Religion and Homosexuality

[SurveyMack10]

The point I am trying to make...Is there is nothing wrong with liking the same sex! It hurts nobody. Sorry if you don't want them to be gay, but there are many things in this world I detest but is allowed i.e. strip joints, sex shops, *bleep*, sex in movies and so on.

Also being gay is NOT a choice and from my experience at such a young age should show you it is a natural thing. Children don't know it is "wrong" until you kick up a fuss.

Also, let's see, I know many kids that will put bugs in their mouth or frogs and eat them (from America's funniest home videos and other sources) but it isn't until the parent or another person freaks out do they think it is bad.

Prove it's not a choice.

Whether it's wrong or not is an OPINION.

[502mania]

The point I am trying to make...Is there is nothing wrong with liking the same sex! It hurts nobody. Sorry if you don't want them to be gay, but there are many things in this world I detest but is allowed i.e. strip joints, sex shops, *bleep*, sex in movies and so on.

Marie are you insisting sex is unnatural? if sex in moves is wrong then so is anger, happiness, sadness, etc. If we didn't have our everyday emotions in movies what would be left? Strip joints? Sex Shops? *bleep*? what's in sex shops? well i've been in one and i'll tell you. various toys for female and male pleasure several nicknacks that can be applied in the bedroom, Lingerie and stripper like outfits and costumes along wih novelty items. name one person that any of those things could cause harm to (excluding small parts kids could choke on). *bleep*, in my eyes *bleep* is a work of art. i don't watch *bleep* (i won't say i haven't seen it, but i don 't watch it regulary). *bleep* is the same concept as stand up comedy. comedy makes you laugh, *bleep* may make you get off, the same way horror movies scare you. All of them are manipulatons to the senses because the are not technically reality.( like your not actually making that 3 pointer but it sure was fun watching!). Why single out *bleep*?

[SurveyMack10]

The point I am trying to make...Is there is nothing wrong with liking the same sex! It hurts nobody. Sorry if you don't want them to be gay, but there are many things in this world I detest but is allowed i.e. strip joints, sex shops, *bleep*, sex in movies and so on.

Also being gay is NOT a choice and from my experience at such a young age should show you it is a natural thing. Children don't know it is "wrong" until you kick up a fuss.

Also, let's see, I know many kids that will put bugs in their mouth or frogs and eat them (from America's funniest home videos and other sources) but it isn't until the parent or another person freaks out do they think it is bad.

Prove it's not a choice.

Whether it's wrong or not is an OPINION.

The only way we can prove it isn't a choice is to run studies on small children before grown ups tell them being gay is against God and is bad and awful and wrong and immoral and a sin.

on children haha, children exploring at a young age isn't even sexual. but by all means set your cameras and try to catch some exciting

[SurveyMack10]

The point I am trying to make...Is there is nothing wrong with liking the same sex! It hurts nobody. Sorry if you don't want them to be gay, but there are many things in this world I detest but is allowed i.e. strip joints, sex shops, *bleep*, sex in movies and so on.

Also being gay is NOT a choice and from my experience at such a young age should show you it is a natural thing. Children don't know it is "wrong" until you kick up a fuss.

Also, let's see, I know many kids that will put bugs in their mouth or frogs and eat them (from America's funniest home videos and other sources) but it isn't until the parent or another person freaks out do they think it is bad.

Prove it's not a choice.

Whether it's wrong or not is an OPINION.

The only way we can prove it isn't a choice is to run studies on small children before grown ups tell them being gay is against God and is bad and awful and wrong and immoral and a sin.

on children haha, children exploring at a young age isn't even sexual. but by all means set your cameras and try to catch some exciting

Haha the bruden of proof is absolutely NOT on me, you're the one claiming it's a fact that it's a choice.

YOU did that as a child. That never happened to me with any of my friends EVER. It is not a normal thing for children to do sexual stuff- they are too innocent to even know of sex yet. Regardless, you can't prove a thing about it not being a choice and you playing doctor with your friends is not proof by any means.
The burden of proof is on you. I have personal experience. Trust me, it is sexual.

