A lot of posts i've read here involve opinions that being gay is wrong and also use religion, claiming that being gay is sick and immoral and disguisting. But i also thought the bible says --YOU SHOULDN"T JUDGE--- and that's what your doing!

quote:

. Furthermore, I would like clarification as to how the Bible justifies incest and rape.

Check the "Biblical Lies" thread in spirituality. I'm 95% sure it's there, it's fairly long and you won't miss it. I won't post it here because it's THAT long.

I like how you reply, by the way. You obviously think beforehand writing. I'm sorry if I disrespected you before.

quote:

The argument involving necrophilia I utilized was adapted from the PIB (polygamy, incest and be.ast.iality) argument put forth in John Finnis "Law, Morality, and Sexual Orientation."

But those three and necrophilia are different. The thing with necrophilia is, that, well, it's with dead people. And neither of them are in sexual orientation, I can't call them desires either, I can't explain, but they fall in between. I personally see a sexual orientation as a sexual desire you have at only one thing, thus I'd classify pedophilia as a sexual orientation (for example) if the person was only attracted to children.

quote:

An interesting, unpopular, however (as I believe) correct view of human sexuality in general can further be found in Vincent C. Punzo's "Morality and Human Sexuality".

But this is where we differ. I don't mix morality with sexuality (usually), I see sexuality as physical and morality as more of a personal opinion. I believe more in the de Sade view of sexuality (not that I am a sadist, but a Sadist, just saying), which is, long story short, sexuality is for pleasure and morals have (in human instinct alone) nothing to do with it.

quote:

Just because they are desires, does not mean that we should act upon them

If law were to ban these sexual desires, then sexuality as a whole should be as well. Sexual desires shouldn't (unless they involved violence or abuse and the like) be banned, because, regardless of how much law we may put, we can't control a person's sexual desires. I have alphamegamia, and have tried to "cure" it for years, tried to shun it off my system as if it were never there, but if I am honest to myself, I know it's still there, it's part of my sexuality.

quote:

Just so you are aware, necrophilia is also an observed animal characteristic, and I doubt that we would claim that this is a just reason to declare necrophilia acceptable.

Again, but necrophilia involves the dead. The dead can't consent, and I'll assume it's illegal to dig up a grave.

quote:

Reactionary, suppose that homosexuality is genetic. Do you think that homosexuals will still go to hell?

If I may, I wish to respond on behalf of reactionary. In keeping with traditional Christian doctrine, the sinner is condemned so long as s/he lives in sin. Repentence is what seperates the saved from the condemned. Therefore, according to this doctrine, if a homosexual, even by genetics, is in the act of sin (just as a heterosexual is in the act of fornication, masturbation or viewing of pornography) s/he must repent the sin before God in order to be cleansed of the sin. If the sinner, regardless of the sin, is truly repentant, then they need not fear condemnation.

We all sin everyday, true repentence and submission is what makes us worthy Christians. This is no easy task as we are all prone to sin, nonetheless, if we truly seek redemption and union with our heavenly Father, repentence of these sins must occur at some time. Does that answer your question?

WorthWaitingFor, it seems as if we are walking a very thin line between sexual desires and orientations. I will be the first to admit that I am no pyschologist and I have no idea where that line should be drawn. Is it merely that with sexuality (in homosexuality and heterosexuality) that it is between living human beings? And is it absolutely sure that necrophilia and b.eas.tiality are sexual desires rather than orientation, where same sex is replaced with either dead corpse or different species? From this outlook, necrophilia looks dim, but b.east.iality looks a little more complicated.

The only reason I reference these articles is because my arguments are modeled from these. Consider these as footnotes to my arguments from more intellegent men/women than I.

quote:

Originally posted by ItalianStallion:
Allow me to clarify a few points from my early posts. First of all, a relationship, as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary, is a romantic or sexual involvement. Perhaps this is not the common usage of the word in your own mind Celtic, but certainly is accepted and was the definition I was attempting to use for the purposes of brevity. I apologize, I should have clarified that point earlier. Furthermore, as it seems you do not respect me enough to open your minds to my views, perhaps from a respected and published author. The argument involving necrophilia I utilized was adapted from the PIB (polygamy, incest and be.ast.iality) argument put forth in John Finnis "Law, Morality, and Sexual Orientation." In addition, Michael Levin offers a fantastic essay against homosexuality in "Why Homosexuality is Abnormal". An interesting, unpopular, however (as I believe) correct view of human sexuality in general can further be found in Vincent C. Punzo's "Morality and Human Sexuality". These are all published authors who have quite the say on the topic we are discussing and my views coincide with their own. For the sake of space and devotion to reading these essays or articles, I ask that you seek them out, at your leisure, to better understand the posts I am making. Sure, I could post the argument, with qualification, on this board, but it would be overlooked by the majority, so I ask that if you seek a true inspired debate, seek these texts out as I am obviously doing a poor job of conveying this points to you.

