Is It Wrong to Think Homosexuality is a Sin?

[Gracie]

You bet they would be what? Born like it?

I bet they would be treated badly and people would protest against them.... but even today, people are not like Europeans yet, where it's acceptable to have a "side" mate...

What?

Actually, people ARE born as adulterers, we are not monogamous by nature.

And we are no longer ruled by our nature as you put it. We are in control of our actions. One can choose to be monogamous

You're joking right? How many people actually stay monogamous...? Not many, and it's not cause they are assholes....

Speak for yourself. Once you say I DO, you do. Period. If you want to fuck around against your vows, you are the asshole.

 

[Taz]

Anyone know of any news stories of a christian going into a muslim cafe and demanding sausage or pork chops and when told they do not serve that and are refused, then SUE that cafe? I haven't heard of such a thing.

It's not a human right to stick a sausage in your mouth. In your case, it's only an obsession to stick sausages in your mouth.

Now you are just being a dick. Or a sausage. Whatever.
Done with this. You're going to DEMAND I think as you do. Sorry, but not sorry. I will say and think as I wish and all the berating on your end will not change that fact.

You can think what you want, but you'll still be wrong.

 

[Bonzi]

Actually, people ARE born as adulterers, we are not monogamous by nature.

And we are no longer ruled by our nature as you put it. We are in control of our actions. One can choose to be monogamous

One can also choose to abstain from sex with the same sex.
We all have sexual urges of varying kinds.
I'm not saying someone that is attracted to the same sex SHOULD abstain.
I'm saying that people who practice a religion that feels it is ungodly or counter-productive to society has the right to feel that way and express it.

They can feel and say whatever they want. It's the acting on their prejudices that run afoul of the law

They don't like the law. they have a right to voice that as well.
And if they break a law, well, that's their choice as well, they would suffer the consequences...

But they think because of their backwards religious views they should be allowed to break the laws

Some do... that was way too much stereotyping and overgeneralizing in one sentence.

 

[Gracie]

Actually, people ARE born as adulterers, we are not monogamous by nature.

And we are no longer ruled by our nature as you put it. We are in control of our actions. One can choose to be monogamous

One can also choose to abstain from sex with the same sex.
We all have sexual urges of varying kinds.
I'm not saying someone that is attracted to the same sex SHOULD abstain.
I'm saying that people who practice a religion that feels it is ungodly or counter-productive to society has the right to feel that way and express it.

They can feel and say whatever they want. It's the acting on their prejudices that run afoul of the law

They don't like the law. they have a right to voice that as well.
And if they break a law, well, that's their choice as well, they would suffer the consequences...

But they think because of their backwards religious views they should be allowed to break the laws

According to YOUR beliefs, they are backwards religious. Do you not even see what you say???

Oy.

Goodnight.

 

[Bonzi]

I bet they would be treated badly and people would protest against them.... but even today, people are not like Europeans yet, where it's acceptable to have a "side" mate...

What?

Actually, people ARE born as adulterers, we are not monogamous by nature.

And we are no longer ruled by our nature as you put it. We are in control of our actions. One can choose to be monogamous

You're joking right? How many people actually stay monogamous...? Not many, and it's not cause they are assholes....

Speak for yourself. Once you say I DO, you do. Period. If you want to fuck around against your vows, you are the asshole.

I actually agree with that, I'm just saying we have not "outgrown" out nature to want to have sex than more than one person for life. Many still do, and only the ones that MEAN their vows will keep them.

 

[Taz]

What?

Actually, people ARE born as adulterers, we are not monogamous by nature.

And we are no longer ruled by our nature as you put it. We are in control of our actions. One can choose to be monogamous

You're joking right? How many people actually stay monogamous...? Not many, and it's not cause they are assholes....

I banged enough broads before I met my wife, who is beautiful, so get a man who has already sowed his oats before trying to settle down with him.

women cheat too, just sayin'

Not the good ones.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And we are no longer ruled by our nature as you put it. We are in control of our actions. One can choose to be monogamous

One can also choose to abstain from sex with the same sex.
We all have sexual urges of varying kinds.
I'm not saying someone that is attracted to the same sex SHOULD abstain.
I'm saying that people who practice a religion that feels it is ungodly or counter-productive to society has the right to feel that way and express it.

They can feel and say whatever they want. It's the acting on their prejudices that run afoul of the law

They don't like the law. they have a right to voice that as well.
And if they break a law, well, that's their choice as well, they would suffer the consequences...

But they think because of their backwards religious views they should be allowed to break the laws

According to YOUR beliefs, they are backwards religious. Do you not even see what you say???

Oy.

Goodnight.

Yes my belief and I have the right to say that. But I do not have the right to deny service to people simply because of their religious affiliation or their backwards beliefs

Get it?

 

[Bonzi]

Actually, people ARE born as adulterers, we are not monogamous by nature.

And we are no longer ruled by our nature as you put it. We are in control of our actions. One can choose to be monogamous

You're joking right? How many people actually stay monogamous...? Not many, and it's not cause they are assholes....

