• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Christianity and Homosexuality

Status
Not open for further replies.
These articles demonstrate some genetic basis for sexual orientation, but also observe that the unique environment a child develops in molds his sexual identity. It is due to both genotype and phenotype. Why do you think God does not use both nature and nurture to apply a soul's karmic debts to an incarnation's life?

I wouldn't trust Wikipedia, and I wouldn't trust a book unless it's based on primary research and not personal theory. Show me some primary research articles that point out homosexual physiology or a candidate gene. As of now, there is no proven genetic linkage, and from what I understand there is no classical Mendelian inheritance pattern for sexual orientation.
 
I wouldn't trust Wikipedia, and I wouldn't trust a book unless it's based on primary research and not personal theory. Show me some primary research articles that point out homosexual physiology or a candidate gene. As of now, there is no proven genetic linkage, and from what I understand there is no classical Mendelian inheritance pattern for sexual orientation.

Wikipedia has references to the basic research. Are you saying that 88 references, like the wiki page I posted, is insufficient foundation? Most scientists would disagree.

The other link I provided is basic research from 2005.

It does point out a genetic basis and correlation, but it is not clear and they point out that a mixture of genetics and environment contributing, with environment as the more prevalent cause. However, there still remains a genetic link.
 
It really takes some Scriptural gymnastics to find support for homosexuality in the Bible.
 
It really takes some Scriptural gymnastics to find support for homosexuality in the Bible.

I would say the opposite is true. The Bible has been translated to present that view.
 
I personally do nopt believe in any type of God or Goddess, so in my own opinion people just need to get over this issue. Obama is getting a lot of "crap" from some groups of people (Religous finatics), for his support on the Gay Marriage issue. In my own opinion just let them get married , it's not like I am going to marry the guy, so i see no point in worrying about it, but then there are some people who say, "Fags, willl destroy what marriage stands for." I care to disagree. Homosexuals or as some call them 'Fags," make loving parents and spouses and hardly ever divorce the spouses like some heterosexual couples,but some like to bring religon into this argument saying, 'God, says marrigae is between a man and a women." Again, your God or religous figures have no say in making laws or what goes on between a man and man, women and women, or man and women. I believe in seperation of Church and State for this reason and so did our founding fathers. Religon and Politics are a bad combination and should be avoided.
 
You can say it all you want, but 99% of Christendom doesn't agree with this assertion. Maybe that should tell you something.

I don't think anyone would argue that the transliteration of the Scriptures is not word for word perfect. Some languages have no equivalent words. However TPD contends that though the Bible could not have come through unscathed, Jesus's words did. This makes no sense, because there is the just as much chance that Jesus' words were changed as any other word in the Bible. We have many transliterations from Hebrew to English now, and translations from Greek to English. It seems these versions have been thoroughly reviewed by many.
 
You are wrong, there is articles and prove that their is a thing called the "gay gene."
The Real Story on Gay Genes | Sex & Gender | DISCOVER Magazine

It's difficult for me to take seriously a .com piece that states, "It is not clear if Hamer and his team found the locus of the genetic code that causes men to memorize lines from A Star Is Born."

Or this "paradoxical" statement: "Whether or not a gay gene, a set of gay genes, or some other biological mechanism is ever found [This means that a gay gene has NOT been found], one thing is clear: The environment a child grows up in has nothing to do with what makes most gay men gay. Two of the most convincing studies have proved conclusively that sexual orientation in men has a genetic cause ["Proved conclusively" means that a gay gene has been found]."
 
I don't know where I stand on this issue.

There are so many interpretations on the Bible.

If you think homosexuality is wrong, well, more and more oftenly you're branded as some sort of hateful monster. You can't even voice an opinion against it on TV any more without running the risk of losing your job, being demonized, raged against, etc.

What's a person to do? Just cave in?
 
...If you think homosexuality is wrong, well, more and more oftenly you're branded as some sort of hateful monster...

more like "if you think homosexuality is evil, immoral, and disgusting....and homosexuals are sinful beings who are hated by God"
 
more like "if you think homosexuality is evil, immoral, and disgusting....and homosexuals are sinful beings who are hated by God"

Please clarify so I can understand the point of your post.
 
its self-explanatory.

extreme religious homophobes tend to be the ones who are accused of being hateful.

OK, you seemed to have clarified your point.

That said, I disagree. Those who merely have an opinion against homosexuality/whatever are, as I said stated earlier, maligned.

Building off of that, I'd imagine it's difficult to hold that view when you're continuously raged against. More times than not you see a person post an argument or two not in favor of homosexuality/gay marriage and that person is either attacked or other insinuate that that person needs to "come out of the closet." It's intellectually dishonest and wrong. No fair discussion is going to happen when people attack them like that.
 
OK, you seemed to have clarified your point.

That said, I disagree. Those who merely have an opinion against homosexuality/whatever are, as I said stated earlier, maligned.

Building off of that, I'd imagine it's difficult to hold that view when you're continuously raged against. More times than not you see a person post an argument or two not in favor of homosexuality/gay marriage and that person is either attacked or other insinuate that that person needs to "come out of the closet." It's intellectually dishonest and wrong. No fair discussion is going to happen when people attack them like that.

does it surprise you that folks who are accused of being evil, Satanic, hated by God, and an abomonation, have equally mean words to throw at those who attack them?
 
does it surprise you that folks who are accused of being evil, Satanic, hated by God, and an abomonation, have equally mean words to throw at those who attack them?

But that's dishonest.

Would you like to know why?
 
Moderator's Warning:
This dead horse has been beaten long enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom