Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
..because some people don't SEE a difference?Some people don't see how offensive a comparison it is. Others are so interested in "winning an argument" they don't CARE how wrong the comparison is. Plus it makes you look so "Christian" comparing people you don't like to people nobody likes.
tulc()
guess they think it benefits their argument.
stratt: If you can be born gay, then is a child molester born the same way?
why is when the subject of homosexuality is being discussed, somebody has to bring up child molesters?.. are the 2 groups THAT similar?
Most child molesters (if not all) were molested themselves..(I honestly don't get the connection, but I keep hearing there is 1) and they're intention is to have sexual satisfaction, not a loving relationship. The way I see it, that group is closer to rapists altho for the most part they aren't as violent, but some molesters do rape children. This is not along the same lines as the subject of homosexuality so I don't see how some ppl think there's some kind of connection or similarity
He believes that homosexuality is against the law of God and therefore he is arguing that calling it love is not an adequate defense. This is a sound argument, for it is typical in many types of non-acceptible behaviors (like verbal and physical abuse) that the perpetrators call what they are doing love. So the proper response to this argument is not to yell "infidel" (or "homophobe") but to attempt the calm application of reason.
It is clear to me that the love is as varied as people and that that love and good are two different things. When a wife is murdered, who is the prime suspect? Love can follow many twisted paths. How then are we to judge when something which is called love is also a good and wholesome thing. In the obvious cases where it is not good, this is made quite clear by the evidence of trauma and harm that someone experiences as a result of it.
In cases of verbal abuse, however, the evidence of trauma can be increasingly difficult to establish. What do you think of a relationship between husband and wife where the wife is subtly encouraged to thingk that she is incapable of taking care of herself. It is subtle but there is a twist of wrongness in this thing they call love between them. However, such things are generally considered nobody's business but theirs. Relationships are often quite complicated with both good things and bad, and only the participants can judge for themselves if the relationship is more good than bad.
So, when a homosexual relationship is called love, how shall we judge if this is a good thing? Is there evidence of trauma? Are the participants happy? Does the relationship diminish one of the participants or does it empower both of them and make them more effective and healthy? Who better than the participants themselves can make such an evaluation? This is assuredly the basis for the secular judgement which does not classify a homosexual relationship with those other things which people might call love but which are illegal because there is evidence of trauma and harm.
So how might someone who believes that homosexuality is a sin classify the such relationships differently. It must be according to some type of spiritual harm which is not objectively observable or measurable. Which means that it is very much subject to religious belief, and so if our society is to pay any reasonable respect to the principles of religious freedom, this cannot be the basis of secular law and judgement.
Christians have disagreements about a great many things including how many different passages of the Bible are to be interpreted or taken seriously. It seems to me that we must accept the fact that a portion of Christendom embraces the secular judgement of homosexuality as part of their understanding of Christianity. As long as we have the freedom to our own interpretations and the right to speak our mind where it is appropriate, then why should we complain?
Its the same argument. But, one that offends gays. Because it makes the perspective they use, being exposed as a cover for the degenerate. Ironically, so. They must admit its no justification for such behavior.
..because some people don't SEE a difference?Some people don't see how offensive a comparison it is. Others are so interested in "winning an argument" they don't CARE how wrong the comparison is. Plus it makes you look so "Christian" comparing people you don't like to people nobody likes.
tulc()
Well, genez just proved the point.
Some people seem incapable of discerning between consentual, loving relationship and rape.
Makes me shudder to think what their partners must be going through.
Well this is presumptive and certainly offensive to me and every other so called "normal straight" person who do not see homosexuals as degenerate. At least not without the context of the admission that as a sinner I am just as degenerate and as criminal in the eyes of God as any pedophile. I have the same disease (sin) and without the aid of God, I am just as doomed.as a normal straight person sees a gay being degenerate.
This like the majority of genez' post, this is a very good argument against many of the types of justifications that I have heard for homosexuality and it is the reason for my positive response above. Again I must repeat that the only legitimate justification for homosexuality that I can see is simply the freedom of religion and choice - the right to live ones life as one chooses as long as it does not infringe on the same rights of others.For, they know if the same argument is given for child molesters as is tried for gays, i.e., born that way. That it destroys any sense of justification for that being their excuse.
