Jump to content

Is Homosexuality Really A Sin?


Recommended Posts

Blind faith (which is what you suggest) is "knowing" without any basis in a practical sense of proof or evidence. The validity of what you believe holds no more strength then the fact that the religion is practiced by many and has lasted a long long time.I'll make a bet, though, that your Christian dogma would be scoffed at by followers in the 17th century.You can talk all day long about people with their own realities, I don't care... it means nothing to me. Just don't act like I should sit back and consider your possible reality to be truth when you can't even present a shred of practical proof or evidence in the god that you believe in. Your religious views deserve no respect or consideration until you give a decent reason as to why they should be.
My faith is not blind, I am touched and blessed by God on a daily basis. What they did in the 17th Century doesn't concern me. I have a personal relationship with God that doesn't require acceptance from you or anyone else dating back to the beginning of time. I have all the practical proof and evidence I need, it seems to me that YOU are the one needing something else. My religious views deserve equally as much respect and consideration as your mindless chatter.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

MELLO, BUFFALO. CHANDLER, BUFFALO. KENYON MARTIN, BUFFALO. JR SMITH, BUFFALO. PIGIONNI, HE'LL BUFFALO YOUR FUKEN COOKIES

I'm more of an Otter man myself, F.

True.
Wait wait wait.. back the truck up...If you are using the fact that homosexuality is against nature because straight guys can't stomach watching gay guys fck.. then..How come straight guys go wild for women have sex with each other? That doesn't make sense at all. If the "yucky" test is supposed to show how "unnatural" it is to have homosexual sex, then gosh.. I guess it must be natural for women to have sex with each other, because that doesn't pass the yucky test in anyway what so ever. Either that or the "yucky" test is a pile of crap that proves nothing, one or the other. If XX or YY is wrong and unnatural therefor disgusting to watch, it shouldn't matter what the gender of the perticipants are. You could take 10,000 straight guys, and make them watch a video of a dude taking a sht, and they ( other than the odd scat fan) would recoil in disgust and leave the room.. it doesn't stop them from later taking a perfectly natural sht.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You could take 10,000 straight guys, and make them watch a video of a dude taking a sht, and they ( other than the odd scat fan) would recoil in disgust and leave the room.. it doesn't stop them from later taking a perfectly natural sht.
Lois's point is apparently only relevant when there is sex involved.So lets get 10,000 straight guys and let them watch 2 girls having sex and see if anyone is disgusted. My guess is it would go down well, so according to the yucky test homosexuality is ok
Link to post
Share on other sites
My faith is not blind, I am touched and blessed by God on a daily basis. What they did in the 17th Century doesn't concern me. I have a personal relationship with God that doesn't require acceptance from you or anyone else dating back to the beginning of time. I have all the practical proof and evidence I need, it seems to me that YOU are the one needing something else. My religious views deserve equally as much respect and consideration as your mindless chatter.
Oh, I do need something else? Because I'm actually quite content and live a great life.And no, your religious views deserve no respect. None. Zilch. You're free to have them and I'll defend that freedom, but respect?... hell no. You provide less convincing proof and evidence of your claims then conspiracy theorists do.And your animosity isn't very Christ-like tsk tsk tsk (To quote Penn & Teller BS) ELVIS NEVER DID NO DRUGS!
Link to post
Share on other sites
if you think i'm going to hell for being an atheist your views deserve no respect from me.
So unless someone agrees with you totally, they deserve no respect? I do believe that if you die today an atheist, you will face the judgement of God. What he chooses to do with you is his decision, it's not voted on by the rest of us.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, I do need something else? Because I'm actually quite content and live a great life.And no, your religious views deserve no respect. None. Zilch. You're free to have them and I'll defend that freedom, but respect?... hell no. You provide less convincing proof and evidence of your claims then conspiracy theorists do.And your animosity isn't very Christ-like tsk tsk tsk (To quote Penn & Teller BS) ELVIS NEVER DID NO DRUGS!
You are the one who keeps asking for proof, not me. I have all the proof I need. Just keep closing your eyes and sticking your fingers in your ears while singing at earsplitting level....it doesn't make us go away just because you refuse to believe. But one day you will...good luck at tuning God out.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are the one who keeps asking for proof, not me. I have all the proof I need. Just keep closing your eyes and sticking your fingers in your ears while singing at earsplitting level....it doesn't make us go away just because you refuse to believe. But one day you will...good luck at tuning God out.
How do you know that?
Link to post
Share on other sites
