It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Researchers Say They Can Prevent Homosexuality in Sheep - Are Humans Next?

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:11 AM
link   
Hm...

I'm not gay...I have a penis, I don't really see myself wanting another. *shrug*

It seems the whole issue of biological versus cognitive homosexuality is only a hot topic for:

1. Gay people themselves
2. Family/friends of gay people

I personally could care less why someone is gay...

Although, the idea of not giving a newborn the biological/mental choice later in life seems to me to be a form of "circumcision"...

If a person decides to be homosexual--that's their own personal choice, it'd be a shame to have somthing like that decided before you were born.

Untill we make it illegal for parents to decide to circumcise their baby boys, I don't see what is wrong with gene manipulation, designer genomes and the like. We need to take care of some more basic, archaic models of "pre-life" decisions.

.2




posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Know hardly anyone will read this; but…
Just thought I would share this link showing Lesbians are more like likely to develop breast cancer (possibly 2 to 3 times).
www.southernvoice.com...
Further reading: www.metrokc.gov...

I went to an all boys school and I noticed that gay people were always more likely to be spending time in sick bay than other people. I bet any proper study would show gay people are more likely to develop everything to the common cold.

I’ve always wondered what (in evolutionary terms) the purpose of homosexuality is.
Is it a way of “aborting” a potentially unhealthy child without killing it? This could make sense as it would it would provide the tribe-clan with the physical advantages of having an extra member; without that member feeling the need to reproduce. It could also be more complicated than that. This link says: www.cbcrp.org...

Lesbians were more likely to live in urban areas (50%) than their sisters (31 %, p



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:27 AM
link   
Rocknroll Stop hiding behind those bible pages! Everyone can see what your up too. Honestly you’ll feel a lot better when you’ve come out the closet, and the “temptation” might not be as proliferant as you thought it was.

I loved your open mindedness when you said…

That's cool, as I myself will totally disregard anything you have to say based on the fact you believe the Holy Spirit to be irrational.


I guess ignorance is the best way to stay faithful to little more than ink and paper?
But I see where you were from coming; the holy spirit (one of the people who wrote the bible) was quite rational when they said “homosexuality = sin”. This is because there would otherwise be less children of the true religion (and this is bad news for any religion).
But if it turns out that homosexuality is a way of evolution eliminating bad health I wonder what you bible followers will make of “God’s” advice then?
Actually I know what you’ll say. You’ll say it’s God’s advice and he’s only trying to put our faith to the test; with these latest (somehow wrong) scientific findings.

By the way I also believe in an afterlife; but also god and gods. I think what you call “Jehovah” is another branch of “Satan”.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:28 AM
link   
schallb


I tried finding on the web once about how many gays said that they were born gay. so far I haven't found any sites.


My suspicion is that you didn't try very hard because it took me all of thirty seconds to find half a dozen articles on the subject.



link

By Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard Science is rapidly converging on the conclusion that sexual orientation is innate. It has found that homosexuals often act differently from heterosexuals in early childhood, before they have even heard of sex. A recent study by Simon LeVay, a neurobiologist at the Salk Institute, reported a difference in the hypothalamus, a part of the brain that develops at a young age, between homosexual and heterosexual men.




seattletimes.nwsource.com...

As the culture wars rage over gay rights, a flock of sheep at Oregon State University may help answer a key question behind the controversy: Is homosexuality a matter of choice or biology?

The Corvallis herd includes a group of rams that scientists delicately refer to as "male-oriented." These animals consistently ignore females and bestow all their amorous attentions on members of their own sex.

Researcher Charles Roselli says a decade of study suggests sexual orientation is largely hard-wired into the sheep's brains before birth. Now, he's trying to figure out how that happens, zeroing in on genes and hormones. In a bold test of his ideas, he hopes to engineer the birth of gay rams by altering conditions in the womb.




link

A new study on homosexuality is being used to back up the contention that sexual orientation is determined in the womb and not by sociological factors.

North American researchers say a study of almost 1,000 Canadian men found a link between homosexuality and the number of older brothers a man has. Such an association has been reported before, but in the past left open the possibility that both biological or sociological factors may play a role.

This time, however, the researchers say the link appears to exist irrespective of whether the man was brought up with the brothers.


That's just three of them. Now, the case is not closed, and I don't think anyone is saying it is (well, anyone responsible anyway). It seems clear to me that sexual preference is decided by a variety of factors acting in conjunction.



There seems to be NO GENE in the human body that says you will be gay.


What a silly oversimplification.


