[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
We’re anti-homosexuality orientated.
/End Thread
Edit: No, seriously, I just won the thread![/quote]
Cause yer like, stupid, n stuff.
:D[/quote]
U mad bro?
Being a homosexual is not a sin, engaging in extramarital sex is considered a sin. Since same gender marriages are not ever going to to be allowed in most religions sect, then homosexual sex will always be a sin.
Now, are you trying to get into an argument about why it’s a sin or why it’s wrong? Or whether it’s a sin…The sexual activity is a sin. I supposed it’s based on just because one’s got a penis and the other’s got a hole, doesn’t by default mean that penis belongs in that hole.
This is not an irreconcilable problem though. We’re all sinners, I don’t think homosexuals should shun God because they are drawn to do a sinful act. It’s certainly a struggle, but they, like the rest of us can and should reconcile ourselves to God and if we fall down along the way, we pick up our asses and continue. We don’t up and whine about how mean God is like a bunch of pussies.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
We’re anti-homosexuality orientated.
/End Thread
Edit: No, seriously, I just won the thread![/quote]
Cause yer like, stupid, n stuff.
:D[/quote]
U mad bro?[/quote]
Nah dawg.
I just disagree with your perspective, sir. I don’t see cause to be anti-homosexuals/ality.
Being homosexual is not a sin. Practicing homosexuality is. I don’t believe it’s neccessarily either a choice or naturally ocurring. I believe certain people have desires for the same sex. That can’t be taught. Nobody had to teach me or millions of other horny boys to like girls. Meanwhile, we don’t all act on our carnal desires. If we did, you would have a lot more pedophiles in the world. The thing that I don’t understand is how a society that can slam a priest for being a pedophile can think it’s perfectly OK for two men to have sex. Both are wrong because they are both perversions.
[quote]forbes wrote:
Homosexuality is seen by some to have a strong genetic base to it. If it really is genetic, can it be seen as wrong? Or just a sickness? In the end is it a choice, or does the subconscious drive the person to do what they do, and therefore have no control (or very little) over their actions, much like an alcoholic or a gambler?
Again, I’m just a by stander asking questions, trying to learn both sides. [/quote]
It has always been my belief that homosexuality is a choice that a person might feel more inclined to partake in, much like you suggested with alcoholism or a gambling addiction. Most people have at least that one moral dilemma that they struggle with more than others.
I’m a Christian and have been raised by Christian parents. When I was 19, my girlfriend and I tried living the most Christ-like life we could. She would struggle with wanting to party and drink and I never took a sip until I was of legal age. I (maybe it was the hormones!) struggled with sex and she had NO desire to do anything other than kissing. Maybe thats a bad example and a little off topic but take it for what its worth.
I believe that some men and women have homosexual desires and many choose, because of either personal religious beliefs or social persecution, to deny those desires.
In response to a post on the first page…
[quote]According to the bible, men lusting for other men is a sin. Period.
But I think a healthy Christian would see that everyone sins, and being gay isn’t any worse than committing adultery even in your heart (lusting after other women), or sex outside of marriage.
I’ve never understood the logic in thinking homosexuality is some how a special sin that should be singled out.
How can a guy that sleeps around condemn others for homosexuality? [/quote]
I try not to view any sin as greater than another. However, I believe several years ago a Methodist minister announced he was gay and was no longer aloud to serve. Many were up in arms about this saying, “How can we as Christians judge him when we all sin?”
A man that leads an openly gay life is saying “this is not wrong”. It is not the same as a man that is an alcoholic. Although he may drink every night, a true Christian knows that he is sinning and will ask for forgiveness. I can’t see the same thing happening in this situation.
First time posting in these forums. Not a very opinionated person but I think there’s a lot to be learned in life from some of the things written in the P&WI threads so I thought I’d join. Good day to all.
…okay Mike, i’ll bite, it’ll be fun:
[quote]
Unlike other things in nature, humans have free will. Thus, humans can make a conscious choice to engage in behavior that would otherwise be unnatural. That is the purpose of Natural Law - to impose a sense of what is natural because humans have the ability to essentially “override” what would otherwise be considered natural [/quote]
…not too long ago lefthandedness was considered “of the devil” and left handed children were forced to use their right hand. Did these children make a free-will choice to use their left hand? No. Was it free will to be forced to use their right hand? No. Besides, free will is a concept i don’t believe in: we don’t have free will. The distinction between natural and unnatural is subjective and influenced heavily by culture and society. This distinction is therefore far from universal, and thus invalid…
…so, religious notions of law are equal to Natural Law? How does that affect my statement since i believe in neither? If such notions change and as a result infringe on your preferences and life, would you still say it’s a valid position?
…the use of the word faith, as if faith is something magical, something more than opinion/prejudice is total and utter bullshit. Calling opinion faith does not make that opinion less of an opinion. Dress-up a turd and guess what; it’s still a turd. Please show the audience how faith adds truth to a certain position, and how faith is more than an opinion, please…
…Mike, how can homosexuality be a violation of Natural Law if homosexuality is prevalent in nature itself?
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
I’m sayin.[/quote]
This is the part where I get to chastise you for believing in mystical things that have no foundation in reality the way you do to christians.[/quote]
Ethics are the ideas you base your moral, or action, codes on (near as I can understand the terms).
Hardly supernatural or mystical, like a big bearded white man in the sky.[/quote]
You are using abstract words to define abstract ideas. moral, codes est have no existence in the real world.
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Being homosexual is not a sin. Practicing homosexuality is. I don’t believe it’s neccessarily either a choice or naturally ocurring. I believe certain people have desires for the same sex. That can’t be taught. Nobody had to teach me or millions of other horny boys to like girls. Meanwhile, we don’t all act on our carnal desires. If we did, you would have a lot more pedophiles in the world. The thing that I don’t understand is how a society that can slam a priest for being a pedophile can think it’s perfectly OK for two men to have sex. Both are wrong because they are both perversions.[/quote]
…really? You don’t see a difference between consenting adults willingly engaging in sex, and the rape of a child by a man in a position of authority?
[quote]red bull wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote: No, it’s family structure.
Where you work your boss is in a position of authority over you. Does that mean that your company is saying he is better than you?[/quote]
Maybe not ‘better’. But to carry on using the office metaphor, you could say your boss is nearer to the CEO than you, shares more in his presence and has a closer relationship with him… perhaps even an exclusive one. With regards to women and their relationship with God, as described in a lot of Biblical texts, it’s fairly obvious where that metaphor is going…
[/quote]
The bible never sets up either with any limit to their closeness to god. Even in the business situation, access to a CEO is not based on structure of employees. For example our IT guys have a closer business relationship to the CEO than our VP of engineering.
I’m borderline on “being christian”. I am however a follow of christian, specifically jesus’, philosophy. Even minus the divinity, he was still dead on with his views, and someone I try to model my life after.
I’m not defending the church. I think the church and Christianity are separate things. It’s also worth while to not here that the early church not only excluded women from communing with god, but also everyday people. Direct communication with god was officially limited to clergy.
And I think that is what the bible and jesus teach, regardless of what men have done with it.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Being homosexual is not a sin. Practicing homosexuality is. I don’t believe it’s neccessarily either a choice or naturally ocurring. I believe certain people have desires for the same sex. That can’t be taught. Nobody had to teach me or millions of other horny boys to like girls. Meanwhile, we don’t all act on our carnal desires. If we did, you would have a lot more pedophiles in the world. The thing that I don’t understand is how a society that can slam a priest for being a pedophile can think it’s perfectly OK for two men to have sex. Both are wrong because they are both perversions.[/quote]
…really? You don’t see a difference between consenting adults willingly engaging in sex, and the rape of a child by a man in a position of authority?
[/quote]
He is illustrating the difference between a desire and an action. And noting that actions are what define a person.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Being homosexual is not a sin. Practicing homosexuality is. I don’t believe it’s neccessarily either a choice or naturally ocurring. I believe certain people have desires for the same sex. That can’t be taught. Nobody had to teach me or millions of other horny boys to like girls. Meanwhile, we don’t all act on our carnal desires. If we did, you would have a lot more pedophiles in the world. The thing that I don’t understand is how a society that can slam a priest for being a pedophile can think it’s perfectly OK for two men to have sex. Both are wrong because they are both perversions.[/quote]
…really? You don’t see a difference between consenting adults willingly engaging in sex, and the rape of a child by a man in a position of authority?
[/quote]
He is illustrating the difference between a desire and an action. And noting that actions are what define a person.[/quote]
…no, he’s being an asshole for equating homosexuality with pedophilia…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Being homosexual is not a sin. Practicing homosexuality is. I don’t believe it’s neccessarily either a choice or naturally ocurring. I believe certain people have desires for the same sex. That can’t be taught. Nobody had to teach me or millions of other horny boys to like girls. Meanwhile, we don’t all act on our carnal desires. If we did, you would have a lot more pedophiles in the world. The thing that I don’t understand is how a society that can slam a priest for being a pedophile can think it’s perfectly OK for two men to have sex. Both are wrong because they are both perversions.[/quote]
…really? You don’t see a difference between consenting adults willingly engaging in sex, and the rape of a child by a man in a position of authority?
[/quote]
He is illustrating the difference between a desire and an action. And noting that actions are what define a person.[/quote]
…no, he’s being an asshole for equating homosexuality with pedophilia…
[/quote]
This.
Anal sex between a man and a woman is a perversion, as well as oral sex, or sex while a woman is on her period, according to the christian bible.
However, christians, when the topic of homosexuality comes up, dont compare gay sex to any of these, but INEVITABLY to pedophilia.
I wonder why this is…
Or even consentual sex between a man and a woman who aren’t married.
