[Mobius]

Many things are open to changes. Did you hear of those pyramids in Bosnia? They could re-write the history of the human species.

How? They're no older than Stonehenge.

But they're much more complex than Stonehenge. We know of the old British civilizations, but I can find nothing(without considering the newly discovered pyramids) of a civilization in Bosnia.

I, for one, HATE homosexuality.  I hate it with a passion.  It disgusts me.


That said, I have nothing against homosexuals.

I wouldn't say I'm for making gay marriage illegal.  I would, however, like a distinction to be made between marriage by the Church and marriage by the State.

As far as "love your neighbor as yourself," think about how you love yourself.  You screw up.  You make stupid choices.  You look back on things you did and say "What an idiot I was!" But you don't hate yourself.  This is what I believe that thing means.  Love others the way you love yourself.  You hate the fact you make mistakes, but you don't hate yourself for your mistakes.

That said, a person can love you despite of your mistakes.  But that doesn't mean they don't wish you to mke them better.

I don't like homosexuals, either. I know I have been influenced by local traditions(by "local" I mean the place where I live, not Italy in general) and I don't know if I'm doing the right thing. I mean, in North Italy you can find homosexuals kissing each other while here it's impossible.

And homosexuals can't have children, how can two homosexuals be an alternative to two eterosexuals?

The Old Testament god did say Homosexuals should be put to death, and you think Jesus is the same god.

And you make th No True Scotsman Fallacy anyway, btw.

Blah blah, the teachings change. People no longer want to be Christian because they see the Christian religion as a bunch of rules to respect, like "Go to the Church!", "Don't have sex before marriage!" and many, many others. The true dochtrine is different. You can spend your life far from a Church, but you can remain a more than valid Christian. You can have sex before marriage and there's nothing wrong with it as long as you respect your partner(one partner is allowed, more not...it's immoral). I'm not Christian but I consider many teachings of Christianity as something valid.

Hey, know what?  Every mode of thinking is flawed!

1.  Most Christians lack tolerance with respect to homosexuals thanks to certain passages in the Old Testament that say homosexuals must be put to death.

2.  Most Muslims lack tolerance with respect to other major religions, thanks to their ****ing maniacal theofascist leaders in the Middle East.

3.  Most atheists lack tolerance with respect to any major religion thanks to this perceived belief that everyone who belongs to other religions are attempting to force their beliefs down their throats.

Well...except Buddhists.  They're just sitting on the sidelines keeping to themselves and being possibly the most peaceful human beings on the planet.

And for the love of God (no joke intended), Ed, why can't you just use the Edit button?

1) Read above, then talk to a true Christian. A true Christian doesn't trust the Bible at 100%, it's a book written by humans(who are not perfect!) thousands of years ago.

There are things that take precedence over the so called rules. "Supporting each other" takes precedence over "Kill the homosexuals!" and "Love" takes precedence over "Don't have sex before marriage!". "Respect God and the others, and behave well" takes precedence over "Go to the Church!". I have talked with Christians who have heads full of teachings taken from the Bible and I can guarantee that they're pretty far from your stereotyped idea of "Christian".

2) Things are going to change, I think. I heard of the first transmission in "Muslim territory" in which a sexuologist(I hope I spelt it in the right way) talked about sex.

3) Meh, a true atheist should keep his/her/its mouth closed. About the Buddhists...they aren't that peaceful. I watched a video time ago: a nice fight between Buddhists and people bleeding.

mkay... two pointless posts.


Impressionable nothing.  I investigated for six months before making my decision

So why were you an atheist and what changed your mind?

Meh, people want illusions. They can't accept the fact that this planet is florid thanks to a coincidence. They can't of Earth as an insignificant place in this Universe...and more important, they can't think of feelings as the result of chemical processes.

[jr2]

Eh, ye old "I don't agree with homosexua-----""HOMOPHOBE!!!111ONEONE"

I am with G0atmaster in his persuasion....

Oh, did I mention, I've worked with several homosexuals, and none of them would say I'm a homophobe, or that I hate them? 

You see, when we say "I hate homosexuality", we are just not also saying "I hate all sins... idolatry, adultery, thievery, etc, etc."

Even though some of us still slip up and do some of those things.

We don't hate people who do them.

