If someone chooses to be gay, then that means they are actually straight- and chose to be gay...
... then doesn't that mean that someone chooses to be straight which really means they are gay- and chose (at some point) to be straight?
@R.S. Hutchinson- nice turnaround
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the point of the discussion was less about answering the title, and more about addressing some people's silly logic. The turnaround can be used on nearly every xenophobic comment out there.
Yes.. you are correct I'm not sure everyone got that though!
Of course, yes when you choose to do something that usually imparts that there are more than one alternative
Good call Richie. Now do you think you can discern my point without me having to spell it out?!
Yes I know what you are trying to say, people that chose to be straight are actually gay if people who chose to be gay are actually straight :S
I don't know whether some people are born gay or not but I do know it is wrong to go with the same sex just because you have had bad experiences with the opposite.
Well.. not really that's not what I was trying to say, but my thought process can be rather abstract at times (as an old English Proefessor once told me)... My main point was that I don't believe people "choose" to be gay. I am by all means in every sense of the word straight, but I have friends who are in every sense of the word gay.. my male gay friends are attracted to other males (they claim) the same way I am attracted to females. And my attraction to females is so strong that I cannot help but believe it was how I was born, therfore, I deduce that they must have been born that way as well.
No because if a person decided they was gay, then they would have been gay from the start unless they felt like a change, much like you would with a new pair of shoes, but if the straight person has a gay person inside them then they may be considered hiding a gay, then if the gay person inside the straight person was actually straight then that means the other straight person has just eaten them.
A person cannot choose to be gay or straight. You cannot control who you are or are not attracted to, and/or who you fall in love with. The choice is whether or not to live that lifestyle, to be with the person you want to be with.
Untrue. You determine what you seek? Do you not?
Kinda makes it sound like we all float around like fairy dust and cling to whatever we bump into along the cosmos corridor.
Who knows ,sub consciously ,maybe we do ,because Ive had some dorky boyfriends back in the day
Perhaps that's true.
That's why 80% of any given population adheres to the prevailing faith tradition of that community. It's not that they have discovered the truth, but that they have been indoctrinated into what they "bumped into" in the accident of their birth.
Read my hub about indoctrination into faith. Tell me what you think.
I dont think so....i beleive people are born Gay......
It is apparent that homosexuality does not have one particular "cause." It is not purely genetic in origin, for instance, because the very twin studies (Bailey and Pillard) that some interpreted as "proving" a purely genetic origin of homosexuality actually "disproved" it, because only 52% of identical twins of homosexual persons were also homosexual. If homosexuality were dependent on a particular "gay gene," both twins should have possess that gene, and thus there should have been a 100% correspondence.
No, people don't choose to be gay.
I don't think I chose to be heterosexual either. So far all the people I know who are gay have always been thus from as long as I have known them anyway.
I may have not understood the thread, I am drugged up to the eyeballs at the moment, but if anyone has a go at my gay friends, I come out of my corner like Cassius Clay anytime!
So, no. In my experience gays are just folk who are gay, I am a folk wot ain't gay.
How can you say that you have some friends who are gay? Ridiculous. If you know that they are gay then you should have shown a modicum of friendship and deport them to a Mental Hospital.
A Gay is not by choice, one can't become mad by choice. It is serious mental disease.
I don't think it's gay people who have a mental disease on this thread
Very rightly said, some statements really make you smile indeed. First time heard someone saying in Hubpages that, being Gay is a serious mental disease.
And, you are smiling. Great. Are you Gay? Ask your parents about this. I know their responses. And then, interrogate with your family doctor about the possibility of any sort of Mental Disorder that your dad, mom is going through. I know you will never need to ask your family doctor because your parents will never say that Homosexuality is OK. Don't get furious. I know what will be the response of your parents.
If you don't know anything about Psychology then at least keep your mouth shut. Don't utter nonsense. Homosexuality is a MENTAL DISORDER, that's what Indian culture says. And, Indian culture is the oldest one. A great one. Pure. It rests itself on the rule of nature, not on a prophet or pope.
Homosexuals should be discouraged. Its not about religion. Its about nature. If everyone will opt to be a homosexual, then the reproduction system will be stopped. Nature don't want to see its evolutionary creatures getting extinct. It has its own rule to preserve them. It asks them to reproduce, that's why one feels attraction towards opposite sex. One means a sane person, not INSANE or HOMOSEXUAL who is attracted towards same sexes.
Freedom of expression comes with a caveat. Understand this and then allow your hands to write something.
If you are hurt by my response, then certainly you are a Gay. Govt. of India is running some very good Mental hospital, get yourself admitted. Ask your heart.
I have my sources in Central Institute of Psychiatry, Ranchi. I can get yourself admitted and ask doctors there to take care of you. That is also not far from your state. If you Wish.
ROTFLMFAO... you tell em, Ranj.
It is not a natural thing. Even if you take religion out of the equation it is still an unatural act, and deviant state of being.
It's nice to know that a right-wing Easterner and a right-wing Westerner can come together in their hatred of gays. There is hope for world unity.
Not really I have several Indian friends that would argue quite fiercely about this with him. I read some of this over the phone to one of them... he laughed for quite some time both about his views and his Indian history. So sorry, there are some open minded, intelligent people in India too. There goes world unity...
Which is why I specifically mentioned "right-wing Easterner" and "right-wing Westerner."
How come you know their response ? do you wash dishes at his house ?
You assume a lot about others. Where you learn all of this S**t from? RSS camp ? or buy this from some temple ?
Do you have medical education ? if so, show me the proof that being gay is mental disorder ? If not STFU. Search google for 'STFU'.
Indian culture is not book of psychology to pass any empirical evidence based on cultural finding to that of biological concept. Ironically kamasutra has non-human sex inputs in the book. No need to explain you that people during mauraya's dynasty used to have sex with same sex and animals. Get education instead of blabbering psychology in indian culture. You know rats a$$ about psychology let alone indian culture. Don't teach me about indian culture, i tolerate your religious and cultural bullshit in this country all the time.
Great one? ghanta. Just because it is old doesn't mean it is right all the time and has empirical evidence for every known thing on this planet.
Go get some education: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual … in_animals
Proof ? Besides that worry about population of india.
How the eff you know ?
People blabber without any proof in this part of the world. No wonder population is rising here.
Freedom of expression doesn't mean religious nutcase can go on and blabber their crap on others without any valid proof.
BS. Just because anyone defends gay or lesbian doesn't mean they have to be gay. Height of deluded brain. One can be straight and defend others those who are gay or lesbians. Get that conservative air out of algae size brain.
Loved your response. Worth reading. I appreciate this one. However, I wish you had removed the religion and RSS stuff from your response. I didn't like that, everything else is fine and perfectly add to discussion.
But, then removing religious angle from your response makes it quite ridiculous.
Religion is the best way to defend Homosexuality. It is happening everywhere. Gay people like you are blabbering about other being against them because of religious motivations. Lol!!
As I said, it is nothing about religion. And, then you are trying to defend your community by saying that there are cases of homosexuals among animals. Let me add, homosexuals are not only insane, but also it is tantamount of becoming an animal.
Mauryan's dynasty? Lol! I don't know from which dirt you belong, but at least try to read something about Indian History. Try to awaken yourself. Simply nonsense.
Empirical or normative. That's not my contention. and, at least I can assure you that being old it is not true for everything, like it can not defend insane people uttering nonsense. In fact, it does not need to defend itself from idiotic responses from people who don't understand nature.
Worry about the population of India? Another idiotic response. It means to say Indians should go for homosexuality to stop population rise. And, you should know about demographic dividend. Do you know. Well, grow up. Population is not a problem.
I just assumed that Ronnie's parents loves nature, not religious, that's why I said that they will never ask Ronnie to become Homosexual. Lol! I won't mind washing dishes of Ronnie's parents. Sikhs who are millionaires come to India to wash utensils of unknown people. That's all.
BTW.... whether you are Gay or Lesbian..... I mean male of female.
Why ? conservative brain doesn't like associating itself with similar conservatives ? it hurts isn't it ?
LOL. You assume a lot as i said earlier. Do you think i'm gay or lesbian ? or you deduce that from algae size brain of yours because my arguments are against your shi*ty cultural thought process of yours ? Have you ever got molested by gays or lesbians ? You look damn desperate in your offense against them.
Humans are animals. Whether you like it or not. Swallow it.
I'm not from religious and conservative dirt like you. Try to learn what is indian history first and get some education. Simply BS.
So you have no empirical evidence and no medical education and blabber based on cultural conservative though process, don't you ? Thanks for BS.
Population is not problem ? are you kidding me ? Do you even live in india to make that statement ?
As i said earlier, you assume a lot and have no medical education, no empirical evidence for what you blabber. You only blabber based on ancient BS and for what you're brainwashed by people around you. Get some education. You need it.
I'm straight and defending human species from religious sh*ty conservative dirt of this secular country. What about you ?
The Western world decided a long time ago that homosexuality was not a mental illness.
Done with this argument. As I said at the beginning...there are gay people and there are straight people, get used to it. Tired of people assuming only their way of life is "normal."
It was only in 1971 that Homosexuality was delisted as a mental disorder at the tireless work of Dr. Spitzer, who, in 1999 admits he was wrong. Since homosexuality is not a mental disease, the fact that so many homosexuals seek psychiatrists, is for what?
Helloo, My son is gay, Not mad, neither is he 'unnatural, And, as his mother, I've always told him that sane, natural people will like him for who he is, not what he is.
You are hilarious!
More than one of them are church clergy, another one of our leading judges, another barrister, and to represent the other classes, a dentist and two doctors, and a cleaner off the top of my head.
A Gay is not by choice, one can't become mad by choice. It is serious mental disease.
You would have been right back, in 1973 when the law made being gay illegal or gay acts and punished them, by throwing them in jail with a bunch of others gays.
I wonder if some day, we will look at too much religion, as a mental disease. Some do use Satan, as a form temporary insanity to get away with murder in court. They certainly get away with wars and free taxes.
Sorry PRanj. But, the arguement that being gay is a mental illness has come and gone. And, a good reason for that, is that a lot of psychiatrists are homosexual, so, how can they tell a homosexual that they have a mental illness when they are also gay. Not saying that all shrinks are gay, but, I know several, along with a lot of doctors, lawyers, and other people in the medical field. It's almost like saying a black cat is not black, when you are a black cat. But, if your gay, the cat's color is probably more than likely called Midnight ambrosia....black is for too ordinary. LOL!
Personally, I think bigotry is a serious mental disease. Far more serious than being gay could ever hope to be.
Perhaps if people were recognized for being people rather than for being gay, straight, liberal, or conservative, life would be a much happier endeavor for all involved.
This is perhaps the most outrageous thing I've ever heard in regard to the psychological origins of homosexuality.
WHAT??????? YOU have the mental problem!
Wow, you seriously think it's a mental disease? Your mind is as narrow and homophobic as it gets. People like yourself and others who believe (by religion or other motives) that being gay is either wrong or a disgusting disease are the reason why this world can't move forward socially. Anyone has the right to feel love for anyone; loving someone of the same sex in a romantic way is not immoral or mentally twisted. It is a right everyone has, with no discrimination. I guess you mind isn't as developed yet as to understand something so simple as that. I hope someday you realise how absurd your argument was.
Yes, it is as logical as the arguments made by some religious thinkers, who believe everything is a matter of choice. I have also heard some Christians suggest that people with disabilites are being punished by God for their sins, and some Spiritualists that believe we choose health conditions such as cancer as a way of learning a lesson for the next life. There is no logic to their arguments, but their thinking is so habitual, that it is not possible for them to think out of the box, or view things differently to the black and white way they have been conditioned to think.
I'd just like to mention one relevant point here, so you don't know any women who have had bad issues with men(even mothers) and then chosen to try women instead?
WHy would it be a personal experience, you see it everyday, 'men are scum' , 'men are dishonest', 'I'm turning lesbian' blazzay blazzay...
Oh Richie, they don't really turn lesbian, no matter how badly men treat them. It's just an expression. I have even used it myself on many an occasion LOL
The odd woman who does leave her husband and family for another woman, has always been gay but perhaps fought the feelings to try and be 'normal' like she perceived others to be.
That happened to a mate of mine on the taxis, his wife ran off with another woman she met on the internet. He blamed the internet, but she must have always been lesbian trying to act like a normal wife and mother.
In fact, my current partner's last wife also left him for another woman - couldn't have been good for his ego!!
But if was lesbian, she was lesbian, end of story.
you might want to try hanging out with some different type of women!- definitely not all women talk like that, and the ones who do are mainly just talking. "trying" the same sex is much different than being gay - gayness you just can't avoid. If you are a lesbian you just aren't interested in men at all, only women - you wouldn't be complaining about the men in your life because they wouldn't be that important to you.
I don't quite see it that way.
I believe that Women are suppressed anyway and heterosexualised from an early age so the pressure to conform is immense, even more than for men.
Later when some are freed from religious repression, or social pressures they can rediscover their sexuality with less fear of reprisals.
I know I'll get howled down for this - but yes, I do know two "lesbian" couples whom I've always felt slightly confused about.
All four women are older and all have been married or had several boyfriends. All are vocal about what bastards men are and how they never want anything more to do with them - and it's still a favorite topic of conversation, even though they've been "lesbian" for years.
When they talk about being lesbian, they talk in terms of trust and affection and never mention sex - and nothing in their body language suggests intimacy. They behave more like besties. Every time I see them, I get the uneasy feeling they've just taken refuge in a "friendship with benefits" rather than acted on their true nature.
On the other hand, I have another friend who thought she was straight until she was about 30 years old, when she fell deeply in love with a woman. I remember hours of anguished discussions as she tried to come to terms with that realization - made more difficult because the object of her affection was completely unaware how she felt. There was no question in my mind that Trish didn't have any choice in her feelings.
I have a cousin, who for years had relationships with men, before settling down with a woman, with whom she seems to be very happy. I am not sure if this means she was always gay, but hid her true feelings, or if some women can change sexuality. It does seem to be different for some women. Whereas men tend to be either/or, with very few being bisexual, I have read that an estimated 25% of women have bisexual feelings. I don't know how true this is.
I have recently discovered I have another cousin, who lives in the US, who is also gay, and is married to a clergyman.
Most lesbians Ive met never looked like they've ever had a religious influence cast on them lol
BTW I have no problem being friends with gay people, I have a few. What other people do is their business and I'm not saying that some aren't born gay.
If someone chooses to be gay, its before they are born that they make that choice, not afterwards.
It is a proven fact that people don't choose to be straight or gay. It is all to do with genes ...
i.e. your born with blue, green, brown eyes due to your genetic makeup and scientist have found the genetic code that also makes a person gay, straight or bisexual.
Wrong, there is NO science that suppoprts any genetic homosexuality in any of the fields.
So I suppose that means there isn't for heterosexuality also. Why did you choose to be straight?
I am not going to have this conversation in two threads... so pick one.
I am naturally attracted to the oppposite sex... as all people are... until they choose to be with the same sex.... or suffer some traumatic experience, or other-wise aquire a proclivity for the lifestyle.
No genetics are invloved, and, no science supports any gay gene.
Those are just facts... deal with it... and live with them.
And I do not judge gay people, nor do I hate them, but I do judge the act... it is immoral, deviant, and other-wise un-natural.
I will not embrace immorality, dis-function, choices to live deviant life-styles, nor abnormal behaviour, and call it moral, normal, natural, correct and acceptable for all, simply because some want to justify, normalize, or just plain lie and call it something it is not.
You want to practice immorality, or deviant life-styles, go ahead.. that is your choice.
But do not think everyone should embrace and accept your choice for moral and acceptable... when it is not. And do not try to lie and say science supports or concludes such a finding... when it does not.
Again you assume that anyone who defends gay people must be gay...
What are you talking about UW...
I have not assumed you were gay in the least... no where. I made a general remark insiide a comment, "you want to....."
That is not to you... that is in general.
Well said, TM. I agree. I find homosexuality to be unnatural because the purpose for mating is procreation. Two men nor two women cannot procreate. Yes, you can adopt. Yes, you can go to a sperm bank, but that too is not natural. The two are attracted sexually not for any other reason.
I believe what your saying is true do you have a link with some proof on it? I personally do not believe poeple are born Gay, do to religious reasons,I always believed some poeple may be more genetically suseptable to being Gay but that ultimately its a choice. My theory is that you could most likely find a genetic link to any behavior such as violence, risky behavior, murder, stealing etc but if the behavior is wrong I can't see blaming it on genetics.
I have posted dozens of links destroying thier science and forcing them all to admit that there is no genetic, or other-wise scientific, link to be found... and it has been a chore.
Do I have a link that says... "definitely it isn't genetic".
How do I prove a negative?
But I do have the proof that, as of yet there is no genetic link, nor any science that shows any support for one.
Regardless of Evan's lil interviews with LGBT's storm-troopers.
They are all welcome to keep working on the science... but they do not get to lie about it and claim it shows something it does not.
It is just like the percentage of people gay in the world numbers some clown back in the thread threw up... something about Australia and 25% increase in population if the gays were put there.
That is BS... the number of the gay population in this world is approx, 1.7%... not a threat to world domination as of yet.
I think they are waiting for a population explosion within their ranks... kinda ironic, eh?... copuld be a while lol... but the BS slung as fact cannot stand.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percent_ … rld_is_gay
This is a good article that shows that you stridently stating what percentage of the world is gay is based on your agenda and not any universally accepted number.
The key to the article is the last paragraph, which states that an accurate number is impossible because people feel the threat of persecution from people like yourself, and fear self identifying as gay.
In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus used as an example of who is our brother a man from a sect that was considered the sworn enemy of the jews. The fundamentalist crowd saw Samarians as the lowest form of life, and yet Christ used one of them as his crowning example of how we should treat our fellow man, and never suggested that the Samarian converted. He made the point that those you villify could be the ones God will choose. I can't help but wonder if he was telling this tale today, if the man who gave his help freely would be a gay man.
My information comes straight from the Supreme Court of the United States, the filings of over 31 gay rights groups and advocates and they established the percentage in their own words in said filing...
---U.S. Supreme Court on March 26, 2003 in the Lawrence v. Texas, known as the Texas sodomy case.---
In footnote 42 on page 16 of this legal brief, 31 homosexual and pro-homosexual groups admitted the following: “The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS). The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. See Laumann, et al, The Social Organization of Sex: Sexual Practices in the United States (1994). This amounts to nearly 4 million openly gay men and 2 million women who identify as lesbian.”
Despite this indirect admission that the 10% figure homosexuals have used for more than two decades is wrong, the writers of the brief still continue to lie about the real numbers. The claim that 4 million men and 2 million women are gay is based on multiplying the 2.8% and 1.4% figures by the total number of males and females in the U.S.
It is unreasonable to count any of the 60 million Americans who are 14 or younger (including 40 million who are under nine years of age) as “openly gay men and women.” Yet, that is what this brief claims. Even as homosexuals admit they’re wrong about the 10% figure, they apparently still can’t resist lying about their true numbers in our population.
You all did get that one, right?...
It is unreasonable to count any of the 60 million Americans who are 14 or younger (including 40 million who are under nine years of age) as “openly gay men and women.” Yet, that is what this brief claims.
Wow.. what a bunch of BS that is... but that exemplifies the length and breath of the deceptions and twistings, of the American Left, Progressives, and the Homosexual agenda...
Google it... very interesting reading.
And as to the science of gay genes and other BS...
---"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."---
I will take the U.S. Supreme Court, and those 31 Homosexual Groups and advocates who represent millions of gay men and women.... over your Wiki any day.
The Wiki article cites your source, and many others. It simply says that the numbers are unknown, based on people not wanting to put themselves at risk of people like yourself.
The SCOTUS number is also only referring to the U.S., not the world at large.
I agree that it is unreasonable to count those under 14. It would be equally unreasonable to count them as hetero, so their numbers should simply be thrown out of the equation altogether, right?
But, what about natural reproduction? Here in India, the biggest challenge that the Government is facing in its fight against AIDS is this hidden Gay Community.
Its not about religion, its about nature and its principles.
My point is simply the 25%, of the population, or of America... is BS Bruce.
And the numbers and polls do show a couple things....
One... would be the length some have gone to to increase the numbers and lie about them.
Two... would be the rigged studies they use to promote such BS.
Three... would be that from the evidence we have... the number is nowhere near as high as the Left and the homosexuals have tried to spout and push as fact.
That much can be gleaned form the information at hand.
And the someone like me?...
Someone who points out the facts, and how said facts are in contradiction to the BS spouted by many and taught as fact?
Well I am truly sorry for having to destroy the dream of you alls la la la liberal land.
Your reading is challenged again. Go back and read what the 25% refers to. You have it wrong again.
Bruce, you can spout all the BS that you want.
