PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Gay Rights Debates
     I have a question/theory.

Topic Jump
Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
Aeval

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Doesn't the bible say, "That which you hold true on earth, I will hold true in heaven."?
If so, why can't we just say that being gay, gay marriage, and gay adoption is okay? Wouldn't that 'save' thousands of people that would otherwise burn in a firey demension for all eternity?


(Edited by Aeval 12/4/2012 at 7:14 PM).
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 11:29 AM on February 20, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Actually, the quote you are referring to in the Bible was told to the Apostles when they were being told not to worry about what they were to say as the Holy Spirit would guide them.  And it actually says that what they held true (through divine inspiration) was already held true in heaven.  So, no, we can't say that something is OK when the Bible has clearly and unequivocally state that it is not.

I also think that most Christians would disagree with your idea that the religion was created by men.  You tell them not to get upset and then tell them that their Bible is a lie.  I'm not sure what exactly you are going for here.

The main reason that Christians take a stand against homosexuallity (and lets not forget their position on murder, thievery, etc.) is that it is just a halfway house.  Once you accept the idea that sexual orientation is not a choice then you can no longer hold anyone accountable for their sexual tendencies.  Pedophile?  You were born that way.  Bestial?  You were born that way.  Necrophiliac?  You were born that way.  Polygamist?  You were born that way.  Christians will quit speaking against homosexuality the same time they quit speaking against all of these other acts (not to mention murder, adultery, thievery, lasciviousness, etc.)


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 12:14 PM on February 20, 2006 | IP
EntwickelnCollin

|        |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I don't know why anyone would chose to be a pedophile anymore than someone would chose to be gay. Both are illogical decisions when given the conditions of our society. As for "Polygamist"... there's no such thing. There exists no person who can't have true sexual emotions without being married to multiple spouses.

So, back to pedophilia... Unlike homosexuality, it's scientifically verified that if you were molested as a child, odds are that you'll molest a child when you become an adult, and the child you molest will molest a child, and that child will grow up to molest a child, etc. On the other hand, people don't grow up to be gay if they have gay parents, while children often do grow up to be pedophiles if they have a pedophiliac parent.

The point is, they aren't comparable--not only because of the evident differences in how one becomes a pedophile/homosexual either.

A pedophile is dangerous to society, because their acts are harmful to the people they become sexually involved with, and are illegal under several of our laws, namely sexual assault. Their actions have been proven to destroy the lives of the people they abuse.

Not so with homosexuals, at least on a statistical basis. Any sexual abuse that homosexuals commit is easily accounted for just as frequently on the heterosexual side.

I realize that the morality of homosexuality isn't the debate so much as its stance within Christianity, but you really have no case at all to say homosexuality is a choice, which is apparently what you're trying to say the issue hinges on.



-------
http://ummcash.org/officers.html
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/wow_1.php
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/a_triumphant_beginning.php
We're official!
 


Posts: 729 | Posted: 07:46 AM on February 21, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Again, if you allow someone to say that their sexual choices are ingrained and not anything they have control over then you open the door for anyone to say that their sexual choices are ingrained and they don't have any control over them.  Sex is a choice (no matter what orientation we are refering to).  No one has ever had sex on accident.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 09:27 AM on February 21, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

the thing is, if heterosexuality isn't a choice but natural and homosexuality is a choice and unnatural, then why would anyone ever be attracted to the same sex? if homosexuality is not natural, then why would anyone practise it? It would be completely against our nature - no one would even consider it as an option.
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 03:37 AM on February 23, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Why would anyone ever be attracted to a child?  Or a dead body?  Or their dog?  Or their sister?  Or a blow up doll?  Or are you saying that no sexual tendencies are unnatural?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 08:18 AM on February 23, 2006 | IP
JustineCredible

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

How anyone can be so dence as to assume that one sexuality is not a choice but the opposite sexuality is boggles the mind. There's no logic to that assumption at all.

The only choice I've ever made in regards to my sexuality is whether or not to be true to what I have been give or not.

Oh, and as far as Homosexuality being a "preferance" I suggest you take a look at who and what you've been dating resently.
"Preferance" refers to what body type and/or personality someone "prefers" not what gender.

Get over yourselves.


-------
"All those who believe in physcokenetics ~ Raise My Hand!"
 


Posts: 24 | Posted: 5:41 PM on February 24, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I'm confused.  I thought heterosexuality was a choice too.  If homosexuality is a choice then heterosexuality is a choice.  Wasn't that clear?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 9:09 PM on February 24, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from EMyers at 08:18 AM on February 23, 2006 :
Why would anyone ever be attracted to a child?  Or a dead body?  Or their dog?  Or their sister?  Or a blow up doll?  Or are you saying that no sexual tendencies are unnatural?


No, i'm saying that calling heterosexuality 'natural' and homosexuality 'unnatural' makes no sense in that if one is a choice the other must be also.

And btw, the 'sexual tendencies' you mentioned above can in no way be compared to homosexuality. The above situations involve a) a human who is legally considered too young to consent to a relationship, b) a human who cannot consent at all, c) an animal, d) a human who is a relation and e) a human substitute.

Homosexuality, on the other hand, is something that can occur between two consenting, unnrelated, adult humans - just like heterosexuality. It doesn't violate anyone, anything or any laws.


 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 01:53 AM on February 25, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actually, they can be and they are.  All represent sexual choices (regardless of the reciprocation of the objects involved).  Once you throw out homosexuality as being a choice of the homosexual, you have to throw out the other options as being choices as well.  Sex is a choice.  There is no way around that fact.  Yes, heterosexuality is natural versus the others.  You think there is a reason that tab A fits in slot B and is required for reproduction (through "natural" means)?  I don't know how much more natural you can get.  Just because something is natural and another thing is unnatural does not eliminate them from being choices.  You can choose the natural or unnatural, pure and simple.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 10:15 AM on February 25, 2006 | IP
JustineCredible

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Actually, they can be and they are.  All represent sexual choices (regardless of the reciprocation of the objects involved).  Once you throw out homosexuality as being a choice of the homosexual, you have to throw out the other options as being choices as well.  Sex is a choice.  There is no way around that fact.  Yes, heterosexuality is natural versus the others.  You think there is a reason that tab A fits in slot B and is required for reproduction (through "natural" means)?  I don't know how much more natural you can get.  Just because something is natural and another thing is unnatural does not eliminate them from being choices.  You can choose the natural or unnatural, pure and simple."



What you seem to not understand is that your assertation of "natural" and "unnatural" is erronios.
Homo and Heter sexualities are both natural. Scientific proof has shown us this repeatedly. Your choice to believe or disbelieve reality is just that...you're choice.
The fact that you cannot force anyone to believe exactly the same way you do is something you're just going to have to accept.

Here's something to mull over:

Sexuality:

1)The condition of being characterized and distinguished by sex.
2)Concern with or interest in sexual activity.
3)Sexual character or potency.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sexuality

Sex:
1.

      a.The property or quality by which organisms    are classified as female or male on the basis of their reproductive organs and functions.

     b. Either of the two divisions, designated female and male, of this classification.
     
2.  Females or males considered as a group.

3. The condition or character of being female or male; the physiological, functional, and psychological differences that distinguish the female and the male. See Usage Note at gender.

4. The sexual urge or instinct as it manifests itself in behavior.

5. Sexual intercourse.

6. The genitals.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sex


Sexual identity
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article refers to sexual identity as used by sexologists, rather than to sexual orientation, sexual behaviour, gender identity, gender role or sex
The term sexual identity is used by psychologists and some recent writers in the general area of sexology to describe the gender or sex with which a person identifies, or is identified.

Laymen tend to use sexual identity and sexual preference interchangeably, but this encyclopedia distinguishes between the two concepts: the latter refers to the object of one's sexual attractions, rather than one's self-concept.

Scientists such as John Money, Milton Diamond, and Anne Fausto-Sterling have sought to discover and describe the biological processes involved in the formation of sexual identities. A large array of factors have been hypothesized as being determinative, but there is as yet no settled view on these matters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual%5Fidentity


Sexual orientation

Sexual orientation refers to the sex, sexes, gender or genders, to which a person is attracted and which form the focus of a person's amorous or erotic desires, fantasies, and spontaneous feelings. The alternative terms sexual preference and sexual inclination have similar meanings. Clinicians and those who believe sexuality is fixed early in life tend to use the former term; those believing sexuality is fluid and reflects preference and choice tend towards the latter terms.