Like the other statement, this is going overboard in attributing attitudes to people which is both presumptive and completely incorrect. The vast majority of people do NOT see both as equally offensive. In fact, I believe that the majority does not consider the sexual practices between consenting adults to be either offensive or anybody's business but theirs.But for normal straight society? They see both as equally offensive.
This is simply grossly incorrect. Even without violence there is ample evidence of trauma in the sexual abuse of children! And even without this evidence of trauma there is a huge difference between taking advantage of children and the activities of consenting adults.No difference between homosexuality and pedaphilia, when the terrible violence we see in the news concerning child rape being associated with pedaphiles, is eliminated from the equation.
See? Just don't see any difference.That's why when it's pointed out there doesn't seem to be any difference between Islamic theocracy and Christian theocracy they just nod their heads and say you're absolutly right.
tulc(or...they should anyway)
that's weird.. I wonder why ppl feel they are equally offensive. On my block there's a lesbian couple (one has a young son and her girls are adults now), and a lesbian cpl that just moved in right across the street from me. And I'm friends with 2 guys who are a gay couple. I have no qualms here, but I would not like it if a child molester moved in next door or down the street.
Well, genez just proved the point.
Some people seem incapable of discerning between consentual, loving relationship and rape.
Makes me shudder to think what their partners must be going through.
So no, it isn't justified to me. It isn't OK to molest a child.
don't know about you, but to me homosexuality and heterosexuality are almost alike... the difference being gender and the ability to breed.
We probably don't have a problem with seeing a difference between heterosexuality n child molesters, right? I don't justify my heterosexuality, and I don't need anyone to justify their homosexuality to me. Why would anyone need or want gay ppl to justify their sexuality?
I have to agree...i.e. Sodom and Gomorrah...[/color][/font][/size]
[/color]Its not OK to molest anyone. But? If pedaphilia became a norm of a culture? As it was once in ancient cultures? That would be for another day, and for another bombardment of politically correct enforcement to change the thinking of a people...... down the raod a ways. First, let's get the gays acceptable. That's too much for now.
Breed? Like in breeders?
Like in the derogatory term gays use towards straights? I wonder why you chose that term. I believe I see a strong bias showing.
There is much more to heterosexuality when God blesses the relationship. Rarely seen these days since we had the sexual reveolution of the Sixties. And, that is exacly why gays feel so free to decalre themselves as equals. For? Without God's love blessing a man and woman? Sex is sex..... Just choose your apparatus in the form of a person.
Leviticus 20:13 niv
" 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
I do not believe God is a big fan of gay sex.
Do you believe he is?
" 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
That is because its not just sin involved. Its because they have turned to evil, and its revealed in HOW they sin. Its a lie against the truth. It is a perversion of God's image of man and woman. God is both male and female in his creating man in his image. Interesting thought.
Now? If you want to turn this into a secular debate and leave God out of it?
Then! I would say you are doing a fine job of holding your ground. But, not when God is left in the equation.
Have a nice Day, GeneZ
TOO TRUE...genez: I have learned over the years that there are some people that have a natural affinity for gays, and they are not gay. They are not the norm, though. If they were? We would not be having this debate. Would we? So how do you represent most people?
I don't. What I've learned over the years is that most ppl are driven by ego.. well the need to feel as if they are above the next person, the desire for some kind of authority over the next person so they can dictate what that person can n cannot do and to deny things like rights, and so on. Today it's gay people, maybe tomorrow we'll go back n terrorize the native americans. It's been a while. At one time it was the norm to discriminate against black ppl.. maybe next week we'll give it another go.
Most ppl and their "norm".. aren't satisfied unless they are making someone else's life miserable. But I'm probably wrong.
genez: I have learned over the years that there are some people that have a natural affinity for gays, and they are not gay. They are not the norm, though. If they were? We would not be having this debate. Would we? So how do you represent most people?
I don't. What I've learned over the years is that most ppl are driven by ego.. well the need to feel as if they are above the next person, the desire for some kind of authority over the next person so they can dictate what that person can n cannot do and to deny things like rights, and so on. Today it's gay people, maybe tomorrow we'll go back n terrorize the native americans. It's been a while. At one time it was the norm to discriminate against black ppl.. maybe next week we'll give it another go.
Most ppl and their "norm".. aren't satisfied unless they are making someone else's life miserable. But I'm probably wrong.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?