-
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.
Why is Homosexuality Wrong?
- Thread starter FSTDT
- Start date
- Status
C
Cerberus~
Guest
Explain to me how homosexuality is anymore detremental to evolution than ppl who go though life without ever having children? Or the celebate priests?
Not to mention that homosexuality has been around for a long, long time, probably even before humans, and if it's a threat to evolution, it hasn't been too effective.
Not to mention that homosexuality has been around for a long, long time, probably even before humans, and if it's a threat to evolution, it hasn't been too effective.
Upvote
0
Arnold_Philips
what
- Sep 15, 2002
- 6,416
- 462
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
Nymphalidae
Well-Known Member
carternordstrom said:Why on the other side of the planet? Well slight exaggeration there, just the thing is I'm a big part of our church and what my parents/family thinks of me is just so important. Also, I'm going into pediatric dentistry and a big part of why I'm doing that is b/c my genuine desire is to give the Lord my skill/education by donating my summers at orphanages to offer free dental aid to some of the thousands and thousands of children with such saddening circumstances. My church currently makes such 2wk long trips, but really the Lord's blessed me and I'm confident will continue to, so it's the least I can do. great experience!
So anyways I wouldn't be able to do all that if I was "out," and I really think that it'd mean much more to me to help with that in the summers (more fullfilling) than having a gay relationship that the very people I care about would despise/disapprove of.
Sure, if it's easy enough for your cousin to send me some verses that'd be nice! carternordstrom@yahoo.com
PS: Don't worry, I do realize that the meanest thing for me to do to someone is to sweep them up, marry them and fake a connected relationship only to have children and the american dream.
In fact, I'm wondering how much longer I've got before people start assuming I'm gay...that is, I am attractive, in great shape, and have a very promising career ahead. I've made plenty of friends with girls that I later realize only are so interested in me because they want to date/have a relationship. Don't worry though, I'm pretty decent at letting them know my intentions b/c the last thing I'd want to do is to keep them away from a true boyfriend when I had no interest regarding that.
My dad's successful, my family's very well-liked at church, so all that together makes it even less difficult for me to get an admirerer. (please, I'm not boasting or anything like that sorry) So once I finish school I'll have to adapt my response/excuse I guess. hmm
As for now, I'm very busy in college and tell people I'm not serious-enough of a person for anything more than great friends.
This is the most heart-breaking thing I've heard in a long time. If you had a family, it would be an all-American family, because America is about diversity and acceptance. That's why so many people came here to begin with. Your family should love you no matter what, and it's not like being gay or straight changes who you are. It isn't at all fair that you should be denied the joy of love and of having your own family just because some other people have a big stick up their collective rear end. And I'm sure there are charitable organizations that wouldn't snub your help because of your sexual orientation.
Upvote
0
one love
Well-Known Member
Cerberus~ said:
HOmosexuality promotes an agenda that teaches making lovely or soley loving one of the same sex. If straight men and women go through life without having children, it is not the same, they are promoting at least the basic concept of how life comes about. Priest are no worse than homosexuals in degrading mankind's evolution. They often turn out to be homosexuals who molest alter boy...bit of an exageration.
Upvote
0
Arnold_Philips
what
- Sep 15, 2002
- 6,416
- 462
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Homosexuality qua homosexuality doesn't promote anything. It's just the sexual and romantic attraction to the same sex.one love said:
I think it's pretty much impossible to find a homosexual that doesn't know that it takes a man + woman to make a baby.
"Often turn out?" Hardly.
Upvote
0
There are plenty of ways same-sex couples can raise children: sperm donation, surrogate mother, adoption, or just children from previous heterosexual relationships.one love said:
But, how same-sex couples can produce children shouldnt matter, because you havent explained why not producing children is so wantonly immoral, or why evolution should serve as a basis for ethics.
And I dont see what the reasoning is behind your consideration that same-sex couples not producing children is bad but celibate heterosexual couples are not bad. Both are consequentially identical - this tells me that you dont see "not producing children" as a bad consequence, but rather homosexuality itself as the bad consequence. I'd like to know the reason for this.
Personally, I feel you are making a lot of premature and poorly-thoughtout assumptions.
Upvote
0
one love said:
Weelll.... at least you're attempting to make a non-religious argument.
As far as I can tell, your argument goes like this:
1. Procreation occurs through heterosexual sex.
2. Heterosexual sex and relationships are the paradigm or template for the continuation of the species.
3. Childless heterosexual couples follow the template, though they may be sterile.
4. Homosexual couples do not follow the template.
5. Therefore homosexuality is morally wrong.
Bzzzt! Sorry, #4 does not automatically imply #5.
DuchessDinesOut (#29) Cerberus~ (#31) FSTDT (#37), in the posts referenced, gave secular arguments against a variety of other moral wrongs. So far, you have not done so for homosexuality.
DrummerWench
*DW ignores the conflation of consenting adult homosexuals with pedophilic priests as being off-topic*
Upvote
0
appleofhiseye
Veteran
My bible says that adultery is wrong, fornication is wrong, divorce is wrong, harlotry is wrong, as well as homosexuality is wrong.
We as a society however, turn a blind eye to most of these things. Like it doesn't matter what happens between two "consenting" adults. Pre-marital sex is not illegal, etc.
I can't see where secular society can prohibit homosexuality, when these other "sins" are so tolerated.
On the other hand I still haven't figured out why Homosexuals want "gay- marriage" legalized. It just seems silly to put yourselves under the constraints of marriage covenant as outlined in religious doctrine. I have nothing against civil unions, though.
We as a society however, turn a blind eye to most of these things. Like it doesn't matter what happens between two "consenting" adults. Pre-marital sex is not illegal, etc.
I can't see where secular society can prohibit homosexuality, when these other "sins" are so tolerated.
On the other hand I still haven't figured out why Homosexuals want "gay- marriage" legalized. It just seems silly to put yourselves under the constraints of marriage covenant as outlined in religious doctrine. I have nothing against civil unions, though.
Upvote
0
Toboe
Well-Known Member
- Jun 18, 2005
- 810
- 25
- 35
- Faith
- Pagan
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Gay and bisexual people can be equally religious as any other straight person. Marriage has existed before christianty and not all religions follow the same dogma as christianty. And even now marriage is nothing more than a legal binding document. Hell I heard on the news today that two straight guys got married just for the tax breaks.appleofhiseye said:
Upvote
0
staugustine68
Greyhounds as pets
Do you know why they don't kiss in front of thier parents? Because it's shameful!FSTDT said:
Upvote
0
appleofhiseye
Veteran
ohh just for the "Tax-Breaks"Toboe said:
well that's gonna screw up our society's basic building block, "nuclear family" having to recognize all those unions as legit. families, could get rather confusing to say the least. Then what happens to those two guys when they want to start a family with their GF's? They have to get a divorce? Divorces can be costly, not a good way to start out.
lol sorry we're getting off track of the OP
Upvote
0
Toboe
Well-Known Member
- Jun 18, 2005
- 810
- 25
- 35
- Faith
- Pagan
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Seriously I mean it would be awsome to marry yourbest friendappleofhiseye said:ohh just for the "Tax-Breaks"
well that's gonna screw up our society's basic building block, "nuclear family" having to recognize all those unions as legit. families, could get rather confusing to say the least. Then what happens to those two guys when they want to start a family with their GF's? They have to get a divorce? Divorces can be costly, not a good way to start out.
lol sorry we're getting off track of the OP
1. Either spouse was already married to someone else at the time of the marriage;
2. Either spouse was too young to be married, or too young without required court or parental consent;
3. Either spouse was under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the marriage;
4. Either spouse was mentally incompetent at the time of the marriage;
5. If the consent to the marriage was based on fraud or force;
6. Either spouse was physically incapable to be married (typically, inability to have sexual intercourse which persists) at the time of the marriage;
7. The marriage is prohibited by law due to the relationship between the parties.
They could get an anulment under the grounds that they never consimated(sp) the marrige.
Upvote
0
butterfoot
Formerly Known as cameronw
Being gay or living the Homosexual lifestyle just does not fit in the cycle of life. Lets not even look at what the bible says but rather life in general. Life begets Life. To have life you must create it in some form. The current system that works is that Man and Woman procreate. The woman gets pregnant and has child. So here starts the circle of life. It then starts all over again. Child grows up, meets someone of the opposite sex, they procreate and have child. That child grows up meets someone of same sex for relationship, they (procreate) wait no child. Circle of life ends. I hope this explains in a nutshell why homosexuality is not natural.
I guess if homosexuals aren't careful and listening to the Evolutionist pretty soon men will start having kids. I guess that would be wierd but hey evolutionist are right aren't they?
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_fixe.htm
-cw
I guess if homosexuals aren't careful and listening to the Evolutionist pretty soon men will start having kids. I guess that would be wierd but hey evolutionist are right aren't they?
