Why do Christians like to fixate so much on homosexuality?

Page 10 of 15 [ 237 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 15  Next

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

13 Feb 2011, 11:05 am

AlSwearengen wrote:
Sorry to hear that

I thank you for your understanding there. While making that last post, my vision was actually "going whiteout" or whatever until the sugar from the orange had began kicking in ...

Much better now!


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

13 Feb 2011, 1:01 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:
In other words, "Because they said so" which means there's no basis in objectivity and your argument is ret*d.

No, no, no! The objectivity was predetermined elsewhere ... and the remainder of that statement is getting awfully close to flaming.

AceOfSpades wrote:
I don't need a book to tell me killing is wrong because empathy is inherent in social beings for the most part.

Sure, but so is "fight or flight" and any result that might follow. Therefore, at least some of us *do* need to be told, "Be angry, and sin not."


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

13 Feb 2011, 1:14 pm

leejosepho wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
In other words, "Because they said so" which means there's no basis in objectivity and your argument is ret*d.

No, no, no! The objectivity was predetermined elsewhere ... and the remainder of that statement is getting awfully close to flaming.
The line is that thin? I thought attacking the argument was permitted and not the person? I didn't say 91 was ret*d. I don't think the dude is ret*d since ret*d would mean you lack a normal mental capacity. But time and time again he has shown gaping flaws in his arguments. Does that mean he's mentally incapable of understanding that? No, it has more to do with cognitive distortion than cognitive incapability.

You know what gets on my nerves? How quick people are to call someone "stupid" when it has more to do with short-sightedness, cognitive distortion, a dysfunctional way of thinking, willful ignorance, etc than it has to do with mental capacity. Even fundamental flaws in thinking have to do with stagnant development rather than incapability.

leejosepho wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
I don't need a book to tell me killing is wrong because empathy is inherent in social beings for the most part.

Sure, but so is "fight or flight" and any result that might follow. Therefore, at least some of us *do* need to be told, "Be angry, and sin not."
Well the difference is one is a biological mechanism, and the other is some arbitrary rule laid out by a book.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

13 Feb 2011, 1:15 pm

91 wrote:
Volodja wrote:
How is it wrong for two men or two women to have sex though??


Because it is written that it is. Though this in your view likely, the least satisfying answer, it is in my view, the best. Reasons can be changed, if it is objectively defined as wrong, however arbitrary and unfair this might seem, it cannot be changed.



The Bible only prohibits two men from having coitus together. The Bible doesn't have an issue with two women getting it on. Nor should anyone who claims to follow the Bible.

Quote:
AlSwearengen wrote:
Does a Christian belief structure make it an easy mark for those rallying against homophobia? Yes.


Hating someone for the sexual preference is prohibited under Christian doctrine. It is possible for someone to be a hypocrite but the system is hardly enabling (certain Churches might be). Your description is perhaps, too sweeping.


Hating anyone, regardless of circumstances, is prohibited under Christian doctrine. Even if you're being tortured and crucified.



leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

13 Feb 2011, 1:32 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:
The line is that thin?

If you wish, post a poll:

>> I didn't say (name removed) was ret*d.
>> more to do with cognitive distortion

Better safe than sorry, I would suggest.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 82
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

13 Feb 2011, 1:53 pm

But who among us can GUARANTEE we are free from cognitive distortion? How could we tell?

We can to a degree [assuming a pile of bases] measure compatibility with a norm, but who can vouch for the degree of distortion of the norm?

I will grant that ignorant, misled, and obstinate might be more polite than either ret*d or distorted of cognition.



leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

13 Feb 2011, 1:56 pm

The point here is this: It is only the weakest argument or position that requires mention of the opposition (at an opponent's expense) as a distraction from itself.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

13 Feb 2011, 3:01 pm

Philologos wrote:
Quote:
You brought up gender differences, I'm thinking, for the traditional claim that male/male parts don't fit together as naturally as male/female parts. Yes? If no, why did you bring up gender differences?


No. I did NOT bring up gender differences for any such reason. I brought them up SIMPLY to support my statement that sex automatically involves gender-based differences...
I say again - I do not talk about it. I am not now talking about homosexuality. I am talking about honest non-subverted communication.


What the hell is your game? Why are you talking about gender differences on a thread about homosexuality, if not to comment about homosexuality?



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

13 Feb 2011, 3:05 pm

Philologos wrote:
LKL:

But I don't think that was the point of the thread.

We could ask the poster what he thought he meant. But in any case it SAID Christians fixate on homosexuality.

I responded to what it said, seeing no signals of irony or subtext.

The poster did not correct me if I misunderstood.

So you say I am disingenuous because I believed what I read?

How can anybody talk in a culture where no one says what he means?

Because the OP also said a lot more than that. You can't pick out one sentence and say, 'that's the entire point of the thread, and anyone addressing the other parts of the OP is going off-topic and seeing subtext that isn't there.' Because that IS what you are saying, here.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

13 Feb 2011, 3:09 pm

Philologos wrote:
I am not now nor have I ever been any kind of activist. I do not interact with bigots. These days I do not watch TV. Having seen how futile my attempts to promulgate reason have been, I stopped trying.

I speak up when I see someone speaking clear false or accusing me of things I will not be accused of - IF I think I have half a chance of being heard.

Ok, fine, you're a private saint.
Quote:
DO NOT JUDGE ALL CHRISTIANS AS THE SAME - whether good or bad. THAT is bigotry.

I think I made it perfectly clear that I am willing to grant that many Christians are not homophobes, but what I want to know is, 'why do the non-homophobic Christians only declare their lack of bigotry when non-Christians attack the visible, loud bigotry of those who claim to represent Christianity?
If you sit back and let them speak for you, you should not be surprised when you are included in their flock by people on the outside.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

13 Feb 2011, 3:11 pm

Philologos wrote:
In any case, I will gladly talk with you on anything BUT homosexuality. You are too fixated on the subject.

*snort*
Well, then, since this is a thread about homosexuality, our conversation is over.



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

13 Feb 2011, 3:12 pm

leejosepho wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
The line is that thin?

If you wish, post a poll:

>> I didn't say (name removed) was ret*d.
>> more to do with cognitive distortion

Better safe than sorry, I would suggest.
Meh I'm not even gonna bother. Unless it's a direct personal attack or an insinuation, the line might be thin but it hasn't been crossed. I will call people out on their arguments but I don't necessarily attack people (though I am guilty of having made insinuations in the past which I will definitely tone down).



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 82
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

13 Feb 2011, 5:38 pm

Hey guys and / or gals -


Just for the record:


I am sorry I stupidly assumede words still have meanings whch LKL assures me is not true in this Deconstructionist age, but, for the record

Up till 1986 I was an atheist.

After July of 1986 I was a Christian

That is all that changed.

I did NOT change my attitudes nor my behavior toward:

science

education

governmental structure

politicians

liberals

conservatives

Muslims

Jews

Christians

UnChristian so-called Christians

atheists

homosexuals

heterosexuals

idiots

fakes

Asians

AfroAmericans

Amerinds

Hispanics

Persons of Polish descent

abortion

vivisection

physical education.

---------

If my beliefs in any of these or many other areas need to change because I I am a Christian, God has failed to notify me.

-----

If tonight I realize that new data convince me of the validity of atheism, none of those attitudes will change.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

13 Feb 2011, 8:02 pm

I was just thinking--why is God allegedly so dead set against male homosexuality? Maybe it has something to do with him being omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. He sits there in Heaven, looking at absolutely everyone at the same time, all the time. He doesn't want to look at male-on-male. But he may get off on male-on-female and female-on-female.

I was just thinking about myself, and what I look at on the internet. I may have just exactly the same tastes as God. Male-on-male I delete or navigate away immediately. Anything involving women --especially if she has a nice ass-- Great!

In fact, both God and I may actually be Lesbians, trapped inside a man's body.



leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

13 Feb 2011, 8:18 pm

pandabear wrote:
In fact, both God and I may actually be Lesbians, trapped inside a man's body.

The same one?


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

13 Feb 2011, 8:24 pm

Possibly. It is getting crowded in here.