yes, it wast really his point, it goes a little deeper than just prevention of stds, do you agree?
ps: condoms are claimed to be 99% effective against pregencya and stds if used correctly, if used incorrectly the percentage goes down, not hugely, but enough that they sometimes do fail, such as is often the case on drunken one-nighters, so that's just another deterrant to them, if the moral reasons doesnt stop you!
Yes there is, but since women can't really have sex with each other, and since everyone is equal in God's eyes anyway, was there really a need to say that?
Of course there would be reason to say it. Homosexuality isn't a choice anyway so if god treated everybody equally then homosexuals should be able to have sex with who they love. Also, if you're gonna do that then guys can't have sex anyway because sex by definition is a man penetrating a woman meaning that the "sin" of homosexuality is unachievable.
Homosexuality isn't a choice anyway so if god treated everybody equally then homosexuals should be able to have sex with who they love. Also, if you're gonna do that then guys can't have sex anyway because sex by definition is a man penetrating a woman meaning that the "sin" of homosexuality is unachievable.
But the Bible said that men should not lie with other men. That was my point on equality, not the actual term. The Bible didn't say sex. Anyway, I find it difficult to stress an issue such as abstinence, so I can't use logic to explain my views on homosexuality because most people shouldn't have to think about it, as long as they're straihgt (and I'm not accusing you of being gay, I was only pointing out that yes, it will look different to homosexuals). It should be the basis of logic, like "we should live." What logic really insists that we need to live? We're all going to die anyway, why prolong it? Logic can be used up to a certain extent, but there should be a basis such as "we should live" for everything. Unfortunatley, most people wouldn't take the basic stand on homosexuality, so it remains an open debate. And thus, I concede my arguments.
But the Bible said that men should not lie with other men. That was my point on equality, not the actual term. The Bible didn't say sex. Anyway, I find it difficult to stress an issue such as abstinence, so I can't use logic to explain my views on homosexuality because most people shouldn't have to think about it, as long as they're straihgt (and I'm not accusing you of being gay, I was only pointing out that yes, it will look different to homosexuals). It should be the basis of logic, like "we should live." What logic really insists that we need to live? We're all going to die anyway, why prolong it? Logic can be used up to a certain extent, but there should be a basis such as "we should live" for everything. Unfortunatley, most people wouldn't take the basic stand on homosexuality, so it remains an open debate. And thus, I concede my arguments.
I remember one time in the bible, God was going to strike down a town. One of the occupants of the town was called "Lot". THere were men who came to his house (these guys were angels) the men in the town wanted to have "sex" with them.
So therefore god acknowledges sex between other men, but in that same chapter it states the angels struck down the sinners with a blinding light. So gay sex is considered wrong in the bible. according to that passage.
Buut if we look at david's wife... he I mean she.....
Buut if we look at david's wife... he I mean she.....
Um... I don't know if that's really supposed to mean anything. Sorry, but I don't remember reading any of this in the Bible. Maybe point out where in the Bible this is, or I can't really reference it.
Hey man it the ones doing 'it's choice, anyone hear about the 13 year old and his girlfriend that humped like bunnies, GUESS what the end result was? starts with a P... but seriously it's not that big of a deal if humans did not have sex we would be wiped out. Hell back in the 1950s and below a 27 yr old marrying a 13 year old wasn't strange hell amongst those mormons who still believe in polygamy it's still common. Sorry off topic a bit anyway the point is sex happens trying to stop it doesn't help and if we weren't supposed to do it, we would have a way to do asexual reproduction where a male is not needed.
Um... I don't know if that's really supposed to mean anything. Sorry, but I don't remember reading any of this in the Bible. Maybe point out where in the Bible this is, or I can't really reference it.
it was a joke, I mean the woman King David killed the husband of (Bathsheba?)
your point makes no sense... if you preached abstinence as a way of life for everyone then nobody could ever have sex...not just gays... if you say, 'wait until you are married' then many churches allow gay marriages, abstinence does not apply extra-strongly to gay couples, that's a bit...weird o.O
My point makes perfect sense. There is a struggle to legalize gay marriage in America, abstinance that is being preached means that you shouldn't fuck until you're married. If gay's can't get married then you're descriminating against gays.
And to Bigpo8, Two of my best friends are gay together. And I can honestly say that those two girls have the purest form of love I have ever seen. To say that's wrong is horrible.
Also, to all the bible bashers, if you're going to take what leviticus says about gays then you have to take what exodus say about working on Sundays, if you have EVER worked on a Sunday and are still alive you're oppinion isn't and never will be valid on this or any religious topic.
Also, to all the bible bashers, if you're going to take what leviticus says about gays then you have to take what exodus say about working on Sundays, if you have EVER worked on a Sunday and are still alive you're oppinion isn't and never will be valid on this or any religious topic.
You know that's not meant to be taken literally, right? I guess Jesus can't argue on religious topics either, since he worked on Sunday. The Pharisees thought him evil for working on Sunday, but he explained that Sunday was the day we could rest, not the day that we must rest. As for gays, sorry if I hurt anybody's feelings with my reasoning. As it's not me and it's not the most important issue, I'm really never going to vote along the lines of who will and won't legalize gay marriage, so it doesn't even matter.
I meant that if somebody takes the part about gays literally then they have to take the rest literally too. It's not really fair to just pick and choose.
get your point but that just didn't fit in there
Yeah, it doesn't fit in the thread but I was on a roll and figured I should get it aaallll out.
