My views on homosexuality

[Otherright]

Sexual desire is not comparable to an ideological stance.

Darkendless' question was a question of coping. Why would one cope. It wasn't about sexual orientation.

 

[Storm]

Otherright, I'm sorry, but you're wrong. I've given you science, others have given you analogies. You haven't answered either adequately.

 

[Father Heathen]

Because of choice. Some will taste good. Some will taste bad. You will chose not to eat the ones you find to taste bad.

Now you're contradicting yourself. You said that whether or not something tastes good or bad itself is a choice. So why would it be any different with sexuality then?

You lost the argument based on your wording. You chose the word choice when you should've used something else. Its was easy to pick up the word choice and run with it.

I only used the word choice in the exact same way you did with sexuality.

And, I think you know you lost that round by hurling an insult toward me, something I will respond with by showing you the respect you didn't show me, by not insulting you. But if it is a question of logic, I aced it, both classes.

Eh? I hurled no insults. Also, in order for something to be considered logical it needs to be both consistent and coherent.

 

[darkendless]

Why would anyone choose to be atheist, especially in the South in the United States and endure the condemnation of Fundamentalists. You are asking a question of will. Do you have the will to stand by your conviction. You don't think religious preference is genetic do you?

Yes but athiesm does not affect ones rights.

Why would a homosexual harm their legal rights by choosing their lifestyle? Its essentially saying goodbye to marriage given the homophobic narrow-mindedness of the American and Australian (to name only 2) voters.

It simply does not make sense.

 

[Otherright]

Now you're contradicting yourself. You said that whether or not something tastes good or bad itself is a choice. So why would it be any different with sexuality then?

I only used the word choice in the exact same way you did with sexuality.



Eh? I hurled no insults. Also, in order for something to be considered logical it needs to be both consistent and coherent.

No I didn't read it again. I said you will chose either to eat it or not based on whether it taste good or bad.

 

[Storm]

No I didn't read it again. I said you will chose either to eat it or not based on whether it taste good or bad.

Which didn't answer his question. He asked whether you chose how it tastes.

 

[Otherright]

Otherright, I'm sorry, but you're wrong. I've given you science, others have given you analogies. You haven't answered either adequately.

I said that I may be wrong, but I still feel it is choice. You having read my opinion homosexuality, do you:

feel I support it or am against it?
feel that I must agree with you 100% to support you?

 

[Father Heathen]

No I didn't read it again. I said you will chose either to eat it or not based on whether it taste good or bad.

Oh, so you're actually saying what food people find to taste good or bad isn't a choice? So why exactly would sexual tastes be any different then?

 

[Storm]

I said that I may be wrong, but I still feel it is choice.

"You're entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts."

YECs make the same argument regarding evolution, and it doesn't work there, either.

feel I support it or am against it?
feel that I must agree with you 100% to support you?

1) Support.
2) No.

You're obviously not a bigot, for which I'm grateful. You're just as obviously in error, and I don't understand why you won't accept correction.

 

[Otherright]

Oh, so you're actually saying what food people find to taste good or bad isn't a choice? So why exactly would sexual tastes be any different then?

Look man, you guys are getting caught up on whether or not its choice. I have said repeatedly that there is no moral implication in homosexuality. Love is what it is. It does not know gender, age, or creed. It is what it is. I have in all these posts, had nothing but respect for homosexuality and have not in anyway discouraged it.

Does it matter if my opinion is that its choice, if I completely support it? Honestly, how am I judging or hindering the ideas of homosexuals by having that opinion?

 

[Father Heathen]

Look man, you guys are getting caught up on whether or not its choice. I have said repeatedly that there is no moral implication in homosexuality. Love is what it is. It does not know gender, age, or creed. It is what it is. I have in all these posts, had nothing but respect for homosexuality and have not in anyway discouraged it.

Does it matter if my opinion is that its choice, if I completely support it? Honestly, how am I judging or hindering the ideas of homosexuals by having that opinion?

I guess it really doesn't matter, but this is a discussion/debate board, and you've presented a silly notion that people will be compelled to address.

 

[Otherright]

"You're entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts."

YECs make the same argument regarding evolution, and it doesn't work there, either.


1) Support.
2) No.

You're obviously not a bigot, for which I'm grateful. You're just as obviously in error, and I don't understand why you won't accept correction.

Storm, I love you. As a human being I love you, and I don't even know you, but I don't have to to love you and want you to have the most fulfilling life you can. My desire for you is to know love. I don't care what form it comes in. To have a trusting bond with someone else is the right of all people.

As I said before, I think we all chose our destinies. I could be wrong in saying it is choice, but when you have choice, you have control over your destiny. When you point to something else, you take your ability to control your destiny away from yourself.

Whether you've chosen or not, in the end, doesn't really matter to me. Be proud of yourself. Everyday be proud. Walk your path and listen to nothing anyone else judges about you and your path. But walk your path and know yourself.

Metta (love and loving compassion).

 

[839311]

A homosexual would be just as much a sinner as everyone else, and has an equal chance of salvation.

Lets hope that equal chance is 100%. It would be a disgrace to the allmighty ruler of the cosmos if he excluded people from his after party.

 

[Otherright]

I had a private chat with Storm and she said something very simple and very wise that I hadn't really considered. I concede to her. She is right.

 

[Storm]

 

[thebigpicture]

Two questions:

1. Can a man have sex with another man and make a baby?
2. Can a woman have sex with another woman and make a baby?

When both these questions can be answered with the response, “Yes” -- then we can talk about homosexuality being “natural”.

A man’s body is made to connect to a female’s body and the reverse. It’s like a prong and an outlet. They obviously go together.

 

[Storm]

Two questions:

1. Can a man have sex with another man and make a baby?
2. Can a woman have sex with another woman and make a baby?

When both these questions can be answered with the response, “Yes” -- then we can talk about homosexuality being “natural”.

A man’s body is made to connect to a female’s body and the reverse. It’s like a prong and an outlet. They obviously go together.

So, I take it you don't engage in oral sex, or kissing?

 

[Many Sages One Truth]

Two questions:

1. Can a man have sex with another man and make a baby?
2. Can a woman have sex with another woman and make a baby?

When both these questions can be answered with the response, “Yes” -- then we can talk about homosexuality being “natural”.

So I suppose heterosexuality is equally unnatural if the heterosexual is unable to have children eh? See how that argument works?

 

[thebigpicture]

So I suppose heterosexuality is equally unnatural if the heterosexual is unable to have children eh? See how that argument works?

Wrong. When a heterosexual couple can’t have a baby, it’s because of a medical reason. Not because it’s impossible for heterosexual couples to have babies. However, homosexual couples cannot have babies together because it is impossible. Two men having sex or two women having sex will not make a baby, period.

You seemed to have overlooked that important difference.

 

[Storm]

Wrong. When a heterosexual couple can’t have a baby, it’s because of a medical reason. Not because it’s impossible for heterosexual couples to have babies. However, homosexual couples cannot have babies together because it is impossible. Two men having sex or two women having sex will not make a baby, period.

You seemed to have overlooked that important difference.

If breeding is all that matters, you have to look down your nose at infertile people, too.

Not that bigots much care about being consistent.