or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Swiss iPhone rumor; BlackBerry Thunder; Apple gay-friendly
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Swiss iPhone rumor; BlackBerry Thunder; Apple gay-friendly - Page 7

post #241 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Look at your genitalia. Look at the genitalia of the opposite sex. Tab A was designed for Slot B. Look at the orifice on your backside. It was not designed for the purpose. It was designed for exit, and has no lubrication system.

Frugality, do you look at the genitalia of the opposite sex? Have you ever seen it? Where? In an anatomy book? If not, then I guess you're a closet sinner, aren't you?

Otherwise, how the hell do you know what "fits" and what doesn't?

REPENT!

Flagellate yourself 20 times for each time you've downloaded pr0n off the internet. That should do it.

Of course, if you believed in Leviticus, as you claim to, you would expect to be put to death.
post #242 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Look at your genitalia. Look at the genitalia of the opposite sex. Tab A was designed for Slot B. Look at the orifice on your backside. It was not designed for the purpose. It was designed for exit, and has no lubrication system.

Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?

That's not what love--or sex--is all about.
post #243 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?

That's not what love--or sex--is all about.

Except that he's never touched or been attracted to a woman's vagina, as he claims. He's not attracted to females. He's shown no evidence of having such an attraction. Who knows, maybe on his wedding night, he might find himself repulsed by a woman's anatomy, or confused by it.

Honestly speaking he's just as likely to be attracted to penises as he is to vaginas. But his family and church have already told him who he should be attracted to (as he's trying to tell us, without having any personal experience on the subject), and he's never tested their theory.

There have actually been fundamentalist Christians who married and tried to have sex literally for years by putting the husband's penis into the wife's navel, they were so ignorant about anatomy.

And there have been homosexual fundamentalist Christians who tried to fight their sexuality, with the help of huge organizations backing them up, and failed. You can't tell me Bussee et. al. were raised in a homosexual-friendly environment that indoctrinated them into becoming homosexuals.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex-gay :

Quote:
* John Paulk, then leader of Focus on the Family's Love Won Out conference and chairman of the board for Exodus International North America, was photographed in September of 2000 exiting a Washington, D.C. gay bar.[65] This led to Paulk stepping down from the two organizations.[66]

* Michael Johnston, an HIV-positive man who is featured in the film It's Not Gay, promoted by the American Family Association, had frequently been interviewed on U.S. television and radio regarding his claimed change in sexuality, and even featured in a national television advertising campaign in 1998 stating that Jesus Christ empowered him to leave his homosexual past. In 2002, he was exposed as having recently resumed having sex with men, and he admitted to having had unprotected sex with multiple male partners without disclosing his HIV-positive status, despite knowing he that he was HIV-positive, for over a period of two years.[67]

* Exodus International's co-founder Michael Bussee and his partner, a fellow ex-gay counselor, Gary Cooper quit the group and in 1979, held a life commitment ceremony together. Bussee went on to become an outspoken critic of Exodus and the ex-gay movement.[68] He flatly rejects therapies designed to change or "cure" gay people, but recently acknowledged potential for therapy that "does not promise change, but instead offers patients help in managing their desires and modifying their behavior to match their religious values -- even if that means a life of celibacy".[69]

* Colin Cook, founder of Homosexuals Anonymous, was in 1986 discovered to be engaging in sexual acts with his patients. He claimed that the nude massages of other men should desensitize them against homosexual desires. In 1987, he was expelled from Homosexuals Anonymous for sexual activity, and in 1995 a similar scandal happened with his newly founded group FaithQuest Colorado. Cook had engaged in phone sex, practiced long and grinding hugs, and asked patients to bring gay pornography to sessions so that he could help desensitize them against it.[70]

* Christopher Austin was an ex-gay counselor who was sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2007 for sexually assaulting a male client. Austin was affiliated with and gave presentations at NARTH and Evergreen International, which describes him as "a therapist specializing in homosexual and sexual addiction recovery [and] the creator of RENEW, a multi-dimensional treatment approach for men struggling with homosexuality".[71][72]

* Terrance Lewis was a minister and former counsellor at Providence Bible College in Winnipeg, Canada who was found guilty in February 2008 for sexually assaulting a young man who sought counselling to make him straight. The alleged victim, now 29, told court he started meeting Lewis for counselling sessions in early 2000 after his parents caught him viewing gay pornography on the family computer. The man said Lewis started a program of “touch therapy,” which included the two kissing and fondling each other and engaging in sexual roleplaying. [73][74]
post #244 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?

