Valmorian

</strong>

No, it doesn't, but then again, wouldn't you feel bad if someone you cared about didn't 'accept' you for having the previous red hair?

</strong>

Involving consenting individuals? Yes.
Why? The better question is Why not?

Good and evil are relative measures. One person's good is anothers evil.

Doubting Didymus

You mean this?:

I think I must also practice abominable behaviours, then:

Same book, same condemnation. Lie with a man: abomination. Eat a lobster: abomination.

Go eat a scallop.

Shadowy Man

But for some reason we are allowed to grasshoppers. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Mageth

- does acceptance of a person = approval of every behavior Y/N

Being homosexual is not a "behavior" of which one might approve or disapprove any more than being heterosexual is.

- Are ALL sexual tastes equally valid? Y/N why?

Being homosexual is not a "sexual taste" any more than being heterosexual is.

- Is being yourself automatically Good? Y/N

Are you heterosexual? If so, is it "Good" to "be yourself" with a consentual member of the opposite sex? Should you go against "being yourself" and participate in consentual same-sex relationships? If the answer is no, then I'd say the same answer applies to the homosexual - it is good for them to "be themselves" with consentual partners of the same sex.

Gamaliel

M, let me try to summerize your position...

- If I am born with a certain characteristic, that characteristic should be seen as good. -

Yes

No, being myself is not automatically good...my actions must be defined and governed by my creator...just because I can have sex with a woman doesn't mean that it is good...


Let me take a step back and ask a previous question...

Is anything wrong with anything? Y/N

Says who?

If I answer that all good/evil is defined by culture or self, can I logically live with the consequences?

G

ImGod

Is anything wrong with anything? Y/N

My answer is C. Depends on the definition of anything. "Anything" is too ambiguous for a yes/no response.

Are you going to keep phrasing everything in the form of a question or are you going to define your stance? So far I feel like you're speaking as a counselor. Nice try, but most of us are past the point of needing gentle guidance to find god.

Says who? Me.

[ December 05, 2002: Message edited by: ImGod ]</p>

Mageth

- If I am born with a certain characteristic, that characteristic should be seen as good. -

I'm not saying that an inborn characteristic should necessarily be seen as "good". I was born with bad vision; I don't consider that "good." But if you or anyone else doesn't "accept" me because I have poor vision, is that good or bad?

Red hair is neither "good" nor "bad", IMO. It's just a characteristic. I was born with red hair. And I have experienced non-acceptance based on that fact, believe it or not! Do you consider that non-acceptance good or bad?

For the record, I'm not gay. But if I was gay, like red hair, I would not consider that "good" or "bad". Just like I don't consider being heterosexual "good" or "bad". The mere fact that one is attracted to members of the same sex, rather than members of the opposite sex, harms no one. Now, would it be good or bad for someone not to accept me because I was heterosexual? Or, if I was, because I was homosexual?

Is anything wrong with anything? Y/N

Says who?

If I answer that all good/evil is defined by culture or self, can I logically live with the consequences?

You are unnecessarily broadening the playing field; we're discussing homosexuality, not "anything". Your stance indicates you consider homosexuality merely a choice (which you seem to consider an "evil" choice).

As stated, being homosexual in and of itself causes no harm, any more than being heterosexual does. The only reason you assign "evil" to it is that you think it's a chosen behavior, and some mouldy ancient book written by a (relatively) primitive culture about a cruel war-god (who is attributed with committing numerous atrocities), and from which you selectively glean what's "good" and "evil", calls it an "abomination." Going by those standards, as has been mentioned, you should consider anyone eating clams an "abomination." You should also have your children stoned to death if they rebel against you, by the way. There's an extensive list of other things you should do, most of which I'm sure you wouldn't even consider actually doing.

[ December 05, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]

[ December 05, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

happyboy

i did not "choose" to be gay, anymore than a child born with freckles "chose" to have freckles. it's a part of me, the same way my near-sighted eyes are a part of me, on a biological level.

Mageth

i did not "choose" to be gay

Exactly. You don't choose to be gay any more than gamaliel (I assume) chooses to be hetero.

Doubting Didymus

But I DO choose to eat prawns, perhaps that makes it an even worse sin?