ArchivedAn interesting logo...So we agree it is a pleasurable activity, and we agree that homosexuals have the right to engage in sex? That's not what I've heard [the latter part]. Yes exactly, and what I'm saying is that is totally immoral. The argument I have seen as to why it is prohibited is that unisons between people who love each other must be heterosexual [and to a more arguable point, within an age range, but I don't want to touch that]. I get the general impression that gay sex is prohibited for the sake of it being gay sex. I'm yet to see a logical reason as to exactly why it's prohibited*. I may have made that a little unclear. Gay sex isn't, from the perspective of nature and the human body, a 'natural' or 'correct' action. Since that isn't the function of a penis and an anus, basically. It is very arguable indeed, though. Though it doesn't need to get any deeper than that for the sake of this debate. The "arguable from a christian perspective" part was suggesting that christians may argue that statement by saying "God intends us to be this way", whatever the function is [generally speaking, not necessarily homosexualism]. Anything such as learning to play music, or using tools, anything at all, it could be argued that God intended that to be so. I should have made that clearer. Surely it's not THAT clean cut? I mean there are actions that neither promote love or hate, neccessarily. Are these neutral actions considered unacceptable? For instance, if I was to just look out the window, that's not necessarily good or bad. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you wrote. I agree that sex isn't love either, but I do think it can be an expression thereof. If it wasn't, I do wonder why billions of people would treat it as such. Well, it's ultimately down to the individual, what they want, and how they wish to live their life, the way I see it. And I suppose if they weren't to be bound by these guidelines on homosexuality [and not obey them] then they wouldn't be (good) christians. That doesn't explain why they view it as immoral, it simply explains that *"God said so". I'd consider that freedom of will, with positive results, is anything BUT immoral. It could probably get more profound than that introducing 'what defines something as positive or negative?' though I believe happiness is a pretty agreeable example of positive. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame