Some people I read about:

[Wiccan_Child]

There are several species of animals that mate for life.
But that is a fruitless argument to even get into as humans are not animals but were fearfully and wonderfully made in the image of God. Animals do not possess such a claim. If we were to adapt our lives to the lower that human way animals conduct themselves and the codes they live by rather than the way God created us to live and conduct ourselves and our lives, we may be killing and eating our young.

The argument is not to justify living 'like animals', but to show that homosexuality is as natural and non-Fall-induced as one's eye colour. I believe it is you who created the strawman.

strawman. NULL/VOID

Care to justify this accusation? Your personal beliefs, no matter how strongly felt, are evidence of nothing more than your ability to believe.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Dear Wiccan_Child,
Species? They would die out then.

Only if the entire species was homosexual. Naturally, this is not the case.

Which species have some of their number do this?

That form monogamous homosexual 'couples'? The Zebra Finch, for one.
It should be noted that monogamy is rare in the animal kingdom (humanity included), even in previously-thought exemplars such as Swans and wolves.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Wiccan_Child,
The argument for you may not be justifing like animals or not, but for many of us it is. If we dont have the same starting point we cant argue along the same lines.

Only if the entire species was homosexual.

Yes of course, you should have said some members of some species. It is an important distinction because of course in evolution it would be a weakness... if one believes in evolution that is.

So is there a difference between homosexuality in animals such as zebras and humans, if so what exactly.

 

[david_x]

No. Your god is supposed to have planted it in every human. It is not so much a gift as a mandatory and unreturnable burden.

If you follow what God wants, it is almost like not having it. Therfore you are what God wanted you to be.

Species? They would die out then. Which species have some of their number do this?

Animals don't do anything that is "right" anyway so I don't see how it matters.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

The argument for you may not be justifing like animals or not, but for many of us it is. If we dont have the same starting point we cant argue along the same lines.

The point of an argument is to objectively convince someone of your position. We all start from the same premises (homosexuality, including gay monogamy, exists in animals). The conclusions we draw are our own. IamRedeemed created a strawman, and thus created a fallicious conclusion. That is all.

Yes of course, you should have said some members of some species.

I figured it was obvious. I guess not.

It is an important distinction because of course in evolution it would be a weakness... if one believes in evolution that is.

For such a smart person, I'm surprised that you misuse the term 'evolution'. Do you mean the Theory of Evolution?

So is there a difference between homosexuality in animals such as zebras and humans, if so what exactly.

The Zebra Finch (a bird, by the way) species contains members that are sexually attracted to members of the same sex. Humanity (a monkey, by the way) also contains members that are sexually (and/or romantically) attracted to members of the same sex.
So no, the homosexuality is preciesly the same: some members are sexually attracted to the same sex.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

If you follow what God wants, it is almost like not having it. Therfore you are what God wanted you to be.

How does one discern what God wants?

Animals don't do anything that is "right" anyway so I don't see how it matters.

That, of course, depends on your definition of 'right'.

 

[ReformedChapin]

That, of course, depends on your definition of 'right'.

Well since you are in a Christian forum, right and wrong is pretty much what the bible says. I would think you figured that out by now.

 

[Miracle_Storm]

Proven genetic evidence? A rather odd and specific phrase. But yes, there is much evidence that homosexuality is at least partially derived from one's biology (specifically, one's neurochemistry).

LINK?

The argument is not to justify living 'like animals', but to show that homosexuality is as natural and non-Fall-induced as one's eye colour. I believe it is you who created the strawman.

I know you are pagan, but still it seems you would be able to discern for yourself how UNNATURAL homosexuality is..

[/color][/size][/font]
Care to justify this accusation? Your personal beliefs, no matter how strongly felt, are evidence of nothing more than your ability to believe.[/color][/size][/font]

Same could be said of you.

Only if the entire species was homosexual. Naturally, this is not the case.

