[Dad was my hero]

Well, what I'm having trouble with is resolving this... We know that birth defects are no longer considered punishment from God due to sin but I've been taught that we recognize them as our crosses we bear in this life. So if the author is stating that God doesn't make them homosexuals at birth because that would be evidence of a cruel God (and for the record, I don't believe they are born that way), then why does he allow babies to be born with birth defects. It's sort of like this, why would homosexuality not be considered similarly to, say, a birth defect? Their cross to bear so to speak.

I'm sure I'll get my mind right soon. ;^)

[pgyanke]

I took issue with the author in this area as well. It boils down to this... who do we think we are to pronounce God good or bad? We're the creation, not the creator. Good and evil are His to designate--and He has. We all have crosses to bear. In every case that springs to mind, these crosses can be the ties that bind us to Him, therefore blessings.

[xzins]

As with everything else, defects occur and decay sets in.

This appears to be demonstrable with birth defects wherein they've EASILY found genetic deficiencies, but is not the case with homosexuality wherein they have not found genetic deficiencies.