Can People Be Born Homosexual?

[formergothardite]

Nope. You haven't read my posts correctly. I want government out of the welfare business so it can be privatized and not abused. I am not for putting women in prison for abortion, only their doctors.

I honestly think the reason Jericho is slow to explain her change in beliefs is because she didn't really change beliefs, just forgot what she wrote. If you read this post, she makes if very clear that if you think she believes women should be put in jail for abortions, it is just because you read her posts wrong, not because, you know, she actually wrote it.

But perhaps I am wrong and she will come and tell us what we did that moved a "Abortions are murder and the women should go to jail for killing babies" person into "Well, it isnt' great but we should just give hugs to the mothers." person.

[Renting with Raggles]

Because you're a jackass who would take away my reproductive rights in a second if you had the power to do so. That's a damn sight worse than me pointing out that you're a weaselling liar. I think false niceness is bullshit.

So do I, but bullying and hurting women is not against her own moral code (on the contrary actively encouraged) whereas bearing false witness is explicitly forbidden. I think it's more insulting to her to call her out on the slimy weasel thing.

I'm still waiting for her to address the real way to get rid of abortions. Plain answers please: no equivocators in heaben to party with the Jeebus-baby!

[formergothardite]

I'm still waiting to hear Jericho's opinions on homosexuality.

Since Jericho is only for the government protecting lives, then she should be pro-gay marriage. It is the only logical conclusion to her belief on the government.

[Boogalou]

And the saga continues... Anyway, I think the original topic is an interesting one and would be interested to here some other thoughts on it, especially about this:

This does show that there are people who will find a way to find homosexuality wrong, even if they accept that the person can't help having a same sex desire.

The question is, why is homosexuality considered a sin? I generally think of sins as things that hurt yourself or others. Lying hurts the person you lie to (sometimes). Murdering hurts the victim and their family. Adultery hurts your spouse. Theft hurts the person you stole from. I guess you could argue that taking the Lord's name in vain, working on the 7th day and coveting don't really hurt anybody, except maybe God. Homosexuality... hurts no one. Do some people argue then that homosexuality hurts God in some way? I just don't see how it can be considered sinful and wrong.

[formergothardite]

And the saga continues... Anyway, I think the original topic is an interesting one and would be interested to here some other thoughts on it, especially about this:

The question is, why is homosexuality considered a sin? I generally think of sins as things that hurt yourself or others. Lying hurts the person you lie to (sometimes). Murdering hurts the victim and their family. Adultery hurts your spouse. Theft hurts the person you stole from. I guess you could argue that taking the Lord's name in vain, working on the 7th day and coveting don't really hurt anybody, except maybe God. Homosexuality... hurts no one. Do some people argue then that homosexuality hurts God in some way? I just don't see how it can be considered sinful and wrong.

This sounds crazy now, but growing up I thought gay people automatically got aids. I have heard people say that if it weren't for gay people aids wouldn't exist, so gay people are hurting the world by spreading aids around. I know it doesn't make any sense, but that was a reason I was given to why homosexuality hurts the world.

[emmiedahl]

I'm still waiting to hear how much s/he has given up to donate organs to others. Being so pro-life and all.

[Kitchen Princess]

I wonder which one of these ladies is jericho?

http://dumbtweets.com/protest-it-out#comments

[jericho]

Because you're a jackass who would take away my reproductive rights in a second if you had the power to do so. That's a damn sight worse than me pointing out that you're a weaselling liar. I think false niceness is bullshit. Why is it better to be two faced and pretend that it's okay for someone to try to take away other people's freedom than to call that excrement out for what it is?

Okay, so you don't like my opinion. About 50% of the public believe how I do though, so I hope you can live with that. How am I a liar?

[Renting with Raggles]

How am I a liar?

This has been explained by several people. The fact that you try to wriggle out of the accusation by posing the question again shows you to be less than honest. Answer my questions and maybe you'll gain some credibility with one person here at least. Slimy little dominatrix bugger.

[emmiedahl]

Okay, so you don't like my opinion. About 50% of the public believe how I do though, so I hope you can live with that. How am I a liar?

Because they have no science education, and have not thought through the results of their beliefs, etc. A lot of people are being convinced by pastors that being pro-life is more Biblical, despite evidence to the contrary. This is why I have made it a priority to call out this monster wherever it rears its ugly head.

*More people are pro-life now than ever in American history*. Being pro-life is not a return to traditional beliefs on the matter, but a rejection of them. Have you ever considered that this is part of the downfall of society that you seem to decry?

[jericho]

This has been explained by several people. The fact that you try to wriggle out of the accusation by posing the question again shows you to be less than honest. Answer my questions and maybe you'll gain some credibility with one person here at least. Slimy little dominatrix bugger.

I'm sorry, but I don't recall anyone else calling me a liar. Can you refresh my memory?

Slimy little dominatrix bugger.

Uncalled for.

[Renting with Raggles]

I'm sorry, but I don't recall anyone else calling me a liar. Can you refresh my memory?

Can you read the thread? Or does cupcake need someone to hold her hand while doing that, too?

