Homosexuality - what is your view?

[Stefan Bauwens]

I disagree with all of the things you said.

1) You can't spread AIDS by just being homosexual. You can spread it by being irresponsible.

2) You mean, the human race would end. That might actually be a good thing for the rest of the world.

3) As well as homosexuality and lust, being straight is also natural. Falling in love is not a choice. Therefore, falling in homosexual love is also not a choice.

Nobody is born straight either. You only discover your sexuality when you actually fall in love for the first time - not when you breathe for the first time.

On the subject of religion, holy books say a lot of things we disagree with. They were written so long ago, some support things that are illegal nowadays. Even though I'm not religious, I think it's okay to disobey those things, and I think homosexuality is one of them.

1. If being irresponsible is not using a condom then your point is still invalid. A condom can always fail. Condom or not, gays still spread AIDS more efficiently as the link I posted a few posts up says. The chances of being gay and that one time a condom fails out of all the times seems pretty high to me. Also, to me, just the fact that you have to use a condom proven that it's unnatural. Of all those so cald gay animals, how many has to use a condom to not spread AIDS?

2. Yes, that's what I meant. The world would end for the human race.

3. I have come to this conclusion: Some people defenitly choose to be gay, and by others it comes "naturally". Just as lust comes natural. But you can do something about lust. You can, and should refrain from it. Lust is indeed nothing you choose for directly, but should and can be refrained. And the same counts for homosexuality.

 

[dazzilitchigirl]

1. If being irresponsible is not using a condom then your point is still invalid. A condom can always fail. Condom or not, gays still spread AIDS more efficiently as the link I posted a few posts up says. The chances of being gay and that one time a condom fails out of all the times seems pretty high to me. Also, to me, just the fact that you have to use a condom proven that it's unnatural. Of all those so cald gay animals, how many has to use a condom to not spread AIDS?

2. Yes, that's what I meant. The world would end for the human race.

3. I have come to this conclusion: Some people defenitly choose to be gay, and by others it comes "naturally". Just as lust comes natural. But you can do something about lust. You can, and should refrain from it. Lust is indeed nothing you choose for directly, but should and can be refrained. And the same counts for homosexuality.

I still disagree.

1) I mean not using contraception for BOTH people involved. If both people use contraception, it's practically impossible they will both fail.

2) How is that a bad thing? If everyone in the world was homosexual, it just means nobody's going to have babies. It doesn't mean people are going to die young.

3) Who would choose to be homosexual? In what way is it a choice, and why are you so convinced it is? How can love and lust not be a choice, but homosexuality is? Also, nothing is unhealthy about plain homosexuality, you can't say it is. You're saying that homosexuals having a sexual relationship will spread AIDS. So therefore you mean that you should refrain from sex if you are homosexual, which I still disagree with.

 

[Stefan Bauwens]

First things First use a condom no matter gay or straight ...

I don't think gays spread anything.... A condom will help,but yes not always will it work and sometines will cause diseases and some other STDs,if it breakes or you use it wrong .. I don't see how it would be different anyway .. Just becarefull of your sourroundings.

If you're straight, why use a condom? How else can you get children?

Anyway, dazzilitchigirl, gay's spread AIDS still today more efficiently and more gays are getting AIDS than straight people. Straight people have less reason to use a condom, but stil gays get it more. This is so obvious to me. You may not believe in signs. But both this sign and the sign that they cannot continue the human race makes it obvious that it is not the good way to live.

How is that a bad thing? The last people who walked the earth would then homosexuals. They do not care for kids, or the future of the people on earth. This is not what you call love. Therefore, they are bound to extinction left on their own.

 

[Amat Gotchi]

But if everyone who was heterosexual had a sexual relationship with no contraception then we would overpopulate even more...

I just think the argument that "if everyone was gay we wouldn't have children and would all die out" is a bit eccentric. If everyone in the world was gay, then it would be totally normal to be gay and we would all have children through homosexuality, not heterosexuality.

Homosexual couples still adopt children, and care for them quite well, I must say.

Homosexuality is not average, but should still be accepted.

Maybe one of the reasons gays get AIDS more often is that gays are very often not allowed to get married...maybe it would help solve the problem if they were allowed to marry more often?

 

[ciara683]

Christians are funny folk, the ones against homosexuality and other related things are usually the ones that have the need to bash yet ignore everything else.

few examples:

"Leviticus 19:28 reads, "You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord."

"Leviticus 19:19 reads, "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together."

who are you to tell someone they cant be in love with someone else? love is learned and taught . You can't call yourself a christian and hate other people. it honestly isn't your business to tell someone who they can and cannot love. it's not your business on who someone lays with at night. Who are you to care or judge someone like that?

Its more of a sin for YOU to judge someone than it is for them to be in love.

 

[SailorRosette]

Remember to keep this duscussion level-headed. This is getting a bit heated. If you feel you cannot keep an open mind, please refrain from posting here until you feel you can. People may not share the same veiws as yourself, but might understand where your veiws maybe comming from.

To each, a love of their own. Weather its right or wrong in the eyes of the lord or bible you may have read from.

 

[robodog]

I seriously doubt it's a choice. Think of the persecution gays still get in this day and age. Who would choose to have to deal with that if they didn't have to?

But here's my take. I'm not God. I am not so arrogant as to think I can begin to know how God thinks. If homosexuality is a sin then it's God's place to deal with it and not mine. I'm not going to judge people for what they do so long as what they do harms no one. I used to work with a gay couple at a pet store. They were perfectly nice people. They deserved to be able to live their lives as they saw fit. I never thought any less of them because they were gay.

 

[Stefan Bauwens]

Christians are funny folk, the ones against homosexuality and other related things are usually the ones that have the need to bash yet ignore everything else.

few examples:

"Leviticus 19:28 reads, "You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord."

"Leviticus 19:19 reads, "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together."

who are you to tell someone they cant be in love with someone else? love is learned and taught . You can't call yourself a christian and hate other people. it honestly isn't your business to tell someone who they can and cannot love. it's not your business on who someone lays with at night. Who are you to care or judge someone like that?

Its more of a sin for YOU to judge someone than it is for them to be in love.

If you read all of the previous posts in this thead, which I think you, and everyone else who posts here, should do to avoid posting comments that don't add anything or in this case accuse me of something where I have said a reason towards.

I said that these were not noted as laws, but as statutes. Which I take as the "law" of that time. Not the law of God, that never changes, but more like the "governmental" law, that does change by time. Also, if you want to be very literally, it's directed to the "children of Israel". And a lot of things have changed from those laws. For example, sacrificing and eating unclean foods.

 

[dazzilitchigirl]

If you're straight, why use a condom? How else can you get children?

Anyway, dazzilitchigirl, gay's spread AIDS still today more efficiently and more gays are getting AIDS than straight people. Straight people have less reason to use a condom, but stil gays get it more. This is so obvious to me. You may not believe in signs. But both this sign and the sign that they cannot continue the human race makes it obvious that it is not the good way to live.

How is that a bad thing? The last people who walked the earth would then homosexuals. They do not care for kids, or the future of the people on earth. This is not what you call love. Therefore, they are bound to extinction left on their own.

If you're straight, why use a condom? How else can you get children?

Anyway, dazzilitchigirl, gay's spread AIDS still today more efficiently and more gays are getting AIDS than straight people. Straight people have less reason to use a condom, but stil gays get it more. This is so obvious to me. You may not believe in signs. But both this sign and the sign that they cannot continue the human race makes it obvious that it is not the good way to live.

How is that a bad thing? The last people who walked the earth would then homosexuals. They do not care for kids, or the future of the people on earth. This is not what you call love. Therefore, they are bound to extinction left on their own.

You haven't said why you are so certain that homosexuality is sometimes a choice.

It doesn't really matter if the last people were homosexuals. And if there are no children to care for, in what way is it a bad thing that they don't care for them? This IS what you call love in my view; homosexual couples love each other the same way straight couples do.

 

[Famous Last Words.x]

*image removed - site rules*

This has nothing to do with the previous arguments, but I was scrolling through my Facebook just before and I found this, and thought it was relevant enough to the topic.

TM Edit: I get that you feel the image is relevant but it insults others' religious beliefs - no matter how witty or cool you may think it is.

Please everyone - remember the first rule of TamaTalk:

All posts are to be concise, friendly, respectful and with the intention of positive contribution towards TamaTalk.

 

[Stefan Bauwens]

You haven't said why you are so certain that homosexuality is sometimes a choice.

It doesn't really matter if the last people were homosexuals. And if there are no children to care for, in what way is it a bad thing that they don't care for them? This IS what you call love in my view; homosexual couples love each other the same way straight couples do.

Some people want to try something "new" and try out homosexuality. Some may like it and stick to it. That is something that I know for a fact.

Also, that chart is flawed. It does not say in the Bible that Paul refers to male prostitution, etc...

Because god made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. This is true also. And if God would be okay with it and be just he would have made 2 extra. One man and one woman, so he could have the choice. Also God has nothing against overpopulation since he says every child is a blessing.

The man does say clearly marriage as a one man-one woman relationship, but does contain stories where this is the case. As far as I know, it is nowhere in the Bible justified.

And the chart is biased as well for calling pro-gay people civilized. Who are they to decide what civilized people are? Anyway, to me it's obvious, and I actually don't understand why you don't see it too. It's so obvious to me it's so wrong.

 

[dazzilitchigirl]

As for all the religious arguments - I know religious people believe their god is correct in all ways, and that's okay. It's your reason for disliking homosexuality. However, if you really believe your god and the bible are always correct, I don't think any of you should be eating shellfish, wearing clothes with different fabrics or eating pork. I don't mean any offence to Christians in saying that. I think it's fine to disobey some of the rules in the bible, even if you're very religious. "No homosexuality" is one of them.

 

[Kuribotchi]

No, I believe that homosexuality is a choice, and an unhealthy one.

And if my friend kept it secret from me, what kind of friend is he?

For me, a friend is someone who basically has the same views as yourself.

Probably people that I call contacts you would call friends. That's the thing, nowadays people easily call someone a friend. For me a friend is someone very special.

Are you telling me you chose to be straight?

Also, your friend was probably going through a very tough time, you should of been there for him rather then being mad at him for not telling you he was gay. "And if my friend kept it secret from me, what kind of friend is he?" That is down right wrong. He's your friend, you should be there for him and stick with him through tough times. You definitely do not know how to be a proper friend to someone.

 

[Flutternot-so-shy]

Well, this is a bit difficult to discuss for me. I haven't fully decided on what my standpoint should be, but I am certainly trying to consider both sides of the topic, and honestly, I am in the middle. I am not hateful or disgusted by/towards homosexuals, but I do not approve of it either. I do strongly support the idea that homosexuality is NOT a choice, but rather a "neurological condition". This is just my opinion of course, but I have met several homosexuals that, as unbelieveable as it may seem, do not want to be that way anymore. Maybe it is because of peer pressure, or lack of support from their families and/or friends, I don't know. I plan to look in to the "condition" further, and see if there is any sort of significant cause. I believe that homosexuality develops, and is caused or brought on by some kind of traumatic event in the person's early stages of growth, but then again, this is my opinion. If you have found any of my remarks to be offensive, please comment or PM me so I know.

 

[Flutternot-so-shy]

Some people want to try something "new" and try out homosexuality. Some may like it and stick to it. That is something that I know for a fact.

Also, that chart is flawed. It does not say in the Bible that Paul refers to male prostitution, etc...

Because god made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. This is true also. And if God would be okay with it and be just he would have made 2 extra. One man and one woman, so he could have the choice. Also God has nothing against overpopulation since he says every child is a blessing.

The man does say clearly marriage as a one man-one woman relationship, but does contain stories where this is the case. As far as I know, it is nowhere in the Bible justified.

And the chart is biased as well for calling pro-gay people civilized. Who are they to decide what civilized people are? Anyway, to me it's obvious, and I actually don't understand why you don't see it too. It's so obvious to me it's so wrong.

Ok, listen. This isn't just pointed towards you, but your comment made me snap. I know very well that this is not a religion topic, but have you people that always mention "God" in their posts ever considered that some of us might not believe in a diety of any sort? Also, have you considered that people might be homosexual as an act of support for the religion they believe in, maybe one that, doesn't have a god? Perhaps they think that it isn't wrong, because they believe that there is no god. So who is telling them that they are wrong? You. Who are you to tell them what is right or what is wrong? As I said, I do not support or disprove of homosexuality, but you have to look at both sides before making any declarations like that.

 

[happiholic]

I, personally, have nothing against homosexuality. In fact, I have a lot of gay friends, and I love them dearly. I don't see them as being any different from my other friends.

 

[Stefan Bauwens]

As for all the religious arguments - I know religious people believe their god is correct in all ways, and that's okay. It's your reason for disliking homosexuality. However, if you really believe your god and the bible are always correct, I don't think any of you should be eating shellfish, wearing clothes with different fabrics or eating pork. I don't mean any offence to Christians in saying that. I think it's fine to disobey some of the rules in the bible, even if you're very religious. "No homosexuality" is one of them.

Did you read the fourth post above yours? Please do.

Ok, listen. This isn't just pointed towards you, but your comment made me snap. I know very well that this is not a religion topic, but have you people that always mention "God" in their posts ever considered that some of us might not believe in a diety of any sort? Also, have you considered that people might be homosexual as an act of support for the religion they believe in, maybe one that, doesn't have a god? Perhaps they think that it isn't wrong, because they believe that there is no god. So who is telling them that they are wrong? You. Who are you to tell them what is right or what is wrong? As I said, I do not support or disprove of homosexuality, but you have to look at both sides before making any declarations like that.

My post was mainly directed to the people who were trying to use religious arguments agains me.

The reason why I think it is wrong, is for religious beliefs and because of the unnaturallity of it. I would not want to repear everything I wrote in this thread, but if you do I give also unreligious reason why I believe it to be wrong.

@Kuribotchi: I said I could not be a true friend with a homosexual, as well as any other person who sins(for my religion). I chose my friends on the matter I want to., which I have right to do. Also, I do not want a friend who lies to me, or in this case actually deceives me by not telling me. A true friend would not hide something like this of me.

 

[Amat Gotchi]

maybe they would hide it if they knew you would stop being their friend when you found out

i see why you would be mad at a friend who lies but orientation is hard for a gay person to accept and you should b civil to them, after all everyoe sins.

so that friend would be out of luck either way?¿

 

[Stefan Bauwens]

maybe they would hide it if they knew you would stop being their friend when you found out

i see why you would be mad at a friend who lies but orientation is hard for a gay person to accept and you should b civil to them, after all everyoe sins.

so that friend would be out of luck either way?¿

Well, the thing is I would in no way blast him or so. I would on a calm way say my views about it. But if he continues to sin against my religion I can't act as nothing happened. That counts for any sin bytheway.

 

[LeaChaos]

I personally think it's absolutely horrible to judge someone just based on their sexuality.

Be they: Bisexual, Homosexual, Heterosexual, Pansexual, Asexual, or Polysexual.

It shouldn't matter. We are all human. We all have our own likes and dislikes.

I don't think anyone should have the right to deny a loving gay couple not to have sex or get married.

That's like a form of segregation.

Live and let live.