The Truth, the Whole Truth And. . .

[_JS]

It isn't about my rights or asking for advice. I don't need your permission to teach my children anything. I don't even know if you have children. I know that Sirs does not. I doubt seriously that I'll require either of your permission or advice when it comes to my children. That is entirely irrelevant.

My question was direct and simple, your refusal to answer it (or even address it) is noted.

But onto the questions you did answer and I thank you for that.

1. You believe that homosexuality is a choice and not an attraction these individuals had from youth?

Definitely , sexual attraction is trainable .

How so? When you were an adolescent you looked for guidance in determining your sexual attraction?

2. You believe that homosexuals actively "recruit" people to their lifestyle?

Yes , should I look up a discussion of this ?, I don't really like to go there too often, washing my computer in three waters afterwards is hard on the circuits.

I'm just going to give two real-life examples and you tell me why these two aren't actively "recruiting." I have a really good friend who is an Oxford graduate (England, not Ole Miss) and now lives in London who is most certainly gay. He has never once tried to "recruit" me or any of our common friends. Also, I've been a moderator of this board for a while and I've never had anyone complain that Fatman's behavior is anything less than impeccable. Are these two individuals out of the loop on "recruiting" policy?

3. #2 automatically assumes that heterosexuals are vulnerable to this "recruiting" so we can infer that you believe this as well?

To some degree , do you think that people are born with a complete set of instincts that with no instruction produces a well rounded person? Human beings are very teachable and reprogrammable even to great depths of the sub conscious. Do you think that people are born with Bestiality or Rape in their system ? Do you think that people are born thieves or born leaders , born to Football or born to Soccar? There are really very few things we depend on instinct for as adults and more things in which we use reason for overcoming our instincts.

Rape is not comparable as it can and does happen across different sexualities. Sporting events are not comparable because they are not biological functions innate to the natural world. To some degree people are born leaders - or at least with the personality traits that would lend them towards leadership roles. Thievery is obviously learned and again not innate to the natural world.

Of course humans learn as any animal does (and obviously more so considering our high cognitive abilities), but that does not mean that there are no biological traits at all. This is a poor argument. Because you cannot be born a thief you cannot be born with blue eyes. That makes no sense. 

[_JS]

GREAT point, Plane

Strawman...I never said you could not shun anyone you want, hence why I asked the question.

No, it's not.  This whole bullying technique in trying to suppress criticisms of homosexual behavior is what's not going to fly.  You can NOT take an obvious Christian principle of immorality, and PC it to death in order to make everyone all acceptant.  We can respect the person (even love them, as I do my brother), while still condemning any acts our God has taught us as being immoral. 

Oh please.

What canNOT do is invent garbage that has nothing to do with science or reason and then apply it to an entire community of individuals all the while trying to strip them of the same rights that others enjoy and then turn around and pin that onto Christ. That isn't His burden - it is yours.

[sirs]

Please yourself.  If your walk with God, has no problem with you supporting and/or condoning immoral behavior, that's between you and your God.  Nor would you expect me to have you alter my walk.  A simple concept actually

[Plane]

It isn't about my rights or asking for advice. I don't need your permission to teach my children anything. I don't even know if you have children. I know that Sirs does not. I doubt seriously that I'll require either of your permission or advice when it comes to my children. That is entirely irrelevant.

My question was direct and simple, your refusal to answer it (or even address it) is noted.

But onto the questions you did answer and I thank you for that.

1. You believe that homosexuality is a choice and not an attraction these individuals had from youth?

Definitely , sexual attraction is trainable .

How so? When you were an adolescent you looked for guidance in determining your sexual attraction?

My parents and animals / the parents were much better sources but the horses were more demonstrative.

2. You believe that homosexuals actively "recruit" people to their lifestyle?

Yes , should I look up a discussion of this ?, I don't really like to go there too often, washing my computer in three waters afterwards is hard on the circuits.

I'm just going to give two real-life examples and you tell me why these two aren't actively "recruiting." I have a really good friend who is an Oxford graduate (England, not Ole Miss) and now lives in London who is most certainly gay. He has never once tried to "recruit" me or any of our common friends. Also, I've been a moderator of this board for a while and I've never had anyone complain that Fatman's behavior is anything less than impeccable. Are these two individuals out of the loop on "recruiting" policy?.

Yes, they probably already have a toaster oven.

3. #2 automatically assumes that heterosexuals are vulnerable to this "recruiting" so we can infer that you believe this as well?

To some degree , do you think that people are born with a complete set of instincts that with no instruction produces a well rounded person? Human beings are very teachable and reprogrammable even to great depths of the sub conscious. Do you think that people are born with Bestiality or Rape in their system ? Do you think that people are born thieves or born leaders , born to Football or born to Soccar? There are really very few things we depend on instinct for as adults and more things in which we use reason for overcoming our instincts.

Rape is not comparable as it can and does happen across different sexualities. Sporting events are not comparable because they are not biological functions innate to the natural world. To some degree people are born leaders - or at least with the personality traits that would lend them towards leadership roles. Thievery is obviously learned and again not innate to the natural world.

Of course humans learn as any animal does (and obviously more so considering our high cognitive abilities), but that does not mean that there are no biological traits at all. This is a poor argument. Because you cannot be born a thief you cannot be born with blue eyes. That makes no sense. 

Blue eyes are not a belief nor a behavior. Your argument is poorer than mine.
Rape is an attitude towards other persons and a behavior set .A good argument could be made for its agreement with instinct, but that is no moral nor leagal excuse for a rapist its being natural to a person is nothing to the law and nothing to social opprobrium.
Leadership is a partly innate and partly learned quality even if you have the innate qualities that lend themselves to leadership you can still learn to do it badly.

Observe a tree full of squirrels if onehas a nut he either eats it or hides it , if he doesn't hide it well enough another squirrel will eat it. Thievery is a very natural behavior , children are trained not to thieve else they would pick up what they wanted , refusing to thieve is unnatural.Even people who are quite cultured often revert to thevery sometimes even if they cover it up with rationalisations and euphemisms.An intelligent theif can tell you many reasons that what he is doing is a good idea , he may even be telling himself exactly the same thjings.

People train themselves to be cool , people train themselves to like turnips , people trainthemselves to smoke and with great effort train themselves to quit , so what about homosexuality makes it a habit immune to training?

[_JS]

Please yourself.  If your walk with God, has no problem with you supporting and/or condoning immoral behavior, that's between you and your God.  Nor would you expect me to have you alter my walk.  A simple concept actually

Not so simple. I don't like the idea of you imposing bigotry on others. The Southern Baptists used to preach that African-Americans were the descendants of Ham and therefore not to be treated with the same dignity and respect as a white person, though both were Christian. I love the idea of anyone finding his or her own path to God...but that isn't a license to use Christ for one's own disingenuous purposes.

There are many laws and corrections in the Bible. I doubt either you or Plane follow them all with any regularity. So I take your little jibe on "condoning immoral behavior" for what it is worth. 

[_JS]

I'm not even sure how to respond to your post Plane.

Rape is an attitude? Quite clearly it is an action. Try using "rape is an attitude" in a court of law. I've heard of nuanced definitions before, but that takes the cake.

You can learn to be a bad leader? Sure. You can learn to be lousy at anything. I don't recall saying you couldn't. That's completely irrelevant and off-topic.

What you explain with the squirrels is not "thievery" but survival and hunger - biological impulses. Note that squirrels don't take acorns and then sell them for a profit.

Refusing to be a thief is unnatural? Really? So God created little heathen thieves? Interesting. I thought I was a cynic.

People train themselves to be cool , people train themselves to like turnips , people trainthemselves to smoke and with great effort train themselves to quit , so what about homosexuality makes it a habit immune to training?

Because it isn't a "habit."

My parents and animals / the parents were much better sources but the horses were more demonstrative.

