California Proposition 8

[Mare Tranquillity]

Now you're really inserting your own reality into the fray...
I insisted on staying away from religious discussions involving this subject and sticking to science.

Let me refer you to my post from page 6:

You are attempting to insert religion into my arguments because on their own merit they are kicking your butt. So to sully them, you need to make them look like bias instead of critical thinking.

I understand. It's just that you're dealing with people here that are smarter than the average bear and see through your devices.

And aside: Oh, and Andy, I'm a woman. I tried to log on originally with the name "Silhouette" with an "L", to spell the word properly. For some reason it wouldn't let me so I dropped the "L" and it worked.

Yes, well let's deal with your famous quote from page 6, that's why I said "imaginary logic". If you start with false premises you can very logically produce unassailably false conclusions. Which is what you have done. Before you can make a logical argument you must have a logical, provable basis or else you're just building on sand. You have not provided a single iota of scientific evidence to support your initial conditions, therefore the "garbage in/ garbage out" rule applies.

As to your lack of religion, I think that is a calculated sham because you know it's unsupportable from the get go and you feel that faux science is a more likely prospect in an age when people are actually talking seriously about "creation science". You also can attempt bolster your credibility by claiming (again no proof given) that you majored in biology.

I have given two credible scientific sources aimed at the layman level of education, each with sources more accessible to the professional researcher. So far I'm the only one backing up my statements.

(Sihouette, I thought initially that you were a woman, but one of the other posts referred to you in the masculine so I thought my first impression had been wrong, sorry.)

 

[top gun]

Of course gays are human beings. Just like any other deviant. We need to view them compassionately because in my opinion and from my observation, most of them are "made", environmentally formed in an impressionable age by an inappropriate contact from an older homosexual. And once they are thus harmed, their sexual urges seem to be permanently fixed that way. We just decided we don't want their impressionable mental affect to be modeled as a normal sexual relationshp (marriage) between two adults.

That's why I gave the examples of farm animals who were frustrated or trained to mount dummy females for the purposes of artificial insemination (AI). Trainers all know to get at the animal right at the onset of puberty because this is the time they are most malleable to be "set" towards a certain type of sexual behavior. Many of these bulls, stallions and boars will only mount a dummy and will turn askance from even a female in heat. This is not their normal behavior and it was trained. This is how powerful the sexual-preference malleablility factor is in mammals, of which we are.

Now if common farm folk have that mechanism down to a science and know full-well that sexuality is imprinted just at the onset of adolescence, then how come human behavioralists sit around scratching their heads, sitting on their hands and playing dumb and mute when it comes to the same mechanism in people? That's where your blinding acedemia and political-correctness gets in the way of common sense every time..

Homosexuality is a deviant sexual behavior in all animals since sexuality in animals originated to procreate young. It is the most common-sense thing you can say to describe the situation.

Yes, homosexuality is deviant behavior and we don't model deviant behavior as "normal" to our impressionable youth. Remember, youth can sense hypocrisy immediately. When we teach them that the sexual drives came about to create offspring and then ask them to accept homosexuality as "normal" we will show them we are dysfunctional, and then they'll either run with that and rub our noses in it (rebel) or model themselves after hypocrisy.. Neither of which is desireable.

My advice would be stick to "farm animal psychology" and leave the human interpretations out... because right down the line every single analogy you made as far as human gay people goes... have been clinically proven wrong like a gazillion times.

They have about a million books out on it... maybe hit the library?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Ok, the facts and evidence I was referring to was outlined in post #66. That's not religious dogma, that's scientifically provable evidence.

Wait a second, in post #82 you said they were religious dogma, so which is it? You gotta get your story straight or we're liable to think you're lying.

Assuming that you are referring to the Bible and such, you have brought up the Bible more than anyone on this thread. You can claim that it is religious dogma, but you have failed to make any provable points about it.

As even you have noted, the whole argument here is based on religious dogma. You don't have a shred of scientific evidence to support your religous beliefs--despite Sih's heroic biological histrionics.

Your refusal to accept his logic, does not make it "imaginary". Nor does your inability to consider other view points make you less "bigoted" than those you are arguing with.

