NationStates Jolt Archive

No it's not!!! I can't help but notice all you ignorant, illogical fools in various posts saying "I think that being gay is a choice", "they chose to be gay" or other similar statements. Well guess what? Nobody cares what you think about it because you aren't living it so you can't possibly know!

I most certainly did not choose to be gay, but here I am...GAY! There was no point in my life where I suddenly decided, "You know, I think that I'm going to be gay, go through a whole year of hating my life, crying myself to sleep at night and trying to make myself straight; 6 months of believing I am just bisexual and don't have to tell anyone; an additional 1 and a half years of hiding it from everyone; then start coming out; and then have to fight for the right to marry while being hated by people who used to be my friends for no good reason; and then I can constantly hear words describing who I am used in negative connotations or as insults towards me.

Come on now, be realistic. You did not choose to be straight any more than I chose to be gay. So stop telling me this is some choice that I made. The only choice I had in this whole life-changing experience was to accept myself and start sharing myself more openly with the people I love.

I encourage anyone else on this forum who is gay/lesbian/bi to reply to this with their own experience and input to back me up on this. If anyone here wants to refute this be my guest, but I want to hear facts supporting what you have to say.(ya it's gunna b pretty hard isn't it)

Let's seperate this out, because you are both wrong and right. Being gay is not a choice, but acting gay is. Let me explain... A person does not choose to be attracted to a member of the same sex. But they do choose to engage in a relationship with them.

I can't help but notice all you ignorant, illogical fools


What a nice way to start out thread... :rolleyes:

Being gay is not a choice.

Acting gay, however....

once the aryan armies of inversion seize power many will attempt to choose their orientation, but we will seperate the true spartan warrior from the cryptobreeder, and the false shall be spanked and sent back to procreate with the other lesser beasts in manflesh.

Let's seperate this out, because you are both wrong and right. Being gay is not a choice, but acting gay is. Let me explain... A person does not choose to be attracted to a member of the same sex. But they do choose to engage in a relationship with them.

Oh, brglfrickle! You beat me to it. Well done.

I can't make it any clearer than that. People ask me if its a choice and I respond "Yeah...I made the wonderful choice to be gay in Nebraska. To be shunned, questioned, oppressed, and so forth. A great choice." My experiences were almost exactly like yours. No, I can't explain homosexuality, and I don't think I should have to. I'm still human and should be viewed and treated as such.

I agree with you, but I hardly think you are being...how shall I say this...TACTFUL about this topic. If you want debate, at least be rational and not rant. That intro makes even me not want to debate.

No it's not!!! I can't help but notice all you ignorant, illogical fools in various posts saying "I think that being gay is a choice", "they chose to be gay" or other similar statements. Well guess what? Nobody cares what you think about it because you aren't living it so you can't possibly know!

I most certainly did not choose to be gay, but here I am...GAY! There was no point in my life where I suddenly decided, "You know, I think that I'm going to be gay, go through a whole year of hating my life, crying myself to sleep at night and trying to make myself straight; 6 months of believing I am just bisexual and don't have to tell anyone; an additional 1 and a half years of hiding it from everyone; then start coming out; and then have to fight for the right to marry while being hated by people who used to be my friends for no good reason; and then I can constantly hear words describing who I am used in negative connotations or as insults towards me.

Come on now, be realistic. You did not choose to be straight any more than I chose to be gay. So stop telling me this is some choice that I made. The only choice I had in this whole life-changing experience was to accept myself and start sharing myself more openly with the people I love.

I encourage anyone else on this forum who is gay/lesbian/bi to reply to this with their own experience and input to back me up on this. If anyone here wants to refute this be my guest, but I want to hear facts supporting what you have to say.(ya it's gunna b pretty hard isn't it)
Uh oh. I hear the stampede of angry posters/flamers to come. ;)

Now, I'm bi (male, in case this makes some sort of difference), and it was more of a realization than a choice for me about my sexual orientation.

The closest thing, to my knowledge that gays/lesbians/bis get is acting upon their sexual preference, or attempting to force themselves to act straight, or abstain from intimate relations entirely.

I think the single best way to approach the 'being gay is a choice' argument is to refer your opponent to the kid on the playground [assuming he attended public school] that exhibited undeniable homosexual tendancies as early as, say, age 5. There's always one kid in there that likes all the shit that the girls like, and he'd always hold the kickball up by his chest with both arms wrapped around it like a girl too. And whenever they'd play baseball you'd see em hold their hand way out and close their eyes at the last second like a girl of that age generally would.

You really think that kid is thinking to himself: "Gee, I can't wait to take cocks up the ass?"

Let's seperate this out, because you are both wrong and right. Being gay is not a choice, but acting gay is. Let me explain... A person does not choose to be attracted to a member of the same sex. But they do choose to engage in a relationship with them.

Well I can't say I disagree with you, which is why I had the part about choosing to accept who I was. With this acceptance(choice) comes the part where I will begin to act on my feelings. So you are very correct yet I wonder why you say I was wrong because I never once said that being in a relationship is not a choice.

No it's not!!! I can't help but notice all you ignorant, illogical fools in various posts saying "I think that being gay is a choice", "they chose to be gay" or other similar statements. Well guess what? Nobody cares what you think about it because you aren't living it so you can't possibly know!

I most certainly did not choose to be gay, but here I am...GAY! There was no point in my life where I suddenly decided, "You know, I think that I'm going to be gay, go through a whole year of hating my life, crying myself to sleep at night and trying to make myself straight; 6 months of believing I am just bisexual and don't have to tell anyone; an additional 1 and a half years of hiding it from everyone; then start coming out; and then have to fight for the right to marry while being hated by people who used to be my friends for no good reason; and then I can constantly hear words describing who I am used in negative connotations or as insults towards me.

Come on now, be realistic. You did not choose to be straight any more than I chose to be gay. So stop telling me this is some choice that I made. The only choice I had in this whole life-changing experience was to accept myself and start sharing myself more openly with the people I love.

I encourage anyone else on this forum who is gay/lesbian/bi to reply to this with their own experience and input to back me up on this. If anyone here wants to refute this be my guest, but I want to hear facts supporting what you have to say.(ya it's gunna b pretty hard isn't it)
Why does it matter if it's genetic or a choice? Are you any less of a human, any less a member of Homo sapiens because of your homosexuality? Of course not. It only matters to people who have so little to worry about in their own pathetic lives that they have to dig around in others.

For the record, I'm straight, like it matters. It's not like I'm being distracted from the issues of the day by the sound of one man's balls slapping another man's ass.

You really think that kid is thinking to himself: "Gee, I can't wait to take cocks up the ass?"

LOL!

Well, what you said prior to that is all true. I saw it at every public school I went to. You could definitely tell who the gay kids were...

I can't make it any clearer than that. People ask me if its a choice and I respond "Yeah...I made the wonderful choice to be gay in Nebraska. To be shunned, questioned, oppressed, and so forth. A great choice." My experiences were almost exactly like yours. No, I can't explain homosexuality, and I don't think I should have to. I'm still human and should be viewed and treated as such.
you are not just human, but the highest state of human evolution. the gay man(and the lesbian) is born to a higher destiny. while the breeder is meant to do the necessary animalistic business of continuing the species, the gay is destined to lofter callings; to create, to lead, to educate. never sell yourself short, to aspire to equality with the brood herd is to sell yourself far too short.

Your are born one its really genetic, so let us accept the fact that being gay is one of nature's natural phenomenon, there are gay animals too you know.

Let's seperate this out, because you are both wrong and right. Being gay is not a choice, but acting gay is. Let me explain... A person does not choose to be attracted to a member of the same sex. But they do choose to engage in a relationship with them.

So you are saying that homosexuals should have greater control over their sexual desires than heterosexuals?

LOL!

Well, what you said prior to that is all true. I saw it at every public school I went to. You could definitely tell who the gay kids were...
no you can tell who the sissies are, and large percentage of whom may well grow up to be gay. you can not tell alot of the bother young men who will grow up to be just as gay just a bit more butch.

you are not just human, but the highest state of human evolution. the gay man(and the lesbian) is born to a higher destiny. while the breeder is meant to do the necessary animalistic business of continuing the species, the gay is destined to lofter callings; to create, to leader, to educate. never sell yourself short, to aspire to equality with the brood herd is to sell yourself far to short.

LOL!!!!! Thanks, you really made my day :)

Your are born one its really genetic, so let us accept the fact that being gay is one of nature's natural phenomenon, there are gay animals too you know.
well its clear sexuality is not a conscious choice. it seems to have some heredity elements, but since those have not been completely unravelled its still difficult to rule out the effects of early childhood development.

you are not just human, but the highest state of human evolution. the gay man(and the lesbian) is born to a higher destiny. while the breeder is meant to do the necessary animalistic business of continuing the species, the gay is destined to lofter callings; to create, to leader, to educate. never sell yourself short, to aspire to equality with the brood herd is to sell yourself far to short.

...Why does this sound like someone stole from Nietzsche?

Anyways, that would imply that gays and lesbians are more capable that straight people (and I suppose us bis, as well), because they're "just breeders", which is absolutely preposterous. Yes, a child is a burden, but that does not mean it inhibits the potential of its parents. In fact, its parents would be inspired to work harder, to proved the absolute best for the child.

And take it in the butt

if they so choose, some do not engage in anal intercourse, instead prefering to find their pleasures only orally or manually. the sex act is not defining of orientation, only the choose of partners.

And take it in the butt

Gee thanks for you observation :rolleyes: . What's your point? Lots of straight women take it in the butt...boohoo. Interesting that you who has so much to say against Gay Marriage has nothing to refute this topic.

...Why does this sound like someone stole from Nietzsche?

Anyways, that would imply that gays and lesbians are more capable that straight people (and I suppose us bis, as well), because they're "just breeders", which is absolutely preposterous. Yes, a child is a burden, but that does not mean it inhibits the potential of its parents. In fact, its parents would be inspired to work harder, to proved the absolute best for the child.


It was obviously a joke, couldn't you tell? I mean, NOBODY could be THAT stupid :D

...Why does this sound like someone stole from Nietzsche?

Anyways, that would imply that gays and lesbians are more capable that straight people (and I suppose us bis, as well), because they're "just breeders", which is absolutely preposterous. Yes, a child is a burden, but that does not mean it inhibits the potential of its parents. In fact, its parents would be inspired to work harder, to proved the absolute best for the child.

psst I think he was being silly

Gee thanks for you observation . What's your point? Lots of straight women take it in the butt...boohoo. Interesting that you who has so much to say against Gay Marriage has nothing to refute this topic.


Does it really matter? You started this thread off as a flame so should we take it seriously?

...Why does this sound like someone stole from Nietzsche?

pssst famous gay nazi here, we all loved freddie's work ;)

I'm not sure I buy EITHER the "it's a choice!"/"the homosexual agenda is making gaysex look attractive" arguments of the religious right OR the simplistic "it's genetic" argument of the left.

Is it likewise genetic or a choice, etc. to get turned on by human feces, feet, etc.?

Let's call it a fetish and get over it.

(Just to set the record straight, I fully support gay rights, including their right to get married, etc. - to the point where I hope to one day live in a world where nobody even cares about sexual orientation - I just think it's going too far to just say, "it's genetic!" Besides, if it's fully genetic, I think you'd expect to see the number of gay people shrink over time, and you might not expect bis either, and certainly not degrees of gayness/straightness.)

who cares, just don't act like you queers are special. Your gay or a lez, so what? Is there a Hedorosexual Pride Parade anywere? (Yea, my spelling sucks) Keep your sexual preferance out of realm of stupid; if you don't know what I mean just look at those parades. lol. Anyway Peace out

...Why does this sound like someone stole from Nietzsche?

Anyways, that would imply that gays and lesbians are more capable that straight people (and I suppose us bis, as well), because they're "just breeders", which is absolutely preposterous. Yes, a child is a burden, but that does not mean it inhibits the potential of its parents. In fact, its parents would be inspired to work harder, to proved the absolute best for the child.


I think that most people are too screwed up have kids, I'm happy enough to know that I can should I decide to. ;)

It was obviously a joke, couldn't you tell? I mean, NOBODY could be THAT stupid :D

lol, I sincerely hope it was. But...in my time on NS...I've seen some rather...intellectually challenged people state some rather dim things. If it is a joke, then I'm amused. *crosses fingers*

In my opinion, as long as men have testosterone and women have estrogen then I refuse to believe that homosexuality is not a choice. There is no real solid science backing the "not a choice" side either...

Don't get me wrong. While I am straight myself, I have nothing against the homosexual population... as long as they're not talking about anything I wouldn't want to hear lol. Luckily, the ones I have met are very understanding of that.

Gee thanks for you observation :rolleyes: . What's your point? Lots of straight women take it in the butt...boohoo. Interesting that you who has so much to say against Gay Marriage has nothing to refute this topic.

Yeah me and my girlfriend love it like that! :D

pssst famous gay nazi here, we all loved freddie's work ;)

lol, I love Nietzsche as well, hence why it sounded like you might've stolen from 'im. Though I did laugh at the thought of a gay Nazi, and decided I have, in fact, seen it all.

In my opinion, as long as men have testosterone and women have estrogen then I refuse to believe that homosexuality is not a choice. There is no real solid science backing the "not a choice" side either...

Don't get me wrong. While I am straight myself, I have nothing against the homosexual population... as long as they're not talking about anything I wouldn't want to hear lol. Luckily, the ones I have met are very understanding of that.

Erm..they each have a bit of both.

who cares, just don't act like you queers are special. Your gay or a lez, so what? Is there a Hedorosexual Pride Parade anywere? (Yea, my spelling sucks) Keep your sexual preferance out of realm of stupid; if you don't know what I mean just look at those parades. lol. Anyway Peace out

I do believe the reason they are doing such thing is to win full rights. Because if they don't protest they don't get rights

Could someone of the "it's a choice if you get into a homosexual relationship" crowd please explain to me why that makes a difference?

who cares, just don't act like you queers are special. Your gay or a lez, so what? Is there a Hedorosexual Pride Parade anywere? (Yea, my spelling sucks) Keep your sexual preferance out of realm of stupid; if you don't know what I mean just look at those parades. lol. Anyway Peace out
Heterosexuality is the default, so be definition every outward display of sexuality is heterosexual pride. From beer commercials where dumpy guys get hot chicks to wedding rings, it's all hetero all the time. Why begrudge gays a day or two out of the year for a parade, or god forbid, a chance to actually hold hands or kiss their partners in public like straight people do all the time. The horror!

I do believe the reason they are doing such thing is to win full rights. Because if they don't protest they don't get rights

Don't know what country you live in but they have rights here.

Does it really matter? You started this thread off as a flame so should we take it seriously?

Yes it does matter. I may not have started this thread off in the most..courteous way. The reason for which being that I am sick of hearing people say that there was some kind of a choice involved in being gay. I'm kind of hoping that somehow this thread will manage to convince a few currently ignorant people that there really is no choice in this.

you are not just human, but the highest state of human evolution. the gay man(and the lesbian) is born to a higher destiny. while the breeder is meant to do the necessary animalistic business of continuing the species, the gay is destined to lofter callings; to create, to leader, to educate. never sell yourself short, to aspire to equality with the brood herd is to sell yourself far to short.


Well good luck with your "leadering" and your "lofter callings."

Heterosexuality is the default, so be definition every outward display of sexuality is heterosexual pride. From beer commercials where dumpy guys get hot chicks to wedding rings, it's all hetero all the time. Why begrudge gays a day or two out of the year for a parade, or god forbid, a chance to actually hold hands or kiss their partners in public like straight people do all the time. The horror!

Ever hear of majority rules?

Heterosexuality is the default, so be definition every outward display of sexuality is heterosexual pride. From beer commercials where dumpy guys get hot chicks to wedding rings, it's all hetero all the time. Why begrudge gays a day or two out of the year for a parade, or god forbid, a chance to actually hold hands or kiss their partners in public like straight people do all the time. The horror!


go anywhere in any major city and you'll see it

Yes it does matter. I may not have started this thread off in the most..courteous way. The reason for which being that I am sick of hearing people say that there was some kind of a choice involved in being gay. I'm kind of hoping that somehow this thread will manage to convince a few currently ignorant people that there really is no choice in this.


Since when do you speak for all homosexuals?

Could someone of the "it's a choice if you get into a homosexual relationship" crowd please explain to me why that makes a difference?

I believe that they, by they I'm talking about the religous, think that it is a choice and therefore not created by God and so therefore immoral and evil. If it isn't a choice then that means that God created it and so therefore can't be evil.

Ever hear of majority rules?
Every hear of tyrany of the majority?

I believe that they, by they I'm talking about the religous, think that it is a choice and therefore not created by God and so therefore immoral and evil. If it isn't a choice then that means that God created it and so therefore can't be evil.

God is a myth, just like free speech, clean water and American hockey;)

who cares, just don't act like you queers are special. Your gay or a lez, so what? Is there a Hedorosexual Pride Parade anywere? (Yea, my spelling sucks) Keep your sexual preferance out of realm of stupid; if you don't know what I mean just look at those parades. lol. Anyway Peace out
if we weren't special, the parades wouldn't feak out the dimmer breeders so badly.

I believe that they, by they I'm talking about the religous, think that it is a choice and therefore not created by God and so therefore immoral and evil. If it isn't a choice then that means that God created it and so therefore can't be evil.


Im not religous I just think that there are more reasons for a person to become gay that just to be born that way. I think the "I was born this way" is often used as a cop out.

I believe that they, by they I'm talking about the religous, think that it is a choice and therefore not created by God and so therefore immoral and evil. If it isn't a choice then that means that God created it and so therefore can't be evil.
I just wonder, because it seems to be saying that, yes, you may be attracted to your own sex, but you should instead get married and have sex with someone on the other team, if you will. I just flip that and ask if it's fair then to be forced into a homosexual relationship, or chose being without companionship, if you're not interested in your own sex.

It's a very illogical stance.

if we weren't special, the parades wouldn't feak out the dimmer breeders so badly.


special like the short bus?

go anywhere in any major city and you'll see it
I lived for the last two years in San Francisco, and now I'm in Fort Lauderdale--three of my very closest friends are gay. I'm very happy to see public displays of affection from gay people--it shows that they're less afraid now and that public opinion is changing over time to become more accepting.

I believe that they, by they I'm talking about the religous, think that it is a choice and therefore not created by God and so therefore immoral and evil. If it isn't a choice then that means that God created it and so therefore can't be evil.


No....the same thing could be said for straight men who lust after women. Just because something is natural does not make it right. I don't see the point of this argument.

I lived for the last two years in San Francisco, and now I'm in Fort Lauderdale--three of my very closest friends are gay. I'm very happy to see public displays of affection from gay people--it shows that they're less afraid now and that public opinion is changing over time to become more accepting.



yea, that's what I was saying. There's no need to be classified as special in today's society

Every hear of tyrany of the majority?

Yeah I live in San Francisco, Its real tyranny here!

I just wonder, because it seems to be saying that, yes, you may be attracted to your own sex, but you should instead get married and have sex with someone on the other team, if you will. I just flip that and ask if it's fair then to be forced into a homosexual relationship, or chose being without companionship, if you're not interested in your own sex.

It's a very illogical stance.


Celibacy.

if we weren't special, the parades wouldn't feak out the dimmer breeders so badly.

Oh, we know you are "special"

In my opinion, as long as men have testosterone and women have estrogen then I refuse to believe that homosexuality is not a choice. There is no real solid science backing the "not a choice" side either...

Don't get me wrong. While I am straight myself, I have nothing against the homosexual population... as long as they're not talking about anything I wouldn't want to hear lol. Luckily, the ones I have met are very understanding of that.

Testosterone and estrogen aren't responsible for WHO you are attracted to. There doesn't have to be any science to support the "it's not a choice" because we have millions of people who can testify to it.

Ever hear of majority rules?

Ever hear of majority rule with respect to minority rights, that's how gov'ts are run these days(well..advanced gov'ts). Majority rules is for the playground.

Since when do you speak for all homosexuals?

I never claimed to be speaking for all homosexuals. But you know, of all the gay/lesbian/bi's i've spoken with in my life, not one has ever argued with me in saying that we never chose to be this way.

Well good luck with your "leadering" and your "lofter callings."
okay perhaps i'm not destined to lead the world into a new dawn of perfect spelling and typo free internet discussions... but there are those out there4 in the same sex loving community who can and will. i am but a humble prophet of the new order, there are those who come after me who shine much brighter.

yea, that's what I was saying. There's no need to be classified as special in today's society
Maybe not where you are, and not where I am now, but in plenty of places, even in the US, it's still dangerous to be gay, so pride events where the community can show some solidarity are very important.

Celibacy.


Quite the sacrifice for someone else's comfort. Sorry but you just aren't that important.

My mistake, but you get the idea.

Males have more testosterone.

Females have more estrogen.

usually.

In some freak cases the levels can be distorted... however there is no positive proof that it leads to homosexuality though. At least not solid proof confirmed by science everywhere. There is still too many theories floating around. In any case, these "distortions" are more then likely a lot less in number then the actual amount of homosexuals, so I'm still for the "choice" side.

And just to restate, I have nothing against the homosexual population.

special like the short bus? special like a new sun which will burn away the ignorance of the breeder dominated society like the morning fog and illuminate a dawn of enlightenment.

Oh, we know you are "special"
let us hope you genuinely do.

Maybe not where you are, and not where I am now, but in plenty of places, even in the US, it's still dangerous to be gay, so pride events where the community can show some solidarity are very important.


wow, i didn't realize homos were so emotionally fragile that they have to wear bondage and S&M clothes in a downtown major city just to gain solidarity. What a pile of $#*!

Someone posted something about homosexuals being of a somhow "higher calling".

I don't think I've ever laughed as hard as I am now.
To say that homosexuals don't bend to animalistic urges...
THat's like saying the babies are delivered by a stork.

Here lies the problem - As a human - you a re susceptible to animal desires.
Regardless of your orientation, or how you feel about it, you're going to bow to them. So get over yourself. You may not produce babies by this, but you're GOING to lust.
A homosexuals propensity to create/lead/be greater than one of a heterosexual leaning is hardly greater - or lesser. The fact of the matter is, this should have never even been an issue to begin with. If everybody would just mind thier own damn business....

My sexual orientation is not important here. I'm not going to say what half of the species i'm attracted to, simply because it's a non-issue.
TO be perfectly honest, i consider myself nonsexual. I find other creatures, living or dead, physically repulsive, and prone to idiotic behavior.

Someone posted something about homosexuals being of a somhow "higher calling".

I don't think I've ever laughed as hard as I am now.
To say that homosexuals don't bend to animalistic urges...
THat's like saying the babies are delivered by a stork.

Here lies the problem - As a human - you a re susceptible to animal desires.
Regardless of your orientation, or how you feel about it, you're going to bow to them. So get over yourself. You may not produce babies by this, but you're GOING to lust.
A homosexuals propensity to create/lead/be greater than one of a heterosexual leaning is hardly greater - or lesser. The fact of the matter is, this should have never even been an issue to begin with. If everybody would just mind thier own damn business....


true mate.....Some people just can't keep their PRIVATE lives to themselves

My mistake, but you get the idea.

Males have more testosterone.

Females have more estrogen.

usually.

In some freak cases the levels can be distorted... however there is no positive proof that it leads to homosexuality though. At least not solid proof confirmed by science everywhere. There is still too many theories floating around. In any case, these "distortions" are more then likely a lot less in number then the actual amount of homosexuals, so I'm still for the "choice" side.

And just to restate, I have nothing against the homosexual population.

Umm...the endocrine system doesn't have much, if anything, to do with it.

*shakes head*

wow, i didn't realize homos were so emotionally fragile that they have to wear bondage and S&M clothes in a downtown major city just to gain solidarity. What a pile of $#*!
do the leather pants and studded codpieces scare you, are you afraid the big bad leatherboys are going to give your delicate breeder ass a spanking, then just a little bit more.

No....the same thing could be said for straight men who lust after women. Just because something is natural does not make it right. I don't see the point of this argument.

However a man can marry a woman and have sex with her and be fine moraly. If God created homosexuality, which he did, it should, therefore, be okay for gays to get married and have sex.

do the leather pants and studded codpieces scare you, are you afraid the big bad leatherboys are going to give your delicate breeder ass a spanking, then just a little bit more.


no, just try and explain it to a grandmother or a 6 year old.

Your are born one its really genetic, so let us accept the fact that being gay is one of nature's natural phenomenon, there are gay animals too you know.

It is a genetic thing. Sweden, I believe, found that hetrosexuals and homosexuals respond to the pheromones of the sex they are interested in. You would have to be extremely devoted to your choice of being gay to change how your brain is wired.

However a man can marry a woman and have sex with her and be fine moraly. If God created homosexuality, which he did, it should, therefore, be okay for gays to get married and have sex.


read #45

Yeah I live in San Francisco, Its real tyranny here!
Then rejoice! Obviously the majority of the people of San Francisco have approved of homosexuality. See? Majority rules, even if YOU don't like it.

What? You DON'T like it and you don't want to or cannot move somewhere else?

Alas...

This is why there are so many balances on majority power within the US framework. Of course it is far easier to call for majority power when you're in the bloody majority.

Celibacy.
Right, and I assume then you will be willing to abstaine from all sexual contact yourself for the rest for your life, willingly? (And if you say yes, pull the other one, it's got bells on)

Umm...the endocrine system doesn't have much, if anything, to do with it.

*shakes head*

Actually, there's no concrete evidence that the endocrine system is involved OR uninvolved. If it is involved, it'd be in fixing preference during gestation. You're likely correct if you're talking hormonal influence after development. The role testosterone and estrogen (and others) have on fetal development is largely unstudied for correlations to sexual preference. If you claim otherwise, I'd like to see some links to the studies you're useing for proof.

Testosterone and estrogen aren't responsible for WHO you are attracted to. There doesn't have to be any science to support the "it's not a choice" because we have millions of people who can testify to it.

Well not who you like specifically, but hormones have a lot to do with sexuality. Do your research.

And millions of people testifying to being gay when cases of weird hormonal patterns can not possibly be that high is exactly why I believe it to be a choice.

Aside from that, if you had to have come from straight parents who came from straight parents who came from... etc., where does the genetic disorder come from? This is not a flame, but a logical question. I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

My mistake, but you get the idea.

Males have more testosterone.

Females have more estrogen.

usually.

In some freak cases the levels can be distorted... however there is no positive proof that it leads to homosexuality though. At least not solid proof confirmed by science everywhere. There is still too many theories floating around. In any case, these "distortions" are more then likely a lot less in number then the actual amount of homosexuals, so I'm still for the "choice" side.

And just to restate, I have nothing against the homosexual population.

Yes I got it the first time that you have nothing against us and I'm not trying to be hostile towards you. I'm curious though, seeing as your are wanting scientific proof on this matter rather than taking our word for it and looking at it in a logical sense(who in their right mind would choose to be gay)..please tell me your an atheist..cuz if not then I think your being a tad bit hypocritical.

No it's not!!! I can't help but notice all you ignorant, illogical fools in various posts saying "I think that being straight is a choice", "they chose to be straight" or other similar statements. Well guess what? Nobody cares what you think about it because you aren't living it so you can't possibly know!

I most certainly did not choose to be straight, but here I am...STRAIGHT! There was no point in my life where I suddenly decided, "You know, I think that I'm going to be straight, go through a whole year of hating my life, crying myself to sleep at night and trying to make myself gay; 6 months of believing I am just bisexual and don't have to tell anyone; an additional 1 and a half years of hiding it from everyone; then start coming out; and then have to fight for the right to marry while being hated by people who used to be my friends for no good reason; and then I can constantly hear words describing who I am used in negative connotations or as insults towards me.

Come on now, be realistic. You did not choose to be gay any more than I chose to be straight. So stop telling me this is some choice that I made. The only choice I had in this whole life-changing experience was to accept myself and start sharing myself more openly with the people I love.

I encourage anyone else on this forum who is straight/bigoted/dickhead to reply to this with their own experience and input to back me up on this. If anyone here wants to refute this be my guest, but I want to hear facts supporting what you have to say.(ya it's gunna b pretty hard isn't it)

I lived for the last two years in San Francisco, and now I'm in Fort Lauderdale--three of my very closest friends are gay. I'm very happy to see public displays of affection from gay people--it shows that they're less afraid now and that public opinion is changing over time to become more accepting.


