- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Need an explanation on homosexuality
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:02 pm to antibarner
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:02 pm to antibarner
quote:
It can't get out altogether.
It absolutely can. Marriage is a state-issued license. It can choose to stop. You might have an issue with invalidating current marriages, but you could certainly stop issuing new ones.
What would happen? Everyone would be treated as individuals, file your own tax returns, etc. Individuals could enter into private contracts to assign certain rights and responsibilities to others - via power of attorney documents. People could still enter into joint accounts.
Trust me, the world would not end.
0
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:02 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:
Let me clear this untruth up, since you are speaking wrongly.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:05 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:
This proves you don't have a clue about the bible.
The bible carries no more weight in a court of law than an issue of playboy. And frankly, I think many would be more interested to see what playboy has in it. The bible is a literary/artistic piece with little other value in a court of law.
So, why do you quote it?
quote:
I love how people that have no clue about what the bible actually means, try's and inform Christian's what the WORLD SEEMS TO THINK THE BIBLE MEANS.
I don't try to do this. I just say straight out that the bible is really irrelevant outside of a literary and perhaps a historical piece. However, many of the things stated in the bible are known to not have happened and so it is not historical in that sense. I mean the literature of the time historically speaking.
quote:
We, as Christians have zero right to say where someone went after his death, because he might have sought God's forgiveness, but if 5 years before he dies he is advocating homosexuality, and stealing, lying, etc. etc. we can JUDGE that he is wrong in his lifestyle according to the word of God.
You do realize your christianity takes a backseat to the constitution, yes?
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:05 pm to Volmanac
quote:
How is it "unnatural"? Does it not occur in nature?
Animals eating their own feces also occurs in nature.
Does that make it normal behavior for humans?
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:06 pm to ballscaster
quote:ballscaster, really ended this thread with his response one post in.
quote:
After all, everything pertaining to this line of politics is simply an opinion. Not a fact.
Nothing in your post has anything to do with politics.
quote:
I do not agree with the way of life.
Homosexuality isn't an opinion. There is nothing with which to agree or disagree.
quote:
I personally, just do not think it is right
Sexuality is not a moral value. It is neither right nor wrong. Any moral value placed on sexuality is inferred by you and you only.
quote:
homophobic
This word appears in every English dictionary. Look it up. It applies to you (first sentence of your OP).
quote:
ignorant
This word also implies to you, or else you wouldn't have any questions. You are ignorant of something and wish not to be ignorant of it. That is good.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:07 pm to Crimson1st
quote:
So at what point in time does a written truth become any less or more valid to live by?
It isn't the time elapsed per say, but rather the lack of outside verification available for texts written so long ago. That combined with the natural impossibility and/or historical inaccuracy of various aspects of the text is the reason many find the Bible a poor source to base your entire life philosophy on.
Now if the Bible described the molecular genetics of human creation, or accurately conveyed events that we now know were occurring in other parts of the world than where the writers were located, or predicted specific events at exact times that we could then check and document, then ok. We would need to sit down and have a serious discussion about the moral implications of such a text.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:12 pm to antibarner
We can also assume that they went to hell, but we should refrain from taking God's role as the final arbitrator of Heaven and Hell publically as we are not God.
But to judge anyone as pertaining to their actions during their life span is a good and correct thing to do. Read the Apostle Paul's letters to the Churches, they are full of admonitions to the peoples.
Reproof, Judgment of actions.
But to judge anyone as pertaining to their actions during their life span is a good and correct thing to do. Read the Apostle Paul's letters to the Churches, they are full of admonitions to the peoples.
Reproof, Judgment of actions.
This post was edited on 12/15/14 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:16 pm to Volmanac
quote:
How is it "unnatural"? Does it not occur in nature?
Monkeys cannibalize other monkeys in nature too. Do you suggest that we follow their example since it is natural?
Perhaps you can provide a word to describe it besides," unnatural" that wouldn't offend your sensibilities?
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:20 pm to Revelator
quote:
Monkeys cannibalize other monkeys in nature too. Do you suggest that we follow their example since it is natural?
We are not following another species example. We are talking about human beings.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:24 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
We are not following another species example. We are talking about human beings.
When someone interjects the excuse that it's ok because it's found in nature, the door is opened to make comparisons. One can't simply use animal nature as an excuse when convenient and then flip flop when it isn't.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:25 pm to Revelator
quote:
Monkeys cannibalize other monkeys in nature too. Do you suggest that we follow their example since it is natural?
Perhaps you can provide a word to describe it besides," unnatural" that wouldn't offend your sensibilities?
The point is that unnatural is being applied incorrectly.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:27 pm to Revelator
quote:
When someone interjects the excuse that it's ok because it's found in nature, the door is opened to make comparisons. One can't simply use animal nature as an excuse when convenient and then flip flop when it isn't.
The OP brought up the unnatural aspect, which was pointed out to be incorrect.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:27 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
We are not following another species example. We are talking about human beings.
Apparently you missed the 2nd post after the OP.
quote:
How is it "unnatural"? Does it not occur in nature?
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:27 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
The point is that unnatural is being applied incorrectly.
And that is brought up to derail the point. Pick a word that is suitable and let's stop trying to divert attention from the facts.
Would you prefer words like;" evil, perverted, twisted, nasty, gross, etc. instead?"
This post was edited on 12/15/14 at 4:30 pm
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:29 pm to Volmanac
quote:
How is it "unnatural"? Does it not occur in nature?
There are all kinds of genetic abnormalities that occur in nature when a species' population is too large. This is one of nature's ways of combatting overpopulation. So it's not what nature intended on humans to be. If homosexuality was what nature intended on being the norm, then you could have two people of the same sex procreate with each other.
So yes, it's natural in the sense that it's nature trying to dwindle down a species. But it's not what humans were intended to do.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:30 pm to Revelator
quote:
And that is brought up to derail the point. Pick a word that is suitable and let's stop trying to divert attention from the facts.
That's not the first time though. Unnatural is a commonly misapplied in these situations. Incorrect application as a fact (this not a fact) diverts attention from the actual facts.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:30 pm to Revelator
quote:
Monkeys cannibalize other monkeys in nature too. Do you suggest that we follow their example since it is natural?
Perhaps you can provide a word to describe it besides," unnatural" that wouldn't offend your sensibilities?
The point is that a lot of people don't know what unnatural means.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:32 pm to Revelator
quote:
One can't simply use animal nature as an excuse when convenient and then flip flop when it isn't.
Again, we're not talking about animal nature, but human nature. A sexual preference for those of the same sex occurs naturally within the human species. Just like other preferences one may have.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:33 pm to Lg
quote:
Apparently you missed the 2nd post after the OP.
No I didn't. There was no mention of animals, just nature. You've never heard of human nature? No Michael Jackson fans on the PB
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:33 pm to Henry Jones Jr
quote:
So it's not what nature intended on humans to be. If homosexuality was what nature intended on being the norm, then you could have two people of the same sex procreate with each other.
Watching football, discussing politics, debating homosexuality; none of these lead to procreation. So how can you make such an absolute judgement on what nature intended? If nature has one intention, then everything else is pointless.
Page 12 of 29
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News