(September 26, 2011 at 3:22 pm)Stucky Wrote: I believe that the act of homosexual sex is a sin, just the same as sex outside of marriage, stealing, lying or many other things that God decreed as sins, however, none of these sins will keep a person out of Heaven if that person accepts the fact that Jesus died to pay the penalty for their sins. Salvation is given to anyone, anywhere in the world, that accepts Jesus free gift of forgiveness.

Now, I know that some will say "What about the person that never heard of Jesus?" and all I can respond, through faith, is that God said in the Bible that He has put the knowledge of Him and a persopns need for a Saviour in the heart of every living person and if a person acknowledges their sin and their need for a Saviour (which the Jews did before Jesus was born) then they are saved.

Nice.

(October 1, 2011 at 7:04 pm)salty Wrote:

(October 1, 2011 at 5:19 am)Napoleon Wrote: I'm sure it's not bad when a straight couple who simply can't have babies adopt. Why is the feeling different for gays?

I don't think its bad for homosexual couples to adopt. I think its great that children are given homes where people love and care for them. A lot of preparation goes into adoption. I'm saying that some people want children of their own bodies and biologically this cannot be so for same sex couples the child will belong to one or the other. Stating that doesn't mean children won't be loved or valued.

Then what is the issue? How are straight couples who cannot concieve differentiated?

Nature shows us by the homosexual couple's inability to conceive it is unnatural for them to be together, making the combination wrong. Naturue shows us by the heterosexual's couple's ability to conceive that it is natural for them to be together, making the combination right.

It is human emotion that leads us to the desire to see people happy. We want all people that we love to be happy and to be loved and to love. There nothing wrong with people loving people, but if you put the Biblical persepective aside on sexual matters, you can see that nature pronounces the sexual relationship between a man and a woman correct, and the relationship between same genders incorrect.

Really, whether a heterosexual couple can actually make children does not challenge the argument of if they were "meant" to make children. It is a known fact that a man and woman are needed to procreate children, whether they will do it, is up to them.

I don't like how you use the word "wrong"... It has bad connotations in this subject.

(October 3, 2011 at 10:45 am)salty Wrote: Nature shows us by the homosexual couple's inability to conceive it is unnatural for them to be together, making the combination wrong. Naturue shows us by the heterosexual's couple's ability to conceive that it is natural for them to be together, making the combination right.

It is human emotion that leads us to the desire to see people happy. We want all people that we love to be happy and to be loved and to love. There nothing wrong with people loving people, but if you put the Biblical persepective aside on sexual matters, you can see that nature pronounces the sexual relationship between a man and a woman correct, and the relationship between same genders incorrect.

Really, whether a heterosexual couple can actually make children does not challenge the argument of if they were "meant" to make children. It is a known fact that a man and woman are needed to procreate children, whether they will do it, is up to them.

Fuck off. Nature in no fucking way suggests homosexuality is 'wrong'. There are literally hundreds if not thousands of examples of animals in nature acting in a homosexual way. Do entire species of animals die off because they can't reproduce because a few of them are queer? Please, get fucking real.

The whole "gays can't have kids" argument is just total bollocks. We aren't discussing how to make babies, we are discussing the love between two people. Letting gay people be gay isn't suddenly going to stop the human race from reproducing is it?

"Really, whether a heterosexual couple can actually make children does not challenge the argument of if they were "meant" to make children. It is a known fact that a man and woman are needed to procreate children, whether they will do it, is up to them."

Why is this relevant?

Power to Napoleon!

I've tried, Nap. I've tried three times to illustrate this. But no, the ding-dong isn't supposed to go up the shitpipe, you can't make babies there, ergo homosexuality is FUCKING IMMORAL.

Salty, how do you take yourself seriously when saying stuff like this? You are supposed to be explaining why something is immoral. What is the immoral action being performed in a homosexual relationship? If it's the fact that they're having sex for pleasure and not procreation, then they don't have the market cornered. If it's that they can't procreate full stop, then by this logic we should ostracise any members of society who cannot conceive naturally, because they're useless to what is apparently the only point of having a relationship, to be baby factories.

Wake up. Still waiting to hear what the immoral action is. Are you ever going to tell us what it is?

(October 2, 2011 at 6:59 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(October 1, 2011 at 7:04 pm)salty Wrote: Do you like for every person to agree with you? Is this the first time someone has shown an opposing view? I did not contradict myself, you just refused to accept my reasoning. I explain to you that the simple fact that bodies of the same gender cannot come together, therefore by nature this combination is wrong, but your emotions are leading you, so you cannot understand me. There are no absolutes when it comes to relationships. There is no contradiction when someone leaves room for error, for the circumstance where things work out and when they don't. Be done with me if you want, but know that I am entitled to share my opinion.

I'm not opposed to disagreement but you need to have valid reasons for it.

