 08:47 PM
You have not adressed the premise that homosexuality manifests itself in other species
you have only admited that different cultures deal with it in different ways
read the whole article about homosexuality and you will see that some cultures make allowence for it and seem no worse off.

Well you see Agape4Robin or Ain'tGonnaListen is Clete's little lap dog. She is going to follow Clete's example of pointing out irrelevant errors in the text. As opposed to confronting the logic of the argument

fool
May 26th, 2005, 08:52 PM
Well you see Agape4Robin or Ain'tGonnaListen is Clete's little lap dog. She is going to follow Clete's example of pointing out irrelevant errors in the text. As opposed to confronting the logic of the argument
thanks noguru
fool will keep trying
that's what fools do

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 08:59 PM
the article didn't talk about just birds
and even if "It's closer to 2% and no more than 4%" then the point still stands that it does manifest itself in other species.
It does not manifest itself in other species. You're buying a lie.
The 2-4% figure is in the human population where being a homo is actually possible. It is precisely ZERO in the animal population. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN because it cannot happen. You cannot even show that animals understand what they are doing much less that they have an understanding of gender. There is simply no way for an animal to be a homo regardless of what they may accidently be tricked into doing by whatever means.


and if you maintain that Wikipedia is "poorly informed" could you please direct me to a more "informed" encyclopedia?
On this issue, just about any of them would have to be better. The writer of that article is very clearly either biased or misinformed.

Resting in Him,
Clete

fool
May 26th, 2005, 09:02 PM
It does not manifest itself in other species. You're buying a lie.
The 2-4% figure is in the human population where being a homo is actually possible. It is precisely ZERO in the animal population. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN because it cannot happen. You cannot even show that animals understand what they are doing much less that they have an understanding of gender. There is simply no way for an animal to be a homo regardless of what they may accidently be tricked into doing by whatever means.


On this issue, just about any of them would have to be better. The writer of that article is very clearly either biased or misinformed.

Resting in Him,
Clete
inform me

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 09:08 PM
I read the article too and almost laughed when it said that (paraphrasing here) "to a lesser extent Islam is against homos......." (compared to christianity and judaism)

Are you kidding me??!!!!!! They not only think its ok to kill a homo, they actually do it!!
Good point! Although it should be pointed out that they do so some times in an unjust manner. That's a separate issue though, I bring it up just to point out that even though they are very unjust in many of their punishments and jurice prudence, they nevertheless reap the benefits of those parts of their law which is just. As a consequences of their swift and public execution of homos, their societies have no AIDS, and no child molestation (which translates to very few homos ever being found in their society to begin with). In addition their strict (again sometime unjustly so) laws against adultry reap the consequences of virtually no divorce, teen suicide is unheard of as is teen pregnancy, and on and on and on. Such far reaching ramifications of individual and very simply laws is proof of their validity and just nature.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 09:09 PM
inform me

No.

fool
May 26th, 2005, 09:11 PM
Good point! Although it should be pointed out that they do so some times in an unjust manner. That's a separate issue though, I bring it up just to point out that even though they are very unjust in many of their punishments and jurice prudence, they nevertheless reap the benefits of those parts of their law which is just. As a consequences of their swift and public execution of homos, their societies have no AIDS, and no child molestation (which translates to very few homos ever being found in their society to begin with). In addition their strict (again sometime unjustly so) laws against adultry reep the consequences of virtually no divorce, teen suicide is unheard of as is teen pregnancy, and on and on and on. Such far reaching ramifications of individual and very simply laws is proof of their validity and just nature.

Resting in Him,
Clete
could you link us to this info please?

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 09:11 PM
No.

Actually, I already did!

fool
May 26th, 2005, 09:12 PM
No.
thank you for your time

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 09:13 PM
could you link us to this info please?

No. Find it yourself. It isn't hard if you try.


I suspect you don't care anyway.

fool
May 26th, 2005, 09:14 PM
Actually, I already did!
this fool must have missed it could you do it again for me and our audiance?

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 09:18 PM
thank you for your time

I'm sure it was quite wasted on you. However, there are others here who might find what I've said worthwhile.

By the way, if you do decide to try to inform yourself more on the actual facts of this issue, I recommend staying away from Google. All you'll find with it is the stuff that people with money are willing to pay to have you find (like Wickopedia for example).
Get creative and use the mind God gave you for something besides a hat rack. The truth is findable if you are willing to see it and to really look for it.


Proverbs 8:17
I love those who love me, And those who seek me diligently will find me.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 09:19 PM
this fool must have missed it could you do it again for me and our audiance?
Post 173 and just about every other post I've made on this thread.

fool
May 26th, 2005, 09:55 PM
I'm sure it was quite wasted on you. However, there are others here who might find what I've said worthwhile.

By the way, if you do decide to try to inform yourself more on the actual facts of this issue, I recommend staying away from Google. All you'll find with it is the stuff that people with money are willing to pay to have you find (like Wickopedia for example).
Get creative and use the mind God gave you for something besides a hat rack. The truth is findable if you are willing to see it and to really look for it.


Proverbs 8:17
I love those who love me, And those who seek me diligently will find me.

Resting in Him,
Clete
I corinthians 3;18-19
Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world,
let him become a fool, that he might be wise.
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

Clete
May 26th, 2005, 10:02 PM
I corinthians 3;18-19
Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world,
let him become a fool, that he might be wise.
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
:thumb:

fool
May 26th, 2005, 10:06 PM
It does not manifest itself in other species. You're buying a lie.
The 2-4% figure is in the human population where being a homo is actually possible. It is precisely ZERO in the animal population. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN because it cannot happen. You cannot even show that animals understand what they are doing much less that they have an understanding of gender. There is simply no way for an animal to be a homo regardless of what they may accidently be tricked into doing by whatever means.


On this issue, just about any of them would have to be better. The writer of that article is very clearly either biased or misinformed.

Resting in Him,
Clete
this post is your evidence that it dosen't happen with other species?

wholearmor
May 26th, 2005, 11:27 PM
The unnamed designer coded for random homosexual expression?

I wonder how many prisoners who would never have committed homosexual acts outside of prison commit them inside prison.

Jukia
May 27th, 2005, 05:59 AM
Not in the way I am attracted to my wife, no. This is rediculous. Your dogs are not enamoured with one another. They are driven by instinct to reproduce via sexual behavior it is not at all the same thing as lusting after someone.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Really? Then you have never seen 125 pound Noah, the dog, attempting to get to a female in heat. Comes as close to animal lust as I want to be around.
And we are not "driven by instinct to reproduce via sexual behavior"?

Jukia
May 27th, 2005, 06:04 AM
Get creative and use the mind God gave you for something besides a hat rack. The truth is findable if you are willing to see it and to really look for it.

[


Clete: Problem with trying to use my mind for something other than a hat rack is that when I do that I come up with information that seems to contradict what you and many others here seem to say. How can that be?

Clete
May 27th, 2005, 08:49 AM
Clete: Problem with trying to use my mind for something other than a hat rack is that when I do that I come up with information that seems to contradict what you and many others here seem to say. How can that be?
Because fool took your first choice of screen names?


Proverbs 1:20Wisdom calls aloud outside;
She raises her voice in the open squares.
21She cries out in the chief concourses,[b]
At the openings of the gates in the city
She speaks her words:
22"How long, you simple ones, will you love simplicity?
For scorners delight in their scorning,
And fools hate knowledge.
23Turn at my rebuke;
Surely I will pour out my spirit on you;
I will make my words known to you.
24Because I have called and you refused,
I have stretched out my hand and no one regarded,
25Because you disdained all my counsel,
And would have none of my rebuke,
26I also will laugh at your calamity;
I will mock when your terror comes,
27When your terror comes like a storm,
And your destruction comes like a whirlwind,
When distress and anguish come upon you.
28"Then they will call on me, but I will not answer;
They will seek me diligently, but they will not find me.
29Because they hated knowledge
And did not choose the fear of the LORD,
30They would have none of my counsel
And despised my every rebuke.
31Therefore they shall eat the fruit of their own way,
And be filled to the full with their own fancies.
32For the turning away of the simple will slay them,
And the complacency of fools will destroy them;
33But whoever listens to me will dwell safely,
And will be secure, without fear of evil."

Resting in Him,
Clete

fool
May 27th, 2005, 09:03 AM
Huh?

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 09:07 AM
It does not manifest itself in other species. You're buying a lie.
The 2-4% figure is in the human population where being a homo is actually possible. It is precisely ZERO in the animal population. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN because it cannot happen. You cannot even show that animals understand what they are doing much less that they have an understanding of gender. There is simply no way for an animal to be a homo regardless of what they may accidently be tricked into doing by whatever means.


I don't know, I've seen dogs that will hump anything that moves :noway:

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 09:14 AM
And actually what you said about animals not understanding what they're doing, and having no concept of gender is actually a good argument for animal gayness, because they just will try to mate with anything and not understand what they're doing. I guess the human differnce is that humans can try to repress their desires if they're gay.

fool
May 27th, 2005, 09:15 AM
the wikipedia article mentioned that the penquins mated for life and raised an adopted egg together
they had been using a rock befor that
I realize that Clete thinks it's made up
but I've heard of this before
suppose any source I find will just be dimissed by someone who's mind is made up

fool
May 27th, 2005, 09:23 AM
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html
try this

fool
May 27th, 2005, 09:24 AM
or just type "gay animals" into your google bar

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 01:40 PM
Yeah, I'm not even sure why some christians don't believe gay animals exist.

Since most christians see gayness as wrong, and apparently some see it as a strictly human phenomenon, than I guess murdering your children is strictly a human phenomenon as well...(of course we all know it DOES happen in the animal kingdom)

So my point is animal gayness shouldn't even be a problem for christians. Just because an animal does something doesn't make it standard, common, or OK for humans to do.

beanieboy
May 27th, 2005, 01:44 PM
Well, the argument is pointless.

They tell you that it doesn't happen in nature, so there is proof.
You show them that it does happen in nature, and they contradict themselves, and argue that we are not animals.

People believe what they want to believe.

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 01:54 PM
yeah, the argument that it doesn't happen in nature can almost be considered anti-christian since it equates human activity with animal activity, and turns humans into just another animal

fool
May 27th, 2005, 02:36 PM
yeah, the argument that it doesn't happen in nature can almost be considered anti-christian since it equates human activity with animal activity, and turns humans into just another animal
unfortunatly we are animals
and I think that it's the hieght of bigotry to channel so much hate at people who are born a certain way
I don't understand it personally but the fact that it's present in the animal kingdom should go to show that it's not just hate for God, or love of sin that make homos homo
at the very least, in this day and age, we should try to treat the homos like human beings and put away all this talk of execution

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 02:46 PM
unfortunatly we are animals
and I think that it's the hieght of bigotry to channel so much hate at people who are born a certain way
I don't understand it personally but the fact that it's present in the animal kingdom should go to show that it's not just hate for God, or love of sin that make homos homo
at the very least, in this day and age, we should try to treat the homos like human beings and put away all this talk of execution

yeah i agree with putting the execution behind us, and I'm not really sure being homo is something you choose to do, i mean how can you choose a hairy smelly dude over a woman of your own free will, and not be born into that ;)

fool
May 27th, 2005, 02:48 PM
yeah i agree with putting the execution behind us, and I'm not really sure being homo is something you choose to do, i mean how can you choose a hairy smelly dude over a woman of your own free will, and not be born into that ;)
exactly

wholearmor
May 27th, 2005, 04:23 PM
Y'all skipped over this post:


I wonder how many prisoners who would never have committed homosexual acts outside of prison commit them inside prison.

wholearmor
May 27th, 2005, 04:24 PM
yeah i agree with putting the execution behind us, and I'm not really sure being homo is something you choose to do, i mean how can you choose a hairy smelly dude over a woman of your own free will, and not be born into that ;)

So is it of their own free will or are they born into it?

fool
May 27th, 2005, 05:23 PM
So is it of their own free will or are they born into it?
Wholearmor; I think we've shown that there can be a predisposition to it.
so the question is now what?
what should these people do?
live a lie, or stay celibate,
and why your answering that question
answer this
why do you get to decide?

fool
May 27th, 2005, 05:25 PM
Y'all skipped over this post:
I wonder that to

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 05:40 PM
Y'all skipped over this post:

I didn't see that, but that's a good question, although I'm pretty sure most prisoners into that kind of thing are into it for power, not sexual pleasure. They do it to keep those around them in line, I mean it's not like they're doing it out of "love."

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 05:46 PM
So is it of their own free will or are they born into it?

It's certainly not of their free will in that one day someone says "I'm going to start having sex with men." I don't think someone just wakes up one day and says "i'm going to stop being attracted to girls and start seducing men."

Yes, I think that some are born into it, but I'm not entirely sure. And the argument that gays are molested to become gay isn't much different from being gay genetically, both are external forces that they have no control over, the only difference is that someone who is genetically gay wouldn't be able to change.

Funny thing is, one of the principal assumptions of christianity is that humans are born into sin, and that we're born knowing how to cheat, lie, steal etc. I'm not sure why an exception is made for gays, and it is claimed that they choose to be gay (as opposed to being born into it....like just about every other sin)

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 05:48 PM
i guess it all goes back to the old nature/nurture debate

Clete
May 27th, 2005, 05:49 PM
Wholearmor; I think we've shown that there can be a predisposition to it.

When did you ever show that?!

beefalobilly
May 27th, 2005, 05:56 PM
When did you ever show that?!

Tell me what you think about some of my thoughts on the subject that i've posted. My mind isn't really set on the subject, so tell me where you disagree with my thoughts.

fool
May 27th, 2005, 06:45 PM
When did you ever show that?!
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-02,GGLD:en&q=gay+animals

Clete
May 27th, 2005, 11:48 PM
It's certainly not of their free will in that one day someone says "I'm going to start having sex with men." I don't think someone just wakes up one day and says "i'm going to stop being attracted to girls and start seducing men."
You're right of course. Homos are made by molesting children (primarily). The resulting confusion left in the mind of a child leads to the perversion. This can be avoided and usually is but the point here is that what makes someone into a homo begins at a very early age. This is part of the reason why they universally report having always felt the way they do and thus believe that they were born that way.


Yes, I think that some are born into it, but I'm not entirely sure.
They cannot have been born that way. God commands the death penalty for being a homo. If they were born that way such a penalty would be unjust. God is not unjust thus believing that they are born that way is incompatible with being a Christian.


And the argument that gays are molested to become gay isn't much different from being gay genetically, both are external forces that they have no control over, the only difference is that someone who is genetically gay wouldn't be able to change.
There is a lot more to it than simply having been molested or else all molestation victims would become homosexual which the majority do not. Molestation is the primary contributing factor but is still only that, a contributing factor. The perverted lifestyle must still be chosen and acted upon by the individual.
There are similar major contributing factors that occur during the childhood rapists as well. Do you suppose that they should be excused because those factors were out of their control? I certainly don't. The point being obvious, just as the rapist does not have to commit his crime; neither does the homo have to commit his.


Funny thing is, one of the principal assumptions of Christianity is that humans are born into sin, and that we're born knowing how to cheat, lie, steal etc. I'm not sure why an exception is made for gays, and it is claimed that they choose to be gay (as opposed to being born into it....like just about every other sin)
This doesn't even make any sense. Are you suggesting that we excuse those who steal because they were born into it? Is that what you are getting at? If not, what in the world was your point here? It makes no sense at all. :confused:

Resting in Him,
Clete

beefalobilly
May 28th, 2005, 12:30 AM
They cannot have been born that way. God commands the death penalty for being a homo. If they were born that way such a penalty would be unjust. God is not unjust thus believing that they are born that way is incompatible with being a Christian.


