• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mormon Church To US Supreme Court: Ban Gay Marriage

Status
Not open for further replies.

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
I bet that you think that his parents are at fault and that your friend was the victim rather than his parents, who were probably indoctrinated all there lives that homosexuality was unnatural and they too probably visualised what their precious son was doing with other men and it shamed them, through no real fault of their own. That is what the majority think, but say nothing. i feel sorry for both the parents and the son. Things must have been so bad for the parents, whether you agree or not, that they felt it necessary to move away. The son obviously could not change how he felt so he took his life in order to stop the emotional pain. It is not always the parents fault. Most parents do not want a gay son. They want grandchildren who are part of their seed and a daughter in law to know that their son is doing what they consider to be normal. Homosexuality seems to be fraught with huge negatives that everyone knows about, except for the homosexuals. We tend to think that the person who is deseased is always the victim because they are dead, but that is not always the case. People like me find homosexuality to be wierd and unnatural because that is how we have been raised, plus, when you look at it carefully, it is wierd and unnatural,
I don't know that you should be speaking on behalf of "most people."
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Well, it is good to see someone using objective reasoning instead of being brain washed by subjectively bigotry. There is nothing wrong in playing Devils advocate, It is, in my opinion, the best way of learning about why people are what they are.



When I grew up the whole of society was anti-gay, it was illegal. If you were found to be gay then you were sent to a mental institution and given electric shock theopy to cure you. Politicians openly denounced their behaviour, as did our schools. Our society was far more religiously orientated back then and readily accepting of outlawing anything that went against the norm, other than conventional missionary position heterosexual sex. I think my wife might have divorced me if I suggested anal sex to her thinking that I may be gay. Woman were treated with the utmost respect and decorum. Homosexuality was considered weird and anyone who indulged was considered to be untrustworthy and suspicious.



We are all very different. We all grew up in differing environments with varying degrees of morality and respect. When i was younger i thought that it was very strange for two men to engage in anal sex. Nothing to do with religion, just very odd. Today, after 40 odd years of being a Christian, I still feel the same, however, I now just accept it to be none of my business and the free agency of men, I will have to stand accountable for my own sins so I cannot get involved in the wrongs and rights of homosexuality. I only express my beliefs on these forums, which is enough for me when these religious type forums are always so full of atheists, antichrists and gays. My personal belief is that anal sex is disgusting and creates many negatives in our society, however, I also believe that time is running short and those spirits that dwell on earth today were fence sitters during the war in heaven, so nobody is going to change them. No ammout of evangelism will convert them. They are Satan's elite and are being prepare for Armageddon. I sincerely believe that and this is just one prophecy that is being realised in preparation for that day. It goes contrary to the teachings of Christ, as he said it would. Sexual perversion will become common place in the last days. It now appears to the world as though it is normal, however, smoking was once considered normal until people started dying of lung cancer.



It seems to me that you have left the protection of your parents and have decided that the standards of society are right and your dad is wrong. The bible tells us that in the last days there will appear a great devide between the standards of the world and the teachings of God. The same as with Sodom and Gomorrah only much, much worse, as demonstrated by the Brussels Bombing today. In my opinion, you are backing the wrong horse when choosing the values of a corrupt society and the morals of a loving God. Homosexuality is just the tip of the iceberg. God said that we should honor our parents and the day of our life will be long. I think you should reconsider the words of your father. He is not going to tell you anything that will hurt you, on the contrary, we cannot do that. Fathers love their offspring with a unique and abising unconditional lovem something that is considered to be missing when adopting because it is a spiritual bond
What if your parents beat the living snot out of you every day for your entire childhood. Why honor people like that?

I'd just like to add that fathers of adopted children are perfectly capable of loving and bonding with their children, just as much as any biological parent is capable of. Besides, there are plenty of biological fathers who care very little for their own children.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
And that is important to you, right, playing to an audience. That is obviously what gets you off. It does nothing for me. I need no audience to play to.
A pathetic and ineffective attempt at provocation. What's important to me is speaking out against the kind of entitled, systemic violence in which your posts are complicit.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
No, I have never blocked you. I don't get sensitive to criticism, as sojourner does, If I did then I wouldn't be here. I actually expect posters to disagree with me as my candid opinions are plainly-spoken and forthright, never-the-less, they are made in earnest and honesty. I have no agenda. I would only block someone if I start to get a migraine from banging my head against a brick wall.
:rolleyes:
 

Demonslayer

Well-Known Member
Christians are going to alienate the great majority of people with this gay issue. No one gets it, you just look like bigots to everyone.

Hey, keep it up I'm all for marginalizing all religion. The more religious people focus on weird stuff like ranting and raving about homosexuality, the more people will realize they don't need religion.
 

Demonslayer

Well-Known Member
No, I have never blocked you. I don't get sensitive to criticism, as sojourner does, If I did then I wouldn't be here. I actually expect posters to disagree with me as my candid opinions are plainly-spoken and forthright, never-the-less, they are made in earnest and honesty. I have no agenda. I would only block someone if I start to get a migraine from banging my head against a brick wall.


Well good, I respect one thing about you then...the acceptance of challenge and debate without getting all upset like some people do.
 

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
Your "conclusion" is as reality-based as the rest of the drivel you've posted here. Heck! You think that the bible condemns homosexuality, yet you can't seem to produce one text that explicitly does so.

If I am posting drivel based on my lack of reality why are you responding to my post. Seems a bit odd, or your feathers are getting ruffled.
See Luke 4:17-21. People are held captive and oppressed by those in power. Setting them free is subversive to that power base. That's what Xy is all about; it's why Jesus came -- to release captives.

and Jesus said "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." Those that were in earshot of his voice. His primary purpose here was to atone for the sins of the world and to die and be resurrected that that all men might be resurrected. He came to proclaim the word of God and in doing so one might get closer to God and reap the happiness that it brings. What you talk about here is just incidental to his mission. It was to demonstrate who he was. It was not his sole reason for being. My word, you need to brush up on your interpretations of the words of God.

What do you call releasing captives and freeing the oppressed?

"The brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

Obviously, you've been living in "Fluffy, Christian, Candy Land," where everyone thinks and believes as you do -- where you don't have to feel bad about oppressing women or homosexuals.

Tell me, am I talking here to an adult or a child as these juvinele remarks are in keeping with a child, as are your opinions.

See above. People own gold. Women are not gold. Women are human beings.

Most women were treated as gold dust, precious and with great value. I did not say that they were gold. That is your words placed in my mouth.

No one "makes" women work. Women want to work -- to have careers, educations and opportunities.

Citation required, otherwise it is anecdotal, your subjective opinion.

My wife longed to stay at home to be a mother and wife and I was happy for here to realize her wish.

In your world, apparently, women are treated so well that they have a chain long enough to reach the stove from the bed.

Again, you will have to show me where I said that all women are treated so well that they have a chain long enough to reach the stove from the bed. I do not recall saying that.

No, it's your narrow-mindedness.

The ball please, not the player.

Of course it is! What do you think "white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant males" are?

The are men who have their own minds and act according to their own will. They are not God, therefore, you cast aspersions on the wrong person.

If you don't have any business with what others do,

Your delevery of the English language leave a lot to be desired. I have no clue as to what you are trying to say. Try again.

why are you here?

I am here to debate whereas you are here to agitate

You have said many, many times that homosexuality is an abomination, and you have tied it to anal sex.

I have said many many times that it is anal sex that I object to and not the love of two people. Why do you not quote that instead of trying to ensnare me with your petty insignificance's. Maybe you need to portray me in a bad light because your argument is weak? Hey, but let me make it crystal clear for you know. I believe that the scriptures on sexual perversions relates to two men lying together, like with a woman, and partaking in anal sex. The scripture condemn that as an abomination and I support those scriptures 100%. The scriptures mention nothing about two men loving each other, therefore, I reserve my judgement on the homosexual lifestyle. If you go through my 2000 odd posts you will see that theme throughout, now, stop your attempts to discredit me and debate the opinions that I have. If you find the subject to upsetting, then may I suggest that you leave the debate.


This has nothing to do with percentages. It has everything to do with treating people who are normal as if they're normal.

