Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I can see that you're terribly confused as to what this thread is about and this particular topic that we're currently discussing.
Rather, I can't figure out if you just forgot what we were talking about or if you're really going overboard in avoiding answering my question.
Granted, that is a little confusing.
While I'm usually pretty good with staying up with conversation in my own thread, your smokescreen without a doubt has been rather confusing.
The topic of conversation was how the LGBTQueer movement has promoted a hoax to promote a homosexual "gene", hoping that society would create laws to protect desires and hence behaviors that the LGBTQueer movement says is unchangeable.
You went off on a tangent about fornication and adultery and I must admit, I dosed off long ago.
BTW, in case there's any hope of your answering the question, it was this: "Why the assumption that God specifically lays down the genetic code in each and every individual? Where are you getting that from?"
You said it, I didn't. I'm just talking about being born with natural sexual desires (heterosexual).
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I'm extremely comfortable when I say that God made mankind in His Image and hence gave us natural sexual desires upon conception in the womb.
I know. The question was why you think one follows the other. And why you seem to think "natural" somehow means "good".
When conducted in the format that God gave mankind (one man, one woman, united in matrimony) it brings forth life, is the nucleus of society (the family) and is extremely healthy (no STD's). I would not only call that "good", I would call that "necessary" for any society.
I agree we're made in God's image. I agree we are born with natural sexual desires. But, as I've pointed out, "natural sexual desires" include desiring people we aren't married to and thus "natural" obviously does not mean "good". Ergo, being made in God's image doesn't mean our natural desires are going to be good and therefore we can't claim any kind of genetic moral purity based on that.
Again, that's why God created government, to legislate and enforce laws that curb immoral behaviors (adultery, out of wedlock sex) and sexual perversion (homosexuality).
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
BTW, I was hoping you'd expound a bit further on this comment that you made:
Quote: Originally posted by Huckleberry
If that's so, then I have to ask about some of the billion other imperfections humans are so often born with. Why don't these things likewise violate that standard?
Surely you're not implying that because God allowed some humans to be born without hearing, seeing or were born with other physical disabilities, that he would create people with deviant sexual desires are you?
No, I was asking a question. And, again, you didn't answer it. At least you referenced the question this time, which is nice, but...yeah, didn't answer.
Boy, it sure sounds like you're saying that if God made people with physical imperfections, why couldn't he make them with sexual ones as well?
Feel free to expound.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Is it just my opinion or do you feel uncomfortable talking about homosexuality, the homosexual movement and it's agenda and want to talk about anything but that?
(LOL...he does feel extremely uncomfortable talking about homosexuality, the homosexual movement and it's agenda).
Not at all. I was a little mystified at this non-sequitor popping up out of nowhere in place of an answer to my ques-...
Oh, wait. Now I get it.
You know what? I'm not even going to repeat this one for you. Go back and find it. That's what you get for playing this dumb homophobe card.
Just so that we're on the same page: Did you call me a homophobe?
On that note: So I can cut your rant to a palatable size, I'll skip some of your quotes and continue with these:
The universe is corrupted by sin. So are we, existing in it as we do. And never mind that we are the original source of that corruption in the first place.
As I've mentioned many times before, that is why God created 3 institutions for the governance of man (the church, the family and civil government) so that man's corruption could be controlled and guided on a constructive path.
Why are you buying into this ridiculous idea that genetically predetermined behavior amounts to a hill of beans?
I just said that God created man in His own Image when it comes to natural sexual desires. I've also pointed out numerous times that it is environmental factors (sexual molestation, a dysfunctional family) that corrupts those desires.
Sure, it's important to the various fields of psychology but not to Christianity. The bible established this point a long time ago. We already know this. It's interesting seeing to what degree and in what manner nature v nurture plays out here, but it doesn't approach the fact that we are born sinners.
This is the trap of the whole "born that way" argument. Don't get confused and fall for it, rushing to argue that God would not create some people homosexuals. He didn't, genes notwithstanding.
Not to worry, I've been exposing this "gay gene hoax" for sometime now and don't plan on falling for the trap.
Now. I think I've offered my position on this issue abundantly and I'm pretty sure I've answer every question you've thrown my way. Are you going to answer any of my questions?
Specifically: Where do you get the idea that being created in God's image means our natural born sexual desires are good?
You've consistently offered the "God's image" argument in defense of heterosexual desires, despite this including the desire to fornicate and commit adultery. And even that apparently because it's your argument against the "born gay" thing.
If this is your argument then you need to explain...well, what this even means. Why it doesn't apply to other things besides sexuality, for instance the sugar desire I mentioned earlier. Why it doesn't apply to birth defects. How this is even an argument, essentially.
So far all I'm getting is: *confusion and distraction* GOD'S IMAGE! *confusion and distraction*
(Ouch, I'm laughing so hard that it hurts. Did he just accuse me of *confusion and distraction* and bring sugar into a thread that deals with what has happened since the decriminalization of homosexuality?).
lain:
