[toby843]

Originally Posted by stonedape

They're on videos in school, they monopolize televised fashion, so that's (positive) discrimination? Maybe it's different in the UK, but every boy in school besides the top dog was called a fag every day in school, and for men who actually acted effeminate, goodbye happiness/social life. I'd say they deserve a little video in school.

The moral issue is whether two people of the same sex having a sexual relationship is morally right or wrong. Two consenting adults having sex harms no one, and in fact helps people out a great deal, as anyone who has had sex would know. There's the "non-natural" argument, which defeats itself as homosexuals exist in nature, and not just in humans. There's the "no procreation" argument which defeats itself as any trait that causes infertility will be rare in a population and never "take over", and the same stigmas are not attached to infertile straight couples. And there's the Biblical argument, which we've already gone over.

In the end, morality just isn't determined by the Bible. For the most part, people have kept the parts of the Bible that make moral sense like murder and theft while discarding the bits that don't matter like witchcraft, dietary codes and not working on Sunday. We just haven't all figured out homosexuality is in the 2nd category yet.

Ok so you're not in the UK? What I mean by positive discrimintation is that it is a widely held belief that employers will pick the minority (Gay, Race, Physical abilty etc) over the standars white manle/female in order to not be seen as discriminating against a certain demographic.

So do we think its right to teach the next generation homosexuality is right? Thats a question not an opinion by the way.
You're right about people using the parts of the bible they want and not the parts they don't. It happens in almost every religion, and usually the ones who follow all the guidelines to the letter invariably end up in a very unhappy society. As I've said before I'm not religous so lets leave the religous views to Dave.

So there is no harm in two consenting adults having sex? Well the worldwide statistic on AIDS that clearly state homosexual males are in a higher risk category would argue your point I think. But yes you are right to a degree, any adults that choose to indulge in homosexuality have the right to do so. But should we be in the situation where a 10 year old child is worrying whether they are gay or not? I would say we are only in this position because of the pro gay attitude of general culture. I don't mean to say I want gays banished to an underground scene in any way, I am not anti gay, I'm just arguing do we want our young children to feel in that position.

The non natural argument doesn't really add up in a pro gay way as there are no solely homosexual animals, there are animals that indulge in homosexul behaviour but will still mate with the other sex for pro creation, human homosexuals won't do that, with the exception of bi-sexuals, but we're talking homosexual here. And I would add that humans have developed (or been given???!!!) a far more complex and powerful brain, wheras homosexual animals are solely in it for physical gratification. Animals lick their own anus, would that mean its acceptable for you to in public?

The no creation argument I can't see as a real argument to be honest. There is no situation that comes to mind where we will be stuck for having babies to be honest. So you can have that one!! haha

I like this, thanks.