Can a Homosexual become a Heterosexual?

[Dakota_Roberts]

I suspect that there is no answer is possible because the conclusion is true. It’s just about sex.

As I have stated before

It’s about potential, the possibility for a committed relationship, to share your life with someone.
It’s also about romantic desire, which isn’t necessarily about sex. It’s about an emotional connect. All of those with someone of the same gender.

Because A≠B and B≠C you can’t apply Transitive Principle of Equality.

 

[John21652]

As I have stated before

It’s about potential, the possibility for a committed relationship, to share your life with someone.
It’s also about romantic desire, which isn’t necessarily about sex. It’s about an emotional connect. All of those with someone of the same gender.

If we go to the Oxford Dictionary, we can learn that ‘Romance’ refers to a feeling of excitement and mystery associated with love, while the lesser dictionaries tell us it is usually a short lived association of intense feelings towards another. Now I know what’s missing in the relationship I have with my three brothers, whom I love so much I’d willingly lay down my life for them. I must tell them we need to work on the romance a bit more.

Because A≠B and B≠C you can’t apply Transitive Principle of Equality.

But you haven’t demonstrated that A≠B. Until you do so, warpspeedpetey can indeed apply the Transitive principle of Equality. Just as he wrote, I suspect you can’t demonstrate that A≠B.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

As I have stated before

It’s about potential, the possibility for a committed relationship, to share your life with someone.
It’s also about romantic desire, which isn’t necessarily about sex. It’s about an emotional connect. All of those with someone of the same gender.

Because A≠B and B≠C you can’t apply Transitive Principle of Equality.

Yes you said those things and I refuted them in posts #124

Originally Posted by Dakota Roberts View Post
It’s about potential, the possibility for a committed relationship, to share your life with someone.
It’s also about romantic desire, which isn’t necessarily about sex. It’s about an emotional connect.

This is a quality shared by all people. As I pointed out, If there is more to being gay than sex, then it must be some quality that is not sexual in nature or shared by non-gay people. Otherwise, the only thing left is sex. Since the qualities you mention above are shared by all of humanity, they are not something about being gay, that is more than sex. Do you have an example that avoids the logical problem with your claim? Some quality unique to gay people and not about sex?

and #130.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota Roberts View Post
The crucial difference is all that is felt towards a person of the same gender instead of towards the opposite gender, so it is in fact different.

Sexual attraction is about sex, and your claim is that being gay is about more than sex. If you claim that it is not sexual attraction than it cannot be homosexual by definition. If there is more to being gay than sex, then it must be some quality that is not sexual in nature or shared by non-gay people. Otherwise, the only thing left is sex. Do you have another example for us to examine, or do you care to admit the conclusion?

P1. homosexual = sex (One is only a homosexual if they actually have homosexual relations)

P2. sex = choice (The manner of sexual relations is a choice)

Apply the Transitive Principle of Equality
If A = B, and B = C, then A = C

C1. homosexual=choice (homosexual relations are a choice)

You have yet to demonstrate a quality that is not sexual in nature or shared by non-gay people. Such a demonstration would prove your assertion that A≠B, in regards to premise1.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

If we go to the Oxford Dictionary, we can learn that ‘Romance’ refers to a feeling of excitement and mystery associated with love, while the lesser dictionaries tell us it is usually a short lived association of intense feelings towards another. Now I know what’s missing in the relationship I have with my three brothers, whom I love so much I’d willingly lay down my life for them. I must tell them we need to work on the romance a bit more.

But you haven’t demonstrated that A≠B. Until you do so, warpspeedpetey can indeed apply the Transitive principle of Equality. Just as he wrote, I suspect you can’t demonstrate that A≠B.

Feelings can come out of nowhere, whether you choose to embrace them or push them away is a choice, and acting on them is also a choice, but normally you don’t choose for the feelings to happen.

the sub part can also be “love, esp. when sentimental or idealized”. Romance can blossom into love like what happened to my grandparents who have now been married over sixty years. Romance isn’t between siblings, that’s an entirely different type of relationship with a different type of love (philia). That still leaves most of what I pointed out intact.

You don’t understand at all. It’s like trying to explain Catholicism to Dawkins.

 

[Ciknay]

I believe that they can’t. As most people who are truely Homosexual (not just confused in teens) have been that way since birth, and it is who they are. Some have tried to change to hetrosexuality, but became depressed with who they were.

 

[Cristiano]

I believe that they can’t. As most people who are truely Homosexual (not just confused in teens) have been that way since birth, and it is who they are. Some have tried to change to hetrosexuality, but became depressed with who they were.

Here you are giving the definition that homosexuals are those who cannot change and then you say that they can’t change. This is a tautology, it is neither evidence nor an opinion.

