You CAN post in this thread anonymously by logging out and posting in this thread as a "guest". This is one of the only threads with this type of set up. Due to the subject and very passionate emotions people have about it, we have set up the anonymous guest posting to encourage participation from people who might not otherwise feel comfortable.
That's like saying: if I see a person speeding down the road to a bridge that I know is out - that I don't have the right to try and stop them and tell them to go in a different direction - for their own good.
If I see my child reaching for a hot stove burner - I don't have the right to stop him and tell him not to do it.
Just the opposite - I have a responsbility as a fellow human to tell you the truth (which will set you free). If you choose to reject that truth - then that's on you. Furthermore, I have a responsibility and a "command" to preach the good news that you and all can be set free from sin. Now I don't have the privaledge of shoving it down anyone's throat - but simply making a proclamation - and leave it for you to decide what you want to do with the information.
What about ancient greece when it was common to see bisexuality and homosexuality? Before christ... what about then? Because they believed in many gods. Why is your religion right? Because it's the most widely known? You would have been an outcast in ancient times preaching this.
TVDinner wrote: Lpspider wrote: TVDinner wrote: hawgwild65 wrote: But if acquired - just like any other sinful act - it can be forgiven and corrected.
why not forgiven and accepted.
Is this a serious question?
I mean, you can accept that you don't think it's wrong. But the fact is that if it was wrong it could be forgiven. But to be accepted? That'd be like accepting that a person likes to abuse children or kill people. It would be like accepting something that was wrong. If it was accepted it wouldn't need forgiving.
(I'm not saying they're the same thing).
of course it is. what gives you, or anyone else for that matter, the right to "correct" anyone for anything. Just because you don't think it is right does not make it wrong. It makes it different then what you believe in, but you do not have the right to try to change them. You can disagree, but not force change. so yes, it is 100% a serious statement. And you are wrong about your comparison. 2 men or 2 women in love, in my opinion is nothing at all a child abuser or a murderer. Your comparison is offensive and I hope you see that. Again, you can choose to personally not agree with the lifestyle, but you can not force change.
You are the one who said "why not forgive and accept". To forgive you must admit what you did is wrong.
TV dinner, please read by post before you reply on it. If you actually read it you would see I wasn't saying they were the same thing.
Furthermore you said I can't say if something is wrong or not - but in your post you're saying I'm wrong! Why can you claim something's wrong and not me?
Mr Morningstarr wrote: If smoking causes cancer, you can't apply cancer as an inherited illness. If children are born with some kind of genetic illness that wasn't passed on then surely that would be a mutation.
True.
MH0825 wrote: What about ancient greece when it was common to see bisexuality and homosexuality? Before christ... what about then? Because they believed in many gods. You would have been an outcast in ancient times preaching this.
What about it? Common meaning what? So?
The only reason you say it's wrong today is because your bible says it is. That's my point. Because a book says it's wrong but it was a practice very common before this book was written, all of a sudden it's wrong? The bible was written by men who decided what to put in it and what to keep out of it.
roadkill wrote: mr. m--I skimmed through your post and decided it was best for me not to bother trying to read it all and understand your "logic". I'd like to keep my sanity, thanks. You mean you can't understand it. No big surprise there.
However, there are some comments i'd like to respond to. "Like I said, many homosexuals did make a choice to lead a straight life, and managed to perform their marital duties."
I doubt any homosexuals make the choice to "lead a straight life" on their own. And I feel bad for them, because if they're homosexual and leading a heterosexual life, they're living a lie. I'm sure they wouldn't have "converted" if it wasn't for social and religious pressure. And???? Your claim was that heterosexuals can't have gay sex, well that's total bollocks. Heterosexuals do have gay sex, and homosexuals do have straight sex. So there's clearly no genetic repellant preventing them. "If smoking causes cancer, you can't apply cancer as an inherited illness. If children are born with some kind of genetic illness that wasn't passed on then surely that would be a mutation."
I don't think MH0825 ever mentioned cancer from lifestyle choices like smoking. In fact, I searched the entire page for 'cig*' and 'smok*' and did not find any results. Did you pull this one out of your ass? I found this on Google, you might find it helpful. It's called "How to debate rationally and effectively". http://www.truthtree.com/debates.shtml MH0825 asked how two parents with no history of cancer could have a child which developed cancer, the answer is simply the child develops cancer from environmental influences. It's not rocket science, take your head out of your arse and you might understand. I find being able to understand simple English is most beneficial to debate, try that for starters. "The act of sex is ultimately to procreate. If this is the case, homosexuality is clearly wrong."
Homosexuals may fail at procreating, but how does that make their lives wrong? And how does "being wrong" relate to genes? What do you mean by wrong? Can't you understand that if the act of copulation is intended to fertilize an egg, if you copulate with anything that is impossible to impregnate then you're clearly doing it wrong? "There are arguments that a homosexual lifestyle is unhealthy, and that homosexuality is bad for society in general."
Unhealthy as in -- they die younger? How is it unhealthy?
Bad for society -- how? How does it affect anyone?
Yes, homosexuals die younger. Statistically they are more inclined to contract STD's and have higher levels of suicide in young gay men.
Homosexuality is criticised for eroding the "family unit".
This is irrelevant though, try to stay on topic. That's good debating skills.
You can't correct anyone's genes. You can't "correct" sociopaths. You can't "correct" the mentally retarded. You can't "correct" people with illogical viewpoints who refuse to look at the other side. (well, not before going insane first)You see, this is where your smart arse references to learning how to debate fall flat on their arse. You are using the fact that homosexuality is caused genetically as an argument for why it cannot be "corrected". You fail because there is no proof that homosexuality is genetic. You have missed the whole point of this debate, you simply insist that homosexuality is genetic then use that as your argument.
I'll start again to clarify for the quick to post and slow to think, there is no proof that homosexuality is genetic. The sooner you get that in your thick skull the sooner you'll stop using at as an argument. You waste of time.
You could "pressure" homosexuals into acting straight. But that doesn't make them straight.
So you can defy genetic coding with peer pressure? You said that as a heterosexual you would simply not be able get sexually aroused to have sex with a man. Now you admit you could be pressured into it? Nice U-Turn.
So if your sexual desire is genetic, and you can't have sex unless you're turned on you are now claiming that genes can be influenced after birth by environmental forces.
Firstly that's wrong, secondly that would simply mean that sexual orientation is defined by environmental forces whether it's genetic or not.
Thanks for the lesson on debating, use an argument with no real backing in fact, make u-turns, talk nonsense, fail to understand most of what is written in front of you. Well done.
hawgwild65 wrote: I believe it to be wrong because God said it was wrong. He judged two cities and destroyed them by fire because they were totally overcome with homosexuality and other "dark" lifestyles. That took place in the days of Abraham - the founder of the nation of Israel.
When Israel escaped from Egypt, the law was givn to Israel to keep them a Holy and Healthy People (if they followed the law). They were less than Holy - but they always returned to Jehovah God. That law speaks to the sinfulness of any sexual promiscuity outside of marriage. Try thinking for yourself rather than take the word of an invisible being which has clearly abandoned you, from thousands of years ago.
Sorry, but you decide to believe this one piece of nonsense from the Bible but choose to ignore other parts. If you want credibility follow the Bible fully and I will respect you for doing so.
hawg - my point was not about the word "forgiven" in the original quote, but the word "corrected".
Your example about having an affair is a different situation and in that case it is just a decision of the person who is being cheated on to BOTH accept the situation and forgive the person doing the cheating OR just move on. The correcting of the negative behavor (the cheating) is on the person having the affair. In the context of this thread all of this is irrelevant.
Who gives anyone the right to "correct" the free choice of others. Regardless of if you agree with it or not, it is not your life, it is someone elses. The people who are gay can be gay and it does not effect you, so just let them be. You dont need to "correct" anything and their lives actually do not effect you at all. Accepting their being gay is something you can decide to do or not, but you never should "correct" anything.
Lpspider wrote: MH0825 wrote: What about ancient greece when it was common to see bisexuality and homosexuality? Before christ... what about then? Because they believed in many gods. You would have been an outcast in ancient times preaching this.
