There's No England Now...

[Mountain Man]

So? These baselines, like any others invented by men, can be changed at will -and often are.

Even consent is not an absolute. We do a lot of things in this world without people's consent, such as punishing someone for their crimes, or establishing certain restrictions. What guiding principle does one use to decide when consent is necessary, and when it's not?

[Carrikature]

Let me put it another way:

Anyone willing to forgo "treat me well" and "let me be free" can safely be excluded from the decision-making process. They're clearly getting what they want anyway.

[Darth Executor]

There is still a fairly high level of social ostracism and bullying for being gay. You guys seem to consistently (mis)portray some sort of current universal social acceptance of gay people, while at the same time being virulently homophobic yourselves.

The relation persists (and is sometimes bigger) in progressive areas. So no. Nevermind that correlation does not equal causation. There have been a rash of fake hate crime accusations over the last few years, like this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ping-curb.html

Gay guy tries a flip, lands on his face, then blames "homophobes" because he was embarassed (which sounds dumb and crazy to me).

So even if there was a correlation between claimed ostracism and gay dysfunction, it doesn't mean that the ostracism caused the dysfunction. It's just as, if not even more likely, that the more disturbed a homosexual is, the more likely he is to blame his archenemy the Christian Conservative for his situation. This is actually Statistics 101.

[seer]

Those baselines have never changed. They show up time and again throughout history. I call them fundamental for a reason.

So cruelty and selfishness would also be baselines since they too show up time and again throughout history.

[Meh Gerbil]

The relation persists (and is sometimes bigger) in progressive areas. So no. Nevermind that correlation does not equal causation. There have been a rash of fake hate crime accusations over the last few years, like this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ping-curb.html

Gay guy tries a flip, lands on his face, then blames "homophobes" because he was embarassed (which sounds dumb and crazy to me).

So even if there was a correlation between claimed ostracism and gay dysfunction, it doesn't mean that the ostracism caused the dysfunction. It's just as, if not even more likely, that the more disturbed a homosexual is, the more likely he is to blame his archenemy the Christian Conservative for his situation. This is actually Statistics 101.

There is much truth in this post.
It is like when you have a zit on your face and you assume everyone is looking at you.

People respond to what they're self conscious about and project.

[Mountain Man]

Let me put it another way:

Anyone willing to forgo "treat me well" and "let me be free" can safely be excluded from the decision-making process. They're clearly getting what they want anyway.

We lock felons up despite their desire to be free and treated well, just to pick the most obvious example, so those principles are obviously not absolutes, either.

[Jedidiah]

Surely the question is "should Christians treat others with love and compassion?". A lot of Christians currently appear to prefer to try to guilt-trip and shame gay people to the point where gay people get depressed and take to alcohol or drugs to seek escape from the prejudice they experience, or just kill themselves.

As you know it is a question of what love and compassion entails. I and many Christians do not feel that supporting the normalization of homosexual behavior is not even close to loving and compassionate. Your supposition of what your "A lot of Christians" do is not in evidence here. The results seem to be in dispute.

I assume you mean that you've personally met? After all, Leonhard and others on this site are gay.

Yes. Even so I had forgotten, if I ever knew, that Leonhard is homosexual, that is of no interest to me. As I stated I do not treat people based upon whether they are homosexual or not.

[Jedidiah]

That has nothing to do with gluttony, it's saying Sodom didn't feed the poor despite having plenty. The having plenty isn't a criticims, it's to show they could feed the poor and chose not to.

Not to mention the "abomination" the Sodomites did before God, what ever that was.

[rogue06]

As you know it is a question of what love and compassion entails. I and many Christians do not feel that supporting the normalization of homosexual behavior is not even close to loving and compassionate. Your supposition of what your "A lot of Christians" do is not in evidence here. The results seem to be in dispute.

That is a very good point. If you truly believe that something is harmful then if you loved someone you would not be supportive of their doing what you think is harmful. To do so is not being compassionate or supportive but is really nothing more than enabling. I mean if someone you loved smoked would you be encouraging them to smoke another cigarette?

[Starlight]

If you truly believe that something is harmful then if you loved someone you would not be supportive of their doing what you think is harmful.

Hmm, yeah, I guess we should make it clear that we don't support religion and do our best to stop people being religious. Let's ban religious people from marrying, for starters, and then also ban them having sex. And also, let's make it legal for any employers to fire anyone who's religious. And also have laws making sure religious people can't use public bathrooms, and prevent schools from banning the bullying of kids for being religious.

[Starlight]

I am against polygamy, incestual marriage, bestial marrage, and pedophilial marriage too. I suppose when they come up, you will vote "yes" to show God's love for them?

Surely there's a fairly solid biblical case to be made for polygamy?

Polygamy is something I've been a bit unsure about for many years because it's historically been associated with mistreatment of women. However, in modern Western society I think there are good protections for women in relationships. So I think I would vote yes for polygamy, though obviously not the other items you mention.

[Terraceth]

except there has been less bullying, name-calling and social ostracism for being gay and yet the suicide rates are still 2 to 6 times higher than heterosexuals and run about 30% of gays attempting suicide. About the same or higher than when I was growing up when there was more bullying, name-calling and ostracism of gays.

Here is a study from 97-98 showing the suicide rate of Gays and Bi's was:
Results. Twenty-one percent had made a suicide plan; 12% had attempted suicide (almost half of those 12% were multiple attempters). Most who attempted suicide made their first attempt before age 25.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447240/

And the study I posted earlier had rates HIGHER!

http://www.speakforthem.org/facts.html

Suicide is the leading cause of death among Gay and Lesbian youth nationally.
30% of Gay youth attempt suicide near the age of 15.
Gays and Lesbians are two to six times more likely to suicide than Heterosexuals.
Almost half of the Gay and Lesbian teens state they have attempted suicide more than once.
It has been conservatively estimated the 1,500 Gay and Lesbian youth commit suicide every year.

First, thank you, Sparko. Your post wasn't posted in direct reply to mine, but it's still the kind of information I was looking for.

Unfortunately, there are a few issues with comparing the information in the two links. The one from 1996-1998 was them interviewing homosexuals who were alive and the percentage they give (12%) is how many of the ones alive had attempted suicide. Obviously, if you only count in people who are alive, the percentage of people who have attempted suicide will be dropped dramatically, as you're not counting anyone who was successful. But the second source appears to be a count of how many have attempted suicide period, not what percentage of those alive who have attempted, plus it limits itself to people 15 or younger. Also, the second source for no reason gives no indication where those numbers came from, making them suspect. But even if accurate, these two can't really be compared in order to figure out if the amount has increased or decreased because they're measuring different things.

And this is a problem I ran into very frequently when I went and tried to look myself for corresponding studies. Finding two different studies, each in the preferred time frames (one before 2002 and the other in the 2013-2017 range) that examine the same thing is very difficult. They'll be in different countries or one will be generalized but the other will only be youths or one will be the percentage of people who have ever attempted suicide whereas the other will be the percentage who attempted it within the last year or something else entirely. Very tricky to find points that line up. Especially because you have to then figure out what the rates were for the overall population during those time periods and see how they shifted in comparison to any shift in the homosexual rate.

After looking through a lot of stuff I'm unable to find anything that really manages to fit the criteria, but if anyone else finds some it'd be very interesting to see.

[Roy]

And like every good centrist you make sure to validate their attacks by gunning down your own side with arguments you picked up from Internet Infidels.

Genetic fallacy.

More importantly, one of the reasons I respect teh Gerbil is that unlike many here, he doesn't refrain from pointing out flaws in the arguments of those with whom he generally agrees.

You should gun down flawed arguments that support your own view - because they turn away those who might otherwise be persuaded.

[Meh Gerbil]

Hmm, yeah, I guess we should make it clear that we don't support religion and do our best to stop people being religious. Let's ban religious people from marrying, for starters, and then also ban them having sex. And also, let's make it legal for any employers to fire anyone who's religious. And also have laws making sure religious people can't use public bathrooms, and prevent schools from banning the bullying of kids for being religious.

Well played.

[Mountain Man]

Surely there's a fairly solid biblical case to be made for polygamy?

No. The Bible only explicitly endorses marriage between one man and one woman.