Homosexuality is not a choice!!!!

[Elysian]

But heterosexuals have the advantage of being able to be married in the eyes of God, and therefore acceptable to have sex after Marriage.

Homosexuals are not afforded that option. They can't have sex at all during their lifetime because they can never be married in the eyes of God.

A bit unfair to use a blanket statement like that.

If a homosexual is a genuine christian and truly desires to serve the lord then they will forget all about sodomy and thinking how unfair God is towards the things he despises.They would marry a member of the opposite sex or choose celibisy like countless hetrosexuals have done.
Furthermore life and marriage is not about having ''sex''.Life is about obeying and glorifying God and marriage is a reflection of Christ and the church.It's also about having children, a husband loving his wife and a wife respecting her husband. No homosexuals are not afforded that option and if you feel that is somehow unfair or wrong I would like to say you will have your chance to take it up with God one day but when we finally come before the throne of judgement I doubt we will be saying anything.

 

[Budman]

I find it odd that homosexuality is now so accepted and celebrated, with all of the parades, the legalization of gay marriage, the giving of special rights to homosexuals, and labeling those who come out as "heroes", there has been an explosion of people who have suddenly "discovered" they are gay.

 

[Omni]

I find it odd that homosexuality is now so accepted and celebrated, with all of the parades, the legalization of gay marriage, the giving of special rights to homosexuals, and labeling those who come out as "heroes", there has been an explosion of people who have suddenly "discovered" they are gay.

It is not a special right given, it is a ban against an equal right lifted. There's a difference.

Fair proportions of every population are people who are attracted to the same sex. Recent reports suggest about 92% of people identify as straight in tests, but it's possible that some of those are still closeted individuals. The reason you're seeing openly gay people more frequently is precisely because it's becoming something to which there is attached less and less stigma. Years beforehand, most of those gay people would have lived straight lives out of fear, shame, and cultural pressure.

I don't celebrate homosexuality, per se, because I'm straight, but I do celebrate the lifting of a ban on homosexuality that has caused people to live lies for centuries. I don't think anybody should have to live a lie. Religion was the only ever basis for the ban in the first place, and since not everybody wants to be religious, nobody in a secular country should have to follow laws that have no basis other than religion.

 

[Budman]

Religion was the only ever basis for the ban in the first place

That's not true. Secular governments recognized that homosexuality was an affront to procreation. Without children, no state can survive. Soviet Russia and other atheistic communist countries banned homosexuality for that very reason. It had noting to do with religion.

 

[kaylagrl]

This is an old thread where the OP has been banned...

 

[Omni]

That's not true. Secular governments recognized that homosexuality was an affront to procreation. Without children, no state can survive. Soviet Russia and other atheistic communist countries banned homosexuality for that very reason. It had noting to do with religion.

So you're taking your legal lessons from Stalin now?

Stalinist Russia was not a "secular country", lol, or a freely atheist state. Beliefs (atheism is the way, Russia is owned by Stalin, obey or be killed, do not speak freely, do not think freely) were forced on the Russians. That's not secularism, freedom, democracy or freethinking atheism. It was a totalitarian dictatorship run by the head of an insidious personality cult. Being gay was banned, as were being religious, having free speech, freedom of press, free ciné, unapproved translations, foreign radio and a whole host of other freedoms.

In the UK and America (remember: secularist, non-totalitarian states), we now realize, quite openly and freely, that not everybody wants to follow Christian laws, biblical rules, or priestly teachings. There is no non-Stalinist, non-totalitarian, non-fascist, genuine, intrinsic, non-biblical reason why homosexuality should be banned.

 

[Mitspa]

So you're taking your legal lessons from Stalin now?

Stalinist Russia was not a "secular country", lol, or a freely atheist state. Beliefs (atheism is the way, Russia is owned by Stalin, obey or be killed, do not speak freely, do not think freely) were forced on the Russians. That's not secularism, freedom, democracy or freethinking atheism. It was a totalitarian dictatorship run by the head of an insidious personality cult. Being gay was banned, as were being religious, having free speech, freedom of press, free ciné, unapproved translations, foreign radio and a whole host of other freedoms.

In the UK and America (remember: secularist, non-totalitarian states), we now realize, quite openly and freely, that not everybody wants to follow Christian laws, biblical rules, or priestly teachings. There is no non-Stalinist, non-totalitarian, non-fascist, genuine, intrinsic, non-biblical reason why homosexuality should be banned.

Just making the point that even the law of nature, condemns this perversion. Any honest person ...saved or unsaved can see how sick these people are and they need help not approval.

 

[Omni]

Just making the point that even the law of nature, condemns this perversion. Any honest person ...saved or unsaved can see how sick these people are and they need help not approval.

I would disagree. Homosexuality isn't unique to humans, and the fact that it exists and is practiced in various species is evidence that it has a place (however small) in the natural world. Humans, collectively, are one of the species who are predisposed to it. It's observed in human cultures all across the planet, and it defies religious and social boundaries.

 

[Budman]

So you're taking your legal lessons from Stalin now?

Really, man? That's what you got out of that?

You said bans on homosexuality were religious only - and I proved that to be wrong.

 

[Mitspa]

I would disagree. Homosexuality isn't unique to humans, and the fact that it exists and is practiced in various species is evidence that it has a place (however small) in the natural world. Humans, collectively, are one of the species who are predisposed to it. It's observed in human cultures all across the planet, and it defies religious and social boundaries.

So your best argument is that some animals act in perverted ways as well? The law of nature ...common evident sense, says this is clearly a perversion.

 

[Omni]

Really, man? That's what you got out of that?

You said bans on homosexuality were religious only - and I proved that to be wrong.

No, I said the ban that has been lifted was a ban that was religiously motivated. Obviously that is a reference to America, not Russia. Unless Russia has suddenly decided to lift their bans on gay marriages or homosexual sex?

 

[Omni]

So your best argument is that some animals act in perverted ways as well? The law of nature ...common evident sense, says this is clearly a perversion.

No. My argument (not "my best argument") is simply to refute your assertion that "the laws of nature condemn this perversion". "The laws of nature", are a figment of your imagination. There are no "laws of nature" written in biological cells that stop homosexuality. Nature is what it is. It has homosexuals in it.

 

[Budman]

No, I said the ban that has been lifted was a ban that was religiously motivated. Obviously that is a reference to America, not Russia. Unless Russia has suddenly decided to lift their bans on gay marriages or homosexual sex?

You said:

Religion was the only ever basis for the ban in the first place, and since not everybody wants to be religious, nobody in a secular country should have to follow laws that have no basis other than religion.

Once again, secular countries did have a ban on homosexuality that had no basis in religion. America's ban was also not rooted in religion, but for the same reason as bans in secular nations - homosexuality is recognized as an attack on families that produce children. No children - no state.

 

[Budman]

I would disagree. Homosexuality isn't unique to humans, and the fact that it exists and is practiced in various species is evidence that it has a place (however small) in the natural world.

Yet another falsehood. Animals go into heat and will try to have relations with whatever in handy. Be it a member of their own gender, a couch, or a human leg. It has nothing to do with one animal choosing to be with a member of it's own gender.

 

[Omni]

You said:



Once again, secular countries did have a ban on homosexuality that had no basis in religion. America's ban was also not rooted in religion, but for the same reason as bans in secular nations - homosexuality is recognized as an attack on families that produce children. No children - no state.

Don't pick and choose what I said. What I said, with its context, was:

"I don't celebrate homosexuality, per se, because I'm straight, but I do celebrate the lifting of a ban on homosexuality that has caused people to live lies for centuries. I don't think anybody should have to live a lie. Religion was the only ever basis for the ban in the first place, and since not everybody wants to be religious, nobody in a secular country should have to follow laws that have no basis other than religion".

This is clearly in reference to a country who have recently lifted a ban on homosexuality. What country could that be?

 

[Omni]

Yet another falsehood. Animals go into heat and will try to have relations with whatever in handy. Be it a member of their own gender, a couch, or a human leg. It has nothing to do with one animal choosing to be with a member of it's own gender.

You say this like homosexuality in its entirety is nothing more than a conscious choice people make to be attracted to the same sex against the will of the JudeoChristian God. This is patently false; homosexual behaviours can be observed in the myths of Hindu legends that long predate Judaism and Christianity, as well as in civilizations that had not encountered or did not widely adopt Abrahamic religions, for instance Native American cultures; the Aztecs; the Mayans; the Quechas; the Moches; the Zapotecs; the Tupinamba; the Chinese duanbei; the shudo and nanshoku of Japan; Kathoey in Thailand; the Ancient Greeks; ancient Egypt; Florentines and Venetians during the Renaissance; and several African tribal cultures, among many, many others.

The idea that strict social enforcement of biblical moralities actually prevent homosexual attractions is also patently false: King James I (from whom the King James Bible gets its name), is known to have had several secret homosexual relationships, notably with the 1st Duke of Lennox, with the 1st Earl of Somerset, and with the 1st Duke of Buckingham, all of whom he appointed to himself after the relationships had developed.

To anybody who believes being attracted to the same sex is a conscious choice, I would ask this: do you make a conscious, concerted effort and momentary choice to be attracted to the opposite sex, or does it just "happen"?

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

This thread is like the non-drinker defending the alcoholics...

 

[tourist]

That's not true. Secular governments recognized that homosexuality was an affront to procreation. Without children, no state can survive. Soviet Russia and other atheistic communist countries banned homosexuality for that very reason. It had noting to do with religion.

How can a disease be banned?

 

[Omni]

This thread is like the non-drinker defending the alcoholics...

Only if you think alcoholism -- a dangerous, life-threatening mental dependency on, and physical addiction to, alcohol which drives sufferers to act recklessly, dangerously and to early graves -- can be compared to a homosexual attraction -- an intrinsic mental and physical sexual interest in a member of the same sex which in and of itself is not harmful, destructive or life-threatening.

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

Only if you think alcoholism -- a dangerous, life-threatening mental dependency on, and physical addiction to, alcohol which drives sufferers to act recklessly, dangerously and to early graves -- can be compared to a homosexual attraction -- an intrinsic mental and physical sexual interest in a member of the same sex which in and of itself is not harmful, destructive or life-threatening.

My brother was gay. In the end he became HIV positive, fell into depression and killed himself... What a way to go to an early grave...

His lovers (ALL OF THEM) were violent, abusive and vindictive... Is that every gay person? I certainly hope not but I have seen my share of good and evil in gay people.