Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How is this a bogus list. It is a list of sexual practices. The original poster, and others, claim sexual orientation is unchosen. If that is so, then all of this must fit that claim too.
Paraphilias and Fetishes are not sexual orientations.
Quote:
You have qualified your answer with "consenting adults" and legality. Does that mean they are wrong (these other orientations) because they are illegal? If so, then where homosexuality is illegal, it is also wrong by your reasoning.
No, they are wrong because they take advantage of someone or something that can not legally consent.
It's only a sin if he engages in anal sex within a pagan temple in order to gain favor from the gods.
Learn your Bible already.
One: Not everyone of us is Sola Scriptura. The Church Fathers up to 350 AD (When Catholicism, Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodoxy were still one) pretty clearly saw homosexuality as wrong. (And I know of Boswell, but I don't find him remotely credible)
Two: Your individual interpretation of the Bible, or mine, should not be deemed infallible or binding on all.
Three: The Gospels certainly seem to indicate fornication and adultery are wrong while Jesus only mentioned marriage when referring to man-and-wife. This does not appear to give much room for homosexuality unless one interprets sodomy as not being sex at all as a few cultures kind-of did.
(Matthew 15:19, Matthew 19:4-6, Mark 7:21: These mention marriage and/or prohibitions on fornication and adultery)
Last edited by Thomas R.; 06-14-2011 at 12:17 AM..
IN reality, if you believe something that's proven to not be true, you're called either a liar or stupid. (not ignorance, since ignorance implies not having had the information to begin with)
I live in a rural state, small town. I am gay, have been as such my whole life with NO CHOICE MADE. being gay does NOT mean that you're 'more sexual' than straight people, being gay is NOT a behavior, it's a sexual orientation. There is no 'gay lifestyle'. I have the same lifestyle as the average american in a small town rural state does. I go to work, grocery shopping, watch tv, read etc. I have barely dated because I believe that the right person will be there when the time is right and if you try too hard you're not going to find the right person. JUST LIKE MANY STRAIGHT PEOPLE DO.
if i was to be in a relationship the PRIMARY thing driving it would be LOVE and COMMITMENT... NOT SEX.
I am an HONEST, GOOD, HARDWORKING person. Actually EXTREMELY honest. I even have a degree in religion.
You can gather this INFORMATION about the FACT (not belief) that being gay is NOT a choice NOR a lifestyle, by talking to FIRST HAND PRIMARY SOURCES>.... GAY PEOPLE!
There is NO excuse to believe LIES when you have walking proof to ask if you want to know.
I think the reason that some people look at gay as a lifestyle choice is because, from a Christian's perspective, they see it as deliberately choosing to sin against God. In other words, a person may be born gay, may have the tendencies to want to have sex with the same sex, but that still doesn't change the fact that they choose to live in sin as Christians view it.
It's no different than being born with the tendency to be an alcoholic, pedophile, or drug addict. The problem is not being born that way, the problem is allowing oneself to indulge in behavior that is contrary to what God wants. I have shared my opinion about this topic on several threads, and justified my thinking on it using the bible as my guide.
I don't have a problem with a person being gay or who feels that he or she was born gay. I accept that, and I understand it. Nor am I going to judge a person for being gay, no more than I shouldn't judge a person for being a drug addict, alcoholic, chronic liar, backbiter, gossiper etc. (I hope you see what I am getting at), and IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO ALL OF US BEING BORN INTO SIN. This also applies to a heterosexual person who likes to have sex outside of a marriage with multiple partners or with a partner that he or she, for what ever reason, hasn't married. It still boils down to sinning against God.
But also, what I do have a problem with is a gay person justifying his lifestyle choice when the bible is quite clear in regard to engaging in any sex outside of a heterosexual marriage. I draw the line there, and a christian gay person who is convicted by God's Holy Spirit will be left with no choice but to live a celibate life so that he or she is NOT engaging in behavior that's contrary to glorifying God and truly being in good fellowship with Him.
I think the reason that some people look at gay as a lifestyle choice is because, from a Christian's perspective, they see it as deliberately choosing to sin against God. In other words, a person may be born gay, may have the tendencies to want to have sex with the same sex, but that still doesn't change the fact that they choose to live in sin as Christians view it.
It's no different than being born with the tendency to be an alcoholic, pedophile, or drug addict. The problem is not being born that way, the problem is allowing oneself to indulge in behavior that is contrary to what God wants. I have shared my opinion about this topic on several threads, and justified my thinking on it using the bible as my guide.
I don't have a problem with a person being gay or who feels that he or she was born gay. I accept that, and I understand it. Nor am I going to judge a person for being gay, no more than I shouldn't judge a person for being a drug addict, alcoholic, chronic liar, backbiter, gossiper etc. (I hope you see what I am getting at), and IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO ALL OF US BEING BORN INTO SIN. This also applies to a heterosexual person who likes to have sex outside of a marriage with multiple partners or with a partner that he or she, for what ever reason, hasn't married. It still boils down to sinning against God.
But also, what I do have a problem with is a gay person justifying his lifestyle choice when the bible is quite clear in regard to engaging in any sex outside of a heterosexual marriage. I draw the line there, and a christian gay person who is convicted by God's Holy Spirit will be left with no choice but to live a celibate life so that he or she is NOT engaging in behavior that's contrary to glorifying God and truly being in good fellowship with Him.
that's where it doesnt' make any sense. comparing our sexual orinetatios to a drug addiction is weird and makes absolutely no sense? are you married, dating someone? is dating someone or being in love with someone similar to a drug addiction? is existing as YOURSELF a drug addiction? a sexual orientation is a CORE part of our IDENTITIES. a DRUG addiction (obviously to most) is something completely different.
and WHY the Heck would I have a 'heterosexual' marriage. I'm not a heterosexual. To have one would be CRUEL to the person I married. IF something is made up BY HETEROSEXUALS (from their point of view) saying I have to have a HETEROSEXUAL marriage when I"m not one... hmmm, that kind smacks of EGO, believeing that since I"M a certain way EVERYONE ELSE MUST be and people who are different are inferior/wrong/evil etc.
That's like if a gay person wrote parts of the Bible and said that any NON gay relationship was NOT ok, and then telling straighit people that that came from GOD. (really the ego)
Last edited by Rlarson21; 06-14-2011 at 07:10 AM..
One: Not everyone of us is Sola Scriptura. The Church Fathers up to 350 AD (When Catholicism, Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodoxy were still one) pretty clearly saw homosexuality as wrong. (And I know of Boswell, but I don't find him remotely credible)
That's nice. They also viewed only missionary position as acceptable for procreation. Non- procreative sex was a sin. While I don't accept Sola Scriptura either, I give no authority to the Church.
The Jewish view in most cases has shifted in light of modern understanding on orientation. Most Jews believe the verses need to be reinterpreted.
Quote:
Two: Your individual interpretation of the Bible, or mine, should not be deemed infallible or binding on all.
I never said it was. However, in light of scientific evidence about sexual orientation, as well as the textual, cultural, and historical evidence surrounding the 5 clobber passages, the interpretation about it referring to pagan prostitution seems the most likely and well supported scenario.
I also don't believe God created gay people for the express purpose of making them suffer.
Quote:
Three: The Gospels certainly seem to indicate fornication and adultery are wrong while Jesus only mentioned marriage when referring to man-and-wife. This does not appear to give much room for homosexuality unless one interprets sodomy as not being sex at all as a few cultures kind-of did.
Well, I believe Jesus only mentioned a man and woman marrying because that was the overwhelming majority of his audience. I take the view that the Bible was directed to the general audiences. It does not take the time to single out groups that were relatively unknown at the time. Jesus doesn't describe who intersex individuals can marry either for instance.
As for sodomy. That word originally meant general wickedness, even in the earliest KJV. Its sexual connotation is relatively modern and inaccurate due to the fact that Sodom was not destroyed for the reason most people think. Sodomy also applies to heterosexuals.
I think the reason that some people look at gay as a lifestyle choice is because, from a Christian's perspective, they see it as deliberately choosing to sin against God. In other words, a person may be born gay, may have the tendencies to want to have sex with the same sex, but that still doesn't change the fact that they choose to live in sin as Christians view it.
And those Christians would be ignoring Paul who says celibacy is a gift most people don't have and if they don't, they should marry to control their sexual urges. Gays have absolutely no remedy.
The other glaring problem being the overwhelming majority of Christians have never bothered to research the Biblical context of the 5 "anti-gay" verses. They are content to quote a modern English translation out of context and say, see gays are evil!
Quote:
But also, what I do have a problem with is a gay person justifying his lifestyle choice when the bible is quite clear in regard to engaging in any sex outside of a heterosexual marriage. I draw the line there, and a christian gay person who is convicted by God's Holy Spirit will be left with no choice but to live a celibate life so that he or she is NOT engaging in behavior that's contrary to glorifying God and truly being in good fellowship with Him.
Perhaps you need to read 1 Corinthians 7. Paul specifically says most people cannot live a celibate life as it is a gift from God that not everyone has.
Do you really think God created hundreds of millions of gay people with no option but to be alone and incapable of being in a loving relationship? It's one thing if a person feels a calling to be a minster and live a celibate life to better serve God. But you are saying that every single person in human history who was born gay, was born to be alone and sexually frustrated.
If sexual orientation is "unchosen" as you claim, (and no I'm not going to debate whether it is or not) do you then champion the cause for the following "unchosen" sexual orientations, or just yours?
What if they all use your same reasoning? Should they all be embraced and acceptible too? Or, would you like to qualify certain ones as being appropriate, and others not?
"Pedophilia: “Sexual activity with a prepubescent child (generally age 13 years or younger)”. The individual with Pedophilia must be age 16 years or older and at least 5 years older than the child. For individuals in late adolescence with Pedophilia, no precise age difference is specified, and clinical judgment must be used; both the sexual maturity of the child and the age difference must be taken into account…Some individuals prefer males, others females, and some are aroused by both males and females.” (pp. 527-528; DSM-IV).
Exhibitionism: “Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving the exposure of one’s genitals to an unsuspecting stranger.” (pp. 525-526; DSM-IV).
Voyeurism: “Achieving sexual excitement” by “peeping”, that is “observing unsuspecting individuals, usually strangers, who are naked, in the process of disrobing, or engaging in sexual activity” (p. 532; DSM-IV).
Bestiality (clinically known as Zoophilia): Zoophilia is sexual attraction to and relationships with animals. Bestiality is defined as “sexual relations between a person and an animal” (p. 532; DSM-IV; Webster’s)
Bisexuality: Sexual desire and interaction with both males and females.
Coprophilia: Sexual arousal associated with feces (p. 532; DSM-IV).
Frotteurism: “Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving touching and rubbing against a nonconsenting person” (p. 526; DSM-IV).
Fetishism: “Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving the use of nonliving objects (e.g. female undergarments)” (p. 526; DSM-IV).
Transvestic Fetishism: “In a heterosexual male, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving cross-dressing.” In severe cases he may be diagnosed with the additional “With Gender Dysphoria” when he desires “to dress and live permanently as a female and to seek hormonal or surgical reassignment” (p. 530-531; DSM-IV).
Gender Identity Disorder: “A strong and persistent cross-gender identification, which is the desire to be, or insistence that one is, of the other sex,” along with “persistent discomfort about one’s assigned sex or a sense of the inappropriateness in the gender rle of that sex” (p. 532-533; DSM-IV).
Klismaphilia: Sexual arousal and pleasure derived from enemas (p. 532; DSM-IV).
Necrophilia: “An abnormal obsession with death and the dead, especially an erotic attraction to corpses (Webster’s; p. 532, DSM-IV).
Partialism: Sexual arousal obtained through “exclusive focus on part of body” (p. 532; DSM-IV).
Sexual Masochism: “Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving the act (real, no simulated) of being humiliated, beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer” (p. 529; DSM-IV).
Sexual Sadism: “Recurrent, intense, sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving acts (real, not simulated) in which the psychological or physical suffering (including humiliation) of the victim is sexually exciting to the person” (p. 530; DSM-IV).
Telephone Scatologia: Obsession with “obscene phone calls” (p. 532; DSM-IV).
Transgenderism: A person whose gender identity is not clear, and who may take on the sexual identity of either male or female to carry out sexual fantasies or behaviors.
Transsexual: A person who identifies himself as having the identity “of the opposite sex, sometimes so strongly as to undergo surgery and hormone injections to effect a change of sex” (Webster’s).
Transvestite: “A person who derives sexual pleasure from dressing in the clothes of the opposite sex” (Webster’s).
Urophilia: Sexual arousal associated with urine (p.532; DSM-IV)."
Oh, my. For what it's worth (although with posters like this, I find they have chosen to be unconvinced by reason to an embarrassing degree), this is the standard that I usually use when thinking about this nonsense: If there are two people involved with each other, sexually or otherwise, and one of them warrants the term 'victim', then it's not okay. If the two are equals, and neither is a victim, then it is okay.
For example: man and child; lady and sheep; man and stranger on the subway: one of them is a victim. Not okay.
For example: man and boyfriend, woman and wife, two adults who enjoy the same fetish (provided, once again, that one is not a 'victim' of anything): Perfectly okay.
There's a WORLD of difference between the two. There is no LEGITIMATE proof that people are born gay. There's a bunch of junk science that stereotypically pops up to allegedly prove something in relation to the latest fad/trend. Now being gay is the fad/trend so scientists purport to prove that people are born that way. You aren't born that way. You CHOOSE to live a gay lifestyle. Black people have no choice in being born the color they are born. To compare the gay lifestyle with that is insulting and absurd to say the least.
And for the record, the gay lifestyle is just what the name implies: living as a homosexual person. It isn't rocket science.
Absolutely ridiculous post. If there is no proof you are born gay (and by the way, there is technically no proof of gravity, which is why it's a theory. Nothing in science is proven, which is the very nature of science. There is, however, a ton of evidence that people are born gay) then there is also no proof that it's a choice.
Indeed, even though there is a mountain of evidence that people are born gay, there is an even larger mountain of evidence that trying to change one's sexual orientation has drastic and long-term negative effects, up to and including suicide. As a result, if it can't be changed, whether it's a choice or not, it's effectively immutable, which is the basis upon which legal protections are based.
Everyone is born a sinner. Question is: are you going to remain one? God has provided a release of such captivity. However, if you reject it, then you'll die in your sins to face the consequences.
So, whether you're practicing homosexuality, adultery, fornication, drunkenness, lying, cheating and/or a multitude of other sins, then God wrath abides on you. You can argue until you're blue in the face about how you were born in sin and how unfair it is, but that argument won't work on judgement day.
Revelation 21
[6] And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
[7] He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
[8] But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
