Homosexuality is a sin; it's unnatural.

[Scazarith]

No sir I am not the discussion police and I am sorry if I have offended you. I'm very tired of the bickering and baited questions.  

[marzipancakes]

Not looking for an argument, just stating my thoughts. If it's an argument that ensues, that's not really my fault; it's how others choose to reply.

CR: "nor men who practice homosexuality"
So women are okay to do it?  

[Silver_Rose_of_Life]

No.
Romans 1: 26-27 (KJV)
26) For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27) And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.  

[Kazydi]

sheheartsthings

Not looking for an argument, just stating my thoughts. If it's an argument that ensues, that's not really my fault; it's how others choose to reply.

CR: "nor men who practice homosexuality"
So women are okay to do it?

How are you not looking for an argument when you come to a forum of this nature and start a thread like this? Should I go to a homosexual forum and start threads about how I don't agree with that, and then claim I wasn't looking for trouble?

I assume you're smarter than that.  

[Xahmen]

Kazydi

sheheartsthings

Not looking for an argument, just stating my thoughts. If it's an argument that ensues, that's not really my fault; it's how others choose to reply.

CR: "nor men who practice homosexuality"
So women are okay to do it?

How are you not looking for an argument when you come to a forum of this nature and start a thread like this? Should I go to a homosexual forum and start threads about how I don't agree with that, and then claim I wasn't looking for trouble?

I assume you're smarter than that.

Why would you "assume" anything?

If she had come in here swinging and calling us a bunch of bigots that would be one thing, but her initial post was civil.  

[Kazydi]

Zahwomen

Kazydi

sheheartsthings

Not looking for an argument, just stating my thoughts. If it's an argument that ensues, that's not really my fault; it's how others choose to reply.

CR: "nor men who practice homosexuality"
So women are okay to do it?

How are you not looking for an argument when you come to a forum of this nature and start a thread like this? Should I go to a homosexual forum and start threads about how I don't agree with that, and then claim I wasn't looking for trouble?

I assume you're smarter than that.

Why would you "assume" anything?

If she had come in here swinging and calling us a bunch of bigots that would be one thing, but her initial post was civil.

It wasn't civil, it was sarcastic and instigative.  

[Xahmen]

The internet has no inflection, just because you perceive words as hostile when you read them aloud doesn't mean that they always are.
I wasn't offended by her post.  

[Kazydi]

Zahwomen

The internet has no inflection, just because you perceive words as hostile when you read them aloud doesn't mean that they always are.
I wasn't offended by her post.

Well, of course you weren't. You'd have said the same thing yourself. If she wanted to have a mature, civil discussion, she should of presented it that way. But no, she had to open with comeback, when no one even asked a question. That seems instigative to me.  

[marzipancakes]

Kazydi

Zahwomen

The internet has no inflection, just because you perceive words as hostile when you read them aloud doesn't mean that they always are.
I wasn't offended by her post.

Well, of course you weren't. You'd have said the same thing yourself. If she wanted to have a mature, civil discussion, she should of presented it that way. But no, she had to open with comeback, when no one even asked a question. That seems instigative to me.

I suppose I could have put it differently, but I was just trying to make a point that would hopefully spark some interest. That's just the best way I could think to put it; give examples so everyone would know what I was talking about.
I'm sorry if you took it the wrong way and if it offended you. That wasn't my intention.
If you're still offended, I'm kindly asking you to please refrain from posting here in this topic. I'd like to know what other people have to say about my post, and not have argument interfering. If you have anything other conflict you'd like to discuss with me, please do so via private messaging.
Again, my apologies.  

[Kazydi]

Apology accepted. And now that you've explained, I can understand you better.  

[[ k e e l y ]]

Kazydi

How are you not looking for an argument when you come to a forum of this nature and start a thread like this? Should I go to a homosexual forum and start threads about how I don't agree with that, and then claim I wasn't looking for trouble?

I assume you're smarter than that.

I go to a Catholic high school and MANY students and faculty/staff support homosexuals (and even a few support gay marriage). No one in a homosexual forum is going to appreciate you criticizing their way of life.

Secondly, homosexuality isn't unnatural. That's just it. There is such thing as homosexuality among animals (one example from National Geographic: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html). This is just uncommon because our evolutionary instincts are survive and reproduce in order to keep the species from becoming extinct. HOWEVER, I believe the best explanation for animals (excluding humans) to participate in homosexual acts is genetic defect (I don't mean this term in a derogatory way, I use it because it goes against the natural instinct of survival). Now I do believe that some humans choose to sexually love someone of the same sex, but I also believe some don't. And I don't believe that either is wrong, just, again, against our survival instincts.

Regardless of all the scientific reasons, I choose love over hate. Who am I to tell someone they are going to hell because of their sexuality? Doesn't the Bible teach us that that is solely God's responsibility? And if you are going to argue with me by saying "Who am I to tell someone they are going to hell for murder?" that is an act of hate, not love. And I wouldn't tell them they are going to hell, I would tell them they are going to jail.  

[Kazydi]

[ k e e l y ]

Kazydi

How are you not looking for an argument when you come to a forum of this nature and start a thread like this? Should I go to a homosexual forum and start threads about how I don't agree with that, and then claim I wasn't looking for trouble?

I assume you're smarter than that.

I go to a Catholic high school and MANY students and faculty/staff support homosexuals (and even a few support gay marriage). No one in a homosexual forum is going to appreciate you criticizing their way of life.

Secondly, homosexuality isn't unnatural. That's just it. There is such thing as homosexuality among animals (one example from National Geographic: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html). This is just uncommon because our evolutionary instincts are survive and reproduce in order to keep the species from becoming extinct. HOWEVER, I believe the best explanation for animals (excluding humans) to participate in homosexual acts is genetic defect (I don't mean this term in a derogatory way, I use it because it goes against the natural instinct of survival). Now I do believe that some humans choose to sexually love someone of the same sex, but I also believe some don't. And I don't believe that either is wrong, just, again, against our survival instincts.

Regardless of all the scientific reasons, I choose love over hate. Who am I to tell someone they are going to hell because of their sexuality? Doesn't the Bible teach us that that is solely God's responsibility? And if you are going to argue with me by saying "Who am I to tell someone they are going to hell for murder?" that is an act of hate, not love. And I wouldn't tell them they are going to hell, I would tell them they are going to jail.

Wait, so because the animals do it, that makes it ok? Monkeys fling poo. Shall I defecate into my hand and throw it at your face because I don't like you? Lions sit around on their a** all day, while all the lioness' do the work. And then the lion's get to eat first. Shall we start running society that way? Or maybe I could act like a dog, or most any animal in the animal kingdom for that matter, and touch you and have sex with you or whoever I wanted whether they consented or not? I would think not.

As for choosing love over hate, not all kinds of love are right. Just because "love" is involved doesn't exactly make everything a-ok. Jim and Sue love each other very much. They have a close bond, and they would do anything for each other. They're a heterosexual couple, but they still can't get married. Why? Because they're first cousins. But they love each other, right? Aren't they two consenting adults?

Or what about Mark and Ryan. Mark loves Ryan to death, and Ryan the same. They want to be together so badly, but society just doesn't understand. So what if Mark is 26, and Ryan's 13. I mean, after all, they love each other, right? And who's to tell Ryan that he can't "love" because he's only 13?

We live in a world today where people are afraid to lose. People are afraid to tell someone else that they're wrong. People are afraid to stand up for what they believe in. People are afraid to hurt someone else's feelings. Nobody wants to right their wrongs, they want to make their wrongs right. That way, they can do whatever they want, guilt-free because it's now become the societal norm of course.

If someone does something wrong, they have to face the consequences. Homosexuality is wrong, in my opinion. It seeks to serve nothing, but a personal lust, but it disguises itself under the pretext of "love."  

[[ k e e l y ]]

Kazydi

[ k e e l y ]

Kazydi

How are you not looking for an argument when you come to a forum of this nature and start a thread like this? Should I go to a homosexual forum and start threads about how I don't agree with that, and then claim I wasn't looking for trouble?

I assume you're smarter than that.

I go to a Catholic high school and MANY students and faculty/staff support homosexuals (and even a few support gay marriage). No one in a homosexual forum is going to appreciate you criticizing their way of life.

Secondly, homosexuality isn't unnatural. That's just it. There is such thing as homosexuality among animals (one example from National Geographic: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html). This is just uncommon because our evolutionary instincts are survive and reproduce in order to keep the species from becoming extinct. HOWEVER, I believe the best explanation for animals (excluding humans) to participate in homosexual acts is genetic defect (I don't mean this term in a derogatory way, I use it because it goes against the natural instinct of survival). Now I do believe that some humans choose to sexually love someone of the same sex, but I also believe some don't. And I don't believe that either is wrong, just, again, against our survival instincts.

Regardless of all the scientific reasons, I choose love over hate. Who am I to tell someone they are going to hell because of their sexuality? Doesn't the Bible teach us that that is solely God's responsibility? And if you are going to argue with me by saying "Who am I to tell someone they are going to hell for murder?" that is an act of hate, not love. And I wouldn't tell them they are going to hell, I would tell them they are going to jail.

Wait, so because the animals do it, that makes it ok? Monkeys fling poo. Shall I defecate into my hand and throw it at your face because I don't like you? Lions sit around on their a** all day, while all the lioness' do the work. And then the lion's get to eat first. Shall we start running society that way? Or maybe I could act like a dog, or most any animal in the animal kingdom for that matter, and touch you and have sex with you or whoever I wanted whether they consented or not? I would think not.

As for choosing love over hate, not all kinds of love are right. Just because "love" is involved doesn't exactly make everything a-ok. Jim and Sue love each other very much. They have a close bond, and they would do anything for each other. They're a heterosexual couple, but they still can't get married. Why? Because they're first cousins. But they love each other, right? Aren't they two consenting adults?

Or what about Mark and Ryan. Mark loves Ryan to death, and Ryan the same. They want to be together so badly, but society just doesn't understand. So what if Mark is 26, and Ryan's 13. I mean, after all, they love each other, right? And who's to tell Ryan that he can't "love" because he's only 13?

We live in a world today where people are afraid to lose. People are afraid to tell someone else that they're wrong. People are afraid to stand up for what they believe in. People are afraid to hurt someone else's feelings. Nobody wants to right their wrongs, they want to make their wrongs right. That way, they can do whatever they want, guilt-free because it's now become the societal norm of course.

If someone does something wrong, they have to face the consequences. Homosexuality is wrong, in my opinion. It seeks to serve nothing, but a personal lust, but it disguises itself under the pretext of "love."

...You have to be kidding me. You completely missed my point and I have a feeling explaining even further won't get you to understand where I'm coming from because you're so blinded by your own opinion. The point of talking about animals is to explain that it isn't unheard of. It isn't unnatural. Is it possible for you to discuss the issue of homosexuality like an adult? Here you were complaining about how sheheartsthings was trying to start a debate and you're using exaggerated metaphors that are not the same.

Children are easily manipulated into believing they are in love and adults are very good at manipulating children. However, if they truly do love each other, than it shouldn't be a problem to wait until the child is of age. If the adult truly loves the him/her, than s/he will respect the child's innocence. If the only reason the adult wanted to be with the child is because s/he had a fetish for young boys and girls then that isn't love at all.

I'm not really sure how I feel about the relatives issue. I just know that it can lead to some very strange genetic problems. I haven't made up my mind about this one, though, honestly. And I don't think that's a problem. I keep an open mind.  

[Kazydi]

[ k e e l y ]

Kazydi

[ k e e l y ]

Kazydi

How are you not looking for an argument when you come to a forum of this nature and start a thread like this? Should I go to a homosexual forum and start threads about how I don't agree with that, and then claim I wasn't looking for trouble?

I assume you're smarter than that.

I go to a Catholic high school and MANY students and faculty/staff support homosexuals (and even a few support gay marriage). No one in a homosexual forum is going to appreciate you criticizing their way of life.

Secondly, homosexuality isn't unnatural. That's just it. There is such thing as homosexuality among animals (one example from National Geographic: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html). This is just uncommon because our evolutionary instincts are survive and reproduce in order to keep the species from becoming extinct. HOWEVER, I believe the best explanation for animals (excluding humans) to participate in homosexual acts is genetic defect (I don't mean this term in a derogatory way, I use it because it goes against the natural instinct of survival). Now I do believe that some humans choose to sexually love someone of the same sex, but I also believe some don't. And I don't believe that either is wrong, just, again, against our survival instincts.

Regardless of all the scientific reasons, I choose love over hate. Who am I to tell someone they are going to hell because of their sexuality? Doesn't the Bible teach us that that is solely God's responsibility? And if you are going to argue with me by saying "Who am I to tell someone they are going to hell for murder?" that is an act of hate, not love. And I wouldn't tell them they are going to hell, I would tell them they are going to jail.

Wait, so because the animals do it, that makes it ok? Monkeys fling poo. Shall I defecate into my hand and throw it at your face because I don't like you? Lions sit around on their a** all day, while all the lioness' do the work. And then the lion's get to eat first. Shall we start running society that way? Or maybe I could act like a dog, or most any animal in the animal kingdom for that matter, and touch you and have sex with you or whoever I wanted whether they consented or not? I would think not.

As for choosing love over hate, not all kinds of love are right. Just because "love" is involved doesn't exactly make everything a-ok. Jim and Sue love each other very much. They have a close bond, and they would do anything for each other. They're a heterosexual couple, but they still can't get married. Why? Because they're first cousins. But they love each other, right? Aren't they two consenting adults?

