Are there any valid arguments against homosexuality at all?

Realistically being gay is an anti-evlolution gene since it doesn't promote reproduction, so how is it so wide spread today? Well it's really humanity that caused it. If you were gay 1000 years ago would you actually come out of the closet? No you would be forced to live a straight life and pass on the gene. So i wouldn't say it is nature doing anything.

Only if as a species we were in danger of becoming extinct and didn't have the tools to procreate artificially, as in, could only do so by copulation. In that scenario, it's not even an argument "against" homosexuality since it would be an easy enough endeavour to have females capable of being impregnated become pregnant, whether they were homosexual are not. Including the males doing the impregnating. It doesn't take much imagination to envision a society where sexual intercourse is a communal thing. It's arguably better.

This question threw me a little.

1) Evolution isn't goal driven, so just because a group of genes can create homosexual tendencies which can thrive in nature doesn't really undermine its evolution. Just because a particular gene could give the perception of being negative in a certain set of scenarios doesn't mean that it would negative in all possible scenarios. Sometimes harmful genes can turn out to have their own benefits that aid survival in a special way.

2) The genes could have easily spread so wide because of homosexual men being pressured in trying to purse relationships with women due to socio-economical factors like you stated, but bisexual men are the most likely candidate because they are naturally attracted to both genders and would have no issue pasting the gene on very easily.

3) Depends on how you define "Nature", but I don't see what you stated that couldn't be interpreted as environmental factors.

@w0nd: :)

Im not arguing with point one I'm just saying being gay is high in numbers today simply because thats how humans forced breaded ourselves and that naturally it wouldn't be high in numbers other wise.

I'll just say this, and be on my way.

Homosexuality is Morally Wrong, Contradicts Natural Law and is a drug that's poisoned this worlds Morality.

I'm out :P.

More like choose to be out, many people will have a problem with this.

Let us get things straight.

First this.

"A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord." - Deuteronomy 23:1

If you get testicular cancer and choose to do anything about it, you're going to hell.

Jewish faith said that to join the assembly of God, one must be born Jewish or if not, converted to their faith and circumcised. That is the law, you cannot comply if your testicle is cut or crushed.

Cutting or Crushing of the said organ is a popular pagan practice of that time.

Many people misunderstand the difference between ceremonial and moral laws. Moral laws continue throughout time; ceremonial laws were for a particular period. The ban of certain types of food, including shellfish, was a ceremonial law, intended to essentially teach Israel that they should not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. That picture is no longer required in our time, and so the prohibition against eating shellfish is removed (though the moral law of restraining from being unequally yoked is still in play). Indeed, the Bible even teaches in the New Testament that everything is to be received, if it be received with thanksgiving (speaking about food).

There are Biblical Laws that are periodical in nature, like the command for the people on Noah's time after the great flood to go and multiply does not mean that there should be no birth control. Think of the time it was mentioned. Also, marriage is not implemented during that period IIRC.

As for the ban on some food here is the reason and it is a logical one. God does not want us to get sick. Man is like an infant back then, shellfish are bottom dwellers and eats all kind of things under the sea or river, toxin accumulate in their bodies and if eaten could result to serious complications even death.

What "plenty of people do" is not the issue. Many people lie, but that doesn't mean that lying is okay with God. And since we're all sinners, we're all doomed, unless God has mercy on any one of us. So, even if "doing something" about testicular cancer were wrong in God's eyes, that person would be in trouble with God for the many thousands of other sins they've committed.

God's law is pretty much strict, if you have sinned you will die as told in the scriptures. To work around this, God send his Son to die for mankind's sin. Those washed by his blood will be saved but that does mean you are saved for life, because you will need to work hard to keep yourself worthy and not continually commit sin or else there will be no amount of prayer or sacrifices that can save you.

As are Shellfish and wearing gold.

As to the wearing of Gold, Christ wants his follower to be simple and humble and not be tempted by material wealth.

The Vatican seems quite concerned with material wealth.

I'm talking about the first century followers of Christ. The one the Disciples personally handled.

If you read the whole thread you can clearly see that there are no objective arguments against homosexuality, just a lot of assumptions taken to support one's opinions. And while I generally advocate personal opinion, I am also against any belief that includes discrimintating, deprecating or limiting people who don't do any of those things.

The more popular arguments against are:

1- It's a sickenss.
2- It's unnatural.
3- My religion says it's wrong.
4- I don't like it.

And they are all non-arguments...

1- It is not a sickness by any definition. It doesn't induce pain, suffering or alter the quality of life, phisically or mentally. It doesn't lead to self-harm like real psychological conditions like bulimia, anorexia etc.

2- It's unnatural. Which any person who ever read anything about the animal kingdom would know to not be true. Homosexuality is a well documented behaviour in animals, with the difference that they practice it more freely and less exclusively. For example, bonobo alfa females (which are very close to us, behaviourally and biologically), after having reproduced, are often known to pick some female companions to have sex with, because it's more fun and enjoyable for them.
To this I often hear the reply "Rape also occurs in nature! Is that right too?", which is again a very stupid argument. I did't say that since something occurs in nature then it is also right. I'm saying that it's a contraddiction to call "unnatural" something that occurs in a vast portion of the animal kingdom.
So, rape is something that occurs in natural and so some humans get that urge. But since it carries physical and psychological damage to others, good people refrain from it. Homosexuality is something that occurs in nature and has no bearing on the well being of the individual. See the difference?
SMALL NOTE: the fact that a lot of mammals go both ways when they feel like it tells a lot about the fact that maybe humans are not as clean cut as homo or heterosexual. A lot of people are not 100% one or the other, they just need to be at ease with admitting it.

3- Religion is a matter of personal belief. It is based on wisdom from people who didn't have any of the scientific knowledge of today, and was modified by centuries of history and cultural shifts. Your belief that homosexuality is wrong is about as right as some other's belief that being black is wrong, eating pork is wrong, having a tattoo is wrong, growing to kinds of vegetables in the same crop is wrong, not blowing a horn every moon cycle is wrong.
If you expect people to respect your religion, you should adhere to a religion that preaches tolerance and respect of all others.

4- If you don't like it it's ok. Some people, who are very straight, find the idea repulsive. That goes the same for homosexuals: if an individual is completely homosexual, they might find sex between two different genders disgusting. It doesn't mean that they are right. It's just a personal preference, an impulse.
I myself hate peppers (especially green and yellow ones). Doesn't mean that they suck, just that I don't like it.

I really don't understand why people focus so much on how different others can be. What do you care? Why do you think it's important for you to styfle something that doesn't injure or scar anybody? Couldn't you direct that energy into doing something positive for people who are actually suffering in a blatand and explicit way, instead of people that you think might regret something in an hypotetical situation nobody has ever seen happen?

@dbvse7: Cute troll.

His opinion. Please respect it.

Accept the TRUE Batman as savior and rid yourself of such thoughts. ;p

Why should we respect his opinion?
BB

@billy_batson: We shouldn't. Overlord is trolling super hard as well.

@billy_batson: Because it is exactly that an opinion..........and he is free to express it.

Because it is his and he did not attack anybody in his statement or try to force his idea to anybody.

If you disagree with his opinion, then address him properly and say why you disagree.

@jaken7: How is he trolling besides forcing his Batgod views on one of the unsaved as yourself ;)

I was serious in the first statement. The second one is a troll one because its tradition. ;p

Are you sure we should respect the opinion of somebody who judges and would limit the freedom of others? What about racism? Should we be respectful of racists?

Not being flippant! I am actually asking your opinion on this.

Ok. Calm down...

@laflux is this the classic Acidskull like?

He attacked me, my family, my beliefs, my lifestyle, and my very being. He claims me and people like me are "morally wrong," that our very existence "contradicts nature," and that we have "poisoned this world's morality."

CAN YOU HONESTLY NOT GRASP WHY I'D HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT!? DON'T YOU DARE TELL ME TO "RESPECT" HIS GODDAMN OPINION.

*ahem* So yeah...

Don't...you...f%cking...start...with...that...sh%t.

*tries best to breathe but instead collapses, red in the face*

I actually I agree more with Jaken7, even though I would phrase it in more calm tones ;)

Think about it: saying that we are morally wrong and that we are poison is not just an opinion, it's judgement, it's the belief to be born morally superior to (let's say) 9-10% of the population.

It's like saying to respect a nazi because he has an opinion that is different that yours. What if somebody's opinion is that you are wrong, poisonous, and also that maybe you should be cured/exorcised/cast away?

@matteopg: You can't fight hate with hate, I know that's it frustrating because of the bigoted nonsense that they promote is so toxic, you can't fall to that level. Plus, you'll get this thread locked, just respect his right to have his opinion, man.

As his statement said, it is not pointed in anyone in particular or say anything negative such as punishment or cease on living if you ever are one.

An opinion is an opinion, but if you ever act on it and it and violate the rights of others, then it is wrong.

The best thing you can do is to address him properly or ignore him if you find it that offensive.

@matteopg: The quickest way to piss me off is to bring up homosexuality from an anti-gay's perspective. My dad has always pointed out and taken pride in the fact that I have an uncanny ability to see both sides of a debate. That even though I may believe one thing, I'm respectful and accepting of the other (although I'll debate with them to my last breath), and can at least see where they're coming from. The one, count 'em, ONE exception is any topic related to homosexuality. Can't stand anyone who isn't accepting of me or my family, therefore, I don't owe them acceptance back. I really am a hothead when it comes to this subject.

I think that's meant for me. And no, I refuse.

You're right, it's a sweeping generalization aimed at all of us LGBT folk.

And he may not have outright said we should be cast away or cease to exist, but what else would you do to a "poison on this world's morality?"

@OverLordArhas: I absolutely agree. Still, he threw the opinion around with a jokey emoticon, like condemning a whole chunk of population is something to be taken lightly. I have found, in my long experience, that that kind of opinion is often based in ignorance or religious zeal.

Still, I understand you point. I don't think everybody should agree on everything. Still, one thing is saying "I don't like this" and one other is "This thing is wrong". Do you see my point?

Nontheless, I didn't attack him or anything, i was just hoping to discuss this point :)

Ehi, I know. I didn't use harsh terms nor did I shout (or use capslock, whatever). I was just trying to debater a different point. I think I'm allowed to do that, right? I don't recall being hateful or anything.

@jaken7: Oh, you're right, I did reply to the wrong guy. And yeah, man. I do understand where you are coming from, anti-gay arguments get so under my skin it's unreal. Especially how so many creationists like to argue against humanity but then try and quote it to support their hate-filled, idiotic arguments.

@jaken7:

And he may not have outright said we should be cast away or cease to exist, but what else would you do to a "poison on this world's morality?"

Again, his opinion that he must substantiate or it hold no water. No reason to get angry.

...and it is evident that he does not want to, that is why I'm saying that it is his opinion and whatever it is, it is his.

@matteopg: Sorry, bud, I replied to the wrong fello, you're doing a good job.

I think I've already explained that I have every reason to be angry.

Yeah, I mean... *sigh*

@keenko@OverLordArhas@eisenfauste@matteopg

Look guys, I never claimed to be Gandhi. When someone says something like that, I'm not just going to be passive and ignore it. I'm a human being. I have feelings, and I'm not above getting emotional. I'm going to hold onto my right to be upset, and that's all there is to it...

@jaken7: I respect and understand that.

@jaken7:

I do not know if it just me, but if anything thrown at me is not substantiated I often ignore it. No skin off my nose.

I'm thought to never wear my heart on my sleeve.

You sound rather...cold. Well, you are the Lich King after all. ;p

@jaken7 said:

@keenko said:

@jaken7: I respect and understand that.

^ dat dude gives girly hugs. I love it!

♥

@OverLordArhas: Okay, I have to ask. Are you the same Overlord? There was some dude from the original's work filling in for him when he was banned, and when the original came back, he said he was leaving for good and that someone else was going to take over his account. But you don't seem all that different...or maybe I've just gotten so used to you, I can't remember what the original was like. So...what's the truth?

And don't worry if you aren't the original, as I've gotten rather acquainted with you. Maybe even more so than the original...

because no matter how much i chase them, lesbians will never have sex with me

@OverLordArhas:

Fairly close.

Oh okay. Thanks!

This is not a good attempt at a counter-argument my friend. Whether or not you like it, homosexuality goes against nature. A man's penis is supposed to insert into a woman's vagina. Forget about carry capacities. We are talking about the act of sex. Again, let me stress that this does not define my sexuality (although I am indeed straight), or whether or not I feel comfortable around gay people. Let me put it to you another way; when to women have sex,and they use phallic toys to achieve the same stimulation as they would if they had sex with a man, then that is unnatural.

But you know what? I've seen your other comments, and it will take a little more than this one comment to convince you, and I'm honestly tired of seeing my name in this thread. Just ask one of your real life friends or family how homosexuality, and the act of gay sex defies nature, and I'm sure they will explain it to you.

@twentyfive: how can something be unnatural if it happens in nature? That is the contraddiction, from the way I see it. You say unnatural, which means that it is not found in nature. But homosexuality is. So I really don't understand the point.

@sheenlantern: Yes i would know. I have observed this.I have also taken the liberty of asking multiple gay people about there life styles and there answers support my understanding.

@pikahyper:So called True Homosexuality is not a real thing.There are no levels or stages to homosexuality. You either are gay or you are not. To be a homosexual is to simply have a sexual desire (regardless of reason) towards anyone of the same sex. Also i agree with your statement about those those who jump on the gay train for popularity & wealth. I have observed that too. Going by the definition of Homosexuality they are no diffrent from what you consider "True Homosexuals".As they ultimately desire and engage in those activities.

That's a pretty harsh generalization.

I agree

1) You are playing fast and loose with the word natural, so you need to define what you mean by natural and unnatural.

2) I don't see how your analogy illustrates what you mean by something being natural and unnatural. Again, you're assigning make believe definitions to those terms.