You dismiss it so quickly because it spells out the truth.

I agree, so lets stop fooling ourselves that a minority group of mis-fits are acting in the same way as the rest of us. They are not so they do not comply with the norm. The are abnormal in their behaviour.

You said, "Fathers love their children unconditionally." "All" is implied by the structure and context of that sentence.

Again, you try to undermine me, yet it is your colors that are on display here, not mine.

"All" was not said, therefore, the implication is all yours and is conspicuously wrong, as though you were attacking me rather than my opinion. I was talking in general, as reflected in the context of my words. To think otherwise is a sad reflection on the readers level of comprehension or ignorance to logical reasoning as that reader must assume that it is possible to make such a unlikely sweeping statement that would be impossible to evidence thus making him look quite silly for assuming that it was to imply such an inconceivably preposterous protestation that one would know the opinion of every father in the world. That you think that is possible is very telling..

Much worse than what? Routine slavery, torture, rampant disease, lack of education, lack of basic, human rights? Worse than that?

Where on earth is the connection between what you have written and what I have written. How am I supposed to respond to such incoherent rhetoric?
 
Last edited:

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
Christians are going to alienate the great majority of people with this gay issue. No one gets it, you just look like bigots to everyone.

Hey, keep it up I'm all for marginalizing all religion. The more religious people focus on weird stuff like ranting and raving about homosexuality, the more people will realize they don't need religion.

Why will they?
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
If I am posting drivel based on my lack of reality why are you responding to my post.
So that those who are willing to look at truth and facts can see just how desperate some people are, how far some people will go in order to protect their beliefs, etc.

Basically, since you have shown you are completely immune to truth, reason, logic, and facts, any reply to you is not for your benefit, but for any and everyone else reading the thread.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Not in my world, Maybe in the world of those who are deluded by woman were treated like gold dust in my time and in my fathers time and in my grandfathers time. I know that because I lived in it.

What time would that be?

Not in my country, we are not. In my world women were not made to work, or wanted to work. They had a far more important and injoyable job, raising children into responsible adults.

What country do you live in?

And what if women didn’t think that the most fulfilling thing in the world was to clean a house and do laundry and cook and raise children. Did it ever occur to anyone in “your time” that women might want something different?

Or is it your bigotry

That person is not displaying any bigotry.

That has nothing to do with my God. Last time I read anything on that it was man that create those unfortunate situations, not God. Institutional violence is perpetuated by men and their choices.

Man creates the “unfortunate situations” of perpetuating institutional violence against his fellow man because he thinks that’s what god wants. (Some men, anyway.)

I am not. You are. I have do problems with people who love each other, although you are desperately trying to hang that on me. Anal sex is a sexual perversion. God has condemned it as a sin. Anal sex is what gays do and the bible says that they must not do it. There is no mention of heterosexuals not doing it, although I am sure it comes under the umbrella of sexual perversion. This is about God saying that anal sex is unacceptable and a heinous sin.

No, you are the one who cannot stop talking about anal sex and keep equating it with homosexuality. (Remember how I keep pointing out how you’re ignoring lesbians?)


Anal sex is not what gays do. It’s what some gay men do sometimes, and some heterosexual couples do sometimes.

Homosexuality is a minority group, around 3.5%, as was the David Koresh's Branch Davidians, Pedophilia, Satan Worshipers. All of these are condemned as unnatural and unacceptable in our society. There are currently 79 countries where homosexuality is illegal. The biggest concentration of homosexuals is in a country where 86% of its occupants call themselves Christian. Society do not accept minority group simply because they are in a minority.84 percent of the world population has faith; a third are Christian. To suggest that 3.5% follow a lifestyle that is normal is nothing short of pathetic. The norm is quite obviously heterosexuality as it is the majority orientation. Homosexuality is an anomaly an abnormality that few subscribe to. the world sees it as an oddity, a peculiarity, a incongruity, an exception to the rule, a divergence to societies view on normality. You are saying that heterosexuals and homosexuals both act within the realms of normality. Do you believe that pedophiles, rapists and murderers are normal? There can only be one normal and it isn't homosexuality.