 

[speakttruth]

Again it’s the same old lie they had this since birth. They are not born this way. If you truly believe in God the creator, you would know that he does not make mistakes. He intended man and women to become one and procreate and nurture the love that they have for each other and the possibility to multiply. What on earth is not made with a female and male parts that produces something. Nothing. Everything, even electrical components are male and female and you wouldn’t even produce electricity without them. Nails into wood produces homes. Something that makes something needs a male and female component. Everything is male in female in this world. Even the tiniest things in the world we can’t even see, have a female and male component to create. These are truths and facts.

So WHY would God make a man in the very image of himself to be perverted and have same sex? Sin entered the world and Satan has a hold on many homosexuals, because he wants those souls. He has been trying in every way possible to destroy the body that was made in the image and likeness of God and SS is one of them, Drugs, money, pornography, gluttony, sports, music, television, movies, plastic surgery, etc., using all the senses of the body to destroy our bodies or idolize them. To make ourselves like little Gods and look what has happened in the world.

It is common sense that we are made different for a reason, male and female. So just because someone is unhappy with this problem you think it’s better to act out? You have no idea how many lives are ruined because of this lifestyle, because the gay activists, don’t want to tell you. Satan has convinced them of this lie. He is the master deceiver. Just like any sin, when we give our free will to consent to do sin, we pay the price. It is because of **that **reason we are unhappy, because we think we are better than God. Ask God the question, God do you make mistakes or did we? What do you think?

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Again it’s the same old lie they had this since birth. They are not born this way. If you truly believe in God the creator, you would know that he does not make mistakes. He intended man and women to become one and procreate and nurture the love that they have for each other and the possibility to multiply. What on earth is not made with a female and male parts that produces something. Nothing. Everything, even electrical components are male and female and you wouldn’t even produce electricity without them. Nails into wood produces homes. Something that makes something needs a male and female component. Everything is male in female in this world. Even the tiniest things in the world we can’t even see, have a female and male component to create. These are truths and facts.

So WHY would God make a man in the very image of himself to be perverted and have same sex? Sin entered the world and Satan has a hold on many homosexuals, because he wants those souls. He has been trying in every way possible to destroy the body that was made in the image and likeness of God and SS is one of them, Drugs, money, pornography, gluttony, sports, music, television, movies, plastic surgery, etc., using all the senses of the body to destroy our bodies or idolize them. To make ourselves like little Gods and look what has happened in the world.

It is common sense that we are made different for a reason, male and female. So just because someone is unhappy with this problem you think it’s better to act out? You have no idea how many lives are ruined because of this lifestyle, because the gay activists, don’t want to tell you. Satan has convinced them of this lie. He is the master deceiver. Just like any sin, when we give our free will to consent to do sin, we pay the price. It is because of **that **reason we are unhappy, because we think we are better than God. Ask God the question, God do you make mistakes or did we? What do you think?

If it is caused by society then do tell why it did not disappear during the Middle Ages?

Temptations constitute trials and passing those trials makes us better people however there will always be those who fail and debase themselves.

Money is bad? Is money bad when used to feed, shelter or clothe the hungry? Is a capella music bad such as in the hauntingly beautiful Miserere Mei Deus? Is plastic surgery bad when it is used to reconstruct the face of a mauling victim? Yes, they can be used for evil, but also good.

Passions are a neutral thing, when used for good they are good and when they are used wrongly they are evil. Michelangelo’s David is an objectively beautiful statue, is it tainted by the sublimation of improper passions? How about the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel?

Sure, go ahead and bash gay hedonism, you should also bash hedonism by heterosexuals while you are at it.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

If it is…

Do you have an answer to my last post? If you cannot find such a quality to being gay that is neither sexual nor shared by the other orientations, then being gay is really just about the sex. I hope you don’t repeat refuted arguments or tell us we do not understand. If logic proves your claim false then it is just false, no matter how badly you wish otherwise. Of course you could just admit the conclusion is true, which is the honest thing to do if it is. So what say you?

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Do you have an answer to my last post? If you cannot find such a quality to being gay that is neither sexual nor shared by the other orientations, then being gay is really just about the sex. I hope you don’t repeat refuted arguments or tell us we do not understand. If logic proves your claim false then it is just false, no matter how badly you wish otherwise. Of course you could just admit the conclusion is true, which is the honest thing to do if it is. So what say you?

How is loving someone of the same gender the same as loving someone of the opposite gender?

The Church doesn’t know what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

How is loving someone of the same gender the same as loving someone of the opposite gender?

All orientations can love. That isn’t “something more to being gay than sex” that is just a quality everyone shares.

The Church doesn’t know what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.

That’s pretty much the point. It looks like a choice and there is no real evidence otherwise. Evidence would be this quality that you say makes being gay more than about the sex.

 

[estesbob]

How is loving someone of the same gender the same as loving someone of the opposite gender?

The Church doesn’t know what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.

But everybody knows what causes homosexual behavior. As with all grievous sin it is a conscious choice

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

All orientations can love. That isn’t “something more to being gay than sex” that is just a quality everyone shares.

That’s pretty much the point. It looks like a choice and there is no real evidence otherwise. Evidence would be this quality that you say makes being gay more than about the sex.

