From: lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard)
Subject: Re: Homosexuals anywhere are wrong
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 05:54:34 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.233022.7722@macc.wisc.edu> stmarys@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Ted Babcock) writes:
>The point about homosexuality being a "defect" follows from gays' own 
>definition of their condition as "sexual orientation" rather than 
>"sexual preference."  It is not a choice, they say, but an in-born 
>fact about themselves.

Left handedness is inborn, blond hair is inborn, so where do you
get inborn==defect?

>While this is still a matter of dispute, I accept it for the purpose 
>of discussing the morality of homosexuality because it doesn't affect 
>the Christian's case against it.  

It only makes you all the more wicked when you condemn people for
what they cannot change.
Homosexuality is still an ethical activity in any case so long
as those involved are consenting.

>Gays would have us believe that, 
>because it is something over which they have no control, it cannot be 
>an object of moral disapproval.

No it just means if there is a god you will have more to answer for
when you meet him. You will have no way of removing the blood of
teenage suicides from your hands since you alone have a choice.

>This is not so, any more than the modern notion of alcoholism as a 
>disease cancels the Bible's injunctions against drunkenness.  

Drunkeness will result in a very premature death so there is reason
for the person to make great efforts to fight what they where born with.
Homosexuality only results in premature death if you are careless, or
if a person such as yourself makes sure that homosexuals don't get the
information they need about safer sex.

>We must 
>distinguish between the _condition_ and the _behavior_.  It is the 
>behavior that the Bible condemns, not necessarily the condition; the 
>only way that the condition itself could be condemned would be if it 
>were chosen.

So lets see how long you stay in the boyscouts after announcing that
your homosexual and a virgin....

>The condition of homosexuality--like that of alcoholism--is a defect 
>in the sense that it is an in-born propensity toward immoral behavior.  

Stating that its immoral does not make it so. The biblical arguments
for the "immorality" of homosexuality are shaky at best, and the
secular arguments are non existant.

>It makes one more susceptible to the temptations that lead to the 
>actions.  If sin is separation from God (and therefore a bad thing), 
>and a certain condition tends to lead one to sin, then I would call 
>it a defect--a physical defect to the extent that the condition is 
>physically based.  QED.

A well formed proof based on a false premise is still false, until you
can prove that homosexuality is immoral this statement is meaningless.

-- 
>>Unix/C Contract worker available 5 years C/unix work experience<<  ______
Available for Telecommuting/Travel and contracts on the T Line       \    /
in the Boston MA area. Send me e-mail for a copy of my Resume.        \  /
       -- VWIS 508-793-9568 (2400 baud), Linux support BBS.--          \/
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc