It doesn’t happen in nature? WTF! continuum, try to learn something before making overreaching statements like this. Homosexuality is evident in a number of animal species, such as bonobo monkeys, rats, fruit flies, giraffes, and probably a dozen more than someone will come up with before I even finish posting this.
Your use of the naturalistic fallacy is appalling as well. Here’s news for you: religion, belief in god, marriage, wearing clothes, bathing daily, and using computers don’t happen in nature either. I have a feeling you don’t think that us humans should stop doing those particular things.
And finally, God did not create two different sexes for a reason. It was a result of a sexual split that occurred about 600 million years ago, with no teleological purpose.
P.S. Okay, I lied. Here’s my ‘finally.’ What about all of those OT patriarchs who had many wives? If man is meant for woman (singular), were they somehow violating God’s will by being married to numerous women?
One thing I noticed about my biblical references (and some I didn’t post) is they seem to focus on gay lust and sex and not the underlying state of preferring same sex partners or loving them in a romantic way. Would it then be moral for two male or female homosexuals to live together as a married couple as long as they don’t go beyond kissing and heavy petting (which seems to be OK for heterosexuals to do before marriage)?
My quandry is if these individuals are born gay, it seems unfare to expect them to go through life with the same drive as everyone else but no outlet. I didn’t choose to be right-handed or my sexual preference. I don’t imagine I could successfully change either one.
Please explain your logic behind this. For a split to have occured, then there would’ve had to have been some kind of reproduction already in process. Why would there be a sexual split unless there was a more efficent way of reproducing? You could argue that it was simply a ‘random mutation’ but for a random mutation, it sure was beneficial. Also, I would like to see the evidence supporting this claim. This must’ve happened while life on the planet was still consisting of the* very first *organisms (which, unless I’m misinformed, are not shown in the fossil record) otherwise, this mutation would’ve had to have happened in many different species of organisms at different times, which would hardly support your ‘no teleological purpose’ arguement.
If someone is born without the ability to walk, it seems unfair that they should go through life without that ability that all the rest of us take for granted. Like you said, homosexuals can’t help the way they they were born, just as someone w/o the ability to walk cannot.
Now, as you’ve stated, there is scripture to back the arguement that it is wrong for homosexuals to engage in sex with each other. The restriction in this case is not necessarily a physical limitation (even though one could argue that case, from a biological standpoint due to the mis-match of…uh…hardware), but a limitation set by biblical standards. By christian standards, gay sex is wrong and sinful. Therefore, if a man is homosexual AND is christian, he must restrain himself from the sex. I don’t know about the romantic love, as my scripture (unfortunately) is a little rusty. The restriction set for a homosexual christian is in place and must be followed, just like the rest of God’s rules. If you’re not a christian, then you can pick and choose which rules (if any) you wish to follow. Christians cannot force their values on another; they can merely expose them to their philosophy on life and hope/pray they accept it. (To us, it is their eternal salvation at stake)
In reply to the question ‘Can a homosexual still be a christian?’, here is my $.02: A christian is a christian no matter what he does, since he is forgiven of his sins by Faith, not works, BUT a christian must also honestly tryto follow the teachings of the Bible. This is something that must be judged by God, since it is impossible for a man to say what is in another man’s heart.
Somehow I got my date misremembered. The split occured 240-320 million years ago, not 600 million. And it was not the beginning of sexual production, but rather the differentiation of the X and Y chromosomes. Read all about it here.
No, I can’t prove that this split was not teleological; that would be impossible. God could always act in such a way as to appear as though everything he did was done according to natural law. But unless someone can prove to me that this was teleological, I’ll assume that it was not.
I simply meant my comment to be a rejoinder to those who think that the existence of males and females, as determined by genetics, is traceable straight back to Adam and Eve in the garden, and that homosexuality is wrong because man and woman were once one flesh, and therefore should be reunited as such. Anyone basing morality on Hebrew fairy tales is in desperate need of a reality check.
Just as humanity has provided persons with physical disabilities the ability to participate in life to the fullest degree without discrimination (ie. ADA), humanity should also make provisions for innately gay individuals to live “normal” lives, as one might see fit, by allowing legal same sex unions, adoptions by gay couples, etc.
Do you agree with this (biblical issues aside)?
It is not required for paraplegics to grow new working legs; they are accepted as from birth and provided with alternate means of mobility.
Thanks for the link. I’ll have to research that in a little more detail before I respond. And as to ‘basing morality on Hebrew fairy tales’, I’d have to tell you that many of the laws (and derivative laws) of the USA (and most other countries of the world) are based on the Ten Commandments, and other teachings of the Bible.
WWE-
I agree with you, in that the act is sinful. I don’t know about the love, due to the fact that my scripture is rusty (as I mentioned).
In my earlier post, I was going on the assumption that homosexuality is non-changeable. I was comparing the homosexual lifestyle to the non-ability to walk in that gays can still enjoy life, but are limited in it to that (according to Christian rules) they cannot have sex with their prefered gender, just as a person who cannot walk can enjoy life except they simply cannot walk.
Really? Please tell me how many of the Ten Commandments are also laws in the U.S. By my count, only three of those listed in Ex. 20 are laws. None of those listed in the true Ten Commandments at Ex. 34 are. How about the 613 laws in the Torah? How many of those are laws in the modern U.S.? I would make a WAG of <10%, probably somewhere around 2-3%. New Testament law fares not much better.
And don’t forget that just because there are some laws in common between the Torah and the U.S. doesn’t mean that the latter were based on the former. The Code of Hammurabi has a lot of laws against murder and theft as well, as does the Qur’an, as do the Five Ethical Precepts of the Buddha.