Yes like the public displays of foreplay in front of school children or publically exposed genitals at gay partys that spill out to the street, Or Gay art, I was walking down Fillmore and in front of a store I noticed some elementry school kids responding to something in the window. As I passed I saw a monitor playing what looked like a waist high view of a man in jeans, then the man unzipped his jeans and pulled out his penis which he proceeded to spin around. This was in the store window of an art gallery owned and operated by a gay couple. The store was 2 blocks from an elementry school. I just think they dont respect any boundries.

read #45

If you will note, I was respoding to a questin about why there is a whole argument about it being a choice. Since such arguments are made by the religious (stupid Christians actualy) it would be hard, actually impossible, to explain their arguments without refering to God.

Also I believe that God exists and this thread isn't about God's (non)existance

No it's not!!! I can't help but notice all you ignorant, illogical fools in various posts saying "I think that being straight is a choice", "they chose to be straight" or other similar statements. Well guess what? Nobody cares what you think about it because you aren't living it so you can't possibly know!

I most certainly did not choose to be straight, but here I am...STRAIGHT! There was no point in my life where I suddenly decided, "You know, I think that I'm going to be straight, go through a whole year of hating my life, crying myself to sleep at night and trying to make myself gay; 6 months of believing I am just bisexual and don't have to tell anyone; an additional 1 and a half years of hiding it from everyone; then start coming out; and then have to fight for the right to marry while being hated by people who used to be my friends for no good reason; and then I can constantly hear words describing who I am used in negative connotations or as insults towards me.

Come on now, be realistic. You did not choose to be gay any more than I chose to be straight. So stop telling me this is some choice that I made. The only choice I had in this whole life-changing experience was to accept myself and start sharing myself more openly with the people I love.

I encourage anyone else on this forum who is straight/bigoted/dickhead to reply to this with their own experience and input to back me up on this. If anyone here wants to refute this be my guest, but I want to hear facts supporting what you have to say.(ya it's gunna b pretty hard isn't it)

Uh, we heard you the first time, Junior.

Bringing God into the argument is pretty infantile.
While, I have a stance on the existance of God, my take is not important.
It's none of your concern anyway.

First of all, you cannot logically prove the existance of God. If you think you can, you're out of your mind.
THe idea is - You hsouldnt have to be able to prove it, since faith is far more important that that aspect.

According to the bible, God created man. God created man as a flawed creature. Lust, being a sin - Is a flaw. Regardless of what the lust is directed toward, It is sinful behavior. A homosexual who lusts is in the same boat as a heterosexual who lusts. It matters not to god - lust is lust, plain and simple.

Actually, there's no conrete evidence that the endocrine system is involved OR uninvolved. If it is involved, it'd be in fixing preference during gestation. You're likely correct if you're talking hormonal influence after development. The role testosterone and estrogen (and others) have on fetal development is largely unstudied for correlations to sexual preference. If you claim otherwise, I'd like to see some links to the studies you're useing for proof.

I was referring to the post natal endocrine system not fetuses.

However a man can marry a woman and have sex with her and be fine moraly. If God created homosexuality, which he did, it should, therefore, be okay for gays to get married and have sex.


If you say God created homosexuality, then you could say God created murder. WE created murder, from our desire to kill. The temptation to kill is there but do we have to yield to it?

no, just try and explain it to a grandmother or a 6 year old.
6 year olds need the entire world explained to them, but you might want to wait awhile to deal indepth with any issues of complicated sexuality. they won't really understand alot of these issues gay or straight until they are older.

granny is probably offended by a great deal of modern society. if she can't keep up with the times, that is sad but the world can't stand still to accommodate her archaic vision of propriety.

Bringing God into the argument is pretty infantile.
While, I have a stance on the existance of God, my take is not important.
It's none of your concern anyway.

First of all, you cannot logically prove the existance of God. If you think you can, you're out of your mind.
THe idea is - You hsouldnt have to be able to prove it, since faith is far more important that that aspect.

According to the bible, God created man. God created man as a flawed creature. Lust, being a sin - Is a flaw. Regardless of what the lust is directed toward, It is sinful behavior. A homosexual who lusts is in the same boat as a heterosexual who lusts. It matters not to god - lust is lust, plain and simple.

Howeverit is okay to act upon those lusts if one is married to the person one is lusting after.

Yes like the public displays of foreplay in front of school children or publically exposed genitals at gay partys that spill out to the street, Or Gay art, I was walking down Fillmore and in front of a store I noticed some elementry school kids responding to something in the window. As I passed I saw a monitor playing what looked like a waist high view of a man in jeans, then the man unzipped his jeans and pulled out his penis which he proceeded to spin around. This was in the store window of an art gallery owned and operated by a gay couple. The store was 2 blocks from an elementry school. I just think they dont respect any boundries.


And they complain about "having their rights infringed upon" :rolleyes:

Well not who you like specifically, but hormones have a lot to do with sexuality. Do your research.

And millions of people testifying to being gay when cases of weird hormonal patterns can not possibly be that high is exactly why I believe it to be a choice.

Aside from that, if you had to have come from straight parents who came from straight parents who came from... etc., where does the genetic disorder come from? This is not a flame, but a logical question. I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

Yes but the hormones you were speaking of are more directed to gender and sex-drive. I didn't exactly understand what you were trying to say in your second paragraph so if you could rephrase it I'd be happy to reply. As for the last, I personally don't believe that my being gay is entirely genetic per say..all I can tell you is that I did not choose to be gay. Infact..I do recall playing with barbies as a little boy(lol)..I think being gay has something to do with what goes on during development(as a fetus or as a very young child)

If you will note, I was respoding to a questin about why there is a whole argument about it being a choice. Since such arguments are made by the religious (stupid Christians actualy) it would be hard, actually impossible, to explain their arguments without refering to God.

Also I believe that God exists and this thread isn't about God's (non)existance


yes i understood that. However, I for one don't believe in it. There is no choice for being gay, some guy like dick and ass, some chicks like mawing rug. Those are the facts of life. Those 'people' who think religion has some part in justifing it only use religion ( and all religion not just christianity) as a cruch because they have no guts and can't take responsiblity for their own actions.

6 year olds need the entire world explained to them, but you might want to wait awhile to deal indepth with any issues of complicated sexuality. they won't really understand alot of these issues gay or straight until they are older.

granny is probably offended by a great deal of modern society. if she can't keep up with the times, that is sad but the world can't stand still to accommodate her archaic vision of propriety.


So, "Keeping up with the times" means being a militant homosexual nazi like you? Don't homosexual and nazi form an oxymoron anyway?

If you say God created homosexuality, then you could say God created murder. WE created murder, from our desire to kill. The temptation to kill is there but do we have to yield to it?

First off this thread is about whether or not homosexuality is a choice. If it isn't a choice that means that God made it so that there were people who were homosexual because they were born that way, because God doesn't seem like the type of entity to create beings who had no chance of going to Heavan. Murder is a choice and as the first murder happened before any other human had died, how do you know Cain knew what would happen?

6 year olds need the entire world explained to them, but you might want to wait awhile to deal indepth with any issues of complicated sexuality. they won't really understand alot of these issues gay or straight until they are older.

granny is probably offended by a great deal of modern society. if she can't keep up with the times, that is sad but the world can't stand still to accommodate her archaic vision of propriety.


dude you totaly missed the point. Keep the crap off the streets. Everyone in the government is just too politically correct to say it. Keep what you do in the sac in the sac

yes i understood that. However, I for one don't believe in it. There is no choice for being gay, some guy like dick and ass, some chicks like mawing rug. Those are the facts of life. Those 'people' who think religion has some part in justifing it only use religion ( and all religion not just christianity) as a cruch because they have no guts and can't take responsiblity for their own actions.

Indeed and I agree with your sentiments about the religious, and I say Christianity because the most vocal of those against homosexuals, at least in America, are Christians, such as Jerry Fallwell (Who happens to live near me).

So, "Keeping up with the times" means being a militant homosexual nazi like you? Don't homosexual and nazi form an oxymoron anyway?
psst the real ernst rohm was executed at hitler's orders in the night of the long knives in 1934, he's really kinda old school. he was openly gay and running the nazis SA before most of those scandalized grannies were even born.

Actually, there's no concrete evidence that the endocrine system is involved OR uninvolved. If it is involved, it'd be in fixing preference during gestation. You're likely correct if you're talking hormonal influence after development. The role testosterone and estrogen (and others) have on fetal development is largely unstudied for correlations to sexual preference. If you claim otherwise, I'd like to see some links to the studies you're useing for proof.

Agreed.

Just so happens that I am referring to a family relation in the medical research business. Smart man, and I value his opinion on this. (by the way, a University of Cincinnati Graduate if that means anything to anyone)

So I am with the 'involvement' side on this matter obviously lol.

wow, i didn't realize homos were so emotionally fragile that they have to wear bondage and S&M clothes in a downtown major city just to gain solidarity. What a pile of $#*!

Right on! Me and my girlfriend were trying to find a parking space near market street in San Francisco during one of their Penis/BDSM whatever parades and It was cordoned off but there were half naked freaks running around playing grab-ass out side of the alotted area. Anyways we counted about four sex acts in public, twenty exposed penises, Asses everywhere. All outside the restricted area. I mean this is a major area where families shop. I dont want to see naked freaks in orgies when I'm trying to buy a guitar.

First off this thread is about whether or not homosexuality is a choice. If it isn't a choice that means that God made it so that there were people who were homosexual because they were born that way, because God doesn't seem like the type of entity to create beings who had no chance of going to Heavan. Murder is a choice and as the first murder happened before any other human had died, how do you know Cain knew what would happen?


God created man who developed homosexual TENDENCIES which can be resisted. Much like a person with a penchant for killing can resist those urges. Matthew 19:12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.

dude you totaly missed the point. Keep the crap off the streets. Everyone in the government is just too politically correct to say it. Keep what you do in the sac in the sac
hmmmmm, let me think about that for a minute.... uhhhhmmm, hmmmm....



nope.

Uh, we heard you the first time, Junior.

Maybe you should learn to read things in their entirety. It was a different author who changed "gay" to "straight" to make a point :rolleyes:

dude you totaly missed the point. Keep the crap off the streets. Everyone in the government is just too politically correct to say it. Keep what you do in the sac in the sac

How is that crap? One could say the same thing (to give one example) about overweight men riding about in leather clothes without shirts on a motorcycle, congregating in some town (that was a purposeful stereotype, mind you..I realize not all bikers are like that, at all), but people don't, because it's viewed as freedom of speech/expression, which is protected in the Constitution.

So, "Keeping up with the times" means being a militant homosexual nazi like you? Don't homosexual and nazi form an oxymoron anyway?
And there we have it folks, Godwin's Law is now in effect.

God created man who developed homosexual TENDENCIES which can be resisted. Much like a person with a penchant for killing can resist those urges. Matthew 19:12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.

You do realise that he was talking about ACTUAL eunuchs. Also if homosexuality is an urge caused by being human then why does it exist in animals?

Right on! Me and my girlfriend were trying to find a parking space near market street in San Francisco during one of their Penis/BDSM whatever parades and It was cordoned off but there were half naked freaks running around playing grab-ass out side of the alotted area. Anyways we counted about four sex acts in public, twenty exposed penises, Asses everywhere. All outside the restricted area. I mean this is a major area where families shop. I dont want to see naked freaks in orgies when I'm trying to buy a guitar.
maybe you should move to a place where your kind are more accepted... i hear their is a thriving militant breeder community in salt lake city. the weather is very nice, the streets are clean and if they don't carry guitars in the stores out there you can always order one on line.

Right on! Me and my girlfriend were trying to find a parking space near market street in San Francisco during one of their Penis/BDSM whatever parades and It was cordoned off but there were half naked freaks running around playing grab-ass out side of the alotted area. Anyways we counted about four sex acts in public, twenty exposed penises, Asses everywhere. All outside the restricted area. I mean this is a major area where families shop. I dont want to see naked freaks in orgies when I'm trying to buy a guitar.


I'm normally against capital punishment, but I think it should be mandatory for anyone, straight or gay, doing that in front of children....or anyone else for that matter.

Howeverit is okay to act upon those lusts if one is married to the person one is lusting after.


And yet, it seems somehow less sinful for heterosexuals to lust , outside of marraige, than it is for homosexuals. This, i feel has nothing to do with God, and everything to do with the fact that a goodly number of people are so insecure about thier own sexuality, that they feel the need to impose thier own as being somhow superior to the other.
Which is ridiculous and shameful.

Regardless of the choice/born-that-way issue - you are a a friggin human. you're flawed, and so is everyone else. Get used to it.

Let's say that being homosexual is a sin, straight up. Sins can be forgiven. It's not a mortal sin.
From a religious standpoint, it's okay to think one person's lifestyle is unacceptible. however - this is the kingdom of earth - and the kingdom of earth and the kingdom of heaven are...significantly different places.
Nor do they belong together. the issue of choice/birth doesnt matter, simply for the fact that people are going to do things that you don't agree with, regardless of the law. Be that heavenly or earthly law. Disallowing them earthly rights (for instance, civil unions) isn't going to change a damn thing.

pandering to lust and lowly desires is not the marking of a "higher being"
These orgy parades are foolish, pubescent and low behaviors.

And there we have it folks, Godwin's Law is now in effect.
i begin godwin's law by just entiring a thread.

First of all, you cannot logically prove the existance of God. If you think you can, you're out of your mind.

The post was fine except for that. If you believe that it is 'infantile' to bring up God then why are you sharing your views on that with us?

maybe you should move to a place where your kind are more accepted... i hear their is a thriving militant breeder community in salt lake city. the weather is very nice, the streets are clean and if they don't carry guitars in the stores out there you can always order one on line.


I don't remember anyone other than the participants themselves and a few elite politicians "accepting" open displays of extreme sexual activity IN PUBLIC...and you wonder why so many people oppose the agenda.

God created man who developed homosexual TENDENCIES which can be resisted. Much like a person with a penchant for killing can resist those urges. Matthew 19:12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.

Omg would you leave god out of this!!! There is a huge difference between being gay and having homosexual tendencies! Homosexual tendencies are experienced by many teenagers due to teenagers, so resistance technically isn't necessary. Being gay is a whole different story and no matter how hard you resist(I put up the "good" fight for a year and a half myself) it just can't be changed.

And there we have it folks, Godwin's Law is now in effect.

It's been in effect since page three when he misused Nietzsche and later called himself a gay nazi.

The post was fine except for that. If you believe that it is 'infantile' to bring up God then why are you sharing your views on that with us?

because i am a hypocrite.
You are right. it was not tactful or appropriate for me to say that, given the content of my post.

You do realise that he was talking about ACTUAL eunuchs. Also if homosexuality is an urge caused by being human then why does it exist in animals?


I think he was suggesting neutering for those who can't control their urges, be they straight or gay. And was I denying it took place in animals? It's natural, but does that justify it? As I said before, the desire to kill is natural so does that make it right?

because i am a hypocrite.

LOL

works for me

And yet, it seems somehow less sinful for heterosexuals to lust , outside of marraige, than it is for homosexuals. This, i feel has nothing to do with God, and everything to do with the fact that a goodly number of people are so insecure about thier own sexuality, that they feel the need to impose thier own as being somhow superior to the other.
Which is ridiculous and shameful.

Regardless of the choice/born-that-way issue - you are a a friggin human. you're flawed, and so is everyone else. Get used to it.

Let's say that being homosexual is a sin, straight up. Sins can be forgiven. It's not a mortal sin.
From a religious standpoint, it's okay to think one person's lifestyle is unacceptible. however - this is the kingdom of earth - and the kingdom of earth and the kingdom of heaven are...significantly different places.
Nor do they belong together. the issue of choice/birth doesnt matter, simply for the fact that people are going to do things that you don't agree with, regardless of the law. Be that heavenly or earthly law. Disallowing them earthly rights (for instance, civil unions) isn't going to change a damn thing.

pandering to lust and lowly desires is not the marking of a "higher being"
These orgy parades are foolish, pubescent and low behaviors.

Err... I'm not sure why you are using my quote for this, because I was saying that since it is okay for heterosexuals to act out their lusts in marriage, so too should it be okay fo homosexuals. Sex outside of marriage is, from a religous standpoint, wrong whether one is gay or straight.

I don't remember anyone other than the participants themselves and a few elite politicians "accepting" open displays of extreme sexual activity IN PUBLIC...and you wonder why so many people oppose the agenda.
my agenda is world conquest i expect to be opposed by many... as to the so called "gay" agenda... meh... gay marriage, why anyone would fight for the right to pretend to be a breeder is beyond me... must have something to do with being able to get your friends to buy you expensive china and flatware sets you have already picked out.

Omg would you leave god out of this!!! There is a huge difference between being gay and having homosexual tendencies! Homosexual tendencies are experienced by many teenagers due to teenagers, so resistance technically isn't necessary. Being gay is a whole different story and no matter how hard you resist(I put up the "good" fight for a year and a half myself) it just can't be changed.


Tell that to the homosexuals who haven't given in to their lusts, and to the heterosexuals who abstain as well. 1 Corinthians 10:13 No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.

It's been in effect since page three when he used Nietsche and later called himself a gay nazi.
Naw, I go with the legal opinion that self referals or general mentions does not invoke Godwin's Law, it is one poster calling another a nazi that invokes the law. ;)

I think he was suggesting neutering for those who can't control their urges, be they straight or gay. And was I denying it took place in animals? It's natural, but does that justify it? As I said before, the desire to kill is natural so does that make it right?

So you are saying that God did in fact create homosexuality?

Also you will note a number of times in the bible where people are killed, under order of God, howeve rmurder is a sin.

I think he was suggesting neutering for those who can't control their urges, be they straight or gay. And was I denying it took place in animals? It's natural, but does that justify it? As I said before, the desire to kill is natural so does that make it right?

The desire to kill can be fought off and changed. Homosexuality can't be changed. That really is an unfair analogy you made. And how the hell does homosexuality being right or wrong have anything to do with this post? It is supposed to be about how homosexuality is NOT a choice.

Err... I'm not sure why you are using my quote for this, because I was saying that since it is okay for heterosexuals to act out their lusts in marriage, so too should it be okay fo homosexuals. Sex outside of marriage is, from a religous standpoint, wrong whether one is gay or straight.

I was not directly adressing you, so much as further adressing my point, in referrence to that post.

I don't remember anyone other than the participants themselves and a few elite politicians "accepting" open displays of extreme sexual activity IN PUBLIC...and you wonder why so many people oppose the agenda.

Agreed.

I would expect that everyone here would have enough decency to at least say no to extreme public displays of affection. I mean really, think of the kids... and the old women on the streets with heart conditions lol.

So you are saying that God did in fact create homosexuality?

Also you will note a number of times in the bible where people are killed, under order of God, howeve rmurder is a sin.


God's laws do not apply to Him, just to humans. As the Almight Creator of the universe, and One who can determine our temporal as well as spiritual destiny, wouldn't you think he would be a little above the laws of finite beings?

The desire to kill can be fought off and changed. Homosexuality can't be changed. That really is an unfair analogy you made. And how the hell does homosexuality being right or wrong have anything to do with this post? It is supposed to be about how homosexuality is NOT a choice.



Homosexual attractions cannot be resisted, but the act itself can. Much like the desire to murder cannot be resisted but the act itself can.

All I can say is... yeah, gays kind of scare me. You might say I'm homophobic. However, it's more like... yeah they just freak me out. So rather than acting extremely uncomfortable around them for long periods of time, I choose to leave their company as soon as I possibly can without creating too much of a disturbance.

POINT OF CLARIFICATION: I do not, I repeat, do not, hate the people themselves, I hate the action. It's against what God had planned for human relationships and is a result of the Fall of man.

KakeWalk

God's laws do not apply to Him, just to humans. As the Almight Creator of the universe, and One who can determine our temporal as well as spiritual destiny, wouldn't you think he would be a little above the laws of finite beings?

I'll take that as a yes to the "Did God create homosexuality" question. As such, if God created homosexuality then it is not wrong. If God is opposed to lusting and sex when not married to the person in question ergo gay marriage is just as acceptable as "regular" marriage

God's laws do not apply to Him, just to humans. As the Almight Creator of the universe, and One who can determine our temporal as well as spiritual destiny, wouldn't you think he would be a little above the laws of finite beings?
well if the rules don't apply to him, then they don't apply to me either. i would have created the universe myself if it hadn't already been done, and i'd have done it better and quicker and with brighter colors.

my agenda is world conquest i expect to be opposed by many... as to the so called "gay" agenda... meh... gay marriage, why anyone would fight for the right to pretend to be a breeder is beyond me... must have something to do with being able to get your friends to buy you expensive china and flatware sets you have already picked out.

Yay time for a lesson. Welcome to "What Marriage Brings 101"
1. The right to be in the ambulance with your partner should something happen
2. The right to visit you partner in the hospital under any circumstances
3. The right to marriage benefits offered by the companies you both work for
4. This could be something tax-deductable depending on where you live
5. The right to make decisions on you deceased partners estate should he/she not have a will
6. The right to take that final step in showing your love and commitment to your partner.

All I can say is... yeah, gays kind of scare me. You might say I'm homophobic. However, it's more like... yeah they just freak me out. So rather than acting extremely uncomfortable around them for long periods of time, I choose to leave their company as soon as I possibly can without creating too much of a disturbance.

POINT OF CLARIFICATION: I do not, I repeat, do not, hate the people themselves, I hate the action. It's against what God had planned for human relationships and is a result of the Fall of man.

KakeWalk

You say that God didn't create homosexuality, yet it exists in animals which are neither good nor evil. Therefore homosexuality is not evil.

All I can say is... yeah, gays kind of scare me. You might say I'm homophobic. However, it's more like... yeah they just freak me out. So rather than acting extremely uncomfortable around them for long periods of time, I choose to leave their company as soon as I possibly can without creating too much of a disturbance.

POINT OF CLARIFICATION: I do not, I repeat, do not, hate the people themselves, I hate the action. It's against what God had planned for human relationships and is a result of the Fall of man.

KakeWalk
gays are gay cuz that eve got adam to eat some fruit... please.

Agreed.

I would expect that everyone here would have enough decency to at least say no to extreme public displays of affection. I mean really, think of the kids... and the old women on the streets with heart conditions lol.

It shows me that almost nobody has any self control anymore. Sad state of affairs, but it is these same people who are so easily led and manipulated...
these parades whose sole aim is to seem to say "behold! for we cannot control ourselves!"

The desire to kill can be fought off and changed. Homosexuality can't be changed. That really is an unfair analogy you made. And how the hell does homosexuality being right or wrong have anything to do with this post? It is supposed to be about how homosexuality is NOT a choice.

Psst..religious orientation isn't too far removed from schizophrenia. How's that for analogizing? :D

I'll take that as a yes to the "Did God create homosexuality" question. As such, if God created homosexuality then it is not wrong. If God is opposed to lusting and sex when not married to the person in question ergo gay marriage is just as acceptable as "regular" marriage


Must we keep going in circles? If you say something is ok because God created the tendency to do it, then you could justify murder, as he created us with the tendency to commit it! God gave us our desires and the free will to submit to them or to resist them in order to enter His kingdom.

Homosexual attractions cannot be resisted, but the act itself can. Much like the desire to murder cannot be resisted but the act itself can.

So..if society told you it was wrong for you to be attracted to women(assuming your a guy) would you resist the act? Would you sentence yourself to a lifetime of loneliness because society didn't agree? It sounds to me like you pretty much just said you agree that homosexuality is not a choice.

Oh and new general rule. Please no more God! This thread is not to debate the existence, or intentions of god or the word of the Bible. So just leave religion out of this!

Psst..religious orientation isn't too far removed from schizophrenia. How's that for analogizing?


Nor is believing that the physical could originate from nothing without a cause that far from mental retardation. How's that for analogizing?

Yay time for a lesson. Welcome to "What Marriage Brings 101"
1. The right to be in the ambulance with your partner should something happen
2. The right to visit you partner in the hospital under any circumstances
3. The right to marriage benefits offered by the companies you both work for
4. This could be something tax-deductable depending on where you live
5. The right to make decisions on you deceased partners estate should he/she not have a will
6. The right to take that final step in showing your love and commitment to your partner.

breeder crap, after the revolution they'll be begging to get our benefits...


and 6 is psuedo sentimental crap, if you need state sanction to take the final step to show anything to your signifigant other you're way fascist for this old nazi.

Homosexual attractions cannot be resisted, but the act itself can. Much like the desire to murder cannot be resisted but the act itself can.

Agreed.

Though, as long as I don’t have to look at it, ya’ll do whatever you want. It isn’t my place to judge a gay person on what is essentially a sexual sin, when I, like almost all biologically healthy human beings, suffer my own bouts with lust.

Must we keep going in circles? If you say something is ok because God created the tendency to do it, then you could justify murder, as he created us with the tendency to commit it! God gave us our desires and the free will to submit to them or to resist them in order to enter His kingdom.

Incorrect! Adam and Eve's eating of the apple are what allowed for things like murder. Whereas homosexuality was present before such a time, in the animals! Also while murder is clearly stated against, because its in the Ten Commandments, You will notice that there is no eleventh Commandmenth along the lines of "Thou shalt not lay with a man if thou art a man"

So..if society told you it was wrong for you to be attracted to women(assuming your a guy) would you resist the act? Would you sentence yourself to a lifetime of loneliness because society didn't agree? It sounds to me like you pretty much just said you agree that homosexuality is not a choice.

Oh and new general rule. Please no more God! This thread is not to debate the existence, or intentions of god or the word of the Bible. So just leave religion out of this!



I'm not a guy :D But anyways, if >>Society<< told me then I really wouldn't give their desires much thought. However, if God himself, through the apostles and the prophets, condemned homosexuality and I was homosexual, then I would remain abstinent. "Nevertheless, not My will but Thine be done." As for religion....it's the only reason we oppose gay marriage and the like. Except for when it comes to open homosexual and/or heterosexual acts in the middle of the city.....we oppose that based on all that is decent >.<

gays are gay cuz that eve got adam to eat some fruit... please.

lmao..that made me laugh. I hope using the word "fruit" was your intention in this because it was funny for me. teehee..it reminds me of a joke I have with my friend..if being gay isn't genetic then where do gays come from? We grow on trees of course! ;) (fruit..get it..lol)

Oh and new general rule. Please no more God! This thread is not to debate the existence, or intentions of god or the word of the Bible. So just leave religion out of this!

lol that is just it though isn't it? Every controversial issue is usually tied to God in some way or another. I don't like getting different topics in a thread, but there is really no avoiding it.

maybe you should move to a place where your kind are more accepted... i hear their is a thriving militant breeder community in salt lake city. the weather is very nice, the streets are clean and if they don't carry guitars in the stores out there you can always order one on line.


Yeah, we plan to leave this festering asshole of a town as soon as possible.
And mabye with luck the quakes will bury it real deep after were gone.

Incorrect! Adam and Eve's eating of the apple are what allowed for things like murder. Whereas homosexuality was present before such a time, in the animals! Also while murder is clearly stated against, because its in the Ten Commandments, You will notice that there is no eleventh Commandmenth along the lines of "Thou shalt not lay with a man if thou art a man



A. It was never called an apple, I don't see why people insist on it being an apple :mad:

B. Sexuality itself (from what I infer) was not present before the Fall. Adam and Eve certainly did not exhibit it at all.

C. "Thou shalt not lay with a man if thou art a man" was actually mentioned in Leviticus, Romans (in context), and the epistles.

Agreed. Although I do enjoy a good spiritual debate...

My argument is, the "well, why not?" argument. I know that the activities of a minority of people aren't going to affect me at all - DIsney is evil, gay days or no - So let them have thier fun - Just don't bring your family if you don't want them to see it.

at the other end - People who cannot control themseves - Need to be controlled. Public displays of nudity and/or sexual activiy are for weak minded individuals who can think of no other way to express than by acting like animals.
Living in an ordered society requires that you exist within the bounds of a social contract. directly defying the contract will not change it. Changing society will.
HAving no self control will not change society- but galvanize it against you.

lol that is just it though isn't it? Every controversial issue is usually tied to God in some way or another. I don't like getting different topics in a thread, but there is really no avoiding it.

