Evidence that homosexuality is wrong..?

[Phinehas2]

Hi EnemyPartyII
Dear EnemyPartyII

Three couples... a heterosexual couple, a male homosexual couple and a female homosexual couple... all 3 couples love each other... all 6 individuals feel the same emotion for their partners.

No it isnt Christian at all, you are referring to sex again, love isn’t sex, sex may be a part of love, but to love God and love ones neighbour according to the God’s love in the Bible it is not inclusive of all sex, sex is to be within a faithful man/woman union otherwise its not loving God.

Christian view

 

[HaloHope]

Christian view

Anyone else getting mildly sick of this "Christian view" rubbish?

Christians can have different views on things like homosexuality and still be Christians. Its sadly a fact and no matter of claiming "Christian View" will change this.

There are MANY Christian views.

To constantly claim this you are insinuating some posters here (like myself) are non-Christian. Which is extremely rude.

I can accept your view as Christian, yet I can also accept the views expressed by me are Christian. We are all different, with different views and opinions.

Dont think my view is Christian? Tough. It is, as I am one.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Hi EnemyPartyII
Dear EnemyPartyII

No it isnt Christian at all, you are referring to sex again, love isn’t sex, sex may be a part of love, but to love God and love ones neighbour according to the God’s love in the Bible it is not inclusive of all sex, sex is to be within a faithful man/woman union otherwise its not loving God.

Christian view

She made no mention of sex. Misquoting your opponent is intellectually dishonest.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Wiccan_Child,
Now come on whst the Sex in heteroSEXual and homoSEXual, she did mention sex. Please dont start making false accusations

 

[naotmaa]

There's no gay gene if that's what you're implying. The only things on the inborn stuff is hypothesis- not even theory. I could bore you with the details, but it's time for bed.

As i said before nothing has been absolutely proven or disproven. I believe that it could happen because of a gene or in utero because is most logical to me. If you don't believe it is so then what theories do you know of which concludes that it is not inborn?

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Halohope,
Sorry but I just discussed the issue, and tried to put what I see is the Christian view, I have others saying they are Christian so their view is Christian,so which view is Christian.

Christians can have different views on things like homosexuality and still be Christians.

Ah but I dont think there are two diffierent Christian view on it despite what you think. So we need to discuss which is the Chistian view.
My opinion is that some represent what is another religion which just seems like Christianity but in fact just undermines the core beliefs of Christianity, and is humanism. But I have tried to focus on the issues, its just that some dont accept the Bible benchmark as the truth.

Which is extremely rude.

Well I am sorry you feel that way but I am cant help that if some of us have a definition of Christianity that is different to yours.

I can accept your view as Christian, yet I can also accept the views expressed by me are Christian.

I can accept your view but I cant accept it as the Christian view and I have explained why.
You can claim what you like but dont expect me to accept it because it doesnt fall into my definiton.
Personally I dont think I can ultimately make that call, I think Jesus has to.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

What are you jabbering about?

Three couples... a heterosexual couple, a male homosexual couple and a female homosexual couple... all 3 couples love each other... all 6 individuals feel the same emotion for their partners.

Dear Wiccan_Child,
Now come on whst the Sex in heteroSEXual and homoSEXual, she did mention sex. Please dont start making false accusations

So if I write the word 'slaughter', would you point out that I mentioned laughter?
'Homosexual' means 'same-sex', and 'heterosexual' means 'different-sex'. In both of these cases, 'sex' refers to one's physical gender. That delightful act of intimacy is not what is being discussed.

 

[Ohioprof]

Dear Halohope,
Sorry but I just discussed the issue, and tried to put what I see is the Christian view, I have others saying they are Christian so their view is Christian,so which view is Christian.
Ah but I dont think there are two diffierent Christian view on it despite what you think. So we need to discuss which is the Chistian view.
My opinion is that some represent what is another religion which just seems like Christianity but in fact just undermines the core beliefs of Christianity, and is humanism. But I have tried to focus on the issues, its just that some dont accept the Bible benchmark as the truth.
Well I am sorry you feel that way but I am cant help that if some of us have a definition of Christianity that is different to yours.
I can accept your view but I cant accept it as the Christian view and I have explained why.
You can claim what you like but dont expect me to accept it because it doesnt fall into my definiton.
Personally I dont think I can ultimately make that call, I think Jesus has to.

I think there certainly can be more than one Christian view on just about any issue, and there are multiple Christian views and have been since the beginning of Christianity. That's why we have so many Christian sects, because Christians hold different views on quite a few issues.

Christians have held different views on the trinity, how one is saved, the nature of the Bible, how to interpret the Bible, what will happen when the world ends (pre-millennialism vs. post-millennialism), the role of women in the churches and society, slavery, racial segregation, homosexuality. There have been other divisive issues as well.

There are different Christian viewpoints. That's why we have debates.

 

[Ohioprof]

So if I write the word 'slaughter', would you point out that I mentioned laughter?
'Homosexual' means 'same-sex', and 'heterosexual' means 'different-sex'. In both of these cases, 'sex' refers to one's physical gender. That delightful act of intimacy is not what is being discussed.

Good observations here.

 

[Phinehas2]

No becuase the defintion of the word homosexual is having a sexual orietation. The definiton of the word slaughter does not involve laughter.

This is why I refer to gay thinking, even our language gets confused.

 

[naotmaa]

No becuase the defintion of the word homosexual is having a sexual orietation. The definiton of the word slaughter does not involve laughter.

This is why I refer to gay thinking, even our language gets confused.

No she was talking about love between two same sex couples. It wasn't about sex. Why are you trying to make it so?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

No becuase the defintion of the word homosexual is having a sexual orietation.

