your opinions on gays

[goofyjim]

Before I end my participation in this thread, may I know your answer to the following:

1. What makes a homosexual a homosexual?
2. What is the inclination of a homosexual?
3. Is your answer to no. 2) not also true to heterosexuals?

I feel what makes a homosexual is the general attraction towards one 's own gender. There may never be any real inclination to have sex bu the attraction prevents him from ever experiencing aorusal from the opposite sex. He can still stay chaste despite these conditions.

 

[agangbern]

I feel what makes a homosexual is the general attraction towards one 's own gender. There may never be any real inclination to have sex bu the attraction prevents him from ever experiencing aorusal from the opposite sex. He can still stay chaste despite these conditions.

What is he attracted about his “own gender”? If there is no inclination to have sex with one’s own gender, then what is the inclination of the homosexual?"

 

[rlg94086]

What is he attracted about his “own gender”? If there is no inclination to have sex with one’s own gender, then what is the inclination of the homosexual?"

Hi agangbern,

On your question of inclination/attraction, ask yourself this. Why do heterosexual couples date and wed? Is it purely driven by sex?

So, the answer to your list of questions is…

1. Don’t know.
2. An attraction (even “puppy love”) for people of the same gender
3. From an attraction standpoint, I think the answer is ‘yes’, but obviously the object is different

 

[agangbern]

Hi agangbern,

On your question of inclination/attraction, ask yourself this. Why do heterosexual couples date and wed? Is it purely driven by sex?

So, the answer to your list of questions is…

1. Don’t know.
2. An attraction (even “puppy love”) for people of the same gender
3. From an attraction standpoint, I think the answer is ‘yes’, but obviously the object is different

It is sad that we are talking here about homosexuals and yet we don’t know what makes a homosexual a homosexual. I am not asking why homosexuals date with each other. I am not interested in that question. My question in no. 1 is simply that. No need to confuse it with what is not asked there.

In question no. 2, I am asking what is the inclination of the homosexual. If you are saying that attraction and inclination are the same, so be it. Then, what is he attracted about the same gender? Puppy love? What do you understand by puppy love?

 

[rlg94086]

“Puppy love” is a term used here when children start to “fall in love” with someone…it isn’t about sex. The point is that attraction/inclination is not all about sex. I love my wife, but it is not all about sex. When I was first attracted to her, it wasn’t because I wanted to have sex with her. I thought she was cute.

I am not confusing your number 1 question. I’m saying we don’t know.

It is sad that we are talking here about homosexuals and yet we don’t know what makes a homosexual a homosexual. I am not asking why homosexuals date with each other. I am not interested in that question. My question in no. 1 is simply that. No need to confuse it with what is not asked there.

In question no. 2, I am asking what is the inclination of the homosexual. If you are saying that attraction and inclination are the same, so be it. Then, what is he attracted about the same gender? Puppy love? What do you understand by puppy love?

 

[agangbern]

“Puppy love” is a term used here when children start to “fall in love” with someone…it isn’t about sex. The point is that attraction/inclination is not all about sex. I love my wife, but it is not all about sex. When I was first attracted to her, it wasn’t because I wanted to have sex with her. I thought she was cute.

I am not confusing your number 1 question. I’m saying we don’t know.

You quoted CCC2357. What for?CC2357 is defining homosexuality. That is not what I am asking about in question no. 1.

 

[rlg94086]

You quoted CCC2357. What for?CC2357 is defining homosexuality. That is not what I am asking about in question no. 1.

You asked “what makes a homosexual a homosexual?” So, I think you better clarify your question. I assumed you were asking why someone is homosexual. You could be asking what features of a person defines them as homosexual. Your frustration is due to your ambiguous question.

If you are asking why someone is homosexual (causation), I answered it…we don’t know.

If you are asking what features would define someone as homosexual, I would say “attraction to someone of the same gender.”

Are you asking a different question? If so, please clarify.

 

[Elric]

To help you remember, here is the actual occurrence:

Originally Posted by Elric View Post
I have experienced the worst (accusations of discrimination over nothing) I have experienced some uncomfortable moments (some have tried to pick me up/proposition me in pubs, one sexually harrassed me at work to the point of where I had to physically confront him and tell him to stop because management did nothing to stop him even after I complained several times)

To that, agangbern replied as follows:
Human rights are natural rights of every man. Recognizing this natural law, the civil law categorically says, “Every person must, in the exercise of this rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.” Therefore, in every instance where one’s right is violated, he has always a right to seek redress. That is equal to all. No need of a special law for non-special people.

Yes I know what you responded with, but I wasnt sure what you meant by it or what you were refering to. Which is why I asked:

Originally Posted by Elric
I dont get what you are talking about. Are you refering to the sexual harassment bit?

To which you replied with:

*Originally Posted by agangbern
As I previously quoted, I was referring to the so-called “worst experience” that you had among your equal human beings. *

You use the phrase “so-called”, which insinuates that you believe that what I posted is questionable.

Is the reply questioning your experience?

Well it does look that way, which is why I asked you if that was what you were doing.

And is that suggesting that homosexuals are inferior human beings?

It could, I dont know. Which is why I asked you if that is what you were doing.

The answer is very obvious.

It is?

Well why not just spell it out then?

Since you wont answer the questions and have resorted to this condescending/riddiculing response, I have to assume that it was your intention to question what I said and suggest that homosexuals are inferior to other human beings.

 

[agangbern]

You asked “what makes a homosexual a homosexual?” So, I think you better clarify your question. I assumed you were asking why someone is homosexual. You could be asking what features of a person defines them as homosexual. Your frustration is due to your ambiguous question.

OK, maybe you really found the question ambiguous. So let me explain it. The question is asking for the essence of a homosexual. And let me quote to clarify what I mean by essence. “Essence is properly described as that whereby a thing is what it is, an equivalent of the to ti en einai of Aristotle (Metaph., VII, 7).” I hope it is clearer now. To the question you have given two answers:
1)“don’t know.”

1. “attraction to someone of the same gender.”

The second answer replaced the first. Now, a boy could be attracted to another boy in the way the latter speaks, or in the way the latter comb his hair, or in a way as simply to idolize him. And because of that attraction the two could even become friends. But we do not say that because of that they are necessarily homosexuals. May I know what kind of attraction to the same gender is unique to a homosexual?

 

[agangbern]

It is?

Well why not just spell it out then?

Since you wont answer the questions and have resorted to this condescending/riddiculing response, I have to assume that it was your intention to question what I said and suggest that homosexuals are inferior to other human beings.

OK, you don’t have to assume. Let me show you how the answer is obvious:
To that, agangbern replied as follows:
Human rights are natural rights of every man. Recognizing this natural law, the civil law categorically says, “Every person must, in the exercise of this rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.” Therefore, in every instance where one’s right is violated, he has always a right to seek redress. That is equal to all. No need of a special law for non-special people.

The words that I bolded is enough to tell the reader that no man is inferior to other human beings, unless of course the reader doubts that homosexuals are persons.

The word “so-called” does not imply questioning the authenticity of the thing so named. That is a fact demonstrable even by logic. So, there is no reason for you to say that I am questioning your experience called “worst experience.”

 

[rlg94086]

OK, maybe you really found the question ambiguous. So let me explain it. The question is asking for the essence of a homosexual. And let me quote to clarify what I mean by essence. “Essence is properly described as that whereby a thing is what it is, an equivalent of the to ti en einai of Aristotle (Metaph., VII, 7).” I hope it is clearer now. To the question you have given two answers:
1)“don’t know.”

1. “attraction to someone of the same gender.”

The second answer replaced the first. Now, a boy could be attracted to another boy in the way the latter speaks, or in the way the latter comb his hair, or in a way as simply to idolize him. And because of that attraction the two could even become friends. But we do not say that because of that they are necessarily homosexuals. May I know what kind of attraction to the same gender is unique to a homosexual?

My “don’t know” answer was in regards to causation, not essence. The essence is attraction to the same sex in the same way a heterosexual is attracted to the opposite sex. This doesn’t only entail a desire for sex, as it also includes the love attraction associated with the desire for sex.

