why can't we have a relationship with other men?

[payak]

1robin,exactly what should a gay person who is attracted to the same sex and disgusted by the opposite do.

For them to touch a woman would feel the same as you touching a man.

so what should they do.

 

[1robin]

What does that have to do with homosexual behavior causing massive love and happiness to a lot of people everywhere in the world and the attempt to stop this without a justification for doing so?

Let's pretend the 4% of people who are gay are being so because of love. That is not even close to being true but let's pretend it is.

Is the (one type of love among many) love they experience a justifying compensation for the producing 60% of just the aids cases alone. How many lives, how much suffering, and how many billions in dollars that other must endure is only one aspect of love 4% of the population claim exists worth. Our law is built on many principles. One of the most profound is gain versus loss. I never said no gain exists in homosexuality. I said the huge increase in suffering and death is not justified
by the little gain that exists in it.

Lets say only 10,000 people died from aids spread by homosexuality. How much "love" justifies this?

 

[1robin]

1robin,exactly what should a gay person who is attracted to the same sex and disgusted by the opposite do.

For them to touch a woman would feel the same as you touching a man.

so what should they do.

I judge behavior not people. I myself make many mistakes. The difference is I call my mistakes - mistakes. I call bad things bad. I never say that some happiness of mine or some pleasure I get justifies it harming others. A behavior is right or wrong independent of any solutions to it. I have steered away from solutions because I have no experience or qualifications to comment on it in depth. I will say a few things but regardless of any solution things are justifiable or not.

1. As admitted by a person who defends homosexuality, the church has had success in turning people from this practice. There are many people who have left their gay life behind and embraced heterosexuality and will and have said that it was a choice and a spiritual problem not a genetic mandate. They do not have homosexual desires any longer. Even secular programs have successes, they are just much lower rates than Christian institutions.
2. I am not saying it is easy. Like alcoholism and drug addiction etc.... recovery and getting away from the hold it has on us is hard. It can and has been done but many do not make it. That does not mean that it is justifiable.
3. Drug addiction is also a love affair (I am speaking from experience). We literally love drugs more than anything. More than a lover, more than a spouse, more than even food or our health. Trying to be free is a nightmare and without God I would never have made it. However whether I ever made it or not I would have told anyone who asked it was wrong and unjustifiable.
4. There are countless things people would claim their desire to do was irresistible. Yet we do not claim they were right or justified because they claimed they were compelled to do them.
5. However lets say there is no solution possible. Which is a lie but lets pretend it was true. Abstinence is always an option. I was in the Navy and when out to sea for months we were all 100% abstinent. Priests and holy men of most faiths have practiced it. People who get tired of playing the games involved in dating have given up sex. Now take the reasons those people chose abstinence and think how much greater the motivation for it when what is resisted causes so much pain, misery, and death. If I and others have practiced abstinence based of preference or convenience. How much more could do so based on not risking injury to others for the sake of physical lust. A lust by the which can be satisfied in other ways that do not risk others lives.

Claiming to like to do something is never an excuse for doing so alone.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

2. I am not saying it is easy. Like alcoholism and drug addiction etc.... recovery and getting away from the hold it has on us is hard.

Yeah, same with Christianity. Like alcoholism and drug addiction, etc., it's very hard to escape the hold which Christianity has on us.

But people do it every day. So let's not despair. Let's not just shrug and accept that we can never escape Christian theology and stop our immoral Christian behavior.

We can all escape our drug addictions and our Christianity.

We can change ourselves!

 

[1robin]

Yeah, same with Christianity. Like alcoholism and drug addiction, etc., it's very hard to escape the hold which Christianity has on us.

But people do it every day. So let's not despair. Let's not just shrug and accept that we can never escape Christian theology and stop our immoral Christian behavior.

We can all escape our drug addictions and our Christianity.

We can change ourselves!

Wrong thread again. Of course you have no use for what the actual subject matter is anyway. Are you stalking me or something? Getting desperate? Am I all you got?

 

[Jester]

Let's pretend the 4% of people who are gay are being so because of love. That is not even close to being true but let's pretend it is.

Is the (one type of love among many) love they experience a justifying compensation for the producing 60% of just the aids cases alone. How many lives, how much suffering, and how many billions in dollars that other must endure is only one aspect of love 4% of the population claim exists worth. Our law is built on many principles. One of the most profound is gain versus loss. I never said no gain exists in homosexuality. I said the huge increase in suffering and death is not justified
by the little gain that exists in it.

What!? Homosexuals don't just GENERATE AIDs! One of them would have to have it for it to be spread.

People aren't killed by homosexuality, just because they are the group killed the most by the virus doesn't make them the cause of it.

The Church has no record of every actually turning anyone straight either. A lot of people that "turn" end up to still be gay in secret. Advocates for turning heterosexual have been found to be secretly still homosexual, just hiding it because they think it's a sin.

Abstinence is also completely unnatural. Being abstinent is demanding something of people that shouldn't be demanded because it doesn't actually make any logical sense outside of religion.

 

[jetson]

The reason is, God says it is abomination to God. If you are in this sin, you will end up burning in the lake of fire, if you don't get out and accept Christ.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

The reason is, God says it is abomination to God. If you are in this sin, you will end up burning in the lake of fire, if you don't get out and accept Christ.

God approves of homosexuality. He loves gay people.

 

[1robin]

What!? Homosexuals don't just GENERATE AIDs! One of them would have to have it for it to be spread.

Find a single claim where I said they created aids. I said they spread most of it. They create the most new cases of aids even though they are a small minority. Please use what I actually said if you wish to comment on it.

People aren't killed by homosexuality, just because they are the group killed the most by the virus doesn't make them the cause of it.

They were in that group on the sole criteria that they were gay. Do you know more than the CDC. They did it not me. I am going with them.

The Church has no record of every actually turning anyone straight either. A lot of people that "turn" end up to still be gay in secret. Advocates for turning heterosexual have been found to be secretly still homosexual, just hiding it because they think it's a sin.

When I provide several that have turned by finding God will you concede the point. I will use their words alone that say they no longer have any homosexual desires. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

Abstinence is also completely unnatural. Being abstinent is demanding something of people that shouldn't be demanded because it doesn't actually make any logical sense outside of religion.

Every animal and every person has been abstinent for more time than they have been having sex without exception. Only your side would claim the majority is unnatural but the exceptions are natural. Most animals by far are not homosexual and none are purely homosexual so pure homosexuality can't possibly be natural.

 

[1robin]

The reason is, God says it is abomination to God. If you are in this sin, you will end up burning in the lake of fire, if you don't get out and accept Christ.

That is certainly true. However using all of reality with a group of people who deny half of it, will not be effective. You must meet them on a lower level and far narrower band of reality. If you look at my previous posts my two primary claims are secular and so far have not been even dented.

 

[1robin]

God approves of homosexuality. He loves gay people.

Still waiting for the slightest hint of evidence (even bad evidence that is applicable would be acceptable since no possibility of good evidence exists) for what you wish was true actually being true.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Still waiting for the slightest hint of evidence (even bad evidence that is applicable would be acceptable since no possibility of good evidence exists) for what you wish was true actually being true.

Since God has never said a single word against homosexuality, therefore God must approve of homosexuality.

Now you. Do you have even the slightest hint of evidence (even bad evidence) that God opposes homosexuality?

Didn't think so.

If you ever find any evidence, secular or religious, against homosexuality, I hope you won't be too shy to present it here in this thread.

 

[Skwim]

Since God has never said a single word against homosexuality, therefore God must approve of homosexuality.

Now you. Do you have even the slightest hint of evidence (even bad evidence) that God opposes homosexuality?

Didn't think so.

If you ever find any evidence, secular or religious, against homosexuality, I hope you won't be too shy to present it here in this thread.

Just dropped in for a visit and came across your post here. Gotta ask---and maybe you've already covered this point---what do you make of

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." (NKJ, Leviticus 18:22)
​

and

"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." (NKJ, Leviticus 20:13)
​

I would think that "lie with a male as with a woman" indicates a homosexual act, an expression of homosexuality. Although, in truth I'd be pleased if I'm wrong about this.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Gotta ask---and maybe you've already covered this point---what do you make of

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." (NKJ, Leviticus 18:22)
​

and

"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." (NKJ, Leviticus 20:13)

​

I would think that "lie with a male as with a woman" indicates a homosexual act, an expression of homosexuality. Although, in truth I'd be pleased if I'm wrong about this.

Thanks for asking. They look like the bigotry of an ancient, primitive people inserted into a Book which claims to be from God.

A scary bit of nonsense and slanderous against God.

Obviously it's not from God. No legitimate God would send down immutable Words to one specific ancient primitive culture, in a language which no one knows anymore. And no legitimate God would hate homosexuality.

Do you believe that the Bible is an actual Message from God?

 

[Curious George]

That is certainly true. However using all of reality with a group of people who deny half of it, will not be effective. You must meet them on a lower level and far narrower band of reality. If you look at my previous posts my two primary claims are secular and so far have not been even dented.

Dented? They've been destroyed.

You say homosexuality spreads disease
Homosexuality has no purpose
Therefore homosexuality is wrong.

I provided a specific instance that defeats your premises. So what you think is rational thought is clearly bias.

Please explain how you can reach your universal conclusion when your premises are not universal.

I'm still waiting for a response to my last post that should have cleared up any miscommunication and allowed you to see the logical flaw.

 

[Skwim]

Thanks for asking. They look like the bigotry of an ancient, primitive people inserted into a Book which claims to be from God.

A scary bit of nonsense and slanderous against God.

Obviously it's not from God. No legitimate God would send down immutable Words to one specific ancient primitive culture, in a language which no one knows anymore. And no legitimate God would hate homosexuality.

Do you believe that the Bible is an actual Message from God?

I don't, but that makes no difference. If Christians believe it is then I believe the passages I cited would stand as evidence to them that god condemns homosexuality. Don't you?

 

[Walkntune]

It has been the River flowing through me that has cleaned my river banks, not me cleaning my river banks so the River can flow.
God loves all people just as they are. I don't feel it is important or necessary to judge ones fallen state no matter what the state is. Christians should just lift up Christ as the serpent was lifted up and all who look to Him will be saved although they may be getting bit.

 

[Agnostic75]

I judge behavior not people.

Good, so you should not judge healthy homosexuals who have been monogamous for at least ten years, and have demonstrated their preference for monogamy, and have thereby earned the right to share the joys of having sex. That argument is even more true of homosexuals who have been monogamous for at least twenty years.

Let's pretend the 4% of people who are gay are being so because of love. That is not even close to being true but let's pretend it is.

Upon what evidence do you base that absurd guess? Please provide a secular definition for being in love.

Is the (one type of love among many) love they experience a justifying compensation for the producing 60% of just the aids cases alone.

But the vast majority of homosexuals never get HIV, or AIDS.

How many lives, how much suffering, and how many billions in dollars that other must endure.......

But only a small percentage fraction of the suffering, and billions of dollars due to often preventable cases of heart disease, cancer, and obesity.

Our law is built on many principles. One of the most profound is gain versus loss. I never said no gain exists in homosexuality. I said the huge increase in suffering and death is not justified by the little gain that exists in it.

You have shown on such thing regarding homosexuals who have been monogamous for at least ten years.

The Negative Health Effects of Homosexuality
By Timothy J. Dailey, Ph. D. Senior Fellow, Center for Marriage and Family Studies
New York Blade News:

Reports at a national conference about sexually transmitted diseases indicate that gay men are in the highest risk group for several of the most serious diseases. . . . Scientists believe that the increased number of sexually tranmitted diseases (STD) cases is the result of an increase in risky sexual practices by a growing number of gay men who believe HIV is no longer a life-threatening illness.[1]

What about lesbians, who have less risk than heterosexual men and women do?

80% of American homosexuals do not have HIV, and risks are far less in some countries. In 2010, the AIDS risk in Australia, and New Zealand was only about 1/6 of what it was in the U.S..

Instability and promiscuity typically characterize homosexual relationships.

But millions of homosexuals are not promiscuous, and many who are promiscuous practice safe sex, and do not have any STDs.


There are not any doubts whatsoever that the vast majority of homosexuals do not have HIV, or AIDS, are not pedophiles, are not alcoholics, and do not abuse drugs.

If a God exists, he created most harmful viruses that kill humans, and innocent animals. Many diseases that humans have were originally transmitted to humans through animals, probably including AIDS, and God has killed millions of people in many other ways. Since God is not very much interested in the physical health of humans, why are you? God could have easily prevented the Irish Potato Famine, which killed hundreds of thousands of people, most of whom were Christians, but chose not to. The same goes for the Bubonic Plague, which killed millions of people.

Animals existed long before humans did. How do you explain why they killed each other, and probably practiced homosexuality? The Bible says that eventually, the lion will lay with the lamb. Why weren't things that way before humans existed?

The Bible says that God is not the author of confusion. You said that the Bible is not confusing, but there are hundreds, or thousands of examples of where it is confusing. Perhaps I will start a few thread on that issue. If I do, you can explain why you believe that what the Bible says about Adam and Eve, and the flood, and what Jesus said about divorce, and tithing, are not confusing.

 

[Agnostic75]

Message to 1robin: I will number my arguments for easy reference.

