Homosexuality

[Esau of Isaac]

Maybe, but you must be careful. If you challenge something that's deeply rooted into someone as "right" or "wrong", you stand a good chance of alienating them. Pick your fights and words wisely.

Absolutely every person I have aggressively mocked for their insulated religious beliefs eventually joined me in my heathen ways, I'll have you know. :V

Rather more seriously, while you are correct that there are some who require gentler means of persuading, they are fewer and farther between. Being more kindly about tackling something you find truly outrageous may come off as more acceptable on the forum, but I personally believe it is far less effective as it gives the individual the impression that their beliefs are themselves acceptable in your eyes, even if stated otherwise. This is even forgetting the fact that debates are not based upon persuasion of the opponent. If they were, the practice would itself be even more pointless than I'm guessing most here assume it already is. Instead, individuals attempt to persuade those who are in between the two. Aggressive and even negative argumentation can give a sense of confidence and surety which helps this process along. Also, it's a fair way to pass stress from you to the opponent.

[Fire Emblem Addict]

^This

Anyways, I just don't see the logical correlation between "deviance" and "morally wrong".

Edited May 22, 2011 by Fire Emblem Addict

[Caliban of Sycorax]

Because some forms of social deviance are acceptable. I don't remember the terms but there's a set of social "laws" that nobody observes, and nobody cares if someone deviates. The example I remember in the book is a guy walking down the street shirtless. Nobody cares if he's shirtless unless he's fat and hairy.

[Phoenix Wright]

Because I believe homosexuality is a sin, no, I don't believe they should have the right to marriage.

Now you're confusing me.

Let me get this straight:

You believe in the separation of church and state.

You believe that laws should not constrict rights.

You believe that unjust laws exist.

Why are you against gay marriage? You are a hypocrite. As long as laws don't affect you negatively (ie, religiously), I guess you believe in the ideologies above.

[Ring Wraith]

Ring_Wraith: It is good to see that you are firm in your faith, but I think you'd be better received if you'd stop condemning things. You may not agree with it, but it is not our place to judge others. Leave that to He who knows better.

...We're debating whether homosexuality is wrong or not. You really can't debate against homosexuality unless you condemn it.

I'm not judging them. I'm not condemning them. Just their actions. I'm not saying "Homosexuals are the devil and are going to Hell in a space shuttle because of their wicked deeds." Homosexuals will be in Heaven. Heaven will be filled with sinners. However, I do have a problem when sin is looked at as unsinful.

To say you condemn homosexuality is to condemn homosexuals from expressing who they are. To the best of my knowledge, most homosexuals don't get to choose their sexual orientation. Therefore, for to say that you condemn homosexuality is to condemn a part of who they are (a part that they can't change at that). This, in my opinion, is very much like condemning someone for how they look or sound. From this logic, homosexuals can either express their homosexuality and risk being condemned, or they could be forced to suffer through a life of sexual abstinence just because some ancient text says that its "wrong".

I condemn lust too. Does that mean I condemn everyone (myself included) from expressing who we are? Nobody chooses to be so hormone driven, and we can't change that fact. Temptation is not a sin. Acting on it is.

There have been homosexuals who have forsaken that lifestyle. They can change.

Working on a statement of why I believe...hopefully will have it done in the next couple of days, but I want to be thorough.

[Caliban of Sycorax]

There have been homosexuals who have forsaken that lifestyle. They can change.

Do you seriously want to argue that path? Because the only people who believe it are Jesus freaks and Bible thumpers.

You CANNOT forsake your identity. You can DENY it but you cannot FORSAKE IT. IF you can choose to not be gay then you can choose to be gay. Not true.

[Fire Emblem Addict]

If you condemn the action of having sex then yes, you would be condemning everyone from expressing who they are without just cause.

They can change.

And why should they might I ask? Because some people condemn it (without just reason I must add)? This is like me going around the city telling people they shouldn't have sex because I "condemn" and then I pull out my 1700 year old book that agrees with me as "justification". No one should have the right to ask others to "change" just because he/she does not like what others do.

EDIT: I was under the impression that you meant change as in "not act upon their homosexuality". If Caesar's interpretation on what you said was correct (i.e. you're saying that gays can become "not gay"), then I'm afraid that's even worse. In this case, like Caesar said, you're trying to force them to change their identity.

Edited May 22, 2011 by Fire Emblem Addict

[Strawman]

There have been homosexuals who have forsaken that lifestyle. They can change.

Do you seriously want to argue that path? Because the only people who believe it are Jesus freaks and Bible thumpers.

You CANNOT forsake your identity. You can DENY it but you cannot FORSAKE IT. IF you can choose to not be gay then you can choose to be gay. Not true.