My faith is not blind, I am touched and blessed by God on a daily basis. What they did in the 17th Century doesn't concern me. I have a personal relationship with God that doesn't require acceptance from you or anyone else dating back to the beginning of time. I have all the practical proof and evidence I need, it seems to me that YOU are the one needing something else. My religious views deserve equally as much respect and consideration as your mindless chatter.
Could you please give me some examples of the practical proof and evidence you have? Or is the amount that you 'need' actually ZERO?If it's zero, then kiser is correct.If there is some practical proof or evidence that you rely on in contructing your beliefs, then please tell us what it is.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Lois's point is apparently only relevant when there is sex involved.So lets get 10,000 straight guys and let them watch 2 girls having sex and see if anyone is disgusted. My guess is it would go down well, so according to the yucky test homosexuality is ok
I am not saying that there isn't a double standard. Straight guys are dirty and warped too, evidenced by the love for anything lesbian. And porn. And violence. And self-love. Which really just supports my anything goes thought that I had. How does any of this delicious behavior make for a stronger, more advanced society? It doesn't. Mental illness skyrockets each year... people aren't happy doing whatever the **** they want,quite the opposite.. yet nobody tells them that, they give them a pill, tell them that they are fine, that it's no big deal, carry on. How about a little self control? How about a little just say no? That would require judgement, though, and God forbid we do that...the thing is, there are so many behaviors and issues that we look the other way on these days, the homosexuality is just a glaring sort of WTF moment for me...it is so obviously not what God intended, it is so obvious that it goes against what is natural, yet we look the other way and then pretend that that is enough to call ourselves accepting. Kiser would say that we were programmed to think this way, by society, which is fine.. yet aren't we being programmed right now? You can't make that argumnet and not accept the idea that what you think happened before to make us think a certain way is happening right now to make us think another way.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait wait wait.. back the truck up...If you are using the fact that homosexuality is against nature because straight guys can't stomach watching gay guys fck.. then..How come straight guys go wild for women have sex with each other? That doesn't make sense at all. If the "yucky" test is supposed to show how "unnatural" it is to have homosexual sex, then gosh.. I guess it must be natural for women to have sex with each other, because that doesn't pass the yucky test in anyway what so ever. Either that or the "yucky" test is a pile of crap that proves nothing, one or the other. If XX or YY is wrong and unnatural therefor disgusting to watch, it shouldn't matter what the gender of the perticipants are. You could take 10,000 straight guys, and make them watch a video of a dude taking a sht, and they ( other than the odd scat fan) would recoil in disgust and leave the room.. it doesn't stop them from later taking a perfectly natural sht.
What does homosexuality do for nature?
Link to post
Share on other sites
So unless someone agrees with you totally, they deserve no respect? I do believe that if you die today an atheist, you will face the judgement of God. What he chooses to do with you is his decision, it's not voted on by the rest of us.
fundamentalist religious belief deserves no respect because it is necessarily divisive.
Link to post
Share on other sites
What does homosexuality do for nature?
just a theory at this point, but it might be naturally selected as a mechanism for population control. wouldn't even necessarily have to be genetic for that to work.
Link to post
Share on other sites
just a theory at this point, but it might be naturally selected as a mechanism for population control. wouldn't even necessarily have to be genetic for that to work.
LOL I was just saying it to take the pizz. but you seem to be serious.....Seriously, though.. I don't buy against the "natural law" argument in the slightest.. there are endless things that humans do that you see no where else in nature ( homosexual sex is NOT one of them, how ever.. many, many mammals have been observed in the wild and in zoos engaging in it).. Indoor plumbing isn't natural, Bacobits on my salad aren't natural, and on and on and on..Listen, you can believe homosexuality is wrong all you want to but A) your test is just full of crap as witnessed by the lesbian verse male homosexual sex and B) it seems kind of arbitrary to pick out homosexuality out of the trillions of things humans do and create that aren't "natural".
Link to post
Share on other sites
just a theory at this point, but it might be naturally selected as a mechanism for population control. wouldn't even necessarily have to be genetic for that to work.
retards the exponential and dangerous human population growth.
Winners!(I would get in the debate, but Lois and I had ours about 10 pages ago. I think we agreed to disagree)
Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL I was just saying it to take the pizz. but you seem to be serious.....Seriously, though.. I don't buy against the "natural law" argument in the slightest.. there are endless things that humans do that you see no where else in nature ( homosexual sex is NOT one of them, how ever.. many, many mammals have been observed in the wild and in zoos engaging in it).. Indoor plumbing isn't natural, Bacobits on my salad aren't natural, and on and on and on..Listen, you can believe homosexuality is wrong all you want to but A) your test is just full of crap as witnessed by the lesbian verse male homosexual sex and B) it seems kind of arbitrary to pick out homosexuality out of the trillions of things humans do and create that aren't "natural".
Arbitrary? I attacked violence, self-love, homosexuality and pornography in my last diatribe.... yet all you saw was homosexuality. If that isn't the population being reprogrammed I don't know what is. It's actually quite funny how you guys are pretty much ****ing robots when it comes to this issue... I throw out gems in my last big paragraph,good conversation points and all you can continue to harp on is "He claims homosexuality is wrong!" Seriously, it's not that big of a deal. Plenty of people will be going to hell for more mundane stuff than this. My favorite argument of all is the one where animals engage in it.... good for them. You should ask them why. You know what they will do? Look at you, or run, or eat you. Not learning much from that angle, but if you want to say that we are no better than animals, go ahead. I will spend the next 5 days naming of species that we rule, one by one. (Hint: all of them)
Link to post
Share on other sites
Winners!(I would get in the debate, but Lois and I had ours about 10 pages ago. I think we agreed to disagree)
It certainly does, which is nice, except for the fact that God is a big fan of the whole family unit thing. So, that in and of itself will not justify the gays. Not to mention no gay anybody has ever said to me that they are a product of population control. Pretty cold if you ask me. I want to stress something...... I don't like the whole thing. I don't. I don't quite understand how we have this large population of people that God seems to single out, and they are by and large good people. This topic bugs me, because like I have said before, my favorite friends are gay as can be, yet here is the rub... knowing them gives me insight into the culture, and some of the sub-cultures, and I can see why God has a problem with them, even though I don't like it. I am actually going to be hanging out with one of my gays soon working on techniques to bleach flames into jeans.(One of my hobbies is fashion design) We get along fabulously. Tha being said, to hear him talk at times... good lord, the things he talks about. Nothing short of just sinful as can be. What is God supposed to do? Look the other way?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Arbitrary? I attacked violence, self-love, homosexuality and pornography in my last diatribe.... yet all you saw was homosexuality. If that isn't the population being reprogrammed I don't know what is. It's actually quite funny how you guys are pretty much ****ing robots when it comes to this issue... I throw out gems in my last big paragraph,good conversation points and all you can continue to harp on is "He claims homosexuality is wrong!" Seriously, it's not that big of a deal. Plenty of people will be going to hell for more mundane stuff than this. My favorite argument of all is the one where animals engage in it.... good for them. You should ask them why. You know what they will do? Look at you, or run, or eat you. Not learning much from that angle, but if you want to say that we are no better than animals, go ahead. I will spend the next 5 days naming of species that we rule, one by one. (Hint: all of them)
1) This is the "Is Homosexuality Really a Sin" thread, is it not? Forgive me for staying on topic.2) You were the one to bring up that it was "unnatural" and I was just pointing out it's existence in nature. I certainly don't call for the way animals behave to be the basis of human behavior and society. On the other hand, I also don't claim that something is "natural" or "unnatural" as a basis of moral condemnation. 3) you dodged the lesbian point fairly effectively.. I take it you're ready to concede the yucky test point, then?
Link to post
Share on other sites
1) This is the "Is Homosexuality Really a Sin" thread, is it not? Forgive me for staying on topic.2) You were the one to bring up that it was "unnatural" and I was just pointing out it's existence in nature. I certainly don't call for the way animals behave to be the basis of human behavior and society. On the other hand, I also don't claim that something is "natural" or "unnatural" as a basis of moral condemnation. 3) you dodged the lesbian point fairly effectively.. I take it you're ready to concede the yucky test point, then?
Hell no. I think it says alot that we are largely disgusted by gay sex, and can't say so because the new breed of programmer is sending a new message. Also, I am not a mod. Sometimes, within an issue, there may be other issues that can be discussed. If you want to play mod go ahead, but it's not your style. Animals eat there young, and kill the weak to save the herd.. should we go that route, too? My point was that every time this comes up some jackhole jumps up and yells,"Animals do it!!" like he has hit on some briliant argument. Animals doing it says nothing, except for the fact that animals do it. Animals are not judged by god... they die and rot and that's it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hell no. I think it says alot that we are largely disgusted by gay sex, and can't say so because the new breed of programmer is sending a new message. Also, I am not a mod. Sometimes, within an issue, there may be other issues that can be discussed. If you want to play mod go ahead, but it's not your style.