Who cares if they’re in the minority, they’re still human beings. Are you really saying that something is not normal just because it’s not part of some majority?

Just as a matter of interest, did you know that by saying "What planet have you been living on" that you are insulting me. If you do then what is your motive for being so hostile.

As with everything is our world, there are always exceptions to the rule. I didn't say that all fathers love their offspring unconditionally for that reason. Still trying to put words in my mouth. You make it sound like the alternative is common place, as you do with homosexuality.

You made a generalization (and suggested that adoptive fathers couldn’t have the same bond and unconditional love as biological fathers), when you said:

“Fathers love their offspring with a unique and abising unconditional lovem something that is considered to be missing when adopting because it is a spiritual bond.”

Oh, the world is getting much worse, and anyone who says that it is not, with the plethora of evidence available, is to be treated with suspicion. And I say this a s a member of the Religious Forum as the clergy have no authority to call themselves clergy. You are fulfilling the prophecy that men will call wrong right and right wrong.

Things are getting better if you are a woman, if you are gay, and if you are a person of colour or an ethnic minority, just for starters. I would say that people who think the world is getting worse should be treated with suspicion and bewilderment.

12 Signs That The Decay Of Society Is Accelerating

What in the world is happening to America? All around us there are disturbing signs that the slow-motion collapse of society is accelerating. With each passing year, criminals seem to be getting more desperate and more twisted. Some of the sick things that some people are willing to do to their fellow human beings are simply beyond description. What kind of psychotic individual would hold elderly men captive for a decade in order to get their Social Security and veteran benefit checks? How depraved do you have to be before you are able to convince yourself to rape a 16-year-old girl and then throw her body off of a roof? What kind of heartless teens would pour gasoline on an innocent boy walking home from school and then set him on fire? The social decay that is eating away at our nation like cancer is starting to get a lot worse, and yet there are still lots of people out there that will flat out deny that society is collapsing. They have totally bought into the propaganda being pushed by the mainstream media, and they are fully convinced that things in America are actually getting better even though our communities are literally coming apart at the seams all around us. How much worse do things have to get before everyone finally is willing to admit that we have a major problem on our hands? The following are 12 signs that the decay of society is accelerating…

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/12-signs-that-the-decay-of-society-is-accelerating

What kind of sick group of people tortures witches and heretics to death?

What kind of sick people ravage and pillage their neighbours and kill all their women and children while keeping the virgin women for themselves?

What kind of people use the sick array of torture devices that litter humankind’s history?

What kind of people do we have to be to keep other human beings as property to treat however we please?

What kind of sick people stone children to death for being disobedient or force women to marry their rapist?


When I look at the history of our existence on this planet, I can’t help but think about how happy I am, as a woman, that I am lucky enough to live here in the western world in the 21st century rather than at any other point in human history. We have it awfully good. So I usually find it pretty perplexing when I see people go on about how society is falling apart.
 
Last edited:

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Citation required, otherwise it is anecdotal, your subjective opinion.

My wife longed to stay at home to be a mother and wife and I was happy for here to realize her wish.
Citation required??? How about the women's movement?

I'm a woman. I want to work. I want to do the things I want to do, like any other man or woman int he world. I want to support myself rather than relying on someone else to support me because you never know what is going to happen.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
I agree, so lets stop fooling ourselves that a minority group of mis-fits are acting in the same way as the rest of us. They are not so they do not comply with the norm. The are abnormal in their behaviour.
They are not abnormal in their behavior, given that plenty of heterosexuals practice anal sex (if that's where you're going with that).
Otherwise, homosexuality is a sexual orientation, not an act and not a behavior. An orientation.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
I agree, so lets stop fooling ourselves that a minority group of mis-fits are acting in the same way as the rest of us. They are not so they do not comply with the norm. The are abnormal in their behaviour.
This is nothing more than an appeal to numbers fallacy.
Unfortunately for you, the US Supreme Court is not fooled by it.
 

Demonslayer

Well-Known Member
Why will they?

Because they will look around and see the most religious people in the world are beset with problems. Warped, sad ideas about sexuality, hatred for those outside their religion, etc.

