J
Joe_5859
Guest
Blessedtoo, MdntDrmr’s links did work for me if I cut and pasted them. I notice that MdntDrmr didn’t address your point that one of the three articles actually argues against a gay gene.
MdntDrmr, just because two people were victimized and it made national headlines years ago does not back up the assertion that homosexuals are in immediate grave danger of being “beat, hurt, cursed and killed” for being homosexual. It’s two isolated incidents. I could probably find at least one or two instances where heterosexual people were “beat, hurt, cursed and killed”, too. It doesn’t justify making such broad generalizations.
The fact that most don’t choose it is also not proof that it is genetic. If it was the result of upbringing, that too is beyond most children’s control.
But, all this is really off topic. Whether or not it is nature, nurture, or a combination of both doesn’t change the morality of homosexual acts. For those, there is always a choice. No one is saying that those with the inclination are guilty of sin. Only if they act on it.
MdntDrmr, just because two people were victimized and it made national headlines years ago does not back up the assertion that homosexuals are in immediate grave danger of being “beat, hurt, cursed and killed” for being homosexual. It’s two isolated incidents. I could probably find at least one or two instances where heterosexual people were “beat, hurt, cursed and killed”, too. It doesn’t justify making such broad generalizations.
The fact that most don’t choose it is also not proof that it is genetic. If it was the result of upbringing, that too is beyond most children’s control.
But, all this is really off topic. Whether or not it is nature, nurture, or a combination of both doesn’t change the morality of homosexual acts. For those, there is always a choice. No one is saying that those with the inclination are guilty of sin. Only if they act on it.