Of course there isn't ONE GENE - there's hardly anything that's determined by ONE GENE. The genes work in concert to produce..whatever.

Nevermind the scientific evidence against a gay gene, there's the simple fact that it would be de-selected by evolution for one glaringly obvious reason.



They had done survies years ago and everyone either was raised around gays, or had been sexually molested as a child or young adult


You'll have to excuse the terse tone of my post up until this point, but reading crap like this makes my blood boil. Are we to believe that all homosexuals are child molesters too? Are we to believe that all homosexuals are promiscuous? Are we to believe all homosexuals talk with a lisp and like tight-fitting clothes? Are we to believe all homosexuals are ANYTHING besides individuals?

Broad brushes are used to paint houses, not people. :shk:

[edit on 3-1-2007 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spawwwn
i think this is a good thing. as long as this doesn't become a mandatory shot for humans..then i support this reasearch. i know a lot of people will cry and say this is messed up, especially the gay community, but i think this will only benefit those parents who do not want their children living that lifestyle.

while i have nothing against the gays, if there was a shot or a patch like they say, that would prevent my kid from being gay (or retarted, disabled, deformed, or sickly) then i would ask my wife to take the medication. plus if it works after birth, then maybe some people who don't want to be gay could take this and be normal. believe it or not there are some people who do not like being gay, but they can't help it.

i've always stated that i thought homosexuality was a genetic dysfunction of some kind. I mean it's common science. Man + Woman = Life. That's the way it works in human nature, and in 95% of animal nature. it's just the way things were ment to be. religion and politics aside, lets be real there would be no living things on earth if male and female species did not procreate. So homosexuality is like getting your wires crossed genetically. It's not a choice or a sin really, just a simple geneitic flaw much like many other geneitc flaws.

I say go for it and push this science further. I think it's our duties as humans to cull out as many genetic weaknesses as we can. There are so many babies that are born that are essitially just draining society. babies with brain defects or babies that are not born with all their limbs or something..are just brining regular able bodied people in society. It's harsh but i honestly feel that we would benefit from ridding our society of these problems.

I don't think people should use this for vanity. Like i don't think that you should just be able to "create-a-baby" like it was a video game..and be able to choose eye color and height or whatever. But If there was some kind of medicine you could take while pregnent to ensure that your baby would not come out brain dead, or deformed, or gay..then i think it's our duties as humans to research that science.

Immagine if you could take something during pregnency that would make your kid immune to AIDS or cancer. what if you could prevent him from getting genetic deasieses later in life like parkisans, or alzheimers? shouldn't we do everythign in our power to make true? that's why stem cells, and studies like this one are vital to more forward as a species.

Cloning even partially has some potential, as long as it's used in the right way. Think about this..what about all these people who get burned beyond recognition. ever since i was a kid i've probly felt more emotion towards those people than any other people who haev had some kind of tragic event to them. burned people are just turned into monsters.

So what if we could take away their pain and essentially clone them a new body? or real replacement skin? Even with grafts burn victims are deformed for life...there's nothing anyone can do to help them. But what if they could go back to looking EXACTLY the way they did before they were burned? It's our duty, to find new ways of science to help these people..and studies like this are the path to that type of world.

so while i have mixed feelings about this study..i support it full heartedly. We need to think ahead to figure out how we can twist and malnipulate our genetics a bit. I'm not saying lets play god, but lets help these poor souls who can't function as regular people have a normal life..even if it is just a simple thing as malnipulating sexual preference for right now.


So in this hypothetical world would you thank your parents for say, biologically manipulating your taste buds so you don't enjoy food and eat only to refuel your body, because that way there's no danger you could end up leading an obese lifestyle, making you biologically incapable of handling alcohol to reduce the risk of you leading an alcoholics lifestyle, take it a step further, all sensual receptors in your brain that make sex enjoyable are removed or dampened so you make relationship decisions based soley on practical needs so you grow up date one (suitable) woman and marry her, raise your children and remove any danger of you meeting and falling for someone else and leading a potential divorcee/second marriage lifestyle. Boring eh! It starts seeming far less reasonable when it starts being you that's affected.
Life blossoms and leads us and we make our choices and decisions organically not through chemical and biological regimentation. It's one thing using science to help eradicate disease and physical infirmity, quite another to fundamentally alter a person to be something they were not intended to be.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 03:49 AM
link   
I think all of the people that thinks that homosexuality is a desorder because "Man+woman=life", forget one important thing: just 3 to 9 % of a life time total sexual activities happens with the desire to "breed"(make a child)! all the rest is the desire to have sexual pleasure!
We can't say homossexuality is not natural just because 2 mans or 2 womans can't make a child!, because the moust part of the time ppl are interacting in sexual activities JUST for PLEASURE!, sexuality is not just used to make childs!
The classical steriotype of a familly=man+woman+childrens, was created only for control issues. the religion start it, and the modern types of governation pick it up to control better the people. the classical esteirotype of a familly is much productive and desireble in the modern societys then a diferent one,(from a economics point of vew) so they enforce it on us as the "Normal" thing to folow, something diferent will be a aberration.
I used to say: seek the truth always in the simplicity of the things! and in this case if homossexuality happens in nature freely, then it's a natural thing!there are plenty of studies in the internet about this envolving for exemple dogs, deers, reptiles and octopus!
Saying that Homossexuality is a disorder or a dysfuntion, is the same then tell to some one that don't like oranges, that he have a disorder or a dysfunction!
about the topic, i think it's horrid the idea to control this, and just show very well how the system fears all that can disrupt they'r control level upon the people in a so called organized society!



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 06:14 AM
link   
@ rocknroll
I could write pages and pages debating your statements, but clearly you've made up your mind, and nothing I'm going to say is going to change your mind. There are however two misconceptions you have, which I would like to address.


Originally posted by rocknroll
Gay men say they're spiritual, but heck, bring up God or Jesus and they don't want to talk about it. Well, in my book, your spirit came from God and no one else. So, how can you be spiritual if you deny who made your spirit? Answer: You can't, you're fooling yourself. Another hypocrisy in the gay world.

I am gay (goes without saying), and very much a Christian just like yourself. I'm not afraid to talk about God or Jesus. I have a healthy relationship with my Creator. And I have a healthy relationship with a guy.

So what's the difference between you and me? You don't act on your sexual urges to be with a guy. And you do this because you believe this is the way God want you to live even though HE made you who and what you are.

I on the other hand am just as convinced as you that my soul have been saved, BUT I don't hide behind religion. I live. I made peace with God. I made peace with who I am.

I have a healthy relationship with God and I know with 100% certainty that I'm saved. You have a healthy relationship with God and you're convinced that you're saved. So who is right? Maybe we should chat again about this on Judgement day? Or would now be a good time to mention the ancient Biblical law that forbids MEN to lie with MEN? Or maybe we could talk about how Jesus, hundreds of years later removed all the ancient by-laws with love, and preached day in and day out about love for one another? I know what you're going to say next, and the answer is love does not equal sex. And yes, I know the difference.


Originally posted by rocknroll
If homosexuality was eliminated you'd probably see AIDS disappear in this country (just about).
...
the huge wave of AIDS that killed thousands upon thousands of gay men in the 1980's. They all died because of their promiscuity. Which cannot be denied (it wouldn't have spread like wildfire if they hadn't been so promiscuous). Every gay man I know who came down with AIDS was a promiscuous,sex addicted, slut who hopped from bed to bed so often he couldn't even remember the amount of men he slept with. Play with fire, and you get burned.
...
Hmmmm, guess that's why all the poeple I've known who've gotten it and/or died were gay. And you're wrong 64% of all new cases in the USA this year were gay men alone.

1. Times have changed since the 80's. Things changed a bit since you were "out there".
2. You're living in a bubble. There is much more to HIV/AIDS than America.

You use a lot of percentage, where you get them I don't know, but let's look at some hard facts for a change:

USA AIDS Stats
USA AIDS Stats by Exposure

If we look at the above stats it looks like you're right. The numbers show that AIDS are predominantly spread by male-to-male sex. Second follows drug use and only third heterosexual interaction. But take a closer look at the Cumulative diagnoses, and you'll see that female infections are about double that of male infections amongst heterosexual infections. What exactly does that say about heterosexual females? Since September 2003 6,585,528 million females have been infected by HIV. (Source) Could all of this possibly be caused by homosexual men?

But as I said. There's a whole lot more to HIV/AIDS than the USA. Take a careful look at the South African statistics:
SA Stats
South Africa is currently experiencing one of the most severe HIV epidemics in the world. By 1990 The first national antenatal survey to test for HIV found that 0.8% of pregnant women were HIV positive. By 1991 The number of diagnosed heterosexually transmitted HIV infections equalled the number transmitted through sex between men. Since this point, heterosexually acquired infections have dominated the epidemic. By 1997 the HIV prevalence rate among pregnant women was 17.0%. By 2005 the HIV prevalence rate among pregnant women was 30.2%.(Source)

You'll also note that the HIV infection rate is much higher amongst black people compared to white people (and people of other colour).

So, if we apply your argument "if homosexuality was eliminated you'd probably see AIDS disappear in this country" to the South African statistics, we get "if pregnant women and black people were eliminated you'd probably see AIDS disappear in South Africa".

Now that argument seems a little silly, doesn't it.

The 80's has long since passed. Your heart was broken by someone you committed yourself to for 8 years (you were able to commit and weren't promiscuous?) and now you're punishing yourself. Is it worth it? I guess if you're happy with who you are and your way of living, then all is fine. But in my opinion God won't hate you for loving another man.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Can anyone here answer to me, WHY the only people that care about the issue of biological/cognitive homosexuality are either gay themselves, have a gay family member, or are in denial about their own status?

Just wondering, because this seems to be a "hot topic" -- but only among a certain select minority.

Just wondering why more ppl that normally are interested in gene therapy and the like don't jump in with the same "Gusto" as those mentioned above...

Perhaps the mentioned minorities have a more "vested interest"?

IDK, It just seems that the only people that shout and scream about these issues are the homophobic/homosexual people themselves.

Hell, I went to a gay bar 2 weeks ago to say happy b-day to some friend of a friend. Those ppl know how to cut loose! Not my scene really (I can't find single women as easy! LOL) but just like with straight people, gays can quote, "smell their own"...I wasn't hit on at all by any gay men...in retrospect i feel a little insulted, hell I'm almost skinny enough to fit in with them!
(joke guys, seriously, a joke okay?)

Anyway...I just wanted to pick the brains of those that have a vested interest in this subject, and inject a little light-hearted humor.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 10:28 PM
link   


Can anyone here answer to me, WHY the only people that care about the issue of biological/cognitive homosexuality are either gay themselves, have a gay family member, or are in denial about their own status?


I care, and I'm none of the above.

I'm interested in a lot of subjects that don't directly affect me - and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Your assumption is incorrect, I think.



IDK, It just seems that the only people that shout and scream about these issues are the homophobic/homosexual people themselves.


Well, that's one thing, what you said earlier is another. There's a difference between being interested, and being a loudmouthed, obnoxious jerk about the issue. I think people can be interested in a subject without foaming at the mouth, no?

To be honest though, what interests me most about this particular story is the potential for it to evolve into something much, much bigger. If this hormone adjustment technology expands to include control over other behaviors, specifically violence, we could be fast approaching a utopian/dystopian societal threshold.

Change excites me.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne


Can anyone here answer to me, WHY the only people that care about the issue of biological/cognitive homosexuality are either gay themselves, have a gay family member, or are in denial about their own status?


I care, and I'm none of the above.

I'm interested in a lot of subjects that don't directly affect me - and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Your assumption is incorrect, I think.




Ditto.






...what interests me most about this particular story is the potential for it to evolve into something much, much bigger. If this hormone adjustment technology expands to include control over other behaviors, specifically violence, we could be fast approaching a utopian/dystopian societal threshold.




Ditto.

But I suspect a propensity for violence will be bred into certain populations, and qualities other than non-violence will be coveted and engineered.




posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 10:52 PM
link   


I went to an all boys school and I noticed that gay people were always more likely to be spending time in sick bay than other people. I bet any proper study would show gay people are more likely to develop everything to the common cold.


It's an interesting theory, but it hasn't been true in my experience. I think you actually came up with a more convincing reason for the corrolary, later in the same post.



I’ve always wondered what (in evolutionary terms) the purpose of homosexuality is.
Is it a way of “aborting” a potentially unhealthy child without killing it? This could make sense as it would it would provide the tribe-clan with the physical advantages of having an extra member; without that member feeling the need to reproduce. It could also be more complicated than that.


Well, in animal packs, homosexuality could be a way to avoid dangerous competition for mates, while still benefitting from sex for favor relationships - just from the same sex instead of the opposite.

For example, a chimp might choose/instinctually decide that it's safer and wiser to groom and mount the dominant male, to get a few extra scraps of food or a good cleaning now and then, rather than to risk life and limb competing for a few females.

Remember, the first order of business is survival, the second is breeding. One can't breed when dead, so homosexuality in animals could be more temporary than it is in humans - don't know.

I'd be interested to see a study on the percentage of homosexual individuals in over-populated animal packs vs. underpopulated animal packs. I'm guessing that the percentages are higher in larger populations.

Anyway, a homosexual in the animal kingdom can avoid competition for mates, and even garner services/food/protection from a more prominent individual in the pack. It's a clear choice for some, I would imagine.

I'm not suggesting that humans are exactly like the animals, but we are similar in many ways. Maybe homosexuality is a combination of genetics and unconscious choice, designed (originally) to benefit the individual in a crowded society.



This link says: www.cbcrp.org...
quote: Lesbians were more likely to live in urban areas (50%) than their sisters (31 %, p



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne


I care, and I'm none of the above.

I'm interested in a lot of subjects that don't directly affect me - and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Your assumption is incorrect, I think.


Well, that's one thing, what you said earlier is another. There's a difference between being interested, and being a loudmouthed, obnoxious jerk about the issue. I think people can be interested in a subject without foaming at the mouth, no?

To be honest though, what interests me most about this particular story is the potential for it to evolve into something much, much bigger. If this hormone adjustment technology expands to include control over other behaviors, specifically violence, we could be fast approaching a utopian/dystopian societal threshold.

Change excites me.


Well put, I guess you are just one of the few (like myself) that takes an interest in any kind of human biological development.

Thank you for responding!



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 12:34 AM
link   
I dont have an agenda either way. What freaks me out more than the whole "cure" or whatever for homosexuality, is that yet again someone is trying to control us and take away our freedom of choice (what little we have left). It concerns me that that when/if this technology becomes available a "cure" for homosexuality could be given along with standard vaccines. Who knows what other "cures" etc could be administered. Hey presto a society of drones! Scarey.

[edit on 4-1-2007 by xtr3m3paranoia]



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 02:19 AM
link   
The thing is...

The freedom of choice has never been automatically handed to us.

As newborn infants, our parents make a decision in the hospital whether or not to circumcise their male babies.

All through our childhood and even into our adulthood we are automatically given paths without choice.

Sure, another choice taken away is a travesty against human nature--but at the same time why not try and change the fundemental "choice/no-choice" issue at the most basal and archaic level?

Oh...i'm "cut"...not that I'm upset or anything--but I think that somthing like that ought to be left up to the individual in the fundemental.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 02:31 AM
link   
It's a hygeine issue - hardly a hill to die on.

I was circumcised, and I couldn't care less. No, I take that back, I'm glad they did it before I had the chance - it saved me the trouble.

I realize that you're pointing out the similarity, but I think there's such a huge difference in scale that it's apples and oranges.

You don't give your parents permission to bathe you or change your diapers, do you? You don't give your parents permission to feed you, right? When a kid doesn't want to take a shower or go to school or eat their greens, the parents step in and make that decision on their behalf.

So where's the line?



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by apc
There's a reason nature has produced homosexuality. A response to localized overpopulation, a pacification of mating desire, the need for herds/communities to grow stronger bonds... Whatever the reason, it must be a good one.

You're dead right. They'll breed gayness out of the population and then wonder what went wrong when humanity as a whole begins dying out.

If there were no selective advantage in producing homosexual individuals from time to time, animal (and human) populations would long ago have stopped doing it.

Of course, this cuts no ice with the religious extremists who want to eradicate homosexuality, because they don't believe in evolution either, do they?



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by GemwolfI have a healthy relationship with my Creator. And I have a healthy relationship with a guy.


Can't be healthy if you're where you're at. Your happiness won't last because it's false. And we're only hearing your side of the story. Wonder what God think's of you? When you get to the gates and he tells you you're not allowed in because you showed no remorse or sorrow for the homosexual lifestyle (sin) that you lived in (an abomination - although quite a pleaurable one to us gay guys). You're going to tell him, "I was born this way, I couldn't help it, men will be men....it's only human nature? There was no way I couldn't act on this!" He's gonna pull me out and say, "This is St. Robert, he was just like you, same feelings, but he listened to the Holy Spirit and ignored his human nature, understood my word. He is welcome in my kingdom, but you..........you ignored and disobeyed me strictly for your own happiness and pleaure." This is selfishness.


Originally posted by GemwolfSo what's the difference between you and me? You don't act on your sexual urges to be with a guy. And you do this because you believe this is the way God want you to live even though HE made you who and what you are.


I don't think he "made" me gay. I think somewhere along the line "sin" came into my life (thoughts) and it occurred. You yourself act on your human nature and prefer a life of carnal pleasure. I don't. It only leads to sorrow down the road. You've chosen vice over virtue.God didn't make me gay. I chose to act on my homosexual desires, much the way a serial killer decides to murder when it excites him or a thieve steals for material gratification. Different degress of sin, but all sins nonetheless. As a Christian you must know by now it's forbidden by God and if you can't understand why then you aren't a very good Christian. You are either with Him or against Him.


Originally posted by GemwolfI on the other hand am just as convinced as you that my soul have been saved, BUT I don't hide behind religion. I live. I made peace with God. I made peace with who I am.


You don't sound at peace at all, sorry.
You wouldn't be responding to this thread if you were at peace. You're not at peace so quit fooling yourself. You worry about your soul. It's all over your post. I don't hide behind religion, I dwell within it, and have learned to use it to better my life. As a Christian you should know Jesus wanted His believers to spread His message to others. Any Christian who says Jesus thought homosexuality was "ay okay" is a liar. You know this.


Originally posted by GemwolfI have a healthy relationship with God and I know with 100% certainty that I'm saved. Maybe we should chat again about this on Judgement day? Or maybe we could talk about how Jesus, hundreds of years later removed all the ancient by-laws with love, and preached day in and day out about love for one another? I know what you're going to say next, and the answer is love does not equal sex. And yes, I know the difference.


I'm not as proud as you (did you know pride is a sin also?). I cannot say I'm 100% certain I'm going to be saved, but I am working toward it. To be honest, if I do make the cut, I highly doubt I'll see you there with your self righteous homosexual cavalier attitude. I can't see Jesus siding with your attitude. He's all about total perfection and purity and I doubt very much he wants decadence in heaven.

Brotherly love, not sexual. And if you know this, why did you bring it up?



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Your response is very funny actually. It's all the irony. Worth a smile. Earlier in this thread you asked another poster who he is to judge. From where I'm sitting you're pointing your finger very hard at me and homosexuality and my faith...

You remind me a lot of another "retired gay member" of ATS, zerotolerance. He shares a lot of your opinions. Wouldn't be surprised if you're actually one and the same person?


Originally posted by rocknroll

Originally posted by GemwolfI have a healthy relationship with my Creator. And I have a healthy relationship with a guy.


Can't be healthy if you're where you're at. Your happiness won't last because it's false. And we're only hearing your side of the story. Wonder what God think's of you? When you get to the gates and he tells you you're not allowed in because you showed no remorse or sorrow for the homosexual lifestyle (sin) that you lived in (an abomination - although quite a pleaurable one to us gay guys). You're going to tell him, "I was born this way, I couldn't help it, men will be men....it's only human nature? There was no way I couldn't act on this!" He's gonna pull me out and say, "This is St. Robert, he was just like you, same feelings, but he listened to the Holy Spirit and ignored his human nature, understood my word. He is welcome in my kingdom, but you..........you ignored and disobeyed me strictly for your own happiness and pleaure." This is selfishness.

I don't know how you can say any of this; seeing that you don't really know me, nor do you know anything about my relationship with God. Are you God's spokesperson? How would you know what God thinks, but I wouldn't?

See, part of any healthy relationship is communication. Not God speaks and I listen and that's that. Or vice versa. I converse with God. He speaks to me, and I speak to Him. He has personally assured me that I have been saved. What you're saying is that God is lying to me?

Later in your reply you call me/my attitude "self righteous homosexual cavalier attitude"... Yet you think you are a Saint? So much for being humble.

You think God don't want us to be happy? If the god you pray to doesn't want you to be happy, then he's a pretty mean god. I know the God I worship is happy when I'm happy and sad when I'm sad. Great God, my God.


Originally posted by rocknroll
I don't think he "made" me gay. I think somewhere along the line "sin" came into my life (thoughts) and it occurred. You yourself act on your human nature and prefer a life of carnal pleasure. I don't. It only leads to sorrow down the road. You've chosen vice over virtue.God didn't make me gay. I chose to act on my homosexual desires, much the way a serial killer decides to murder when it excites him or a thieve steals for material gratification. Different degress of sin, but all sins nonetheless. As a Christian you must know by now it's forbidden by God and if you can't understand why then you aren't a very good Christian. You are either with Him or against Him.

You don't "think" He made you gay? Sounds to me like an opinion. You are very fast to judge based on your opinion, aren't you?

You keep hammering on sex. Between you and me, I'm not a very sexual person, and sex isn't very high on my daily to-do list. Nor do I practise anal sex. You think being gay is only about "carnal pleasure"? There's so much more to it, just like any heterosexual relationship. You compare being gay to being a serial killer? How do you get to that, where being gay is about love, and being a killer is about hate and death? You want me to ignore any feelings of love, because it is/may turn into a sin? My God doesn't think love is a sin. In fact, it's all about love.

Can I tell you another secret? When two people love each other, they may end up sleeping together. Sex isn't a dirty sin. It's something beautiful. Yes, it can turn into something "bad" when it's only physical, and yes many homosexual relationships is just about sex, but so are many heterosexual relationships. How many straight men goes to strip clubs and/or hire a (female) hooker, then go back home to their wives? Not to forget the thousands of men who cheat on their wives with their secretaries? Oh, that's just human nature when "the straights" do it, but when a gay guy does it for the pleasure alone, it's only a sin?


Originally posted by rocknroll
You don't sound at peace at all, sorry.
You wouldn't be responding to this thread if you were at peace. You're not at peace so quit fooling yourself. You worry about your soul. It's all over your post. I don't hide behind religion, I dwell within it, and have learned to use it to better my life. As a Christian you should know Jesus wanted His believers to spread His message to others. Any Christian who says Jesus thought homosexuality was "ay okay" is a liar. You know this.

Oh, please enlighten me... Show me one instance in any of my replies where I doesn't sound "at peace"?! If I'm responding to this thread because I'm not "at peace" why are you responding to this thread? Are you saying that everyone that responded to this thread isn't "at peace" and that they/we all worry about our souls - including you? What kind of absurd reasoning is that? If my "worrying about my soul" is all over my post, then you wouldn't have a problem to point such indications out. Yet you don't do it, because like all you're other claims it's just hot air.

I responded to this thread to correct you. You said that gay people can't/don't want to talk about Jesus and/or religion. And here I am... Then you turn on attack mode? I tell you that I'm a Christian and that I'm not afraid to talk about religion, and you turn around to tell me that I'm lying? I don't have to prove anything about my person to you. I do however want to point out that you have a misconception about homosexuality and religion.

At what stage do I hide behind my religion? You started talking about religion in one of your earlier posts, and I responded to that. Thus the (off) topic discussion is about religion and homosexuality. How am I hiding behind my religion? I don't force my sexuality OR my religion down anyone's throat. You are more than welcome to go through my post history, and you'll see that I rarely talk about religion.

Yes, I know Christians are supposed to "spread the news". You think you're spreading the news to me, and I thought I was spreading (some good) news to you. And here we are again. Who's right? Your message is that God will smite me down for not walking the thin line, and that Jesus hates me because I'm gay? Again, you've got a pretty mean god. My God, is a much better God. He says that He loves me no matter what. My Jesus was willing to guarantee the MURDERER on the cross next to Him eternal life, just because the murderer said "This man is truly God". I know Jesus is OK with the fact that I'm gay. I know He's not OK with a promiscuous life-style, but that goes for both homo- and heterosexuals. I'm sorry St. Robert. I prefer my God to yours.


Originally posted by rocknroll
I'm not as proud as you (did you know pride is a sin also?). I cannot say I'm 100% certain I'm going to be saved, but I am working toward it. To be honest, if I do make the cut, I highly doubt I'll see you there with your self righteous homosexual cavalier attitude. I can't see Jesus siding with your attitude. He's all about total perfection and purity and I doubt very much he wants decadence in heaven.

Brotherly love, not sexual. And if you know this, why did you bring it up?

Did you know judging others is also a sin?

Yes, I'm proud of who I am. Do you want me to sit in a dark corner and feel sorry for myself because I'm gay? Oh poor me. I can't help the fact that I'm gay, and it's never going to change, so I won't ever be able to love someone special. I'll have to live inside this dark closet for the rest of my life and be miserable. But at least, God won't hate me.
Is that who you want me to be? If so, then we're clearly talking about two different Gods. You time and again try to make me feel guilty about being gay, but you're not going to achieve it. Sadly somewhere along the line someone made you feel guilty for being gay, and changed your life and attitude for the worse. (Or maybe for the best? Maybe you were living a sinful life in the gay scene?)

You can't see Jesus siding with my attitude? My certain attitude? I've got a positive attitude because I know for certain that my soul has been saved. Yet, you are not so certain. Hmmm. Yet according to you I'm wrong and you're right?

Put yourself in an atheist's shoes. He looks at both our attitudes. He sees your attitude: "Be careful! Don't sin! Maybe I'll make it into heaven, maybe not. Either way round I'll keep myself from being happy for the rest of my life. Maybe I'll be made a Saint when I die."
He sees my attitude: "Jesus loves me unconditionally. Even though I'm gay. My soul have been saved. I just need to keep believing and living according to a simple set of guidelines and values."

