Anyone who can't accept homosexuality...

[CSL]

Makes sense - they might think its the only reason they need, but only because they ignore logic, and thus, haven't bothered to think to consider anything else. If you can't justify something using logic and facts, how are you supposed to argue at all?

because to them religion are the only facts they need wether anyone likes it or not.

its also how people are raised, if a kids father says look at the ****ing f____t, the kid will grow up and most likely say the same

[Matra et Alpine]

Here is an article that discusses homosexuality and other morality issues without using religion as its main argument.

http://www.narth.com/docs/whypsych.html

Interesting article.
I'd have been more impressed if he had included the Victorian standard of having a mistress and a wife and the impact it had on the family and children for the period 60-100 years before the snapshot he's chosen.

Also his earlier comments about the Judeo-Christian church being what kept reasoning and ignited scientific inquiry astounded me in it's lack of knowledge about middle and far east civilsation.

I suspect we have an evangelical psychologist writing a nice story for the church magazine

[Egg Nog]

because to them religion are the only facts they need wether anyone likes it or not.

Religion doesn't provide people with facts, its provides them with a set of beliefs. They may believe that they are facts, but that doesn't make it so.

fact n.

1. Knowledge or information based on real occurrences: an account based on fact; a blur of fact and fancy.
2. • Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact.
   • A real occurrence; an event: had to prove the facts of the case.
   • Something believed to be true or real: a document laced with mistaken facts.
3. A thing that has been done, especially a crime: an accessory before the fact.
4. Law. The aspect of a case at law comprising events determined by evidence: The jury made a finding of fact.

[spi-ti-tout]

people like their daily brainwash

If time doesn't permit sometimes I'm forced to take a shower every two days

[Matra et Alpine]

stupid comment?

im 24 and unless you deal with kids that age everyday you cant really comment on it

I'm chariman of my lcaol school board and work in schools most weeks

OK ?

I also help in local community and hospitals.

I ama Christian and follow His teachings. Just not blindly

Do you KNWO the history of the bible so many will cite ?
Most folks who hold the Word up as gospel don't even realise that Paul wrote laid out most of it and it was contradictory in many places to the oral history passed down the immediate family of Jesus and their descendants. Study of the Nicea meetings and the creed that followed should be made compulsory in churches IMHO. At least then folks are making judgements based on His will and not on the churches agenda

THE strongest challenge to Christianity is not from outside. It's from inside. MANY folsk who have studied teh develpoment of the church(es) have felt betrayed as more truth comes out.

Just as the homosexual acts of priests has caused many to be upset. Something condoned in the curch for centuries Whilst at the same time making a congrgation feel immoral for even contemplating similar !!!!

"Church without walls"

[PerfAdv]

Interesting article.
I'd have been more impressed if he had included the Victorian standard of having a mistress and a wife and the impact it had on the family and children for the period 60-100 years before the snapshot he's chosen.

Sure its got holes but the point is the slow disintegration of moral fabric. Homosexuality is just one of the symptoms. I'm not out to bash gay people but considering other than the accepted explanation is worthwhile in such a discussion.

Also his earlier comments about the Judeo-Christian church being what kept reasoning and ignited scientific inquiry astounded me in it's lack of knowledge about middle and far east civilsation.

Ignoring or not including the Muslim or Far Eastern POV might have been a necessity for his target audience. I don't doubt that a similar if not lessened impact in other civilisations is also a reality.

I suspect we have an evangelical psychologist writing a nice story for the church magazine

Yes, but it had been a religious figure, his argument would be dead before anyone even considered it.

[Egg Nog]

Sure its got holes but the point is the slow disintegration of moral fabric. Homosexuality is just one of the symptoms. I'm not out to bash gay people but considering other than the accepted explanation is worthwhile in such a discussion.

When moral fabric is defined by certain religious groups, yes - But then we're just back to square one. "The slow disintegration of moral fabric" is a pretty fluffy way to describe a point, but in truth its nonexistent without the religious views that back it up.

How could homosexuality possibly contribute to something like this when its not even their choice to be homosexual in the first place? Even if it were immoral, a societal decrease in something so general as "moral fabric" would require that people are actually out there choosing to stop being straight and take up homosexuality. It doesn't work; its a logical misfire.

[CSL]

I'm chariman of my lcaol school board and work in schools most weeks

OK ?

I also help in local community and hospitals.

I ama Christian and follow His teachings. Just not blindly

Do you KNWO the history of the bible so many will cite ?
Most folks who hold the Word up as gospel don't even realise that Paul wrote laid out most of it and it was contradictory in many places to the oral history passed down the immediate family of Jesus and their descendants. Study of the Nicea meetings and the creed that followed should be made compulsory in churches IMHO. At least then folks are making judgements based on His will and not on the churches agenda

THE strongest challenge to Christianity is not from outside. It's from inside. MANY folsk who have studied teh develpoment of the church(es) have felt betrayed as more truth comes out.

Just as the homosexual acts of priests has caused many to be upset. Something condoned in the curch for centuries Whilst at the same time making a congrgation feel immoral for even contemplating similar !!!!

"Church without walls"

Well then you should know how early teenagers are. They are very immature for the most part and think they know everything.

[Matra et Alpine]

Well then you should know how early teenagers are. They are very immature for the most part and think they know everything.

Sorry, CSL, I took your response wrong as I saw his POV very mature given what he said about not liking it but accepting that it's there.

[PerfAdv]

How could homosexuality possibly contribute to something like this when its not even their choice to be homosexual in the first place? Even if it were immoral, a societal decrease in something so general as "moral fabric" would require that people are actually out there choosing to stop being straight and take up homosexuality. It doesn't work; its a logical misfire.

The question whether homosexuality is a choice or not is the critical point for debate. The current psych consensus is that it is but there is a growing number of experts that are starting to disagree with this understanding. (see: link I attached earlier)

Homosexuality is a behavioral choice not something one is born with. Are liars born? Is bestiality a choice or something one is born, with a tendency for? How about pick-pocketing or stealing in general? When it comes to challenging any POV its best to not fling too much mud as that'll be what you see coming back your way, as well. The comment about bestiality is only to invoke thought.

[CSL]

When moral fabric is defined by certain religious groups, yes - But then we're just back to square one. "The slow disintegration of moral fabric" is a pretty fluffy way to describe a point, but in truth its nonexistent without the religious views that back it up.

How could homosexuality possibly contribute to something like this when its not even their choice to be homosexual in the first place? Even if it were immoral, a societal decrease in something so general as "moral fabric" would require that people are actually out there choosing to stop being straight and take up homosexuality. It doesn't work; its a logical misfire.

Anne heche? THat is exactly what she did, Straight-Lesbian-Straight

[jorismo]

Many people in my school call eachother 'gay' as a matter of insult. I never use that because homo-sexual people ARE people. I know some people who are homo-sexual and I have no problems with them. In fact they are much more fun to hang out with.

And on the other hand if people have a religious reasen to not accept homo-sexuals, than that's their human right as well.

[drakkie]

i live in one of the most open countries in the world about this issue. Most people here tend to think: "as long as they dont bother us, i have no problem with it". In my age group there are a lot of people that swear with f****t or other words for it. i think they are just thinking about THE act (which seems not very nice to me either),however not that those persons involved casn really love eachother too. This is just a common stereotype

[RazaBlade]

...It's a occurs in some humans and animals, just like something like blindness or lactose intolerance...

Sorry to break up the trend of religious posts, but I got here a bit late!

Im sorry Egg Nog, but I will have to disagree with that point you made. Blindness and lactose intolerance are biological conditions, things that happen because the body is not functionning correctly or at all. However, homosexuality is in my opinion a social, behavioural and psychological condition. And I feel the 'gay gene' is a totally false concept, making a personal trait a biological condition.

Everybody has different likes and dislikes. Lets take cars for example. We all at UCP love cars in one way or another. Does that mean if someone did a study on us we would have a gene coding for 'car fans'. No, thats just absurd. Years ago when the scientists found the 'gay gene' they didnt stop to think what they were saying. You cannot inherit a gene that will absolutely make you gay. What they failed to realise was that human nature is formed by the action of many many genes combined with the environmental effects. So, if they tested UCP users, they would find a certain number of genes that would be common. Physiological traits such as dextrous fingers and special nasal receptors. If they did brain scans, they would find we had certain areas that are larger than that in the general population, such as brain areas for intelligence, memory. So therefore, the 'car fan' gene does exist!!

But lets now go over what Ive just said. They all have dextrous fingers so they can type huge responses on their forums! They have special nasal receptors as they love the smell of petrol. They have more intelligence obviously, but a larger memory section therefore allows them to remember all the car facts. They weren't genetically predisposed to become a car fan. The way they were brought up, the life events that happened, combined with the genetically shaped factors they already had combined and brought about the final characteristic. The same I feel applies for homosexuality.

I hope my very long winded explanation above makes sense!!!! Well it took so long for me to type this, PerfAdv raised my point in a more concise manner!!!

[CSL]

i live in one of the most open countries in the world about this issue. Most people here tend to think: "as long as they dont bother us, i have no problem with it". In my age group there are a lot of people that swear with f****t or other words for it. i think they are just thinking about THE act (which seems not very nice to me either),however not that those persons involved casn really love eachother too. This is just a common stereotype

Its used everywhere, being called a f.....t is the new "your such a girl" insult