What is your belief about homosexuality?

Still no answer about bisexual cookies.

I wonder what the response would be if someone came in here and said they wouldn't eat cookies baked by a black man.

 

Well, I tell you I sure don't eat cookies baked by dead people. I draw the line there. Nope, no zombie virus for me thank you. Is my prejudice showing? Here, let me hitch that up so you can't see it anymore.

 

Where the cookies at??????????? Is there punch, too??????



Probably said it before, but that's like the whole Chick-fil-a thing. Unless being gay makes you a bad fast food worker, just gimme my sammich.

 

If it is fun then it is alright. As long as no puppies are hurt dueing the mashing of uglies I particularly don't care

 

It is 100% natural but that's all I can say about it. It ain't neither bad nor good, as heterosexuality. This is the reason why I dislike the parades, for example. If it is meant as a protest than I'm OK with it. If it is meant as a way to brag about it, find potential partners or say that you are proud to be a homosexual, then please do not involve me in this. I don't want to use alternative routes or pay taxes for such silly reasons. ...And I hold the same position in many other areas (sports, anybody?).
You love Real Madrid? Very well then! Try not to make me hate you because of the same reason. Keep your love for yourself, as much as possible, as I do.

I do agree with the basic laws of economy, according to which people other than me should benefit from my tax money, but nobody stops me from believing such payments are wasteful.

I also do not agree that info about homosexuality are of no concern to society. Not being able to give birth is a factor that would help in various statistics. Demographic trends, for example, may be very important in a country that has a retirement system based on contribution to the State (taxes which go to the pension funds).

 

I usually don't participate in such discussion but as I saw your question I decided to write something.. Also beforehand I declare, I don't like to enter any argue with oppositions, because I know arguing with them is useless and they will just persist on their belief and desires. So what I say is what I know and as I said before I don't like to have had any argue with those who follow homosexuality or claim it is a natural thing.

Homosexuality is not a natural relationship but is an unnatural and a very hazard sexuality. It is unlike the creation purposes and causes some diseases naturally, and some disasters supernaturally, in addition to some dangerous spiritual ills and habits. In medicine ( it has not been discovered yet), homosexuality is caused some genetically change in a homosexual (maybe he becomes like a zombie forever), in addition to some unknown "Sexually transmitted diseases." Spiritually, a homosexual lose his shame and honor and this corruption damages his morality and humanity.
God never looks at a man that is homosexual and do sodomy and never listen to his pray in the difficulties, but such male is deserve to anger and unhappiness of Lord.
I have heard when a homosexuality is done on the earth the empyrean begin shaking and angels curse its doers. Also another heavenly quote says, the one who, people do sodomy with him, God will place his *** on the fire in doomsday, while is angry at him.
Homosexuality is a sin, worse than adultery, because Lord has never destroyed a folk that did adultery but he has destroyed an area completely in the history because, its men did sodomy. Gabriel changed into a so great angel and flattened the cities based on will of God . It occurred at dawn. A horrible paranormal earthquake with a fearful sound, and then there was nothing. except some thunderbolts on the destroyed city and a great mass of dust. Minutes later, nobody could understand that there was a city.

 

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." - Mark Twain...

 

Sorry. That post got fudged.

I found it difficult to accept that poster believes anything they wrote.

 

Still, good thing I'm not a homosexual, even though I've had sex with someone of the same sex.

Bisexuality: Angels won't destroy the world, cause you aren't gay.

It's the new bisexual motto.

 

"I wonder. you invite someone to express his opinion about an issue and when he did, you offend him emotionally. I knew already this will happen and the one who is familiar with light and says the realities will be a target for emotionally respond. Step back to the topic title and note what it had questioned, I just answered to them :


What is your belief about homosexuality?
Is homosexuality good?
Is it bad?
Is it a sin?
Is it not a sin?
Is it natural?
Just curious as to what everyone's outlook is.



And I just responded to these questions. So what is my fault that you attacked me by a quote which its meaning is included the persons that talk thoughtlessly? I responded to the question and warned people about the final of this fatal and horrible action, when it appears the dark clouds of Lord's anger and all the doors will be closed to going out the circle of punishment. When an alarm become active it is not wisely you break its light or speaker so that it doesn't work!
As you enjoy the posts that they mention homosexuality as a legal and natural action so tolerate a post that is talking about somethings that people don't know and haven't heard yet.

 

"Don't know and haven't heard yet"?? Really? Sorry, but we have heard those things time and time again and it still makes no difference. Stating your beliefs on a matter is one thing, getting preachy about it and stating your beliefs as some kind of fact is another. I have beliefs too, I have my own faith/spirituality, but I don't argue those beliefs as facts that others must recognize. If in a position to argue a point it is much better to use arguments that can actually be substantiated with scientific proof or the like. Things anyone else can see and look up and so on. We cannot prove beliefs, that is why they are called beliefs. We don't know, we may have what we believe is a good idea about something, but the fact is, we really don't know and are just doing the best we can with what we feel we know and understand. Best guess and all that. So it really makes no sense to argue as fact our spiritual beliefs. You want to do more than just state your belief in a subject? You want to possibly convince someone that your position on something is correct? Then you must do so without your spiritual beliefs, but with verifiable fact.

Honestly, you didn't just respond to the questions. All those questions could have been simply answered with a "yes" or a "no". You expounded your spiritual beliefs as reasoning. You said that you knew that others would respond negatively to your position, but what you fail to realize is that it was more your spiritual beliefs in detail being presented as fact than merely saying "I believe it is wrong/unnatural/sin". This is the problem that several have run into in these types of threads. While many people are presenting verifiable evidence to support a position the arguments against them boil down to faith related answers and scripture. If someone can't hang in the same realm of proof standards, it does get "guffawed".

 

This posting is so far off base given the thread is about homosexuality and not beastiality. Given that Leviticus speaks of both an abomination that still does not mean that you can assert that acceptance of beastiality is next to follow a trend of what is natural. To understand what Leviticus says one must ask what the offence really was. To mix the roles of a woman was a purity rite that offence, defiled the land, Israel. Hence, the sin was idolatry. This stands to reason since all of Israel was always about her idolatry. Then, Israel was a small nation. To spill the seed on the ground was also a crime. Understand that Israel, the country, is also the religion. A small population needed to encourage copulation and this needed to be pure.

These laws were not about homo - sexuality. I see nothing in the Bible that addresses what anybodies sexuality is to include or not include.

 

No, you did not "just respond to those questions".
You were preaching.
You even knew that your preaching was going to elicit a "negative" response.
So I honesty fail to understand what it is you are whining about at this point.

Then you go on about how no one has heard your sermon before?
Do you honestly think you are the very first person to ever preach that sermon?

 

So did Jesus disapprove of homosexuality? Did he discriminate against them in the Gospels?

 

The term "discriminate" did not appear 2,000 years ago. But, Jesus said He was there for the ill and not the healthy; so even it were a sin, Jesus would have preached to them: Just as He did with the tax collectors and prostitutes.

 

A fair point.

 

Uh huh. Don't worry, there's nothing at all to argue about. Just go read Ezekiel 16:49, and then meditate on the Twain Mesty was kind enough to provide.

 

Of course. Don't they all?