I want to share our discussion with you, and though it may be long, I assure you it is not finished. I do not have Jack's permission to post our thread, I have not asked. But I have changed his name. In some portions I responded before he had a chance to respond, and visa-versa. I have only changed Jack's name, and provided basic coding for links used in our discussions.
I would feel shameful posting these messages without first saying that in our discussions there were many parts of Jack's nature that offended me, and I know I offended him. We are very different. We are both ignorant to the culture of the other. We both have a lot to learn. I post these mostly because of the blinding differences in our languages, and as a case study should you ever encounter a person like Jack (or a person like me for that matter). Needless to say we expose our cultural weaknesses and both have a lot to learn about each other and ourselves.
I hope you enjoy, and check back in a few days for [part 2]
Jack -- February 2 at 8:29pm
Colin. I would like to continue our discussion about homosexuals if you want to.
Thanks,
Jack
Colin -- February 2 at 9:37pm
I would love to. Why don't you tell me how you feel, and we'll go from there.
Jack -- February 2 at 10:13pm
Remember how I kept telling you that homosexuals can't keep their hands off of people. Let me give you real examples in my life and my family's life.
1. My brother and myself was molested by our homosexual uncle who would frequent gay bars.
2. The same uncle made a move on my sister.
3. My best friends dads friend who was a homosexual tried to mess with me.
4. My best friends dad who was a homosexual molested me.
5. Homosexual hunters propositioned me after asking for directions.
6. A homosexual asked my cousin to come see his tennis rackets and tried to make a move on him.
7. A homosexual man running to be judge tried to make moves on me.
8. Our friends daughter was approached by a lesbian in high school and was told, "you will be mine."
So as you can see, homosexuals can't keep to themselves and I have many friends that have been messed with by homosexuals.
This is what the Bible states in 1Thess 4:3:
"For this is the will of God, [even] your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:"
In layman's terms, it's God will to not be messing around outside of marriage (marriage being between a man and woman).
Thanks for adding me as your friend. I don't hate homosexuals I just don't like their sin. I know that they have to eat, work and live.
Colin -- February 2 at 10:42pm
I understand your concerns and your examples make sense. It is frustrating to see so many valid concerns against homosexuals, but if you'll let me I'd like to address some of these concerns.
From your examples I see that you were molested on several occasions by men which is unfortunate. What I would like you to understand is that these people who have wronged you are sick individuals. They should not be generalized to "gays" as a whole, but are creeps in their own way. In some cases they are pedophiles (since your uncle molested your sister I'm not sure you can count him as gay as much as a pedophile). Individuals are always representative of the group, but these individuals are pedophiles more than gay. Not all gays are pedophiles.
In more of your examples there was a proposition for sex which I will tell you is rampant in the gay community. It is also rampant in the straight community. For this reason you can't blame being horny on gays, it is a human issue. Men especially crave sex for genetic reasons. We are meant to spread our seed and propagate. It is biological. We crave sex and seek it out. This is also a gay issue as well as a straight issue.
As far as gays "trying to make moves" on you and your family, many gays never try to make moves on straight guys, and if you say, "I'm straight" 9 times out of 10 they are going to walk away. It is unfortunate that you encountered this so much, but think about how many times that gay man was rejected. Chances and statistics would say 9 times out of 10.
My real concern is that you have only met gay men and women in these uncharacteristic circumstances. So let me give you a few examples from my life.
1. I am a confirmed Catholic, and godfather to my cousin
2. I studied philosophy and religion in college, and I think it has deepened my relationship with God.
3. I have never solicited a straight person for sex.
4. I have never solicited a child for sex.
5. I have never engaged in sex outside of a monogamous relationship.
For these reasons I am fundamentally different from the homosexuals you outlined in your points. Because of this it is unfair to characterize me in the same light.
As far as sex outside of wedlock, i think you'll agree that as a whole America is fine with sex before marriage. You are not, which is totally valid. This is your religious right. Be lenient with me as I go over this next point - For the most part straight couples have sex outside of wedlock. For the most part Americans have sex before they turn 18. It is seen as a development, a stepping stone in life. I would predict 95/100 women are not virgins on their wedding day. This is not different in the gay lifestyle, and I know you have a problem with this across the board.