I banged enough broads before I met my wife, who is beautiful, so get a man who has already sowed his oats before trying to settle down with him.

women cheat too, just sayin'

Not the good ones.

I'm just debating "we are not ruled by our nature"
If your nature is to be homosexual or someone who likes variety (or both), well either way, you can let your nature rule you or not. Ultimately, it's all a choice.

 

[Taz]

And we are no longer ruled by our nature as you put it. We are in control of our actions. One can choose to be monogamous

You're joking right? How many people actually stay monogamous...? Not many, and it's not cause they are assholes....

I banged enough broads before I met my wife, who is beautiful, so get a man who has already sowed his oats before trying to settle down with him.

women cheat too, just sayin'

Not the good ones.

I'm just debating "we are not ruled by our nature"
If your nature is to be homosexual or someone who likes variety (or both), well either way, you can let your nature rule you or not. Ultimately, it's all a choice.

Not all women's nature is to be a slut. You just got the bad luck of the draw.

 

[K9Buck]

You're joking right? How many people actually stay monogamous...? Not many, and it's not cause they are assholes....

I banged enough broads before I met my wife, who is beautiful, so get a man who has already sowed his oats before trying to settle down with him.

women cheat too, just sayin'

Not the good ones.

I'm just debating "we are not ruled by our nature"
If your nature is to be homosexual or someone who likes variety (or both), well either way, you can let your nature rule you or not. Ultimately, it's all a choice.

Not all women's nature is to be a slut. You just got the bad luck of the draw.

How is she a slut?

 

[Divine Wind]

So what? Also adulterers don't get treated badly by society, treated like second class citizens, and also adulterers weren't born as adulterers. They had a choice.

But then you have a problem with people who try and gain an identity huh?

I bet they would be if they ran around bragging about it and carrying a "cheaters flag"!

You bet they would be what? Born like it?

I bet they would be treated badly and people would protest against them.... but even today, people are not like Europeans yet, where it's acceptable to have a "side" mate...

What?

Actually, people ARE born as adulterers, we are not monogamous by nature.

Disagreed on being born adulterer. Marriage is a choice. Violating those vows is a choice.

 

[Divine Wind]

Anyone know of any news stories of a christian going into a muslim cafe and demanding sausage or pork chops and when told they do not serve that and are refused, then SUE that cafe? I haven't heard of such a thing.

It's not a human right to stick a sausage in your mouth. In your case, it's only an obsession to stick sausages in your mouth.

If your fantasy is to have someone stick sausages in your mouth, then I support your right to have as big a sausagefest as your heart desires.

 

[Divine Wind]

I didn't support Gay Marriage because I don't believe governments should be in the business of defining what IS or ISN'T a marriage between two consenting adults. I think it sets a very dangerous precedent to establish legal marriage, sanctioned by government, on the basis of sexual proclivities..

I don't quite get that- since the government has been in the business of defining marriage for quite a long time before same sex couples wanted to be legally married too.

If you just oppose state controlled legal marriage- then oppose that- not just when it includes same gender couples.

I believe there is a difference between 'legal marriage' and 'religious marriage'. Some people just want the benefits from marriage (economic) while others want to make a vow to each other, their families, and their God if they so believe or choose AND have the legal advantages of marriage.

To me they can be two different things. The government doesn't care if you love each other or anything like that.... it's just a job to do.... another paper to file....

Yes, I want gays to have the same RIGHTS as a husband and wife but not under Gods law of man and woman SPIRITUALLY. Give them rights with MANS law so they are not cut off from those they love with things they bought and shared together as a couple. Just don't call it marriage. It isn't. Its a civil RIGHT. And should be. But also not force people of different faiths to be pc and say oh sure its ok when to them..its not.

That probably didn't make sense. It's the wee hours and my brain is shutting down. It made sense to me, so....there ya go!

Secular law is all we can, and should, give anyone. Let God judge from there. The whole "render unto Caesar...." thing.

I believe in God and I am frequently telling fellow believers to let secular society be secular. If Adam wants to "marry" Steve at the local courthouse, it's ok with me. I'm not affected in any way. Why should I care? Why should they care?

I will add that supposedly free people should be free to discriminate. If a bakery doesn't want to make a same-sex wedding cake, they should be free to deny service.

Agreed on all points....although the "bakery" scenario can become complicated, I think there are ways to make everyone happy without trampling all over the rights of private citizens.

 

[Taz]

I banged enough broads before I met my wife, who is beautiful, so get a man who has already sowed his oats before trying to settle down with him.

women cheat too, just sayin'

Not the good ones.

I'm just debating "we are not ruled by our nature"
If your nature is to be homosexual or someone who likes variety (or both), well either way, you can let your nature rule you or not. Ultimately, it's all a choice.

Not all women's nature is to be a slut. You just got the bad luck of the draw.

How is she a slut?

Did you see her denying it?

 

[K9Buck]

women cheat too, just sayin'

Not the good ones.

I'm just debating "we are not ruled by our nature"
If your nature is to be homosexual or someone who likes variety (or both), well either way, you can let your nature rule you or not. Ultimately, it's all a choice.

