What would you do if your child came and told you he was gay?

[Goose]

I've already defined "pervert" in another thread. Enough of the definition game.

 

[Hank]

Hank, you've not even attempted to back up what you believe with any kind of scripture. So everybody believe the way Hank believes. Why? Because you say so? This kind of Christian behavior really gets old. How about giving God the respect that he deserves and finding out what he says about it and then showing us where you come to your conclusions.

Poly the kind of hate you expressed is not abated by quoting the Bible. That’s done at this forum all the time and though occasionally someone concedes a minor point, no ones mind is changed. This kind of hate is only changed by prayer and fasting. BTW I’m not a Christian.

 

[Hank]

By Sozo

Also, homosexuality is a choice and should be criminalized.

Sexual acts, both heterosexual and homosexual are a choice. Sexual orientation is not a choice. I am attracted to the opposite gender. No amount someone telling me that was a sin (if it was) could make me be attracted to the same gender.

According to your logic, everything that is a choice, and I assume you are talking about a sin according to your interpretation of the Bible, should be a criminal act. However we live in a democracy, not a theocracy, and it was deliberately set up that way because of the abuses created under theocracies that had occurred.

 

[AsLan]

Originally posted by Goose
I've already defined "pervert" in another thread. Enough of the definition game.

Maybe start a 'Goose Dictionary Quick Reference' thread.

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by AsLan


Maybe start a 'Goose Dictionary Quick Reference' thread.

Maybe read a dictionary and use common sense. I can't force you to care so quit wasting my time.

 

[AsLan]

Originally posted by Goose
Maybe read a dictionary and use common sense. I can't force you to care so quit wasting my time.

Well, that doesn't sting. Not from you. Enjoy standing on your wobbly little tower of definition blocks without being able to explain your disgust with the undefined 'them' of society.

 

[Freak]

Originally posted by Goose
Maybe read a dictionary and use common sense. I can't force you to care so quit wasting my time.

AsLan, is a clown. You are not alone in attempting to clarify something to this punk. He refuses to read. He is hopeless. But Jesus loves him.

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by AsLan


Well, that doesn't sting. Not from you. Enjoy standing on your wobbly little tower of definition blocks without being able to explain your disgust with the undefined 'them' of society.

I've already defined "them" for you. It's you who seems to be needing the definition.

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by Freak


AsLan, is a clown....

Depends on what your definition of "is" is. :thumb:

 

[AsLan]

This is how Goose defines homosexual.

Originally posted by Goose
Common liberal tactic: Definition Game

A homosexual is someone who lusts after the same sex and commits sexual acts with them.

An extramarital, sexually active person interested in the same sex would be how I would explain his definition.

I asked a lot of questions, which he simply evaded to save his fingers typing I assume:

Are you talking about someone who speaks to a friend in confidence and wonders if they like guys or girls or both?

Are you talking about someone who is married to someone of the same sex?

Are you talking about someone who is having homosexual premarital sex?

Are you talking about someone who has a single sexual experience with more than one person at the same time, possibly the same sex and different sex?

Are you talking from Christian viewpoint or a secular 'moral' viewpoint?

Should extra or premarital sex with the opposite gender be included in whatever punishments society deems appropriate for 'homosexuals'?


Later in the thread he reverts to using the word pervert:

Originally posted by Goose
ALL homosexuals are perverts

Which webster's defines as:

per·vert ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-vûrt)
tr.v. per·vert·ed, per·vert·ing, per·verts
To cause to turn away from what is right, proper, or good; corrupt.
To bring to a bad or worse condition; debase.
To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse. See Synonyms at corrupt.
To interpret incorrectly; misconstrue or distort: an analysis that perverts the meaning of the poem.


As you can see, pervert isn't an objective term. It is up to the person using the word as to what is 'right, proper, or good'.

His reasons for 'them' being 'perverts' is merely because he thinks it's wrong. This is a fine reason of course, but he could have saved us a lot of typing by simply saying it was his opinion from the beginning.

So we are still left with Goose, who defines his stance using purely subjective terms and makes no effort to clearly enunciate what his obdurate thinking has to offer us.

 

[Hank]

I disagree. I believe homosexuality is something one is born with, not something one chooses. And homosexuals have emotional feelings, love if you will, for their partners. That's the difference, in a nutshell, between bi- and homosexuals who are only in it for the variety of sex, and those who are truly only capable of loving another of the same sex. I'm heterosexual, but I have absolutely no problem with homosexuals, other than those who are obviously choosing to be so for the sexual aspects of it. If two people love each other, who am I to tell them they can't?
Shoot, for that matter, if two people ARE only in it for the sex, who am I to tell them they can't do it? If it isn't affecting my life or harming the lives of others, then it's not my business to tag them with opinionated labels.

I agree with you Kali

 

[Mustard Seed]

Even if one is born with "homosexual tenddancies" Tha does not mean they have to be homosexual. I have many tendancies which I could atribute my sin to but I know that we all have are weak points. I do not believe God would give us any weakness we could not overcome. Not saying it's easy to overcome but so much of the world would like us to think we are the way we are and there is nothiing we can do about it. I think this is one of the most dangerous things we can inflict on ourselves, a feeling of "predestination" to sin.

 

[Mustard Seed]

"our" not "are". I am far to impatient when I go to submit these posts.

 

[mberthot]

Here is something to think about...

because I am hetrosexual, does that define who I am? NO
So just because they are homosexuals, does not mean that is all they are. If they believe in Christ they are Christian and one in whom Christ dwells.
Just as we sin they sin and they pay for sin everyday in this life just as we do for our sins.

 

[Falcon]

Do you all believe that "being gay" is a choice, and not the makeup of your genes at birth? Do you think if a gay person had a choice, he or she would choose to be gay? It is so hypocritical and ignorant for you to presume how Jesus would or would not accept any soul who loved him.

 

[Sting]

I believe being gay is a choice. I'm sure a lot of gay people would wish to be straight if they were asked what they would choose if they had a choice, because a lot comes along with telling others you are gay. But if that is how they feel then they are being very true to themselves to be bold about something that is very widely and blantantly looked at as being wrong. I don't believe sexuality can define if Jesus will love you or not.

 

[Sting]

I am amazed at what some of you said about what you would say about your child stating he or she was gay! That takes amazing courage and strength to even admit that to the few people in the world who mean everything to you, your parents! If my child had the will to tell me that, I would be so taken aback by their courage to even approach me about the subject. What a wonderful thing to see in your child! The will and strength to find something out about himself and to act truthfully to his feelings, I would be so proud to raise a child that had enough self-esteem to do that. And you all said that you would drop him and pray for him to repent? That you would love to see him be "fixed" of this problem that he so strongly feels upon? I'm sorry, I don't see how that is right or just. I don't enjoy it, but thats my kid! I can't just drop my kid because he has a difference in sexuality than most, that is the least of my worries! I really dont' understand how you guys can think that! Please do explain.

 

[Luke-mc]

if being gay is a sin and your child tells you he is gay maybe you should examine your part, parent

 

[Flipper]

Sozo wrote:

Logic? Whose logic?

Y'know. Argumentative logic. particularly inductive argumentation (which is mostly what we are concerned with on these sites). Unless the premise is axiomatic or a definition is not required, which almost never happens in the murky, opinionated world of argumentative logic then terms need to be defined.

The problem with language as the medium of logic was explained by Prof. Rudolf Carnap, who used to teach logic at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton:

"If certain scientific elements - concepts, theories, assertions, derivations, and the like - are to be analyzed logically, then often the best procedure is to translate them into symbolic language. In this language, in contrast to ordinary word language, we have signs that are unambiguous and formulations that are exact: in this language, therefore, the purity and correctness of a derivation can be tested with greater ease and accuracy. A derivation is counted pure when it utilizes no other presuppositions than those specifically enumerated. A derivation in word-language often involves presuppositions which were not made explicitly, but which entered unnoticed..."

It is worth pointing out that when Carnap talks about word-language definitions, he means in the sense of Euclidian axioms which are realms away from the levels of presupposition that arguments on social or philosophical issues contain. Without some sort of definition, these inductive arguments are often utterly worthless.

 

[Patroclus]

It is worth pointing out that when Carnap talks about word-language definitions, he means in the sense of Euclidian axioms which are realms away from the levels of presupposition that arguments on social or philosophical issues contain.

Perhaps you could expaciate on this a bit more, because my first objection comes with the fact that symbols carry with them myraids of meaning. For instance, the sea is often a symbol for life, or death, or both simultaneously.