Homosexuals and Bisexuals

[BigBadWlf]

Do you have FAITH?

What does that mean in the case of one's belief or not in the veracity of the scriptures? I mean really ...? Is having faith that the Bible writers are beyond reproach in regard to their reporting for God the determining factor as to who is and who is not 'saved'?

I believe that it is being suggested that since I don’t share his personal prejudices and have a nasty habit of confronting false witness that hi somehow not a real Christian™

 

[cantata]

I guess we bisexuals are the worst of all because we could just stop with the sexings of our own sex if we wanted to, and pretend to be straight.

That wouldn’t be any fun, though.

 

[Scott Parsons]

YouTube - stop calling me a homo

 

[CraigBaugher]

I believe that it is being suggested that since I don’t share his personal prejudices and have a nasty habit of confronting false witness that hi somehow not a real Christian™

Not at all... I am saying if you have Faith, and have been saved and baptized, then your Faith will get you into Heaven, if that is what you believe to be true.

Again... It should not matter, to you, what I or anyone else thinks, for we are unimportant!!! Say it Loud! Say it Proud! I AM A CHILD OF GOD, AND THE LORD JESUS CHRIST WILL LEAD ME HOME!

That has always been my point all along... I could think you are going to burn in hell, but who am I... Nobody when it comes to that decision! Only the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit knows your heart... King David was a very sinful man, yet was one of God's Choosen people... Why? Because of his FAITH!!! King David had GREAT FAITH!!!

 

[Wyzaard]

the fact that they have sex with the same sex. It's not wrong to love the same sex, but once you cross that line into a sexual lust or acts with that person its wrong in God's eyes.

Because the all-powerful creator of quadrillions of star systems is just so terribly, terribly interested in what your penis or vagina does with other penises and vaginae.

Come on.

 

[CraigBaugher]

Because the all-powerful creator of quadrillions of star systems is just so terribly, terribly interested in what your penis or vagina does with other penises and vaginae.

Come on.

Why Yes... Yes he does... Like you care about your children, or you will when you have children.

That is the most amazing thing about God... The fact that we are smaller than a nano-particle is the grand scheme of things, and yet, the Lord knows us, and what we do... INCREDIBLE!

 

[Scott Parsons]

I used to be gay. But now I am very interested in girls.

 

[Skaloop]

I used to be gay. But now I am very interested in girls.

You keep telling yourself that...

 

[BigBadWlf]

Why Yes... Yes he does... Like you care about your children, or you will when you have children.

That is the most amazing thing about God... The fact that we are smaller than a nano-particle is the grand scheme of things, and yet, the Lord knows us, and what we do... INCREDIBLE!

If either of my boys turn out to be gay…they turn out gay. I won’t love them any less nor will I be so twisted and egocentric to insist they lie about being gay and that they pretend to not be gay.

A parents primary concerns are their children’s well being and happiness. Hating someone because of who they are and demanding they lie about it is not loving no matter how you twist things and it is harmful in the extreme to their well being

 

[Garyzenuf]

I used to be gay. But now I am very interested in girls.

Wow...no wonder your mood thingy says stressed.

Could you elaborate on the transition, I don't want to heckle, neither do I disbelieve you, I've just never talked with someone who has actually gone thru the process.

No problamo' if you don't feel comfortable doing that, I can well understand why you wouldn't in this format.

Gary.

 

[CraigBaugher]

If either of my boys turn out to be gay…they turn out gay. I won’t love them any less nor will I be so twisted and egocentric to insist they lie about being gay and that they pretend to not be gay.

A parents primary concerns are their children’s well being and happiness. Hating someone because of who they are and demanding they lie about it is not loving no matter how you twist things and it is harmful in the extreme to their well being

Wow... Are you a parent? Because I am, and I have rules that are to be obeyed, and if they are not, there is punishment. These rules are to insure their well being and happiness, as well as, their ability to function well in this world. My punishment, if needed, does not mean I hate them, on the contrary, I punish them out of love and with love.

Now, if one of my daughters told me they were gay, I would not love them any less, nor would I try and change them. Somehow you are not getting it...

God does not want you to lie, or to murder, or to covet someome else's wealth or spouse, or property, and the list goes on... To do so is a sin, and Christ sacrificed himself for the forgiveness of our sins. If you believe that, and you are saved and baptized, you are going to Heaven! Regardless of what I may think or believe... We all sin... We all fail in the eyes of God... and yet, He LOVES YOU so much, he sacrified his only begotten son so that you have eternal life - IF YOU BELIEVE THAT!!! and HAVE FAITH IN THAT!!!

Let me say this one more time... King David was not a very good man... and YET he was ONE OF GODS CHOSEN PEOPLE... WHY... FAITH!!!!!!!! He Put God First! He asked God for Forgiveness, and BELIEVED HE WAS FORGIVEN!!! and HE WAS!!!! He BELIEVED GOD would LEAD HIM to VICTORY and PROSPERITY and HE DID!!!!

 

[KarateCowboy]

This has always made me shake my head. A homosexual can love another of the same sex, but if those feelings of love also incorporate or turn to lust then some kind of sin has been committed. Please explain the innate wrongness in the mere desire to be physically intimate. Exactly what kind of harm--to anyone--is wrought by desiring something? In what way is anyone the worse off by desiring physical intimacy than by desiring, say, a new set of clothes?

Then there's the matter of the innate wrongness when a certain part of one's body touches a certain part of another's body. In some cases, say I touch someones nose with the tip of my finger, no one much gives a hoot, but if I take that same finger tip and touch another part of someone's body it becomes a matter of censure. It's really only a matter of flesh touching flesh. So the real issue here isn't the actual touching but the motivation behind it: satisfying one's sexual urges, which brings us to the core of the problem: homosexuals should not do XY & Z because it would satisfy there sexual needs, although heterosexuals may do XY & Z because it does satisfy their sexual needs. And what is so different about the two needs? The means of satisfaction. In one case it's a person of the same sex and in the other case it's a person of the opposite sex. So, wherein lies the actual harm, the innate wrongness, in one versus the other?

If it's just the say-so of someone or some book then it's only an issue incumbent upon those who want to subscribe to that person or that book, and should have absolutely impact on anyone else.

It's strange that you talk this way but have a Darwin sticker in your signature. If you understood the basics of Darwin you would not be saying this. I mean, if you actually understood the mechanics of things.

In biology the word "sex" as a verb means "reproduction between a male and a female". In Darwin's world there is no such thing as homosexuality. It really is a misnomer. "Homosexphilia" is a much more accurate and scientific word. Dang psychologists and their "soft science" gets it all screwed up.

You see, in the world of biology there are two forms of reproduction: sexual and asexual. Contrary to popular belief asexuality does not mean a lack of warm fuzzy feelings. It means reproduction by copying yourself. Bacteria reproduce asexually. Sex, meaning reproduction between a male and female, evolved to facilitate more genetic diversity than can be afforded by one individual mutating a little and then copying himself. Of course in order to have sexual reproduction you need the different sexes. Thus, male and female.

And there you have it: the whole reason for the existence of male and female forms of the species is to reproduce with each other. Now according to Darwinian biology some species have developed something called sexual dimorphism, which adds some bits and pieces to it, but more or less that's how it is.

According to Darwin's laws there is no such "homo" variety of sexuality. There simply is or is not sexuality. Hence the Latin prefix "a" meaning "without". So we have "reproducing by copulation with a member of the opposite sex" or simply copying yourself. "Homo" sexuality is like "square" circles. It does not exist. You will never, ever, ever, ever, ever see a sperm fertilizing a sperm, or an egg fertilizing an egg. It does not happen.

Finally, there is the matter of being anti-Darwin. People would probably say that you don't get more anti-evolution than Creationism, but you do. It's called "homosexuality". Homosexuality is anti-reproduction and thus anti-evolution. The day homosexuality wins the species loses. Homosexuality is to humans what a big giant meteorite was to the dinosaurs. Homosexuality is pretty much the ultimate evolutionary failure. Homosexuality is to Darwin what 666 is to Christianity. Homosexuality is The Anti-Darwin.

 

[Legion.As.One]

I think that its digusting people judge others based on sexual preferences. (The only execption being an adult and child). People should be able to live their sexual lives no matter what their preference, and without being judged by people who would have no clue.
You can't change who you were born as. If you are born liking the same sex, so be it. Nothing can change that, no god no person. Their own choice to act of their feelings is exactly that, their own choice. No one has the right to judge another when they don't know the person and base their judgement on petty things such as sexual orientation.

 

[Ryal Kane]

It's strange that you talk this way but have a Darwin sticker in your signature. If you understood the basics of Darwin you would not be saying this. I mean, if you actually understood the mechanics of things.

In biology the word "sex" as a verb means "reproduction between a male and a female". In Darwin's world there is no such thing as homosexuality. It really is a misnomer. "Homosexphilia" is a much more accurate and scientific word. Dang psychologists and their "soft science" gets it all screwed up.

You see, in the world of biology there are two forms of reproduction: sexual and asexual. Contrary to popular belief asexuality does not mean a lack of warm fuzzy feelings. It means reproduction by copying yourself. Bacteria reproduce asexually. Sex, meaning reproduction between a male and female, evolved to facilitate more genetic diversity than can be afforded by one individual mutating a little and then copying himself. Of course in order to have sexual reproduction you need the different sexes. Thus, male and female.

And there you have it: the whole reason for the existence of male and female forms of the species is to reproduce with each other. Now according to Darwinian biology some species have developed something called sexual dimorphism, which adds some bits and pieces to it, but more or less that's how it is.

According to Darwin's laws there is no such "homo" variety of sexuality. There simply is or is not sexuality. Hence the Latin prefix "a" meaning "without". So we have "reproducing by copulation with a member of the opposite sex" or simply copying yourself. "Homo" sexuality is like "square" circles. It does not exist. You will never, ever, ever, ever, ever see a sperm fertilizing a sperm, or an egg fertilizing an egg. It does not happen.

Finally, there is the matter of being anti-Darwin. People would probably say that you don't get more anti-evolution than Creationism, but you do. It's called "homosexuality". Homosexuality is anti-reproduction and thus anti-evolution. The day homosexuality wins the species loses. Homosexuality is to humans what a big giant meteorite was to the dinosaurs. Homosexuality is pretty much the ultimate evolutionary failure. Homosexuality is to Darwin what 666 is to Christianity. Homosexuality is The Anti-Darwin.

Wow. That's some bad science right there. If there is indeed a genetic component to homosexulaity then it would probably be recesive, in a similar manner to blue eyed people. A 'gay gene' could esaily exist in the gene pool and move rom generation to generation.

Furthermore, gay people are just as capable of reproduction as their heterosexual counterparts. Their likelyhood of doing so is usually less but that doesn't mena that they cannot and do not have children.

Also human beings are communal animals. Our survival depeends on our interaction and success as a group, not just as an individual. In an evironment with limited resources, having 10% of the population who didn't have children could be highly beneficial. You increase the worker to dependant ratio.

Sexual behaviour in humans is also for far greater purpose than pure reproduction. It exists a bond between individuals and a recreational activity. trying to claim that sex is only sex if it's male / female intercourse for reproduction is a vast over simplification.

The scenario you're describing is one in which somehow everyone is gay, as if they can contract 'the gay'. If you genuinely believe that the wolrd is heading down that path then I can sort of understand the phobia associated with it. However this is not, nor will ever be the case.

 

[Bytemeister]

Here's what people have against homosexuals. They're different, and we've been told to shun them. I have nothing against homosexuals.

The real question is, what do people have against gay marriage?

 

[Legion.As.One]

I have nothing against gay marriage. Its their choice.

 

[cantata]

Finally, there is the matter of being anti-Darwin. People would probably say that you don't get more anti-evolution than Creationism, but you do. It's called "homosexuality". Homosexuality is anti-reproduction and thus anti-evolution. The day homosexuality wins the species loses. Homosexuality is to humans what a big giant meteorite was to the dinosaurs. Homosexuality is pretty much the ultimate evolutionary failure. Homosexuality is to Darwin what 666 is to Christianity. Homosexuality is The Anti-Darwin.

1. Believing that evolution happens doesn’t mean that one advocates the evolution of the human species. Evolution is not an ethical framework, it is a scientific account. I believe that gravitational theory is true, but I don’t advocate pushing people off cliffs.

2. More than 50% of all the ants in a colony are sterile females. As a species, they manage very well. I think we can cope with a 10% homosexual population—a population that isn’t even sterile, but simply unlikely to produce offspring by accident.

 

[HaloHope]

I think one thing that irritates me in this debate is that most of those opposed to homosexuality seem to think it's such an easy and and wonderful thing to do for a gay person to leave that "lifestyle" ( I hate that phrasing so much) and starve yourself of intimacy from the ones you love for the rest of your life. Do these people really view homosexual relationships as so devoid of any real "love" that they think its a feeling that can just be switched off via prayer?

Another thing that annoys me is that if a hetrosexual couple who are in a relationship/married/wahtever who love each other have sex it isn't a big deal to them, but as soon as a same-sex consenting couple have sex they are clearly slaves to their own lust, and have absolutely no self control. It's a ridiculous conclusion to jump to as there is no difference between the scenarios, clearly any hetrosexual who has sex is a slave to lust too.

Tell you what, if all the fundys here abandon their relationships and never have sex in their lifetimes again ever I might consider doing the same with my same-sex relationship. but seeing as thats never going to happen I can't say im too concerned.

 

[Andreusz]

It's strange that you talk this way but have a Darwin sticker in your signature. If you understood the basics of Darwin you would not be saying this. I mean, if you actually understood the mechanics of things.

In biology the word "sex" as a verb means "reproduction between a male and a female". In Darwin's world there is no such thing as homosexuality. It really is a misnomer. "Homosexphilia" is a much more accurate and scientific word. Dang psychologists and their "soft science" gets it all screwed up.

You see, in the world of biology there are two forms of reproduction: sexual and asexual. Contrary to popular belief asexuality does not mean a lack of warm fuzzy feelings. It means reproduction by copying yourself. Bacteria reproduce asexually. Sex, meaning reproduction between a male and female, evolved to facilitate more genetic diversity than can be afforded by one individual mutating a little and then copying himself. Of course in order to have sexual reproduction you need the different sexes. Thus, male and female.

And there you have it: the whole reason for the existence of male and female forms of the species is to reproduce with each other. Now according to Darwinian biology some species have developed something called sexual dimorphism, which adds some bits and pieces to it, but more or less that's how it is.

According to Darwin's laws there is no such "homo" variety of sexuality. There simply is or is not sexuality. Hence the Latin prefix "a" meaning "without". So we have "reproducing by copulation with a member of the opposite sex" or simply copying yourself. "Homo" sexuality is like "square" circles. It does not exist. You will never, ever, ever, ever, ever see a sperm fertilizing a sperm, or an egg fertilizing an egg. It does not happen.

Finally, there is the matter of being anti-Darwin. People would probably say that you don't get more anti-evolution than Creationism, but you do. It's called "homosexuality". Homosexuality is anti-reproduction and thus anti-evolution. The day homosexuality wins the species loses. Homosexuality is to humans what a big giant meteorite was to the dinosaurs. Homosexuality is pretty much the ultimate evolutionary failure. Homosexuality is to Darwin what 666 is to Christianity. Homosexuality is The Anti-Darwin.

Another fundamentalist who thinks he understands evolutionary theory, but doesn't understand the first thing about it. I would advise you to do some reading.

 

[Mumei]

So I've read through the thread.

What is the problem with homosexuality, again? Pretend for a moment that we are not Christians - gasp - and that even if God does clearly condemn homosexuality, we can't quite bring ourselves to care, or we are Christians who are unconvinced that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible.

In other words, tell us the real world consequences of homosexuality.

Does it lead to earthquakes? Cause loss in battle? The spread of plague?

What are the bad things that are going to happen if homosexuality is treated as openly and as nonchalantly as heterosexuality is? There is an obnoxious sort of circular reasoning here:

Person 1: Homosexuality is wrong.
Person 2: Why?
Person 1: Because God says so in the Bible.
Person 2: Why does God think it is bad?
Person 1: Because it is wrong?

So let's stop that cycle and cut to the chase. Anyone feel like answering my questions?