This is Why Homosexuality is Wrong. . .

[TheManeki]

If there are two people in a long-term monogamous relationship, and there's no agent of the state or some cleric around to bless it, are they committing adultery? Y'know, like a desert isle or something?

 

[GwynApNudd]

If there are two people in a long-term monogamous relationship, and there's no agent of the state or some cleric around to bless it, are they committing adultery? Y'know, like a desert isle or something?

Two different threads. Two different minds. Same question (but framed differently). Two bad we both already repped one another today.

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=37644716&postcount=85

 

[LittleNipper]

Do you actually read what you write, or do you just let the words fall at random from your fingers?

That is the most rediculous statement I have seen in all the time I've been posting here. And there have been plenty of rediculous statements on this board, mostly from people like you.

If monogamy among gays only happened because of AIDS, how do you explain all the happy and committed couples throughout history?

Oh, come now! Surely your have read something, somewhere worse! I'd hate to think you're that limited in your scope...... Committed couple would spotlight the sanctity of marriage. One slip outside that bond by either partner could likely have disasterous consequences for both.... I'm very happy you read what I write. You are left without an excuse.

 

[selfinflikted]

Oh, come now! Surely your have read something, somewhere worse! I'd hate to think you're that limited in your scope......

You're right. You're running a close second to MercyBurst at the moment.

 

[LittleNipper]

So two people in a same sex relationship that are deeply in love get your stamp of approval until they actually have sex, huh? Why does the act of sex pose a problem? Is it because they aren't married? Then help campaign for marriage rights.

GOD set the rules. It is not for me to make them up to suit my behavior patterns.

 

[LittleNipper]

So does God therefore bless sex outside of marriage? He does seem to do so quite often, given all the children conceived and born outside of wedlock...

And I suppose, then, that those gay couples who decide to have children must be similarly blessed...

What, too, does God make of in vitro fertilzation techniques that require no husband at all?

Guess regular, heterosexual marital sex just isn't producing enough children, God's gotta go and bless a bunch of other processes that he apparently didn't intend to have happen.......

Isn't it interesting how a blessed event for a married husband and wife is so often seen as a curse to the unwed? Gay couples must turn to a hererosexual egg & sperm metamorphisis to accomplish their desire.

 

[TheManeki]

GOD set the rules. It is not for me to make them up to suit my behavior patterns.

Please tell us where. People have tried before, and have ended up misinterpreting scripture.

 

[RealityCheck]

Isn't it interesting how a blessed event for a married husband and wife is so often seen as a curse to the unwed? Gay couples must turn to a hererosexual egg & sperm metamorphisis to accomplish their desire.

I didn't say it was a "curse" - that's your description, not mine.

But let's focus on this more, LN, because it really is fascinating to read your pov on this.

You wrote that sex was created expressly and only for husband and wife, and that within these bounds, husband and wife are permitted to enjoy it. You also wrote that God MAY choose to use sex for the purposes of creating life.

Thus, you're saying that God is essential to the procreation process - that conception cannot happen without God. Is this right so far?

You also state that conception is a blessing to the husband and wife - right?

But you said nothing about conception in general - in your view, what is conception to the unwed couple, what is conception to the single mother, what is conception performed artificially? Isn't God necessary for conception in all these cases? And if so, is such a blessing or not?

And if it's a blessing, then isn't God effectively putting his stamp of approval on whatever means were used for that conception?

Do you believe that birth control methods of all types are wrong?

 

[OdwinOddball]

Y'know, you might not want to dis the world too much, LN. Feel free to interpret scripture to your heart's desire, but ultimately it has to face a reality check.

F'r example, you can pontificate all you want about how two people in a long-term homosexual relationship are continuously living in sin and will burn forever and ever in Hell, but the existence of people like ChaliceThunder can easily refute this idea. Do yourself a favor, do a reality check, get to know some people like CT.

Otherwise you just sound like those wackos who interpret the Bible as saying the Earth is the center of the universe, and claim that all science to the contrary is an eevil conspiracy. http://www.reformation.org/stationary-earth.html

And I'm sure you don't want to sound like that, do you?

Apparently you aren't all that familiar with LN.

 

[sister_maynard]

Apparently you aren't all that familiar with LN.

Sadly, acquring the familiarity is rather like trying to butt heads with the Great Wall of China.

 

[LittleNipper]

Please tell us where. People have tried before, and have ended up misinterpreting scripture.

Read Matthew 15:1-19

 

[TheManeki]

Read Matthew 15:1-19

Umm....I don't get that. It's about some Pharisees (who tend to resemble legalistic Christians for some reason) where Jesus calls them a bunch of hypocrites for emphasizing following the letter, but not the spirit, of God's law.