In fact, if we did, that would be a worse sin, because, according to Jesus, hating one's brother is equal to murder.  Put that in your pipe and smoke it. 

[TrashMan]

Isnt Bush a Christian?   

Nah, he's a idiot.

And don't be fooled, the real reason for all wars in the middle east are liquid - oil and water.

Only up to a point. In the quantum realm you can and its why talking about the first cause of the big bang is a moot point.

Excuse me, I took an course in quantum mechanics and  Idon't recall hearing anything even remotely similar to that.

[Edward Bradshaw]

Isnt Bush a Christian?   

Nah, he's a idiot.

And don't be fooled, the real reason for all wars in the middle east are liquid - oil and water.

Oh I know the Bush government is covering up the real reasons for the war in the middle east, but that doesnt mean he isnt a Christian. You cant keep saying that Christians dont do bad things and whenever someones shows an example of a Christian doing just that just say they arent real Christians.

On a side note, whats water got to do with the war? Ive not heard that one.

Excuse me, I took an course in quantum mechanics and  Idon't recall hearing anything even remotely similar to that.

Then excuse my ignorence as I havent. I will humbly accept my error if you will accept G0atmasters argument that something cannot come from nothing logic is flawed when we look at the quantum relm. As you are no doubt aware things are very different at that level.

Ed

[Edward Bradshaw]

You see, when we say "I hate homosexuality", we are just not also saying "I hate all sins... idolatry, adultery, thievery, etc, etc."

Even though some of us still slip up and do some of those things.

Dont you see how insulting this is? You dont choose who you are attracted to. If you think you can, why dont you try it! To say its the same as adultery and theft it makes out its they are the same thing. Homosexuality is as natural as hetrosexuality. You dont choose to be attracted to girls, you just are. You dont choose to be attracted to some girls more than others, you just are. And before you start to say its unnatural if that were true we should find no examples of this in nature, but nature is full of examples of homosexual animals. We are part of nature. I know you would rather imagine us as magically created completely seperate from them damned dirty animals, but we are, in every objectively measureable way possible; animals.

We don't hate people who do them.

You dont look down on cheaters, theives and murderers? 

[jr2]

Hate ≠ look down on.  There is a big difference.  Nice try though.  No, we don't hate cheaters, thieves and murderers.

And no, people are not "born" homosexual; it is a result of their decisions, which are often influenced heavily by their environment... I wish they were "born" that way... we might have a cure.  (Consider: homosexuals cannot have children!)  Although, I'm sure you feel the same way about Christians. 

[Edward Bradshaw]

Hate ≠ look down on.  There is a big difference.  Nice try though.  No, we don't hate cheaters, thieves and murderers.

Fine, but you would say you look down on them, right? Becuase you see to the rest of the world the same way one looks down on theives rapists and murders could be called "hate". Maybe you have a different definition of hate to most people, but I and a lot of others would call it hate. Calling it hate then becomes semantics, comparing homosexuality to these terrible crimes is the issue.

And no, people are not "born" homosexual; it is a result of their decisions, which are often influenced heavily by their environment... I wish they were "born" that way... we might have a cure.  (Consider: homosexuals cannot have children!)  Although, I'm sure you feel the same way about Christians. 

Homosexuals can and do have children, either from a past marriage or relationship which didnt work because they were "living a lie" ie. trying to act like they were hetrosexual. Or by using sperm doners either from friends or from a sperm bank.  This is irrelevant though, please address the fact that if homosexuality is unnatural why we have homosexual animals. As far as I can see this debate really hinges on this.

[jr2]

Animals have also been known to attack their young.  Is that therefore natural?  Besides, if you're trying to say people are born homosexual, it would be a self-solving problem, as the genes responsible would be eliminated...

      Biology's Declaration

             The "Dual Sin" of Homosexuality

Many people fail to see that the sin of homosexuality is different from other sins in the sense that it is the only one (aside from bestiality, to my knowledge)  that involves dual wrong, moral and biological.  Not only is the practice of homosexuality a sin but it also violates God's created order in biological sexuality.

Strictly from a scientific perspective, we all know that same-sex couples are biologically incapable (by design) of having sexual intercourse and producing children.  The sexual organs were designed by God to complement each other and work together for mutual pleasure and species reproduction.  The question then comes to mind that if God truly wanted same-sex couples to engage in sexual activities and so forth, why did He not allow them the ability to procreate as heterosexual couples usually can?  Surely the omnipotent God could have made it possible if He so chose.

Homosexuals are well aware of this biological problem and it is not surprising that they generally choose to ignore this problem and its logical implications.  The usual retort is that some heterosexual couples can’t have kids either.  But the fact that some heterosexual couples may have a defect that hinders normal reproduction doesn’t prove anything for the same-sex couples’ case.

For even if the reproductive organs don’t work properly in some heterosexual couples, the fact remains that the biological function of the sexual organs was designed to work only in a certain way, i.e., heterosexually.  And no amount of deceptive rhetoric or Scripture distortion or straw man arguments or emotional appeals can do away with this fact.  Biology joins with the Bible to condemn homosexuality as both morally and biologically aberrant.

              Homosexual Animals?

Weak attempts have been made to draw conclusions in favor of the homosexual lifestyle from the animal kingdom.  Popular books have tried to say that since there are animals that perform homosexual acts, we can conclude from this  that homosexual behavior is somehow "natural" and not abnormal.  But the same problem from biological design remains even if we grant that some animals perform "homosexual" acts.

No two males or females can reproduce.  Sperm and sperm (or egg and egg) cannot provide for the continuance of the race, whether animal or human.  Homosexuality by its very nature is self-defeating, for if every creature were to forsake the created order, in time all male/female gendered species would die out.  Ultimately, then, homosexuality on a broad scale in this context is synonymous with death.

Another problem ignored by those who try to argue this way is the fact that animals are not the moral creatures that we are.  A male dog will "hump" a human's leg in an attempt to perform a sexual act.  But is this animal  cognitively attempting to commit bestiality, or was the animal simply reacting to certain environmental stimuli out of instinct?  It is completely asinine to try to argue for homosexuality from the animal world because animals will attempt to have sex with just about anything when properly stimulated.  We know this for a fact without any deep scientific studies.  They mainly act on instinct and environmental stimulus, not human moral and cognitive principles.  This argument is seriously flawed because people have simply forced human morality and cognition on mere animals.  It has no validity whatsoever and in no way validates human homosexuality.

Possible Causes of Homosexuality

In discussing the possible causes of homosexuality, one has to be careful to note that homosexuality is not monolithic.  All homosexuals do not share the same experiences and all do not “become” homosexual by the same means.  Despite the widespread myth that people are  “born” with a homosexual “orientation” that is unchangeable and “natural,”  the fact remains that there are about 6 basic potential causes for homosexuality.  One of these causes, from a Christian theological perspective, is the sinful nature and is the ultimate cause of all sinful acts and behaviors.  We’ve already covered this area so there is no need to repeat the Biblical points here.  We will now look at these potential causes in this order:1- People Choosing to be"Gay," 2- Bad Relationship with Male or Female Parent, 3 -Hormonal Imbalance in the Womb, 4- Genetic Defect, and 5- Demonic Activity.

    1-People choosing to be “gay”

There are those who want us to believe that you cannot “choose” to be homosexual, just as you cannot “choose” to be African-American.  However, the problem is that you have to assume that being “gay” and being born into a particular racial category are somehow equivalent.  Yet no one has ever chosen to be Chinese or Irish or African.  You are either born that way or you’re not. But I think a good number of people, myself included, have known or do know people who have chosen a homosexual lifestyle.

Women will talk about going out with other women because they’ve been hurt emotionally so much by men.  And we know that there are some men out there who will pull the “switch” on women for the same reason.  For those homosexual men and women who actually chose to have relations with the same sex, it cannot be said that their “orientation” is caused by genetics and being born a certain way.  Since there are some who can make this choice, and no one can make such a choice regarding his or her ethnic background, it would seem that homosexuality cannot be equated with ethnicity in an attempt to justify it as some do.

    2- Bad Relationship with Male or Female Parent

Some have argued that one of the reasons for homosexuality is because a male had a bad relationship with his father, or a female had a bad relationship with her mom.  The person who seeks to find fulfillment in the same sex is simply trying to attain the love from the same sex he or she did not get from that parent.  This argument is based on extensive psychoanalytic research, and it reveals:

“That in the lives of their patients there was unusually often an emotional mismatch between the child and same-sex parent (such as a father who subtly or overtly rejects a son who has many ‘feminine’ traits); or an emotional mismatch between the child and the opposite sex parent; or sexual abuse of a child by either the same sex or opposite sex parent; and most often the rejection of a child by same-sex peers.” (Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, p. 104, by Jeffrey Satinover, Baker Books, 1996).

Although I am sure this argument has some validity, it would seem that it has an obvious flaw.  There are perhaps millions of people who have not become homosexual but did not have a good relationship with a parent.  So what explains this?  The answer is simple.  As stated earlier, homosexuality is not monolithic.  There may be some who are attracted to the same sex for this particular reason, but this does not explain those who do not fall into this category.

    3 -Hormonal Imbalance in the Womb

There is evidence that another component in the formation of homosexual “orientation” could be intrauterine environmental conditions.  In other words, the conditions in the womb during fetal development.  Dr. Satinover remarked about the research of Gunter Dorner:

“In 1991 Gunter Dorner, one of the major researchers of the prenatal hormonal influences on sexuality, published a review of the studies on the subject to date.  He concluded that a prenatal abnormality in hormones – perhaps caused by undue stress to the mother – will cause later homosexual behavior.” (p. 101).  Dr. Satinover also noted that this conclusion has been "vigorously disputed"  and that “…no hormonal difference has ever been discovered between homosexuals and heterosexuals (as is dramatically the case between males and females)…” (p. 102).

However, Dr. Satinover further explained that research done by behavioral neurologist Norman Geschwind and Ronald Galaburda proposed that “homosexuality might be an intrauterine developmental abnormality that is not necessarily hormonal in nature” (p. 102).  They found that at least one cause of left-handedness was “an abnormal autoimmune effect during pregnancy” (p. 102).  They also noted that left-handedness appeared to be more common among homosexuals.  This research has also been disputed, but it seems that there is a remote possibility that there is a link between homosexuality and developmental autoimmune abnormality.  Perhaps more detailed and comprehensive research, done without bias or activist agenda,  will help us better understand this potential cause of homosexuality.

    4- Genetic Defect

After looking at some of the research and pondering the implications, I cannot help but feel a sense of awe at all the variables involved.  My initial impression was that, if homosexuality is genetic at all, then it was perhaps a genetic defect, much like sickle-cell anemia. People are born with sickle-cell, but this does not mean they were meant to be that way.  It is a genetic defect that needs correcting, not something to be praised or paraded as something to take "pride" in.

From the research so far, it seems that we simply do not know enough about the workings of human genetics  to accurately determine the cause or causes of homosexuality from a genetic perspective.

But my “prediction” on this is that if we do find a clearly defined, conclusive genetic link to homosexuality, it will turn out to be a genetic defect.  It simply makes sense in light of what we already know about human sexuality and biology.  There are only two sexes, not three or four, despite artificial attempts of people create new genders (like “bisexual”) or to have their gender changed.

The little conundrum that homosexuals find themselves in is that they want to be able to say their lifestyle is “normal” and should be accepted because they are “born” that way.  Yet if genetic research should find that they are born that way as a result of a genetic defect, they will be faced with the undeniable fact that their condition is something abnormal that should be “corrected.”   It is a catch-22 indeed, but it is one that they will have to deal with if later research should prove homosexuality is tied to a genetic defect.

    5- Demonic Activity

This last possible cause of homosexuality is perhaps too popular in some Christian circles.  Some would argue that all homosexuality is demonic in nature, meaning that they think demon spirits are behind it.  While it is entirely possible, from a Biblical point of view, that demons are indeed involved in homosexuality, it does not make sense to argue that all homosexuality is demonic based on what we know so far from the Bible and science.

The Bible tells us that all are sinners (Romans 3:23).  We don’t need demons to help us sin. We can do it all by ourselves quite well.  But, the Bible also tells us that satan and his demons do indeed involve themselves in our affairs in order to tempt us and provoke us to sin and disobey God.  Jesus was tempted by satan himself in Matthew 4.  According to Ephesians 2:1-3 we find that satan, the “prince of the power of the air,” is the “spirit” who now works in the “sons of disobedience.”

Satan influenced Peter to even try to “rebuke” Jesus for stating the fact that He would suffer and die and be raised up (Matthew 16:22).  Satan himself is said to have “entered” Judas and used him to betray Jesus into the hands of the Romans (Luke 22:3, 47, 48).  We even have the testimony from both Testaments that idol worship, the worship of a false god, is tantamount to demon worship (Deuteronomy 32:17; 1 Corinthians 10:20).

So these and other passages demonstrate that demons are active in the world and seek to influence us into disobedience against God’s revealed will.  Therefore, since the Bible declares homosexuality against God’s will and biological design, it is no wonder that demons would also get involved with promoting homosexuality just like any other sin.

But we must be careful not to fall into the trap of thinking that homosexuality is any more demonic than any other sin.  It is not.  It may be different and people may be treating it as if it is something to be proud of by having parades and so forth, but this does not mean it is more demonic or any worse sin in God’s eyes than any other. 

[NGTM-1R]

's not even listed among the mortal ones, for crying out loud.

[Edward Bradshaw]

Animals have also been known to attack their young.  Is that therefore natural?

It sure isnt unnatural, but that doesnt mean its not immoral if humans did that.  But to clarify the reason for bringing up homosexual animals is to refute the argument that homosexuality is unnatural becuase it has no apparent reproductive value.  However, since there are homosexual animals we can see this is irrelevant.

At the same time it also goes some way to refute the religious idea that a humans are choosing to be gay, since if that were true and its unnatural then homosexual animals must also be "choosing" to be gay as well and therefore must be sentient and have a soul just like humans do in order to have the free will to do so.  Since if they didnt choose to be homosexual, they wouldnt be at all if we use the same logic.

And I asked you before, can you personally choose to be sexually attracted to someone of the opposite sex? Can you even force yourself to be attracted to someone you're not attracted to even if they are of the same sex?

And just in case you thought I forgot, the reason why killing your children and homosexuality isnt the same is that homosexuality doesnt hurt anyone. Really, whats wrong with being gay if you just put aside your opinion that its icky.

The article you quoted may be right in that one of the causes of homosexuality may be hormonal imbalence in the womb, but that doesnt mean they need to be "corrected". In fact that also shows its not unnatural.

  Besides, if you're trying to say people are born homosexual, it would be a self-solving problem, as the genes responsible would be eliminated...

Yet as we can see from the rest of the animal kingdom, that is demonstratively not the case.

[achtung]

Animals have also been known to attack their young.  Is that therefore natural?  Besides, if you're trying to say people are born homosexual, it would be a self-solving problem, as the genes responsible would be eliminated...

Actually, if it were genetic, the extreme hatred towards them in the past probably kept them making it with the ladies for fear of death.  Hence, the genes were carried down, producing more homosexuals. 

Of course, I think it's neither genetic nor choice.  I think it's due to hormones pre-birth.

[Mustang19]

Reproductive failures? I think it bears relation to getting involved in 20-page internet debates.

[NGTM-1R]

Well its not unnatural, but that doesnt mean its not immoral.  But to clarify the reason for bringing up homosexual animals is to refute the argument that homosexuality is unnatural becuase it has no apparent reproductive value.  However, since there are homosexual animals we can see this is irrelevant.

No, it's not, and see my comment at the end.

At the same time it also goes some way to refute the religious idea that a humans are choosing to be gay, since if that were true and its unnatural then homosexual animals must also be "choosing" to be gay as well and therefore must be sentient and have a soul just like humans do in order to have the free will to do so.  Since if they didnt choose to be homosexual, they wouldnt be at all if we use the same logic.

This is a logically bankrupt argument; you need not have a soul if sentient, for starters, nobody ever said that and a lot of religions have argued some group or another doesn't have a soul at various points.

But leaving aside the philosophical implications, you need not be sentient to "choose" as it were. A lab rat in a maze can go left or right. This is a choice, and it makes one. You can condition an animal (or a person) to do irrational things. Environmental factors need to be examined in these cases, as does the fact that pure random chance plays a factor.

And I asked you before, can you personally choose to be sexually attracted to someone of the opposite sex? Can you even force yourself to be attracted to someone you're not attracted to even if they are of the same sex?

