Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
WSJ - How Psychiatry Went Crazy
... The DSM-II published in 1968, made homosexuality a mental disorder, a decision revoked by vote in 1973. In the general excitement about that progressive decision, few noted that voting didn't seem to be the most scientific way of determining mental illness. Narcissistic Personality Disorder was voted out in 1968 and voted back in 1980; where did it go for 12 years? Doctors don't vote on whether pneumonia is a disease. ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
Yes, It seems prone to not only political influence but financial ones, witness the past 20 years and all the new disorders, and new pricey drugs, therapies, etc. that have mushroomed all over the place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,498 Posts
When you can vote yourself riches beyond measure, how do you vote??
Geoff
Who read a book about the **** vote, mentioned it on the old FreeNet and all copies in the Cleveland library system were defaced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,168 Posts
The one that tickled me was 'caffeine intoxication' :confused: ???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
Sad state when we can "vote" moral behavior out of our society...what we allow or accept today we will embrace tomorrow..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
Well I'm a Christian, but I'll admit that there is a good deal of research to support the assertion that homosexuality is biological in many instances, and in many others, it's pure choice. We live in a secular society, that's just the way it is. If we were a theocracy, I'm betting such changes would never have been made. But then again, we all know that theocracies tend to become radicalized every last time. So I'll tolerate the homosexuals as long as they tolerate my love of the Lord. This is one Christian who will NEVER discriminate against someone for who or what they are. My job is to love all...JUST AS THEY ARE. Jesus took my just as I am, all MY flaws and sins. I'm no better than a homosexual in the eyes of the Lord, and he loves me just as much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
Well I'm a Christian, but I'll admit that there is a good deal of research to support the assertion that homosexuality is biological in many instances, and in many others, it's pure choice. We live in a secular society, that's just the way it is. If we were a theocracy, I'm betting such changes would never have been made. But then again, we all know that theocracies tend to become radicalized every last time. So I'll tolerate the homosexuals as long as they tolerate my love of the Lord. This is one Christian who will NEVER discriminate against someone for who or what they are. My job is to love all...JUST AS THEY ARE. Jesus took my just as I am, all MY flaws and sins. I'm no better than a homosexual in the eyes of the Lord, and he loves me just as much.
Well said...once we accept we repent. Repent means "turn-away" not just feel bad or sorry. Paul said "work out your salvation with fear and trembling"
its a daily work to pick up your cross....that means dying to self and all our self desires each day. for that day
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
Well said...once we accept we repent. Repent means "turn-away" not just feel bad or sorry. Paul said "work out your salvation with fear and trembling"
its a daily work to pick up your cross....that means dying to self and all our self desires each day. for that day
But repentence is not a condition of salvation; that's where a lot of fundamental Christian churches go wrong and end up treating homosexuals like second class citizens. We are ALL willful and habitual sinners; it's in our nature. Their sin is no greater than ours; whatever it may be. But since it's a sexual sin, American's and fundamental Christiand distort the message and say because they didn't repent, they will neve be saved. That's not the message of Christ. Yes we repent, of course we repent. But that's a condition of the heart, not a condition of salvation. Look at Paul's struggles. If repentence was truely a condition of salvation, none of use would make it; least of all Paul.

We commit our souls to the Lord, and we trust in the Holy Spirit to do the rest. The Holy Spirit will drive change in our lives. You CAN'T be truely saved and never change. The Holy Spirit will change your "want to's". But if a homosexual is never able to change his urges, that doesn't mean he's going to hell. Just that he has an affliction (remember Paul's affliction?) that he struggles with more and more. Hey we win some and we lose some.

Any idiot can see that there are some serious biological differences in some people that make them pre-disposed toward homosexuality; you'd have to be blind to not see that. Homosexuality is a sin, but it's not the unofrgivable sin. We as Christians in America have let the fundamentalists completely isolate and aleniate homosexuals to the point to where they no longer think Jesus loves them. How would you like to attone for THAT sin on judgment day?

John 13:34-35: THAT is the guideline for EVERYTHING a Christian is supposed to do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
... there is a good deal of research to support the assertion that homosexuality is biological in many instances, and in many others, it's pure choice.
I have yet to see any evidence that supports propagation of homosexuality through biology. There are claims that they have found the "gay gene" but nothing found so far can explain how such a gene would survive natural selection. Natural selection would eliminate the carriers of an inherited trait that results in dysfunctional self destructive sexual behavior.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
But repentence is not a condition of salvation; that's where a lot of fundamental Christian churches go wrong and end up treating homosexuals like second class citizens. We are ALL willful and habitual sinners; it's in our nature. Their sin is no greater than ours; whatever it may be. But since it's a sexual sin, American's and fundamental Christiand distort the message and say because they didn't repent, they will neve be saved. That's not the message of Christ. Yes we repent, of course we repent. But that's a condition of the heart, not a condition of salvation. Look at Paul's struggles. If repentence was truely a condition of salvation, none of use would make it; least of all Paul.

We commit our souls to the Lord, and we trust in the Holy Spirit to do the rest. The Holy Spirit will drive change in our lives. You CAN'T be truely saved and never change. The Holy Spirit will change your "want to's". But if a homosexual is never able to change his urges, that doesn't mean he's going to hell. Just that he has an affliction (remember Paul's affliction?) that he struggles with more and more. Hey we win some and we lose some.

Any idiot can see that there are some serious biological differences in some people that make them pre-disposed toward homosexuality; you'd have to be blind to not see that. Homosexuality is a sin, but it's not the unofrgivable sin. We as Christians in America have let the fundamentalists completely isolate and aleniate homosexuals to the point to where they no longer think Jesus loves them. How would you like to attone for THAT sin on judgment day?

John 13:34-35: THAT is the guideline for EVERYTHING a Christian is supposed to do.
Agreed...we make choices everyday. We choose to sin or choose to follow God, ANY rebellion to God is sin...its not separated by degrees. Homosexuality is in direct rebellion to Gods creation and design for His creation. All sin is forgivable but must be confessed as such.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
I have yet to see any evidence that supports propagation of homosexuality through biology. There are claims that they have found the "gay gene" but nothing found so far can explain how such a gene would survive natural selection. Natural selection would eliminate the carriers of an inherited trait that results in dysfunctional self destructive sexual behavior.
good point...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
I have yet to see any evidence that supports propagation of homosexuality through biology. There are claims that they have found the "gay gene" but nothing found so far can explain how such a gene would survive natural selection. Natural selection would eliminate the carriers of an inherited trait that results in dysfunctional self destructive sexual behavior.
Then you're either not looking or you're specifically looking for evidence to the contrary. Homosexuality exists in a myriad of animals all throughout the world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
Then you're either not looking or you're specifically looking for evidence to the contrary. Homosexuality exists in a myriad of animals all throughout the world.
I gotta say "show me" on that one Kevin...I think your confusing sexual drive for homosexuality. If you know your Bible, that's the only sin Gods call an "abomination". It is in direct contrast to creation. You can still love the sinner but we are not to love the sin. Repentance is a sign of salvation and points to acceptance of Christ sacrifice on the cross. Otherwise, whats the point? Just go on intentionally sinning? Are we to test God and His grace? as Paul writes "may it never be".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
Researchers found that disabling the fucose mutarotase (FucM) gene in laboratory mice - which influences the levels of estrogen to which the brain is exposed - caused the female mice to behave as if they were male as they grew up.

Homosexual behavior in animals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you want to know the truth, you'll read it. Otherwise, you'll pick out a few things you can pick on to support your pre-disposed conclusions. I'm not going to get into a theological debate on homosexuality; it's fruitless (no pun intended).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
Then you're either not looking or you're specifically looking for evidence to the contrary. Homosexuality exists in a myriad of animals all throughout the world.
I am "tip-toeing" into this.....
It is true that some animals in nature engage in activity that would to us be perceived as "homosexual." But does this represent true homosexuality?

Take for instance the example of a certain type of frog. These frogs (I recall the observations but have forgotten the name of the frog) have been seen to engage in homosexual behaviour. Further research, however reveals the truth.
These frogs are stupid. Okay that isn't really supposed to be a joke; but these frogs have such simple reptilian brains they have no way to distinguish male frogs from females. They are essentially "pre-programmed" by evolution to a set of behaviour; when they come across another frog of their kind, they attempt to mate. If it is a female frog they succeed, but obviously if it's another male, they don't.
This cannot be said to be "homosexual behaviour," per se. It is in fact an evolutionary evolved instinct-driven behaviour that allows the specie of frog to survive.
Other situations may also drive "homosexual" behaviour, such as lack of members of the opposite sex. Is this true "homosexual" behaviour, or is it simply a means of venting built-up .... :mrgreen: .... "tensions?"
With animals I don't think we really can know, atleast all the time. Frogs are so primitive I think I'm on safe grounds claiming that it's a result of lower instinctual behaviour, not a matter of sentient choice. In higher animals the matter can become murky.
Earlier in history there were societies that did not disdain homosexuality as our present eurocentric "Christian" society(ies) does. During the Roman Empire, as well as the earlier Greek, it was not vilified in the way we do -- in fact in a lot of ways it was more the norm.

Ratfink2u said:
If you know your Bible, that's the only sin Gods call an "abomination". It is in direct contrast to creation.
Yes, this is true. But remember what was considered more important back then was to procreate. Many children died before adulthood was reached and it was common for women to die in childbirth. Society could fail if there were no replacements and however one feels about homosexuality it is not a behaviour that causes replacements to happen.
It is said in the Bible that it would be better for a man to spread his seed in the belly of a "whore" than on a rock. Need I explain why? The "whore" can become pregnant.
That's why.

Now as far as the present day is concerned we no longer have a dire need to keep up "replacing" people -- in fact overpopulation seems more of a problem today.
Is homosexuality a sin?:confused:
Well, as has been pointed out, God apparantly thinks so. The Bible says it is. But then ... maybe it wouldn't today -- I mean there is context and as I said our current problem is overpopulation. Just maybe today God is aware of this and would alter his ....."suggestions."

In any case it is any of my business to pass judgement, to "cast stones" -- since I am "without sin?":rolleyes: Ha ha. No that is NOT the case:

Kevin Gibson said:
So I'll tolerate the homosexuals as long as they tolerate my love of the Lord. This is one Christian who will NEVER discriminate against someone for who or what they are. My job is to love all...JUST AS THEY ARE. Jesus took my just as I am, all MY flaws and sins. I'm no better than a homosexual in the eyes of the Lord, and he loves me just as much.
I stand with Kevin on this. I don't care what people do in their private lives, so long as they respect me I respect them. And anyway, if God still regards it as a sin, that's HIS business. It is NOT my business. I do not know his will. But if he is omnipotent he will enforce his will.
....
And that, against me as well as other sinners, for we are all sinners.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
I am "tip-toeing" into this.....
It is true that some animals in nature engage in activity that would to us be perceived as "homosexual." But does this represent true homosexuality?

Take for instance the example of a certain type of frog. These frogs (I recall the observations but have forgotten the name of the frog) have been seen to engage in homosexual behaviour. Further research, however reveals the truth.
These frogs are stupid. Okay that isn't really supposed to be a joke; but these frogs have such simple reptilian brains they have no way to distinguish male frogs from females. They are essentially "pre-programmed" by evolution to a set of behaviour; when they come across another frog of their kind, they attempt to mate. If it is a female frog they succeed, but obviously if it's another male, they don't.
This cannot be said to be "homosexual behaviour," per se. It is in fact an evolutionary evolved instinct-driven behaviour that allows the specie of frog to survive.
Other situations may also drive "homosexual" behaviour, such as lack of members of the opposite sex. Is this true "homosexual" behaviour, or is it simply a means of venting built-up .... :mrgreen: .... "tensions?"
With animals I don't think we really can know, atleast all the time. Frogs are so primitive I think I'm on safe grounds claiming that it's a result of lower instinctual behaviour, not a matter of sentient choice. In higher animals the matter can become murky.
Earlier in history there were societies that did not disdain homosexuality as our present eurocentric "Christian" society(ies) does. During the Roman Empire, as well as the earlier Greek, it was not vilified in the way we do -- in fact in a lot of ways it was more the norm.

