good question
Reshared post from +Atheist ®
Religious doctrine contradictions deserve serious inquiry!~John
Post imported by Google+Blog for WordPress.
They would first have to admit to a genetic component to homosexuality, which would be a problem. Quite a conundrum…
They would first have to admit to a genetic component to homosexuality, which would be a problem. Quite a conundrum…
It seems many Christians that are against homosexuality believe it is a choice, so the question isn't really relevant.
It seems many Christians that are against homosexuality believe it is a choice, so the question isn't really relevant.
Against. If you think this is a good question, you don't REALLY know any Christians.
I'm not trolling and Im not interested in entering in to any debate.
Real Christians would not abort a baby because it's gay.
Against. If you think this is a good question, you don't REALLY know any Christians.
I'm not trolling and Im not interested in entering in to any debate.
Real Christians would not abort a baby because it's gay.
No true Scotsman.
No true Scotsman.
Interesting thought experiment. +John Borgen in case you didn't understand +Gabriel Fitzpatrick's post this will provide more background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
Interesting thought experiment. +John Borgen in case you didn't understand +Gabriel Fitzpatrick's post this will provide more background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
If +John Borgen is saying that a true Christian would accept their fellow human, regardless of sexual orientation, because compassion and acceptance are important virtues, then I agree. If he is just saying they feel that strongly that abortion is wrong… well, I still might agree with his statement, but I don't like the idea behind it as much.
If +John Borgen is saying that a true Christian would accept their fellow human, regardless of sexual orientation, because compassion and acceptance are important virtues, then I agree. If he is just saying they feel that strongly that abortion is wrong… well, I still might agree with his statement, but I don't like the idea behind it as much.
Dumb question. Gay people aren't and won't ever be born gay, they turn gay for several reasons or events they may have gone through.
Dumb question. Gay people aren't and won't ever be born gay, they turn gay for several reasons or events they may have gone through.
And +J.D. de León brings me my Quad Era Demonstrandum like mufuckin clockwork. Fuck I'm good at this.
And +J.D. de León brings me my Quod Era Demonstrandum like mufuckin clockwork. Fuck I'm good at this.
+J.D. de León Do you believe the same for the animals that engage in homosexual sex?
+J.D. de León Do you believe the same for the animals that engage in homosexual sex?
+Sharon Strandskov that is what +John Borgen is saying…
"a true Christian would accept their fellow human, regardless of sexual orientation, because compassion and acceptance are important virtues…"
And you said it so very, very well.
+Sharon Strandskov that is what +John Borgen is saying…
"a true Christian would accept their fellow human, regardless of sexual orientation, because compassion and acceptance are important virtues…"
And you said it so very, very well.
+Sharon Strandskov, we can't be compared to animals for several reasons, one being animals not being able to realize their species would disappear if they all decide to be homosexual.
+Sharon Strandskov, we can't be compared to animals for several reasons, one being animals not being able to realize their species would disappear if they all decide to be homosexual.
+J.D. de León you do realize that your example of why we cannot be compared to animals is itself an example of comparing ourselves to other animals.
+J.D. de León you do realize that your example of why we cannot be compared to animals is itself an example of comparing ourselves to other animals.
I dont think people could make that decision and consider it a religious decision. Because if they were to ask God what he wanted, it obviously would not be for that child to die. Therefore they would be making that decsion without the support of the God they believe in. That kind of decision would be on them, not the God they believe in.
I mean you could point to Sodom and Gomorrah for example of God's distaste for homosexuality, but they were filthy human beings in many other ways, and there homosexuality bordered on rape of individuals. Read some of the things that men from those cities said to Lot when angels came down, those were not homosexuals looking for acceptance and equal rights. They were filthy vermin, and i would consider them sexual predators. That is the filth he wiped from the face of the earth.
I dont think people could make that decision and consider it a religious decision. Because if they were to ask God what he wanted, it obviously would not be for that child to die. Therefore they would be making that decsion without the support of the God they believe in. That kind of decision would be on them, not the God they believe in.
I mean you could point to Sodom and Gomorrah for example of God's distaste for homosexuality, but they were filthy human beings in many other ways, and there homosexuality bordered on rape of individuals. Read some of the things that men from those cities said to Lot when angels came down, those were not homosexuals looking for acceptance and equal rights. They were filthy vermin, and i would consider them sexual predators. That is the filth he wiped from the face of the earth.
+J.D. de León That doesn't answer my question, though.
All that argument says to me is that you believe rational thought would allow someone to choose their sexual orientation due to its impact on population, as a service of humanity. Unless I am missing something, that does not negate our similarities to animals in our primal urges, nor our ability to be born homosexual similar to the animals that engage in homosexual sex. Just that one may be born homosexual and choose to have heterosexual sex, which, is a different question entirely.
+J.D. de León That doesn't answer my question, though.
All that argument says to me is that you believe rational thought would allow someone to choose their sexual orientation due to its impact on population, as a service of humanity. Unless I am missing something, that does not negate our similarities to animals in our primal urges, nor our ability to be born homosexual similar to the animals that engage in homosexual sex. Just that one may be born homosexual and choose to have heterosexual sex, which, is a different question entirely.
+Christopher Himes, sure, but I'm guessing you are not understanding what I meant by "we can't be compared to animals for several reasons" – Meaning we can't justify our actions with the actions of animals for we are NOT animals.
+Christopher Himes, sure, but I'm guessing you are not understanding what I meant by "we can't be compared to animals for several reasons" – Meaning we can't justify our actions with the actions of animals for we are NOT animals.
+J.D. de León Excuse me, I thought I was dealing with a serious person. My mistake.
+J.D. de León Excuse me, I thought I was dealing with a serious person. My mistake.
+Sharon Strandskov, I'm not sure what is it you don't understand about my answer. Animals aren't born 'gay' either, how in the world would they procreate? – Animals also eat their own excrement, their own vomit, they eat each other!
So no, I don't believe the same about animals, they have no soul so I don't have to worry about their actions, I, as well as true Christians, simply want to keep people from sin.
+Sharon Strandskov, I'm not sure what is it you don't understand about my answer. Animals aren't born 'gay' either, how in the world would they procreate? – Animals also eat their own excrement, their own vomit, they eat each other!
So no, I don't believe the same about animals, they have no soul so I don't have to worry about their actions, I, as well as true Christians, simply want to keep people from sin.
+Jim Benson and +Gabriel Fitzpatrick Thank you so very much in pointing that out. I'd never heard the term "No true Scotsmen" and enjoyed reading the wiki.
I'm sorry I committed such a fallacy in my statement. I'm very happy with the way +Sharon Strandskov explained my position (or postulated my position perhaps). However, I will try not to suffer the same fallacy again.
I love Google Plus of this kind of stuff!
+Jim Benson and +Gabriel Fitzpatrick Thank you so very much in pointing that out. I'd never heard the term "No true Scotsmen" and enjoyed reading the wiki.
I'm sorry I committed such a fallacy in my statement. I'm very happy with the way +Sharon Strandskov explained my position (or postulated my position perhaps). However, I will try not to suffer the same fallacy again.
I love Google Plus of this kind of stuff!
+J.D. de León Just in case you didn't know, humans are actually animals.
+J.D. de León Just in case you didn't know, humans are actually animals.
+J.D. de León I see that we will not be able to have a productive discussion, so there is no point in continuing. Have a good day.
+J.D. de León I see that we will not be able to have a productive discussion, so there is no point in continuing. Have a good day.
+Sean Pereira, I'm not sure you know where the word "animal" comes from, if you consider yourself an animal then I'm not sure I want to get into that conversation with you.
+Sean Pereira, I'm not sure you know where the word "animal" comes from, if you consider yourself an animal then I'm not sure I want to get into that conversation with you.
+Sharon Strandskov, I'm guessing a productive discussion would have been agreeing with you at some point? – Thank you, have a great day yourself
+Sharon Strandskov, I'm guessing a productive discussion would have been agreeing with you at some point? – Thank you, have a great day yourself
+Sean Pereira I think you can tell from my comments that I am on your side of this topic, but there is a key difference between us and most other animals. It is likely that we are the only animals with the rational thought processes that allow us to choose to suppress our primal instincts. All that says though is that someone who was born gay can choose to deny who they are and suffer a life of going against what is natural for them, in favor of procreation and societal norms.
+Sean Pereira I think you can tell from my comments that I am on your side of this topic, but there is a key difference between us and most other animals. It is likely that we are the only animals with the rational thought processes that allow us to choose to suppress our primal instincts. All that says though is that someone who was born gay can choose to deny who they are and suffer a life of going against what is natural for them, in favor of procreation and societal norms.
I would like to point out though that being homosexual does not prevent someone from procreating, it just means that they will not do so via sex with their partner.
Additionally, there are plenty of humans who are not able to procreate due to health conditions, so I don't put value on people based on their ability to have children.
I would like to point out though that being homosexual does not prevent someone from procreating, it just means that they will not do so via sex with their partner.
Additionally, there are plenty of humans who are not able to procreate due to health conditions, so I don't put value on people based on their ability to have children.
+Sharon Strandskov We suppress our instincts to a point. We are naturally attracted to others that will provide the best offspring. Our purpose on this planet, much like animals, is to spread our DNA and continue our bloodlines.
As for homosexuality, if it is determined from birth then it should be considered a birth defect. As a birth defect then a cure should be sought out. Coming from an evolutionary standpoint, the idea of a defect that has the potential to eliminate the species should be terribly disconcerting.
Before you point out the other health conditions that affect procreation, don't forget there are people out there looking for a cure for these ailments.
+Sharon Strandskov We suppress our instincts to a point. We are naturally attracted to others that will provide the best offspring. Our purpose on this planet, much like animals, is to spread our DNA and continue our bloodlines.
As for homosexuality, if it is determined from birth then it should be considered a birth defect. As a birth defect then a cure should be sought out. Coming from an evolutionary standpoint, the idea of a defect that has the potential to eliminate the species should be terribly disconcerting.
Before you point out the other health conditions that affect procreation, don't forget there are people out there looking for a cure for these ailments.