Naturally or else we wouldn't exist. If you want to compare human beings to animals you are trying to compare them to beast of the field. An animal will take an unwilling mate, an animal will hump a leg. an animal will roll in feces and enjoy it...Animals do not define what is okay or natural. God did not create us to be as wild beasts.

That form monogamous homosexual 'couples'? The Zebra Finch, for one.
It should be noted that monogamy is rare in the animal kingdom (humanity included), even in previously-thought exemplars such as Swans and wolves.

Lots of wolves in the midst of sheep on this board lately.

How does one discern what God wants?

Pick up the Bible, read the Word of God, be saved and indwelled by the Holy Spirit Let Him guide you. Stay in prayer and relationship with the Lord God Almighty. Then pray for discernment. You might find your "wisdom" turns into foolishness.

That, of course, depends on your definition of 'right'.

You will never know "right" until you know the One who is Good, Holy, Perfect, and "Right"


You will define "right" as "if it feels good do it"

 

[Wiccan_Child]

LINK?

This page looks at many aspects of human biology and psychology, and the various claims made thereof to homosexuality. Not all are deemed conclusive, but the majority nevertheless are.

I know you are pagan, but still it seems you would be able to discern for yourself how UNNATURAL homosexuality is.

How so? I see nothing unnatural about homosexuality. Indeed, it is observed in over 1,500 species of animal, humanity included. How, then, is it unnatural?

Same could be said of you.

Indeed. That is why I stick to rigour and logic, not religious beliefs.

Naturally or else we wouldn't exist. If you want to compare human beings to animals you are trying to compare them to beast of the field. An animal will take an unwilling mate, an animal will hump a leg. an animal will roll in feces and enjoy it...Animals do not define what is okay or natural. God did not create us to be as wild beasts.

I have answered this fallicious claim elsewhere. The argument from comparison with nature is not to conclude that we are to act 'like animals', but to show that homosexuality is prevalent in non-human animals. To claim that homosexuality is unnatural is to fly in the face of the evidence.

Lots of wolves in the midst of sheep on this board lately.

How droll.

Pick up the Bible, read the Word of God, be saved and indwelled by the Holy Spirit Let Him guide you. Stay in prayer and relationship with the Lord God Almighty. Then pray for discernment. You might find your "wisdom" turns into foolishness.

Yes, I tried that once. I was Christian for 11 years. You know what I learnt? Nothing. Nothing came to me, I wasn't indwelled by anything more than slight cramp. Forgive me if I do not take you on faith (no pun intended).

You will never know "right" until you know the One who is Good, Holy, Perfect, and "Right"

Of course dear.

You will define "right" as "if it feels good do it"

I will do no such thing. Do you see me advocating paedophilia? Incest? Rape? Murder? Theft? No.
I define moral wrongness as that which infringes upon the free will of others. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Well since you are in a Christian forum, right and wrong is pretty much what the bible says. I would think you figured that out by now.

Then what of the things that the Bible doesn't say? What of the holocaust? What of nuclear missiles?

 

[david_x]

How does one discern what God wants?

Prayer, reading, and listening.

That, of course, depends on your definition of 'right'.

No, right is right is right.

Then what of the things that the Bible doesn't say? What of the holocaust? What of nuclear missiles?

Uh, love your neighbor. They were not supposed to kill anyone, that is what the bible says about that.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Prayer, reading, and listening.

Statistically speaking, prayer is ineffective.
What do I read? The Bible? If so, what translation? Or do I learn Ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek? What parts should I read? I understand that there are various books and whatnot that have been included or ommited over the millenia. What of them?
To whom do I listen? I was a Christian for 11 years, and I heard nothing.

No, right is right is right.

Indeed. Socrates is Socrates. But this is a tautology: while it is as true as truth can be, it doesn't tell us what is right.

Uh, love your neighbor. They were not supposed to kill anyone, that is what the bible says about that.

The Bible sanctions murder. Is that loving thy neighbour?

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Wiccan_child,

So no, the homosexuality is preciesly the same: some members are sexually attracted to the same sex.

So if homosexuality in zebras is the same as in homo-sapiens, is it only justified if monogamous and loving?.... or should I ignore that argument in future?

Also is it in born in zebras, is there any genetic evidence or is it aquired by zebras?

 

[ReformedChapin]

Then what of the things that the Bible doesn't say? What of the holocaust? What of nuclear missiles?

Why are you bringing that up HERE?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

So if homosexuality in zebras is the same as in homo-sapiens, is it only justified if monogamous and loving?.... or should I ignore that argument in future?

I don't understand. I was asked for an example of a species that exhibits homosexual monogamy, and I gave you one: the Zebra Finch.
My original argument, however, is a counterargument against the "Homosexuality is unnatural" argument against homosexuality. That is, by demonstrating that homosexuality exists outside of the human species, I have shown that it is indeed natural. If it was unnatural, why would it be exhibited by over 1,500 species?

Also is it in born in zebras, is there any genetic evidence or is it aquired by zebras?

I don't know. Is it relevent?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Why are you bringing that up HERE?

Because it is pertinant to my point. Why else?

 

[ReformedChapin]

Because it is pertinant to my point. Why else?

It's completely irrelvant to this issue.

 

[MrPirate]

Dear Wiccan_child,
So if homosexuality in zebras is the same as in homo-sapiens, is it only justified if monogamous and loving?.... or should I ignore that argument in future?

Actually yes. in species that form pair bonds same sex couples form and maintain relationships

Also is it in born in zebras, is there any genetic evidence or is it aquired by zebras?

Is there any real evidence that sexual oriention is a choice in human beings?

 

[ReformedChapin]

Statistically speaking, prayer is ineffective.
What do I read? The Bible? If so, what translation? Or do I learn Ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek? What parts should I read? I understand that there are various books and whatnot that have been included or ommited over the millenia. What of them?
To whom do I listen? I was a Christian for 11 years, and I heard nothing.


Indeed. Socrates is Socrates. But this is a tautology: while it is as true as truth can be, it doesn't tell us what is right.


The Bible sanctions murder. Is that loving thy neighbour?

You cannot be a Christian without being a part of God's elect. Most versions of the bible are the same only minute differences are between them, if you can read the bible in original languages are much better. And yes some books are excluded from the cannon because they weren't written by inspired sources and contain doctrinal contradictions inside of them.

Secondly " prayer is statistacally inefective" is far one of the dumbest statements I ever heard. You cannot calculate prayers by any reliable format.

The bible sanctions killing not murder per definition. You just call it murder because you don't like it.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

It's completely irrelvant to this issue.

Do you seriously have the audacity to tell me what my own point is? Wow, I knew some Christians thought they were the bees knees, but... wow.

You cannot be a Christian without being a part of God's elect. Most versions of the bible are the same only minute differences are between them, if you can read the bible in original languages are much better.

On the contrary, each version contains instances of it's authors baises. Compare Young's Literal to King James.

And yes some books are excluded from the cannon because they weren't written by inspired sources and contain doctrinal contradictions inside of them.

Apparently not. Leviticus contradicts reality by explicitly stating that locusts have four legs, when they have six. Why, then,
Also, who determines what is and isn't written by inspired sources? Is there some form of objective test, or is it on the personal convictions of the compiler?

Secondly " prayer is statistacally inefective" is far one of the dumbest statements I ever heard. You cannot calculate prayers by any reliable format.

Nonsense. It is a relatively easy task to calculate the ratio of 'answered prayers' to 'unanswered prayers', and to calculate the probability that a prayer will be answer due to pure coincidence. You know what every single verified study on prayer has yeilded? The same number. The ratio of 'answered' to 'unanswered' prayers is roughly the same number we'd expect if it were all by pure chance.
Unless, of course, you're willing to back up your appeal to emotion.

The bible sanctions killing not murder per definition. You just call it murder because you don't like it.

No. I call it murder according to it's own definition.