Can Homosexuality Be Proved Wrong From Natural Law

  • Thread starter Thread starter Portrait
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In my case Christianity of course. If I am in a Buddhist country, I will respect the Buddhist beliefs which I did in my former country. What I am saying is that there should be no room for Atheist states.
What does this mean? Do you mean that no country should actually have a secular government, with separation of church and state?
Ok maybe you misunderstood. To be a GAY is 100% ok. Its what one does that they are responsible for. So being a practicing GAY is NOT ok. So if your family memeber is a practicing gay, he might not affect your family (but it already seems to have affected your view on sexuality) but it will influence many other families psychologically, and physically. It will also cause psychological harm to those who know your brother in that they will think being a practicing Gay must be OK.
How can I misunderstand when you stated that gays would “tear a family apart”? How did I misunderstand that remark? It appears that you are revising your claim dramatically.
Well I don’t know which high-shool and who you exactly are to tell you if I think you are a bad teacher or not. But, if you match the description of teachers I mentioned, then I condemn you as a teacher. I think you are leading generations of students astray.
Is it permissible to teach literature by gay writers? I teach high school literature, and I teach literature by gay writers. My students ask me if they are gay. I answer accurately. Some of the writing is clearly sympathetic to the plight of demonized gays. Some is clearly sympathetic to the idea of love between gays (often in coded language, since it, too, is demonized). Do you “condemn” this? Can we teach art and music by gays? Can history examine the mis-treatment of gays?
Ha? I don’t think so. What are you citing here? Abstinence is 100% effective. Safe sex is not. I would have thought that’s obvious to you.
Abstinence teaching, I said. As a policy promoted to young people, it has failed. The most recent study on this is common knowledge. Type it into google.
Secondly, all psychological research in to ‘sex before marriage’, ‘living together before marriage’ have shown that they are in-fact detrimental for any long term relationship
That is a false claim.
So you are telling me that you want to teach students to live their lives a certain way that would jeopardize their long term relationships?
I don’t want to tell students how to live their lives at all. What are you talking about? When a book simply reveals to children that gays exist, how is that an attempt “to teach children to live a certain way”? Are you for denying that gay couples exist?

Do you have children?

.
The birth rates of western societies are dropping to the point of having a risk of facing a complete social and economical melt down.
That is false fearmongering.
The only reason the West is still surviving is due to the influx of immigrants which was also the reason this problem went unnoticed for sometime now.
False fearmongering.
All you have to do to see the problem is look at demographics that account for immigration.
What makes you think that we have to keep enlarging our population at higher rates? Or is this a fear of immigration that you are expressing?
 
I’m not sure what is meant by “Natural Law.” Of course, it is embedded in “Naturalism” which the physical universe. Natural Law is what governs events in the natural world. So the very fact of homosexuality viewed naturalistically means that there are natural laws that cause it. So in that sense, homosexuality is a result of natural law, just as heterosexuality is. Understanding the naturalistic causes behind homosexuality allows for the prediction (or even creation of it!) of homosexuality.

But I think you guys are using natural law to mean the behavior is natural or normal. Since homosexuals comprise only 10% - 20% of the population, you can’t really say it’s normal. You can show physiologically however that homosexuality, contrary to popular belief, is not “chosen” – if you doubt this try choosing your opposite sexual preference for just a day. Can’t do it, can you?
 
larkin

What does this mean? Do you mean that no country should actually have a secular government, with separation of church and state?

I understood him to mean there should be no atheocracies. I’m sure you can agree with that! 😃
 
larkin

What does this mean? Do you mean that no country should actually have a secular government, with separation of church and state?

I understood him to mean there should be no atheocracies. I’m sure you can agree with that! 😃
I don’t even know what that means. Like outlawing religion?
 
dchezik

You can show physiologically however that homosexuality, contrary to popular belief, is not “chosen” – if you doubt this try choosing your opposite sexual preference for just a day. Can’t do it, can you?