So when you saw your Anne Marie Collins, or picked up your first Playboy you were thinking about your mom and dad and horses?


 

[sirs]

Please yourself.  If your walk with God, has no problem with you supporting and/or condoning immoral behavior, that's between you and your God.  Nor would you expect me to have you alter my walk.  A simple concept actually

Not so simple. I don't like the idea of you imposing bigotry on others.

See?.....exactly my point (and Plane's as well), trying to bully someone into repressing any condemnation towards what they've been taught as immoral behavior, by trying to call them a bigot.  News flash Js, unless you want to go on record as claiming Christianity is a religion of overt bigotry, I'd suggest you cease the judging of someone else's walk.  Last time I checked, God wasn't so supportive of such an effort

[_JS]

Please yourself.  If your walk with God, has no problem with you supporting and/or condoning immoral behavior, that's between you and your God.  Nor would you expect me to have you alter my walk.  A simple concept actually

Not so simple. I don't like the idea of you imposing bigotry on others.

See?.....exactly my point (and Plane's as well), trying to bully someone into repressing any condemnation towards what they've been taught as immoral behavior, by trying to call them a bigot.  News flash Js, unless you want to go on record as claiming Christianity is a religion of overt bigotry, I'd suggest you cease the judging of someone else's walk.  Last time I checked, God wasn't so supportive of such an effort

Are you trying to claim that the history of Christianity has been one of openness and toleration?

[sirs]

I'm claiming that Christianity is a religion advocating free will, choice, and an adherence to living a moral life, as God would want (as referenced in the Bible)

Your walk with God is for you and he to figure out, so best stop trying to judge others and their walk.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I think it is pretty clear that the sex drive is a biological instinct. In Freudian terms, it is part of the "Id", the center for instinctive behavior. In society, it is not permitted for a person to simply grab and rape anyone he is attracted to. The Ego is the force that controls the instinct. Since sex is a drive, like hunger and a need for warmth and shelter from the elements, the Superego reconciles the desire of the Id with the restraint of the Ego. You must court the object of your affections in a socially acceptable way.
If one is homosexual, one is attracted to members of his/her own sex. If one is heterosexual, one is attracted to members of the opposite sex.

In societies where homosexuality is frowned upon, there is normally a subculture which arises to provide for courtship rituals that are acceptable to the homosexuals and invisible to the heteros, so as to avoid being jailed, stoned or in some way punished.

I don't think that Plane is correct in his belief that it is as simple for a homosexual to indoctrinate himself into heterosexual desires as it is to teach oneself to enjoy eating turnips or spinach. Sex is a different drive than hunger, and operates differently in the mind.Of course, eating turnips or refusing to eat them is not something society bans or encourages as much as sexual preference.

[_JS]

I'm claiming that Christianity is a religion advocating free will, choice, and an adherence to living a moral life, as God would want (as referenced in the Bible)

Your walk with God is for you and he to figure out, so best stop trying to judge others and their walk.

Best for you to follow your own advice.

Interesting that in this sentence: "I'm claiming that Christianity is a religion advocating free will, choice, and an adherence to living a moral life, as God would want (as referenced in the Bible)" in which you define Christianity - you never once mentioned Christ. You went out of your way to point at the individualist aspects of Christianity (free will, choice, individual moral life) - but you neglected to mention Jesus, His two commandments, His ministry, The Kingdom of God, the Apostles, Faith, the Holy Spirit.

That is a telling description. In your sentence you could easily substitute Islam or Judaism for Christianity and the sentence would hold true. There is nothing in there that truly defines Christianity at its essence. I'm not attacking by any means...I just find it fascinating. The essence of Christianity is not free will, choice, or adherence to a code of ethics from written text.

[sirs]

Your walk with God is for you and he to figure out, so best stop trying to judge others and their walk.

Best for you to follow your own advice.

I have been.  I'm not telling you how to run your walk, or anyone else for that matter, but you sure as hell are trying to do it with me (and Plane).  Pulling out the ol bigotry calling card is pretty pathetic.  Even trying to decipher my view of Christianity as some twisted version.  That's what's really telling

[_JS]

I'm not going to get into a juvenile argument with you Sirs.

I love studying theology, plus it helps with what you call my "walk with God." I do find your definition interesting because it focuses so much on the individualist notions in religion as opposed to the higher theological principles that make Christianity what it is. The primary among those being the reincarnation of God into a human messiah of Jesus Christ who led a remarkable ministry where He discussed the Kingdom of God, which led to his crucifixion at Golgotha. In His ministry Christ and the apostles were very much people of Orthopraxy whereas many of the Christian leaders today (and throughout history) have been people of Orthodoxy.

You tend towards stressing orthodoxy and I believe that is why we have conflicts on religious issues. Both are obviously important and I'll leave it at that.

As for using the term "bigotry" - I'll call it when I see it. I make no qualms about it. The Southern Baptists hid behind their "walk with God" too. That didn't make it right Sirs. I'm all for leaving people alone, but not when it starts hurting others and selectively isolates people who have done nothing to deserve it.

[sirs]

I'm not going to get into a juvenile argument with you Sirs.

Not asking you to.  I'm asking you to leave my walk with God alone, and refrain with the juvenile attempts at kneejerk labeling anyone a bigot for daring to support the notion that some acts, clearly articulated in the bible, are immoral.  Simple as that

[Plane]

I'm not even sure how to respond to your post Plane.

Rape is an attitude? Quite clearly it is an action. Try using "rape is an attitude" in a court of law. I've heard of nuanced definitions before, but that takes the cake.

You can learn to be a bad leader? Sure. You can learn to be lousy at anything. I don't recall saying you couldn't. That's completely irrelevant and off-topic.

What you explain with the squirrels is not "thievery" but survival and hunger - biological impulses. Note that squirrels don't take acorns and then sell them for a profit.

Refusing to be a thief is unnatural? Really? So God created little heathen thieves? Interesting. I thought I was a cynic.

People train themselves to be cool , people train themselves to like turnips , people trainthemselves to smoke and with great effort train themselves to quit , so what about homosexuality makes it a habit immune to training?

Because it isn't a "habit."

My parents and animals / the parents were much better sources but the horses were more demonstrative.

So when you saw your Anne Marie Collins, or picked up your first Playboy you were thinking about your mom and dad and horses?


 

Oh no Playboy is what it is , but before I ever had one I knew something about Sex.

Ssquirrels do not sin of course , but they do take what they find , as do children too young to have been trained , that training is the diffrence between thevevery and not (I know how to spell theveveverey but I don't know when to quit) either way it is a behavior that is completely natural. Could you find for the the scriptures that urge one to be completely natural?

Rape is most certainly an attitude , so is murder a closely related attitude , people who are civilised enough to hold the lives of others in great esteem do not perform these as acts because they do not consider them legitamate acts in their attitude. Both Rape and murder have a lot to do with rage , hatred and power, can you imagine a hate crime being done with no hate at all? Murder is natural to mankind even though it is corrosive to everything about us as victim and as perpetrator and as society . Rape is only the same thing with added humiliation and reduced lethality. that they are natural results of inborn traits does nothing to make them good , acceptable or fair or leagal , you are right about it being a very lousy defense in court even though it is truely a natural phenominon it isn't  much of a defense to say so.

As one can learn to be a bad leader , one can learn to be bad at sex, this seems to be one feild at which we value both skill and lack of practice , I am sure you could catch my drift if you weren't trying to avoid it.

People train themselves to be cool , people train themselves to like turnips , people trainthemselves to smoke and with great effort train themselves to quit , so what about homosexuality makes it a habit immune to training?

Because it isn't a "habit."

Oh Great! now we need a definition of" Habit " that we can agree on , as well as a definition of Homosexuality that is exclusive of it.
Then you can start telling me what makes Homosexuality unique of all human attributes in that it is not the result of training and it is immune to change by training.