Is Homosexuality Unnatural?

Author: Salixes

Posts

Read-only
Total: 57
#31
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Hey Gomer, I know homosexuals who have fathered and birthed children.

So?

Then homosexuals can have children Gomer.

I didn't say they couldn't. I have said five fkn times now that homosexuals (males) cannot reproduce with other homosexual (males).

Your grasping for life trying to defend against this "abomination" created by god himself.


So are you saying that homosexuality is a conscious choice?
No, I'm saying that homosexuals are not genetically different from heterosexuals



You say it is nothing to do with your god and also say that not nothing to do with genetics and you are now saying it has nothing to do with a conscious choice. Then where did this "abomination" of a man fking another  man come from? Einstein.

post15 --> @ethang5 wrote:
Homosexuals are not genetically different from heterosexuals, and are not genetically fkd up. You are just ignorant and illiterate.

OK so that rules out genetics.



post15 --> @ethang5 wrote:
God made nothing bad.
OK so that rules out god. 


So are you saying that homosexuality is a conscious choice?
No, I'm saying that homosexuals are not genetically different from heterosexuals
And that above then, also rules out a conscious l choice.

You have managed to rule out just about all possible reasons for there even being homosexuality. So why do we have homosexuality in the world, What is that attracts a man to another man sexually? And a woman to a woman sexually. 


Everything is gods creation according to you.
When did I say that? Are you lying again?

No, that would be you doing ALL the fkn lying princess. I have absolutely nothing to defend or lie about. You on the other hand, persistently lie about what is written in your own scripture as can be clearly seen above at post 15 where you state;

Leviticus 20:13 does not specify homosexuals. Anyone performing that sin is guilty, even heterosexuals. But your reading comprehension is poor.

No it doesn't , stop fkn lying. YOU JUST CANNOT HELP YOURSELF CAN YOU!!!! 


Leviticus 20:13 New King James Version (NKJV)
13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

AND AGAIN AT 

Chapter 18 verse 22. "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."

You have a serious fkn bad habit of contradicting your own fkn scripture in the hope of making a point and winning an argument. Contrary for the sake of being contrary, how fkn childish.  You really are pathetically spent and empty and devoid of  reason and explanation or even  for excuses,  arn't you.


God did not create your loony thread.

AND this is not my thread princess.
#32
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
Bigotry is one of those grey words.

Who has the right to decide the difference between a difference of opinion and intolerance?

After all, people tend to either agree or disagree. Otherwise a stasis of indecisive tolerance would perpetuate

Isn't it just the strength of the accompanying rhetoric that is used to define bigotry or not?


#33
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
I have said five fkn times now that homosexuals (males) cannot reproduce with other homosexual (males).
They can't reproduce with heterosexual males either doofus.

You say it is nothing to do with your god and also say that not nothing to do with genetics and you are now saying it has nothing to do with a conscious choice.
No poor reader. I said none of that. All of it is just your loony conjecture.

Then where did this "abomination" of a man fking another  man come from? 
From the bible shemp. Notice the verse says nothing about homosexuals.

You have managed to rule out just about all possible reasons for there even being homosexuality. 
I ruled out nothing homer. You did.

So why do we have homosexuality in the world, What is that attracts a man to another man sexually? And a woman to a woman sexually. 
Who knows? I'm not trying to explain homosexuality homer.

Everything is gods creation according to you.
When did I say that? Are you lying again? 

No, that would be you doing ALL the fkn lying princess.
Then why can't you show where I said that?

Repeating stupidity doesn't cut it genius. Dodging the point doesn't save you. The verse says nothing about homosexuality. The condemns an act any man can engage in.

I asked, "If a heterosexual man lies down with a male as with a woman, is he guilty of violating this law?

You dodged answering because you're hypocritical and dishonest, but the Gentle Readers saw your fakery.

AND this is not my thread princess.
I did not say this was your thread, poor reader. I said God did not create your loony threads, proving God did not create everything.