On the Oprah Network(OWN) there was this show called "Our America" where TV Journalist Lisa Ling went around the U.S. exploring different aspects of our society or whatever. Well one of the episodes was titled "Pray the Gay Away?" and it was basically about Christian Homosexuals. There is actually some huge convention where homosexuals get together and try to pray themselves straight basically. It also focused on this one woman who claims to have been gay but was turned straight be God. She was helping this gay teenager try and turn straight. While some of the leaders of the convention and the idea behind it seems really ridiculous and wrong, some of the people seemed happier about it. The woman was definitely happier and the kid did too. It was completely up to choice, not something that was forced. But of course it still brings up an issue with self image. They also showed a Christian summer camp for gay teens that was trying to teach them that there isn't anything wrong with being gay and Christian.

You guys should check it out now that you've brought the whole turning straight issue. Its really interesting. They even had like a live discussion show afterward where people could call in and share their thoughts.

Oh and just to clarify I am not taking sides on this current issue with this post. Its just meant to tell you about a relevant episode of a Tv Documentary.

Edited May 22, 2011 by Strawman the SawmanShaman

[Fire Emblem Addict]

I disagree strongly with this "turn the gays straight" philosophy because you're teaching the homosexuals that there's something "wrong" with them, something that needs fixing. Once again, these claims are unjustified.

[Bearissoslow]

You can't change human nature, only repress it.

[eclipse]

Perhaps more research on the nature of human sexuality is in order? I remember once upon a time, I hated broccoli, but now I like it. . .

[Bearissoslow]

Yes, more research is definitively needed, since you don't seem to understand the difference between human nature and preference.

[eclipse]

People change, but that doesn't seem like something that's important to you. I've seen cases of gays being in a straight relationship and having children before admitting/realizing that they weren't happy because they were living a lie. Don't see why it can't work the other way. What I'd like to know is WHY this happens. Were they truly repressing something for that long? Did something else in their psyche change?

[Bearissoslow]

People change, but that doesn't seem like something that's important to you.

Baseless attack on my character? Boy, now I know I'm in for a well-tempered argument.

I've seen cases of gays being in a straight relationship and having children before admitting/realizing that they weren't happy because they were living a lie.

...And? What's your point? They repressed their sexuality and found themselves miserable because of it. Aren't you pretty much agreeing with me?

Don't see why it can't work the other way.

When did I ever say anything about a situation? Why are you assuming my arguments before I make them? I never said "only gay people can't be fixed"; don't be an idiot and put words in my mouth. You know what I did say? "Human nature cannot be changed, only repressed." How about you start attacking my real words and not just the ones that your strawman is saying? Just a suggestion.

What I'd like to know is WHY this happens. Were they truly repressing something for that long? Did something else in their psyche change?

Well, clearly. They didn't embrace their sexuality. It wasn't necessarily a conscious decision of "I'm going to choose to be straight", it was just a repressed side of them that never got a chance to blossom due to undeterminable circumstances.

Sorry if I'm hostile btw, stupid sunburns make me irritable.

Edited May 22, 2011 by Bearissoslow

[eclipse]

If you're sunburned and irritated, I don't think this is the best place for you to be.

[Ring Wraith]

Do you seriously want to argue that path? Because the only people who believe it are Jesus freaks and Bible thumpers.

Well, I'm a Jesus freak and a Bible thumper, so why not?

Getting serious, that's basically the only reason to argue against homosexuality anyway. I already said on a strictly political level, I would be for homosexuality. So, when a homosexual becomes a Jesus-freak/Bible-thumper, they believe they can go against that lifestyle. And they do. Google it.

You CANNOT forsake your identity. You can DENY it but you cannot FORSAKE IT.

Statement retracted. I agree. There's no way to truly get rid of any part of your sin nature, you can only repress it.

I disagree strongly with this "turn the gays straight" philosophy because you're teaching the homosexuals that there's something "wrong" with them, something that needs fixing. Once again, these claims are unjustified.

There's something wrong with all of us, something that needs fixing. Sinful nature. Yes, I am going to use that incredibly overused and cheesy argument. It's true.

And why should they might I ask? Because some people condemn it (without just reason I must add)? This is like me going around the city telling people they shouldn't have sex because I "condemn" and then I pull out my 1700 year old book that agrees with me as "justification". No one should have the right to ask others to "change" just because he/she does not like what others do.

You're correct. There's no reason they should change because of something I believe. Unless of course the Bible is right, and God does exist, and He does think it's wrong. I understand this isn't doing much to sway you (of course, I haven't been trying to sway you), but I'm hoping once I get around to finishing my statement of why I believe you'll be able to see where I'm coming from.

[Fire Emblem Addict]

In that case, I eagerly await for justification for these claims.

[Zanarkin]

Getting serious, that's basically the only reason to argue against homosexuality anyway. I already said on a strictly political level, I would be for homosexuality. So, when a homosexual becomes a Jesus-freak/Bible-thumper, they believe they can go against that lifestyle. And they do. Google it.

And they live a lie and wonder why their life is so miserable.

There's something wrong with all of us, something that needs fixing. Sinful nature. Yes, I am going to use that incredibly overused and cheesy argument. It's true.

Animals also require this then. They don't get punished.

You're correct. There's no reason they should change because of something I believe. Unless of course the Bible is right, and God does exist, and He does think it's wrong. I understand this isn't doing much to sway you (of course, I haven't been trying to sway you), but I'm hoping once I get around to finishing my statement of why I believe you'll be able to see where I'm coming from.

If he thinks its wrong he's really weird. He made us and therefore made human nature. I'm sorry why would he create something he sees as "wrong".

[Crystal Shards]

Sexuality is fluid. That only means that things can change. It doesn't mean that one particular interest is better than the other, or that a basic legal right should be disregarded to those who are deemed abnormal. Interracial relationships were--and still are to some extent--seen as abnormal. But we don't deny people who are attracted to and engage in relationships with another race. The same goes for most other aspects of sexuality. We don't tell people they can't be attracted to blondes, or that they can't be attracted to tan people, or responsible people, or "'bad boys/girls"... Sexual orientation is just another aspect of our sexualities which are due partially due to genetics and also due to experiences. Sexuality is a huge part of who we are because it encompasses so much.

As for people who have changed their sexuality, a lot of that is repressed, and it's easy to say that due to community pressure they seem happy, but many of them aren't. I've done a lot of research on this topic (indeed, it's a huge part of my research going into a PhD program--I'm not saying that as some kind of authoritative statement, but just rather an explanation of how I've come into contact with a lot of this information), and I can tell you right now: many of them are not as happy as they seem. This is true for a lot of people. Are there people who have changed/repressed their sexuality and are happy with their lives? No doubt. But for every happy (or seemingly happy) story of a "reformed Gay" you can find, I can find countless cases of communities where the person was forced to be exorcised or tortured until s/he "admitted" s/he was really straight, and it caused permanent mental (and sometimes physical) damage.

In short, don't just believe what you want--look at the other side too.

And I will stress yet again: weddings are religious. Marriages are legal contracts. Religious arguments against gay marriage don't fly by me because they aren't relevant. If you want to talk about gay weddings, we can talk. But any religions' belief system should not enter into our legal system, for obvious reasons.

[Janissary]

And I will stress yet again: weddings are religious. Marriages are legal contracts. Religious arguments against gay marriage don't fly by me because they aren't relevant. If you want to talk about gay weddings, we can talk. But any religions' belief system should not enter into our legal system, for obvious reasons.

As a Christian and IRL friend of RingWraith (kind of), I agree with the above sentiment. I could not care less what the government has to say about gays. The government doesn't tell me what my morality is, and won't ever. If they think marriage is a right to all regardless of gender, go for it. Marriage is largely just glorified cohabitation to the government anyway. That being said, on a religious, moral, and "wedding" level, I oppose homosexuality because the source of my morality has stated that it is an abomination against the natural order. However, governmentally speaking, yeah, they probably should be allowed to marry.

As for the issues that homosexuals are taught they are born bad by the Church, yes, they are. But, so is everyone else. Christianity has held since its inception that all man, regardless of anything, is born full of sin -i.e. not good. So, assuming homosexuality is genetic and thus "born that way", I think that argument is irrelevant in the context of Christian conversion as any strong Christian church would say the same thing to a straight man.

[Caliban of Sycorax]

The difference is that the Catholic Church just likes to take it out more on us by throwing Leviticus and Sodom & Gomorrah at us.

[eclipse]

The difference is that the Catholic Church just likes to take it out more on us by throwing Leviticus and Sodom & Gomorrah at us.

Not all Christians are Catholic.

[Caliban of Sycorax]

Not all Christians are homophobic either.

[Janissary]

Not all Christians are homophobic either.

I think homophobia in Christians began initially as fear that acceptance would be condoning the lifestyle, and since they didn't know how to act, they simply avoided. And because people like Fred Phelps don't know anything.

Personally, I think Christians are called to be known by love. I'm no less sinful than a homosexual because I am straight, I have simply been given eternal mercies. If that is true, I don't see any reason why I can't be merciful and love those who are in sin as I was.

*obvious note: I am making the assumption my beliefs are true. I am just putting a note so you don't say it later if you disect the post.

Edited May 30, 2011 by Janissary

[Fire Emblem Addict]

And am I to understand that you imply homosexuals cannot obtain these same "eternal mercies"? But anyways, I don't really mind people saying "I don't like it, but it's not my place to tell them what they should or should not do" (which I take to be your opinion from reading your posts). However, I do mind (as I have stated above) people saying "What you're doing is wrong and you should stop doing it" without proper justification. Unfortunately, the second opinion is prevalent amongst the christian community (from what I've seen talking with people from this church that I used to frequent).