Thats “perverse” and “sinful”, right, Pat? How about we compare homosexuality to that?
If you look at it religiously then yes it is a sin.
The problem I have is if it is natural does that just make them nature’s rejects?
Now I don’t think anyone can deny some people out there choose to be gay to get back at there parents, to get attention or for whatever reason. Now are all this way? I don’t know but I have yet to see proof of the gay gene(which is required if you believe people are born with it or else you are just using faith to back up your point of view).
At the end of the day I don’t really care I just think that both sides use a lot of faith to back up their claims.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
I hardly see how something that hurts no one and takes place between one or more consenting adults could possibly be considered in any way shape or form, evil.
If you disagree, you’re going to have to explain your system of morality to me, and prove that it isn’t filled with gaping holes the size of Jupiter.
I really don’t care if you hate gay people, so long as your consistent and hate everyone else having sex too.[/quote]
/thread
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
I hardly see how something that hurts no one and takes place between one or more consenting adults could possibly be considered in any way shape or form, evil.
If you disagree, you’re going to have to explain your system of morality to me, and prove that it isn’t filled with gaping holes the size of Jupiter.
I really don’t care if you hate gay people, so long as your consistent and hate everyone else having sex too.[/quote]
/thread[/quote]
Nope. I already claimed /end thread.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
If the I Ching isn’t completely right, then there can be no right or wrong.
If the Qu’ran isn’t completely right, then there can be no right or wrong.
See how the whole “If there is no God/if the bible is wrong then there can be no right or wrong” argument is fucking stupid?[/quote]
Good gosh this is the dumbest strawman ever. never mentioned the bible or Christianity or the christian god.[/quote]
Who did you think I meant when I said Sky Wizard, babe?[/quote]
Look man. You clearly dont believe in any type of god, let alone the Christian God. So why bother with this post? Lets just say we werent talking about homosexuality, and were about murder, adultery, or robbery. Are they wrong to you? They are wrong to society and government but why to you? And I myself(as a Christian) havent decided on the homosexuality dicussion but you did mention that homosexuals get alot of mistreatment. Really? Check the media. Every show, movie, and newscast welcome them with open arms like everyone else. And Im glad they do bc whether they are wrong or not, they are human. Also I will admit that I do use the word “gay” alot. Ex: If my fiancee asked me if i would wear a pink shirt, I would no. If she asked why? I would say bc it looks gay. Meaning that it looks feminine. Its meaning has developed so much that many people say it without directing in a bigotry way.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
According to the bible, men lusting for other men is a sin. Period.
But I think a healthy Christian would see that everyone sins, and being gay isn’t any worse than committing adultery even in your heart (lusting after other women), or sex outside of marriage.
I’ve never understood the logic in thinking homosexuality is some how a special sin that should be singled out.
How can a guy that sleeps around condemn others for homosexuality?[/quote]
Well in the Old Testament, men were never punished for having sex with multiple women. The only case was when it was another mans wife. In fact, in the Old Testament, it never condemns a man sleeping with a woman. The story of David and Bathsheba was because he took another mans wife, not just because he had sex with Bathsheba. If she had been a single woman, it may or may not have even been mentioned in the bible. However, it does repeatedly condemns homosexuality, even requiring the death penalty for it. But thats from a biblical standpoint.
[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
If the I Ching isn’t completely right, then there can be no right or wrong.
If the Qu’ran isn’t completely right, then there can be no right or wrong.
See how the whole “If there is no God/if the bible is wrong then there can be no right or wrong” argument is fucking stupid?[/quote]
Good gosh this is the dumbest strawman ever. never mentioned the bible or Christianity or the christian god.[/quote]
Who did you think I meant when I said Sky Wizard, babe? [/quote]
Look man. You clearly dont believe in any type of god, let alone the Christian God.
[/quote]
Wrong. I’m a pantheist, I believe in god. Just not Sky Wizard.
[quote]
So why bother with this post? Lets just say we werent talking about homosexuality, and were about murder, adultery, or robbery. Are they wrong to you? They are wrong to society and government but why to you? And I myself(as a Christian) havent decided on the homosexuality dicussion but you did mention that homosexuals get alot of mistreatment. Really? Check the media. Every show, movie, and newscast welcome them with open arms like everyone else. And Im glad they do bc whether they are wrong or not, they are human. Also I will admit that I do use the word “gay” alot. Ex: If my fiancee asked me if i would wear a pink shirt, I would no. If she asked why? I would say bc it looks gay. Meaning that it looks feminine. Its meaning has developed so much that many people say it without directing in a bigotry way. [/quote]
But the topic isnt murder or robbery, it’s homosexuality. If you want to talk about those things, make threads about them.
And, yes, poor you, when you describe anything you don’t like as “gay”, people call you a bigot. Imagine that… just the other day someone asked if I wanted taco bell and I said “Nah I dont want any of that spic shit”… and they called me a racist! Go figure!