Oh wait -- verse 19:

For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.

Yeah...adultery, sexual immorality...that can be just about anything and everything. I guess I can see "adultery" in the strictest sense of the word (sex between two people not married to each other) because people won't allow people in a same-sex relationship to be considered married.

Which is kinda hypocritical, y'know.

 

[MarcusHill]

Gay couples must turn to a hererosexual egg & sperm metamorphisis to accomplish their desire.

"Heterosexual egg and sperm metamorphosis"? I'm confused. Are you claiming:

a) Homosexuality is so deeply genetically ingrained that one can tell whether an egg or sperm is "heterosexual" - I doubt that very much, especially from you.

b) The process of fertilisation is "heterosexual" - not really, especially if it's done in a test tube it's only a biological process involving a couple of cells.

c) The persons from which the egg and sperm originated must be heterosexual - which is also false, it's entirely possible for homosexual people to be egg or sperm donors.

 

[TheManeki]

Whoops! Posted a reply in the wrong thread.

 

[LittleNipper]

Umm....I don't get that. It's about some Pharisees (who tend to resemble legalistic Christians for some reason) where Jesus calls them a bunch of hypocrites for emphasizing following the letter, but not the spirit, of God's law.

Oh wait -- verse 19:
Yeah...adultery, sexual immorality...that can be just about anything and everything. I guess I can see "adultery" in the strictest sense of the word (sex between two people not married to each other) because people won't allow people in a same-sex relationship to be considered married.

Which is kinda hypocritical, y'know.

Actually, JESUS called these "learned" people hypocrites because they CHANGED the law, bent the law, and adapted the law to suit themselves. A sexual union between two unmarried person of the opposite sex is fornication. Sex between men or between women is called SODOMY ---- as is sex between humans and animals. Sex for sex sake. No baby possible------ever with such a union.

 

[TheManeki]

LN, saying something in caps doesn't make it true, no matter how hard you try.



About the best objection you've come up with is the "no baby possible" one, and even that has severe problems.

[bible]Genesis 9:1[/bible]

Mission accomplished!

Furthermore, most of the same reproductive techniques used by infertile heterosexual couples can be used by a same-sex couple (surrogates, in vitro/in vivo fertilization, etc). Do you call these methods abominations? That would set your beliefs against those of most people, Christians, and even fundamentalist Christians.

Sodomy (and the underlying Sodom-was-destroyed-because-of-homosexuality) is a tired cliche I and others have refuted before. If you really want to argue this point, respond in a more appropriate thread here.

http://www.christianforums.com/t5839873-the-evolution-of-sodom.html

Be sure to read the first few posts before you reply, so we don't have to repeat ourselves again.

 

[LittleNipper]

LN, saying something in caps doesn't make it true, no matter how hard you try.



About the best objection you've come up with is the "no baby possible" one, and even that has severe problems.

[bible]Genesis 9:1[/bible]

Mission accomplished!

Furthermore, most of the same reproductive techniques used by infertile heterosexual couples can be used by a same-sex couple (surrogates, in vitro/in vivo fertilization, etc). Do you call these methods abominations? That would set your beliefs against those of most people, Christians, and even fundamentalist Christians.

Sodomy (and the underlying Sodom-was-destroyed-because-of-homosexuality) is a tired cliche I and others have refuted before. If you really want to argue this point, respond in a more appropriate thread here.

http://www.christianforums.com/t5839873-the-evolution-of-sodom.html

Be sure to read the first few posts before you reply, so we don't have to repeat ourselves again.

I suggest you read Matthew 15:1-20 once again, or perhaps you must simply read it, and quit making up excuses or try to shift the blame to others that are only holding a lamp so you might see. Wearing a blindfold, attempting to break the lamp, or blow out the flame, will be of no avail.

 

[LittleNipper]

"Heterosexual egg and sperm metamorphosis"? I'm confused. Are you claiming:

a) Homosexuality is so deeply genetically ingrained that one can tell whether an egg or sperm is "heterosexual" - I doubt that very much, especially from you.

b) The process of fertilisation is "heterosexual" - not really, especially if it's done in a test tube it's only a biological process involving a couple of cells.

c) The persons from which the egg and sperm originated must be heterosexual - which is also false, it's entirely possible for homosexual people to be egg or sperm donors.

You are correct when you say that you are confused.

 

[MarcusHill]

You are correct when you say that you are confused.

Then please enlighten me. What exactly do you mean by the phrase "heterosexual egg and sperm metamorphosis"? Please make sure you're specific about how this process (or any component thereof) is necessarily heterosexual.

 

[LittleNipper]

It takes a sperm and an egg to fulfill coupulation. Neither two eggs nor two sperm can unite to begin the procreation process. Such attempts are futile.