why homosexualy and homosexual marriage is so wrong

[Unveiled Artist]

Marriage is for everyone. It is not right for one couple and wrong for another. No one faith has the claims to commitment between two people within their faith or lack thereof.

Men and women to whomever they choose to be with can do these things: 1. Share intimacy 2. Share lust 3. Share love. 4. Share sex.

Of course two people can do all four. Each of them or together have their gives and takes. Depending on ones morals and beliefs, depends on what is wrong and what is not. I will explain them individually.

It is not wrong to:

1. Share intimacy. Intimacy can be brief as holding hands to more intense to hugs and kisses. There is no parts being involved in intimacy level of intimacy. Another word is going courting.

This is not unnatural and immoral for two women or two men to share intimacy with each other.

2. Share lust

Depending on your faith, yes any lust between any person is immoral.

In general, between two (or more) consenting adults, lust, in itself, is not immoral.

Going by religious standards, in some religions, it is immoral because it is down outside of marriage and it is of the flesh rather than of the heart.

These have nothing to do with gender.

3. Share love

In this kind of love, I will say matrimonial and betrothal. It has nothing to do with gender. It has to do with the heart. A couple who are committed to each other, taking vows, and acting on those vows until death do they part is not immoral.

It has nothing to do with gender. It is the relationship between one person and another to sustain a marriage and/or family by their commitment with each other. Any two people can do this.

4. Share sex

Two men and two women cannot biologically have sex; I agree. They cannot have children, I agree with that.

How do they consummate their physical commitment they took vows in spiritually?

Marriage does not need to involve sexual intercourse (natural intercourse). It is not a prerequisite for getting married. Any two people can marry without needing have sex.

It is not immoral to:

Share physical involvement with someone that you are committed to. Any two people can hold hands, kiss, and so forth. When does it become immoral? It's immoral when done outside of a committed marriage (adultery). It's immoral when harm is inflicted on oneself or others. It's immoral when both couples go outside their beliefs to engage in activities against their morals.

Physical intimacy, in and of itself, is not immoral.

This is for any couple regardless of gender.

--

So how do we conclude this? It is based on your belief. It is immoral to say to someone else their relationship--their commitment with each other--is immoral because that is what you believe.

A lot of homosexuals believe heterosexuality is moral. They believe in all forms of sexual intimacy and it is part of human nature.

In my opinion, it is imoral only if:

1. The sharing love goes outside of their values, morals, and/or beliefs.

2. Sharing any of the four acts outside their committed marriage or relationship

3. Engaging in very specific acts that the human body is not designed to do.

It balls down to the heart not the genitals. Marriage has nothing to do with whether one is male or female. It is not a one faith word.

sex is between man and women

there cannot be homosexualytiy

its not sex

maybe theres erotic love between 2 men or 2 women

its not sex

it cannot be sex

because sex is between to difrentiated sexual beings, man and women

so their cannot be marriage between 2 men or 2 women#

because marriage is between man and women

there can be bonds which can be according to law

but thats not marriage

 

[Shad]

Well, I have spent over 4 decades studying word for word all English translations of the scriptures, Hebrew and Greek scriptures, original texts from the scrolls found to date, and I can say with absolute certainty that you haven't done your homework at all. You're taking the writings of other men as factual, and practically all of them are anything but factual. You're taking the teachings of religions as factual, when ALL religions are completely false. Had you actually "done your research" as you claim, your attitude would be quite the opposite of what it currently is.

You study translations of men regarding texts published by men using the language of men regarding knowledge passed on by men for generations for thousands of years.. All while having the gall to make this statement. Hilarious double-standard you have here.

I can use the very same argument to dismiss the Bible and your nonsensical arguments.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The inspired word of God contains no myths. It does require belief in God, and in His son, and what they sacrificed for us. But not one single solitary myth. Conflate is to merge into one entity.

Where is the proof that the Ark existed? Where is the proof of a global flood? How does the Bible account for dinosaurs and huge gap in the fossil record between dinosaurs and humans? Where is the tower of Babel? Why do linguistic studies not confirm the story of Genesis as to origins of the world's different languages? Why are there no signs of a huge army of Egyptians being drown in the Red Sea? Why is there no proof of Jesus' existence outside of the Bible and Biblically-biased sources? Why is god prone to the lesser emotions of man that cloud and distort judgement, emotions such as anger and jealousy?
Why is there no evidence that requires faith?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Archaeoligically, the Ark, flood, and the Egyptians drowning in the Red sea exist.

Where? The Ark has never been found, there are no signs of a global flood, and there is no evidence in the Red Sea to suggest this mass drowning happened.
And, as I asked, why does this stuff not exist outside of Biblically biased sources? You can go scour the bottom of the Red Sea yourself; I promise, you will not find any signs of this slaughtered army.
Even if Etemenanki is the tower of Babel, this still does not confirm the Genesis account of the confusion of the languages and the origin of different languages, as, archeologically, we can trace many languages being developed independently of each other, and many more developing from earlier languages, gradually, over a period of time that is too slow for the instant appearance of all the different languages.
And what of dinosaurs? We know they existed, but the Bible never mentions them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think not. I will NOT do your research for you. What do you think I am, a researcher for charity?

