The Christians hating gays contradiction

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


Look, when you find out whether you're a boy or a girl, THAT decides it. If your an in-between hermaphrodite, it's hard to tell but there are probably tests for that.
I can remember being 5 years old and I had a garage set. Like one toy car and a mini-garage I played with in Alabama. I also watched clint eastwood movies with my dad.
Anyway, someone ran over it and didn't even stop. I can remember getting SO Mad that I balled my fists up looking at one of my only toys sprinkled on the dirt-driveway.
Then and there, I thought Momma must of lied to me and I was really a boy, I had a boy haircut.
I soon realized that I was a girl, but, I KNEW I was a tom-boy!
I found out what I was.

I may have had gay relation further on, but, I knew they were wrong.
I'm not a girly-girl, though!




posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:19 PM
link   
If you don't believe in the Bibles divine authorship, and you are not a Christian why do you care what we think? If there's no God you have nothing to worry about, get over it. Why justify yourself to others? Why do you care what others think or do you just get off shoving your lifestyle in the faces of those that find it wrong or sinful. You are just causing problems so you can play victim wahhhhh!!!! The Christians hate me WAAAAHHHH!!!!!



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:20 PM
link   
It appears to me that both sides of the arguement here take some things from the bible and dismiss others.

surely a christian who believes the bible is gods word, must take everything that the bible says as truth, and which should be obeyed.

A difficult if not impossible thing to do considering the amount of contradictions in it.

If you do not believe in god or the bibles teachings then surely you shouldn't grab a statement and say 'see it says it in your bible'.

also the statement 'it's un-natural' is also wrong, in every species of animal there is 'gay sex', therefore if it's in nature it's natural.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


I apologize. Let me clarify.

"It may not be genetic but is is 'natural.' 30 million people..."

Natural does not imply "normal."

No one, not even you will imply that cleft palates are normal. 140,000 kids a year are born that way.

115 out of every 100,000 women will have breast cancer. That is natural. Not normal.

And the fact you stated you HATE heterosexuals is far from normal or natural.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 

You suggest that the Bible is man's rules, not God's.

We'll see.

Won't we?



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   
The arguement I’ve heard is that even if there was a genetic influence, it would still have to be controlled. There is a genetic influence for some for anger or violence, but that doesn’t mean you can go around hurting others.

I don’t think its that good of an argument. People pick and choose what is sinful according to their own personal interests. They might quote a Bible verse, but that’s not to say that it is set in stone. The strict dietary laws of the Jews are thought by some people to have developed out of safety in times when foods weren’t always cooked right. The dietary law was there to protect people from illness and had nothing to do with sin or God, that is the thought for some. Others will basically say you have to follow it or God will become angry, who’s right? Similarly the verses in the Bible mention homosexual activity largely could have been in response to the prevalance of homosexuality in Greek life. Polytheism was also prevalent in that society so would it make sense to distance yourself, and mold your religion away from that? Makes sense to some. But like the dietary laws, homosexuality itself wasn’t bad but the connection to polytheism is what made it something to look down at.

Back to my main topic, if there are predispositions to “bad” traits via genes, is it possible perhaps that these traits have nothing to do with salvation at all? I think so
People like to think that actions are important, but its the intention. If there a genes that give people a predisposition to “goodness” does that mean that they have an easier time getting to heaven? Lets say there is a Mother Terresa gene, is that all that is nessicary to go to heaven? They wouldn’t even have to work in life, they’d be a born saint. It’d be like a free pass into heaven. And with science, we could easily give everyone this gene and everyone would go to heaven because they all are “nice” people that follow rules and kiss eachothers’ butts. Is it that easy, really? I don’t think so


To top it off, right in between the verses that condemn homsexuality, you have verses that talk of killing the women and children yadda yadda. People don't take that seriously, but it is the direct word of God so go figure.

[edit on 13-11-2008 by ghaleon12]



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by dooper
 


We don't have to, we can use deductive logic.

Bible -> written by man.

That's the fact.

Anything past that is speculation, like it's Gods rules.

It's entirely a man's construction.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by whoswatchinwho
 


Not exactly.
The Old Covenant and the New Covenant, (Brought in by Jesus' sacrifice) involve more than that.
The Kingdom on Earth of The first Temple and the theocracy of Hebrew Kings, mandated the rules of citizenship for God's chosen people.
Like not wearing mixed cloth, not touching dead bodies without proper 'cleansing'.
Come to think of it, it made life for a woman easier(unless your husband was horrible), in that women got to take a week off every month and go outside of the city for menstruation< It was considered unclean.
Let me tell you, it's hard with PMS, lots of children and a husband, sometimes!
After Jesus died, the veil of the Holy of Holies was torn in half, giving ALL men and women DIRECT approach to the High Priest Jesus for atonement.
No more did we sacrifice, doves and sheep and bulls, for forgiveness.
Gentiles and Jews have the perfect One time Sacrifice of Jesus.

[edit on 13-11-2008 by Clearskies]



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   
OK I'm gonna get beat for this maybe but I am Straight as an arrow and I don't want to ever go same sex in any way. I wonder why people who are different don't come up with a different view? Marriage is between a Man & a Woman and should forever be. It's like trying to change the NFL to the NHL or the NBA to the WNBA. Before there was women basketball there was NBA. Well now that women has come along there is WNBA. Can gays and lesbians call it AnyMarriage or Outie Marriage? Or Garriage, larriage etc... I honestly feel that Marriage is a trademark and if it isn't it should be. Again I have nothing against gays and Lesbians and know they will not affect my way of life at all but please trademark your own union with the same rights if you want to.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


Well actually sexual identity is genetic too. Thus why there are so many transvestites. Recent studies are showing that natural urges are genetic and are subject to genetic limitations.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


"Natural urges are genetic"

Pedophilia

Beastiality

A genetic predisposition takes all the worry out of it doesn't it? You have no responsibility for your thought or actions.

"It's not my fault"

Does that help you sleep at night?



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   
I believe it is a very hard argument to claim that people are born gay. Since a baby can not convey logic, or a possible understanding of sexuality or love.

When I was younger I had a babysitter who had a younger brother, we use to play with G.I Joes, his sister also had Barbies and all of her accessories and what-not. We would also play with those, play with both, I remember I wanted to be a G.I Joe, along with many other things as a child, because they were amazing to me.

But, that makes me think, what if I was more infatuated with the Barbie, rather than the G.I Joe? Would that mean I would want to become more feminine? To become more like some childhood object, because I took a liking to it early on? My logic is, possibly early on, some surrounding, some influence, something that makes you feel an urge to imitate it, even it's gender role?

But, possibly people are born gay, but it would be very hard to prove due to memories or feelings of your early childhood.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


So if there's no God at least no real Jesus because some "men" made it all up over the course of a few thousand years then our whole society is a sham! Why if there's no final judgement then it's the law of the jungle. If you really believed that you would be a stone cold killer, rapist, thief.
Convince me that there's no God go ahead! the heart of man is evil beyond comprehension it's the respect or Love or fear of god that restrains it.

#1 I do not believe genetics play a part in Homosexuality
#2 I don't hate gays, you all hate yourselvesenough for both of us
#3 this was to stay on topic

[edit on 13-11-2008 by racegunz]



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy


Hate the sin but not the sinner


correct

I hate heterosexuality. I hate the heterosexual orientation.


i see you are uselessly flipping the coin here.






I don't hate it at all. I am just flipping the coin over.


and why would you flip the coin. if gays are born that way, then maybe those that find it disgusting were born that way?

what gives you the right to flip the coin? if were all born a certain way then thats it. gays are born that way. bi-sexuals are born that way. hetero-sexuals are born that way.

what we see here, is bi-sexuals at least cant be born that way, because they enjoy both sexes, that is a choice. a choice that some people find disgusting because they are born that way.




[edit on 13-11-2008 by pureevil81]

[edit on 13-11-2008 by pureevil81]



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by crmanager
 


Don't blame me, I didn't design our DNA, your God did.


 

reply to post by racegunz
 


I'm not here to prove God doesn't exist. My point is that he didn't write the bible. Now from your post it sounds to me like you cannot tell the difference between the two. You my friend are indulging in a kind of idolatry called Bibliolatry.

If you can't tell the difference, you need help.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by pureevil81
what gives you the right to flip the coin? if were all born a certain way then thats it. gays are born that way. bi-sexuals are born that way. hetero-sexuals are born that way.


And if they are, it's unfair and unjust to persecute them, just as much it is unjust to persecute blacks or redheads or whatever.


what we see here, is bi-sexuals at least cant be born that way, because they enjoy both sexes, that is a choice. a choice that some people find disgusting because they are born that way.


Why? If we can be born to be attracted to either sex then it suggests a spectrum considering that some people are more attracted to one sex as opposed to the other.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Solarskye
 


That's respectable. But of course, if you were gay I'm sure you'd have mildly different thoughts. And the straight people have their, sometimes, antigay thoughts. But if opinion is so easily changeable, then who is right and where is the objectivity? I can say very safely that any person in here who turned gay would change their thoughts fairly quickly. Many gays grow up strict Christians, have a crisis early in life, and somehow manage to resolve it while still considering themselves Christians afterwards. Not being judgmental on these peoples' closeness to Christ, how is this possible?

Marriage in the first place should only be recognized by the church, not the state. If that was the case, the problem would be solved. Civil unions would be given out to everyone, gay and straight, and marriage would be granted by the church. I can almost be certain that gays would not be seeking out recognition within the church as being married. Certain rights come with marriage so it is nessicary to allow gays those rights, like partner visitation in a hospital or tax breaks. The church as far as I'm concerned is like a club, which is what it should be viewed as by the state, in which case getting a certain recognition within it very isn't all that important and would have no affect on life outside of that institution.

[edit on 13-11-2008 by ghaleon12]



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


why are you asking me why, it is pretty clear. if you enjoy both sexes it is a choice. period.

you are exactly right, it is not ok to persecute anyone for color of skin, oreientation, etc etc.......

why do gay people try to make everyone see it is ok, we are born a certain way, why try to pass your beliefs on someone else?

personally, i have no problem if your gay, straight or whatever. just trying to see another's point of view, thats all.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by pureevil81
 


My opinion conforms with the science communities. Now, as for choice, well it's a moot point really. Having sex with anyone is a choice, having sex is a choice. Attraction isn't. There is no evidence to suggest you can reverse sexual attraction, and bisexual attraction isn't like one or the other, it's a spectrum as I said.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


ok, a spectrum it is.

dont think im anti-gay, im just trying to see it from another perspective here.

sex aside, lets talk physical attraction.

if one is attracted to both sexes, not one. then how would they get married, who would they CHOOSE.

that would be their choice would it not?

thanks for the replie good wolf.





 
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join



atslive.com

hi-def

low-def