Well put!

I’m sorry you wasted all that time typing out that very reasoned explanation of why Dr Dodd is beyond wrong and deluded. But alas, it was a waste because he/she is so deluded.

If heaven did exist, and he/she were the type they let it, Hell, if it did exist, would look like a cold drink of water!

If your brother’s wife dies you will certainly marry your sister-in-law?

Your all for stoning to death stubborn and rebellious sons?

Good with the nearest relative of accidental death victim killing the one who caused the accident?

You would advocate rapist only having to pay a virgins father cash the victim and rapist must marry? Sick

What about food you sure you have been on that old testament diet?

I wont even go into the O T laws on menstruation and semen being a homophob I doubt you could handle the conversation, lets just say if you live in the west and have been with a woman or just ejaculated you are unclean.

Ya right you follow all these laws and more ha!

You just pick and choose what you want out of your Bible to support your prejudice just like radical islamist.

good day sir

No, I would say in this particular instance the meaning behind it is extremely clear. No room for mistake even for you.

>>if i were i’d be sure you would not be getting into your heaven.

Good thing you aren’t the one who decides such things. But your statement does say a lot about you.

Yes, quite a lot about you.

#105 Dodd
as i thought you need help from what many would consider an imaginary friend to justify your own thoughts.

Your biblical ignorance makes me sad and i’m not even a believer but if i were i’d be sure you would not be getting into your heaven.

You are simply finding a few texts out of thousands that seem to support your prejudice.

According to the gospels Jesus says nothing about homosexuals. If you want to go Old Testament on me you had better be doing every thing the Old Testament says to (lots of it is illegal in the US so I hope you live elsewhere).

To discriminate against minorities is un-American
To pick and choose what you want out of your Bible to support your prejudice will land you in what you that hell you have heard about.
If turns out we have souls I fear for yours.

Your wasting your time with Dr Dodd. The Bible says homosexuality is wrong so, instead of thinking and reasoning for himself, he believes what in his lazy mind, his god says. Why think for yourself, when religion spells it all out for you!

Reasonable debate is wasted on people like him/her

However, that is actually irrelevant to the question you dodged. Specifically and solely with respect to homosexuality, if you were given sufficient evidence to convince YOU that homosexuality was innate behavior, would you still oppose gays being permitted in the military?

It seems clear that you would, so whether homosexuality is innate or not is entirely orthogonal to your opposition to their entry. In other words, whether homosexuality is, as you called it, a “deviant behavior”, or not has absolutely nothing to do with your opposition. You personally have issue with homosexuals and you are using the dismissive of “deviant behavior” as an excuse.

Your premise if flawed making the rest of your hypothetical unrealistic.

But let’s have some fun anyway.

It’s like me saying I was born with the innate need to rob banks. I’m black and since puberty I’ve had this strange need to rob banks.

Understanding I was born with this problem does the bank manager hold a bigoted opinion by not giving me a job at his bank?

I’ll ask the same question to you as to pedro: If you were given sufficient evidence such that, by some miracle, you were convinced that homosexuality was innate and not a choice, would that change your opinion about whether they should be allowed in the military?

So you’re comparing dark skin pigmentation with deviant homosexual behavior?

That’s absurd on the face of it.

There is something insane about a group who would purposely destroy an institution that not only protects them but the entire nation.

That’s what people said before Truman integrated blacks into the rest of the military. Arguments included:

“The primary mission of an Army and Navy is to fight, not to try and reform or improve social customs of the country which it serves.”

“There would be decreased fighting potentialities because of the presence in the ranks of a large number of individuals who would strenuously object to being made to live, work, eat and fight with colored “brothers-in-arms.”

Sound familiar?

So call it instinct if it helps you. Of course, in doing so, you accept that congenital behavior tendencies do exist in contrast to what you have said earlier and that heterosexuals also have this instinct.

Again, I come back to the fundamental questions you have not answered:

1. Do you already support open acceptance of gays in the military?
2. If no, is the reason you do not support it because you feel that homosexuality is not innate but a conscious choice?

You mean the same nations who depend on the US military to come to the rescue in case of any real trouble?

It’s easy to play progressive when your military is at best a social club.

Fair enough. You’re still like a hysterical schoolgirl though. Note how many other nations allow out gays in the military. Your ‘destruction of the military institution’ bollocks is just paranoid bigotry with no basis in reality.

Have a nice day!