That's how it works. If it's academia, certain forms of journalism, or an online forum (and many other mediums), you are expected to post your sources to verify your claims. Since the burden of proof falls on you, this means that you are expected to provide sources that verify your claims.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Where is the proof that the Ark existed? Where is the proof of a global flood? How does the Bible account for dinosaurs and huge gap in the fossil record between dinosaurs and humans? Where is the tower of Babel? Why do linguistic studies not confirm the story of Genesis as to origins of the world's different languages? Why are there no signs of a huge army of Egyptians being drown in the Red Sea? Why is there no proof of Jesus' existence outside of the Bible and Biblically-biased sources? Why is god prone to the lesser emotions of man that cloud and distort judgement, emotions such as anger and jealousy?
Why is there no evidence that requires faith?

Not only that but many of the stories of the Bible are "borrowed" from Canaanite (well, the Israelites were originally Canaanites that broke off and formed their own culture, so Canaanite religion is really just their original religion), Babylonian and Akkadian religions.

 

[Shad]

Your mispelled argument is so full of holes, and claim of a double standard which couldn't possibly be made in this case, is absurd. I study the original texts, English, Greek, and Hebrew translations written from original texts mostly, not knowledge passed on by men for generations for thousands of years. And it's GALL not GULL. Gull is a bird. Gall is a digestive acid.

Misspelling is not a reasonable view to dismiss an argument. I corrected the spelling so your point is now moot. You have no counter argument. Also your point is an ad hominem thus fallacious. Try again son, your years of studies seems to have been lacking on logical arguments and rebuttals.

You study texts made by men using the language of men. Men you just claimed can be wrong. So what is the factor is used to to determine what these men wrote is correct while other text's produced by men is wrong? Beside your confirmation bias that is.

We have no original texts, we have no texts written by Jesus, David, Moses, etc. We have no text written any of these people. We only have texts written by others claiming their texts are based on texts from other texts, and so on, to a supposed original text we do not have. I am all ears.

 

[Shad]

I think not. I will NOT do your research for you. What do you think I am, a researcher for charity? No amount of giving one like you citations and sources would have ANY beneficial effect on you. I am not here to teach those who aren't my students. If you want to learn about the things I mentioned, get to work and stop being lazy. I've done, and still do my own research. What is stopping you from doing the same other than laziness and a bad attitude.

You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you. Considering I am an archaeology student I am interested in your sources since none of the events you claimed are true are taught as fact. Rather each event is taught as a mythology.

I have done my own research, the lack of evidence for these events points toward it being mythology. The plagiarism of other mythology incorporated into Biblical narratives again points towards mythology based on borrowed mythology.

 

[Shad]

You are funny. Naive as well.

While you dodge questions since you are incapable of providing evidence of your claims

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You are completely incorrect on all points. Do some research.

I have. It has never reached your conclusions. This is why you are expected to provide sources.
I've studied enough in linguistics to know there is no one single point of origin for multiple languages. You must provide sources that indicate this has happened. I have never seen valid and conclusive evidence the Ark has been found. You are making the claim it has, thus you must provide evidence.
And I'm wrong that the Bible doesn't mention dinosaurs? Perhaps you should read it, because dinosaurs are not mentioned.

 

[truthofscripture]

While you dodge questions since you are incapable of provided evidence of your claims

I think you mean "providing". I am not going to do your research for you. I did my own, now it's your turn. You're being obtuse and lazy and I certainly will never support that in anyone. It wouldn't do you any good anyway as you haven't any intention of drawing close to God so that he can draw close to you, so what would be the point? None.

 

[truthofscripture]

If you want to go there, then you have no grounds whatsoever to complain if people sumarily disregard your claims.

In fact, you should be surprised if that does not happen. Why would anyone take your opinion over their own without anything in the way of justification?

For one, I have posted no "claims", only facts, and I've posted no opinion at all.

 

[LuisDantas]

For one, I have posted no "claims", only facts, and I've posted no opinion at all.

You presume to speak of what God wants and deny that to be a claim?

Allow me to introduce you to this revolutionary concept. It is called "credibility".

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I have no "burden" of proof at all. Because you claim I do, does not make it so. It is your burden to find out the things you want to find out, not mine. The Bible contains no religion. Religion is in opposition to God and the scriptures. It is for that reason that the Bible SAYS that religion is false and will all be destroyed in the final battle. The burden of knowing the truth is yours. No one can do it for you. Your lack of interest isn't an excuse. Your hockey game is more important to you, so watch hockey.

Fallacy: Burden of Proof
As a final example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data).
The Burden of Proof
The burden of proof is always on the person making an assertion or proposition.
More Fallacies
Misplaced Burden of Proof
What if you were to say this to your friend: “I think God exists and I can prove it using logic.” Then your friend were to say, “How could you possibly do that?” Then you were to say, “How? Well, how can you prove God doesn’t exist using logic?
This is misplacing the burden of proof.
Here are three more sources saying the burden of proof falls squarely on you.

 

[The Hammer]

I have no "burden" of proof at all. Because you claim I do, does not make it so. It is your burden to find out the things you want to find out, not mine. The Bible contains no religion. Religion is in opposition to God and the scriptures. It is for that reason that the Bible SAYS that religion is false and will all be destroyed in the final battle. The burden of knowing the truth is yours. No one can do it for you. Your lack of interest isn't an excuse. Your hockey game is more important to you, so watch hockey.

Your logical fallacy is burden of proof

That is all I am posting here. G'night

 

[Shad]

Archaeoligically, the Ark, flood, and the Egyptians drowning in the Red sea exist

This is the claim. Now produce evidence supporting this supposed fact.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This is the claim. Now produce evidence supporting this supposed fact.

My extensive research has concluded that all the religious texts of the world were written by cultists who worshiped various Great Old Ones; Christianity put forth by a servant of Cthulhu. These things we done so we may be more docile and not quite so shocked when these seemingly supernatural beings from another dimension invade our planet. They just didn't realize there is just not enough preparation to prepare us humans, as a whole, to readily accept their pending return and reclaiming the power to reign over Earth.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

My years of research has also shown that Cain, brother of Abel, is the first of the Damned. But he was not fully Damned until after he was cursed by his father, by the Arch Angels, by God, and after his encounter with Lilith. After all that, he became the world's first vampire. He created his children, and his children made children, and now they rest, buried within the bowels of the Earth. But the reawakening of the Antediluvians approaches as fast as the dawn! The day of Gehenna comes!

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Since I did not mention God and Jesus in my answer, I cannot compare your reply with my post. I don't see the relation.

What I can say is that if I did mention about God, rather than saying "it depends on your beliefs" then you have a point..

First, religion is a practice of your faith. As a Christian, you have a relationship with Christ. That relationship is not abstract. It does not exist somewhere in the air somewhere without you doing what Christ told you to do. That doing is religion. That's part of the relationship you have with Him. It is not a one-street matter.

So, religion and faith go hand in hand. I am not confused.

With my original post, I am not gearing towards any specific religion. I know scripture says marriage is not just based on the heart, it is based on gender too. It is wrong; and, I understand why the Bible would say that. It is cultural as well as spiritual.

That aside, I have not mentioned Christ, God, or sin in my post. How does your reply relate to what I said?

What God said is wrong, is wrong. You're also confusing religion with faith, or rather, the "one true faith" that Jesus taught, and that God, Jesus' father sent him to bring to us. God and Jesus and the scriptures have NOTHING to do with religions. In fact God and Jesus have both said all religions are false, and are works of the flesh. All religions are in OPPOSITION to God and to Jesus, even though they lyingly claim the opposite.

 

[Sees]

It's quite easy to determine what God's will is, in fact, God said, in His inspired word, that we MUST study daily to learn what His will is. And you speak of credibility? Matthew 4:1 Then Jesus was led by the spirit up into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil. 2 After he had fasted forty days and forty nights, then he felt hungry. 3 Also, the Tempter came and said to him: “If you are a son of God, tell these stones to become loaves of bread.” 4 But in reply he said: “It is written, ‘Man must live, not on bread alone, but on every utterance coming forth through Jehovah’s mouth.’” Romans 12:
2 And stop being molded by this system of things, but be transformed by making your mind over, so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Ephesians 6:5 Slaves, be obedient to your human masters, with fear and trembling in the sincerity of your hearts, as to the Christ, 6 not only when being watched, just to please men, but as Christ’s slaves doing the will of God whole-souled.

Hebrews10: 36 For you need endurance, so that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the fulfillment of the promise.

1 Peter 2:15 For it is the will of God that by doing good you may silence the ignorant talk of unreasonable men.

1 John 2:15 Do not love either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; 16 because everything in the world—the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of one’s means of life—does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world. 17 Furthermore, the world is passing away and so is its desire, but the one who does the will of God remains forever.

So you see the importance of learning what the will of God is, and in doing that will of God. Please, don't speak of credibility when you yourself haven't shown me that you know these things and call the truth that I post a "claim". There are a lot more scriptures that tell us to learn what is and do the will of God. So yes, we can learn what God wants in any situation. His will as specifically stated, His principles, and His commands make CLEAR what God wants, without any question at all.

"This is God's Will because it says it is God's Will" doesn't work for lots of folks. Also, repetitively quoting a book people don't believe in, to convince them of something, is kind of like mumbling to them.