Using this logic then, wouldn't also the concept of hell be incompatible with being a christian? After all, "the wages of sin is death." The penalty for all sin is death, none of us are righteous. That means we all deserve hell, and some will meet their end there because they were born into sin and never repented. Is this unjust as well?




This doesn't even make any sense. Are you suggesting that we excuse those who steal because they were born into it? Is that what you are getting at? If not, what in the world was your point here? It makes no sense at all. :confused:

Resting in Him,
Clete

Looking back on the post I made I can see how it doesn't make sense. I'm not suggesting we excuse those who steal at all. What I was trying to say was that we're all born with a sin nature, and I'm pretty sure most christians believe that. We're born with a sin nature so that we tend to lie, steal, cheat whatever. No one teaches us how to do that. We don't need external forces to teach us how to do such things.

"Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

And so I'm not sure why it's so adament for christians that gayness be a result of external forces but other sins are a result of a natural sin nature. If humans are allowed to go naturally then they will go down the path of sin, and yet it's argued that gayness is un-natural (these two concepts contradict each other).

If sin is the natural nature of humanity, then gayness would also be for certain people (i don't assume that all humans have the same struggles with the same sins), and the argument that gayness is wrong because "it's unnatural" is invalid because naturally some people would tend towards gayness, and un-naturally they would tend towards being straight.

Clete
May 28th, 2005, 12:57 AM
Using this logic then, wouldn't also the concept of hell be incompatible with being a christian? After all, "the wages of sin is death." The penalty for all sin is death, none of us are righteous. That means we all deserve hell, and some will meet their end there because they were born into sin and never repented. Is this unjust as well?

Romans 5:14-16
14Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man's offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification.
No one will go to Hell because of Adam's sin. Christ made sure of that on the cross. If anyone goes to Hell it's because they chose to reject God. God is not unjust, period.


Looking back on the post I made I can see how it doesn't make sense. I'm not suggesting we excuse those who steal at all. What I was trying to say was that we're all born with a sin nature, and I'm pretty sure most Christians believe that. We're born with a sin nature so that we tend to lie, steal, cheat whatever. No one teaches us how to do that. We don't need external forces to teach us how to do such things.
I agree that this is a common Christian belief but it has no bearing on the issue of this thread.


"Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

And so I'm not sure why it's so adamant for Christians that gayness be a result of external forces but other sins are a result of a natural sin nature. If humans are allowed to go naturally then they will go down the path of sin, and yet it's argued that gayness is un-natural (these two concepts contradict each other).
So again, should we not execute the murderer because he was conceived in sin? This argument of yours just doesn't make any sense.


If sin is the natural nature of humanity, then gayness would also be for certain people (i don't assume that all humans have the same struggles with the same sins), and the argument that gayness is wrong because "it's unnatural" is invalid because naturally some people would tend towards gayness, and un-naturally they would tend towards being straight.
Being a homo is wrong because it kills people, lots of them. It also erodes a society from its base and leads to anarchy. If you swiftly execute people who commit such crimes, you will save millions of lives.
Besides, when someone says that being a homo is unnatural it is obviously in reference to the common sense notion that a male and female go together 'naturally'. What homos do, they are not designed to do, it is therefore "unnatural". It has nothing to do with original sin or the sin nature, that's a completely different issue altogether.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Lighthouse
May 28th, 2005, 01:03 AM
So I take it that all those people on here who claim to love God never sin. And those of us who do sin hate God by your definition? Must be nice to be perfect.
:rolleyes:

The only perfection any of us have is Christ.

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."

-1 John 1:8

justchristian
May 28th, 2005, 01:28 AM
Being a homo is wrong because it kills people, lots of them. It also erodes a society from its base and leads to anarchy.
Could you possibly explain why?

Lighthouse
May 28th, 2005, 01:57 AM
beefalobilly said that his dog humps anything that moves. Does that mean his dog lusts after everything that moves?:rolleyes: Does a dog who humps the couch lust after couches?:rolleyes:

Animals who "hump*" other animals are doing one thing, and one thing only... they are exerting dominance.

