H
Hosh
Guest
Whats the point? If it isn’t then It’s still at risk in youth, not to mention who is going to teach it the skills it needs to survive…whats the point?
- Status
B
bennierja
Guest
Hand shakes, holding hands, hugs, and kisses on the cheek are legitimate culturally variable displays of affection between men that have nothing to do with sex. It is exactly this confusion of legitimate need with illegitimate means of satisfaction that’s at the root of homosexuality. For whatever reason, American culture has developed a kind of macho idea of masculinity where men never cry, show need, display affection, or show any kind of weakness, and their only pastime is sports. If a homosexual man in his childhood had kisses and hugs from father, was loved by father, if he were not rebuked for his need and allowed to be whoever he wanted to be as a man, not just an athlete, then the need would have been met and would never have become sexual. Homosexuality is not just an emotional deficit, it is almost always a physical deficit as well. Homosexual men in their childhood were not bounced up and down on father’s knee, weren’t tossed up in the air and caught again by father, weren’t tucked in at night with a kiss, weren’t woken up in the morning with a hug. Physical does not equate to sexual, and it is precisely this confusion that turns a legitimate need into the homosexual drive.
C
chessmane4e5
Guest
Fact is no one, not even scientists know why some animals engage in homosexual behavior. Humans can theorize, but we do not know the mind of an animal.
Also, simply because animals do it, will all animal actions be integrated into humans? We can not pick one action of animals and use that a basis for human action.
What does make sense is that male and female “fit” together naturally, not only that, but when they do “fit” they are able to make offspring with furthers our species. Animals that engage in homosexual behavior also engage in heterosexual behavior. So at best, animals are bi-sexual, not strictly homosexual.
H
Hosh
Guest
Bonobo’s pretty clearly use it as a way to make up after conflict.
C
chessmane4e5
Guest
So it would not be comparable to the homosexuality we see in humans?
To me that is the key. If people are going to use the animal argument, they need to prove the intent of the animal, which I believe to be impossible.
H
Hosh
Guest
I’m not using the animal argument, some one asked me too. The point is; the gay lisp thing cannot be all nurture.
C
chessmane4e5
Guest
What does that have to do with anything. I know gay people that do not lisp. I know some gay guys that are very feminine, and some are not.
What we know for sure is that there is no gay gene. I can only assume that it is in the brain.
H
Hosh
Guest
I’m sure there is no single gene that makes a person gay, but probably a combination of them that predisposes someone to be more likely to be gay. If by “In the brain” you mean neurological as opposed to “the mind” which would be psychological then it is genetic.
C
chessmane4e5
Guest
I meant in the mind, thank you for that distinction.
I do believe that people who experience SSA do so because of a combination of factors, if it was only one thing, we would have identified it by now.
Unless one thing is in the brain, as the brain is the one organ we know the least about.
D
Dousias
Guest
Dear Buffalo,
You supplied a link to the NARTH website. I asked for your sources on this statement:
“Which is early childhood development of overbonding with the mother and an absent father.”
So share two independent sources from reputable scientific bodies.
Blessed be, Dousias
D
Dousias
Guest
D
Dousias
Guest
Dear Hosh,
Yes he does. A major part of his life experience is sharing his beliefs with others. He simply follows the path set out in his religion. The path is simple and unequivocal and many people choose to follow these paths because they ARE simple paths. Before you think I’m saying people who follow simple paths are simple people, I would argue the opposite, that these paths are actually taken by people who are really smart and take a path with little resistance involved. Yes, little actual thinking is needed and of course inquiry and discernment are non existent, but the payoff knowing they have eternal salvation with little effort is admirable.
Then there are the complex paths that force the sojourner to seek personal truth and worldly knowledge first hand. Going beyond set game plans is a scary thought for many people. For those that question the absolutes proposed in some 4,000 religions found in the world today, those who see problems with set dogma in those religions, the answer for them is to seek personal truth and fulfillment first hand.
The simple path and the personal path will get us all to the same thing after all is said and done.
These words are important for us free thinking sojourners in life:
- Gods existence is independent of what we think.
- What happens to us after this life ceases happens to us all the very same way. (And is also independent of what we think it is.)
I walk a path of personal joy and happiness. I do not fear death for I know I was existent before birth and I will continue my existence after death. We exist in an infinite continuum. I understand this thing we call God or Spirit or any of the thousand other names is just a part of the natural world we live within. As a part of the natural world, God exists within all things, everywhere.
I love the thought: We are Spiritual Beings having a human experience.
Blessed be, Dousias
C
chessmane4e5
Guest
The Christian path is a simple path? Have you read the bible? Have you considered how difficult it is to wrestle with sin everyday?
Maybe you are talking about Christians that believe “Man is saved by faith alone.”
Catholics do not believe this, that is a teaching of Martin Luther, he added the word “alone” to Paul’s letter to the Romans.
Where is your evidence that “many people choose to follow these paths because they are simple?” I think most Catholics will say they follow the path of Christ because it is the right path, not because it is simple (which I still argue, it is not simple). You might say they are deluding themselves, but then so are people who do not believe in God.
Inquiry and discernment are non-existent? I do not know one Catholic that has not inquired into their faith and the Church. It may be to different levels, but to say it is non-existent is false. As for discernment, what is more obscure than the concept of God? Of God taking human form and dying on a cross for us? Are you saying people do not think about this, and just accept it?
This describes exactly what I did and it led me to the Catholic Church
How so? Are you saying everyone goes to heaven? That their is no hell?
Thank you for at least acknowledging number 1. Number 2 is similar to what you said above. I am not so sure that the what happens will be the same way. I can see no evidence to prove this, even if you do not believe in God? On some level, how you die might influence this. People who die in their sleep might experience something totally different from someone who dies of a heart-attack. They are both in different “states” so why would they both come to the same end (assuming no God that is)?
C
chessmane4e5
Guest
You can look here if you are truly interested
trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp
but I feel your question is a loaded one.
It is a known fact that starting in 1973, research into homosexuality declined when it was taken off the list by the APA (American Psychological Association) as a mental disorder (or course where is their evidence especially in light of the human genome project did not find a “gay gene”). I wish I could find the exact number of actual research studies done (I will keep looking) but since 1973 there have been something like 70 studies done on homosexuality, most of those before 1980, with only like 5 done in the past decade.
So as for scientific evidence: their is a lack of. Which begs the question, by what right did the APA have to remove homosexuality from its disorder list when their was no evidence for it.
Well basically the APA says that since homosexuality does not in or itself cause harm, it is not a mental disorder.
Okay, but that does not mean their is not something wrong, or that is can’t be cured. Fact is, more research needs to be done before we tell the world that being gay is okay.
H
Hosh
Guest
I’m sorry but the whole “they haven’t found a gay gene” argument needs to stop. We know many mental disorders are genetic because of the high coincidence in family members, but we have yet to understand the genetic factors for a single one. Just because we mapped the human genome doesn’t mean we understand it.
The word “wrong” is very subjective. Is there something wrong if a person was born with extraordinary musical skill, or high I.Q.? It’s atypical gene expression and it does no harm, but is that wrong? I wish I could remember the name of the book, its geared towards children and I read it along time ago in 4th grade… It was a society were societal sameness was enforced. It was about a kid who had 20/20 vision so they made him wear glasses that impeded his vision.
B
buffalo
Guest
The act is what is intrinsically wrong.
H
Hosh
Guest
Well that’s Moral’s not the cause. So god must have made people weak for a reason, okay I buy that for arguments sake.
How about this: If two guys love each other but are devout Catholics so they don’t have sex, can they live together like two people in love. What about hugs and kisses?
B
buffalo
Guest
The Four Loves by CS Lewis is a good read on the type of love.
B
buffalo
Guest
It is more than morals. The homosexual act is not logical and it violates the natural law.
H
Hosh
Guest
I think this is rooted in the Catholic belief that the only purpose for sex is procreation, no?
- Status