- 11,646
- Intercourse, PA
- Carbonox
It's still mind boggling. You don't approve of two consenting adults of the same sex engaging in intercourse, but when it's two consenting adults of different sexes, there's nothing wrong with it?
The Homosexuality Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Duke
- 9,138 comments
- 450,242 views
- 30,052
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
Does your god condemning people for something they have no control over not make you question your beliefs at all?
- 87,843
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Not old enough not to keep going on about it five days down the line... I mean, it was one hell of an effort even to bring it up just then - it wasn't even on anyone else's mind when they read @LeadFootLiam's post that you got caught using lazy language at the beginning of the week.
Use it as a learning experience - after all, you're never too old to learn, and you should learn something new every day. Yours between Tuesday and the present should be that "homos" isn't a polite way to refer to homosexuals and "normal" is not a polite way to refer to heterosexuals - and that gives you two days free to learn more things.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
Are you saying all gays have been born gay?
Here is what the bible says.
1 Corinthians 6:9,10
Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled.Those who are sexually immoral,idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, thieves, greedy people,drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom.
Last edited:
- 13,918
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Is there something in that quote that states that gays are not born gay?
Is there even a reason that we should trust the Bible's opinion on matters of what is genetics and what is learned and optional behaviour over the study of learned men with access to far greater knowledge and technology than anything men in biblical times had? It should be noted that those learned men also have access to the Bible.
- 3,288
- Southern Carolina
- PeteWheet
Quoting a verse from a religious book doesn't back up your point very much. You can say that pork is bad for you and all pork eaters were born pork eaters and quote the verse all you want, but it's still not going to stick to some people since they won't change their eating ways. They're born with an attraction to pork.
It's the same story with being gay. I'm pretty sure you weren't born and instantly became straight. It was gradual realization over time. There are also genes that can show that you can be born gay. Science does work at times. Using a religious book isn't always a good way to determine a certain thing.
I'm always getting tree'd...
Dan
Premium
- 15,396
- United States
- 12,389
- Betelgeuse
- Beeblebrox_237
Would you agree with the practice of lying? The bible is far more clear about the fact that lying is a sin than homosexuality. It's one of the ten commandments. I smell some serious hipocrisy here.
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
It says men. What's your issue with lesbians again?
But what is wrong with the lifestyle of a woman who has traditionally male mannerisms? Is she walking around with a strap on hanging out of her pants, or is she just wearing pants?
Let's not forget this was from a letter a not infallible dude wrote to a group of people, not any declaration of Christ. Never mind that different versions of the Bible (when did JWs start using the ESV version?) translate it to abusive men, abusers of themselves, or abusers of themselves with men. I saw one that turned it into "those who engage, passively or actively, in homosexual acts." It sounds like selective translation for the purpose of fitting your own beliefs and/or wants.
And never mind that was written by the same man who questioned if men of God should even be allowed to marry, creating the pattern in the Catholic Church that has lead to a convenient hiding place for homosexuals and pedophiles. The irony is too great for words. The same Catholic Church who claims Peter as their first pope, the married Peter. Paul's words about marriage also led to groups like the Shakers never marrying or having sex.
Truthfully, we could take all of Paul's words and get 50 meanings from each chapter due to translation differences and find quite a number of things to argue about among denominations. No really, the arguing thing happens today.
BobK
Premium
- 7,020
- Massachusetts, USA
All that's saying is they won't inherit God's kingdom, whatever that is. As if that were somehow a bad thing. Doesn't say they're bad people or anything.
As for the pants-wearing lesbians, aren't they supposed to be stoned to death or something, for wearing mens clothing and all?
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
Obviously not, I try to be honest in all things. Why do you smell hypocrisy?
@FoolKiller When it says men it means both sexes, I don't know why.
And if one can be born gay, I'd like to see a study that has proven this. Right now I cant fathom that two straight people can produce offspring that is born homosexual.
@odnomre In the bible, it tells us to spread the word of God. If we do that, why would God throw us into hell?
- 3,475
- Vilnius
So you want others to provide scientific studies to back up their claims while "this several millenia old book just says so. I don't know why" is apparently supposed to be good enough to back up yours?
Dan
Premium
- 15,396
- United States
I'm at a complete loss for words with this statement.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,810
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Says who?
I hope you have some time, quite few exist.
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=homosexuality and genetics&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=53UUVNi7HoTXaoyVgfAF&ved=0CB4QgQMwAA
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar...netics+causes&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&as_vis=1
For breaking anyone of a number of vague and contradictory rules it would seem (beware the prawns).
- 3,288
- Southern Carolina
- PeteWheet
You do realize that despite straight people can make babies they have no control over what they come out to be, do you? They could have a different skin color, different eyes, different hair color, and sometimes a different personality than their parents. They don't choose to have them; they're born with it. Have you heard anyone said that they wished they were gay? They didn't ask for it; they're born with it.
- 1,085
- Dutchietown
- Odnomre
I'm talking about that lovely group of people that would very much like to mutilize, hang or stone me for loving another man. But it's all in the name of a god so it's alright, no?
"Thou shalt not kill". Unless someone thinks differently than you, or lives his/her life in a certain way. Then it's fair game
(This is not aimed at you directly, i'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of religion)
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
I found this article quite interesting, especially point 4.
http://socialinqueery.com/2013/03/18/no-one-is-born-gay-or-straight-here-are-5-reasons-why/
http://socialinqueery.com/2013/03/18/no-one-is-born-gay-or-straight-here-are-5-reasons-why/
- 87,843
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
After all, who needs peer review in science when you've got an op-ed piece on a special interest website?
- 1,085
- Dutchietown
- Odnomre
The picture that's at the top of that page made me facepalm so hard... Glad you're confirming to the stereotype, guys. Bravo 👍
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
- 24,129
- Scarfolk
- Grim10
- Are you kidding?
This should be your catchphrase.
- 87,843
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
The website you linked to is an agenda-led special interest one - that means they publish pieces that suit their opinion and exclude ones that don't.
That particular piece is an op-ed (opinion/editorial) dubbed five reasons why people aren't born with their sexuality. Three of the reasons are because it doesn't fit their opinion - and they're not reasons. The other two are "the science isn't right", but they don't seem to have cited any peer-reviewed papers showing this to be the case.
In any case, there only needs to be one reason - and that's one they haven't actually brought to the table. I wonder why that is - and I wonder why you've chosen to read that instead of the link Scaff gave you. Perhaps because it suits your opinion?
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,810
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
I give you page after page of peer reviewed scientific data, and you use a non-per reviewed piece of noise.
Look up 'conformation bias' for me and then come back and explain exactly how it applies to what you just did, until then please don't pretend that you are anything other than heavily biased on this topic.
If you want to be specific its "thou shalt not murder", they can kill who they like, particularity if god says its OK. Then even genocide is fine (honestly someone said that in another discussion)."Thou shalt not kill". Unless someone thinks differently than you, or lives his/her life in a certain way. Then it's fair game
- 1,433
- Northern Ireland
Point 4 equates homosexual attraction with the desire to eat cheese.
Even if you wanted to chuck all science out the window and make a case for how the world works based on what you can make up in your head (you know, like kids do), that still doesn't sound sensible. How you can use stuff like that to condemn so many people I cannot fathom.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
Then clearly I don't know any better. I'm pretty confused right now as well.
- 1,085
- Dutchietown
- Odnomre
I wasn't sure what it was exactly when I wanted to write it down. I thought it was "Thou shalt not kill", and Wikipedia confirmed it as one of the translations from Hebrew. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou_shalt_not_kill
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
