Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
You can of course, but don't expect it to be approved by religious groups or by society as a whole.
Because people attack it strongly, denigrate their relationships and deny them their rights in many countries around the world.
Because none of us here genuinely believe interracial relationships are disgusting, whereas you genuinely believe homosexual relationships are. If anyone on these forums told you they believed your relationship was abnormal, unnatural or disgusting to them, I would be very surprised if you didn't "bite back" in some way.
To call something "disgusting" and "abnormal" is more than just "not being comfortable with it". It is passing judgement in an ignorant, insulting manner intended to denigrate homosexual relationships and directly demean homosexuals.
Then respect us when we tell you our true feelings that your true feelings are ignorant and narrow-minded.
What rights do they have and where did they get them? Do governments have a warehouse full of rights that they dispense at will?
That does not explain the vile and disgusting exhibitions in many gay rights parades or the NAMBLA manifesto for example. There is something inherently rebellious in homosexuality. The much higher rate of promiscuity and infidelity ( not being true to their mate) is evidence of this.
What? So I am not allowed to be disgusted by anything? Who is it that is intolerant again? I personally did not use disgusting as an argument but I did use the massive harm that comes from using organs in ways they were unintended for, causing abhorrent damage. Is that not allowed either?
It is hard to respect those who willingly cause massive suffering to others without any justifying gain from the behavior besides gratification. It is a little weird for someone to call others intolerant and then act in ways that potentially may kill many others who did not practice the behavior. I do not mean you personally. I have no idea what you do your self. I mean the behavior.
What are you talking about? Are you aware that there are countries in the world right now where being openly gay is sufficient to garner an extended prison sentence (or death). In Russia, there are currently laws which make it illegal for people to talk openly about gay rights. There are places in the world where homosexuals are treated as third-class citizens, denied healthcare, legal representation and almost any kind of equality.
Your personal taste on what goes on in a parade have no bearing whatsoever on the rights of people to participate in those parades. I've been to gay parades and festivals, and I have failed to see anything I would describe as "vile" or "disgusting".
Comparing homosexuality to paedophilia is the most concise way of demonstrating that you do not have the required level of maturity or understanding to debate gay rights meaningfully. Gay rights, just like "heterosexual rights", deal exclusively with consenting adults, and if you can't make that simple distinction then we can no longer debate this subject.
No more than there is in interracial relationships.
Garbage. Evidence, please - from non-biased sources.
I didn't say that. You're straw-manning.
Clearly not me, since I never said that you're not allowed to be disgusted by anything. You're allowed your opinion of homosexuals, and I am allowed my opinion of your opinion of homosexuals.
Your personal feelings do not matter more than the rights of adults acting with consent in a way that does not directly harm, or even affect, anyone other than themselves.
I didn't say that anything "wasn't allowed". Please stop straw-manning.
That's completely insane. What "massive suffering" do homosexuals cause to others? Are you completely unfamiliar with the idea that homosexuality is about more than just sex? If you can't discuss homosexuality without sex being the primary talking point, perhaps you need to pull your head out of the gutter.
Again, that's just insane. How can a gay couple "potentially kill many others" simply by being permitted to be together in all the same ways that heterosexual couples are? I would absolutely love to hear your rationale for this.
Wow I think you really misunderstood my comments. I was asking where rights are derived from. You seem to suggest everyone has the right to their own sexual tastes. Why? Where do they get that right? I do not suggest anything about punishment of homosexuality.
Again what rights?
If you will deny what I claimed I do not think debating it's obvious existence would help.
Ok, since you reject the way I stated it. Let me simply ask again, what rights? Derived from what? NAMBLA and the parades mentioned are evidence for the claim that homosexuality seems to always be associated with rebellion. It was not an attempt to characterize all homosexuals as pedophiles, so get off the soap box.
I have never seen a disgusting interracial marriage parade and no of no interracial NAMBLA equivalents.
Since I have no idea what you going to yell biased at I will give a few and see if any survive your scrutiny. BTW the most rabid defender of homosexuality I have ever seen. Agnostic75 did not contest my claims.
Oh forget it. It is not worth rehashing.
Of course. The issue is which opinion is most supported by facts. One of my Navy buddies is a corpsman. I can literally not even type the issues that he said he saw even before open homosexuality was allowed in the military. Even in the days of don't ask don't tell it was rampant. At least male anatomy is not designed or intended to be used that way. It produces massive problems but as I said it is disgusting to me to even list them.
It results in directly harming millions and costing billions. What are you talking about? I have never debated anyone homosexual or straight that did not grant that fact upfront.
An observation in the form of a question or an illustration of a point is not a straw man. I need no such devices. Let me illustrate my two primary contentions.
If you do not agree homosexuality increases suffering in massive quantities then I doubt a rational discussion can be had. Facts do not come any more obvious and the CDC among countless others record these facts. I have never had anyone even contest this issue. What level of denial am I dealing with here?
Again either you live in a cave or an Island where the genetics that operate every where else on Earth do not exist and the internet has not reached or your in denial. If we can't even begin with the givens I have no idea how a debate might proceed. In fact you can find CDC data in many places in this thread that I and many others have posted. I just can't justify posting it all again.
If I have to explain to you what a "right" is, we aren't going to have any kind of intelligent discussion on this matter.
See above. I, personally, find picking your nose disgusting - does that mean you shouldn't have the right to?
This sentence makes no sense. I didn't deny anything you claimed, I just said it was entirely a matter of personal taste, not a fact.
Again, I refuse to explain rights to you. Go look it up.
Again, equating homosexuality and paedophilia is ignorant and dishonest. If I said the existence of the Ku Kux Klan is evidence that "being white" will always be associated with ethnic cleansing you'd assume I was insane - and you would be right. This is a ridiculous argument with no factual basis whatsoever.
If you could attempt to respond to the actual point I made and not this strawman, it would help. It doesn't require a soapbox to see that this argument is pathetic.
And I have never seen a disgusting gay pride parade. Matters of personal taste do not trump human rights.
Completely irrelevant study. I could easily reel off a list of studies of any number of diseases and the groups in which they are more prevalent - this doesn't demonstrate that homosexuality is specifically any more "destructive" to society than heterosexuality.
See above.
Hardly seems to be supporting your conclusion.
The center for marriage equality is a biased, anti-gay rights organization. Dismissed.
Same as above. The entire poll is poorly conducted, since it compares committed relationships vs. any relationships gay people have. That's like using statistics compiled by contrasting "white marriage" and "interracial relationships".
Re-hashing an argument I didn't make? You've been caught out making a straw man, just admit it.
I find it interesting that you say what matters is facts, then state a load of nothing but opinions. I happen to associate with homosexuals of all kinds of a semi-daily basis, and I can happily inform you - since you seem so reluctant to find out for yourself - their actions, love lives and behaviors are no more "disgusting" than yours or mine.
I asked for facts, not a re-statement of facts supported with what is undoubtedly a lie. Why is it that whenever I ask you for facts, a common ploy of yours is to pretend that it's uncontested? I'm clearly contesting it. Stop posturing and present facts. If the above links are the best you have, then your argument is already transparently baseless.
No, a straw man is when you inaccurately represent another person's argument. That's what you did.
Which has no basis so far.
Considering it's clear you have never intentionally associated with any great number of homosexual individuals or have made any personal effort to understand them or their situation in any detail beyond googling right-wing religious apologist sites that comply with your blinkered, ignorant perceptions of what homosexuality is about, you clearly lack the knowledge to make that assessment.
They're not facts, and they're certainly not obvious.
Posturing will get you nowhere. You've been asked for facts, and presented nothing. Try not to compensate with this ridiculous "it's obvious, nobody has ever contested it" nonsense when this thread alone is filled with people who have and are contesting that very argument. And yet you hilariously speak of "denial"? Pull your head out of the sand.
Please give me a comprehensive list of "justifiable and compensating gains" of heterosexual relationships that cannot also be found in homosexual relationships.
Gay couples do produce and care for children.
I fail to see how this is an argument about homosexuality any more than it's an argument against the very practice of sex in any form. Again, you need to get over this ridiculous fixation on sex and understand that there is such a thing as "love" in homosexual relationships.
That was very polite Mystic. I do not remember you or our debate and in a place where politeness is such a rarity I find that remarkable but my position is summed up in my two main contentions. The information in post #304 was used to support them but not what my contentions rest upon. Someone whom I give enough credit to possibly know said some of those early statistics were incorrect. I do not know if there is any truth to that but unless they, plus all the others I posted are all wrong, I believe my two main contentions stand. I would also like to differentiate between what I find personally disgusting (I have no more polite word to use), what I find theologically wrong, and what I find logically unsupportable. My main contentions lie only in the latter though some of my comments may stem from the former.
You can use only my CDC links if you wish. Claims of biased sources even if true will not resolve them all. I would like to know if you do not agree that homosexuality increase suffering in large amounts before I get deeper into this. There is nothing debatable about that fact. If you disagree then I think this will be unproductive.
Well look who popped up here. Sounds like from what? What are you listening to. I will be more than happy to discuss Christianity's influence upon history both good and bad but only in an appropriate thread even though I am not a defender of men. IO defend the Bible and God not necessarily things done in his name though you will have an uphill battle once you pick the thread anyway.
No it does not in proportion with the amount of people who practice it and anyone who cared about the integrity of conclusions based on statistics would know this, nor even if it was the same would homosexuality be any more justifiable.
Some people are appalled at the way gay people are treated and want to correct it. They are, after all, human beings.
It's a little weird for someone to repeatedly claim that gay people are causing massive suffering to other people without explaining exactly what that entails.
Yes, exactly. There is no difference.
Holy crap a post increases in size exponentially when you reply. Since it is getting too large to be practicable I will only continue the interesting or important parts. You claimed something concerning rights in your defense of Homosexuality. Where does it get them? I made no claims about rights. I have no obligation concerning them.
I did not claim it as necessarily representative but the disgusting behavior that the large city gay parades have resulted in is common knowledge. I am still trying to determine if you are in denial or have a context or amount disagreement. Once I determine that the common ground of reality is not on which a debate can take place I usually determine the debate should not take place. I am going to consolidate this down at the bottom for this purpose.
If you claim to have them then you should support them. I didn't yet will do it for you. Even the non-Christian Jefferson said that only our creator granted rights. On what basis do you find rights outside this? Who has them to dispense? Whatever they are, outside of God they are subjective, ever changing, and opinion based and so are no part of any justification. You would have saved time supplying he source instead of deflecting.
For the sake of time I will grant this but my point was one of prevalence, not equivalence.
Rights again. Where do you get them from? Hitler, Jefferson, Adams, Stalin, me, you? I resent a concept defended at such a cost being trivialized by anyone who wishes to defend their personal desires. Please stop claiming to have them or defend them.
I have given maybe 50 studies from at least 30 sources including the CDC and even homosexual sources. Is your entire position a denial of anything that is inconvenient. I keep looking for any common ground to debate the issue and you deny all of them and no basis whatever. Rights that do not exist, common knowledge of parade behavior, and now studies from every source conceivable are out. What is left besides flame's opinion?
What difference does it make if you deny on convenience.
This is getting absurd.
More absurd.
What does caught out mean?
If reality is no longer a field where issues can be settled I see no point in debating opinions.
You have contested nothing. You have claimed and refused to even attempt support, you have rejected based on bias you did not even attempt to demonstrate, and you have contested common knowledge with opinion and then objected to opinion that weren't opinions and yelled straw man every few responses for good measure.
See above.