 | | Re: End of Year Thoughts
|
|
(...) Allen, as I kicked off the initial message that started this thread, I was wondering about that myself. But I would feel cheesy if I highlighted my own message... Thanks for the thought though! :) -Hendo (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) I don't see how this relates to my post. You said that all of 4000 years of religious doctrine was correct (except possibly the gay genes). I argued that with the diversity of the various doctrines, it couldn't _all_ be correct. Fredrik (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Amen, well spoken! /Tore (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) According to Christianity, every child (with or without the "gay gene"), is born into sin. Is that not a bit more powerful than the "genetic behavior" above? If indeed some very few percent are born into a genetic disposition towards a sinful (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Well two things-- 1st off, this gets into sketchy territory. What is want? How do we define it? And, further, is it really *as* bad as the act? Hence, if we want it, why not just go do it since it's just as bad? Is there any positive side to (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Ok so far I guess-- although we're assuming some stuff about sin and morality, but there's a chance we won't need to get into it very far... (...) Ah. So your thought is that someone who is genetically predisposed to be gay is someone who (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Withdrawing
|
|
The debate that I began seems to be drawing to somewhat of a conclussion. I've made my points, then clarified them, then defended them. It is unfortunate that some still think I have some ulterior motive to the whole debate, however, I am not a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) That'd be great, except that the demands are not that simple. I really wish I new where to look for the lawsuits, I've heard about them on the news and from Christians, but I've never been able to read about them. (...) It is no longer that (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
I am finding that making so many individual replies is somewhat taxing. I seem to be saying too much in some posts, and not enough in others. Here, I should have distinctly referred to Christianity, rather than religion in general. Other religions (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Low writes: [snip] (...) Asked and answered ;-) (...) 'Cause then we'd be giving birth in winter, which wouldn't be real wise :-) Cheers Richie (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Actually, simply acknowledging that something is beauiful would not be a sin, however, thinking, "...wow, what a bod, I just gotta have it..." is just as bad as actually "getting it". (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Matthew 5:21- here Jesus speaks about "thought sins", whereby a person dwells upon a sin, knowing it's nature, with the intent of "pretending" to to act it out. Specifically the example of adultery, whereby even looking upon a woman lustfully (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(don't mind me, I'm just a teenager who doesn't really know alot) I've been reading through this whole debate with interest, I know a girl who is gay and she says she knew ever since puberty (However she still hasn't told her parents [which makes me (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) The part that says sin can be overcome and must be repented of for acceptance into the kingdom, unfortunately some in the gay community want Christianity, but not the rules. (...) Having a genetic behavior suggests that the behavior cannot be (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Dang, I can't believe I did that, it's supposed to be Leviticus 20:13, I must've looked ahead on my list (It seemed appropriate to make a list). (...) I'm not sure this is really an issue, just an additional verse that shows God's view of how (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
in article Gntz4y.IMp@lugnet.com, David Eaton at deaton@intdata.com wrote on 12/4/01 11:55 AM: (...) Sorry; I didn't read your too well, and I shouldn't have shot me mouth off. I suspect the attraction is largely chemical/hormonal, and that is (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
in article Gnty9D.Fty@lugnet.com, David Eaton at deaton@intdata.com wrote on 12/4/01 11:36 AM: (...) Which is what Catholicism DOES in fact say. Rob (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) I'm not sure where to go with this part of the debate without actually veering into a no-holds-barred religious debate. The idea of sin is based on faith, that immorality is a wrong against a god. As such, sin could never be proven or (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) I'm not sure I follow you -- why couldn't a gay-gene be maintained in a heterozygote sub-population, like many other recessive traits? (...) Well give it a go!! But given the lack of extant ancestor species, apes seem like the best bet for (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) True. That would not fit the requirements of a default setting for the gay-gene though. (...) I do know of the cases. I'm looking for a different pattern, not sure how to fit it into words. (...) Did humans evolve in an environment that would (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap Scientist (Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag )
|
|
(...) As I was going through my inbox right after I posted about this I found the same message Scott posted. I should read all my mail when it arrives. Thanks Scott -chris (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) But genes that inhibit reproduction _can_ be inherited, recessively. Cf cystic fibrosis (without treatment sufferers die before puberty). (...) Try a little google search for "homosexual bonobo". My thoughts, such as they are: I think the "why (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap Scientist (Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag )
|
|
(...) Buy it buy it! Each week a fresh issue delivered to your mailbox, to (cherish/ tear articles out of/ swat bugs with) for only a buck a pop -- what a bargain! Thanks for the ref Scott. // Dave (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!
|
|
(...) Is the first on cited on this page? (first result returned by google) (URL) interesting... -chris (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) No, it does doesn't. Pattern does usually follow process though. It would have to be the default(1). The only ones who matter(2) in evolution are the ones who reproduce, so therefore how can it be that we should incapable of reproduction? (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap Scientist (Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag )
|
|
That is cheap. Hmm... buy it or use the library copy.... decisions decisions (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Essentially, it implies that similarly being homosexual is the same as being heterosexual :) IE if I sinned by thinking that the waitress is hot, I sin equally by thinking that a waiter is hot. Again, as long as I know not to act on my (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) The Bible simply IS part of the discussion. Christians and homosexuals alike have argued it to such a degree that it is difficult have a discussion of only homosexuality. For what it's worth, when I began debating gay-by-birth elsewhere, a (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Clearly, "4,000 yrs. of religious doctrine" must include more than just the Bible. The Bible, as we know it today, was not available 4,000 years ago. Take an example. According to Jewish belief, Jesus is not the son of God. According to (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) I was only speaking from a hypothetical standpoint and not voicing my own opinion. My viewpoint is the same as yours, but from the Catholic standpoint, you just commited a sin (the thought is the same as the action), so what does that imply? (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him." This has what to do with homosexuality? (...) "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Nah. I would say that we still have the ability to overcome the desire given to us by the gene. Just like I might have the urge to cheat on my wife. Genetic? Of course! I mean, that waitress is hot! Why do I think so? Instinct! But I still (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Why? What part is falacious? I presume that you mean to say that God would create humans with equal desires towards sinning. Hence, if it were found that SOME people had MORE desire to sin based on their genetics, that it would prove that God (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Idunno - as I said, that's their problem to wrestle with (I am not a literalist). I'm tempted to say the problem is one of their own making, but I am hardly enough of a Bible scholar to actually say that with any certainty. I don't know of (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) No problem. I found it interesting in my research that many *Christians* don't have a clue where to find these scriptures. I had to resort to an 1700+ page index and a dictionary to find them. Most Christians readily say something to the (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) And I never once said that you were. But at the same time I note you don't deny it. You have adopted a stance similiar to that of many fundamentalist Christians, and have brought the Bible into this discussion. It seems to me that you don't (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Yes, if any of your above examples become reality, then the Bible is thereby proven falacious. The Bible is an instruction for Christianity and includes a code of conduct. The Bible should not be used as a source of social reform, but as a (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Just asking-- what problem is created for literalists? How does the literal Bible (Old or New Testament) contradict the existance of a gay gene? I honestly can't think of anything that WOULD contradict unless it said somewhere that "God won't (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) From the Holy Bible: Leviticus 20:13 1Corinthians 6:9 Romans 1:26-27 While reading these scriptures, it is important to understand the context that they are being used in. Homosexuality is described as a practice, as are incest, beastiality, (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
