Some are born gay, some achieve gayness, and some have gayness thrust upon them (1 Viewer)

[*TRUE*]

~Sigh

In other news would you like a twistie?
EDIT: Nah, Tangent, I don't think gays should be angry at the Church.

 

[Kwayera]

In other news would you like a twistie?
EDIT: Nah, Tangent, I don't think gays should be angry at the Church.

Why not? The Church thinks they're inhuman, malformed and deviant.

 

[Iron]

nah, just practising ones

 

[*TRUE*]

Why not? The Church thinks they're inhuman, malformed and deviant.

So what if they do? Many groups think much the same of the Church. Deal with it, offence isn't lethal.

 

[Kwayera]

So what if they do? Many groups think much the same of the Church. Deal with it, offence isn't lethal.

When it has much less influence over public policy, then gays can stop hating the Church for hating them.

 

[Iron]

lol dont blame us for democracy, guy.

 

[*TRUE*]

When it has much less influence over public policy, then gays can stop hating the Church for hating them.

The Church hates gays? Eh, whats this?

 

[Tangent]

So what if they do? Many groups think much the same of the Church. Deal with it, offence isn't lethal.

But to have someone to make a judgment on you for something you cant change?
It's like saying that a schoolyard bully has no affect on their victims when they call them names.

More to the fact that because of religion, there are still those who see it wrong (because it goes against the nature of things, they cant make babies, it makes me uncomfortable, the bible says its wrong etc.) , and do you know how that would make anyone feel at all?? Think about it, feeling that you are not right, that there must be something you can change to be able to fit into society, to be accepted, to be safe. Coming out would be even worse, because everyone is assumed straight.

I think there is a reason to be angry at the church, thinking about how its views had and still have a strong influence on society. That being said, it shouldnt be held against religion, but taken on a case by case basis or the individual, and what they say and do. Religion and the reason, but the individuals actions are their own.

 

[jules.09]

I think there is a reason to be angry at the church, thinking about how its views had and still have a strong influence on society. That being said, it shouldnt be held against religion, but taken on a case by case basis or the individual, and what they say and do. Religion and the reason, but the individuals actions are their own.

I suppose that argument can be summarised by the need for the separation of the Church and the state. I think the issue with gays is that it is a relatively novel phenomenon discerned by society at large. It has existed prior to more recent times, but it lacked the benefit of social discussion. The social stigma surrounding homosexuality has overshadowed these individual's confidence in coming out, and religious doctrine in conjunction to those who preach it, are equally adverse.

We dont accept homosexual acts because of explicit and consistent biblical prohibitions, as well as our satisfaction that they are against Our Lord's intended order of procreation and love which glorifies Him above all else. It is a big deal.

Having said that, youre quite right to say that we have no right to 'impose' this on non-believers; more importantly, we dont have the will to do this (also, we dont have the power). However what we do have is an obligation to spread the Word and make sure that people are at least made aware of our position, in the hope that they may connect with its inherent Truth and goodness and beauty!

Iron, I'm quite certain you are sincere in your comments, but homosexuality isn't largely due to nurture. If it's an inherent fact to your being, and society is going to discriminate against you on that basis, it's wrong. Down syndrome kids can't help the fact that they are extremely dependent on others throughout life and can't learn to read at the rate that the norm can. Your neighbour can't help the fact that they're black.. and the reclusive woman down the street inherited aids and has an extremely limited life span.

There are things in life that are beyond your own volition, regardless of what the bible alleges. Why do you continue in persisting to shape your life with respect to the bible? The book is archaic!

 

[Iron]

We must always strive to distinguish a homosexual 'mindset' from homosexual acts. There may well be a gene that makes men more vulnerable to alchoholism, but the individual still retains the power within themselves to leave off the drink

 

[SnowFox]

Even just on the BoS website I have noticed a particularly large group of people who are starkly opposed to Christianity. Freedom to practice Christianity is something that I feel is threatened.

I couldnt give two shits if you followed Ancient Egypt religious studies, just dont push your beliefs and views upon others.

 

[HumanDichotomy]

We must always strive to distinguish a homosexual 'mindset' from homosexual acts. There may well be a gene that makes men more vulnerable to alchoholism, but the individual still retains the power within themselves to leave off the drink

But in the end, is homosexuality hurting anyone? There are beneficial genetic variations, detrimental genetic variations and neutral variations. Not all are necessarily bad. And in the end, whether genetic or not, there's a crucial difference between homosexuality and alcoholism. See, the thing is, alcoholism can have a devastating effect on friends and family of the person, not to mention the person themselves. On the contrary, a happy, accepting relationship between two people of the same sex is fulfilling for both members, and for those around them. The only problem comes with a lack of understanding.

Iron, imagine if someone asked you not to be a Catholic because they didn't agree with it and, in their opinion, it was something that you could just 'get over'. It's evident from your posts that you feel that it's a crucial part of you, and many people here, including myself, respect that, even if we don't agree with all your views. But imagine if we didn't...imagine how you might feel about being unable to be open and express what you think of as a crucial part of yourself.

 

[Iron]

But in the end, is homosexuality hurting anyone? There are beneficial genetic variations, detrimental genetic variations and neutral variations. Not all are necessarily bad. And in the end, whether genetic or not, there's a crucial difference between homosexuality and alcoholism. See, the thing is, alcoholism can have a devastating effect on friends and family of the person, not to mention the person themselves. On the contrary, a happy, accepting relationship between two people of the same sex is fulfilling for both members, and for those around them. The only problem comes with a lack of understanding.

Iron, imagine if someone asked you not to be a Catholic because they didn't agree with it and, in their opinion, it was something that you could just 'get over'. It's evident from your posts that you feel that it's a crucial part of you, and many people here, including myself, respect that, even if we don't agree with all your views. But imagine if we didn't...imagine how you might feel about being unable to be open and express what you think of as a crucial part of yourself.

I dont agree. The homosexual is at least as harmful as the drunk. The Catholic on the other hand is the building block of a thriving, civilized society which has love and life at its core.

Does homosexuality not have a devastating impact on family? What about the 3rd world parents who depend on their children to raise a stable family which can support them in their retirement? What of the 'person' who realises that no love can endure when it denies God and pretends that it can be a self-perpetuating end in itself? The homosexual is compelled to live a lonely and unfaithful life, unsatisfied by the empty, fleeting meaning of materialism. They will die with nothing but regret of a totally self-centered life which never sought to truely look beyond itself for meaning and truth.

 

[SnowFox]

I dont agree. The homosexual is at least as harmful as the drunk. The Catholic on the other hand is the building block of a thriving, civilized society which has love and life at its core.

Does homosexuality not have a devastating impact on family? What about the 3rd world parents who depend on their children to raise a stable family which can support them in their retirement? What of the 'person' who realises that no love can endure when it denies God and pretends that it can be a self-perpetuating end in itself? The homosexual is compelled to live a lonely and unfaithful life, unsatisfied by the empty, fleeting meaning of materialism. They will die with nothing but regret of a totally self-centered life which never sought to truely look beyond itself for meaning and truth.

*Cough*CRUSADES*Cough*

 

[Iron]

*Cough*CRUSADES*Cough*

What about them?

 

[HumanDichotomy]

Iron, you still haven't answered my question. How would you feel if someone forced you to renounce a part of you? If homosexuality is really so full of the 'empty, fleeting meaning of materialism' then surely gay people would seek something more? The reason they can't just denounce it is they feel it's a part of them...an important part.

 

[SnowFox]

What about them?

You can not say the Crusades were civilised.

 

[Iron]

You can not say the Crusades were civilised.

Considering that Muslims, bent on putting Christians - even pilgrims in the Holy Land - to the sword, were pushing through Spain into France, bleeding Byzantine so dry that it was begging for any assistance from the hated west, and pricking the whole mediterranian from north africa?

 

[Iron]

Iron, you still haven't answered my question. How would you feel if someone forced you to renounce a part of you? If homosexuality is really so full of the 'empty, fleeting meaning of materialism' then surely gay people would seek something more? The reason they can't just denounce it is they feel it's a part of them...an important part.

It is a lie. But youre a fool to say that i'm 'forcing' them to give it up. It is their own choice. Your idea that mankind is no stronger than his urges is not a view that I share, pagan.

 

[jules.09]

I dont agree. The homosexual is at least as harmful as the drunk. The Catholic on the other hand is the building block of a thriving, civilized society which has love and life at its core.

Does homosexuality not have a devastating impact on family? What about the 3rd world parents who depend on their children to raise a stable family which can support them in their retirement? What of the 'person' who realises that no love can endure when it denies God and pretends that it can be a self-perpetuating end in itself? The homosexual is compelled to live a lonely and unfaithful life, unsatisfied by the empty, fleeting meaning of materialism. They will die with nothing but regret of a totally self-centered life which never sought to truely look beyond itself for meaning and truth.

Iron this is rhetoric.

It has been pointed out that the nature of homosexuality and alcoholism are extremely different. I'd like to take a different spin: consider Catholicism and homosexuality in comparison to one another.

Catholicism is a self professed truth for its adherents, such as yourself Iron. However, I would argue that it has been fabricated by humans, and you would only identify yourself as a Catholic, if you have been enlightened of such an organised religion. In this regard, it can/may not be a resourceful addition to your life. Some people on this planet have never even been informed about Christianity and they live in their 'basic state', either religion-free or following their own religion, contentedly.

Now consider homosexuality.

Homosexuality is largely congenital: it is inherent to your being regardless of context. You don't have to necessarily identify the experienced phenomenon as homosexuality in any language, but it is a human condition which exists.

Of course, you can draw the distinction between the homosexual mindset and the associated acts, and you are essentially endorsing a form of repression for homosexuals at large. It's the same as asking an Aboriginal person to acknowledge that they are Aboriginal, but they must assimilate into a white community, because this is what the prevailing doctrine dictates.

People can't change what is inherent to their person, as they can convert from religion to religion, or un-religion.