Not all women's nature is to be a slut. You just got the bad luck of the draw.

How is she a slut?

Did you see her denying it?

Perhaps she didn't want to dignify your statement with a response.

 

[Taz]

Not the good ones.

I'm just debating "we are not ruled by our nature"
If your nature is to be homosexual or someone who likes variety (or both), well either way, you can let your nature rule you or not. Ultimately, it's all a choice.

Not all women's nature is to be a slut. You just got the bad luck of the draw.

How is she a slut?

Did you see her denying it?

Perhaps she didn't want to dignify your statement with a response.

She rated that post as "funny". So she responded, just not to deny anything.

 

[Divine Wind]

women cheat too, just sayin'

Not the good ones.

I'm just debating "we are not ruled by our nature"
If your nature is to be homosexual or someone who likes variety (or both), well either way, you can let your nature rule you or not. Ultimately, it's all a choice.

Not all women's nature is to be a slut. You just got the bad luck of the draw.

How is she a slut?

Did you see her denying it?

No, but I didn't see you denying you're gay either. Did you deny being a male prostitute giving blowjobs for a dollar at truck stops?

 

[K9Buck]

I'm just debating "we are not ruled by our nature"
If your nature is to be homosexual or someone who likes variety (or both), well either way, you can let your nature rule you or not. Ultimately, it's all a choice.

Not all women's nature is to be a slut. You just got the bad luck of the draw.

How is she a slut?

Did you see her denying it?

Perhaps she didn't want to dignify your statement with a response.

She rated that post as "funny". So she responded, just not to deny anything.

Ok.

 

[rightwinger]

I don't quite get that- since the government has been in the business of defining marriage for quite a long time before same sex couples wanted to be legally married too.

If you just oppose state controlled legal marriage- then oppose that- not just when it includes same gender couples.

I believe there is a difference between 'legal marriage' and 'religious marriage'. Some people just want the benefits from marriage (economic) while others want to make a vow to each other, their families, and their God if they so believe or choose AND have the legal advantages of marriage.

To me they can be two different things. The government doesn't care if you love each other or anything like that.... it's just a job to do.... another paper to file....

Yes, I want gays to have the same RIGHTS as a husband and wife but not under Gods law of man and woman SPIRITUALLY. Give them rights with MANS law so they are not cut off from those they love with things they bought and shared together as a couple. Just don't call it marriage. It isn't. Its a civil RIGHT. And should be. But also not force people of different faiths to be pc and say oh sure its ok when to them..its not.

That probably didn't make sense. It's the wee hours and my brain is shutting down. It made sense to me, so....there ya go!

Secular law is all we can, and should, give anyone. Let God judge from there. The whole "render unto Caesar...." thing.

I believe in God and I am frequently telling fellow believers to let secular society be secular. If Adam wants to "marry" Steve at the local courthouse, it's ok with me. I'm not affected in any way. Why should I care? Why should they care?

I will add that supposedly free people should be free to discriminate. If a bakery doesn't want to make a same-sex wedding cake, they should be free to deny service.

Agreed on all points....although the "bakery" scenario can become complicated, I think there are ways to make everyone happy without trampling all over the rights of private citizens.

The "bakery scenario" is a farce
If it is a strict Christian bakery, its service should restrict service to all sins

Why produce a cake for a known adulterer or pregnant bride?
Both are sinful

Why is the only "sin" under consideration homosexuality?

 

[K9Buck]

I believe there is a difference between 'legal marriage' and 'religious marriage'. Some people just want the benefits from marriage (economic) while others want to make a vow to each other, their families, and their God if they so believe or choose AND have the legal advantages of marriage.

To me they can be two different things. The government doesn't care if you love each other or anything like that.... it's just a job to do.... another paper to file....

Yes, I want gays to have the same RIGHTS as a husband and wife but not under Gods law of man and woman SPIRITUALLY. Give them rights with MANS law so they are not cut off from those they love with things they bought and shared together as a couple. Just don't call it marriage. It isn't. Its a civil RIGHT. And should be. But also not force people of different faiths to be pc and say oh sure its ok when to them..its not.

That probably didn't make sense. It's the wee hours and my brain is shutting down. It made sense to me, so....there ya go!

Secular law is all we can, and should, give anyone. Let God judge from there. The whole "render unto Caesar...." thing.

I believe in God and I am frequently telling fellow believers to let secular society be secular. If Adam wants to "marry" Steve at the local courthouse, it's ok with me. I'm not affected in any way. Why should I care? Why should they care?

I will add that supposedly free people should be free to discriminate. If a bakery doesn't want to make a same-sex wedding cake, they should be free to deny service.

Agreed on all points....although the "bakery" scenario can become complicated, I think there are ways to make everyone happy without trampling all over the rights of private citizens.

The "bakery scenario" is a farce
If it is a strict Christian bakery, its service should restrict service to all sins

Why produce a cake for a known adulterer or pregnant bride?
Both are sinful

Why is the only "sin" under consideration homosexuality?

All fair points.