Renting with Raggles wrote:

Slimy little dominatrix bugger.

Uncalled for.

Own it - that's what you want to be - hey, you were born that way, maybe!

And I'll keep calling you a slimy bugger until you address the issue I posed several times instead of trying to be all wide-eyed disingenuous with the cutsey-poo questions and the dear-me histrionics at the naughty words (note: it doesn't really work with the boot-on-the-throat sadism).

[Shina]

Hey jericho, quit arguing with Raggles. You know you're going to lose.

[valsa]

And the saga continues... Anyway, I think the original topic is an interesting one and would be interested to here some other thoughts on it, especially about this:

The question is, why is homosexuality considered a sin? I generally think of sins as things that hurt yourself or others. Lying hurts the person you lie to (sometimes). Murdering hurts the victim and their family. Adultery hurts your spouse. Theft hurts the person you stole from. I guess you could argue that taking the Lord's name in vain, working on the 7th day and coveting don't really hurt anybody, except maybe God. Homosexuality... hurts no one. Do some people argue then that homosexuality hurts God in some way? I just don't see how it can be considered sinful and wrong.

I think people believe it's sinful because it grosses them out. That's why you see a lot more general hatred towards gay men than lesbians (lesbians get hate too but I think that's mostly sexism at play- ie, men getting pissed because a certain category of women they find hot aren't willing to fuck them) And if it's gross, it's got to be bad and sinful.

[Renting with Raggles]

So before I turn in...

Three 'pro-life' advocates have shown up here within the last week or two. They all felt strongly that abortion should be criminalised. All were convinced that making abortion illegal would decrease its incidence.

When each was presented with evidence that this was not the case, not one would address this - even when offered a chance to present their own data supporting their statements. Tree mom and a few others actually provided lists of the strategies that are actually proven to be effective in preventing abortion and these were dismissed in a previous thread, ignored in this one. OHM just kept floundering around saying 'This is what I believe!' as if that should have any bearing on the formation of public policy. J flat-out refused to respond, and got butthurt for being called out on it.

I can only conclude that 'pro-life' statements are essentially meaningless: they obviously have no interest in actually reducing the number of abortions. OHM and Jericho and their ilk really like abortion, but they absolutely love exercising power over other women. The 'pro-life' movement allows them to do both under a religious cover. I asked some sincere and polite questions earlier, but I know now never to take someone who claims their position seriously. Thanks guys!

Thanks also to valsa, valiantly steering the thread back on topic.

[Boogalou]

So, to sum up, homosexuality is a sin because it causes AIDS (which it doesn't) and it's gross. It's a great thing to base your value system on lies and things you don't like and then try to legislate those lies and distaste. I think that Christians should focus on loving EVERYONE else like they love themselves and getting everyone else to do the same and then when they have that down pat they can turn their attention to taking rights away from other (which they would not do if they actually listened to what Jesus said).

[formergothardite]

Well, I'm going to join in calling Jericho a liar until she provides a reason for her change in opinion since the last thread. And you were correct in the last thread, going the route you are going now really does weaken your argument that abortion is wrong because it kills lives.

[dcmhejbl62]

God didn’t create the world primarily for our benefit, he did it for his glory. He created a world that would display his glory most fully and most perfectly. That is to say, every aspect of God’s character could be shown in its most extreme form. If God had created a world in which no one sinned, what aspects of his character could he have shown? His creative power, his loving-kindness, his provision for his people. But what about his mercy? Or his justice? Or his wrath? And would we have seen even his creative power to its fullest extent if there had been no death and therefore no resurrection?

Furthermore, in this self-sacrifice God demonstrates the perfection of His holiness, the sinfulness of sin, the proof of God's righteousness, the victory over the evil one, and the guarantee of the saved with whom He can shed His love and glory forever. In this, God is glorified.

We could come up with a variety of possible reasons why God made people knowing they would sin and we probably can never fully answer this. But, knowing that they would sin is no reason that God shouldn't make them, especially if His plan includes the acts of sinners so that others would be redeemed.

Why do some people so enjoy making sure God has all the human frailties and nasty character traits we'd like to get rid of in ourselves, but in a much larger scale? Vengefulness? A sense of power? It's like little kids saying "My daddy can beat up YOUR daddy!"

Jericho, no thinking person should want anything to do with a God like this. It's straight out of a fairytale.

And I have no intention of being a willing pawn in God's creative attempts to stroke his own ego.

[dcmhejbl62]

I believe in compassion for a mother who has had an abortion. She should be aware that what she did was against the law, and the doctor and medical staff who are "professionals" should definitely be put in jail.

You should know that is a fairly recent position. Pro-lifers were not originally concerned at all with the woman's circumstances, since she was just a "murderer."

[debrand]

Really, if you believe abortion is murder, not putting women in jail is disrespectful to women. Let me explain. Women are not less responsible for their own actions than men. THe only justification for not putting women in jail would be if society vews women as not capable of making their own decisions. That, of course, opens another nasty can of worms.

