Posted on 06/09/2011 1:19:09 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain told Hotsheet Wednesday that homosexuality is a sin and a choice.
"I believe homosexuality is a sin because I'm a Bible-believing Christian, I believe it's a sin," he said. "But I know that some people make that choice. That's their choice."
Cain was asked: "So you believe it's a choice?"
"I believe it is a choice," he responded.
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE FULL INTERVIEW
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
You say to them that they’ve had a mental illness for a long time.
True 1.5%, but surveys show that the populace believe that the homosexuals = 25%, proving that the public schools have done their job of indoctrinating kids, very well.
In this context, "choice," means chosing to have homosexual relations, not choosing whether or not you're attracted to the same sex. But even in that, I suspect there's an element of choice among homosexuals. As an example, no one "chooses" to walk on two legs; it's something that happens naturally in a normal human context. But someone who desires to go outside the bounds of that normality by deliberately walking on all fours does so by choice.
Whether you agtree with him or not- I LOVE THAT HE SPEAKS HIS MIND AND GIVES STRAIGHT ANSWERS
I am of the opposite camp- I have a family member who is gay and everyone in the family knew it from very early on- it IS genetic, I am 100% convinced.
My thought as well. Glad to see Cain speak out against homosexuality.
I hope this helps Cain. I like him and I support him, although I will vote for whomever is nominated. I agree with this talking point. Obama just declared June to be LGBT awareness month. I do not agree that people are “born” gay and nowhere else in the animal kingdom is there gay behavior. Propagation of the species is the second strongest instinctual drive; the strongest being survival. Bravo for Cain to have the guts to come out and make such a statement in public.
What Cain is doing; is setting the bar very high for other conservatives. He knows others will be asked the same question about homo’s and muslims.
How will the others answer...are they for the truth or will PC will out.
http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/born-gay-hoax-studies-debunked/
"Immediately after the Hamer study was published a media explosion ensued, but like the Hypothalamus study before it, Hamer’s study was soon to be discredited as both biased and corrupt. In fact, the title of an article appearing in the same-gender sex magazine, New York Native, illustrates this fact well. The article is titled:
“‘Gay Gene’ Research Doesn’t Hold Under Scrutiny, Chicago Tribune’s John Crewdson Uncovers Possible Scientific Misconduct by NCI Researcher.” (New York Native, 7-10-95, p.25)
First, the article informs the reader of the following:
“In addition to the political and social firestorm Hamer’s research has ignited, he has also been criticized by numerous scientists for not performing what seems to be an obvious control experiment: examining the genes of heterosexual brothers. Those scientists, including two prominent geneticist/biologists at Harvard University [Richard Lewontin and Ruth Hubbard], were not government researchers.” (New York Native 7-10-95, p.28)
“Even worse for Hamer, the National Institute of Health’s Office of Research Integrity is now investigating his ‘gay gene’ research, according to Crewdson. The inquiry concerns allegations that Hamer was selective about which data he chose to report (i.e., that he ignored data that didn’t support his contention that homosexuality is genetically determined).
The data manipulation was reported to NIH’s integrity office by a junior researcher who performed research crucial to Hamer’s claimed discovery, according to Crewdson.” (New York Native 7-10-95, p.28, emphasis mine)
http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/born-gay-hoax-studies-debunked/ It's like the Environmentalist Hockey Puck Graph - DEBUNKED!
Alissa Milano letting her hair down for me. Next question?
What’s the alternative to choice—genes? I don’t think so. There’s also a choice of celibacy even if there is an inclination toward “effeminancy.” In other words, it’s not so much the choice between homosexuality and heterosexuality; the choice may well be between profligacy and decency. But of course we’re drowning in modern left-wing definition assuring us that homosexuality is as natural a human condition having green eyes, when it’s no more “natural” than a right to abortion.
Excellent!
Your post reflects the liberal teaching in colleges. Once people start down a path, its very difficult to get off that road they’ve chosen. Hence, drug addicts, alcoholics, etc.
I agree with HC, and so does the Bible. God created them male and female, He created Adam & Eve - not Adam & Steve - regardless of how libs want to twist everything. God also told them to be fruitful and multiply. Um, homosexuals don’t procreate, they might multiply, but, only by causing others to become deviants.
The enemy of God - Satan - takes everything God created and twists it.
{“I can remember having same sex attractions in Elementary School”. What do you say to that?}
Teachers are doing a bang up job, the indoctrination in K-12 schools is intense, homosexual feelings are induced by homosexual teachers, and they are plentiful in the schools, especially so in California. Teachers who openly promote this behavior have a little rainbow on their door, showing that you can come in and be encouraged to get in touch with your true self.
Please notice that Christian teachers are prohibited from doing the same thing in most, but not all schools. They do however have great tools to force the Christian teacher to get their mind right.
This is definitely going to hurt Herman Cain’s chances . . . of finding a male sexual partner.
It's time to stop beating up candidates for telling the truth.
>>> If we take the assumption that normal attraction is a man attracted to a woman and a woman attracted to a man, >>>
speaking purely philosophically, you can’t 100% make that assumption because no man is attracted to all women and no woman to all men - so right there you have the start of the breakdown of your equation.
Where do we draw the line? Men who like women with shorter hair? Men who like athletic women versus feminine women? The point is, if you are married to a buxom blonde -because that’s what attracted you years ago - but become strangely attracted to a thin small breasted brunette, it is not proper to act on it because you are married. If you do, it’s a CHOICE even though the new strange attraction to a different type of woman is perhaps not a choice.
So it is in that sense that urge is irrelevant, in the sense that we have the choice of acting right or wrong in all areas of life regardless of our urges. As I said, I am speaking in the philosophical sense. Don’t we all have urge that are not choices but our choice to act or not is just that, a choice.
I agree. Herman is not going to get the Libs and the college kids anyway or the gays so he might as well say what he thinks. The fundamentalists will eat it up and supposedly the average independent leans right. Anyway this time around its all about jobs and the economy.
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.