Yes, this is true. But remember what was considered more important back then was to procreate. Many children died before adulthood was reached and it was common for women to die in childbirth. Society could fail if there were no replacements and however one feels about homosexuality it is not a behaviour that causes replacements to happen.
It is said in the Bible that it would be better for a man to spread his seed in the belly of a "whore" than on a rock. Need I explain why? The "whore" can become pregnant.
That's why.

Now as far as the present day is concerned we no longer have a dire need to keep up "replacing" people -- in fact overpopulation seems more of a problem today.
Is homosexuality a sin?:confused:
Well, as has been pointed out, God apparantly thinks so. The Bible says it is. But then ... maybe it wouldn't today -- I mean there is context and as I said our current problem is overpopulation. Just maybe today God is aware of this and would alter his ....."suggestions."

In any case it is any of my business to pass judgement, to "cast stones" -- since I am "without sin?":rolleyes: Ha ha. No that is NOT the case:

I stand with Kevin on this. I don't care what people do in their private lives, so long as they respect me I respect them. And anyway, if God still regards it as a sin, that's HIS business. It is NOT my business. I do not know his will. But if he is omnipotent he will enforce his will.
....
And that, against me as well as other sinners, for we are all sinners.
God is immutable. He does not "change" His mind or His word. Which is good for us because if He did, then we wouldn't know how to please Him. It would constantly be changing and we wouldn't have a clue. Also, Since Jesus is God and Vice versa, He is immutable as well. Good thing again, otherwise His death on the cross might not be enough tomorrow, He might change His mind. Again, where would the plan of salvation be?
I don't hate gays or lesbians, we have several friends who are and practice that life style, What I am saying is God call it sin, not based upon a "period of time" but always. I can place my faith in something that doesn't "evolve" or change with the shifting winds of mans thoughts, perceptions or idea's. His are far greater, since He is the creator. I'm not forcing anything upon anyone, but my faith is steadfast.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,758 Posts
... If you know your Bible, that's the only sin Gods call an "abomination". It is in direct contrast to creation. You can still love the sinner but we are not to love the sin. Repentance is a sign of salvation and points to acceptance of Christ sacrifice on the cross. Otherwise, whats the point? Just go on intentionally sinning? Are we to test God and His grace? as Paul writes "may it never be".
If you claim to be Christian then you follow the "New Testament." Where in the NT does it mention Homosexuality? If you are going to follow Leviticus, then you can't pick and choose, you have to follow all of it. Had any shrimp lately? (Cause that's a no-no and also called an "abomination," but it is ok to own slaves as long as they're not locals).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
If you claim to be Christian then you follow the "New Testament." Where in the NT does it mention Homosexuality? If you are going to follow Leviticus, then you can't pick and choose, you have to follow all of it. Had any shrimp lately? (Cause that's a no-no but it is ok to sell your sister into slavery).
Where do you come up with all of this? Give biblical passages to back your claims please.
If you believe God is the creator, then is almost redundant to say you believe in His creation and the design for it. Man was given a woman, not another man or Gods plan would have ended right there. Your trying to justify your own desires of the flesh through biblical passages.
I follow and believe the Bible as Gods Holy word...that's my right. Your not going to force me into another way of beliefs nor am I you.
The whole reference to "seed on a rock" is waaaaaay out of context...I suggest if you want to challenge Gods word, read it thoroughly and read some commentaries on it. It's called faith for a reason...
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top