Argument #1

You said that you do not need to provide any solutions for homosexuality, but you have done so many times by saying that all homosexuals should practice abstinence.

Argument #2

From a secular perspective, no behavior is wrong unless there are better alternatives. There are not any better alternatives for most homosexuals who have been monogamous for at least ten years, and have proven their preference for, and dedication to monogamy.

Argument #3

Having sex has proven health benefits, and long term abstinence has proven health risks.

Argument #4

None of your statistics deal with homosexuals who have been monogamous for at least ten years. You cannot provide any evidence that those homosexuals have enough risk to warrant practicing abstinence.

Argument #5

It is common knowledge that many homosexuals who tried reparative therapy, and/or long term abstinence ended up much worse off than they were before, and required medical treatment as a result. Obviously, it would be reasonable for those people to have sex again in order to try to improve their physical, and mental health.

Argument #6

The others are not so easily prevented nor have I argued for their allowance.

If necessary, I can provide lots of evidence that shows that heart disease, and obesity, can frequently be prevented, and that cancer can often be prevented, but to a lesser degree than heart disease, and obesity. Any informed person knows that heart disease, cancer, and obesity are far bigger problems than homosexuality is. Regarding heart disease alone, in 2010, about 15,000 Americans died from AIDS, and about 600,000, or 40 times more, or 4,000% more, died from heart disease. Homosexuality causes a small fraction of the health care costs that heart disease, cancer, and obesity do.

Argument #7

There are not any doubts whatsoever that heterosexuals' greatest health threat by far is themselves, not homosexuals, as proven by epidemic levels of heart disease, cancer, and obesity.

Homosexuality is a problem, but you need to keep it in perspective, and realize that there are a number of far more serious health problems, many of which are largely preventable.

Argument #8

As far as STDs are concerned, it is important to note that lesbians have less risks than heterosexual men and women do.

Argument #9


Message to 1robin: I will number my arguments for easy reference.

Argument #1

You said that you do not need to provide any solutions for homosexuality, but you have done so many times by saying that all homosexuals should practice abstinence.

Argument #2

From a secular perspective, no behavior is wrong unless there are better alternatives. There are not any better alternatives for most homosexuals who have been monogamous for at least ten years, and have proven their preference for, and dedication to monogamy.

Argument #3

Having sex has proven health benefits, and long term abstinence has proven health risks.

Argument #4

None of your statistics deal with homosexuals who have been monogamous for at least ten years. You cannot provide any evidence that those homosexuals have enough risk to warrant practicing abstinence.

Argument #5

It is common knowledge that many homosexuals who tried reparative therapy, and/or long term abstinence ended up much worse off than they were before, and required medical treatment as a result. Obviously, it would be reasonable for those people to have sex again in order to try to improve their physical, and mental health.

Argument #6

The others are not so easily prevented nor have I argued for their allowance.

If necessary, I can provide lots of evidence that shows that heart disease, and obesity, can frequently be prevented, and that cancer can often be prevented, but to a lesser degree than heart disease, and obesity. Any informed person knows that heart disease, cancer, and obesity are far bigger problems than homosexuality is. Regarding heart disease alone, in 2010, about 15,000 Americans died from AIDS, and about 600,000, or 40 times more, or 4,000% more, died from heart disease. Homosexuality causes a small fraction of the health care costs that heart disease, cancer, and obesity do.

Argument #7

There are not any doubts whatsoever that heterosexuals' greatest health threat by far is themselves, not homosexuals, as proven by epidemic levels of heart disease, cancer, and obesity.

Homosexuality is a problem, but you need to keep it in perspective, and realize that there are a number of far more serious health problems, many of which are largely preventable.

Argument #8

As far as STDs are concerned, it is important to note that lesbians have less risks than heterosexual men and women do.

Argument #9

In order to be fair, you need to recommend that all of the following groups of people should practice abstinence since they are all at risk:

1. Heterosexual men and women 45 years of age and older.

2. Heterosexual black American men and women.

3. Heterosexual black men and women who live in sub-Saharan African countries.

4. People who live in poverty.

5. People who live in overpopulated countries.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I don't, but that makes no difference. If Christians believe it is then I believe the passages I cited would stand as evidence to them that god condemns homosexuality. Don't you?

Of course it might. For a creationist, fossils might stand as evidence that evolution is false. Heck, the existence of grits might stand as evidence the evolution is false.

But for me, fossils and grits might be evidence that evolution is true.

I guess I'm not following whatever you seem to be trying to say. Did you think I was denying that Christians see evidence that their God hates homosexuality?