gadgetlady

Well, since YOU are the one who brought up hormonal factors, why don't you tell me about YOUR studies first? I'm headed out to dinner and look forward when I get back to seeing the proof from hormonal studies or otherwise that homosexuality is something people are born with.

Precisely my point. It is a preference, not an unchangeable orientation.

What you said was "I don't think you are a Christian Fundamentalist terrorist, even if you take their side quite often." I guess since you would vote the same way as they, you wouldn't mind my calling you a commie, Maoist, Marxist, Stalinist, or pinko?

There are a lot of behaviors that people choose to engage in that they claim are not a choice or that they don't have the ability to overcome. These range from overeating to compulsive shopping to drug abuse to pedophilia. I believe that we all have challenges in this life and the measure of who we are is, in part, how we overcome our challenges. I don't do so well with some challenges, to my shame, and I do quite well with others. I don't believe, however, that you can ask a person who is struggling with their challenge to give you an accurate, unbiased opinion of that challenge.

Oh very much so, yes they are two different concepts. Amount of education does not equal intelligence. So what was the point of bringing up the education of athiests?

LOLOL! I'm so NOT entitled to my opinion and my freedom of speech because I'm a conservative Christian!

Which are . . . .??? Are the irrefutable scientific facts that people engaging in homosexual behavior tell us that they have no choice? They much-reported "gay gene" has never been found. Show me your irrefutable scientific facts.

:pound: All hail the super-intelligent athiests! I bow to your superior intelligence. :hail:

As usual, Leatha, I agree with you on everything. And I agree that Paladin's post is just as offensive as the other threads about terrorists like me I am offended by both types of postings.

So the experiences of my friend and others who have had similar experiences -- and they're not an aberration; there are many of them -- are to be discounted, but the experiences of your friends, acquaintances, etc. are accurate? Again, you can choose to believe whatever you want. I choose to believe what I think accurately represents the world around me.

I'm right there with you. How, in fact, could I ruin their lives, make them feel shame, or cause them to live a life filled with regret if they don't beleive what I believe. I personally don't think anyone can make you feel guilty for something that isn't morally wrong. I will never feel guilty for buying a Whirlpool washing machine instead of a Maytag. You can throw guilt at me all day long, tell me your god prefers Maytag over Whirlpool, and that Whirlpool is sinful. But if I don't believe in your god, I don't really care what he believes about washing machines. Unless asked, I wouldn't.

I'm verrrrryyyy confused. The very first thing I said on this thread was that I found the original post "disrespectful, presumptous, and crude". I don't understand why two people have now challenged me about that, especially since they're two people who seem, from their posts, that they would agree with me And yet you go on below to discuss such unacceptable things about Christians. I've studied it too, and I mentioned in another thread that I have a very, very good friend who used to live a homosexual lifestyle and no longer does. She has very interesting things to say about it, one of them being that the feelings that cause someone to choose homosexual behavior can be encouraged or enhanced by behavior, by surroundings, and by the people with whom one interacts; similarly, they can be discouraged by the opposite factors (different behaviors, different surroundings, and different people). I think it'd be pretty difficult if one were in the midst of a homosexual lifestyle to claim that it's anything other than something they can't control. I believe sexuality can be an addictive behavior. I have never destroyed anyone's life. I don't run around telling people I think their lifestyle is sinful (if they choose to ask me about it I will sit with them, listen, and tell them what I honestly think and see). I don't think I'm ignorant or cruel; as I said, I have studied this issue and know quite a bit about it. I'm sure I'm going to be flamed here -- homosexuality isn't a choice, no one would choose it, people can't control what they feel, why would anyone choose a life like that, etc. Bottom line, I HAVE studied it and I have reached a conclusion based on the facts that I see in the world around me. Let the flames . . . uh, games . . . begin.

:confused: Did you want me to explain why I think the original post is disrespectful? (Oy Vey)

Thanks for pointing that out, BubbleButt. I thought everyone believed exactly as I do:faint:

Ditto! Wait, someone mentioned Creation Science and didn't mention ME???!!!???? I'm HURT :paranoid (As an aside, as a conservative Christian I'm not particularly pleased with this thread's inception -- I think it's disrespectful, presumptous, and crude)

:bump2::bump::bump2:

Ain't that the truth! Call me white, call me caucasian, call me Italian-American, or call me a WHOP -- I could care less.

It's painful as an adult -- imagine how painful it is for children when they hear their peers say stuff about them? That's one of the reasons I choose to homeschool! You definitely can't count on the parents to combat it, because that very well might be where they're getting it from. However, from the "other side of the fence", I have a recent funny. We were driving somewhere the other day and very late for an appointment. We were in the left lane behind this driver that was going about 10mph slower than the speed limit and weaving within the lane (it was broad daylight so we didn't suspect drunkenness). My husband was flashing his lights but the driver didn't seem to notice. He was finally able to get to the center lane and get around the car, and as we passed we all turned to look and see what the problem was. Driving the car was a very aged Asian woman. My 6YO, from the back seat, says, "Oh that's the reason! She's Chinese!" We all jumped all over her right away, "Why would you say that??!!???" She informed us that she assumed a Chinese woman wouldn't know how to drive very well because they don't have any cars in China. LOL! (We had just finished a book about a woman who was a missionary to China in the early 1900's and had walked and ridden donkeys all over the countryside.) Of course, we explained to her that China had plenty of cars and this woman's problem was simply that she was a poor driver and had nothing to do with her heritage.

Nope! We just GOT all kinds.

LOL!!! Oh, wait. Are you serious? I wouldn't put anything past the Discovery Channel.

On the website of course there are discussion boards addressing many topics. Amazing stuff, actually, with one thread entitled "Christianity is going DOWN, DOWN, DOWN!!!!!" (and then, of course, lots of hatespeak after that). LOL! Not, not, not.

IMO, they did and the results didn't fit the premise of their drama.

It was, IMO, part docudrama and part reality TV. There were flashbacks to "historical events" such as Jesus lovingly saving Mary Magdalene from being stoned, and Jesus looking down from the cross at his wife and son. There were also predictable "gasps" at DNA "evidence" (or non-evidence, as it were) that proved nothing. And, in the final scene, the "production" was shut down by the authorities requiring the supposed tomb to be sealed with a cement slab before they could get more experts in to analyze writings on the wall. As the credits ran, I was none too surprised to see James Cameron as the Executive Producer -- you know, the "scholar" from Terminator, The Abyss, and Titanic. The text then invited the viewer to draw his own conclusions. It is unfortunate that many will be bowled over by excellent graphics, story-writing, and editing, to believe what they saw was the "God's honest truth".

