Wow... this thread is still around. Huh.

Here's a question for the religious folks or people who don't like gays... what if someone's gay but is totally celibate and doesn't engage in romantic behavior of any kind? Technically that's okay, right? No moral issue since they're not doing anything. They just have feelings.

I only bring it up because I found out that the NYC priest at the WTC on 9/11 (I think his name is Father Judge) apparently was gay, but never acted on it and was completely celibate because of his faith in God and his belief that it would be amoral.

 

Given that most Western religions are about resisting temptation, I think most would agree with you.

 

Even thoughts are considered a sin; you don't have to act upon it.

 

If being gay was okay, then why aren't they "allowed" to reproduce? Can't answer that, huh? It's as if a higher being isn't allowing them to do it ...

 

So Jesus was sinning when he walked through the desert and was tempted by the devil?

So being infertile is...?

 

More like they don't have all the things necessary to reproduce, not that they aren't being allowed. You kinda need eggs and sperm. That's why gay couples and lesbian couples sometimes get together to have kids. They're all gay, but they can reproduce that way.

And here's a conundrum. If a horse mates with a donkey, they create a mule, a retarded, infertile mule. Why would a higher being allow that abomination to happen?

 

That's what i was taught. Everyone sins. I'm not a very holy person so don't ask me about the Bible. That's all I remember.

Being infertile was not a choice. Being gay is ... and I don't want to hear this, "They can't help it if they're gay." Yes, they can.

You guys know that deep down a man and a woman were meant to be together. If not, then you'd be with a man too.

I don't hate gay people. I'm sure that most of them are pretty nice people. I just don't like what they choose to do.

 

Since gay people overwhelmingly say it's not a choice, I'm gonna ask you why is it?

I mean, you see gay youth committing suicide because they can't deal with it, you see gay adults turning to lifelong celibacy or the church (or both) to save themselves, most would rather be straight that there are groups that try to convert them back to heterosexuality (which never work. The spokes-"gay-turned-straight"-man for a Colorado one was caught at a gay bar trying to pick up guys.)

I see a population that keeps trying to "help it", actually spending time, money, and emotions to "help it", but nothing has worked.

 

not to mention, there is increasing scientific evidence that gay people's brains develop differently than straight people's....look it up on the internet......actually, I think a long time ago, a few pages back in this thread I posted a ton of links to the evidence on the internet.

I bet you wont go look though, will you Mantis.....?

 

Wow, impressive thread. Lots of good arguments..and a few ignorant rants from people who would probably get jollies from driving around with their friends spraying mace on, let's say, gay couples.

The bottom line is that "hate" is a very strong word, and HATING someone just because of their sexual preferences is the same as hating someone based on their religion.

A better thread would be titled "Gay Marriage" or "Should gays be allowed to adopt children?", and that would probably revolve around the more useful and intelligent topic of social ACCEPTANCE of gays versus whether they should be burned at the stake.

Question for you "haters": do you think what happened to Matthew Shepard was justified or correct in any way, shape, or form? He was the 21 year old gay student who was killed a few years ago.

You can argue whether homosexuality is socially acceptable or not, but to hate people based solely on that is just plain wrong.

Shingo