I don't understand

[EnemyPartyII]

Simple, provide historical evidence of church fathers regarding the topic of homosexuality in which they clearly approved it. If you are regarding scientific evidence please show the findings of the gay gene and the individuals theoretical frame work which lead him to that conclusion. Not just "two cats are rubbing against each other that means they are gay."

THATS right... I forgot you came up with the mother of all goal post shifts....

going from "there is no evidence that animals are homosexuals" to animals that display homosexuals traits do so by accident and arent REALLY homosexual.

I know that I myself posted you several links relating to the evidence suggesting a genetic link with homosexual tendency, and seem to recall you dismissed it out of hand

 

[ReformedChapin]

THATS right... I forgot you came up with the mother of all goal post shifts....

going from "there is no evidence that animals are homosexuals" to animals that display homosexuals traits do so by accident and arent REALLY homosexual.

I know that I myself posted you several links relating to the evidence suggesting a genetic link with homosexual tendency, and seem to recall you dismissed it out of hand

Again, it's your biased homosexual view which leads you to believe they are gay. There is NO LOGICAL conclusion why they should be. It violates darwinian theory itself...gays are starting to say now that "darwin was wrong." That's if I believed in evolution in the first place.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Hello fellow teenager in Christ.

Well, as you've probably notice, most of homosexuality revolves around the truth of the Bible. Most of those here who are against homosexuality ONLY cite the Bible and most of those here who aren't are only for outside logic. I happen to think there's nothing wrong with homosexuality besides all the things wrong with heterosexuality. Mostly because the pattern of sin is to PROTECT us not to RULE us. Homosexuality is the only sin that doesn't harm anyone else (unless it comes accompanied with a sexual sin like adultery or prostitution).

In any case, don't ask other mortals about it because it'll only confuse you more. I suggest praying about it. A LOT. I prayed about it for almost a year before I finally started seeing a new light.

This is by far the biggest lie in this forum considering the liberal system is self defeating. Applying logic one can see that homosexuality in no way can be applied biblicaly since there is no application to humanities design. The only way homosexuality can be allowed is if God feel like messing with us and saying hey I feel like making gays today even if I have been saying for over 2000 years that it's wrong. That would not only violate the law of non-contradiction but God would stop being God.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Again, it's your biased homosexual view which leads you to believe they are gay. There is NO LOGICAL conclusion why they should be. It violates darwinian theory itself...gays are starting to say now that "darwin was wrong." That's if I believed in evolution in the first place.

Um, well actually... there are several logically coherent reasons to for animals to display homosexual traits... you just need to look them up.

So, for the rest of your post... are you sayuing "animals can't be gay because that would be against evolution, and I don't believe in evolution either"?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Again, it's your biased homosexual view which leads you to believe they are gay. There is NO LOGICAL conclusion why they should be. It violates darwinian theory itself...gays are starting to say now that "darwin was wrong." That's if I believed in evolution in the first place.

So anyway... if they aren't homosexual... whats with all the... you know... homosexual activity?

It a LOT more involved than "rubbing up against each other" too... as if you didn't know

 

[ReformedChapin]

So anyway... if they aren't homosexual... whats with all the... you know... homosexual activity?

It a LOT more involved than "rubbing up against each other" too... as if you didn't know

Their stupid animals? Yes everything they do regards their sexuality. Maybe if a dog humps a guys leg he is gay.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Their stupid animals? Yes everything they do regards their sexuality. Maybe if a dog humps a guys leg he is gay.

They're stupid animals, maybe... but are you saying they aren't aware of the gender of the other animal they are attempting to have sex with?

When a dog humps someone's leg, that is because of the way dogs perceive themselves in relation to that person's "pack"... the logic behind THAT phenomenon is pretty well understood, if you ever cared to actually research such matters

 

[teen4jesus92]

...If you are regarding scientific evidence please show the findings of the gay gene and the individuals theoretical frame work which lead him to that conclusion...

I have yet to find a scientific study that proves homosexuality is innate (or that there is a "gay gene"), and I'd like it if someone could find one for me. But... that may be kinda hard.

Anyway, I guess Mr. Pirate was right,

if you were to read what was being posted you would notice the debate IS about what the bible says.

The church fathers were against homosexuality, right? Did they use the original texts or texts in the same languages as the originals?
And why would Bible scholars and translators purposely translate the Bible wrong? They research all this stuff from "the early days" so they should know the correct word usuage, right?
Am I just confused?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I have yet to find a scientific study that proves homosexuality is innate (or that there is a "gay gene"), and I'd like it if someone could find one for me. But... that may be kinda hard.

Anyway, I guess Mr. Pirate was right,


The church fathers were against homosexuality, right? Did they use the original texts or texts in the same languages as the originals?
And why would Bible scholars and translators purposely translate the Bible wrong? They research all this stuff from "the early days" so they should know the correct word usuage, right?
Am I just confused?

As yet, there is not CONCLUSSIVE evidence tht homosexuality is genetic... that is to say, there is not yet an identified "gay" gene... howeverm like virtually ALL behavioural traits, there IS strong evidence that genetics plays a strong part in predisposing people to certain types of behaviour, and also some fairly compelling evidence that explains homosexuality as a recessive gene that increases fertility in females...

 

[SolidTom]

Again, it's your biased homosexual view which leads you to believe they are gay. There is NO LOGICAL conclusion why they should be. It violates darwinian theory itself...gays are starting to say now that "darwin was wrong." That's if I believed in evolution in the first place.

So a male ram that continually has sex with other male rams is doing so by "accident", or is it just poor eye vision?

Why do you not want to accept reality, that those animals are objectively gay?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

So a male ram that continually has sex with other male rams is doing so by "accident", or is it just poor eye vision?

Why do you not want to accept reality, that those animals are objectively gay?

because reality does not coincide with some people's prior assumptions, they prefer to say that reality is wrong

 

[DMagoh]

THATS right... I forgot you came up with the mother of all goal post shifts....

going from "there is no evidence that animals are homosexuals" to animals that display homosexuals traits do so by accident and arent REALLY homosexual.

I know that I myself posted you several links relating to the evidence suggesting a genetic link with homosexual tendency, and seem to recall you dismissed it out of hand

So what if it IS genetic, are we to act on instinct no matter what the Bible teaches is right and wrong? Read this scripture...

18They said to you, "In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires." 19These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.

Hmmm, dont believe I want to follow "mere natural instincts" and fulfil my "ungodly desires".

 

[Der Alte]

[SIZE=-1]THATS right... I forgot you came up with the mother of all goal post shifts....

going from "there is no evidence that animals are homosexuals" to animals that display homosexuals traits do so by accident and arent REALLY homosexual.

I know that I myself posted you several links relating to the evidence suggesting a genetic link with homosexual tendency, and seem to recall you dismissed it out of hand[/SIZE]

"suggesting a genetic link" If homosexuality was genetic, then if one monozygotic, i.e. "identical twin," is homosexual, then virtually 100% of the other twins would also be homosexual. This 1991 study shows that only 52% of the second twins were homosexual. The Australian study was even lower, 38%.

This settles the question now, and forever, homosexuality is NOT genetic.

Bailey and Pillard (1991): occurrence of homosexuality among brothers

• 52% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual men were likewise homosexual
• 22% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
• 11% of adoptive brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual

J.M. Bailey and R.C. Pillard, “A genetic study of male sexual orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 48:1089-1096, December 1991

http://www.worldpolicy.org/globalrights/sexorient/twins.html

Better research, however, was based on twins who were recruited for other reasons, and only subsequently asked about their sexual orientation. These are known as "registry" studies, and they similarly gave a concordance rate between identical twins of less than 50%. There have been two major published registry studies (4,5), one based on the Minnesota Registry, the other on the Australian Registry. The larger of the two registry studies is the Australian one, done by Bailey, Martin and others at the University of Queensland. Using the 14,000+ Australian twin collection, they found that if one twin was homosexual, 38% of the time his identical brother was too. For lesbianism the concordance was 30%. Whether 30% or 50% concordance (snowball samples), all the studies agree it is clearly not 100%.

The critical factor is that if one identical twin is homosexual, only sometimes is the co-twin homosexual. There is no argument about this in the scientific community.

http://www.narth.com/docs/whitehead2.html

The distribution of sexual orientation among cotwins of the monozygotic probands appeared to be bimodal. In other words, most subjects classified themselves as heterosexual or homosexual, with very few giving evidence of significant bisexuality. This finding is in agreement with other recent studies (e.g. Buhrich et al. 1991).

