Produce "Pro gay (or LGBT)" scripture

[99percentatheism]

Very simple.:The movement to homosexualize The Church, to celebrate and encourage people to engage in homosexuality, including the redefining of marriage even, has been going on for a few decades now. With of course the expected schism by those Christians that cannot be part of that.

So, simply, for those that support homosexuality, "gay pride," and those that define themselves by the sex act or desire for it (Gays, Lesbians, and Bi-Sexuals), produce the open and unambiguous scriptural support New Testament or Old Testament . . . for "Christians" to engage in, support and promote homosexuality.

[Haven]

We are human beings right and not beasts of the field or jungle? Yes or no.

No. We are animals--"beasts" if you will--and we are just as subject to biology as any other animal species.

There are memories one cannot recall. I have a fear of falling. Am I a heightaphobe or as a child did I trip and fall at some point in my upbringing? Scars heal but still have consequences.

This is a fallacious appeal to ignorance. You're claiming something exists on the basis of absence of knowledge ('how do you know you didn't choose to be straight,'), but there is absolutely zero basis for making such a claim.

Being weak and wimpy is a condition many children go through. That doesn't mean that they are destined to desire homosexual interactions.

Being weak has nothing to do with homosexuality--but like being gay, it isn't a choice.

Prejudice? People are fat simply by caloric consumption. No matter how one comes to their obesity, it is a matter of fact how it is obtained. Malnourished children with a "thyroid condition" cannot biologically get fat unless they engage in fattening behaviors.

This is actually false:

Article

Everyone can repent of their sins. ANYONE. Maybe not the beasts of the field or farmyard, living room or zoo, but we humans can.

Humans are animals! I am an animal. You are an animal. To deny this is to deny biological reality.

[99percentatheism]

Danmark
[Replying to post 59 by 99percentatheism]

Post 59 is a catalogue of logical fallacies and devoid of evidence.
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/

Evidence:

'Researchers have speculated in the past that genes linked to homosexuality in men may have survived evolution because they happened to make women who carried them more fertile. This may be the case for genes in the Xq28 region, as the X chromosome is passed down to men exclusively from their mothers.

Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University in Illinois, set out the findings at a discussion event held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Chicago on Thursday. "The study shows that there are genes involved in male sexual orientation," he said. The work has yet to be published, but confirms the findings of a smaller study that sparked widespread controversy in 1993, when Dean Hamer, a scientist at the US National Cancer Institute, investigated the family histories of more than 100 gay men and found homosexuality tended to be inherited. More than 10% of brothers of gay men were gay themselves, compared to around 3% of the general population.Uncles and male cousins on the mother's side had a greater than average chance of being gay, too.

The link with the mother's side of the family led Hamer to look more closely at the X chromosome. In follow-up work, he found that 33 out of 40 gay brothers inherited similar genetic markers on the Xq28 region of the X chromosome, suggesting key genes resided there.
....
"Genetic factors explain 30 to 40% of the variation between people's sexual orientation. However, we don't know where these genetic factors are located in the genome. "
....
Historically, the persecution and awful treatment of LGBT groups has been because politicians, religious leaders and societies have viewed sexual orientation as 'choice' or due to poor upbringing."'
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014 ... tion-study

This is in accord with my own anecdotal experience. None of my four siblings are gay or lesbian. On my father's side, none of my counsins or nephews are gay; however, on my mother's side I have a gay cousin [and ardent GOP spokesman] and two gay nephews. All of these relatives were raised by devout evangelical Christian parents.

My anecdotal experience shows me that society is becoming more sexualized and licentious and has accepted a lasciviousness that has caused redundant laws (Yes Means Yes) to have to be created to deal with it. (Just a trip down MTV Lane is proof of that sexualization. Nicki Minaj and Lady Gaga are not the poster children of morality. Well not Christian morality.)

The writing is on the wall and is getting clearer by the day.

What a very prophetic utterance that is. The writing is on the wall alright and it looks more like that of Pompeii. We don't see the gay pride movement coming out of a great awakening of a repenting society wailing over the realization that things are getting darker every day. We see it on the coattails of a decidedly irreligious movement of secularism and an anything goes culture that has embraced ancient paganism and certainly "progressive" in taking the world back to a time where sexuality had little to no boundaries to depravity being the social norm. And my personal experiences lead me to see this as a matter of anecdotal experience too.

The writing is on the wall and it is getting clearer. How perfect a statement is that.

And it is the same old message sent anew: "Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin"

The reason?

But you did not honor the God who holds in his hand your life and all your ways.

- Daniel 5

The Gay liberation movement was not ushered in by an embracing of religion. But by a new movement of secularization that has brought us from the Humanist Manifesto to the gay pride movement taking power through secular law.

This thread is about pro gay scriptures in the Bible. No one has produced any pro gay scriptures and until Bibles are written in gay pride translations, that is never going to happen. Which writing appears to be on the wall as well.

And modern science?:

"The gene or genes in the Xq28 region that influence sexual orientation have a limited and variable impact. Not all of the gay men in Bailey's study inherited the same Xq28 region. The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay."

I'm not sure it gets any clearer and less ambiguous than that: "The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay."

One problem all along for gay activists is that even a cursory survey of sexual orientation among identical twins makes the "born that way" meme impossible to accept.

Identical twins have identical DNA, which is why they are called identical twins. If one has blue eyes, so will the other. If one has black hair, so will the other. If one is tall, so is the other.

If sexual orientation is genetically determined, then the concordance rate among identical twins should be 100%. If one twin is gay, so should be the other. Alas, the concordance rate, according to researchers Peter Bearman from Columbia and Hannah Bruckner from Yale, is somewhere between 5% and 7%. Oops.

The Guardian swallows hard, but notes this fact:

"The flawed thinking behind a genetic test for sexual orientation is clear from studies of twins, which show that the identical twin of a gay man, who carries an exact replica of his brother's DNA, is more likely to be straight than gay. That means even a perfect genetic test that picked up every gene linked to sexual orientation would still be less effective than flipping a coin."

In other words, the genetic evidence for biological causation is so poor you'd have better luck predicting orientation by throwing darts blindfolded.

Bailey adds, "We found evidence for two sets [of genes] that affect whether a man is gay or straight. But it is not completely determinative; there are certainly other environmental factors involved."

We have often argued that environment has by far the largest impact on a young child's sense of sexual identity. The nature of a young boy's relationship with his father and with this mother can play an outsized role. Same-sex abuse at an early age can leave a lasting imprint on a boy's sense of his sexual identity.

One of Bailey's colleagues, Alan Sanders chimes in this way: "When people say there's a gay gene, it's an oversimplification. There's more than one gene, and genetics is not the whole story."

Bearman and Bruckner put it this way: "[O]ur results support the hypothesis that less gendered socialization in early childhood and preadolescence shapes subsequent same-sex romantic preferences."

- http://www.onenewsnow.com/perspectives/ ... DpA3WddVvA

[99percentatheism]

Haven

We are human beings right and not beasts of the field or jungle? Yes or no.

No. We are animals--"beasts" if you will--and we are just as subject to biology as any other animal species.

You really want to go down that anatomical trail? Nature and nature's biology is no friend to the gay agenda. Same gender sexual couplings look to be exclusively in the aberrant department. Unless of course oral and anal sex can produce stronger and more adaptive offspring. Which neither can. But of course fear of homosexuality may indeed be as natural as evolutionary forces.

99%
There are memories one cannot recall. I have a fear of falling. Am I a heightaphobe or as a child did I trip and fall at some point in my upbringing? Scars heal but still have consequences.

This is a fallacious appeal to ignorance. You're claiming something exists on the basis of absence of knowledge ('how do you know you didn't choose to be straight,'), but there is absolutely zero basis for making such a claim.

Fallacious appeal to ignorance? I made a statement of logic. Much more logical than someone "being born" with the desire for same gender mating. Somewhere along the way, a decision was made that gay sex was pleasurable. I'd like to see you show where the desire for anal sex is natural in any species in nature?

99%
Being weak and wimpy is a condition many children go through. That doesn't mean that they are destined to desire homosexual interactions.

Being weak has nothing to do with homosexuality--but like being gay, it isn't a choice.

Being weak is certainly something that can be overcome. No NFL player is "born with the desire" to experience ineffectiveness. They train hard to not be weak. They overcome their congenital condition of not being able to run the Forty in less than five-seconds.

99%
Prejudice? People are fat simply by caloric consumption. No matter how one comes to their obesity, it is a matter of fact how it is obtained. Malnourished children with a "thyroid condition" cannot biologically get fat unless they engage in fattening behaviors.

This is actually false:

Article

If people do not take in the calories to become obese they cannot become obese. That's a fact. No matter the birth condition, if someone "predisposed to obesity" does not take in excessive amounts of calories, or burn them off when they do they cannot get obese. Any athlete or fashion model can prove that fact. Once they stop their dietary and physical "fat burning" lifestyles, they get fat.

99%
Everyone can repent of their sins. ANYONE. Maybe not the beasts of the field or farmyard, living room or zoo, but we humans can.

Humans are animals! I am an animal. You are an animal. To deny this is to deny biological reality.

OK. I actually use evolution in its proper setting often. I certainly do not deny scientific logic. The weak and deviant in nature "get what they deserve" through natural processes. Even Darwin's Finches are still birds and can only move on in nature to becoming a better species through exclusively and immutably opposite gender sexual means. Is nature heteronormative or heterosexist?

Now produce scientific evidence that offspring can be produced through homosexual mating? Let's go to Galapagos Island OK? That would be fascinating as to what kind of community Darwin's Gay Finches have developed. Rainbow colored Finches that breed only with other same gender Rainbow colored Finches? Not a chance, per science and nature. (Pun intended for logical reasons.)

Humans are animals! I am an animal. You are an animal. To deny this is to deny biological reality.

It looks like it is natural to reject homosexuals and homosexuality does it not? The Bible and science agreeing yet again. Maybe that is the direct answer as to why there are no pro gay scriptures perhaps?

Now let's move back to the OP shall we?

Thread derails are like same gender matings in evolution.

[Danmark]

It looks like it is natural to reject homosexuals and homosexuality does it not? The Bible and science agreeing yet again. Maybe that is the direct answer as to why there are no pro gay scriptures perhaps?

It is wrong to claim the Bible and 'science' agree on this subject. Science has shown homosexual behavior is common among animals including man.
As of 1999, nearly 1,500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, have been observed engaging in same-sex behaviors; this is well documented in about 500 species.
Bruce Bagemihl, Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity, St. Martin's Press, 1999; ISBN 978-0312253776; Harrold, Max (1999-02-16). "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity". The Advocate, reprinted in Highbeam Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2007-09-10. [from Wikipedia]
The scientific evidence, quoted in this subtopic, suggests a genetic basis for 'gay' behavior. If the Bible disagrees with these conclusions, then the Bible and 'Science' are in disagreement.