dodge
New member
You are sold out to lies and man made traditions that contradict scripture, which makes you a liar and a non factor.
Homosexuality selected because of societal function
- Thread starter kmoney
- Start date
You are sold out to lies and man made traditions that contradict scripture, which makes you a liar and a non factor.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Another complete non answer.
If lust is the precursor to same sex attractions happening then how come you can't make any sort of logical or plausible argument for that? All you do is run away from it when confronted.
glassjester
Well-known member
This is merely a shortcoming of the English language.
"Love" has so many definitions, as to be almost meaningless.
We can love anyone. Truly love them.
Male, female, friends, relatives - in the "agape" sense, and the "philia" sense of the word.
Of those people we love - we must choose who it would be appropriate to foster an "eros" type love with.
With the culture buying into the orientation essentialism myth - it seems like we will lose the ability for true, loving same-sex friendships to develop. Now, adolescents who feel a strong bond with someone of the same sex, may wrongly assume they were "born gay" - and either distance themselves from the friend, or begin to foster an "eros" type relationship with that person.
Why is this issue always twisted and distorted every which way? It gets so tiresome.
There are two ways to view it: In a religious (moral) way, and in a medical way. Intermingling the two gets you nowhere.
Religiously, the physical "act" is a sin. That's the short answer. (Long answer to follow.)
Medically, same-sex attraction is a disorder.
LONG religious answer, previously posted: "All people have disordered desires. Some people are addicts, others are gluttons, some are violents, etc. etc. Our disordered desires are part of our fallen nature. Same-sex attraction is just another disordered desire.
It is up to people to be the master of their disordered desires and order them to what God intended. The violent man must learn to be kind and loving. The glutton must learn to consume in moderation. The addict must abstain. The homosexual too must abstain.
And by the way, for all here: This is why ACW's threads on making "homosexuality" illegal are so stupid and ignorant. He, like the rest of us, and like homosexuals, all have disordered desires. Is the man prone to violence or gluttony any worse than the man prone to same-sex attraction? No, because all is sin, and as long as a man does not engage in his desires and not act upon them, then the manner or type of his disorder is irrelevant.
There are two ways to view it: In a religious (moral) way, and in a medical way. Intermingling the two gets you nowhere.
Religiously, the physical "act" is a sin. That's the short answer. (Long answer to follow.)
Medically, same-sex attraction is a disorder.
LONG religious answer, previously posted: "All people have disordered desires. Some people are addicts, others are gluttons, some are violents, etc. etc. Our disordered desires are part of our fallen nature. Same-sex attraction is just another disordered desire.
It is up to people to be the master of their disordered desires and order them to what God intended. The violent man must learn to be kind and loving. The glutton must learn to consume in moderation. The addict must abstain. The homosexual too must abstain.
And by the way, for all here: This is why ACW's threads on making "homosexuality" illegal are so stupid and ignorant. He, like the rest of us, and like homosexuals, all have disordered desires. Is the man prone to violence or gluttony any worse than the man prone to same-sex attraction? No, because all is sin, and as long as a man does not engage in his desires and not act upon them, then the manner or type of his disorder is irrelevant.
I won't argue with that. I just have a low tolerance for lies and ignorance.
dodge
New member
Not possible the RCC teaches contrary to what Jesus taught. You are deceived.
no it isn't and it is a lie to claim that it is
then perhaps you should stop lying and educate yourself.
Racists have been saying the same thing about blacks for generations. :yawn:
dodge
New member
What does being born black have to do with dishonoring ones own body by placing their sexual part in fecal matter and or in someones mouth ?
glassjester
Well-known member
It seems to be false in both cases.
dodge
New member
It is a lie to claim that a man placing their male part in fecal matter or someones mouth is not perverted.
glassjester
Well-known member
Nothing.
I was saying between men and men and boy and boys, not men and boys - it's not natural Dante
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
and hitler ate cornflakes with milk for breakfast
so if you eat cornflakes with milk for breakfast, you must hate the jews, right? :kookoo:
That is such a sick, pathetic, lowlife thing to say. There is absolutely no comparison between the two whatsoever, and playing the race card here just shows what a void wasteland lies between your ears.
Yes, it is, and you are the liar here, not me.
The proof is in the obvious: If someone actually has an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, that is disordered. The most base instinct in ANY species is to procreate and perpetuate the species. Therefore, if you have an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, then the normal main instinct that you should have is skewed and disordered.
More and more people, even religious people, are growing more tolerant of same sex because they are fools and are buying into the world's pervertities. Homosexual sex is a sin. Period.
It is also a mental disorder; that is as plain as the nose on anyone's face. If someone actually has an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, that is disordered. The most base instinct in ANY species is to procreate and perpetuate the species. Therefore, if you have an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, the normal main instinct that you should have is skewed and disordered. Even a child could see that much.
As I said in another thread, aside from the religious issue, there is a medical and a legal argument.
LEGAL: The precedent of standing law is not to be taken lightly. The law in a America, and even in civilization as a whole, has been that same-sex marriage is not valid. To make it legal now is to overturn centuries of law.
MEDICAL: Same-sex attraction is a mental disorder. Same sex attraction is a disorder according to the American Psychological Association (APA) for most of its history, until recently.
For some folks though, this disorder is now the "non-disorder formerly known as disorder." It was a disorder in the DSM I and II published by the APA. But in the last publication, DSM IV, it was removed as a disorder. Why?
Protests by gay rights activists against the APA began in 1970 when the organization held its convention in San Francisco. The activists disrupted the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, gay rights activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you." To put is bluntly, the American Psychological Association buckled and caved to protesters, and therefore have no legitimacy now.
So the APA can be, and is, wrong. The current APA thinks that they were "wrong back then," and "right now." But certainly, the opposite can be true, that is was right back then and wrong now. I think that they were right before and wrong now because they now fear liberal retaliation and political correctness that did not exist before. Plus: The APA is actually a lobbying group, and less than half the psychiatrists in America belong to it. They lobby on Capitol Hill and therefore engage in political correctness to garner support. Their removal of homosexuality from the list of disorders was purely a political move, and had no basis in science.
It is also a mental disorder; that is as plain as the nose on anyone's face. If someone actually has an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, that is disordered. The most base instinct in ANY species is to procreate and perpetuate the species. Therefore, if you have an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, the normal main instinct that you should have is skewed and disordered. Even a child could see that much.
As I said in another thread, aside from the religious issue, there is a medical and a legal argument.
LEGAL: The precedent of standing law is not to be taken lightly. The law in a America, and even in civilization as a whole, has been that same-sex marriage is not valid. To make it legal now is to overturn centuries of law.
MEDICAL: Same-sex attraction is a mental disorder. Same sex attraction is a disorder according to the American Psychological Association (APA) for most of its history, until recently.
For some folks though, this disorder is now the "non-disorder formerly known as disorder." It was a disorder in the DSM I and II published by the APA. But in the last publication, DSM IV, it was removed as a disorder. Why?
Protests by gay rights activists against the APA began in 1970 when the organization held its convention in San Francisco. The activists disrupted the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, gay rights activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you." To put is bluntly, the American Psychological Association buckled and caved to protesters, and therefore have no legitimacy now.
So the APA can be, and is, wrong. The current APA thinks that they were "wrong back then," and "right now." But certainly, the opposite can be true, that is was right back then and wrong now. I think that they were right before and wrong now because they now fear liberal retaliation and political correctness that did not exist before. Plus: The APA is actually a lobbying group, and less than half the psychiatrists in America belong to it. They lobby on Capitol Hill and therefore engage in political correctness to garner support. Their removal of homosexuality from the list of disorders was purely a political move, and had no basis in science.
Natural? That is a tall order, proving that the human reproductive system is physiologically or biologically designed for homosexuality that is. So, it is your assertion that the "natural" function of the penis is to be inserted into the garbage chute of the human body? That is the "natural" function of the bowels & anus after all, waste processing and removal, are we now to say that these have other "natural" functions science has not yet defined? That is absolutely absurd! The "natural" function of the human reproduction system is to reproduce, regardless of the anomalous behavior that is displayed in the animal kingdom or in humankind. Try as you might you cannot make the unnatural act of homosexuality into a natural act, it simply is not possible.
Last edited:
Hate speech is always the same no matter who it's directed against.