Apparently having no more scientific education than she, you are willing to accept her fallacious basic premise and follow her line of logic to its fallacious conclusion because YOU Want it to be true. Scientific facts based on research don't seem to have the same credibility for you as the maunderings of a bunch of nomadic goat-herders who claim that God told them it was okay to keep slaves, sell children, rape women, and commit genocide.

I have talked with people like you before, and learned many things from doing so. Namely, it would be pointless for me to get the references that you refer to as basis of your fruity claims. Because even after I explain the real meaning, the context, the obvious observation of what they really mean, you will no doubt, neither accept that, nor learn anything from it.

In other words, you accept by faith the view the Bible supports those things, and if someone were to challenge that, you would bigotedly reject all new information.

Why should I waste my time? It does no good for me, because most of those I've heard before and know the answer. It does not good for you, because you are religiously attached to your belief, and will never give it up.

Andy, I would love to get along with Christians, but they keep passing judgment on me based on what they interpret the Bible to mean--sorry but that doesn't work well. THREE THOUSAND sects of Christians in the world today and NONE of them can agree on what the Bible really means. In all of your posts I have never once seen you quote what Jesus said were the two most important commandments in the Bible. Why? Why is bashing gay people so much more important than doing what Jesus said were the two most important things? I've never been able to understand that.

 

[Andy]

Wait a second, in post #82 you said they were religious dogma, so which is it? You gotta get your story straight or we're liable to think you're lying.

That was sarcasm. I was laughing at you, for calling facts and evidence "religious dogma".

As even you have noted, the whole argument here is based on religious dogma. You don't have a shred of scientific evidence to support your religous beliefs--despite Sih's heroic biological histrionics.

Post #66. Thanks for your time.

Apparently having no more scientific education than she, you are willing to accept her fallacious basic premise and follow her line of logic to its fallacious conclusion because YOU Want it to be true. Scientific facts based on research don't seem to have the same credibility for you as the maunderings of a bunch of nomadic goat-herders who claim that God told them it was okay to keep slaves, sell children, rape women, and commit genocide.

It was in a medical journal. Are all medical journals now considered 'religious dogma' as well?

Andy, I would love to get along with Christians, but they keep passing judgment on me based on what they interpret the Bible to mean--sorry but that doesn't work well. THREE THOUSAND sects of Christians in the world today and NONE of them can agree on what the Bible really means. In all of your posts I have never once seen you quote what Jesus said were the two most important commandments in the Bible. Why? Why is bashing gay people so much more important than doing what Jesus said were the two most important things? I've never been able to understand that.

Sure, the two most important commands are to love G-d with all your soul, your heart, your mind, and your strength. And the second, is love your neighbor as yourself.

Btw, how does one love G-d? By following his commands and supporting his word. What does the word say about homosexuality?

This isn't gay bashing. I have yet to bash any gays. I have accurately reported the truth of the homosexual lifestyle. Helping people out of homosexuality, is the most loving thing I can do.

Supporting people who end up with tubes up their rear, and aids for the rest of their lives, is no more loving than giving an alcoholic money for a beer when his wife left him, his kids hate him, and his job fired him. It might be easier, they might like it better, but in the end, both result in destruction.

 

[top gun]

This isn't gay bashing. I have yet to bash any gays. I have accurately reported the truth of the homosexual lifestyle. Helping people out of homosexuality, is the most loving thing I can do.

Supporting people who end up with tubes up their rear, and aids for the rest of their lives, is no more loving than giving an alcoholic money for a beer when his wife left him, his kids hate him, and his job fired him. It might be easier, they might like it better, but in the end, both result in destruction.

Dude do you not even know any gay people?

How about straight people who enjoy anal sex... that's OK. How about the vast majority of people all around the world that contract AIDS that are not homosexual... that's God's revenge for what exactly?

The fact is Andy that what you are doing is not really supporting anybody. What you are doing is you are judging using your own personal biases and prejudices to the table.

You notice that you only focus on gay as in "men". Women that are gay are never mentioned.

You don't see it as I at one time when I was young did not see it because when you are young things often seem very black & white. I can assure you this is not the case.

You will sometime in your life be able to look beyond the stereotype and meet perfectly happy & healthy, extremely successful, gay people that except for some indoctrinated religious bias you actually think of as good people and hopefully even friends. These will be people that you would never in a thousand years even begin to believe were gay... but are.

When that happens you will find it hard to be so judgmental & condescending. Trust me on this.

 

[Sihouette]

My advice would be stick to "farm animal psychology" and leave the human interpretations out... because right down the line every single analogy you made as far as human gay people goes... have been clinically proven wrong like a gazillion times.~Top Gun

We are but farm animals dear, when it comes to sexuality. Our penchant to learn socially as primates, the most potent example of primates who learn socially, sets us into a special class where we can really tweak those primal drives depending on the status quo.

We are animals, only with suits and ties. The problem is that we've convinced ourselves that because we have the ability to use our hands (man..manos...hands) to write an communicate that way, we are somehow innately different from animals in our basic primal drives...foremost of which is the reproductive drive. Which of course many studies have been done on human sexuality and hormonal surges that show we are exactly in line with our animal friends.

There are a million books out on that. I suggest that you hit the library...lol..

Meanwhile, getting back to the social learning thing promoting tweaks of the natural drive to procreate.. The gay marriage proposal must not go forward as "normal" or "the status quo". Again, for all the reasons stated above.

And yes, any heterosexual relationship that involves sex other than normal penal-vaginal copulation is deviant. Remember: don't ask , don't tell and maybe we'll get the sex genie back in the bottle for the most part. I've said before that sex is overrated, overdone, overemphasized to the point of nauseum in our western culture. And because of this people are placing it atop love (pardon the pun) as of importance in love relationships between two (or more) people. So it is virtually today that love is nearly or actually synonymous with sex. And we wonder why entities like NAMBLA exist. It's not enough that a man can feel a deep and profound affection for a junior male, no. He has to also be having sex with him.

We need to tease apart the definitions of deep love and sex. If we are better than animals, then we should be able to do this.

(Sihouette, I thought initially that you were a woman, but one of the other posts referred to you in the masculine so I thought my first impression had been wrong, sorry.)~ Mare

De nada. I take no offense at all. I like men and women equally so any reference to me either way is as complimentary. I think the words "men" and "women" are adjuncts to this debate BTW. In all we are "minds", or "souls" if you will with either a male or female shell...depending on the luck of the draw. We sometimes feel compelled to think or behave in ways tied deeply to sexual sterotypes foisted upon us. Luckily I decided long ago that that was not the way I was going to be "female"...lol.. And in the same vein this is when I decided that it behooves us to preserve the definition of "normal" sex between two people as between a man and a woman. Not liking the opposite gender is not a good excuse for avoiding intimate contact with them sexually. If we find the right partner, many wrongs can be set to right via LOVE as the prelude to sex.

It may be why Anne Heche "defected"...lol... She may have simply found a man to heal the wounds that caused her to seek a same-gender sexual relationship. To put it simply, she fell in love with a man. No crime in that. And if you think that is a crime, then you are a "recruiter" homosexual.

 

[Andy]

Dude do you not even know any gay people?

Yes, like I said before, I know quite a few.

How about straight people who enjoy anal sex... that's OK. How about the vast majority of people all around the world that contract AIDS that are not homosexual... that's God's revenge for what exactly?

Straw-man. Please locate, where in any post, I said this.

The fact is Andy that what you are doing is not really supporting anybody. What you are doing is you are judging using your own personal biases and prejudices to the table.

This coming from someone who openly judges based on how poor people are, and assumes their opinion and information is to be disregarded.

You notice that you only focus on gay as in "men". Women that are gay are never mentioned.

If you looked at the information and data that I posted, it included Women.

You don't see it as I at one time when I was young did not see it because when you are young things often seem very black & white. I can assure you this is not the case.

The information is fairly conclusive and is well documented in many other reports.

You will sometime in your life be able to look beyond the stereotype and meet perfectly happy & healthy, extremely successful, gay people that except for some indoctrinated religious bias you actually think of as good people and hopefully even friends. These will be people that you would never in a thousand years even begin to believe were gay... but are.

When that happens you will find it hard to be so judgmental & condescending. Trust me on this.

I do have, and have had, people I was friends with that were gay. This neither addresses, nor changes the documented evidence of how the gay lifestyle effects people, nor does it change the testimony of those who came out of the gay lifestyle.