But the fact is that the numbers do not support the BS of 25% of the world's population being gay, or that 15% of America is gay, blah-blah-blah-... it is not in the numbers, and it is BS.
Niether does the science support gay genes, or any other biological origin, excuse, justification... etc.
And if pointing out the facts... the truth... makes me a bigot... then fine.
Period... I do not care which of you like it or not.
I have no problem with people doing anything they want as long as they do not hurt another. But no one has the right to push immoral behaviours, and un-natural acts in our schools and social institutions, as moral and acceptable, based on BS science and stats.
And you can point out all the aberrations in nature you want... they are still un-natural and immoral.
Another angry response.
The 25% referred to how much Australia's population would grow if the entire gay population of the planet replaced the current population of that continent.
No one is trying to suggest what the percentage of the worlds population is gay. I'm saying there is no way to know, and mostly because homophobes keep good people in the closet in fear.
You can call all the many varied same sex relationships in nature "unnatural", but the fact that they exist consistently in nature make them very natural, by definition.
thebrucebeat, there is little point in trying to appeal to Mason by using the parable of the good Samaritan. Mason is a good Christian, and will therefore not allow any teaching of Christ to get in the way of his belief system.
You and Bruce pre-suppose a lot.
I for one do not see homosexuals as any type of low form or other form of life. They are people making bad choices, simple.
That does not mean I have to embrace the lifstyle choice as, "natural", great and morally acceptable, when it is not.
And to throw up Jesus is a red herring...
Jesus would have told the homosexual who asked for forgivness, that he or she was, "forgiven, now go your way and sin no more".
Not given 'em a free pass, as you both seem to think.
The sex cults were not foriegn to Jesus. He would not have and did not accept immoral sexual practices as a good thing and right to do.
Not in the least.
And my response are not angry... simply facts. You can cry about the world population this, and blah blah that... but we see your floundering and reliance on solely insulting another, so as to skew the vision and course of the facts.
And, you continue to claim a higher moral ground, at each and every turn. Too bad your own "bad" choices continue to damage society more than gays/lesbians.
Bad choices? According to whom.. You? That's a laugh.
It's actually just as natural to be attractive to the same sex. How? It's sexual attraction, which is natural in every way known to humankind. Just because it doesn't go along the path of what you supposedly assume is natural or the procreation of humans, doesn't make it any less morally acceptable than you being heterosexual.
As I said before, Cags, abnormal, deviant, immoral... un-natural.
The natural function of sex is pro-creation... so... think about it.
And I claim no ground. I Simply continue to correct the lies about the science and stats you all spin to try and uphold the BS.
How many times have you had sex? How many children do you have? If this is not approximately a 1-1 ratio, I suggest you may have another purpose to your personal kanoodling.
I can assure you I do.
Yes, apparently it's you that is the problem.
And, as I have said before- there is nothing abnormal, deviant or immoral about being gay, including the actions, because the actions are not to be judged based on either "good" or "bad". Being gay/lesbian is a emotional sexual attraction.
No. Pro-creation is just ONE function of many humankind has on an individual level.
There is no different between a gay man and a man who choose to be single(with sex) and not pro-create for whatever reasons.
Sure you do, the second you choose a side, instead of accepting people for who they are. Again, you are unable to see beyond yourself, so you cannot do it.
I don't speak BS, but I see through it though. And, you're polished, apparently been at it while, but my task isn't to bring you down, but IS to correct your lies.
I have three children, and I like women. If something ever happened (forbid it) to my husband, I might choose to be with a woman. Does this mean I can no longer fulfill my basic function?
So, we are all just babymakers in the end?
What about overpopulation? Maybe we should make everyone gay to solve that problem, then heteros will be the minority. The "deviant ones."
I accept everyone for who they are.
I do not accept immorality and un-natural, as moral and natural, though.
Big difference, Cags.
Sorry, TM, your argument holds no water. The natural function of sex is not for procreation - if that were so there would not be a booming business in condoms, abortions, the "morning after" pill and all the other methods used to allow sex wwithout procreation.
Procreation is but a very small part of the reason for sex in the human animal. I believe that a very few others (notably some of the other great apes) have sex for reasons other than procreation, but humans certainly do.
Rather, sex in humans is used primarily for entertainment - the good feeling it produces. For every sexual act used with the intent to produce offspring you will thousands used solely for that entertainment function.
That you have decided that a small percentage of those sex acts used for entertainment are immoral and deviant, are un-natural, has no bearing in reality - only in your own religious background.
Peoples uses for sex, and twisted desires... are not the same as the, "natural" function.
Gimme a break!...
How many whore house do the monkeys have? Are the sex shops a booming bussiness for apes and donkeys?... What a joke... more red herrings. That is all you poeple can do is throw up red herrings and obfuscate the facts.
First you all lie about the science... then get mad cause I pont out the lies... then insult... now throw around useless red herrings... you will be back to insulting next.
It is quite obvious to all.
The natural function of sex in nature, the "NORM", is to pro-create... period.
And that is an indisputable fact.
Our twisted ways to attain the pleasure of sex is not, "natural", it is purely man made.
My two dogs are both fixed and they hump each other all the time. 20% of Seagulls engage in gay behaviors. Sex for fun happens in the natural world all the time.
That is not sex for "fun"... that is succombing to an urge.
They are animals, not humans... which is, in the end, the whole point.
The purpose of sex isn't procreation. That happens to be the result. You have never had two chimps enjoy one another for the purpose of creating another chimp. They do it because they like it. Most of us do it for the same purpose, even you. We answer the call to the urge.
This is getting almost hilarious. Now the most natural act of sex for pleasure is not "sex for fun" (which it certainly is!) but "succumbing to an (evil) urge".
Incredible that you do not re-read your own posts and laugh out loud at the obvious religious concepts being spouted without regard to the world of nature and reality. At the idea that the human animal, understanding the Word of God, knows better than to succumb to these evil urges and should deny their nature and heritage.
I wonder if those seagulls will go to hell for their immorality? Perhaps if they accept Jesus as their Lord and Saviour, they can be saved.
It seems obvious that we have different definitions of the word "natural". To me it means something common (in this case), something that is done by most people, something that nature and evolution has provided for.
Sex for entertainment fits this bill perfectly. Evolution has provided that the human animal very much enjoys sex - the result is that there is enough inevitable reproduction that happens to maintain the species. For the human animal this reproduction is strictly a side effect - the pleasure and entertainment is the immediate and primary reason for the act. I have little doubt that your own lifetime of sexual acts bears out this basic truth - most such acts had no thought of procreation behind them.
That humans (and a very few other animals that you attempt to deride and make fun of) perform the sexual act without the female being in estrus bears this out. By your way of thinking we would surely have a method (pheromones perhaps?) to easily determine the status of the female, but we do not. Instead we enjoy the act so much that we perform it with or without any possibility of reproduction.
Yes, I understand that the Judeao-Christian ethic has tried for centuries to defeat this most natural act for anything but procreation, but it has failed to do so. Humans, being the animal that they are, will always have sex with no thought of procreation. I also understand that the act of homosexual sex was demonized to a much greater extent, but that is also flies in the face of nature - it is a "natural" act for a large minority of the species.
TM, You're just simply speaking the truth with common sense.
Well, not really. Very few people nowadays think homosexuality is unnatural.
But he has the support of you, Reverend Fred Phelps, and dwindling populations of homophobes all over the country.
What a coincidence!
We have a Reverend Fred Niles in Australia who ran for politics on his homophobic ticket.
Got his a**e kicked big time.
livelonger, That's your opinion. Homophobes? Lol, what a joke. I am not hateful toward homosexuals. I would appreciate if you would quit attacking my true character. Falsely labeling me as a homophobe to silence me will not work. I have a right to not embrace abnormal immoral acts, and this is not judging anyone because I choose to do so. Love you anyway.
By claiming that the expression of homosexuality is an ABNORMAL act you are by definition a homophobe. This is not opinion or an attack on your character it is fact.
A homophobe is a person who fears and hate homosexuals. Once again, that does not describe who I am. Good night.
Silence you? Obviously that was not my intent, and I'm glad that you didn't think so either, since you posted twice again.
If you're courageous enough, maybe you can tell us what you think of divorce, and if you would classify divorce and remarriage as an immoral act.
It's already bad enough that the religious who are claiming that homosexuality is an immoral act, don't actually understand what "immoral" or "moral" is to begin with.
Being gay? Cannot be "immoral" or even "moral" for that fact. Because, being gay isn't an action, in and of, itself. It's an emotional attraction, which is being determined an action, even if you never act on it.
So, it goes to show off the ignorance of the religious.
I'm sure that you know (by now) that directly pointing out a flaw in anothers thinking will always have said individual feigning ignorance.
It's like watching children bending the rules to suit their behaviours.
Hey livelonger, One has legal ground to divorce if there is adultery or abuse in their marriage. There is nothing immoral with divorcing under those terms. Divorce is permissible if sexual immorality is commited outside of marriage. The innocent person has a right to divorce and remarry. I do not hate anyone who divorce for any other reason which is not legal ground, but it does not mean I should embrace an immoral act. I thought you might rant about divorce and remarriage in your response, so I was well prepared. By the way, I have never remmaried. I encourage you to not justify things that is immoral as if they are moral. I would rather follow God's word anytime than to follow man-made morals.
No, not true, at least according to the word of Jesus. There is no grounds for divorce except fornication, which is not the same as adultery. Fornicators are not married, and adulterers are married. If one of the married couple had been discovered to have engaged in fornication ("porneia" in Greek), meaning they really hadn't been virgins when they got married, then the divorce was granted.
Adultery and abuse? No. Jesus commands a woman to return to her husband, even if he cheated on her or beat her, and reconcile. She is not allowed to remarry, which Jesus says in no uncertain terms is equivalent to adultery, an abomination worthy of hell.
I wonder how much time you spend counseling your divorced friends that they should reconcile with their former spouses, or else face an eternity in hell for engaging in an abominable sin. You do follow God's word, and not the word of man, right?
..But like a bad reporter who only report facts to sensationalise the story ,you have not reported ALL the facts,pertaining to what Jesus said.
Shame on you.
Really? What did I leave out?
And what have others left out as it relates to Jesus's words about gay people?
Try to resist the urge to put words in Jesus's mouth, something that Christianists are commonly known to do.
Well I assuming you quote from the Bible ,as many Christians do too, including myself.
Jesus fulfiled the law ,Im flattered that you might think he would need any of my words
You left out the Spirit of the Law
Ya'know why Jesus said what he did to the Pharisees. Before Jesus came on the scene they had been living under certain laws for 400 years....and were not about to give the up (and their power and weatlth) for a guy who had been born in a stable.
So ,in effect Jesus was establishing his authority and explaining the spirit of the law (they had no idea about Spirit) til then. You could say it was hard ,rigid and chauvunistic.
Kings ruled the land.
It really was a time of transformation and politics when Christ explained the law.
When it comes to gays, we have Christianists poring over every possibly anti-gay line in the Bible.
When it comes to the sins that they and their loved ones commit, we must ignore the specifics of the Law and instead refer to its spirit.
Double standards are evident in all walks of life. Yes?
(Except its probably more than likely called Hypocrisy)
It is no different for Christians. It is not an excuse ,that is just the reality.
Nobody is perfect -nobody.
I agree there is nothing worse than a Bible bashing self righteous religious holier than thou standing on his/her soapbox spewing out Thou shall not's, while they themselves live a less than moral lives.
I know there are many instances where self proclaimed men of God scammed or became sexual deviants,while lying and deceiving family and friends.
That is not right in any shape or form ,and Jesus himself said ...He would spew them out of his mouth..(figuratively speaking)
livelonger, I respectfully disagree. You are not in line with the word of God. Are you assuming I do not give advice to people who are divorced? If not, feel free to keep wondering. I am fully aware of the difference between a fornicator and a adulterer. When a person is having sex outside of their marriage, they are committed adultery, not fornication. It seems to me you have things mixed up. I'm shocked after reading your second paragraph. No Jesus does not command a woman to return to her husband for he can continue to beat the life out of her. A woman is free to reconcile with her husband if he recieves help and change. No hard feelings, but I am done discussing this with you. Please don't waste time with any snide remarks. Have a nice day.
Jesus commands a woman to return to her husband and reconcile. There is no exclusion for an abusive husband.
As stupid and heartless as this sounds, this is the word of the Bible as it's written. If you're a fundamentalist, you can't and won't dispute it. If you want to "read between the lines" and choose to make exclusions that make sense, then you are on shakier footing than people who say that Jesus did not condemn gay people (who are, by the way, more than an "act").
You are either a fundamentalist who reads everything literally in the Bible with equal measure ("the Law") or someone who understand the spirit of Jesus's message and makes allowances accordingly. If you are the former sometimes, and the latter sometimes, only makes you a hypocrite who maintains double standards, guilty of something Jesus was emphatically against.
In other words, if you rely on Jesus to be against homosexuality, you sure be better even more against divorce. I rarely see that happen among Christianists.
So when you can't handle the argument, you run?
You are going to have to deal with the challenging issues if you are to be taken even a wee bit seriously.
Kiwi, you are right, nobody's perfect, and I agree that there are double standards. Some are quick to fasely label all christians as living a double standard life, and does not know anything about the person. What a shame. One thing for sure, if I chose to engage in any form of immoral act, I wouldn't expect the whole world to embrace it as if it was something to celebrate.
How brave u r. Wimmin kin preech now iniit?Like wot jeebus sed innit.
You probably do a lot of things that I and most others find immoral, but I will defend your right to do them under the law.
I agree WOC.
Of course the world has a different standard,and openly promotes the 'If I feels right for you -just do it'
or 'Its a free world' but of course broken marriages ,kids with one parent, std clinic running night clinic to catch up with their clients needs, hardly suggest all that is fun is free.
Cause and effect in action.
Maybe God was trying to protect our freedom,rather than hurt it.
This is not a matter of "if it feels right for you, just do it." And you should know that it's not. Why would you say that if you know it's not true?
It's deeply hurtful that people who claim to be loving can demean long-term loving relationships. There's a reason more Christians are accepting gay relationships as valid, and it has nothing to do with libertine views.
I was replying to W.O.C in a general sense.
Particularly noting how low moral standards often have an undesired effect.
So in that context I said it because its true.
I opologise if you felt I was minimising homosexual relationhips.
You sound like Mark Knowles. This reply is refering to Evolution Guy.
You hit the nail on the mark Kiwi. Everything that feels good is not always right.
You don't see them as a lower form of life, only as unnatural and immoral ones.
Well, that is a great relief, Mason.
Why do you think Jesus is not quoted in the Bible regarding homosexuality? Why does he have such an intense concentration on greed, money, the rich and pride?
I find homo-phobes immoral and un-natural. TMM, have you heard the expression "take the plank out of your own eye first" or perhaps, "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God?" Anyone who condemns or labels anyone else should look to their own first. Personally, I find eating oysters deviant (slimy disgusting things) but that's a personal choice for others to make.
I really have lots of sympathy for those ignorants who defend immorality - homosexuality.
They defend themselves by uttering nonsense about religion, by trying to show themselves to be a Leftist. Lol!!! Those very people who used to abuse Communists are now juxtaposing themselves with the same group.
Immorality at its worst.
P.S. No offence. Not personal.
And, I have accepted that there are people ignorant enough to have sympathy for those who defend "immorality" - "homosexuality". Your usage of words are incorrect. Which isn't anything new, coming from a religious individual.
And, I find it interesting how religious folk, such as yourself, cannot see beyond themselves long enough to maintain a rational thought and see that thought to the end result. The level of ignorance in believers is deeper than those without.
Improper word usage. Good for you. You must be proud.
None taken. You've only offended yourself and failed to see how you did it. So don't take it personal, if you can?
Thank you for your reply, I will look at your posts!
In 2000 the scientists, let me correct, the Gay/Lesbian scientists had to admit that despite years of search they could not find a 'gay' gene. As of today, in 2011, the 'Gay Gene' has not been discovered.
We still haven't figured out the nature of the origin of energy and matter in the universe yet, either, so by your logic, the universe doesn't exist.
Just as no "straight" gene has been discovered.
My brother is gay. Why would anyone choose to be gay? There is no minority more villified, stereotyped, or just flat out picked on than the gay community.
I was bisexual myself when I was a young adult/teen. I eventually made the choice to be hedero as it was an easier lifestyle. (and my wonderful husband is male)So I can see where you'd ask if it was a choice. Our proclivities are not choices. I happen to find men and women equally exciting. If my soulmate had happened to be female, I'm sure i would be classified as a lesbian.
Having dated many women over the years, I was always annoyed very much by the stereotype that bisexual people are easy and go in for constant threesomes. (I never liked to share.)
So is being gay a choice? Absolutely not for those who are only attracted to the same sex. For those attracted to both sexes, most of the time.
No they do not choose to be gay, nor are they born that way. Babies are innocent. I think some of the gay people in the world have a reason of something happened in their life to the point they saw being gay as an "escape". That's some and not all.. I don't think being gay should make us turn our backs on them, I think they are who they are and when they die God will have the final say and punish them how he sees fit.. I say live and let live... and change the topic LOL
...wow...you actually believe that? 'punish them how he sees fit'?...and then later a 'lol'?...i figure yor goin' straight to hell.....
I suppose that means I am heading straight to hell. As I have always enjoyed being warm, it will at least save on the heating bill..
Are you friends with Ms. Bachman? Her husband preaches something like that creed.
Yes, people chose to be gay. The only other option is to commit suicide of a sorts. If you cant be who you are, you cant live.
I think it was Freud who postulated that homosexuality is more like a gradient or spectrum instead of a black and white thing, that indeed, to some degree or another everyone is homosexual barring the very very few minority who actually do exist right at the extreme straight or homosexual side of the spectrum. I know Freud isn't always right, matter of a fact he was wrong more often then anything else but this theory kinda rings true to me. It goes a long way toward explaining how victims of horrid abuse at the hands of the opposite gender can find themselves 'man haters' or 'woman haters'. Strip away the abuse and give them a proper experience of life and chances are they would still have landed somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, the abuse just pushed them a bit further along the spectrum. I could be totally off base with that idea but until I hear better it suits me just fine. I do like the idea that most homophobic 'gay bashers' are in reality at least a little gay themselves and simply freaking out cause they cannot just accept themselves and others as God made them (supposedly).
This has got to be the 300th thread debating homosexuality...time for people to grow up and get over it.
There are gay people, there are straight people...fact of life. You don't like it? No one is forcing you to be gay...or straight.
What an amazing amount of ignorance in one single thread.
Thank god I chose the hetero path.
People choose to be gay or straight, just as they choose to be black or white, or to have blue eyes or brown, or a man or a woman, or with a disability or without, or European or Asian. Yes, it is all one big choice. I find this argument absurd in the extreme.
I agree completely. You've stated this quite simply, and quite well.
I believe that human beings are sexual beings. They choose to act on that or not to act on it, but they do not choose to whom they find themselves attracted. Either way, they are human beings who should be respected as such. Period. I hate, hate, hate this argument. Judging a person by their sexual orientation is small minded and cruel. I think regardless of a person's religious stance, God is far more concerned about how we treat others than with whom we choose to share a bed.
I am bi-sexual. I did not choose to find women attractive. I am living as a straight woman now, because I chose to marry a man and be faithful to him alone. If I would have fallen in love with a woman and chose to be in a committed relationship with her, I would be acting as a lesbian. I am still attracted to women, and thank God I have a husband that understands when I stare a little too long.
The point is, while I may CHOOSE to abstain from any other (as you really should when married) there is still a part of me that is unfulfilled. I can not imagine how those with no heterosexual inclinations at all could ever be happy living the "straight lie" no matter how many pills they take or how many times they pray to God for strength.
I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to torment a person like that just so other people can be assured that no one else in the world is behaving in their so called "deviant" behavior. Even coming from a religious view, what the hell happened to "Judge not, lest ye be judged"?
I agree. It is my experience that many Christians are quick to judge. Maybe they should take a leaf out of the book of that Jesus chap, they claim to follow. They would find that they are much more accepting of other people. Although I am not a follower myself, it is my understanding that Jesus taught love, not hate.
I am a Christian. I don't hate. I don't judge. All I do is say what God's Word says. If you disagree with that, take it up with Him. I didn't write it; I'm just the messenger. Yes, I know, the shoot the messenger.
Hi preacherdon, I have done what you suggested and have taken it up with Him upstairs. He told me that He has changed his mind, which considering He is God, he is perfectly entitled to do. Apparently, he has decided that he now only wants gays as sunbeams, because with all the glitter, they shine more brightly. He also told me that you need to get with the programme and move into the 21st century. Don't blame me for being the messenger, I am only saying what He told me.
You go gurl! Perhaps the reason some people like to shake their fingers at other ways of life is simple. Like the schoolyard bully, it makes them feel better about themselves and their way of life.
... gay carrot. No question. Swings to the left ...
This photo gives new meaning to "cuffing a carrot". Sorry, I couldn't resist.
I've clearly led a very sheltered life - had to look that up
Seriously, this should be renamed The Thread That Has Long Outlived Its Usefulness. I have to say one thing, which is that I've seen enough smarminess and hypocrisy here to last me for quite a while - all that "hate the sin, love the sinner" cr*p: urgh. It's like when someone says "I feel sorry for you" or "I pity you" when they really mean "I think I'm better than you but I don't quite have the cojones to come right out and say that."
@ PRanj - wow. Verbiosity at its finest. And, if I may say so, one of the best attempts at armchair psychology.
@ TMMason - In. Your. Book.
I believe heterosexuality is natural by nature. Anything different is by choice. The purpose of sexual attraction was meant for procreation
Anything different is not by choice, but by 'pagalpan [Hindi] Madness'. Nature loves symmetry. It will never allow someone getting homosexual. But, Insanity will always be there.
Homosexuality is neither natural, nor by choice. It is a plain Insanity.
Pranj you keep saying that "Nature loves symetry" and basically that homosexuality goes against nature-
...as skyfire pointed out ..
homosexuality runs rampant amongst animals. Are they not considered part of nature or are those animals also suffering from a mental illness? And if it's the later, what -just out of curiosity, would you suggest we do with said animals that display such "madness"?
I dont know, do people choose to be black? Do people choose to be midgets? Do people choose to be blind? This question is about as logical as the ones I just proposed. And should not require a rational explanation.
Religious people don't consider themselves as species born on this planet. Christians assume god made humans as his image and sex is only for the sake of spreading Christianity like virus (i guess god masturbated while creating females and humans(being his image) took it wrong for homosexuality ) and in case of other religions they think humans are not animals born out of evolution but made for entertainment purpose of god with appropriate karma cycles and mana.
To stop madness ? In case of christians, if their dog/cat/birds show signs of homosexuality then they should take their pets to church and let priest brainwash them to such extent that they only think of following jesus.
As I said, Gay like you defend yourself by uttering nonsense about religion. Grow up, dude. Understand the base of nature.
You know rats *behind* about biology, so stop blabbering about something you don't know. Get some education before becoming preacher of nature.
Your response to Indian History and Population convinced me that you are not worth talking. First of all, you need to get out of Wikipedia and read something that is not based on only facts. Anyway, why should I preach a Homosexual?
First of all, come out of religion. Gay always defend themselves by this. Talk logically. I didn't say a single word about religion in defense of my hatred for Homosexuals. Why you? It is you who has been brainwashed by your un-natural sexual orientation.
You are definitely a Gay, and I am not a psychiatrist. I am extremely sorry, I can't treat You.
You should better admit yourself in a good metal asylum.
Get Well Soon Dude.....
Best of Luck.....
And, rest assured, I won't tell your neighbor about your madness.
The way you blabber without any medical education and empirical evidence about something you don't know, convinced me what type of person you're. I know where to put likes of you.
There are plenty of medical evidences given in wikipedia article. Do yourself a favor and read before you talk anything that related to biology/nature. If you have medical education come up with evidence to refute it. If not, get some life, better yet get a girlfriend and start populating this planet the way you learned it from nature. If that's not enough blabber your BS elsewhere. You don't need to preach homosexuality if you're straight i don't preach it either, but then why you oppose them without medical evidence ? Have you ever got molested by gays or lesbians ?
Joke of the day.
Really ? when you were blabbering indian culture in this thread, didn't you made reference to ancient dominating religion in this country ? (i.e. santan dharma) Borrow some brain from nature before arguing.
As i said earlier, you got yourself molested by gays so anyone who defends gays, looks gay to you. Cure this paranoia, you know the hospital, don't you ?
Get some education, biology books are good starting point. Then consult with psychiatrist for paranoia and then go to history teacher for reference to indian history. You're welcome at bhandarkar institute for these references any time.
To Skyfire: Hey Mohammed! why dont you go masterbate to the thought of your 86 virgins, buy a knew prayer rug, and go worship some cows. I hear that is very popular in India. Other than that let me just say...You have nothing to say that is worth being heard!
Why you? It is you who has been brainwashed by your un-natural sexual orientation.You are definitely a Gay, and I am not a psychiatrist. I am extremely sorry, I can't treat You. You should better admit yourself in a good metal asylum.
If you could take all the gays in the world today , replant them all into one Countrry like Austraila, their country/s population would be 25 times greater.
Do you think you could cure all the gays it they were in one place, like they tried back in 1973 within the prison system. Or do you think many gays would commit suicide if they couldn’t convert, for those gays you could smile down on them in hell from heaven?
The only other gay choice is for them to create their own families in hell's afterlife. Where they also can create swans, Hot night Clubs and waterfalls. Then put a sign in front of hell's gate, NO straight people Allowed!!!
Soul salvation: is not the same in Spirit and soul as in my books
Another ridiculous thread about gays/lesbians.
Regardless of whether or not it's a choice, it shouldn't matter at all. How one lives life, as long as it is not a detriment to society as a whole, is their business.
Mocking or making fun of, or spreading hate, isn't justified. The sexual orientation of an individual does not and never has defined a person's overall character. It has very little to do with it.
It is the wrongful perception/perspective used by those who are already influenced by external sources, which is skewed.
Honestly, I think by even trying to respond to this question, I will have somehow become dumber by doing so. In fact I believe I am loosing brain cells as I speak simply by be tempted into writing any form of response to this thread. Thanks for making me dumber as a human being.
Another interesting statement.
So, what exactly was your intent with the above post?
My statement was just a response to the original question proposed, "Do people choose to be gay?" And my way of responding to this question by way of sarcasem to reveal how rediculous it is. I believe people do not choose to be gay, the thought of that is , well, absolutly retarded. If I thought that one day I could just turn gay by choice and not by it being natures intent I might just drown myself in my own bathtub. Do people choose to be gay? common, are you serious, I mean really, why is this even a discussion. Once again I feel dumber by responding once again.
My statement was just a response to the original question proposed, "Do people choose to be gay?" And my way of responding to this question by way of sarcasem to reveal how rediculous it is. I believe people do not choose to be gay, the thought of that is , well, absolutly retarded. If I thought that one day I could just turn gay by choice and not by it being natures intent I might just drown myself in my own bathtub. Do people choose to be gay? common, are you serious, I mean really, why is this even a discussion. Once again I feel dumber by responding once again.
So dumb in fact that you posted twice
Really, why do people get their underwear in a tangle over stuff that occurs between consenting adults that they don't happen to have a taste for themselves?? Or maybe it's a case of "methinks the good gentlemen do protest too much"
Because if they aren't getting the big "O" (Frigidity comes with mental rigidity) then no one else should be either.
Surely it goes a lot deeper than that though. I mean, not everyone who isn't "getting any" goes out on a crusade to stop everyone else from doing so
I just think there is a type of person with a mentality that tends to look at what everyone else is doing and "wag the finger" in disapproval at people who don't measure up to what that person considers to be the "norm". I mean, telling other people what they should (or shouldn't) be doing is far easier than evaluating one's own behaviour and motives, right? And I'm not just talking about sexuality here, either.
I didn't really take enough psych courses to diagnose someone Honestly, my guess--if it isn't motivated by God's referral program--is that it is about claiming moral superiority in order to build one's own self-esteem. Something along the lines of "Yes, I may be a total tool, but at least I'm not gay"
As to members of god's referral program, I think they believe they'll get a fluffier cloud if they torment enough homosexuals into living a horrible unhappy life. I'm not sure exactly what chapter and verse says "Thou shall pass judgement on everyone else in the world and enforce your twisted definition of what my Book says until the poor bastards either fake reform or commit suicide" I've read the whole book, haven't found it.
Your post has at least four fantastic T-shirt slogans in it:
"Paid-up member of God's referral program"
"I may be a total tool, but at least I'm not gay"
"I'm going to be raptured, and you're not. So there" (came up with this one after a bit of internet research - thankfully there are but few people who believe in the "rapture" in my part of the world)
"There's a cloud in heaven reserved for me. And it's well fluffy too"
I just posted this on another forum, but thought it might fit here as well. It's an interview from this week on Dylan Ratigan with a neuroscientist and addresses this very topic about halfway through. It's definitely worth watching, entertaining and informative.
It doesn't advocate for either side, it's just good info I think.
Well, after reading through these answers I have to say I don't think most of you read the entire question, and if you did you did not understand that the real question was not about if we choose to be straight or gay. The real question addresses the logic proclaiming that someone can "choose" to be gay or not.
Some of you got that and I applaud you!
There are of course, some that feel, "yes" you are born straight and then choose to be gay yet they failed to acknowledge the logic I outlined in the OP (that they -under that logic- must have chosen to be straight if we are to accept that gay people have chosen to be gay.)
I was very surprised/amused at the "gay is a mental disorder claim". I honestly thought that reference of thinking expired sometime in the 50's. Obviously I was wrong. But again, that opinion has nothing to do with the OP and seems to just be a debacle for heated debate- which was not my intent.
And to the women that chime in about being Bi/gay... Well, all I can say is that I don't blame you because if I was a woman I'd certainly be gay!
Bah... It's not all it's cracked up to be... Sure the house is clean, but the oil never gets changed in the car.
*ducks and flees*
I bet it is not as clean as a gay man's house, or as fragranced.
I used to have a cat who had previously lived with two lesbians over the road, but he came to live with me because he couldn't come-to-terms with lesbian wallpaper.
"Live and let live. Anybody who can't cope with that should be killed."
btw, what is a metal asylum? I hear aluminum and titanium are happy the way they are.
Homophobes are always bone ignorant and abusive, it's part of the whole hate filled crud from the psychotic bible.
The assertion that your sexuality, whether it be heterosexual or homosexual, is a conscious choice made at the onset of puberty is ludicrous. I find it laughable when heterosexuality goes unquestioned by politicians, religious figures, media and everyday people but homosexuality is questioned at every turn while systematically being labelled a 'choice' - so, what pre-teen in their right mind, knowing the intolerance in the world, would choose to be gay?
Maybe before someone labels it a 'choice' they sit-down and write out a list of pro's to being gay. Once you see, presently, the cons outweigh the pros then we'll discuss the draw of making that choice.
I'm also sick of people stating they 'do not hate' or 'do not judge' before following it up with a judgement they've divined from above - I'm fairly certain I would respect you more if you, at least, had the conviction in your own opinions to stand wholly behind them.