However, not recognizing any kind of marriage, or monogamy or spirituality in a gay man or woman is to animalize them to purely sexual creatures, which we are not. We have ideas and motives and loves just like you, and under the law we should be treated equally.
Jack -- February 3 at 11:00pm
Colin, thank you for your reply.
I'd like to start out by saying that the real definition of gay is happy.
The word has been wrongly changed in our society today.
I understand what your saying that pedophiles should not be generalized as homosexuals. But that's what myself, family and friends have went through. We can't come to any other conclusion but that homosexuals can't keep their hands off of people.
Your right, sex is rampant in the homosexual and straight community. But I believe there's difference even though both are still wrong.The straights are having the correct sex but they aren't married. The homosexuals are not having correct sex and not married. Both are sinning but the straights are with the correct people because the man parts fit the female parts.
This is what marriage is in the Bible:
Gen 2;18
And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Did God make a man to be his help meet?
No, He didn't. He made a woman.
Gen 2:24 [Jesus is speaking]
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Jesus reaffirms this thousands of years later in Mark 10:6-8
Genesis 1:28
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
We can see in this verse that man and woman were to have sex to replenish the earth due to the disaster in the pre-adamic age where Lucifer messed up.
You had mentioned that America is fine with sex before marriage. That still doesn't make it right. In 1Thess 4:13 it states this:"For this is the will of God, [even] your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:"
Sex is meant to be between a man and woman who are married and anything outside of that is sin and not the will of God.
If people are doing the opposite of God's will then it's demonic because the devil counterfeits the things of God.
Marriage between a man and woman is the best thing for society and as we have seen, Jesus Himself approves of men and women in marriage.
Colin -- February 5 at 5:25pm
Jack,
There is a lot in this message and as the one trying to fight these confining definitions it would take me a very long time to answer your reply with all I'd like to say, that's why it took me so long to respond. Instead of going through your message and identifying my problems with your views I'd like to just make a couple points and ask a few questions.
The most restricting ideas you have stem from the ideas you have about homosexuals in your immediate life. These people who have molested you and your family have committed sins besides homosexuality and I would say that it is these sins that you reject. I mean you wouldn't have been ok being molested by a female, or even being molested by a female you are married to, and so the molesting is the sin.
Aside from these experiences you draw heavily on the bible, and homosexuals in the bible as your reference for the modern lifestyle. It would be similar to me identifying modern taxpayers by the means I saw them in the bible.
Regardless you said at the end of your message that Jesus approves of men and women in marriage, but I ask you, did Jesus ever say that men and men shouldn't be married? Did he ever say that women should not be married to women?
The old testament is full of rules, many you quoted to me, and it is the belief of many modern Christians that Jesus died on the cross to save us from a life of rule-memorization. When Jesus gave himself up for us, he died so that we could live a life in god and in freedom. He was a figure that declared as long as love ruled, everything else was forgiven by god.
The bible says things like "shellfish are an abomination" and that you can't "wear clothes of many cloths" but I'm sure you do not follow these rules to the T.
I present you with a problem: Say you have an affinity for vanilla ice cream, but you live in a city where everyone assumes you enjoy chocolate. You are given chocolate ice cream whenever you walk into a store or drive down the street, every day people are trying to sell you chocolate but you know its not for you. One day instead of chocolate you are presented with Vanilla, and although you've never tasted Vanilla ice cream you know this is for you. Before you can put the ice cream in your mouth you are stopped by a friend. Your friend tells you that this is a test from god and that you aren't supposed to eat Vanilla because its bad... but they can't give you a very good reason for WHY its bad except that you're not supposed to. Your friend may enjoy eating chocolate with no such test, and they encourage you to "just try it... you may like it", but you know you would be sinning against yourself to even taste it. People are beginning to suspect you are different and they call you names, not because you eat Vanilla ice cream but because you don't eat chocolate, so you try it. You try to fit in and you can't, and still people make fun of you. Again you are presented with Vanilla ice cream, this time from a friend who tells you there is nothing wrong with Vanilla ice cream, and that you shouldn't be afraid to try something new if it's where your soul guides you. What do you do? Reject your friend or embrace the community that hates you for who you are and live your life suffering in silence?
Jack -- February 5 at 9:12pm
Colin, thank you very much for your reply. I made a mistake about 1Thess 4:13. It should of been 1Thess 4:3
Concerning the ideas that I have about homosexuals in my immediate life, anyone having sex with the same sex is having homosexual sex. Doesn't matter if it's rape, molestation, etc...
Concerning the Bible and homosexuals; The First Amendment has been around for 219 years, and I don't hear anybody saying we've got to get rid of it because it's so out of date.
Concerning what you said about Jesus and men and men and women and women getting married.
Why would God create man and woman then? He told them to be fruitful and to multiply. Jesus didn't have to say anything about men and men and women and women being married because He said that the man and woman are to be together.
Concerning the Old Testament rules, Christ died to save us from our sins and one of those sins is homosexuality. You mentioned that Jesus declared as long as love ruled, everything else was forgiven by god. If that's the case why did Jesus tell more than one person, "Go and SIN NO MORE?" God doesn't want us in sin because it keeps us away from Him.
Remember when I quoted 1Thess 4:3? My question to you is this; Do you want to be in the "Will of God"? If you want to be in the "Will of God" then you must abstain from fornication. If you fornicate then your not in "God's Will" and that keeps us from Him.
Concerning the Bible saying things like "shellfish are an abomination" and that you can't "wear clothes of many cloths",
those were for the Jewish nation. Christians don't live by Jewish laws. As you can tell, I have not quoted any verses from the law of Moses to you. I did quote verses prior to the law of Moses in Genesis and what Paul wrote to New Testament believers.
God tells us why we shouldn't be eating vanilla ice cream because it's deadly. We could get herpes on our mouths, fecal matter in our mouths, anal cancer, cryptosporidium, giardia lamblia, herpes simplex virus, human immunodeficiency virus, human papilloma virus, isospora belli, microsporidia, gonorrhea, viral hepatitis types B & C, syphilis, hemorrhoids anal fissures, anorectal trauma, etc...
When God tells us not to be doing something, it's not for us to hate Him for it, it's to keep us safe. If our soul guides us away from the things of God then that is the working of evil spirits talking to us in our mind making us think it's us thinking those things. They devil can manipulate our mind, will and emotions. It is the devil that wants us in homosexuality/same sex attractions so he can destroy us and to keep us from our destiny in God.
Thanks for the reply and I enjoy our conversations.
Thanks,
Jack
Colin -- February 5 at 11:59pm
Hi Jack,
First off I'd like to thank you. A lot of people in your position in this conversation would immediately shun from this topic. Frankly they are scared of it. I'm glad you are allowing me to challenge your views and I hope you take the challenge seriously, because I do. While I am a homosexual and while I do have regular sex with my boyfriend, I am also deeply spiritual. I have talked to Andy about our conversations and tried to explain your side of the argument. It is very hard to talk about these things because they just come naturally to me, and I know it is the same for you.
I'd like to talk about our culture for a moment. Things are very different then they were back in the days of early Christianity. In Jesus' time it was required of a responsible Jewish man to have a wife and bear children which I think gives a lot of credit to your arguments. I would like to challenge these views on a cultural as well as scientific front.
In our society today it is not completely necessary to procreate in order to further the Christian tradition because of the far reaches of the Christian faith. In the early days it was important because this faith was not popular and not far-reaching, but we live in a much different world today. For these reasons the procreation argument simply does not hold against my views for the rejection of homosexuality.
400 years ago we started a certain scientific revolution in which religion was challenged. In England the same people who made musical instruments and celebrated religious worship were also the same people pushing for the scientific revolution, the doctrine of the scientific method. The scientific method (testing hypotheses to gain a natural truth) began to rise which informed us of things like germs, the workings of the solar system, advanced mathematics etc that simply did not exist in the times of Jesus.
I can take validity in your argument about not doing certain things because God says not to because they would make us ill. The fact is that we know a lot more about science than they did, and God does not need to protect us from certain things because we have the ability to understand them. Back in the dark ages if someone was sick it was because they did something that was unclean and unhealthy, but the attitude was that they were overcome by a demon or demonic spirit. Now we have a name for these spirits, and they are the diseases you mentioned. Because we know how they are transmitted and can understand the way they grow, we can take measures to protect ourselves that were not possible back then. This is my case for homosexual sex.
In a couple posts previously you said that men and women were made for each other because their parts fit. This is true. What is also true is that in ways mens parts also fit men, and womens parts may be stimulated by women.
When a homosexual man has anal sex with another man, he inserts his penis until it pushes against the prostate gland, which is at the end of his anal canal. This gives pleasure. The anal canal at an average length is exactly the same average length as the penis.
For women, many of the parts of their organs that may be stimulated are on the surface, and those that are deeper inside the body may be manipulated by the tongue or by the fingers, but the simple friction of two vaginas is enough to cause sexual pleasure. In these ways the human body is flexible in its sexuality in a very biological sense.
To answer your question about the will of God: it would take a lot of pain out of the world if people abstained from sex until marriage, I definitely agree, but this is not the world we live in. But I grant you, what if there was a homosexual man who did not have sex, but was romantically involved with another man. They love each other purely, and while they have never had sex, they want to wed. If Eve WAS made for Adam, so these two mens spirits can be made for each other. These men are pure, and they do not intend to conduct any sex that is unholy - these men should be allowed to marry, shouldn't they?
Jack -- February 6 at 2:17pm
Colin, I wanted to thank you also for not shunning away from my views and thank you for allowing me to challenge your views in a respectable way. If more people on both sides could debate as we do, the world would be a better place.
I was wondering if I could ask when you first knew when you were homosexual. If you don't want to answer that is ok. Did you have a same sex attraction toward men before you did homosexual acts? Or did you just want to have sex with anybody (this is general question)? Did you have a father and mother? What was your childhood like?
I agree that is not necessary to procreate to further the Christian tradition. If I'm reading you correctly I didn't know that in the early days it was required to procreate to further the Christian religion.
I had thought that the 'fundamental function' of sex is procreation.
Concerning 'the fact is that we know a lot more about science than they did, and God does not need to protect us from certain things because we have the ability to understand them.'
If that is the case then why does the homosexual community have the highest rates of syphilis. That might not be you and your partners case but in overall homosexuality it is.
Concerning 'posts previously I said that men and women were made for each other because their parts fit.'
Anal intercourse is the sine qua non of sex for many gay men.
Yet 'human physiology' makes it clear that the body was not designed to accommodate this activity. The rectum is significantly different from the vagina with regard to suitability for penetration by a penis. The vagina has natural lubricants and is supported by a network of muscles. It is composed of a mucus membrane with a multi-layer stratified squamous epithelium that allows it to endure friction without damage and to resist the immunological actions caused by semen and sperm. In comparison, the anus is a delicate mechanism of small muscles that comprise an 'exit-only' passage. With repeated trauma, friction and stretching, the sphincter loses its tone and its ability to maintain a tight seal. Consequently, anal intercourse leads to leakage of fecal material that can easily become chronic. Condoms do break during sex.
The potential for injury is exacerbated by the fact that the intestine has only a single layer of cells separating it from highly vascular tissue, that is, blood. Therefore, any organisms that are introduced into the rectum have a much easier time establishing a foothold for infection than they would in a vagina. The single layer tissue cannot withstand the friction associated with penile penetration, resulting in traumas that expose both participants to blood, organisms in feces, and a mixing of bodily fluids.
I agree that it would take a lot of pain out of the world if people abstained from sex until marriage. Your right on the dot about that.
If a homosexual man didn't have homosexual sex then would he be homosexual?
David Blankenhorn, who is a life-long, pro-gay, liberal democrat who disagrees with the Bible’s prohibitions against homosexual behavior makes a powerful case against same sex marriage in his book, 'The Future of Marriage.'
He writes, “Across history and cultures . . . marriage’s single most fundamental idea is that every child needs a mother and a father. Changing marriage to accommodate same-sex couples would nullify this principle in culture and in law.”
The law is a great teacher, and same sex marriage will teach future generations that marriage is not about children but about coupling. When marriage becomes nothing more than coupling, fewer people will get married to have children.
People will still have children, of course, but many more of them out-of wedlock. That’s a disaster for everyone. Children will be hurt because illegitimate parents (there are no illegitimate children) often never form a family, and those that “shack up” break up at a rate two to three times that of married parents. Society will be hurt because illegitimacy starts a chain of negative effects that fall like dominoes—illegitimacy leads to poverty, crime, and higher welfare costs which lead to bigger government, higher taxes, and a slower economy.
