[automagsrule]

Originally Posted by jsgnado1996

It's pretty much impossible to separate the two.

i absolutely disagree with that.

I pretty much disagree with every opinion you've stated in this thread, in fact.

[OccupyST]

Originally Posted by jsgnado1996

Look, I said that their marriage is fine, not failing. They've been together for 15 years. Your whole argument is invalid.

My argument is not invalid. It is based on statistics. (everyone else in this forum uses statistics to prove their point, so I'll again point out that your example is a horrible outlier.)

My argument is also completely valid based on the fact that your religion stopped the whole "gay to straight" camps years ago. Your own organization finally admitted that homosexuality is something that CANNOT nor SHOULD NOT be "corrected" as it is NOT behavioral or a choice.

So fine--perhaps your friend is able to live a decent lie--just don't use that as evidence that it actually works. There are THOUSANDS of family psychiatrists that make their living off of this. I've been in the LGBT community for a while now -- have come across way more failure examples than you have. "God" is most obviously not the answer/solution to "correcting" homosexuality. Accepting one's self as what they are is the solution.

Originally Posted by jsgnado1996

because you can't truly accept God if you're gay

Turn the tables. God created something that scientists confirmed is a biological attribute. Think about what that says about your dude in the sky. May as well insert the whole "You can't condemn someone for having blue eyes" comment as it's equally valid.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Rape is a biological fact as well. Be careful.

[OccupyST]

Actually more proves my point. (Morality subjective yada yada proven rhetoric)

[Iamamartianchurch]

Only if we don't have agency. And we definitely have agency.

[Umami]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

And we definitely have agency.

Woah big guy. A lot of very intelligent people have made very strong arguments in opposition.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Umami

Woah big guy. A lot of very intelligent people have made very strong arguments in opposition.

I bet they have.

Also, don't call me fat.

[Umami]

Hahaha, I was referring to your ego. But if that's how you want to interpret it, go ahead

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Umami

Hahaha, I was referring to your ego. But if that's how you want to interpret it, go ahead

I'm very self conscious about my big bones.

[barrel roll]

Originally Posted by Snake13

I had shellfish in the desert just a few days ago, and chicken is just essential to cook properly, and one would think that an all knowing god would foresee the advent of refrigeration when laying down rules for all eternity. Besides that your equating good food safety with a moral sin punishable by eternal damnation, that is arbitrary. There's no rational argument for eating shellfish being an immoral act outside of "god said so". Saying man laying with man is abhorrent is arbitrary as **** based entirely off "ew that's gross", and perhaps an entirely outdated societal need to promote procreation (which is actually the exact opposite of our current societal needs).

Your other two examples are fine, I never said every example of dogmatic based morality is arbitrary, treating others with kindness and not murdering people or cheating on your wife are all good moral rules that can be rationally defended.

Im not equating food safety with a mortal sin punishable by eternal damnation.

Saying a man shouldn't lay with another man (and mentioning nothing about a woman laying with a woman) is not based off of "ew that's gross". Anal sex is an extremely high risk sexual activity. Especially in a time where there were no condoms, or refrigerators, or even electricity.

[Treghc]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

I'm very self conscious about my big bones.

Grow a bigger beard to hide behind.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Treghc

Grow a bigger beard to hide behind.

The camera takes off 6 inches.

[Treghc]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

The camera takes off 6 inches.

I've got a few pics that could grow those 6 inches back.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Treghc

I've got a few pics that could grow those 6 inches back.

Whoa, THOSE six inches are closer to 4 full mast.

[Snake13]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

Im not equating food safety with a mortal sin punishable by eternal damnation.

Saying a man shouldn't lay with another man (and mentioning nothing about a woman laying with a woman) is not based off of "ew that's gross". Anal sex is an extremely high risk sexual activity. Especially in a time where there were no condoms, or refrigerators, or even electricity.

Yes I'm sure the reason people are claiming gay people are going to hell, the fact that they have suffered a history of violent abuse, deprivation of rights, and being made outcasts is because of the relative health risk of anal versus vaginal sex. This is made clear by the fact we also have in recent history tied people who speed on the highway to fence posts and beat them to death.

Again, you are equating "this is a riskier activity" with making something a moral sin.

[barrel roll]

People are claiming homosexuals go straight to hell without collecting $200 because they are taking the easy road and not trying to understand what is being said. I'm not equating anything to a moral sin.

[jsgnado1996]

To occupyST: My "religion" didn't do anything of the sort. Religion itself is static, it doesn't change. You may be referring to the catholic church, which I have no attachment to whatsoever, I'm protestant, my ideals are based on the bible, not the traditions of a long corrupt corporation. I would also appreciate a link to an article or report of the study that confirmed homosexual attraction as a biological attribute.

[Necropolis]

you must be very well versed in history to make the claim that religion itself does not change

[OccupyST]

Originally Posted by jsgnado1996

I would also appreciate a link to an article or report of the study that confirmed homosexual attraction as a biological attribute.

All over the web, bro.

http://io9.com/5967426/scientists-co...es-in-the-womb

Pretty static and absolute compared to a bible on this if we're going tit for tat. ;-)