I'll listen/read if you'll only provide your own arguments, even using quotes from the texts you named, if you wish. I have more time to read your posts on here than to seek out others' published written texts on the matter.

quote:

Instead, I would maintain that necrophilia and pedophilia are sexual desires, much like homosexuality is a sexual desire. Just because they are desires, does not mean that we should act upon them. Society prohibits action on these sexual desires and likewise should prohibit action upon homosexual desires.

Homosexuality is a sexual orientation; not just a desire. By that, I mean that it is simply the sexual orientation of heterosexuality with "opposite sex" being replaced by "same sex." And heterosexuality, a sexual desire following your trend, is allowed so why shouldn't homosexuality?

quote:

WorthWaitingFor, I'm sorry I have not addressed your posts entirely, and if this does not answer them, I fully intend to do so. However, one point I will address at this juncture. You claim that homosexuality has evolved to become natural, not only in our species, but in other species as well. Just so you are aware, necrophilia is also an observed animal characteristic, and I doubt that we would claim that this is a just reason to declare necrophilia acceptable.

Well, of course not. I was just explaining that you cannot say that homosexuality is not natural.

As part of my argument in favor of homosexuality, I'd like you take a glance at this excerpt from The Complete Idiot's Guide to Psychology by Joni Johnston, Psy. D. :

Birds Do It, Bees Do It

In the past, most psychologists argued that sexual orientation was learned. Some still do. However, as anyone with more than three brain cells can see, there are a few problems with this explanation. First of all, there is no evidence that the style of parenting, absence of a male or female parent, or degree of opportunity for any type of sexual experience in adolescence contributes to the development of sexual orientation. Early seduction or rape by someone of the opposite or same sex does not cause it.

Second, between 1 percent and 5 percent of men and women are homosexual in every culture, with a larger percentage practicing bisexuality. This is true in cultures that accept homosexuality and in cultures that punish and outlaw it. If sexual orientation is learned, it's pretty darned hard to see the payoffs in doing something that might land you in jail.

It's Just the Way It Is

We know genetic differences play some role in determining sexual orientation. Roughly 50 percent of identical twins share the same sexual orientation. In contrast, if you have a gay sibling, your chances of also being gay are about 15 percent, compared to the 1 percent to 5 percent of the general population.

The puzzle of sexual orientation is still a mystery, but recent studies suggest it is something we discover about ourselves, not something we choose. Think about your own sexual orientation. When did you know you were attracted to men or women? Homosexuals and heterosexuals alike say their sexual orientation was present in their childhood thoughts and fantasies, typically by age 10 or 11.

Did you consider all the alternatives and then consciously choose the one that felt right to you? Did you ever think you made a mistake or that you should give a different sexual orientation "a chance"? Chances are, at some point you just knew your sexual orientation, probably long before you understood it. Whatever its cause or causes, sexual orientation is a deeply rooted and early emerging aspect of ourselves.

Insight

The feeling of attraction to one sex or the other often exists for years before it is expressed. Considering how hard it can be to rid yourself of sexual feelings for a partner who's clearly bad for you, imagine trying to change your attraction toward an entire gender. It's almost impossible.

quote:

Instead, I would maintain that necrophilia and pedophilia are sexual desires, much like homosexuality is a sexual desire. Just because they are desires, does not mean that we should act upon them. Society prohibits action on these sexual desires and likewise should prohibit action upon homosexual desires.

But isn't heterosexuality a "sexual desire"? In the case of necrophilia, there is no consent from the dead body. In the case of pedophilia, it is illegal to have sex with minors, even consenual sex. A homosexual relationship is between two adults with consent, just like a heterosexual relationship.

Reactionary, suppose that homosexuality is genetic. Do you think that homosexuals will still go to hell?

quote:

Not true. God is angry with the wicked (Pslam 7:11), not just with the sin.

Exactly my point...He doesn't hate anyone(esp. those of the gay life style) He still loves them as his children but he is angered in the manner which they live their lives. As far as the sin, he hates that.

quote:

Originally posted by YoungWorld:
God doesn't hate the homosexual, the lesbian or bisexual.

Not true. God is angry with the wicked (Pslam 7:11), not just with the sin.

Celtic, never have I mentioned, on any of my posts, that the Bible should be the reason for banning homosexual unions. It's enough for me, but I certainly understand that it is not enough for all and, seeing as how we live in a country where freedom of religion is basic, it should not be used to govern this land on the basis of it alone. That being said, I have listed other reasons why these activities should be outlawed. Furthermore, I would like clarification as to how the Bible justifies incest and rape. Perhaps this has been done on another board, but if not, I inquire here.

Allow me to clarify a few points from my early posts. First of all, a relationship, as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary, is a romantic or sexual involvement. Perhaps this is not the common usage of the word in your own mind Celtic, but certainly is accepted and was the definition I was attempting to use for the purposes of brevity. I apologize, I should have clarified that point earlier. Furthermore, as it seems you do not respect me enough to open your minds to my views, perhaps from a respected and published author. The argument involving necrophilia I utilized was adapted from the PIB (polygamy, incest and be.ast.iality) argument put forth in John Finnis "Law, Morality, and Sexual Orientation." In addition, Michael Levin offers a fantastic essay against homosexuality in "Why Homosexuality is Abnormal". An interesting, unpopular, however (as I believe) correct view of human sexuality in general can further be found in Vincent C. Punzo's "Morality and Human Sexuality". These are all published authors who have quite the say on the topic we are discussing and my views coincide with their own. For the sake of space and devotion to reading these essays or articles, I ask that you seek them out, at your leisure, to better understand the posts I am making. Sure, I could post the argument, with qualification, on this board, but it would be overlooked by the majority, so I ask that if you seek a true inspired debate, seek these texts out as I am obviously doing a poor job of conveying this points to you.

I would contest whether or not you actually know more about the topics than I do. I am offering philisophical hypotheticals, not factual accounts. My examples are merely used to foster dialouge as analogies to everyday situations. In the majority of my posts, I ask my readers to assume certain things, for the moment, just as I asked people to assume the necrophilia and be.ast.iality were genetic, just as homosexuality is supposedly genetic.

Clpo, I apologize, I did not mean to imply that pedophilia and necrophilia are genetic, that is a flaw on my part that Cletic pointed out. Instead, I would maintain that necrophilia and pedophilia are sexual desires, much like homosexuality is a sexual desire. Just because they are desires, does not mean that we should act upon them. Society prohibits action on these sexual desires and likewise should prohibit action upon homosexual desires.

WorthWaitingFor, I'm sorry I have not addressed your posts entirely, and if this does not answer them, I fully intend to do so. However, one point I will address at this juncture. You claim that homosexuality has evolved to become natural, not only in our species, but in other species as well. Just so you are aware, necrophilia is also an observed animal characteristic, and I doubt that we would claim that this is a just reason to declare necrophilia acceptable.

I think I read somewhere that necrophilia and pedophilia are genetic? Proof, please.

quote:

Therefore, even if homosexuality is related to genetics, it does not mean that it should be allowed based on the claim that it is genetic. Several things are genetic abnomalities that we condone by law. Homosexuality should not be exempt from this category.

It is allowed, that's the first. The second, homosexuality hurts no one. Until a bunch of gay people come and murder straight people, I will refuse to make homosexuality wrong just because it's "immoral" because a great work of fiction says it is, though justifying incest and rape.

Yes we all know that homosexuality is immoral, it's an abomination, and even yes that some may find this way of living "disgusting." But those opinions of others are just that opinions. I myself don't like the homosexual life-style, but it is not personally effecting me in any way.

Homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals, transvestites, all of them are human beings, whether or not we approve of their life-style is of irrelevance. We have no right to judge another, because we all contain flaws. No man is perfect, if we were there would be no hate crimes against these people, there would be no poverty, there would be no need for war and so on. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

God doesn't hate the homosexual, the lesbian or bisexual. Yes it grieves him to know that his children have chosen an alternative life-style from which he meant for us to live, but that is why he gave humans the greatest gift of love ever...free-will. To choose to live life in the way you see fit, freedom of the mind, body and soul. No man answers to another for they way they choose to live; no man is a credible judge to judge another for the way they live, the only man that can judge is God.

It is not our place to find anyone guilty of a certain life-style, but to merely tolerate it(you don't have to like it, and if you don't like it keep it to yourself) What good is your judgement on individuals in a flawed society, when you are guilty of an imperfection yourself?

quote:

The point I was trying to make, which you so ignorantly missed, was that we do not allow necrophilia in this country, so why should we allow homosexuality

Well, damn, I don't know why necrophilia should be illegal, you're just screwing a stranger's corpse...

Necrophilia and homosexuality are very different.

quote:

. You have provided no evidence of ignorance on my behalf (with the possibility that I did not dumb down my posts for uninformed/ignorant people to read). I ask you to consider the issues I have raised and present some form of an intellegent critique to them, rather than annoying ramblings. Once again, Celtic, please read my previous postings for explainations of this.

Google pedophilia and all philias in general. You have proven ignorance because you assumed things about necrophilia and pedophilia that aren't true. Since when do necrophiles want a relationship with the corpses? The notion of necrophilia is usually romantic, but I would love to know how the hell can you take a corpse out to dinner and to meet your parents. Also, the comment on pedophilia is useless, because children (only children fall into the clinical pedophilia likings) have not enough life expirience/knowledge maturity to even be in any romantic/sexual relationship.

By your post, I can assume you mean a homosexual relationship is the same as a necrophile's or a pedophile's relationship. Which is wrong. A necrophile's relationship with his/her corpse may have some romantic-ideal roots in it, but usually not involving the person the corpse was, and they clearly know they cannot have a true relationship with the corpse. A pedophile also stands the same as a necrophile, in the sense that the romantic ideals of the clinical (not legal) pedophile and a necrophile may be rooted in similar feelings. But, both acknowledge you can't have a relationship with the person.

Another thing is, a necrophile usually isn't just attracted to corposes or a pedophile just to children. Your father may be a pedophile who is very attracted to his wife but has a "thing" for dead people. In the case of homosexuality alone (by alone I mean that they also don't happen to be a necrophile or the like), you are only attracted to one type, that is one of your same gender. There is no variation and no way to hide it. A necrophile may have his/her fantasy for years and can live with its urges fine, a homosexual can't.

By the way, these are not my "dumb" annoying ramblings. While I do acknowledge my arrogance is annoying, I know a hell lot more about these topics than you do and am fully able to write correct essays about them if I wish to, and I will do so because there are so many uninformed people out there who make assumptions based on bias created by media and the like. If you would like to think I'm wrong because you're too dense to admit someone who goes against your views is correct, fine, go ahead and be an ignorant about the topic, it just proves my other theories about people in general. Your comparison of homosexuality and necrophilia and the like is wrong because the two you can't compare in any way other than they may have to do with sex, which isn't that valid because all humans have to do with sex.

quote:

The point I was trying to make, which you so ignorantly missed, was that we do not allow necrophilia in this country, so why should we allow homosexuality.

1. Necrophilia and homosexuality are only related in the fact that both deal with sex. Other than that, they are not related at all and have nothing to do with each other.

2. Homosexuality is allowed in America, in case you haven't noticed. We're still working on the marriage part, obviously...

quote:

Neither of these sexual events effects other people except the ones preforming the actions, yet they are still considered abominations, and we punish those who partake in acts of necrophilia and b.east.iality.

So you're saying the connection between homosexuality, necrophilia, and b**stiality is that the sexual act doesn't affect other people?

Ah, but this is not true of the latter two. Necrophilia is sexual acts with a corpse. It affects the family of that person who has died. Would you want one of your dead loved ones to be a sex toy of a necrophiliac? Of course not. And the problem with b**stiality most likely comes from animal rights folks who want to save the critters.

Homosexuality is about loving another person. Heterosexual people and homosexual people are the same: they work, they go out and have fun, they have friends and families, they are spiritual, etc. The only difference is that homosexuals prefer the same sex while heterosexuals prefer the opposite sex.

As opposed to these other taboo sexual relationships, homosexuality harms no one else (whether it be directly or indirectly) and it is the most similar to heterosexuality. You can't compare it to these other sexual relationships.

quote:

Therefore, even if homosexuality is related to genetics, it does not mean that it should be allowed based on the claim that it is genetic. Several things are genetic abnomalities that we condone by law. Homosexuality should not be exempt from this category.

I'm assuming you meant the opposite of "condone" (since condone would mean accepted by the law). So I have a couple questions.

1. Are you saying that you think homosexuality in itself should be forbidden?
2. What other "genetic abnomalies" are against the law?

The reason why most people bring up homosexuality being genetically linked is because homophobes often have the argument, "Why don't homosexuals just stop being homosexual?" I, along with others who think it's genetically linked, say that they can't stop; it's a part of their genetic makeup and who they are.

This was my original response to you, by the way. You must have missed it.:

quote:

Originally posted by WorthWaitingFor:

quote:

Denying marriage rights to homosexuals is the same as denying relationship rights to necrophilacs and pedophiliacs.