Typically a person may be identified as primarily heterosexual (the focus is primarily people of the opposite sex), homosexual (people of the same sex), bisexual (potentially both or either sexes), or asexual (no sexual desire for either sex). (But compare Homosexuality and transgender for a discussion on the use of homo- and heterosexual when referring to transgender or intersex people.)

The term sexual orientation may also refer to the "identity" of a person, either by choice or as an expression of an inner attribute.

These categories are also used to describe sexual behavior, which may depart from an individual's chosen identity or spontaneous desires.

”Sexual orientation“ is also a legal term that has a meaning developed through case law that is separate from the meaning used in other fields. It is the most common term used in laws that prohibit discrimination based on homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality.

Classification of individuals into these groups is controversial, and different observers may prefer orientation, behavior, or self-identification as the sorting criterion, and make different judgments as to degree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation


(Edited by JustineCredible 2/25/2006 at 3:27 PM).


-------
"All those who believe in physcokenetics ~ Raise My Hand!"
 


Posts: 24 | Posted: 3:06 PM on February 25, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Scientific proof has shown us this repeatedly.  What proof?  Alfred Kinsey?  What?  Where?  I'd be interested in seeing this proof.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 3:20 PM on February 25, 2006 | IP
JustineCredible

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
+1

Rate this post:

Proof including:

Animal sexual behavior takes many different forms; even within the same species, researchers have drawn parallels between this and homosexuality, bisexuality, intersexuality and transgender behavior in humans. Homosexual behavior has been documented in over 450 species.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals

Bonobos
The Bonobo, which has a matriarchal society (unusual amongst apes), is a fully bisexual species -- both males and females engage in sexual behaviour with the same and the opposite sex, with females being particularly noted for engaging in sexual behaviour with each other.

[edit]
Birds

Squawk and Milou
Male chinstrap penguins, one of several homosexual pairs at the Central Park Zoo in Manhattan.
(Picture:Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times)Some black swans of Australia form sexually active male-male mated pairs and steal nests, or form temporary threesomes with females to obtain eggs, driving away the female after she lays the eggs. More of their cygnets survive to adulthood than those of different-sex pairs possibly due to their superior ability to defend large portions of land.

In early February 2004 the New York Times reported that a male pair of chinstrap penguins in the Central Park Zoo in New York City were partnered and had successfully hatched a female chick from an egg. Other penguins in New York have also been reported to be forming same-sex pairs.

Zoos in Japan and Germany have also documented male penguin couples. The couples have been shown to build nests together and use a stone to replace an egg in the nest. Researchers at Rikkyo University in Tokyo, found twenty such pairs at sixteen major aquariums and zoos in Japan. Bremerhaven Zoo in Germany attempted to break up the male couples by importing female penguins from Sweden and separating the male couples; they were unsuccessful. The zoo director stated the relationships were too strong between the couples.

Recently, a mated pair of swans in Boston were found to both be female. They too had attempted to raise eggs together. (365gay.com)

Studies have shown that ten to fifteen percent of female western gulls in some populations in the wild prefer other females.

[edit]
Lizards
Whip-tailed lizard females have the ability to reproduce through parthenogenesis and as such males are rare and sexual breeding non-standard. Females engage in sexual behavior to stimulate ovulation, with their behavior following their hormonal cycles; during low levels of estrogen, these (female) lizards engage in "masculine" sexual roles. Those animals with currently high estrogen levels assume "feminine" sexual roles.

Lizards that perform the courtship ritual have greater fecundity than those kept in isolation due to an increase in hormones triggered by the sexual behaviors. So, even though asexual whiptail lizards populations lack males, sexual stimuli still increase reproductive success.

From an evolutionary standpoint these females are passing their full genetic code to all of their offspring rather than the 50% of genes that would be passed in sexual reproduction). Certain species of gecko also reproduce by parthenogenesis.

[edit]
Sheep
An October 2003, study by Dr. Charles E. Roselli et al. (Oregon Health and Science University) states that homosexuality in male sheep (found in eight percent of rams) is associated with a region in the rams' brains which the authors call the "ovine Sexually Dimorphic Nucleus" (oSDN) which is two times smaller than the corresponding region in other male sheep.

