Aslan firstly

You said "They (homosexuals) are trapped in a self-destructive lifestyle".

My "lifestyle" is thus: I've been with one person for 11 years (faithfully). We own a house. We get up daily and go to work. We come home and walk the dogs, have dinner and go to bed. We are planning a family. We both do postgraduate studies. We go to a pub maybe once every 6 months. We go to restaurants more frequently than that. We look after our parents.

Please, do tell me, how my "lifestyle" is self-destructive because for the life of me, I can't see it.

Now, consider this...

Somewhere in the world tonight, someone's son is sitting in his room writing a suicide note. He has heard all his life from the "Christians" that he is perverted, sick, immoral, against God. He has been bullied relentlessly at school because "Christians" teach their children that it's okay to be intolerant of homosexuals. He is terrified to tell his parents that he might be gay. The fact is, he'll never know what his life holds because tonight he's going to kill himself.

Think of him tomorrow morning over breakfast, because his blood is on your hands.

Concerned

He has been bullied relentlessly at school because "Christians" teach their children that it's okay to be intolerant of homosexuals.

This seems a bit unfair to me. Gay bashing is not a byproduct 'only' of distorted Christian teaching. In fact, I grew up as a teenager with virtually zero 'Christian' teaching, all my peers were non Christians except one (RAAF) but bashing of gays was something referred to as 'sport' by the non Christians, and I never ever heard any Christian urging others to 'bash' gays. I cannot even conceive of a Christian parent ever suggesting their kids should bully anyone else for any reason. Bullying is unChristian.

To all those who can only see one possible Christian view of homosexual people, (seems to be all non Christians here) I suggest you interact on a personal level with some Christians, and gain a cross section of attitude. Avoid allowing the 'last bigot' you spoke to, color your perception of ALL Christians.

Our struggle is that we do believe in a moral universe and a moral Creator, as opposed to an amoral universe, existing in itself. Our view is also extending back, and looking forward, encompassing history and culture. We didn't wake up one morning and suddenly get the bright idea "OH, lets hate those dirty gays"

The TOPIC here, if we may return to it for a moment, is about portrayals in cartoons and how they might effect children, and whether we should control how characters and behaviors are portrayed.

If a cartoon came out where the villain was always a mean spirited ugly and cruel 'Christian' would it suprise anyone that children may grow up with a rather negative attitude towards those of the faith ?
The corrollary being, that if positive portrayals of deviant behavior are done, are they not just as likely to regard such behavior as 'ok' and further, regard those who oppose such to be 'bad' ? I think this is a fair comment on the issue or portrayals generally. Remember the 'wicked' witch of nursery rhymes ?

Boaz

I don't hate all Christians, some of them are my best friends.

Interesting how this thread has been "off-topic" for quite some time now, but as soon as I post the reality of this "gay hatemongering", you suddenly seem to want to start talking about cartoon characters again.

The reality too much for you, is it?

Aslan you really are a fool Mr. Darwin is widely know as the father of evolution. Thales may have speculated but that is quite different form coming up with a theory most of Thales writing in this area are to do with his belief that everything comes from water. Only Christians cite the work of Thales in this manner and to say that it breaks my argument is shear stupidity which I’ve come to except from you. You say that racism is a product of evolution, that would entail every racist to be familiar with the theories of evolution this is clearly not the case. Even a half whit can see that most racist take their lead from their culture/religion. There has only been recent change of heart on by mainstream Christians but as usual they quickly spin it up.

Aslan You say that I am “intolerant of Christians and call them names”. Like what names did I call ‘Christians'. I call you names for sure, but you are not representative of Christians.

I have Christian friends you know and I have other friends who are homosexual and in fact I know one couple – been together now for 12 years – who are both Christian and homosexual! I haven't asked them if they indulge in those sexual practices you listed. None of my business really.

You say that I am intolerant of those who disagree with me. Nope! I am intolerant of stupidity and bigotry, irrationality and ignorance. You demonstrate them all

And delusions. You also say that I demand that my view be taught to children. If you mean I'd like tolerance taught to children, then certainly I do and I am proud of that.

You ask “So who's really the intolerant bigot?” and the answer is clear! You are, you silly man.

You say that you have advanced degrees in both science and Christianity (including the history of science and history of Christianity) and will gladly debate me on any of these topics. I say, hmmmm, well isn’t that what we have been doing and your debate has not been very impressive.

You ask me why I don't put up an argument instead of just making wild unsubstantiated assertions? I have put up arguments and provided substantiation’s for my position and shot you down in flames. Perhaps you are too choleric with rage to be able to read properly?

You ask “what do you really know about the history of the Christian church?” Obviously I know more than you do.

Anyway, this should make you happy. I am done with you – you are boring and I have a new computer game. Bye. Might catch up with you again on another topic some time.

Mollydukes,

Humans are not machines. There are many factors contributing to person's behaviour not just a single cause. Everyone recognises that drinkdriving causes accidents and deaths. Yet, if you follow your strict causation principle consistently you would have to conclude that drinkdriving doesn't cause accidents because not all drinkdrivers have accidents and many non drinkdrivers also have accidents. But that would be an aburd conclusion.

The point is that a homosexual's sexual behaviour is the major contributing factor to their pathologies, addictions and psychological problems.

The practices I referred to, which almost all people regard as deviant and perverse, are normal part of homosexual activity. If you don't believe me, look at the contents page of top selling gay sex guide, "The New Joy of Gay Sex"
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0060924381/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-7086310-0755057#reader-page
Or this one on the web:
http://www.sexuality.org/l/lesbigay/gaysex.html

Compare this with the contents of a heterosexual sex manual, "The Joy of Sex":
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1400046149/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-7086310-0755057#reader-page

Your "explanation" is just that - an explanation. It is not an argument. You have offered no supporting evidence, merely a "just...so" story.

Concerned,

Nice story. Pity (for you) it's complete fiction. Here's a more realistic scenario. A boy hears at school that homosexuality is a valid choice and perfectly normal. A gay friend persuades him he's gay and he begins engaging in gay "sex" and shortly after contracts HIV. Several years later he dies in his prime, alone and in great pain.

Kenny,

Thales evolutionary views were similar to modern ones, as were his student's, Anaximander. Empedocles (493-435 B.C.) believed that chance “was responsible for the entire process” evolution and advocated spontaneous generation, gradual evolution by trial-and-error recombination, and natural selection as the primary mechanism of evolution. Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) claimed humans are the highest point of a long, continuous “ascent with modification” of life. Add to these Charles De Secondat Montesquieu (1689-1755), Benoit de Maillet (1656-1738), Georges-Louis Leclerc, John-Bapiste Lamarck (1744-1829), Étienne Geoffroy St. Hilaire (1772-1844)and Chuck's grandfather Erasmus (1731-1802).

I did NOT say that racism is a product of evolution. I said that evolutionists believed that blacks were less than human. That is a documented fact.