Is Homosexuality Really A Sin?

[jmkiser 0]

The product itself is not natural. You must see that. If you take away X the product cannot exist. Is this really all that hard? I'm not being a prick, it just seems like such an easy concept.

This isn't that hard... you're making it MUCH harder then it needs to be.If you take away X or if you add X the product is still natural. Everything is natural. No matter what man does to something does not change the fact that it's natural.Again, man does not create atoms out of nothingness. Man just changes and works with material. It is a really simple concept that I figure you can grasp onto if you would actually concede being stubborn for once.

[Loismustdie 0]

This isn't that hard... you're making it MUCH harder then it needs to be.If you take away X or if you add X the product is still natural. Everything is natural. No matter what man does to something does not change the fact that it's natural.Again, man does not create atoms out of nothingness. Man just changes and works with material. It is a really simple concept that I figure you can grasp onto if you would actually concede being stubborn for once.

No... the materials are natural. Without X the product cannot realistically exist,ever. Therefore, it is not not natural- nature did not create it.

[BWToth2 0]

No... the materials are natural. Without X the product cannot realistically exist,ever. Therefore, it is not not natural- nature did not create it.

Where do the materials that make up the 'product' come from?

[jmkiser 0]

We're not talking about the overall creation of the product and how it got from Point A to Point B to Point C and further.The claim made is that everything is natural. Everything originates and is then messed with by human. God, this is the simplest concept in the world.

[Loismustdie 0]

We're not talking about the overall creation of the product and how it got from Point A to Point B to Point C and further.The claim made is that everything is natural. Everything originates and is then messed with by human. God, this is the simplest concept in the world.

The every "thing" would not be natural. Do you refer to a car as a hunk of metal? No- it's definitely a car. That would be the thing in which is being described. Therefore, the "thing" in this case is not natural. It's actually quite simple. Think of it this way- let's say the Grand Canyon was erodeing, very, very quickly, and a group of engineers got together, and they built a replica that fit over the top of the original. Let's say they made it out of plastic. It looks pretty much the same,except now it is plastic. Would anybody say,"Wow, look at the Grand Canyon in it's natural state? No- it no longer is. It's still the Grand Canyon, but what the eye is now witnessing is the Great plastic cover project of 2007." Pretty easy to figure out. Are chemically treated vegetables natural? No. How about a genetically enhanced sheep? No. I could go on all day.

[jmkiser 0]

The every "thing" would not be natural. Do you refer to a car as a hunk of metal? No- it's definitely a car. That would be the thing in which is being described. Therefore, the "thing" in this case is not natural. It's actually quite simple. Think of it this way- let's say the Grand Canyon was erodeing, very, very quickly, and a group of engineers got together, and they built a replica that fit over the top of the original. Let's say they made it out of plastic. It looks pretty much the same,except now it is plastic. Would anybody say,"Wow, look at the Grand Canyon in it's natural state? No- it no longer is. It's still the Grand Canyon, but what the eye is now witnessing is the Great plastic cover project of 2007." Pretty easy to figure out. Are chemically treated vegetables natural? No. How about a genetically enhanced sheep? No. I could go on all day.

My god you are so painful sometimes.Yes, please, go on all day.Regarding the plastic Grand Canyon. The plastic Grand Canyon would be natural. I'm not talking about natural state, semantics of natural, natural looking, etc. I'm talking about everything being natural.Chemically treated vegetables... there is nothing unnatural about them. Nothing of which the atoms of its existence were created by man. Same with genetically enhanced sheep.Keep going there, Lois.

[Loismustdie 0]

My god you are so painful sometimes.Yes, please, go on all day.Regarding the plastic Grand Canyon. The plastic Grand Canyon would be natural. I'm not talking about natural state, semantics of natural, natural looking, etc. I'm talking about everything being natural.Chemically treated vegetables... there is nothing unnatural about them. Nothing of which the atoms of its existence were created by man. Same with genetically enhanced sheep.Keep going there, Lois.

Directly from a well known encyclopedia, and I didn't even need it. Enjoy:Nature, in the broadest sense, is equivalent to the natural world, physical universe, material world or material universe. "Nature" refers to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general. The term generally does not include manufactured objects and human interaction unless qualified in ways such as, e.g., "human nature" or "the whole of nature". Nature is also generally distinguished from the supernatural. It ranges in scale from the subatomic to the galactic. The term generally does not include manufactured objects and human interaction. HOW VERY INTERESTING. HERE IS MORE. The word "nature" derives from the Latin word natura, or "the course of things, natural character." WOW. YOU DON'T SAY? COME AGAIN? HERE IS MORE. . This more traditional concept of natural things which can still be found today implies a distinction between the natural and the artificial, with the latter being understood as that which has been brought into being by a human or human-like consciousness or mind. NO WAY!! Don't tell me a encyclopedia said exactly what I say- and I never even used it? What the H, mang. Am I really that smart? So, to break it down for you caveman style, Car. Man. Waterfall. Nature. Booga-booga.