That's not what love--or sex--is all about.

No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.

It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.
post #245 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?

That's not what love--or sex--is all about.

That's the thing. To these bigots, sex has nothing to do with love. Nor do they want it to. It's simply a means for procreation. And they are forbidden by many churches, even in marriage, to enjoy it.
post #246 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Except that he's never touched or been attracted to a woman's vagina, as he claims. He's not attracted to females. He's shown no evidence of having such an attraction.

The first part is true; I've never touched a woman in that way. The rest of your assumptions are false.
post #247 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.

It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.

So are you saying Hillary Clinton would be "completed" by marrying Elton John?

Like I said... a bigot.

I guess Ellen DeGeneres and Portia DeRossi are a match made in heaven.



Quote:
She said, "I could say the same thing I've said in every relationship: 'I'm happy.' But there's happiness and there's love, and then there's completion. It doesn't take away from any of the relationships that I've had, 'cause I've had amazing relationships. ... But I feel like I found my perfect fit."



Ellen agrees with you!
post #248 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

The first part is true; I've never touched a woman in that way. The rest of your assumptions are false.

SINNER!
post #249 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

That's the thing. To these bigots, sex has nothing to do with love. Nor do they want it to. It's simply a means for procreation. And they are forbidden by many churches, even in marriage, to enjoy it.

Man, you're on a roll today with the mis-information.

Studies were done asking people how satisfied they were with their sex lives. You would think the people with the highest ratings would be the adventurous ones....single college students, swingers, homosexuals... But the people who were most satisfied with their sex lives were.....(drum roll please).....heterosexual Protestant Christian married couples.
post #250 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

SINNER!

Yes I am. But Jesus canceled that debt. And he will pay for yours, too, if you let him.
post #251 of 426
Lots of time for replies but no links to a paper published by 'some scientists', from you, so far.

I'm waiting.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #252 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Yes I am. But Jesus canceled that debt. And he will pay for yours, too, if you let him.

No. You didn't read the Bible carefully. If the New Testament is true, then he paid for mine. Whether I "let him" or not. According to what is written, as opposed to what is spread by the false prophets of most "Christian" churches, he paid for all our sins. Not just those who "love" him. Love for Jesus is not the "get out of Hell free" card. Jesus' sacrifice was (if you believe in it). It really sounds like you're not a very good Christian. You're willingly being used by the false prophets to spread their lies.

Unfortunately, logic won't have the best of your ilk. Just like Robot Santa, your head may explode, but a new one exactly the same will grow back in it's place, if not fatter, and more determined to be "right" than the one that came before.
post #253 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.

It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.

OK, that is indeed a non-biblical reason, but it's based completely on theory.

You have obviously never loved or had sex with someone (and apparently you've already said that).

Love and sex are visceral--you feel them. You can theorize about what's "right" all day long--but until you feel the attraction of love and sex, you'll never understand it. And you'll never understand how two men (or women) can be attracted to each other. Theory has nothing to do with it.

I don't understand why I'm attracted to men (especially men with beards), but lemme tell ya, it's real. I don't care if it's "not supposed to happen".

(FYI, I tried the marriage thing for 10 years, and it didn't work for me.)
post #254 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

No. You didn't read the Bible carefully. If the New Testament is true, then he paid for mine. Whether I "let him" or not. According to what is written, as opposed to what is spread by the false prophets of most "Christian" churches, he paid for all our sins. Not just those who "love" him.

By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.

There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.
post #255 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.

There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.

And by accepting my sexuality I am saying to God "Thy will be done". Homosexuals who deny their sexuality are the ones denying what God gave them.

And as pointed out before, eating shrimp is proclaimed in Leviticus as being cause for death. So I think we can rule out the "laws" of Leviticus as being pertinent to this day and age. So please tell me again, where in the Bible does it say anywhere that "God's will" is for exclusively heterosexual behavior? Or is it not actually the Bible that says so at all? Is it just the conjecture of false prophets? Yes. It is. And you can't prove otherwise.

By following those false prophets and spreading their lies, you are committing a far greater sin than anything written in the obsolete pages of Leviticus.
post #256 of 426
I love you guys, my day started crappy, but this just made me laugh all day.


And Lesbians still get to go to heaven since no one disproved my realization!


^_^



Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

And by accepting my sexuality (heterosexual for your information) I am saying to God "Thy will be done". Homosexuals who deny their sexuality are the ones denying what God gave them.

I said the exact same thing earlier.

I mean I am who I am, it's not like I want to be discriminated against.


Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.

There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.

Oh god, I can't resist...

If Hell's gates are locked from the inside that should make it easy enough to unlock and leave.
post #257 of 426
Maybe it is, but you are too busy enjoying the side benefits of the sinfulness so much that you don't notice you're currently on fire.
post #258 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG4G View Post

Maybe it is, but you are too busy enjoying the side benefits of the sinfulness so much that you don't notice you're currently on fire.

What are the side benefits of spreading the false prophets' lies? What, they get to go to Church barbecues? Is that why they're on fire? Accidentally splashed their sinning selves with lighter fluid?
post #259 of 426
I have my own beliefs, you have yours

If you want to winge about Christians pushing their beliefs on you, have a look at this thread. I see 99% here are atheists trying to convinve the 1% christian population here they are wrong, and just throwing insults.

You don't agree with Christians' views? Thats fine. Don't. Just dont insult people because of their views, and I won't insult you for yours.
post #260 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG4G View Post

I have my own beliefs, you have yours

If you want to winge about Christians pushing their beliefs on you, have a look at this thread. I see 99% here are atheists trying to convinve the 1% christian population here they are wrong, and just throwing insults.

Where, in all my arguments above, did you get the impression that I'm an Atheist? I am, but you had nothing in this thread upon which to base that assumption, except that I don't blindly follow hateful church doctrine. I'm not against Christian views, to love thy neighbor as thyself, to live life with charity, compassion and forgiveness. But I am against the views that are nowhere to be found in any plausible part of the Bible and never taught by Christ, and that are being spread by the false prophets of various churches.

Ask yourself. When their views diverge (be it with the acceptance of homosexuality, or the consumption of crustaceans), do you choose to believe in Jesus, or do you choose to believe in the Church? If your answer is the latter, then you are the non-Christian, not I.

I think you foolishly confuse Christianity with the blind following of Church dogma.

Are you a Christian, or are you a blind follower of a false prophet?

Quote:
You don't agree with Christians' views? Thats fine. Don't. Just dont insult people because of their views, and I won't insult you for yours.

I think if you look at this thread, you'll notice that no one came out defending homosexuality or "throwing insults" until some bigoted non-Christian assholes came out condemning it. Those assholes were not invited to share their views, and cannot be allowed to spread their ignorance and false prophecy without rebuttal.
post #261 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Where, in all my arguments above, did you get the impression that I'm an Atheist? I'm not against Christian views, to love thy neighbor as thyself, to live life with charity, compassion and forgiveness. But I am against the views that are nowhere to be found in the Bible, and that are being spread by the false prophets of various churches.

Ask yourself. When their views diverge (be it with the acceptance of homosexuality, or the consumption of crustaceans), do you choose to believe in Jesus, or do you choose to believe in the Church? If your answer is the latter, then you are the non-Christian, not I.

I think you foolishly confuse Christianity with the blind following of Church dogma.

I don't confuse it, and I agree with you that we shouldn't follow what the church says, but what Jesus says.

I read the bible for what is the most plausible thing they are trying to say, with reference to their culture, and their accepted meanings behind the text.