I can't vouch for the latter, but the former? Certainly. I've done it before; several of my relationships have had a "convincing myself" stage. Perhaps I'm strange; perhaps I grew a little too cynical about people in general. Still, it proves it can be done. Equally germane, you can chose not to be attracted to someone of the opposite sex, and we do it all the time.

  Besides, if you're trying to say people are born homosexual, it would be a self-solving problem, as the genes responsible would be eliminated...

Yet as we can see from the rest of the animal kingdom, that is demonstratively not the case.

Is it? The point he makes is valid. It ought to be self-eliminating. But it apparently isn't, which leads to the fact that they must be reproducing, wtfbbqlol and so on.

So maybe we're all a bunch of idiots sitting here arguing about homosexuality in animals when the animals in question were bisexual. We've drawn pretty little pictures in our head in black and white. This is normally considered A Bad Thing, yet here, somehow, we've decided that black and white is shiney and works. We believe it feverantly.

I suspect this to be all delusional.

I think in the end the choice thing isn't wholly wrong, in that in our rush to create the black-and-white shiney-ness (on both sides of the coin here) a lot of people on one side or other have managed to force down a part of themselves, which perversely proves the point that you can make a choice at least in a negative sense.

The irony here is that if genetic it may well end up being self-eliminating for humans because of our insisting on that shiney black-and-white duality, thus smacking everyone across the face and "proving" the argument you just tried to refute "correct."

[TrashMan]

FYI, there aren't any "real" homosexual animals as far as I've seen. There's no doubt there are animals that are attracted to the same sex, but there is NEVER real intercourse. They are moving around but they don't actually "stick it in".  I've seen female animal attempting to "hump" male ones.

And yes, there is a lot of things in nature that I would never want to happen. Some insects kill their partner during/after sex and eat it..God knows I wouldn't want that.

Ergo, methinks homosexuality is genetic in nature, as the vast majority (if not all) homosexuals claim it's not by choice, but they have always been like that.


EDIT - quantum level is all strange and not very well understood, but show me a article or research study that shows something can just come out of nothing... We don't know allsmot anything about strings themselves, but I bet no scientist will claim they appear just out of nowhere.

[Edward Bradshaw]

FYI, there aren't any "real" homosexual animals as far as I've seen. There's no doubt there are animals that are attracted to the same sex, but there is NEVER real intercourse. They are moving around but they don't actually "stick it in".  I've seen female animal attempting to "hump" male ones.

Where did you hear that? Lets just take one other ape, the bonobo. These animals have a very sexual society and exbit just about every perversion humans engage in, and yes they do "stick it in" and I challenge you to find any credible source that says they dont.

And yes, there is a lot of things in nature that I would never want to happen. Some insects kill their partner during/after sex and eat it..God knows I wouldn't want that.

But its not unnatural for those insectes to do that. If you are going to say homosexuality is unnatural you have to accept what using that word will mean for your argument.

Ergo, methinks homosexuality is genetic in nature, as the vast majority (if not all) homosexuals claim it's not by choice, but they have always been like that.

And so it cannot be compared to theft, murder or adultery which are all more of less a choice rather than something one is born with such as your ethnicity.

EDIT - quantum level is all strange and not very well understood, but show me a article or research study that shows something can just come out of nothing... We don't know allsmot anything about strings themselves, but I bet no scientist will claim they appear just out of nowhere.

The whole logic put forward is that you cannot get something from nothing, but noone suggested there was "nothing" before the big bang. That is the point. OTOH your side believes everything was poofed out of nothing in more of less its present form by magic words spoken by a cosmic deity.

Ed

[Edward Bradshaw]

This is a logically bankrupt argument; you need not have a soul if sentient, for starters, nobody ever said that and a lot of religions have argued some group or another doesn't have a soul at various points.

But leaving aside the philosophical implications, you need not be sentient to "choose" as it were. A lab rat in a maze can go left or right. This is a choice, and it makes one. You can condition an animal (or a person) to do irrational things. Environmental factors need to be examined in these cases, as does the fact that pure random chance plays a factor.

