Can someone point me to a rigorous proof as to why homosexuality is wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JFonseka
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JFonseka

Guest
Most of my arguments for why homosexuality stems from Catholic doctrine which uses biblical evidence, however when arguing with atheistics and agnostics this is difficult because they do not agree with scriptures, is their a good secular perspective on this issue?

Thanks in advance.

God Bless
 
JFonseka said:
Most of my arguments for why homosexuality stems from Catholic doctrine which uses biblical evidence, however when arguing with atheistics and agnostics this is difficult because they do not agree with scriptures, is their a good secular perspective on this issue?

Thanks in advance.

God Bless
Click to expand...
  1. Disease.
Both in the infectious sense and by using body parts in the way they were not intended leads to dysfunction of those parts.
  1. Family unit (Mom, Pop, kids) is time tested, anthropolically the best (most stable) for a society.
 
JFonseka said:
Most of my arguments for why homosexuality stems from Catholic doctrine which uses biblical evidence, however when arguing with atheistics and agnostics this is difficult because they do not agree with scriptures, is their a good secular perspective on this issue?

Thanks in advance.

God Bless
Click to expand...
Hi J,

I’ve thought about this myself. Biologically, limiting the gene pool (due to non- reproduction) does not appear to be evolutionarily adaptive. Variety allows species to be able to have representatives that can survive through changes in the environment. Perhaps there some posters that have more thoughts on this. I’m admittedly no expert.
 
mariyka said:
Hi J,

I’ve thought about this myself. Biologically, limiting the gene pool (due to non- reproduction) does not appear to be evolutionarily adaptive. Variety allows species to be able to have representatives that can survive through changes in the environment. Perhaps there some posters that have more thoughts on this. I’m admittedly no expert.
Click to expand...
This is good, I can work with this and expand on it. Thanks a lot mariyka!
 
JFonseka said:
This is good, I can work with this and expand on it. Thanks a lot mariyka!
Click to expand...
You are most welcome. Of course, you have to take into consideration that priests and nuns would also fall into this group! 🤷

MA
 
mariyka said:
Biologically, limiting the gene pool (due to non- reproduction) does not appear to be evolutionarily adaptive. Variety allows species to be able to have representatives that can survive through changes in the environment. Perhaps there some posters that have more thoughts on this. I’m admittedly no expert.
Click to expand...
Mariyka, I am no expert either and what I am about to say is not meant as a criticism, but rather to help sharpen the argument.

From an evolutionary perspective, altruism is very advantageous. For example, Emperor penguins without a chick, will often adopt a chick whose mother and/or father have been killed. This helps perpetuate the species. Homosexuality may have offered a similar evolutionary advantage.
 
Dale_M said:
Homosexuality may have offered a similar evolutionary advantage.
Click to expand...
Except for the the fact that only a very small percentage of homosexual couples actually wish to adopt children. The idea that there are great numbers of same sex couples who want to have children is erroneous. In addition, while it may serve an “altruistic” purpose for the penguin species, placing human children into experimental families in the hopes that it might benefit society is hardly analogous.
 
I am not sure I can provide proof but there are a few things that can be looked at.
There is the issue of survival of a species that depends solely on reproduction. The only natural reproductive method for humans requires a man and a woman. Even using artificial means involves a woman’s egg and man’s sperm.
Is the human merely an animal or is there something more involved in human reproduction? Here’s where the issue of dignity would come in since the congugal relationship is also a reproductive relationship.
If our culture holds that men and women should have equal dignity, then the only congugal relationship that upholds that dignity is the one between a man and a woman.

The overemphasis on sexual relationships in society today is obscuring relationships without a sexual component. It is possible to have a relationship as described Lonesome Dove that is as close as any two individuals who might have sexual relations. It is necessary to separate intimacy from lust.

Families are meant to contribute to the transformation of the earth and the renewal of the world, of creation and of all humanity (John Paul II).
 
Its really quite simple. Only an idiot would try to fasten two items together using only two bolts or only two nuts. When the parts do not properly fit together, at minimum something is being overlooked. Even an atheist should be able to grasp that. Of course we all know that when hormones take over rationality goes out the window.
 
As our priest put it… The plumbing tells the story… As a nurse, you see many long term injuries in homosexual males. Certain areas of the body do not adapt… they become scared and injured.

God made us different for a reason. Just like Thunder and Lightening… Male and Female go together.
 
They don’t agree with science either otherwise they would understand why they have the sexual organs they were born with and the intended use of them.

Defeating “Gay” Arguments With Simple Logic
The “gay” vision of a society with no restrictions on sexual conduct is an immature and selfcentered fantasy. It promotes behavior that is non-procreational and highly associated with
disease, addictions, psychopathology, abortion and shortened life span, in short, a “culture of death.”…
Homosexuality is the condition of being sexually attracted to persons of the same gender, in contradiction to the self-evident heterosexual design of the body. As with all people, a homosexual’s sexual impulse originates in the reproductive system, but is, through trauma or family dysfunction, directed toward the wrong gender. Thus it is an intrinsically disordered
“sexual orientation.” Therapists call this disorder Same Sex Attraction or SSA. Many people who suffer from SSA become deeply addicted to “gay” sexual relationships and reject the option of recovery in favor of a lifestyle of unrestricted sexual license. The “gay” movement is a global network of political activists made up of people with SSA who reject the notion that their behavior is wrong, but instead insist that all nations and cultures adopt their philosophy of sexual anarchy in place of the norms of the marriage-based society. It is not a random social force, but a highly organized army of social engineers with a single purpose. The “gay” movement is the most dangerous social and political movement of our time because it threatens the very foundation of civilization by using every possible means to break down the walls that restrict sexual behavior to traditional marriage. It is also a purely selfinterested movement, willing to advance its own goals at the expense of all other members of
society. This single-mindedness can be seen in its claims to victim status, its many proposals for laws which advance only the interests of “gays,” and its use of any access to power to silence and punish opposition
Click to expand...
Pray a lot for conversions…
 
JFonseka said:
Most of my arguments for why homosexuality stems from Catholic doctrine which uses biblical evidence, however when arguing with atheistics and agnostics this is difficult because they do not agree with scriptures, is their a good secular perspective on this issue?

Thanks in advance.

God Bless
Click to expand...
JFonseka,

Try Chapter 116 - 121 of the Pro-Life handbook:

prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae116
prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae117
prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae118
prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae119
prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae120
prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae121

I have some links to medical studies that shows what happens to the intestinal tracts of people who engage in anal sex (heterosexual and homosexual). It may be a little too graphic (very grose medical pictures) for this website, but I’ll send it to you over IM if you want it,
 
Arguing that they don’t fit together and weren’t meant for each other are not good arguments.

Look at interracial couples. They look different, right? On the outside, their body parts, including their reproductive organs, are totally different colors. It’s just not the same, it’s not right, and we all know it. I mean, no one tries to match up black and white and think they’re the same, right? They’re different.

Those kind of arguments can be used to justify racism as well.

We have no right to claim natural order and that kind of **** as justification to take away other’s rights. If they’re not hurting anyone, they can do what they want. You may not like gay sex because you feel it is unnatural, but racists feel the same way about interracial sex. Our morals are always shifting, slowly including more and more people into our perceived brothers and sisters. First we included other races, then other religions, then other genders, and now sexual orientations. Of course gay marriage will be legal, all civil rights movements are always successful, it’s just a matter of time. In the future, our descendants will look back on us like we look back on our ancestors, wondering how we could ever be so stupid as to discriminate against fellow humans who are doing no harm.

I wish we could learn from history already, and start jump starting the changes that we know are going to happen, based on the trends that our species development have followed.
 
IanBoyd57 said:
Arguing that they don’t fit together and weren’t meant for each other are not good arguments.

Look at interracial couples. They look different, right? On the outside, their body parts, including their reproductive organs, are totally different colors. It’s just not the same, it’s not right, and we all know it. I mean, no one tries to match up black and white and think they’re the same, right? They’re different.

Those kind of arguments can be used to justify racism as well.

We have no right to claim natural order and that kind of **** as justification to take away other’s rights. If they’re not hurting anyone, they can do what they want. You may not like gay sex because you feel it is unnatural, but racists feel the same way about interracial sex. Our morals are always shifting, slowly including more and more people into our perceived brothers and sisters. First we included other races, then other religions, then other genders, and now sexual orientations. Of course gay marriage will be legal, all civil rights movements are always successful, it’s just a matter of time. In the future, our descendants will look back on us like we look back on our ancestors, wondering how we could ever be so stupid as to discriminate against fellow humans who are doing no harm.

I wish we could learn from history already, and start jump starting the changes that we know are going to happen, based on the trends that our species development have followed.
Click to expand...
You are really off track here. Our color difference comes from our geographical orientation. We are all of the same blood. We are all the children of God.

And when you said:
" In the future, our descendants will look back on us like we look back on our ancestors, wondering how we could ever be so stupid as to discriminate against fellow humans who are doing no harm."

did you not realize that we will have no descendants if we all become homosexuals… HELLO
 
The primary purpose of sex is to reproduce.

There is absolutely no chance for reproduction in sex between two members of the same sex.

Ergo:
Sex between two members of the same sex defeats the primary purpose.

(Yes, some will argue that it is pleasurable, but these are secondary effects that are there to inspire the primary.)
 
If you want to take out religion, fine.

Lets go with nature the whole purpose of species is to survive.

How do species survive?

They procreate.

If the species does not procreate then the species dies.

That goes against nature.

OR

If you use a fork as a hammer it is going to break.

OR

When you wash your dog…

Try touching his butt.
What does he do?
My dog?
Puts his butt down on the ground and won’t let you touch him again.
Try moving a 200lb dog so you can wash his behind!
Who says dogs are dumb?
 
rwoehmke said:
Its really quite simple. Only an idiot would try to fasten two items together using only two bolts or only two nuts. When the parts do not properly fit together, at minimum something is being overlooked. Even an atheist should be able to grasp that. Of course we all know that when hormones take over rationality goes out the window.
Click to expand...
Some of us are born without a complete ‘bolt’ or a ‘nut’. The church forbid me from marrying as a result, thus I’ve drifted away because of this issue.

The church says that ‘to be safe’ since either dating men or women might be homosexual for me and there’s no way to be sure, that I should just be utterly celibate and refrain from meaningful relationships with anyone.

I was basically told to ostracize myself and leave my fiance of 5years. They denied me my love. Things are never so absolute, so I have a tremendous amount of understanding and sympathy for homosexual individuals
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top