[jmkiser 0]

Directly from a well known encyclopedia, and I didn't even need it. Enjoy:Nature, in the broadest sense, is equivalent to the natural world, physical universe, material world or material universe. "Nature" refers to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general. The term generally does not include manufactured objects and human interaction unless qualified in ways such as, e.g., "human nature" or "the whole of nature". Nature is also generally distinguished from the supernatural. It ranges in scale from the subatomic to the galactic. The term generally does not include manufactured objects and human interaction. HOW VERY INTERESTING. HERE IS MORE. The word "nature" derives from the Latin word natura, or "the course of things, natural character." WOW. YOU DON'T SAY? COME AGAIN? HERE IS MORE. . This more traditional concept of natural things which can still be found today implies a distinction between the natural and the artificial, with the latter being understood as that which has been brought into being by a human or human-like consciousness or mind. NO WAY!! Don't tell me a encyclopedia said exactly what I say- and I never even used it? What the H, mang. Am I really that smart? So, to break it down for you caveman style, Car. Man. Waterfall. Nature. Booga-booga.

God, you're an idiot.How many times do I have repeat myself that I am speaking of all of the compounds? How many times do I have to tell you that I am speaking of the compounds no matter what the human interaction is?EVERYTHING is natural. EVERYTHING EXISTS IN NATURE. Yes, EVERYTHING... even before man screws with it. Therefore, no matter how many times man screws with material, it's core is always natural. EVERYTHING IS NATURAL

[BWToth 0]

He'll never get it.

[semaj550 0]

God, you're an idiot.How many times do I have repeat myself that I am speaking of all of the compounds? How many times do I have to tell you that I am speaking of the compounds no matter what the human interaction is?EVERYTHING is natural. EVERYTHING EXISTS IN NATURE. Yes, EVERYTHING... even before man screws with it. Therefore, no matter how many times man screws with material, it's core is always natural. EVERYTHING IS NATURAL

I don't think you two are even arguing over the same thing.While everything may begin from a base that is wholely natural, some things can be altered to a form that could not possibly occur in nature without man's intervention. You have modified the form of something natural into a product that is unnatural. While its individual components may remain natural it, in total, is not.

[David_Nicoson 1]

I suppose if we were speaking about crapping that would apply. It doesn't. It's common that while alot of people are o.k. with people being gay they cannot stand to see it happening in front of them, cannot stand to see the reality of what they are saying is o.k. come to fruition- which means that they are o.k. with it as long as they don't have to see it. For some this goes as far as not wanting to see gays kiss-which I think speaks volumes about how far gays have really come. Our society tolerates, but really, that's as good as it's gonna get. What they want, which is complete acceptance, by nature cannot happen. It is impossible.

My point was that the argument that if it's icky it's therefore unnatural doesn't work. If your argument was indeed something more subtle, then my point doesn't apply.

[BWToth 0]

I don't think you two are even arguing over the same thing.While everything may begin from a base that is wholely natural, some things can be altered to a form that could not possibly occur in nature without man's intervention. You have modified the form of something natural into a product that is unnatural. While its individual components may remain natural it, in total, is not.

Humans are themselves natural though correct? so if something like Trees (Natural) + Humans (Natural) = House (Natural)Would you call a Bird's Nest unnatural? or a Dam made by beavers?

[semaj550 0]

Humans are themselves natural though correct? so if something like Trees (Natural) + Humans (Natural) = House (Natural)

By analogy: (Odd Number) + (Odd Number) = ?

Would you call a Bird's Nest unnatural? or a Dam made by beavers?

From dictionary.com:Natrual: existing in or formed by nature (opposed to artificial): a natural bridgeArtificial: made by human skill; produced by humans (opposed to natural): artificial flowersAnd yes, I would call the nest and dam unnatural. I would call any end product that bears the marking of intelligent design (lol, had to bring up that phrase) unnatural. While the naturalness of the base components may be immutable, combing them can certainly produce something unnatural. It's kinda like pouring cream into coffee. Apart they may be one thing but once you put them together you get something different from which you can never reobtain the base components.

[BWToth 0]

By analogy: (Odd Number) + (Odd Number) = ?From dictionary.com:Natrual: existing in or formed by nature (opposed to artificial): a natural bridgeArtificial: made by human skill; produced by humans (opposed to natural): artificial flowersAnd yes, I would call the nest and dam unnatural. I would call any end product that bears the marking of intelligent design (lol, had to bring up that phrase) unnatural. While the naturalness of the base components may be immutable, combing them can certainly produce something unnatural. It's kinda like pouring cream into coffee. Apart they may be one thing but once you put them together you get something different from which you can never reobtain the base components.

It's not odd number + odd number = letter....odd + odd = numberYou can reobtain the basic components of anything....even fossil fules will turn back into fossils one day in the distant future...the point is it's still the same components just changed around and used in a different purpose.

[semaj550 0]

It's not odd number + odd number = letter....odd + odd = number

lol...you completely missed the analogy. Odd + Odd = Even

You can reobtain the basic components of anything....even fossil fules will turn back into fossils one day in the distant future...

Okay, you go pour some cream into coffee and try to get it back out.

the point is it's still the same components just changed around and used in a different purpose.

And that's precisely the part that makes it unnatural.

[BWToth 0]

I know knew what you were getting at but your analogy doesn't work...my response illustrates that.It's call chemistry dude. It's components are still natural.

[semaj550 0]

I know knew what you were getting at but your analogy doesn't work...my response illustrates that.

Not really...natural is a complement to artifical every bit the same as even is a complement to odd.

It's call chemistry dude.

You do realize that many solutions and reactions are impossible to reverse don't you? Ever try burning a log and then trying to get the log back? It's true that coffee and cream only form a potentally separable mixture but for all practical purposes once you lighten your coffee you're stuck with it that way. Besides, that wasn't at all the point. The point was that the lightened coffee couldn't possibly occur without some human intervention and therefore isn't natural.

It's components are still natural.

This was exactly the point in the discussion between jm and Lois that I came in. One side is talking about constructs and the other components. Having natural components does not make something necessarily natural. Take, for instance, your example of a a dam. Before the beavers get to work you have perfectly natural pieces of wood, no argument there. After the beavers finish working you have a dam (which is unnatural) composed of natural pieces of wood. After a hurricane comes and tears the dam apart you end up with nothing but natural pieces of wood. The only thing that is unnatural is the construct which couldn't have occured without the intelligence and effort of the beavers. Being used in the dam doesn't make the wood itself unnatural. In the same way, when you add 3 + 3 you get 6 (an even number) but that doesn't change the fact that 3 is an odd number.

[Loismustdie 0]

Not really...natural is a complement to artifical every bit the same as even is a complement to odd.You do realize that many solutions and reactions are impossible to reverse don't you? Ever try burning a log and then trying to get the log back? It's true that coffee and cream only form a potentally separable mixture but for all practical purposes once you lighten your coffee you're stuck with it that way. Besides, that wasn't at all the point. The point was that the lightened coffee couldn't possibly occur without some human intervention and therefore isn't natural.This was exactly the point in the discussion between jm and Lois that I came in. One side is talking about constructs and the other components. Having natural components does not make something necessarily natural. Take, for instance, your example of a a dam. Before the beavers get to work you have perfectly natural pieces of wood, no argument there. After the beavers finish working you have a dam (which is unnatural) composed of natural pieces of wood. After a hurricane comes and tears the dam apart you end up with nothing but natural pieces of wood. The only thing that is unnatural is the construct which couldn't have occured without the intelligence and effort of the beavers. Being used in the dam doesn't make the wood itself unnatural. In the same way, when you add 3 + 3 you get 6 (an even number) but that doesn't change the fact that 3 is an odd number.

I liked how JM got even angrier when the uncykolowpeedeeyuh matched what I said. That was good times for me.

[Loismustdie 0]

God, you're an idiot.How many times do I have repeat myself that I am speaking of all of the compounds? How many times do I have to tell you that I am speaking of the compounds no matter what the human interaction is?EVERYTHING is natural. EVERYTHING EXISTS IN NATURE. Yes, EVERYTHING... even before man screws with it. Therefore, no matter how many times man screws with material, it's core is always natural. EVERYTHING IS NATURAL

The uncykolowpeedeeyuh says you are wrong. Alot of smart guys wrote that. You should read it. It will help you.

[Loismustdie 0]

My point was that the argument that if it's icky it's therefore unnatural doesn't work. If your argument was indeed something more subtle, then my point doesn't apply.

Yeah, I wasn't just saying that it's icky, therefore blah blah blah- it goes deeper than that in the human mind.

[jmkiser 0]

The uncykolowpeedeeyuh says you are wrong. Alot of smart guys wrote that. You should read it. It will help you.

The encyclopedia has no relevance to the statement I was making.At least Semaj recognizes that.I made the statement that everything is natural.You are trying to give me definitions of what natural is. And I'm telling you that because of the definition of the word natural, that everything is natural.Yes, an artificial flower is a semantic of the fact that it is not actually a real flower.But every component of everything is natural, therefore, everything is natural.For something not to be natural, it would require human creation of atoms into the process of creation of the product. Meaning parts of it would have to not already exist in nature.Funny how this argument is completely over your head, Lois.

[brvheart 1,752]

yes..... to the OP.

[Ouch-8s 4]

Could those things appear on there own, without the hands of men? No? Then they are not natural.

While I think the whole construct/component natural/unnatural debate was annoying and pointless, condemning something for appearing 'by the hands of men' is silly. By that logic, the Bible is unnatural.

[semaj550 0]

While I think the whole construct/component natural/unnatural debate was annoying and pointless, condemning something for appearing 'by the hands of men' is silly. By that logic, the Bible is unnatural.

That really made me lol. It's not a bad point though. Unless you define natural as, "What God intended to be the proper course," and unnatural as "Other than what God intended for the world." I think those definitions are more to the point of what was supposed to be the debate at hand.

[BWToth 0]

Do all of the Christians in here believe that Homosexuality is a conscious choice then? What evidence is their to support that opinion?I think that may have already been covered once in this thread, but i'm not going back through 30 pgs to look right now.Because along the lines of natural and unnatural...for example, when a child is born with autism, that happens naturally. But autisic is not that 'natural' state for a child to be born.