prove that homosexuality is wrong.

Doctor REALITY wrote:

It's no secret that homosexuality will continue to exist until the Lord Jesus Christ returns.

Really? Then why do you folk keep on insisting that we get rid of ours?

Doctor REALITY wrote:

It's just one of many 'weapons' that Satan the devil uses in his 'spiritual arsenal' against sinful humanity to keep them from the Holy Cross of Calvary....

Mmm, okay? If that is what you want to pray for, knock yourself out, but as far as convincing me that I should get down on my knees and pray that beside you, not so much. I'm not picturing you as having been touched by God to save me from Satan, I'm picturing you as just plain touched in the head. He says he works in mysterious ways sweetie, not the stark raving mad.

Doctor REALITY wrote:

It's no secret that homosexuality will continue to exist until the Lord Jesus Christ returns. It's just one of many 'weapons' that Satan the devil uses in his 'spiritual arsenal' against sinful humanity to keep them from the Holy Cross of Calvary. That's all that matters to him!!: CALVARY!! Calvary was his most BITTER DEFEAT since the Lord expelled him from heaven with the speed of lightning!! But you would think that the lessons of Sodom and Gomorrah, along with the millions of AIDS-related deaths, that homosexuals would come to REALIZE that their sexual orientation is a POISON FROM SATAN that will cost them their souls.....UNLESS THEY REPENT BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE.

Is the Lord Jesus H. Christ coming back on a cloud? LMAO

Rick in Kansas wrote:

<quoted text>Really? Then why do you folk keep on insisting that we get rid of ours? <quoted text>Mmm, okay? If that is what you want to pray for, knock yourself out, but as far as convincing me that I should get down on my knees and pray that beside you, not so much. I'm not picturing you as having been touched by God to save me from Satan, I'm picturing you as just plain touched in the head. He says he works in mysterious ways sweetie, not the stark raving mad.

Poor weak minded individual needs his opiate to get through the day.

WasteWater wrote:

Poor weak minded individual needs his opiate to get through the day.

Hooked on an opiate when what the man clearly needs is a serious anti-psychotic.

WasteWater wrote:

<quoted text>
For mental illness I suppose.

Yes. On the sitcom Big Bang Theory, a character named Sheldon is often heard to say, "I'm not crazy, my mother had me tested."

;)

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
Sexual behavior is not a legitimate issue on a thread about orientation???
You wish.

This thread is specifically about homosexuality, not "orientation" or anal sex. I've explained repeatedly that anal sex is neither exclusive to nor the definition of homosexuality.

I believe you know that, but once again you do not have anything of substance to reply to my post... but you apparently are incapable of leaving anal sex out of the discussion.

What if the discussion were about heterosexuality, and I kept bringing up BDSM as if it were the definition of heterosexual behavior? You and others, I'm sure would protest... except that you wouldn't be on that thread... you are too obsessed with homosexuality and anal sex.

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
Love it.
In spite of 'psychology, psychiatry, biology and sociology' not knowing what causes homosexuality, you claim they can determine the normalcy?
Do you really think anyone believes that nonsense.
Smile.

As you pointed out, while they are not 100% certain about the "causes" for homosexuality, they do have some reasonable theories. And especially in the fields of psychology and psychiatry, yes... there are criteria that distinguish what is a mental illness or "defect" and what is a normal variation of human characteristics.

Yes, people of intelligence and not influenced by anti-gay propaganda, hate, prejudice and ignorance, DO believe that.

;)

number four wrote:

<quoted text>A) What of greed , sloth ,foul language , this behavior is not harmful ..but, still remains immoral ..(that's why you post "frack" )

I would say greed and sloth and foul language are not really relevant to this discussion. But on the foul language, I would note that like language itself, it is an invention of man. Society has decided that certain words are foul because somebody said so, not because any word is really more harmful or offensive than any other word. One can easily offend or hurt another person with words, without using "foul" language. And society differs on what is considered foul culturally and geographically. in other words, society makes this stuff up, there is no scientific right or wrong to it.

number four wrote:

A1) The danger of homosexuality (if accepted)..is that children will begin to perceive it as harmless decision ..

Your assumption here is based on supreme ignorance. Homosexuality is not a "decision."

Why is it that the most anti-gay are so paranoid that even though they see homosexuality as something perverted, deviant, disgusting, etc., they believe it is becoming an increasingly appealing "decision" that people will inevitably make????

number four wrote:

"KiMare" is correct there is nothing wrong with homosexuality ...it "is" the unnatural coitus ...that must be avoided ...

Then avoid it. It's perfectly fine for you to decide for yourself what kind of "coitus" is okay, and what kind you should avoid. But why on earth would you think it's okay for you to decide that for anybody else? How is it any of your business what kind of sex people have that aren't you or your partner?

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
Sexual behavior is not a legitimate issue on a thread about orientation???
You wish.

Did you come to this thread to discuss sex? Anal sex to be specific?

It has been my experience that those who discuss anal sex are those that have not experienced it or they oppose it. I find that strange. I always just assume they are curious.

How much research have you done on anal sex?

Do you think that oral sex would be a better alternative?

number four wrote:

I think I should "go" ..

Buh bye.

number four wrote:

"Tre H" gays raped by women does not produce heterosexuals ....but, men raping boys ; this add to the gay population ...

More supreme ignorance... unless it's just an outright lie, because it's completely false. No rape or any sexual behavior "turns" anyone gay.

number four wrote:

Stay White ..!!!

Really?

REALLY?

Tre H wrote:

<quoted text>
This thread is specifically about homosexuality, not "orientation" or anal sex. I've explained repeatedly that anal sex is neither exclusive to nor the definition of homosexuality.
I believe you know that, but once again you do not have anything of substance to reply to my post... but you apparently are incapable of leaving anal sex out of the discussion.
What if the discussion were about heterosexuality, and I kept bringing up BDSM as if it were the definition of heterosexual behavior? You and others, I'm sure would protest... except that you wouldn't be on that thread... you are too obsessed with homosexuality and anal sex.

I'm sorry, but when you try to equate a orientation that history and cultures have recognized as abnormal, I have every right to point out the reasons why.

I understand that you don't like what that exposes, and revert to ad homoan attacks because logic evades you.

Tre H wrote:

<quoted text>
As you pointed out, while they are not 100% certain about the "causes" for homosexuality, they do have some reasonable theories. And especially in the fields of psychology and psychiatry, yes... there are criteria that distinguish what is a mental illness or "defect" and what is a normal variation of human characteristics.
Yes, people of intelligence and not influenced by anti-gay propaganda, hate, prejudice and ignorance, DO believe that.
;)

You noticeably insinuate scientists suspect the cause, without expressing what that is.

1. No legitimate scientists claim a conclusion without proof.

2. The only cause that is close to being proved is that homosexuality is an epi-marker mistake.

Propaganda, hate, prejudice and ignorance can affect any position, DO believe that.

AnnieJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Did you come to this thread to discuss sex? Anal sex to be specific?
It has been my experience that those who discuss anal sex are those that have not experienced it or they oppose it. I find that strange. I always just assume they are curious.
How much research have you done on anal sex?
Do you think that oral sex would be a better alternative?

Read back on my posts.

Look up the info on anal/oral sex for yourself.

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm sorry, but when you try to equate a orientation that history and cultures have recognized as abnormal, I have every right to point out the reasons why.

This sentence doesn't really make sense. Whatever. When you point out "reasons" that are untrue or irrelevant, I have a right to point out that they are untrue or irrelevant.

KiMare wrote:

<
I understand that you don't like what that exposes, and revert to ad homoan attacks because logic evades you.

I understand that you love to use the phrase "ad homoan attacks," however I can't find a dictionary or other source that defines the term. Anyway, telling you that anal sex is neither exclusive to, nor defines homosexuality isn't any kind of attack; it's simply explaining why it's irrelevant. What I don't like being exposed is lies, falsehoods, distortions, and ignorant bigotry as if they are the truth.

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
You noticeably insinuate scientists suspect the cause, without expressing what that is.

So what. It wasn't the point. There are likely multiple factors involved in influencing sexual orientation in utero.

KiMare wrote:

1. No legitimate scientists claim a conclusion without proof.

Who said they did?

KiMare wrote:

2. The only cause that is close to being proved is that homosexuality is an epi-marker mistake.

False. This is what you personally are focused on, and the word "mistake" is your personal interpretation.

KiMare wrote:

Propaganda, hate, prejudice and ignorance can affect any position, DO believe that.

Including yours. Your insistence that homosexuality must be a "mistake" tells us more about your personal feelings than your scientific knowledge.

Tre H wrote:

<quoted text>
So what. It wasn't the point. There are likely multiple factors involved in influencing sexual orientation in utero.
<quoted text>
Who said they did?
<quoted text>
False. This is what you personally are focused on, and the word "mistake" is your personal interpretation.
<quoted text>
Including yours. Your insistence that homosexuality must be a "mistake" tells us more about your personal feelings than your scientific knowledge.

Tre, you are playing games. Childish and a waste of time.

The deepening denial of gays is only setting up a bigger fall.

Why are you afraid of reality?

If homosexuality wasn't WRONG.....God would not have created woman. Homosexuality is an ABOMINATION!

Doctor REALITY wrote:

If homosexuality wasn't WRONG.....God would not have created woman. Homosexuality is an ABOMINATION!

You post is an ABOMINATION!

Hell will be a dark, lonely, dreadful bottomless 'pit' where the damned will fall and fall and fall away from the presence of God, and Christ Almighty who was REJECTED by them in exchange for a 'short season of sin'! Hell will be a place where the damned will NEVER be able to practice the sins they chose over Christ Almighty!

Tre H wrote:

<quoted text>
I would say greed and sloth and foul language are not really relevant to this discussion. But on the foul language, I would note that like language itself, it is an invention of man. Society has decided that certain words are foul because somebody said so, not because any word is really more harmful or offensive than any other word. One can easily offend or hurt another person with words, without using "foul" language. And society differs on what is considered foul culturally and geographically. in other words, society makes this stuff up, there is no scientific right or wrong to it.
<quoted text>
Your assumption here is based on supreme ignorance. Homosexuality is not a "decision."
Why is it that the most anti-gay are so paranoid that even though they see homosexuality as something perverted, deviant, disgusting, etc., they believe it is becoming an increasingly appealing "decision" that people will inevitably make????
<quoted text>
Then avoid it. It's perfectly fine for you to decide for yourself what kind of "coitus" is okay, and what kind you should avoid. But why on earth would you think it's okay for you to decide that for anybody else? How is it any of your business what kind of sex people have that aren't you or your partner?

..I'm "thinking" THIS is just another heresy ....but..... about morality ...("We" now for the first time ever ...question 'objective' morality ...)

You must know every society "has" rejected gay love ...for 200 hundred years you've had "classical" Greek ...but,....that was it ..!!

Greece swung towards Hellenism ...

I like you "Tre H" ...but, DON'T keep your hopes high ...