Forums » General » Currently: Homosexuality and Religion
Okay, so I figure we could use a little experiment here. This'll be called "The Tangent Topic," and we'll use it as a detour thread, of sorts, for brief discussions that break off from the topics of our main debate threads. This will come in handy if we have mini-topics we want to settle for the purpose of use in another debate that are too indirect to fit the debate, but a thread specifically for them hasn't been opened yet.
Things we see in here might become full-fledged debates, or they might just get talked about and then get replaced by new tangential topics. So, in order to promote both of those outcomes, the limit for a single topic in this thread will be two pages of Serebii default (specifically, 40 posts). After that, the topic will be changed or closed, whatever suits our needs.
If this turns out not to be too useful, or not to work the way I envision it, we can scrap the idea. No biggie.
Mattj, when you make the distinction between 'natural' and 'natural function' where does it say in Romans 1:26-27 that the natural function of a man and a woman is the same thing natural function of their respective sexual organs? I apologize that I can't understand a majority of this conversation, but I still have a few thoughts, so be patient with me. So if I'm understanding this, women abandoned men for other women and men abandoned women for other men. Is it possible that this passage mourns the division between the sexes in general and how being exclusionary puts their morals at a disadvantage? 'Indecent acts' could refer to the rise of sexism and the pitfalls of having a male-only cabal in charge of society. Think of predominantly male occupations and how they have a reputation of being rude, perverted, and indecent. Men can act in a certain indecent ways when they only stay around their own gender and exclude women. All of the same goes for an exclusively feminine group in different ways, although I hear there are less examples of that historically.
It seems to me that your answer to this point just took the debate back to the well-established fact that 'natural' is the most vague, fuzzy and subjective term anyone can use, and it doesn't really help to pair it with the word 'function' because function can refer to anything since everything functions. When you jumped to describing the natural function of sex organs, I had de ja vu of some of the posters who come in and don't use any religious support, and jump to 'men and women are supposed to have sex with each other!' and leave it at that. This just seems to validate the reoccuring claim that any devout Christian could be an athiest and still have the same opinion about homosexuality not because they are following their religion, but because of their personal assumptions that they pick up for whatever reasons.
I am calm about homosexuals. I'm straight, and I don't care who sleeps with whom. I only think about my relationship with the girl, but not about strangers. However, I often fantasize about having sex with a guy, and my girlfriend knows about it. I even often go to this indian hd site, where there is a lot of interesting stuff.