Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list
Posted on 12/05/2003 5:50:56 AM PST by xzins
Cruel Joke or Medical Anomaly? Proponents of same-sex "marriage" owe us an answer
by Tim Wilkins
(part of this article may be unsuitable for young readers)
The Physiology of Mankind
"Love and marriage, love and marriage, go together like a horse and carriage. This I tell ya, brother, you can't have one without the other." Neither can you have a marrriage without a man and a woman, unless you’re the Massacheutts Supreme Court–to whom I ask the following question.
Why is one hundred percent of the homosexual population physiologically heterosexual?
When I asked that question before a group of university students, one said the question contained a presumption–that homosexuals were physiologically heterosexual. I am always open to differing views, yet he offered no explanation. In postmodernism one need not waste syllables buttressing one’s views—verbalizing a belief automatically makes it factual. Hubert Humphrey said, "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." The student reminded me of a man who, on another occasion, steadfastly disagreed when I said that at conception the man determines the sex of the child. "Every man has a right to his own opinion, but he does not have a right to his own set of facts."
My statement regarding human physiology is neither sexist nor politically motivated. It is a fact.
Look at this statement from two perspectives—first, a theological perspective and second, a medical perspective.
If in fact God creates some people as homosexuals, we must conclude that God has played a cruel joke on them. He has engineered their minds and emotions for attraction to the same-sex and yet created their physiology to be in direct opposition to that attraction. Such an act would be malicious. Only a sadistic god would conceive and conduct such a horrific deed.
Look at the statement from a medical perspective! If homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomenon—a legitimate alternative to Mankind’s expression of sexuality, we would have to conclude that homosexuals bear severe physiological anomalies.
I am aware the previous conclusion may infuriate some; few things anger people more than uttering a logical thought. Truth has always angered people—which is why some wise sage cautioned, "Tell the truth and run!"
But alas I do not believe the conclusion because I do not believe homosexuality to be moral.
If for no other reason, homosexuality is illegitimate in that it is anatomically unsuitable.
The Ingenuity of the Physical Body
Regardless from where you believe Mankind originated, we must agree that the human body is the work of a genius. How do we account for tear ducts that automatically flush the eye when a microscopic grain of sand invades them? Who can fathom how an arm or leg produces chill bumps, which in turn raises the hairs on those limbs in order to reduce the amount of body heat being expended by a cold wind?
These mysteries of the human body include libido. When sexually aroused, the woman’s body changes through a series of preparations. Her vagina lengthens for a distinct reason. Her body, equipped with Bartholin’s gland, produces lubrication for a distinct reason. More intricate than any scientific invention ever conceived or constructed, the outer third of her vagina swells with blood for a distinct reason. The Psalmist was correct--we are "fearfully and wonderfully made." (Psalm 139:14)
But these incredible workings lead us to another question which refuses to be ignored--why would such physiological changes occur in homosexual women when the changes do nothing to assist sexual interaction?
One cannot simply dismiss the question as irrelevant. If God makes no mistakes, and He does not, what accounts for this dichotomy among homosexuals? If homosexuality is "natural" why the inappropriate and unnecessary body changes?
No legitimate answer exists. God desires each of us to become personally what He has created us to be physiologically, biologically and anatomically.
The Universality of Sin
The answer to why homosexuality exists is sin—a universal condition unconfined to homosexuals; one hundred percent of the world’s population are sinners. "…for all have sinned and come short of God’s glory." (Romans 3:23)
And the answer to sin is Jesus Christ who, by the way, performed His first miracle during the marriage of a man and a woman.
The proponents of homosexual "marriage" appear to have all the answers. What say ye? Is this phenomenon a cruel joke or a medical anomaly?
Show the proof that you exist. Or that anything else exists, for that matter. Remember, the senses can be fooled; while dreaming, a dreamer cannot distinguish the sensations experienced in his dream from the sensations he perceives when awake. Any real proof has to be objective proof — i.e. proof gained without the use of the senses, which are organs of subjective perception.
What device can measure and detect it?
What device can measure and detect your own consciousness? You can't see your own mind, after all; you can't smell, touch, taste, or feel your own consciousness. (Brain electrochemistry can be detected, but brain electrochemistry is not the same thing as consciousness, else we would be able to re-animate the dead by tinkering their brains.)
Answer this question: How do you know that you exist?
What other non-measurable things do you "believe" in? Zeus? Allah?
God, i.e. the Christian Trinity. Dreams. Ideas. Love. Other people. Adam_az. The universe outside my own mind. None of these things can be measured or observed using our senses — yet I believe ( = an act of faith ) that all are real.
And so do you. You, too, are a believer. Without the slightest shred of physical evidence, you take it on faith that you are not dreaming, hallucinating, or floating in a sensory-deprivation tank jacked into a Matrix-like virtual world. You accept as a matter of blind faith that the world is real, that other people exist, and that what you perceive subjectively via your senses bears some relationship to an outside Reality.
But you can't prove it. And neither can anyone else. Since our senses can be fooled, any “proof” perceived through them is ultimately unreliable. In fact, the only thing we can know objectively is that which we perceive objectively, directly, without the use of our subjective sensory perceptions: in other words, we can only know that we ourselves exist.
Descartes put it best: Cogito, ergo sum, “I think, therefore I am”. We do not perceive our selves; we are ourselves. The fact that you can hear yourself think, see things in your mind's eye, and experience tastes, smells, and textures from days long past proves beyond any doubt that an adam_az exists somewhere. To say otherwise is to deny that oneself exists — and, by extension, that anything whatsoever exists. I trust your skepticism does not extend that far.
Shalom.
No problem with that. The author says essentially that very thing: (and I repeat again) *****Regardless from where you believe Mankind originated******
The issue here is physiology and hetero/homo sexuality. The point is: 100% of homosexuals have heterosexual physiology.
Theory one is created by God, if you aren't in one of the major three religions, then pick the god you want, but regardless his point is that if you are a Diast he is trying to cover that argument.
Theory two is creation by happenstance and evolution and he is covering that potential.
What is your confusion as to why he is addressing God in the argument?
Love.
You?
Shalom.
Well, the proof of the first is the resurrection.
I do not have proof that the others are false except that they are mutually incompatible with the first. However, if someone wants to offer proof of numbers 2 and 3 I will examine it.
Shalom.
You are a person of faith, apparently. You hold the belief that all things that can be explained through science. Your faith doesn't allow for the unobservable and unmeasurable.
Your denial of the Christian belief system here rankles so because it smacks of hypocricy. You demand that we prove God exists. God has shown Himself throughout history yet you deny the text of the witnesses. I assume you also deny the geographic record that hasn't yet contradicted the Word. Apparently, your faith is only in science and not in history.
God can't be proven through science because such proof would take the place of faith. This is true of your scientific faith as well... you can't prove through science what has not yet been measured and observed. Just as modern science has shown the blindness of early scientists, future scientists will prove you blind.
We can find the best representation of God's love for us in our love for our children. There is much they don't understand and there is a time when we simply ask them to trust us until they do. All will be revealed. The child can't "prove" you love him, he can only trust that what you do is out of this professed and unprovable love. It's all about the relationship and faith... science has no instruments for this exercise.
Although Christian beleif must ultimately be based on faith, there are facts which demonstrate that it is true. The Bible itself says that nature declares that there is a God and that no one has an excuse for rejection of God.
Really? Please prove it.
I'm being a scientist here, and ironically you are being the solipist.
Wrong.
1. Solipsism is the belief that nothing beside oneself exists.
2. I do believe that other things (God, the Universe, love, dreams, other people, etc.) exist.
3. Therefore, I am not a solipsist. QED.
Please re-read my post. What I said was that there is no way to know that anything other than myself exists. I most certainly do believe that God, the Universe, love, dreams, other people, etc. exist, but I can't prove that they do; I take their existence on faith.
As do you.
What other unmeasurable, undetectable things do you "believe" in?
Adam_az.
Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list
This sentence is great - it must be like garlic, a wooden stake and a silver cross are to vampires:
"Every man has a right to his own opinion, but he does not have a right to his own set of facts."
All his arguments are more proof that liberalism is a mental illness. Unfortunately it is a chosen mental illness, which makes it also evil. In Vacaville CA there is an institution for the criminally insane. That is what liberals are turning into - criminally insane, and their rabid support of homosesexuality and the gay rights' actvists' demands are proof of that.
It's like a sick animal who tries to eat its own leg. They have an avowed stated desire to destroy the family and destroy society.
Thoughtful people should ask why.
I, too, liked that one....a lot.
The facts keep mounting up against homosexuality.
1. 100% of homosexuals have heterosexual physiology.
2. Homosexuality causes awesome disease and kills the practitioner.
3. Homosexuals can change to heterosexual practice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.