Replies

Don't you agree that petty insults are somewhat less that grown up.

It was not an insult, it was an observation. You're pretending that actions can be considered in isolation from motivations. Kids can get away with that kind of reasoning because they lack context. Grown-ups don't get that sort of free pass.

To your point: I do not need to consider the basis for the actions of thief to know that they are wrong or that the perpetrator should sanctioned for such.

We're not talking about theft. And even then, we can and often do make distinctions about theft based on the motives of the perpetrator. For example, the person who steals because he's starving, is in a different moral class from the person who steals because he likes to steal. Stupid kids who steal are different from career criminals, and are treated differently.

If it can be said of homosexual behavior that there is a negative impact upon individuals and society from these actions, then the same logic applies.

Here again, you are operating without context. I know homosexuals, both male and female, who are profoundly useful members of society; who are pretty private about their activities; and who don't spend a lot of time pushing their agenda on others. Aside from your attitude their behavior, what would make those particular folks "bad" for society?

It's not as simple as you would have it be.

Sorry to be so long in replying… business interfered with my internet hobby.

You're pretending that actions can be considered in isolation from motivations.

I am not pretending… I truly do not care what the motivations are, or are not, for homosexual behavior. Such is irrelevant to the act unless you are going to maintain that homosexual behavior is the result of a mental illness. Either an individual has the intent to commit a homosexual act and does so, or he or she doesn’t.

If the individual does not commit the act, then there is no potentially disease-ridden, immoral threat to society’s definition of marriage or other values. On the other hand, if the individual commits the act privately with another consenting adult in a completely monogamous or monandrous relationship and doesn’t insist on altering any societal values nor claiming any special rights, then their actions are none of my concern.

However, an overwhelming majority (according to government statistics and academic studies) of homosexual practitioners do not restrict themselves to private, monogamous/monandrous relationships. Additionally, this same overwhelming majority of homosexual practitioners loudly and obnoxiously insist on altering millennia-old societal values. Furthermore, despite comprising a very small percentage of the population, they and those that traffic with them make up between 60 and 80 percent (or more) of the HIV/AIDs infections in this country. Moreover, while not all homosexual practitioners are pedophiles and child molesters, a hugely disproportionate number of pedophiles and child molesters are homosexual practitioners.

Kids can get away with that kind of reasoning because they lack context. Grown-ups don't get that sort of free pass.

I think the previous paragraph is more than enough context. However, there is certainly more if you want it.

We're not talking about theft. And even then, we can and often do make distinctions about theft based on the motives of the perpetrator. For example, the person who steals because he's starving, is in a different moral class from the person who steals because he likes to steal. Stupid kids who steal are different from career criminals, and are treated differently.

Ok, I am willing to treat homosexual practitioners who commit homosexual acts because they are starving differently. Similarly, I am also willing to treat stupid kids who commit isolated homosexual acts differently from those homosexual practitioners who are habitually doing so. Contextually satisfied yet?

I know homosexuals…who are pretty private about their activities; and who don't spend a lot of time pushing their agenda on others. Aside from your attitude their behavior, what would make those particular folks "bad" for society?

Let’s modify your assertion slightly to see if passes the “smell test:” There are prostitutes and polygamists, bestiality practitioners and incestuous adults that are pretty private about their activities; and who don't spend a lot of time pushing their agenda on others…

Using your logic, prostitutes, polygamists, adult incest practitioners and bestiality practitioners should not be sanctioned by society. Is that your intent?

It's not as simple as you would have it be.

On the contrary, it is exactly as simple as I stated: If homosexual behavior is a voluntary choice, then it is/should be subject to the same types of societal behavioral regulations/norms/laws as is any other sexual behavior.