lunar1126 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Because its true. male and female produce life. that is how nature has it to be. a man and women produce a child' date=' thats teh natural process.[/quote'] Your argument keeps jumping around from a 'biological back up,' to a 'cultural back up.' Make up your mind! First you use 'nature' and 'natures natural way' to back up your side, then you start talking about 'mariage and the way it's been done for 1000s of years.' Ever heard of the bonobo monkeys? They have sex with multiple partners, sometimes between the opposite sex and......sometimes between the same sex! Heck, they even have orgies at the drop of a hat! They are part of the 'natural world,' aren't they? Explain that... But of course this is more about sex. It's about love. True, in most cultures a pair bond is usually a man and women. But you have to understand that there is biological and cultural variation. There exists all sorts of combinations of sanctioned marriages in this world. As an_cat said, there is polygyny, polyandry, trigamy....what do you say to those cultures who have been practicing those forms of unions for thousands of years? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matter-Eater Lad Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 *jumps in* So Nick, you say that marriage is the natural way, and its a tradition that we should uphold. Couple of things: One, why do we have to keep the tradition between a man and a woman? Because the Christian God said so? He also said we shouldn't eat seafood. Also, you say that its the natural way. Now, homosexuality has been around for thousands of years. Its been documented as far back as the Egyptian civilization. There were gay Greeks, gay Romans, gay Saxons, etc... Wouldn't after a long enough time like that, it would be considered natural as well? Its not as if homosexuality suddenly sprang up 30 years ago. Again im not talking about god or christian beliefs. im talking about marriage as a acient tradition. Just because something has been here for along time, does not make it natural. there have been gays for thousands of years. i never said or hinted toward it, that homosexuality is a recent occurrence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrfSnwColdplay Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 *jumps in* So Nick, you say that marriage is the natural way, and its a tradition that we should uphold. Couple of things: One, why do we have to keep the tradition between a man and a woman? Because the Christian God said so? He also said we shouldn't eat seafood. Also, you say that its the natural way. Now, homosexuality has been around for thousands of years. Its been documented as far back as the Egyptian civilization. There were gay Greeks, gay Romans, gay Saxons, etc... Wouldn't after a long enough time like that, it would be considered natural as well? Its not as if homosexuality suddenly sprang up 30 years ago. 1. Christ fed 5000 people with fish and loaves of bread. So did He in no way say we shouldn't eat seafood. 2. Homosexuals have been considered as 'lepers' until recently. It was definitely more natural thousands of years ago to be hetero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunar1126 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Because its true. male and female produce life. that is how nature has it to be. a man and women produce a child' date=' thats teh natural process.[/quote'] Humm.....homosexuality exisits in nature too btw. Now why would nature (which you seem to think is, by definition, some ideal model) allow homosexuality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matter-Eater Lad Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Your argument keeps jumping around from a 'biological back up,' to a 'cultural back up.' Make up your mind! First you use 'nature' and 'natures natural way' to back up your side, then you start talking about 'mariage and the way it's been done for 1000s of years.' Ever heard of the bonobo monkeys? They have sex with multiple partners, sometimes between the opposite sex and......sometimes between the same sex! Heck, they even have orgies at the drop of a hat! They are part of the 'natural world,' aren't they? Explain that... But of course this is more about sex. It's about love. True, in most cultures a pair bond is usually a man and women. But you have to understand that there is biological and cultural variation. There exists all sorts of combinations of sanctioned marriages in this world. As an_cat said, there is polygyny, polyandry, trigamy....what do you say to those cultures who have been practicing those forms of unions for thousands of years? you can have to point of argument. one being it goes agaisnt nature, that is about homosexuality. my other view point was marriage is for man and women. back up my side? man and women have a baby not man and man, thats the evidence. nature has proven the natural way. monkeys also throw fecies at each other, is that the natural way for humans? no. like i said i dont care if two of the same sex love, thats none of my bussiness, what i do care about is upholding the acient tradition of marriage. go have gay sex, or love the same sex, i dont give a damn, just leave marriage to what its sapposed to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egghead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Ok, technically its shellfish And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination. --- Don't eat shellfish Leviticus 11:10-11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matter-Eater Lad Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Humm.....homosexuality exisits in nature too btw. Now why would nature (which you seem to think is' date=' by definition, some ideal model) allow homosexuality?[/quote'] in select cases in nature, black widow spiders for example, after mateing(sp?) they eat their mate, so its it natural for a women to kill a man after sex? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
an_cat Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 My dog was gay. No, seriously...... my dog Timmy was gay............... He had sex with our neighbor's male dog. I am NOT joking about that... :stunned: It kind of scarred me for life...... Sorry uh, that could have been really off topic but I thought it did relate to homosexuality occuring in nature. lmfao....... :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunar1126 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 in select cases in nature' date=' black widow spiders for example, after mateing(sp?) they eat their mate, so its it natural for a women to kill a man after sex?[/quote'] hey man, I'm not the one who keeps saying 'ohhh, it's the natural way'..... :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matter-Eater Lad Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Ok, technically its shellfish --- Don't eat shellfish Leviticus 11:10-11 Old testament books. rules that applied only before jesus. nice try Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrfSnwColdplay Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I think the difference between sexual urges in animals and humans are completely different. A human can control itself. It's just whether he chooses not to is the deciding factor. A dog will go hump anything if it's horny, becuase it has no reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egghead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 like i said i dont care if two of the same sex love, thats none of my bussiness, what i do care about is upholding the acient tradition of marriage. go have gay sex, or love the same sex, i dont give a damn, just leave marriage to what its sapposed to be. but in other cultures polygynous and polyandrous marriages have been the tradition. so your argument doesn't make sense. unless you're talking about the christian definition of marriage, which you're saying you aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matter-Eater Lad Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 hey man, I'm not the one who keeps saying 'ohhh, it's the natural way'..... :rolleyes: Because its not for humans and most species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunar1126 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 My dog was gay. No, seriously...... my dog Timmy was gay............... He had sex with our neighbor's male dog. I am NOT joking about that... :stunned: It kind of scarred me for life...... Sorry uh, that could have been really off topic but I thought it did relate to homosexuality occuring in nature. lmfao....... :confused: hahah. pfft, totally relates! :kiss: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrfSnwColdplay Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I see nothing in Leviticus 11:10-11 that pertains to shellfish. What translation do you have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
an_cat Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Right, Egghead! I keep asking and I really want to hear the answer, what are your views towards polygamists and polygynists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egghead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Old testament books. rules that applied only before jesus. nice try So Jesus' voice trumps God's voice? Remind me not to play poker with them.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrfSnwColdplay Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Jesus is God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matter-Eater Lad Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 So Jesus' voice trumps God's voice? Remind me not to play poker with them.... in the christian religion. god made those rules for the jews that lived before jesus. after jesus came the old way was changed. after jesus there was no need to sacrafice animals for sins and things such as that. jesus voice doesnt trumps god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrfSnwColdplay Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 It's called the Trinity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egghead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Jesus is God. well then he's just contradicting himself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrfSnwColdplay Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 No, He isn't. That's why I said it's called the Trinity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matter-Eater Lad Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 well then he's just contradicting himself! How? he made a rule that relates to the world pre jesus and one for after his coming. no contradiction at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egghead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Ok fine. I'm waiting for your opinion on polyamorous marriages, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrfSnwColdplay Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 How? he made a rule that relates to the world pre jesus and one for after his coming. no contradiction at all. Nicely put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now