According to their data, 52% (29/56) of monozygotic cotwins, 22% (12/54) of dizygotic cotwins, and 11% (6/57) of adoptive brothers were homosexual. Heritabilities of homosexuality were calculated using these results under a wide range of assumptions of the population base rate and ascertainment bias. Under all conditions considered, heritabilities were substantial (h2 was between .31 and .74 in all cases). However, "the rate of homosexuality among nontwin biological siblings, as reported by probands, 9.2% (13/142), was significantly lower than would be predicted by a simple genetic hypothesis and other published reports."

http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/studies.html#sotmtsoh
​

 

[teen4jesus92]

So what if it IS genetic, are we to act on instinct no matter what the Bible teaches is right and wrong? Read this scripture...

18They said to you, "In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires." 19These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.

Hmmm, dont believe I want to follow "mere natural instincts" and fulfil my "ungodly desires".

DMagoh makes a good point. I mean, sin is innate. Everyone is born into sin. (Psalm 53:3, Romans 3:12, Romans 5:8) So, even if homosexuality is innate (I'm not sayng it is, though), then we would still need to confess it and turn from it just like we confess and turn away from all other sins that are a part of our sinful nature, right?

 

[ReformedChapin]

So what if it IS genetic, are we to act on instinct no matter what the Bible teaches is right and wrong? Read this scripture...

18They said to you, "In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires." 19These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.

Hmmm, dont believe I want to follow "mere natural instincts" and fulfil my "ungodly desires".

And it's NOT genetic, which is the good part.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

Hey NewGuy, my brother has autism which isn't considered genetic (it can be caused by other sources but his was seemingly random and didn't show itself until a late age). So every time he's disrespectful because of it, is he sinning? Is he CHOOSING to be like that? Of course not! Just because something is not genetic doesn't automatically make it choice.

Not to say homosexuality is a mental disorder. But it is a different balance in hormones. As I said, I don't believe you're born with any attraction. You're born innocent to hormones, sex, etc. How you develop that attractive is simply how your hormones decide to work themselves.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Hey NewGuy, my brother has autism which isn't considered genetic (it can be caused by other sources but his was seemingly random and didn't show itself until a late age). So every time he's disrespectful because of it, is he sinning? Is he CHOOSING to be like that? Of course not! Just because something is not genetic doesn't automatically make it choice.

Not to say homosexuality is a mental disorder. But it is a different balance in hormones. As I said, I don't believe you're born with any attraction. You're born innocent to hormones, sex, etc. How you develop that attractive is simply how your hormones decide to work themselves.

Little course in logic, sinning means missing the target. In other words out of God's will. Your brothers sickness is not in God's will. Does it mean it's his fault? Nope. If we could help your brother out of his sickness would we YES. Just like homosexuality. We do everything we can to cure the sickness out there.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

Little course in logic, sinning means missing the target. In other words out of God's will. Your brothers sickness is not in God's will. Does it mean it's his fault? Nope. If we could help your brother out of his sickness would we YES. Just like homosexuality. We do everything we can to cure the sickness out there.

I'm afraid you're wrong. Sin is separation from God. It isn't missing the target per se. Sin is simply misdirecting where your so called "independence" goes. My brothers sickness is in God's will, and it doesn't do him any harm. He'll be magnificent some day. I hardly consider him sick at all. He just thinks a little differently, like all people. God uses my brother to help me understand and then to help others understand. If I had a choice, I wouldn't cure him. I wouldn't try to change who he his since it hasn't crippled him.

Likewise, I don't understand why you would want to change a homosexual. Homosexuality is not a sickness, it's a trait. It's a part of someone that doesn't cripple them in the least. Have you seen X-Men 3? To quote Storm, "They can't cure you. There's nothing to cure."

Also, educate yourself on your own opinion. You've insisted homosexuality is a choice and now you're saying it's a mental disorder. Make up your mind.

 

[teen4jesus92]

...

Likewise, I don't understand why you would want to change a homosexual. Homosexuality is not a sickness, it's a trait. It's a part of someone that doesn't cripple them in the least. Have you seen X-Men 3? To quote Storm, "They can't cure you. There's nothing to cure." ...

A trait? A part of someone? Then why did God tell us not to "lie with" (or sleep with) a person of our own gender? (Lev 18:22 and the verses I mentioned in the first post)
How does a loving God command humans to not be homosexual, and then allow for an unchangeable trait of homosexuality?
He doesn't.

 

[*Starlight*]

Hi

In my opinion, a loving relationship is something good, no matter if it's heterosexual or homosexual. The world needs more love, and research made by psychologists hasn't found anything harmful in same-sex relationships, so I just don't have any reasons to be against it. Especially since someone's sexual orientation isn't something a person chooses. Some people are just heterosexual, and some are homosexual, and that's normal...