I'd say that the Apostle Paul denotes quite well what the difference is between them within the bible, and that has to do with how the law was an application for the Jewish people at that time, and how some of the rules are for the benefit of the culture, some of them for sanitary reasons (such as menstrual issues, and keeping clean) others around dietary issues at the time (the best foods in that culture) and some of them for spiritual well-being. All these tied up in Levitical law.

Some no longer apply because their groups no longer apply (eg, sanitary issues can be laxed now, etc) and some do apply because they cross the cultural divide. I think paul makes that view about sexual practice, and speaks of how those laws relate to your body and mind, and aren't as subjective.
post #262 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG4G View Post

I don't confuse it, and I agree with you that we shouldn't follow what the church says, but what Jesus says.

I read the bible for what is the most plausible thing they are trying to say, with reference to their culture, and their accepted meanings behind the text.

I'd say that the Apostle Paul denotes quite well what the difference is between them within the bible, and that has to do with how the law was an application for the Jewish people at that time, and how some of the rules are for the benefit of the culture, some of them for sanitary reasons (such as menstrual issues, and keeping clean) others around dietary issues at the time (the best foods in that culture) and some of them for spiritual well-being. All these tied up in Levitical law.

Some no longer apply because their groups no longer apply (eg, sanitary issues can be laxed now, etc) and some do apply because they cross the cultural divide. I think paul makes that view about sexual practice, and speaks of how those laws relate to your body and mind, and aren't as subjective.

The only thing the non-Christian anti-gay bigots have to cling to in the New Testament is Paul. Not Jesus. Paul. I have news for you. There is a large faction of academics who have studied the Bible carefully who theorize that Paul himself was a homosexual.

As far as Leviticus goes, I agree with you that it's obsolete. Shrimp can be cleaned and refrigerated, making the disease factor of eating crustaceans obsolete. Men can wear condoms, making the disease factor of having homosexual intercourse obsolete. There's no difference in "subjectiveness". Just simply pick-and-choose proselytizing by false prophets.
post #263 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiMiC View Post

then you best be getting back there before they send mommy to find you

Find/come up with your own jokes...if you can.
post #264 of 426
And there are a lot of academics that would say that I, too, am a homosexual.

Oh, wait, that would have something to do with the fact that I like to have sex with guys... wait.. I AM GAY

If Paul was gay, which he may or may not have been, then it is more likely he would have been pro gay not anti-homosexual activity. It proves nothing...

And I would hold that Paul's words, though not Jesus' are still contained in the bible and were selected in the same way the Old Testament was - a collection of books Jesus backed as the word of God.

I actually sway to the belief that Paul was gay too, as a matter of fact. Whether he acted on it or not, is a different story. I actually would find comfort knowing I am in good company like that.

But there are more important things in life... like holding to Jesus teachings of loving others despite their sin. I won't yell at a Christian if they have a different interpretation to me... Heck, I know how hard it is to come to a conclusion, and I am not exactly a know it all and don't claim to be.

Humility in all areas goes a long, long way.
post #265 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG4G View Post

If you want to winge about Christians pushing their beliefs on you, have a look at this thread. I see 99% here are atheists trying to convinve the 1% christian population here they are wrong, and just throwing insults.

Gosh, why would you assume that everyone who disagrees with the Christian fundamentalist line is automatically an atheist? I myself am a lapsed Catholic, but I still believe in God.

In fact, most people do... the survey I looked at stated that the US is 78% Christian, of various flavors. Only 14% of people surveyed said they had "no religious affiliation", which I take to mean atheist, agnostic, or just doesn't care.

Thus, Christians in the US outnumber atheists at least 5 to 1, probably more.

So tell us again why you think this forum is 99% godless and Christians are being persecuted by the giant mob of unruly atheists?

Or is it more likely that many of the ppl who are fed up with fundamentalist Christian bullshit are, in fact, Christians themselves?


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #266 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG4G View Post

If Paul was gay, which he may or may not have been, then it is more likely he would have been pro gay not anti-homosexual activity. It proves nothing...