Wailing at the Tomb? Christians Should Face the Facts in The Discovery Documentary By Gregory Koukl (www.str.org) The documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” hadn’t even aired yet and many Christians were already in a panic. Just the suggestion that someone found Jesus’ bones in a limestone box had believers by the droves shaking their fists or sticking their heads in the sand in a don’t-confuse-me-with-the-facts posture. Apparently, many Christians don’t even need to see the evidence to pass judgment. When one Evangelical web site polled its visitors with the question, “Do you believe the ‘Tomb of Jesus' documentary, which denies the resurrection of Christ?” 97% said no. This was three days before the documentary even aired. Blind faith is so convenient, isn’t it? You never have to actually confront your critics. Then there’s the bullies. One media watchdog demanded Discovery “cancel this slanderous ‘documentary.’” Another prominent Evangelical organization composed this letter for their constituents to hammer Discovery with: "I resent the Discovery Channel's attempt to demean and belittle Christianity by saying it is based on a lie. It is hard for me to believe that The Discovery Channel would dare do such a 'documentary' on any other religion. "It may turn out that you have done Christianity a favor by awakening millions of Christians to your anti-Christian bias and bigotry. Perhaps they will no longer stay silent." This kind of bullying is profoundly embarrassing to me, a follower of Christ, and should be discomfiting to every thoughtful Christian. It is not only a dismal retreat from a legitimate challenge that must be answered; it’s obscurantist. Look, if the Bible says it and you believe it, that might settle it for you, but it doesn’t settle it for millions who might be interested in your ideas and are waiting to hear a thoughtful response to what appears on the surface to be a fair challenge. There are good reasons to doubt the conclusions of this documentary, but no one will ever know them if Christians pull up the drawbridge and bellow from the parapet. Having seen the documentary, here are some problems that quickly come to mind: Scholars have known about these tombs for over 25 years. There’s a reason they haven’t taken these names seriously. Only three have any direct biblical significance: Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. And that cluster of names is statistically unremarkable. In fact, it would be odd if a family with those three names was not found in a tomb together, given their common use (there are at least four ossuaries discovered inscribed “Jesus, son of Joseph,” and one in four women were named Mary, so it’s even money that one of these tombs would have that combination). And connection of Jesus to any of the other names? Wild speculation. So what you have here is a creative guessing game. The entire argument is based on the statistical significance of the names in a cluster. If Jesus was married, and if Jesus was married to a woman named Mariamne, and if Mariamne was also a nickname for Mary Magdalene, and if Jesus had a brother named Matthew, and if Jesus had a son named Judas, and if the now-famous James ossuary belonged to James the brother of Jesus, then you’d have all the members of Jesus’ family together in one tomb. But that’s a lot of “ifs. Even though this is called the “Jesus Family Tomb,” there is no hard evidence that any of these so-called “family members” is even related. The only DNA testing that’s been done—between Jesus and Mariamne—came up negative. Let me repeat that: The DNA test came up negative. That is fact. The rest is speculation. The documentary claims, “Jesus and Mary were married, as the DNA evidence suggests.” This is nonsense. Think about it. How can DNA evidence suggest someone is married? DNA can’t “suggest” anything about legal relationships, only biological ones. In this case, the DNA evidence showed Jesus and Mary were not related by a mother, not that they were husband and wife. The truth is, she could have been married to any one of the males in the tomb, or to none of them for that matter. The DNA “suggests” nothing. The researchers claim they’re just trying to connect the dots? Fair enough. But why connect the dots the way they did? I’ll tell you why. Because it tells their story. There are many other legitimate ways to connect those same dots—some much more probable than the way the documentary connects them, but won’t give the story they’re promoting. But, of course, that wouldn’t create breaking news, would it? Jesus’ family was a poor family from Nazareth, not a middle- to upper-class family from Jerusalem. So this tomb is the wrong kind of tomb located in the wrong city. The documentary claims Jesus spoke in codes. This is false. Jesus spoke in parables, like many of the teachers of His day, not in codes that needed to be deciphered. They say Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ most trusted apostle. But you have to wait 400 years before this evidence pops up in any alleged historical record. They said that Jesus’ family members were executed because He was a pretender to throne of Israel. This is pure fiction. Notice what this accomplishes, though. All of these little exaggerations and inaccuracies make an unlikely tale sound more plausible when, on its own unembellished merits, it is not. What we have here are two different characterizations of what happened to the body of Jesus of Nazareth 2,000 years ago. One is based on artifacts—the ossuaries—and one is based on documents—the historical records of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and Paul. Now granted, these kinds of things are not entirely exact science, but all things being equal, which do you think gives us more precise information, bone boxes or written records? The written records, obviously. The claim of Jesus’ resurrection, was part of the earliest, most primitive testimony regarding Jesus. And it was made by those very same people that the documentary suggests knew Jesus’ bones were actually secretly buried in Jerusalem. Why would so many of them die for this lie when they knew it was a lie? It doesn’t add up. But that’s what you must believe if you take seriously the conclusions of this documentary. If Christianity stands or falls on the historical fact of Jesus’ resurrection, as the Apostle Paul said, then Christ’s followers have no liberty to retreat behind blind faith or hide behind an angry scowl. No, if you’re a Christian you shouldn’t run, whine, scream, or have a religious tantrum. Instead, you should be thanking the Discovery Channel for giving you the chance to step up to the plate and knock this soft ball out of the park.

I watched most of it. I missed some of the beginning. Living in the greater-LA area, I have been involved with a number of Hollywood productions and this one (even though it was produced in Canada) had the typical components of Hollywood and was more of a drama than a documentary. I found it quite interesting that they did two DNA tests. One on the supposed bones of Jesus and one on the supposed bones of Mary Magdalene. The conclusion of these tests was (drum roll please) that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married because they did not have the same mother. HUH? Why not test Mary (the mother of Jesus) to Jesus? Or the supposed child of Jesus and Mary Magdalene to Jesus and Mary Magdalene? Or perhaps those tests WERE done but the results didn't fit into the premise of the drama. I received a wonderful commentary on the show in my email today. I will post it below this one.