[jordandog]

The site has no scientific evidence of your own personal deity. Like I said, it just pokes holes in current scientific reasoning and capitalizes on the bible. And yet the banner up top says "Evidence for God". To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses (wiki). There is nothing of this with your personal deity because there is nothing there; especially since this deity is conveniently deemed in the supernatural world. I rest on Jordans words- "A god of the gaps".

There are three major areas that have been posited to provide evidence for the existence of God. Thomas Aquinas, argued in favor of the existence of God on the basis of fundamental aspects of the universe such as causality and change. William Paley argued that the hand of God is evident in the apparent design of the universe and living beings. The third line of evidence argues that God makes Himself evident in personal transcendent experiences of people. Of these three lines of evidence, science has eliminated none, although many would argue that the evidence for biological evolution has weakened the argument for the design of living organisms. Even so, there are numerous gaps in evolution - many of which have appeared recently.

Many skeptics believe that all arguments for the existence of God fall into the God of the gaps variety. According to this premise, one would expect these arguments to become fewer in number as scientists make more discoveries and learn more about our world. In reality, evidence continues to accumulate suggesting that the universe was designed by an intelligent agent. The evidence suggesting that the universe and its physical laws were designed continues to accumulate at a rapid rate.

If evidence for the existence of God were truly a God of the gaps type, we would expect these gaps to be disappearing, instead of increasing in number. The evidence is so strong that long-time promoter of atheism, Antony Flew announced in 2004 that he had become a deist because he "had to go where the evidence leads."

It gives PLENTY of evidence.

From OBSERVING that everything in this world that contains information, was created by a form of intelligence, gives a person reasonable and logical conclusions that the very essence of life "DNA" containing VAST amounts of complicated information in every single cell in the human body, that an intelligence created life. LIFE is evidence for God, no mechanism for evolution can be found to have the ability to create information. THEREFORE, adding information to DNA coding to evolve from one species to another is found to be IMPOSSIBLE. Life being spontaneously created in a soup from chemicals is IMPOSSIBLE.

The design position IS falsifiable, since advocates of naturalism could discover a natural process capable of creating the necessary information if such a process exists. If Neo-Darwinism were true as a general theory of biological creation, it would falsify the claim that some additional information-creating mechanism is necessary. The "design is religion, not science" position is not falsifiable because it decides the disputed question by the manipulation of words rather than by empirical investigation. Hence, by the standard of falsifiability the intelligent design hypothesis is scientific, and the refusal to consider it on its merits is unscientific. quote by me from another thread.

Again, refusing to look at evidence because the presenter of the evidence infers God, is closed minded. You can deny it and you can try and justify yourself all you want but your actions and you words show that you have no interest in considering an alternative. You are the definition of closed minded.

Wow Sherene....you should teach.  What an excellent post!

Not to be a bi*tch, but 99.9% of those words are Rich Deems' from 'godandscience.org'.

[jordandog]

It's a real shame that it APPEARS to us on here that ALL Christians are being lumped together as a "delusional, looney-bin, crazy, stupid" group.

I have never used any of those words, just for the record. Perhaps I should have qualified "you" as Christians and not just those in these forums. As for the rest of what you wrote, jcribb, I keep seeing the same thing over and over and I DO understand what you are saying. However, I cannot get around the thinking that by you collectively justifying your stance because of [any and all] religion and what is written in the bible, you are NOT holding a large number of people back from living their lives. That is how I feel and how I see it.

jordandog, I did put those words in quotes because they came from this forum.  I would like to acknowledge to those reading this thread that those words do NOT apply to anything you have said.  There are 2 or 3 others on here who speak these words freely without respect, so in my irritability, I failed to mention that those words do NOT include you.  Thank you for calling me on it and please accept my apology. 