I find the very religious people I know to be very humorless, sad, view the world negatively, have issues with sex be it homosexuality or generally seeing sex as dirty and shameful, and often appear outwardly angry at the world outside of their faith.

This is much less so for the "religious-lite" type people. But the more devout, the less happy I see people. Isn't religion supposed to bring happiness? Yet Muslims are bombing people and Christians are out trying to prevent gay people from being treated equally.

Meanwhile the rest of us are having a good time.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
If I am posting drivel based on my lack of reality why are you responding to my post. Seems a bit odd, or your feathers are getting ruffled.
The drivel only serves to perpetuate institutional violence. As such, to remain silent while it goes on is to be complicit in it. I refuse to be complicit in it.

and Jesus said "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." Those that were in earshot of his voice. His primary purpose here was to atone for the sins of the world and to die and be resurrected that that all men might be resurrected. He came to proclaim the word of God and in doing so one might get closer to God and reap the happiness that it brings. What you talk about here is just incidental to his mission. It was to demonstrate who he was. It was not his sole reason for being. My word, you need to brush up on your interpretations of the words of God.
Since the texts are inherently multivalent, I'd have to say that this cheap attempt at ad hominem and provocation is wasted. Here's the quoted text from Isaiah:
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,

because he has anointed me

to proclaim good news to the poor.

He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners

and recovery of sight for the blind,

to set the oppressed free,

19to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
Let's take a look at what Jesus has been anointed to do: proclaim good news to the poor (downtrodden).
Let's take a look at what Jesus was sent to do: 1) proclaim freedom for prisoners, 2) sight for the blind, 3) free the oppressed. Your problem is that you have a particular, fundamental and stylized notion of what constitutes "salvation." Typical for a 21st-century Christian who appears to be confused about the very nature of the body of Christ. In the time when the texts were written, the language was decidedly less theologically loaded and far more common and practical. For the writer, salvation was the common, physical act of setting people free from their oppression. It's the same thing that's happening with homosexuals today: they're being set free from the system that's oppressing them.

"The brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
This simply doesn't address my post.

Tell me, am I talking here to an adult or a child as these juvinele remarks are in keeping with a child, as are your opinions.
More ad hominem fecal matter to which we need pay no attention. Can't even spell "juvenile" correctly. A jejune attempt at best, and usually the first indicator that you have no reasonable argument left and are feeling frustrated.

Most women were treated as gold dust, precious and with great value. I did not say that they were gold. That is your words placed in my mouth.
OK. So, IOW, you simply treat (your word -- not mine) women as possessions. Your Freudian slip is showing.

Citation required, otherwise it is anecdotal, your subjective opinion.

My wife longed to stay at home to be a mother and wife and I was happy for here to realize her wish.
Not every woman is your wife. Many, many more (ref. feminist movement) want to work, be independent, and treated equally and as human beings -- not possessions.

Again, you will have to show me where I said that all women are treated so well that they have a chain long enough to reach the stove from the bed. I do not recall saying that.
Your perspective is that women who don't work, whose only task is to raise children, are happy, because they're "in their place." The reference to the chain is hyperbole, designed to illustrate how ridiculous that perspective really is within mainstream society. But I think you already know what I meant.

The are men who have their own minds and act according to their own will. They are not God, therefore, you cast aspersions on the wrong person.
Exactly. All of this oppression of homosexuals has nothing whatsoever to do with God. It's got everything to do with human beings, acting according to their own will. In this case, those human beings are the majority, have the social power and, hence, the entitlement to force others into boxes of their choosing.

Your delevery of the English language leave a lot to be desired. I have no clue as to what you are trying to say.
The problem isn't with my writing; it's with your comprehension. Heck, you can't even seem to be able to spell "delivery" correctly, and you're being critical of my writing?

I am here to debate whereas you are here to agitate
You are here to provoke. I am here to defend and refute.

I have said many many times that it is anal sex that I object to and not the love of two people. Why do you not quote that instead of trying to ensnare me with your petty insignificance's. Maybe you need to portray me in a bad light because your argument is weak? Hey, but let me make it crystal clear for you know. I believe that the scriptures on sexual perversions relates to two men lying together, like with a woman, and partaking in anal sex. The scripture condemn that as an abomination and I support those scriptures 100%. The scriptures mention nothing about two men loving each other, therefore, I reserve my judgement on the homosexual lifestyle. If you go through my 2000 odd posts you will see that theme throughout, now, stop your attempts to discredit me and debate the opinions that I have. If you find the subject to upsetting, then may I suggest that you leave the debate.
Hmm... how quickly you forget (or else cover up your litter box with sand...). After a cursory examination of just a few pages of this thread, I refer you to your posts numbered, 722, 726, 731, 746, 749, 751, 760. I'm sure there are more examples. In each of these you do object to homosexuality and homosexual marriage (which is an expression of the love of two people), and not just to anal sex. I'm trying to portray you in an honest light -- to illustrate just how weak your position really is. Mission accomplished, I should think.

You seem to want me to go away awfully badly. This is the third time you've suggested that course of action. I wonder why you would wish such a thing, if you're "here to debate" and "don't become upset?" Surely, after having called me "dishonest," "ignorant," "sounding stupid," "no serious knowledge of Christianity" (post #746), "insulting" (post #747), "trouble making zealot with a spiteful tongue" (post #748), "lying," "gay" (post #750), "delusional," "desperate" (post #751) "blind," "agitator" (post #773), Oh! And the coup de grace: "knowledge of scripture falls short of that of an ordained minister" (post #833), I should think you'd want to keep me around so that you could set me straight and save my miserable, dishonest, ignorant, stupid, dumb, insulting, trouble-making, zealous, spiteful, lying, gay, delusional, desperate, blind, agitating, unordained soul. But maybe, in your magnanimous Christian love for all people (as Jesus taught), you just don't care enough about me to do so?

You dismiss it so quickly because it spells out the truth.
I dismiss it because statistics prove nothing and can easily be twisted.

I agree, so lets stop fooling ourselves that a minority group of mis-fits are acting in the same way as the rest of us. They are not so they do not comply with the norm. The are abnormal in their behaviour.
Homosexuals are not "misfits." They do act in the same way as the "rest" of us: they love, they have desires, they want to be loved. They do comply with the "norm" inasmuch as we allow them to do so. They are not "abnormal" in their behavior. As you so aptly put above: "Citation required, otherwise it is anecdotal, your subjective opinion." Cite one credible source that says homosexuals are "misfits" and act "abnormally."

"All" was not said, therefore, the implication is all yours and is conspicuously wrong, as though you were attacking me rather than my opinion. I was talking in general, as reflected in the context of my words.
You forgot the part about context. You were talking "in general." But "in general," fathers do not love their children unconditionally. Just in 12 counties in Missouri last year, there were over 9000 cases of child abuse. And those are just the ones we know about -- the ones that actually get reported and followed up on. There are many more counties in Missouri, 49 other states in the country, and many other countries on earth.

Where on earth is the connection between what you have written and what I have written. How am I supposed to respond to such incoherent rhetoric?
You said life is much worse now. The (short) list I posted were commonplace in the past, and not commonplace now, thereby showing that life is not "much worse" now.
 
Last edited:

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
What time would that be?

That would only give my age away.

What country do you live in?

And what if women didn’t think that the most fulfilling thing in the world was to clean a house and do laundry and cook and raise children. Did it ever occur to anyone in “your time” that women might want something different?

I am sure that such women with these aspirations existed in my age.

That person is not displaying any bigotry.

Each to their own opinion.

Man creates the “unfortunate situations” of perpetuating institutional violence against his fellow man because he thinks that’s what god wants. (Some men, anyway.)

If that is the case with anyone who calls themselves a Christian then they are very much mistaken in there belief and their stance as a Christian must be brought in question. At the end of the day it is is mankind who is responsible for their own actions and not God.

No, you are the one who cannot stop talking about anal sex and keep equating it with homosexuality. (Remember how I keep pointing out how you’re ignoring lesbians?)

If I was not posting then there would be no debate. This is a debating forum where people debate. These are my opinions. By all means critique them but don't try to stifle freedom of speech. That is dictatorial.