Or what about Mark and Ryan. Mark loves Ryan to death, and Ryan the same. They want to be together so badly, but society just doesn't understand. So what if Mark is 26, and Ryan's 13. I mean, after all, they love each other, right? And who's to tell Ryan that he can't "love" because he's only 13?

We live in a world today where people are afraid to lose. People are afraid to tell someone else that they're wrong. People are afraid to stand up for what they believe in. People are afraid to hurt someone else's feelings. Nobody wants to right their wrongs, they want to make their wrongs right. That way, they can do whatever they want, guilt-free because it's now become the societal norm of course.

If someone does something wrong, they have to face the consequences. Homosexuality is wrong, in my opinion. It seeks to serve nothing, but a personal lust, but it disguises itself under the pretext of "love."

[ k e e l y ]

...You have to be kidding me. You completely missed my point and I have a feeling explaining even further won't get you to understand where I'm coming from because you're so blinded by your own opinion.

Well, of course not. Are we both not completely set in our ways of thinking?

[ k e e l y ]

The point of talking about animals is to explain that it isn't unheard of. It isn't unnatural.

There are plenty of things that are unnatural, but still wrong.

[ k e e l y ]

Is it possible for you to discuss the issue of homosexuality like an adult? Here you were complaining about how sheheartsthings was trying to start a debate and you're using exaggerated metaphors that are not the same.

Personal insults now? I choose not to respond to that. As for my problem with sheheartsthings earlier (which was resolved; thanks for opening up the can again) I believed that she was trying to start a fight rather than a debate. Those are two different things.

[ k e e l y ]

Children are easily manipulated into believing they are in love and adults are very good at manipulating children. However, if they truly do love each other, than it shouldn't be a problem to wait until the child is of age. If the adult truly loves the him/her, than s/he will respect the child's innocence. If the only reason the adult wanted to be with the child is because s/he had a fetish for young boys and girls then that isn't love at all.

Eh, I could argue against this, but I'll give you this one.

[ k e e l y ]

I'm not really sure how I feel about the relatives issue. I just know that it can lead to some very strange genetic problems. I haven't made up my mind about this one, though, honestly. And I don't think that's a problem. I keep an open mind.

I keep an open mind to things, but once I've experienced something, I make up my mind as to whether I'm down with it or not. I close my mind like I close my front door; weird stuffs going on in the neighborhood. And these are exactly the kinds of things that people worried the door WOULD be opened for.  

[Xahmen]

******** YEAH.
RED HERRING FALLACIES AND CIRCULAR REASONING.
I'm looking at you Kazydi.

Because EVERY counter-point you used was a red herring, and every SINGLE backing argument was nothing but circular reasoning (this is right because it's right so therefore it is right).

"Who cares if it can be natural, it's still unnatural, monkeys fling s**t, therefore being gay is still wrong"

Do you know why monkeys fling s**t at each other?
It's a defensive mechanism, hard-wired into that particular species.
Can you name me another species that flings s**t at each other?
No?

Seeing as homosexuality has been recording in frogs, chimps, apes, swans, ducks, dogs, humans, and penguins, I'd say that it occurs more commonly in nature than s**t-flinging.
But that wasn't the point, and you knew that, you were trying to derail the point away from its intended message.
"Homosexuality isn't a choice, it's a genetic goof-up, and it doesn't just occur in man".

Another Red Herring was your mention of Mark and Ryan, two homosexual males, one of which was clearly a child.
Good job playing the heart strings of Prop 8 there, by accepting homosexuality we are accepting *****. There is no evidence linking homosexuals and *****, and as a matter of fact, MOST male ***** that target young boys are straight.

Then there was Jim and Sue, the ******** again, derailing the topic from homosexuality into Incest, another thing the supporters of Prop 8 told California they would have to live with if they accepted homosexuals.

"People are afraid to hurt each others feelings"

I like how you imply that everybody thinks homosexuality is wrong, and just doesn't want to say it. Have you talked to everybody?
can you verify that you've talked to everybody to show that their beliefs are counter-intuitive to what they say?

The only honest thing in your entire reply was your very thinly veiled threat against homosexuals there near the end.
"If someone does something wrong, they have to face the consequences. Homosexuality is wrong..."

But then again, you're what?
15, 16?
Living in a socially conservative household?
You've obviously never taken any logic classes, and as they are generally required courses in college I'm going to put you in high school.

With how sheltered you probably are (whether by your own means or that of your family) I'm surprised that you managed to formulate this much of a (snerk) argument.