Homosexuals and Bisexuals

[BigBadWlf]

Actually I would agree with you on the basis of sexual orientation such a person has "homosexual tendencies" that is to perform homosexual acts. While the other who already does that is already defined as such. In general a person who "acts out homosexual behaviour" is defenately a homosexual if that is all that he identifies sexually a biosexual the same and so forth....

Sexual orientation is independent of any sexual act.

No one has “homosexual tendencies” any more than anyone has “heterosexual tendencies” people are what they are

That is why identifying with being a homosexual IMHO is not enough to be called a homosexual as much as you are a murderer if you contemplaint a murder... or we are all already thieves if we contemplaint to steal something?

Is it OK to compare other minorities to murderers?

I agree to that and also that agrees with the Gospel as those who were "sleeping with men" (arsenokoitai) were condemned not those who had "thoughts" of doing a homosexual act.

For most of the history of Christianity arsenokoites was translated to mean masturbation, the most recent bible to make this translation was 1968.


The defense for claiming that arsenokoites means homosexual is made by claiming that the meaning of this compound word is derived from the meaning of its two root words: arseno (man or men) and koitai (bed). This approach is linguistically invalid. Deconstructing compounds is difficult no matter what language one uses. One can’t just define a compound word by taking it apart, getting the meanings of its component parts, and then assuming, with no supporting evidence, that the meaning of the longer word is a simple combination of its component parts. To "understand" does not mean to "stand under." In fact, nothing about the meaning of understand has anything to do with standing or being under anything.
definitions of arsenokoites that derive its meaning from its components are indefensible. Using this method it would be equally valid to claim that when using the word arsenokoites Paul was condemning the lazy or even the bed making industry.

Also that is again in agreement that there was no "homosexual" personality or identity in the ancient times but only people performing homosexual acts like Sodoma and Gomora.... and so forth.

"This is the sin of Sodom; she and her suburbs had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not help or encourage the poor and needy. They were arrogant and this was abominable in God's eyes." Ezekiel 16:48-49

 

[Philothei]

For most of the history of Christianity arsenokoites was translated to mean masturbation, the most recent bible to make this translation was 1968.


The defense for claiming that arsenokoites means homosexual is made by claiming that the meaning of this compound word is derived from the meaning of its two root words: arseno (man or men) and koitai (bed). This approach is linguistically invalid. Deconstructing compounds is difficult no matter what language one uses. One can’t just define a compound word by taking it apart, getting the meanings of its component parts, and then assuming, with no supporting evidence, that the meaning of the longer word is a simple combination of its component parts. To "understand" does not mean to "stand under." In fact, nothing about the meaning of understand has anything to do with standing or being under anything.
definitions of arsenokoites that derive its meaning from its components are indefensible. Using this method it would be equally valid to claim that when using the word arsenokoites Paul was condemning the lazy or even the bed making industry.

Also that is again in agreement that there was no "homosexual" personality or identity in the ancient times but only people performing homosexual acts like Sodoma and Gomora.... and so forth.
​

"This is the sin of Sodom; she and her suburbs had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not help or encourage the poor and needy. They were arrogant and this was abominable in God's eyes." Ezekiel 16:48-49

These are all one sided agenda driven translations...and most likely "interpretations" those who declaire such slanted translations of the Greek language have no integrity of what they are saying. Malakos means sodomist? By far...That is a misstranslation. Also the form of the verb is arsenokoitai....not tes in the ending... That is slanted grammar also to serve one purpose to make it look like a 'femine" it is not. It is arsenokoitai and it means those men sleeping with men. Slanted information comes from slanted agendas and sources.

Barely any evidence to what you are claiming BBW. As Greeks we know our language no Greek scholar would translate those words as such for a good reason. Cause they do not mean that. Period.

 

[BigBadWlf]

Part of behavior is thought. If a person has homosexual thought patterns, that is still a behavior. That's the whole point. I have never argued that is not possible, though none of you have proven it and there are studies that call it into question.

“Sexual orientation is an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectional attraction toward others. It is easily distinguished from other components of sexuality including biological sex, gender identity (the psychological sense of being male or female), and the social gender role (adherence to cultural norms for feminine and masculine behavior).
Sexual orientation exists along a continuum that ranges from exclusive heterosexuality to exclusive homosexuality and includes various forms of bisexuality. Bisexual persons can experience sexual, emotional, and affectional attraction to both their own sex and the opposite sex. Persons with a homosexual orientation are sometimes referred to as gay (both men and women) or as lesbian (women only).
Sexual orientation is different from sexual behavior because it refers to feelings and self-concept.. “ –Sexual orientation and homosexuality.
http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31

 

[Shane Roach]

It was for years both, but now we are forbidden.

You want to destroy any hope of a nation that would attempt to ensure to as many kids as possible that anyone who has children should be ready willing and able to care for them. Any minute hint that rampant sexual immorality would be in any way hindered is the anti-gospel of the socialist.

We had freedom for both Christians and atheists and anyone else, when we were a Christian nation, because Christianity demands no less. You cannot force a person to become an actual Christian.

Atheists have no such qualms, What people believe is irrelevant as long as you fear and obey.

It was never the government forcing prayer in schools. The evidence of that is the popular resistance to it, even the spontaneous prayers at football games.

It's not indoctrination if you do it of your own volition. An atheist being offended by merely being "forced" to hear, is offended only inasmuch as he hates his neighbor for not believing as he does.

And it is the same thing down and down to gay marriage. No one cares what's true, no one cares what's right. What is imporant is that the judges will make their rulings, and you will do as you are told or suffer the consequences, even in the privacy of your own property. And many of you openly revel in it.

People here on this very thread have praised the invasion of the state into the choices allowed a church.

Don't try to turn this back on the innocent. You don't want freedom. You want tyranny because it's the only way you can have what you want -- the end of Christianity.

 

[b&wpac4]

Shane, do you really believe I am hoping for the end of Christianity in that fashion?

 

[Wyzaard]

Stop pretending it doesn't matter where children come from. Obviously it is a huge big deal.

Not really, no... arguments from obviousness are fallacious.

I'm sorry if this would have resulted in you not having a child, buy I am more concerned with what we are putting our kids through in the name of "equality". I've lived through the mess the last liberal push made of marriage, and I have seen the evidence that it has harmed a lot more people than just me.

Unshown.

Question: If you had your way in setting political policy, would you mandate FlamingFemme's children be taken away from her and her partner?

Excuses do not get people's lives back for them. This nation owes it to the next generation to start backtracking on the sexual revolution.

And enforce your brutal religious values onto other people's lives? Methinks you would have a nasty problem with implementation...

 

[Shane Roach]

“Sexual orientation is an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectional attraction toward others. It is easily distinguished from other components of sexuality including biological sex, gender identity (the psychological sense of being male or female), and the social gender role (adherence to cultural norms for feminine and masculine behavior).
Sexual orientation exists along a continuum that ranges from exclusive heterosexuality to exclusive homosexuality and includes various forms of bisexuality. Bisexual persons can experience sexual, emotional, and affectional attraction to both their own sex and the opposite sex. Persons with a homosexual orientation are sometimes referred to as gay (both men and women) or as lesbian (women only).
Sexual orientation is different from sexual behavior because it refers to feelings and self-concept.. “ –Sexual orientation and homosexuality.
http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31

I agree.

Still a behavior. We do not speak of racial orientation or gender orientation. You are what you are.

I've also seen a study that makes it clear that there are genetic cues for homosexual response, but they are wide spread and not everyone who is gay necessarily has them.

Behavior is complex. Why anyone would presume to think that this makes it not behavioral is beyond me.

Potential for homosexual response is prevalent and genetic.

 

[Belk]

It was for years both, but now we are forbidden.

You want to destroy any hope of a nation that would attempt to ensure to as many kids as possible that anyone who has children should be ready willing and able to care for them. Any minute hint that rampant sexual immorality would be in any way hindered is the anti-gospel of the socialist.

We had freedom for both Christians and atheists and anyone else, when we were a Christian nation, because Christianity demands no less. You cannot force a person to become an actual Christian.

Atheists have no such qualms, What people believe is irrelevant as long as you fear and obey.

It was never the government forcing prayer in schools. The evidence of that is the popular resistance to it, even the spontaneous prayers at football games.

It's not indoctrination if you do it of your own volition. An atheist being offended by merely being "forced" to hear, is offended only inasmuch as he hates his neighbor for not believing as he does.

And it is the same thing down and down to gay marriage. No one cares what's true, no one cares what's right. What is imporant is that the judges will make their rulings, and you will do as you are told or suffer the consequences, even in the privacy of your own property. And many of you openly revel in it.

People here on this very thread have praised the invasion of the state into the choices allowed a church.

Don't try to turn this back on the innocent. You don't want freedom. You want tyranny because it's the only way you can have what you want -- the end of Christianity.

Rawr! RAWR!!!!

Man, I never realized what a monster I was until Shane told me how I am trying to destroy everything.

 

[Wyzaard]

I'm telling you I know the score no matter which way you choose to peel this onion.

Unshown, as usual.

 

[FlamingFemme]

It was for years both, but now we are forbidden.

You want to destroy any hope of a nation that would attempt to ensure to as many kids as possible that anyone who has children should be ready willing and able to care for them. Any minute hint that rampant sexual immorality would be in any way hindered is the anti-gospel of the socialist.

We had freedom for both Christians and atheists and anyone else, when we were a Christian nation, because Christianity demands no less. You cannot force a person to become an actual Christian.

Atheists have no such qualms, What people believe is irrelevant as long as you fear and obey.

It was never the government forcing prayer in schools. The evidence of that is the popular resistance to it, even the spontaneous prayers at football games.

It's not indoctrination if you do it of your own volition. An atheist being offended by merely being "forced" to hear, is offended only inasmuch as he hates his neighbor for not believing as he does.

And it is the same thing down and down to gay marriage. No one cares what's true, no one cares what's right. What is imporant is that the judges will make their rulings, and you will do as you are told or suffer the consequences, even in the privacy of your own property. And many of you openly revel in it.

People here on this very thread have praised the invasion of the state into the choices allowed a church.

Don't try to turn this back on the innocent. You don't want freedom. You want tyranny because it's the only way you can have what you want -- the end of Christianity.

Let's get one thing clear right now: The United States of America is not now, has never been, and will never be a 'Christian Nation'. The fact that the majority of Americans are Christians is of no consequence. This is a secular nation, with secular laws, and a secular government. Keeping in mind that 'secular' does NOT mean 'atheist'. Secular is non-religious, and neutral. No one is going to try to tell you that you CAN'T believe in G-d, but you also cannot go around and tell the rest of us what we can and can't do based solely on your Bible, and your beliefs, when we don't share those beliefs.
Which brings us right back to why it is wrong to pass a law banning gay marriage simply because you say the 'Bible says it's wrong'. In a secular nation, the laws are based on the common good, not one particular religious doctrine. If you want to live in a 'Christian Nation', then go find one. But don't go holding your breath that the USA will become one, because it won't.

 

[Philothei]

Behavior is complex. Why anyone would presume to think that this makes it not behavioral is beyond me.

Behaviour is complex you admit it ...So the fact that we all have thoughts we do not "act out" all the time makes us guilty of "behaving" as our thoughts dictate us? We either do behave or not... No one though can call us guilty of anything until those thoughts are "acted out". FRom a pure patristic Christian perpsective we are all sinners in our mind as human mind is always bombared by "bad thoughts" by the devil. That is where our true Chrisian commitment comes though to be able to resist such thoughts and more so not to act them out. To have a homosexual tendency that is not acted out proves a behaviour? How can you be proven guilty before you commit a sin...Futhermore the homosexual agenda does wants us to believe that if a child has homosexual tendencies or acts queer is already a homosexual...That helps the idea that "expressing one's sexuality" is "healthy"...While in reality such behaviour could be just a "phase" of adolescence as it is been recorded in Ancient times esp. ancient Greece where the homosexual act was just viewed as such and there was not a "homosexual lifestyle" ever....It was a mere "phase" of adolescence and if anyone was found guilty of practicing it as a youth adult still the penalty was indeed death or exile.

 

[Wyzaard]

You want to destroy any hope of a nation that would attempt to ensure to as many kids as possible that anyone who has children should be ready willing and able to care for them. Any minute hint that rampant sexual immorality would be in any way hindered is the anti-gospel of the socialist.

You have yet to actually describe what I, a socialist, thinks and feels about such matters.

It was never the government forcing prayer in schools.

It's not indoctrination if you do it of your own volition.

Children who have no choice but to go to and stay in school possess no such volition.

And it is the same thing down and down to gay marriage. No one cares what's true, no one cares what's right.

We don't care what YOU think is true and right as regards to these legal issues, because you're basing such matters on your religious prejudices.

People here on this very thread have praised the invasion of the state into the choices allowed a church.

(Looks around, sees no one doing such things)

Don't try to turn this back on the innocent.

You don't want freedom. You want tyranny because it's the only way you can have what you want -- the end of Christianity.

Complete 100% hogwash.

 

[Shane Roach]

Shane, do you really believe I am hoping for the end of Christianity in that fashion?

"In that fashion."

I like you, but yes. I have seen nothing from you to indicate that you are not a committed anti-Christian.

My friend, I believe in Jesus. Do you not understand? I am not an idiot. I have had all the discussions people here bring up. I am aware of the issues.

I was high school high honor and who's who. I went to the US Naval Academy, though I admit I never finished even the first semester because I was previously ill, and was not able to stay awake even standing up in class after Plebe Summer was over. My point here is not that I am an expert. My point here is that I am way too informed and well aware of my relative intelligence to accept constant badgering as an argument.

It's been going on my whole life. I know where it's coming from, because it is coming from the same place it has come from every single time it has come up before. It's not just an intellectual enterprise for me. You are threatening things that I hold to be exceedingly important on incredibly flimsy evidence, and continuing in an anti-Christian tradition that stretches back to Marx and Engel, and probably well beyond if I knew enough of their underlying philosophy to judge.

People bond with their offspring in a unique way, especially at birth. I have seen the effects first hand of being the "step child". I know what i have read and seen, and I am not going to accept this transparent roundy round that goes on here as well intentioned or convincing. It is spam meant to drown out the legitimate discussion. It comes from an identifiable source, though not all of the people spewing it are card carrying members.

 

[BigBadWlf]

I think that is irrelevant. Socialism would promote these causes to maintain jobs? I do not think so... They offer absolutely nothing and this money could be given to poor teachers who make peanuts ...



How same-sex "marriage" affects Massachusetts

Wow…something from one of the few recognized anti-gay hate groups in the country. That is impressive.

Lets check Mass Resistnace’s facts:

Mass Resistance claims - “In 2005, when David Parker of Lexington, MA – a parent of a kindergartner – strongly insisted on being notified when teachers were discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and put in jail overnight.”
Not the truth. Parker was arrested for trespassing and got out on bond and later plea bargained in court.
In a January 17, 2005 e-mailed the school demanding that any and all references to same gendered led families be forbidden form discussion in any classroom. His son brought home a Xeroxed copy of a collection of his class mates families which include a same gendered couple.

Joseph Estabrook Elementary principal, Joni Jay, wrote Parker an email clearly saying homosexuality is not a part of the kindergarten curriculum, or any curriculum however it happens and some of the children from same gendered led families attend school . Parker went to the school to repeat his demands and was told exactly the same thing. However parker refused to leave even after the school closed. He demanded to be arrested “If I’m not under arrest, then I’m not leaving.” so the school complied and the police were summoned and Parker was arrested for trespassing.

Parker continued to make false statements about the school and its students In May 2006, Parker’s son was involved in a fight at school with a friend over seating in the school cafeteria. The fight was not physical in any way. His son and the other student made peace with each other and continued to be friends. They even had a play date later that week. Parker was informed as to what happened. However, less than a month later, the Mass Resistance sent out a press release claiming that Parker’s son was set upon by “eight to 10 students” who beat him because their parents “did not appreciate his fight against Joseph Estabrook Elementary.”

The Boston Globe, April 29, 2005
Maine Today, June 14, 2005
Press release, Lexington Public Schools, May 2, 2005


Mass Resistance claims - “In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal Civil Rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judges dismissed the case. The judges ruled that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children, Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is “legal”, a federal judge has ruled that the schools now have a duty to portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe!”

Not even close to the truth. And they manage to libel a judge too.
Parker has attempted to sue the school district in Federal Court, because they refuse to comply with his demands. In February 2007, U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf dismissed the lawsuit as frivolous. He appealed and lost the appeal and the Supreme court has refused to hear the case.
Here is what Judge Wolf actually said: “Public schools are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, particularly when the school imposes no requirement that the student agree with or affirm those ideas, or even participate in discussions about them.”
The Boston Globe, Feb 24, 2007


Mass Resistance claims - “At my own children's high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex “marriage” in early December, 2003. It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who announced that they would be “marrying” their same-sex partners and starting families either through adoption or artificial insemination. Literature on same-sex marriage – how it is now a normal part of society – was handed out to the students.”
One of Mass Resistances better known fibs. No such assembly took place. The literature that was supposedly handed out to the students was not. This claim stems form a conference for therapist and counselors on human sexuality. This was held at said school during that schools spring break. Included in the conference were venders providing information documents including brochures on safe sex guidelines. Mass resistance went there and picked up a pamphlet and went on to make all sorts of false claims from there


Mass Resistance claims - “Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September, 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, MA, told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the floodgates for teaching homosexuality. “In my mind, I know that, `OK, this is legal now.' If somebody wants to challenge me, I'll say, `Give me a break. It's legal now,'” she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.”
Well here is the actual NPR interview.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/a8a/general/NPR_091304.htm
as you can see Mass Resistance is lying in their claims. The above quote was said by a student being interviewed outside of class, not by the strangely unnamed teacher Mass Resistance is falsely claiming.


Philothei, you have said that lying about a minority group is wrong. Can you explain how the lies of Mass Resistance are OK?

 

[BigBadWlf]

Adoption of a homosexual couple is problematic...as is parenthood.

Evidence?

Would be very interesting to read as all the actual published evidence shows that the children of same gendered parents are happy, healthy and well adjusted and no different from their heterosexually raised peers and the evidence shows they remains so well into adulthood.

It is the same with marriage. It is NOT and NEVER was between homosexuals but heterosexuals.

Same thing was said about interracial marriage

 

[Shane Roach]

Philothei, you have said that lying about a minority group is wrong. Can you explain how the lies of Mass Resistance are OK?

I'll be checking on these due to previous experience with your citations.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7358406-24/#post51416556

 

[BigBadWlf]

Are you implying (by bringing the example) that homosexual families are "as bad as a single mother family"? Because if you do that you do not prove to me that homosexual parents are "good" either see??? That is the fallacy for those who try to "defend" the homosexual unions and families...They cannot stand on defending them but ONLY by comparison... Nice

You try to claim others are presenting strawman arguments (when they are not) but then you go and produce one yourself. The poster said nothing of the sort and it is dishonest of you to try to claim she did

 

[Shane Roach]

I think you are preaching to the choir. No offense, but it is being argued that homosexuality is not related to behavior at all, largely due to the fact that surveys show that people are more sympathetic to homosexuality in general if they believe it is something a person is born with.

Behaviour is complex you admit it ...So the fact that we all have thoughts we do not "act out" all the time makes us guilty of "behaving" as our thoughts dictate us? We either do behave or not... No one though can call us guilty of anything until those thoughts are "acted out". FRom a pure patristic Christian perpsective we are all sinners in our mind as human mind is always bombared by "bad thoughts" by the devil. That is where our true Chrisian commitment comes though to be able to resist such thoughts and more so not to act them out. To have a homosexual tendency that is not acted out proves a behaviour? How can you be proven guilty before you commit a sin...Futhermore the homosexual agenda does wants us to believe that if a child has homosexual tendencies or acts queer is already a homosexual...That helps the idea that "expressing one's sexuality" is "healthy"...While in reality such behaviour could be just a "phase" of adolescence as it is been recorded in Ancient times esp. ancient Greece where the homosexual act was just viewed as such and there was not a "homosexual lifestyle" ever....It was a mere "phase" of adolescence and if anyone was found guilty of practicing it as a youth adult still the penalty was indeed death or exile.

 

[BigBadWlf]

These are all one sided agenda driven translations...

Shinny shinny mirror

and most likely "interpretations" those who declaire such slanted translations of the Greek language have no integrity of what they are saying. Malakos means sodomist? By far...That is a misstranslation. Also the form of the verb is arsenokoitai....not tes in the ending... That is slanted grammar also to serve one purpose to make it look like a 'femine" it is not. It is arsenokoitai and it means those men sleeping with men. Slanted information comes from slanted agendas and sources.

Barely any evidence to what you are claiming BBW. As Greeks we know our language no Greek scholar would translate those words as such for a good reason. Cause they do not mean that. Period.

And you have presented none

 

[Shane Roach]

Mass Resistance claims - “Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September, 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, MA, told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the floodgates for teaching homosexuality. “In my mind, I know that, `OK, this is legal now.' If somebody wants to challenge me, I'll say, `Give me a break. It's legal now,'” she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.”
Well here is the actual NPR interview.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/a8a/general/NPR_091304.htm
as you can see Mass Resistance is lying in their claims. The above quote was said by a student being interviewed outside of class, not by the strangely unnamed teacher Mass Resistance is falsely claiming.

You appear to have posted a link to Mass Resistance's own copy of the interview which highlights in yellow the portions you claim are not there. Perhaps this was a mistake.