One of the main claims of Christianity is that humans have a choice either to serve god or to go against him. My point was that if homosexuality isnt natural AND it is a free choice, then BECAUSE we see it in other animals this must mean (for those two points to be true) that the animals were choosing to engage in the FREE CHOICE of being homosexual.

And the very people that put forth the idea that homosexuality is unnatural will almost always say humans are gods special creation because god gave them free will. And becuase of that free will we deserve to be punished when we "choose" sin. They will believe that animals just act in instict and cannot choose to go against that instict. In which case, that instict shows that homosexuality is natural.

I can't vouch for the latter, but the former? Certainly. I've done it before; several of my relationships have had a "convincing myself" stage. Perhaps I'm strange; perhaps I grew a little too cynical about people in general. Still, it proves it can be done. Equally germane, you can chose not to be attracted to someone of the opposite sex, and we do it all the time.

So then if its such a hard thing to do to convince yourself you are attracted to someone even of the opposite sex, why do you think anyone would put themselves through the hardship of trying to do that for their same sex? Think about the bullying by their peers, rejection by their parents. People commit suicide over this and yet you are saying they choose to fancy people of their own gender. You think they'd choose to be in one of the most hated groups in all of history?

Is it? The point he makes is valid. It ought to be self-eliminating. But it apparently isn't, which leads to the fact that they must be reproducing, wtfbbqlol and so on.

It might not be genetic. One theory is that its due to chemical imbalences or something in the womb. Whatever the case, homosexuality exists in nature and therefore the argument that it would weed itself out is demonstratively not true. The only question now is WHY not.

So maybe we're all a bunch of idiots sitting here arguing about homosexuality in animals when the animals in question were bisexual.

So youve just decided all animals that exibit homosexual behavior are bisexual in order to pretend again that humans are different.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

I think in the end the choice thing isn't wholly wrong, in that in our rush to create the black-and-white shiney-ness (on both sides of the coin here) a lot of people on one side or other have managed to force down a part of themselves, which perversely proves the point that you can make a choice at least in a negative sense.

The irony here is that if genetic it may well end up being self-eliminating for humans because of our insisting on that shiney black-and-white duality, thus smacking everyone across the face and "proving" the argument you just tried to refute "correct."

I dont understand what point you're trying to make here.

[karajorma]

Animals have also been known to attack their young.  Is that therefore natural? 

Yep. Look up Preying Mantis if you have trouble believing that it isn't. Plenty of animals will kill and even eat their own young. It doesn't happen in primates that much because there is a significant investment in the rearing of young.

Besides, if you're trying to say people are born homosexual, it would be a self-solving problem, as the genes responsible would be eliminated...

 By your logic we should have eliminated every single genetic disease that kills people before breeding age too. That's obviously not true so your entire argument is already proven false on this alone.


OH and while I'm at it, Edward for ****'s sake stop double posting.

[Mobius]

Yep. Look up Preying Mantis if you have trouble believing that it isn't. Plenty of animals will kill and even eat their own young. It doesn't happen in primates that much because there is a significant investment in the rearing of young.

Lions and bears oftentimes kill puppets. I know of some Eagles "kill" the weakest young: they let the strongest one kill it.

By your logic we should have eliminated every single genetic disease that kills people before breeding age too. That's obviously not true so your entire argument is already proven false on this alone.

[G0atmaster]

Wow, this one's gonna be huge.

The Old Testament god did say Homosexuals should be put to death, and you think Jesus is the same god.

And you make th No True Scotsman Fallacy anyway, btw.

Blah blah, the teachings change. People no longer want to be Christian because they see the Christian religion as a bunch of rules to respect, like "Go to the Church!", "Don't have sex before marriage!" and many, many others. The true doctrine is different. You can spend your life far from a Church, but you can remain a more than valid Christian. You can have sex before marriage and there's nothing wrong with it as long as you respect your partner(one partner is allowed, more not...it's immoral). I'm not Christian but I consider many teachings of Christianity as something valid.

The important thing in Christianity is Christ.  As far as your marriage thing, in marriage, two lives merge.  In sex, two bodies become one.  In the Hebrew culture, sex was what "sealed the deal," and without it, a couple were not considered married.  However, I believe problems do arise on a spritual level as well as others, when people become one in this way, and not every other way, just as divorce is akin to cutting off a piece of oneself.  This is also why I believe there should be a distinction between marriage in the eyes of the State and marriage in the eyes of God.

Hey, know what?  Every mode of thinking is flawed!

1.  Most Christians lack tolerance with respect to homosexuals thanks to certain passages in the Old Testament that say homosexuals must be put to death.

2.  Most Muslims lack tolerance with respect to other major religions, thanks to their ****ing maniacal theofascist leaders in the Middle East.

3.  Most atheists lack tolerance with respect to any major religion thanks to this perceived belief that everyone who belongs to other religions are attempting to force their beliefs down their throats.

Well...except Buddhists.  They're just sitting on the sidelines keeping to themselves and being possibly the most peaceful human beings on the planet.

And for the love of God (no joke intended), Ed, why can't you just use the Edit button?

1) Read above, then talk to a true Christian. A true Christian doesn't trust the Bible at 100%, it's a book written by humans(who are not perfect!) thousands of years ago.

I'm sorry sir.  I respect you, but that is a blatant falsity.  The Bible is indeed the Word of God through and through.  There are places when men wrote down their own thoughts, rather than ones inspired by God, and it is noted of that (take Paul, for example.  Many times he says "I say (I, not God)..." and "I say (God, not I)..."  Just about any other time, we can take the Bible as the Word of God.

There are things that take precedence over the so called rules. "Supporting each other" takes precedence over "Kill the homosexuals!" and "Love" takes precedence over "Don't have sex before marriage!". "Respect God and the others, and behave well" takes precedence over "Go to the Church!". I have talked with Christians who have heads full of teachings taken from the Bible and I can guarantee that they're pretty far from your stereotyped idea of "Christian".

  I don't know so much about your tiered system of rules there, but I agree, true Christians are generally rather far from the modern stereotype.

mkay... two pointless posts.


Impressionable nothing.  I investigated for six months before making my decision

So why were you an atheist and what changed your mind?

Meh, people want illusions. They can't accept the fact that this planet is florid thanks to a coincidence. They can't of Earth as an insignificant place in this Universe...and more important, they can't think of feelings as the result of chemical processes.

Mostly true.  Rather than simply feelings, I can't think of sentience as a chemical process brought on by random happenstance from an unconscious universe.

And yes, there is a lot of things in nature that I would never want to happen. Some insects kill their partner during/after sex and eat it..God knows I wouldn't want that.

But its not unnatural for those insectes to do that. If you are going to say homosexuality is unnatural you have to accept what using that word will mean for your argument.

Edward Bradshaw:  Cmon man, you've honestly never heard of anyone making the "Genetic predisposition to violence" argument to explain why they killed someone?  (sarcasm) Seriously, they shouldn't go to jail!  It's in their genes that they HAVE to kill someone, right?  It's not their fault! (sarcasm off)

Here's a little piece of Scripture for you to mull over for a bit.  The end of the first chapter in the book of Romans, detailing the full extent of the wrath of God:

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 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.

 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Romans 1:18-32

IDK about you, but that sounds a whole lot like humanity as it is today.  Furthermore, the Bible tells us that when a man turns to Christ, God's wrath is no longer upon him.  Therefore, we are indeed, without excuse.  Also, Karajorma, Mefustae, notice the second sentence in that chunk of Bible there.  "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."  I think that very much supports my belief that science indeed points straight to God.

[Scuddie]

And no, people are not "born" homosexual; it is a result of their decisions, which are often influenced heavily by their environment... I wish they were "born" that way... we might have a cure.  (Consider: homosexuals cannot have children!)  Although, I'm sure you feel the same way about Christians. 

It's this kind of thinking that makes me genuinely hate somebody.  Here's a reality check for you, pal.  You have NO RIGHT to insist upon ANYTHING!  Why?  Because you don't know!  You being a christian gives you even less of that right, as that breaks the first commandment.  I don't know whether your lack of knowledge, or your lack of abstract thinking offends me more.  You base your entire train of thought on 'because someone or something said so'...  Yet even when proven wrong, you still blindly follow the blind man, who himself follows another blind man.

You fail on so many levels that I'm not even going to bother explaining it.

EDIT:  G0atmaster, do you know what Word of God means?  Because by the way you wrote your post, it doesn't look like you do.