Wow... someone needs to tell Senator Larry Craig that, then... oh, and anti-gay evangelical preacher Ted Haggard too.

Is there room for a Mark Foley joke in here somewhere?

Why is it that so many conservative and/or very religious anti-gay crusaders and politicians end up being gay themselves? Too funny. They'll just end up as sad old queens who hate themselves.



.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #267 of 426
Do I hate myself? No. I accept that I am attracted to men. Joke about it. Its a laugh, what many including a lot of gay friends see as a contradiction.


I see this as something God allowed into my life. Its a complexity. Its a uniqueness. It helped make me who I am and I am better for it.

Just because I don't want to act on it anymore, doesn't mean I hate myself. I kinda find some enjoyment in the joke of it all
post #268 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG4G View Post

Do I hate myself? No. I accept that I am attracted to men. Joke about it. Its a laugh, what many including a lot of gay friends see as a contradiction.


I see this as something God allowed into my life. Its a complexity. Its a uniqueness. It helped make me who I am and I am better for it.

Just because I don't want to act on it anymore, doesn't mean I hate myself. I kinda find some enjoyment in the joke of it all


Hey, I wish you luck in your own unique personal struggle. But I really hope that you don't end up a lonely old man who looks back at his life and wonders, "What if I had just accepted myself?".

But, I'm not gay myself, and cannot completely understand all that you're going through. Must be tough. I'd hate to be stuck with your problem... beliefs versus 'what I am'.


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #269 of 426
Tough? Yeah, at times its not easy.

Recently has been an especially bad patch.
post #270 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiopollution View Post

Which scientists did some calculations?

Can you please provide a link to the research paper? PubMed link?


Also ignoring the fact that a protein has no need to randomly come together for life to form.

RNA world baby!

Of course, I'm guessing frugal probably thinks DNA IS a protein.
It's super when people who clearly have zero understanding of biology try to argue these things.

I hope frugal at least jacks off a lot.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #271 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

By the same token, you can sequester a gay male with a single female (called "marriage") and he will usually have sex with her.

But are you changing his essential sexuality? No.

People don't "become" gay or straight. They're born that way.

It doesn't mean you can't force them to have sex with a gender different from the one they would naturally choose--in extenuating circumstances like jail (or marriage, LOL).

No, I think it's much more accurate to assume there are some who will always be gay, some who will always be straight, any many who fall within a gradient of preference between the extremes.

In any case, absolutes don't pass muster when you are talking about behavior.

edit: wasn't satisfied with my phrasing.
post #272 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by skottichan View Post

Oh god, I can't resist...

If Hell's gates are locked from the inside that should make it easy enough to unlock and leave.

Exactly.

But if you leave, the only other place to go is heaven, which is where God is. And hell is the place where people who reject God would rather be. They would prefer to be in hell than to be with God, so he says, "O.K., then, have it your way." God is fair and just.

Choose wisely.
post #273 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

And by accepting my sexuality I am saying to God "Thy will be done". Homosexuals who deny their sexuality are the ones denying what God gave them.

And a pedophile can just as well say, "God made me like this." Should a pedophile deny his urges?
post #274 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

And a pedophile can just as well say, "God made me like this." Should a pedophile deny his urges?

Does pedophilia involve 2 consenting adults?

No.
post #275 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidm77 View Post

No, I think it's much more accurate to assume there are some who will always be gay, some who will always be straight, any many who fall within a gradient of preference between the extremes.

In any case, absolutes don't pass muster when you are talking about behavior.

edit: wasn't satisfied with my phrasing.

I totally agree that there are gradients of sexuality.

But my point continues to be that those don't change over time. If you greatly prefer men over women (or vice versa), that basic preference is not going to change over the course of your life.
post #276 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

Does pedophilia involve 2 consenting adults?

No.

What if it's a consenting man and a consenting boy? The age of consent is an arbitrary thing. Should we change it?

But the argument stands, though, that there are some sexual urges that are not to be acted upon.

And I'll point out again that sex is only for a male and female within the confines or marriage. That means we single people shouldn't be having sex, either. I can't argue that God made me horny, so I have the right to have sex. I don't. Only if I get married. Until then, urges need to be kept in check.
post #277 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

What if it's a consenting man and a consenting boy? The age of consent is an arbitrary thing. Should we change it?

But the argument stands, though, that there are some sexual urges that are not to be acted upon.

And I'll point out again that sex is only for a male and female within the confines or marriage. That means we single people shouldn't be having sex, either. I can't argue that God made me horny, so I have the right to have sex. I don't. Only if I get married. Until then, urges need to be kept in check.

No, I'm not advocating we change the age of consent. And, no, a consenting boy is not the same thing as a consenting adult.

So you have no answer to "2 consenting adults", do you? Of course not. There is nothing to argue there.

If you want to wait until you're married to have sex, that's your right. Personally, I think it's a rule that made sense when humans knew a lot less about preventing babies and getting diseases. Nowadays, there is lots of information on preventing diseases and children--it is very easy to be sexually active and disease (and child) free. So, what's the problem with having sex? Why is it so "special"? To me, sex is like eating or breathing--a normal part of life. Sex is a good thing; something to be cherished with someone special. But nonetheless a part of normal life.

To deny that seems ludicrous to me. But that's just my opinion, of course.
post #278 of 426
Daddy, why do bad men get away with doing terrible things?
God punishes them after they are dead. In hell!

Daddy, why does God let little children die with horrible diseases that He invented?
He makes it up to them later, in heaven.

So when Jesus died, he knew he was gonna be awright?
Err... Yeah

So it was like, no big deal. Jesus said crucificion, what-ever! I'm gonna be in heaven dude.
No. It really really hurt. And he did it for us! He died.

Daddy, you are making this shit up aren't you?

C.
post #279 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

What if it's a consenting man and a consenting boy? The age of consent is an arbitrary thing. Should we change it?

But the argument stands, though, that there are some sexual urges that are not to be acted upon.

And I'll point out again that sex is only for a male and female within the confines or marriage. That means we single people shouldn't be having sex, either. I can't argue that God made me horny, so I have the right to have sex. I don't. Only if I get married. Until then, urges need to be kept in check.

Oh your naivety is soooo cute!!


Age of consent is far from arbitrary, it's been proven time and time again that children are far from mentally or emotionally ready to enter into a contract/serious adult relationship. The way it sounds, you don't seem like you're able to wear big boy pants, and you're what? Pushing 40?


On that note, talked to my ex's dad this morning (he's a retired pastor), there is ZERO mention of lesbians in the bible. All references to "gay is a sin" are Man/Man only, and pretty much confined to the hyperstrict rules of Leviticus.


So as I've been saying all the time... All Lesbians Go to Heaven!
post #280 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Daddy, why do bad men get away with doing terrible things?
God punishes them after they are dead. In hell!

God gave us free will, which leaves open the option of doing wrong. If there is no judgement for doing wrong, then you would be free to do anything and everything you like.

We have all lied, cheated, stolen, spoken badly of some, committed adultery, or any combination thereof. We all deserve eternal separation from God. However, God has paid the fine, if we will accept it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Daddy, why does God let little children die with horrible diseases that He invented?
He makes it up to them later, in heaven.

God did not invent any of that. He intended our universe to be perfect, but our sin has caused a downward spiral of all creation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

So when Jesus died, he knew he was gonna be awright?
Err... Yeah
So it was like, no big deal. Jesus said crucificion, what-ever! I'm gonna be in heaven dude.
No. It really really hurt. And he did it for us! He died.

Here you are much closer to the mark. Jesus "for the joy set before him, endured the cross." He saw beyond death and saw his suffering as worth enduring because he loved us and didn't want to lose us.

Jesus denied himself many things in this life because he was looking toward the end result in heaven, when he would be reinstated fully as God the Son, having paid the ransom for all of us to be with him in heaven.

Sometimes you give up something you want here and now for something better later.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Swiss iPhone rumor; BlackBerry Thunder; Apple gay-friendly