If homosexuality is proven to be biological . . .

[KCKID]

One person shows another person. Also know as orientation.

how do you think fundie Christians will handle it?

The way the Fundie Messiah in the Gospel handled it. Marriage is a man and a woman.

Be that as it may . . .

Homosexuality, if proven to be biological induced, would then be proven to be a developmental congenital defect. Since obviously, anyone with a logical mind and the ability to learn, can see that same-gener sex acts are not normal. Same-gendered individuals cannot have sex in all reality.

The mouth, throat, stomach and rectum are not part of the sexual organs. Latex figurines and rubber devices are not naturally part of the human anatomy. Batteries may power pace makers and other life saving devices, but are still not part of the natural body.

Forget about "fundie Christians" medical doctors will always know what sexual intercourse actually is by using science to show what is and what isn't sexual intercourse.

I've been studying you (kind of) for some time now, PC_F. You remind me so much of the occasional reformed smoker whose task in life is to reform all other smokers. It becomes their aim in life to show others what 'they' did and how clever and strong 'they' are for having done so. It isn't done so much out of genuine concern for others but mainly to 'big-note' themselves.

From atheism (you say) to Christianity the similarities are there, PC_F. Whether intentional or not, the over the top zealousness you display in exalting yourself above others is very evident. I doubt that it will last, however. Eventually common-sense reasoning - and the actual word of God and not your stylized version of it - will kick in and the fanaticism you presently display will subside. Meantime - while we wait - your posts are infuriatingly irritating for those of us who can read between the lines.

 

[Wyzaard]

The definition of marriage is not being able to marry a consenting adult that they love, it's being able to marry a consenting, unrelated (in most states) adult of the opposite sex.

And at one time in most states, 'of the same race'... fortunately, reasonable supreme court justices ruled that this definition violated the Constitution; thus, it was changed.

 

[Beanieboy]

The true question is if homosexuality is something which a cure for should be researched? Even without morals of religion influencing our judgment, I think we would have better chance at reaching a cure than getting some cultures to accept homosexuality. Am I sure? No, but I think classical conditioning could be done so that a homosexual becomes a bisexual, after which they act only on the heterosexual side of their bisexuality. Should this be forced on people? No. But if it is possible, we should offer it to people if they wish to undergo it so they can better fit in with societies which would take decades if not more to make them accepting of homosexuals (accepting does not mean approving).

It has been.
They have used shock therapy, testosterone therapy, psychotherapy...
And nothing changes.
Go figur'.

As a homosexual, I don't care whether you accept it or not. You can think me a sinner, choosing my sexual lifestyle, or that I have miraculously passed the age limit of gay men. Believe what you will.

When you start imposing laws upon my civil rights, the law will defend me ultimately.

There are KKK members who will probably never accept Jews and Blacks. Do you think the Jews and Blacks care?

 

[Kattylove]

Hopefully they'll start shutting up about it.

The Old Testament condemns shaving more than it does sodomy, and it doesn't condemn same-sex love at all. I don't see anyone proposing a national ban on razors.

 

[KCKID]

The Old Testament condemns shaving more than it does sodomy, and it doesn't condemn same-sex love at all. I don't see anyone proposing a national ban on razors.

Shhh ...not too loud . . .

 

[OphidiaPhile]

Hopefully they'll start shutting up about it.

The Old Testament condemns shaving more than it does sodomy, and it doesn't condemn same-sex love at all. I don't see anyone proposing a national ban on razors.

I just sinned for the second time today if that is the case.

 

[Oneofthediaspora]

​

how do you think fundie Christians will handle it?

I think attitudes to abortion might change.

 

[cantata]

I don't know what the fundamentalist Christians will say, but I'll be pretty depressed.

 

[WatersMoon110]

I don't know what the fundamentalist Christians will say, but I'll be pretty depressed.

Why?

 

[cantata]

Why?

I guess I'd feel like I wasn't a proper bisexual.

 

[WatersMoon110]

I guess I'd feel like I wasn't a proper bisexual.

How so?

 

[sidhe]

If homosexuality is proven to be biological, I will continue to not care which gender someone is knocking boots with when I make my appraisal of them. I'll also continue to complain about the false dichotomy of Western gender.

The crispy types will find some other reason that teh Gheyz are unnatural.

 

[cantata]

How so?

Well, because I wasn't born that way.

 

[WatersMoon110]

Well, because I wasn't born that way.

But does "biological" have to mean "born that way"?

I think that you have said in the past that you chose to be bisexual. But haven't you also said that you don't believe in free will?

 

[cantata]

But does "biological" have to mean "born that way"?

I think that you have said in the past that you chose to be bisexual. But haven't you also said that you don't believe in free will?

Well, sure.

But generally speaking, when people say "biological" they mean "pre-natal" rather than generally "to do with the brain" (since the latter is almost tautological).

 

[Merlin]

If homosexuality is proven to be biological . . .
how do you think fundie Christians will handle it?

irrelevant
we are commanded not to do it

 

[OphidiaPhile]

irrelevant
we are commanded not to do it

If all you have as a basis for saying that is the bible then you have no basis for believing it.

 

[Merlin]

If all you have as a basis for saying that is the bible then you have no basis for believing it.

why?

 

[OphidiaPhile]

why?

Well there is the fact that there is no evidence to back it up whatsoever second it was written by man third it contradicts itself constantly fourth there is nothing in the bible about homosexuality, the word did not even exist in that time period so it had to added when the bible was translated and the person doing the translating was either guessing or projecting his own prejudices.

 

[Merlin]

Well there is the fact that there is no evidence to back it up whatsoever

nonsense
i can read.

second it was written by man

so?

third it contradicts itself

no it doesn't

fourth there is nothing in the bible about homosexuality, the word did not even exist in that time period so it had to added when the bible was translated and the person doing the translating was either guessing or projecting his own prejudices.

nor was there any other English word.
that's why it's called a translation.