know what really causes homosexuality....

[mattskramer]

And Timothy is an example of direction being given to a group of people who are out of control.

Jesus told us to love each other and the rest would follow. That's the only law we need to take to heart.

I don't believe sodomy is an example of showing love for another person. Neither is cheating on your spouse, or stealing your neighbor's things. So you can see how that works.

It depends on if the other person wants sodomy.

Okay. So you are not a literalist. You pick and choose and interpret passages to suit yourself. As I read it, the instructions were intended for everyone.

 

[AllieBaba]

If it's in the Bible, it's of the spirit. Yes, I am a literalist. I believe the laws found in the NT, if followed, make for a strong, safe, kind society.

That doesn't mean I don't understand the context of the books of the Bible, or the history.

 

[AllieBaba]

And clean society. Which can be the argument against sodomy.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Any evidence to back that up, or is that just a bizarre form of brainwashing?

No, I do not think Homosexuals should practice their sex, BUT I am smart enough to know, TRUE homosexuals are probably scientifically genetically predisposed to be JUST that. This poster will not be able to provide any scientific evidence to back the claim.

 

[mattskramer]

If it's in the Bible, it's of the spirit. Yes, I am a literalist. I believe the laws found in the NT, if followed, make for a strong, safe, kind society.

That doesn't mean I don't understand the context of the books of the Bible, or the history.

Bottom line: Do you advocate making each and every suggestion, admonition, and instruction within the New Testament the law of the land? If not, then you can't sue the Bible as a reason to outlaw Homosexual behavior. Try something else.

 

[Larkinn]

Actually, yes. The studies have been made, the point isn't even argued anymore in the scientific community.

Err, what? Actually there is still a lot of research being done and new research and theories have come out in the past few years about how a genetic version of homosexuality could be passed on.

The Human Genome Progect, the Hamer study are just two studies which have shown there isn't such a thing as genetic sexual hardwiring. Read up.

Err the Hamer study actually showed there was a link between homosexuality and genes. The Human Genome Project was merely a mapping of the Human Genome....we know where the genes are, not exactly what each one does.

 

[midcan5]

Homosexuality is a choice, by the way. It has nothing to do with genetics. Right or wrong, people choose to be homosexual at some point in their lives. To then try to blame it on science or genetics is a cop out and actually enrages many homosexuals.

My suggestion noted above somewhere in this long thread is the same, try switch hitting and let us know how you make out. Ask your friends too. Surely if it is a choice you can check it out for a day or so and still remain the macho stud I'm sure you are.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

My suggestion noted above somewhere in this long thread is the same, try switch hitting and let us know how you make out. Ask your friends too. Surely if it is a choice you can check it out for a day or so and still remain the macho stud I'm sure you are.

Your a moron as well. Or are you claiming that if someone is forced or choses once to have sex with a person of the same sex that makes them gay?

 

[actsnoblemartin]

Yes its a new pill called, being gay

side effects include

saying you go girl
being good an interior decision
watching queer eye for the straight guy
and lots of anal sex

talk to your doctor today and see if being gay is right for you

"You want to know what really causes homosexuality?"

"This question, which arises from an assumption that one is homosexual because “something went wrong,” should be just as interesting as the question, “What causes heterosexuality?” Think about that question for a moment, and ask yourself why nobody ever asks it. In asking this question, are you looking to change someone? To heal someone? Yourself perhaps?"

"The two most common answers one hears today is that sexuality is either a choice, or it’s genetic. Have you considered it might be neither? Perhaps sexuality (homo, hetero and anything in-between) is ‘learned’ as subtely as one’s mother tongue, or perhaps it’s a psychological reaction. It could be a result of parental hormones during conception or pregnancy or breastfeeding. It could be a result of womb-temperature, the vitamin balance in the parents, or their age. It could be a complex combination of these factors. The only honest answer to this question at the moment is that nobody knows."

"Which of these ‘causes’ would justify discrimination?"
Which would make one sexuality inferior to another? Many people believe that if homosexuality were proven to be genetic, then those who discriminate against us would have no reason to discriminate. It’s a seductive argument, but I believe it has more to do with people trying to put their own minds at ease, as they struggle with (self-)acceptance."

"Those who believe a genetic cause would make discrimination unjustifiable, clearly imply that discrimination against homosexuals is justifiable in other circumstances. More importantly, this argument relies on a belief that reason can defeat discrimination, implying that discrimination is based on reason; that discrimination is reasonable."

"If skin-colour were a choice, would racism be justified?
Would it then be completely reasonable to say that only if you are a particular colour are you allowed to marry or join organisations or visit a loved-one in hospital? If skin-colour were a choice, would it be reasonable to say that some skin-colours were sinful or evil or immoral, and others not?"

"Skin-colour is genetic, but has this fact ever changed the opinion of even one of those who discriminate against other races?

Hate is not reasonable.

"Hate is not a reasoned argument. Don’t pander to those who hate by trying to prove you ‘couldn’t help it’, or ‘given the choice, you’d be heterosexual’. Beware of the ‘good little boy’ syndrome, where you over-achieve in the hope that people will be willing to ‘overlook’ your supposed imperfection. These things only justify the discrimination.

"The cause of sexuality is really quite irrelevant, except to those who are insecure and want you to conform. There’s no need to look for some cause, as your sexuality is not an imperfection. You’re just fine the way you are, with your own potential, possibilities and set of things you have to offer to the world.

"Be yourself, inasmuch at does not bring physical harm, and know you’re not alone. History is littered with proof of the fact that it is possible for the majority to be wrong.

"And quite frankly, the only ‘reasonable’ answer to unreasonable bigots is, well, none at all."

www.scottowen.org

 

[midcan5]

Your a moron as well.

As well as ? a great guy, wonderful father, great husband, hard worker, come on finish the line.

PS try it you'll like it.

 

[Diuretic]

Your a moron as well. Or are you claiming that if someone is forced or choses once to have sex with a person of the same sex that makes them gay?

In prison culture, so I'm told, the initiator is regarded as still being a straight man whereas the passive partner is regarded as obviously being gay. When the "straight" man leaves prison he is apparently rehabilitated in more ways than one, whereas the passive man who leaves prison has apparently turned the corner.

 

[mattskramer]

In prison culture, so I'm told, the initiator is regarded as still being a straight man whereas the passive partner is regarded as obviously being gay. When the "straight" man leaves prison he is apparently rehabilitated in more ways than one, whereas the passive man who leaves prison has apparently turned the corner.

I think that I disagree with you. Years ago I was physically attracted to a young man. I was passive. It did not get far sexually. We went as far as masturbating each other. I think that I was curious more tan anything else, though he was very good looking. Anyway, our relationship slowly drifted away. Today I’m a happily married heterosexual without any interest in having a homosexual encounter.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

Ive heard its normal for men and women to experiment and it doesnt neccesarily mean your gay.

Im not sure if that report was teen yearsm 20's or both. But i dont think anyone can decide for anyone else, who is gay and who isnt.

I think that I disagree with you. Years ago I was physically attracted to a young man. I was passive. It did not get far sexually. We went as far as masturbating each other. I think that I was curious more tan anything else, though he was very good looking. Anyway, our relationship slowly drifted away. Today I’m a happily married heterosexual without any interest in having a homosexual encounter.

 

[Diuretic]

I think that I disagree with you. Years ago I was physically attracted to a young man. I was passive. It did not get far sexually. We went as far as masturbating each other. I think that I was curious more tan anything else, though he was very good looking. Anyway, our relationship slowly drifted away. Today I’m a happily married heterosexual without any interest in having a homosexual encounter.

I think I was trying to explain what I've been told about prison culture rather than generalising to the whole population. I haven't worked in a prison so I can't speak about the culture of prisons with any authority. I have dealt with criminals though and in dealing with them you do find things out and this was a point made to me by a couple of crims who were explaining what prison is like. Homosexual acts are rampant in prisons but, I suppose this is about ego protection, prisoners (I am told) tend to indulge in a bit of cognitive dissonance. "I am having sex with another man. However I am the aggressor. Therefore I am not gay." I think that's how it goes. The conflict is a man who describes himself as heterosexual (and outside of prison wouldn't think of having sex with another man) but who, out of sexual frustration, has sex with another man can ameliorate his confusion and conflict by taking shelter in the knowledge that he is the active partner. He says, "I can't be gay, I'm not passively receiving another man."

That all sounds a bit overly complex I know. I've probably confused everyone know but I know what I mean!

 

[Chips Rafferty]

I think I was trying to explain what I've been told about prison culture rather than generalising to the whole population. I haven't worked in a prison so I can't speak about the culture of prisons with any authority. I have dealt with criminals though and in dealing with them you do find things out and this was a point made to me by a couple of crims who were explaining what prison is like. Homosexual acts are rampant in prisons but, I suppose this is about ego protection, prisoners (I am told) tend to indulge in a bit of cognitive dissonance. "I am having sex with another man. However I am the aggressor. Therefore I am not gay." I think that's how it goes. The conflict is a man who describes himself as heterosexual (and outside of prison wouldn't think of having sex with another man) but who, out of sexual frustration, has sex with another man can ameliorate his confusion and conflict by taking shelter in the knowledge that he is the active partner. He says, "I can't be gay, I'm not passively receiving another man."


That all sounds a bit overly complex I know. I've probably confused everyone know but I know what I mean!

Reading you five by five.

Little pretty blokes do boob time ten times as bad as bigger more aggressive males.

Their only hope of not getting continually raped is to "cop it sweet" from a really bad bastard who will chase off all the junior bulls.

 

[Doug]

The male sex drive is so powerful that if men are isolated from women they will turn to each other. Or many of them will.

And since the sex drive is intended to allow you to spread your genes, it is also accompanied with strong feelings of jealousy if you think you are being two-timed.

Which leads to fights and murder and general social disintegration.

Which is why societies that have survived have created the institution of marriage, to try to control that sex drive and prevent endless low-level wars over who is sleeping with whom.

And they have erected all kinds of taboos around sex. Society "knows" that you are playing with fire here. It's the wisdom of thousands of years of social practice -- not something dreamed up by a great thinker.

The conservative unhappiness towards the gay movement is fueled not really by some abstract moral theory about what sex is acceptable, still less by this or that individual's personal hangups, but by the impression we get that the gay movement is relentlessly undermining one taboo and institution in this area after another.

They are not content with being ignored, and allowed to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes. This right has been a de facto reality for decades in civilized societies and is now about as firmly established in both practice and law as you could wish.

But the gay movement is not satisfied with this. They appear to have bigger ambitions. So they are pulling one prop after another out from the complex construction we call "society", and just at the same time that other social and economic factors are undermining marriage, disparaging patriotism, and questioning traditonal values.

And we fear the consequences. That's the real "phobia" in our "homophobia".

 

[Diuretic]

But sexual jealousy might also be cultural - I think I remember reading where Eskimo/Innuit (what's the current acceptable phrase?) people would allow visiting men to have sex with their wives. There was a reason for it, a social reason, but I can't remember what it was now. I wonder if we have sexual jealously because we regarded women as chattels, historically speaking I mean.

As for the radical gays. So, what is the "radical gay agenda" I keep reading about?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

But sexual jealousy might also be cultural - I think I remember reading where Eskimo/Innuit (what's the current acceptable phrase?) people would allow visiting men to have sex with their wives. There was a reason for it, a social reason, but I can't remember what it was now. I wonder if we have sexual jealously because we regarded women as chattels, historically speaking I mean.

As for the radical gays. So, what is the "radical gay agenda" I keep reading about?

In your face homosexual displays, demands for special rights and protections, demands to change marriage, demands against religion, demands to prevent the gospel from being read because it may "offend" them. Claims that they are just like blacks( the prejudice thing ) and to be treated the same by law and special rights and protections in hiring, housing , schooling etc etc.

 

[Diuretic]

In your face homosexual displays, demands for special rights and protections, demands to change marriage, demands against religion, demands to prevent the gospel from being read because it may "offend" them. Claims that they are just like blacks( the prejudice thing ) and to be treated the same by law and special rights and protections in hiring, housing , schooling etc etc.

What's an "in your face homosexual display(s)"? They're banging each other on Market Street????

Demands for "special rights and protections"? What "special rights and protections"?

Demands against religion? What are they telling people not to practise their religion? Yes, I'd regard that as unacceptable.

Same for reading of the gospels.

Are they asking for equality or something?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What's an "in your face homosexual display(s)"? They're banging each other on Market Street????

Demands for "special rights and protections"? What "special rights and protections"?

Demands against religion? What are they telling people not to practise their religion? Yes, I'd regard that as unacceptable.

Same for reading of the gospels.

Are they asking for equality or something?

Homosexuals are already protected by our laws. The vocal bunch want special laws that give them more rights then other citizens. They want special treatment on par with the Civil Rights act for Blacks, affirmative action, etc etc. They want to be able to sue people and have the laws written so that the burden doesn't fall on them to prove the case.

They want religion forced to accept them, they want to be able to sue or have arrested any religion that ever says anything against homosexuals. They want special specific laws that use the term homosexual as the cause of the law. In other words, take the hate crime laws, they want a specific law that STATES homosexual in it, even though they are already protected.

They want special protections and preference for hiring and to sue if fired. Even though that is already covered in law.

They want to force everyone to call their unions marriages. They are OPPOSED to Civil Unions.

You would have to see their displays to understand them. They want to force anywhere anytime, every place they chose to allow Gay parades that are lewd to say the least.

They are opposed to laws that punish gays caught having sex in public places, they are against police actions to clean up public haunts where gays have sex and leave the evidence behind, some places it is so bad it is really a health risk. Usually parks and bathrooms.