You are not one to talk about being judgmental or condescending, when you've been both. A suggestion you might consider, is to fix the plank in your own eye before worrying about the tiny splinter in your neighbors eye.
Matthew 7:3-5

 

[top gun]

We are but farm animals dear, when it comes to sexuality. Our penchant to learn socially as primates, the most potent example of primates who learn socially, sets us into a special class where we can really tweak those primal drives depending on the status quo.

We are animals, only with suits and ties. The problem is that we've convinced ourselves that because we have the ability to use our hands (man..manos...hands) to write an communicate that way, we are somehow innately different from animals in our basic primal drives...foremost of which is the reproductive drive. Which of course many studies have been done on human sexuality and hormonal surges that show we are exactly in line with our animal friends.

That's totally ridiculous if you even take just one second to connect the dots.

When it comes the the "human brain" there is a vast difference between that and animal species. I know of dogs and monkeys that can't even understand they shouldn't eat their own poop.

Reproductive drive obviously has NOTHING to do with human homosexuality since when it comes to gay people I'm almost completely certain no gay humans actually believe that they will be reproducing in their sexual encounters. (once again humans know that because of their knowledge and reasoning capabilities... animals do not... animals can be tricked).

You total hypothesis is just bash the gays because they have another preference whether it be nature or nurture... and it's all unsophisticated, uninformed/misinformed, silly, homophobic thinking.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Post #66. Thanks for your time.

That's it? Post #66? Not a single word about lesbians who have the lowest rate of spousal abuse, the lowest rate of venereal disease, the lowest rate of abortions? You have focused on one part of the male homosexual community and extrapolated to all gay people--male and female. That's every bit as silly as Sih's use of confined, domesticated animals as examples of normal sexual behavior.

Sure, the two most important commands are to love G-d with all your soul, your heart, your mind, and your strength. And the second, is love your neighbor as yourself.

Btw, how does one love G-d? By following his commands and supporting his word. What does the word say about homosexuality?

This isn't gay bashing. I have yet to bash any gays. I have accurately reported the truth of the homosexual lifestyle. Helping people out of homosexuality, is the most loving thing I can do.

Supporting people who end up with tubes up their rear, and aids for the rest of their lives, is no more loving than giving an alcoholic money for a beer when his wife left him, his kids hate him, and his job fired him. It might be easier, they might like it better, but in the end, both result in destruction.

What you have done is bash gays by taking the crazy few and calling all of them the same--pretty hateful. I don't make you out to be Rev. Fred Phelps do I?

And for clarity, Jesus never said anything about homosexual or transsexual people, in fact neither word appears in the Bible. If you are going with all the rest of the stuff in the Bible, then as you probably know ya'll gonna be busy selling children, purifying yourself after touching women who are having their periods, avoiding shellfish, and following a whole lot of other laws supposedly demanded by God.

Part of the "bashing", Andy, is taking one law out of the Bible and applying it to people you don't like, while ignoring all the other laws that would make your life difficult, laws that your religion used to focus on, like inter-faith and interracial marriage, and ignoring them. I don't want to think that you are a hypocrite, but your selective indignation seems to point in that direction. How many scriptures are there in the Bible admonishing us to care for the poor and unfortunate? To give our wealth to the poor? Someone once counted up all of them and it came to nearly 2000. So what do you think is foremost in God's mind? Eating shellfish is condemned with exactly the same word--abomination--as you folks throw at gay people. The Bible also says that if you break one rule it is as if you have broken all of them. Gay bashing is just the flavor of the month for Christians, interracial marriage was the flavor of the month when I was growing up and they used the same arguments and the same rhetoric that is currently being used against gay people.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

We are but farm animals dear, when it comes to sexuality. Our penchant to learn socially as primates, the most potent example of primates who learn socially, sets us into a special class where we can really tweak those primal drives depending on the status quo.

We are animals, only with suits and ties. The problem is that we've convinced ourselves that because we have the ability to use our hands (man..manos...hands) to write an communicate that way, we are somehow innately different from animals in our basic primal drives...foremost of which is the reproductive drive. Which of course many studies have been done on human sexuality and hormonal surges that show we are exactly in line with our animal friends.

There are a million books out on that. I suggest that you hit the library.

Repeating the same discredited argument again suggests that you have no argument. One of the Nazi propaganda fellows in the 2nd World War said that, "A lie told often enough soon gains the substance of truth." Anita Bryant's Christian group proved this again with their campaign to convince people that all homosexuals were child molesters even though statistcally there is no apparent difference in the hetero and homo populations as a whole. If you break the stats down in small enough groups you can ferret out all kinds of interesting things--such as the study in New York State showing that rates spousal abuse could be predicted by how many hunting licenses were sold county by county.

If one nips off to the library as you suggest and avoids the Christian propaganda section, one will find that comparing domesticated animals bred for docility, milk production, weight gain, etc. to wild animals will show that you cannot predict one from the other. Similarly, suggesting that human behavior can extrapolated from feedlot cattle is imaginary logic. There is nothing to support your position and a vague "hit the library" reference is as meaningless as claiming to have majored in biology.

Meanwhile, getting back to the social learning thing promoting tweaks of the natural drive to procreate.. The gay marriage proposal must not go forward as "normal" or "the status quo". Again, for all the reasons stated above.

There were no reasons cited above, just hopes based on imaginary logic.

And yes, any heterosexual relationship that involves sex other than normal penal-vaginal copulation is deviant.

As I noted in a much earlier post, you seem to have some serious issues around sexuality.

Remember: don't ask , don't tell and maybe we'll get the sex genie back in the bottle for the most part. I've said before that sex is overrated, overdone, overemphasized to the point of nauseum in our western culture. And because of this people are placing it atop love (pardon the pun) as of importance in love relationships between two (or more) people. So it is virtually today that love is nearly or actually synonymous with sex. And we wonder why entities like NAMBLA exist. It's not enough that a man can feel a deep and profound affection for a junior male, no. He has to also be having sex with him.

This is hardly a new occurence, many cultures have had older man/younger man relationships and they were accepted as normal. Just because we don't agree with that today doesn't in any sense make the NAMBLA folks a product of our "morally flawed" society. No does any group of pedophiles prove that homosexuals are child moleters anymore than heterosexual men. When one looks at the stats showing that 3 out of every 5 women will be sexually assaulted in some fashion during their life and NONE it done by gay men, doesn't that suggest that it may be something about "men" in general. Just like Andy, you seem to have pretty selective indignation.

We need to tease apart the definitions of deep love and sex. If we are better than animals, then we should be able to do this.

Maybe they are part and parcel of each other and cannot be properly separated. Perhaps consensual sex between adults can be just another way of attempting to bridge that seemingly unbridgable gap that keeps us all locked up inside ourselves.

De nada. I take no offense at all. I like men and women equally so any reference to me either way is as complimentary.

I will assume that your "like" does not extend to any kind of sexual feelings.

I think the words "men" and "women" are adjuncts to this debate BTW. In all we are "minds", or "souls" if you will with either a male or female shell...depending on the luck of the draw. We sometimes feel compelled to think or behave in ways tied deeply to sexual sterotypes foisted upon us.

An interesting idea, but if we are "minds" inhabiting bodies and we are procreating fast enough to insure our survival, why should love relationships with or without sex between ANY consenting adults be regulated?

Luckily I decided long ago that that was not the way I was going to be "female"...lol.. And in the same vein this is when I decided that it behooves us to preserve the definition of "normal" sex between two people as between a man and a woman. Not liking the opposite gender is not a good excuse for avoiding intimate contact with them sexually. If we find the right partner, many wrongs can be set to right via LOVE as the prelude to sex.

It may be why Anne Heche "defected"...lol... She may have simply found a man to heal the wounds that caused her to seek a same-gender sexual relationship. To put it simply, she fell in love with a man. No crime in that. And if you think that is a crime, then you are a "recruiter" homosexual.

Your conclusions are not supported and one more anecdotal example hardly makes the case. Many people move back and forth between the hetero and homo sexual worlds because they are bisexual--why the desperate need to make this black and white if we are just "minds" in bodies?

 

[Sihouette]

It's the matrix of normality that we need to preserve. Of course there will be deviations. We need to preserve the idea of a normal marriage. Like the guy said, anyone is free to marry...someone of the opposite sex. And sex is implied in the word "marriage". So let the deviants come up with their own arrangements, but lets not call those "marriage".

Its again, about the youth and the power to mold subsequent generations. They know sexuality and what it's ultimately for (procreation). Telling them (by legitimizing anything but an adult male/female union) it's for having fun (other than for procreation) might lead them to think putting a crack pipe in their mouths (instead of food) is also fun and pleasurable...along those same lines of thinking. We must attempt to not be hypocrites.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

It's the matrix of normality that we need to preserve. Of course there will be deviations. We need to preserve the idea of a normal marriage. Like the guy said, anyone is free to marry...someone of the opposite sex. And sex is implied in the word "marriage". So let the deviants come up with their own arrangements, but lets not call those "marriage".

Its again, about the youth and the power to mold subsequent generations. They know sexuality and what it's ultimately for (procreation). Telling them (by legitimizing anything but an adult male/female union) it's for having fun (other than for procreation) might lead them to think putting a crack pipe in their mouths (instead of food) is also fun and pleasurable...along those same lines of thinking. We must attempt to not be hypocrites.

A "matrix of normality". "We must attemp to not be hypocrites." It ain't workin'.

Sex is not just for procreation or people would be like many animals and come into "heat" once a year, sexual availability is for pair bonding to insure that there are stable relationships in which children can be raised. Gay people have always been involved in raising children in the extended families that were the norm until the last century. Your analogy is faulty and your conclusions are not supported by any science in this century.

 

[top gun]

Yes, like I said before, I know quite a few.

Good.

Straw-man. Please locate, where in any post, I said this.

You brought up anal sex... go back a post and look.

This coming from someone who openly judges based on how poor people are, and assumes their opinion and information is to be disregarded.

Andy I've told you before I only care about your 82 Buick when you tell me what a wonder machine it is. I only care about your 13K per year income when you complain about taxes (of which I know your bracket is paying almost none)... or when you try and give deep economic advice with great certainty.

Andy I'm 51 years old. Graduated college on a business degree. Have owned and operated two separate successful small businesses (Body Shops) and after selling the last on off at an excellent profit have been in the Property Management business for the last 12 years.

I don't mean to upset you but I think it's fair that I call 'em like I've seen 'em. That's not judging you.

I do have, and have had, people I was friends with that were gay. This neither addresses, nor changes the documented evidence of how the gay lifestyle effects people, nor does it change the testimony of those who came out of the gay lifestyle.

Well I hope you someday understand that you are homophobic. The fact that some people flip flop around in their sexual preference means nothing in regard to those who do not. Some people never really were gay... and some people were bi-sexual all along.

I could as easily post for days (and have) the studies that show no harm in sexual preference. I've actually posted a lot on studies showing conclusively no negative impact on children (as a father & a coach effects on children are especially important to me).

And I know you have a religious angle but so ya know I'm not buying (and nobody else should either) that you can pray your way straight. I know when Conservatives like Ted Haggard get caught having crystal meth sex with gay prostitutes that's the preferred treatment... but it's silly!

You are not one to talk about being judgmental or condescending, when you've been both. A suggestion you might consider, is to fix the plank in your own eye before worrying about the tiny splinter in your neighbors eye.
Matthew 7:3-5

I'm sorry you feel that way. I look at it as not being brow beaten by someone who in my opinion is almost alway wrong.

 

[Andy]

That's it? Post #66? Not a single word about lesbians who have the lowest rate of spousal abuse, the lowest rate of venereal disease, the lowest rate of abortions? You have focused on one part of the male homosexual community and extrapolated to all gay people--male and female.

Only 17.3 percent of lesbians had relationships that lasted more than three years. 75-90 percent of women who have sex with women have also had sex with men. Lesbians average a domestic violence rate of roughly 40 to 50%. Finely the list of health problems on post #66, include women. Moving on.

What you have done is bash gays by taking the crazy few and calling all of them the same--pretty hateful. I don't make you out to be Rev. Fred Phelps do I?

I have done nothing of the sort. I have taken the data available and posted it.

And for clarity, Jesus never said anything about homosexual or transsexual people, in fact neither word appears in the Bible. If you are going with all the rest of the stuff in the Bible, then as you probably know ya'll gonna be busy selling children, purifying yourself after touching women who are having their periods, avoiding shellfish, and following a whole lot of other laws supposedly demanded by God.

If you wish to discuss the other issues, that's fine. But it doesn't change the clear outline in the New Testament, of what is ordained by G-d. In fact basic understand of high school level biology should make it clear how things are supposed to work.

