Questions on being Narrow-Minded

[n8TheRevelator]

Wow on my inaugural first post.

It always interests me how: one, someone can be so turned off of religion by certain words or actions said or done by HUMANS attempting to represent a religion; and two, how doctrine can be used by ideologues to arrive at such a rarely seen, extreme form of certainty.

I do see both sides of the coin very clearly and I empathize with both actually.

But one question I have never had fully answered to my satisfaction by ideologues is if homosexualiy is in fact a choice (unnatural), then why would these individuals choose discrimination, hate, hell, to be without healthcare, and even without the means to procreate amongst themselves?

If your answer is they are confused, save your fingers and keys some work.

 

[Philthy]

But one question I have never had fully answered to my satisfaction by ideologues is if homosexualiy is in fact a choice (unnatural), then why would these individuals choose discrimination, hate, hell, to be without healthcare, and even without the means to procreate amongst themselves?

Because they get a reward from the behavior which they feel counterbalances those negatives. How would their choosing to act on their same sex attraction be any different than, say, a husband choosing to cheat on his wife and run the risk of discrimination, hate, hell, alimony, etc?

 

[JRKH]

Wow on my inaugural first post.

Welcome to the Boards.

But one question I have never had fully answered to my satisfaction by ideologues is if homosexualiy is in fact a choice (unnatural), then why would these individuals choose discrimination, hate, hell, to be without healthcare, and even without the means to procreate amongst themselves?

Why would a person Choose Drugs, or Alchohol or Murder or any one of a host of other sins that lead to hate, hell, prison, death, etc.?
The fact that we make certain Choices, does not mean that we always make the correct choices or that we make them for right reason.
Yet somehow we manage to rationalize our poor decisions when we make them, or right after we make them in the case of a “spur-of-the-moment” reaction.

I do not wish to downplay the strong inclination of the homosexual, nor will I totally discount a possible genetic component, however I cannot, in good conscience, support a position that says it is somehow a normal thing; a personal choice. While it may well be a personal choice, it must be acknowledged that it is certainly not a normal thing. It is not how the human is designed to function.

Peace
James

 

[houseofsaul]

Before I begin, I should probably mention that I’m a liberal atheist who believes that everyone should be valued based on merit of character, rather than immutable facts. Obviously, this goes directly against the Catholic church, so I’ll try to put minimal bias into my answers.

To quote verbatim from a dictionary:

1. having or showing a prejudiced mind, as persons or opinions; biased.
2. not receptive to new ideas; having a closed mind.
3. extremely conservative and morally self-righteous.

There’s not much more you can say from that. To be narrow-minded is to be closed to someone’s ideas, unwilling to accept that the world is changing around us and to be prejudiced a certain way.

To this I am sad to say YES.

For all of history, Christians have been condemning, killing, torturing those who were different from them. The principles stated in a 2000-something year old book can not and should not apply today. Many of the things written in the Bible are still not politically or morally acceptable, unless you think it’s okay to have your son’s eyes eaten out by various wild birds. (Proverbs 30:17)

I, as both an atheist and a student, believe science is the basis of and the reason for everything. If you want to make a scientific argument, you can’t exclude vital and obvious facts of science, and only choose the ones that appeal to your argument. I agree that the sex organs are scientifically designed for one another. Science has made it so that female eggs are able to get pregnant from male sperm. It allows for the continuance of life.

But science has also allowed for the creation of homosexuality. It occurs, making it a natural thing; it is from nature. Personally, I believe that homosexuality is science’s way to say “STOP HAVING BABIES.” Theoretically, homosexuals cannot produce children, therefore combating overpopulation. There *has *to be a reason why more and more people are coming out as homosexual. Things don’t just happen for no reason. Even your Bible says it. It’s becoming more politically acceptable to be homosexual in this day and age, and I think it’s a wonderful step towards progress.

Yes, there are homosexual people. Yes, they are in love and want to get unionized to each other. Yes, it’s close-minded to say that someone cannot be with the one they love because of an ancient book. Marriage is a church term. Union is a joining together of two people who love each other. To deny people of rights, of benefits just because they are born as homosexual is absolutely wrong. To tell someone they can’t* be who they are*, to me, is disgusting.

1. Does “separation of church and state” mean that you should not vote how you do because of what you believe religiously? If not, what other definition can we offer?

No, because religion affects your beliefs, directly affecting your decision when it comes to voting. I think that separation of church and state means that religious figures have no divine rights over government. Priests cannot hold trial, deacons can’t write their own search warrant, etc. just because they’re “of the faith.”

But, unfortunately, church and state is still not completely separated.

Homosexuals are not born, it is a lifestyle choice.