Homosexuality and Religion

[Tau]

Plus of course as many service operators and retailers will tell you, gay men in particular frequently have large disposable incomes and spend a lot of their money, rather than saving it, making wise purchases I am sure, but either way, good for an economy.
In my book, as a small business operator this would be if I catered for that particular group's market, a wonderful thing.

Just another way of looking at it..

 

[McBell]

The priority of each choice is not the self.

Even in nature the 'un-natural' acts are to ease frustrations and dominance.

If each have that choice, they make it. Yet when an open disclosure is structured to establish the choice as 'normal' shares the selfish enterprize of the misconception.

The greatest error in the model is the attrition of children. For some reason this area is never addressed in these conversations. Very few actually recognize how the confusion grows and develops. such the same that most will not perfect the knowledge that literally shares that most who are biased for same sex; the majority had an adverse or negative imposition to their childhood development.

So the compassionate observation should remove the self of the observance and look at the imposition to the total, first!

So now all you needs do is show which is the 'natural' and which is the 'unnatural.'
I contend that heterosexuality is the 'unnatural.'

greatest error ... is the attrition of children?
The reason it is not addressed is because the jury is still out on it.

 

[Bishadi]

So now all you needs do is show which is the 'natural' and which is the 'unnatural.'
I contend that heterosexuality is the 'unnatural.'

And if your parents thought the same you would not be here.

greatest error ... is the attrition of children?
The reason it is not addressed is because the jury is still out on it.

Who needs to be told the answer by a jury? Use your own mind.

No one cares for what a 'clic' suggests as true, nature runs the show.

Leave an island full of hetero couples on an island we have life.

Try your idea and find extinction as the ultimate reality. Which if you think about it, then there would be no kids to corrupt with irresponsible fun.

 

[McBell]

And if your parents thought the same you would not be here.

Non sequitur.

Care to try again?

Who needs to be told the answer by a jury? Use your own mind.

I do use my own mind.
And the fact of the matter is that there is no conclusive evidence that shows the link you suggest.

No one cares for what a 'clic' suggests as true, nature runs the show.

You wish.
You yourself care what the clic's think.
If you did not, then you would not be presenting your case.

Leave an island full of hetero couples on an island we have life.

So what?

Try your idea and find extinction as the ultimate reality.

Since when did heterosexuality equate infertility?

Which if you think about it, then there would be no kids to corrupt with irresponsible fun.

Really?
Again when did heterosexuality equate infertility?
And yet again, you have as yet shown the "irresponsibility" of it.

Are you going to address my points or continue to skirt around them?

 

[nawab]

Let me make one thing very clear,if you think that i would like you to convert thats why i am presenting to you your wrong. I just mentioned about Islam in relation to Homosexuality. Not propogation. I do not speak for all Muslims. I dont have such a big heart to care about every human being and inviting them to the truth. If you want to beleive, than you beleive if not face the consequences later. Why do i have to care.
it is not my duty to present the truth but rather your duty to learn the truth. just like when your thiristy you go to the well, the well does not come to you.

How about a young couple can they have children or not. How about two dead gays can they make out. by giving examples of old people you have only proved your own standard of knowledge to me.

Inhospitality and selfishness.

In fact He never mentions it. Yes, they do. Would you like me to cite the studies? So? Neither can an elderly heterosexual couple, does that make their love wrong?

You're mistaken.

O.K., I think that rules that religion out for our OP. Good job at preventing another convert, nawab.

 

[Mike182]

Let me make one thing very clear,if you think that i would like you to convert thats why i am presenting to you your wrong. I just mentioned about Islam in relation to Homosexuality. Not propogation. I do not speak for all Muslims. I dont have such a big heart to care about every human being and inviting them to the truth. If you want to beleive, than you beleive if not face the consequences later. Why do i have to care.
it is not my duty to present the truth but rather your duty to learn the truth. just like when your thiristy you go to the well, the well does not come to you.

How about a young couple can they have children or not. How about two dead gays can they make out. by giving examples of old people you have only proved your own standard of knowledge to me.

no, it shows the big inconsistencies in you "moral" argument against homosexuality. if you don't recognise that or counter it with decent argument, then your posts are not really worth anyone's time.

 

[Bishadi]

Non sequitur.

Care to try again?

Nope! Fact is you share a line of what you think is OK, but fail to see anything but your own needs.

I do use my own mind.
And the fact of the matter is that there is no conclusive evidence that shows the link you suggest.

Sorry, if integrity is your weakest link.

You wish.
You yourself care what the clic's think.
If you did not, then you would not be presenting your case.

It is the little people. These sites have little minds wishing to learn and develop and it is the preditor such as the argument suggests, certain groups can not exist unless they procreate by ruining someone mind. i.e... you don't think, as all you are doing is spreading the lack of care for anyone but yourself.. 'your clic'

So what?


Since when did heterosexuality equate infertility?

Hetero= means babies.

Homo = just fun for the self

Really?
Again when did heterosexuality equate infertility?
And yet again, you have as yet shown the "irresponsibility" of it.

Are you going to address my points or continue to skirt around them?

That irresponsibility is what you are doing now! Trying to suggests that it is simply OK to represent same sex fun as normal.

Please discontinue and enjoy life. Otherwise if you feel your own needs come over and above others, then a bulls eye is on your head.

 

[Mike182]

Hetero= means babies.

Homo = just fun for the self

rubbish. this basic description of the qualities of heterosexuality implies that heterosexuals are not selfish in their love making - if it was only about babies, heterosexual couples would only have sex when trying for a baby and that would be it. this is certainly not the case, so sex for fun and pleasure is obviously not an issue. if sex for fun is not an issue for heterosexuals, why should it then become an issue for homosexuals?

your description of homosexuality as simply being for fun is ridiculously misguided and bordering on offensive.

That irresponsibility is what you are doing now! Trying to suggests that it is simply OK to represent same sex fun as normal.

human sexuality is an incredibly complex thing, what is normal and not normal in culturally relative and not in any way objective. what you really mean when you say homosexuality is not normal, is that you find the idea of it icky. i see no moral argument against homosexuality here.

 

[McBell]

Nope! Fact is you share a line of what you think is OK, but fail to see anything but your own needs.

Perhaps if you left your assumptions at home and dealt with the facts....

Sorry, if integrity is your weakest link.

I suppose I was to subtle for you.
Please present a legitimate peer reviewed paper that supports your allegations.

It is the little people. These sites have little minds wishing to learn and develop and it is the preditor such as the argument suggests, certain groups can not exist unless they procreate by ruining someone mind. i.e... you don't think, as all you are doing is spreading the lack of care for anyone but yourself.. 'your clic'

I have to agree.
unfortunately for you, Your clic is one of them.
difference between your clic and the one you assume I am in is that you spout all manner of nonsense without supporting any of it with anything other than your opinion and more claims.

Your assumptions are revealing your bias.

Hetero= means babies.

Homo = just fun for the self

Hetero and homo have absolutely no bearing on the ability to have children.
You really needs take a biology class if you think otherwise.

That irresponsibility is what you are doing now! Trying to suggests that it is simply OK to represent same sex fun as normal.

And you have yet to show anything to support your claims other than more of your claims.
Even when flat out asked.
So who is being irresponsible?
You have not shown that homosexuality is irresponsible.

Please discontinue and enjoy life. Otherwise if you feel your own needs come over and above others, then a bulls eye is on your head.

So I guess the answer is no, you will not actually address the points.
You are to busy trying to procreate your clic.

 

[Bishadi]

rubbish. this basic description of the qualities of heterosexuality implies that heterosexuals are not selfish in their love making - if it was only about babies, heterosexual couples would only have sex when trying for a baby and that would be it. this is certainly not the case, so sex for fun and pleasure is obviously not an issue. if sex for fun is not an issue for heterosexuals, why should it then become an issue for homosexuals?

What a subject to be debating.

This word "only' is rubbish. And the tone whether 'bordering offensive' is also rubbish. Anything to do with sex in a religious forum is rubbish.

Even when every person ever born on earth came from sex, that is not what this is about. It's about integrity over and above 'legal rights'.

Legal rights allows parades thru down town SF with guys holding each others winkies.

Freedom of choice is to each their own but homosexuality is not normal. From nature to reality; real truths are not based on a clic. Clics just create a louder voice than a single. And since most every piece of material information this person represents is from this persons own homework, then all you have to work with is me.

And us three are the only clic sitting on this forum debating a stupid issue, with a darth vader and a religion nut that likes girls on trampolines.

Hey what ever floats your boat.

your description of homosexuality as simply being for fun is ridiculously misguided and bordering on offensive.

See even you have an opinion.

I think people who think their sexual preferences should be in open public is rude.

human sexuality is an incredibly complex thing,

Anyone could imagine as in will and grace, jack still has no idea what girl do.

what is normal and not normal in culturally relative and not in any way objective.

So in some other culture maybe beastiality is normal.

what you really mean when you say homosexuality is not normal, is that you find the idea of it icky.

Now that would usually call for a retalitory comment but why? Never said a word about my idea of the action. You presume you have it all figured out, almost like trying to catagorize or shelf the opinion.

i see no moral argument against homosexuality here.

and what is you moral basis? Religion, political. theist, or let me guess clicish?

This one comes from reality, such that to combine atom "A" with atom 'B" in a physical constuct of pure truth. From the physics of life, to consciousness and not many religious in between that have not been observed. If compassion is the rule then I'm your huckleberry but premise one is honesty, otherwise not interested in the debate as we could be here for months at this rate. Neither of you admits at least the first real fact. Life would not exist if same sex was 'normal.'

it's a pass time enjoyment in the case of the human experience.... and over 90% of the procreation of the like players comes from children being exposed or inflicted adversely in a relationship....... do the homework... when you say hey the stat is incorrect then back it up...

the only objective that is important is that when the case of compassionate observance is to be placed, the majority is the rule, not the needs of a few when the whole line of the debate is enjoyment.

 

[painted wolf]

Legal rights allows parades thru down town SF with guys holding each others winkies.

Wow... this is one of the inane, bigoted and sad things I think I've heard in a very long time.

sadly I'm sure it will be topped soon.

wa:do

 

[Bishadi]

Wow... this is one of the inane, bigoted and sad things I think I've heard in a very long time.

sadly I'm sure it will be topped soon.

wa:do

no, you have the crown......

just because you suggest revealing what does occur in open public, is bigotry, seems maybe I should post a few pictures of the 'rights' that are often abused, just to make a point (their march for equal rights)

 

[Autodidact]

Let me make one thing very clear,if you think that i would like you to convert thats why i am presenting to you your wrong. I just mentioned about Islam in relation to Homosexuality. Not propogation. I do not speak for all Muslims. I dont have such a big heart to care about every human being and inviting them to the truth. If you want to beleive, than you beleive if not face the consequences later. Why do i have to care.

Of course, if it were true, you wouldn't have to try to frighten people into believing it, would you?

it is not my duty to present the truth but rather your duty to learn the truth. just like when your thiristy you go to the well, the well does not come to you.

Right back at you, brother. What do you think is a good way to do that?

How about a young couple can they have children or not. How about two dead gays can they make out. by giving examples of old people you have only proved your own standard of knowledge to me.

Sorry, this reads like gibberish. Could you try to rephrase it for me? Thanks.

Do you believe that people should only be allowed to have sex if it may lead to reproduction or not?

 

[painted wolf]

Unless "winkies" is some sort of wierd code word for "hands" I hardly think I missed the bigotry.

If it is, I hardly see the harm in holding hands in public. (Outside of a few oppressive nations where holding hands in public will get you fined and/or whipped.)

wa:do

 

[Mike182]

This word "only' is rubbish. And the tone whether 'bordering offensive' is also rubbish. Anything to do with sex in a religious forum is rubbish.

Even when every person ever born on earth came from sex, that is not what this is about. It's about integrity over and above 'legal rights'.

Legal rights allows parades thru down town SF with guys holding each others winkies.

Freedom of choice is to each their own but homosexuality is not normal. From nature to reality; real truths are not based on a clic. Clics just create a louder voice than a single. And since most every piece of material information this person represents is from this persons own homework, then all you have to work with is me.

And us three are the only clic sitting on this forum debating a stupid issue, with a darth vader and a religion nut that likes girls on trampolines.

Hey what ever floats your boat.

See even you have an opinion.

I think people who think their sexual preferences should be in open public is rude.

Anyone could imagine as in will and grace, jack still has no idea what girl do.

So in some other culture maybe beastiality is normal.

Now that would usually call for a retalitory comment but why? Never said a word about my idea of the action. You presume you have it all figured out, almost like trying to catagorize or shelf the opinion.



and what is you moral basis? Religion, political. theist, or let me guess clicish?

This one comes from reality, such that to combine atom "A" with atom 'B" in a physical constuct of pure truth. From the physics of life, to consciousness and not many religious in between that have not been observed. If compassion is the rule then I'm your huckleberry but premise one is honesty, otherwise not interested in the debate as we could be here for months at this rate. Neither of you admits at least the first real fact. Life would not exist if same sex was 'normal.'

it's a pass time enjoyment in the case of the human experience.... and over 90% of the procreation of the like players comes from children being exposed or inflicted adversely in a relationship....... do the homework... when you say hey the stat is incorrect then back it up...

the only objective that is important is that when the case of compassionate observance is to be placed, the majority is the rule, not the needs of a few when the whole line of the debate is enjoyment.

would you care to have another go at writing this post, perhaps try making an actually coherent argument? that would be swell

 

[Autodidact]

What a subject to be debating.

No one is forcing you.

This word "only' is rubbish. And the tone whether 'bordering offensive' is also rubbish. Anything to do with sex in a religious forum is rubbish.

Then why are you talking about it?

Even when every person ever born on earth came from sex, that is not what this is about. It's about integrity over and above 'legal rights'.

Yes, integrity is important. That's why gay people should be honest to themselves and others.

Legal rights allows parades thru down town SF with guys holding each others winkies.

Wow, this hardly bears replying to, but is one of the most juvenile, inaccurate, and generally stupid contributions I've seen on this forum in a long time. No, they don't.

Freedom of choice is to each their own but homosexuality is not normal.

Define "normal."

Hey what ever floats your boat.

Cool. Why are you arguing then?

I think people who think their sexual preferences should be in open public is rude.

Does this apply equally to heterosexuals, or is it only rude if homosexuals do it? For example, will you get married in private, or have a public ceremony?

Anyone could imagine as in will and grace, jack still has no idea what girl do.

So in some other culture maybe beastiality is normal.

Now that would usually call for a retalitory comment but why? Never said a word about my idea of the action. You presume you have it all figured out, almost like trying to catagorize or shelf the opinion.

We're all having a hard time understanding you. Maybe if you took a little more time in writing your posts?

and what is you moral basis? Religion, political. theist, or let me guess clicish?

That would be a long story. Basically, none of the above. Mine would best be characterized as empirical.

This one comes from reality, such that to combine atom "A" with atom 'B" in a physical constuct of pure truth. From the physics of life, to consciousness and not many religious in between that have not been observed. If compassion is the rule then I'm your huckleberry but premise one is honesty, otherwise not interested in the debate as we could be here for months at this rate. Neither of you admits at least the first real fact. Life would not exist if same sex was 'normal.'

I'm sorry I have no idea what you're driving at. And what is a huckleberry?

it's a pass time enjoyment in the case of the human experience.... and over 90% of the procreation of the like players comes from children being exposed or inflicted adversely in a relationship....... do the homework... when you say hey the stat is incorrect then back it up...

Again, we don't understand what you're saying. If you want us to, you need to try again.

the only objective that is important is that when the case of compassionate observance is to be placed, the majority is the rule, not the needs of a few when the whole line of the debate is enjoyment.

Are you saying that everyone needs to comply with the majority? Would this include say Muslims in America? Should they give up their religion to make the non-Muslims happy?

 

[Bishadi]

Then why are you talking about it?

'empirical' responsibility

Yes, integrity is important. That's why gay people should be honest to themselves and others.

But compassion means 'others' first, not the self.

Wow, this hardly bears replying to, but is one of the most juvenile, inaccurate, and generally stupid contributions I've seen on this forum in a long time. No, they don't.

Saw with my own eyes. Just like the words represent truth, no fibs when it comes to reality.

Define "normal."

Nature!

Does this apply equally to heterosexuals, or is it only rude if homosexuals do it? For example, will you get married in private, or have a public ceremony?

Did you get an invitation? Cuz to you, it was private!

We're all having a hard time understanding you. Maybe if you took a little more time in writing your posts?
That would be a long story. Basically, none of the above. Mine would best be characterized as empirical.

Who's the last word? You? Sorry but the nature of existence only works one way; that is empirical!

Are you saying that everyone needs to comply with the majority? Would this include say Muslims in America? Should they give up their religion to make the non-Muslims happy?

Yes! IN both! The total is what is to be kept as priority and yes, as the revealing unfolds then all religions will be but historical reference.

And if the few wish to play in with each other just for their own needs, then that is their choice, but not to brandish their desires in open public or ever think that nature offers condolences. Meaning perfection is not the requisite but that to impose upon others just because they (the individual) think they have rights, they can affect others in such an adverse way.

It is not that we the poeple do not care about the confusions of the few but that the confusion of the developing minds of the majority is the priority.

kind of common sense

 

[McBell]

Ok.
i am ready for you to continue

 

[texan1]

Hi Bishadi,

Just curious - the OP asked what different religions think of homosexuality. Are your opinions of homosexuals religious based at all? Or do they simply represent your own idea of what is "natural"?

 

[Magic Man]

Ok.
i am ready for you to continue

I think we're gonna need a bigger boat.