Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 7

[Idolater]

You seem to think that there's some sort of 'psychological cause' for homosexuality

Of course there is. What do you think it's genetic or something?

that can be isolated and cured. That's nonsense. Some people are just naturally homosexual. It's not something that can be 'cured'. Those atrocious 'conversion therapy' centers (thankfully shut down for the most part nowadays) only succeeded in abusing people.

Celibacy is up to the individual.

Who said otherwise?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Of course there is. What do you think it's genetic or something?

Who said otherwise?

Plenty of folk are just gay Idolater. If you think there's some psychological cause for it then good look finding it. That line was abandoned in the 70's and with good reason.

 

[Right Divider]

In regards to homosexuality, not very much and it's only the modern day equivalent of the legalists of the time that think we should have laws in the present that should make it a capital crime.

What does God say?

Prove that people aren't naturally homosexual.

YOU CLAIMED that they are "naturally homosexual". It's up to YOU to prove YOUR CLAIM.

Note that even if this was true, it does NOT "make it OK" per God.

There's plenty who'll tell you they are.

People make all kinds of claims about themselves. Some men claim to be women.

Did you choose to be straight?

Irrelevant, but thanks for another of your patented attempts to misdirect.

 

[Right Divider]

So, if two of the woman's accusers had remained behind you reckon Jesus would have condemned the woman?

Jesus kept the law. Jesus was not a law breaker.

 

[Right Divider]

Plenty of folk are just gay Idolater. If you think there's some psychological cause for it then good look finding it. That line was abandoned in the 70's and with good reason.

Indeed, most of the world is rejecting God.

 

[Arthur Brain]

What does God say?

YOU CLAIMED that they are "naturally homosexual". It's up to YOU to prove YOUR CLAIM.

Note that even if this was true, it does NOT "make it OK" per God.

People make all kinds of claims about themselves. Some men claim to be women.

Irrelevant, but thanks for another of your patented attempts to misdirect.

Nothing to suggest that modern day societies should stone homosexuals to death along with all manner of other legalism advocated by plenty on the far right.

Cos plenty are. It's prevalent in nature as well so you really should be clued up. Heck, why would people have 'chosen' to be gay in times where they could and would be persecuted for it? Do the math.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Indeed, most of the world is rejecting God.

Rather, it was acknowledging that homosexuality wasn't a mental illness. Doing away with ignorance is not tantamount to 'rejecting God'.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Jesus kept the law. Jesus was not a law breaker.

So, in your opinion Jesus would have condemned the woman if two of her accusers stayed behind then? That correct?

 

[7djengo7]

The say so of a few witnesses doesn't establish a person's guilt in itself.

By your word, "witnesses," do you mean bearers of true testimony, or do you instead mean bearers of false testimony? Which one do you mean?

By your phrase, "the say so of a few witnesses," do you mean true testimony, or do you instead mean false testimony? Which one do you mean?

 

[Arthur Brain]

By your word, "witnesses," do you mean bearers of true testimony, or do you instead mean bearers of false testimony? Which one do you mean?

By your phrase, "the say so of a few witnesses," do you mean true testimony, or do you instead mean false testimony? Which one do you mean?

Well, that's the trouble with reliance of human witness testimony isn't it? Especially back then. How could it be ascertained that accusers were telling the truth or not?

 

[7djengo7]

Well, that's the trouble with reliance of human witness testimony isn't it?

By your phrase, "human witness testimony," to which are you referring: 1) truth or 2) falsehood?

Which do you mean?

1. "Well, that's the trouble with reliance of [truth] isn't it?"
2. "Well, that's the trouble with reliance of [falsehood] isn't it?"

Especially back then.

Oh, of course...back before mankind was blessed with the counsel of sages such as yourself!

How could it be ascertained that accusers were telling the truth or not?

By "ascertained" do you just mean known?

When you know that what an accuser is telling is the truth, it's very easy to know by inference therefrom that he/she is telling the truth.

When you know that what an accuser is telling is not the truth, it's very easy to know by inference therefrom that he/she is not telling the truth.

 

[Arthur Brain]

By your phrase, "human witness testimony," to which are you referring: 1) truth or 2) falsehood?

Which do you mean?

1. "Well, that's the trouble with reliance of [truth] isn't it?"
2. "Well, that's the trouble with reliance of [falsehood] isn't it?"

Oh, of course...back before mankind was blessed with the counsel of sages such as yourself!



By "ascertained" do you just mean known?

When you know that what an accuser is telling is the truth, it's very easy to know by inference therefrom that he/she is telling the truth.

When you know that what an accuser is telling is not the truth, it's very easy to know by inference therefrom that he/she is not telling the truth.

How do you "know" that an accuser is telling the truth or lying? You say it's very easy to know by inference.

Explain how.

 

[7djengo7]

How do you "know" that an accuser is telling the truth or lying? You say it's very easy to know by inference.

Explain how.

Where did I say anything about lying? Quote?

 

[Right Divider]

Nothing to suggest that modern day societies should stone homosexuals to death along with all manner of other legalism advocated by plenty on the far right.

Cos plenty are. It's prevalent in nature as well so you really should be clued up. Heck, why would people have 'chosen' to be gay in times where they could and would be persecuted for it? Do the math.

Many a "modern day society" throughout history has been destroyed by rampent sexual perversion and hedonism.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Many a "modern day society" throughout history has been destroyed by rampent sexual perversion and hedonism.

Many a modern day society is rampant with religious extremism that subjugates its populace to barbaric laws and treats women like second class citizens. See Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan etc.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Where did I say anything about lying? Quote?

Oh dear, reduced to pedantry already?

I'll alter my quote to take that into account:

How do you "know" that an accuser is telling the truth or not telling the truth? You say it's very easy to know by inference.

Explain how.

 

[Right Divider]

Many a modern day society is rampant with religious extremism that subjugates its populace to barbaric laws and treats women like second class citizens. See Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan etc.

It's blasphemy to compare God's law to that of those countries.

 

[7djengo7]

Many a modern day society is rampant with religious extremism that subjugates its populace to barbaric laws and treats women like second class citizens. See Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan etc.

Muslims? Where do you get off calling Muslims "religious"? They don't even worship God, which fact excludes them from being religious.

 

[Arthur Brain]

It's blasphemy to compare God's law to that of those countries.

Who was comparing? I was pointing out the dangers of religious extremism and thankfully in our respective countries, there's no chance of such coming about.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Muslims? Where do you get off calling Muslims "religious"? They don't even worship God, which fact excludes them from being religious.

Yeh, thanks for that little gem of insight 'Djengo Unhinged'...