Oh it's just the whole god thing that bugs me. I am hard core atheist and it takes everything I have not to start pointing out all the flaws in religion and historical facts that point to the Bible being false as well as how illogical religion and the idea of a god is...and please people don't use this as a means to start debating religion!! plz plz plz plz!!

I can't make it any clearer than that. People ask me if its a choice and I respond "Yeah...I made the wonderful choice to be gay in Nebraska. To be shunned, questioned, oppressed, and so forth. A great choice." My experiences were almost exactly like yours. No, I can't explain homosexuality, and I don't think I should have to. I'm still human and should be viewed and treated as such.

I may not be gay, but I agree with what you have to say.
I've known many gays and lesbians and they have never had any problem with alot of others until they announced that they were gay. As soon as they did, they lost friends and family.
I was wondering though, we always attack gays and talk about how wonderful heterosexuals are, but where does that leave the bi-sexuals in the world???????

Yes it does matter. I may not have started this thread off in the most..courteous way. The reason for which being that I am sick of hearing people say that there was some kind of a choice involved in being gay. I'm kind of hoping that somehow this thread will manage to convince a few currently ignorant people that there really is no choice in this.

Actually it sounds like you made this as a flame bait thread and everyone flocked to it to shove your opinions down your throat. But being as you say you're clearly gay, then you'd enjoy getting things shoved down your throat.

Agreed. Although I do enjoy a good spiritual debate...

My argument is, the "well, why not?" argument. I know that the activities of a minority of people aren't going to affect me at all - DIsney is evil, gay days or no - So let them have thier fun - Just don't bring your family if you don't want them to see it.

at the other end - People who cannot control themseves - Need to be controlled. Public displays of nudity and/or sexual activiy are for weak minded individuals who can think of no other way to express than by acting like animals.
Living in an ordered society requires that you exist within the bounds of a social contract. directly defying the contract will not change it. Changing society will.
HAving no self control will not change society- but galvanize it against you.



True, homosexuality does not affect us in any observable ways (at least, that we know of)....excluding the fact that the anus is rather fragile and not suited for the task of intercourse....but I digress.....Homosexuality is not a sin against man, but against God.

I'm not a guy :D But anyways, if >>Society<< told me then I really wouldn't give their desires much thought. However, if God himself, through the apostles and the prophets, condemned homosexuality and I was homosexual, then I would remain abstinent. "Nevertheless, not My will but Thine be done." As for religion....it's the only reason we oppose gay marriage and the like. Except for when it comes to open homosexual and/or heterosexual acts in the middle of the city.....we oppose that based on all that is decent >.<

Again I will point out to you the fact that homosexuality is mentioned all of 3 times in the entire course of the bible in a negative way. Of those, at least two are ambiguous and that leaves one passeage and given the relative length and age of the Bible it is highly likely that it was misstraslated.

Also you just admitted that the US can't deny homosexuals the right to marry. Seperation of Church and State, remember?

Oh it's just the whole god thing that bugs me. I am hard core atheist and it takes everything I have not to start pointing out all the flaws in religion and historical facts that point to the Bible being false as well as how illogical religion and the idea of a god is...and please people don't use this as a means to start debating religion!! plz plz plz plz!!


I agree with you there God is intangible therefore cannot be called upon reliably in an argument.

Oh it's just the whole god thing that bugs me. I am hard core atheist and it takes everything I have not to start pointing out all the flaws in religion and historical facts that point to the Bible being false as well as how illogical religion and the idea of a god is...and please people don't use this as a means to start debating religion!! plz plz plz plz!!

you're feeding the beast. You're debating religion, and asking others not to.

Hey, I uesd to believe that gay people chose to be gay. Then I started talking with people who do cat scans on gay people and research the differences in the minds of straight and gay people. And I found that there are definate chemical differences in gay and straight people's brains. And because everybody is whining about it, I thought that I should provide scientific evidence for all of you regarding this somewhat controversial topic.

And let me make myself clear: I like gay people as people. I dont support the act of being gay. And I definately dont support how the liberals in our country and the rest of the world want to give gay people special rights just because they are gay. That's not right. Being gay isn't a choice, but choosing to act immorally because of it is something that I cant stand for.

And gay mairrage is legal everywhere, period, there is no law saying that gay people can't get married. I dont see why gay people say that they are being oppressed. It's probobly just because they hate Bush and are trying to get him out of office. I think that society needs to act more mature about this topic. First of all, the radical left needs to realize that the right doesn't hate gay people and that they are a group of tolerant gracious people, they just have different morals. And the radical right, needs to express these morals in an effective way that will show that they are tolerant, and all of the rednecks need slap to the face saying that times are changing and you cant go around committing hate crimes and being openly offensive towards gay people. Cause that's just not fair.

Finally, I am a strong Christain myself. But I believe that a good portion of the Christain nation hates gay people and sees them as inferior people. I have to say that people need to become more accepting and look at people as equals. Because all humans are equal, no matter what. It is all based off of Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin.

A. It was never called an apple, I don't see why people insist on it being an apple :mad:

B. Sexuality itself (from what I infer) was not present before the Fall. Adam and Eve certainly did not exhibit it at all.

C. "Thou shalt not lay with a man if thou art a man" was actually mentioned in Leviticus, Romans (in context), and the epistles.

A. I call it an apple because that is what a majority of people consider it to be.

B. That's why I said "in the animals!"

C. They aren't anywhere near as clear that, at least the first two aren't, an even the wording I gave is a little ambiguous

Oh it's just the whole god thing that bugs me. I am hard core atheist and it takes everything I have not to start pointing out all the flaws in religion and historical facts that point to the Bible being false as well as how illogical religion and the idea of a god is...and please people don't use this as a means to start debating religion!! plz plz plz plz!!


Fine, I won't evolve this topic into a religious discussion but I am allowed one rebuttle: Religious and historic facts actually vindicate the Bible of its critics. Any apparent "flaws" can easily be explained and usually don't last long (as was the case with the skeptics pointing to the lack of a Hittite civilization which was discovered in 1947....or somewhere around that time.) It's one of the things that has kept Christianity, Judaism, and Islam alive so long :)

Actually it sounds like you made this as a flame bait thread and everyone flocked to it to shove your opinions down your throat. But being as you say you're clearly gay, then you'd enjoy getting things shoved down your throat.

No I decided that rather than repeatedly explaining that being gay is not a choice throughout this forum that I'd just create a topic with an attention grabbing title and try and get my point across. What I had to say was not my opinion, it's something I know as fact. How long were you sitting at your computer putting the words of that response together so that you could take a swing at my being gay?

I'm not a guy

:eek:I always figured you were an old, dude. Judging by your positions on issues and such. But you know what they say about assuming…

So, I happen to be one of those people who believe that there's an element of choice to homosexuality. Before I go any further though I want to point out that I think that homosexuality is in no fundamental way better or worse than heterosexuality, and that in some practical ways it is in fact better.

Now, it seems obvious to me that regardless of innate preference people can choose to have sex with members of the same sex the opposite sex, or to be celibate and still lead happy and fulfilled lives. I think that anyone who disagrees on that point values sexuality far too much, and could probably benefit from ridding himself of the sex obsessed mentality our culture has inculcated in him. In this rather blunt sense, homosexuality, as a lifestyle, is a choice.

As far as innate preference goes, I believe that there probably are people who are innately homosexual and have little choice in the matter. But, I also believe that the vast majority of people are really close to bisexual in natural inclination and that our culture is responsible for most people sticking to only one sexuality. My best piece of evidence for this is the fact that large numbers of people of other cultures, like those of ancient Greece have been bisexual, and I just don't believe that the ancient greeks were all that different biologically from us. If that's the case, then our fairly rigid sexual divisions are primarily cultural, and thus changeable.

I'm willing to grant that some small number of people may be inflexibly straight or gay, but I think most people have a choice.

True, homosexuality does not affect us in any observable ways (at least, that we know of)....excluding the fact that the anus is rather fragile and not suited for the task of intercourse....but I digress.....Homosexuality is not a sin against man, but against God.

Well ,i'm sure sodomy isn't what nature intended, and a sin against nature is a sin a aginst god.

However, the fact that it is not a sin against man is, therefore, no reason why it should be outlawed.

Oh it's just the whole god thing that bugs me. I am hard core atheist and it takes everything I have not to start pointing out all the flaws in religion and historical facts that point to the Bible being false as well as how illogical religion and the idea of a god is...and please people don't use this as a means to start debating religion!! plz plz plz plz!!

I am a Christian myself, but ok. I'll avoid the God subject.

This leaves science which I already explained earlier.

And again and again I mean no offense. That is just my view.

Nor is believing that the physical could originate from nothing without a cause that far from mental retardation. How's that for analogizing?

Actually that's the domain of quantum mechanics, string theory especially, but since you're the genius we'll just have to relent because it's just a THEORY and we all know bronze age mythology is superior to modern science. ;)

Hey, I uesd to believe that gay people chose to be gay. Then I started talking with people who do cat scans on gay people and research the differences in the minds of straight and gay people. And I found that there are definate chemical differences in gay and straight people's brains. And because everybody is whining about it, I thought that I should provide scientific evidence for all of you regarding this somewhat controversial topic.

And let me make myself clear: I like gay people as people. I dont support the act of being gay. And I definately dont support how the liberals in our country and the rest of the world want to give gay people special rights just because they are gay. That's not right. Being gay isn't a choice, but choosing to act immorally because of it is something that I cant stand for.

And gay mairrage is legal everywhere, period, there is no law saying that gay people can't get married. I dont see why gay people say that they are being oppressed. It's probobly just because they hate Bush and are trying to get him out of office. I think that society needs to act more mature about this topic. First of all, the radical left needs to realize that the right doesn't hate gay people and that they are a group of tolerant gracious people, they just have different morals. And the radical right, needs to express these morals in an effective way that will show that they are tolerant, and all of the rednecks need slap to the face saying that times are changing and you cant go around committing hate crimes and being openly offensive towards gay people. Cause that's just not fair.

Finally, I am a strong Christain myself. But I believe that a good portion of the Christain nation hates gay people and sees them as inferior people. I have to say that people need to become more accepting and look at people as equals. Because all humans are equal, no matter what. It is all based off of Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin.

Actualy a number of states have passed laws banning gay marriage, all of them very conservative states. I'm pretty sure that Bush has said some things about making gay marriage illegal but I don't remember if this is true or not.

Actually that's the domain of quantum mechanics, string theory especially, but since you're the genius we'll just have to relent because it's just a THEORY and we all know bronze age mythology is inferior to modern science.



Bronze Age mythology? Hah!

True, homosexuality does not affect us in any observable ways (at least, that we know of)....excluding the fact that the anus is rather fragile and not suited for the task of intercourse....but I digress.....Homosexuality is not a sin against man, but against God.

How is it a sin against God if God created it in animals?

Bah, sorry to be the bitch but why does everyone keep offering opinions! I don't want your opinion on something you've never experienced. If you think it's a choice support you stance or don't reply.

...and I said no religion..

Bah, sorry to be the bitch but why does everyone keep offering opinions! I don't want your opinion on something you've never experienced. If you think it's a choice support you stance or don't reply.
Well, I posted my opinion along with supporting evidence above. Any comments?

So, I happen to be one of those people who believe that there's an element of choice to homosexuality. Before I go any further though I want to point out that I think that homosexuality is in no fundamental way better or worse than heterosexuality, and that in some practical ways it is in fact better.

Now, it seems obvious to me that regardless of innate preference people can choose to have sex with members of the same sex the opposite sex, or to be celibate and still lead happy and fulfilled lives. I think that anyone who disagrees on that point values sexuality far too much, and could probably benefit from ridding himself of the sex obsessed mentality our culture has inculcated in him. In this rather blunt sense, homosexuality, as a lifestyle, is a choice.

As far as innate preference goes, I believe that there probably are people who are innately homosexual and have little choice in the matter. But, I also believe that the vast majority of people are really close to bisexual in natural inclination and that our culture is responsible for most people sticking to only one sexuality. My best piece of evidence for this is the fact that large numbers of people of other cultures, like those of ancient Greece have been bisexual, and I just don't believe that the ancient greeks were all that different biologically from us. If that's the case, then our fairly rigid sexual divisions are primarily cultural, and thus changeable.

I'm willing to grant that some small number of people may be inflexibly straight or gay, but I think most people have a choice.


OMG, finally sombody with an objective observation. And not debating defensively.

Being Gay's a Choice?

Does it matter? Would it make any difference? Should it make any difference?

I believe in the right of any member of the human race to live their lives in the way they chose, as long as they don't infinge on the right of others to do the same (and no, gay kissing in the street does not infinge on this as straight kissing is allowed)
Whether the reason for ones behaviour to live ones life as described above are genetic, upbringing or free will is immaterial.

Bah, sorry to be the bitch but why does everyone keep offering opinions! I don't want your opinion on something you've never experienced. If you think it's a choice support you stance or don't reply.

That's another thing about this forum. Expect opinions from everywhere lol. That's why I rarely post myself.... Just when I'm in the mood for a good debate.

How is it a sin against God if God created it in animals?


God also created animals that devour each other. This is irrelevant.

(and no, gay kissing in the street does not infinge on this as straight kissing is allowed)


Gay sex, bondage clothing, and nudity in public does infringe upon our rights though -.-

f
I dont see why gay people say that they are being oppressed. It's probobly just because they hate Bush and are trying to get him out of office. I

But by pushing for it when they did they helped polorize the vote in Bush's favor, Thank you very much.

Bronze Age mythology? Hah!

Well if you'd care to prove it being much beyond that please do. I'll come back after I had some dinner to see how you're progressing. :)

God also created animals that devour each other. This is irrelevant.

Because humans don't eat meat

You say that God didn't create homosexuality, yet it exists in animals which are neither good nor evil. Therefore homosexuality is not evil.

You commented that in reply to my somewhat rash and bored-of-this topic post.

I hope, however, that if you've read your little children Bible recently, you'll realize that before the fall there was no sin whatsoever. Sin, as stated by God Himself through His people in the book of Leviticus, includes homosexuality. Therefore animal homosexuality did not exist before the fall. God has never, and will never create Sin. Homosexuality in all creatures is evil, plain and simple.

Do remember that we're all sinners in one way or another and yet we love other people and hate gay people. That is not good. We're all sinners, hate the acts that we do, not who we are. If you get down to brass tacks, even the acts don't matter because the sin of murder is just as horrible in the sight of God as lieing to your mom.

KakeWalk

A. It was never called an apple, I don't see why people insist on it being an apple :mad:

B. Sexuality itself (from what I infer) was not present before the Fall. Adam and Eve certainly did not exhibit it at all.

C. "Thou shalt not lay with a man if thou art a man" was actually mentioned in Leviticus, Romans (in context), and the epistles.


C: Okay. The translation is "Thou shalt not lay with a man as thou would lay with a woman" or very close to that. Noe, the problem comes in interpreting that. Does it mean two men should never sleep with each other or does it mean they should not sleep with each other with thoughts of breeding or something more/less specific we don't know about? See, that's my question. The ancient hebrew was translated using oral histories and other types of mutated guides. This leads to great deal of problems in finding the true meaning behind certain passages. And if I keep talking, I'll start debating myself on the milk/meat thing. And that'd get boring quick. So I'll just move on now.

Of course, I'm an asexual semi-agnostic/athiest Jew who couldn't care LESS what anyone does in the bedroom, as long as they keep it away from me. I don't care if they use The Complete Guide to William Shakespeare as a dildo. Just leave me in peace.

Well, I posted my opinion along with supporting evidence above. Any comments?

Fine I'll rebuttle then I'm going to bed.haha..

It wasn't just the Greeks.Many ancient cultures were accepting of homosexuality. The Greeks just happened to be very accepting of it. In fact I do believe it was most cultures at the time of pagan beliefs had homosexuality being a very common thing. Then along came Christianity..*dun dun dunnnn*.. damnit now I have to bring religion into this.
Ok..the Vatican, as it became well established, began seeing pagan religion as a threat. So it began launching smear campaigns against all things related to those pagan religions, homosexuality being one of those things. Thanks to the Vatican's smear campaigns, homosexuality, along with many other things such as women and sex, were recast as immoral, perverse things.

That is why we don't see homosexuality as a common occurence through most of recorded history. Greek history however, being so well documented, shows a large number of homosexual occurences.

There I hope I made my point.(I think I know way to many random facts)

Gay sex, bondage clothing, and nudity in public does infringe upon our rights though -.-

Though I will admit. I would rather not even see kissing in the streets... holding hands is quite enough. Call that extreme, conservative, overly moral or whatever you will.

Now would I ever try to stop it? Of course not. Not even if I had the oppertunity to put a law in place. That would be way too controlling. Extreme 'activities' however...

You commented that in reply to my somewhat rash and bored-of-this topic post.

I hope, however, that if you've read your little children Bible recently, you'll realize that before the fall there was no sin whatsoever. Sin, as stated by God Himself through His people in the book of Leviticus, includes homosexuality. Therefore animal homosexuality did not exist before the fall. God has never, and will never create Sin. Homosexuality in all creatures is evil, plain and simple.

Do remember that we're all sinners in one way or another and yet we love other people and hate gay people. That is not good. We're all sinners, hate the acts that we do, not who we are. If you get down to brass tacks, even the acts don't matter because the sin of murder is just as horrible in the sight of God as lieing to your mom.

KakeWalk

Actually it does not explicitly state homosexuality.Also only humans ate the fruit that gave them the knowledge of Good and Evil and therefore they are the only ones who can be evil. So animals aren't evil and since animals can be homosexual, homosexuality isn't evil.

C: Okay. The translation is "Thou shalt not lay with a man as thou would lay with a woman" or very close to that. Noe, the problem comes in interpreting that. Does it mean two men should never sleep with each other or does it mean they should not sleep with each other with thoughts of breeding or something more/less specific we don't know about? See, that's my question. The ancient hebrew was translated using oral histories and other types of mutated guides. This leads to great deal of problems in finding the true meaning behind certain passages. And if I keep talking, I'll start debating myself on the milk/meat thing. And that'd get boring quick. So I'll just move on now.

Of course, I'm an asexual semi-agnostic/athiest Jew who couldn't care LESS what anyone does in the bedroom, as long as they keep it away from me. I don't care if they use The Complete Guide to William Shakespeare as a dildo. Just leave me in peace.



"Sleeping with a man as with a woman" implies sexual thoughts, as that commandment was directed towards men. You can deduce that is what He was suggesting also, when he refered to lesbian acts as sinful as well.

C: Okay. The translation is "Thou shalt not lay with a man as thou would lay with a woman" or very close to that. Noe, the problem comes in interpreting that. Does it mean two men should never sleep with each other or does it mean they should not sleep with each other with thoughts of breeding or something more/less specific we don't know about? See, that's my question. The ancient hebrew was translated using oral histories and other types of mutated guides. This leads to great deal of problems in finding the true meaning behind certain passages. And if I keep talking, I'll start debating myself on the milk/meat thing. And that'd get boring quick. So I'll just move on now.

Of course, I'm an asexual semi-agnostic/athiest Jew who couldn't care LESS what anyone does in the bedroom, as long as they keep it away from me. I don't care if they use The Complete Guide to William Shakespeare as a dildo. Just leave me in peace.

Well you could say it is speaking out against bisexuals given the wording

No it's not!!! I can't help but notice all you ignorant, illogical fools in various posts saying "I think that being gay is a choice", "they chose to be gay" or other similar statements. Well guess what? Nobody cares what you think about it because you aren't living it so you can't possibly know!

I most certainly did not choose to be gay, but here I am...GAY! There was no point in my life where I suddenly decided, "You know, I think that I'm going to be gay, go through a whole year of hating my life, crying myself to sleep at night and trying to make myself straight; 6 months of believing I am just bisexual and don't have to tell anyone; an additional 1 and a half years of hiding it from everyone; then start coming out; and then have to fight for the right to marry while being hated by people who used to be my friends for no good reason; and then I can constantly hear words describing who I am used in negative connotations or as insults towards me.

Come on now, be realistic. You did not choose to be straight any more than I chose to be gay. So stop telling me this is some choice that I made. The only choice I had in this whole life-changing experience was to accept myself and start sharing myself more openly with the people I love.

I encourage anyone else on this forum who is gay/lesbian/bi to reply to this with their own experience and input to back me up on this. If anyone here wants to refute this be my guest, but I want to hear facts supporting what you have to say.(ya it's gunna b pretty hard isn't it)

First off, theres nothing wrong with being gay. I say that just in case some of my comments come across as homophobic, which isn't my intention.

Alright, so you were born gay? You woke up after being born, and from that moment on, you were alwyas going to be gay? I'm sorry, but this doesn't sound right to me. Being gay is a culture thing, in my opnion. Some people like that sort of thing, some people don't. It's free will... maybe there is something else in it, but I have a number of gay friends, and although some tell me that they were born gay, others say that one day they realised that they weren't actually interested in girls and were more interested in men, and that's all fine and dandy. But to go so far as to say that there is NO CHOICE in the matter is taking things to a little bit of an extreme.

Gay sex, bondage clothing, and nudity in public does infringe upon our rights though -.-

Im not against what individuals do in their bedrooms, But I am not impressed at all with the gay community as a whole because you can be judged by the company you keep, and when obcene acts occur at public gay rallies/events and such you are infringing our rights. So when you start saying "us, we, gays, homosexuals, our special people, our kind, whatever, you include that element as well, therefore youre a mob.

Actually it does not explicitly state homosexuality.Also only humans ate the fruit that gave them the knowledge of Good and Evil and therefore they are the only ones who can be evil. So animals aren't evil and since animals can be homosexual, homosexuality isn't evil.


Animals aren't good or evil. Animals are pretty much neutral, as they cannot distinguish between the two. Also, following that logic, wouldn't it be ok to kill someone too? Animals kill people/animals, thus killing isn't evil?

"Sleeping with a man as with a woman" implies sexual thoughts, as that commandment was directed towards men. You can deduce that is what He was suggesting also, when he refered to lesbian acts as sinful as well.


ACTUALLY, G-d never says anything against lesbians in the Torah. According to the Torah (Which is all I know, thanks) women can sleep with women, just not with animals. I know these things because I'm a boring girl who spent hours of her childhood ignoring sermons and reading the Torah instead. Mostly how to sacrifice animals and why.

I totally think we should go back to those rules. It'd be FUN.

But yes. Nothing against lesbians in the Torah and Reform rabbis are quesiton the translations of the line(s) against homosexual men.

Gay sex, bondage clothing, and nudity in public does infringe upon our rights though -.-
That has nothing to do with the subject, though. And why should the behaviour of some be taken as proof that all gays have intercourse in public regularly?

That reminds me, you might also say
"Straight sex, bondage clothing, and nudity in public does infringe upon our rights though -.-"
Ever seen pictures of the Berlin Love Parade (or Spring Break in the US)? Does that make all heterosexuals immoral sex beasts?

ACTUALLY, G-d never says anything against lesbians in the Torah. According to the Torah (Which is all I know, thanks) women can sleep with women, just not with animals. I know these things because I'm a boring girl who spent hours of her childhood ignoring sermons and reading the Torah instead. Mostly how to sacrifice animals and why.

I totally think we should go back to those rules. It'd be FUN.

But yes. Nothing against lesbians in the Torah and Reform rabbis are quesiton the translations of the line(s) against homosexual men.



I know in Romans 1, it refers to men/men and women/women sexuality as wrong, and I'm pretty sure it was mentioned somewhere in the OT...anyways, I wanna read the Torah :(

Animals aren't good or evil. Animals are pretty much neutral, as they cannot distinguish between the two. Also, following that logic, wouldn't it be ok to kill someone too? Animals kill people/animals, thus killing isn't evil?

Indeed killing isn't evil, murder is!

First off, theres nothing wrong with being gay. I say that just in case some of my comments come across as homophobic, which isn't my intention.

Alright, so you were born gay? You woke up after being born, and from that moment on, you were alwyas going to be gay? I'm sorry, but this doesn't sound right to me. Being gay is a culture thing, in my opnion. Some people like that sort of thing, some people don't. It's free will... maybe there is something else in it, but I have a number of gay friends, and although some tell me that they were born gay, others say that one day they realised that they weren't actually interested in girls and were more interested in men, and that's all fine and dandy. But to go so far as to say that there is NO CHOICE in the matter is taking things to a little bit of an extreme.

No saying that being gay is genetic is extreme at this point. Your going to have to learn to take our word for it that we did not choose to be gay. I myself had a moment of realization and the wonderfully hormonal age of 13. And I think one can pretty logically say that being I spent almost two years trying to change who I was is pretty solid evidence of the lack of choice involved in being gay wouldn't you.

Fine I'll rebuttle then I'm going to bed.haha..

It wasn't just the Greeks.Many ancient cultures were accepting of homosexuality. The Greeks just happened to be very accepting of it. In fact I do believe it was most cultures at the time of pagan beliefs had homosexuality being a very common thing. Then along came Christianity..*dun dun dunnnn*.. damnit now I have to bring religion into this.
Ok..the Vatican, as it became well established, began seeing pagan religion as a threat. So it began launching smear campaigns against all things related to those pagan religions, homosexuality being one of those things. Thanks to the Vatican's smear campaigns, homosexuality, along with many other things such as women and sex, were recast as immoral, perverse things.

That is why we don't see homosexuality as a common occurence through most of recorded history. Greek history however, being so well documented, shows a large number of homosexual occurences.

There I hope I made my point.(I think I know way to many random facts)


I also seem to recall mention that in these cultures that had prominant homosexuality, women were not treated very well, Coincedince? Correct me if I am wrong.

Fine I'll rebuttle then I'm going to bed.haha..

It wasn't just the Greeks.Many ancient cultures were accepting of homosexuality. The Greeks just happened to be very accepting of it. In fact I do believe it was most cultures at the time of pagan beliefs had homosexuality being a very common thing. Then along came Christianity..*dun dun dunnnn*.. damnit now I have to bring religion into this.
Ok..the Vatican, as it became well established, began seeing pagan religion as a threat. So it began launching smear campaigns against all things related to those pagan religions, homosexuality being one of those things. Thanks to the Vatican's smear campaigns, homosexuality, along with many other things such as women and sex, were recast as immoral, perverse things.

That is why we don't see homosexuality as a common occurence through most of recorded history. Greek history however, being so well documented, shows a large number of homosexual occurences.

There I hope I made my point.(I think I know way to many random facts)
I feel like we're arguing at cross pruposes here :p. So it seems to me that if a long time ago homosexuality was a lot more common, then cultural changes made it less common, the natural conclusion is that homosexuality is affected strongly by cultural forces and is not necesarily primarily biological.

If that's the case it seems to me that homosexuality is something that you can make a choice about.

That has nothing to do with the subject, though. And why should the behaviour of some be taken as proof that all gays have intercourse in public regularly?

That reminds me, you might also say
"Straight sex, bondage clothing, and nudity in public does infringe upon our rights though -.-"
Ever seen pictures of the Berlin Love Parade (or Spring Break in the US)? Does that make all heterosexuals immoral sex beasts?



Did I imply that all homosexuals did that? I was specifically refering to the animals that did do it in public. As for the Love Parade and open displays during Spring Break, did I ever say they were right?

Ever seen pictures of the Berlin Love Parade (or Spring Break in the US)? Does that make all heterosexuals immoral sex beasts?

If you have been reading, you'll note that we are condemning both sides that participate in these extreme acts. Be them straight or gay.

Also, read the rest of the thread to see how that came up.

I know in Romans 1, it refers to men/men and women/women sexuality as wrong, and I'm pretty sure it was mentioned somewhere in the OT...anyways, I wanna read the Torah :(

I read that stupid section of the law so many times. I kept opening to the same page. But if we ever need to start sacrificing animals and stoning people, I'll be able to train boys.

But, yes. Nothing against lesbians in the Torah whatsoever that I've ever seen. And I could build an ark! Which is pretty good, considering I've only been to temple three or four times since my confirmation 3 years ago.

Actually it does not explicitly state homosexuality.Also only humans ate the fruit that gave them the knowledge of Good and Evil and therefore they are the only ones who can be evil. So animals aren't evil and since animals can be homosexual, homosexuality isn't evil.

