Presbyterian Church (USA) Amends Constitution to Allow Gay Marriage

Presbyterian Church (USA) Amends Constitution to Allow Gay Marriage

This is a pleasant surprise! The Presbyterians I know wouldn't ever go for this. According to them, unless you are a heterosexual WASP ... you are lost. Maybe the ones I know don't represent the beliefs of their church? Anyways, awesome news coming from the Presbyterian church.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

If it is safe to assume or liken homosexuality to lefthandedness then it is just as equally justified to speculate that...

Above average intelligence's do not like homosex or practitioners of it.

It is not good for the development of our societies because once a deviation is accepted it becomes a norm, then we look for the next thing to be accepted.

I will gladly go back to being persecuted for being left-handed if we can keep on persecuting homosexuals

originally posted by: FlyersFan

Presbyterian Church (USA) Amends Constitution to Allow Gay Marriage

This is a pleasant surprise! The Presbyterians I know wouldn't ever go for this. According to them, unless you are a heterosexual WASP ... you are lost. Maybe the ones I know don't represent the beliefs of their church? Anyways, awesome news coming from the Presbyterian church.

no need to bring race into this Sir/Ma'am Moderator

originally posted by: AinElohim
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

It is not good for the development of our societies because once a deviation is accepted it becomes a norm, then we look for the next thing to be accepted.

We are ALL deviations/mutations from the first human.

We ALL have birth "differences". Unless you believe we're clones.

I guess a sterile hetero must be forbidden to marry.

Just because someone is naturally attracted to same gender ---- does not mean their sexual organs aren't 100% functional. Gays are not broken. There is nothing in their physiology that prevents them from living a full productive life.

If you were forced to have same sex wouldn't it feel wrong to you?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: AinElohim
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

It is not good for the development of our societies because once a deviation is accepted it becomes a norm, then we look for the next thing to be accepted.

We are ALL deviations/mutations from the first human.

We ALL have birth "differences". Unless you believe we're clones.

I guess a sterile hetero must be forbidden to marry.

Just because someone is naturally attracted to same gender ---- does not mean their sexual organs aren't 100% functional. Gays are not broken. There is nothing in their physiology that prevents them from living a full productive life.

If you were forced to have same sex wouldn't it feel wrong to you?

lol yes...

you are correct, I believe you now.

Where is your evidence?

All you have done in this thread is state opinions as if they are facts, and call people who disagree with you names. By doing so you simply make yourself look ignorant.

Do you have anything other than opinions? I doubt it.

a reply to: chadderson

Either way you look at it we are on this earth to learn, to improve, and to love. Lessons will be learned and we will grow from them.

Well pay attention then because you might just learn some lessons here that improve your capacity to love and help you grow as a human being despite all your defects.

homosexuality exists in two forms. One, as a defect where the individual has no perspective besides that of a homosexual. The soul is the same as us, the lens at which they witness the world is different, defected.

No perspective outside of that of a homosexual? What does that even mean? That they don’t have the perspective of a heterosexual? Well yeah. Duh. Just as you don’t have the perspective of a homosexual. Are you defected as a result?

but sex that is focused on the orgasm and inflating the ego, rather than who or what they are engaging with. This act is not one of love, though many may think and claim it to be, but one of selfishness.

This ‘argument’, for lack of a better word, is predicated on homosexual sex only ever being a focus on their own selfish needs and their own orgasm. That it’s not ever about love or intimacy or even just mutual enjoyment. How are you claiming that to be true?? Are you witness to the private lives of all homosexuals?? I’m not sure what power of omniscience you possess but one thing is for sure; you might want to reflect on your own sexual orientation if you feel driven to continuously observe their sex lives.

a reply to: chadderson

We will see as time goes on, what the stories of soddom and gomorrah were all about.

I'm familiar with this story.

Lot offered his young daughters to some townsfolk to be raped. Raped in place of the angels disguised as men. Gang-rape is not homosexuality. It's rape.

What lesson are we supposed to derive from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah? That 'god' will brutally destroy our major cities, and all its inhabitants, including infants, babies, toddlers, young teens, pregnant mothers... all because the cities embrace homosexuals as equal citizens?? Are you attempting to to instruct us of some moral lesson here? Friend I think it might be you with a 'defective perspective' on this matter.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: DeathSlayer

So, your statement:

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Did you know that now it is legal for incest sex? That's right Dad and daughters, Moms with their sons all having sex and it is legal!!

Is NOT in fact, true. For one thing, that's in Germany. This is in the USA (see title).
And secondly, it's not at all legal in Germany for "dad and daughters, moms with their sons" to have sex. Your external quote proves what you said to be false. Read it carefully.

Who cares if it is in USA? I surely don't! AND I was contributing to the fact that morals have changed just as it occurrced within the Presbyterian Church.

And again you are wrong:

And secondly, it's not at all legal in Germany for "dad and daughters, moms with their sons" to have sex. Your external quote proves what you said to be false. Read it carefully.

My quote was from the deciding factor and vote of the German ethics committee where a brother and sister having sex (they even had kids) which was in the PAST illegal is now legal! This new law is not just for brothers and sisters having sex but incest is now legal.

I show you proof and you still whine. Stop twisting the facts.

But that is not what bothers me about your entire post - what gets me is that you made no mention whatsoever to the new law of humans now can legally have sex with animals! It appears you accept this practice since you made no negative mention of this in your post. To anyone who accepts either bestality or incest has a sick mind and outlook on life.

Since you are a proud supporter of gay rights I can only assume by what statements you left out of your original post you also support bestality?

I noticed you made numerous posts in the pet forum about your dogs?

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Young man, homosexuality prevents the individual from having children, this is a serious defect. "despite all your defects", would you please elaborate on apparently, my defects?

a reply to: windword

Altruism is not a defect, it does not limit ones ability to procreate. Homosexuality prevents the individual from having children. Sex organs can be completely functional but the brain is behind the involuntary actions of the organs. Thus, the only way a homosexual male can procreate is to do so without the veil of love... technology, surrogate, etc. The connection between a man and a woman in sexual intercourse dictates the experience. The connection between a man and a woman in the moment of conception dictates whether or not the child was conceived in love. Do you believe in meditation, cymatics, mind over matter? Do you believe love can elevate us? It can, it does, and it is the way we are supposed to bring our children into this world.


You said "A prime example of the beauties of life is having a companion who loves you, who's your "best friend" regardless of gender. You can't take that away from any loving couple regardless of your archaic small mindedness." You said exactly what I have stated in a previous post. Homosexual relationships are merely friendships. It is a union that cannot create new life. Sex within a union that cannot procreate is one of two things, a defect or a choice to chase an orgasm with the absence of love.

The defected lens still has love behind it, whereas the second, orgasm chasing, does not. The love of someone innately gay, with an actual developmental defect, is merely channeled through defective pathways and comes out as homosexuality.

You tell me "I dont believe your god exists". I have not indicated who "my god" was, so why have you said that? I acknowledged our creator, the common link between you and i. My creator is the same as your creator, whether you are presently aware of it or not.

a reply to: chadderson

Young man

Appreciated. I'm starting to feel old.

homosexuality prevents the individual from having children, this is a serious defect.

Which is completely untrue. If that is what you mean by defect then you have just defeated your own argument. This has been pointed out to you by other members. Just because they are homosexual doesn't automatically mean their reproductive system magically stops functioning. They can and do reproduce. Gay women get pregnant. How does that happen do you think if their gayness prevents them from bearing children?

"despite all your defects", would you please elaborate on apparently, my defects?

One of your defects I am almost certain would be your ability to wholly disregard everything I'd elucidate on the matter. You didn't address some of the things I said in my post to you. If that's how our discussion would continue then I don't see much point.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Homosexuals have functional organs. Homosexuals have malfunctioning brains. The brain controls the organs as well as their involuntary actions. True arousal is an involuntary action. (Yes, anyone can stimulate themselves with thoughts or touch to arousal, but this is manufactured.) A homosexual cannot be aroused with a partner that would allow conception.

Homosexual relationships are merely friendships. It is a union that cannot create new life. Sex within a union that cannot procreate is one of two things, a defect or a choice to chase an orgasm with the absence of love.

As for "my defect" of not acknowledging many points of your post. By the assortment of letters you have typed out to me, it is clear that you have not read all of the posts in this thread and have thus missed the answers, I am in this conversation 100%, if you want to partake do your part and be aware of the subject matter.

Thank you for calling my name out when you are addressing me, I now realize i may have missed a post or two from previous users simply because they posted without addressing their messages to me. I appreciate it.

a reply to: chadderson

Sex organs can be completely functional but the brain is behind the involuntary actions of the organs

Sex is always involuntary? I am fairly certain our minds, a byproduct of our brains, makes voluntary decisions as well. Some of which is who with and when to have sex. Gay people, with their functioning brains and reproductive systems, sometimes choose to have sex exclusively with the person they love, and they choose to have a child with that person. They then go on to love that child. They choose to be a loving parent.

Thus, the only way a homosexual male can procreate is to do so without the veil of love... technology, surrogate, etc.

You introduce so many fallacies with your reasoning it's nuts.

First off procreation that results from heterosexual sex isn't always through a loving union. Heterosexuality does nothing to guarantee that. Just as nothing about homosexuality guarantees there will be a lack of it.

That depends on factors that apparently completely escape you!

Your posts reek to me of someone who has a very bizarre or wholly unsophisticated understanding of love and intimacy. Which is surprising because you're the "old man" and I am the "young man".

You think what you want to think. You're free to do that. Care to explain how you know as a matter of fact that homosexuals lack love and intimacy? That their sex is purely selfish? Can you actually explain how you know that, without simply repeated it is so?

My creator is the same as your creator, whether you are presently aware of it or not.

Brahmā, right?

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Arousal is involuntary. Sex blossoms out of arousal. Sex is voluntary, arousal is the push to get you there.

If one is truly gay, why would they have sex with a woman? If one is truly gay, the one that they love would not be of the opposite sex.

I never said all heterosexual procreation was under the veil of love. Obviously by default and the laws of creation, half are, and half are not. Heterosexual procreation is the only way to create a child under the veil of love.

Homosexual sex is an act of love, but it is a defect. To be having sex with the same sex, is a defect. A man that is attracted to the same sex, has real developmental defects that can be quantified... to the extent of their inability to produce the proper ingredients in their biochemistry to yield the chemical reactions that push us forward. Think about testosterone, estrogen, stages of develpment and what happens if one of these steps is missed or if some of these ingredients are simply non-existent within the individual. The result is a completely natural birth defect

a reply to: chadderson

Homosexuals have malfunctioning brains.

Sounds scientific. Please cite all your sources so we can review the scientific merit that their brains are malfunctioning.

A homosexual cannot be aroused with a partner that would allow conception.

Scenario: a homosexual woman is aroused by her female partner who has a functioning reproductive system. I just rendered your argument invalid. Whether they can reproduce together is separate from the point you're attempting to make about them being 'defected'. It's more than likely either of them can get pregnant. They are not 'defected' in that way. If then the only issue is a lack of procreation in general then the alternative methods such as surrogate mothers and insemination is still ultimately creating new babies. New babies as a result of their voluntary decision.

Homosexual relationships are merely friendships.

Do you have sex and raise families with your 'just friends'? I imagine you do not. Gay people do that all the time with their "friends". They also often love them deeply. They say this about their experience. I'm going to trust that mountain of personal testimony over your single opinion. Please by all means explain how you have the power of omniscience that you would be privy to their inner thoughts and emotions, and their sex lives, and you could potentially sway my opinion entirely.

It is a union that cannot create new life.

Other than what's already been brought up by myself an others I feel the need to point out that lots of gay people have procreated with the opposite sex... sometimes before they 'came out'. Regardless it defeats your notion that they are 'defected' because they cannot reproduce. They even can and do with the opposite sex.

You need to rethink and refine your argument.

As for "my defect" of not acknowledging many points of your post. By the assortment of letters you have typed out to me, it is clear that you

Tu Quoque

Sex within a union that cannot procreate is one of two things, a defect or a choice to chase an orgasm with the absence of love.

Black or White

a reply to: chadderson

A man that is attracted to the same sex, has real developmental defects that can be quantified

Demonstrate this.

If one is truly gay, why would they have sex with a woman?

Your posts continue to frame homosexuality as if it were only between men. It’s not.

If one is truly gay, the one that they love would not be of the opposite sex.

It would be the same sex? See I told you if you stuck around you would learn and grow

Heterosexual procreation is the only way to create a child under the veil of love.

I see no reason at all to think your thoughts have any merit concerning the nature of love and intimacy and when and how it arises for people. Truly you do not appear to be a sage on this matter. You’d be better off linking some science and studies instead of mere conjecture.

a reply to: chadderson

You tell me "I dont believe your god exists". I have not indicated who "my god" was, so why have you said that? I acknowledged our creator, the common link between you and i. My creator is the same as your creator, whether you are presently aware of it or not.

This is a thread about Christians, Presbyterians, specifically. I believe the thread is focused on the Christian God. Specifically, my reply was in reference to this "creator god" you refer to:

Marriage is not about commiting yourself to another person. It is commiting yourself to a promise with your creator that you love and trust who has been put before you. That you will continue to be an upright, disciplined, positive, astute person or that union can fall apart. To find yourself before the person that IS truly in this world just for you, you MUST be in union with your creator first.

Yeah, no it's not. Marriage is contract between two people. "Your Creator" has nothing to do with it.

Altruism is not a defect, it does not limit ones ability to procreate.

Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends.

The definition of altruism is put another's life above your own. If you're not alive, you can't procreate. Some people might see that as a defect.

Homosexuality prevents the individual from having children.

No it doesn't. Homosexuals have been procreating since the dawn of man.

Thus, the only way a homosexual male can procreate is to do so without the veil of love...

So, in your world, love = sex, sex = love? Jesus' teachings much be really confusing for you!

The connection between a man and a woman in sexual intercourse dictates the experience.

Do you think every married man has always been in love with his wife, and vice versa?

The connection between a man and a woman in the moment of conception dictates whether or not the child was conceived in love.

So what? What's love got to do with procreation?

Do you believe love can elevate us? It can, it does, and it is the way we are supposed to bring our children into this world.

Why do you think that homosexuals can't be in love? Experience loving relationships?

Not all married people are meant to have children, unmarried single parents CAN be better parents than two dysfunctional and abusive parents. One doesn't have to be THE biological sperm or egg donor to be a good and loving parent, either.

Homosexual relationships are merely friendships. It is a union that cannot create new life. Sex within a union that cannot procreate is one of two things, a defect or a choice to chase an orgasm with the absence of love.

Orgasm is always the goal of sexual intercourse, regardless of gender. Getting pregnant is not! Lots of couples, regardless of gender and sexual orientation, get married and have NO intention nor desire of having children.

Romantic sex is rarely about procreation. It's about getting to know one another and exploring each other's body's. In reality, marital sex is rarely about procreation. Most women spend a lot of energy making sure that they DON'T get pregnant! Marital sex is about enjoying each other's body's and company.

The defected lens still has love behind it, whereas the second, orgasm chasing, does not.

How is "orgasm chasing" a homosexual problem?

Your perception (defective lens) is skewed and you are wrong that same sex couples can't enjoy the same level of love, commitment and affection as any hetero couple.