Homosexuality

TKR

don't you?

dont i what?

Reply 442

Howard

All people are sinners. Homosexual and heterosexual alike. All who do not repent of their sins and put their faith in Christ will burn in hell; homosexual and heterosexual alike.

No need to make this personal. I don't make the rules.

That's sad. Everyone will burn in hell if what you believe is right :frown:

Reply 443

TKR

technik

dont i what?

Don't you think that "it" (and by it I am referring to being a homosexual i.e. having sex with persons of the same sex and forming relationships with them while failing to do the same with members of the opposite sex. I hope this is the same "it" that you were using) is "acceptable behaviour"?

Reply 444

RudyKatoch

What, what???? A peace loving homosexual IS worse than a Christian oil glutton??? I don't understand, aren't (in your viewpoint) both sin's of equal merit, one who steals, kills, destroys other innocent lives is not as worse as someone who falls in love with the same sex and is generally a nice, loving person? If that is Howard, well that is bull****, it really is!

My viewpoint? My viewpoint on God's word is irrelevant. As is yours. I might, with you, think it's a bit unfair. But, so what?

Reply 445

all red and ermine

Yeh, I suppose I shouldn't really get all personal on you like that, you don't make the rules, you just follow them....

I just wanna say that I don't agree with them (your views I mean), but are intrigued by them nonetheless as it provide good debate :smile:

Reply 446

anabelle

That's sad. Everyone will burn in hell if what you believe is right :frown:

That's their choice.

Reply 447

TKR

i personally find it degenerate.

Reply 448

technik

incase you hadnt noticed there arent enough kids in the UK to pay for the OAPs...

its only places like the 3rd world that are overcrowded to a dangerous level. hence all their difficulties when the rain doesnt come on time.

I think the greenhouse effect and food shortages are quite more worrying than how much OAPs in a relatively well off country get every week. But you probably wouldn't mind a cull of all "undesirables" to up the weekly pension in this country would you?

And pray tell, if you're atheist and don't believe in religion how is being straight any more right than being gay? There's as much evidence that men were made to mate (note: mate, not create children) with other men as there is for men mating with women :smile:

Reply 449

Howard

Assuming God actually exists of course :wink:

. And what exactly makes you so sure that your viewpoint that a god (and a Christian one at that) does exist, over say the evidence that a lot of fundamental Christian beliefs fall down quite easily before science.

Reply 450

Clueless?

There's as much evidence that men were made to mate (note: mate, not create children) with other men as there is for men mating with women :smile:

Is there?

Reply 451

Well I don't find it very moral to tell people they will burn in hell, it makes them feel sad and scares them, that makes them less happy, so following the utilitarian theory it's immoral.

Reply 452

Clueless?

Assuming God actually exists of course :wink:

QUOTE]

Indeed. Assuming I am right.

Reply 453

Clueless?

There's as much evidence that men were made to mate (note: mate, not create children) with other men as there is for men mating with women :smile:

seems you missed the classes in school that explained reproduction, its purpose, and how its achieved in humans?

Reply 454

technik

seems you missed the classes in school that explained reproduction, its purpose, and how its achieved in humans?

By mixing an ovule and a sperm in vitro?

Reply 455

anabelle

Well I don't find it very moral to tell people they will burn in hell, it makes them fell sad and scares them, that makes them less happy, so following the utilitarian theory it's immoral.

I disagree. It seems very moral to me. By warning people about what awaits them they are afforded the chance to repent and distance themselves from the offending "sinful" behaviour. So instead of hell, they get heaven. Sounds rather moral to me.

And what is this utilitarian theory you keep going on about?

Reply 456

Howard

Is there?

What a useful post :rolleyes:

!

Yes there is actually, aside from the obvious location of the male g-spot, which suggests that for most satisfaction men (similar to women) need to be penetrated (quite hard with a vagina - though I guess you'll have to wait until your wedding night to find out) to achieve full satisfaction, there's a myriad of other things including male-male pheremones which suggest that men could/should mate with men as well as women. Clearly men have mated with men since man first evolved so there is plenty of evidence to back it up. And just because less men mate with men doesn't make it wrong, there might be less black people worldwide, that doesn't make them wrong, does it? Less men who like pink, does that make them wrong?

Reply 457

Howard

It's a moral theory mostly shaped by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Here are some links explaining it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism
http://ethics.acusd.edu/theories/Utilitarianism/index.html

Reply 458

Clueless?

What a useful post :rolleyes:

so because a males "g-spot" is up his ass (and remember not everyone even has a "g-spot") you just ignore the fact you get sperm from a penis and to create a child that somehow needs to interact with the egg...suprisingly the egg is not located in a mans anus. some mighty fine "evidence" you have going here.

Reply 459