I am not an expert on these matters, but I understand that the desire I have for my wife is not just for sex. I guess if you want to go the evolutionary/freudian direction, you could say it is all based on sex, but that is not what I believe.

I think it is also fair to consider that there may be a spectrum of desire - from the strongly homosexual to the strongly heterosexual. In that case, the “essence” is not clear cut. There would be some people who have varying degrees of desire for both sexes. They may be considered homosexual or heterosexual because of the choice they have made between their conflicting desires.

 

[agangbern]

Originally Posted by agangbern View Post
The second answer replaced the first. Now, a boy could be attracted to another boy in the way the latter speaks, or in the way the latter comb his hair, or in a way as simply to idolize him. And because of that attraction the two could even become friends. But we do not say that because of that they are necessarily homosexuals. May I know what kind of attraction to the same gender is unique to a homosexual?

My “don’t know” answer was in regards to causation, not essence. The essence is attraction to the same sex in the same way a heterosexual is attracted to the opposite sex. This doesn’t only entail a desire for sex, as it also includes the love attraction associated with the desire for sex.

So, you are saying in essence that the homosexual’s attraction to the same sex also includes the desire for sex with the latter, except that it doesn’t “entail” only that, and that just as that of the heterosexual, such sexual desire has varying degrees. Therefore, it can be said that, there must be a desire for sex with the same gender in order for one to qualify being a homosexual, right? And absence of a desire for sex with the same gender, the person is not a homosexual.

I

 

[blackiron1]

I wrote my Congressman about ENDA and got this reply:

WASHINGTON:

2441 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON, DC 20515

(202) 225-6216 0 FAX: (202) 225-3489

TODD 'TIAHRT 4TH DISTRICT, KANSAS

WWW.HOUSE.Gov/TIAHRT

November 13, 2007

Dear :

Thank you for contacting me regarding Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007, H.R. 2015 and H.R.3685. I greatly appreciate knowing your thoughts on this important issue.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act was introduced by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) on April 24th. This bill would ban “employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.” Like you, I abhor bigotry and discrimination; however, this disingenuous and vaguely-constructed overhaul of labor law is inconsistent with the free exercise of religion and will weaken traditional marriage.

Free exercise of religion as found in the Constitution and as codified by Congress in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) must be firmly upheld. It is a cornerstone of our nation’s founding and our future. America’s churches, synagogues, and religious non-profits must maintain the right to employ those that share their particular religious or moral worldview. Unfortunately, ENDA would impede on these fundamental rights.

ENDA would also weaken the landmark Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by giving Federal statutory significance to same-sex marriage rights. DOMA is the federal law that declares marriage is between one man and one woman. Maintaining DOMA is essential in defending the sanctity of marriage. However, passage of ENDA will provide activist judges around the country the legal ammunition to undermine state and federal marriage laws. Courts in New Jersey, Vermont and Massachusetts have all used state legislation similar to ENDA as a springboard for mandating same-sex marriage or civil unions. In 2005 Kansas overwhelmingly passed the Marriage Amendment by 70 percent. The people of Kansas have spoken. With the path is so clearly defined in history, it would be irresponsible for Congress to pass ENDA.

Upon introduction, H.R. 3685 was referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the House Committee on the Judiciary, and the House Committee on Administration. It was passed out of the Committee on Education and Labor on October 22nd by a vote of 27-21. ENDA was considered on the House Floor on November it and passed by a vote of 235-184. I voted “no” on this legislation. The bill now moves to the U.S. Senate for consideration.

Again, thank you sharing your concerns with me regarding ENDA. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me or my labor policy aide, Jim Richardson. It is an honor to serve you in the United States Congress.

Best regards,

Todd Tiahrt Member of Congress

 

[agangbern]

I wrote my Congressman about ENDA and got this reply:
WWW.HOUSE.Gov/TIAHRT

"Like you, I abhor bigotry and discrimination; however, this disingenuous and vaguely-constructed overhaul of labor law is inconsistent with the free exercise of religion and will weaken traditional marriage.

