So, If You're A Christian, You're Then Unfit To Become A Professional Counselor?

[julius]

I'm simply relating from my post #36.

The act of having sex is not the same as sexual preference. You said that it was about being able to procreate. Gays can procreate.

 

[julius]

this is actually fun.

 

[ABM]

Don't pick and chose one, or make a blanket statement.

As far as I know, I've done none of that. I've simply attempted to share a few of the biblical examples/precepts which have lead to the forming of my world-view.

 

[ABM]

The act of having sex is not the same as sexual preference. You said that it was about being able to procreate. Gays can procreate.

Not on their own they can't.

pro·cre·ate: to beget or bring forth (offspring)

 

[barfo]

Not on their own they can't.

No one can procreate "on their own".

barfo

 

[ABM]

No one can procreate "on their own".

barfo

man/woman married couples can procreate on their own, though. I think you got the point.

 

[julius]

Not on their own they can't.

So is sex only for procreation now? And if it is, are the only times you've had relations with a woman, was she A: your wife and B: you were trying to conceive?

what do you say about couples who can't conceive due to infertility?

Seems too much emphasis is being put on sex, considering long term it's not as huge of an issue as this thread seems to imply it is.

Let me ask you this. If you were given the opportunity to be with your (ex?) wife for all of your days, but you never could have sex with her, wouldn't you jump at the chance?

Seems that it shouldn't be about the sex then, because if you were with someone you love, but never could have sex, you'd realize it's not about the sex. It's about love, companionship and compassion. Sex is just gravy.

 

[barfo]

man/woman married couples can procreate on their own, though. I think you got the point.

man/woman unmarried couples can too. as can a gay man and a woman. Or a straight man and a lesbian. Or a gay guy and a lesbian. Or a woman and a turkey baster.

barfo

 

[ABM]

man/woman unmarried couples can too. as can a gay man and a woman. Or a straight man and a lesbian. Or a gay guy and a lesbian. Or a woman and a turkey baster.

barfo

Yep, and it's their "choice". That's what Keeton has asserted, as well.

 

[tlongII]

man/woman married couples can procreate on their own, though. I think you got the point.

Heck, a gay man and gay woman could procreate if they so chose.

 

[tlongII]

man/woman unmarried couples can too. as can a gay man and a woman. Or a straight man and a lesbian. Or a gay guy and a lesbian. Or a woman and a turkey baster.

barfo

I'm not sure about the turkey baster...

 

[SlyPokerDog]

SOME OF YOU HAVE LOST YOUR FU*KING MINDS.

Just saying.









I know these things because I lost mine years ago.

 

[barfo]

Yep, and it's their "choice". That's what Keeton has asserted, as well.

Yes, we all agree that gays are physically capable of having heterosexual sex, just the same as catholic priests. I don't think anyone has ever disputed that.

barfo

 

[tlongII]

I mean did the turkey baster "choose" to have sex?

 

[ABM]

Heck, a gay man and gay woman could procreate if they so chose.

Now you're getting the gist of the OP. ASU maintains that gays/lesbians/whatever are "born" that way. Conversely, Keeton argues that it's a matter of their respective "choice".

 

[tlongII]

Now you're getting the gist of the OP. ASU maintains that gays/lesbians/whatever are "born" that way. Conversely, Keeton argues that it's a matter of their respective "choice".

I get it. You believe people are gay because they choose to be. You also believe that choice to be immoral and therefore said people should be subjected to persecution and prejudice. I'm sorry, but I don't agree with that.

 

[ABM]

I get it. You believe people are gay because they choose to be. You also believe that choice to be immoral and therefore said people should be subjected to persecution and prejudice. I'm sorry, but I don't agree with that.

I agree with your second sentence. However, (third sentence) I never said that "said people" should be subjected to persecution and prejudice. As I had mentioned in another thread, I have family and a number of friends - some, very close - who are gay/lesbian. I don't let me personal convictions inhibit nor jeopardize these relationships in any way, shape, or form. They're not even part of my conversations....nor should be the discussions of the sexual activities of my married friends and family.

 

[julius]

Now you're getting the gist of the OP. ASU maintains that gays/lesbians/whatever are "born" that way. Conversely, Keeton argues that it's a matter of their respective "choice".