What about it? Common meaning what? So?
spider, it is what has been said over and over in this thread. homosexual people have existed from before "the bible" and the current god that is followed. Ultimately people are using this one book to blindly make their decision on if this is right or wrong. But reality shows that who cares what someone else does. As long as you can do what you want and be straight if you want - who cares.
My point above was completely about your use of the word "corrected", so please dont tell me what to read or not to read. You do not have the right to correct if someone wants to be gay or not, no matter what your "bible" says. You can choose to accept it or not, but you do not have the right to correct anyone for believing in something different then you.
I still haven't figured out how to cop in the quote.
You are correct - it is not my place to correct anyone. The original question in this thread is "Born Gay or Acquired." I simply stated my position. I have not tried to correct anyone here in this context. When I used the word "corrected" it was intended that if a person saw their immoral wrong and sought forgiveness for being Gay - then forgiveness is available and they can begin "being corrected" in their behavior (I would have hoped that would have been self explanatory, but when people try to twist your meanings to justify their position - I guess in this format I should have known to "over-explain" everything I type).
You further asked the question (why Forgiven and not accepted)...so I was on point with my response - as I was again - answering your question.
I am not trying to correct you or anyone (that's not my job) - but in terms of being Gay as "acquired" and not "genetic" then it must be a moral issue. Morality is based on the natural laws of mankind. How many gay animals exist? I never see two female dogs or horses carrying on in homosexual behavior. If it is genetic - it would be genetic in all of creation as an animalistic trait - like eating, seeing, and breathing.
As for thinking for myself (whoever made that brilliant comment) - I am fully capable of thinking for myself. I have cognitively made the choice to believe that a higher being exists and I have been introduced to the "path" to have a relationship with him - as all of humanity has imbedded into their thinking from birth the inescapable questions of life (is there a God, and if so - can I know him?) I have thought for myself and determined that there is a God and I was informed as to how to know him. I have cognitively decided to step out on Faith that the Bible is the Word of God and everything in it is Truth - I know the truth and the truth sets you free. And even if I'm wrong and it's the worlds biggest hoax - My life is still the better for following it's precepts and way of life.
Finally - I have purposely maintained my conversation to that of explanitory position and not personal attacks. If as board leaders, making personal attacks is how this board is going to approach its discussion threads - then I will simply choose to delete my account and not participate. It's one thing to recieve attacks from another member (I'm able to stand on my own two) - but from board leaders/monitors/website owners - is unacceptable.
hawgwild65 wrote: When I used the word "corrected" it was intended that if a person saw their immoral wrong and sought forgiveness for being Gay - then forgiveness is available and they can begin "being corrected" in their behavior
Let me state further on the subject of correcting somone's behavior.
I CANNOT correct anyone else's behavior. I can play Dr. Phil and point out their incorrect behavior (ie., sin) but the ultimate correcting comes from the individual's perspective - and the Holy Spirit's working with the person through conviction and the process of sanctification.
I'm dealing with a drug addict. I work with him and his wife - for a while on a daily basis. I counseled them, I've encouraged them, I've supported and worked with them...but the ultimate correcting of their behavior (once forgiveness was received) was between them and God. I was only a support factor. Having said that - 2 weeks ago, they took a turn in the wrong direction and decided to go back to drugs (after 2 years of working with them and 8 months clean). I can't correct that. They will have to work that out for themselves - but I cannot accept their behavior and continue to "enable" them in their wrong while they are working through it. .
I still haven't figured out how to cop in the quote.
Hi hawg - 2 ways to do it.
1) if you are quoting an entire other post hit the QUOTE button on that post and not the "reply" button.
2) the other way is using the Reply button - copy and past in text and then highlight the text you want to be in the quote box. Once you have it highlighted click on the button that looks like quotation marks
So your text will look like this. I hope this helps. PM me if you have any other questions
EDIT - it looks like you figured it out. Good job!!
Mr Morningstarr wrote: hawgwild65 wrote: I believe it to be wrong because God said it was wrong. He judged two cities and destroyed them by fire because they were totally overcome with homosexuality and other "dark" lifestyles. That took place in the days of Abraham - the founder of the nation of Israel.
When Israel escaped from Egypt, the law was givn to Israel to keep them a Holy and Healthy People (if they followed the law). They were less than Holy - but they always returned to Jehovah God. That law speaks to the sinfulness of any sexual promiscuity outside of marriage.
Sorry, but you decide to believe this one piece of nonsense from the Bible but choose to ignore other parts. If you want credibility follow the Bible fully and I will respect you for doing so.
Tell me what parts of the Bible that I have failed to follow - since you know me so well. I haven't claimed that I am perfect - but I do know what the Bible says on this subject - so whats your point?
If your generalizing me with all Christians - sure there are hypocrits among us. Just like there are dishonest Doctors and Lawyers, but we still use them because they are not all dishonest and hypocritical. But that isn't the point of this thread.
If your attacking me as not following the entire Bible - you just don't know me well enough to make that judgement.
hawg - i don't think there have been any personal attacks from me, just good conversation. This is the "heated debate" section and people can also post anonymously if they want to. That is why we set this site up. Enough about that. we move on.
I am not gay, but I choose to not have a problem with anyone who is. Personally I just don't care if they are gay or not. I have very close friends who are gay and they are still good friends of mine. nothing more. I have had business partners who were gay. Again, just business partners and successful I am happy to report. So I guess my point is that it does me no harm in any way how they live their life, so I find nothing wrong with it.
Back to the thread topic, I still feel that this is an acquired thing. I can not pinpoint why one person may end up gay and another will not, but IMO something in a person's upbringing leads them down a different path. Again, I can not explain it, and neither can anyone at this point. Again, just discussion.
TVDinner wrote: The people who are gay can be gay and it does not effect you, so just let them be.
First of all - Let me apologize for my earlier statment regarding personal attacks coming from board leaders. The attack I received was not from a board leader - I was mistaken. my bad.
I already commented on 'correcting' someone else's behavior so I'll let that ride. But I will further state that "people who are gay can be gay..." is a true statement. But I can point them to a 'better way of life' then let them choose to remain gay or change....and if they choose to be gay - I will let them - by I won't accept nor do I have to - their behavior.
to say "it does not affect me..." is NOT a true statment. The gay community has affected this entire country. They are pushing their agenda into the schools where my children attend. So that affects my children. I choose to teach my children that homosexuality is morraly wrong. To have someone else come along and teach them something different than what I as their parent have determined to teach - most definately affects me and my family. To allow homosexuality to socially acceptable as our country has - to the point that we are even arguing as a nation to allow same sex marriages - affects me also. It affects me as a taxpayer. It affects what my children are exposed to. It affects me as a citizen because it further errodes us as a society. and I'm sure there are many other areas to which I'm affected by the homosexual movement.
As a matter of fact - the Homosexual movement has made it their AGENDA to change our children.
Well, Mitt Romney is on Nightline with his mormonism - - I've got to click over the myspace and tell everyone LOL This has been enough fun for one night than one person should be allowed to have anyway.
I don't see how the gay community is trying to change our community? They're not saying you're not gay, you should be. In fact it's the non gay community that's doing that. "You're not straight, you should be".
Moral values are subjective to a point. What's moral to you may not be moral to someone else. What you feel is moral may not be moral in other cultures. It's not moral for our country to have many wives but in tribes it is.
Is it our place to say they're wrong? I don't think so.
It's been a lot of years since I've read the Homosexual Manifesto....so that would be something I would have to go re-look up....but they do have an AGENDA to prosolyte our kids into the "rainbow" lifestyle. In Oklahoma (when I lived there 8 - 10 years ago) among female teens - homosexuality had reached epidemic proportions. I'm sure some of that is "experimentation" of youth - but to the point - it affects my children who are growing up in that culture.
BTW: Isn't the United States supposed to be a "Christian" Nation? So why is it so unreasonable to expect Christian values to be the norm in this country? Why are Homosexual values being pushed onto our children in public schools as well as Muslim, Hindu, and other religions - but Christianity being taught - or countless other Christian activities taking place requires Court Orders and law-suits to be able to take place with the "Separation of Church and State" battle cry being sounded.
TVDinner wrote: hawg - i don't think there have been any personal attacks from me, just good conversation. I recognize that and appreciate the "attitude" of your posts.