I wonder part of which religion/faith the atheist would want to be part of? Scary enough it's actually the same religion and faith. Talk about “brotherly love”.


And on the point of being right and wrong, we've gone waaaay off topic, and for some reason you didn't even respond to the part of my response that has to do with the actual topic. You didn't even bother to respond to the part where I used facts to point out that your AIDS argument is wrong. The AIDS part of my reply was actually the longest and most important part of my reply, the religion part was just a side-note. Interesting how you responded to it all.

You won't admit you were wrong about your AIDS argument, nor will you admit you may be wrong about the religion and homosexuality topic.

Edit: Grammar

[edit on 5-1-2007 by Gemwolf]



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 04:58 AM
link   
The whole gay thing should be like this:

"OK, you're gay, I don't care, good for you, now lets get on with our lifes."

Straight people shouldn't say stuff or spread things about being gay, and they shouldn't even care about how someone is sexually orientated, and gay people shouldn't do that either.

Shadowflux, I think you'll find most straight people don't really give a damn if someone is gay. However still, a large proportion are idiots and try and find 'cures' for homosexuality which is a load of crap, and should just be ignored. After all, they're not going to change you are they?



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by GemwolfEarlier in this thread you asked another poster who he is to judge.


I'm not judging, just guessing based upon what I know of Holy Scripture. If you're a Christian you should believe in Scripture. Scripture says homosexuals shall not inherit the kingdon of heaven. So if you're Christain how do you expect to enter the kingdom of heaven when you die? Answer: You won't because scripture makes that very clear. Read: 1 Cor 6:9-11 if you don't believe me, or do you not believe scripture?


Originally posted by GemwolfYou remind me a lot of another "retired gay member" of ATS, zerotolerance. He shares a lot of your opinions. Wouldn't be surprised if you're actually one and the same person?


I don't remember you, but good guess, obviously you remember me. I must have made enough of an impression on your conscience. Another time that I made you question your lifestyle and faith. This is good. God is working in you. I'm glad my post causes you to question your behavior.


Originally posted by GemwolfSee, part of any healthy relationship is communication. Not God speaks and I listen and that's that. Or vice versa. I converse with God. He speaks to me, and I speak to Him. He has personally assured me that I have been saved. What you're saying is that God is lying to me?


What I am saying is that there is no way God would endorse your homosexual lifestyle. I'm sure he loves you very much, but I know he hates your sin (homosexuality). And if you keep it up to the moment of your death, than yeah, chances are you will spend eternity in hell. I'm not judging, I'm telling you what Scripture says. "You will not inherit the kingdom of God" under any circumstances if you die embracing a homosexual lifestyle. You still have time to change. While we are here He is merciful and forgiving and will forgive you of any sin.....any. But after you die and meet Him face to face He is no longer merciful, He is a just judge and you will be judged accordingly. He will not take pity on you or feel sorry for you when you knew the rules and blatantly broke them for your own happiness. There are some things that make us happy that are very, very bad for us in the long run. Again quit being selfish. If you love Him, than do as He says. You in effect are rebelling against Him.


Originally posted by GemwolfLater in your reply you call me/my attitude "self righteous homosexual cavalier attitude"... Yet you think you are a Saint? So much for being humble.


I am not perfect and far from it. But I can say homosexuality was my biggest sin of all. I can admit it was wrong. I don't believe in "gay pride" anymore. What's to be proud of? My goal is to be a saint in heaven one day. There's nothing wrong in being humble about that and striving for it...sorry that attitude bothers you, but I think what bothers you makes God smile.


Originally posted by GemwolfYou think God don't want us to be happy? If the god you pray to doesn't want you to be happy, then he's a pretty mean god. I know the God I worship is happy when I'm happy and sad when I'm sad. Great God, my God.


Same ol, same ol, tired homosexual argument....."how could God not want me to be happy", again, weird analogy, but the serial killer feels happiest when he's living out his sick fantasies and killing people....a sin is a sin is as sin. God does not want you searching for happiness in carnal pleasure, blowjobs, anal intercourse, fetishism, S&M, B&D, fondling other men's penises or groping them til you squirt. God wants you to find happiness through Him, not through human flesh. When you leave here, you'll have no flesh, yet your happiness was found through the flesh....you'll be spirit, a spirit bound to earthly sin who will be lost in the afterlife without his body to make him feel happy. You need to concentrate on what makes your spirit happy and not the thing between your legs.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join