Homosexuality

Wow, this thread has reminded me of a story I've considered posting several times, but it always seemed a little too sensitive. Now it appears that the members of this forum are about as sensitive as a rawhide scrotum, so I'll relate it now. But first, two points:

(1) I don't think anyone chooses to be homosexual. Life is much easier if one is hetero, and if it were a choice, I think virtually everyone would choose that path.

(2) Some of the rhetoric on this thread is way too Old Testament fire-and-brimstone for me. I believe in a kind and benevolent God of the New Testament. If there are two homosexuals who are exemplary citizens, do good deeds all day long, are charitable, follow the commandments, worship their God and treat everyone they meet with kindness, I can't believe in a God who would relegate them to hell because they cornhole each other at night. Sin is evil because it somehow causes harm, and while it may be repugnant to me, what two consenting men do at night does no harm.

The story: In the summer of 2018, I was at a party/BBQ at the home of a friend. After the meal, as often happens at these kinds of affairs, the women tended to congregate inside the house, and the men retreated outdoors for Scotch or bourbon and a cigar. (I don't think there were any gin or vodka drinkers invited, thank God.) Anyway, somehow the subject of conversation got around to homosexuality and the other LGBTQ rainbow delusions. Because there were about a dozen of us, both religious and secular positions were presented. One guy who had been a clinical psychologist in private practice for four decades offered a slant on the subject that has been touched on here.

As best I can remember his position a year and a half after the party, it went like this: God (if you're a believer) or Mother Nature (if you're not) went to incredibly elaborate lengths to ensure that humans, and indeed most other animal species, would survive. They created (or evolved) two sexes. They created or evolved emotional and sexual attraction between the two, and perfectly engineered physical mechanisms for mating. They even went so far as to ensure that offspring get half of their genetic material from each parent, in order to ensure that the species' gene pool remain robust and diverse.

So if that was the intent of God or Nature, what should we make of homosexuality and the other LGBTQ people? The progressive current that society has been on for a hundred years wants us to believe those are just normal variants of the species, like red hair or left-handedness. But taken to their logical extremes, having red hair or being left-handed wouldn't bring about the extinction of humanity, while homosexuality and LBGTQ-ism would. Since God or Nature doesn't make those kinds of mistakes, perhaps those sexual abnormalities are something else. What if, rather than normal variants, they are a relatively common and benign form of mental illness? What if some anatomical, physiological, genetic, chemical or hormonal "error" is the cause of those conditions? Rather than normalizing and legitimizing every new gender delusion that comes down the pike, as we do today, we instead study the potential causes of those conditions to determine what they are and, with time and luck, arrive at an explanation and a potential correction?

When the guy completed his theory, another older dude who had been a surgeon almost as long added: That theory is as valid and worthy of serious medical and academic study as any. However, that explanation is so fraught with landmines of political correctness and perceived offenses that it will never see the light of day that leads to serious study.

Could both of them be right?

Adultery is a sin not because of the sex, but because of the deceit.  A person promised to be faithful and then broke that promise, that commitment.  The fact that it was sex and that it was with another consenting adult is irrelevant.

Incest in & of itself isn't a sin, it is only forbidden because of the higher potential for birth defects (and because all kids find their opposite sex siblings icky).  If two people who were raised as orphans meet, fall in love and get married, only to find out later that they have the same father, I don't see how that is a sin.

I have never understood the rejection of true, consensual polygamy and that it should be considered a sin.  I am not talking about turning young women into Stepford wives, but rather a situation where 3 or 4 people make a commitment to each other and stay faithful within that commitment.  I always laugh when people talk about how Polygamy is illegal but it is perfectly legal for an NBA player to have kids with 9 different women out of wedlock.

Fair enough. Then what is the difference between a committed relationship between 1st cousins (incest) versus a committed relationship between 3rd cousins (not incest) as far as sin is concerned? Why would the former separate the participants from God while the latter doesn't?

Is considered a sin because the Bible says so and we are not in any position to question why? In that case, calling things "sins" as a way to protect society from ills is different than something being a sin because it separates us from God (the example of eating pork being considered a sin as an example).

I figured you would be so insecure, you would feel compelled to respond so, yes, I did read this one...

But other than this comment, your off-topic and self-righteous nonsense merits nothing further, you can respond to this or not, as you choose, but I will neither read nor (obviously) respond to you again.