Then why aren't we disgusted by lesbian sex? Morally, aren't they the same, and shouldn't, if our disgust of male gay sex is a moral reaction to the act's unnaturality, create the same disgust?LOL I wasn't playing mod, I was just telling you why I'm "fixing on that whole homosexuality" thing
Animals eat there young, and kill the weak to save the herd.. should we go that route, too? My point was that every time this comes up some jackhole jumps up and yells,"Animals do it!!" like he has hit on some briliant argument. Animals doing it says nothing, except for the fact that animals do it. Animals are not judged by god... they die and rot and that's it.
Are you even reading my posts? Here, let me help you..
2) You were the one to bring up that it was "unnatural" and I was just pointing out it's existence in nature. I certainly don't call for the way animals behave to be the basis of human behavior and society. On the other hand, I also don't claim that something is "natural" or "unnatural" as a basis of moral condemnation.
I DO NOT THINK that animals doing something should be the moral basis or doing, or not doing anything... this is why I think the "natural" argument itself is just plain stupid. There is no way anyone can claim any sort of "natural" human behavior. Humans behave in many different was based on many different factors, including biological disposition and environmental influence. WHile in our society straight men may recoil against homosexual acts, in other societies homosexual acts are part of religious and right of passage rituals.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Then why aren't we disgusted by lesbian sex? Morally, aren't they the same, and shouldn't, if our disgust of male gay sex is a moral reaction to the act's unnaturality, create the same disgust?LOL I wasn't playing mod, I was just telling you why I'm "fixing on that whole homosexuality" thingAre you even reading my posts? Here, let me help you..I DO NOT THINK that animals doing something should be the moral basis or doing, or not doing anything... this is why I think the "natural" argument itself is just plain stupid. There is no way anyone can claim any sort of "natural" human behavior. Humans behave in many different was based on many different factors, including biological disposition and environmental influence. WHile in our society straight men may recoil against homosexual acts, in other societies homosexual acts are part of religious and right of passage rituals.
I think we can safely say this.. humans will damn near do anything to just feel good. Agreed? Naturally, sex is to procreate,correct? Now, using your body to do other things wouldn't be of nature, would it? The whole point of christianity is to have behaviours that makes God happy, and one of those that makes him unhappy is homosexual acts, among many,many behaviours. That was the whole issue in the first place,whether or not the bible actually says homosexuality is wrong. So far, the only semi-argument for homosexuality is population control..o.k., imagine you are god. Your argument is,"I helped population control." Really? So did famine, and disease, and hurricanes, and tsunamis... you want credit because you didn't procreate 1.75? " Evil in the name of good is still evil.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Then why aren't we disgusted by lesbian sex? Morally, aren't they the same, and shouldn't, if our disgust of male gay sex is a moral reaction to the act's unnaturality, create the same disgust?LOL I wasn't playing mod, I was just telling you why I'm "fixing on that whole homosexuality" thingAre you even reading my posts? Here, let me help you..I DO NOT THINK that animals doing something should be the moral basis or doing, or not doing anything... this is why I think the "natural" argument itself is just plain stupid. There is no way anyone can claim any sort of "natural" human behavior. Humans behave in many different was based on many different factors, including biological disposition and environmental influence. WHile in our society straight men may recoil against homosexual acts, in other societies homosexual acts are part of religious and right of passage rituals.
Oh, and we love lesbians because-big suprise- we are ****ed up,too.
Link to post
Share on other sites

lolLois, you assume because I am disgusted by homosexuality that I should know and just admit that it's wrong. That is crazy. I have never in my life had a bone in my body that thought being gay was wrong.Just like it has been said before, a guy taking a **** disgusts me and shitting obviously isn't wrong.Why should I believe homosexuality is wrong? Give me some good reasons that have nothing to do with God.Also, if you want to have a discussion on moral philosophy or the direction of our present society, I'm fine with that. Bring up a topic and we'll debate it. If you're points have "because God says" anywhere in them, though, don't bother. You know I don't care :club:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...