Which has nothing directly to do with sex. It is to do with who you are attracted to.
I am a man attracted to men, but not women, so I am gay. Who I sleep with is irrelevant.

The definiton of the word slaughter does not involve laughter.

You highlighted the letters SEX in the word homoSEXual. This told me that you would see sLAUGHTER in the same fashion.

This is why I refer to gay thinking, even our language gets confused.

Funny how noone else is confused, isn't it.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Ohioprof

I think there certainly can be more than one Christian view on just about any issue,...

Well as long as the views are Christian. What you say is a generalisation

Christians have held different views on the trinity,

ah that’s a good analogy because the Trinity is a Christian view. It is based on what is the Bible says. One can show where God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The difference with the promotion of same sex sex here is there is no scripture to support it.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Wiccan_Child
Dear Wiccan_child
Originally Posted by Phinehas2
No becuase the defintion of the word homosexual is having a sexual orietation.

Which has nothing directly to do with sex. It is to do with who you are attracted to.

Who you are attracted to sexually. Of course it has to do with sex, in fact it is only about sex.

I am a man attracted to men, but not women, so I am gay. Who I sleep with is irrelevant.

So what do you mean by attracted to?

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear naotmaa,
What do you mean by love, I love my brother and he is the same sex as me. You mean same-sex couples as in a sexual couple and sexual desires.

 

[Ohioprof]

Dear Ohioprof
Well as long as the views are Christian. What you say is a generalisation
ah that’s a good analogy because the Trinity is a Christian view. It is based on what is the Bible says. One can show where God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The difference with the promotion of same sex sex here is there is no scripture to support it.

There is no scripture denouncing slavery either, but nearly all Christians today repudiate the pro-slavery provisions in the Bible and agree that slavery is immoral. They interpret away or ignore the provisions of the Bible that quite clearly condone slavery.

Unitarians long argued that there is nothing in the Bible to support the doctrine of the trinity and that it was just a human invention. Whether there is scripture to support something or not is often a matter of debate over how people interpret scripture.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Who you are attracted to sexually.

No, just who I am attracted to. Consider Stephen Fry: he is celebate, and does not want to have sex. However, he is attracted to men.

Of course it has to do with sex, in fact it is only about sex.

Except it is not defined in terms of sex. You keep saying it has to do with sex, but you have yet to demonstrate where sex comes into it from the definitions given.

 

[naotmaa]

Dear naotmaa,
What do you mean by love, I love my brother and he is the same sex as me. You mean same-sex couples as in a sexual couple and sexual desires.

The love a man may have for his sister is obviously different then the love he has for his wife, do you agree?
No I don't mean that. A same sex couples can love each other the same way a opposite sex couple can.
I define love as a person you would happily sacrifice everything for, someone you care for deeply, and want to be as happy as possible. Someone who makes you a better person ans vice versa. I don't see any of that has to do with sex.

 

[CShephard53]

I just explained it's evolutionary advantage.


I just explained it's evolutionary advantage.


You are asking for proof of knowledge, which will never be given to you. Science gives you probable knowledge based purely on empiricism and deduction. Science tells us homosexuality is probably natural.
Review the evidence for 'nature v nurture' wrt homosexuality.


This is simultaneously equivocation and an appeal to authority.


On the contrary, there is evidence. I don't have time for an exhaustive list, but:
Bailey and Pillard (1991) in a study of gay twins found that 52% of monozygotic brothers and 22% of the dizygotic twins were concordant for homosexuality Bailey, Dunne and Martin (2000) used the Australian twin registry to obtain a sample of 4,901 twins.

Primary source: Bailey, J.M., Dunne, M.P., Martin, N.G. (2000). Genetic and environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(3)

Also cited in: Rahman, Q. and G. D. Wilson (2003). "Sexual orientation and the 2nd to 4th finger length ratio: evidence for organizing effects of sex hormones or developmental instability?" Psychoneuroendocrinology 28(3): 288-303.

I've seen your studies. They don't give evidence to anything, the authors of the studies say that same thing.

"Evolutionary advantage" doesn't mean a thing with regards to how it got started. My point, which you have yet to refute with any sort of evidence, is that you cannot know that or call homosexuality natural. There's not enough evidence to prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt, in a court of law.

This is simultaneously equivocation and an appeal to authority.

Your point being what? I know what a logical fallacy is, and I haven't even touched an appeal to authority. The thought was my own, and I'm telling you that it's been verified by scholars- people with doctorates. If you want to call that an appeal to authority, go for it. But the fact remains, that you ignore what's being put in front of you and calling it false without bothering to refute it.

Review the evidence for 'nature v nurture' wrt homosexuality.

I've reviewed it for about a year now. If that's not good enough, or should I say, if what the findings dictate are unacceptable to you, tough. It's not my job to change your mind- I'm here to make sure the facts are presented. And the fact is there is no solid conclusion on the topic of where homosexuality comes from, unless you believe the Bible is the word of God. Which you don't.




ENEMY PARTY II, you may want to review the work of the Holy Spirit yet again. You've missed a large chunk if you think that only God can make God's word. God uses people, and God likes to use His people to spread messages to the general populus. That much should be clear to you, even if you don't think it's God's word.

 

[CShephard53]

As i said before nothing has been absolutely proven or disproven. I believe that it could happen because of a gene or in utero because is most logical to me. If you don't believe it is so then what theories do you know of which concludes that it is not inborn?

I'll note to you that the only theories, not hypotheses, are the ones that dictate nurture being the cause of homosexuality. I'll also note that until the public put a lot of pressure on them for their position, the APA (American Psychological Association) deemed homosexualty a mental problem- a psychological disorder. That was up until 1973. That raises a red flag to me.