Frogboy,
Saying that there are moral absolutes does not mean that I'm saying I set them, there are universal absolutes and the absolutes set in the Bible. In recent times it has become a "dirty concept" to call something what it is. It wasn't my judgement call, it was God's. There is a difference between respect and intolerence, why do you seem to think they are the same thing? I can respect people as people, I just don't agree with things that they do.
Janice & Frogboy,
I believe it was Janice who claimed these people were born gay, but Frogboy addressed this too, so I"m answering you both now. I use the term "birth defect" because, and even you admitted, it was against the norm. When people are born with something wroing with them physically or mentally we call it a birth defect, what's wrong with calling homosexuality a birth defect as well? I was using your thought process there.
A fetish is anything that turns someone on sexually. There really are some strange ones out there too. The only reason some gay people are torn over it is because they know that it is morally wrong. It's the same debate over commiting a crime if it benifits someone, does that make it a crime, etc. A crime is a crime, a sin is a sin.
There are child molestors, pediphiles, and murderers who are always at conflict with what they do. They know it is wrong but yet they do it. It's an example to illustrate my point.
Luke,
I enjoy your comments, you sound like a great person to debate with on many subjects. I think that the reason why people get defensive and nasty when subjects like these come up is because they are afraid to have their beliefs challenged and maybe even swayed to a different point of view.
I would, however, like to clarify that I do not feel that a person has been bad to bring on a gay lifestyle, I"ve actually never heard of that concept before. By judging from the scriptures I feel that it's a sin, just like any other sin. All sins are equal, and therefore I have no qualms of comparing sins with sins, and it's usually the first ones that come to mind.
I was never relating HIV to gay people, I always saw this topic as being along the same path as the HIV infected character. Once they do this a gay character is not far behind. I think we agree on this point.
Luke & Fellowlover,
I have remained civil and respectful in all of my posts and will continue to be so, no matter how hostile people reat me for these views.
Radionate,
1.) I never made a connection between HIV and gay people. I believe I said that this would open the door for that to be the next step. Muppet Qulter said that he'd like to see a gay character on the show and that is how is discussion began.
2.) This country was founded by what you would consider to be "religious fanatics" but they never executed gays. THat is a myth. If you look at American History the founding fathers founded America as a Christian Nation and this meant that Christianity dictated all forms of government (and this was upheld by the SUpreme Court until the 1960's!) Even with this strong religious attitude the founding fathers allowed other religions and credes to settle here for they were loving their neighbor as they loved themself, even though they did not believe in many of the things that these people reprsented.
3.) Whn you stait that it took you 20 years to figure out you were gay you are proving my point, people are not born gay, they just decide one day that that's the lifestyle for them. You know what else? All homosexual periodicals printed until the early 1980's PROUDLY PROCLAIMED that homosexuality was a choice and one that they took pride in making. It was not until the mid 80's that the tune changed to "This is a birth defect."
Hays,
That is what I was saying in an earlier post. There are specifics that young children just do not need to know because their minds are not rady for them.
Frogboy,
"Until you walk in someone else’s skin you cannot truly understand them"
Yet you call me disrespectful and offensive, but say I need to spend a day in someone's shoes to understand them. Why aren't you holding this same rule true about myself and my views? It seems one sided to me.
Fellowlover,
Thanks for showing that. It saves me the trouble.
Frogboy,
Jesus said not to specifically judge a perso of sin, not to judge an action as a sin. I have only stated actions that are sins, not anyone who has committed them. With your spin, nothing would be wrong and there would be no way to hve morals, aka situational ethics. That is not what the BIble teaches at all. I also do not aplogize when I have done or said nothing wrong.