From reading the postings on this subject I've learnt I have a brain malfunction, am inclined to beastality and child molestation, I'm an abomination in the eyes of God and am an irresponsible male. Geez, Louise, it's amazing I can get out of bed in the morning (is Bin Laden posting to this website under an assumed name?).

One consolation is that while the posters are spewing their bile on this forum they're not on the streets harming people. The other consolation is that the Australian electorate rejects that sort of fanaticism. For example, Fred Nile couldn't even win a lousy Senate seat in the 2004 Federal Election - and his homophobia is pretty mild compared with some of the stuff I've read here.

Gay human rights is only compatible with democracy. As long as Australia and Western European countries are democracies, gay people will have human rights now and in the future. Gay rights are impossible in regimes like the Soviet Union and its clones and theocracies such as Saudi Arabia and Iran.

So, if those working themselves up in a frenzy of excitement about gays want to be truly happy, you may need to move to an anti-gay regime. It won't be very democratic but you might be able to see a few gays getting beheaded or beaten to death as a bonus.

Runner,
I use the term Gay Christian as there are a number of Gays who profess to having a faith in Christ. I've acknowledged the Bible's standards about homosexuality, but as I am not gay this does not apply to me. Gay Christian groups have there own explaination for the Bible's standard on homosexuality and that is between them and God. We have no right to criticise gays when there is sin in our own lives. I believe the biggest sin in the Church is hypocrisy. The fact is that the church has rarely showed God's love to the Gays, we have only offered them hate.

By the way, where is Gibo at the moment. Has he been banned? He wrote a lot of unproked vile comments about me that were deleted and he hasn't been seen since then. If one can't handle having their opinions challenged on this forum, they shouldn't be here. That's what these forums are all about.

Boazycrap: << homosexual behavior reflects a malfunction in the brain or a choice. There is no other possible explanation

[...]

But 'the voice'.. is still reverberating...even now. >>

It seems our born-again homophobe is still hearing voices, poor chap.

Well, Boaz, what a fascinating new line of argument you have come up with!

>>how dare you cite ancient obscure documents..and even offer interpretations of them... After all.. you are on record as confessing to no faith in such<<

The idea being, I guess, that while you are permitted to make all sorts of outlandish claims based on the Bible, to selectively use passages from it to justify your observations on the actions and activities of your fellow human beings, and to wave it about as some kind of all-conquering talisman, I am barred from pointing out the inconsistency of your interpretation, simply because I am not religious?

That sounds like the argument of a desperate man, Boaz.

I would be the last person on earth to deny you the right to use any document you see fit to buttress your faith in an omnipotent being in the sky. I know how much it means to you, and how without its support you would be nothing.

But you cannot escape some simple facts.

Primary amongst these is that these stories were written by people. And these people, apart from their predilection to see the hand of God in the stuff they could not comprehend, were also historians.

When they “saw” the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, they happily saw divine intervention.

When they reported the activities of Lot's daughters, they saw nothing unusual in the actions of a family, intent on dynastic continuity. The moral judgements against incest are those imposed by a retrospective application of twentyfirst-century standards.

>>The theological position on this type of behavior (for whatever reason) is that it is an 'abomination' to God.<<

The inconsistency, as ever Boaz, is this.

You choose to believe that homosexuality is an “abomination” based upon your interpretation of the Bible, but reject the thought that the same document is comfortable with incest.

And whether you like it or not, the fact that I do not use the same writings as the basis of my understanding of the universe, does not disqualify me from pointing this out.

Steel Mann

You write 'The fact is that the church has rarely showed God's love to the Gays, we have only offered them hate.'

You seem to be totally missing the point. By calling homosexuality sin is not hate. It is the same as calling adultery or fornication sin. If you hated people you would not want them to repent and turn to Christ. You would allow them to continue their path to hell if you hated them.

I have and never would condone harming anyone. This issue is about 'gay marriage' which condones something not only unhealthy in this life but leads to hell. People living together in heterosexual relationships are also on the same road if they are not married.

I know Christians who have nursed homosexual aids patients (something some of their own would not do).

This issue is about what is good for society. Endorsing and promoting homosexuality is certainly not good for society.

Runner are you saying your mates only nursed homosexual AIDS patients, and not heterosexual AIDS patients!

Rather patronising and unprofessional of them, don't you think