*When sexual reproduction is not the purpose.

Ninjashadow
May 28th, 2005, 02:01 AM
Could you possibly explain why?

AIDS spread because of gays and AIDS is definately a killer. If gay marriage is allowed, what's next? Polygamy? Pedophilia? Beastiality? Where does it end?

Lighthouse
May 28th, 2005, 02:19 AM
Where does it end?
Judgmentr Day.;)

Ninjashadow
May 28th, 2005, 02:20 AM
Judgmentr Day.;)

Touche.

But I think you got my point.

Lighthouse
May 28th, 2005, 02:40 AM
:D

fool
May 28th, 2005, 07:42 AM
AIDS spread because of gays and AIDS is definately a killer. If gay marriage is allowed, what's next? Polygamy? Pedophilia? Beastiality? Where does it end?
AIDS is spread by alot of people
Pedophilia involves people to young to understand what's happening and give concent
beastiality happens all the time kinda hard to get the victim to talk
Polygamy, what's wrong with that?

beefalobilly
May 28th, 2005, 08:49 AM
beefalobilly said that his dog humps anything that moves. Does that mean his dog lusts after everything that moves?:rolleyes: Does a dog who humps the couch lust after couches?:rolleyes:

Animals who "hump*" other animals are doing one thing, and one thing only... they are exerting dominance.

*When sexual reproduction is not the purpose.

Well that comment was a joke, although if you look at prison gayness, that's about dominance too, so is that ok? Rape, whether homo or hetero, is about dominance not pleasure..

ThePhy
May 28th, 2005, 09:26 AM
Why is it that the question of whether God ďdesignedĒ homosexuality (that is only tenuously tied to the focus of this forum) generates far more responses than more purely scientific questions?

If someone asks about the historicity of Christ, the posters go nuts responding. Ask about Bible correctness, and the resulting thread gets many hits daily. But ask a solid relevant science question, and usually a core of just a few posters will modestly tackle the issue.

No wonder religion is really big business. Hasnít done much to elevate manís lifestyle, in spite of being a major influence in society for several millennia. In the last hundred years, science has done a hundred times more for the advance of knowledge and technology than religion has since it was crafted by primitive societies.

justchristian
May 28th, 2005, 09:28 AM
AIDS spread because of gays and AIDS is definately a killer
Aids spread because of promiscuous unprotected sex - its just spread faster among homosexuals due to the nature of sodomy.

If gay marriage is allowed, what's next? Polygamy? Pedophilia? Beastiality? Where does it end?
This is the arguement for eroding society and leading to anarchy? It's a gateway sin...it will lead to all sorts of other immoral compromises. :bang: Anyone got anything else? Please? You're killing me here.

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 09:28 AM
AIDS is spread by alot of people
Pedophilia involves people to young to understand what's happening and give concent
beastiality happens all the time kinda hard to get the victim to talk
Polygamy, what's wrong with that?
Seriously? What's wrong with polygamy?

It undermines God's purpose for the family. In the garden of Eden, God created one man and one woman and joined them........polygamy is against God's purpose and plan for humanity.

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 09:29 AM
Well that comment was a joke, although if you look at prison gayness, that's about dominance too, so is that ok? Rape, whether homo or hetero, is about dominance not pleasure..
:thumb:

justchristian
May 28th, 2005, 09:32 AM
In the last hundred years, science has done a hundred times more for the advance of knowledge and technology than religion has since it was crafted by primitive societies.
What I love about science most is it keeps proving itself wrong. While religion keeps running from one extreme to the other. Sometimes I wonder if way up we look like a bunch of overexcited mice running around aimlessly bumping into eachother.

