It's not a problem for animals to have sex with the same sex

[firedragon]

Why is it sinful for man?

Are there any homosexual animals?

Yes. Many animals are bisexual. Many are homosexual as well. Some males have been seen mounting another male occasionally. So its not a definite world out there.

I would say that we leave it to basic human rights values. And if you are a theist, just leave it to God. Don't play God.

 

[InChrist]

The purpose of life is not for physical pleasure. Those who have made that their purpose will have hell to pay after they die and no longer have a physical body. Enjoy it while it lasts. It won't be for long.

I think this is a very imp

Nope. It's a perfectly legitemate response to what you said.
You stated this rule: "if it's god's design, then it's ok".
The premise being that god designed everything, like humans and their biological nature.

You'll necessarily have to engage in special pleading to break your own rule when you say that it's wrong for gay people to act upon their gay nature. It's really simple:

P1: if it's god's design, then it's ok
P2: god designed everything, including human and their biological nature
P3: gay people exists

Conclusion: It's ok for gay people to exist and be gay. They exist, so god designed them. They are gay, so god designed them gay.




Being gay is not a behaviour like stealing or whatever.
Just like being hetero is not a behaviour in that sense.

It's just sexual orientation. Your sexual orientation is what it is. Just like your skin pigmentation.
One can't "will" being gay or not. One either is gay or not.



The facts of reality say otherwise.
I don't care what scripture says. If scripture says thing that don't correspond to the facts of reality, then scripture is wrong. It's that simple.

When your beliefs disagree with reality, it's not reality that is incorrect.



Then the scriptures are in direct contradiction with the "rule" you mentioned earlier: "if it's part of god's design, then it's okay".

It's ridiculous though.

It's like god created black people and then commanding them to be white.

I really think you are confused and have bought into the delusional thinking of the day.

Sexual preferences, urges, and orientations are not genetic or biological which are influenced by many factors: upbringing, environmental factors, abuse, pornography, and others. On the other hand, gender is genetic and biological determined by one's DNA, just as skin color. Yet, in today's confuse world people are trying to base their gender on feelings. Gender is biological and sexual interests are emotional/behavioral.

Is homosexuality genetic? A critical review and some suggestions. - PubMed - NCBI

Homosexuality

I don't believe a person's "identity" is determined or meant to be their sexual orientation. I believe God, as the Creator, designed human beings to find and know their identity in Him and His love, not just for this brief life, but for eternity. Of course, since you deny God and consider God irrelevant as many do, it makes perfect sense that the world is in a state of confusion.

There are ramifications which impact others:

"Science is being replaced by adult desire"

 

[RedhorseWoman]

I think this is a very imp

I really think you are confused and have bought into the delusional thinking of the day.

Sexual preferences, urges, and orientations are not genetic or biological which are influenced by many factors: upbringing, environmental factors, abuse, pornography, and others. On the other hand, gender is genetic and biological determined by one's DNA, just as skin color. Yet, in today's confuse world people are trying to base their gender on feelings. Gender is biological and sexual interests are emotional/behavioral.

Is homosexuality genetic? A critical review and some suggestions. - PubMed - NCBI

Homosexuality

I don't believe a person's "identity" is determined or meant to be their sexual orientation. I believe God, as the Creator, designed human beings to find and know their identity in Him and His love, not just for this brief life, but for eternity. Of course, since you deny God and consider God irrelevant as many do, it makes perfect sense that the world is in a state of confusion.

There are ramifications which impact others:

"Science is being replaced by adult desire"

So, you believe that sexual preferences (orientation) is not genetic, but is a choice? Tell us, then, exactly when YOU "chose" to be attracted to the opposite sex. Are you saying that prior to making that "choice" you were equally attracted to both the opposite and the same sex, but that at some point you "chose" to limit your attraction to solely the opposite sex? How, exactly, did you accomplish this?

 

[Trailblazer]

lol, owkay.
I think that the very thing it centers on, is fundamentally flawed.

It completely ignores that many, many children don't get to live up with the biological parents that produced them, for a wide variety of reasons, and are adopted by other people. These other people can be gay couples.

It also ignores the fact that gay couples are perfectly capable of raising a child like any other.
As a matter of fact, some of them will do a far better job then heterosexual couples. I can say that for a fact, as I personally know such people. I know many hetero couples that totally messed up their kids, who did a mega poor job, who were irresponsible, etc. My gay couple friends would outparent every single one of them. As a matter of fact, they would outparent most couples I know. They are awesome with their kids.

I agree that many gay couples do a better job of raising children than straight couples. I have no problem with gay couples as long as they are married. I respect married gay couples a lot more than heterosexual couples who live together out of wedlock. The former shows commitment, the latter does not.

I do not make the laws, so I have nothing to say about them. I just try to follow them. I had no sex until I got married at age 32 and my husband had no sex until he married me at age 42. Then we made up for lost time. Then after a number of years I decided I cared more about getting right with God than physical pleasure. I cannot even imagine ever going back to that life. I have no interest in sex and it is a thing of the past. Everyone is different, but I know it would intervene between me and God and I cannot afford that because I have enough problems being close to God as it is.

How would you know?

From experience, a lot of experience.

Oral sex clearly is a thing that people love to do.

Not all people love to do it even though most people love to get it.
I have always been a giver rather than a getter so my husband never had any complaints.

Why would any benevolent, just, mercifull and loving god design great pleasure and intimacy inducing body features and then tell you that you can't use them for great pleasure and intimacy?

Was it a "mistake" in the design?
In fact.... why even make orgasms possible? This whole sexual morality thing would simply evaporate instantly.

Oral sex is not prohibited in the Baha’i Law, as long as it is between a man and wife.

Regarding what people love to do, we are allowed to enjoy ourselves as long as it is within the confines of the law. Here is what Baha’u’llah said:

“Whatsoever deterreth you, in this Day, from loving God is nothing but the world. Flee it, that ye may be numbered with the blest. Should a man wish to adorn himself with the ornaments of the earth, to wear its apparels, or partake of the benefits it can bestow, no harm can befall him, if he alloweth nothing whatever to intervene between him and God, for God hath ordained every good thing, whether created in the heavens or in the earth, for such of His servants as truly believe in Him. Eat ye, O people, of the good things which God hath allowed you, and deprive not yourselves from His wondrous bounties. Render thanks and praise unto Him, and be of them that are truly thankful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 276

Then why design the human body in such a way that to not only include pleasure inducing features, but even such that any human will instinctively seek out such pleasure to the point that it actually dominates large aspects of his or her life?

It's like designing a hammer but making it look like a screwdriver....

Sex is enjoyable to ensure procreation. Since the purpose of life is not physical pleasure, if it dominates their lives they then miss out on the real purpose of life. However, this earthly life is difficult, so I think God made sex pleasurable so people could enjoy themselves in order to counterbalance some of the struggles of this life.

Scare tactics. The last resort weapon of the irrational defense.

That is not scare tactics at all. I said to enjoy it while it lasts since we won’t have physical bodies in the afterlife, we will have spiritual bodies. You should enjoy food and drink while it lasts too, because there won’t be any in the afterlife. It will be a huge liability to be attached to physical things that no longer exist in the spiritual world, for obvious logical reasons. By contrast, anything we have that is mental or spiritual will be a huge asset since we retain full consciousness in the afterlife.

Ok. Now, why should I care what that book says?

You do not have to care because you are not a Baha’i. Baha’i laws only apply to Baha’is.

 

[InChrist]

So, you believe that sexual preferences (orientation) is not genetic, but is a choice? Tell us, then, exactly when YOU "chose" to be attracted to the opposite sex. Are you saying that prior to making that "choice" you were equally attracted to both the opposite and the same sex, but that at some point you "chose" to limit your attraction to solely the opposite sex? How, exactly, did you accomplish this?

No, I do not believe it is as simplistic as that, making a choice, like choosing vanilla or chocolate. I think it is much more complex. Yet, because we live in a fallen world each of us deals with innate issues in our very being and have a propensity to sin in different ways, which at some point we either surrender or not to God's wisdom and will. You may be interested in the linked article, or not. It's up to you.

Why am I gay? | Living Out

 

[RedhorseWoman]

No, I do not believe it is as simplistic as that, making a choice, like choosing vanilla or chocolate. I think it is much more complex. Yet, because we live in a fallen world each of us deals with innate issues in our very being and have a propensity to sin in different ways, which at some point we either surrender or not to God's wisdom and will. You may be interested in the linked article, or not. It's up to you.

Why am I gay? | Living Out

It's not really that complex, if you are honest about it. You, obviously, are heterosexual, are you not? Did you have to think about which sex you would be attracted to, or did it just come naturally? If you are male, did you ever feel sexual attraction for another male and then stopped yourself from having those feelings, or were you simply not sexually attracted to other males?

Sexual orientation is genetic whether you like it or not. No matter how you try to explain it away, there is no way that you can legitimately do so...if you are honest, that is.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Sexual orientation is genetic whether you like it or not. No matter how you try to explain it away, there is no way that you can legitimately do so...if you are honest, that is.

My dear it's really so very much more complicated than this. Most people do not choose their inclinations, it's true. That doesn't mean it's genetic. If one identical twin is gay, it doesn't mean the other identical twin is gay. There are epigenetic things happening, hormonal things in vitro, environmental factors such as getting molested or raped.... And honestly, some people, especially many women, are more sexually amorphous than others.There are so many, many other factors, and we are just beginning to understand them. It does a disservice to both gays and straights to say either that it is genetic or that they choose. Can we agree that it is complicated?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I really think you are confused and have bought into the delusional thinking of the day.

No.

Sexual preferences, urges, and orientations are not genetic or biological which are influenced by many factors: upbringing, environmental factors, abuse, pornography, and others. On the other hand, gender is genetic and biological determined by one's DNA, just as skin color. Yet, in today's confuse world people are trying to base their gender on feelings. Gender is biological and sexual interests are emotional/behavioral.

Dude.... one this is pretty much certain: being gay is not a matter of just deciding to be so.
One either is or is not gay or bi or hetero.

That there is no underlying biological explanation (yet) as to be able to say "here, this gene here" or "that hormonal balance right there", or whatever, as being the reason for being gay or not, does not change the fact that gay or hetero people don't choose to be so.

It is a fact that it is not a matter of choice.
And if you would actually spend some time informing yourself, talking to some gay people and looking inwards to your own sexuality and sexual orientation, you would understand this.

But obviously your religious beliefs prevent you from undertaking that sort of test with any form of honesty.

I don't believe a person's "identity" is determined or meant to be their sexual orientation

I'm not talking about "identity" - whatever you mean by that.
I'm talking about sexual orientation and how it's clearly not a choice that people make.

I believe God, as the Creator, designed human beings to find and know their identity in Him and His love, not just for this brief life, but for eternity

Good for you. But kind of irrelevant when it concerns the facts of reality.

Of course, since you deny God and consider God irrelevant as many do, it makes perfect sense that the world is in a state of confusion.

My disbelief of god(s) has nothing whatsoever to do with the facts of reality.


It doesn't matter if I believe in God(s) or not. Gay people will still be gay. The sky will still look blue. Things will still fall down and not up. The earth will still be 4.5 billion years old. Life will still evolve.

In short: the entire universe will keep on existing the way it does, regardless of what I believe (or not).

There are ramifications which impact others:

"Science is being replaced by adult desire"

I'm not interested in argument-by-youtube. Especially not if you aren't even going to go through the effort of summarizing the main points in your own words.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I do not make the laws, so I have nothing to say about them. I just try to follow them.

And that, right there, is why I consider religion to be one of the greatest dangers to humans and human civilisation.

It lobotomizes its followers and reduced them to sheep who just go by their perceived authority, who completely sacrifice their moral compass to this perceived authority, who don't question the things they are asked to do and believe,....

This is how religion succeeds in convincing a bunch of people to fly boeings into buildings.

I had no sex until I got married at age 32 and my husband had no sex until he married me at age 42. Then we made up for lost time. Then after a number of years I decided I cared more about getting right with God than physical pleasure. I cannot even imagine ever going back to that life. I have no interest in sex and it is a thing of the past. Everyone is different, but I know it would intervene between me and God and I cannot afford that because I have enough problems being close to God as it is.

Good for you. But your asexuality is your business. Other people like sex and don't need you telling them that they are being immoral because they like something that you don't.

Sex is enjoyable to ensure procreation.

Other animal species, who aren't able to achieve orgasms, don't "enjoy" sex but thrive as a species nonetheless. In fact, there are even species out there where the male gets eaten by the female right after depositing his seed.

Clearly, sex doesn't need to be enjoyable in order to ensure procreation.

Since the purpose of life is not physical pleasure, if it dominates their lives they then miss out on the real purpose of life

Contrary to what you seem to believe, you don't get to dictate to others what their purpose in life is.

That is not scare tactics at all

Yes, it is. Perhaps you used it, or have heared it, so many times by now that it doesn't even register with you any more. But that is exactly what it is.

I said to enjoy it while it lasts since we won’t have physical bodies in the afterlife, we will have spiritual bodies

Demonstrate it.

You should enjoy food and drink while it lasts too, because there won’t be any in the afterlife. It will be a huge liability to be attached to physical things that no longer exist in the spiritual world, for obvious logical reasons. By contrast, anything we have that is mental or spiritual will be a huge asset since we retain full consciousness in the afterlife.

So you believe.

You do not have to care because you are not a Baha’i. Baha’i laws only apply to Baha’is.

Then perhaps you should stop citing / preaching them as if they apply to everybody.

If they don't apply to others, then what are you doing citing them here as if it is a proper argument?

 

[FooYang]

Then perhaps you should stop citing / preaching them as if they apply to everybody.

Just keep in mind that you yourself said that, most of your posts come off entirely as proselytizing.

 

[Trailblazer]

And that, right there, is why I consider religion to be one of the greatest dangers to humans and human civilisation.

And that, right there, is why I consider religion to be one of the greatest protections for humans and human civilisation.

It lobotomizes its followers and reduced them to sheep who just go by their perceived authority, who completely sacrifice their moral compass to this perceived authority, who don't question the things they are asked to do and believe,....

Religion protects humans from their own perverse inclinations and lack of a moral compass.

Good for you. But your asexuality is your business. Other people like sex and don't need you telling them that they are being immoral because they like something that you don't.

Show me where I ever told anyone they are immoral. Just because I have different standards to live up to because of my religion does not mean I said anyone is immoral.

Have at it. Nobody told you not to enjoy sex. All I ever said is that I could not care less about sex anymore. That does not make me asexual, I just care more about God than sex and time is short. I do not have time for sex.

Clearly, sex doesn't need to be enjoyable in order to ensure procreation.

Maybe not, so what is your point?

Contrary to what you seem to believe, you don't get to dictate to others what their purpose in life is.

I did not dictate your purpose; I just said what “I believe” is the purpose of life.
You can have sex as your purpose if you want to because you do not believe in God.

I said to enjoy it while it lasts since we won’t have physical bodies in the afterlife, we will have spiritual bodies

Demonstrate it.

You won’t believe anything I call evidence so you will have to wait till you die.
You will have proof after you die.

You do not have to care because you are not a Baha’i. Baha’i laws only apply to Baha’is.

Then perhaps you should stop citing / preaching them as if they apply to everybody.

I told you they do not apply to anyone except Baha’is.

If they don't apply to others, then what are you doing citing them here as if it is a proper argument?

I am not making an argument, I am just stating what I believe.
I responded to you because you asked. Otherwise I never would have said anything at all.

******************************************************************************************

Trailblazer said: God did not design body parts to go with any or all body parts.

TagliatelliMonster said: So where in your glorious book is it written which body part is allowed to be combined with which body part?

Trailblazer said: God designed specific body parts to go with specific body parts.

TagliatelliMonster said: Yeah, it's obvious how an average penis is just the right size to fit an average human mouth.
Or how the material of a tongue feels so sensational to a woman when it rubs her clitoris.

Trailblazer said: Some humans then misused their body parts, putting them where they do not belong.

TagliatelliMonster said: I must have missed that divine manual on what goes where. Can you point me to it?

#161 TagliatelliMonster, Thursday at 5:07 AM

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Just keep in mind that you yourself said that, most of your posts come off entirely as proselytizing.

I'm just noting that if there is this acknowledgement that "such and such laws only apply to x", then these laws don't seem relevant in a discussion about or with y.

As for what I am "proselytizing"... I don't care what you call it. I'm just calling for rationality and healthy scepticism.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And that, right there, is why I consider religion to be one of the greatest protections for humans and human civilisation.

How so?

My statement was in response to you expressing blind and unquestioned obedience to a perceived authority, and how that is usually exactly what religions demand of their followers. What is your statement in response to?

Religion protects humans from their own perverse inclinations and lack of a moral compass.

Suicide bombers, pedophile priests, sectarian wars, religiously induced genocide, witch burnings... disagree.

I see exactly zero evidence of religions protecting humans against perversity. I see much evidence of it oftenly doing the exact opposite though.

Do you know what the difference is between a religious terrorist and a maffia terrorist?
The religious terrorist believes that his terrorist carreer is a moral duty and that he is a soldier of ultimate good. While a maffia terrorist actually realises very well that he's on a pretty evil path which will be paid for either with premature violent death or life in prison.

Maybe not, so what is your point?

It undermines your point.

I did not dictate your purpose; I just said what “I believe” is the purpose of life.
You can have sex as your purpose if you want to because you do not believe in God.

Well obviously, if you have no problem whatsoever with other people engaging in sex with mutual consent for whatever reason they seem fit and with whatever gender they feel like and have no need to discriminate socially against them in any way... And don't feel a need to make moral judgements thereof...

Then obviously I have no argument with you.
It's just that... that's not really the impression you gave me.

But, perhaps I was incorrect then.

You won’t believe anything I call evidence so you will have to wait till you die.
You will have proof after you die.

I told you they do not apply to anyone except Baha’is.

Yes. But the quoted message below wasn't a question about the bahai. It was a question about all of humanity.

I am not making an argument, I am just stating what I believe.
I responded to you because you asked. Otherwise I never would have said anything at all.

******************************************************************************************

Trailblazer said: God did not design body parts to go with any or all body parts.

TagliatelliMonster said: So where in your glorious book is it written which body part is allowed to be combined with which body part?

Trailblazer said: God designed specific body parts to go with specific body parts.

TagliatelliMonster said: Yeah, it's obvious how an average penis is just the right size to fit an average human mouth.
Or how the material of a tongue feels so sensational to a woman when it rubs her clitoris.

Trailblazer said: Some humans then misused their body parts, putting them where they do not belong.

TagliatelliMonster said: I must have missed that divine manual on what goes where. Can you point me to it?

#161 TagliatelliMonster, Thursday at 5:07 AM

[/quote]

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm just noting that if there is this acknowledgement that "such and such laws only apply to x", then these laws don't seem relevant in a discussion about or with y.

They are relevant to the discussion because you asked.
Why did you ask about the laws of my religion pertaining to sex if you did not want to know?
*********************************************************************************************
Trailblazer said: God did not design body parts to go with any or all body parts.

TagliatelliMonster said: So where in your glorious book is it written which body part is allowed to be combined with which body part?

Trailblazer said: God designed specific body parts to go with specific body parts.

TagliatelliMonster said: Yeah, it's obvious how an average penis is just the right size to fit an average human mouth.
Or how the material of a tongue feels so sensational to a woman when it rubs her clitoris.

Trailblazer said: Some humans then misused their body parts, putting them where they do not belong.

TagliatelliMonster said: I must have missed that divine manual on what goes where. Can you point me to it?

#161 TagliatelliMonster, Thursday at 5:07 AM

 

[Trailblazer]

How so?

Religion is the chief instrument for the establishment of order in the world and tranquility among the people. The weakening of the pillars of religion strengthens the foolish and makes them more arrogant. The more religion declines, the more wayward people become, and that can only lead to chaos and confusion. Also, the fear of God has always been a defense and a safe stronghold for all the people of the world as well as the chief cause of the protection of mankind, and the supreme instrument for its preservation.

My statement was in response to you expressing blind and unquestioned obedience to a perceived authority, and how that is usually exactly what religions demand of their followers.

No, all religions do not demand blind and unquestioned obedience to a perceived authority. My religion does not demand that. It is not blind when one goes into it with their eyes open and it is not unquestioned when a person questions it. Only after they do both do they accept the authority of the Manifestation of God who established the religion. Nobody demands it, it is a choice we make.

Suicide bombers, pedophile priests, sectarian wars, religiously induced genocide, witch burnings... disagree.

That is not true religion. I was talking about true religion.

I see exactly zero evidence of religions protecting humans against perversity. I see much evidence of it oftenly doing the exact opposite though.

I see plenty of evidence, as if people actually follow the teachings and laws of true religion, they cannot be perverse. If they follow what leaders of the older religions tell them to do that might be another story.

Do you know what the difference is between a religious terrorist and a maffia terrorist?
The religious terrorist believes that his terrorist carreer is a moral duty and that he is a soldier of ultimate good. While a maffia terrorist actually realises very well that he's on a pretty evil path which will be paid for either with premature violent death or life in prison.

Religious zealots who become terrorists do not represent the true religion as revealed by God.

Well obviously, if you have no problem whatsoever with other people engaging in sex with mutual consent for whatever reason they seem fit and with whatever gender they feel like and have no need to discriminate socially against them in any way... And don't feel a need to make moral judgements thereof...