... and, just so we're all clear, I've already tried to use the 'i'm still sick with the gay' excuse to get out of work - doesn't work, apparently that excuse hasn't worked since 1973
Falling in love is not a choice. Who you fall in love with is not a choice. When someone falls in love with someone of the opposite sex it is not a choice. When someone falls in love with someone of the same sex it is not a choice.
It's quite simple.
I honestly wouldn't give a monkeys for the opinion of some. I have a shitty family but by heck am I glad none of them base their opinions on some of the stuff I've seen in this thread.
Gotta laugh at the irony though. The fact that some use religion as a solid base. And found their opinions upon it. Big lol.
But, what about those who don't base their opinion on religion? Supporters of immoral homosexuals always find refuge by abusing religion.
They forget that the most vociferous supporters of Homosexuality - The Leftists - are behind the massacre of maximum no. of people since Marx.
You can not defend insanity by writing Good English. You can not defend them by the principles of individual liberty.
Nature has its own principles. Let us conform with those principles.
How is homosexuality immoral? Forget religion. But, take it at face value...how IS it immoral?
Conformity to nature is awesome! Lets say you go live in a natural cave in the middle of a completely natural forest, hunt your food with a (natural) sharpened stick, and wait for lightning to light the fire that you cook your prey on. Please don't take your horribly unnatural computer with you.
Perhaps PRanj, the reason the people who are not homophobic "abuse" religion is because it is often the religious who are homophobic. It is religious bigotry which is one of the biggest obstacles to an equal and fair society. If the religious cannot stand criticism, then they ought not to dish it out. You religious demand respect, yet are the last the give respect to anyone you consider different to you. There seems to be a well-understood consensus that you are not allowed to disrespect religion. Why? Because you are not. But why not? You are just not. And that is the end of the argument. Yet you are allowed to display your bigotry for the whole world to see. Your ignorance amazes me. Respect is a two-way street.
... and the problem with nature is that sometimes things don't quite hit the mark. For all its beauty, nature is flawed.
Does that (then) make all the flaws immoral?
Flaws in nature, if not advantageous, tend to get weeded out through natural selection.
Homosexuality among a minority seems to have an evolutionary advantage. That we haven't figured out exactly what that is yet doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Over-population? We hetero's appear to breed like rabbits. More so in some parts of the world than others.
Personally I don't care about an individual's sexuality. I care about the person they are, not who they choose to sleep with.
More so in some parts of the world than others.
This shows your character.
Do you really think I'm interested in your opinion of who and what I am. In the event that you're confused - that would be a no.
I don't play the keyboard warrior game. I have real, physical, healthy and (ultimately) respectful relationships with the people that I know and love.
You don't happen to be one of them.
If you've a grain of sense, you wouldn't (and shouldn't) give me a second thought.
@ Susana - I see no benefit in offering anything profound in places like this. You'll always find that this type of subject matter drags out the bigots, religious, inane and plain old ignorant.
As I've said before - you can't educate carrots.
No, I don't think. And, in fact, you shouldn't.
It would be my worst nightmare to be among the group of ignorant bigots like you. Never expect rational people to be with you.
Second of thought? Lol!!! Ask your heart. You don't deserve.
No one can educate carrots.This is fact. But, people who try to educate frogs are really wasting their time. Won't come here again.
BTW, you have chosen a PERFECT avatar for yourself. It suits your personality, thinking, and character. Good.
Pointless and inane - you're probably right on that score frog.
I just wish that some of those immoral humans would get on with their own lives and stop bashing others.
Why does anyone care what consenting adults do in the bedroom, or the living room floor or the shower? With carrots or whatever.
I bet that PRanj gets turned on by women "doing it".
IDK - doubt I'll ever find out, he/she doesn't like me very much.
If it makes you feel any better, I've never met a frog I didn't like...hahaha!
I wouldn't want to find out. But I've yet to meet a man that wasn't. Even the gay bashing ones. HYPOCRITES.
There is no problem when two consulting adults do this on their bedroom. But, gradually they started to make a community and went ahead with their demand. Again, one should not show resentment for these groups. They are also human beings. But, when this group starts to demand constitutional rights and this and that, then one has to oppose them to preserve future generations.
"Demand constitutional rights" - which ones (that you already have) should they not have?
"Demand this and that" - which this and that do they want that you don't already have?
I have always assumed that any right I am given by our government is available to anyone. It would appear that you disagree - which of your rights would you deny them? Or are you claiming that they somehow want rights that you don't have? If so, what are they?
If you truly believe that the race will die out as a result of homosexuality I'm surprised that you can actually turn on the computer, let alone type the words. No one can possibly be that stupid and still do these things.
That means be fruitful and over populate the world, then over pollute the earth some more.
And, what do you know about Character? Apparently nothing, considering your attempt to defame Frogdropping, because of her statement, which is actual FACT.
I am only pointing it out, because your thinking is flawed.
Ahhh Cags ... thank you.
But it's not PRanj's fault that there may well be a flaw in their thinking.
Nature's flawed, remember?
If 'frogdropping' is a female then let me take back my words for Her. I didn't know this.
I was not infuriated by FACT, but the context in which FACT has been presented by Andira. Ponder over it.
Ranj and TMM
According to many major studies, it average out to be about 9% of the population is homosexual or at least some form of same-sex sexual contact within his or her lifetime. About 20% of the population have thought about it or had feelings about it, . Homosexual behavior is also widely observed in about 5000 species of animals have been report to have home sexual acts.Due to religious and political conditions facilitated their visibility has been harmed for very long time and that will only change in time and understanding
Being Christian is in our genes or is it a choose, Yet a certain percentage of people have the gene to be gay and to change them would ruin their lives in which is unnatural and unethical
Show me a great Christian nation with morals and I will show you a place that is most like Sodom and Gomorrah
We have already established the deciet in that story, position... too bad.
Go back and read.
It is well established that the numbers do not support any where near that figure. Please. Give me a break, repitition doesn't make it any truer.
Pay attention... the BS has already been strained.
It was all in the Court records, where they, the Homo-activist and gay groups, could not come out with blatent lies to perpetuate a myth and normalize an aberration. It would have been perjury to not tell the truth in the filings.
From your earlier post:
"In footnote 42 on page 16 of this legal brief, 31 homosexual and pro-homosexual groups admitted the following: “The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS). The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. See Laumann, et al, The Social Organization of Sex: Sexual Practices in the United States (1994)."
The two numbers (2.8% and 9%) given are for two different things; the SC refers to the number of gays that will admit not only to themselves, but to the world, that they are gay; they other number estimates the total number of gays, and includes bisexual people (not gay), closet gays and those that do not understand why they don't like the opposite sex.
If you're going to quote and compare statistics, do try to make it apples to apples.
The fact is the admission of these numbers show the duplicity and deciet that the Leftists and Homosexuals are engaged in, and that none of their own spoutings about percentages can be trusted, and are damn sure false.
Like adding the 9 years olds and under in, and the under 14 year olds... to beef up the numbers, as if... what a disgusting trick that is. How does anyone even defend that BS.... it exemplifies the lie and scum-baggy deciet they have adopted as tactics.
It is all about inflatng the numbers through deciet and deception to normalize, make appear as natural, and make moral... the immoral and unnatural.
Their own actions speak louder that any of you alls words.
Um, no, what you're saying is both offensive and personal. It's utterly flabbergasting there is this amount of ignorance and, blatant, homophobia in 2011
I see no one has tried to answer the question of whether people choose who they fall in love with. If we don't choose who we fall in love with, then it follows that we don't choose to be gay, bisexual or straight.
When a person feels love towards someone and wants to express it physically if the other person feels the same way and they give consent, I really can't see what the problem is.
Love is not just for straight people.
It's usually in our teens that we have our first experiences of falling in love - the time when we most want to fit in and be like everyone else. For those that discover that they love someone of the same sex, they usually have a real struggle with it initially. Hate it and try to deny it. If it was a simple choice they would not have those feelings.
That is absurd.
That is a good as my pen has red ink... so all pens are red.
There are many kinds of love... you can love everything about someone and not want to have sex with them.
It's not absurd at all. One of the characteristics of falling in love is the intense desire to express that love physically through sex.
You are Right. Nature wants its creatures to attract sexually towards OPPOSITE SEXES. One doesn't need training for this. However, when this desire becomes desperation, then some cross the boundary of nature and make physical relationship with same sex. Nature doesn't want that.
I don't know what you mean by desperation or how you can say what nature wants. Nature is as it is and the reality is that some people are attracted to the same sex.
So you think gay people only have intimate relationships with people of the same sex out of desperation? That happens in places like prison where choices are limited, but that certainly isn't a normal characteristic of gay relationships. Like I've said, it usually starts with love, just like straight relationships do.
I couldn't agree more. The gay couples I know had to have a lot of love for each other, they had to fight for every right they have.
One couple (girls I know) have been together for 23 years now.
Their love for each other makes their home one of the nicest family nests I visit and I can't help but feel good in their company.
It is by no means the only expression of loving someone. nor is it to most people the most important, or even necessary for love of some people, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, etc.
So what would make you think sex, as a component, an act of physically expressing love in a relationship.... makes it genetic?
The perverbial, to learn to love an ugly woman. A guy meets a girl, no attraction at all he thinks she is worse thing he has ever seen, but after time and getting to know her, he learns that she is more than just her looks and begins to see her in a new light. Literally... ugly girls can become prettier if they are beautiful inside... it is reflected upon their outside when you get to know them. He falls madly in love with her, they get married, do it... happilly ever after.
Nothing genetic... just perception. We can learn to love... or our perception of someone might change over time, and they become someone we would be with.
Sex is a secondary act... a physical expression of your desire to be that much closer to someone in the most physical and intimate of ways, to express a love for someone in a special way... not a genetic based function of love. Are there chemicals that attract and produce desire... yes... but they do not speak to gay genetics either. They would speak to a cross-wired system such as synesthesia.
A birth defect?
And sex is not what love is measured by... and plenty of sex occurs with no love at all invlolved. So that doesn't prove any type of inherant genetic link.
And then there is Lust.
You're twisting emotions with actions. Two different things.
Lust does not equate to love, sex does not equate to love... love does not equate to sex, love is a lot of things... sex a small aspect of it, if at all important in the end.
The arguments made for homosexuality being a choice are very similar to those made at one time for left-handedness. I remember only a few years ago, a friend who was educated in a convent school, where her left wrist was regularly beaten by the nuns in an attempt to beat the devil out of her, which they believed was the cause for her left-handedness. It seems religion is still being used as an excuse for ignorance.
Yes. it wasn't that long ago that religious people thought that a deformed child was the spawn of Satan, and usually wanted it put to death. But, they usually just ended up in traveling shows where men got rich on showing off what they called the freaks of nature. Then people wised up, and realised that all the freak shows were just an attempt by an asshole to make money.
At Coney Island in New York City back in the late 1800's, they put human beings on display. They brought in entire villages of people from Africa, midgets, and the deformed, and turned them into a sideshow. And, the sad thing is, that people actually paid money to see them. The bearded lady was probably just a man in drag, but society was too dumb to know the difference.
I should also add that the freak show idea has not changed, it just moved into the field of medicine, where the freaks can be treated and cured. At least that is what they want people to believe. Like this huge push by some people in our beloved government that believe that homosexuality can eventually be cured, which translates into more research dollars for doctors and think tanks.
Just a different group of people getting rich off the freaks.
Homosexuality has been a part of humanity since the dawn of our existence. I think that some make the choice to explore it and/or embrace it, while others are genetically predisposed towards their own gender. Though personally, I don't think it matters. Love is love, sex is sex, does it really matter what we choose to choose? lol
The fact is niether Christ nor God would, or do, accept the act of Homosexuality as normal and moral behaviour. And the Churches who have allowed this and accepted it into their ranks are in no way true houses of God. Period.
God speaks on many occassions of the abominations of the practices of sex cults. He railed against Israel and Judah before the diasporas to cease the syncretism of his religion and the acceptance of abhorant sex acts and human sacrifices.
Christ would not have accepted that behaviour, either. He would have expected you change the way you choose to act...
(Or he would have healed you of the defect... if you want to call it genetic.)
...and then told you that... "You are forgiven, now go your way and sin no more.".
Pretty simple, if you read the bible it is all right in there.
The fact is that people need to worry about their own soul, their own marriage, their own bedroom. The amount of time invested into threads like this suggests some measure of self-neglect, and at minimum the scarier end of homophobia.
My soul is just fine.
So don't you worry about me, I have made my peace with God.
As far as my commenting in this thread or any other, I will plaster comments from here to the other end of the internet on any topic I want and as much as I want.
And there are important reasons why this debate has to take place in this country. 1 being the implimentation of the gay agenda into the schools, and the pushing of this as a normal and morally acceptable choice of behaviours for our children to make and to participate in.
So I do not care if you want to ignore it and make lil remarks... I know and many others know this is an improtant issue.
Among many others in todays society, of which I comment on a lot also.
If you were doing a study on me, in the end my option about myself would the most important option in the world.
ILGA launched 2011 ILGA State-Sponsored Homophobia Report at University of London, They say 10% 0f the world is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex group. Founded in 1978, ILGA, is now an association of over 700 groups in over 110 countries campaigning for lesbian, gay, bisexual, Trans and intersex (LGBTI) rights.
To raise awareness on the extent of State Sponsored Homophobia in the world, this year you will find ’only’ 76 countries criminalize in the same list, including the infamous 5 which put people to death for their sexual orientation: Iran, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen [plus some parts of Nigeria and Somalia]," wrote ILGA Co-Secretary General Gloria Careaga-Perez. "One country less compared to the 2009 list may seem little progress, until one realizes that it hosts one-sixth of the human population, as the country in question is India." I hear it’s criminalize “consensual sexual acts between persons of the same sex in private over the age of consent is up to 80 countries and death penalty in 9 countries
It’s too bad religious people are at the top of the list as the most homophobia people in the world. I would rather see two people having a love relationship than two people killing each other, as for the greatest reason to kill someone, is in the name of God. Not the kind of God I would find all loving.
Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.
Do you recognize these? They are the Fruits of the Spirit as laid out in Galatians by Paul. They are the signs of the Christian who's soul is "fine".
How many of them do you think you exhibit in your posts?
But if you believe the bible to be myth or hopelessly compromised by the cultural norms of the time or altered dramatically over time through the oral tradition and then scribal alterations, what argument are you left with?
We know you have a simple belief in scripture and God, at least when it supports what you want to believe anyway. But it isn't evidence one way or the other regarding the OP.
Well thanks for that TM, Nice to know that my church is not a true house of God. Does that mean that I can now disassociate myself with the idiots that protest funerals? Cause that would be awesome! I'm tired of having to qualify the fact that I am a christian with "but I'm not like those morons". I'm damn tired of people like you being the loudest and therefore stereotypical representatives of Christianity. And, quite frankly, it sucks that the bigots that use Christ as their shields really DO do all the things that the militant atheists say they do.
I'm genuinely curious... Nevermind what God feels about homosexuality... Why do YOU care? And don't give me all that crap about decline of society cause that's posturing. How does what two people do in the privacy of their own bedroom concern you at all?
You aren't trying to save their souls... (If you are then you are doing a piss-poor job of conversion) You aren't trying to save yourself from the slew of gay men that are just itching to get in your pants...I just don't get what you think that beating people over the head with your interpretation of the Bible is going to do.
It is an abominable act in the eyes of God... period. You want to be a preacher of God... then reform yourself.
There is no compromise on it.
So is eating bacon cheeseburgers, but I don't see many Christians following that one.
You can claim "continuing revelation" all you want, but Jesus himself never said a word about homosexuality. The only one who even mentioned it in the New Testament was Paul and there's dispute about the exact translation of the terms used. They were not the commonly used terms for homosexuality at the time and some people argue that he was referring specifically to temple prostitutes and the practice (common in Rome at that time) of mentor-student sexual relations between boys and adult men.
No it isn't, that is absurd.
And Christ not mentioning homosexuality, does not equate to him condoning it... what would make you think that? How much absurdity can you toss about in one comment, kerry.
There is no continuing revalation about it... it is condemned as a practice, and that is it. Any church who accepts it into their ranks, having gay ministers, is an abomionation. Period.
Leviticus forbids both consumption of pork and consumption of meat and dairy in combination, so bacon cheeseburgers are an abomination twice over.
I didn't say Christ condoned homosexuality, I said he didn't say anything about it. Only Paul did, and his statements are disputed. Therefore, if you consider homosexuality an abomination, you consider it an abomination on the basis of it being described as such in the Old Testament. Leviticus, to be precise. Why do you pick out this one small part of Leviticus to harp on about while conveniently ignoring its many other prohibitions?
As to the food, we as Christians are allowed to eat of anything, as was granted through a vison to Peter. I believe it is Acts 10 or 11?
So we can eat bacon cheese-burgers kerry... grill 'em up.
And as for the Homosexuality... I thought you were saying that it was acceptable to allow it within the ministry of a church simply because Christ had not specifically metioned it. Sorry bout that.
And Paul was speaking to all the abominable sex practices of the cults and people. We cannot just single out the ones that people want to hold to.
No, that's up to the interpretation of the individual church. Some believe the New Testament overrides the Old and that homosexuality is therefore okay; others believe that the New Testament overrides the Old and the homosexuality is therefore not okay. It all comes down to how you translate Paul.
Give it up, Kerryg. Things are only an abomination to the common religious fundie if they themselves don't want to perform the practice while others do. If they enjoy pork then it is not an abomination and some explanation/translation/interpretation allowing it will always be found.
It is why there are so many hundreds of religions and sects - everyone must find or make up one that allows them to do what they want while forbidding everything else.
He did mention homosexuality, only to say that gay men are exempt from the requirement for marriage (Matthew 19:12). Since the topic was up, it would seem that would have been a good time for him to condemn gay people...but he didn't.
But speaking of marriage...do you know what Jesus said about divorce and remarriage, TMMason?
Wow, that shut him up. It works on Brenda, too, who also rails about homosexuality being immoral but has been divorced and remarried.
You know just cause someone isn't around to reply to all your remarks when you slip em in there... doesn't mean you have shut anyone up.
Please... you all are too funny.
@-Castle... You're the funniest of all... I cannot even barely translate half of what you mean from the blather of words you use all twisted together.
The answer to your assertion is... NO... yours would be the most self serving and biased of opinions regarding youself and the truth.
@live... Mathew 19:12... Does not speak to Homosexuality at all. It speaks to Marriage Divorce and re-marrriage, and the fact that certain people, eunichs among them, are exempt.
Jesus did/does not imply any tacit approval of homosexuality through alotting them an exemption from marraige... what a load of BS you are trying sling on that one. Give it a break Live... that is a joke.
And I find it funny you would try to use a verse from Matthew to justify homosexuality, when Christ specifcally refers to Genesis and Creation in the same verse, to set for marriage a man and a women,.... which straight out rebukes your interpretation of this verse and its meaning. So if homosexuality is referenced... it is in the inferring that it is un-natural and un-acceptable from Genesis on, in the eyes of God.
And Wild... Live... people have lives... your questions and jabs are not the only thing I have to contend with daily. Stop patting yourselves on the back so much and pay attention to the facts.
What a laugh.
And to whoever you where...
Definition of ABOMINATION
1: something abominable
2: extreme disgust and hatred : loathing
And as to the rest of you all... "tolerance", and, "acceptance"... are two very different things. Christians are to tolerate the sinful acts and choices of others... not to accept them into their lives and embrace them as normal, natural, and morally acceptable.
And I have not been discussing marriage... you were.
I watched a short film recently on Youtube, which reminded of Mason. It is quite funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncd7oaaY … re=related
Color me unsurprised. You went on another homophobic rant to avoid the question of what the Bible, specifically Jesus himself, said about divorce, something you think Christians should accept because "people have lives."
Matthew 5: 31-32
So, explicitly, Jesus says that divorce and remarriage is the same as adultery, which is an abomination that lands you squarely in hell. His words, not mine.
So, unless you've never remarried yourself, you should be careful of what you ask other people to find immoral, since the guy you pretend to worship has made it exceedingly clear that you're in the wrong.
What are you talking about?
Where would you get that I am divorced?
You have no clue what you are talking about, Live. Amazing... the BS that spouts from you all. I have not made one representation towards divorce in either way... and you're off on some self praising rant.
And you know... I have never claimed to be perfect at all... but that doesn't mean I throw away all my morals and embrace immorality and un-natural behaivour as normal and acceptable... what a joke.
And I have no clue where you woulld get that I am?
Well, I guess I was wrong, then. You must be in Jesus's good graces.
Do you embrace and accept friends and family members who have been divorced and remarried, or do you not have any of those, either?
I accept them, the same as I accept my gay friends, my friend Marcella is trans-gender and I accepted him as one of my best of friends... all the way till the day he died of Aids, and to this day...