ThePhy
May 28th, 2005, 03:51 PM
From justchristian:
What I love about science most is it keeps proving itself wrong. This parody of science as a field that has no permanence in its conclusions has little validity. Certainly some ideas in science have been found to be in error, but the great majority of change in science is in improving old ideas, rather than in abandoning them. Newtonís concepts, even though now known to be only approximations, are still very useful. Thermodynamics has been a field strongly refined over the last couple of centuries. And, contrary to the misrepresentation some on this forum give, the core of Darwinís ideas are now more firmly backed by data and better understood than at any time before.

fool
May 28th, 2005, 03:56 PM
What I love about science most is it keeps proving itself wrong.
at least it's proving somthing

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 07:03 PM
at least it's proving somthing
But it has yet to prove that homosexuality is genetic.

fool
May 28th, 2005, 07:10 PM
But it has yet to prove that homosexuality is genetic.
nor has it proven that it isn't
and the bible proves nothing other than people don't like it

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 07:14 PM
nor has it proven that it isn't
and the bible proves nothing other than people don't like it
You forgot God........you've heard of Him, haven't you? The creator? He says it's unnatural.

fool
May 28th, 2005, 07:23 PM
You forgot God........you've heard of Him, haven't you? The creator? He says it's unnatural.
there is no God
so how could he say anything?
what you've heard, that God said
was said by men
so why do you listen to men
and not your heart?

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 07:26 PM
there is no God
so how could he say anything?
what you've heard, that God said
was said by men
so why do you listen to men
and not your heart?
.............said the fool................... :rolleyes:

fool
May 28th, 2005, 07:37 PM
.............said the fool...................
.................said the Agape4Robin...................

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 07:38 PM
.................said the Agape4Robin...................
Ooooooooooooo..................what a comeback! :yawn:

Who writes your material? :kookoo:

fool
May 28th, 2005, 07:40 PM
Ooooooooooooo..................what a comeback! :yawn:

Who writes your material? :kookoo:
I do
who reads it to you?

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 07:42 PM
I do
who reads it to you?
So what does an Atheist hope to gain by posting on a Christian theological website? :rolleyes:

fool
May 28th, 2005, 07:46 PM
So what does an Atheist hope to gain by posting on a Christian theological website? :rolleyes:
what does a Christian hope to gain?

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 07:47 PM
what does a Christian hope to gain?
:bang: just answer the question.........

fool
May 28th, 2005, 07:49 PM
:bang: just answer the question.........
:bang: just answer the question......................

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 07:51 PM
:bang: just answer the question......................
Ahhhhh...............now I know why you chose fool for a screen name.... :rolleyes:

fool
May 28th, 2005, 08:04 PM
Ahhhhh...............now I know why you chose fool for a screen name.... :rolleyes:
1 corinthians 3; 18-19

Agape4Robin
May 28th, 2005, 08:06 PM
1 corinthians 3; 18-19
:darwinsm:

fool
May 28th, 2005, 08:09 PM
:darwinsm:
:cheers:

Lighthouse
May 29th, 2005, 01:41 AM
Well that comment was a joke, although if you look at prison gayness, that's about dominance too, so is that ok? Rape, whether homo or hetero, is about dominance not pleasure..
I did not think you were supporting the idea of homsexuality in animals. I was using what you said as a reference. Dogs do tend to hump anything.

And prison rape has some to do with pleasure, as does other rape. But there is more to do with powere and control [i.e. dominance]. But this is humans we are discussing, in these events, not animals. Morality applies to humans only.

Agape4Robin
May 29th, 2005, 03:50 PM
I did not think you were supporting the idea of homsexuality in animals. I was using what you said as a reference. Dogs do tend to hump anything.

And prison rape has some to do with pleasure, as does other rape. But there is more to do with powere and control [i.e. dominance]. But this is humans we are discussing, in these events, not animals. Morality applies to humans only.
I have to go with :Brandon: on this one.

I know......I was shocked too..... :noway:

:chuckle:

beefalobilly
May 29th, 2005, 08:57 PM
I did not think you were supporting the idea of homsexuality in animals. I was using what you said as a reference. Dogs do tend to hump anything.

And prison rape has some to do with pleasure, as does other rape. But there is more to do with powere and control [i.e. dominance]. But this is humans we are discussing, in these events, not animals. Morality applies to humans only.

Yup, I definately agree on morality being applied to humans only, if it was based on animal behaviour we could justify all kinds of things :noway: