I told you, there is a cure for homosexuality.

WRONG. in medicine, the gold standard is your prospective, randomized controlled studies. Case reports (anecdotes) can be used, but they are the exception, not the rule, when practicing medicine.

This is confirmation bias, and in science, the true professionals fight this type of approach. IE you have a pre-conceived bias that homosexuality is a choice, and you found an anecdote to support your argument.

Unfortunately for you this is proof of nothing.

 

Duplicate

 

He obviously is for SOME


Think of the amount of hatred a person has to work up towards gays to prefer a vicious dictator's word on homosexuality......sick indeed!

 

Incarceration is a unique environment where most inmates aren't given a choice. Genetics determine the person's sexual preference, but it doesn't control the environment a person ends up living in, or how that person responds to that environment. Both genetics & environment are important factors in the decisions we all make in our lives. The military has more choice than incarceration, since there are times off base & home visits open to them.

I am not homosexual, but I have had friends who are, and have no problem with them as a group. I actually have no problems with any group so long as they don't use their beliefs to invade the rights of others. One major reason I'm Pro-Choice is because they don't try to inflict their views onto others, but are always allowing every individual to make their own choice. But the same is not true for the Pro-Life side, who do everything in their power in a relentless quest to inflict their narrow views over & onto everyone else, using government & the law as the means of choice for imposing that view. In my view, the Pro-Lifer side invades the rights of others.

 

If an adult wants to go through conversion therapy,they should be allowed to, but the far right want parents to be allowed to force their children to go through it against their will

There have even been thoses who proposed requiring all gays to go through it by law, taking away choice all together.

 

Idiotic claim. Paul was living in the Roman empire, at a time when male homosexuality was rampant, and about 500 years after Sappho lived. He knew exactly what he was talking about.

Cherry picking. Reinterpreting a single word has no effect on the overall meaning of Paul's letters. The Greek is actually much more explicit than the KJV translators chose to paint it in English.

Apparently you didn't read them. They cover a lot more ground than just "fornication".

 

Quickly

1. The government should butt out of child raising
2. Science doesn't trump religion and the way it's used to create public policy it needs to be seen as a religion and subject to the separation of church and state.

How a person raises their kids is non of your business. Damn when did the world become so full of nosey busybodies.

 

if you dont want to give your kids vaccinations they have no business being in public.

 

If you want to control what other people do you have no business in the American government.

 

Ashley wood Paul was referring to was the sin of Sodom. the sin of Sodom was hostility towards strangers or new comers.

 

the concept of homosexuality is that there are people that are naturally attracted to the same sex. This was developed in the late 19th century not the Roman empire.

actually it's not the reinterpretation of a certain word it's the understanding of several phrases. In Corinthians he says something about people giving up what is natural for what is unnatural.

Homosexuality is natural for a homosexual.

No I just don't read it from a brainwashed position.

 

Very nice. But you missed a fundamental force or historical truth... those societies that move toward more homosexuality and that which we term immorality in general tend to get replaced by more primitive, barbaric societies which view homosexuality and general immorality in much more dim light. Back in the early 1800s, it was the Mexicans who viewed themselves as the civilized ones and viewed Americans as the uncivilized people, and it was the Americans who advanced and expanded and conquered territory and pushed the Mexicans south of the Rio Grande. Today it's we who view ourselves as civilized and the Mexicans as barbaric, and it's the Mexicans who are advancing and expanding into our territory. And guess which one has more conservative views about homosexuality.

 

Your religion is make believe. Prove that wrong and we can look at proposing religious rules into law.
Until then people will rightfully fight you as hard they do Muslim extremists wanting to behead infidels.

 

It's not genetic or else identical twins would always either both be heterosexual or both be homosexual. In fact, it's only about 30% likely for the second twin to be homosexual if the first one is, much higher than in the general population (~1.5-2.5%, not 10% as some homosexual activists would like you to believe), but much less than a feature such as a genetic trait would show up. The best evidence so far (for males) is that it's a combination of biology (something that happens in the womb), environment (a weak father and a strong mother), and abuse (nearly all homosexual males had sex with an older male while still in their early teens). Any one of these by itself is not determinative, as most men who were abused as children don't turn out to be homosexual. Homosexuals better hope there isn't some gay gene or the next generation of homosexuals will be aborted in the womb.

 

I'm atheist. I'm only correcting people who claim Paul didn't say what he did in fact clearly say. My feeling is you're free to ignore or dismiss Paul if you want, but don't try to change what he said to something else. That's simply dishonest.

 

May I suggest you consider the fact nobody, especially contemporary biblical scholars, can be 100% certain anything claimed to be Paul in the New Testament can be proven to be so or if it is it hasn’t been fiddled with by Rome very early on .

 

Don’t know where you’re getting that nonsense. In some ways though I hope homosexuality isn’t genetic as science would then devote vast resources to detecting it in-utero and the abortion rate would sky rocket.

 

If it had been, you can be sure Rome would have taken out the parts that condemn homosexuality.

I read a lot.

 

Does that include banning abortion????

 

You cannot call conversion therapy torture and be pro abortion. That would be hypocritical.

 

Biggest load of nonsense.

 

That's the silliest thing I ever heard but it sure got you out of answering that awkward question: """Does that include banning abortion????"""


Let's try again!! YOU posted :

Robert E Allen said: ↑
If you want to control what other people do you have no business in the American government."""

Then I asked :


FoxHastings said: ↑
Does that include banning abortion????


ok, now do you have an answer pertaining to THAT question??

 

I thought you worked at a WalMart type store?

 

No it does not include murdering unborn babies. Because abortion violates the inborn babies right to life. Not ackward at all just we have been down that road and no matter how ling we fight about it you'll always be wrong.