Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[Paleo]

im sorry u had to experience that, does explain the belligerence

I can't cite my sources atm because i'm playing chess, sorry! also ure clearly ignorant as to how they gathered the data. Read up on it !

My goodness, your grammar is just beautiful. Have fun with chess.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yeah, and we know how that is turning out lol. The trauma of not having a mother / being genetically deformed. No, I won't even get started down that avenue.

What on earth are you talking about? Not having a mother? Genetically deformed? Huh?
My cousin gave birth to her child three years ago. She is not deformed and she has TWO mothers.

There are countless sources on the homosexual populace in various countries. Compare WW2 Britain to contemporary Britain (use google).

The source for your assertions here seem to be your backside.

 

[AlphaAlex115]

If the only goal of sex is procreation then why do non-sex organs become sexually aroused? Why do see a number of different species having sex for pleasure and group bonding? And you also have to consider homosexuals do not make up a very large part of the population. Even if half of us turned exclusively homosexual overnight, our species would be in no danger of extinction.

"then why do non-sex organs become sexually aroused?" To reproduce!!!
"Even if half of us turned exclusively homosexual overnight, our species would be in no danger of extinction. " you have no idea do you

 

[Desert Snake]

Oh i understand, this is ''make up reality as we go along''' ..

 

[AlphaAlex115]

My goodness, your grammar is just beautiful.

dude keep ur sarcasm towards people u know. its kinda impertinent here.

What on earth are you talking about? Not having a mother? Genetically deformed? Huh?
My cousin gave birth to her child three years ago. She is not deformed and she has TWO mothers.

The source for your assertions here seem to be your backside.

My sources are valid, its just u're not bothered to look em up.


If she has two mothers than she's missing a father. daddy issues will ensue... people never think of the children. itd be just so weird and i bet friends will mock them

 

[AlphaAlex115]

Oh i understand, this is ''make up reality as we go along''' ..

There are countless sources on the homosexual populace in various countries. Compare WW2 Britain to contemporary Britain (use google).

 

[AlphaAlex115]

What? Do you think homosexuality is a new thing?

of course. adam and eve werent gay

 

[Desert Snake]

I wasn't answering your post, there. The OP asked for the opinions of people with religions, but this thread is getting a lot of answers from people with no/?/ religions. If they do have religions, they aren't listing them.


hmm makes you wonder.

 

[AlphaAlex115]

I wasn't answering your post, there. The OP asked for the opinions of people with religions, but this thread is getting a lot of answers from people with no/?/ religions. If they do have religions, they aren't listing them.


hmm makes you wonder.

On retrospective it's pretty clear that homophobia is just as sickly conforming as religion. What some people have actually said in this thread is ridiculous.

 

[Paleo]

of course. adam and eve werent gay

Oh you're trolling. Good, I was worried there for a minute.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"then why do non-sex organs become sexually aroused?" To reproduce!!!

Nipples serve zero reproductive purposes, but they are erogenous zones. The mouth serves no reproductive purpose, but it's an erogenous zone. The clitoris serves no reproductive purpose, but it's an erogenous zone. The anus serves no reproductive purpose, but it's an erogenous zone.

"Even if half of us turned exclusively homosexual overnight, our species would be in no danger of extinction. " you have no idea do you

Yeah, I do have an idea. Homosexuals make up roughly 10% of the population, maybe a bit higher. Basically, that means that in a city with a population of 100, 90 of them are going to be sexually reproducing. There is no risk of dying out from a lack of sexual reproduction.

 

[AlphaAlex115]

Oh you're trolling. Good, I was worried there for a minute.

Worried about what? By the by, that's not trolling but just stating the obvious. Sceptic's ostensibly (if I'm correct) a christian and he didn't think of that.

 

[Paleo]

OP you've made personal jabs at more than one member because you ran out of things to back up your argument. So pardon my crazy assumption that you were trolling rather that just being rude and illogical (what a combination).

 

[AlphaAlex115]

Nipples serve zero reproductive purposes, but they are erogenous zones. The mouth serves no reproductive purpose, but it's an erogenous zone. The clitoris serves no reproductive purpose, but it's an erogenous zone. The anus serves no reproductive purpose, but it's an erogenous zone.

Guess what all of those erogenous zones are for. They almost invariably will lead to sex. Individuals with more sensual genes would reproduce and pass on their "sensual" alleles to offspring whilst the stagnant, non-sexual ones died out. It makes perfect sense.

"Yeah, I do have an idea. Homosexuals make up roughly 10% of the population, maybe a bit higher. Basically, that means that in a city with a population of 100, 90 of them are going to be sexually reproducing. There is no risk of dying out from a lack of sexual reproduction." Obviously haven't read what I've been saying. Protip: read what people say in a thread before posting

 

[Shadow Wolf]

of course. adam and eve werent gay

We have plenty of evidence that homosexuality was practiced in ancient Rome and Greece, India, Native American cultures, and pretty much just about everywhere else.

 

[AlphaAlex115]

OP you've made personal jabs at more than one member because you ran out of things to back up your argument. So pardon my crazy assumption that you were trolling rather that just being rude and illogical (what a combination).

I've made no such personal jabs (i dont think). If I did then I apologise, i only want to debate with you people. Most of you are making interesting responses so keep it up

Also, you're being a massive sardonic hypocrite:

My goodness, your grammar is just beautiful.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Guess what all of those erogenous zones are for. They almost invariably will lead to sex. Individuals with more sensual genes would reproduce and pass on their "sensual" alleles to offspring whilst the stagnant, non-sexual ones died out. It makes perfect sense.

Having non-reproductive uses reduces the chances of reproduction. You can't get pregnant if the sperm is going in the mouth, in the anus, or being squirted on her face. And you didn't address the point of group bonding and pleasure.

Obviously haven't read what I've been saying. Protip: read what people say in a thread before posting

I have read, and you're still using a very dated and very wrong argument that is not, at all, based on reality, facts, statistics, or logic. The "dying off" argument from people turning gay isn't even a valid argument.

 

[AlphaAlex115]

We have plenty of evidence that homosexuality was practiced in ancient Rome and Greece, India, Native American cultures, and pretty much just about everywhere else.

I was alluding to before all of that. Man has been around for ages. It is only purportedly recent, as the population surged, that homosexuality is a thing.

 

[Paleo]

I've made no such personal jabs (i dont think). If I did then I apologise, i only want to debate with you people. Most of you making interesting responses so keep it up

Also, you're being a massive sardonic hypocrite:

Nope. Not at all because that was a direct response to you poking fun at my family history. You aren't debating, you're arguing.

 

[AlphaAlex115]

Having non-reproductive uses reduces the chances of reproduction. You can't get pregnant if the sperm is going in the mouth, in the anus, or being squirted on her face. And you didn't address the point of group bonding and pleasure.

And such sexually active individuals will also let their sperm loose in other areas .

I have read, and you're still using a very dated and very wrong argument that is not, at all, based on reality, facts, statistics, or logic. The "dying off" argument from people turning gay isn't even a valid argument.

Very dated and wrong argument? How can an argument be wrong? Is my viewpoint not as viable as yours? I've constantly referred people to sources.