That’s like saying cars and motorcycles are the same because they both transport you places.
The thing being loved is different.
Using an awl on a piece of wood is different from using an awl on a piece of leather, yes the action is is basically the same and it uses the same instrument, but they are different things.

But everybody knows what causes homosexual behavior. As with all grievous sin it is a conscious choice

So someone who only has homosexual attractions, but never engages in sex is asexual?

If a person never engages in sex they are asexual?

Of course actions are choices

Is a man who has sex with a man in prison, but does not love any men different from a man who only loves men and has sex with them?
The why matters

 

[warpspeedpetey]

That’s like saying cars and motorcycles are the same because they both transport you places.
The thing being loved is different…

The love is the same, it’s the object of the love that is different. Further, love assumes you want the best for the other, and obviously you cannot both claim to truly love someone and claim the source of that love is a sinful desire. That’s not any more love, than breathless assertions of some teenager at lookout point.

 

[White_Peony]

What are your thoughts?

With Christ, most definately.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

The love is the same, it’s the object of the love that is different. Further, love assumes you want the best for the other, and obviously you cannot both claim to truly love someone and claim the source of that love is a sinful desire. That’s not any more love, than breathless assertions of some teenager at lookout point.

“love assumes you want the best for the other” That’s agape, the giving love, OTOH eros is about what the person wants and doesn’t necessarily care what the other person wants. The teenager isn’t necessarily at lookout point for sex, they many just want to see the sunset with their boyfriend/girlfriend and cuddle.

While they are the exception to the rule there are homosexual couples who have been together decades, there might, just might be something there beyond a desire for sex.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

…While they are the exception to the rule there are homosexual couples who have been together decades, there might, just might be something there beyond a desire for sex.

Love is a quality all orientations share. You claimed that there was something more to being gay than sex, yet you cannot tell me what this quality is, what other choice do I have than to assume you cannot offer such a quality and thus the conclusion is true? Further, you have yet to explain why it’s not hypocritical for you to be intolerant of orientations that violate your moral world view. While asking us to be tolerant of orientations that violate our moral worldview. It seems to me that you have no legitimate reason to reject other orientations other than your personal prejudices concerning them. Why then shouldn’t our society allow plural marriage? Necrophilia? Zoophilia, and incestuous marriages? Who do they hurt? If you wish society to accept homosexuality, it seems that you have no recourse but to admit that all these orientations are just as valid as any other and society should accept them as well. Why should you have a problem with these other orientations?

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Love is a quality all orientations share. You claimed that there was something more to being gay than sex, yet you cannot tell me what this quality is, what other choice do I have than to assume you cannot offer such a quality and thus the conclusion is true? Further, you have yet to explain why it’s not hypocritical for you to be intolerant of orientations that violate your moral world view. While asking us to be tolerant of orientations that violate our moral worldview. It seems to me that you have no legitimate reason to reject other orientations other than your personal prejudices concerning them. Why then shouldn’t our society allow plural marriage? Necrophilia? Zoophilia, and incestuous marriages? Who do they hurt? If you wish society to accept homosexuality, it seems that you have no recourse but to admit that all these orientations are just as valid as any other and society should accept them as well. Why should you have a problem with these other orientations?

As I said earlier “Using an awl on a piece of wood is different from using an awl on a piece of leather, yes the action is is basically the same and it uses the same instrument, but they are different things.”

Love can not be reciprocated between a person and a corpse, likewise with a human and an animal. In a relationship between a parent and a child it is inherently unequal, we also frown on relationships between teachers and students because it is inherently unequal. Plural marriages are legal messes plus are inherently unequal.

I have never asked for acceptance for homosexual acts.

 

[CopticChristian]

What are your thoughts?

This question is answered on the understanding of Homosexuality.

Homosexuality is no longer a disease based on the DSM IV. It was taken out of the DSM III as a result of homosexual psychiatrists voting it out.

According to William Glasser, M.D., formulater of Choice Theory and Reality Therapy, who does not believe in the DSM at all, homosexuality is a choice.

The Church teaches Homosexuality is a sin. Sin is a choice.

If homosexuality is a choice then the homosexual is a heterosexual making a choice and in that regard can choose to be what he or she is.

With that understanding Homosexuals can become what they are by choice and become what they are by not choosing to sin.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

This question is answered on the understanding of Homosexuality.

Homosexuality is no longer a disease based on the DSM IV. It was taken out of the DSM III as a result of homosexual psychiatrists voting it out.

According to William Glasser, M.D., formulater of Choice Theory and Reality Therapy, who does not believe in the DSM at all, homosexuality is a choice.

The Church teaches Homosexuality is a sin. Sin is a choice.

If homosexuality is a choice then the homosexual is a heterosexual making a choice and in that regard can choose to be what he or she is.

With that understanding Homosexuals can become what they are by choice and become what they are by not choosing to sin.

The Church teaches homosexual acts are mortally sinful.