November 16, 2009
-
Homosexuality in nature? I call B.S.
I’ve already gone into this topic before on another site, but I just left a comment on this stupid Huffington Post article, and I thought I’d bring it on over here to Xanga. That article briefly mentions some nonsense about how there are around 1,500 species of animals, including bugs, who practice “some form of homosexuality.” The author of the article also says she is a gay Christian, and she wrote about Joel Osteen saiying that gay people are of course allowed in his church, but that we should be the best we can be for God. She got offended, thinking he was implying that gay Christians aren’t as good as straight Christians. So that’s what the article was about. Here is my response to it:
There are zero (0) animals that show homosexual tendencies. When a male dog humps another male dog, would you say he’s gay? No, you’d say he’s an animal and he has untamed animal instincts. When a dog humps a pillow, would you say he has an attraction to pillows and is “pillowsexual”? No! That’s absurd, right? How about when he humps my leg? Is he a “legasexual”? No. See, homosexuality is about attraction. If a man is attracted to another man, then he is gay. Dogs and fruit flies and other animals do not feel sexual attraction. They feel urges only, and they act those urges out without regard to whether it’s normal or right. Humans are expected to be above animals in this way; we are expected to have more self-control.
A vagina works with a penis and only with a penis because that is the way “nature” intended it. Not only God, but biology and “evolution” disagree with homosexuality. It does nothing to advance civilization, so there is no need for it in nature. Any “natural” feelings gay people have are not from nature at all. Nor are they from God, Who intended males to be with females and Who created love only between men and women. This is a fact that all Christians must accept.
That said, God does love gay people just as much as straight people. And so should we. But God also disapproves of the sin of acting out homosexual desires just as much as He disapproves of lying and murdering and stealing. What makes gay “Christians” think their homosexuality is the only sin God is fine with (as the Christian Bible clearly states it’s an abomination against God and all that He intended for us)? It’s because gayness suits gay people’s lifestyle, and they don’t want to give it up. So they convince themselves it’s not wrong. Just like a homeless person who steals will convince himself that stealing, in his case, is okay in God’s eyes since he is homeless; he’s just subconsciously deluding himself so that he can continue practicing his lifestyle without feeling any guilt towards the God he claims to follow.
Comments (10)
Amen.
@ProjectHappy -
Thanks
i like this
@christian_is_as_jesus_does -
Thank ya!
You pose a splendid argument, and I especially like your first point, concerning animals e.g. dogs having sexual urges as opposed to attractions. It is very ignorant for gay advocates to pull the 1,500-species-are-gay card, for so many reasons. For one, though there might be 1,500 species of animals that have been observed in nature to have some sorts of homosexual tendencies, there are 14 million other animals species that remain predominantly heterosexual, so, well, that’s around a measly .01% of animals being “gay.” Is it even logically possible to call something “normal” among all species of animals when it happens in only .01% of animals? Such an argument also does not take into account the reason for those homosexual tendencies, such as the example you gave with sexual urges being the driving factor, or if it serves the purpose of one male establishing dominance, or if it might even be a necessary part of reproduction in that species (whatever way that may be…).
Regardless of the reason for homosexual tendencies to exist in other species, even if it occurred in 90% of animals, since when did we look to animals to mirror our lifestyles? Do we ask our pets for guidance in deciding what is the right thing or the wrong thing to do? Do we likewise eat feces, or engage in incest? After all, those things are also natural and healthy for certain other species. Gay advocates forget the fact that we are a different species in the first place, therefore what is natural and right for us to do will always be much, much, much different.
Homosexuality being a sin is mentioned 90 times in both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. The only nature that Dowlin might be staying true to is our sinful nature, which, oddly enough, is not the best one can give to God. We humans certainly do not sin in the fourth grade, as sin is only the result of society. That 10 year old boy watching porn is doing it all out of innocence.
All that to say, I agree. =P
Martha
@liferemainsbeautiful -
Ooh, I love your points! Very nice. But I do disagree with one thing: children DO sin. They lie, they steal from candy stores, they make excuses, they try to manipulate their parents. They are not exempt from the temptation of sin just because they are young. If a boy in the 4th grade is watching porn, I guarantee you he has an erection, and I guarantee you he likes what he sees. If it was out of curiosity, fine–he’ll look at it once, and that’s it. But if he looks at it twice, he is lusting, and you can’t argue that he’s not sinning. 4th graders do have sexual urges. I was around 6 years old or so when I noticed that certain things felt good, if you know what I mean.
@BecauseIamDonnieDarko -
I was being sarcastic. =P Doesn’t translate all that well online. = Yeah, I meant exactly what you’ve just explained.
@liferemainsbeautiful -
You were being sarcastic about the 4th grader?
@BecauseIamDonnieDarko -
Yes sir. I was mocking what the author said about her realizing her homosexuality in 4th grade, saying that her “real” instincts were exposed by her innocence and yet unscathed by society’s standards. Sorry, my comment on that was really ambiguous. This post is over a month old, though I commented as if it were written today -_-
@liferemainsbeautiful -
Ohhh, haha, I yeah, I totally forgot that the source of this post mentioned the lady being in 4th grade and all that. And that her name was Dowlin. I thought you were talking about Darwin and were maybe just a horrible speller