How can you expect anyone to take you seriously, Kinetic? Lot wasn't their genetic father? The Bible lied when it said he was? They were adopted? So you APPROVE of sex between parents and their adopted children?

Your first line of defense is that Lot wasn't their real father, your second line of defense is that it was the fault of Sodom and Gomorrah? Now your third line of defense is that, since it was before the 10 Commandments were published, having sex with your children was not a sin?

I love the way you segue from defending drunken, incestuous rape by one of God's Chosen people to condemning gay sex in your last sentence. Your arguments would be funnier if they weren't so pathetic.

An open question to the four people who voted "yes", that homosexuality should be criminalised: what do you see the punishment should be? I'm interested in knowing as a gay man, just what you feel should happen to me? Do you want me thrown in jail? Do you want me to pay a fine? None of that will stop me being who I am.

Am I the only one who wonders about the anal sex fixation of the "religious" people? It could be an honest fixation though when one realizes that in the Bible there several instances that suggest the Christian God may be somewhat analy fixated as well. In Deuteronomy 28:27 He punishes the Israelites with hemorrhoids (called "emerods" in those days), He did likewise to the Philistines for taking the Ark of the Covenant, but He went one better there and required the Philistines to make 5 golden images of their "emerods" as a trespass offering (payback for swiping the Ark). Ezekiel 4:10-17 tells the story of God punishing His Chosen people by commanding them to make bread and bake it with their own feces, and then go out in public amongst the Gentiles and eat the bread. Luckily for them, Ezekiel interceded and their most merciful God recinded the commandment and let them use cow dung instead. This same anal fixation carries on through the Bible, and in Malachi 2:1-3 God threatens His people again by saying that He will "...corrupt their seed and spread dung upon your faces." There are more examples of this, but thinking people should get the picture.

I'll be interested to see if Kinetic will try to spin this like he did with the story of Lot and the rape of his daughters.

__________________
Fanaticism is redoubling your efforts after you have forgotten your goal.

It is a common recurrent theme in the Bible that Men who are flawed end up doing good. Also incest as a means of reproducing, but in ancient times maybe there were not enough people to not do this? I don't know. Anyways I am reminded of Saul who at first persecutes the christians and helps the romans capture them to send them to death..but later converts to christianity and becomes Paul.

I don't approve of it either way. I was offering my two cents. The part you seemed to gloss over is that this was prior to the Ten Commandments when adultery was declared a sin by God. I mean it was what came out of Sodom and Gamorah after all. What would anyone expect?Line of defense? What the hell are you taliking about? Am I to be persecuted for my belief in every stinking lousy post? What's up with that anyway.I didn't defend it. I explained it the best that I know about it.

It's vial and disgusting but by no means defendable. There is a Lot that is written about. That doesn't mean we should find it acceptable conduct. Duh.

__________________
United We Stand.

I am unsure what this sentence means exactly.This isn't my thread. I didn't introduce it nor did I bring up Lot getting drunk after he escaped Sadom and Gamorah.

What I don't understand is what happened to the topic? If homosexual behavior becomes once again illegal, I don't expect it to, then there would likely be more people in some closet again.

__________________
United We Stand.

Exactly Kinetic! That is what I don't understand about the question of this thread to begin with: by making homosexuality illegal is NOT going to decrease the number of homosexuals on the planet. All it will do is make it less visible, and people will revert to subversive actions that they used to 20-30+ years ago. If homosexuality is made illegal, not one single person will suddenly go "oops, it's against the law, so now I'll be straight." Anyone who thinks otherwise is seriously delusional.

I'd like to make obesity a criminal offense. Not only does it offend me, but the sheer cost to us all in terms of health care and medical expenses is a travesty. Actually, I'd like to recommend that everything that I don't like be made illegal; that'd make a great society now huh?

While we agree on something, and I am not advocating criminization of homosexual conduct, you are unable to be aware of the affects that flaunting, boasting it up, promoting it, and pushing for licensing it does to the society. Naturally, (and I do mean naturally) this would
be something that would be undesireable for the vast majority, for the nation as whole and morality of the Govenernment to promote it with equal status.But, obesity doesn't require a license. Nor is anyone seeking one. You continue to compare apples to oranges.

__________________
United We Stand.

Homosexuality doesn't require a license either. Forget about gay marriage for a moment: we're not discussing that here (there's enough bloody threads on that topic already).

How do you feel that homosexuality is being flaunted or promoted? Because you now see the occasional gay character on tv? isn't that just a reflection of society? Wasn't there a big outcry in the 60s when black characters first started appearing on tv? What about the huge controversy that erupted when the first inter-racial kiss took place on screen (on Star Trek no less)? Aren't we simply revisiting those issues but with a different contextual topic? You often speak of "promotion", so I'd like to hear how exactly you see it being promoted?

BTW, I object to Christian evangelism, but it's shoved down my throat each day in the media, government and television. Is there a difference? You religion is your business, yet people insist on making it mine. My sex is my business and I have no intention of making it yours, yet people seem intent on making it so. I don't understand the fascination?

I agree. We probably don't need to discuss that issue, but it always, always, always comes up. The push to have gay clubs in schools, gay parades that often border on obscenity, television appearances where homosexual characters are overbearing (I know I don't have to watch but it's the exposure to our youth) and other instances that I cannot think of because it's late.That's a perfect example. You compare Christianity to homosexual behavior. One is based on moral fortitude the other is base on a moral absence. How can you compare them as being equal value? I know why but it isn't politically correct to.Those who are offended by belief in God don't seem to understand who we are that our rights according to the Declaration of Independence, come from God. Without God, there can be no life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.It's not fascination. The only reason that I would even discuss this at all is because of how defensive of marriage I am. I am also defensive of our schools, government and the moral compass of American culture. There doesn't seem to be any shame just anti-Christian speech for anyone who speaks out in favor of keeping marriage laws between one-woman one-man.

I guess it comes down to a moral breakdown in our society that could easily be lost to behaviors that are indefensible and primarily the destruction of marriage.

__________________
United We Stand.

I made the comment to "evangelical Christianity" as often portrayed on television, so are you seriously going to sit there and defend Jimmy Swaggert, Jim Baker, et al, as moral guardians that uphold morality on television in the name of Christianity?

In your opinion! But again, as I have asked repeatedly with little response, when you (and others on here) talk of morals, there is a seeming fixation on homosexuality, and little to no mention of adultery, pre-marital sex, divorce, et al, all of which are in opposition to so-called "morals". I won't hold my breath waiting for you to start threads on these issues with the regularity that you start threads on homosexuality.

You have spoken often about the Bible being the Word of God, how is it now that you are saying that some of it isn't acceptable? I agree with you in that I too believe that much of the stuff in the Bible is not acceptable, all the violence, cruelty, hatred, slavery, weird sex, and condemnation are unacceptable to me. It's a book written by people, nothing more or less and I hope you can come to realize that.

You are not being persecuted, people are simply disagreeing with what you have written. You can shut off your computer and none of us will ever speak to you again. We are not persecuting you, but the gay people that you hate cannot shut off their computers and get away from the persecution you advocate for them, can they? They will still be second class citizens, disenfranchised, and hated by people who belive all the "unacceptable" stuff in the Bible. Persecution is when you can't get away from the hatred and abuse of others.

__________________
Fanaticism is redoubling your efforts after you have forgotten your goal.

I still don't get the comparison. What does Christianity have to do with the Government promoting homosexual conduct, or any immoral behavior, with a license?Actually there is not. I oppose brothers and sisters obtaining a marriage license as well.Incest, homesexual conduct, group sex and other immoral behaviors ar all adultery and pre-marital sex. I oppose the Government recogonizing any of them.Contrary to your claims, I didn't start this thread. Nor do I believe that adutery or divorce are good things. I oppose the overall moral collapse of our society. Those who are engaging in sinful behavior harm more than just their own souls. They impact the entire nation as well.

__________________
United We Stand.

The comparison is in relation to your objection to seeing homosexual characters, or the "promotion" of homosexuality on television; and I'm saying that I object to having fundamentalist Christianity driven down my throat on television in an evangelical way. I can switch it off, as can you; but I'm making the point that you object to one thing on tv that you don't agree with, as am I.

I don't see the two as being equal but understand your reasoning.

__________________
United We Stand.