Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Arrowman · 08-01-2002, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:
<strong>...Roadkill makes me vomit.
But I would eat it if the only other choice was starving....</strong>

So, Theo, if you were facing a future with no prospects of a heterosexual relationship, you'd start bonking guys just so you'd get some. Is that what you're saying? I doubt it.

You've asserted that homosexuality is a choice, but you haven't backed this up. I've seen Christians do this before.

The closest you've come is this suggestion that "homosexual sex is better than none" - which is clearly wrong on two counts:

1. For most heterosexual men, the preferences would be
a. Heterosexual sex.
b. Daylight.
c. Celibacy.
d. Daylight.
- Homosexual sex just ain't on the list of options.
2. The implication is that homosexual men are butt-ugly losers who can't get a woman. Again, clearly false.

So, Theo - put your money where your assertion is.

Please explain, in specific terms, how homosexuality is a choice - why it is attractive etc, and in particular why homosexuals choose that orientation over heterosexual relationships.

Your time starts now.

scigirl · 08-01-2002, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrowman:
Thing is, people use their religion to reinforce and justify their personal beliefs - whether that is on matters of morals, sexuality, politics, whatever. Why are so many Southern Baptists politically conservative (and very often they will use Scripture to support their views), while Anglican church leaders often espouse views which are eseentially politically "left"? It's the people and the way they use their religion; not the religion itself.

That is a very good point.

So. . .what are we to do, to try and get the religion out of politics, and make laws based on common sense and reason??

scigirl

Opera Nut · 08-01-2002, 05:13 PM

Dum, de, dummm, de, do, de, dummmm........

[Tapping toes, twiddling thumbs.....]

Still waiting for those True Christian [TM] donations to lift me out of my sinful state!!!

tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick.......

St. Robert · 08-01-2002, 05:13 PM

Anyone who claims to love Jesus, yet hates homosexuals is a liar, not a Christian (1 John 4:20-21).

Arrowman · 08-01-2002, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by scigirl:
<strong>So. . .what are we to do, to try and get the religion out of politics, and make laws based on common sense and reason??
</strong>

Well, make you the US President and me the Australian PM for a start.

I have no idea.

Consider the political debates on abortion and stem cell research, for example. Many people who are not particularly religious, would have an aversion to these things based on purely personal feelings, and fair enough. But I venture to say that such people would not necessarily campaign strongly to outlaw these activities; the question remains a personal and relatively subjective one.

The problems start when you have a strong religious belief that a 200-cell embryo is a human life, blessed by God or whatever, which must be protected at all costs - and they believe that this is an objective view. Unfortunately our legislators sometimes have difficulty telling the difference.

Bree · 08-02-2002, 10:43 AM

I'm still waiting with baited breath for the acceptance of a formal debate

.

St. Robert · 08-02-2002, 04:22 PM

I'm willing to debate anyone on the topic of homosexuality from a biblical perspective.

Dr Rick · 08-02-2002, 04:32 PM

Would you please tell us what you think "the Biblical perspective" on homosexuality is and what position you would be defending?

Thanks,

Rick, Moderator of the Formal Debates and Discussions forum

St. Robert · 08-02-2002, 04:55 PM

We could start with why God considers homosexual sex to be a sin.

Dr Rick · 08-02-2002, 08:19 PM

...That's not a start, though; prequisite to discussing "why God considers" anything is a convincing argument or at least a presuppostion that there is such a thing as a god. Then you would have to convincingly argue "what" God considers before you could begin to debate "why."

"Does Christianity promote gay and lesbian bigotry?", on the other hand, requires no a priori theistic arguments or assumptions.

Rick

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-01-2002, 05:13 PM	#163
Opera Nut Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Houston TX Posts: 1,671	Dum, de, dummm, de, do, de, dummmm........ [Tapping toes, twiddling thumbs.....] Still waiting for those True Christian [TM] donations to lift me out of my sinful state!!! tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick.......

08-01-2002, 05:13 PM	#164
St. Robert Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 170	Anyone who claims to love Jesus, yet hates homosexuals is a liar, not a Christian (1 John 4:20-21).

08-02-2002, 10:43 AM	#166
Bree Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Twin Cities, USA Posts: 3,197	I'm still waiting with baited breath for the acceptance of a formal debate .

08-02-2002, 04:22 PM	#167
St. Robert Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 170	I'm willing to debate anyone on the topic of homosexuality from a biblical perspective.

08-02-2002, 04:32 PM	#168
Dr Rick Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: USA Posts: 5,393	Would you please tell us what you think "the Biblical perspective" on homosexuality is and what position you would be defending? Thanks, Rick, Moderator of the Formal Debates and Discussions forum

08-02-2002, 04:55 PM	#169
St. Robert Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 170	We could start with why God considers homosexual sex to be a sin.

08-02-2002, 08:19 PM	#170
Dr Rick Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: USA Posts: 5,393	...That's not a start, though; prequisite to discussing "why God considers" anything is a convincing argument or at least a presuppostion that there is such a thing as a god. Then you would have to convincingly argue "what" God considers before you could begin to debate "why." "Does Christianity promote gay and lesbian bigotry?", on the other hand, requires no a priori theistic arguments or assumptions. Rick

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.