Why so many "gay marriage" posts?

[ega]

YinYangMom:

Excuse me, but the anus naturally is designed to expel excrement. That some people manage to find any other function for it to be sexually pleasurable is not natural. It’s a learned behavior.

Well, the counter point have already been listed regarding actual wiring, but let me add that the anus is also self-lubricating, so your argument from design fails, as you are ignoring evidence that contradicts your view.

A second, and no less important point is that you are assuming monopurposes. Odd, no other part of your body has a single purpose, you eat and speak with your mouth…which is its natural function?

You hear and balance with your ears? Which is its natural function?

Your hands can masterfully maniplate the most delicate and dainty of object, or crush and destroy.

Your legs are for propulsion, yet for the wheelchair bound their ams replace this.

Even your genitals combine excretion and childbirth…so which is the natural function.

YinYangMom:

It is about participating it the Trinity with G-d. It is symbolic of the love He has for us and we for Him.

Indeed, his convenant with us that we must love one another as he loves us.

You are the ones obsessed with sex and genitals. Is this really what you think gods wants of you?

Sex has a unitive function, yes, but that is second to the procreative (and neither is designed for more than one man and one woman).

Technically there is evidence you are wrong. men, when exposed to pictures of group sex produce better quality and more mobile sperm. It seems clear from this that group-sex improves mens procreative ability.

 

[ega]

fix:

As you are aware the internal and external anal sphincters and rectal mucosal lining are not intended for sexual use or reproduction. Should I list the pathologies found in active male homosexuals, like “gay” bowel syndrome?
.

Well, it seems that you dont seem to realise that arguing backwards from your conclusions is hardly a good foundation. i have provided ample evidence that your various arguments from design are flawed. That is, there is good design evidence to demonstrate anal sex is meant to happen.

As for gay bowel syndrome…do you know what a collapsed womb is? Do you know you can get it from having kids? You know havin lots of kids permanently damages a womans immune system, and can cause chronic back problems, calcium deficiency, and that without modern medicin many women and children would die?

It seems reproduction is dangerous, dangerous enough to suggest people need to tie a knot in it.

 

[Lisa_N]

soulspeak23:

Lisa,
I have been reading in the background of this forum for some time now and you have come across as one of the most hateful persons here.

Interesting observation from someone who has a handful of posts. I do hate homosexual activity. There is absolutely nothing positive about it. You don’t have to go to the Bible, all you need to do is learn a bit of basic biology. And if you actually have read these boards enough to make a conclusion about my state of mind you also know that my parents who were atheist PhD biologists stated that homosexual behavior is absolutely unnatural and abnormal. No species would survive if this were the norm. It is deviant behavior that the homosexual activists wish to normalize. This is absurd as saying it is normal to be a drug addict or a schizophrenic. It is not. We don’t hate the drug addict or the person suffering from a mental illness. But it does them no help to pretend this condition is normal, healthy or life affirming. We help the person by understanding their condition and finding appropriate treatment.

soulspeak23:

I’m absolutely certain that there are no homosexuals demanding to come into your living room and have sex in front of your children and yourself. Nor are they trying to “shove it down your throats.”

Unfortunately they are trying to ‘shove it down our throats.’ Homosexual activists are demanding that homosexuality as a ‘lifestyle’ be normalized in society and taught in schools. Again I don’t really care what Joe and Bill do in bed. They just don’t need to share it with the general public.

soulspeak23:

Homosexuals are asking for LEGAL recognition, completely separate from any church (which, in case you’ve forgotten, there are more than one of in this country).

Again my opposition to normalizing homosexual activity is based on biology. It is unhealthy, deviant, and not life affirming. Homosexuals do have recognition. Last time I looked no one asks your sexual orientation before you buy a piece of property or vote. However by promoting homosexual marriage you are promoting unhealthy and abnormal behavior. A society does not general promote unhealthy and abnormal behavior. Why should it?

soulspeak23:

I completely understand your disagreement with what they choose to do. However, coming from a church that preaches “Love thy neighbor”, you seem to have an awful lot of stipulations that come with what your neighbor must be in order to love him.

