Testing the Logic

[DMagoh]

This thread concerns the flawed logic of persons justifying homosexual behavior. I have seen many reasons posted as to why people think homosexual behavior is okay. However, if these reasons are true, then the logic should follow through to all things. So let's test the logic. Here are some popular reasons I have seen posted, and why you cannot say homosexual behavior is okay based on these “logical” reasons.



Let's Test The Logic


Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.

Flawed Logic: Jesus also never mentioned incest, polygamy, pedophilia, necrophilia.... are those okay too?


Why would a loving God hate love?

Flawed Logic: If I love my sister and she turns me on sexually, is it okay to have sex with her?


Animals do it.

Flawed Logic: Animals also eat their young and some female animals kill their male counterparts after mating. (I guess there are some humans that do that too, but they are in prison.)


It’s genetic, it would unnatural for me to be heterosexual.

Flawed Logic: Men turned on by animals and children feel the same way – it would be unnatural for them to have sex with humans or adults.


You should not deny happiness to someone.

Flawed Logic: What if children and animals make me happy?


Monogamous same-sex relationships are okay; it’s just being promiscuous that’s a sin.


Flawed Logic: So if I JUST have sex with my sister, and only my sister?


In no way am I condoning any behaviors in this thread, just merely pointing out the flawed logic. If your reason for thinking homosexual behavior is okay does not follow through to all other activities, then it is flawed logic.

 

[ReformedChapin]

This thread concerns the flawed logic of persons justifying homosexual behavior. I have seen many reasons posted as to why people think homosexual behavior is okay. However, if these reasons are true, then the logic should follow through to all things. So let's test the logic. Here are some popular reasons I have seen posted, and why you cannot say homosexual behavior is okay based on these “logical” reasons.



Let's Test The Logic


Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.

Flawed Logic: Jesus also never mentioned incest, polygamy, pedophilia, necrophilia.... are those okay too?


Why would a loving God hate love?

Flawed Logic: If I love my sister and she turns me on sexually, is it okay to have sex with her?


Animals do it.

Flawed Logic: Animals also eat their young and some female animals kill their male counterparts after mating. (I guess there are some humans that do that too, but they are in prison.)


It’s genetic, it would unnatural for me to be heterosexual.

Flawed Logic: Men turned on by animals and children feel the same way – it would be unnatural for them to have sex with humans or adults.


You should not deny happiness to someone.

Flawed Logic: What if children and animals make me happy?


Monogamous same-sex relationships are okay; it’s just being promiscuous that’s a sin.


Flawed Logic: So if I JUST have sex with my sister, and only my sister?


In no way am I condoning any behaviors in this thread, just merely pointing out the flawed logic. If your reason for thinking homosexual behavior is okay does not follow through to all other activities, then it is flawed logic.

Yep..also

"The bible is wrong, so I get to choose what's right or wrong."

Flawed logic: How can one have an absolute that is flawed with human reasoning? Also if one part of the bible is wrong who get's to choose what's right? It's either all or nothing.

 

[imind]

Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.

Flawed Logic: Jesus also never mentioned incest, polygamy, pedophilia, necrophilia.... are those okay too?

incest is potentially harmful genetically, and taboo in our society. beyond this i can think of no reason to say 'its bad'. i see nothing wrong with polygamy. pedophilia is again potentially harmful, same for necrophilia. so we have reasons to avoid the above without needing christ to speak of them.

Why would a loving God hate love?

Flawed Logic: If I love my sister and she turns me on sexually, is it okay to have sex with her?

already addressed, and you haven't answered why a loving god would hate love.

Animals do it.

Flawed Logic: Animals also eat their young and some female animals kill their male counterparts after mating. (I guess there are some humans that do that too, but they are in prison.)

i've never seen it suggested without being prompted by a fundie that homosexuality is 'unnatural'. in and of itself its a poor arguement, but so is suggesting its unnatural.

It’s genetic, it would unnatural for me to be heterosexual.

Flawed Logic: Men turned on by animals and children feel the same way – it would be unnatural for them to have sex with humans or adults.

already addressed, if nobody is being hurt, why would you have someone be something they are not?

You should not deny happiness to someone.

Flawed Logic: What if children and animals make me happy?

already addressed. if nobody is being harmed, potentially or otherwise, why would you deny them their happiness?

Monogamous same-sex relationships are okay; it’s just being promiscuous that’s a sin.


Flawed Logic: So if I JUST have sex with my sister, and only my sister?

already addressed. is the incest scenario really the only thing on your mind? kinda makes me wonder...

 

[GwynApNudd]

This thread concerns the flawed logic of persons justifying homosexual behavior. I have seen many reasons posted as to why people think homosexual behavior is okay. However, if these reasons are true, then the logic should follow through to all things. So let's test the logic. Here are some popular reasons I have seen posted, and why you cannot say homosexual behavior is okay based on these “logical” reasons.



Let's Test The Logic

OK let's test it.

Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.

Flawed Logic: Jesus also never mentioned incest, polygamy, pedophilia, necrophilia.... are those okay too?

Straw Man. The Bible does not show incidents of Jesus dealing with "incest, pedophilia, or necrophilia." It does show Jesus dealing with the centurion with the sick pais, and praising his faith (Matt 8; Luke 7).

Why would a loving God hate love?

Flawed Logic: If I love my sister and she turns me on sexually, is it okay to have sex with her?

Weak Analogy. The Bible gives good, practical, reasons for forbidding incest. And it gives examples (most notably in 2 Sam 13) of how incestual lust can destroy a family.

It gives no reasons for Lev 18:22 or Lev 20:13, beyond the reasons it gives at the beginning and end of those chapters for all the commands in them. And those reasons are all about keeping the Jewish people and the Jewish religious practices uncontaminated by the idolatrous religions of the other nations.

Animals do it.

Flawed Logic: Animals also eat their young and some female animals kill their male counterparts after mating. (I guess there are some humans that do that too, but they are in prison.)

Eqivocation (part 1). The argument of which this is a mis-representation is not used by "pro-gays" as a primary argument, but as a counter-argument to those who choose to intepret the phrase "para physen" ("against nature") in Romans 1 as "unnatural" as if the sinners Paul speaks of invented an unspeakable, never before heard of, inversion of everything in the natural universe.

It’s genetic, it would unnatural for me to be heterosexual.

Flawed Logic: Men turned on by animals and children feel the same way – it would be unnatural for them to have sex with humans or adults.

Equivocation (part 2) Suddenly, "unnatural" is not "against the natural order of the universe" as asserted by the anti-gays in part 1, but now simply means "against my desires." Neither represents the Biblical interpretation.

Paul uses the phrases "para physen" ("against nature") and "kata physen" ("according to nature") in two more places in Romans:

But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God.

For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.

Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. [SIZE=-2]Rom 2:10-29[/SIZE]

.....

For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.

For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.

Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graff them in again. For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? [SIZE=-2]Rom 11:13-24[/SIZE]

In the second, note especially that it is God's own actions that are described as "contrary to nature."

It would take a much longer examination than I have time tonight to examine the Biblical meaning of "nature," but your shifting between two oversimplistic "definitions" is clearly insufficient.
​

You should not deny happiness to someone.

Flawed Logic: What if children and animals make me happy?

Red Herring Happiness is denied to everyone at one time or another. Anyone who demands "happiness" is a fool.

But in a society built on the equality of all humans, and under a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people," rights matter. Everyone should be entitled to equal rights.

But rights, even "absolute" rights do have limits. If my claiming one of my "rights" harms someone else, it ceases to become a right. Harm in this case is usually physical or mental, but it can also be infringing on a higher-level right of someone else. (A rough ranking of rights would place those guaranteeing life at the highest level, and others in order below them.)

Monogamous same-sex relationships are okay; it’s just being promiscuous that’s a sin.


Flawed Logic: So if I JUST have sex with my sister, and only my sister?

Moralistic Fallacy. Actually there have been sucessful societies built on sibling marriage. Of course, all of them have been non-Biblical, in the sense that they are societies that don't follow the precepts of God's Word, but all that is needed is place reasonable limits on the incest (for example, only the Pharoah's family can engage in it, and only under certain conditions) to avoid the problems associated with the practice.

So, now I've shown the specific fallacies (logical flaws) in your "counter arguments." Care to try again?​

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

I was going to rebut but Gwyn did rather well.

I would like to point out however that you didn't find any flawed logic is the fact that homosexuality doesn't hurt anyway, unlike every other sin.