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_fixe.htm
-cw
Upvote
0
Toboe
Well-Known Member
- Jun 18, 2005
- 810
- 25
- 35
- Faith
- Pagan
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Cw there are other options besides having children yourself. There are seragent mothers child adoptions, invitro ect. I'm usually the only person who uses RT on this forums lol. lol Thats sort of some bad logic lol.( i can't even say cra* man this sucks)cameronw said:
Upvote
0
FSTDT said:
It does tell us why, and at the very beginning of the bible.
"So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."
- (Genesis 1:27)
In the bible, the image of God is reflected in a godly union between the male (Adam) and the female (Eve). In this union, their very nature, both physical, moral, and spiritual, reflects the perfectness of God. God is indeed our Heavenly Father, but it is only in the union of man and woman that this perfect ability to worship as one is reflected. Not only that, but in this union, there is also reflected the nature of God which is His life giving nature. This is only possible between man and woman. Why do you think that is? If God is not opposed to man on man sex or woman on woman sex, then why can't two women create a child together naturally? Why can't two men create a child together naturally?
There is also the issue of disease:
Homosexual anal intercourse carries a high risk of disease, this is recognized in Scripture where gay men are said to receive in their bodies the due penalty for their error. In 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. (Romans 1:27) And please do not bother to give me a speech about HIV and AIDS. I'm well versed on the subject, and this isn't necessarily speaking about HIV and AIDS only.
In this verse where it says "So God created man in His own image" one might assume that he was speaking only of Adam, but this is not so. He is speaking of mankind, and of the union between Adam and Eve, being a perfect reflection of His own image. The two of them together were able to become one in worship.
I have touched on this in previous threads here. Eve was created to be a "help meet".. not help mate but help meet. She was created in order to help Adam reach his full potential in the ability to worship the Heavenly Father. With Eve, the two became one in the spirit, in the flesh, and before God.... a perfect union, a perfect creation.
The image of God cannot be reflected in the union between man and man, or woman and woman, or man and beast, or woman and beast. In these unions there is no mirror image of God, and if God is not in the midst of them, there is only one other who can be.
Upvote
0
Toboe,
staugustine68,
Not that I mind your thoughtful contribution, but I want to keep the focus of this thread on why homosexuality is right or wrong in the first place, I dont want to shift the focus of this thread to gay marriage (it very easily derails a thread).
staugustine68,
That being said, please keep your pollution out of my thread. Thank you.staugustine68 said:
Upvote
0
Adiya,
Aside from that, you dont need a partner of the opposite sex to "help meet". This is demonstrated over and over again by the fact that many same-sex relationships can be happy, mutually beneficial, and "successful" in every sense that a heterosexual relationship can.
And, in the case of the non-believer, your commments have no relevance at all. The non-believer would also see your idea is being incredibly abstract, it doesnt appear to render a moral judgement according to prima facie obligations or consequentialism, so it doesnt look like a moral statement at all -and that is obviously unhelpful. Or, in the case of non-believers like myself, I would argue that God is irrelevant to morality, lending to the conclusion that "reflection of God" is not a moral standard at all, so your comment completely misses the point of this thread (I apologize if this comes of harshly).
If you want to talk about the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality, you have to speak in terms of actual moral terms, such as referring to the consequences of particular actions, how those actions affect people, whether they contribute to suffering, etc.
I dont care what God thinks, I want to know why he is opposed. Can you tell me why?Adiya said:
Dont single out homosexuality. All sex carries a risk. Given the fact that disease is indiscriminate about your sexuality, nothing is explained about why homosexuality is immoral, and heterosexuality is not.Adiya said:
What does this have to do with morality?
Aside from that, you dont need a partner of the opposite sex to "help meet". This is demonstrated over and over again by the fact that many same-sex relationships can be happy, mutually beneficial, and "successful" in every sense that a heterosexual relationship can.
Fine and dandy. There are people who believe God is exalted by homosexuality, and these people draw their conclusions from the same bible that your own mutually exclusive conclusions originate. The disagreement is irresolvable, as it renders the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality to be no different than any particular persons opinions - and that is obviously unhelpful.Adiya said:
And, in the case of the non-believer, your commments have no relevance at all. The non-believer would also see your idea is being incredibly abstract, it doesnt appear to render a moral judgement according to prima facie obligations or consequentialism, so it doesnt look like a moral statement at all -and that is obviously unhelpful. Or, in the case of non-believers like myself, I would argue that God is irrelevant to morality, lending to the conclusion that "reflection of God" is not a moral standard at all, so your comment completely misses the point of this thread (I apologize if this comes of harshly).
If you want to talk about the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality, you have to speak in terms of actual moral terms, such as referring to the consequences of particular actions, how those actions affect people, whether they contribute to suffering, etc.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
