The same ways anyone is meant to be committed to a partner.
In what way is that?
Quote:
Technically, sexuality refers to attraction not just sexual relations.
An attraction to what end?
Quote:
As I said before, I choose to believe in God for all the subjective, intuitive, and mystical reasons that anyone else chooses to do so. It's a belief I constantly question. I also believe in evolution because of all the evidence that has been compiled to support it. But that too is a theory which I constantly question. Teleology and naturalism are not as opposed as you might think on the philosophical level.
If there is a genetic componant to homosexuality, and I, for one, think there is (think Fredie Mercury), I think it is passed on in the same manor that the disorder my daughter has is passed on. The child that inherits the disorder results in an unsuccessful offspring that fails to pass on its genes. This is a case where natural selection selects against homosexual phenotype. Other children may inherit a "recessive" form of the gene that does not express as a phenotype and so is not available for natural selection to operate on. The "recessive" gene is passed on but it is an evolutionary neutral event because it is "hidden" in the genes of successful offspring.
That is a reasonable idea, though the incidence of homosexuality is a bit high for that sort of explanation. At least if that is the cause, its culprit should be relatively easy to identify, like that of sickle-cell disease. Have you found any research supporting your theory?
4 minutes and 34 seconds of gay propaganda masquerading as science. That was your video. I have heard all the claims before.
I think that there is a genetic componant to homosexuality. But that does not change the morality of the situation. A gay has a harder choice to make than a heterosexual because as a heterosexual I can be married and still serve Christ. A gay cannot. A gay must choose between a moral life serving a God and and immoral life serving their sexual desires.
Galatians 5:22-23 (New International Version)
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
That is a reasonable idea, though the incidence of homosexuality is a bit high for that sort of explanation. At least if that is the cause, its culprit should be relatively easy to identify, like that of sickle-cell disease. Have you found any research supporting your theory?
No. It is one of those subjects that is so mired in politics and religion that it can be very hard to find any ligitament scientific research into it.
Galatians 5:22-23 (New International Version)
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
Slogan/motto:
Sing a new song and make a joyful noise.
Reputation:
January 8th, 2009, 11:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egbert
Tony, quote tags work like this: type [ quote ] (text) [ /quote ] (without the spaces). It will show up like this:
Thanks Egbert. I knew that, but I got in a hurry because I had to
take a business phone call. I know it didn't work out well...proving once again...don't rush something if it's important.
Slogan/motto:
Sing a new song and make a joyful noise.
Reputation:
January 8th, 2009, 12:06 PM
Originally Posted by Revelation
"What does AIDs have to do with monogamous homosexual relationships? You can't get an STD if you aren't sleeping around."
Tell that to the many wives of homosexuals who acquired the AIDS virus from their despicable husbands...even though the wives were monogamous.
And it's no wonder you think the way you do about things. With cartoon science (the "video" you promoted) which builds up the Christian "straw man" to easily knock him down it's simply no wonder.
In this world, it's easy to compare ourselves to society as a whole and feel pretty good about our own standing, but your perversion will eventually find you out. I implore you to really consider the actual sexual act you'll be committing once you cease your celibacy. Really think about what is going where. That's about as gross as I care to get, but you should get a clear picture of yourself in that circumstance. Can you see yourself passionately kissing another man? And can you see yourself waking up next to that guy every morning with love in your eyes for one another.
Please...don't go there.
If you're right about your existence, then so be it, and so what to all of us.
If I'm right, you could find yourself thanking the Christians who cared enough to try and talk you out of an eternity apart from life...or lamenting the fact that you didn't listen.
Slogan/motto:
Even if there is merit to it, it's always best to understand why you believe something, rather than blindly following.
Reputation:
January 9th, 2009, 03:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Funderburk
Originally Posted by Revelation
"What does AIDs have to do with monogamous homosexual relationships? You can't get an STD if you aren't sleeping around."
Tell that to the many wives of homosexuals who acquired the AIDS virus from their despicable husbands...even though the wives were monogamous.
And it's no wonder you think the way you do about things. With cartoon science (the "video" you promoted) which builds up the Christian "straw man" to easily knock him down it's simply no wonder.
In this world, it's easy to compare ourselves to society as a whole and feel pretty good about our own standing, but your perversion will eventually find you out. I implore you to really consider the actual sexual act you'll be committing once you cease your celibacy. Really think about what is going where. That's about as gross as I care to get, but you should get a clear picture of yourself in that circumstance. Can you see yourself passionately kissing another man? And can you see yourself waking up next to that guy every morning with love in your eyes for one another.
Please...don't go there.
If you're right about your existence, then so be it, and so what to all of us.
If I'm right, you could find yourself thanking the Christians who cared enough to try and talk you out of an eternity apart from life...or lamenting the fact that you didn't listen.
I'm very aware of the kind of wives you are speaking about who have gay husbands who cheat on them. Here is a video of some and their perceptions...
And I'm not going to pretend the cartoon wasn't biased, because it very clearly was. But the fact that I am here and discussing these matters with theologians who are convinced that I'm going to hell should be more than enough evidence of my willingness to challenge my personal biases. How many GLBT forums have you been to lately?
As far as your argument, I find Christianity can be quite the perversion. It can serve as a form of emotional rape by which a person gets a psychological thrill out of prostelizing their faith regardless of how it affects others. Look at the Westboro Baptist Church and some of the members here. They aren't lamenting and grieving because some of their neighbors will be spending an eternity separated from God; they are enjoying it. They even feel like they are in a special position to judge everyone else for how they live their lives.
In the words of Ghandi....
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
As far as religion, when I was young I was a Jesus freak...But even at a young age I didn't buy a lot of what my church was saying about the Bible. I simply read it and interpreted it differently than how my church told me I was supposed to interpret it.
By what light? I mean, you were a kid with limited life experience, still forming frontal lobes/judgment centers and without the scholarly background to challenge the material independently...a recipe for disaster.
Quote:
By high school I was strongly questioning Christianity, especially when I realized I was gay and I had to listen to my peers going on about how gays were sinful, diseased, etc.
That you knew other judgmentally deficient kids who enjoyed attacking people with differing planks in their eyes is unsurprising. That's really a bit of what you were doing to the church dogma you weren't in a position to properly judge, isn't it?
Quote:
I studied a lot of different belief systems. Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, Satanism, etc. While all of them provided interesting insights, I found it difficult to decipher which of them would be "the one truth path."
It seems that you looked for an alternative that would allow you to find that earlier, fun sense of spirituality without actually making a demand of you that you would be unwilling to meet. As to how diligent you were in your studies...we'll come back to it in a moment.
Quote:
And then in college I studied philosophy. I read Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Kant, etc. and what it taught me was how to use critical thinking.
Always a good thing.
Quote:
That is the ability to look past my own biases and prejudices and to be open to any answer as long as it was supported by reasonable evidence.
Who got to define reasonable?
Quote:
So I went out into the world and I forced people to defend their position and I found that the more you questioned people's beliefs in their religion, the more it was revealed how little they actually know outside of their respected holy scriptures.
Forced? That sounds awfully militant for a relativist...also fairly judgmental. And what people? All? Most? Some?
Quote:
It seems when it comes to morals, everyone I have ever met relies on their feelings and reason to decide what is correct for them to believe.
You should get out more or you're the victim of a bizarre mathematical coincidence.
Quote:
Some people give this very human trait a name like the "Holy Spirit" or "Karma" or whatever, but it's always the same.
If you think the HS and Karma are the same you shouldn't have invested that early study in "Religion For Dummies" as those things are just fraught with error and supposition.
Quote:
Sadly, I found the more you push it, the more self righteous and defensive people become,
You find it sad and/or surprising that when you attack the most personal beliefs people have they become defensive? :squint:
Quote:
largely because of how aware they are of how intangible their beliefs really are.
Really...is that what they said?
Quote:
When I learned psychology I came to understand this was an emotional defense mechanism that people commonly use to avoid anxiety brought upon them when they are forced to contemplate their belief system. Even on this forum I see so many common defense mechanisms being used, like some of the delusional projection I saw in the homosexual thread.
For some that's probably true, for many it probably isn't. For you it's probably part of dealing with the buried guilt of denying what you once embraced and feeling the need to justify the betrayal.
Quote:
In fact, all this was ultimately how I got over all the guilt my church and peers instilled in me for being gay and I was able to develop my own moral propositions from the world around me.
I think this confirms that your search was mostly about self justification and your response is understandable in that light.
Quote:
I think political beliefs are largely situational and dependent on things like your upbringing, peer groups, social class, etc.
Points for ideological consistency in approach then...
Quote:
Sorry for the long intro, but that is me in a nut shell.
By what light? I mean, you were a kid with limited life experience, still forming frontal lobes/judgment centers and without the scholarly background to challenge the material independently...a recipe for disaster.
That you knew other judgmentally deficient kids who enjoyed attacking people with differing planks in their eyes is unsurprising. That's really a bit of what you were doing to the church dogma you weren't in a position to properly judge, isn't it?
It seems that you looked for an alternative that would allow you to find that earlier, fun sense of spirituality without actually making a demand of you that you would be unwilling to meet. As to how diligent you were in your studies...we'll come back to it in a moment.
Always a good thing.
Who got to define reasonable?
Forced? That sounds awfully militant for a relativist...also fairly judgmental. And what people? All? Most? Some?
You should get out more or you're the victim of a bizarre mathematical coincidence.
If you think the HS and Karma are the same you shouldn't have invested that early study in "Religion For Dummies" as those things are just fraught with error and supposition.
You find it sad and/or surprising that when you attack the most personal beliefs people have they become defensive? :squint:
Really...is that what they said?
For some that's probably true, for many it probably isn't. For you it's probably part of dealing with the buried guilt of denying what you once embraced and feeling the need to justify the betrayal.
I think this confirms that your search was mostly about self justification and your response is understandable in that light.
Points for ideological consistency in approach then...
Linear Mode