Uh no, loving someone does not mean loving everything they do. I have a nephew who is sadly in prison. I may love him but I certainly do not love the activity that put him in prison. I have homosexual friends. I imagine that comes as a surprise to you. I love them but I do not love what they do and I fear for their lives and now as a Catholic I also fear for their souls. Loving someone means you reject behavior that damages the person while you still love them as a (flawed) child of God.

soulspeak23:

I sincerely doubt that Jesus said “Love thy neighbor, but only if he meets the following requirements…otherwise, feel free to hate him and treat him in a manner that you would not even treat your dog.”

Your argument is quite silly. I do not approve of homosexuals getting state support for engaging in abnormal and unhealthy behavior. That is not the same as hating them or treating them worse than my dog…frankly my dog is incredibly well treated so that shouldn’t be an issue either.

soulspeak23:

You have your faith, and that is a wonderful thing that no one can take from you. But what about “live and let live?” And why are homosexuals so much worse than heterosexuals who live thier lives using contraception and having illicit sex?

It’s not a matter of whether what they do is ‘worse’ than people who are contracepting and engaging in fornication. It’s a matter that for most people, Catholic teachings are not relevant to their lives. If someone is engaged in fornication and I know about it and have the opportunity, I assure you I will speak out against it just as I speak out against homosexual activity. OTOH I don’t see adulterers marching in the streets demanding state support for their illicit behavior do you?

soulspeak23:

I don’t really see many threads on here aimed at, well, the majority of the population. Heterosexuals have done far more to destroy the so-called “Sanctity of Marriage” than homosexuals ever could.

Soulspeak23

You are free to start any thread on any subject within the parameters of the rules here. If you think we should debate about having affairs or premarital sex have at it.

Lisa N

 

[fix]

ega:

Well, it seems that you dont seem to realise that arguing backwards from your conclusions is hardly a good foundation.

I am arguing from reason.

i have provided ample evidence that your various arguments from design are flawed. That is, there is good design evidence to demonstrate anal sex is meant to happen.

You have provided no objective, irrefutable evidence. You have stated your flawed logic and that is all.

As for gay bowel syndrome…do you know what a collapsed womb is? Do you know you can get it from having kids? You know havin lots of kids permanently damages a womans immune system, and can cause chronic back problems, calcium deficiency, and that without modern medicin many women and children would die?

It seems reproduction is dangerous, dangerous enough to suggest people need to tie a knot in it.

That pathology exists is not the issue. That it is at higher rates for those who engage in unnatural acts is the issue.

 

[fix]

ega:

Well, the counter point have already been listed regarding actual wiring,

That some physical sensation of pleasure may be elicited by various stimuli to various parts of the body does not mean that is morally good, or intended to be used for sexual means.

Is masturbation morally good? Is having sex with a dog morally good because it may provide pleasure?

but let me add that the anus is also self-lubricating, so your argument from design fails, as you are ignoring evidence that contradicts your view.

The intestine and anus are designed for elimination. Is vomitting a normal use for the mouth because the body allows it to happen to for various reasons?

A second, and no less important point is that you are assuming monopurposes. Odd, no other part of your body has a single purpose, you eat and speak with your mouth…which is its natural function?

Multiple purposes do not include perversion.

Even your genitals combine excretion and childbirth…so which is the natural function.

Both are natural. Sodomy is unnatural.

 

[YinYangMom]

ega:

Well, the counter point have already been listed regarding actual wiring, but let me add that the anus is also self-lubricating, so your argument from design fails, as you are ignoring evidence that contradicts your view.

It is self-lubricating when it’s getting ready to do it’s thing - which is to dispose of bodily waste. Otherwise, rule #1 of homosexual activity would not call for 'lubrication, lubrication, lubrication". One has to use artificial lubrication in order to complete the act.

The self lubrication of the genitals is also triggered by their ‘natural’ designs…in male and female the lubrication is a result of hormones…those specifically tied to the reproductive system of the human body.

A second, and no less important point is that you are assuming monopurposes. Odd, no other part of your body has a single purpose, you eat and speak with your mouth…which is its natural function?

You hear and balance with your ears? Which is its natural function?

Your hands can masterfully maniplate the most delicate and dainty of object, or crush and destroy.

Your legs are for propulsion, yet for the wheelchair bound their ams replace this.

Even your genitals combine excretion and childbirth…so which is the natural function.

The natural function is determined by just that - nature. Again, reproductive system is separate from the digestive and the respiratory and the circulatory…each works separately and together to do the job at hand, but each system does have its primary purpose.

Indeed, his convenant with us that we must love one another as he loves us.

Yes, and he loves us as He created us - male and female - to be embraced with Him through marital union.

You are the ones obsessed with sex and genitals. Is this really what you think gods wants of you?

First of all, there are no gods. There is but ONE G-d, and He has spoken on this matter on more than one occasion. Each time He is against same sex coupling.

Second, if any one is obsessed with genitals it would be the homosexual males and females - they have conjured up 1,001 used for each part involving a number of contraptions and objects.
NO human genitalia was designed for bottles, cucumbers, gerbils or fists! THERE IS NOTHING NATURAL ABOUT THAT BEHAVIOR.

Technically there is evidence you are wrong. men, when exposed to pictures of group sex produce better quality and more mobile sperm. It seems clear from this that group-sex improves mens procreative ability.

No, what is clear is that those men’s reproductive systems were in working order. They responded to stimuli just as the body was designed to do. Just because the sperm is more mobile doesn’t mean the quality was any better and that any of those would have reached their mark to actually create life.

 

[Ptero9]

I would think there are “so many gay marriage posts” because two countries recently legally sanctioned them in a world where only two other countries prior have done this.

It’s a very historic moment, yes?

I doubt too many catholics here would deny that were this the year 1930 and we were discussing the Lambeth Commission that there would then be many threads on the sanctioning of contraception in Protestant churches!

It’s “In the News.”

Just to weigh on the drift of the thread towards why gay marriage is undesirable for human culture, let’s not forget that it is opening a can of worms, just as the acceptance of contraception did which can be seen as leading us to this very discussion at this time in history.

If we cannot understand how legally sanctioned homosexual unions will further deteriorate american culture, how do we ever hope to defend against legally sanctioned polygamy, or pedophilia?

For those who are a part of our diverse culture and who do not choose to buy into Christianity in any way shape or form, why not push to legalize all kinds of things? For us Christians, what claim do we have on imposing our morals on their moral code?

Well, I’d say, our claim is in the history and the voice of the founding fathers of our country, who at the very least, were willing to acknowledge as their source for law and order - our Creator.

Why should those of us who have been a part of this country and agree with it’s traditions be bullied into reform by folks who not only are not willing to acknowledge a Creator as the source of our countries rights, but fail to provide a source for the morality they want to impose on our country?

 

[ega]

fix:

I am arguing from reason.You have provided no objective, irrefutable evidence. You have stated your flawed logic and that is all.

it is irrefutable that the excretory and reproductive organs are intimately linked to the same pleasure centres. It is irrefutable that the anus provides a better fit to the cod than the vagina (generally speaking), it is irrefutable the anus self-lubes.

As so many of you argue from design, then you must take into acount all indicators of design. Failure to do so means you risk missing gods grand design.

Indeed, given the focus in these boards on reproduction it seems you (generic you, not specifically ‘you’) think god made us to be self-rightous bunny rabbits.

fix:

That pathology exists is not the issue. That it is at higher rates for those who engage in unnatural acts is the issue.

A clearer statement and expression of double standards could not be wished for. You argue anal sex is unnatural because it causes more damage than reproductive sex. But if DAMAGE is your criteria then neither is natural because both casue damage.

Anal sex causes less damage than sex with radioactive cactus therefore anal sex is natural.

Try again.

 

[ega]

He made us he and she, he and he, she and she. each of us.

All to love in all its forms and all its glory.

To be forever with your soul mate and best friend.

To be one, together, in his light.

To hold the covenant that we shall love one another as he loves us.

As Jonathan loved david.

Peace be with you.

The EGA.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

ega:

He made us he and she, he and he, she and she. each of us.

All to love in all its forms and all its glory.

To be forever with your soul mate and best friend.

To be one, together, in his light.

To hold the covenant that we shall love one another as he loves us.

As Jonathan loved david.

Peace be with you.

The EGA.

No!What you are doing is pushing an agenda herehttp://bestsmileys.com/angry1/11.gifI can NOT believe your posts!http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/4.gifThe very idea of being an apologist for SODOMY!http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/6.gifOne of the SINS that calls out to HEAVEN for VENGEANCE!http://bestsmileys.com/angry2/6.gifAre you aware that this forum is open to 13 year olds?http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/8.gif

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Lisa4Catholics:

No!What you are doing is pushing an agenda herehttp://bestsmileys.com/angry1/11.gifI can NOT believe your posts!http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/4.gifThe very idea of being an apologist for SODOMY!http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/6.gifOne of the SINS that calls out to HEAVEN for VENGEANCE!http://bestsmileys.com/angry2/6.gifAre you aware that this forum is open to 13 year olds?http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/8.gif

Didn’t David have a bit of trouble getting the love thing right? Ah! Yes, it was Solomon who built the Temple. Solomon who loved Wisdom. D-oh!

 

[fix]

ega:

He made us he and she, he and he, she and she. each of us.

All to love in all its forms and all its glory.

To be forever with your soul mate and best friend.

To be one, together, in his light.

To hold the covenant that we shall love one another as he loves us.

As Jonathan loved david.

Peace be with you.

The EGA.

25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.

 

[YinYangMom]

ega:

He made us he and she, he and he, she and she. each of us.

He made us Male and Female, Eve to complete Adam.
For every male there is a female to complement him.
Males are created to seek his female counterpart.
Females are created to seek her male counterpart.
Unless they are created only to serve the Lord in celibacy.

All to love in all its forms and all its glory.

But sexual love is only for male and female as a means to participate in the Holy Trinity (as in 3 persons - male, female, G-d) so as to participate in G-d’s creativity by producing new life.

To be forever with your soul mate and best friend.

That’s no where in scripture. Jesus didn’t speak of this.
Our soul mate is G-d Himself. Everything we do on this earth is to get our way back to Him.

To be one, together, in his light.

In the end times, yes. His light - on earth - would be present in the marital embrace between male/female/G-d open to life. Male to male, female to female removes G-d and therefore there is no light when that occurs.

To hold the covenant that we shall love one another as he loves us.

Yes, to love each other enough to die for one another in order to save each human’s soul. A male seeking sexual activity with another male is not preserving that person’s soul - instead he is condemning it along with his own. How can that ever be considered on the same level as Christ’s love for us?

As Jonathan loved david.

I have no idea what scriptural passage you would be referring to here. Please provide it so we may address it.

Peace be with you.

And also with you. You will be in my prayers.

The EGA.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.

Tell it fix:bowdown:

 

[ega]

Lisa4Catholics:

The very idea of being an apologist for SODOMY!http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/6.gifOne of the SINS that calls out to HEAVEN for VENGEANCE!

The reference to soddom and gomorrah is not lost on me. But as you probably know the word ‘yada’ in the hebrew (to know) is ambiguous and it is not clear that it refers to sex act. And it is questionable whether it could refer to same sex acts because, they were angels not men, and therefore sexless.

But, if you insist that ‘yada’ in this instance refers to sexual congress, and that the ‘strange fless’ refers to ‘other men’ and not angels, then you must characterise it as accurately as possible. In which case the correct description would be ‘homosexual rape’.

So drilling down, reading what is there the sins of sodom seem to come down to rape.

In no way can the rape of strangers be compared to the loving, consensual relationships that leads people to want to marry.

Thus, with the story Sodom I see your reactions demonstrate you havent really read the story or thought about it.

However…

“Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.” Ezekeiel 16:49-50

No mention of same-sex activty there.

 

[fix]

1. Providing a basic plan for understanding this entire discussion of homosexuality is the theology of creation we find in Genesis. God, in his infinite wisdom and love, brings into existence all of reality as a reflection of his goodness. He fashions mankind, male and female, in his own image and likeness. Human beings, therefore, are nothing less than the work of God himself; and in the complementarity of the sexes, they are called to reflect the inner unity of the Creator. They do this in a striking way in their cooperation with him in the transmission of life by a mutual donation of the self to the other.
   
   In Genesis 3, we find that this truth about persons being an image of God has been obscured by original sin. There inevitably follows a loss of awareness of the covenantal character of the union these persons had with God and with each other. The human body retains its “spousal significance” but this is now clouded by sin. Thus, in Genesis 19:1-11, the deterioration due to sin continues in the story of the men of Sodom. There can be no doubt of the moral judgement made there against homosexual relations. In Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, in the course of describing the conditions necessary for belonging to the Chosen People, the author excludes from the People of God those who behave in a homosexual fashion.
   
   Against the background of this exposition of theocratic law, an eschatological perspective is developed by St. Paul when, in I Cor 6:9, he proposes the same doctrine and lists those who behave in a homosexual fashion among those who shall not enter the Kingdom of God.
   
   In Romans 1:18-32, still building on the moral traditions of his forebears, but in the new context of the confrontation between Christianity and the pagan society of his day, Paul uses homosexual behaviour as an example of the blindness which has overcome humankind. Instead of the original harmony between Creator and creatures, the acute distortion of idolatry has led to all kinds of moral excess. Paul is at a loss to find a clearer example of this disharmony than homosexual relations. Finally, 1 Tim. 1, in full continuity with the Biblical position, singles out those who spread wrong doctrine and in v. 10 explicitly names as sinners those who engage in homosexual acts.
   1. The Church, obedient to the Lord who founded her and gave to her the sacramental life, celebrates the divine plan of the loving and live-giving union of men and women in the sacrament of marriage. It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good. A person engaging in homosexual behaviour therefore acts immorally.
   LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
   ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

 

[ega]

fix:

Multiple purposes do not include perversion.

Both are natural. Sodomy is unnatural.

The statements that have been made here, that sex is pleasurable just to get us to reproduce strikes me as blaspemous. God bribes or tricks you into having sex so his plan for reproduction comes about? Unthinkable! Unbelievable! Almost unspeakable in what it suggests about god or his creations.

And yet you believe it?

In anycase, the vatican has admitted sex has a binding function in couples beyond reproduction, clearly indicating sex is a dual-use thingy.

In looking around nature we see that same-sex activites go from low to high, humans, buffalo, apes, dolphins, swans (who mate for life), seagulls, and so on. Go to a farm…watch your dog.

Nothing that permeates nature, all of nature, can be called unnatural. To do so is perverse, contrary to observed facts, and reminds me that de nile isnt just a river in Africa.

 

[fix]

ega:

The statements that have been made here, that sex is pleasurable just to get us to reproduce strikes me as blaspemous. God bribes or tricks you into having sex so his plan for reproduction comes about? Unthinkable! Unbelievable! Almost unspeakable in what it suggests about god or his creations.

And yet you believe it?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

In anycase, the vatican has admitted sex has a binding function in couples beyond reproduction, clearly indicating sex is a dual-use thingy.

Yes, procreative and unitive.

In looking around nature we see that same-sex activites go from low to high, humans, buffalo, apes, dolphins, swans (who mate for life), seagulls, and so on. Go to a farm…watch your dog.

Humans are not beasts.

Nothing that permeates nature, all of nature, can be called unnatural. To do so is perverse, contrary to observed facts, and reminds me that de nile isnt just a river in Africa.

Some animals eat their young, is that natural for man?

 

[YinYangMom]

Ega,

I’m feeling left out…
when will you respond to my responses to your earlier arguments?

YYM

 

[ega]

fix:

Paul uses homosexual behaviour as an example of the blindness which has overcome humankind. Instead of the original harmony between Creator and creatures, the acute distortion of idolatry has led to all kinds of moral excess. Paul is at a loss to find a clearer example of this disharmony than homosexual relations.

Technically this is not true. he talks of men who have sex with each other despite actually having a natural lust for women. That is, they were heterosexual.

Such descriptions do not apply to homosexual men, who have no lust for women, natural or otherwise, to turn away from.

To be absolutely strict in your reading and interpretation you must admit Paul referred to straight men having gay sex and thus being perverse.

For gay men, who only have natural lust for other men, they would be perverse to have sex with women. They would clearly be breaking Gods Plan For Them in doing so. To be true to Pauls teaching they have to have gay sex.

A close and strict reading of what paul wrote supports gay people joining with gay people.

i bet you didnt know that.