It should be noted however that some view this study to be flawed in that the determination of homosexuality within the sheep, (sample population of twenty-seven for the study), was to have animals who were unable to mount female ewes placed in a cage with two stanchioned males and two unstanchioned females (that is, the males could not move or struggle while the females could). Given the aggressive nature of the sheep copulation, the uneven treatment of males and females, many see this as simply evidence that the sheep in question were unable to be aggressive enough to mount females. Some say that the results were situational sexuality, unlike the bonds seen in human homosexuality. However the physical brain anatomy of the rams that preferred males were different.

The scientists found that, "The oSDN in rams that preferred females was significantly larger and contained more neurons than in male-oriented rams and ewes. In addition, the oSDN of the female-oriented rams expressed higher levels of aromatase, a substance that converts testosterone to estradiol so that the androgen hormone can facilitate typical male sexual behaviors. Aromatase expression was no different between male-oriented rams and ewes."

"The dense cluster of neurons that comprise the oSDN express cytochrome P450 aromatase. Aromatase mRNA levels in the oSDN were significantly greater in female-oriented rams than in ewes, whereas male-oriented rams exhibited intermediate levels of expression." These results suggest that "...naturally occurring variations in sexual partner preferences may be related to differences in brain anatomy and its capacity for estrogen synthesis." Read the abstract of the study. As noted previously, given the potential unagressiveness of the male population in question, the differing aromatase levels may also have been evidence of aggression levels, not sexuality. The results of this study have not been confirmed by others.

[edit]
Spotted Hyena
The female Spotted Hyena has a unique urinary-genital system, closely resembling the penis of the male. The family structure is matriarchal and dominance relationships with strong sexual elements are routinely observed between related females.

[edit]
Bottlenose Dolphins
Bottlenose Dolphin males have been observed working in pairs to follow and/or restrict the movement of a female for weeks at a time, waiting for her to become sexually receptive. The same pairs have also been observed engaging in intense sexual play with each other.

Janet Mann, a professor of biology and psychology at Georgetown University, argues (1) that the common same-sex behavior among male dolphin calves is about bond formation and benefits the species evolutionarily. They cite studies that have shown the dolphins later in life are bisexual and the male bonds forged from homosexuality work for protection as well as locating females to reproduce with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals




-------
"All those who believe in physcokenetics ~ Raise My Hand!"
 


Posts: 24 | Posted: 3:32 PM on February 25, 2006 | IP
JustineCredible

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

need more sorces? do your own research before spouting off about something you know nothing about!


-------
"All those who believe in physcokenetics ~ Raise My Hand!"
 


Posts: 24 | Posted: 3:33 PM on February 25, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Didn't see a human in the entire list.  I rest my case.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 5:07 PM on February 25, 2006 | IP
EntwickelnCollin

|        |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Didn't see a human in the entire list.  I rest my case.


That didn't make any sense, Edward. The point of showing homosexuality in nature was to prove that there are species other than human beings that exhibit homosexual urges. Homosexuality is therefore natural. I keep thinking I have the proper rebuttal to what you just said, but then I lose it, and no matter how hard I rack my brain over it, I can't understand what you were hoping to prove with that statement.



(Edited by EntwickelnCollin 2/25/2006 at 7:57 PM).


-------
http://ummcash.org/officers.html
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/wow_1.php
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/a_triumphant_beginning.php
We're official!
 


Posts: 729 | Posted: 7:57 PM on February 25, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You can't make the argument from an animal standpoint.  Animals don't have the ability to reason.  Squids sometimes (literally) screw themselves.  Does that mean it's "natural" to stick your penis (good luck) in yourself?  It's "natural" among many animals to eat their own young.  I would not assume that means it is ok for us to do it.  Apples and apples is all I'm saying.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 9:12 PM on February 25, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sexual orientation is not a choice.

If homosexuality is a choice, then heterosexuality must be also - but i don't remember being asked "So, what's it going to be - heterosexual or homosexual?".

Homosexual urges are as natural as heterosexual ones - if they weren't natural, homosexuality would not exist.
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 12:41 AM on February 26, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Therefore, pedophilia, necrophelia, bestiality must also be natural since nobody asked the person if that was their "choice".  Great argument.  I give up.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 10:05 AM on February 26, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yes, actually, the urges are natural. But such sexual acts are outlawed for a reason - because they violate and harm others. It is someone's choice to act on such urges, but not to have them.

Homosexuality is a natural urge, and the acts that may accompany it do not harm or violate anyone, so the only argument anyone can come up with against it is by using the Bible - and i'm afraid that is not good enough for me.
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 12:46 AM on February 27, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You actually believe that it is natural for someone to want to get it on with a corpse or a child or Flicka?  You've pretty much undermined anything else you have to say on the subject.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 08:09 AM on February 27, 2006 | IP
Aeval

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

When the term "natural" is said, it isn't mean't that it's alright or accepted to do it, it's just that it's not really a choice, it's a primal urge outlawed because it is wrong. And the reason it is wrong is one thing: consent.
People can consent. Dead, animals, inadament objects, and children cannot conset. They may be the same sex and their "parts" may not "fit" but the if the sex is consensual, it should be  "allowed".

And didn't you say you gave up?
Kandis
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 11:27 AM on February 27, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So your argument is that "natural" isn't necessarily "alright" and that homosexuality is "natural"?  You've convinced me.  Homosexuality isn't "alright".


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 2:25 PM on February 27, 2006 | IP
thelmoose

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Ever wonder why the straight boys spend so much time in the gay forums? Why are they so interested in chatting about “unnatural” sex? Take a gander at the book from which EMyers takes his quote at the bottom of his post. Wolf’s Hour is a lusty and cheesy Gothic Romance about spies, Nazis in big leather boots and sex between werewolves. Not exactly the kind of reading material one sees in Bible Club.
 


Posts: 40 | Posted: 3:55 PM on February 27, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Like I've read every book from every quote I've ever heard.  I was told it was a horror story.  Still like the quote.

Here's the snippet on it from wikipedia...

The Wolf's Hour
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Wolf's Hour is a World War II adventure novel with a twist by Robert R. McCammon. A British secret agent goes behind German lines to stop a secret weapon from being launched against the Allies. The twist is that this agent is a werewolf. The book also includes some of the agent's history, namely how he became a werewolf.

[edit]
Plot summary
Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.
It is 1944. A message from Paris warns Allied Intelligence of something big in the works---which might have serious implications for Operation Overlord. The only way to get more information from the agent in Paris---now closely watched by the Gestapo---is to send in a personal courier.

Russian émigré Michael Gallatin is picked for the job. In retirement as a secret agent since a grisly episode in North Africa, Gallatin is parachuted into occupied France, on a mission which will take him to the festering heart of the Third Reich on the scent of doomsday.

As a master spy, Gallatin has proved he can take on formidable foes---and kill them. As a passionate lover, he attracts beautiful women. But there is one extra factor which makes Michael Gallatin a unique special agent---he is a werewolf, able to change form almost at will, able to assume the body of a wolf and its capacity to kill with savage, snarling fury.

In the madness of war, Gallatin hunts his prey---ready to out-think his opponents with his finely-tuned brain. Or tear their throats out with his finely-honed teeth....

.... I'll have to take your word for it on the rest.

(Edited by EMyers 2/27/2006 at 4:10 PM).


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 4:05 PM on February 27, 2006 | IP
thelmoose

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I don't know there, Eddie.
You seem awfully quick to talk about necrophilia, bestiality, sex dolls, etc. Not just in this thread, but several of the others as well. Methinks you doth protest too much.
Didn't read the Nazi lycanthrope sex thriller, huh? I can just see you now, making these posts in your lederhosen before you take off to those Omaha S/M parlors! Unnatural, indeed!
 


Posts: 40 | Posted: 6:23 PM on February 27, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well, I congratulate you on figuring out I live in Omaha.  Don't know of any S/M parlors around here though.  Lederhosen joke wasn't quite as impressive.  Myers is obviously a German name.  Can't say as I've ever worn any though.  Of course if I did live in Bavaria it wouldn't be much of an insult as that is what men wear there.  You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel now.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 8:17 PM on February 27, 2006 | IP
thelmoose

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

My apologies to the forum for getting so far off topic. I am afraid I ended up resorting to mockery and I apologize for wasting space. (I don’t apologize to EMyers because he had it coming.)

