Posted on 12/28/2012 5:11:18 AM PST by 1010RD
Edited on 12/28/2012 5:14:39 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
More than 250 Illinois clergy
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Normal is defined as: 1.usual: conforming to the usual standard, type, or custom 2.healthy: physically, mentally, and emotionally healthy 3.occurring naturally: maintained or occurring in a natural state
We know that homosexuality occurs naturally. There is no homosexual gene, but epigenetic changes affecting hormones and a child's environment seem to be the cause of homosexuality. It occurs in some animal species, but is an evolutionary dead end.
Is it usual? No, homosexuality is rare and unusual. Heterosexuality is common and usual. There are no successful civilizations built on homosexuality. The history of humankind is heterosexual. So in this case homosexuality is abnormal.
Is it healthy? No, homosexuality is not healthy from a physical standpoint and homosexuals suffer from a variety of diseases directly related to their sexual practices. Homosexuality is not mentally healthy. See the DSM prior to 1972. Also see WBEZ's This American Life for Ira Glass' excellent episode on how the APA changed homosexuality from a mental illness listed in the DSM based not on any science, but on emotion and politics: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/204/81-words
It is also not emotionally healthy as seen in the suicide rate, drug and alcohol abuse rate and physical abuse rate in the homosexual community. Keep in mind that homosexuals are a very small subset of the human population, but a very large subset of the above groups. Even the term "gay" is an intentional misnomer created by those with same-gender attraction to describe their misery.
Given the above we should not be indulging those with same-sex attractions or encouraging more of it, but lovingly treating those with same-gender attraction. It remains a mental illness despite the politics and emotion surrounding the issue and is treatable as those who have left the lifestyle will attest.
Also note that the bill endorses “gender identity” so that the mental illness of transvestitism or transexuality are also “normalized”.
Can you imagine the Pandora’s Box of problems that come with nomalizing a person who thinks they’re the wrong sex?
BS! It is not a mental illness - you bought the lie! It is pure evil!
Sorry, had to ACCURATELY correct the header!
Glad you pointed that out....how many of the established church leaders follow this concept....zero.
I disagree with your assertion of homosexuality occurring “naturally!”
Hormones swings of high concentrations do not change your sex. They do not “cause” you to become homosexual, that is a choice. It may even be that “feelings” or “motivations” are strong. You may be “aroused” by seeing nakedness of the same sex and not of the opposite sex...it does NOT make you homosexual. It is an out of balance condition that when balanced changes everything you “feel.” Whether or not you act on it, when you go in that direction against what you later established firmly as abnormal then says you are homosexual or not. It is a choice, notwithstanding the feelings...you must act.
It’s a CHOICE. JMHO.
We are near to having technology available to correct DNA problems ~ in fact, glucophage and glipizide appear to work by rewriting DNA in the cell nucleus ~ and they've been around a good 20 years.
When the CURE appears on the market in pill form we'll still have folks wandering about telling us that it's a choice ~ and they'll refuse to take their pills.
We will have to make the cure mandatory.
and they in turn are misleading their congregations, too, so there will be a special place in hell for them.
God does reign supreme, and He will hold them accountable!
I'll wager this endorsement list will be the most interesting since Santa's 2012 Christmas list.
I'll also bet that the list is loaded with non-denominationals, radical and "progressive" main stream churches, college campus "churches", ministers who are Obama's old buddies and supporters in his old community-organizer neighborhood, and some just plain independently weird congregations scattered here and there around Illinois.
If any Freeper comes across the entire list and cares to post it here, I'd sure appreciate it and I'm sure others would, too....just to be "checkin' it twice" to get the feel of the pro-gay movement among the "religious" pastors, ministers, priests and rabbis in the state.
When will we see published an anti-gay marriage list of clergy endorsers by the liberal leading Chicago newspapers, hmmm?
Leni
Whenever you see public officials endorse homosexual marriage, you will always find a wealthy homosexual benefactor hiding in the background. Just like Glen Beck and Newt Gingrich suddenly endorsing queer marriage. They were bought off. There is an Obama troglodyte (Rahm Emmanuel) hiding somewhere in all this. You can bank on it.
This country sure is obsessed with homosexuality. Everything is about homosexuality these days. We’ve become a nation of sexual deviants.
Any words of support from NOI leader Louis Farrakhan yet?
I say this because there are a lot of things that are normal (by some a simple one-part definition: i.e. does it occur in nature) and are also very damaging to human flourishing. You sort of covered this by asserting a complex 3-part definition of "normal" --- I get that --- but most people wouldthink of "normal" meaning "within a standard range of variations," and conclude that hoimosexuality is normal just like left-handedness is normal.
I would argue that the heart of the question does not require an evaluation of homosexuality as a trait (a tendency or personality variation) but does demand an evaluation of marriage.
Namely, in a world with a huge number of friendship and relationship possibilities, how is marriage uniquely suited only for a male and a female?
Most forms of friendship between adults occur without any external ceremonies, licensing, or regulations. It is assumed that two adults (or three, or any number of adults) will regulate their quilting circle, their bowling team, their fitness-walking-buddyhood, their joint foodie explorations, their gabfests, their romances and amours, or whatever, according to their own preferenes and without public recognition or oversight.
If the adults' relationship involves money, or property, or goods or services, that's what private contracts are all about: again, the adults are assumed capable of contracting to their own mutual satisfaction.
In sum: adults don't need oversight to regulate their relations with colleagues, friends, or lovers.
How is marriage between a woman and a man different from this? Because their sexual union (formalized in marriage) is the only kind of sexual union which can bring forth dependent offspring. And there needs to be an institution which keeps the man and the woman together with any children they bear.
In other words, marriage is not essentially about the intimate relations of adults. Theyu can manage that as they like. Marriage is essentially a bond between a potentially procreating couple, and the children who result from the bond.
If it were not for the possibility of begetting, the state would have no legitimate interest in the relationships of adults per se. There is no PUBLIC interest in regulating romances and love affairs. The PUBLIC interest is in securing the rights of dependent children by recognizing and defending their bond with their natural father and mother.
250 Leaders of congregations bowing to the father of lies, satan, endorse gay marriage.
Just had to bring a tad bit more clarity to the situation.
I guess that supersedes fostering adherence to the very clear Biblical stances against homosexuality.
250 Leaders of congregations bowing to the father of lies, satan, endorse gay marriage.
Just had to bring a tad bit more clarity to the situation.
Double tap....lol
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.