Posted by Chris H. on July 10, 19102 at 15:15:52:
In Reply to: Re: The ol' posted by X on July 10, 19102 at 05:30:50:
<<<<: Im affraid you're not understanding. We are not talking about bestiality, we are talking about two members of the same sex of the sam sepcies living in life long relationships. This has been observed in penguins.>>>>>
Yeah, I understand that, X. I'm trying to expose your argument to other examples to see if it's valid. Scientists have observed long-term homosexual relationships in penguins -- so what? What does that have to do with homosexual humans? You must be concluding that because of this, it must be "natural" and therefore ok with God. I am countering by saying that there are many many many animal behaviours that we observe in nature that we KNOW are not ok with God if humans did them. We also KNOW that long-term loving relationships is not the factor that makes it ok with God, since we KNOW that some kinds of loving, long-term relationships are clearly wrong.
IF you are saying that observing behaviour in nature is the factor that makes it ok with God, *I* am saying that you're opening the door to killing, stealing, and adultery, because we can observe all those in nature. IF you are saying that long-term loving relationships is the factor that makes it ok with God, then you're opening the door to incest, buggery, and beastiality -- as long as they take place within a loving long-term relationship.
I know YOU'RE not saying these things directly, but your arguments are -- and someday those very arguments can and will be used by people who DO want to marry 12-year-old girls!
Chris
<<<<: Your question on authority was interesting.... the bible or science? If the bible contradicted science then the bible would have no authority. >>>>>
You need to "explode" this argument of yours as well. If you believe that the bible's authority is subject to the authority of science, you must also believe that all of Jesus' miracles, especially raising Lazarus from the dead, plus his own resurrection, must either be fabrications, exaggerations, or mistakes. Science would clearly and loudly say that dead people cannot be raised after three days, no one can really walk on water, etc. etc. Of course, you must also believe that Christians have been subject to a mass deception the likes of which the world has never seen before or since, almost all Christians believe in these things which science would clearly say are impossible, or at the very least, not repeatable (which is the important test in scientific truth).
So, which is it? The bible, or science?
Chris
:
: : Heh heh. Lame, huh? Soooo...you're saying any behaviour we find in nature (or in humans, for that matter), must be natural is God's eyes and therefore loved by God, as long as it is in the context of loving feelings and committment and so forth. Do I have this right?
: : This links into another pro-gay argument: that homosexual relationships are ok because and as long as they are loving and long-term. Well, whoever says that must not have a problem with someone having a relationship with their 12-year-old neighbour or daughter. It's loving, isn't it? It could very well be long term. Or, maybe he's taken up with his dog. That couldn't be more loving, it's man's best friend after all!
: : What I really want to know is: what is the ultimate authority? The Bible? Natural science? Or the modern-day mantra of loving, long-term relationships? You can't say homosexual activity is ok because you can observe it in nature and that it's long-term, but beastiality is not ok because the bible says it's not, even though it's loving and long term. I really want to understand the criteria.
: : Chris
: : : lame argument. Your argument ignores the animals' feelings, and scientists have observed LIFE LONG homosexual relationships in animals, thus incidating homosexual attraction and love among them. Your argument is also totally oblivious to scientific observation of gay humans..... so im affraid you are incorrect- homosexuality is not only natural, it is loved by God.
: : : : Hi,
: : : : I've been reading some past posts, and the "Animals Are Gay" argument has come up fairly frequently. It seems to be used most often by the pro-gay camp as a way to show that, if homosexuality can be found in nature amongst animals, then it must be natural and therefore part of God's design, and therefore ok. I'm paraphasing, of course, but you get the idea.
: : : : The big problem with this argument is that, if true, then *all* of the behaviours we observe in the animal kingdom must be natural and ok. Stealing food from weaker neighbours and members of my family, for example. Killing intruders. Killing potential intruders. Abandoning my young. Killing my young. Being as adulterous as possible. All of these behaviours are easily observable in the animal kingdom, and quite commonplace. But of course, the sensible Christian would never try to use these kind of observable behaviours and a model for Christian living. Why do Christian homosexuals do this?
: : : : Chris