Homosexual love (or " homosexual acts") is akin to writing with your left hand, being "left handed" is akin to being homosexual in the comparison. Homosexuality has the same level of free will and volition involved (whether it has a specific gene linked to it or not) as one being left handed. One would be hard pressed to find someone who argues that left handed acts are evil, because they hurt no one. Homosexuality is no different. No unwilling victims are involved when homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it.
No such thing as a "gay gene"
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 682
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
- Christian: No
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
- RickD
- Make me a Sammich Member
- Posts: 22063
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:59 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
- Location: Kitchen
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
You're saying that there are never any victims when two homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it?Seraph wrote: ↑Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:04 pmHomosexual love (or " homosexual acts") is akin to writing with your left hand, being "left handed" is akin to being homosexual in the comparison. Homosexuality has the same level of free will and volition involved (whether it has a specific gene linked to it or not) as one being left handed. One would be hard pressed to find someone who argues that left handed acts are evil, because they hurt no one. Homosexuality is no different. No unwilling victims are involved when homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it.
John 5:24
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 682
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
- Christian: No
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
As long as it is consensual for all parties involved, thats correct.
You could point to certain STDs associated with homosexuality, but all sex carries the risk of various STDs, regardless of orientation. The mere presence of risk does not in itself make something immoral.
You could point to certain STDs associated with homosexuality, but all sex carries the risk of various STDs, regardless of orientation. The mere presence of risk does not in itself make something immoral.
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
- RickD
- Make me a Sammich Member
- Posts: 22063
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:59 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
- Location: Kitchen
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
RickD wrote:
You're saying that there are never any victims when two homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it?
All parties involved?Seraph wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:54 pm As long as it is consensual for all parties involved, thats correct.
You could point to certain STDs associated with homosexuality, but all sex carries the risk of various STDs, regardless of orientation. The mere presence of risk does not in itself make something immoral.
I'm not sure what that means. I thought we were talking about two consenting adults?
With two consenting adults, you can't think of any situation that there would be an unwilling victim? And btw, the same example I'm thinking of, would also hold true for two consenting adults who are opposite sex.
John 5:24
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
-
- Board Moderator
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
I see you know nothing or morals and ethics.
Beyond that, you know very little about the science of biology.
-
- Board Moderator
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
Define consent.Seraph wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:54 pm As long as it is consensual for all parties involved, thats correct.
You could point to certain STDs associated with homosexuality, but all sex carries the risk of various STDs, regardless of orientation. The mere presence of risk does not in itself make something immoral.
Define immoral.
-
- Board Moderator
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Ontario, Canada
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 682
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
- Christian: No
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:51 amI see you know nothing or morals and ethics.
Beyond that, you know very little about the science of biology.
I guess you don't feel the need to elaborate beyond that? In what way have I shown a lack of knowledge of morals or biology?
Im pretty sure its hard to misinterpret what consent means. If the people involved are willingly participating in the action in question, that is consent. Pretty straightforward.
As for morality, Im talking largely from a secular ethics perspective. What is moral is what results in the most wellbeing or happiness for humankind, and what is immoral is that which inflicts suffering on a victim or victims. As a Christian Im sure you have a different standard of what makes something moral, but that's my own standard.
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 682
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
- Christian: No
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
Im not sure what it is you're thinking of, with STDs I mentioned that STDs are possible in the case of either homosexuals or heterosexuals. If youre thinking of rape or something in your case of having an unwilling victim, that's not possible if both people are consenting.RickD wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:28 pmRickD wrote:
You're saying that there are never any victims when two homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it?All parties involved?Seraph wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:54 pm As long as it is consensual for all parties involved, thats correct.
You could point to certain STDs associated with homosexuality, but all sex carries the risk of various STDs, regardless of orientation. The mere presence of risk does not in itself make something immoral.
I'm not sure what that means. I thought we were talking about two consenting adults?
With two consenting adults, you can't think of any situation that there would be an unwilling victim? And btw, the same example I'm thinking of, would also hold true for two consenting adults who are opposite sex.
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
- RickD
- Make me a Sammich Member
- Posts: 22063
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:59 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
- Location: Kitchen
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
What about a man that is married with children, who falls in love with another man, tells his wife he's gay, and leaves her and the children, to be with the man?Seraph wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:19 pmIm not sure what it is you're thinking of, with STDs I mentioned that STDs are possible in the case of either homosexuals or heterosexuals. If youre thinking of rape or something in your case of having an unwilling victim, that's not possible if both people are consenting.RickD wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:28 pmRickD wrote:
You're saying that there are never any victims when two homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it?All parties involved?Seraph wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:54 pm As long as it is consensual for all parties involved, thats correct.
You could point to certain STDs associated with homosexuality, but all sex carries the risk of various STDs, regardless of orientation. The mere presence of risk does not in itself make something immoral.
I'm not sure what that means. I thought we were talking about two consenting adults?
With two consenting adults, you can't think of any situation that there would be an unwilling victim? And btw, the same example I'm thinking of, would also hold true for two consenting adults who are opposite sex.
Still no victims?
John 5:24
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
-
- Board Moderator
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
Im pretty sure its hard to misinterpret what consent means. If the people involved are willingly participating in the action in question, that is consent. Pretty straightforward.
Yeah, that's a nice objective definition that won't cause any issues...* cough age*, *cough mental state*, etc
As for morality, Im talking largely from a secular ethics perspective. What is moral is what results in the most wellbeing or happiness for humankind, and what is immoral is that which inflicts suffering on a victim or victims. As a Christian Im sure you have a different standard of what makes something moral, but that's my own standard.Who decides what is "well being" for "human kind"?
By the way, based on "well being for humankind", homosexuality would, obviously, not be good.
Neither from a biological standpoint OR a social one.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 682
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
- Christian: No
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
Oh there are victims in that case. In that situation, the wise thing would've been better for the gay man to never marry the woman in the first place. If he were honest with himself in the first place, he wouldve been in a relationship with the man from the start and none of that would've happened. Thats an argument FOR gays living honestly, not against it.RickD wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:43 pmWhat about a man that is married with children, who falls in love with another man, tells his wife he's gay, and leaves her and the children, to be with the man?Seraph wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:19 pmIm not sure what it is you're thinking of, with STDs I mentioned that STDs are possible in the case of either homosexuals or heterosexuals. If youre thinking of rape or something in your case of having an unwilling victim, that's not possible if both people are consenting.RickD wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:28 pmRickD wrote:
You're saying that there are never any victims when two homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it?All parties involved?Seraph wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:54 pm As long as it is consensual for all parties involved, thats correct.
You could point to certain STDs associated with homosexuality, but all sex carries the risk of various STDs, regardless of orientation. The mere presence of risk does not in itself make something immoral.
I'm not sure what that means. I thought we were talking about two consenting adults?
With two consenting adults, you can't think of any situation that there would be an unwilling victim? And btw, the same example I'm thinking of, would also hold true for two consenting adults who are opposite sex.
Still no victims?
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 682
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
- Christian: No
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
Okay? I definitely agree that children cannot give consent because of their mental and sexual immaturity. I never argued for pedophilia in the slightest sense. Homosexuality and pedophilia are separate issues entirely.PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:49 amYeah, that's a nice objective definition that won't cause any issues...* cough age*, *cough mental state*, etc
I clearly meant good for the individual, not good for the reproduction of the human species. I already gave my justification for what determines something to be good in my opinion, that which results in the greatest wellbeing for the greatest amount of individuals. Theres no "who" involved or necessary.PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:49 am Who decides what is "well being" for "human kind"?
By the way, based on "well being for humankind", homosexuality would, obviously, not be good.
Neither from a biological standpoint OR a social one.
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
- RickD
- Make me a Sammich Member
- Posts: 22063
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:59 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
- Location: Kitchen
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
So, you'd agree that your comparison with left handedness fails then, correct?Seraph wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 4:16 pmOh there are victims in that case. In that situation, the wise thing would've been better for the gay man to never marry the woman in the first place. If he were honest with himself in the first place, he wouldve been in a relationship with the man from the start and none of that would've happened. Thats an argument FOR gays living honestly, not against it.RickD wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:43 pmWhat about a man that is married with children, who falls in love with another man, tells his wife he's gay, and leaves her and the children, to be with the man?Seraph wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:19 pmIm not sure what it is you're thinking of, with STDs I mentioned that STDs are possible in the case of either homosexuals or heterosexuals. If youre thinking of rape or something in your case of having an unwilling victim, that's not possible if both people are consenting.RickD wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:28 pmRickD wrote:
You're saying that there are never any victims when two homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it?All parties involved?Seraph wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:54 pm As long as it is consensual for all parties involved, thats correct.
You could point to certain STDs associated with homosexuality, but all sex carries the risk of various STDs, regardless of orientation. The mere presence of risk does not in itself make something immoral.
I'm not sure what that means. I thought we were talking about two consenting adults?
With two consenting adults, you can't think of any situation that there would be an unwilling victim? And btw, the same example I'm thinking of, would also hold true for two consenting adults who are opposite sex.
Still no victims?
Homosexual love (or " homosexual acts") is akin to writing with your left hand, being "left handed" is akin to being homosexual in the comparison. Homosexuality has the same level of free will and volition involved (whether it has a specific gene linked to it or not) as one being left handed. One would be hard pressed to find someone who argues that left handed acts are evil, because they hurt no one. Homosexuality is no different. No unwilling victims are involved when homosexuals fall in love with each other and act upon it.
John 5:24
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 682
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
- Christian: No
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
Re: No such thing as a "gay gene"
No, why would I? How'd you show that it fails?
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward