Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[sojourner]

What I am really curious about is why it is so important for you and others to convince me to believe as you do ?

Because your belief apparently causes you to be complicit in the ongoing, systemic discrimination of the LGBTQ community.

 

[shmogie]

^^^This^^^

Same standard for both. Remember, I am the jury, I evaluate the evidence, I decide its value and quality, I give the verdict, for me

 

[sojourner]

You cannot claim you are trying to stop someone who does wrong things to homosexuals by word or deed, because I do not.

When you apply a judging label ("sin") to them, it Harms. Them.

 

[sojourner]

I assure you that if the evidence I require on the matter is ever produced, I wil certainly reconsider my beliefs

I'd still be very interested in knowing why you hold a double standard in that regard between beliefs about homosexuality and beliefs about the bible?

 

[shmogie]

It has EVERYTHING to do with you! Because you're standing on one side of a fence, pointing an accusing finger across to the other side, and apparently using different standards for the other side than you are for your side. If the homosexual side chooses who they're attracted to, so does the heterosexual side. If the heterosexual side does not choose, then the homosexual doesn't either. The litmus test lies with you, because you're the one making the accusation. The litmus test is this: When did you make a conscious choice to be attracted to women?

Nope I am not pointing at anyone. I am attracted to women as are most men, that is how they are designed. Those that are not are outside the norm for their gender

 

[sojourner]

Same standard for both. Remember, I am the jury, I evaluate the evidence, I decide its value and quality, I give the verdict, for me

But it's not a verdict for you. You didn't say: "I believe homosexuality to be sinful for me." You said that homosexuality sinful, implying for all.

 

[sojourner]

Nope I am not pointing at anyone. I am attracted to women as are most men, that is how they are designed. Those that are not are outside the norm for their gender

There's the hidden judgement: "NORM". "Outside" (as opposed to "inside" -- segregation) the "norm" (implying that one is abnormal). Just answer the question: When did you make a conscious choice to be attracted to females, as opposed to males?

 

[sojourner]

re bipolar, I agree. I believe homosexuality is a disorder, or a condition, or state of mind, whatever that compels one outside the norm (5%-8% of the population) to have sex with the same sex

What you believe is irrelevant. You said you needed proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, you should require the same proof for your belief above. All the evidence science can offer points against your belief.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It has EVERYTHING to do with you! Because you're standing on one side of a fence, pointing an accusing finger across to the other side, and apparently using different standards for the other side than you are for your side. If the homosexual side chooses who they're attracted to, so does the heterosexual side. If the heterosexual side does not choose, then the homosexual doesn't either. The litmus test lies with you, because you're the one making the accusation. The litmus test is this: When did you make a conscious choice to be attracted to women?

This! ^^^^^^

 

[SkepticThinker]

Same standard for both. Remember, I am the jury, I evaluate the evidence, I decide its value and quality, I give the verdict, for me

You're not using the same standard for both though. Which is why I pointed it out.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Same standard for both. Remember, I am the jury, I evaluate the evidence, I decide its value and quality, I give the verdict, for me

It doesn't matter what you believe. If the evidence is showing a previously unknown field around certain metal objects, you don't deny magnetics because you simply don't find the evidence to be of "quality." Even Einstein doubted some of his theories, but the math worked out. If there are countless research papers stating homosexuality is not a choice, you and I are not the arbitrator of if the data is of value and quality (well, I'm not yet, anyways). We have a stack of data, numbers that work out, correlations being established, that is how you evaluate the core premises of data. Beyond that, those qualified in the field begin to work on explanations. Science confirms homosexuality (or sexuality in general) is not a choice with the myriad of studies that confirm this hypothesis. It is from there that people try to figure out what causes it, and other forms of sexuality, and the current debate revolves around the question of how much does environment shape it and how much do genetics shape it? They have found and established genetic links, but there are some more issues that are still being worked out. And it does not matter what you believe, because what I just described is how it works, because it has been thoroughly studied and we know that is how it works.

Those that are not are outside the norm for their gender

There is no such "norm." Male or female, everyone has masculine and feminine characteristics. It's normal for men to like sports, it's normal for men to not like sports. It's normal for men to know how to work on a car, it's normal for a man to not know how to work on a car. It's normal for men to be attracted to women, it's normal for men to be attracted to men. There just is no real "norm" once you begin to look at everybody. And, of course, as a very valid question asks of us: "What is normal?"

 

[shmogie]

When you apply a judging label ("sin") to them, it Harms. Them.

It affects them if they agree. I could call somebody a demon from hell, if they don't agree, then their is no affect. Hypersensitivity to words is nonsense, has gotten totally out of control. When I was in college, all those decades ago, The Black Students Union would not admit those of European ancestry because of the color of their skin, if any applied. So what, nobody cared. If some believed Gypsies were thieves, the Gypsies would laugh and go on about their life. Today people CHOOSE to be harmed by words, sounds. The college campuses are full of whiners and crybabies and it is all BS. You can choose to be harmed, or choose to consider the source and move on.

 

[shmogie]

You're not using the same standard for both though. Which is why I pointed it out.

You are free to point out whatever you choose

 

[shmogie]

It doesn't matter what you believe. If the evidence is showing a previously unknown field around certain metal objects, you don't deny magnetics because you simply don't find the evidence to be of "quality." Even Einstein doubted some of his theories, but the math worked out. If there are countless research papers stating homosexuality is not a choice, you and I are not the arbitrator of if the data is of value and quality (well, I'm not yet, anyways). We have a stack of data, numbers that work out, correlations being established, that is how you evaluate the core premises of data. Beyond that, those qualified in the field begin to work on explanations. Science confirms homosexuality (or sexuality in general) is not a choice with the myriad of studies that confirm this hypothesis. It is from there that people try to figure out what causes it, and other forms of sexuality, and the current debate revolves around the question of how much does environment shape it and how much do genetics shape it? They have found and established genetic links, but there are some more issues that are still being worked out. And it does not matter what you believe, because what I just described is how it works, because it has been thoroughly studied and we know that is how it works.

There is no such "norm." Male or female, everyone has masculine and feminine characteristics. It's normal for men to like sports, it's normal for men to not like sports. It's normal for men to know how to work on a car, it's normal for a man to not know how to work on a car. It's normal for men to be attracted to women, it's normal for men to be attracted to men. There just is no real "norm" once you begin to look at everybody. And, of course, as a very valid question asks of us: "What is normal?"

So then,please tell me the one factor, or two, three or four that is always present in homosexuals that can be , beyond a reasonable doubt, proven to be the cause of the same sex compulsion. Evidence is presented, the jury decides

 

[SkepticThinker]

Nope I am not pointing at anyone. I am attracted to women as are most men, that is how they are designed. Those that are not are outside the norm for their gender

Why can't you answer the simplest of questions? When did you make a conscious choice to be attracted to women?

You are saying that sexual orientation is a choice. You have said that people who are heterosexual, can choose to be homosexual in prison, then go back to heterosexuality when they're released from prison. If homosexuality is a choice, then it follows that heterosexuality must also be a choice. That's using your line of reasoning.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You are free to point out whatever you choose

Yeah, I know. Thanks.

 

[shmogie]

Why can't you answer the simplest of questions? When did you make a conscious choice to be attracted to women?

You are saying that sexual orientation is a choice. You have said that people who are heterosexual, can choose to be homosexual in prison, then go back to heterosexuality when they're released from prison. If homosexuality is a choice, then it follows that heterosexuality must also be a choice. That's using your line of reasoning.

Asked, and answered.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Asked, and answered.

Asked and avoided is what happened.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So then,please tell me the one factor, or two, three or four that is always present in homosexuals that can be , beyond a reasonable doubt, proven to be the cause of the same sex compulsion.

You've only ignored what has been presented. Why should we bother to post it again?

Evidence is presented, the jury decides

The thing is, you are not the jury. The peers of scientists are the "jury." One scientists (or a group) conducts research, they publish their research, and their peers are the ones to review it, look for flaws, and decide if it's good or not, and suggest ways to improve the research and suggest things that may have been overlooked. Without a background in any form of science, and without being gay yourself, how can you be so arrogant as to declare yourself the "judge and jury" of scientific evidence?

 

[shmogie]

What you believe is irrelevant. You said you needed proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, you should require the same proof for your belief above. All the evidence science can offer points against your belief.

All the evidence science can offer has identified no specific, inherent, consistent cause for homosexuality. What we invariably are is the result of genetics, no specific gene has been identified and declared the cause of homosexuality in all who have it. If you know of this gene, that has been identified beyond a reasonable doubt to cause homosexuality, identify it