My goodness, your reading comprehension is poor!
#34
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Isn't it just the strength of the accompanying rhetoric that is used to define bigotry or not?
Precisely, that is why I'm comfortable with anyone looking at his comments in context. And why he is careful not to deny outright because he doesn't want his racist comments posted and then contrasted with his limp implied denials.
#35
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
You say it is nothing to do with your god and also say that not nothing to do with genetics and you are now saying it has nothing to do with a conscious choice.
No poor reader. I said none of that. All of it is just your loony conjecture.

Oh FFS! stop with the lies and denials. these are your quotes not fkn mine.  WHAT THE FUCKS THE MATTER WITH YOU MAN!!!!!!


post15 --> @ethang5 wrote:
Homosexuals are not genetically different from heterosexuals, and are not genetically fkd up. You are just ignorant and illiterate.

OK so that rules out genetics.



post15 --> @ethang5 wrote:
God made nothing bad.
OK so that rules out god. 


So are you saying that homosexuality is a conscious choice?
No, I'm saying that homosexuals are not genetically different from heterosexuals
And that above then, also rules out a conscious l choice.

All are your quotes from your fkn own posts . There just has to be something seriously the matter with you if you are going to continue to lie is such open blatant fashion. You are no better and have no more oral integrity that that other liar disgusted  that you fought so hard to get banned.  You should be banned for your persistent denials and lying just for arguments sake. Your a fkn disgrace!!!!!!


You simply have no explanation why god's creation has gone so abominably wrong have you. 
Topic's author
#36
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@oromagi
Here's a DDO debate from 7 years ago that I won on a variation of this topic:
I think where your opponent went wrong was in his opening argument:
"What is the point of sex? I mean what is the point biologically of sex? It's to reproduce."

He (she) made a statement based on a false, if not unqualified or unproven pretext that there is a point to sex.

Yes, sex can result in reproduction but there is no evidence nor reason to suggest that sex has a point any more than saying that life has a purpose.

Topic's author
#37
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Who has the right to decide the difference between a difference of opinion and intolerance?
Confusticating opinion and intolerance is incorrect.

Whichever way one's opinion goes does not alter the fact that intolerance is intolerance.

Society, whether or not we agree with it decides what intolerances are acceptable or not and therefore deemed bigotry or not.

In modern civilised society, intolerance towards minority groups is deemed bigotry to the point where there are laws in place that deal with the vilification of those groups.
#38
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Oh FFS! stop with the lies and denials. these are your quotes not fkn mine.  WHAT THE FUCKS THE MATTER WITH YOU MAN!!!!!!
Please stop being stupid. My comments clearly say none of the loony things you pull out of thin air.

All are your quotes from your fkn own posts.
Which say nothing about "ruling" anything out. All the "ruling out" looniness is you.

You are no better and have no more oral integrity that that other liar disgusted  that you fought so hard to get banned.
I didn't control Disgusted's posts. He posted what he wanted. His ban is on him. This also true for you. I say God created only good, and you start spitting and frothing that I'm "ruling out" that homosexuals are genetically fckd up! Does that make sense to you?

What I post and what you think are different things. You seem to not be able to tell the difference between your opinion and what I write.

You should be banned for your persistent denials and lying just for arguments sake. Your a fkn disgrace!!!!!!
You may be bi-polar.

You simply have no explanation why god's creation has gone so abominably wrong have you.
No, I don't. But the bible does.

Rom 1:21 - because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 - Professing to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 - and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
Rom 1:24 - Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
Rom 1:25 - who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 - For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
Rom 1:27 - Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
Rom 1:28 - And even as they did not like to retain God in theirknowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
Rom 1:29 - being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
Rom 1:30 - backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 - undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful;
Rom 1:32 - who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them

Have someone without a reading comprehension problem read it to you.

#39
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Salixes
The reason for using analogies is to illustrate a point not to imply an equivalence.
The reason for using analogies is to create a comparison. In the point you illustrated, you were attempting to demonstrate an inconsistency between rejection of homosexuality, for reasons you allege are "unnatural" and the acceptance of Jesus, God, and the talking serpent, which are, as many atheists allege, "supernatural." This is a false equivalence.


actually address the topic (for once) instead of nitpicking the semantics in order to avoid addressing the topic.
All arguments are semantic. And I did address your point--twice now. You are arguing a false equivalence. The reason semantics--lexical semantics--is important because words--particularly English words--have many descriptions which inform different contexts. If you do no grasp the context in which an argument is made, then your claim of inconsistency is ill-informed. When Christians refer to the "unnatural," they are referring to the perverse; you, clearly, are using "unnatural" to describe the physically abnormal. Once again, you are arguing against straw men.
#40
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
You say it is nothing to do with your god and also say that not nothing to do with genetics and you are now saying it has nothing to do with a conscious choice.
No poor reader. I said none of that. All of it is just your loony conjecture.

Oh FFS! stop with the lies and denials. these are your quotes not fkn mine.  WHAT THE FUCKS THE MATTER WITH YOU MAN!!!!!!


post15 --> @ethang5 wrote:
Homosexuals are not genetically different from heterosexuals, and are not genetically fkd up. You are just ignorant and illiterate.

OK so that rules out genetics.



post15 --> @ethang5 wrote:
God made nothing bad.
OK so that rules out god. 


So are you saying that homosexuality is a conscious choice?
No, I'm saying that homosexuals are not genetically different from heterosexuals
And that above then, also rules out a conscious l choice.

All are your quotes from your fkn own posts . There just has to be something seriously the matter with you if you are going to continue to lie is such open blatant fashion. You are no better and have no more oral integrity that that other liar disgusted  that you fought so hard to get banned.  You should be banned for your persistent denials and lying just for arguments sake. Your a fkn disgrace!!!!!!


You simply have no explanation why god's creation has gone so abominably wrong have you. 

#41
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
So why do we have homosexuality in the world, What is that attracts a man to another man sexually? And a woman to a woman sexually. 
Who knows?

So how the FK do you know it didn't come from god. Or it isn't a conscious choice? Or that it isn't a genetic fk up? 

Do you not see what a fkn great hypocrite that you are.

#42
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
So how the FK do you know it didn't come from god.
God is not responsible for our adult, conscious, free willed choices.

Or it isn't a conscious choice?
I said nothing about whether its a conscious choice shemp.

Or that it isn't a genetic fk up? 
Because I'm educated.

Do you not see what a fkn great hypocrite that you are.
I see how confused you are, but not confused enough to know not to answer questions.

What? Did you get tired of the all caps, all bold, troll-speak?

#43
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
There are no rules. 
#44
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
So why do we have homosexuality in the world, What is that attracts a man to another man sexually? And a woman to a woman sexually. 
Who knows?

So how the FK do you know it didn't come from god.

God is not responsible for our adult, conscious, free willed choices.

So are you now saying that homosexuality is a conscious choice. 

#45
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
No. Exactly how bad is your reading comprehension?

Here is what I'm now saying.

God is not responsible for our adult, conscious, free willed choices.

My comment above says nothing about homosexuality shemp.

If you have a question about homosexuality, ask it, instead of this ridiculous, "so you're now saying" stupidity.


Topic's author
#46
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@Athias
And I did address your point--twice now. 
Owning a car isn't about dismantling it and examining every piece and writing a thesis on how every part should or shouldn't fit together.

I dare you to take it for a drive. 
Go on, get involved, try it.

Unless of course, you happen to be mortally scared of driving.
Or worse still, perhaps you simply don't know how to drive at all.

#47
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
So are you now saying that homosexuality is a conscious choice. 

No. Exactly how bad is your reading comprehension?

OK, so is homosexuality a genetic disorder, then?

#48
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Ok, so if a heterosexual man should lay with another man as he would with a woman, would that also be a violation of the law?
#49
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
YOU MISSED THIS. WHAT THE FKS THE MATTER WITH YOU!!!! IT IS ONE SIMPLE QUESTION.

So are you now saying that homosexuality is a conscious choice. 

No. Exactly how bad is your reading comprehension?

OK, so is homosexuality a genetic disorder, then?

