The bible and homosexuality

To PecosGeorge:May I ask a question? In your opinion:Is homosexuality (the attraction towards individuals of the same sex as you):
a) A conscious choice made by the individual.
or
b) Determined by genes?Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To PecosGeorge: This claim is contestable, and has been conteste by many in this thread alone. Kindly support your claim before you make a statement so bold. Interesting. So Homosexuality is not a willful choice (according to you) afterall. So they are (according to you) naturally (genetically) "un-reproductive" and "unnatural"?How bizarre?! that statement even sounds a little (godforbid!) contradictory?!Shed a little light this way please, if you're kind.Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

Dear PecosGeorge: Actually, I am bible-ignorant. I know not what the bible says. However, I am intrigued by your point of view, solely because it appears to be contradictory. Whether your point of view arose from the bible or whatever doesn't concern/amuse me in the least.I never asked you to defend scripture. As a matter of fact, my posts so far haven't even included the word "God" or "bible". I merely asked you to defend your own point of view. You CAN do that much, can't you?Patiently awaiting your reply.(By the way, I think someone by the name of "jar" is awaiting your reply also)

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To PecosGeorge:Your point of view:In reply to my question pertaining whether you regard homosexuality (the attraction, not the act) is a conscious choice made by the individual or determined by genes, you reply was: I deduced from the above that it is your opinion that:1) Homosexuality (the attraction, not the act) is unacceptable to God.and,2) You think that someone, somewhere (sorry, you didn't provide sources for these) is trying to find a genetic disposition to homosexuality.This is your point of view, as paraphrased from post 151, yes?Since my question specifically asked for YOUR opinion, I can either deduce that you:
a) Believe that homosexuality is determined by genetic disposition.
or
b) You haven't answered my question.Now I know that you wouldn't be so rude as to answer my question with a paragraph of words that do NOT answer my question, so I chose (a) above and assumed that you believed homosexuality is determined by genetics.Now, if it is your opinion that:
1)Homosexuality (the attraction) is a sin.
and,
2)Homosexuality is determined by genes (so the individual involved has no choice in the matter).then it follows that God has made an individual who is unacceptable to God! Surely that is impossible?! Thus my conclusion that you have contradicted yourself. Please explain/elaborate on any points above.Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To Hangdawg13:I am confused -You mentioned that:
1) You are heterosexual
2) You are exposed to physically desirable women on a daily basis
3) You understand that the desire/urge to pursue sex is not sinful
4) But "wishing and fantasizing" is because it is lust.So far, this boils down to "heterosexual lust is bad".Now I won't play the dummy and ask you why homosexual lust is bad (since I assume you meant that ALL lust is bad), but I would like to point out that you seem to have dismissed the fact that homosexuality is not all about lust.(As pointed out by CrashFrog) Just as heterosexuality is "ok" if the couple is motivated by love (hence love and not lust = thumbs-up), so homosexuality should also be "ok" if the couple is motivated by love.Are you challenging the notion that homosexuals may have loving relationships just like heterosexuals?Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To Hangdawg13:Ok. So for heterosexuals, we have "marriage between one man and one woman" so that they can display their love for each other (and have sex without the lust factor), which is all very convenient.For homosexuals, we are promoting "marriage between two partners of the same sex" so that they too can display their love for each other (again, have sex without the lust factor).Which part of the above do you have a problem with?Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To PecosGeorge: Thanks, I will now rephrase the situation:Ok. So for heterosexuals, we have "marriage between one man and one woman" so that they can display their love for each other.For homosexuals, we are promoting "marriage between two partners of the same sex" so that they too can display their love for each otherWhich part of the above do you have a problem with now?Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To PecosGeorge: Actually, the subject is homosexuality AND lust, not just lust.Yes, you are talking about lust and not homosexuality, but keep in mind that you are interrupting a discussion on both homosexuality AND lust between Hangdawg13 and myself (see post 193).Are you asking me to change the topic of discussion I was having with someone else just because your post deals with lust only? Why, that's rather arrogant of you.Also, pray tell me, if you are discussing lust but NOT homosexuality, are you sure you're posting on the right thread? Me? A problem with lust? Surely not!However, what your perception of a "proper setting" for lust may be very different to what the rest of the world thinks. Keep that in mind.*********************************************************************And to add further to the insult, you have ignored post 177. Pay special attention to this: I hate it when people ignore posts.Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To Hangdawg13: I don't know if you realise this, but this is one hell of an important distinction to make, and I am very happy you hold this view. Ouch. You don't want to go there. Consider: why don't we make heterosexuals under go epistemological rehabilitation to become homosexuals? Considering that I was warned by admin for being emotional and impolite on another thread a couple of weeks ago, I am in no position to comment on this. But thanks anyway.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To PecosGeorge:I feel neglected and ignored. Are these Christian values one display towards acquaintances?Patiently awaiting your reply to post 210.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To PecosGeorge:To is and you should be Do you feel ?To keep this post on topic, I will copy and paste what I wanted you to address: Patiently but enthusiastically awaiting your intelligent reply to post 210.This message has been edited by Sleeping Dragon, 06-16-2004 12:14 AM

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

To PecosGeorge: Spoken like a true fundamentalist, I applaud you!In that case I will simply state that your views, whether derived from the bible or otherwise, are prejudice and discriminatory, and therefore immoral in the eyes of the society. This is the reason why so many people in this forum (and in the world, in fact) oppose your perspective.Yours sincerely.*********************************************************************By the way, you should probably change: to *********************************************************************

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"