The bible and gays

[Robert.Evans]

no, there is nothing that indicates that sex is for reproduction only. its a large part of it but it isnt the only thing im not even sure if reproduction is the primary function or not.

I don't see how you come to that conclusion at all

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I have my own rationalizations why these things are wrong, wholly apart from the bible and i believe even stronger arguments than given by religion. however i wouldnt mind if my partner asked me to perform anal sex on her or if she did a blowjob i wouldnt give a crap about these rationalization for these things being wrong.

My reason are: while the vagina's primarely function is sex the anus and mouth are not used for sex and thus are basically not 'made' or 'designed' to be used for these actions. the anus and mouth have different primary functions. so it is wrong to use wrong body parts for something they arent made for. for example you wouldnt put your penis into somebodies ear because the primery function of the ear is to listen not to have sex with. How good is this, what do you think?

Wait, you're opposed to anal sex but you'd have anal sex if your female partner wanted it?

 

[SomeRandom]

God?...Cruel and Petty? The NT? HA! Are you sure you're reading the same version of the New Testament as everyone else?

I didn't say He was cruel I said the poster made him seem like that. Geez

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

Wait, you're opposed to anal sex but you'd have anal sex if your female partner wanted it?

i think its irrational to have it. however if she really wanted to try it out i wouldnt mind doing something stupid.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

I don't see how you come to that conclusion at all

Because even if you get your partner pregnant you can have sex with her for 9 months without having a second child. There are times of infertility where you can have sex without producing children. etc. etc.

 

[JoStories]

While I recognise that this particular post wasn't addressed to me, I feel compelled to respond. Jo, not all Christians will tell you to deny your sexuality. As you already are aware, there are many denominations which are welcoming and affirming of people who are LGBT. Secondly, the verses used by many Christians as sweeping condemnation of homosexuals in general are actually referring to men (not women) and acts of anal sex (so, that means that lesbians are out of the equation), and even then, there are only two or three of them in the ENTIRE BIBLE. Third, coming from that, there are (obviously) FAR more verses in Scripture that talk about and condemn immorality among heterosexuals than homosexuals (but do you see us complaining about it?) So my ending question for you is: why you trippin', yo?

I understand that DJ and thank you but as you will have noted, the very next post (#1166) was a slam against gays, and in particular, lesbians. It gets very very old.

 

[JoStories]

Everything fits for its own realm. By the way, have you got bad eyes?

Try reading the sentence at the bottom of my posts.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

I understand that DJ and thank you but as you will have noted, the very next post (#1166) was a slam against gays, and in particular, lesbians. It gets very very old.

Dont take it too personal or be disgusted by it: What do you think of anal sex(since we're talking about homosexuality)? I heard many females says: 'I am no hooker so i dont want to do that.' Are you of a similar extraction or do you think gays are in their perfect right to do it(without being denegraded or equalized to 'hookers')?

 

[JoStories]

That would still be wrong though. It does not produce life and body parts are pretty understood now I think...we don't need to be confused with them.

Again, in your opinion. You are free to believe whatever you want. You are not free to tell me what is natural or not.

 

[JoStories]

Dont take it too personal or be disgusted by it: What do you think of anal sex(since we're talking about homosexuality)? I heard many females says: 'I am no hooker so i dont want to do that.' Or you of a similar extraction or do you think gays are in their perfect right to do it(without being denegraded or equalized to 'hookers')?

I think that whatever sexual act a couple wants to participate in is up to them. And frankly, none of my business. I have my own preferences and you likely have yours. And those are private issues that are none of the other's business. What I find distasteful are people who pass judgment on me based on a book.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

I think that whatever sexual act a couple wants to participate in is up to them. And frankly, none of my business. I have my own preferences and you likely have yours. And those are private issues that are none of the other's business. What I find distasteful are people who pass judgment on me based on a book.

How do you deal with someone who has actual arguments, without necessarely adhereing to religious scripiture, that certain sexual acts are irrational?

 

[Jumi]

How do you deal with someone who has actual arguments, without necessarely adhereing to religious scripiture, that certain sexual acts are irrational?

But you yourself have an exception to the rule "if she wants it". I don't see you having an argument here even you find worth defending.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

But you yourself have an exception to the rule "if she wants it". I don't see you having an argument here even you find worth defending.

Because it depends on the person. We all do irrational things in our life, especially if youre in love. If your partner wants you to give her flowers every valintines day then its not a rational thing to do(who needs flowers?) but you still do it to bring a smile on her face.

 

[Jumi]

So you are for anal and oral intercourse if it's love, but just regular intercourse if there is no love. You know that homosexual attraction is just like the one we heterosexuals have, so what are you against?

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

So you are for anal and oral intercourse if it's love, but just regular intercourse if there is no love. You know that homosexual attraction is just like the one we heterosexuals have, so what are you against?

Thats not my exact words. Im for it if she takes the initiative to to ask for something stupid, with conviction. Im against it if she doesnt want or is neutral towards it, because the bodyparts are not for sex. Homosexual relationships and specifically the intercourse is irrational from the get-go in this view.

You know, its like telling your children that Santa Claus is brining them presents(irrational) knowing fully well that you are the one hiding it under the tree so that they may receive joy. It is not necessarey for you to lie to them, especially if you want to raise rational children. Same with this intercourse argument.

 

[Jumi]

So you're fine with people doing irrational things as fine as they are just like you? It sounds awfully selfish to me.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

So you're fine with people doing irrational things as fine as they are just like you? It sounds awfully selfish to me.

Indeed, we do many irrational things and are not free of error. It is better to avoid them if you cant get any joy out of them.

 

[Pudding]

Indeed, we do many irrational things and are not free of error. It is better to avoid them if you cant get any joy out of them.

Sure, we should avoid to do irrational things, but the standards of how things is irrational may greatly differ from people to people. A group may have the rights to continually advice/told another B group that B group is irrational for doing somethings, but B group may also have the rights to continually explain why what they do is not irrational and refuse to do as what A group have say.

It's okay to debate who is right, but it's not okay to force one's standards of rationality upon other group to follow. As long as one doesn't infringe others' human rights, then i don't see any problem with what they do.

One can't get any joy out of something? Then don't do it.
If others want to do that something, should anyone forbid them to do so? Maybe they should only be forbidden to do so if what they do infringe others' human rights, physically and mentally harming others. If not, i don't see why they should be forbidden.
edit

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

Sure, we should avoid to do irrational things, but the standards of how things is irrational may greatly differ from people to people. A group may have the rights to continually advice/told another B group that B group is irrational for doing somethings, but B group may also have the rights to continually explain why what they do is not irrational and refuse to do as what A group have say.

It's okay to debate who is right, but it's not okay to force one's standards of rationality upon other group to follow. As long as one doesn't infringe others' human rights, then i don't see any problem with what they do.

there is only one truth and one rationality. since when does 1+1=/=2?

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

for example you wouldnt put your penis into somebodies ear because the primery function of the ear is to listen not to have sex with

If a girl was really hot and had a big enough ear, I'd give it a shot.

and the earwax would provide the necessary lubrication?