How can homosexuality not be a perversion?

I can see from your latest 3 replies that you know what you've done. I warned you (and even gave you a way out without too much shame) but you wouldn't listen. You've been caught and now your only way out is by slinking out the exit. But we'll all hear the door creak as you open it.

 

People don't have television where you live?

 

It's my thought that some radical gays do want to stifle free speech in the same manner radicals of all stripes have folks in their ranks that wish to do the same things.

Tying to stifle free speech is a sign a person is either weak or really doesn't believe what they re promoting.

 

Now don't be insulting roaches with comments like that, have respect for their feelings.

 

Wow somebody that actually gets it, very rare trait.

Thank you for posting that, simple but very accurate.

 

Only thing I've done is expecting more from you than you're capable of. Meh

 

You can call me a bigot all day lone, it's just a word and they shouldn't always be taken seriously, sadly some people take words way too seriously and get very upset, never realizing that is allowing someone to take control of their mind.

 

Who watches television anymore?

 

Millions of people actually

 

You poor boy.

 

Let me know when two men can lay together and create a baby let me know the same thing when two women lay together and create a baby

 

All irrelevant.

 

Fine. I will agree to use your specific terminology in further exchanges with you. Thus, I will reword my question: How, precisely, does homosexual activity produce children? A lasting family?

The "homosexual" at that point is no longer a "homosexual". Homosexual activity does not yield children... only heterosexual activity does.

IVF is not homosexual activity.

Homosexual activity is not healthy.

True.

Maybe not, but the risk of such things is far higher in people who engage in homosexual activity. One is a vastly increased risk of HIV/AIDS (among other STDs). Then there is increased risk of mental issues, such as depression, as well as substance abuse, hepatitis, anal health, and various cancers.

There you go again, attempting to equate an abnormality with a normality.

Procreation is the purpose of sex, the only purpose. While there are other benefits that come along with having sex, its purpose is for procreation.

 

No, it just shows that the purity of genetics changed.

Okay.

The loss of genetic purity is the problem.

No it isn't.

 

Okay.

Of course one can have sex for a number of different reasons, but the purpose of sex remains procreation. Losing sight of this purpose is what leads to numerous negative consequences, such as increased risk of STDs and having children out of wedlock (which can lead to financial issues, foster care, abortion, etc etc)

Correct.

Of course.

That's not what I said. I said nothing about the person. I said that I disdained the behavior/activity.

Incorrect. A person is not a behavior/activity.

 

this is an old thread. Who bumped it?

 

Abstinence is neither heterosexual activity nor homosexual activity. It is the absence of both.

People use words in different ways, sure.

 

Not accurate. People who have sex without intention of having kids go their entire life not getting STD or having children out of wedlock.

Oh so you only have disdain for a particular behavior/activity. So, for example, you don’t have disdain for rapist. You only have disdain for the activity of rape. Got it.

 

Avoidance. They are all relevant.

 

I , too, consider homosexual lust a perversion.. heterosexual lust usually is perverted and is , in numbers alone , a bigger problem that homosexual lust; outside a monogamous relationship ( a relationship suited for raising children)

Jesus, Yeshua, I'sua.. you know the name,, Lord and Savior, modified the OT to hating the sin, but loving the sinner.


Most people do not seem to distinguish between love and lust. We are made lustful, so we'll procreate, but it is, lust, a powerful thing.. so there are rules.

 

Your question's implication is not a counter argument.

Please substantiate your claim.

 

No their not.

 

Some do. Many others don't.

Yes. I disdain the sin, not the sinner.

Correct. I disdain the sin, not the sinner.

 

That isn't what Mac-7 said.

But feel free to offer examples.

 

its all up to a person's interpretation and opinion
in MY opinion, its nature's way of population control