100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Ain't No Homo Gonna Make It To Heaven... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
homosexuality is wrong and a sin, read the bible And it's your right to feel that way. But to teach a little kid to hate like that and cheer him on? Disgusting. So is it hate to teach your children the person last in the race won't win? No, it's not about hate. I'm not a homophobe, nor do I have anything personal against "homosexuals". But homosexuality in general has no productive aspect about it. Sex is for reproduction, and of course making love in the process. Making a sensual connection that what the two are doing is creating another life. But homosexuality does not offer this. Only offers the physical pleasure of sex, which is of the flesh and again has no real productive aspect about it. There are many straight people who only have sex for pleasure, too. Do you have problems with them as well? For one I have no problem with homosexuals. Secondly, yes those that just have sex for purely the pleasure are just as much in the wrong and against God's commandments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CowboyGH
on
Thu 05/31/12 07:17 PM
|
|
obviously nature intends reproduction obviously two individuals of the same sex cannot physically reproduce together obviously homosexuality is against nature obviously for homosexuality to occur nature must wish to eliminate a species obviously nature tried to eliminate homosapiens several times obviously homosapiens defeated the plague, hiv/aids, syphilis, and many other diseases polio etc. obviously nature approaches the elimination of humanity by reproducing homosexuals reducing the amount of homosapiens through this process obviously god would be for natural intention of reproduction methods rather than against them as well as mother nature Homosexuality does occur in nature. Do a little research on animals. Many species engage in homosexual behavior in nature. I understand that and the natural course of things is reproduction....only some animals reproduce asexually and others need a partner both happen for reproduction......in what species does reproduction happen between two same sex species?? I'm not saying reproduction happens between the same sex. You said homosexuality is against nature.. and I'm just pointing out that it definitely happens in nature. There are many animals that do homosexual actions. Just homosexuality brings no offspring. That is the entire purpose for sex, reproduction. God made it enjoyable so we would reproduce. God told us to be fruitful and multiply to fill the Earth. If sex wasn't as enjoyable as it is, or as strong of a desire for it, people would not do as such. But God doesn't want us just going around sleeping with anyone and everyone, thus he put some speculations on the subject. Think about it, if everyone only ever had one sex partner their entire life. There would be no STD's in the world. No single parents, ect. Yes if we started now being sexually moral on a global scale, there would be for a meantime STD's still remaining, until they ceased to exist. But if people would have been sexually moral from the start, one sex partner, no sex with animals, ect, there would be absolutely no STD's in the world today. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said homosexuality is against nature, there are many animals that do homosexual actions. Just homosexuality brings no offspring. That is the entire purpose for sex, reproduction. God made it enjoyable so we would reproduce. God told us to be fruitful and multiply to fill the Earth. If sex wasn't as enjoyable as it is, or as strong of a desire for it, people would not do as such. But God doesn't want us just going around sleeping with anyone and everyone, thus he put some speculations on the subject. Think about it, if everyone only ever had one sex partner their entire life. There would be no STD's in the world. No single parents, ect. Yes if we started now being sexually moral on a global scale, there would be for a meantime STD's still remaining, until they ceased to exist. But if people would have been sexually moral from the start, one sex partner, no sex with animals, ect, there would be absolutely no STD's in the world today. I didn't say that you said that. I was responding to the person who wrote that post. It is your opinion that the only purpose of sex is reproduction. Yes, it's obvious that is how babies are made, however many, many get pleasure out of sex. You may not use sex in that way, but it does not mean others are wrong for doing so. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
homosexuality is wrong and a sin, read the bible And it's your right to feel that way. But to teach a little kid to hate like that and cheer him on? Disgusting. So is it hate to teach your children the person last in the race won't win? No, it's not about hate. I'm not a homophobe, nor do I have anything personal against "homosexuals". But homosexuality in general has no productive aspect about it. Sex is for reproduction, and of course making love in the process. Making a sensual connection that what the two are doing is creating another life. But homosexuality does not offer this. Only offers the physical pleasure of sex, which is of the flesh and again has no real productive aspect about it. There are many straight people who only have sex for pleasure, too. Do you have problems with them as well? For one I have no problem with homosexuals. Secondly, yes those that just have sex for purely the pleasure are just as much in the wrong and against God's commandments. Humm so your saying that those that are beyond their child bearing time and still enjoy sex are in the wrong? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Those teaching the child his little tune is acceptable and encouraging it are motivated by hate. No assumptions..we obviously have a different perceptions of hate. The fact that you claim they are motivated by hate is not proof that they are motivated by hate. As I see it, you are assuming that they are guilty of hate until proven innocent. Was the child's song tacky? Yes. However, we are unable to read the mind and heart of whoever taught the song. So, it is speculation to say that the song is motivated by hate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
homosexuality is wrong and a sin, read the bible And it's your right to feel that way. But to teach a little kid to hate like that and cheer him on? Disgusting. So is it hate to teach your children the person last in the race won't win? No, it's not about hate. I'm not a homophobe, nor do I have anything personal against "homosexuals". But homosexuality in general has no productive aspect about it. Sex is for reproduction, and of course making love in the process. Making a sensual connection that what the two are doing is creating another life. But homosexuality does not offer this. Only offers the physical pleasure of sex, which is of the flesh and again has no real productive aspect about it. There are many straight people who only have sex for pleasure, too. Do you have problems with them as well? For one I have no problem with homosexuals. Secondly, yes those that just have sex for purely the pleasure are just as much in the wrong and against God's commandments.  Would you care to support your claim with some kind of Bible verse? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said homosexuality is against nature, there are many animals that do homosexual actions. Just homosexuality brings no offspring. That is the entire purpose for sex, reproduction. God made it enjoyable so we would reproduce. God told us to be fruitful and multiply to fill the Earth. If sex wasn't as enjoyable as it is, or as strong of a desire for it, people would not do as such. But God doesn't want us just going around sleeping with anyone and everyone, thus he put some speculations on the subject. Think about it, if everyone only ever had one sex partner their entire life. There would be no STD's in the world. No single parents, ect. Yes if we started now being sexually moral on a global scale, there would be for a meantime STD's still remaining, until they ceased to exist. But if people would have been sexually moral from the start, one sex partner, no sex with animals, ect, there would be absolutely no STD's in the world today. I didn't say that you said that. I was responding to the person who wrote that post. It is your opinion that the only purpose of sex is reproduction. Yes, it's obvious that is how babies are made, however many, many get pleasure out of sex. You may not use sex in that way, but it does not mean others are wrong for doing so. Lol sorry, if you look back I edited my responce one I realised it wasn't in response to something I said. My apologies. Sex for pleasure brings many possible foul things, unwanted pregnancies, emotional distress, single parents, STD's, and so on. Yes sex is enjoyable lol, definitly don't get me wrong there. But it is only enjoyable to make it happen. If it wasn't pleasing, it wouldn't happen. The world would cease to grow atleast as fast as it has/does. But "casual" sex, or whatever you wish to call it brings much avoidable heartache and foul things in this world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
homosexuality is wrong and a sin, read the bible And it's your right to feel that way. But to teach a little kid to hate like that and cheer him on? Disgusting. So is it hate to teach your children the person last in the race won't win? No, it's not about hate. I'm not a homophobe, nor do I have anything personal against "homosexuals". But homosexuality in general has no productive aspect about it. Sex is for reproduction, and of course making love in the process. Making a sensual connection that what the two are doing is creating another life. But homosexuality does not offer this. Only offers the physical pleasure of sex, which is of the flesh and again has no real productive aspect about it. There are many straight people who only have sex for pleasure, too. Do you have problems with them as well? For one I have no problem with homosexuals. Secondly, yes those that just have sex for purely the pleasure are just as much in the wrong and against God's commandments. Humm so your saying that those that are beyond their child bearing time and still enjoy sex are in the wrong?
Not if they are married. If two are married and remain faithful to one another, it's totally ok. For their bodies are no longer their own. Mark 10:8 8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said homosexuality is against nature, there are many animals that do homosexual actions. Just homosexuality brings no offspring. That is the entire purpose for sex, reproduction. God made it enjoyable so we would reproduce. God told us to be fruitful and multiply to fill the Earth. If sex wasn't as enjoyable as it is, or as strong of a desire for it, people would not do as such. But God doesn't want us just going around sleeping with anyone and everyone, thus he put some speculations on the subject. Think about it, if everyone only ever had one sex partner their entire life. There would be no STD's in the world. No single parents, ect. Yes if we started now being sexually moral on a global scale, there would be for a meantime STD's still remaining, until they ceased to exist. But if people would have been sexually moral from the start, one sex partner, no sex with animals, ect, there would be absolutely no STD's in the world today. I didn't say that you said that. I was responding to the person who wrote that post. It is your opinion that the only purpose of sex is reproduction. Yes, it's obvious that is how babies are made, however many, many get pleasure out of sex. You may not use sex in that way, but it does not mean others are wrong for doing so. Lol sorry, if you look back I edited my responce one I realised it wasn't in response to something I said. My apologies. Sex for pleasure brings many possible foul things, unwanted pregnancies, emotional distress, single parents, STD's, and so on. Yes sex is enjoyable lol, definitly don't get me wrong there. But it is only enjoyable to make it happen. If it wasn't pleasing, it wouldn't happen. The world would cease to grow atleast as fast as it has/does. But "casual" sex, or whatever you wish to call it brings much avoidable heartache and foul things in this world. Well, that sure makes things as clear as mud. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have no problems with anyone being homosexual that is their choice....really do not care honestly.....just saying it isnt the natural course of the way things were mapped out.....sexual intercourse between two species were meant for the continuation of said species.........same sex intercourse doesn't promote the continuation of the said species......my only point and my final statment upon the subject as arguing isnt what I enjoy with anyone......and some people tear into it like a dog with a bone.....enjoy your repartee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a bigger issue here.
What standard do you use to determine what is moral and what is immoral? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obviously nature intends reproduction obviously two individuals of the same sex cannot physically reproduce together obviously homosexuality is against nature obviously for homosexuality to occur nature must wish to eliminate a species obviously nature tried to eliminate homosapiens several times obviously homosapiens defeated the plague, hiv/aids, syphilis, and many other diseases polio etc. obviously nature approaches the elimination of humanity by reproducing homosexuals reducing the amount of homosapiens through this process obviously god would be for natural intention of reproduction methods rather than against them as well as mother nature Homosexuality does occur in nature. Do a little research on animals. Many species engage in homosexual behavior in nature. yea, right... if species engaged in homo sex, then they would be an evolutionary dead end. the ones that do are just going through the motions, not being gay, but not being able to control themselves. so are you saying gays cannot control themselves? there is no animal outside of humans that can be considered gay, meaning they only have sex with the same sex... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said homosexuality is against nature, there are many animals that do homosexual actions. Just homosexuality brings no offspring. That is the entire purpose for sex, reproduction. God made it enjoyable so we would reproduce. God told us to be fruitful and multiply to fill the Earth. If sex wasn't as enjoyable as it is, or as strong of a desire for it, people would not do as such. But God doesn't want us just going around sleeping with anyone and everyone, thus he put some speculations on the subject. Think about it, if everyone only ever had one sex partner their entire life. There would be no STD's in the world. No single parents, ect. Yes if we started now being sexually moral on a global scale, there would be for a meantime STD's still remaining, until they ceased to exist. But if people would have been sexually moral from the start, one sex partner, no sex with animals, ect, there would be absolutely no STD's in the world today. I didn't say that you said that. I was responding to the person who wrote that post. It is your opinion that the only purpose of sex is reproduction. Yes, it's obvious that is how babies are made, however many, many get pleasure out of sex. You may not use sex in that way, but it does not mean others are wrong for doing so. Lol sorry, if you look back I edited my responce one I realised it wasn't in response to something I said. My apologies. Sex for pleasure brings many possible foul things, unwanted pregnancies, emotional distress, single parents, STD's, and so on. Yes sex is enjoyable lol, definitly don't get me wrong there. But it is only enjoyable to make it happen. If it wasn't pleasing, it wouldn't happen. The world would cease to grow atleast as fast as it has/does. But "casual" sex, or whatever you wish to call it brings much avoidable heartache and foul things in this world. Well, that sure makes things as clear as mud. Ok I'll make it a bit more clear Married sex - sharing of love for one another, showing commitment towards another. Allowing the other to know just how much appreciat him/her, which can not be done if you're sleeping with anyone and everyone or atleast another. Single sex - Causes/spreads STD's, unwanted pregnancy's, heart ache from cheating, it's purely for the physical pleasure. No emotion into it, one is bout just as good as the other. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Those teaching the child his little tune is acceptable and encouraging it are motivated by hate. No assumptions..we obviously have a different perceptions of hate. The fact that you claim they are motivated by hate is not proof that they are motivated by hate. As I see it, you are assuming that they are guilty of hate until proven innocent. Was the child's song tacky? Yes. However, we are unable to read the mind and heart of whoever taught the song. So, it is speculation to say that the song is motivated by hate. You can speculate all day long...i have no interest in proving anything. Telling other people they are going to HELL IS hateful..to ME. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obviously nature intends reproduction obviously two individuals of the same sex cannot physically reproduce together obviously homosexuality is against nature obviously for homosexuality to occur nature must wish to eliminate a species obviously nature tried to eliminate homosapiens several times obviously homosapiens defeated the plague, hiv/aids, syphilis, and many other diseases polio etc. obviously nature approaches the elimination of humanity by reproducing homosexuals reducing the amount of homosapiens through this process obviously god would be for natural intention of reproduction methods rather than against them as well as mother nature Homosexuality does occur in nature. Do a little research on animals. Many species engage in homosexual behavior in nature. yea, right... if species engaged in homo sex, then they would be an evolutionary dead end. the ones that do are just going through the motions, not being gay, but not being able to control themselves. so are you saying gays cannot control themselves? there is no animal outside of humans that can be considered gay, meaning they only have sex with the same sex... some species of monkeys have been known to be involved in homosexual activities....and with certain primate famlial structures some have been homosexual famlial connections..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obviously nature intends reproduction obviously two individuals of the same sex cannot physically reproduce together obviously homosexuality is against nature obviously for homosexuality to occur nature must wish to eliminate a species obviously nature tried to eliminate homosapiens several times obviously homosapiens defeated the plague, hiv/aids, syphilis, and many other diseases polio etc. obviously nature approaches the elimination of humanity by reproducing homosexuals reducing the amount of homosapiens through this process obviously god would be for natural intention of reproduction methods rather than against them as well as mother nature Homosexuality does occur in nature. Do a little research on animals. Many species engage in homosexual behavior in nature. yea, right... if species engaged in homo sex, then they would be an evolutionary dead end. the ones that do are just going through the motions, not being gay, but not being able to control themselves. so are you saying gays cannot control themselves? there is no animal outside of humans that can be considered gay, meaning they only have sex with the same sex... Nowhere did I say they couldn't control themselves. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said homosexuality is against nature, there are many animals that do homosexual actions. Just homosexuality brings no offspring. That is the entire purpose for sex, reproduction. God made it enjoyable so we would reproduce. God told us to be fruitful and multiply to fill the Earth. If sex wasn't as enjoyable as it is, or as strong of a desire for it, people would not do as such. But God doesn't want us just going around sleeping with anyone and everyone, thus he put some speculations on the subject. Think about it, if everyone only ever had one sex partner their entire life. There would be no STD's in the world. No single parents, ect. Yes if we started now being sexually moral on a global scale, there would be for a meantime STD's still remaining, until they ceased to exist. But if people would have been sexually moral from the start, one sex partner, no sex with animals, ect, there would be absolutely no STD's in the world today. I didn't say that you said that. I was responding to the person who wrote that post. It is your opinion that the only purpose of sex is reproduction. Yes, it's obvious that is how babies are made, however many, many get pleasure out of sex. You may not use sex in that way, but it does not mean others are wrong for doing so. Lol sorry, if you look back I edited my responce one I realised it wasn't in response to something I said. My apologies. Sex for pleasure brings many possible foul things, unwanted pregnancies, emotional distress, single parents, STD's, and so on. Yes sex is enjoyable lol, definitly don't get me wrong there. But it is only enjoyable to make it happen. If it wasn't pleasing, it wouldn't happen. The world would cease to grow atleast as fast as it has/does. But "casual" sex, or whatever you wish to call it brings much avoidable heartache and foul things in this world. Well, that sure makes things as clear as mud. Ok I'll make it a bit more clear Married sex - sharing of love for one another, showing commitment towards another. Allowing the other to know just how much appreciat him/her, which can not be done if you're sleeping with anyone and everyone or atleast another. Single sex - Causes/spreads STD's, unwanted pregnancy's, heart ache from cheating, it's purely for the physical pleasure. No emotion into it, one is bout just as good as the other. That's what did make sex so great, personal, and passionate. A glories time held between two. Just the fact of knowing, that this person you are with only makes you feel this great. And makes you feel greater then any other man/woman has. If sex is just done with many different people, the feeling of being "special" or "wanted/needed" is not there, for if you aren't "giving it up" then they'll just go find another, ect. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Those teaching the child his little tune is acceptable and encouraging it are motivated by hate. No assumptions..we obviously have a different perceptions of hate. The fact that you claim they are motivated by hate is not proof that they are motivated by hate. As I see it, you are assuming that they are guilty of hate until proven innocent. Was the child's song tacky? Yes. However, we are unable to read the mind and heart of whoever taught the song. So, it is speculation to say that the song is motivated by hate. You can speculate all day long...i have no interest in proving anything. Telling other people they are going to HELL IS hateful..to ME. It is very hateful. No one has the position to tell another that. Not to a homosexual, not a murderer, not to a rapist, not to anyone. We will all be judged accordingly. Not one of us is perfect enough to judge another. While we are judging this person for doing this or that, we're turning around and doing another thing that is just as wrong. So we as people, have absolutely no position to judge another, thus why we are told "Judge not". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's just terrible.
Seriously, what is wrong with these people? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obviously nature intends reproduction obviously two individuals of the same sex cannot physically reproduce together obviously homosexuality is against nature obviously for homosexuality to occur nature must wish to eliminate a species obviously nature tried to eliminate homosapiens several times obviously homosapiens defeated the plague, hiv/aids, syphilis, and many other diseases polio etc. obviously nature approaches the elimination of humanity by reproducing homosexuals reducing the amount of homosapiens through this process obviously god would be for natural intention of reproduction methods rather than against them as well as mother nature Homosexuality does occur in nature. Do a little research on animals. Many species engage in homosexual behavior in nature. yea, right... if species engaged in homo sex, then they would be an evolutionary dead end. the ones that do are just going through the motions, not being gay, but not being able to control themselves. so are you saying gays cannot control themselves? there is no animal outside of humans that can be considered gay, meaning they only have sex with the same sex... Nowhere did I say they couldn't control themselves. you said some animals engage in homo sex... why would they do that? obviously they are not gay, so what would be the reason? because they do not know any better, they feel an urge and act on it without thinking... have you seen a male puppy hump another male dog? the other dog will snap or bite at it, teaching the stupid puppy what not to do. IMO, there is no way being gay is a natural thing, just people acting out on urges they cannot or will not control. |
|
|
|
|
