Harm in Homosexuality?

This is pretty much a re-poasting (is that a word?) of an argument I made in a seprate debate but I thought it might be "threadworthy" (that should be a word).I would like someone to explain why God forbids Homosexuality. Christians argue that God does forbid it, but I want to know why. I will not be satified unless their explanation can show legitimate harm.This harm can not be arbitrary punishment from God i.e. "It is a sin becase God says it is" I want to know WHY God made homosexuality a sin. I will also not be satisfied by any answer that says that homosexuality is a choice because whether something is a choice or not is not an explanation of why it is wrong.I will also refuse to accept an explination that says that accepting homosexual behavior encorages more homosexual behavior. Because again this does not explain WHY IT IS HARMFULL. Let me also head off the "we will become extict argument" with 2 words "artifical insemination."This topic comes up a lot on this forum and I think it is related to the larger debate because creationists often make appeals to homosexuality being "unnatural" and Evo's make claims of it being "natural" becase we have many examples of it in the animal kingdom. I think it is important to realize that the "Naturalness" of something has no bearing on it's morality. Perhaps you disagree?

We already have an ongoing thread where this has come up. I think that is the best place right now instead of diluting the conversation with multiple threads.I cannot recommend promoting this one. One of the other moderators may feel differently and you may certainly ask for their opinions.

---

How pierceful grows the hazy yon! How myrtle petaled thou! For spring hath sprung the cyclotron How high browse thou, brown cow? -- Churchy LaFemme, 1950

I have read the thread on "the Bible and homosexuality." It's just a huge argumnet about passeges in Corinthians and Romans and Leviticus etc.I don't want to discuss that. I want to discuss MORALITY.I'm willing to conceed, for the sake of argumnet, that God may have said to was immoral to be gay. But I want to know WHY. What about Homaosexuality is immoral? I don't want another 15 pages of bible quotes and interpretation but a nice even discussion about what may or may not be "wrong" with homosexuality.Let's leave open the question of whether God said it's wrong or not, and instead start talking about what makes actions or thoughts right or wrong to begin with.

Perhaps this is not the right forum to discuss homosexuality at all.But, if we ARE going to discuss it, could we have a conversation that talks about slightly more tangible aspects of the issue? I don't mean to disrespect the Bible but I think there are other issues that are worth discussing in this topic.Things like genetics, sociobiology, and the source of morality, could all play a part in this thread and these topics have been discussed on other threads to a large extent.Tell me if I'm wrong to bring this up here, but I care about this issue and I don't want to adress it in a purely biblical context.This message has been edited by The Dread Dormammu, 11-13-2004 06:36 PM

In consulting http://www.lakenet.com/~mnmoose/alltopic10-24-04.XLS, filtering the "Key Words" for "Contains" "homosexuality", I discover that we've had 20 homosexuality related topics started in 2004. And the "key word" entries may not even be complete.I encourage you to look through those (hope you have Excel, and know how to use it). I really don't have enthusiasm towards even more homosexuality topics right now.I may be wrong - Feel free to respond to this message.AdminnemooseusAdded by edit - For whatever it's worth, there's now a topic in the "Private Admin Forum", discussing this matter.This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-13-2004 07:07 PM

I agree that the topic is rather peripheral (at best) to the issues between creationism and evolution. However, we've never let that stop us.I also agree the the general topic of homosexuality has been over done.However, Dor has managed to find a specific subtopic that hasn't been done to death and will make a well focussed topic. I'd say approve it.

OK - But in the case of this topic, I'm going to preserve the above messages in the released version (not going to spin an individual message off as the new topic).See messages 1, 3, and 4 as the starting points for the debate.Adminnemooseus

---

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:

​

Change in Moderation? (General discussion of moderation procedures)
or
Thread Reopen Requests
or
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
or
Introducing the new "Boot Camp" forum

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

You want to be careful of what you say each side is commiting to. Being "natural" and "unnatural" has nothing to do with human morality. The only reason we point out examples of instances of homosexuality in nature is to show the other side that there is nothing "unnatural" about it. However, it is not the sole argument that we use when we are dealing with the morality of it.Think about it, are we going to start using animal behaviors as examples for our superior sense of morality? I don't think so.

---

Hate world.Revenge soon!

i think that's what he said.i still haven't figured out why homosexuality was outlawed so much. early on it was prolly a population thing and now it's just become taboo. *shrugs*but then i don't understand the whole orientation/definition thing anyways. just love who you want and get over it. it doesn't change who you are. all these crazy people who up and decide they're gay and then tchange their whole personality and outlook... it's silly.

Their is evidence that the average homosexual lifestyle is rather harmful. One of the main reasons is the huge amount of partners that most homosexuals have which results in the spread of AIDS among many homosexuals. From this website by the US Department of Health, it can be seem that about 60% of men are infected with AIDS through homosexual sex, while only 15% of men are infected through heterosexual sex. Thus it is more likely for you to contract aids if you are gay then if you are not.

---

If you say there no absolutes, I ask you, are you absolutely sure?

That's bullshit, Nazort! AIDS is far from the only STD, and most of its victims are straight, not gay.And could you please explain what you mean by your simple-minded reference to the "homosexual lifestyle"?

---

Dog is my copilot.

I don't think we can say that "most" homosexuals have a "huge amount of partners" unless you have some evidence to that effect.In any case, since you have identified the problem as promiscuity, you have not shown that "homosexuality" is harmful; you've shown that promiscuity is harmful.Homosexuals and heterosexuals alike have the ability to choose unsafe sex or many partners - these things increase the likelihood STD transmission, not sexual orientation.Also from the US Dept of Health site you cited: Is being "black" a harmful lifestyle, too?Also, if you consider the entire world, the leading cause of the spread of HIV is heterosexual sex.Thus the average heterosexual lifestyle is harmful, according to your logical.

it's been suggested that the law that bacteria and viruses that improperly cooked pig can contain.so i offer a similar possible explanation for the homosexuality commandment. it could have something to do with tearing rectal tissue and e. coli infections. this would explain why only the actual intercourse is forbidden, and not oral sex, and why it only applies to men and not women.that's my best guess, anyways.This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 11-14-2004 01:35 AM

I just gave you statistics showing that most AIDS victims in the US are homosexuals. Do you have statistics backing up your claims that most victims are in fact heterosexuals? Also, what does other STDs have to do with the fact that most AIDS victims are homosexuals? The promiscuity is what I was referring to.

---

If you say there no absolutes, I ask you, are you absolutely sure?