Anthropologist Stanley Kurtz writes, “When we look at Nordland and Nord-Troendelag — the Vermont and Massachusetts of Norway — we are peering as far as we can into the future of marriage in a world where gay marriage is almost totally accepted. What we see is a place where marriage itself has almost totally disappeared.” He asserts that “Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable.”
But it’s not just Norway. Blankenhorn reports this same trend in other countries. International surveys show that same-sex marriage and the erosion of traditional marriage tend to go together. Traditional marriage is weakest and illegitimacy strongest wherever same-sex marriage is legal.
I am very close to a few men. As a matter of fact I'm in love with one of them. He has fulfilled all of my dreams and desires. The best thing about it is that my wife doesn't mind it one bit. As a matter of fact my wife is in love with Him also and I approve it.
I love Him before her and she loves Him before me. This man is Jesus.
Thanks for your time in reading this and I look forward to your comments. Give my regards to Andy and I just want you guys to know that I don't hate you guys or homosexuals.
Colin -- February 7 at 1:57pm
Jack,
As a person trained in the areas of logic and philosophy you'll have to excuse me if parts of this message are more general than our previous correspondence. I think this will help.
First off I may have conveyed the wrong message when talking about procreation as furthering a Christian world-view. More specifically procreation was important to keep a Jewish world-view alive. In the time of Jesus Judaism was the underdog religion; the Romans were dominant and their empire grew to envelope the Jews, and so their religion was in peril. The teachings of the bible and the teachings of early Christianity were in danger. I think this is an important distinction.
In your last message you used the phrase "the potential for injury", and I'd like to talk about this for a moment. It is true that condoms break, that there is bacteria in the anal cavity and that anal sex is dangerous if not done properly. However, the potential for damage is rife in our existence, yet people still smoke, damaging the lungs and arteries. People still do extreme events like jumping out of planes and tattoo themselves, practices that can be lethal in their own ways. In our environment it is even dangerous to walk in our cities with the threats of violence and pollution, yet we still survive. It may be true that some contract disease through sex, but many more remain clean and healthy. In response to your claim that most cases of syphilis are among men who have sex with other men, this may be true but it would only affect men who have sex with other men with syphilis. There are men homo and heterosexual who sleep around with other men, these are the men most likely to transmit disease. The pool of gay men is smaller than the pool of straight men, and so the risk is higher, but this is no danger unless you are one of the men in the pool. I would argue that a large percentage of gay men are not in this pool, and so it is unfair to generalize a disease to a larger group in this way. Disease is not dependent on sexuality, and sexuality is not necessarily the conduit for disease.
I'd also like you to consider the fact that you do not have to have anal sex to be gay. Many men live under the condition that they will only engage in oral sex, and some don't even engage that far. There are some men who desire being the recipient of anal sex (they are usually referred to as "bottom"s) and some who desire anal sex, but do not want to be penetrated (they are usually referred to as "top"s). As well, lesbians do not engage in anal sex any more frequently than straight women, and so their sexuality is not "dirty" or any more endangered by disease; far less so, I would argue, since women are less likely to have multiple partners than men. In this way it is a much "safer" practice to be a lesbian than a straight woman.
I am not shy and would like to answer your questions about myself candidly. In truth I was gay before I knew what gay was. It was in my Catholic elementary school when I was ten years old that I was first called gay; I had to ask my mother what it meant. As she described the qualifications for being gay, I knew she was identifying me even though I was not sexually active, and was not sexually attracted to men. It was something that I felt, the knowing that I was different. After puberty I started becoming attracted to men. At the time I still imagined a future where I would marry a woman and produce children; Later I knew this was a dream I carried far too long that was proliferated by my love of children and my desire to have a child of my own. I still hope to be a father one day.
I knew some gay teenagers at my high school, and although I had never had any kind of sexual contact with another man, I was strong enough to come out to my friends. I had a girlfriend who I loved, but the sex wasn't there in any form. I did not have a desire to kiss her, and I touched her sexually once by accident (i hugged her from behind and felt her breast), this incident makes me laugh even now :)
I'd also like you to know I don't hate you or heterosexuals, nor do I hate Christians or Republicans, it is only the disinterest and misunderstandings that offend me.
I wonder, do you talk to your wife about our messages? I'd encourage you to, since it has been a rewarding process with Andy and myself.
No comments:
Post a Comment