Oh NOES!!!! WAR ON CHASTITY LOLZ!!!

[Arcturus]

Ah, forget it.

 

[Carcharodon]

Ah, forget it.

I'm just saying that there's a very obvious religious connection to the idea of chastity, especially as the idea is put forth today. It was only a matter of time before a Christian invoked the name of God into this discussion, and personally, I don't find that unreasonable for this type of debate for the very reason I just mentioned.

 

[The Senator]

Scripture doesn't mention *********ion being wrong; all it says is that lust is sinful. Since people clearly have the capability to lust after someone without *********ing, why wouldn't it work the other way around, too? I haven't found anything in Scripture that says *********ion is wrong. The religious world condemns it like crazy, but there's no Biblical support to that view. And, for the record, I'm single.

The scripture also doesn't say that gay marriage is evil, abortion is murder, or relays God's thoughts about the internet and automobiles.

Even though each form of sin has differences with other forms, at theri core they all represent disobedience towards God. Therefore, they all carry the same punishment, unless the offender repents, and turns to Christ before they die. The popular "bell curve" of sin was invented by man, not God.

Actually didn't God invent sin, considering he created the heavens and the stars and man and woman? He created everything, so how is sin not his fault? He was the one who told Adam and Eve not to eat from the apple tree, he was the one who could have thought of a far less cruel punishment. Especially given the fact that he let that talking snake off with a slap on the wrist after he convinced them to eat from the tree... so it seems to me that God is the proprietor of sin, he was the one who chose to damn mankind when he could have let Adam and Eve off with a slap on the wrist, like he did the snake. Seems to me God and the snake were partners in crime on that one.

Not regardless, no. I do want to meet, fall in love with, marry, and have sex with (in that order) a beautiful and Godly woman someday, but as noted, I'm trusting God for the strength to resist temptation, and abide by His standards. I'd rather have a successful, happy, Godly marriage than a temporary "shack-up" situation. I went down that road once; I'm not doing it again.

Yet, you believe that homosexuals shouldn't have the right to have a happy marriage... you would much rather see them pretend to be heterosexuals and enter into a sham-filled, loveless marriage than see them live their lives in utmost happiness.

Isn't that a grand double-standard? How can homosexuals be happy and live fulfilling lives when you want them to live a life filled with lies?

How does a desire to remain pure reinforce negativity towards sex? Not everyone who chooses to abstain believes sex is filthy or evil. Some of us recognize that God created it to be good, but He also commands us to respect the context He created for it.

It doesn't.

You can "remain pure" all you want... but the fact of the matter is, you haven't remained pure. You engaged in premarital sex, yet here you are telling us all about the importance of a 'Godly" marriage, implying that chastity is a good thing and that society should set itself to that standard on the whole.

Sex, by the way, can be absolutely amazing if you are not bound in marriage. People shouldn't have to feel guilty about having sex with someone they truly love, outside of marriage. Sex is something which two people should engage in to express their love, not to express their marriage.

Sadly, the modern religious world has largely used fear and opression to fuel that "false guilt" (as I call it) for decades, if not centuries. Sexual desires in and of themselves were created by God as good, but the world system has perverted it with such things as pornography and prostitution. The rising "sex factor" in the media hasn't helped the situation any, either.

The "rising sex factor"?

Um, sorry we live in a secular world these days, where people don't end up stoned to death for having sex before marriage, or castrated if they cheat on their spouses. Sorry that people are starting to realize that sex is good, that we shouldn't bind ourselves to rules created thousands of years ago by conservative monks.

While everyone has free will, not every person who chooses abstinence breaks it. Recent studies have shown that nearly 50% of those who make chastity pledges remain virgins until marriage. I look forward to the day when that figure represents the majority.

I highly doubt the accuracy of that study, considering there is no way to know for sure if the participants were actually telling the truth. How can you measure one's virginity? Simply because they say they remained virgins until marriage?

To bring back the murderer: If I asked him if he murdered someone last night, and he said "no," should I believe what he said simply because he told me?

I am almost willing to bet money that those results are skewed, and that figure is at least ten points lower, if not more.

 

[Arcturus]

I'm just saying that there's a very obvious religious connection to the idea of chastity, especially as the idea is put forth today. It was only a matter of time before a Christian invoked the name of God into this discussion, and personally, I don't find that unreasonable for this type of debate for the very reason I just mentioned.

No, you're right. Let's just say insomnia does funny things, sorry for my earlier post.

 

[Carcharodon]

No, you're right. Let's just say insomnia does funny things, sorry for my earlier post.

Dude, no need at all to apologize. I wasn't offended or anything.

 

[The Senator]

I'm just saying that there's a very obvious religious connection to the idea of chastity, especially as the idea is put forth today. It was only a matter of time before a Christian invoked the name of God into this discussion, and personally, I don't find that unreasonable for this type of debate for the very reason I just mentioned.

There's also a strong connection between the Jonas brothers, Moviefan, and religious pomposity.

 

[The Senator]

So I have some serious questions for Moviefan which goes back to our earlier discussion on "social irresponsibility."

-Do you believe that doctors should be allowed to refuse medical care to transgendered persons?

-Does God make people intersexed?

 

[Moviefan2k4]

So I have some serious questions for Moviefan which goes back to our earlier discussion on "social irresponsibility."

-Do you believe that doctors should be allowed to refuse medical care to transgendered persons?

All people deserve medical care; they may be making wrong decisions, but they're still human, and as such they deserve proper treatment.

-Does God make people intersexed?

Define "intersexed", as it pertains to your question.

 

[The Senator]

Define "intersexed", as it pertains to your question.

Intersex is when someone is born with biological characteristic of both sexes, and therefore cannot be identified as male or female. For example, someone can be born with a penis, no scrotum, and a uterus. Often, the doctors and the parents then decide the sex of their child, usually depending upon which sex characteristics are most prevalent.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Intersex is when someone is born with biological characteristic of both sexes, and therefore cannot be identified as male or female. For example, someone can be born with a penis, no scrotum, and a uterus. Often, the doctors and the parents then decide the sex of their child, usually depending upon which sex characteristics are most prevalent.

I'd heard rumors of stuff like this for years, but I didn't realize it'd ever actually happened. I don't believe God makes mistakes, so where such cases are concerned, my only theory could be some kind of complication with the baby's pre-birth development. I don't believe God makes "intersexed" people, for Scripture clearly says, "In the image of God created He him, male and female created He them, and God blessed them." I wouldn't classify this sort of thing as any kind of blessing.

 

[Carcharodon]

I'd heard rumors of stuff like this for years, but I didn't realize it'd ever actually happened. I don't believe God makes mistakes, so where such cases are concerned, my only theory could be some kind of complication with the baby's pre-birth development. I don't believe God makes "intersexed" people, for Scripture clearly says, "In the image of God created He him, male and female created He them, and God blessed them." I wouldn't classify this sort of thing as any kind of blessing.

So God isn't omnipotent, or he has NO involvement with pre-birth development.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Gilpesh]

I'd heard rumors of stuff like this for years, but I didn't realize it'd ever actually happened. I don't believe God makes mistakes, so where such cases are concerned, my only theory could be some kind of complication with the baby's pre-birth development. I don't believe God makes "intersexed" people, for Scripture clearly says, "In the image of God created He him, male and female created He them, and God blessed them." I wouldn't classify this sort of thing as any kind of blessing.

And now you're just a jackass.

Thanks for playing.

 

[BlackLantern]

I'd heard rumors of stuff like this for years, but I didn't realize it'd ever actually happened. I don't believe God makes mistakes, so where such cases are concerned, my only theory could be some kind of complication with the baby's pre-birth development. I don't believe God makes "intersexed" people, for Scripture clearly says, "In the image of God created He him, male and female created He them, and God blessed them." I wouldn't classify this sort of thing as any kind of blessing.

Yea...there are those pesky things called medical journals, university studies...ya know...documents other than the Bible that have facts in them....

 

[Carcharodon]

Yea...there are those pesky things called medical journals, university studies...ya know...documents other than the Bible that have facts in them....

His local library must be an awfully empty building.

 

[The Senator]

I'd heard rumors of stuff like this for years, but I didn't realize it'd ever actually happened. I don't believe God makes mistakes, so where such cases are concerned, my only theory could be some kind of complication with the baby's pre-birth development. I don't believe God makes "intersexed" people, for Scripture clearly says, "In the image of God created He him, male and female created He them, and God blessed them." I wouldn't classify this sort of thing as any kind of blessing.

I hate to break this to you, but 1.7% of the human population is born intersexed. Meaning their gender is not defined by physical characteristics. So, while parents may decide that their child-- born with a penis, no scrotum, and a uterus-- is a boy, and may take surgical steps to make their child a boy, that doesn't necessarily mean that their child is a boy.

Therefore, an intersexed individual may be groomed as one sex, but eventually may no longer consider themselves a member of that sex. And that is biologically natural, correct? Since they were born ambiguous of any gender?

Would you say, then, that a "sex change" is warranted in such a case? Considering they do not have a 'set' sex?

I mean, how are they supposed to know which sex they are when they are born with characteristics of both sexes and are biologically ambiguous? It's not like God can come down from his sky palace and whisper in their ear, "you're a boy!"

So what then?

 

[Carcharodon]

I hate to break this to you, but 1.7% of the human population is born intersexed. Meaning their gender is not defined by physical characteristics. So, while parents may decide that their child-- born with a penis, no scrotum, and a uterus-- is a boy, and may take surgical steps to make their child a boy, that doesn't necessarily mean that their child is a boy.

Therefore, an intersexed individual may be groomed as one sex, but eventually may no longer consider themselves a member of that sex. And that is biologically natural, correct? Since they were born ambiguous of any gender?

Would you say, then, that a "sex change" is warranted in such a case? Considering they do not have a 'set' sex?

I mean, how are they supposed to know which sex they are when they are born with both organs and are biologically ambiguous? It's not like God can come down from his sky palace and whisper in their ear, "you're a boy!"

So what then?

You're talking about a gray-area, jman. God doesn't deal with gray-areas. Stop it.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

So God isn't omnipotent, or he has NO involvement with pre-birth development. Thanks for clearing that up.

I was referring to the countless problems which can arise in pregnancy; it could be anything from a problem with the mother's reproductive system, a hormonal issue; there's probably more than a million scenarios, and like I said, I'm no doctor.

 

[Gilpesh]

I was referring to the countless problems which can arise in pregnancy; it could be anything from a problem with the mother's reproductive system, a hormonal issue; there's probably more than a million scenarios, and like I said, I'm no doctor.

No. You're a bigot hiding behind the bible. And going back on your word whenever something doesn't fit into your version of things. Your god made them... but yet something goes wrong and it is their fault?

Nice.

 

[The Senator]

Oh, silly federal government, you should know that the Bible doesn't recognize intersexed individuals, why would you devote your time to studying its medical significance?

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/MEDLINEPLUS/ency/article/001669.htm

 

[The Senator]

I was referring to the countless problems which can arise in pregnancy; it could be anything from a problem with the mother's reproductive system, a hormonal issue; there's probably more than a million scenarios, and like I said, I'm no doctor.

It is a biological issue, a problem with the arrangements of chromosomes.

So... if people can be born intersexed, doesn't that also mean that people can be born gay?

 

[BlackLantern]

That's called getting medically owned.....

 

[The Senator]

Fun Times with Science

Research Supports Gay Genetics Debate

New research reported in Forbes magazine has added a twist to the debate on the origins of sexual orientation, suggesting that the genetics of mothers with multiple gay sons act differently than those of other women.

Scientists have reported that in nearly one-fourth of mothers with more than one gay son, X chromosomes were processed in their bodies in the same way. Normally, women randomly process the chromosomes in one of two ways — half go one way, half go the other.

According to Forbes, the research "confirms that there is a strong genetic basis for sexual orientation, and that for some gay men, genes on the X chromosome are involved," according to the study's co-author Sven Bocklandt, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of California at Los Angeles.

Scientists have been debating the issue of genetics and sexual orientation for more than a decade as a few scientists have tried to find genes that might make people gay or straight. In the new study, Mr Bocklandt and colleagues examined a phenomenon called "X-chromosome inactivation."

"While females have two X chromosomes, they actually require only one and routinely inactivate the other."

"That way, both men and women have basically one functional X chromosome," he added.

Men have both an X and Y chromosome, but the Y chromosome plays a much smaller role, he said.

In his study, researchers looked at 97 mothers of gay sons and 103 mothers without gay sons to see if there was any difference in how they handled their X chromosomes. The findings appear in the February issue of the journal Human Genetics.

"When we looked at women who have gay kids, in those with more than one gay son, we saw a quarter of them inactivate the same X in virtually every cell we checked," Mr Bocklandt said. "That's extremely unusual."

And while researchers aren't ready to say what exactly this means, the writer said he thinks he and his colleagues are moving closer to understanding the origins of sexual orientation.

"What's really remarkable and very novel about this is that you see something in the bodies of women that is linked to a behavioural trait in their sons."

"That's new, that's unheard of."

 

[Mr Sparkle]

I'd heard rumors of stuff like this for years, but I didn't realize it'd ever actually happened. I don't believe God makes mistakes, so where such cases are concerned, my only theory could be some kind of complication with the baby's pre-birth development. I don't believe God makes "intersexed" people, for Scripture clearly says, "In the image of God created He him, male and female created He them, and God blessed them." I wouldn't classify this sort of thing as any kind of blessing.

siamese twins?
babies born with spina bifida?
ummmm, babies born with their organs OUTSIDE their skin and ribcage.


I could go on.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

It is a biological issue, a problem with the arrangements of chromosomes.

So... if people can be born intersexed, doesn't that also mean that people can be born gay?

No, because intersexed births (from your description) is a matter which involves the physical characteristics of the child born. Homosexuality, being a professed sexual desire towards someone of the same sex, is a choice. There's never been any conclusive proof that being gay is a genetic trait, and I highly doubt there ever will.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

siamese twins?
babies born with spina bifida?
ummmm, babies born with their organs OUTSIDE their skin and ribcage.


I could go on.

I'd heard of those things, but I don't recall hearing of any "intersexed" births being a reality until JMan mentioned it