Say, you like what morality the Bible has to offer, but the metaphysical claims are quite unprovable and somewhat ignorant. Then I would hold a bit
more respect for you. I am not saying that I do not respect you, I am just not a fan of fence-sitters.
I get what you're saying, but I say semi-Christian because it's a pain to explain exactly where I agree and don't. Not that my view is so unique
but it's easier to say I believe in some and some I don't think needs to be believed in. If that makes sense.
lastly i feel if 2 people of the same sex generally do love each other in that way thats fine, what they do in their own homes is their business, but
trying to force acceptance of such behaviour on the rest of the community is wrong and in time its going to be something they will have to accept.
They aren't trying to force your (the 'your' i refer to is a generalization) acceptance, they're trying to gain acknowledgment. You need only to
accept that others can do as they please, and that we shouldn't deny someone the right to do something because we don't agree with it.
The title is misleading. Christians do not/should not hate gays. Like God, hate the sin. Not the sinner. Agree or not, I'm just pointing that out.
You're right, though people tend to associate 'crimes' to 'criminals'. That's nothing against Christians, that's just people in general. But
yes, the doctrine you noted is correct.
Moses, even after all his effort, for all those years in leading his people to the Promised Land, was prohibited entry. His offense? Disobedience.
In fact, it would appear to me that the entire Old Testament could be summed up in one word: obedience.
I thought the old testament was 'replaced', in a sense, by the new testament. Do you not feel that men may have influenced the Bible for their own
gain? Do you believe they could have, but ignore the chance and assume the message still gets through? Or do you believe that God intervened enough
to stop that from happening? (For the record, when I ask questions like this I'm 100% genuine, I say that because I realize that if read
sarcastically it sounds like I'm mocking the opposing viewpoint.)
I think we disagree a lot on our interpretation or the purity of the entire scripture, but I'm honestly interested in understanding your point of
"Homosexuality is genetic."
You will find scientists on both sides.
That being said...
Way to completely dismiss the premise of my argument by generalizing it away, while still giving it a 50/50 chance.
Here's a way to look at it. Do you think that a bunch of them got together and said, "hey, lets all talk in high pitched voices and pretend to be
like girls because other guys like girls. Cool, see ya next meeting."
During development, if you are not given the 'normal' amounts of key male hormones like testosterone, many of the stereotypically male traits will
not develop either. The effects of sexual hormones is what create the idea of a strong man. Muscular development, increase in height/weight, hair,
deep voice, aggression, and many other typically male associated indicators. This affects the kind of person you are, the activities you enjoy, the
people you feel comfortable with, it's human nature. As someone else said, you 'chose' to be heterosexual because your hormones lead your brain in
that direction. Those male chemicals motivate you to procreate, and to find anything related to procreation attractive (body parts, eyes, smiles,
etc.). If you start messing with these hormones it influences what attracts you. Attraction is merely a mechanism in place to guide our behavior
from the genetic level. The instructions in our DNA are carried out through this process.
So yes, not wanting to copy your DNA is odd. The motivation may be lacking to make more copies of DNA. Ha, and is there not something egotistical
about doing so much to ensure you copy yourself? (I don't know, just saying
) If a male is created who is not motivated to breed, to copy
himself, then what need for attraction to females does he have? There really wouldn't be a point. Now why he may start liking guys, I don't
Christians are not any more monolthic then the African-Americans or any other "group." Stop with your veiled accusations of "Christians."
You're right that I have generalized Christians in my OP. I only intended to address those who are strongly opposed to gays or gay rights. This is
definitely not all Christians and I should have been more specific.
If you believe that being Gay is genetic then your arguement is true. God does not make people born o be damned.
Oops...slight flaw in your theory. Hitler/Pol Pot/ Dahmer. Are they genteically designed to be "bad?"
The actions of Hitler/Pol Pot/Dahmer greatly harmed others, gay people do not. Part of my argument or position, is that God really wants us to get
along and find peace and love with each other. People like those killers are going against that, gays practicing their lifestyle are not. And if you
feel their presence or 'fruity' behavior is keeping everyone from being happy or relaxed realized that they aren't any more against it than a
random annoying person. Yeah, I don't want some guy in cutoff shorts dancing a foot away from me, but I also don't want some guy telling me stories
about how fast the grass grew at his childhood home from a foot away either.
Anyways, I think using God to negatively treat or communicate with someone is not what He'd like us to do. I'm not saying people in here are, I
know nothing about your personal lives, but only those who would choose to do so.