22 Apr 2011, 1:47 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Bethie wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
We are all born with a sin nature, but no one is born committing a sin. We're all born such that we are lying and stealing by the age of three. But later, many of us learn to curb those impulses significantly. That covers sin nature.
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
No one gives a flying f*ck what bigoted things your homophobic, sexist, genocidal, sadistic, jealous little diva god says about gay people.
As for "resisting" one's orientation, or neurology, you're off the deep end.
I think you are way out of line.
I'm not actually surprised by your foulness, however I am going to point out that liberals are supposed to be the tolerant ones (which as we both know is a falsehood).
Two things:
1) If, by your own admission, liberals are supposed to be the tolerant ones, is that an admission on the part of you, the self-professed conservative, that you've got free reign to be intolerant?
2) I can tolerate most things, but the one thing I have difficulty accepting is when other people act intolerant-- i.e., calling homosexuals "neurologically defective". Call it a weakness, or hypocrisy if you will. I don't really care. I have a niece who is a lesbian, and several gay and bisexual friends about whom I care very much, and it angers me when people look down on them for what I know is really no more of a choice than it was my choice to be an Aspie. I can't speak for anyone else here, but I'm perfectly willing to extend you and your loved ones the courtesy of "live and let live" if you're willing to extend it to me and mine.
22 Apr 2011, 1:51 pm
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Bethie wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
We are all born with a sin nature, but no one is born committing a sin. We're all born such that we are lying and stealing by the age of three. But later, many of us learn to curb those impulses significantly. That covers sin nature.
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
No one gives a flying f*ck what bigoted things your homophobic, sexist, genocidal, sadistic, jealous little diva god says about gay people.
As for "resisting" one's orientation, or neurology, you're off the deep end.
I think you are way out of line.
I'm not actually surprised by your foulness, however I am going to point out that liberals are supposed to be the tolerant ones (which as we both know is a falsehood).
whatever, nobody cares what you think on this matter. I already know you consider homosexuality equivalent to a male dog asserting dominance over another male dog. That disqualifies you from any attempt at appearing tolerant. Badmouthing Bethie for her hatred of Ragtime's stupid, stupid intolerant views just makes you look like an idiot. And obviously it was conservatives fighting for equal rights all this time. Yep, that's exactly how history has gone down.Actually it is well known liberals don't think people that disagree with them have equal rights.
Was Ragtime advocating violence? No.
So quite frankly you and Bethie are out of line.
22 Apr 2011, 2:01 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Bethie wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
We are all born with a sin nature, but no one is born committing a sin. We're all born such that we are lying and stealing by the age of three. But later, many of us learn to curb those impulses significantly. That covers sin nature.
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
No one gives a flying f*ck what bigoted things your homophobic, sexist, genocidal, sadistic, jealous little diva god says about gay people.
As for "resisting" one's orientation, or neurology, you're off the deep end.
I think you are way out of line.
I'm not actually surprised by your foulness, however I am going to point out that liberals are supposed to be the tolerant ones (which as we both know is a falsehood).
whatever, nobody cares what you think on this matter. I already know you consider homosexuality equivalent to a male dog asserting dominance over another male dog. That disqualifies you from any attempt at appearing tolerant. Badmouthing Bethie for her hatred of Ragtime's stupid, stupid intolerant views just makes you look like an idiot. And obviously it was conservatives fighting for equal rights all this time. Yep, that's exactly how history has gone down.Actually it is well known liberals don't think people that disagree with them have equal rights.
Was Ragtime advocating violence? No.
So quite frankly you and Bethie are out of line.
1) Who said anything about violence? You silly little man
2) Ragtime advocates people change their behavior because it is against his religious views, whether they share those views or not. How is that tolerant?
3) Liberals are the ones who have fought for equal rights in history. Your attempts at painting it the other way around stink of Fox News indoctrination. What evidence have you that 'liberals' don't want people who disagree with them to have equal rights? And don't confuse the Democrat Party with liberals. There is a big difference
22 Apr 2011, 2:05 pm
Chevand wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Bethie wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
We are all born with a sin nature, but no one is born committing a sin. We're all born such that we are lying and stealing by the age of three. But later, many of us learn to curb those impulses significantly. That covers sin nature.
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
No one gives a flying f*ck what bigoted things your homophobic, sexist, genocidal, sadistic, jealous little diva god says about gay people.
As for "resisting" one's orientation, or neurology, you're off the deep end.
I think you are way out of line.
I'm not actually surprised by your foulness, however I am going to point out that liberals are supposed to be the tolerant ones (which as we both know is a falsehood).
Two things:
1) If, by your own admission, liberals are supposed to be the tolerant ones, is that an admission on the part of you, the self-professed conservative, that you've got free reign to be intolerant?
Actually, I was calling liberals a pack of liars, because as we've seen liberals are neither tolerant, nor do they truely care for others.
Chevand wrote:
2) I can tolerate most things, but the one thing I have difficulty accepting is when other people act intolerant-- i.e., calling homosexuals "neurologically defective". Call it a weakness, or hypocrisy if you will. I don't really care. I have a niece who is a lesbian, and several gay and bisexual friends about whom I care very much, and it angers me when people look down on them for what I know is really no more of a choice than it was my choice to be an Aspie. I can't speak for anyone else here, but I'm perfectly willing to extend you and your loved ones the courtesy of "live and let live" if you're willing to extend it to me and mine.
He wasn't calling them neurologically defective, he was saying they were experiencing an impulse that they should resist giving into.
22 Apr 2011, 2:07 pm
22 Apr 2011, 2:13 pm
22 Apr 2011, 2:14 pm
Oodain
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,
22 Apr 2011, 2:16 pm
22 Apr 2011, 2:16 pm
22 Apr 2011, 2:18 pm
22 Apr 2011, 2:23 pm
Oodain
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,
22 Apr 2011, 2:28 pm
22 Apr 2011, 2:28 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Quote:
He wasn't calling them neurologically defective, he was saying they were experiencing an impulse that they should resist giving into.
He was claiming they have a neurological impediment that leads them to this impulse. Or do you agree with him? I thought you were oh-so-tolerant? Or are you just as full of sh** as the pundits you constantly get wood for?
I agree that they have an impulse that they should resist, but if they choose not to, quite frankly that is their business as long as they don't run out and flaunt it and/or try to push it on my children.
That's my stance on the subject matter, Ragtime has his own opinion. I will not stand by and let people here behave like the jerks at that other forum that treated me like **** and not call people out on it. I'm standing up for Ragtime like other people should have stood up for me, it really isn't about how much I agree or disagree with Ragtime's stance, it is the fact I will not stand by and watch someone get treated like I was for no reason other than they have a different viewpoint.
If you got a problem with that TOO BAD!
lol so you posted s**t like this at that forum? btw if you were being treated really unjustly I would stand up for you. Ragtime should have expected this thread to go this way. Its practically flame-baiting, and that's how it ended up being treated
But I'm glad to see you admit to your intolerance (yet again). Myself, I think public displays of affection should be kept to a tasteful minimum regardless of orientation. I also think that other people's views shouldn't be forced on my children. Since homosexuality is not a choice, you have nothing to worry about. But intolerance of homosexuality (or other things the Christian Right is so hateful of) is a choice, and you guys should practice what you preach about not flaunting or pushing your views. But in any case, I think you and Ragtime have a neurological impediment you need to resist- this impediment is called intolerance. I am intolerant of intolerance
Got a problem with that? TOO BAD! 
22 Apr 2011, 2:39 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Chevand wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Bethie wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
We are all born with a sin nature, but no one is born committing a sin. We're all born such that we are lying and stealing by the age of three. But later, many of us learn to curb those impulses significantly. That covers sin nature.
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
No one gives a flying f*ck what bigoted things your homophobic, sexist, genocidal, sadistic, jealous little diva god says about gay people.
As for "resisting" one's orientation, or neurology, you're off the deep end.
I think you are way out of line.
I'm not actually surprised by your foulness, however I am going to point out that liberals are supposed to be the tolerant ones (which as we both know is a falsehood).
Two things:
1) If, by your own admission, liberals are supposed to be the tolerant ones, is that an admission on the part of you, the self-professed conservative, that you've got free reign to be intolerant?
Actually, I was calling liberals a pack of liars, because as we've seen liberals are neither tolerant, nor do they truely care for others.
Oh, do tell. I consider myself liberal, and I'd say I'm pretty tolerant. Left to my own devices, I certainly wouldn't bug you for being Christian or a conservative. I've got my own life to tend to, so I'd really just as soon leave you alone and let you live your own way. The only request I have is for the same respect. If living your own way means disrespecting people I care about, then yeah, we have a problem.
Inuyasha wrote:
Chevand wrote:
2) I can tolerate most things, but the one thing I have difficulty accepting is when other people act intolerant-- i.e., calling homosexuals "neurologically defective". Call it a weakness, or hypocrisy if you will. I don't really care. I have a niece who is a lesbian, and several gay and bisexual friends about whom I care very much, and it angers me when people look down on them for what I know is really no more of a choice than it was my choice to be an Aspie. I can't speak for anyone else here, but I'm perfectly willing to extend you and your loved ones the courtesy of "live and let live" if you're willing to extend it to me and mine.
He wasn't calling them neurologically defective, he was saying they were experiencing an impulse that they should resist giving into.
He actually used the words "neurological defect" to describe homosexuality:
Ragtime wrote:
The neurological defect is, of course, not sin.
See? And you have yet to specify-- why should they resist it, if it's a genuine part of who they are? Should I "resist" being an Aspie? Should you "resist" being a conservative?
Don't take this as me being combative. I'm just curious. We could quarrel all day on whether homosexuality is always a conscious choice. I presume you believe it is (but please, correct me if I'm wrong), while I do not. Ultimately, though, neither of us would concede the point, and we'd get nowhere. I'd much rather spend that time trying to understand the reasoning behind your point of view, even if I disagree with it, and work out some sort of détente. I greatly prefer diplomacy over open hostility, if the option is on the table.
22 Apr 2011, 3:35 pm
22 Apr 2011, 4:01 pm