As I responded, this commandment is not about women.

Anal sex is not what gays do. It’s what some gay men do sometimes, and some heterosexual couples do sometimes.

Anal sex is a perversion regardless as to who is doing it or how often. That is the commandment of God so can never be questioned as God is unchanging, the same today, tomorrow and forever.

Who cares if they’re in the minority, they’re still human beings. Are you really saying that something is not normal just because it’s not part of some majority?

No, that is just how it is. Are heterosexuals abnormal and homosexuals normal. Do homosexuals set the bar for society or do heterosexuals set the standard. If you answer that heterosexuals set the standard then you have to declare that homosexuality is outside of the envelope, act contrary to normal human behavior, an abnormality in our society. That is sound reasoning.

As with everything is our world, there are always exceptions to the rule. I didn't say that all fathers love their offspring unconditionally for that reason. Still trying to put words in my mouth. You make it sound like the alternative is common place, as you do with homosexuality.[/quote]

You made a generalization (and suggested that adoptive fathers couldn’t have the same bond and unconditional love as biological fathers), when you said:

“Fathers love their offspring with a unique and abising unconditional lovem something that is considered to be missing when adopting because it is a spiritual bond.”

What I said was "something that is considered to be missing when adopting" I said it was a consideration not a fact.

Things are getting better if you are a woman, if you are gay, and if you are a person of colour or an ethnic minority, just for starters. I would say that people who think the world is getting worse should be treated with suspicion and bewilderment.

I would say that those who cannot see the wood for the trees are deluding themselves or are a part of the problem. The internet is full of articles on it plus our eyes can see it everywhere.

What kind of sick group of people tortures witche and heretics to death?

What kind of sick people ravage and pillage their neighbours and kill all their women and children while keeping the virgin women for themselves?

What kind of people use the sick array of torture devices that litter humankind’s history?

What kind of people do we have to be to keep other human beings as property to treat however we please?

What kind of sick people stone children to death for being disobedient or force women to marry their rapist?

So, you recognize the past transgressions of man but you are blind to today's decaying world.

When I look at the history of our existence on this planet, I can’t help but think about how happy I am, as a woman, that I am lucky enough to live here in the western world in the 21st century rather than at any other point in human history. We have it awfully good. So I usually find it pretty perplexing when I see people go on about how society is falling apart.

And that is why you don't see it. You don't want to
 

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
What if your parents beat the living snot out of you every day for your entire childhood. Why honor people like that?

For the father, he is in dire trouble. For the son, he will be blessed by keeping the commandment. But you are talking about extremes. One would hardly survive being beaten everyday for his entire childhood. I would not expect his childhood to last very long.

I'd just like to add that fathers of adopted children are perfectly capable of loving and bonding with their children, just as much as any biological parent is capable of. Besides, there are plenty of biological fathers who care very little for their own children.

Well, that is debatable. I do not actually know, however, there are questions to be asked, like, what that unconditional bond is and whether someone who is not biologically attached can feel that bond that is all to apparent with biological parents.[/QUOTE]
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
If that is the case with anyone who calls themselves a Christian then they are very much mistaken in there belief and their stance as a Christian must be brought in question.
That's what your posts here are doing. Are you going to bring your own stance as a Christian into question?

don't try to stifle freedom of speech. That is dictatorial.
Refuting poorly-based arguments and decrying hate speech isn't "dictatorial." Neither is hate-speech protected.

No, that is just how it is. Are heterosexuals abnormal and homosexuals normal. Do homosexuals set the bar for society or do heterosexuals set the standard.
No one "sets the standard." there is no "standard" for human sexual orientation.

declare that homosexuality is outside of the envelope, act contrary to normal human behavior, an abnormality in our society. That is sound reasoning.
No, that's wishful thinking.

You make it sound like the alternative is common place, as you do with homosexuality
It is commonplace -- more commonplace than we imagine.

The internet is full of articles on it plus our eyes can see it everywhere.
...because, if it's on the net, it must be true!

And that is why you don't see it. You don't want to
This is projection, if ever I heard it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top