I really don't care if two guys/girls are living together but getting married and having sex is just wrong. As a christian, I don't see why anybody would be homosexual.
Happiness and the joy of love for people whom are "unnatural"? Blasphemy!
[quote]The cereal you eat in the morning was decided one day to be the spawn of an evil lord and anyone who partook even once is tainted and thus unfit to be loved?
That made me laugh more than I should have, but okay. Thanks Voidy
It's ludicrous to say the least. Somethings just simply exist being neither good or evil, right or wrong. Why can't we just accept that? Is it so hard to do?
Unfortunately, yes. It's just the nature of most humans to label everything they see/hear/experience. And if someone sticks out from the crowd, they/it are/is considered bad/weird/'unnatural'/etc.
As a christian, I don't see why anybody would be homosexual.
trade homsexual with black. same stupid sentence. the reason a person would be gay is because he was born that way. or to get attention and be some kind of "cool rebel" which doesnt change him. he would still be streight
1 simple question: do god believers also think that asexuals will burn in hell? they do not feel attracted to anyone.. isn't that so called "wierd, unnatural and against the purpose of life to recreate"?
The closest thing the Bible has on asexuality far as I know is in the writings of Paul. He seems to indicate that not having sex at all is a good thing. An advantage would be given to someone with out a desire to have sex. 1 Corinthians 7
do god believers also think that asexuals will burn in hell? they do not feel attracted to anyone..
i heard its considered holy and people claim jesus was asexual. people do forget that asexual means no SEXUAL attraction. a person can be asexual and still have romantic feeling both for the same or the other sex. there are even people who feel romantically attracted to one sex and sexually attracted to the other.
point is, that is way too complicated for people to judge so they ignore it.
Well I happened to find a truly wonderful article about this and I'll post part of it
Second, if being born gay means that homosexuality is morally acceptable because it is natural to them, then it must also be morally acceptable for those who are born with a tendency to oppose homosexuality. It would mean that "heteros" should not be urged to change their "orientation," nor should they be ridiculed for opposing homosexuality -- since they are born that way. To be consistent, the homosexual community should support homophobia as a natural sexual orientation that they are born with. After all, it would seem more likely that heterosexuality is genetically based since heterosexual behavior produces offspring where homosexual behavior does not. So, heterosexual orientation must be genetically natural, should be supported as a normal behavior, should not be ridiculed, should have civil rights protection, and be promoted in schools and the media. And, homosexuals who accuse heteros of being homophobic should be labeled as heterphobes. Otherwise, the obvious double-standard offered by the homosexual community will once again rear its ugly head.
then it must also be morally acceptable for those who are born with a tendency to oppose homosexuality.
I wouldn't call homophobia something one is born with...but a learned trait.
Let's put an example out there...and yes, this will be quite an exaggerated example. Why? Because I love exaggerated examples
So...say we put 2 male babies in separate rooms (and let's pretend that we know one of them will turn out gay, and the other will not). They each stay in that room until they are...say..17. In the room, they are given 3 meals a day, and mild forms of entertainment that would not sway sexual orientation. At the end of the time (oh...and let's pretend this wouldn't completely mess up the children's psyche like it would in real life), the gay baby will still be gay...but the other baby will not be homophobic. Why? Because he has no reason to be...there was nothing to sway him (religion, strict parents, media, etc) to be so
Now...I'm going to go ahead and pretend you would use my exaggerated idea to say how to make the gay baby...not gay, basically. You put the gay baby in the room..then the entire time, feed him with dogma saying how wrong homosexuality is and all that. He is a baby, then a toddler, then a normal kid, then a teen...all that fun growing up stuff...and during most of that time has yet enter that teenage stage where you get those thoughts of "hey...that person is attractive...I wanna...do...things...". So, before he comes to terms with those feelings...he is being fed with how being gay is wrong and this should make him believe so, causing him not to be gay...right? Well...the best you will do is he will start to get those...feelings..towards his own gender and push them away because of all the dogma brainwashed into him...but that isn't him not being gay. It is just him denying it because he is brainwashed...but nonetheless he is still gay...just hasn't come to terms and accepted it yet
