news:uKpDd.62328$gd.12904@twister.socal.rr.com...
> lizzard woman wrote:
> > "Jason Gastrich" <usenetspam1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:9kmDd.62286$gd.35968@twister.socal.rr.com...
> >> lizzard woman wrote:
> >>> "Jason Gastrich" <usenetspam1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:Y%lDd.62278$gd.33991@twister.socal.rr.com...
> >>>> Doc Smartass wrote:
> >>>
> >>> (snip)
> >>>
> >>>> It seems that you're saying Christians can't have the freedom of
> >>>> speech to say homosexuality is a sin. Is this correct?
> >>>
> >>> I think you have the freedom to say it though it is extremely cruel
> >>> of you to think it's alright to do so. You do NOT have the freedom
> >>> to force your religious views on this matter on innocent,
> >>> unsuspecting people.
> >>>
> >>> The weight of the evidence is clearly on the side that gay people
> >>> are born gay. Thus when you say that you think it's a sin, you are
> >>> doing a horrible thing to the Christians gays. Non-Christian gays
> >>> correctly don't give a hoot if you think homosexuality is a sin. So
> >>> even though we are talking about a relatively small group of people,
> >>> it's still like you castigating your daughter for having the color
> >>> hair she happens to have. It's cruel and heartless.
> >>
> >> This is one theory. However, I do not agree.
> >
> > Why not? Have you studied it?
> >
> >> I think people choose to be gay. I don't think they're born that
> >> way at all.
> >
> > Why not? Have you read any medical/scientific/psychological papers
> > in top shelf jouirnals on the issue?
> >
> >> Do you have any proof for your assertion that they are born that way?
> >
> > Well other than the fact (yes fact) that nobody would choose to be
> > persecuted like gays have been and continue to be, I can recall
> > reading an article in Science (a top shelf journal) that showed a
> > statistically significant difference in the size of some part of the
> > brain in gay v. straight men. That is not dispositive in itself but
> > when you combine it will all the real world evidence most people can
> > see without any scientific degree necessary, it becomes compelling.
> >
> > But let's assume that some day researchers do prove that
> > homosexuality has a physiological basis, would Christians then accept
> > gays and not label their behavior a sin?
>
> With all due respect, the evidence you provided for homosexuality being
> genetic is anecdotal.
>
> The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin. See Romans 1. Therefore,
> Christians will always affirm what the scriptures say; even when we are
> jailed.
>
> My pastor told us about the law in Canada against speaking against
> homosexuality and calling it a sin. I didn't know it was happening here.
> I'm not sure if this would qualify or not, though. Canada actually has a
> law against calling homosexuality a sin and pastors are being jailed.
>
> Regards,
> Jason
They should come to Poland. If they say homosexuality is a sin here, 95% of
the population will say "yes, we know".
Roman catholicism may contain a lot of error, but some things it is good
for.
For the sake of balance I'd also like to point out that some heterosexuals
are even more sexually sinful than most homosexuals and that some
protestants are even more in error than most Catholics.
That last bit is just in case people think I'm a bigot, who has it in for
homosexuals and catholics, which isn't the case, and I have friends in both
those categories.
Uncle Davey
|
|