[If you will permit me to briefly discussing the issue of mocking those nimrods, I promise I will return to this very thoughtful topic. I gave up trying to intelligently discuss things will those rigid religious nut jobs because it is impossible. The ID garbage convinced me they are not interested in having an intelligent discussion. Fundamentalist dogma isn’t about thinking, so it pointless to try. Thus I resort to mockery. Is it childish and petty? Well, yes, but it is so much fun. And they make it so easy, they hand you these lobs and you just gotta smash ‘em right back in their face!]

The original post stated that homosexual behavior is wrong only to the extent that the Christians decide it is. I agree; their behavior is perverted. Why look at the very first response. Old EMyers immediately started talking about the slippery slope to donkey sex. I think one of the main reasons is that they don’t understand human sexuality at all. If your primary attitude is that sex is sinful, how could you understand it? They confuse pedophilia with homosexuality. The former being a disorder in which adults cannot have healthy adult sexual relationships, but instead feels urges toward children of the same or opposite sex. This is very different from homosexuality, which involves normal healthy adult relationships. JustineCredible made an excellent post about the difference between sexual attraction, sexual behavior and sexual identity. It went way over the head of sexNazi EMyers. Likewise Justine gave numerous example of the presence of homosexuality in “nature” when rightly attempting to address the concern of whether homosexuality was natural. She did not mention humans because it is readily apparent to all, that it indeed does occur in humans. EMyers criticized her for that. People do get hung up on the word natural because it can have various meanings. I personally don’t care if you want to erroneously call it unnatural, sinful, or perverted. You can call it mayonnaise and it doesn’t change the fact that gay people exist, always have, always will and a sizable minority of citizens in this country are gay and deserve the respect and legal consideration of everyone else. They do not deserve the scorn of those hung-up Christians.

So, I agree with Aeval’s initial post. The Christians are the ones who truly perverted about this. Especially little EddieMyers, that cross-dressing, German Shepard-loving bondage boy!

I promise that's the last time I will mock that guy.
 


Posts: 40 | Posted: 11:07 PM on February 27, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

What's really sad is that you don't even see the correlation.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 09:45 AM on February 28, 2006 | IP
thelmoose

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

the correlation between which things?
 


Posts: 40 | Posted: 11:12 AM on February 28, 2006 | IP
Jake19

|      |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

TO EMYERS

Sorry to say but any sexual urge is natural but is our reactions as individuals and as a society to those actions that deem them right or wrong. Man likes woman and wants to have sex with her and she agrees to it... society says "thats okay"... Gay wants to have sex with someone of the same sex and that other person agrees but society says... "not okay"

EMyers I hope you get from this that in these two cases both people wanted it and both people said yes. NOW lets look at the pedophilia... Man molest little girl she says no, she cries, and she is tormented by it. THATS WRONG!!! One person who violates the other is what makes the act wrong. A dog can not say yes to a man sodomizing it and that is animal cruelity. which is wrong!!! This just further shows that when one person violates another being then they overstepping their boundaries. BUT Two gay men who have sex are not hurting ANYONE!!!  

(Edited by Jake19 3/1/2006 at 7:18 PM).

(Edited by Jake19 3/1/2006 at 7:20 PM).


-------
~*JaKe*~
 


Posts: 20 | Posted: 7:14 PM on March 1, 2006 | IP
Aeval

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yeah, that whole "consent" thing just won't get into your head will it? The consent is what matters. The consent determines if it is okay or not. Consent: okay. No consent: wrong.
Just keep repeating the two and eventually you'll get it.

And no worries about getting off topic, this whole thread pretty much deviated from the topic right off. The theory hasn't been discussed in a long while, just the right or wrong-ness of homosexuality. All because one thick-skulled moron doesn't grasp the concept of consent.

If we were to get back to the theory I'd say:
All the changes the church makes over the years they always use the quote I mentioned in the original post as an excuse.

And one thing I'd like to mention to EMyers is, you arguements are the EXACT arguements they use for why blacks and white shouldn't be together. "It's unnatural." "God said no." Then they list bible quote on top of bible quote "proving" it is wrong. A good while down the road good christians are going to be looking back at christians like you and they will redden with shame as they do now with how they fought so hard against black/white relationships.
Kandis
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 11:02 AM on March 8, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Um, where does it say in the bible that differently pigmented people can't marry?  What bible are you reading?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 11:17 AM on March 8, 2006 | IP
Aeval

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The bible was twisted to have that meaning, go to several white supremist sites if you don't believe the stupidity. And then think of how you're a lot like them.
Kandis
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 11:35 AM on March 8, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I'm like a white supremist?  I don't remember twisting the Bible to mean anything.  Perhaps you've confused me with someone else.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 11:46 AM on March 8, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yeah, that whole "consent" thing just won't get into your head will it? The consent is what matters. The consent determines if it is okay or not. Consent: okay. No consent: wrong.
Just keep repeating the two and eventually you'll get it.


That's odd.  I thought suicide was consentual and I'm still pretty sure that attempting it is against the law.  How about that guy who got thrown in jail for sleeping with his wife.  She consented.  She was old enough to legally get married with her parents consent, but not old enough to be legally slept with.  Cohabitation is against the law (regardless of sexuality) even with consent.  What about the guy from Germany who consented to eating his body parts and then being murdered.  Didn't the guy who actually murdered him go to jail, regardless of consent?  I got an idea.  How about we only follow the laws that we like?  Oh wait, most people already do that.  


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 11:51 AM on March 8, 2006 | IP
Aeval

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You twist the bible to be anti-homosexual. The bible is wdie open to interpretation. And you may not be a white supremist, but your are prejudice.
For the heck of it, I went and looked up a few of those old use bible quotes.
1.) Deuteronomy 7:3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
2.) Nehemiah 13:25 And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves.
13:27 Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?
3.) Numbers 25:6 And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, who were weeping before the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
25:7 And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from among the congregation, and took a javelin in his hand; 25:8 And he went after the man of Israel into the tent, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.
4.) Kings11:2 Of the nations concerning which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love
5.) Ezra 9:2 For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass.

There were quite a few more, but I think these may be enough. What they once said was against black/white marriage they now say, "whoops, that was against inter-RELIGION marriage. My bad."

No doubt they'll retwist the anti gay quotes down the line.
Kandis
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 12:00 PM on March 8, 2006 | IP
Aeval

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

That's odd.  I thought suicide was consentual and I'm still pretty sure that attempting it is against the law.  How about that guy who got thrown in jail for sleeping with his wife.  She consented.  She was old enough to legally get married with her parents consent, but not old enough to be legally slept with.  Cohabitation is against the law (regardless of sexuality) even with consent.  What about the guy from Germany who consented to eating his body parts and then being murdered.  Didn't the guy who actually murdered him go to jail, regardless of consent?  I got an idea.  How about we only follow the laws that we like?  Oh wait, most people already do that.

Yeah, isn't it silly how commiting suicide can't be punished, and those who only attempt aren't. It's one of those laws we consider stupid so we don't enforce. Much like the "don't walk an elephant down the main street on a sunday." law. We have ALOT of stupid laws. EDIT: one of such laws was that suicide attempts were punishable by death. I know for a fact that one isn't and wouldn't be enforced.

I haven't heard of that guy who was thrown in jail, but I don't know that I buy it. If she was legally able to be married, then she was legally able to have sex. And the guy being murdered and than eaten (not the other way around) was ruled mentally unstable. People who are mentally unstable are not able to consent.
Kandis

(Edited by Aeval 3/8/2006 at 12:07 PM).
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 12:05 PM on March 8, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You are correct.  The Old Testament verses you refer to were designed to keep worshippers of other religions (which was a pretty "by the nationality" thing back then) out.  Everytime Israel mixed with other nationalities they tended to start worshiping their idols and partaking in their sexual immoralities, etc.  The Jews weren't white, so any white person (I refuse to say caucasian.... oops) who thinks that these verses apply to them hasn't bothered to actually read it.  

As for my other point, it was this.  Consent is not the crux on which to base the argument.  Many laws have absolutely nothing to do with consent.  

Lastly, prejudice has nothing to do with it.  I don't believe in murdering someone, but to call murder a sin (or wrong, for the unreligious{word?}) is not prejudicial.  My "prejudice" as you want to call it, is against the sin and not the sinner.  


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 1:46 PM on March 8, 2006 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.