Just because it's natural doesn't make it right.

a reply to: JadeStar

Prolly the same thing as last time...

last time...of which there was NONE!!!!

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Ghost147

Brain chemistry may introduce diverse influencing factors in the decision making process, but it does not ultimately override logic and free will. All you have proven is that each individual has different vulnerabilities to temptation. But like any addiction, temptation can be resisted. That is one of the many virtues that the Bible offers.

So it's back to that "well who cares what science says, I don't like you because you are (fill in the blank)" .

Here's a clue: Guess what I prayed for EVERY night as a child?

That I would wake up the next morning and just be a normal girl.

I guess "the Lord does work in mysterious ways" because around age 7 my parents allowed me to live as normal a life as possible by permitting me to be who and what I am based on my brain not what other (ignorant) people told them I was based on genitalia.

THANK GOD! PRAISE THE LORD!

See what i just did?

wow.

originally posted by: doclec
a reply to: Darth_Prime

But she wasnt always a she, she was a he that became a she

I never felt I was a he. Ever.
Other trans kids will tell you the same thing for example Kim Petras:



Then:



Now:


Swap pop singer with classical pianist/science geek and Germany with the US and our stories are basically identical.

Regardless of what people tried to tell us or our parents, we were not ever boys. Ever.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Ghost147

We aren't animals, and if you consider humans to be animals, then you have to excuse murder, rape, and pedophilia to be as legitimate as homosexuality is.

The LGBT movement is defending a double standard and trying to dismiss personal responsibility.

We know that mammalian nature functions in an orderly manor with heterosexuality, and so has society...up until now.

Unlike murder, rape and pedophilia, who exactly is hurt by the mere existence of LGBTIQ+ people?

Your premise is flawed. There is no such thing as "homosexuality" in the animal kingdom, except in humans. Just cuz it looks like our version of what sex is, doesn't mean that's what the animals are doing. Only humans purposely insert their penis into another humans anus, that does not happen with the "lower" animals.

You need to look up, and seriously ponder the term, anthropomorphism.

Humans have reason, animals have instinct only. Big difference.

So just cuz it appears something happens in the animal kingdom, it's ok for us to do it too? A male lion kills off his rival's young? Hmm, maybe I should have a little talk with my step-children :-)


a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

We aren't animals, and if you consider humans to be animals, then you have to excuse murder, rape, and pedophilia to be as legitimate as homosexuality is.

Excuse me? care to explain that before i comment?

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

We aren't animals, and if you consider humans to be animals, then you have to excuse murder, rape, and pedophilia to be as legitimate as homosexuality is.

Excuse me? care to explain that before i comment?

I already explained myself in the opening post.

a reply to: JadeStar

How about that baker who has to pay $100k+ just because he exercised his freedom of religion, speech, and his right to deny service?

Its one thing to be LGBT its another thing to use it as a political means of destroying the law.

a reply to: Ignatian

Your premise is flawed. There is no such thing as "homosexuality" in the animal kingdom, except in humans.

HAHA! That's funny! It just so happens that the animals that Jesus liked to compare us to, sheep, have a high percent of homosexuality in their populations!

Ovis aries [Sheep] has attracted much attention due to the fact that around 8-10% of rams have an exclusive homosexual orientation. Furthermore around 18-22% of rams are bisexual.

a reply to: boymonkey74

When did you choose to be straight?

Around the age of 12, and yes, the thought did enter my mind.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

How about that baker who has to pay $100k+ just because he exercised his freedom of religion, speech, and his right to deny service?

You mean the baker that was fined for breaking discrimination laws?

Its one thing to be LGBT its another thing to use it as a political means of destroying the law.

What law is being destroyed by allowing equal rights to LGBTQ individuals?

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

How do people not understand this...

Sigh

In Oregon it's against the law to discriminate, a State Law. the Bakery was in that state, they broke the Law

Their Freedom of speech was not taken away, because they could have said whatever they wanted, his freedom of Religion was not taken away because he can believe and worship whatever and whoever. but when they discriminated the Broke The Law

a reply to: windword

What if a Church refuses to marry homosexuals? Will they be treated like the baker? If so, its dead wrong to violate an individual's or group's freedom of religion.

a reply to: Darth_Prime

The action that the baker was asked to commit was against the baker's religion. Oregon is a state unter the US Constitution. The freedom of religion as stated in the Bill of Rights takes precedence over the state law. The courts alienated his right.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: JadeStar

How about that baker who has to pay $100k+ just because he exercised his freedom of religion, speech, and his right to deny service?

He wasn't exercising his freedom of religion. Perhaps I'm ignorant of the verse, but where in the bible does it say not to serve homosexuals?

His speech was not abused

He lost his right to deny service when he discriminated.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: JadeStar
Its one thing to be LGBT its another thing to use it as a political means of destroying the law.

And what laws were destroyed? When things move forwards, like same-sex marriage, it's not a destruction of law, it's a progression of law.

a reply to: Ghost147, Darth_Prime, and windword

Ok, let me splain it to you, Lucy.

In many Christian circles, it is percieved to be a sin to willingly and knowingly aid another person(s) in commiting a sin. In Christianity, gay marriage is also percieved by most to be a sin.

Therefore the baker thought it would be a sin to aid these homosexuals in getting married. It was his freedom to refuse. He wasn't doing it out of hate, he was doing it to keep a clean conscience, therefore the baker's rights were violated.

Now, if Churches who refuse to marry homosexuals (and many will refuse) are treated the same way, then freedom of religion will be violated on a much larger scale.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Ghost147, Darth_Prime, and windword

Ok, let me splain it to you, Lucy.

In many Christian circles, it is percieved to be a sin to willingly and knowingly aid another person(s) in commiting a sin. In Christianity, gay marriage is also percieved by most to be a sin.

Therefore the baker thought it would be a sin to aid these homosexuals in getting married. It was his freedom to refuse. He wasn't doing it out of hate, he was doing it to keep a clean conscience, therefore the baker's rights were violated.

Now, if Churches who refuse to marry homosexuals (and many will refuse) are treated the same way, then freedom of religion will be violated on a much larger scale.

...in the baker example you've given, he wasn't marrying them, but baking a cake (or not)...

Å99

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Technically no it wasn't, he said he didn't want to participate in a Same-Sex Wedding because his God told him so, this cake was not part of the Wedding, it was the After Party


So you fully believe that Religion is above the Law? because in the State of Oregon it is illegal to discriminate no matter what religion you believe in because what....Religion is a belief system not a Law

a reply to: Darth_Prime

The principle is the same. He didnt want to contribute to the union or the celebration of the union. He was within his rights.