I have no problem with that. Why would I? It is not my business what other people choose to do. I am only responsible for myself.

Then obviously I have no argument with you.
It's just that... that's not really the impression you gave me.

Impressions can be wrong.

 

[RedhorseWoman]

My dear it's really so very much more complicated than this. Most people do not choose their inclinations, it's true. That doesn't mean it's genetic. If one identical twin is gay, it doesn't mean the other identical twin is gay. There are epigenetic things happening, hormonal things in vitro, environmental factors such as getting molested or raped.... And honestly, some people, especially many women, are more sexually amorphous than others.There are so many, many other factors, and we are just beginning to understand them. It does a disservice to both gays and straights to say either that it is genetic or that they choose. Can we agree that it is complicated?

Well, no, it really isn't that complicated. You are born with a sexual orientation, which could be 100% heterosexual, 100% homosexual, or somewhere in between, but that sexual orientation cannot be changed through environmental actions.

If sexual orientation is not genetic, then a person would have to choose, would they not? A person's orientation cannot be changed by getting molested or raped. Many homosexuals have stated that they realized they were "different" from the time they were toddlers. There were no external factors that caused them to switch their sexual orientation...they were attracted to those of the same sex.

 

[RedhorseWoman]

And that, right there, is why I consider religion to be one of the greatest protections for humans and human civilisation.

Religion protects humans from their own perverse inclinations and lack of a moral compass.

Humans do not need religion in order to have a moral compass. In fact, many non-religious people are far more moral and ethical than those who espouse a religion.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Well, no, it really isn't that complicated. You are born with a sexual orientation, which could be 100% heterosexual, 100% homosexual, or somewhere in between, but that sexual orientation cannot be changed through environmental actions.

If sexual orientation is not genetic, then a person would have to choose, would they not? A person's orientation cannot be changed by getting molested or raped. Many homosexuals have stated that they realized they were "different" from the time they were toddlers. There were no external factors that caused them to switch their sexual orientation...they were attracted to those of the same sex.

I know you are very convinced of your opinion, so I will be very gentle. I have no wish to pick a fight with you.

1. No, if a person's sexual orientation is not genetic, it does NOT necessarily mean that they would have to choose. For example, I have known women who have been severely traumatized by childhood molestation. Whereas before the molests, they had typical straight thought associations, they came to associate men with the monsters who brutalized them and cannot have normal sexual relationships with them. Their normal heterosexual development was arrested and diverted. They have LEARNED to substitute lesbian love in its place. I have met these women, so don't tell me they don't exist. They have NO CHOICE in this matter, even though there is no genetic interplay. This is only one of many examples I could have given.

2. There are many reasons why a person can be gay due to biology that is not genetic. For example, it could be womb environment (hormones) at specific times during fetal development. This would not be a genetic thing, but an epigenetic condition or something to do with the mother. Surely you can see how this could be a possibility?

3. In most cases, people are set in their orientation just as you have described. But that is not true for all people. Some people are sexually amorphous, and have gone back and forth between one orientation and another. This is particularly common among females. We have many testimonies to this effect. I remember listening to a leader member of the LGBT community be interviewed by Dennis Prager -- she was very up front about how she had once been thoroughly straight, and had changed to being a lesbian in her college years. Those who are more amorphous are most prone to the influence of modern politics and media cullture--they are now more likely to develop a gay orientation where in ages past they would simply have defaulted to a straight orientation.

4. Your "genetic theory" is disproven by basic science. If genes were the end all and be all of homosexuality, then an identical twin who is gay would always have a gay twin. Right? Yet that is clearly not the case.

I'm not even saying that there is no genetic component. All I'm saying is that it is more complicated than ascribing being gay to one factor alone.

 

[Trailblazer]

Humans do not need religion in order to have a moral compass. In fact, many non-religious people are far more moral and ethical than those who espouse a religion.

That is true, but these non-religious people are affected by religion, whether they want to admit it or not.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Humans do not need religion in order to have a moral compass. In fact, many non-religious people are far more moral and ethical than those who espouse a religion.

Scientific research has shown that the most moral people are those at the extreme ends of the spectrum -- highly religious people and atheists/agnostics. It is the people in the middle, the nominitively religious and secular sorts, who end up excusing immoral behavior as in "it's wrong for everyone else but okay for me because of x..."