This assertion flies in the face of evidence that people who have been homosexual can choose to be heterosexual with the right kind of therapy. 👍
 
larkin

*I don’t even know what that means. Like outlawing religion? *

Yes. Study the history of the Soviet Union and China, where religion has been persecuted by atheocractic governments.

Stalin

“We guarantee the right of every citizen to combat by argument, propaganda, and agitation all religion. The Communist Party cannot be neutral toward religion. It stands for science, and all religion is opposed to science.”

Mao

“Religion is poison.”
 
larkin

*I don’t even know what that means. Like outlawing religion? *

Yes. Study the history of the Soviet Union and China, where religion has been persecuted by atheocractic governments.

Stalin

“We guarantee the right of every citizen to combat by argument, propaganda, and agitation all religion. The Communist Party cannot be neutral toward religion. It stands for science, and all religion is opposed to science.”

Mao

“Religion is poison.”
I KNOW that history. I meant that the word you used does not exist.

No, no one wants to live under a dictator that outlaws religion. That’s a no brainer once you have lived in the US, which is very welcoming to faith of all kinds.
 
I meant that the word you used does not exist.

NO KIDDING!

But the institution has existed. Theocracies are not good. Neither are atheocracies, as religious people have found out. 😉
 
What does this mean? Do you mean that no country should actually have a secular government, with separation of church and state?
Oh no I think church and state separation is fine. But the laws should ideally reflect the church of the country. Otherwise its a very hypocritical state. So the church is not the ruling body, it will be the faithful.

But yes, no atheist state should be allowed.
How can I misunderstand when you stated that gays would “tear a family apart”? How did I misunderstand that remark? It appears that you are revising your claim dramatically.
Well maybe because it hit close to home for you. I am not revising my claim at all. I still stand firm that practicing homosexuals tear the family apart as in “family” as a concept and in the sense of all families. I didn’t mean that it tears apart the family they are from. I admit there was ambiguity in the way I phrased it.
Is it permissible to teach literature by gay writers? I teach high school literature, and I teach literature by gay writers. My students ask me if they are gay. I answer accurately. Some of the writing is clearly sympathetic to the plight of demonized gays. Some is clearly sympathetic to the idea of love between gays (often in coded language, since it, too, is demonized). Do you “condemn” this? Can we teach art and music by gays? Can history examine the mis-treatment of gays?
You can teach art and music by even practicing gays lol. This is like asking me if you should use a book written by a Nazi author. Well of course. But the students should know the authors background. Most of the time, the author would try to enter his agenda to the creative material, especially in the case of books. I would certainly question whether the students you teach are capable of understanding that the author is wrong while being able to still read the book. So you do have to be very careful. Usually high-school students are of the nature that they believe what they read and are more emotional than they are logical. Psychologically speaking, a person’s frontal lobe which is responsible for logical understanding does not achieve full development till mid twenties. This is why teens are usually very susceptible to emotional arguments. But anyway, these are things to keep in mind. As a teacher, you should know what is right and wrong. From that step, you should judge whether you teaching the material could give the wrong impression to students. If it does, its better to teach it at a later grade. Simple as that.
Abstinence teaching, I said. As a policy promoted to young people, it has failed. The most recent study on this is common knowledge. Type it into google.
Well obviously genius. We have a society that’s trying to make everything about sex. I am talking about promoting what is right. You as a teacher seems to be more confused about right and wrong. A policy has to reflect what is true. Abstinence is the long term discipline that one should achieve. If students fail at it, then you have to start looking in to reducing these external influences. Work together with parents. Your notion that abstinence doesn’t work in general is a garbage claim because where I am from it works very very well.
That is a false claim.
Alright, with all due respect, have you done any academic work on this matter? Now you are trying to disprove research results in academia on this subject wrong? This is not a false claim. Unfortunately many students who enter University get to hear this very early as second year in class and they have the same reaction you do. But its true. Here is a reference for you and you can dig yourself around some of the research databases for papers on the subject

D.G Myers, S.J.Spencer, Social Psychology, Mcgrawhill, 2006, pg. 392- 393
I don’t want to tell students how to live their lives at all. What are you talking about? When a book simply reveals to children that gays exist, how is that an attempt “to teach children to live a certain way”? Are you for denying that gay couples exist?

Do you have children?
No. Once again, its not the existence of Gay people that’s the problem. Its the notion that “to practice homosexuality is OK” that’s the problem. And if you can’t tell students how to live their lives, then you are a failure as a teacher 😮

What does my children have to do anything with this lol?
. That is false fearmongering.
Sigh. I am confused. You speak like you have authority on this subject over people who spend their lives researching them. As I understood, you are a teacher. Would you please put forth your academic credentials so that I can start believing you and not demographers, economists, and social psychologists.
False fearmongering.
I am honestly not fear mongering here. This is a well known issue in demographics. Russia for an example has one of the lowest birth rates and the government it-self is trying to correct this matter by having special programs to encourage children. You seem to be pretty ignorant to some of these real world issues and you try to shut me down that I am mongering false fears. The problem is that its not FALSE. Please visit the nearest library and start doing some self-research.

Continued to next post…
 
Continued from previous post …
What makes you think that we have to keep enlarging our population at higher rates? Or is this a fear of immigration that you are expressing?
lol. I have no fear of immigration. My family immigrated long time ago from a different country to where I live now.

However, our population needs children. Its called the replacement birth rate. If thats no healthy, at a certain point we will have more old people than young people. At that point our work force will start to dwindle, then there won’t be enough people to offer care services for the old. And that’s when society starts looking down the barrel.

But anyway, understand the problem first. Its not about having a LARGE population. Its about having the right replacement birth rate. Right now its way below.

God Bless 🙂
 
Oh no I think church and state separation is fine. But the laws should ideally reflect the church of the country.
WHat does “reflect” mean? Can you be more specific? Let’s just talk sexual morality. What, “ideally,” are you stating that our “laws” should be around the sexual morality of the Christian Bible?
Well maybe because it hit close to home for you. I am not revising my claim at all. I still stand firm that practicing homosexuals tear the family apart as in “family” as a concept and in the sense of all families. I didn’t mean that it tears apart the family they are from. I admit there was ambiguity in the way I phrased it.
It “tears apart” and “idea”? No, it does not. That is silly. Did letting women vote “tear apart” the idea of democratic suffrage? It simply broadened it. As I hope that we can broaden marriage to include, say, 2% more married couples who happen to be gay.
You can teach art and music by even practicing gays lol. This is like asking me if you should use a book written by a Nazi author. Well of course. But the students should know the authors background. Most of the time, the author would try to enter his agenda to the creative material, especially in the case of books. I would certainly question whether the students you teach are capable of understanding that the author is wrong while being able to still read the book.
“Wrong” about what? What was WH Auden “wrong” about in his poetry? I think that you have no idea what you are talking about in terms of teaching literature.
So you do have to be very careful. Usually high-school students are of the nature that they believe what they read and are more emotional than they are logical. Psychologically speaking, a person’s frontal lobe which is responsible for logical understanding does not achieve full development till mid twenties. This is why teens are usually very susceptible to emotional arguments. But anyway, these are things to keep in mind. As a teacher, you should know what is right and wrong. From that step, you should judge whether you teaching the material could give the wrong impression to students. If it does, its better to teach it at a later grade. Simple as that.
Which “wrong” impression? You keep speaking in vague generalities. Shall I pick a poem and have you explain how it should be taught so that no “wrong” impression is given? Do you know “Streetcar Named Desire”? That was written by a gay man, but it is about hetero desire in the real world. How should I teach that one?

Can you just be more direct? That, especially, teenagers require and respect.
 
larkin

It “tears apart” and “idea”? No, it does not. That is silly. Did letting women vote “tear apart” the idea of democratic suffrage? It simply broadened it. As I hope that we can broaden marriage to include, say, 2% more married couples who happen to be gay.

This truly is a bad analogy.

Being a woman is not an unnatural state to be in. Being a homosexual is a disordered state. Just as it would be a disordered state to be sexually attracted to one’s parent or sibling, or to a child. We don’t validate those disorders by certifying them as legally approved relationships. Neither should we validate homosexual marriage.

Logic 101. 👍 And common sense to boot!
 
WHat does “reflect” mean? Can you be more specific? Let’s just talk sexual morality. What, “ideally,” are you stating that our “laws” should be around the sexual morality of the Christian Bible?
Our laws on sexual morality should be ideally identical to that of the Christian Bible. The more research we do in to Psychology, Sexual ethics and various disciplines of philosophies confirm the Christian view to be the best possible answer. Even if you disregard the Christian view, it clearly shows that some views like the ones present right now are logically INCOMPATIBLE unless you want to go by emotions all the time.
It “tears apart” and “idea”? No, it does not. That is silly. Did letting women vote “tear apart” the idea of democratic suffrage? It simply broadened it. As I hope that we can broaden marriage to include, say, 2% more married couples who happen to be gay.
Ha? Family is a unit. It is defined a certain way. Otherwise its not a family. Homosexuality promotes an incorrect view of sexuality which is something that is confined within the realms of family. The 2% “married” Gay couples are not MARRIED. That is the perversion. Do you get my point? That destroys the meaning of the family.

Also read Charlemagne II’s post #1208 above. He puts it best 🙂
“Wrong” about what? What was WH Auden “wrong” about in his poetry? I think that you have no idea what you are talking about in terms of teaching literature.
Ha? Listen, I was very clear about what an author could be wrong about. If mr. X wrote a book promoting the Nazi agenda, that is WRONG. The book is ofcourse free to be read by anyone. But the person reading the book should know about the agenda. You my dear sir seem to be hell bent on just arguing with me as opposed to understanding me fully.
Which “wrong” impression? You keep speaking in vague generalities. Shall I pick a poem and have you explain how it should be taught so that no “wrong” impression is given? Do you know “Streetcar Named Desire”? That was written by a gay man, but it is about hetero desire in the real world. How should I teach that one?
I stated to you that you have to teach students what is right and wrong. You can teach a book written promoting the Nazi agenda is you want. But you as a teacher should judge the impression it would give the students. If you don’t get what I am saying by \impressions’ in this context you really don’t deserve to be a teacher. Please let me know the high-school you teach in because I for one would not want my kids to learn from you.
Can you just be more direct? That, especially, teenagers require and respect.
Teenagers are not the most logical. Lets face science without hiding behind emotional points shall we? Your psychological understanding of your students is seriously questionable. For a 5 year old kid, everything might seem ok until you tell him its wrong. He probably won’t have any issue in bullying his classmate to get what he wants. This is how a teenager behaves when it comes to issues of this type. They just assume what their emotions and urges say are RIGHT. It doesn’t help one bit when ‘mature’ people like you promote this as teenagers are more respectful. Ask any teenagers parents about the level of respect teens have. Its quiet ironic actually. Teens want to respect others while failing to even respect their own parents and sometimes even themselves. Quiet the contradiction isn’t it. That is what happens when you simply follow emotions. You start to have double standards. You as a teacher should be fully aware of this and guide your students accordingly. Unfortunately you seem to be at the same level of your students in this case.

You have also not replied to me pointing out your ignorance with respect to certain real world matters in the previous post. I assume you accept them. So its time you walked where the evidence leads you instead of dwindling in emotional arguments.

God Bless 🙂
 
Our laws on sexual morality should be ideally identical to that of the Christian Bible. The more research we do in to Psychology, Sexual ethics and various disciplines of philosophies confirm the Christian view to be the best possible answer. Even if you disregard the Christian view, it clearly shows that some views like the ones present right now are logically INCOMPATIBLE unless you want to go by emotions all the time.
Ha? Family is a unit. It is defined a certain way. Otherwise its not a family.
All humans for all time have had perfectly functioning families other than the standard traditional unit. Even some prominent Biblical families were non-standard. You have a falsely narrow ideal.
Homosexuality promotes an incorrect view of sexuality which is something that is confined within the realms of family. The 2% “married” Gay couples are not MARRIED. That is the perversion. Do you get my point? That destroys the meaning of the family.
I see what you are claiming, but you make no persuasive argument for it. As such, it is merely opinion, superficial in thought and narrow in scope. But, yes, I see it.
Ha? Listen, I was very clear about what an author could be wrong about. If mr. X wrote a book promoting the Nazi agenda, that is WRONG. The book is ofcourse free to be read by anyone. But the person reading the book should know about the agenda. You my dear sir seem to be hell bent on just arguing with me as opposed to understanding me fully.
I am simply making you work and be precise and define your terms clearly. This is PRECISELY what I do in my English class with my students. So far, you need to keep practicing on your clarity and precision. Are you comparing the themes of “Streetcar Named Desire” to the propaganda of Nazi literature? Are you stating that gay authors are that propagandistic in the higher arts?
I stated to you that you have to teach students what is right and wrong. You can teach a book written promoting the Nazi agenda is you want. But you as a teacher should judge the impression it would give the students. If you don’t get what I am saying by \impressions’ in this context you really don’t deserve to be a teacher. Please let me know the high-school you teach in because I for one would not want my kids to learn from you.
Now you are just being petulant and petty. If you want to get personal, I am fully capable. I will give you a pass this time.
Teenagers are not the most logical. Lets face science without hiding behind emotional points shall we? Your psychological understanding of your students is seriously questionable. For a 5 year old kid, everything might seem ok until you tell him its wrong. He probably won’t have any issue in bullying his classmate to get what he wants. This is how a teenager behaves when it comes to issues of this type. They just assume what their emotions and urges say are RIGHT
That is a superficial and simplistic view of teenagers.
It doesn’t help one bit when ‘mature’ people like you promote this as teenagers are more respectful. Ask any teenagers parents about the level of respect teens have. Its quiet ironic actually. Teens want to respect others while failing to even respect their own parents and sometimes even themselves
I teach all teenagers, and I presently have two teenaged sons. I repeat, you have a prejudiced and superficial view of teenagers. Please reconsider.
. Quiet the contradiction isn’t it. That is what happens when you simply follow emotions. You start to have double standards. You as a teacher should be fully aware of this and guide your students accordingly. Unfortunately you seem to be at the same level of your students in this case.
Well, well. That’s two strikes in one post.
You have also not replied to me pointing out your ignorance with respect to certain real world matters in the previous post. I assume you accept them. So its time you walked where the evidence leads you instead of dwindling in emotional arguments.
I do not remember making any emotional arguments. Please point to one. Or I will publicy question your honesty here.
 
larkin

It “tears apart” and “idea”? No, it does not. That is silly. Did letting women vote “tear apart” the idea of democratic suffrage? It simply broadened it. As I hope that we can broaden marriage to include, say, 2% more married couples who happen to be gay.

This truly is a bad analogy.

Being a woman is not an unnatural state to be in. Being a homosexual is a disordered state. Just as it would be a disordered state to be sexually attracted to one’s parent or sibling, or to a child. We don’t validate those disorders by certifying them as legally approved relationships. Neither should we validate homosexual marriage.

Logic 101. 👍 And common sense to boot!
The comparison is not women to gays. :rolleyes:

The comparison is the BROADENING of suffrage to the BROADENING of marriage and the possible TEARING effect that either had/will have. In both cases a certain privilege was/will be BROADENED. In the case of suffrage, the BROADENING was MUCH MORE than a mere 2% grow in access to the civil right.

Can you comment on my point without distorting my purpose?
 
larkin

*Can you comment on my point without distorting my purpose? *

I did not distort your purpose. I corrected your logic. 😉

The validation of a woman’s right to vote in no way resembles the validation of the right of gays to be married.
 
larkin

*Can you comment on my point without distorting my purpose? *

I did not distort your purpose. I corrected your logic. 😉

The validation of a woman’s right to vote in no way resembles the validation of the right of gays to be married.
That wasn’t my point.

You are purposely ignoring it and no longer discussing the CONSEQUENCES of broadening a civil right.
 
All humans for all time have had perfectly functioning families other than the standard traditional unit. Even some prominent Biblical families were non-standard. You have a falsely narrow ideal.
lol well CLEARLY, none of them were GAY families. You are very very confused individual.

I am also stating that sexual ethics and philosophy agree with the family as in that which is taught by the religion. Not what is in a story in the Bible. Do you have any idea of how to interpret the Bible? Or are you going to use your teaching credentials to make authoritative claims about that too 🙂
I see what you are claiming, but you make no persuasive argument for it. As such, it is merely opinion, superficial in thought and narrow in scope. But, yes, I see it.
lol what do you want for it to be persuasive? Its not superficial if its true. Have you ever looked in to research in to Gay couples? Do you know the psychological effects of such relationships? I am willing to bet you don’t considering some of the ignorant comments you made about other issues. As a teacher, you are clearly being bad example by trying to step in to other academic fields without any experience and possibly no education on the subject.
I am simply making you work and be precise and define your terms clearly. This is PRECISELY what I do in my English class with my students. So far, you need to keep practicing on your clarity and precision. Are you comparing the themes of “Streetcar Named Desire” to the propaganda of Nazi literature? Are you stating that gay authors are that propagandistic in the higher arts?
NO. I am saying psychologically, every author writes his ideas in to the book. If you are a person of literature that much should be OBVIOUS. Now these ideas can be RIGHT or WRONG. The Naze agenda is WRONG. So is the Gay agenda. I am not equating the two in terms of what they promote. Just pointing out the fact that they are BOTH WRONG.
Now you are just being petulant and petty. If you want to get personal, I am fully capable. I will give you a pass this time.
YES I was being very personal. And don’t give me a pass. Please bring it on. Teachers like you lead our children astray with emotional arguments that lack any logical basis.
That is a superficial and simplistic view of teenagers.
Ok with all due respect, YOU ARE A HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER. You are undermining years of research and experience that people who made these claims have.

Its not a simplistic view. Its the truth. Its backed by research. You are acting like a teenager now by crying ‘no its wrong’ as you did about my previous claims.
I teach all teenagers, and I presently have two teenaged sons. I repeat, you have a prejudiced and superficial view of teenagers. Please reconsider.
Your two teenage sons are not a representative sample of the teenage population. They might be the most logical persons in the world. But I don’t have to reconsider anything. Do you know what I mean by a representative sample?

I just showed you how logically contradictory your point was about teenagers being more respectful. They really aren’t. I am sure some are but in general they are just following emotions. This is why they will be totally disrespectful towards their parents but claim to respect gays.

You seem to be clueless with respect to what represents a valid sample size and even about the psychological state of teenagers.
Well, well. That’s two strikes in one post.
Hey, I am just pointing out the truth. Teachers like you are the cause of children going astray. Thats strike three, now lets hear this thing you’ve been holding back on. I hope its logical because otherwise you already know what I am going to say 🙂

OH … btw… what about the claims of mine that you simply called FALSE when they are backed by research and claims by authoritative figures in the respective fields? Remember those? Forgot all about them did you 🙂 You have one hell of a credibility as a teacher.
I do not remember making any emotional arguments. Please point to one. Or I will publicy question your honesty here.
Yes you did. You kept saying my claims were “false claims”, “fear mongering”, “superficial” bla bla bla. That is being emotional and refusal to see the light of logic. Just go back to Post #1196 for a dose of your own Ignorance.

God Bless 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top