DISQUS

anselm · 9 months ago

I'm not clear how "they hate gays" follows from "they oppose the performance of homosexual acts." If they also oppose the use of heroin, does that mean they hate heroin addicts? And couldn't the belief that sexual acts should be limited to heterosexual marriage be arrived at through philosophical (specifically, natural law) reasoning (separate from "special revelation" in the Bible)? For an example, see this article by J. Budziszewski, one of the signatories of the counter-petition: http://tinyurl.com/5uqc69

lukeprog · 9 months ago

You're right. I have changed the wording above to "hate homosexuality".

I'm sure it's possible to arrive in opposition to homosexuality from a purely philosophical standpoint. It's also possible to arrive at solipsism through philosophical argument. But I think we both know that if the Bible celebrated homosexuality instead of condemning it, all those Christians who signed the counter-petition would accept it, even if the philosophical arguments didn't change.

Thanks for your comment, though. Your comment brings up the two issues I expected to immediately be broached, and I certainly haven't answered them here.

anselm · 9 months ago

Thanks, I appreciate your willingness to accept opposing comments and engage them in a civil and substantive way. I benefit from this blog by gaining a greater understanding of opposing views.

lukeprog · 9 months ago

I am always curious to hear smart replies to everything I assert. It's actually a rather convenient way to learn - a nice complement to extensive reading (which of course I wish I had more time for).

Teleprompter · 9 months ago

Anselm, a big problem with the natural law argument against homosexual acts is that homosexuality is found in a plethora of species in nature.

marcion · 9 months ago

"What is it about Christian apologists that makes them hate homosexuality?"

What is it about atheists that makes them want to stick their dick up another man's ass? or defend such a thing as publicly acceptable for conversation and for being put on TV as role models? I mean, they know what AIDS is right? and presumably that it has a higher transmission rate among homosexuals? So what's their deal? Must be that they're closet homosexuals. There's no other explanation possible.

I guess I'll just have to stick with natural theism or deism or whatever the proper name is. Because I'm not a moron who sees sticking your dick up another man's ass as acceptable at all. If you want to do it in the privacy of your own home, then go ahead...BUT DON'T ASK DON'T TELL. Have enough discretion to keep it to your putrid self.

lukeprog · 9 months ago

marcion,

I have a hard time telling if you're joking or not. Do you really think there is something morally wrong with consensual sex between two men? Why do you think so?

And, why should heterosexuals have the right to flaunt their heterosexuality, but gays not have the right to flaunt their homosexuality?

Or maybe you were joking...

marcion · 9 months ago

If you're seriously asking why should heterosexuals have the right to flaunt their heterosexuality, but gays not have the right to flaunt their homosexuality then you need to check yourself into a mental institution as quickly as possible. It simply is not normal and contuses to all sorts of social ills. The fact is, by the way, that the pink hand (homosexual mafia) is controlled by the eugenics element of the new world order. In other words, the government is pushing pro-homosexuality as a mean of population control to thin out the population to make it more manageable for martial law and the establishment of tyranny. Its sole purpose in modern society (as far as public acceptance goes) is population control, both by the fact that it lacks procreation (which is not evil in itself) and by the fact that it tends to provide a better way for the governmental powers that be to spread disease than heterosexual activity is. Why do you think the U.S. Government invented AIDS and then disseminated that virus first in homosexual bath houses in San Francisco in the 80s? Homosexuality is part of the agenda of nationalization we see unfolding right now. It is being used to weaken the nation socially (while we are being bankrupted) so that it will be easier (smaller population, also too busy poking each other in the ass) to establish a one world currency instead of the dollar (Geitner already said he agrees with the Chinese that this should be done) and to establish their FEMA death camps equipped with gas chambers to kill dissidents under our noses.

lukeprog · 9 months ago

Oh my God, marcion, you are too much!

anselm · 9 months ago

I'm beginning to think marcion must be intentionally trying to help you out by making you look extra reasonable :)

Needless to say, I disassociate myself (and all orthodox Christianity, if I may presume to speak on its behalf in this limited matter) from his remarks. I'm kind of glad he is using the name of a heretic :)

lukeprog · 9 months ago

ha! Indeed.

Victor Reppert · 9 months ago

Why assume that signers of the counterpetition hate gays? I signed the counterpetition, and voted no on Prop 102 in Arizona (same as prop 8 in California).

I was more concerned about the literal meaning of the APA policy, which explicitly mentions orientation and not behavior, and with the intergrity of religious communities. I have detailed my reasons for my signature on my blog.

Of course religious groups have to come to terms with their religion when dealing with homosexuality. Why expect them to do otherwise? There is an open debate on these matters both communities and faith and in the wider community. Why treat the discussion as a closed one, when it most clearly is not.

lukeprog · 9 months ago

That's good to know, Victor. Thanks. I'll have to check your blog to see your reasons for signing even though you (perhaps?) do not hate homosexuality.