Why debate Homosexuality?

[eolculnamo2]

Unprotected sexual intercourse is something one does
Sharing needles for IV drug use is something one does
Giving pregnant while HIV positive is something one does

Sexual oriention is not something you do. People are gay or straight or bi whether they are having sex or not, whether they are a virgin or not, whether they are celibate or not. Being homosexual is not different from being black.


At hand we have the use of the existence of a virus to justify prejudice against a minority. You don’t seem ot have any problems with the morality of that. yet you seem offended by the suggestion that the exact same argument could used to justify prejudice against a different minority.
Can you explain why?

It's sinful to be a homosexual. The Bible is very clear about it.

Romans 1:26-27
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

1 Corinthians 6:9
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders

1 Timothy 6:3-4


3If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, 4he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions,

 

[Dannager]

You call yourself a Christian and you argue with me against it? It's sinful to be a homosexual. The Bible is very clear about it.

The Bible could be wrong.

 

[eolculnamo2]

The Bible could be wrong.

No it can't, if it the Bible could be wrong, it voids our whole religion.

 

[Dannager]

No it can't, if it the Bible could be wrong, it voids our whole religion.

Only if the Bible is your religion. I don't worship the Bible.

 

[eolculnamo2]

Only if the Bible is your religion. I don't worship the Bible.

What are you saying? You're catholic?

Catholic is a form of Christianity and Christianity is based around the Bible

 

[DMagoh]

I don't see why there is such a huge debate over whether or not homosexuality is wrong or not.

I'll tell you why. If someone was a Christian and honestly believed there was nothing wrong with it, I'd leave it between them and God. However, that is not what happens on this forum. There are Christians that are homosexuals who actively try to convince other men that it is not sin and to quit fighting temptation and give in and live life as a homosexual. That's where I have to step in. I cannot allow other Christian men to be talked into giving up without giving the Bible equal time. That's why I debate. Men who are questioning need both sides of the argument.

There was a group at my college who protested and wore shirts saying "HOMOS GO TO HELL".

How can they call themselves Christian? It's almost as if they see joy in telling others they are going to be damned.

I cannot agree more. This type of behavior gives Christianity a bad name. That's NOT the way Jesus convinced people to turn to him and repent.

I personally believe that homosexuality is a sin, but no more of a sin than any of the sins I commit...

Agreed. It is no more of a sin than pre-marital sex, drunkeness, greed, etc. However, if I had a Christian brother that was engaging in premarital sex or getting drunk all the time, I would be remiss if I did not say something to him about it. The same applies to a Christian brother that is engaging in homosexual sex. I would be remiss if I did not talk to him about it.

 

[UnitedInChrist]

No you did not answer the question at all.

You use HIV/AIDS in an attack against homosexuals.

I asked that since HIV/AIDS basically affects people with dark skin does that make it OK to use HIVAIDS to justify racism?

Still no answer from you.

So is it YES it is morally justifiable to use HIV/AIDS to justify racism?
Or is it NO it is not morally justifiable to use HIV/AIDS to justify racism?


[/font][/color]

well lets see.

“The average life expectancy for homosexuals is approximately thirty-four years shorter” The last claim is one of the better known lies spread by Christian hate groups. It was first told by Paul Cameron founder of the Family Research Council after he was expelled form the APA for ethics violation (he made up data and lied about the legitimate research of others)

“the bulk of all bowel diseases in America is carried by homosexuals” That is amazing considering 52% of all cases of colon cancer are in women over the age of 65
75% of rectal cancer occurs in women over the age of 65.
women are twice as likely to have inflammatory bowel disease as compared to men
Ref: American Cancer Society, Mayo Foundation
maybe Rev Ovadal is confused about the meaning of the word “bulk”

“They also have a higher incidence of STDs” love to see the good rev back that claim up with actual facts

“Tuberculosis” strange…Rev Ovadal better call the CDC…they don’t know what they are talking about when it comes to Tuberculosis…they seem to think that foreign born individuals account for the majority of cases. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5511a3.htm


as well as account for the vast majority of all AIDS cases.” Does the World Health Organization know this? they seem to think that the majority of cases of HIV/AIDS is in heterosexual women. http://www.who.int/hiv/en/




Fascinating…considering that 32% of all new cases of HIV were in women who contracted the virus though heterosexual sex. Another 15% were man who contracted HIV though heterosexual intercourse…and then there is another 18% that contracted HIV though IV drug use
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/resources/slides/women/index.htm
so far we are up to 138% and this isn’t including the infants born with HIV.

Nicely handled. Lets also keep in mind Bafriend...whatever he is, makes it a point to post and engage in every homosexual thread on this Forum. I really don't care what his demons are, and what he is trying to fight, or run from, or cover up, or whatever..but what is clear is his bias and less than sound facts that he posts. Similar to this woman that is on another thread that is saying "harry potter will bring down nations"...Not only is it lunacy, ridiculous, and comical..she quotes scripture all day long, and links u to every "christian" website known to man (and woman). Similar to bafriend, mercyburst, etc...they post comments that are all pulled from ministries, and christian websites...and to make it even more comical..from christian websites that support their fundamentalist beliefs...So..you can all continue to feed these posters or you can ignore and hope they will go away. They won't go away b/c you can stop another homosexual thread, and they'll be right there behind you. Not sure where they find the time to attend their bible study etc...Jez, I'd love to even know what his congregation would think given all his time on gay threads. Oh well....

 

[davedjy]

. I cannot allow other Christian men to be talked into giving up without giving the Bible equal time. That's why I debate. Men who are questioning need both sides of the argument.

The ones I see here arguing AGAINST gay people are usually gay themselves. Usually, what I see is gay men pretending to be heterosexuals, and hiding behind false doctrine, while trying to "convince" others that they cannot be the way God made them.

Over 450 vertebrate species are born gay, lesbian, bi and transgender...

"Ex-gay" programs have been denounced by every respected medical and mental health care organization and child welfare agency in America, including:

American Psychiatric Association
American Psychological Association
American Medical Association
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Association of School Administrators
American Federation of Teachers
The Interfaith Alliance Foundation
National Academy of Social Workers
National Education Association
American Counseling Association
World Health Organization
Council on Child and Adolescent Health.

http://www.outfront.org/library/fact.html

 

[UnitedInChrist]

I'll tell you why. If someone was a Christian and honestly believed there was nothing wrong with it, I'd leave it between them and God. However, that is not what happens on this forum. There are Christians that are homosexuals who actively try to convince other men that it is not sin and to quit fighting temptation and give in and live life as a homosexual. That's where I have to step in. I cannot allow other Christian men to be talked into giving up without giving the Bible equal time. That's why I debate. Men who are questioning need both sides of the argument.
Dmagoh...my brother...u know I love you. You're one of the few fundamentalists that know what is happening to to your "name" based on those that are also calling themselves "fundamentalists". Anyway...I disagree with alot of your stuff..but I appreciate what you say, and it is said intelligently. The homosexuality debate is front and foremost here b/c it is the topic of the debate. The reality of the situation though is it is less than MINIMAL in day to day life, and it's impact on the individual as well as society at large. I'm sure if I met you, or if we went to the same church, etc.. We would be friends, and IF the sexuality thing ever came up..we would agree to disagree and still be friends. My sexuality has no impact on you just as yours has none on mine. Is it a sin? To you it is..so I respect that,and certainly understand why you say that. For me...it is NOT a sin..however, if I abuse my sexuality with lude and random sex, than it certainly is. Do I think if you have sex before marriage you are sinning...no i do not. I do understand many hold to that though. For a gay person..no marriage equals no sex..ever. Reality of the situation is this can not be. So, I post on these threads, and read these threads, and I never want to force nor do I think I can change someone's mind about not only accepting homosexuality..but making people believe it isn't a sin. For me...it's an easy discussion..NO ONE CARES!! Honestly...I couldn't possibly care less of heterosexuality issues and what people do..so I would assume that heterosexuals couldn't possibly care about homosexuals and what they do. Seriously..>NO ONE CARES!!!! Those that say they are "str8" and make the issues out of it, and obsess over it, and can't seem to get enough of it, are the one ones that concern me. Why??? Is their life that shallow and that unrewarding that they have all this time to fight about something they supposedly don't agree with, like, accept, etc??? Hmmm...it causes one to wonder no?




I cannot agree more. This type of behavior gives Christianity a bad name. That's NOT the way Jesus convinced people to turn to him and repent.
We've posted on this b4. It's not christianity. It is nothing more than hateful bigots, that surround themselves in a "faith" so they think they are doing something right when it is offensive to nearly everyone that would see it or read it.


Agreed. It is no more of a sin than pre-marital sex, drunkeness, greed, etc. However, if I had a Christian brother that was engaging in premarital sex or getting drunk all the time, I would be remiss if I did not say something to him about it. The same applies to a Christian brother that is engaging in homosexual sex. I would be remiss if I did not talk to him about it.

Fair enough.

 

[DMagoh]

Dmagoh...my brother...u know I love you...I disagree with alot of your stuff..but I appreciate what you say, and it is said intelligently. ...I'm sure if I met you, or if we went to the same church, etc.. We would be friends, and IF the sexuality thing ever came up..we would agree to disagree and still be friends.

I agree with that. If we can agree on the fact that Jesus is God's son, and He died and rose again to save us from our sins, then we are brothers in Christ.

 

[Dannager]

What are you saying? You're catholic?

Catholic is a form of Christianity and Christianity is based around the Bible

Catholics (and most Christians, for that matter) don't believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. That's something that only fundamentalists share.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Technically shaving and wearing wedding rings are also sins

Mind justifying yourself how exactly they are a sin? I really hope you are not talking about the old covenant which is no longer valid .

I made no claims here about genetics

Good

My assumption is that bigotry is never justified. What is your assumption?

Inerrancy of scripture and use of logic to scripture.

And where in this thread did I quote the bible?

That is an interesting statement.
Can you explain it?

How is it then that homosexuality is ok?

 

[Dannager]

Inerrancy of scripture

Is a poor assumption.

 

[MrPirate]

Technically you are wrong. Both of those requirements applied ONLY to Israelites, NOT gentiles converts, see Acts 15, et al.

FYI, The prohibition of jewelry is NT…


Well I have my bible here opened to Leviticus.

What I am not seeing anywhere here is the note saying that chapter 19 is ONLY for the Israelites…but chapters 18 and 20 are not exclusively for them.

Can you cite the specific Leviticus verse that degenerates what rules its OK for modern Christians to follow and what laws its OK for us to ignore.

 

[MrPirate]

I believe he said "evidence" not your unsupported opinion. The "hormonal levels" is only an unproven theory. And these studies disprove the "its genetic" argument, now and forever.


Since monozygotic, i.e. identical, twins are genetically identical, if one twin is homosexual, virtually 100% of the other twins should also be homosexual. These studies show between 38% and 52% of the second twin are homosexual.

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​

Actually these studies do show a genetic component thank you for positing evidence showing such.
without the genetic component twins would have no more chance of sharing a homosexual orientation than any two siblings. The fact that twins have such a high concordance is good evidence of something genetic going on.

 

[BAFRIEND]

Catholics (and most Christians, for that matter) don't believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. That's something that only fundamentalists share.

Catholics are not fundamentalists in the sense that not all scripture is viewed as non-fiction. But the Catholic Church holds that the Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit and the Bible is sacred to the Catholic Church.

In the way you expressed your response, you are wrong in stating that the Catholic Church believes the Bible can be in error. To say as much, is to state that the Holy Spirit has abandoned the Catholic Church as well as all Christian denominations.

 

[BAFRIEND]

• 52% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual men were likewise homosexual

If you have a pair of identical twins, why not 100% of the time are both not homosexual ?

Give free will a little credit.

 

[Dannager]

Catholics are not fundamentalists in the sense that not all scripture is viewed as non-fiction. But the Catholic Church holds that the Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit and the Bible is sacred to the Catholic Church.

Of course.

In the way you expressed your response, you are wrong in stating that the Catholic Church believes the Bible can be in error. To say as much, is to state that the Holy Spirit has abandoned the Catholic Church as well as all Christian denominations.

Hardly. The Holy See has long operated under the premise that not everything in the Bible is (or needs to be) factually accurate, and recognizes that its message still rings true despite this. Factual accuracy is of little importance as compared to the moral and spiritual truths contained within.

 

[Dannager]

If you have a pair of identical twins, why not 100% of the time are both not homosexual ?

Because a) it probably depends on hormonal levels in the mother/parents prior to birth to a significant degree, and b) if a genetic predisposition exists, it may be a gene that increases (but does not guarantee) homosexual orientation in the person. I explained this already.

Give free will a little credit.

Environment was eliminated as a factor by conducting the study with fraternal and identical twins. Free will was isolated and removed from the determinant factors for these studies. We are left with heritable qualities to explain the 38%-52% figure in identical twins and 22% figure in fraternal twins (all of these percentages are far above normal background rates for homosexuality in the population at large).

 

[Dannager]

Actually these studies do show a genetic component thank you for positing evidence showing such.
without the genetic component twins would have no more chance of sharing a homosexual orientation than any two siblings. The fact that twins have such a high concordance is good evidence of something genetic going on.

Oh for Pete's sake. No, the studies don't show a genetic component. They show that a genetic component is a possible explanation and that heritable traits play a significant role. I'm on your side here, but don't do the same thing the other guys are doing by misrepresenting the study. The study supports the idea that homosexuality is something you are predisposed towards from birth - attraction is not a matter of free choice. That much has been made clear.