And in my view you don't. "Oh it's wrong because their bits don't fit together and it's not natural"

Well, so fucking what?!?!?

By that reasoning we should give up flying in aeroplanes because our bodies aren't "designed" for flight.

I believe your husband is causasian?

How would you feel if someone told you that mixed marriages are sinful because black and white shouldn't be interbreeding?

And there are PLENTY of good little christians who think exactly that.

But here there be atheists who are of the opinion that when two people love each other sufficently that they are prepared to commit to each other for the rest of their lives, their gender, color or religion don't matter a fuck.

It is not wrong.

And if you can't see that then you are just as prejudiced, bigoted and narrowminded as any member of the KKK.

Zen,
I'm sorry to get you worked up like this. Every adult can choose their own path, but I stand by the fact that it is unnatural. Will any of these thoughts stop a gril in my wedding from being gay? Will any of these thoughts, stop my coworker, my cousin, my former boss, my other friends from being gay? No, everyone chooses for themselves, it just hurts when someone disagrees, especially when a good amount of people agree on the topic.

Let's clear up the opinion you expressed:
1. I am Black, so I won't be allowed to join the KKK. Please refrain from using your anger to answer for you, it's really offensive for you to say that I'm involved in a society that still works to undermine Black advancement and to be cruel to Blacks without knowing people individually. I never claimed to hate homosexuals, actually I would think it would be difficult to do so as the ones that I know are funny, smart and helpful, but that doesn't change that their behavior is unnatural and they know my opinion, yet we're still friends.

2. My husband is white, you are correct, and there are still people that feel that interracial couples are wrong because they don't want white "blood" to be mixed with black "blood", but science tells us that we can give blood to each other and save lives, so this notion of imbreeding or black people having different blood is a misconception (except for sickle-cell anemia, that's a condition that is more prevalent in Blacks than anyone else).

3. Biblically, interracial marriage was never an issue, even though Whites would use the Bible as a way to claim that each racial group should stay with its own. It was interreligious marriage that God does not like. He doesn't want his people to be dragged away from him by a spouse that worships idols. Even in the New Testament the Lord declares that one should not marry someone who is not a believer, but if they are already married and one person chooses to believe and another does not, the Lord says to not divorce (unless the unbeliever does not want to be married to a believer, then the believer is released from the relationship, but the believer should not leave the relationship otherwise).

Remember, back then people were against interracial relationships because they felt that Blacks were less than human, stupid, worthless, etc. Things they had done to us by not allowing us to read, not paying us fair wages, not giving us any rights. (Which reminds me, there are Christians, myself among them, that believe homosexuals shouldn't be discriminated against in jobs, clubs, wages etc) But science tells us that humans are humans correct? That ethnicity does not stop someone from being human, like the Whites would say. When they made arguments against interracial relationships they weren't angry about love, they were afraid of these multi-ethnic children, about blacks becoming educated and equal, about Blacks achieving things that Whites hadn't done, they were afraid to lose their servants, to lose the safe culture they knew.

If someone told me that my husband and I couldn't be together I would show that Biblically I am approved to be married to my husband. Also, I would show that nature declares any woman and any man can conceive children together. If they persisted, I would leave them to their opinion.

Do you not realise you are just the same as the people who would condemn your marriage?

You deem it wrong, just as they do, when you know that it can't be helped. You can't help being gay... You can't help fall in love with.

Right, you stand by your opinion that this act is unnatural. Napolean has explained to you it is not (and why it is not), and it has been explained to you many times that your opinions may not be an accurate representation of reality.

The bible can be levaraged to promote any agenda the deluded cares to put forward. It's a large text, a veritable buffet of potential propaganda pieces. Nothing could be more deeply ingrained in the text than the concept that certain peoples are greater than others, superior by cosmic decree. A stronger show of support for racism and bigotry could not be imagined. In addition to the usual xenophobia that we carry with us as human beings, the minority you belong to was once argued to be inferior due to their barbaric pagan roots. Strange, when you adopted the faith you were still inferior. Malleability of religious justification.

I find it amusing that your defense of your own marriage clearly shows that you are willing to defer to science as an absolute authority on the issue of interracial relationships and yet you refuse to to extend that authority to any portion of your beliefs that would come into direct conflict with the same. This is the very definition of cognitive dissonance. You cherry pick your science almost as badly as you cherry pick your fairy tale.

On what grounds can you invalidate the bigots beliefs? You have a different interpretation of the text? Please, there are thousands of interpretations of the same text (and we're only one fairy tale in, there are many, many more). If we are to give your own re-telling of the narrative any weight we must afford the Klansman the same. Hardly a position I find myself in. The text you refer to as "gospel" is not an authority, on anything whatsoever. Anyone who draws inferences from this text is as bankrupt as anyone else. You, the "esteemed" members of the KKK, everyone.