janie48 Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 There are many things that could be shown to be normal yet they remain sins and in many cases they are also unlawful.Sin is only other peoples business when it causes harm to others,and yes some sexual acts remain unlawful and rightly so,but homosexual acts between consenting adults is no longer unlawful and should never have been so in my opinion. When you refer to sin(which i don't think is neccessary to do unless you are preaching from a pulpit in church) you should also take into account that in the eyes of the church everyone of us commit sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This one is abusive because you are using the term homophobia as a means to cause insult, but what you think of me is irrelevant because I will be judged by God. The problem seems to be that you take offence at being called something which your beliefs and opinions match the most commonly accepted definition of. That's like taking offence at being called bipedal (presuming you have both legs) or homosapien (presuming you are human). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 I've been back and had another look - not sure exactly what you're thinking of? A lot of 'I don't have a problem, but...' shape to them, is that what you mean? Correct..but they go on ironically with clear problems. It must be very confusing for the confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 They are my beliefs so why would I think they are twaddle. Just because you believe in something doesn't prevent it from being 'twaddle'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 The problem seems to be that you take offence at being called something which your beliefs and opinions match the most commonly accepted definition of. That's like taking offence at being called bipedal (presuming you have both legs) or homosapien (presuming you are human). Rational -in your face- logic is always a good retort. If you're audience is rational and logical that is. Bigots, homophobics, misogynists, racists clearly have a problem with such difficult concepts and even construe it as an insult or bullying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This one is abusive because you are using the term homophobia as a means to cause insult, but what you think of me is irrelevant because I will be judged by God. Ah, now I see where you're coming from...up a creek without a paddle! I have said nothing whatsoever that is meant to cause insult. I merely stated fact. The statment you made is defined as homphobic not only by me but by any dictionary you can refer to. If showing you where you are so patently wrong constitutes insult then I can't help you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Just because you believe in something doesn't prevent it from being 'twaddle'. I like that word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavannahP Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 You are perfectly entitled to think that homosexual sex is an abomination, and then resist the temptation of having such sex yourself. You think it's a sin if you want, or mutter it in private even. But homosexuality is clearly not an abomination, it is perfectly normal and legal. Saying homosexuality is a sin in public is different. The word "sin" is loaded with so much negative baggage that when you say something is a sin in public, you are not merely making a statement about what you choose to avoid but suggesting that others should avoid it too, that they should live by your rules. Saying homosexual sex is a sin in public is using homophobic language, it clearly is judging others. The question was asked in public and the answer given and if you did not want the answer then the question should not have been asked. Without the question there would not have been a reason for me to give you the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 The question was asked in public and the answer given and if you did not want the answer then the question should not have been asked. Without the question there would not have been a reason for me to give you the answer. Do you accept (as most of the rest of the world does) that homosexuals are born that way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 The question was asked in public and the answer given and if you did not want the answer then the question should not have been asked. Without the question there would not have been a reason for me to give you the answer. Mmmmm...deja vu! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.