Free exercise of religion as found in the Constitution and as codified by Congress in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) must be firmly upheld. It is a cornerstone of our nation’s founding and our future. America’s churches, synagogues, and religious non-profits must maintain the right to employ those that share their particular religious or moral worldview. Unfortunately, ENDA would impede on these fundamental rights.

That comment of the congressman is enlightening. Free exercise of religion is simply a precious right in a democratic society. Speaking of bigotry, I don’t think the Church is obstinately intolerant of the beliefs of others. The Church, however, has that right for the free exercise of religion. And in that exercise of her right, no one has a right to force her to compromise her teachings. When she believes that gay marriages is against the natural law, the gays has no right to force her children to let gays be employed in her children’s corporations. Passing a law that would in effect force these corporations to accept the contrary beliefs of gays would be the one which is bigotry.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

As has been pointed out time and time again homosexual attraction does not mean we are spending 24 hours a day in lust. Since we do not know what causes the attraction we cannot say it is a sin. We can say it is not in God’s original design but that means a slight disorder not a sin. For something to be a sin there must be a willful turning away from God. That is just not the case with who you find attractive. It is not chosen.

The “Gay Agenda” has many, many tentacles. This is where anyone that has a SSA must never join with. If one such joins that movement it is a separation from God in no uncertain term.

If one has that struggle to contain his/herself and does not act out the inclination then there is great merit because God’s will is being compied with.

But the “Agenda” wants to adopt children and this has to be an even greater abomination than merely lust…it places children in the most unnatural environment and that will be dealt with when they enter Eternity. There is a place in Hell for such pursuits.

 

[East_and_West]

So someone that has an attraction to children, animals, stealing or fornication or adultery doesn’t need to overcome that?

Just a question goofyJim do you think that the thoughts that go with homosexual “attraction” are ok? I don’t want to misquote you. I’m not trying to be nosy but you say “SSA” is ok but don’t come right out and say the thoughts aren’t. Thinking about sodomy is wrong don’t you think? (homosexaulity)

OK. I think you are seriously confused. Take a look at this. Before marraige, straight people are called to chastity just as homosexuals are. Does that mean before they are married the fact that they are straight is sinful? Must they have no sexuality until they are married?

 

[agangbern]

OK. I think you are seriously confused. Take a look at this. Before marraige, straight people are called to chastity just as homosexuals are. Does that mean before they are married the fact that they are straight is sinful? Must they have no sexuality until they are married?

May I invite you, East and West, to answer the three questions in post # 752.

 

[East_and_West]

Before I end my participation in this thread, may I know your answer to the following:

1. What makes a homosexual a homosexual?
2. What is the inclination of a homosexual?
3. Is your answer to no. 2) not also true to heterosexuals?

I am answering these questions as a homosexual living chastely.

1. A sexual attraction to one’s own gender.
2. A sexual attraction to one’s own gender.
3. What are you getting at?

 

[Bennie_P]

OK. I think you are seriously confused. Take a look at this. Before marraige, straight people are called to chastity just as homosexuals are. Does that mean before they are married the fact that they are straight is sinful? Must they have no sexuality until they are married?

I don’t see how he is confused, just as thinking of sodomy (in a pleasurable manner) it would also be wrong for a “straight” person fantasying on having sex with a member of the opposite sex. It appears you are confused about what the difference of sexuality and lust. Sure someone with SSA may be attracted toward another person, but once they start fantasying about havig sex with that person they have crossed the line just as a person would be in a like situation with a person of the opposite sex. There is inclination toward lust associated with SSA and those without SSA can and most do, have a similar inclination, but that doesn’t justify acting out on your sexual urges in an unchaste action or thought in either case. That is stinking thinking, "he isn’t living by the rules so why should I?:doh2: "

 

[agangbern]

I am answering these questions as a homosexual living chastely.

1. A sexual attraction to one’s own gender.
2. A sexual attraction to one’s own gender.
3. What are you getting at?

Now, a boy could be attracted to another boy in the way the latter speaks, or in the way the latter comb his hair, or in a way as simply to idolize him. And because of that attraction the two could even become friends. But we do not say that because of that they are necessarily homosexuals. May I know what kind of attraction to the same gender is unique to a homosexual?

What do you mean by sexual attraction to one’s own gender?