Also, I must be knocked out by my meds right now, enough, that I'm not quite getting what you are saying in your last 2 sentences.  Please overlook my dumbness and clear the cobwebs for me, ok?  Are we good?   

As usual, I disappeared off FC at my normal time last night to get to work, so I didn't see this or the last few pages until now. I always 'worry' someone will think I am ticked of, pouting, or ignoring them when I don't post replies and just go 'poof'!
The last 2 sentences? I am simply saying I do not agree it is NOT discrimination and cannot say religion and the Bible are NOT holding people back from living their lives, that's all. Apology accepted and of course 'we're good'.

[queenofnines]

Christians have been discriminated against in the past and have died for their beliefs.  In some countries they still are!

Oh, boo-hoo!  Don't try to play that card - it's ridiculous.  While I'm not denying Christians have been persecuted against in the past/present, need I remind you that the ONLY reason you follow Christianity at all is because your religion killed/threaten to kill those who didn't convert?  Religions are viruses, designed to replicate and spread their poison by force.

there is a difference in disagreeing and discriminating.

Indeed there is.  Christianity: protected by the First Amendment right to believe in whatever silly nonsense you choose.  Homosexuality: DENIED basic rights on account of one's sexuality.  People who can't see how it's discrimination are either blind or thick.

Now if gays were given the same rights as a heterosexual person in terms of marriage, jobs, etc. and THEN you still secretly disapproved of them, *that* would be fair.  But that isn't the case yet, now is it?

[jordandog]

Indeed there is.  Christianity: protected by the First Amendment right to believe in whatever silly nonsense you choose.  Homosexuality: DENIED basic rights on account of one's sexuality.  People who can't see how it's discrimination are either blind or thick.

Now if gays were given the same rights as a heterosexual person in terms of marriage, jobs, etc. and THEN you still secretly disapproved of them, *that* would be fair.  But that isn't the case yet, now is it?

Thank you!

[roguetodd]

Just for the sake of argument, not necessarily my personal views.

Homosexuality: DENIED basic rights on account of one's sexuality

Show me in the constitution, where it says that everyone is allowed to marry?

The fact of the matter is, denying them marriage technically isn't unconstitutional. Unethical, perhaps(it's subjective).

[queenofnines]

Uh, if it's a sin....it's wrong.

You missed the point of what Falconer was saying.  You can go label-happy all you want, but just because some ancient book of superstitions says a certain act is wrong, doesn't make it so in the actual world.  I'm sure you're familiar with this when it comes to Islam and the strict laws against sin YOU don't follow.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj799RHKHPE

Abnormal, but completely natural?  Your contradicting yourself on so many levels.

No contradiction.  A person with red hair is ABNORMAL but completely natural (that is, they're rare amongst the population, but still exist in nature).  Checkmate.

[queenofnines]

a neurologist says that a knack for sarcasm isn't necessarily linked to intelligence.

And I agree with that.  However, it's not good to automatically assume the worst in these situations, like person A did X, therefore, they MUST be messed up!

Speaking honestly, I only added that last bit as an afterthought to warn people of your affection for that site.  Saying "a creationist site should have the answer" was enough sarcasm on its own.  

The site ISN'T broken, you are just CLOSED MINDED

‎"Being called closed-minded by religious people is a bit like being called yellow by a bunch of bananas." - Pat Condell

If I said I refuse to take seriously anything that starts out with, and is obviously making a definitive statement, that God does not exist

He didn't.  He just said there was no reputable proof for your god, which is true.  Although I can see how that seems like it's saying there is no Christian god...because it kinda is.

[queenofnines]

What that when I was five or six, I liked little girls and would kiss them and we would touch? Anyone with common sense knows what homosexuals do in the bedroom. Or only when someone spells it out for you do you get it? I am not gay but like I said, I was a kid and it was NOT a choice, it was NATURAL.

Do what you got to do, I am just showing you, I was a child and didn't make a LIFESTYLE choice. It was a natural attraction.

I support what marie's saying, and Amy has touched on this as well.  KIDS EXPLORE THEIR SEXUALITY!!  It's natural!  It's the fundamentalists who are screwing their kids up for life, telling them that sex is ONLY after marriage and ONLY with one opposite-sex partner and ONLY if they don't get divorced.

[roguetodd]

I'm under the assumption that since my post was completely disregarded that I have won this argument.

MUHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

lol 

[queenofnines]

Show me in the constitution, where it says that everyone is allowed to marry?

Actually, it doesn't say anyone's allowed to marry in the Constitution.  Because marriage isn't in it.  lol

The fact of the matter is, denying them marriage technically isn't unconstitutional. Unethical, perhaps(it's subjective).

What about the famous lines from the Declaration of Independence?  Well allowing people of all races, cultures, and religions to marry but excluding gays isn't fair and certainly affects their "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

My husband and I were talking about this subject last night and we kept coming back to, "How in the world do religious people think being homosexual is a CHOICE??"  Putting on my Christian hat here...the only two reasons I can come up with for people thinking it's a "choice" are:

#1  You think gay people are just being rebellious, as someone who indulges in drugs or rock 'n' roll might be.  "*bleep* are so boring...screw society, HE looks fun!"  This might explain some of those of the teen or college-age demographic, but certainly not the scores of older gay adults.  Plenty of gays can attest that they were not "acting out" but simply could not help who they were naturally attracted to.  So this reason is invalid.

OR

#2  "The devil made me do it."  Probably the main reason religious people think being gay is a choice is because they believe Satan tempts people and they have the choice to "give in" or not.  But does this "reasoning" stand up to scrutiny?  Not at all.  Why?

Well you shout time and again that people are not BORN gay.  So what exactly is so tempting about a person of the same sex to someone who is supposedly "heterosexual"?  As my husband pointed out, "Sure, I could 'choose' to f--k a guy, but I wouldn't want to do it and I wouldn't enjoy it because I'm not attracted to males sexually or emotionally, I'm not gay.  I can't just look at a naked guy and force myself to have a b--er."

So is a straight guy just sitting on the beach and a little devil comes up on his shoulder and whispers, "Hey, look at that guy's package!"  And the straight guy goes, "Shut up, Satan!  That's a sin!  I'm not gay!"  And Satan tinkers with his brain...tinker, tinker, tinker.  "Come on, you know you want some!"  Straight guy: "Hmm, I wasn't attracted to men 5 minutes ago, but now they're suddenly so appealing!!"

So god allows Satan to mess with people's brains and turn them gay, and then god gets mad at people for being gay?!  What!!

There's a WAR on YOUR GENITALS!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgWBet96Y_k

[shernajwine]

a neurologist says that a knack for sarcasm isn't necessarily linked to intelligence.

And I agree with that.  However, it's not good to automatically assume the worst in these situations, like person A did X, therefore, they MUST be messed up!

Oh, you mean like you have done with me constantly?

Speaking honestly, I only added that last bit as an afterthought to warn people of your affection for that site.  Saying "a creationist site should have the answer" was enough sarcasm on its own.  

And why do people need to be warned about my using that website?

The site ISN'T broken, you are just CLOSED MINDED

‎

"Being called closed-minded by religious people is a bit like being called yellow by a bunch of bananas." - Pat Condell

Religious people an be open minded, anyone can be. Saying something is "broken from the get go" because it's title indicates something you disagree with, is closed minded. Turning this back around on an entire other group of people doesn't change the fact that closed minded is what he is being.  

If I said I refuse to take seriously anything that starts out with, and is obviously making a definitive statement, that God does not exist

He didn't.  He just said there was no reputable proof for your god, which is true.  Although I can see how that seems like it's saying there is no Christian god...because it kinda is.

"Remember the title" "it's broken from the get go" ......he wasn't taking anything seriously from that site simply because of the title and he as much admitted it