Call me crazy, but I think this passage explicitly states homosexuality. You can even check the reference yourself if you even read the Bible.

" 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." (Leviticus 20:13)

And that chapter only talks about punishments... lol. And actually, animals are not the only ones who can be evil. There is no "animal cannibalism" recorded in the Bible before the Fall. By "animal cannibalism" I mean, of course, simply animals killing and/or eating each other. And not only that, the Bible says that sin spread throughout the world. I have yet to meet anyone but you to say that, that does not mean animals too. Seeing as how by the time the Fall occurred, man hadn't gotten very far, considering exploration. ;)

-KakeWalk

Indeed killing isn't evil, murder is!


Ok then, theft. It is observable in animals, and stealing IS evil.

I also seem to recall mention that in these cultures that had prominant homosexuality, women were not treated very well, Coincedince? Correct me if I am wrong.

Ok I will..lol. in pagan culture women were actually regarded in fairly high esteem. (thus mother earth..Gaia..the goddess). The fact is, women were quite well respected. Unfortunately for women, the Vatican was being run by men, so of course god had to be a man. So the natural thing to do would be to ruin the name of the goddess..and hey while we're at it why not make women our property.

Ok then, theft. It is observable in animals, and stealing IS evil.

Animas don't have property

Ok then, theft. It is observable in animals, and stealing IS evil.

Do you have anything to show that animals believe in individual ownership of things? If not, then there's no stealing involved.

I feel like we're arguing at cross pruposes here :p. So it seems to me that if a long time ago homosexuality was a lot more common, then cultural changes made it less common, the natural conclusion is that homosexuality is affected strongly by cultural forces and is not necesarily primarily biological.

If that's the case it seems to me that homosexuality is something that you can make a choice about.

That doesn't make any sense. The cause for how common homosexuality has been is society's views on it. Once homosexuality became viewed as a bad thing and it was seen what the Vatican did to those who practiced it, it kind of became necessary for one to hide their sexuality.

Do you have anything to show that animals believe in individual ownership of things? If not, then there's no stealing involved.

exactly, animals are not even sentient. So why are we bringing them up? This clearly can not support either side.

It also seems that alot of societies that treated women badly in the past and present(china, middle east, ect) have accepted populations of gays. Its not ok for a muslim woman to be seen in public but her husband can go to the bathouse and pick up a boy. Personally I think that some of the folks in the vatican in the early days who said that priests cant marry or have sex, and enforced the strict obediance of women were were repressed homosexuals.

Do you have anything to show that animals believe in individual ownership of things? If not, then there's no stealing involved.


The lion which tries to defend it's yummy dead carcass from the hyeenas apparently believes in the individual ownership of things. ;)

Firstly, I'm not from a christian background, but I have read the bible (a hobby of mine is studying the texts of the major religions), and from a netural bystander point of view, I see very little in either the old or new version that directly stating that homosexuality is against christianity, although there are a number of sections that suggest that allowing one's lust (presumable both homo- or hetro-) to rule one actions is 'evil'. Note, however, that many post-bible texts are against homosexuality, particularly those produced by the catholic church, and the christainity against homosexuality is something that has developed more in the last thousand years than in christ's time.

I agree with a number of posts about how there is a wee bit too much of public nudity and sexual displays. However, unlike most of the posts that talking about this so far, I would suggest that homosexual displays are still in the minority ... turn on your tv and wait for the first beer ad., go down to your local sporting venue and watch the cheerleader, or if you what real replications of sexual acts turn into your local music-video channel. If you want to see ordinary citizens doing such, find the nearest dirty street corner filled with hookers, or better still head into the parks at night and watch the teenagers getting it on. I am not moralising about this things; rather I am pointing out that while there are people committing public displays of gay sexual acts, there are (proportionally) more displays of hetrosexual acts.

Really, guys, does it matter why someone is gay or what your belief says about that? Just let everyone live their sexual life (gay, bi, a- or straight) as they want and they will let you live yours. Surely simply knowing that there are people who love people of a different or same sex to the ones you love can't ruin YOUR life.

Did I imply that all homosexuals did that? I was specifically refering to the animals that did do it in public. As for the Love Parade and open displays during Spring Break, did I ever say they were right?
No, but neither did I state that I condone this behaviour. It just doesn't work as an argument in a discussion with the topic "Being Gay's a Choice"

Call me crazy, but I think this passage explicitly states homosexuality. You can even check the reference yourself if you even read the Bible.

" 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." (Leviticus 20:13)

And that chapter only talks about punishments... lol. And actually, animals are not the only ones who can be evil. There is no "animal cannibalism" recorded in the Bible before the Fall. By "animal cannibalism" I mean, of course, simply animals killing and/or eating each other. And not only that, the Bible says that sin spread throughout the world. I have yet to meet anyone but you to say that, that does not mean animals too. Seeing as how by the time the Fall occurred, man hadn't gotten very far, considering exploration. ;)

-KakeWalk

Again there is some ambiguity there. And I like how anyone who has a different interpretation of God's message than you hasn't read the Bible. Also sin didn't spread throughtout the world, proof of this is in Genesis, you know the flood? Where two of every animal was saved for breeding purposes. How much you want to bet that every single one of those animals was perfectly straight?

It also seems that alot of societies that treated women badly in the past and present(china, middle east, ect) have accepted populations of gays. Its not ok for a muslim woman to be seen in public but her husband can go to the bathouse and pick up a boy. Personally I think that some of the folks in the vatican in the early days who said that priests cant marry or have sex, and enforced the strict obediance of women were were repressed homosexuals.



Tell that to the Taliban ;)

Also, read the rest of the thread to see how that came up.
I did read the whole of the thread. My point just is that the behaviour of some gay people has absolutely nothing to do with the actual topic of the thread.

Ok I will..lol. in pagan culture women were actually regarded in fairly high esteem. (thus mother earth..Gaia..the goddess). The fact is, women were quite well respected. Unfortunately for women, the Vatican was being run by men, so of course god had to be a man. So the natural thing to do would be to ruin the name of the goddess..and hey while we're at it why not make women our property.


I dig the Gaia.

Tell that to the Taliban ;)

The Taliban are homos. lol.

Again there is some ambiguity there. And I like how anyone who has a different interpretation of God's message than you hasn't read the Bible. Also sin didn't spread throughtout the world, proof of this is in Genesis, you know the flood? Where two of every animal was saved for breeding purposes. How much you want to bet that every single one of those animals was perfectly straight?


Who knows, perhaps those animals who were gay (And I think all animals breed when given the option, bisexuality is about as far as it goes....) became extinct? It never says that all the species on board survived.

Who knows, perhaps those animals who were gay (And I think all animals breed when given the option, bisexuality is about as far as it goes....) became extinct? It never says that all the species on board survived.

Did they hold gay animal pride rallies?

That doesn't make any sense. The cause for how common homosexuality has been is society's views on it. Once homosexuality became viewed as a bad thing and it was seen what the Vatican did to those who practiced it, it kind of became necessary for one to hide their sexuality.
Ohh, ok. I misunderstood your argument.

I suppose my counter argument would be that homosexuality was by all accounts very common in ancient greek times, so that most men had gay sex from time to time. By contrast, a still very small fraction of people even today are homosexual, and I don't think there's a huge fraction of the population that's concealing it's sexuality any more.

If I'm right on those counts, then there were just more people who were homosexual in greeks times, which would mean that for most those people their sexuality was culturally determined, and hence a matter of choice (in principle).

So while I believe there may be people who don't have a choice, I still think that the vast majority of people do have a choice.

Did they hold gay animal pride rallies?

As they are animals, I'm gonna go with no, and aren't posts supposed to add something to the thread?

Call me crazy, but I think this passage explicitly states homosexuality. You can even check the reference yourself if you even read the Bible.

" 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." (Leviticus 20:13)

And that chapter only talks about punishments...

And that chapter, and that whole book, and the ones near it only apply to Jewish people, so even if it does reference homosexuality - which is, according to many sources, unlikely - then it doesn't apply to the majority of people any more than the US constitution applies in Djibouti.

That, or you're giving up on shellfish and clothes made of more than one fibre.

Ok I will..lol. in pagan culture women were actually regarded in fairly high esteem. (thus mother earth..Gaia..the goddess). The fact is, women were quite well respected. Unfortunately for women, the Vatican was being run by men, so of course god had to be a man. So the natural thing to do would be to ruin the name of the goddess..and hey while we're at it why not make women our property.


Actually, women have always been restricted, even in pagan cultures. Restrictions were observable in Rome, which was undeniably Pagan...and women are as much the property of men as men are the property of women.

Matthew 19:4-5 4And He answered and said to them, "Have you not read that He who made[a] them at the beginning "made them male and female,'[b] 5and said, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?

Alright, we have officially sent this topic into a downward spiral by comparing humans to other animals...

And that chapter, and that whole book, and the ones near it only apply to Jewish people, so even if it does reference homosexuality - which is, according to many sources, unlikely - then it doesn't apply to the majority of people any more than the US constitution applies in Djibouti.

That, or you're giving up on shellfish and clothes made of more than one fibre.


But the New Testament applies to Jew and Gentile, and they stated at least twice how homosexual acts were an abomination.

But the New Testament applies to Jew and Gentile, and they stated at least twice how homosexual acts were an abomination.

Okay. Stop RIGHT THERE. I'm Jewish. The New Testament does NOT apply to me. Not in the SLIGHTEST. I believe in the 5 book of Moses, the Talmud and the haftorah. Not the New Testament.

So. No. I'd recommend quiting while ahead. Belief in the New Testament makes you a Christian. Thank you, try again.

No, that's not a sore spot. Not at ALL.

As they are animals, I'm gonna go with no, and aren't posts supposed to add something to the thread?

Ok, Why do so many gays adopt the affectations of women, but then distort them to the point of bieng slutty and then claim how bieng gay has nothing to do with sex?

But the New Testament applies to Jew and Gentile, and they stated at least twice how homosexual acts were an abomination.

There are ambiguous statements, with errors compounded by repeated translation, which some people now interpret to mean that. Let's also take into account that there's evidence of additions being made to the manuscripts by other people, which makes any interpretation of author intent based on two statements in a modern translation, at best, shaky and unreliable.

Similarly, where it says "thou shall not suffer a witch to live", the original word was 'poisoner'. It just happens that the Latin for black magic and poisoning is the same word, which leads to a great deal of difficulty in reading the details of some Roman trials.

Okay. Stop RIGHT THERE. I'm Jewish. The New Testament does NOT apply to me. Not in the SLIGHTEST. I believe in the 5 book of Moses, the Talmud and the haftorah. Not the New Testament.

So. No. I'd recommend quiting while ahead. Belief in the New Testament makes you a Christian. Thank you, try again.

No, that's not a sore spot. Not at ALL.



Romans 3:29 29Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith.




Sorry for prodding the sore spot >.<

No it's not!!! I can't help but notice all you ignorant, illogical fools in various posts saying "I think that being gay is a choice", "they chose to be gay" or other similar statements. Well guess what? Nobody cares what you think about it because you aren't living it so you can't possibly know!

I most certainly did not choose to be gay, but here I am...GAY! There was no point in my life where I suddenly decided, "You know, I think that I'm going to be gay, go through a whole year of hating my life, crying myself to sleep at night and trying to make myself straight; 6 months of believing I am just bisexual and don't have to tell anyone; an additional 1 and a half years of hiding it from everyone; then start coming out; and then have to fight for the right to marry while being hated by people who used to be my friends for no good reason; and then I can constantly hear words describing who I am used in negative connotations or as insults towards me.

Come on now, be realistic. You did not choose to be straight any more than I chose to be gay. So stop telling me this is some choice that I made. The only choice I had in this whole life-changing experience was to accept myself and start sharing myself more openly with the people I love.

I encourage anyone else on this forum who is gay/lesbian/bi to reply to this with their own experience and input to back me up on this. If anyone here wants to refute this be my guest, but I want to hear facts supporting what you have to say.(ya it's gunna b pretty hard isn't it)


Here, Here. I totally agree with you. I consider myself a bisexual. I just accept that fact. You don't just wake up in the morning and say "I'm Gay/Lesbian/Bi." It just doesn't happen.

There are ambiguous statements, with errors compounded by repeated translation, which some people now interpret to mean that. Let's also take into account that there's evidence of additions being made to the manuscripts by other people, which makes any interpretation of author intent based on two statements in a modern translation, at best, shaky and unreliable.

Similarly, where it says "thou shall not suffer a witch to live", the original word was 'poisoner'. It just happens that the Latin for black magic and poisoning is the same word, which leads to a great deal of difficulty in reading the details of some Roman trials.



Ah, the translation has been challenged in the epistles but not in Romans. Romans' depiction was too detailed to be refuted by "translation errors". Paul made it quite clear how God thought of unbridled lust and homosexual acts.

Romans 3:29 29Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith.




Sorry for prodding the sore spot >.<

All I can say is that I've yet to meet a Jew who believes in the New Testament. And would be fairly offended if I did. Belief in the New Testament, belief in 'Christ' is Christianity, not Judaism.

But that's SO another argument for another time. An argument that also involves many things about why Christianity rejected the Torah but still follows the 10 commandments.

But that's SO another argument for another time. An argument that also involves many things about why Christianity rejected the Torah but still follows the 10 commandments.


Not all of them, He lists the ones that we are to keep....but yeah....this is the wrong thread for such a discussion so I'll stop here.

Ah, the translation has been challenged in the epistles but not in Romans. Romans' depiction was too detailed to be refuted by "translation errors". Paul made it quite clear how God thought of unbridled lust and homosexual acts.

Except the ambiguity there is that no clear definition is given to natural and unnatural, and homosexual acts are described as 'unclean' - much like shellfish. Furthermore, unbridled lusts may refer specifically to ecstatic and/or mystery cults.

So, no. It's not quite clear, if you only read what's there, even if you take it on faith that the translators have managed not to screw it up. And remember, there's evidence that King James - the one behind the favourite bible of fundies everywhere - was as gay as a maypole.

So, no. It's not quite clear, if you only read what's there, even if you take it on faith that the translators have managed not to screw it up. And remember, there's evidence that King James - the one behind the favourite bible of fundies everywhere - was as gay as a maypole.


So wouldn't it be rather absurd for him to include those things unless he truly believed what he was doing was wrong? ;)

it should not not be born to be wild it should now say born to be gay, gay is just genetics when you act it then that's acting it choice.

So wouldn't it be rather absurd for him to include those things unless he truly believed what he was doing was wrong? ;)

No, not really - after all, even the passage that you cite as most detailed suffers from an absurd lack of context and definition; the detail depends on assumptions based on possibly flawed interpretations of other passages; house of cards, anyone? 'Natural' could easily refer to the natures of the individuals, in which case it claims that it's improper for a homosexual male to try and get a good look at the Vestal Virgins.

It's fun to see that expression that the fundamentalists get when you tell them, though.

Absurd lack of context? It was pretty evident that Paul was speaking disapprovingly of it or else would he have referred to it in such harsh rhetoric?

I haven't read all of this because I'm tired and it's 3 am, but I am already extremely disturbed after about 6 pages.

You say "acting" gay is a choice. So does that mean all gays must marry the opposite sex and pretend to be straight so those who are straight can feel comfortable with themselves and not be temped? See, I honestly don't get either arguement here. There's nothing to back it really, and don't go saying I'm this or that, because I'm bi-sexual in Montana and believe me, it's not the greatest thing in a town of about 500. I think I'm the only openly bi one in this town.

Anyway, I must ask those of you who are questioning why people are gay. Well, why are you straight? For the men the answer is usually, I like women. For women the answer is of course, I like men. Well, why can't the simple answer for homosexuals be the same? Gay men just like gay men, there should be no questioning, no fights. Maybe they can help themselves, maybe they can't. But if a straight man isn't questioned for liking women then why should a gay man for liking men?

And about all the religions being dragged into here, I personally don't think they have anything to do with gay rights or the like, but since I saw my own I was a little shocked. All I will say however, is that Pagan religions never treated women as slaves, sorry to burst your bubble. Now-a-days, it would be considered that way but in that time period the women had a lot more rights and privledges than women in other places. And if Pagans didn't respect women explain Gaia's existence, wouldn't she be a man if women were nothing?

Yea... I'm going to bed now. Have fun fighting with eachother and tearing apart my words as I'm sure you will.

*nods* Absurd lack of context. The disapproval itself is clear, but there's a good chance it refers to acting against one's own nature or toward the practices of the ecstatic and mystery cults. There's a lack of context for exactly what he's disapproving of.

Not to mention, Paul's other uses of 'nature' refer to the nature of the person.

And about all the religions being dragged into here, I personally don't think they have anything to do with gay rights or the like, but since I saw my own I was a little shocked. All I will say however that Pagan religions never treated women as slaves, sorry to burst your bubble. Now-a-days, it would be considered that way but in that time period the women had a lot more rights and privledges than women in other places. And if Pagans didn't respect women explain Gaia's existence, wouldn't she be a man if women were nothing?


Women were excluded as much in ancient Greece and Rome as they were in Christian times. It's undeniable...and, if you have read Fox's Book of Martyrs, then you will be well aware of the many forms of torture invented by the Pagan persecutors especially for Christian women. I have no more to say.

*nods* Absurd lack of context. The disapproval itself is clear, but there's a good chance it refers to acting against one's own nature or toward the practices of the ecstatic and mystery cults. There's a lack of context for exactly what he's disapproving of.

Not to mention, Paul's other uses of 'nature' refer to the nature of the person.



Then why did he single out homosexual acts instead of including homosexuals involved in heterosexual acts?

Then why did he single out homosexual acts instead of including homosexuals involved in heterosexual acts?

Quite possibly, as a result of unfamiliarity with homosexual acts outside of hearsay reports of cult rites.

Quite possibly, as a result of unfamiliarity with homosexual acts outside of hearsay reports of cult rites.



But this was Rome. Homosexuality would be familiar to anyone, given its prevalence.

Paul wrote his letter to the Romans before he'd even been there.

Paul was a native Roman, I'm certain he would be familiar with their culture...and homosexuality was not limited to Rome itself, it was present in all Roman territory.

Certainly being gay is is not a choice it's an to be thing not a do thing.
But gays should have the right to get married,but neither a lesbian or a gay couple should have children.It has been proven by us in Belgium that they can raise a child very normal an that the children of holebis don't always get teased.But is it right that holebis get kids,i think not.I don't hate holebis bu t it's just not the way of nature,it's like we have to die someday.It's something man is not allowed to know and manipulate.But i don't hate holebis certainly not.I wouldn't be a communist if i hated holebis,i think they could learn things to the society and bring a new refreshing switch and helping hand to us.They also are people like us they can be our friends,family or neighbours,cuz who cares with who they sleep with.
Cuz everby=equal.

So wouldn't it be rather absurd for him to include those things unless he truly believed what he was doing was wrong? ;)
Falsifying the Bible for ones own sake? The word of God? That concept would be so alien to people of those times that it never even come to their mind. No one defied God, because he would strike you down on the spot and then its hellfire for you.
What strikes me with all those Bible vs. Gay discussions is that the Bible fraction plays the salad bar all the time. Hey, that rule isnt valid anymore, that one is, this is ironclad, this is soo 200 BC. Just because it is convenient? Its rather plain and simple, isnt it? Either the Bible is the word of a supreme being responsible for our existence and which is omnipotent and omniscient or it isnt. In which case it is a rule book, combined with stories and legends of the judaic tribes, with an update because a very innovative, brilliant student of the scriptures came along and made some suggestions on how to improve on the old rules.
If God is double-omni, he could not possibly dictate a book that becomes outdated or unclear or open to interpretation by erronous human beings. He'd add things like "Oh, that shellfish thingie becomes invalid with the advent of fridges. Dont bother, Levi, they will understand when the time is right. F-R-I-D-G-E, thats correct".
Whats my point? The tribes of Israel had a harsh, nomadic lifestyle, high infant mortality etc. As important it may be for the individual to abstain from possibly poisonous, spoiled food to prolong his life, as important is a high reproductive rate for the whole tribe and a strictly organized labor force.
The men do the herding, hunting and whatever outside the camps, the women do the household. A two men couple means no one gets to do the upkeep work and the clan has less children, gays are a dead end in continuation plans.
Thus i conclude that the forbiddance of homosexual behaviour has ultimately the same practical reasons as slaughtering laws, not because God is angry, but to ensure the wellbeing of the jewish people as a whole.

Ah, the translation has been challenged in the epistles but not in Romans. Romans' depiction was too detailed to be refuted by "translation errors". Paul made it quite clear how God thought of unbridled lust and homosexual acts.

Coz of course we as humans can know what God is thinking. We can never know what the Lord is thinking, we r, after all, only human. We can put our human spin on it but we will only know if we were right when we die and met him face-to-face (whom ever u believe God is).

Homosexuality is not a choice. i am a bi christian, i did not wake up 1 morn and say well 2day im gonna b bi. i realised i was gay early in my life by the fact that i was attracted to my classm8s. i then realised that i am bi when i met my fiance. I was attracted 2 him and was very confused. B4 him i found no man attractive, even though i have had relations wiv other men. U cannot choose who fall in love wiv. i think that, so long as u dont hurt others, every1 should b allowed to live as they wish.

Also, the bible was altered by the monks etc of the dark/middle ages go gain money from the populace. This was because the majority of ppl could not read so they believed everything that the monks etc told them. this included things 2 do with witchcraft and sexuality.

No saying that being gay is genetic is extreme at this point. Your going to have to learn to take our word for it that we did not choose to be gay. I myself had a moment of realization and the wonderfully hormonal age of 13. And I think one can pretty logically say that being I spent almost two years trying to change who I was is pretty solid evidence of the lack of choice involved in being gay wouldn't you.

But, can you show me any real, physical evidence of either one of these arguements? Suppose you are right, and I am wrong, and that there is no choice in the matter. Evidence? Or, suppose I am right, and you are wrong, and that choice is the defining factor. Evidence? Basically, this thread makes no sense and can never fully resolve the question at hand because there is no hard evidence for one arguement or another. The word of all these people, by the way, cannot be counted as hard evidence due to the fact that they are opinions

id say one of the real issues isnt really if its chosen or not, because who cares. It really isnt our business if soandso sleeps with him/her. I just say, as someone said earlier in this string i believe, is keep it as private as heterosexuals keep their stuff quiet. Dont show youre stuff because straight men dont want to see another man's, gay men may not want to see women's. Lesbian women may not want to see a man's, and straight women may not want to a see another women's. Just dont go so public that it is disturbing... Thats all

I fully respect gay/lesbian culture although im not part of it, i dont care if it is choice or not, though i doubt it could be. And for what it matters, i dont care about religion, sounds harsh, but i see it as BS. And I know im going to hell for it. :headbang: End of story

id say one of the real issues isnt really if its chosen or not, because who cares. It really isnt our business if soandso sleeps with him/her. I just say, as someone said earlier in this string i believe, is keep it as private as heterosexuals keep their stuff quiet. Dont show youre stuff because straight men dont want to see another man's, gay men may not want to see women's. Lesbian women may not want to see a man's, and straight women may not want to a see another women's. Just dont go so public that it is disturbing... Thats all

I fully respect gay/lesbian culture although im not part of it, i dont care if it is choice or not, though i doubt it could be. And for what it matters, i dont care about religion, sounds harsh, but i see it as BS. And I know im going to hell for it. :headbang: End of story

hmmmm. but do u think that its ok for straight cpls 2 kiss? if yes, then what about gay/lesbian cpls? y should it b 1 rule for sum and one for every1 else? i agree that private matters should stay private, but public shows affection should b allowed regardless of who is in the pairing.

i've had enough with all these small minded people that think being gay is something you choose... its not...

and then these people that say... 'well its your choice to act on those homosexual feelings' well, that is just stupid... its like telling a a dog to deny its feelings of being a dog, and act like a cat... because thats seen as more, 'correct'

well, to me thats just STUPID! why deny waht you are??? it doesnt hurt anyone... i dont run around going forcing 'straight' guys to have sex with me... and this whole thing of.. 'they will try and turn you...' its aload of rubbish... a gay person may chat up a staight person... but if they arent interested, then nothign will come of it... just asif a straight person tried chatting up a gay person or for arguments sake, a stright person chatting up another stright person... if there is no attraction then thats as far as it goes!

and yes.. there are exceptions.. as with anything else... some ppl will TRY the gay thing, just to see what its like... doesnt mean they are gay... just as some gay ppl will try the straight thing... only the individual themselves truely know what there feelings are, and other people shouldnt have a go at them for what those feelings are.

ok, rant over... because i have to go out now!

I think the single best way to approach the 'being gay is a choice' argument is to refer your opponent to the kid on the playground [assuming he attended public school] that exhibited undeniable homosexual tendancies as early as, say, age 5. There's always one kid in there that likes all the shit that the girls like, and he'd always hold the kickball up by his chest with both arms wrapped around it like a girl too. And whenever they'd play baseball you'd see em hold their hand way out and close their eyes at the last second like a girl of that age generally would.

You really think that kid is thinking to himself: "Gee, I can't wait to take cocks up the ass?"

Wow... you kids today sure are sophisticated. At that age, we just thought kids like that were weaklings... and they usually were. Acting "Gay" (i.e. playing to negative Stereotypes) is very, very, much a choice. Eutrusca can back me on this-there are lots and lots of guys who're into other guys, who don't act like pansies or get obnoxious. There are also Straight guys you'd swear were flamers-based mostly on body-language and behaviour.

you can be Gay and not be a Pansy. So the statement "Acting Gay is a Choice" is true in that context... because one need not be gay, to behave to stereotype (i.e. you can be a Pansy, and not be Gay.)

Before Clinton's little misguided attempt to fix the Regs using an Executive Order, there were a lot of gays who just didn't act it-and their commanders knew it, but didn't excercise "Discretion" to get rid of 'em-because they were good soldiers. After, Commanders were put into a bind... see, the Clinton policy did exactly zip to eliminate the UCMJ definition of Sodomy, and Sodomy-as-defined under UCMJ is punishable by Dishonourable Discharge and five in Leavenworth.
By removing Commander's discretion, the Commanders are forced to:

1.) Acknowledge that a given soldier is homosexual, and...

2.) Punish said gay soldier for being sexually active.

The Discretion clause was removed by the Executive Order. A Commander no longer has the power to "Know" and not "act."

while this outcome no doubt has Bigots who managed to avoid being busted out of hte service drooling, it's bad for the Service, and it's bad for th Gay Community, and it's bad for the Nation.

Officers don't have the legal authority to pick and choose which Regulations and Lawful Orders they are obligated to follow. it comes with the shiny rank insignia and the green suit (or blue, or Khaki...).

Prior to that state of affairs, there were a LOT of gay soldiers in uniform who did just fine career-wise because they didn't act-the-part in normal interactions. They were more than who they slept with, and defined themselves the way a Soldier, Sailor, Marine, or Airman should-by who they are, not who "Society" (in its sick, twisted collective Id) thinks they are.

Most people don't know they're talking to a Gay man unless he's really camping it up to be noticed as "Gay".

i've had enough with all these small minded people that think being gay is something you choose... its not...

and then these people that say... 'well its your choice to act on those homosexual feelings' well, that is just stupid... its like telling a a dog to deny its feelings of being a dog, and act like a cat... because thats seen as more, 'correct'

well, to me thats just STUPID! why deny waht you are??? it doesnt hurt anyone... i dont run around going forcing 'straight' guys to have sex with me... and this whole thing of.. 'they will try and turn you...' its aload of rubbish... a gay person may chat up a staight person... but if they arent interested, then nothign will come of it... just asif a straight person tried chatting up a gay person or for arguments sake, a stright person chatting up another stright person... if there is no attraction then thats as far as it goes!

and yes.. there are exceptions.. as with anything else... some ppl will TRY the gay thing, just to see what its like... doesnt mean they are gay... just as some gay ppl will try the straight thing... only the individual themselves truely know what there feelings are, and other people shouldnt have a go at them for what those feelings are.

ok, rant over... because i have to go out now!



I'm sorry, but calling well-founded viewpoints "small-minded" and "stupid" automatically invalidates your argument in my eyes. So I'll let someone else who actually cares respond to it.