Homosexuality in Australia (10 Viewers)

What do you think of homosexuality in Australia?

  • Yes, i strongly support it.

    Votes: 674 48.5%
  • I somewhat support it.

    Votes: 201 14.5%
  • No opinion

    Votes: 182 13.1%
  • I do not support it.

    Votes: 334 24.0%

  • Total voters
    1,391

0bs3n3

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
666
Location
Newcastle, NSW
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
What?

A more apt analogy regarding toes and primitive traits is to have a second toe longer than your big toe.
Fungi are now thought to be more closely related to animals than to plants. I could make dumb conclusions from this too.
 

SeCKSiiMiNh

i'm a fireball in bed
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,618
Location
island of screaming orgasms
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Why so much hate? All He wants to do, is love you. He is offering to redeeme you of everything, every sinful action, every bad thought, and eternal life in Heaven.

Christ is not your enemy because He tells you things you don't want to hear. At least consider, that what He tells you is for your own good....

Surely, without considering everything else He has given you (life, free will etc.), you can appreciate His compassion? Why do you reject Him so coldly MingX?
god just sucks. christ sucks. they expect homosexuals to live a life ob abstinence. i bet the majority of the population couldn't pull it off.
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
god just sucks. christ sucks. they expect homosexuals to live a life ob abstinence. i bet the majority of the population couldn't pull it off.
Read the Book of Job (in the Bible obviously), God has asked people to suffer worse than absitnence. Christ had to experience torture and a slow, painful death, He probably wasn't too keen on that either.

Sexaul lust is not the only temptation God will test you will throughout your life, and it is one which everyone expreicnces, regardless of a persons confessed sexuality.

Resisting temptation doesn't mean you will always win. Humans cannot live a perfect life, but we can try and Christ died to redeeme us of our sins, we have only to accept and allow Him.
 

Kwayera

Passive-aggressive Mod
Joined
May 10, 2004
Messages
5,959
Location
Antarctica
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Fungi are now thought to be more closely related to animals than to plants. I could make dumb conclusions from this too.
What? No, it's actually true. Having a longer second toe than your big toe is a primitive trait. Longer big toes are the adaptive one.

I mean, feel free to give us all a lesson in cladistics. It's fascinating.
 

kelly tully

Banned
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
90
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Ok please let's not discuss mycology.

Fucking hate fungi, boringest topic ever.
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
Pssh, another book. I've just made a book called 'all religious people are wrong 'cause I say it's right'.

I'll give it to you for free if you believe and bow and pray down to me. :)

What's your view of 'perfect life' btw? Just to see what you think is 'perfect'. If you don't realise, it's that Christ can't be 'perfect' by himself. Because he needs others to be 'imperfect' to be perfect.

Because he needs others, so that he can be perfect, he is imperfect.

See the Irony?

Life needs 'balance', two sides. I guess that's why I'd believe more in Buddhism. Though I don't believe that they have to eat vegetables all day. I like meat, it tastes nice (I HEART CHICKEN). Maybe Just the Yin-Yang Bit. I'd believe in..
Not really, no.

Depends on your definition of perfect. If perfection is never sinning, or never being tempted to sin, then you harldy need others arround you sinning for you to be perfect ;)

I'm sure you'd be a great author, but unfortunately you are not God, you are not my Creator nor are you my Saviour, and as such your book is not the word of God, and is therfore rather meaningless and holds no authority in how I should live my spiritual life.
 

Lentern

Active Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
4,980
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
If you accept God as your creator, then who are you to question his judgement on what is right or wrong?

He gave you the free will you are using now to question Him. If you believe it is in your interest to go against His word or to reject His love, you are allowed to.

God will not allow a person to decend into Hell, simply because they have had sex outside of marriage. God loves us all, he created us all, he doesn't want to punish us.

The only unforgivable sin is not accepting God, this is what causes someone to be sent to Hell. Anyone who has engaged in a sexual perversion can find faith and see the error of their ways and through Christ seek redemption.

God gave you free will to make your own decisions in this life. He also offers you the chance to redeme yourself, should you find faith, and realise the various sins against Him you have committed. Then he offers the faithful eternal life in Heaven. For this, he asks only that you reciocate His love to you back at Him, hardly what one could describe as "cruel" and "nasty".
If God is what I imagine him to be, loving, benevolent, humble and forgiving then he will ofcourse have my love and presumably when he reveals himself in all his glory he will have the love of a great many other people who are at the moment less than convinced.

Neither you nor I are great enough to understand the almighty so it naturally follows that there are some conditions on our loving him lest he turn out to be quite different o what we imagine. To say otherwise wold either proclaim you are so great you can understand the mystery of our faith with perfect clarity or that your are a prostitute, unconcerned with the principles of your beloved so long as he is the biggest kid in the playground.

If he turns out to be such a bully to demand his subjects renounce a harmless act that brings them happiness and joy for no other reason than to stroke his ego, well then I'd think the real hell would involve spending brain dead drones who still worship him regardless.
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
If God is what I imagine him to be, loving, benevolent, humble and forgiving then he will ofcourse have my love and presumably when he reveals himself in all his glory he will have the love of a great many other people who are at the moment less than convinced.

Neither you nor I are great enough to understand the almighty so it naturally follows that there are some conditions on our loving him lest he turn out to be quite different o what we imagine. To say otherwise wold either proclaim you are so great you can understand the mystery of our faith with perfect clarity or that your are a prostitute, unconcerned with the principles of your beloved so long as he is the biggest kid in the playground.

If he turns out to be such a bully to demand his subjects renounce a harmless act that brings them happiness and joy for no other reason than to stroke his ego, well then I'd think the real hell would involve spending brain dead drones who still worship him regardless.
You confuse pleasure and happiness.

Sex is not a requirement for human relationships. Sex shouldn't even be a requirement for a loving relationship between a married heterosexual couple.

Sex is a gift to people to create life, within the context of marriage.

Having sex for your own selfish pleasure, or to "prove" you "love" someone is not right. If you need to have sex with someone in order to love them and be with them, you should evaluate how strong your feelings of "love" were to them in the first place.

Sex was a gift to people. It is the abuse of this gift, by people for their own benefit, using it in ways which were not intended by God which is evil. God grants us the strength to confront evil in this life and the will to resist our temptations however it is only with faith and through the accepting of Christ as our Saviour is this level of self-control possible.
 
Last edited:

Graney

Horse liberty
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
4,434
Location
Bereie
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
You confuse pleasure and happiness.

Sex is not a requirement for human relationships. Sex shouldn't even be a requirement for a loving relationship between a married heterosexual couple.

Sex is a gift to people to create life, within the context of marriage.

Having sex for your own selfish pleasure, or to "prove" you "love" someone is not right. If you need to have sex with someone in order to love them and be with them, you should evaluate how strong your feelings of "love" were to them in the first place.
How much experience do you have with long term relationships?
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
How much experience do you have with long term relationships?
I have been alive for 16 years, so you could say I am somewhat unexperienced in long-term loving relationships with other people.

Am I to assume however that you are highly knowledgeable in the field of human interactions? How old are you? How long have you been in a relationship with someone?

Tell me, is sex is essential in all human relationships, or is it simply an outlet for the faithless among us who submit to temptation? It is possible to love without having sex, isn't it?

And sex, for that matter.
I told you already Kwayera, I am a virgin, however only a morally corrupted person such as youself would see this as a sign of inadequacy or some sort of qualification required to speak on sexual morality.

Virginity is something special which should be saved for someone you can commit to live in a life long loving relationship, after celebrating your love and committment through the ceremony of marriage.

All this demonstrates is that I have resisted temptation to this point in my life. Could you have said the same Kwayera? Were you a virgin at 16?
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
I was and I think what you are saying is very wrong. Sex is extremely natural.
I never said it wans't "natural". Or that people shouldn't do it.

I said it should only be "used" in certain, very specific circumstances, i.e. between a man and a women, in marriage (as a loving, life-long committment to one another), in a celebration of God and the creation of life.

I also said its not essential to demonstrate love to one another or to have a loving relationship.
 

Kwayera

Passive-aggressive Mod
Joined
May 10, 2004
Messages
5,959
Location
Antarctica
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Tell me, is sex is essential in all human relationships, or is it simply an outlet for the faithless among us who submit to temptation? It is possible to love without having sex, isn't it?
Given that sex is generally the ultimate expression of love and affection within a romantic relationship, it'd be a pretty empty relationship without it.

I told you already Kwayera, I am a virgin, however only a morally corrupted person such as youself would see this as a sign of inadequacy or some sort of qualification required to speak on sexual morality.
Yeah, I do think it's a sign of your inqualification, because you have no idea what you are talking about.

Virginity is something special which should be saved for someone you can commit to live in a life long loving relationship, after celebrating your love and committment through the ceremony of marriage.
Virginity is something to be saved for someone you love and trust and am in a loving, long term relationship with - at least it was for me. Marriage has nothing to do with it.

All this demonstrates is that I have resisted temptation to this point in my life. Could you have said the same Kwayera? Were you a virgin at 16?
Yeah, I was, but I also wasn't going around moralising to people and judging them about something I could necessarily not understand.
 

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
I never said it wans't "natural". Or that people shouldn't do it.

I said it should only be "used" in certain, very specific circumstances, i.e. between a man and a women, in marriage (as a loving, life-long committment to one another), in a celebration of God and the creation of life.
I think people having to do it at certain times is very unnatural.
 

Lentern

Active Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
4,980
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
You confuse pleasure and happiness.

Sex is not a requirement for human relationships. Sex shouldn't even be a requirement for a loving relationship between a married heterosexual couple.

Sex is a gift to people to create life, within the context of marriage.

Having sex for your own selfish pleasure, or to "prove" you "love" someone is not right. If you need to have sex with someone in order to love them and be with them, you should evaluate how strong your feelings of "love" were to them in the first place.

Sex was a gift to people. It is the abuse of this gift, by people for their own benefit, using it in ways which were not intended by God which is evil. God grants us the strength to confront evil in this life and the will to resist our temptations however it is only with faith and through the accepting of Christ as our Saviour is this level of self-control possible.
Even if sex had only one intended purpose the alternative purposes are not harmful so again it is a harsh and arbitrary condition which if real only serves to stroke the ego of the conditioner. This brings us back to cruel and nasty.
 

Graney

Horse liberty
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
4,434
Location
Bereie
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
I have been alive for 16 years, so you could say I am somewhat unexperienced in long-term loving relationships with other people.

Am I to assume however that you are highly knowledgeable in the field of human interactions? How old are you? How long have you been in a relationship with someone?

Tell me, is sex is essential in all human relationships, or is it simply an outlet for the faithless among us who submit to temptation? It is possible to love without having sex, isn't it?
With limited personal experience you would question how reliable your sources are.

A very few people claim that regular sexual activity for pleasure is not good
A few people claim that frequent sexual activity with many partners is good.

The vast majority of people claim that regular sexual activity for pleasure is usually necessary for the vast majority of couples in a loving relationship. The vast majority of religious leaders would agree with this, including the churches.

There are a few that oppose this view, including the catholics. The catholic church no longer significantly campaigns against contraception in the west, you never hear them publicly railing against the pill, because for 40 years the message only served to alienate their followers, who found the preaching of a bunch of celibate for life men to be totally divorced from reality and completely unworkable within the realities of a marriage and human sexual needs.

It is impossible (and unhealthy, not just psychologically, but physiologically) for the average biological male with normal sexual hormones to live without regular sexual release, this is why we have masturbation, why not share this necessary function with a partner? Why is it worse for you to have sex with a partner, than to masturbate (which you do)?
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
With limited personal experience you would question how reliable your sources are.

A very few people claim that regular sexual activity for pleasure is not good
A few people claim that frequent sexual activity with many partners is good.

The vast majority of people claim that regular sexual activity for pleasure is usually necessary for the vast majority of couples in a loving relationship. The vast majority of religious leaders would agree with this, including the churches.
This has been said so many times already, but the majority opinion of society proves nothing. The vast majority of people would have an incentive themslves to claim that it necessary as a means to justify their own actions. The majority of people in soceity would tell you that homosexuality is a healthy alternative lifestyle choice, but here we are.


There are a few that oppose this view, including the catholics. The catholic church no longer significantly campaigns against contraception in the west, you never hear them publicly railing against the pill, because for 40 years the message only served to alienate their followers, who found the preaching of a bunch of celibate for life men to be totally divorced from reality and completely unworkable within the realities of a marriage and human sexual needs.
True the Church changes its aegenda somewhat to keep up with the changing movements in society. Just becuase the focus has shifted from contraception to homosexuality does not mean that the Church now accepts contraception. They are both wrong on a moral level and will always be opposed by the faithful who do not abandon their beliefs in the wake of being alienated by a misguided society.

It is impossible (and unhealthy, not just psychologically, but physiologically) for the average biological male with normal sexual hormones to live without regular sexual release, this is why we have masturbation, why not share this necessary function with a partner? Why is it worse for you to have sex
with a partner, than to masturbate (which you do)?
How is it unhealthy? Is this just more speculation, can you provide a citation?

It's hardly impossible. Sex is not required for the human to live. Nor is it required for the human to live happily. Nor is it required for the human to live in a loving relationship. This is all common knowledge, that doesn't need to be proved by science. Now we have established it however, it means that controlling your lust and temptations towards others comes down to pure self control.

If you can't love someone without having sex with them, what does that say about how much you actually love them? "Till death do us part" all you have to do is read the vow to understand marriage is meant to be a serious committment. If you can't live with someone for the rest of your life, you shouldn't marry them as you can't meet the committment that such a special ceremony is a celebration of.

And what you say about healthiness means very little if not, nothing. There can be no compassion without sacrifice. One could hardly say that being tortured and cruxified was healthy for Jesus, can we?

Often what God asks of us is not easy or what we personally may want. Conversly, temptation often feels good and may be what we want. Faith is about doing what's right by God, not by us. Whatever harm may happen to your body will not tarnish the purity of your soul for resisting temptation and staying true to Him.
 
Last edited:

Graney

Horse liberty
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
4,434
Location
Bereie
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
How is it unhealthy? Is this just more speculation, can you provide a citation?
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3942-masturbating-may-protect-against-prostate-cancer.html

It's hardly impossible. Sex is not required for the human to live. Nor is it required for the human to live happily. Nor is it required for the human to live in a loving relationship. This is all common knowledge, that doesn't need to be proved by science. Now we have established it however, it means that controlling your lust and temptations towards others comes down to pure self control.
I put it to you that you beat off 24/7.
 

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Sex is not required for the human to live.
I'm pretty sure that this is how the majority of life on earth is created. Stipulating that it is only valid under certain conditions is quite odd.

"You must wake up at certain times of the day to be moral!" is an equivalent.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 10)

Top