...their faults and flaws are between them and God. They make their own choices in life and have to answer to him alone in the end.
But that does not mean I teach my children that it is good and morally acceptable to live as they do. Or that acting in such ways is acceptable, moral, normal or natural... either.
Tolerance of wrong choices, and acceptance of wrong choices are two different things. If someone wants to act in such a way, fine, but we do not re-define natural, moral, and acceptable, to accomodate feelings and make those acts and choices something they are not.
And the church most certainly should not embrace those actions and choices as wholly acceptable in the eyes of God and Christ.
No way... that is BS and un-accecptable.
Well, you can scream until the cows come home that homosexuality is unnatural, and science says otherwise. And you can scream that homosexuality was condemned by Jesus, but the Bible says otherwise.
And if you treat divorce/remarriage as something more acceptable, something less abhorrent, something you're more likely to tolerate among your friends and family, then that suggests you're adhering to double standards. If you don't, great! You're truly in a very, very small minority among self-identified Christians.
There is no science, nor biblical support... for any of your arguments.
Gimmie a break.
"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle." - George Orwell
That man would act out and wallow in the most un-natural, debasing, self-serving, and immoral of ways... if left to his own devices.
Yes, pretty obvious... History actually shows it to occur over and over. Decadence and immorality always accompany the down-fall of great nations and empires.
Mason you say you accept your gay friends. Why do I doubt that you really have gay friends? It has been obvious from everything that you have written that gay people disgust you. You believe gay people are wicked sinners, unnatural and perverted. How is it possible for you to be friends with people you view in this way? And to say you accept them, when everything you have ever said shows this cannot be true. Certainly I could never be friends with people who I was repulsed by and who made my skin crawl. For instance, I am disgusted by blood sports. I therefore could never be friends with someone who went fox hunting, because I could not find it possible to look past what they did, no matter how kind or caring they may be in other parts of their life. And I cannot understand why gay people would want to be friends with you, knowing how you viewed them. It must be very confusing for you, thinking of someone as a friend, when everything that they are makes you feel sick.
I use funny logic and if mocking works, so be it. I think it’s wonderful to simplified, simplified simplified as long is. The only rule is-is: not to harm
Hitler tried to simplify and was a devoted Christian, when he went completely MAD nobody knows. His goal was to stamp out gays and Jews. Not to mention 20 million Russian hoping to stamp out atheists too.
Hitler appeared to be truly devoted to Germany and Christians. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution
So you think an abomination is extreme disgust and loathing?
I guess we won't be hearing from you that you don't hate gays anymore, then will we?
So you never responded to why you don't exhibit any of the Fruits of the Spirit, which Paul says are how we can identify someone who is truly infused with the Holy Spirit. Why do you not aspire to these traits?
Homophobia; The act of refusing to embrace the immoral and un-natural... as "moral" and "natural". The act of refusing to buy into the lies of Leftist Homosexual propaganda groups.
Yes. That is me.
Gimme a break. Anytime someone doesn't agree with you they are a homophobic... what a laugh. As good as Islamophobla... whooooww... lol you all are A RIOT.
Homosexuality is immoral? How is that the case? Did the Invisible Super Daddy tell you this into your head? And how come you are using un-natural computers to communicate? Color me not at all surprised by your hypocrisy.
Nobody gets harmed in my ROITS or can't imagine leading the killing feilds.
The killing fields were the Communists, Pol Pot... Leftists, not Right-wing.
So I have no idea what you are speaking of.
Left or right, front or back, it’s all connected,
I thought Jesus was communist, he seem alright to me.
Nobody has died directly from cannabis unless its police or cartel related, in which that war has gone on the longest.
I build history displays and the Christian group leads in prisons, murders, and wars
A person "chooses" to be attracted to the same sex in the same fashion that another "chooses" to be attracted to the opposite sex. It is not a choice, it is hard-wired in the brain.
abomination this, abomination that...
You keep saying that... I don't think it means what you think it means.
But if my church is an abomination then so be it. At least I won't be sharing eternity with the narrow minded and bigoted. You all can have your big ole fluffy cloud and spend your time annoying the big guy by telling him what he said.
Does anyone in here know whether the music in hell is chosen by the gays or the lesbians? I just want to know if I'll be listening to Madonna or Melissa Ethridge.
Apparently, you'll be listening to both? (j/k)
There is no hell and there is no heaven either. Both words are metaphors, used in his teachings, but were distorted by religion.
It must be the lesbians, because I know for a fact that God is a huge fan of Judy Garland, and that The Sound of Music karaoke evenings are mandatory in heaven. So the lesbians must choose the music for the other place.
...oh my gawd...this is still getting flippin' 'air play'?
Half of the country still thinks Obama was born in Kenya...are you really surprised?
no...i guess not....
I have known a few lesbians in my life and every single one of them is a lesbian for a reason. Most reasons start with a male figure in their life mistreating them or being exposed to overly manly or overly girly relationships early on in their childhood. This is solely based on my experience with talking with friends about this specific topic.
I do think its highly childish to simply put someones opinions down in such a manner though. This is a topic up for debt. One should be ready for the augmentative statements as well as the ones which concur with your beliefs. Might as well as to start calling each other stupid, no your stupid... etc.
I'm bi-sexual for a really good reason... boobies make me smile. As far as any other traumatic reasons
I'm not attracted to blonds though, of either sex. Apparently I must have been molested by a blond guy... or would that be a ginger, as they are the most attractive to me... Or was it a brunette women who was too masculine... or a bald man who was too feminine.... Holy crap, I'm gonna have to go to a hypnotherapist. Apparently everyone had a go at me and I don't remember ANY of it.
The most common abuse of gay people of all gender in early life has been shown to be connected to their inability to fit into the narrow confines that their family and school insist upon. This abuse contiues in later life as people around them ensure that they do not 'fit' into the environment. Rejection of what we do not understand or that is different to our immediate familiar environment is a normal human reaction, the more able to reason we are the more we are able to rise above it, it is no accident that the most stupid and the most naive people are homophobic. It is also no accident that the religious apologists fall into this category also, the slimy hypocritical manner in which only the sexual act is wrong but 'we love the people' could only come from the slimy warped minds of the religious.
I just love how the OT is always denied as source due to the hate filled scripture until some narrow minded bigot decides it will win an argument!
hang out with some gay people and ask them. I really think that the only people who think that being Gay is a choice are the people who have never had a gay friend.
I worked with several gay people for a bit over a year and found them to be moral in every way. I have met gays who were a bit over the top personality wise, but honest with themselves, and still great fun to be around.
I guess there are as many bad gays as there are bad non gays per capita, but my guess is most of them have more empathy than we straight folk, as we haven't spent our lives being abused and left out of things because of our sexuality.
We also have a lot of rights such as property rights we take for granted.
PLEASE don't anyone tell me they have the same rights under law, it is simply untrue, and I will dig up the necessary proof.
If you could leave religion out of the equation for a moment ( just try)
If we can respect one anothers choices ,then go ahead do whatever you want (sexually).
I dont want you to tell me who I can sleep with ,when,or how,so I will not tell you.
But never tell me your choice is right for us all.
Unsurprisingly, you're using a strawman argument.
Who is advocating homosexuality for all? Nobody.
Who is advocating heterosexuality for all? Think about that carefully, please.
Im not really into all that forum jargon,guess Im generalising because its quicker and covers more bases
We are not born Gay... God did not create people to be gay or lesbian. Think about our anatomy.... Men are made to fit into women. I'm not saying that it is proof, but it is something to think about... it can't be proof until you believe that it is proof. Most of you will say that it isn't, some of you will say that it is, I certainly believe it is proof... but there is so much more proof in the bible. There are many things in the bible, that proove that God didn't create people to be gay.
Listen to the next thing that I am going to say carefully though....
Some Christians may have told some of you that God hates gay's and lesbians... they are wrong. I am a christian too,,, and I know that God does not hate anyone. God loves everyone equally,,, in fact He is concerned for those who are Gay... just like He is concerned for those who sin (which, by the way, is all of us)... He loves us all! He wants us all to love Him back, but He gave us a choice. He hasn't forced anyone to love Him and not sin, because He wanted us to be free to choose and free to live.
The thing is I chose to love Him... but I still sin... I try not to... but I do... thankfully I have accepted what Jesus did on the cross for me, and now my sins are forgiven. I am trying to live a life without sin... which I know isn't going to happen, but I am trying anyway. Either way, God forgives me.
To all those christians out there who say that God hates homosexuals, you are wrong! We all sin... and all sins are the same to God, because all sin seperates us from Him. The act of murder is worse than the act of lying, but the sin is the same... you know I'm right! I think is terrible for you to accuse homosexuals, you have looked at the splinter in someones eye, and not thought about the plank in your own.
To all homosexuals. God loves you, and I love you. We don't condone that you love someone of the same sex, but we don't hate you for it. I am praying for you all.
This is one of the most slimy, condescending pieces of drivel I have seen in these threads - the religionists are clearly well into their stupor preceding liftoff, thank f*** !
not ALL guys fit into women... some of us, u know.. r a bit too ... "manly"....just sayin
I thought so too,
Sin/forgive, sin/forgive and for what purpose, just to worship the one only Jesus and shut your mind off .
I am getting that numb feeling all over again.
I know that feeling.
Some people cannot absorb anything they don't already believe.
It would be refreshing is any of the religionists could offer anything to the discussion above scripture which most of the non believers know better than they do anyway!
by Edoka Writes 9 years ago
My lesbian friend stated, "most gay people choose this lifestyle?" I don't know, do you?
by Firoz 4 years ago
Do you think gay people choose to be gay? Do you think straight people choose to be straight?
by JideAlexander 9 years ago
Is being gay a disease or choice?
by Brian 10 years ago
Did you make the decision to come out? Or, did someone else out you?There are a lot of questions from straight people wanting to know if being gay is a choice. Nobody knows the true answer to that, but we do know that we eventually have to come out and say who we are. So, did you decide to come out...
by Jacqui 8 years ago
When did you choose?Sexuality. When did you choose? Were you young? Old? After an interesting experience, or a disturbing one?My belief is that if one states that sexuality is a choice, then it is one they have obviously had to make - to be straight, or to be gay. So, I'm looking to see when...
by Brian 11 years ago
There is a question going around about gay people on wether or not they choose to be gay, or if they think they were born that way. Well, someone came up with the brilliant idea of asking people on the street if they were gay or straight, and, then asked them the following question, which had them...
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|