#50
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
Only if he lays down, right? Because the verse definitely says "as he LAY" with a woman. What if that heterosexual man gives the other guy a blow job? Which one is in trouble? The answer is NEITHER! One guy would never be able to do that to a woman, but more importantly, neither is lying down. So while napping together would be enough to put such men to death, blowing each other so long as neither lays down is fine, according to the logic that the verse doesn't say 'homosexual.'
#51
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
WHAT THE FKS THE MATTER WITH YOU!!!! IT IS ONE SIMPLE QUESTION.
I ask that question every time you dodge one of my simple questions.

blowing each other...
If one is hot, the other should fan him, not blow him. A person's breadth is to warm to cool anyone.

so long as neither lays down is fine, according to the logic that the verse doesn't say 'homosexual.
The verse didn't say homosexual Jethro. In what logic does the verse say homosexual? Poor reading comprehension logic?

Which one is in trouble? The answer is NEITHER!
Lol. You couldn't answer my question, so you answered your own?

The Gentle Readers see you dodge. And they know why you dodge. You are an empty fraud. A fake. What they call vacuous.

Only if he lays down, right? Because the verse definitely says "as he LAY" with a woman.
Whaaat?! You mean it doesn't say homosexual?

Lol. D'oh!

#52
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Salixes
Owning a car isn't about dismantling it and examining every piece and writing a thesis on how every part should or shouldn't fit together.
When said car frequently breaks down, it is.

I dare you to take it for a drive. 
Go on, get involved, try it.
Sorry, I don't rabble-rouse.

Unless of course, you happen to be mortally scared of driving.
Or worse still, perhaps you simply don't know how to drive at all.
Anyone can drive a car; it takes discipline to maintain a functioning vehicle.

Metaphors aside, feel free to address my rebuttal:


The reason for using analogies is to create a comparison. In the point you illustrated, you were attempting to demonstrate an inconsistency between rejection of homosexuality, for reasons you allege are "unnatural" and the acceptance of Jesus, God, and the talking serpent, which are, as many atheists allege, "supernatural." This is a false equivalence...

When Christians refer to the "unnatural," they are referring to the perverse; you, clearly, are using "unnatural" to describe the physically abnormal. Once again, you are arguing against straw men.


#53
Speedrace
Speedrace's avatar
Debates: 63
Posts: 6,283
4
9
11
Speedrace's avatar
Speedrace
4
9
11
Attention

This thread has had multiple reported posts. Please refrain from making personal attacks and other punishable offenses.

Topic's author
#54
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@Athias

Metaphors aside, feel free to address my rebuttal: 


Okay then, here we go.

Anyone can drive a car; it takes discipline to maintain a functioning vehicle. 

When said car frequently breaks down, it is.
Let's examine both rebuttals, shall we?

Here we can see two classic examples of introducing a strawman.

It would be an absolute timewaster and an undisciplined twit (who can't earn enough money or discipline himself to schedule regular servicing) who would maintain his own car. And for that matter, who owns a car that frequently breaks down.

In any case, if one's car were to break down, one would call for roadside assistance and catch an Uber.

So, you are completely wrong on every score there.
#55
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Salixes

Metaphors aside, feel free to address my rebuttal: 


Okay then, here we go.

Anyone can drive a car; it takes discipline to maintain a functioning vehicle. 

When said car frequently breaks down, it is.
Let's examine both rebuttals, shall we?

Here we can see two classic examples of introducing a strawman.

It would be an absolute timewaster and an undisciplined twit (who can't earn enough money or discipline himself to schedule regular servicing) who would maintain his own car. And for that matter, who owns a car that frequently breaks down.

In any case, if one's car were to break down, one would call for roadside assistance and catch an Uber.

So, you are completely wrong on every score there.

Enjoy the rest of your day, sir.
Topic's author
#56
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@Athias
Enjoy the rest of your day, sir.

Oh, yeah thanks I will.

It started well already. I got into a really interesting discussion with my Uber driver this morning.

He was talking about the previous ride he gave to a mechanic. He said it was the most useless conversation he ever had. All the passenger would talk about was mechanics and nothing else.
Huh, wouldn't you know it eh?
#57
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Salixes
All the passenger would talk about was mechanics and nothing else.
Sort of like you and your droning, uni-topic, "God bad" spam threads.

Huh, wouldn't you know it eh?
Yeah, we would.