Part of the "bashing", Andy, is taking one law out of the Bible and applying it to people you don't like, while ignoring all the other laws that would make your life difficult, laws that your religion used to focus on, like inter-faith and interracial marriage, and ignoring them. I don't want to think that you are a hypocrite, but your selective indignation seems to point in that direction. How many scriptures are there in the Bible admonishing us to care for the poor and unfortunate? To give our wealth to the poor? Someone once counted up all of them and it came to nearly 2000. So what do you think is foremost in God's mind? Eating shellfish is condemned with exactly the same word--abomination--as you folks throw at gay people. The Bible also says that if you break one rule it is as if you have broken all of them. Gay bashing is just the flavor of the month for Christians, interracial marriage was the flavor of the month when I was growing up and they used the same arguments and the same rhetoric that is currently being used against gay people.

You keep trying to say I "don't like them". That isn't even remotely true. As I said many times before, I've had and have friends that are gay. It is because I do like them, that I want them to escape that lifestyle.

I don't see why I must validate myself to some random guy on the net, but to satisfy the stupidity of this argument, I'll point out that I served free food at Faith Mission in down town Columbus, I packed food at the Mid-Ohio food bank, and I have helped people in need by providing them transportation to work when their car broke down, even though they lived on the other side of town, provided $400 for a air ticket to someone who wanted to visit their family over the holidays, and even helped one girl move when no one else would help out, including spending the whole weekend, and paying for the rental truck. This isn't to say I'm so great. I'm not. But if you want to start talking about helping the poor, I'm not a slacker.

Thanks for your pointers on Shellfish and Interracial marriage. We're discussing homosexuality here.

However since you brought it up, I'll point out that the Bible has many rules, not all of which apply to all people at all times, in the same way not everyone where you work have all the same rules. Since most people have not researched or understood the Bible well enough to realize this, I understand your confusion.

The law about shellfish for example, was an old testament law specifically to the nation of Israel. Since we are not under the old testament law, nor are we Jews anyway, it doesn't apply. Now unless you want any entire lesson on theology, can we stick to the topic?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Only 17.3 percent of lesbians had relationships that lasted more than three years. 75-90 percent of women who have sex with women have also had sex with men. Lesbians average a domestic violence rate of roughly 40 to 50%. Finely the list of health problems on post #66, include women. Moving on.
I have done nothing of the sort. I have taken the data available and posted it.
If you wish to discuss the other issues, that's fine. But it doesn't change the clear outline in the New Testament, of what is ordained by G-d. In fact basic understand of high school level biology should make it clear how things are supposed to work.
You keep trying to say I "don't like them". That isn't even remotely true. As I said many times before, I've had and have friends that are gay. It is because I do like them, that I want them to escape that lifestyle.

I don't see why I must validate myself to some random guy on the net, but to satisfy the stupidity of this argument, I'll point out that I served free food at Faith Mission in down town Columbus, I packed food at the Mid-Ohio food bank, and I have helped people in need by providing them transportation to work when their car broke down, even though they lived on the other side of town, provided $400 for a air ticket to someone who wanted to visit their family over the holidays, and even helped one girl move when no one else would help out, including spending the whole weekend, and paying for the rental truck. This isn't to say I'm so great. I'm not. But if you want to start talking about helping the poor, I'm not a slacker.

Thanks for your pointers on Shellfish and Interracial marriage. We're discussing homosexuality here.

However since you brought it up, I'll point out that the Bible has many rules, not all of which apply to all people at all times, in the same way not everyone where you work have all the same rules. Since most people have not researched or understood the Bible well enough to realize this, I understand your confusion.

The law about shellfish for example, was an old testament law specifically to the nation of Israel. Since we are not under the old testament law, nor are we Jews anyway, it doesn't apply. Now unless you want any entire lesson on theology, can we stick to the topic?

The native Americans refered to people who spoke with a forked-tongue, it's always nice to see a good example of it. The rules don't apply to all the people all the time, but to some of the people some of the time, and mostly to the people you think the rules should apply to, and that's one more reason why the people with the Word of God have splintered into more than one new sect every year since the purported death of their holy joe.

I think you are probably a decent human being, Andy, but I don't think you are entirely truthful with yourself.