Gay Marriage Supporters Threaten to Strip Churches of Tax Exemption

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 11:13 pm Agree: 8   Disagree: 4

So sad Mickey,

When you are given links and quotes, you ignore them and continue to babble your unfounded contentions.

When asked for the information to show the facts behind your contentions, you go on the attack against the person themself.

Must feel pretty bad to not be able to actually prove the things you so much want to believe. All this insisting you are right just because you say so kind of ruins your credibility.

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 11:03 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

Mickey

>>>>>The APA refutes nothing. It states clearly that the preponderance of the evidence shows that sexual orientation is not a choice<<<<<

Where?

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 10:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

Mickey, you are so very hostile. You do not discuss, you attack. Your method is to beat down the opposition, with whatever weapon you can conceive of in that fertile mind of yours.

The refrain has been “it’s been proven that homosexuality is not a choice, that you are born homosexual”, in one form or another. There’s also the refrain that the APA calls it a normal variance, and since it’s not a choice then they say it’s dangerous to try to change it.

I literally stumbled over the APA brochure that refutes any genetic, hormonal, etc. factor being found to account for it. Since I’ve posted that, you’ve changed your tune to “The preponderance of the evidence shows that sexual orientation is not a choice”. If you’re so confident of this as a fact, why are you not posting information that we can follow up on that shows the basis of your contention? After all, I provided a valid source for perusal to back up my claim. Cannot you do the same?

Gay Marriage Supporters Threaten to Strip Churches of Tax Exemption

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 10:24 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 3

DP,

I read that earlier, isn't it amazing how that can add up? Uh, our church is only about 50 people or so, so don't look for $10000 from us (I think you'd call that the very bottom for purposes of average? ;o).

It does make you wonder if tax-exempt status sometimes doesn't just get in the way though, doesn't it. That's a powerful lot of money. But you're never going to get someone like the RC to go for that, they have way too much real estate, after paying all that RE tax even the cardinals would have to dress in sackcloth (I can just see it now!!!).

I wonder if it wouldn’t be a good idea to get churches more educated in the role they CAN legally get involved in to weigh in on those issues that the Bible really speaks to so strongly -- how many really know that there are certain things that they can do. You hear so much about what they can't do, and it's couched in such general terms.

Also, I think a lot of the time the people themselves just get too comfortable in their little niche and don't want to be disturbed out of it. Hmmmm, I wonder how many would change their tune, though, if they understood better what could be accomplished.

Gay Marriage Supporters Threaten to Strip Churches of Tax Exemption

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:26 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 3

Here you go ifeelfine, just so you can get with the program and catch up with the conversation.

Per APA brochure “Answers to Your Questions
For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality”


What causes a person to have a particular sexual orientation?

There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.


http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.html

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:23 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

Okay Mickey, don't mind if I do!

Degenerate:
having fallen below a normal or desirable level, esp. in physical or moral qualities; deteriorated; degraded

Umm, yes, that would qualify when talking about your definition of marriage –


Prejudice:
unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group

Oh my yes, that would perfectly describe how you respond to anyone who is not solidly in your homosexual camp.

There you go Mickey, another question answered! Now answer me this, since you’re so good at not providing information on things that you state so categorically:

Just why do you have such a degenerate prejudice against anyone who doesn’t agree with you lock, stock, and barrel? I think we all ought to get together and buy you a case of Maalox, because at the rate you’re going you are about to perforate your ulcer.

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:09 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Ah, but Mickey, you never asked me about degenerate prejudice!

Gay Marriage Supporters Threaten to Strip Churches of Tax Exemption

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:04 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 2

Mickey

No, you have yet to provide any evidence that sexual orientation is NOT a choice, even though I'm willing to look at any links you provide.

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:43 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

Wilderness

;0

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:41 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

Wilderness

Yes indeed

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:33 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

Mickey

>>>>> No, I'm asking you and as yet you have been unable to give an intelligent, cogent answer. Will you ever?<<<<<

intelligent:
having the faculty of reasoning and understanding; possessing intelligence

cogent:
to the point

My answers to your questions fulfilled the definition of intelligent and cogent.
However, I realize they were not the answers you wanted. The answer you wanted was, “gosh, it makes no difference at all”. If that’s what I believed, that’s what I would have stated. But it’s not, so I didn’t.



I provided a source for you, that you would consider authoritative, to back up my assertion that there is nothing that they have found that shows homosexuality to be inborn. But you have yet to answer this post requesting a source for your assertation:


>>>>>However, most scientific evidence points to the fact that it is not a choice.<<<<<

**Please provide me with some links so that I may read up on this.**




It would be helpful for me to know why you think that this is so.

Gay Marriage Supporters Threaten to Strip Churches of Tax Exemption

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:50 pm Agree: 6   Disagree: 2

Online

And that is where we begin, and where we end. Amen!

Gay Marriage Supporters Threaten to Strip Churches of Tax Exemption

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:48 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 2

Mickey

You say:

>>>>> While no one specific cause for sexual orientation is known, the preponderance of the evidence shows that orientation is not a choice.<<<<<

The APA says:

**no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors**



Which is it?

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:33 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

Mickey

>>>>>However, the question goes unanswered as to why it matters.....<<<<<

For one reason, you keep insisting you had no choice, you were born this way.

For another reason, the definition of marriage is an issue in the voting booth.

And, the Bible tells us that God’s idea of a “two shall become one” is a man and a woman.

If it didn’t make any difference, why all the studies to try and prove that it’s not a choice? Quite a few of the people so involved in those specific studies are homosexual, they must think it’s worth all their time and effort. Maybe you could ask them why it matters.

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:21 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

Mickey

>>>>>However, most scientific evidence points to the fact that it is not a choice.<<<<<

Please provide me with some links so that I may read up on this.

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:16 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

johnzon

>>>>>The human genome is a long way off from being fully understood. <<<<<

This is true. I have my doubts that it will ever be truly understood. As it is, our understanding is being revised on a regular basis as new things are discovered.

>>>>>My sexual orientation was determined by something other than my choice. In likelihood, by my genes as are most of by attributes.<<<<<

I agree that it is not likely that most homosexuals stand up one day, at some point when they are mature enough to make such a determination, and say, “I think I’ll be gay”. But it is also true that so much of who we are is based on the circumstances of our life, not genetics. So many of our responses are “built-in” based on those circumstances.

What I object to is the oft heard refrain of “it has been proven that homosexuality is genetic”, when so far nothing even closely resembling that has been shown to be the case. It is all just speculation, hopeful thinking, and personal experience, all of which is certainly adequate for the point of debate. Let’s just stay away from stating as fact those things which are not fact.

Gay Marriage Supporters Threaten to Strip Churches of Tax Exemption

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 4:43 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 3

Mickey

·>>>>>"The point is, you keep trying to insist that you have no choice because you were literally born without the choice, just like having blue eyes or black skin."

And there is not one shred of proof to the contrary. Therefore the intelligent person will err on the side of human personal experience.<<<<<

Ahhh, so we are now charged with proving a negative and should be looking for an “I am a non-homosexual gene” thing? You insist on a regular basis that it is proven that there are inborn traits accounting for homosexuality, and now that even the APA says there’s no scientific evidence to support that, then you go for an “intelligent people will assume there is an inborn factor until proven otherwise” argument. Based on experience?

Personal experience, though certainly having some weight for an individual, is a product of circumstances, and those circumstances have many variables and are ever changing. As we grow, we begin to realize that personal experience is limited, so we begin to branch out and look for facts to add to that thing called personal experience. In this case, the clarion call has been that homosexuality is inborn, even though the facts have pointed away from that in spite of fervid efforts to find something to support that theory. So far, personal experience has no shred of evidence to back it up. So, at what point do you start saying, hmmmm, is it possible that it’s not inborn at all? I submit that an intelligent, mature person would consider that thought.

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:46 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

johnzon

>>>> << ....most people experience little or no sense of choice about their
sexual orientation. >>

I agree. I knew at a very young age I was heterosexual, my gay friends tell me the same thing, they knew at a very young age they were attracted to same sex.<<<<

Experiencing a “sense” is not the same thing as a definitive genetic cause. The color of your eyes or skin is purely genetics-driven. Science has been unable to prove this factor in homosexuality, in spite of it’s Herculean efforts to do so.

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:26 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Per APA brochure “Answers to Your Questions
For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality”


What causes a person to have a particular sexual orientation?

There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.


http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.html

Gay Marriage Supporters Threaten to Strip Churches of Tax Exemption

GMG »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 2

Mickey

>>>>"....most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."<<<<

Notice the part that says "EXPERIENCE little or no SENSE"

My father-in-law and brother-in-law would agree with this statement, if you relate it to the subject of anger. They think they were born that way.

The point is, you keep trying to insist that you have no choice because you were literally born without the choice, just like having blue eyes or black skin. Even the APA doesn't agree, and they state that there's nothing that science has found to uphold the notion that it's genetic, hormonal, or anything of the like. And this, in spite of the great efforts to prove scientifically that it is.