Homosexuality
pea...@geocities.com
You have some nerve to come in here and start preaching your good news
around to a bunch of people who do not give a shit about what you are
talking about, but since you did I might as well says what I think,
I am 16 yearsold male and GAY thats right i said it i am GAY and proud
of it. Not to mention me being gay i am also a devoted christian and
proud of that too. I feel NO shame in being gay, and I think it is
preposterious that you, being a christian, eould say such a rude and
inconsiderate person. It is not me who will be roting in hell my good
brother, but you. You will be the one spending the rest of eternity in
hell for YOUR actions.
As for MY rights that frankly has nothing to do with it. I truly
in my heart know that i am living my life the way God wants me to. For
you to come in here and start talking about Gods Will and how gay people
break. Then say you do not know what Gods Will is, is obserd you, being a
christian should know what Gods Will is. I will tel you just a little
about what I believe. I believe in everything that is neccesary for my
salvation or eternal life(also known as a dogma)You my brother are
speeking of a doctrine and if you recall from your bible study classes
belief in doctrines are not necasary for eternal life with God the
fater. God gives us the gift of unconditional love. I use that gift to
it fullest and plan to continue. I urge you and everyone else to do the
same. I also urge you and everyone else to respond I realize my opinion
is not the only one, but mine is just as important as everyone elses.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to my opinion.
>I disagree. To me, the question has absolutely nothing to do with what
>you precieve your rights should be. For me the issue is living my life
>the way God intended me to live. The way that I was designed to live, and
>in obedience to his will. Unfortunately it is not always possible for me
>to know Gods will. This greatly grieves me, but I can donothing more
>then try to keep his commands. In my weakness I can't even rely on
>revelation. God knows that Satan is more then happy to provide me with
>any revelation that my itching ears want to hear. So, in his grace he
>provided me a means of reconciliation, for the times that I fall short of
>is desires for my life. Jesus Christ.
> the issue of homosexuality is one of repentence for a sinful act. Not
>all homosexuals are proud of their acts, many feel deep shame, and to
>these I say keep tring, do not give up, do not give in to the shameful
>desires. And continue in repentence and fasting, to reverantly submit
>yourself to Gods word. To the ones that are not repentent, who do not
>admit that their acts are a sin, to these I have nothing to say, unless
>they claim to be christian. In which case I turn them over to satan in
>the hope that the evil, perverse, dispicable, blasphemeous, selfserving,
>totally evil desires may be purged from them. So that they may see that
>they are in bondage to Satan, submiting themselves to the desires of the
>evil one. And that they will recognize their actions for what they truly
>are, Godless, and will turn from them to REPENTENCE.
joyce murray alim
don't you realize that some christians make this stuff up as they go
along. If homosexuality is the greatest "sin" then why does the bible not
identify it as the greatest sin. The bible gives only one sin that is
unforgiven and that is blasphemy (whatever that is). Organized religion
is a tool and some of the proponents are also tools.
On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 h...@hotmail.com wrote:
> pea...@geocities.com wrote:
>
> > As for MY rights that frankly has nothing to do with it. I truly
> >in my heart know that i am living my life the way God wants me to. For
> >you to come in here and start talking about Gods Will and how gay people
> >break. Then say you do not know what Gods Will is, is obserd you, being a
> >christian should know what Gods Will is. I will tel you just a little
> >about what I believe. I believe in everything that is neccesary for my
> >salvation or eternal life(also known as a dogma)You my brother are
> >speeking of a doctrine and if you recall from your bible study classes
> >belief in doctrines are not necasary for eternal life with God the
> >fater. God gives us the gift of unconditional love. I use that gift to
> >it fullest and plan to continue. I urge you and everyone else to do the
>
> You are correct in your statement that God's love is unconditional.
> The point where you are misdirected is equating unconditional love
> with unconditional approval. God can love you without approving of
> your actions. Frankly, there is no scripture (yet written) wherein
> God has approved or sanctioned the homosexual lifestyle. If you claim
> to be a Christain, then you are violating its principles by practicing
> homosexual acts. What you believe has no weight or value in
> relationship with what God believes. Being religious means agreeing
> with His opinion and abiding by it.
>
>
>
>
h...@hotmail.com
Todd K. Pedlar
joyce murray alim wrote:
>
> don't you realize that some christians make this stuff up as they go
> along. If homosexuality is the greatest "sin" then why does the bible not
> identify it as the greatest sin. The bible gives only one sin that is
> unforgiven and that is blasphemy (whatever that is). Organized religion
> is a tool and some of the proponents are also tools.
Nobody's saying it is the greatest sin. It's just one sin like
all the others, and one continues in it without repentance, they
cannot receive eternal life.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd K. Pedlar - Northwestern University - FNAL E835
Nuclear & Particle Physics Group
------------------------------------------------------------------
Phone: (847) 491-8630 (708) 840-8048 Fax: (847) 491-8627
------------------------------------------------------------------
WWW: http://numep1.phys.nwu.edu/tkp.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Bostick
In article <330333...@numep0.phys.nwu.edu>,
"Todd K. Pedlar" <to...@numep0.phys.nwu.edu> wrote:
> Nobody's saying it is the greatest sin. It's just one sin like
> all the others, and one continues in it without repentance, they
> cannot receive eternal life.
Homosexuality isn't a sin; it's an "abomination" ("toevah"), just like
eating shellfish. Have you prayed to God for forgiveness for having
had that shrimp salad at lunch last Friday? You needn't, actually,
because non-Jewish Christians were relieved of the burden of adhering
to Mosaic law by the Council of Jerusalem (see Acts 15).
(n.b.: What Paul was railing about in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy
1:10 was not homosexuality *per se* but a particular variant of male
prostitution -- one where the client pays the prostitute to take the
'active' role, i.e. the prostitute tops the client. The other apparent
admonition. In Romans 1:26-27 it is clear that homosexuality is not
a sin, but God's *punishment* for the sin of idolatry.)
Christian intolerance for homosexuality does not originate in scripture;
it did not come to the fore in any serious way until the thirteenth
century.
--
Alan Bostick | My conclusion is that this is most likely an
| exceptionally well executed fake. It remains the
mailto:abos...@netcom.com | most authentic alien image that I have ever seen.
news:alt.grelb | Whitley Strieber
http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick
Jenner
On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 09:32:10 -0600, "Todd K. Pedlar"
<to...@numep0.phys.nwu.edu> wrote:
: Nobody's saying it is the greatest sin. It's just one sin like
: all the others, and one continues in it without repentance, they
: cannot receive eternal life.
Your god is not my god. Your religion is not my religion. Your
beliefs are not my beliefs. Your sin is not my sin.
***
To reply by e-mail, remove the spam fodder (the **)
from my e-mail address.
http://shell.idt.net/~jenner29
***
Mr. San Diego
Simply stated: Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God as is
so stated in the Bible. You have a choice, deny youself of these sexual
perversions or lose the gift of eternal life. God's anger over such
disobedience will result in your eternal destruction. Who do you
choose to serve, your lusts or God?
Mr. San Diego
joyce murray alim wrote:
>
> don't you realize that some christians make this stuff up as they go
> along. If homosexuality is the greatest "sin" then why does the bible not
> identify it as the greatest sin. The bible gives only one sin that is
> unforgiven and that is blasphemy (whatever that is). Organized religion
> is a tool and some of the proponents are also tools.
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
You're obviously completely ignorant concerning Christian topics so I'll
inform you what the Bible does say: Homosexuality is an abomination in
the eyes of God. Those and other immoral people will be given over to
their sins and their names removed from the book of life. When the wrath
of God soon is manifest upon the earth, will you be sorry that you chose
to worship your lusts instead of God?
Jenner
On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 12:04:28 -0800, another ignorant Christian, "Mr.
San Diego" <ago...@rohan.sdsu.edu> wrote:
: Simply stated: Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God as is
: so stated in the Bible. You have a choice, deny youself of these sexual
: perversions or lose the gift of eternal life. God's anger over such
: disobedience will result in your eternal destruction. Who do you
: choose to serve, your lusts or God?
Simply stated: your god, your bible, and your rules aren't mine, no
matter how much you wish that to be so.
Douglas
pea...@geocities.com wrote in article
<5dtgkq$dsv$4...@scoop.suba.com>...
> As for MY rights that frankly has nothing to do with it. I truly
> in my heart know that i am living my life the way God wants me to.
For
> you to come in here and start talking about Gods Will and how gay
people
> break. Then say you do not know what Gods Will is, is obserd you,
being a
> christian should know what Gods Will is. I will tel you just a
little
> about what I believe. I believe in everything that is neccesary for
my
> salvation or eternal life(also known as a dogma)You my brother are
> speeking of a doctrine and if you recall from your bible study
classes
> belief in doctrines are not necasary for eternal life with God the
> fater. God gives us the gift of unconditional love. I use that
gift to
> it fullest and plan to continue. I urge you and everyone else to do
the
> same. I also urge you and everyone else to respond I realize my
opinion
> is not the only one, but mine is just as important as everyone
elses.
> Thank you for taking the time to listen to my opinion.
The sin is not being a homosexual, but the lusts that accompany it.
I know you cannot change what you are anymore than I can become gay,
but you can fight your desires in the same way that I should reject
my lusts.
If a gay man sleeps with other men he commits the same crime as a man
who sleeps with many women. You cannot serve two masters your lusts
and
your God. To achieve salvation you must believe in Jesus, but in
believing him
you must follow his teachings. It is hard for a rich man to achieve
heaven
because he must cast aside his riches, which bring him great
pleasure. Harder
still is it for a gay man to give up his desires. Yours is the hard
lot, and greater
is your reward.
Doug
Jenner
On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 12:10:24 -0800, "Mr. San Diego"
<ago...@rohan.sdsu.edu> wrote:
: You're obviously completely ignorant concerning Christian topics so I'll
: inform you what the Bible does say: Homosexuality is an abomination in
: the eyes of God.
I don't give a damn what you think your bible says.
:Those and other immoral people will be given over to
: their sins and their names removed from the book of life. When the wrath
: of God soon is manifest upon the earth, will you be sorry that you chose
: to worship your lusts instead of God?
Wow. Living in fear of what will happen to you *after* you die.
What a way to live.
Mortes
Jenner <**jenn...@mail.idt.net**> wrote in article
<3303a0c0...@news.idt.net>...
> On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 12:10:24 -0800, "Mr. San Diego"
> <ago...@rohan.sdsu.edu> wrote:
>
>
> : You're obviously completely ignorant concerning Christian topics so
I'll
> : inform you what the Bible does say: Homosexuality is an abomination in
> : the eyes of God.
>
> I don't give a damn what you think your bible says.
>
> :Those and other immoral people will be given over to
> : their sins and their names removed from the book of life. When the
wrath
> : of God soon is manifest upon the earth, will you be sorry that you
chose
> : to worship your lusts instead of God?
>
> Wow. Living in fear of what will happen to you *after* you die.
>
> What a way to live.
>
>
It is undeniable that homosexuality is a sin against society, God, and
nature. Homosexuality is a perversion, and certainly not one that is
sanctioned by God, and while I believe society should avoid placing limits
on any personal choices that will not damage it, it should not condone
homosexuality either. While it is a sin, it is one that can be forgiven,
and will be forgiven as often as someone is willing to come forward and ask
for forgiveness. It is a crime, but Christians should not attack people
for their crimes, we should try to help them, especially in situations such
as this where it is no harm to us and we know God will forgive it and do so
instantly.
Peh H. Ng
In article <330375...@rohan.sdsu.edu> "Mr. San Diego" <ago...@rohan.sdsu.edu> writes:
>Joyce,
>
>You're obviously completely ignorant concerning Christian topics so I'll
>inform you what the Bible does say: Homosexuality is an abomination in
>the eyes of God. Those and other immoral people will be given over to
>their sins and their names removed from the book of life. When the wrath
>of God soon is manifest upon the earth, will you be sorry that you chose
>to worship your lusts instead of God?
Oh yeah, why don't we continue on with the text from Leviticus
where you get this.
Are you folks ready?
You will be going to hell if
1.Eat fruit from a tree less than five years old (Lev. 19:23).
2.Cross-breed your livestock (Lev. 19:19).
3.Grow two different plants in your garden (Lev. 19:19).
4.Wear clothes made from a mixed-blend fabric (Lev. 19:19).
5.Read your horoscope (Lev. 19:26).
6.Consult a psychic (Lev. 19:31).
7.Cut your hair (Lev. 19:27).
8.Trim your beard (Lev. 19:27).
9.Have a tattoo (Lev. 19:28).
10.Plant your crops for more than seven years without allowing a “rest” or “jubilee” period (Lev. 25:4 and Ex.
23:10-13).
And the list goes on.
Wow, looks like we are all going to hell, aren't we?
Points to ponder.
Is "abomination" referring to the holiness codes for teh then jewish
priests?
So, we just choose whichever phrase we want , and use it?
How convenient!
Peh...
Peh H. Ng
In article <01bc19fd$661984e0$571b...@ADB134.rh.psu.edu> "Douglas" <adb...@psu.edu> writes:
>
> The sin is not being a homosexual, but the lusts that accompany it.
>I know you cannot change what you are anymore than I can become gay,
>but you can fight your desires in the same way that I should reject
>my lusts.
>If a gay man sleeps with other men he commits the same crime as a man
>who sleeps with many women. You cannot serve two masters your lusts
>and
>your God. To achieve salvation you must believe in Jesus, but in
>believing him
>you must follow his teachings. It is hard for a rich man to achieve
>heaven
>because he must cast aside his riches, which bring him great
>pleasure. Harder
>still is it for a gay man to give up his desires. Yours is the hard
>lot, and greater
>is your reward.
>
>Doug
Doug,
Did you know that one can be in a monogamous homosexual relationship
that is NOT lustful, but filled with mutual love?
Just like a heterosexual couple can be in a lustful or NON-lustful
relationship.
Just my 2-cents; I know a lot of gay couples who have been celebrating
"annivaresaries of togetherness" NOT because of opinions like
yours BUT despite them.
Peh...
Alan Bostick
In article <330375...@rohan.sdsu.edu>,
"Mr. San Diego" <ago...@rohan.sdsu.edu> wrote:
> You're obviously completely ignorant concerning Christian topics so I'll
> inform you what the Bible does say: Homosexuality is an abomination in
> the eyes of God. Those and other immoral people will be given over to
> their sins and their names removed from the book of life. When the wrath
> of God soon is manifest upon the earth, will you be sorry that you chose
> to worship your lusts instead of God?
Homosexuality is labeled "abomination" ("toevah") in Leviticus 18:22 and
20:13. In Levitican terms, an "abomination" is something that is ritually
unclean *for Jews*; Jews' avoidance of abominations like homosexuality
or eating pork are part of what set them apart from the goyim as God' Chosen
People.
If you hold that the Mosaic instruction against homosexuality is binding
on Christians, then you ought for consistency's sake hold the entire
corpus of the Torah as binding on Christians. Do you light fires on
Saturdays? Keep Kosher? Feast during Pesach and fast during Yom Kippur?
In point of fact, it is explicit Christian doctrine that, with certain
exceptions, Mosaic law is *not* binding on non-Jewish Christians. Go
back to your Bible and read the account of the Council of Jerusalem in
Acts 15. Homosexuality is *not* one of those exceptions.
You can cite chapter and verse against homosexuality to your heart's
content -- the Devil can quote scripture, after all -- but I can
guarantee you that either your citation will be based on a
misunderstanding or mistranslation of the text, or that it would be
based on the Levitical restrictions that hold no weight for Christians.
Peh H. Ng
In article <5du4q5$p...@camel0.mindspring.com> h...@hotmail.com writes:
>
>Frankly, there is no scripture (yet written) wherein
>God has approved or sanctioned the homosexual lifestyle. If you claim
So? Does this imply that homosexuality is a sin?
Those verses in Genesis, Leviticus, Romans, and Corinthian do NOT
say anything about homosexuality nor sexual orientation.
There is more to homosexuality than just a couple of people
boinking to oblivion.
I do not mind if people have their own little personal opinions
about some issues, but I draw the line when people start
using the Bible or Christianity to justify their little
ignorance or stereotypes.
Maybe you can use organized religion; I would care less because
organized religion is NOT really Christianity, is it?
>to be a Christain, then you are violating its principles by practicing
>homosexual acts. What you believe has no weight or value in
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
See what I mean? You do NOT even know what "homosexuality" nor "sexual
oreintation" is; it is synonymous to people having homosexual acts? I
think not.
In fact, did you know that heterosexuals CAN and DO perform
homosexual acts?
And if a homosexual person (forces himself to get married) and boinks
a person of the opposite sex (ie spouse), does that make it right?
>relationship with what God believes. Being religious means agreeing
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>with His opinion and abiding by it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You should probably add that " with what you interpret as His opinion".
Frankly, I would rather be a Christian and walk the walk of Christ,
meaning have the strength to stand up against people who exploit
the Bible to hurt others. This I would rather do than, yes, be religious.
That's all for now.
Peh...
YouKnowMe
h...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> pea...@geocities.com wrote:
>
> > As for MY rights that frankly has nothing to do with it. I truly
> >in my heart know that i am living my life the way God wants me to. For
> >you to come in here and start talking about Gods Will and how gay people
> >break. Then say you do not know what Gods Will is, is obserd you, being a
> >christian should know what Gods Will is. I will tel you just a little
> >about what I believe. I believe in everything that is neccesary for my
> >salvation or eternal life(also known as a dogma)You my brother are
> >speeking of a doctrine and if you recall from your bible study classes
> >belief in doctrines are not necasary for eternal life with God the
> >fater. God gives us the gift of unconditional love. I use that gift to
> >it fullest and plan to continue. I urge you and everyone else to do the
>
> The point where you are misdirected is equating unconditional love
> with unconditional approval. God can love you without approving of
> God has approved or sanctioned the homosexual lifestyle. If you claim
> homosexual acts. What you believe has no weight or value in
First of all, Lesbians are NEVER mentioned in the bible. Does that mean
they are the chosen ones?
Secondly, being religious does not mean what you said "Being religious
means agreeing with His opinion and abiding by it." It means that you
faithful to a belief, whether that belief is killing those you disagree
with or just brushing your teeth everyday.
You say that unconditional love does not mean unconditional approval but
you show me _ONE_ human being that can seperate the 2.
Dave
Douglas wrote:
>
> The sin is not being a homosexual, but the lusts that accompany it.
Well, actually, ACTING on that lust, but that's just me being nit picky.
> I know you cannot change what you are anymore than I can become gay,
> but you can fight your desires in the same way that I should reject
> my lusts.
Why can this person not change what they are? They chose to act on
their lust, just as you or I do. That's what salvation's all about is it
not? Bringing about inner change.
> If a gay man sleeps with other men he commits the same crime as a man
> who sleeps with many women.
Yeah. But sex with another person of the same sex, though no different
than unwed male and female, is sin regardless.
> your God. To achieve salvation you must believe in Jesus, but in
> believing him
> you must follow his teachings. It is hard for a rich man to achieve
> heaven
> because he must cast aside his riches, which bring him great
> pleasure. Harder
> still is it for a gay man to give up his desires. Yours is the hard
> lot, and greater
> is your reward.
But Doug, are you saying that it is o.k. to be gay/lesbian in, like, a
marriage/commitment relationship? Or are you saying that it is a hard
thing to give up for Christ, and great is the reward for turning your
back on a sinful life?
I'm a little unclear on your stand.
Dave
Todd K. Pedlar
Jenner wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 09:32:10 -0600, "Todd K. Pedlar"
> <to...@numep0.phys.nwu.edu> wrote:
>
> : Nobody's saying it is the greatest sin. It's just one sin like
> : all the others, and one continues in it without repentance, they
> : cannot receive eternal life.
>
> Your god is not my god. Your religion is not my religion. Your
> beliefs are not my beliefs. Your sin is not my sin.
>
Take it as you will - you have every right to reject it. And you'll
be rewarded for it.
Jenner
On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 08:51:29 -0600, "Todd K. Pedlar"
<to...@numep0.phys.nwu.edu> wrote:
Yes I will. Save your threats for somene who is scared by them.
Jenner
On 14 Feb 97 01:00:46 GMT, "Mortes" <Wis...@enid.com> wrote:
: It is undeniable that homosexuality is a sin against society, God, and
: nature.
I just denied it. So much for your logic.
: Homosexuality is a perversion, and certainly not one that is
: sanctioned by God, and while I believe society should avoid placing limits
: on any personal choices that will not damage it, it should not condone
: homosexuality either.
How nice it must be to have two faces.
:While it is a sin, it is one that can be forgiven,
:
Like I said....
: and will be forgiven as often as someone is willing to come forward and ask
: for forgiveness.
I don't bend my knee for you or your god.
: It is a crime, but Christians should not attack people
: for their crimes, we should try to help them, especially in situations such
: as this where it is no harm to us and we know God will forgive it and do so
: instantly.
Stop looking down your nose at others. You'll miss the ones who are
standing up *in front* of you.
Darklady
Mortes <Wis...@enid.com> wrote in article
> It is undeniable that homosexuality is a sin against society, God, and
> nature.
Is it now? Then brace yourself for the following statement:
Homosexuality is not a "sin" against society, God, or nature. Your
personal god (which appears to be a tiny little vindictive fuck with far
too much time on its hands and a mind obsessed with controlling others'
behavior) may well have a hard-on against gay people but even Christians
argue as to the meaning of Leviticus.
If you take your stance on homosexuality from Leviticus, I assume you
also follow ALL of the other rules it sets forth: no eating of seafood, no
wearing of mixed fiber clothing, no trimming of beards, etc.
Secondy, society benefits from a variety of lifestyles. People group
in many different types of "societies" and there are some which include
homosexuals in that structure while others don't differentiate and others
punish their homosexual members. You happen to think your book of 3000
year old lore is the final word on how the world should behave, mistaking
its application only to a small area of the world and to the Jews who
worshipped Jehovah. Even then, not all Jews believe that homosexuality is
a sin.
Finally, homosexual and bisexual behavior exists throughout nature.
All you have to do is read something other than the Bible and you'll find
that a vast panorama of behaviors occur naturally in the world of man and
animal. Did you know that giraffes are bisexual, for instance?
It is a crime, but Christians should not attack people
> for their crimes, we should try to help them, especially in situations
such
> as this where it is no harm to us and we know God will forgive it and do
so
> instantly.
It's not a crime in the United States or many other enlightened
nations. Perhaps you are referring to a crime on a more metaphysical
plane?
--- Darklady
--
http://www.spiritone.com/~darklady (optimized for IE 3.0)
http://www.bcmark.com/exotic.html (my new book!)
http://www.xmag.com (the magazine I edit)
Douglas
Peh H. Ng <pe...@cds.mrs.umn.edu> wrote in article
<5e0r1c$j...@alpha.mrs.umn.edu>...
>
> Doug,
>
> Did you know that one can be in a monogamous homosexual relationship
> that is NOT lustful, but filled with mutual love?
> Just like a heterosexual couple can be in a lustful or NON-lustful
> relationship.
>
> Just my 2-cents; I know a lot of gay couples who have been celebrating
> "annivaresaries of togetherness" NOT because of opinions like
> yours BUT despite them.
>
> Peh...
Peh,
It was not my intention to say that all homosexuals are inherently
lustful or that they can't have relationships with true "mutual love". I
was
just trying to place the sin of homosexuality not on the state of being gay
but on the lusts which MAY accompany it. The only difference between
straight
and gay being the need or excuse of child bearing.
That being said I call into question the nobility of any love which is
influenced by a genetic dispostion towards one sex or the other. To me
love
in its highest sense is not influenced by gender, nor is it given to a
person,
but is reserved for those things eternal(God, goodness, evil, truth etc.)
Doug
mar...@franccom.fr
Mr. San Diego wrote:
>
> h...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > pea...@geocities.com wrote:
> >
> > > As for MY rights that frankly has nothing to do with it. I truly
> > >in my heart know that i am living my life the way God wants me to. For
> > >you to come in here and start talking about Gods Will and how gay people
> > >break. Then say you do not know what Gods Will is, is obserd you, being a
> > >christian should know what Gods Will is. I will tel you just a little
> > >about what I believe. I believe in everything that is neccesary for my
> > >salvation or eternal life(also known as a dogma)You my brother are
> > >speeking of a doctrine and if you recall from your bible study classes
> > >belief in doctrines are not necasary for eternal life with God the
> > >fater. God gives us the gift of unconditional love. I use that gift to
> > >it fullest and plan to continue. I urge you and everyone else to do the
> >
> > You are correct in your statement that God's love is unconditional.
> > The point where you are misdirected is equating unconditional love
> > with unconditional approval. God can love you without approving of
> > your actions. Frankly, there is no scripture (yet written) wherein
> > God has approved or sanctioned the homosexual lifestyle. If you claim
> > to be a Christain, then you are violating its principles by practicing
> > homosexual acts. What you believe has no weight or value in
> > relationship with what God believes. Being religious means agreeing
> > with His opinion and abiding by it.
>
> so stated in the Bible. You have a choice, deny youself of these sexual
> perversions or lose the gift of eternal life. God's anger over such
> disobedience will result in your eternal destruction. Who do you
> choose to serve, your lusts or God?
You need to get out and meet some gay people, go to university to do
some study, and shut up until further notice.
mar...@franccom.fr
joyce murray alim wrote:
>
> don't you realize that some christians make this stuff up as they go
> along. If homosexuality is the greatest "sin" then why does the bible not
> identify it as the greatest sin. The bible gives only one sin that is
> unforgiven and that is blasphemy (whatever that is). Organized religion
> is a tool and some of the proponents are also tools.
>
>
> > pea...@geocities.com wrote:
> >
> > > As for MY rights that frankly has nothing to do with it. I truly
> > >in my heart know that i am living my life the way God wants me to. For
> > >you to come in here and start talking about Gods Will and how gay people
> > >break. Then say you do not know what Gods Will is, is obserd you, being a
> > >christian should know what Gods Will is. I will tel you just a little
> > >about what I believe. I believe in everything that is neccesary for my
> > >salvation or eternal life(also known as a dogma)You my brother are
> > >speeking of a doctrine and if you recall from your bible study classes
> > >belief in doctrines are not necasary for eternal life with God the
> > >fater. God gives us the gift of unconditional love. I use that gift to
> > >it fullest and plan to continue. I urge you and everyone else to do the
> >
> > You are correct in your statement that God's love is unconditional.
> > The point where you are misdirected is equating unconditional love
> > with unconditional approval. God can love you without approving of
> > your actions. Frankly, there is no scripture (yet written) wherein
> > God has approved or sanctioned the homosexual lifestyle. If you claim
> > to be a Christain, then you are violating its principles by practicing
> > homosexual acts. What you believe has no weight or value in
> > relationship with what God believes. Being religious means agreeing
> > with His opinion and abiding by it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
It's no wonder the Romans threw you Christians to the lions. Your
arrogance and blind obedience to that decrepit book called the bible
would force my hand to throw you into the ring at the forum.
If you religious people don't want to lie with someone of the same sex,
then don't do it. But don't tell a homosexual that his feelings and
desires are wrong or sinful. They are perfectly normal and healthy for
one who is homosexual. It is a state of being, an orientation; not some
whim that people dream up. Listen to people's experience,their lives
and close that ridiculous bible. I can't imagine why thinking human
beings in the twentieth century would follow a book written by a bunch
of itinerant Jews. Get real!
martin
jen kilmer
On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 12:10:24 -0800, "Mr. San Diego"
<ago...@rohan.sdsu.edu> wrote:
: You're obviously completely ignorant concerning Christian topics so I'll
: the eyes of God.
You haven't done the reading on this, have you? I'd
suggest starting with John Boswell's _Christianity,
Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality_. If you're
scared of big books with footnotes that were written
by PhDs, try Mel White's _Stranger At The Gate_.
If you're scared of any book but your favorite translation
of The Bible, take a look at:
http://gpu.srv.ualberta.ca/~cbidwell/UFMCC/uf-home.htm
Right now, you sound like an ignorant ass. Come
back when you're ready to talk with grown-ups.
(followups set)
--
jen kilmer - http://www.aa.net/~jenk - jenk(@aa.net)
"You've gone a million miles. How far'd you get?"
- Bruce Springsteen
Fricke
On 14 Feb 1997, Mortes wrote:
> It is undeniable that homosexuality is a sin against society, God, and
> nature.
Is that so? I deny it, and I am decidedly heterosexual. What (other than
old Biblical quotes) causes you to think this way?
> and while I believe society should avoid placing limits on any personal
> choices that will not damage it, it should not condone homosexuality
> either.
Well, I'm glad that you don't like placing restrictions on personal
decisions, but what makes you think that homosexuality is a decision? I'm
assuming that you are heterosexual, now I'm sure that you felt a strong
attraction to someone from the opposite sex. I have, too. We can't
necessarily control who we are attracted to even amongst members of the
sex we are attracted to, we just feel that way about some people. A
homosexual is someone who is only attracted to someone of their own sex.
According to your "homosexuality is a choice" theory, such people choose
to ignore their attraction to members of the opposite sex completely (or
close to completely) and instead go for members of their own sex. I don't
know about you, but not only could I never give up my attraction to
members of the opposite sex, I have never felt any sexual attraction to
any member of my own sex.
Besides, why would anyone want to make a choice that is so looked down
upon in our society?
> It is a crime, but Christians should not attack people
> for their crimes,
Homosexuality is not a crime, at least not in most places.
The Fricke
fri...@wpi.edu
M...@francom.fr
> > <ago...@rohan.sdsu.edu> wrote:
> >
> >
> > : You're obviously completely ignorant concerning Christian topics so
> I'll
> > : inform you what the Bible does say: Homosexuality is an abomination in
> > : the eyes of God.
> >
> >
> > : their sins and their names removed from the book of life. When the
> wrath
> > : of God soon is manifest upon the earth, will you be sorry that you
> chose
> > : to worship your lusts instead of God?
> >
> >
> > What a way to live.
> >
> >
> sanctioned by God, and while I believe society should avoid placing limits
> on any personal choices that will not damage it, it should not condone
> and will be forgiven as often as someone is willing to come forward and ask
> for their crimes, we should try to help them, especially in situations such
> as this where it is no harm to us and we know God will forgive it and do so
> instantly.
It is no crime in Canada. Most provinces have full protection for gays
in their human rights codes. My company has same-sex benefits and the
largest protestant denomination, the United Church of Canada, will bless
same-sex unions.
In what repressive country do you live?
Jeanne
jlk...@cyberspace.org
Peh H. Ng wrote:
>
> In article <01bc1abc$4cd17320$571b...@ADB134.rh.psu.edu> "Douglas" <adb...@psu.edu> writes:
> >
> >Peh H. Ng <pe...@cds.mrs.umn.edu> wrote in article
> ><5e0r1c$j...@alpha.mrs.umn.edu>...
> >
> >>
> >> Doug,
> >>
> >> Did you know that one can be in a monogamous homosexual relationship
> >> that is NOT lustful, but filled with mutual love?
> >> Just like a heterosexual couple can be in a lustful or NON-lustful
> >> relationship.
> >>
> >> Just my 2-cents; I know a lot of gay couples who have been celebrating
> >> "annivaresaries of togetherness" NOT because of opinions like
> >> yours BUT despite them.
> >>
> >> Peh...
> >
> > Peh,
> >
> > It was not my intention to say that all homosexuals are inherently
> >lustful or that they can't have relationships with true "mutual love". I
> >was
> >just trying to place the sin of homosexuality not on the state of being gay
> >but on the lusts which MAY accompany it.
> > The only difference between straight
> >and gay being the need or excuse of child bearing.
>
> Doug,
>
> Maybe I misunderstood your point, but there are heterosexual couples
> who need child bearing and there are those who DO NOT want any child
> bearing - both of which groups do want to and have sex.
> And, there are also homosexual couples who do NOT want to bear child,
> and there are those who do want to have children (and they do and
> they can, you know;-)?
> So, what's the difference?
>
> > That being said I call into question the nobility of any love which is
> >influenced by a genetic dispostion towards one sex or the other. To me
> >love
> >in its highest sense is not influenced by gender, nor is it given to a
> >person,
> >but is reserved for those things eternal(God, goodness, evil, truth etc.)
>
> But while we are put on this world created by the gracious triune GOD, don't
> you think we should try our best to love one another (that includes
> having the special one life partner, among others), regardless of
> our gender or whatever attributes you see in another fellow human?
>
> Peh..
>
> >
> >Doug
> >
Most Xtians think its their duty to persecute the sinner be he a Jew, a
Muslim, a Homo, an Eccentric, etc. What's worse is they think this is
their divine right! Thank fuck that Xtianity is fading into the
background. They are against people's basic human rights.
Craig Macbride
I hate to follow up to something so severely cross-posted, but, oh well ...
"Douglas" <adb...@psu.edu> writes:
> The sin is not being a homosexual, but the lusts that accompany it.
Lust is a sin. Hmmm. <fundy alert!> <fundy alert!>
[ ... awful line breaks on the original fixed up below to make it
more readble ... I guess he can't type well with one hand. ]
>I know you cannot change what you are anymore than I can become gay,
>but you can fight your desires in the same way that I should reject
>my lusts.
>If a gay man sleeps with other men he commits the same crime as a man
>who sleeps with many women. You cannot serve two masters your lusts
>and your God. To achieve salvation you must believe in Jesus, but in
>believing him you must follow his teachings.
>It is hard for a rich man to achieve heaven because he must cast aside
>his riches, which bring him great pleasure. Harder still is it for a
>gay man to give up his desires. Yours is the hard lot, and greater
>is your reward.
You know, there are lots of good things about the USA. Every so often,
people like Douglas remind me that they are the worst thing.
--
Craig Macbride <cr...@rmit.edu.au> URL: http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~craigm
"Even koalas are getting more than I am and they sleep all day."
- Terry Frost
Peh H. Ng
wf...@enter.net
On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 04:20:39 GMT, h...@hotmail.com wrote:
Frankly, there is no scripture (yet written) wherein
>God has approved or sanctioned the homosexual lifestyle.
there is, however, scriptural evidence that the xtian god likes
slavery (eph 6:5ff). sounds to me like your god has a morality problem
of his own. cares more for penises than people
h...@hotmail.com
wf...@enter.net wrote:
>there is, however, scriptural evidence that the xtian god likes
>slavery (eph 6:5ff). sounds to me like your god has a morality problem
>of his own. cares more for penises than people
Did you ASSuMe that I was a xtian? Wrong again! I am not even a
Christian, or of a Bible-based religion. Better luck next flame.
Tim Fung
It is the person that does not care to listen who is the most fated to ill,
no?
Rob Moffett
h...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Simply stated: Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God as is
> so stated in the Bible. You have a choice, deny youself of these sexual
> perversions or lose the gift of eternal life. God's anger over such
> disobedience will result in your eternal destruction.
If we were to be damned for all our sins, then I don't think either one
of us would go to Heaven. A sin is a sin. One sin is NOT worse than
another. They're all wrong, but they are all forgiven if you accept
Christ in your heart. I don't know about you, but I'm a Christian and I
still sin. There's no way around it. But whether or not homosexuality
is a sin (I think so, but doesn't make it true) it WILL NOT result
(necessarily) in eternal damnation. Jesus died for our sins, all of
them.
--
Camp Rockfish Thanks Mr. Lucas!
Environmental education
Summer residential camps NTC...@aol.com
Christian education
Ask for more information JOY!!!
Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, §227,
any and all unsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.
Rob Moffett
Darklady wrote:
> Finally, homosexual and bisexual behavior exists throughout nature.
> All you have to do is read something other than the Bible and you'll find
> that a vast panorama of behaviors occur naturally in the world of man and
> animal. Did you know that giraffes are bisexual, for instance?
I'm interrested in why the argument that homosexuality occurs in animals
is used as support for the homosexual position. Regardless of its
validity, why would humans WANT to behave like animals? Seems to me
like God created humans to be MORE than animals. And as such, we should
do whatever possible to act as their masters, not their imitators.
Before everyone flames me, yes humans have to eat, sleep, excrete, etc,
but you don't see wild animals with indoor plumbing.
wf...@enter.net
>You're obviously completely ignorant concerning Christian topics so I'll
>inform you what the Bible does say: Homosexuality is an abomination in
>the eyes of God.
and slavery is not (eph 6:5ff). your god has a morality problem of his
own. mebbe he's latent
wf...@enter.net
i didnt say you were xtian. better luck next time
wf...@enter.net
wf...@enter.net
On 14 Feb 97 01:00:46 GMT, "Mortes" <Wis...@enid.com> wrote:
>
>>
> It is undeniable that homosexuality is a sin against society, God, and
>nature.
why?
Homosexuality is a perversion, and certainly not one that is
>sanctioned by God
who gives a rats ass what god thinks?
, and while I believe society should avoid placing limits
>on any personal choices that will not damage it, it should not condone
>homosexuality either.
prove that gays damage society. 40% of all unwed teenage moms are
victims of statutory rape. sounds like we straights are the ones
needing control
It is a crime, but Christians should not attack people
>for their crimes, we should try to help them, especially in situations such
>as this where it is no harm to us and we know God will forgive it and do so
>instantly.
>
and your xtian bible accepts slavery (eph 6:5ff) and THAT is a crime!
spare us the hypocrisy please
wf...@enter.net
>Simply stated: Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God as is
>so stated in the Bible.
you xtians used to say the same thing about jews. guess we all know
where that went...people who wore the yellow star wound up next to
people wearing pink triangles. so much for xtian virtue.
Peh H. Ng
In article <3308B7...@bnr.ca> Rob Moffett <rmof...@bnr.ca> writes:
>Darklady wrote:
>
>> Finally, homosexual and bisexual behavior exists throughout nature.
>> All you have to do is read something other than the Bible and you'll find
>> that a vast panorama of behaviors occur naturally in the world of man and
>> animal. Did you know that giraffes are bisexual, for instance?
>
>I'm interrested in why the argument that homosexuality occurs in animals
>is used as support for the homosexual position. Regardless of its
>validity, why would humans WANT to behave like animals? Seems to me
>like God created humans to be MORE than animals. And as such, we should
>do whatever possible to act as their masters, not their imitators.
>Before everyone flames me, yes humans have to eat, sleep, excrete, etc,
>but you don't see wild animals with indoor plumbing.
>
>--
>Camp Rockfish Thanks Mr. Lucas!
Robb,
I think Darklady's point above was in response to a previous poster
that "homosexuality does not exist in the natural world"; her point
being that animals are part of teh natural world, and that some
species boink each other of the same sex.
Did you read the entire message?.
And, I have only one more thing to say.
It does NOT seem to me that God created humans to be more than animals.
I just think that it is darn arrogant of us to even think that
we are created to be MORE THAN animals.
This whole idea of us justifying to be masters of some other species
could have detrimental ramifications.
I am by no means saying that we should all worship animals; just that
we cannot compare nor put a hierarchical scale on ALL creations.
That's all my spill on this.
Thanks for listening.
Peh...
Flor...@citecomm.org
Gee, I forget when the Catholics decided that women really had souls -
the ninth century perhaps. Way to go papists! Now when did they decide
that black people were full human beings? I'll leave this one with the
historians.
Florence
Christopher Michael Cooney
Peh H. Ng (pe...@cds.mrs.umn.edu) wrote:
: > The only difference between straight
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >and gay being the need or excuse of child bearing.
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:
:
: Doug,
:
: Maybe I misunderstood your point, but there are heterosexual couples
: who need child bearing and there are those who DO NOT want any child
: bearing - both of which groups do want to and have sex.
: And, there are also homosexual couples who do NOT want to bear child,
: and there are those who do want to have children (and they do and
: they can, you know;-)?
: So, what's the difference?
:
I believe what he was refering to was the inate ability of a statistically
normal couple to have kids. a man and a woman can. Two men or two women
can't without help. It's not a big difference
Douglas
Craig Macbride <cr...@rmit.edu.au> wrote in article
<5e6d31$ptf$1...@aggedor.rmit.edu.au>...
> I hate to follow up to something so severely cross-posted, but, oh
well ...
>
> "Douglas" <adb...@psu.edu> writes:
>
> > The sin is not being a homosexual, but the lusts that accompany
it.
>
> Lust is a sin. Hmmm. <fundy alert!> <fundy alert!>
>
You can't tell a book by its cover Craig, and people are far
more complex than books. Im not a fundamentalist because I believe
in evolution. It is my belief that lust is a sin. Why? Because it
corrupts
the soul and turns us away from God. How do I know this? Because
it corrupts me.
> [ ... awful line breaks on the original fixed up below to make it
> more readble ... I guess he can't type well with one hand. ]
>
I can type adequately, however, I have obviously have my
wrap text set at the wrong value or something. Id appreciate any
suggestions you could give me.
> >I know you cannot change what you are anymore than I can become
gay,
> >but you can fight your desires in the same way that I should
reject
> >my lusts.
> >If a gay man sleeps with other men he commits the same crime as a
man
> >who sleeps with many women. You cannot serve two masters your
lusts
> >and your God. To achieve salvation you must believe in Jesus, but
in
> >believing him you must follow his teachings.
> >It is hard for a rich man to achieve heaven because he must cast
aside
> >his riches, which bring him great pleasure. Harder still is it
for a
> >gay man to give up his desires. Yours is the hard lot, and great
> >is your reward.
>
> You know, there are lots of good things about the USA. Every so
often,
> people like Douglas remind me that they are the worst thing.
>
You have taken my message out of context. It was written to
a gay man who stated that he believes he understands what God wants
and knows in his heart that being a homosexual is not sinful. This
message
was written to confirm that being gay is not sinful, but homosexual
lusts
and for that matter desires of all worldly things are.
> --
> Craig Macbride
You don't even know me Craig. Im far from the worst thing although
I may be mistaken in my beliefs.
Doug
jenner
M...@francom.fr wrote:
: It is no crime in Canada. Most provinces have full protection for gays
: in their human rights codes. My company has same-sex benefits and the
: largest protestant denomination, the United Church of Canada, will bless
: same-sex unions.
: In what repressive country do you live?
Could be the United States of Amerika.
-- jenner
Web page peek: http://shell.idt.net/~jenner29
Notice: remove the "**" from each side of my e-mail address to contact me.
h...@hotmail.com
wf...@enter.net wrote:
"sounds to me like YOUR god has a morality problem...."
'Survey Says!..........Eeeeeeennn (negative buzzer sound)"
h...@hotmail.com
wf...@enter.net wrote:
>>wf...@enter.net wrote:
>Ah well, nice try...atheists, however, dont have gods....better get
>your buzzer fixed and try again.
no no no no no....I was merely pointing out the fact that you were
implying that I was an Xtian. got it now?
some atheists can be so UNBELIEVABLE...in more ways than one.
wf...@enter.net
Joe & Mary
- OK you've even gotten me involved in this thread! I alway swore I'd stay away from mixing religion and sex. However after having a few sexual experiences that were revaltaions ( for me ) maybe I am qualified to post, if not flame away!
- A little background. I consider myself a Jesuit trained agnostic who is spending a lot of money to send his kids to catholic schools. Since this thread is cross posted I need to tell you my wife and I are swingers, and worse than that we are open to homosexual contact!!!! Not that we have had that much experience we feel for the most part that any activities that two couples find mutaully pleasurable in private is open for discussion and possibly doable. We do have some very defined limits. No children, animals, toliet games, or anything that causes pain, physically or psycologically.
- To some who have posted this goes against what the feel is revealed to them in their religous teachings, readings, or it seems the word of god to their ears! I know there are so many different interpertations of heartfelt rock solid beliefs that I won't try and change anyones feeling but share ours. Too much of history is filled with suposed loving god fearing people killing more loving god fearing people who the first group felt were incorrect in their interpertation of some part of scripture or belief.
- Therefore these thoughs are for us and only posted here for other to think about or to the extreme provide foder for flames.
- We are christians as well as we know how. We do all we can do to help others, be kind and try to follow the teachings of god as revealed to US. If we find ourselves with a couple that we feel a desire to express our careing in a physical way then FOR us it dosen't matter how that might be expressed as long as all are enjoying it. No one gets worked up if a woman kisses another woman as an expression of careing, but god forbid if the same feeling is expressed by two men! Then we are tought that a man and woman comming together sexually to physically express their love is the greatest form of love to be expressed, untill the various churches and religons get involved, then you need a rutual to sanction it, possibly determining it only correct if the sole desired outcome is procreation. How many right ( don't mean the political pun ) thinking religious people break that one? Two men kissing! The end of the world as we know it! Hell even in the swingers lifestyle that one is still taboo!
- My understanding of why all of these rules came into being had to do with the times. Why do some religions still stick to the rule forbiding the eating of pork? Because of the lack of refergiration and preparation in thoses times ... it killed of the faithfull! Why the ban on same sex unions? It caused there to be less of the faithfull, as growing the band of followers was the only way to insure your brand of thinking flourshed! Think of most any forbiden act and it has historical sound reasoning but to cling to them just because someone who cared for his/her people at the time wrote it down is almost insane.
- I'm not saying or even advocating everyone should go out and have sex with members of the same sex. No what I am saying is that you should try and understand that most all of our religious teachings came from rules formulated by very kind thoughtfull people who were trying there best to look out for the rest of the people who felt as they did, and for the most part the largest part were fairly uneducated so they need to be told this was the word of god just to keep them alive!
- Sure if you disagree with me do the net equalivant of the crusades ..... flame away! Just look back to the begining and see that while I personally have my doubts as to the true wrod of god tought by the church of my parents I don't deiny my childer ther chance to make their own decisions, as somewhere I was tought god lets us make our own decisions and untill we meet he/her we won't know which might of offended her/him if any at all.
- Thank you for reading this! I have been on something of an emotional
soap box today as I have been filled with good feelings from a weekend
of shareing very careing feelings, yes some of them may have seemed wrong
to some people who have a different view of life, but I respect there right
to feel that way do they mine?
--
Yours, well only if we all get along, hehe,
Joe & Mary
For information on swinging and swingers events in the
Midwest visit our site at http://members.tripod.com/~MOSwingers
Malcolm McMahon
On Mon, 17 Feb 1997 14:56:40 -0500, Rob Moffett <rmof...@bnr.ca>
wrote:
>
>I'm interrested in why the argument that homosexuality occurs in animals
>is used as support for the homosexual position. Regardless of its
>validity, why would humans WANT to behave like animals? Seems to me
>like God created humans to be MORE than animals. And as such, we should
>do whatever possible to act as their masters, not their imitators.
>Before everyone flames me, yes humans have to eat, sleep, excrete, etc,
>but you don't see wild animals with indoor plumbing.
>
We are more than animals, but we are still animals. Being human is
something we are _in addition_ to being animals.
In this area, of course, the inference is that if animals do it it's
ridiculous to describe it as unnatural. Also, since it's hard for the
modern mind to believe than non-human animals sin it kind of weakens
the case that it's an innately sinful activity.
---------------------------------+----------------------------------
I was born weird: This terrible | Like Pavlov's dogs we are trained
compulsion to behave normally is | to salivate at the sound of the
the result of childhood trauma. | liberty bell.
---------------------------------+----------------------------------
Malcolm
Douglas
jlk...@cyberspace.org wrote in article <3307BC...@cyberspace.org>...
> Most Xtians think its their duty to persecute the sinner be he a Jew, a
> Muslim, a Homo, an Eccentric, etc. What's worse is they think this is
> their divine right! Thank fuck that Xtianity is fading into the
> background. They are against people's basic human rights.
>
Then most Xtians are not following the teachings of Jesus. Therefore
as you hate those who persecute others on the basis of their nature, you
must love Jesus who spoke against such things, and was persecuted by
those same people. Wherever you find a system of belief you will find
those
who hide behind it to carry out there own desires. The only thing you can
do is to seek the truth, and free yourself from illusion.
Doug
Mark Evans
Rob Moffett (rmof...@bnr.ca) wrote:
: h...@hotmail.com wrote:
:
: > Simply stated: Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God as is
: > perversions or lose the gift of eternal life. God's anger over such
: > disobedience will result in your eternal destruction.
:
: If we were to be damned for all our sins, then I don't think either one
: of us would go to Heaven. A sin is a sin. One sin is NOT worse than
: another. They're all wrong, but they are all forgiven if you accept
: Christ in your heart. I don't know about you, but I'm a Christian and I
: still sin. There's no way around it. But whether or not homosexuality
: is a sin (I think so, but doesn't make it true) it WILL NOT result
: (necessarily) in eternal damnation. Jesus died for our sins, all of
: them.
Also I wonder why there is so much fuss from christians about people's
relationships but one never hears about the same people picketing
clothing shops. The same part of the OT which mentions homosexuality
also mentions about not making a garment out of more than one fabric.
Darklady
Todd K. Pedlar <to...@numep0.phys.nwu.edu> wrote in article
<33047B...@numep0.phys.nwu.edu>...
> Jenner wrote:
> > Your god is not my god. Your religion is not my religion. Your
> > beliefs are not my beliefs. Your sin is not my sin.
> >
> Take it as you will - you have every right to reject it. And you'll
> be rewarded for it.
Ah, veiled threats. Always the sign of quality. You MUST be right to
use an argument based on revenge and the suggestion that you'll enjoy
knowing another is suffering.
--- Darklady
Darklady
> >I'm interrested in why the argument that homosexuality occurs in animals
> >is used as support for the homosexual position. Regardless of its
> >validity, why would humans WANT to behave like animals? Seems to me
> >like God created humans to be MORE than animals. And as such, we should
> >do whatever possible to act as their masters, not their imitators.
>
> I think Darklady's point above was in response to a previous poster
> that "homosexuality does not exist in the natural world"; her point
> being that animals are part of teh natural world, and that some
> species boink each other of the same sex.
You understand my point correctly, Peh.
As to Rob: I'm not ashamed of my animal nature. I am an animal... an
animal with an amazing brain which can remember the past and blend it with
the present, resulting in conjectures and desires for the future. I am not
the "master" of any animals... I can exercise more control over my
environment but that doesn't make me the master of it. Anyone who thinks
humans are the master race (oooo... I like that one) should spend some time
in Tornado Alley or along the eastern coastline or a major fault line.
I am always amazed at the arrogance of religious people. They claim
to be so humble and so meek before their god and they bray about being the
master of animals, etc.
As for how this argument relates to homosexuality, the question was,
indeed, whether it occured in the non-human animal kingdom. It does.
Having proven one argument wrong (the "it ain't natural" argument) you're
trying to muddy the water. Why is it less valid to argue that this form of
mutually consensual sexual activity is not immoral based on its "natural"
or "unnatural" state but it's perfectly valid to you to argue that it's
"wrong" because of a religion that is believed by only a segment of the
human race?
--- Darklady
--
http://www.spiritone.com/~darklady (optimized for IE 3.0)
http://www.bcmark.com/exotic.html (my new book!)
http://www.xmag.com (the magazine I edit)
Rob Moffett
Darklady wrote:
> I can exercise more control over my
> environment but that doesn't make me the master of it.
I never said that humans were masters of the environment, just animals.
> They claim
> to be so humble and so meek before their god and they bray about being the
> master of animals, etc.
Well, we are told to be the master over the animals in the OT. Of
course this power comes with responsibility to those we are to control.
But that's off the subject.
> Why is it less valid to argue that this form of
> mutually consensual sexual activity is not immoral based on its "natural"
> or "unnatural" state but it's perfectly valid to you to argue that it's
> "wrong" because of a religion that is believed by only a segment of the
> human race?
I'm sorry if I failed to make my point clear. I'm not claiming that
your argument that homosexuality occurs in nature is invalid. I was
trying to see if someone would explain why we would WANT to behave like
animals. If you have "an amazing brain which can remember the past and
blend it with the present, resulting in conjectures and desires for the
future," then why use it like primates? Is it "natural" for man to try
to behave like animals or is it "natural" for man to try to
differentiate himself as much as possible from the less intelligent
species of the earth?
BTW: Does anyone know why the monkeys performed homosexual acts? If you
know, please respond by posting.
--
Camp Rockfish Thanks Mr. Lucas!
Darklady
Douglas <adb...@psu.edu> wrote in article
<01bc1d3f$00c22580$571b...@ADB134.rh.psu.edu>...
> It is my belief that lust is a sin. Why? Because it corrupts the soul
and turns us
> away from God. How do I know this? Because it corrupts me.
And your experience = the experience of all humankind? How special
for you. I would never be so vain as too assume that my personal struggles
in any way represent a universal constant. I realize that I often battle
with the same weaknesses, insecurities and dyfunctions as others, but I
also notice that my solutions are not always the same as others find best
for them.
I experience lust and I find that it neither corrupts my soul nor
turns me away from "god." You'll clearly disagree, given that I do not
believe in a conscious deity, but I don't base my decisions upon your
personal desires and neither should you base yours upon mine. What
"corrupts" us is how we deal with our lusts. Do we run from them? Do we
allow them to rule our lives? Do we take a good look at them and strive to
find a balance between the extremes of being rules by them or denying them?
I prefer that latter. I strive to endulge in my lusts responsively and
maturely, denying myself some and allowing myself others in measured doses.
Just because you don't have self-control doesn't mean I should have to
be held back in class.
bjth...@bythebit.org
Christians don't know the mind of God any more than anyone else.
Christians have proved themselves to be dangerous murderers over the
centuries because of that fucking BIBLE. It is shit and ought to be
burned.
Peredur
Rob Moffett wrote:
>
> Darklady wrote:
>
> > Finally, homosexual and bisexual behavior exists throughout nature.
> > All you have to do is read something other than the Bible and you'll find
> > that a vast panorama of behaviors occur naturally in the world of man and
> > animal. Did you know that giraffes are bisexual, for instance?
>
> is used as support for the homosexual position. Regardless of its
> validity, why would humans WANT to behave like animals? Seems to me
> like God created humans to be MORE than animals. And as such, we should
> do whatever possible to act as their masters, not their imitators.
> but you don't see wild animals with indoor plumbing.
>
> Camp Rockfish Thanks Mr. Lucas!
> Environmental education
> Summer residential camps NTC...@aol.com
> Christian education
> Ask for more information JOY!!!
>
> Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, §227,
> any and all unsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address
> is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
> US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.
One could ask the same question of heterosexuals.
Peredur
Douglas
Darklady <dark...@spiritone.com> wrote in article
<01bc1e1b$6aa6d540$266d8bcd@default>...
> Douglas <adb...@psu.edu> wrote in article
> <01bc1d3f$00c22580$571b...@ADB134.rh.psu.edu>...
>
>
> > It is my belief that lust is a sin. Why? Because it corrupts the
soul
> > and turns us away from God. How do I know this? Because it corrupts
me.
>
> And your experience = the experience of all humankind? How special
> for you. I would never be so vain as too assume that my personal
struggles
> in any way represent a universal constant.
Darklady
No, my experiences do not equal the experience of all human kind,
and even if it did we might conclude different things from the same
experience.
It is not vain to assume that my struggles are universal it is either
correct or
incorrect, and even then it might be said that it is correct to the degree
that
it is universal. So you disagree that lust corrupts the soul and turns us
away
from God under the assumption that God exists, fair enough. Would you say
that our lusts benefit our soul and bring us closer to God? No, I hope
you would
not believe that.
> I realize that I often battle
> with the same weaknesses, insecurities and dyfunctions as others, but I
> also notice that my solutions are not always the same as others find best
> for them.
And what are the solutions? Rape, murder, and drugs are all
ways of dealing with these problems, but these are solutions which neither
you or I find acceptable. What does "best" mean? Best for society, best
for the individual, best for God, best for the short term, or the long?
Should we
let society determine what are appropriate solutions and alter the truth to
refelect the opinion of the times. Is there not something more universal?
Suppose I believe in God, and the teachings of Jesus, and take them to
heart.
Is it not true that worldly desires lead me away from Jesus. Can I lust
for
riches or women and at the same time love Christ with all my heart, mind,
and soul? It is not possible and in the act of doing or thinking
these things I am corrupted. Do you think I lie to you DarkLady when I
say
I am corrupted/ altered by my desires, or do you think I am confused.
Suppose
though that for myself, and under the assumption of a God, I am correct.
From
my perspective it seems my experience is universal. Can one man be
corrupted by lusts, and another man not affected? I dont think so.
Now you may disagree that there is a God, or rather that Jesus did not
exist and that his teachings are not the foundations for a life, then both
these things are debatable.
> I experience lust and I find that it neither corrupts my soul nor
> turns me away from "god." You'll clearly disagree, given that I do not
> believe in a conscious deity, but I don't base my decisions upon your
> personal desires and neither should you base yours upon mine. What
> "corrupts" us is how we deal with our lusts. Do we run from them? Do we
> allow them to rule our lives? Do we take a good look at them and strive
to
> find a balance between the extremes of being rules by them or denying
them?
Exactly, we take a good look at them, and see them for what they
are. An infant has many desires and has no moral qualms about satisfying
those lusts. A toddler might have desires, but is restricted by fear of
punishment. Later in life most people internalize the punishment so as to
develop a sense of morality. You rationalize your lusts away, call
yourself
responsible, and others will do the same but partake of lusts that you
would
not. What makes you the way you are? Is there not some objective way
of viewing this? I believe in God, and I cannot deceive him. I cannot
rationalize
my lust away by saying look I did this good thing so now I can induldge
myself.
There is one more level we can ascend to. The word is not deny but
understand.
Take a good look at your lusts, and see them as flawed, impulsive feelings.
Rationalize the lust away and in time it will dissapear.
> I prefer that latter. I strive to endulge in my lusts responsively and
> maturely, denying myself some and allowing myself others in measured
doses.
I did the same thing, but then I asked myself where does the
compromise lie?
> Just because you don't have self-control doesn't mean I should have
to
> be held back in class.
>
> -- Darklady
You don't know me Darklady, and I don't know you. Stating our
opinions and reflecting on them, however, gets us a little closer to the
truth.
Doug
Barbara Saunders
In article <01bc1ec4$2be0b020$571b...@ADB134.rh.psu.edu>,
Well, what's your definition of lust? Our sexual desires are part of the
constitution we were created with.
Didn't Christ say, "I came that they might have life and have it more
abundantly." Abundant *life* as embodied souls certainly includes
sexual and financial abundance, and desiring/pursuing either of those is
not a sign of "lust."
rous...@nicecom.fr
This Camp Rockfish dude is really stupid. Jesus Christ, he cannot
follow a simple argument! He's a fucking idiot!
hurl...@sunlink.net
> :
> I believe what he was refering to was the inate ability of a statistically
> normal couple to have kids. a man and a woman can. Two men or two women
> can't without help. It's not a big difference
John Sawyer
Rob Moffett <rmof...@bnr.ca> wrote:
> I'm sorry if I failed to make my point clear. I'm not claiming that
> your argument that homosexuality occurs in nature is invalid. I was
> trying to see if someone would explain why we would WANT to behave like
> animals. If you have "an amazing brain which can remember the past and
> blend it with the present, resulting in conjectures and desires for the
> future," then why use it like primates? Is it "natural" for man to try
> to behave like animals or is it "natural" for man to try to
> differentiate himself as much as possible from the less intelligent
> species of the earth?
The argument used to be that homosexuality was unnatural because it was
believed not to occur elsewhere in nature. Now, after learning it does,
we are presented with the argument of not acting like animals.
Discussing sexual orientation always seems to be a Catch 22. The funny
thing is is that when heterosexuals take the Nature vs. Homosexulity
approach, they don't seem to realize that their arguments can just as
easily be used against their own sexuality.
Now, this notion that people's sexual behavior is nothing more than an
attempt to act like animals is foolish, invalid, and illogical. Humans
behave like humans. Monkeys behave like monkeys. Dogs behave like
dogs. Are there shared behaviors among them? Yes...but that no more
means that a human is acting like a monkey than it does a dog is acting
like a monkey.
Just one of those shared behaviors is to propagate the species through
sexual intercourse. By doing so, aren't humans acting like animals?
If, as you ask, it is "natural" for man to differentiate himself from
the lesser species as much as possible, then surely propagation through
sexual intercourse should be replaced by artificial insemination which,
because it is less animalistic, is the superior method.
> BTW: Does anyone know why the monkeys performed homosexual acts? If you
> know, please respond by posting.
It's my vague recollection that in the case of the pygmy chimps, when
there was tension or aggressive behavior within the group, the members
would engage in sexual acts in order to reduce the tension and return
the troop to a calm state.
John S.
Ezekiel Krahlin
On Sun, 23 Feb 1997 18:25:39 -0800, jrs...@metro.net (John Sawyer)
imparted this delicious tidbit of wisdom:
>The argument used to be that homosexuality was unnatural because it was
>believed not to occur elsewhere in nature. Now, after learning it does,
>we are presented with the argument of not acting like animals.
You brought up really good points, and said them well.
>Just one of those shared behaviors is to propagate the species through
>sexual intercourse. By doing so, aren't humans acting like animals?
>If, as you ask, it is "natural" for man to differentiate himself from
>the lesser species as much as possible, then surely propagation through
>sexual intercourse should be replaced by artificial insemination which,
>because it is less animalistic, is the superior method.
Uncontrolled, unsupervised reproduction has no place any more, in a
world way too overpopulated for its own good. It's time for the human
race to take one more step to becoming *less* like animals...and
require educational courses and proof of parentability, for each and
every person who wants to bring another human into this world.
Childless couples and singles--gay, straight, or bi--are required to
prove their worthiness as parents, before they are allowed the
responsibility of raising a child. Why should heterosexuals be
treated any different? They certainly aren't "God's gift to
perpetuating the human species"...as it takes no brains at all, to
insert rod A into slot B. If it did, we'd have a lot less hatred in
this world.
>It's my vague recollection that in the case of the pygmy chimps, when
>there was tension or aggressive behavior within the group, the members
>would engage in sexual acts in order to reduce the tension and return
>the troop to a calm state.
I like this idea. Next time I'm in a crowd I'll get close to the
sexiest guy there, and yell: "Calm down! Calm down everyone!"
Perhaps some day, planetary societies will brag of their homosexual
prowess, as proof to the Galactic Overseers that they are nonviolent,
hence worthy of acceptance into the Universal Family. There may even
be *contests* (or olympics) staged regularly, just to see which
civilization really *is* the most homosexual...at least for any
particular event!
To reach me, remove "_Z" from my e-mail address.
Victoria Lee
"Simply stated: Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God as is
so stated in the Bible. You have a choice, deny youself of these sexual
perversions or lose the gift of eternal life. God's anger over such
disobedience will result in your eternal destruction."
There's a saying, "The more things change the more they stay the same."
Throughout Christian history there have been those who "Christians" have
persecuted in the name of their God. In my life time I remember
"Christians" saying the same kind of things about alcoholics that they
are about homosexuals now. But alcoholism was found to be an actual
disease and it was suddenly dropped as the "evil of the day."
Others who have suffered the attacks of the "righteous" are Native
Americans, blacks, Jews, and Chinese. Each of these groups have
suffered the persecution that homosexuals now feel by people who go to
church on Sunday and call themselves God-fearing Christians."
Interestingly enough these "Christians" seem to overlook parts of the
Bible and focus only on the parts that they can use in their crusade
against their victim. Where is their righteous ire at tax evaders,
overweight gluttonous people, gossips, even those who molest children?
When is the last time you saw one of these "righteous" so-called
Christians blast write a fiery post on a NG about those who molest or
abuse children? Evidently they are much more concerned about what two
adults do in the privacy of their bedroom than the horrors done to an
innocent child.
Before you jump onto this bandwagon one thing you need to think about:
Once this current "bash the homosexual" fad wanes (and it will just as
the others have) among the "righteous" who will be their next target?
Make no mistake about it - SOMEONE will be next. Will it be you or your
group?
Lee - Indiana - Practice random acts of kindness and senseless beauty.
Peh H. Ng
In article <330B9B...@bythebit.org> bjth...@bythebit.org writes:
>
>
>Christians don't know the mind of God any more than anyone else.
I agree with you on that point.
>Christians have proved themselves to be dangerous murderers over the
>centuries because of that fucking BIBLE.
> It is shit and ought to be burned.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Whoa! Hold it there for a minute.
Just because people have used the Bible as a sword does NOT justify
burning the bible or that the book is excrement.
Please do not blame the bible, but if you must blame, put the
responsibility on the people who exploited the Bible.
And, FYI, the Bible DOES contain good words; it is just that
some of us human beings tend to accentuate the worse, and to
use it as a weapon to justify and substantiate our own fallacies.
Just my 2-cents,
Peh...
Rob Moffett
rous...@nicecom.fr wrote:
>
> This Camp Rockfish dude is really stupid. Jesus Christ, he cannot
> follow a simple argument! He's a fucking idiot!
I follow the argument, I was not questioning the validity of it, re-read
the post and then answer my question intelligently.
--
Camp Rockfish Thanks Mr. Lucas!
Environmental education
Summer residential camps bo...@netpath.net
Rob Moffett
John Sawyer wrote:
Thank you for your intelligent reply.
> Now, this notion that people's sexual behavior is nothing more than an
> attempt to act like animals is foolish, invalid, and illogical.
I didn't mean to imply that sexual behavior was animalistic. It seemed
to me that the argument was that it was natural for humans to
participate in homosexual behavior because monkeys did. I agree that if
homosexuality is part of human nature then it is natural, but if it is
only natural because it occurs in other species then we are imitating
animals. Your argument seems to be that it is human nature. This I can
accept.
--
Camp Rockfish Thanks Mr. Lucas!
Environmental education
Summer residential camps bo...@netpath.net subj:Rob
Rob Moffett
Facts Vs Feelings wrote:
> The core teaching of christianity is intolerance. No matter how sugar
> coated it is. Convert or be damned.
>
> Organized religion is a means of control. It is used to consolidate
> power, generate money, influence governments, and strip away
> individual rights, claiming a universal god for all people, and the
> associated 'morals' of that god.
Fortunately, the job of Christians is not to convert, but to bring the
knowledge of the Bible to those who haven't heard. Any time a Christian
feels it is his/her responsibility to convert someone they have taken
the work of God upon them are are NEVER able to lift the burden. But
when a Christian merely presents the gospel and lets God take over, his
job is complete.
Organized religion IS a problem for many people, but we don't have to
worship in a building called a church. The bible says that anywhere two
of His followers worship together He is there. So organization is not
as important as a personal relationship. Just remember that there is
support out there should you have questions, that's what the
organization of religion SHOULD be; a support network to share God's
Word and our prayers and thoughts.
--
Camp Rockfish Thanks Mr. Lucas!
Environmental education
Summer residential camps bo...@netpath.net subj:Rob
Christian education
Ask for more information JOY!!!
http://www.starwars.com/ 'nuff said!!
John Sawyer
Ezekiel Krahlin <ekra...@fog.net_Z> wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Feb 1997 18:25:39 -0800, jrs...@metro.net (John Sawyer)
> imparted this delicious tidbit of wisdom:
> >Just one of those shared behaviors is to propagate the species through
> >sexual intercourse. By doing so, aren't humans acting like animals?
> >If, as you ask, it is "natural" for man to differentiate himself from
> >the lesser species as much as possible, then surely propagation through
> >sexual intercourse should be replaced by artificial insemination which,
> >because it is less animalistic, is the superior method.
>
> Uncontrolled, unsupervised reproduction has no place any more, in a
> world way too overpopulated for its own good. It's time for the human
> race to take one more step to becoming *less* like animals...and
> require educational courses and proof of parentability, for each and
> every person who wants to bring another human into this world.
I understand your feelings here, but I'm not at all comfortable with
some of the possible ramifications of what you suggest. Realize that
this would require the State to oversee people's sex lives. I thought
this was the last thing we wanted, even if it only applied to
heterosexuals. And even if people were required to take parenting
classes, who would develope the course material and how would we
determine what is or is not proper parenting. For instance, would it be
forbidden for a parent to teach their child that homosexuality is good,
bad or anything in between? Would we excuse people from attending
classes if they had religious or other objections? And if someone's
parenting approach is contrary to what is taught in these classes, will
the State be required to remove the children from their custody?
These are just a few questions, but I'm sure you can see how problematic
this issue could be.
> Childless couples and singles--gay, straight, or bi--are required to
> prove their worthiness as parents, before they are allowed the
> responsibility of raising a child. Why should heterosexuals be
> treated any different?
A little off the topic, but I've always found interesting that those
often accused of being selfish are gay couples who want children and
straight couples who don't.
> >It's my vague recollection that in the case of the pygmy chimps, when
> >there was tension or aggressive behavior within the group, the members
> >would engage in sexual acts in order to reduce the tension and return
> >the troop to a calm state.
>
> I like this idea. Next time I'm in a crowd I'll get close to the
> sexiest guy there, and yell: "Calm down! Calm down everyone!"\
Such a BAD boy!!!
Regards,
John S.
John Sawyer
Rob Moffett <rmof...@work.job> wrote:
> John Sawyer wrote:
>
> > Now, this notion that people's sexual behavior is nothing more than an
> > attempt to act like animals is foolish, invalid, and illogical.
>Thank you for your intelligent reply.
This line not snipped due to vanity <g>
> I didn't mean to imply that sexual behavior was animalistic. It seemed
> to me that the argument was that it was natural for humans to
> participate in homosexual behavior because monkeys did. I agree that if
> homosexuality is part of human nature then it is natural, but if it is
> only natural because it occurs in other species then we are imitating
> animals. Your argument seems to be that it is human nature. This I can
> accept.
Rob,
Yes, I do believe it to be a "natural" component of human nature as it
applies to some people. I do not, however, believe sexuality to be cast
in black and white, and tend to favor the notion of a sexual continuum.
Therefore, the distinct difference we see among people as "gay" and
"straight" is due more to a social construct than a reflection of true
attraction and desire.
Now, the problem with this debate about "Nature" is as I stated in my
previous post. That it was first given as evidence that homosexuality
was unnatural because it occurred nowhere else in nature. When it was
found that it did occur among other species (for whatever reason), those
on the other side understandably began using that fact as a
counterpoint.
I'm not too sure how relevant this debate is though, because I don't
think that homosexuality is necessarily unnatural even if it doesn't
occur among other species. Nor does it have to be natural because it
does. Again, as I stated in my previous post, different species have
some behaviors that are shared and some that are distinct. Both can be
perfectly natural.
As an example of a natural human behavior which is distinct from all
other species, I offer the following:
Humans invent the computer; set up the Internet; program newreaders and
then bash the living hell out of each other in newsgroups for fun. <g>
Regards,
John
Rob Moffett
John Sawyer wrote:
> As an example of a natural human behavior which is distinct from all
> other species, I offer the following:
>
> Humans invent the computer; set up the Internet; program newreaders and
> then bash the living hell out of each other in newsgroups for fun. <g>
I wonder what the monkeys'd think about that! :)
WIZEN
> I'm interrested in why the argument that homosexuality occurs in animals
> is used as support for the homosexual position. Regardless of its
> validity, why would humans WANT to behave like animals? Seems to me
> like God created humans to be MORE than animals. And as such, we should
> do whatever possible to act as their masters, not their imitators.
> Before everyone flames me, yes humans have to eat, sleep, excrete, etc,
> but you don't see wild animals with indoor plumbing.
You also don't see animals eating and sleeping where they dump their
wastes, and yet this superior human race you so admire does that.
I am interested in why everyone is so interested in homosexuality. Human
sexuality is very complex, and homosexulity is not a yes or no issue. No
one is 100% hetero or homo- sexual. Sexual preference is a continuum.
The comments reveal more about the sexual fears and obsessions of the
observers than of the observed.
Laura
Laura L Delaney RN
wi...@aol.com
Ezekiel Krahlin
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997 16:14:50 GMT, Fa...@fiction.com (Facts Vs Feelings)
said:
>Guess what. My personal theory is that homosexuality is basically the
>same. A genetic predisposition. Somewhere in the billions on genes
>is the 'gay strand'. To add fuel to the fire, somewhere else, lies
>the 'god strand'. Yep, I feel the need to believe is also genetic.
Homosexuality, if genetically influenced, would explain quite easily
how AIDS could have managed to focus on GayFolk for a while, in some
large geographical areas, and not go beyond that. It can also explain
why some men are immune to AIDS, yet the present immunity found, which
is in caucasion gay males, would only possibly help other caucasians.
There may be found other immunities specific to other groups too,
eventually. It also implies that AIDS can mutate into a
hetero-specific virus, a left-handed virus, a green-eyed virus, or
even a bible-thumping virus...and so on.
---
(Hail, Athenia...brave new nation!)
Please keep our dialogues public; private mail by request only.
Hostile private replies will be re-posted in the public arena.
V-X
On Sat, 08 Mar 1997 12:20:33 GMT, in alt.recovery.religion,
chief_t...@athenia.com (Ezekiel Krahlin) wrote:
>Homosexuality, if genetically influenced, would explain quite easily
>how AIDS could have managed to focus on GayFolk for a while, in some
>large geographical areas, and not go beyond that.
That brief "focus" is already easily explained.
Visit the Jack Chick Archive and Loads o' Groove at:
http://www.ungh.com
"He can't have been an ordinary person.
His actions take up a whole page."
--Chinese Propaganda Comic, 1965
John Sawyer
Rob Moffett <rmof...@work.job> wrote:
> John Sawyer wrote:
>
> > As an example of a natural human behavior which is distinct from all
> > other species, I offer the following:
> >
> > Humans invent the computer; set up the Internet; program newreaders and
> > then bash the living hell out of each other in newsgroups for fun. <g>
>
> I wonder what the monkeys'd think about that! :)
"There goes the neighborhood." But, they've probably been thinking that
for years. };-)
Regards,
John S.
--
********************************************************
* To reply, remove NS (No Spam) from my e-mail address *
********************************************************
Donald Riley
In article <331C60...@work.job>, Rob Moffett <rmof...@work.job>
writes
>John Sawyer wrote:
>
>> As an example of a natural human behavior which is distinct from all
>> other species, I offer the following:
>>
>> Humans invent the computer; set up the Internet; program newreaders and
>> then bash the living hell out of each other in newsgroups for fun. <g>
>
>I wonder what the monkeys'd think about that! :)
less slagging off here
--
Thanks and kind regards from Donald Riley
donr...@oriley.demon.co.uk
Turnpike evaluation. For information, see http://www.turnpike.com/
MarkEMark (Eldridge)
> >John Sawyer wrote:
> >
> >> As an example of a natural human behavior which is distinct from all
> >> other species, I offer the following:
> >>
> >> Humans invent the computer; set up the Internet; program newreaders and
> >> then bash the living hell out of each other in newsgroups for fun. <g>
> >
> >I wonder what the monkeys'd think about that! :)
To add a different twist: The whole reason that we have computers these
days is because of Alan Turing. He designed what is now called a Turing
Machine. ALL of computer science is now based on his theories. He truely
is the Father of Computer Science.
HE WAS ALSO GAY!!!!!
God. Imagine all those Bible thumpers out there on the 'net who just
realized that they are using the implements of the devil. ha ha ha.
<snif> <snif> Do I smell irony?
MarkEMark
Malcolm McMahon
>
>To add a different twist: The whole reason that we have computers these
>days is because of Alan Turing. He designed what is now called a Turing
>Machine. ALL of computer science is now based on his theories. He truely
>is the Father of Computer Science.
>
>HE WAS ALSO GAY!!!!!
>
>God. Imagine all those Bible thumpers out there on the 'net who just
>realized that they are using the implements of the devil. ha ha ha.
><snif> <snif> Do I smell irony?
>
The other thing to think about is that, had Turing's gayness been
discovered earlier, they would never in a million years have allowed
him to work on code breaking and WWII might have claimed God knows how
many extra lives.
(He was uncovered after the war when his flat was burgled and killed
himself, not surprising given the attitudes of the day).
---------------------------------+----------------------------------
I was born weird: This terrible | Like Pavlov's dogs we are trained
compulsion to behave normally is | to salivate at the sound of the
the result of childhood trauma. | liberty bell.
---------------------------------+----------------------------------
Malcolm
Michael Glaz
Don't worry, there is no hell!
-Mike
--
****************************************
"By the anguish of someone else,
materialistic motives are fulfilled."
****************************************