Denying marriage rights to homosexuals is the same as denying marriage rights to interracial couples.

quote:

Heterosexual marriages meet the base requirement of being, all things equal, able to reproduce. They need not, but they have the capability to. My point here is that this is natural for a man and woman to be together. If reproduction did not occur, our spieces could not endure and would eventually cease. It is for this evolutionary reason that heterosexualism is natural, whereas homosexualism is not.

All though homosexuality was not originally natural (when we needed to reproduce), it has evolved as so. Homosexuality is even found in many species of animals, including apes and monkeys, two we are closely related to.

I believe it has evolved this way because our population has gotten so out of control that reproduction is not really necessary anymore; in fact, this is the reason why China is trying to control theirs because we are overpopulated.

Things that were once unnatural can become natural.

quote:

Behold the most ignorant argument against homosexual marriage in YN.

You obviously have no clue what a NECROPHILE (not necrophliac) is, because you can't marry someone who's dead.

You know, it's a really good thing that I said relationship is the same thing as marriage...because I didn't. Having intercourse with the deceased constitutes a necrophile relationship. The point I was trying to make, which you so ignorantly missed, was that we do not allow necrophilia in this country, so why should we allow homosexuality. Bluedemocrat, the word I was trying to use is b.east.iality (don't know why it was censored). Neither of these sexual events effects other people except the ones preforming the actions, yet they are still considered abominations, and we punish those who partake in acts of necrophilia and b.east.iality.

Celtic, again, the remark of pedophilia was to illustrate that it is a genetic disorder, but it doesn't make it right. Therefore, even if homosexuality is related to genetics, it does not mean that it should be allowed based on the claim that it is genetic. Several things are genetic abnomalities that we condone by law. Homosexuality should not be exempt from this category.

Given this evidence, reasoning and logic, I don't see how my post was ignorant. You have provided no evidence of ignorance on my behalf (with the possibility that I did not dumb down my posts for uninformed/ignorant people to read). I ask you to consider the issues I have raised and present some form of an intellegent critique to them, rather than annoying ramblings. Once again, Celtic, please read my previous postings for explainations of this.

quote:

Denying marriage rights to homosexuals is the same as denying relationship rights to necrophilacs and pedophiliacs.

Behold the most ignorant argument against homosexual marriage in YN.

You obviously have no clue what a NECROPHILE (not necrophliac) is, because you can't marry someone who's dead.

And PEDOPHILES (not pedophiliacs) are much different than gay people, damn it. Children can't get married, period. Gay people aren't trying to marry children, and pedophiles rarely want to marry children, they want to do other things. You know absolutely nothing of what it's like to be a pedophile and have no right to make such baseless, unthought of claim.

I might as well succumb, I guess...

quote:

We are not judging. Homosexuality is sick and and immoral and disgusting. We are merely trying to show homosexuals that there is an alternative, a better path. Contrary to popular belief, God does hate the sinner & the sin. One that is not ripe with sin and enternal damnation. If a blind man was walking towards a cliff, would you not warn him?

I find you to be sick, immoral, and disgusting. Oops, look! I judged...just like you did when you called homosexuality those horrible adjectives. I'm so glad to know that everyone in America has to follow the Bible and that you are privy to know what God thinks.

quote:

Yes I can. It's written in the Bible.

Nope. It's not. Sorry to burst your bubble on that one.

quote:

Worth is pretty much the only Christian who doesn't always use the bible to defend herself. And she doesn't contridict herself.

Thanks, dear.

quote:

Denying marriage rights to homosexuals is the same as denying relationship rights to necrophilacs and pedophiliacs.

Denying marriage rights to homosexuals is the same as denying marriage rights to interracial couples.

quote:

Heterosexual marriages meet the base requirement of being, all things equal, able to reproduce. They need not, but they have the capability to. My point here is that this is natural for a man and woman to be together. If reproduction did not occur, our spieces could not endure and would eventually cease. It is for this evolutionary reason that heterosexualism is natural, whereas homosexualism is not.

All though homosexuality was not originally natural (when we needed to reproduce), it has evolved as so. Homosexuality is even found in many species of animals, including apes and monkeys, two we are closely related to.

I believe it has evolved this way because our population has gotten so out of control that reproduction is not really necessary anymore; in fact, this is the reason why China is trying to control theirs because we are overpopulated.

Things that were once unnatural can become natural.

Go here, anyone who thinks all the Bible says is "Do not judge lest ye be judged!"

And sorry if I'm mistaken, but were people defending necrophiliacs?