Considering there are animals in nature that are homosexual, and the overwhelming majority of homosexuals feel they were "born" that way (no different then I feel I was born 'straight'), I think it's arrogant to think you know more about how a homosexual feels or whether or not they were "born" one way or another.

Growing up, I knew a kid who was obviously gay in elementary school. He may not have had sexual feelings for boys when we were 9, but he was always coming up behind us and playing with our hair, or girls hair. I don't ever remember any of us making fun of him though, but I'm willing to bet he was made fun of for being "different". I should ask him someday.

But anyways, this wasn't some 'choice' he made. It's not like he, at 9 years old, decided "ok, I'm going to be a little more princess than prince. I like looking at Ken more than Barbie".

He was who he was, and he was wired the way he was wired. Why would someone choose to be a member of a minority that is vilified by good hearted "Christians" (and the majority of all religious groups)?

If crandc or kingspeed ever read this rant-a-thon, I pose the following question to them (I picked them because they're the only two openly gay members of our group that I recall).

If you could chose to be straight, where you wouldn't be considered sub-human by some members of the world, would you?

Or, a little better question would be, do you feel as though your "preference" is something you can change? I'm fairly certain I already know the answer.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

ALL OF YOU HAVE LOST YOUR FU*KING MINDS.

Just saying.

Fixed!

 

[julius]

I agree with your second sentence. However, (third sentence) I never said that "said people" should be subjected to persecution and prejudice. As I had mentioned in another thread, I have family and a number of friends - some, very close - who are gay/lesbian. I don't let me personal convictions inhibit nor jeopardize these relationships in any way, shape, or form. They're not even part of my conversations....nor should be the discussions of the sexual activities of my married friends and family.

But the sexual activities of complete strangers? fair game.

 

[ABM]

I think it's arrogant to think you know more about how a homosexual feels or whether or not they were "born" one way or another...

Just because I believe what the Bible has to say about this doesn't make me arrogant.

 

[ABM]

But the sexual activities of complete strangers? fair game.

Only if on a message board.

 

[julius]

Just because I believe what the Bible has to say about this doesn't make me arrogant.

yes it does. Who are you to tell someone else who they should love, or how they should feel?

How would you feel if I said I believe you're only straight because that's what society whats you to be, and you were brainwashed into thinking you were straight?

 

[ABM]

yes it does. Who are you to tell someone else who they should love, or how they should feel?

When did I ever say I should tell someone else who they should love, or how they should feel?

As an aside, I did a quick search and found this. Pretty much sums up where I'm at with all of this...

http://carm.org/homosexuality

 

[barfo]

I mean did the turkey baster "choose" to have sex?

If it didn't want to, it shouldn't have been dressed like that.

barfo

 

[tlongII]

I agree with your second sentence. However, (third sentence) I never said that "said people" should be subjected to persecution and prejudice. As I had mentioned in another thread, I have family and a number of friends - some, very close - who are gay/lesbian. I don't let me personal convictions inhibit nor jeopardize these relationships in any way, shape, or form. They're not even part of my conversations....nor should be the discussions of the sexual activities of my married friends and family.

You never said it, but it seems to clear to me that with your literal beliefs there can't be another way. I don't mean to be harsh, but that's the way I interpret it.

 

[julius]

When did I ever say I should tell someone else who they should love, or how they should feel?

As an aside, I did a quick search and found this. Pretty much sums up where I'm at with all of this...

http://carm.org/homosexuality

You don't see how the whole "choice" thing comes off as you telling someone else how they should feel or who they should love?

 

[ABM]

You never said it, but it seems to clear to me that with your literal beliefs there can't be another way. I don't mean to be harsh, but that's the way I interpret it.

Hey, we ALL have things we're opposed to. That certainly doesn't mean we have to push our own beliefs onto others. That's an entirely different discussion.

 

[ABM]

You don't see how the whole "choice" thing comes off as you telling someone else how they should feel or who they should love?

Read what I just related to tlong.

 

[julius]

Hey, we ALL have things we're opposed to. That certainly doesn't mean we have to push our own beliefs onto others. That's an entirely different discussion.

I agree, she doesn't have to push her own beliefs on others and could just take the stupid classes she needed to instead of whining about religious persecution.