[dcmhejbl62]

Truth is, this forum has made me have to think hard on some things and my view has changed since I wrote that. .

Jericho, if this is true, that's seriously the best news I've heard all week.

I appreciate your willingness to examine your beliefs and even change them if necessary, especially in a forum that's not exactly friendly to that kind of discussion. I hope you continue.

[debrand]

So, to sum up, homosexuality is a sin because it causes AIDS (which it doesn't) and it's gross. It's a great thing to base your value system on lies and things you don't like and then try to legislate those lies and distaste. I think that Christians should focus on loving EVERYONE else like they love themselves and getting everyone else to do the same and then when they have that down pat they can turn their attention to taking rights away from other (which they would not do if they actually listened to what Jesus said).

There are a lot of people who I think that it would be gross to watch having sex. I'm sure none of us want to think about our grandparents having sex. Yet, none of us want to outlaw sex for the elderly or the unattractive.

What amazes me is that there are cultures that didn't have problems with males having sex with one another. The Romans and Greeks, for instance. I think that the Celts were pretty open also. Being grossed out about homosexaulity is not natural to our species. It is a learned trait.

[Austin]

Okay, so you don't like my opinion. About 50% of the public believe how I do though, so I hope you can live with that. How am I a liar?

That really should be of very little comfort to you. I never underestimate the stupidity of the American people. Sad as it is, I believe that we largely get the government we (meaning the huge collective mass of Americans) deserve, which is what we have right now in the congress.

Americans are woefully ignorant of basic civics facts and history, let alone being able to discern the implications of seemingly well-meaning proposals to "protect people". I'm not going to pick on the right or the left here - let's just consider what I think is fairly referred to as "the mindless middle". You know, "the folks".

In the Daily Beast's poll of 1,000 people, 62% of Americans passed a simulated version of the exam [citizenship exam] (with the 60% minimum score), while 38% of Americans failed.

Upon closer examination of the results of the Daily Beast poll, Newsweek discovered the phenomenon of the "mindless middle".

[A] schism emerged about who knew what. Republicans did better than Democrats, with two thirds of Republicans passing vs. only 53 percent of Democrats. But liberals ( 64 percent) did better than conservatives ( 62 percent).

Parsing those numbers further, what we see is engagement at each party’s base. A solid 70 percent of conservative Republicans passed, followed by 61 percent of GOP moderates and 55 percent of GOP liberals. For Democrats, it was the opposite: liberals and moderates proved better informed, with 62 percent of both groups passing, but just 36 percent of conservative Democrats did so. In other words, conservative Democrats pulled down the numbers for both their ideology and their party, while the centers of both parties were the least engaged.

This illustrates something quite dangerous. The operative theory about America’s political situation holds that the fringe of each party is poorly informed, and the middle possesses the wisdom, but our numbers show it’s actually the extremes that are engaged—and thus, up on their facts—while the middle is relatively ill informed.

More than lacking knowledge, a lot of Americans, particularly in the middle, have completely tuned out. And given how little they know, it will be hard to get them back. Here’s the most telling number: Americans who vote regularly in elections tested above average—68 percent passed—but among the one in 10 who told us they weren’t interested in exercising their franchise, just 26 percent would qualify to be citizens of their own country.

http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Political ... cs-History

Point being, I don't think I'd take much comfort that x percentage of people agree with you. Presented in a certain way, you could probably get a majority of Americans to agree or disagree with just about anything. Look how many thought that Newt Gingrich's proposal to haul "activist" judges in, by the force of the US Marshall if necessary, to make them answer to congress for their rulings sounded like a reasonable idea. When my kids were third graders, they would have been aghast at such a proposal, given the fact that they understood a really simple concept called the separation of powers. Which is more than I can say for a lot of Americans of voting age.

[genericJname]

This sounds crazy now, but growing up I thought gay people automatically got aids. I have heard people say that if it weren't for gay people aids wouldn't exist, so gay people are hurting the world by spreading aids around. I know it doesn't make any sense, but that was a reason I was given to why homosexuality hurts the world.

This totally reminded me of something. Sorry this will be TMI about myself, but back when I went to fundie-lite college, I became a submissive girlfriend to this guy and ended up doing PIA (both consensually and not) because PIV would be a sin. Afterward, he got all weird and said something like "I'm such an idiot for doing that. I could get AIDS." I tried to assure him that I was pretty sure that my risk for being HIV-positive was very very low. He didn't get it.

I finally realized that he didn't understand that HIV was a transmitted disease that you get from somebody because they have it. He really did just think that doing PIA spontaneously results in AIDS. :o

[jericho]

Jericho, if this is true, that's seriously the best news I've heard all week.

I appreciate your willingness to examine your beliefs and even change them if necessary, especially in a forum that's not exactly friendly to that kind of discussion. I hope you continue.

Thank you. My views, as should everyone's, should be evolving. It's not healthy to stick by your guns and be closed minded at the same time. I don't want to ever believe something because Republicans believe it or because a Christian leader believes it. I want to believe it because it is the responsible/ethical/logical etc. way.