I am getting extremely fed up with having to answer the silly and illogical foolish arguments of homosexuals and pro-gay advocates. These people fail to think before they open their mouths and spew their mindless ignorance.
Argument #1: Segregation
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that homosexuals did not and would not choose to be marginalized, ostracized, ridiculed, and "hated" by society. That is the exact argument they attempt to stump people with. Inadvertently, yes, you did choose to be marginalized, ostracized, and ridiculed by society, in the exact same way that a pedophile, rapist, murderer, etc., chose to be marginalized, ostracized, and ridiculed by society, because you chose to revel in your sin. Are you going to attempt to argue that pedophiles, rapists, and murderers are born that way and cannot help themselves? That they cannot change or choose otherwise? The same illogical argument must be applied to them as well. Did pedophiles, rapists, and murderers choose to be marginalized, ostracized, and ridiculed by society? Inadvertently, yes. Sorry, but homosexuality is not innate nor is it immutable. It is a choice, as hundreds of ex-homosexuals who have repented and come to Christ will testify to.
Argument #2: Science
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue for so-called "scientific" evidence that homosexuals are born that way by citing rare cases where, (1) with identical twins, both are homosexual, (2) with identical triplets, all are homosexual, or (3) with identical triplets where one is female and the other two are male (or vice versa), either all are homosexual or just the two of the same gender. This so-called "evidence" is called Stacking the Deck. They cherry-pick their cases in order to try and manipulate the data. In other words, they lie through their teeth, which is not surprising in the least given their character. If we examine the cases correctly and honestly, we will find cases where, (1) with identical twins, only one is homosexual while the other is not, (2) with identical triplets, only one is homosexual while the other two are not, or (3) with identical triplets where one is female and the other two are male (or vice versa), only one of the three is homosexual while the others are not, or one of the two with the same gender is homosexual while the other is not. They all share the same genes, the same DNA, yet the results are completely different. Why? Because nobody is born homosexual; they choose to be homosexual. There is not a shred of scientific evidence that lends any credibility to a proposed and supposed "gay gene." It does not exist!
Argument #3: Nature
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that we see homosexuality in nature, but that is not the case. When a male dog mounts another male dog, there is no penetration. It is like when a male dog mounts your leg. He is not penetrating your leg, is he? No, of course he is not! Even if we did see acts of homosexuality in nature, we do not get our morality from animals. Otherwise, if homosexuals and pro-gay advocates are going to try and justify homosexuality based on the morality of animals, then we need to change our laws to allow polygamy and incestuous marriages (brother and sister, son and mother, daughter and father, niece and uncle, nephew and aunt, grandson and grandmother, granddaughter and grandfather—ALL who are of consenting age). Let us face it, if a female dog has puppies, when those puppies reach a certain age, not only will the male and female puppies have sex with each other, but the male puppies with have sex with their mother and the father with have sex with the female puppies. So if we are going to allow homosexuality based on this ignorant argument, then we should also allow polygamy and incestuous marriage for the same reason. Since rape is also common in the animal kingdom, should we be promoting and celebrating rape as well? You cannot argue that one is right because the animals do it but that the other is wrong. That is illogical cherry picking and it is an inconsistent argument.
Argument #4: Comparison to Slavery
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue and compare homosexuals to slaves, claiming that they have had rights stolen from them. Homosexuals have never had any rights stolen from them. Comparing homosexuality to slavery is a false comparison. Homosexuality is not an ethnic minority. Homosexuals have never been bought and sold in America; they have never been denied the right to vote; there are no and have never been gay and straight classrooms; there are no and have never been gay and straight drinking fountains; and they have always had the right to hold property and participate in the political process. Homosexuals have always had the same rights all Americans have had. The same sure cannot be said about African-Americans. The only right they are trying to claim, which is a right that does not belong to them, is the right to marry, which is only permissible between a man and a woman. Marriage is a divine institution and its parameters were defined very clearly by God Almighty when He created man and woman: "For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh" (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:5; Mark 10:7-8; Eph. 5:31), "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, man cannot separate" (Matt. 19:6). This is the only acceptable form of sexuality and the only acceptable expression of sexuality.
Argument #5: "Consenting Adults"
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue acceptance of homosexuality based on the "consenting adults" argument. By logical conclusion of this argument, that means it is perfectly okay for a brother and a sister to hook up; that means it is perfectly okay for a father and daughter to hook up; that means it is perfectly okay for a mother and son to hook up; that means it is perfectly okay for an uncle and niece to hook up; that means it is perfectly okay for an aunt and a nephew to hook up; that means it is perfectly okay for a grandfather and a granddaughter to hook up; that means it is perfectly okay for a grandmother and grandson to hook up; and that means it is perfectly okay for near cousins to hook up. In fact, it also means it is perfectly okay for the queer variations of these scenarios to hook up as well. All of these were condemned alongside homosexuality in the Bible (Lev. 18 and 20; 1 Cor. 5), yet their ridiculous, illogical, and asinine argument says all of these scenarios should be allowed because, after all, they are "consenting adults." Likewise, polygamy should be allowed because they are all "consenting adults."
Argument #6: Progeny
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to use inabilities for heterosexual couples to have children as support for homosexuality. The fact remains, if a heterosexual couple did not have the obstacles in their way that prevent them from having children—regardless of their age, the fact is that they could have children together. However, homosexual couples can never and will never have children together. Period! They have to rely on sperm donors and surrogates because of the impossibility for them to produce anything on their own, which only demonstrates to prove that it takes one man and one woman in order to create life. It will never happen with two men or two women. Heterosexual couples having to rely on sperm donors or surrogates offers no support for homosexuality; they are doing what is naturally required: one man and one woman. I will repeat once more for those hard of paying attention: remove the obstacles that prevent heterosexuals from being able to conceive and they could have children together; however, homosexuals have no such obstacles. The only obstacle in the way of homosexuals being able to reproduce is each other; replace it with the correct counterpart and they will have no issue conceiving because God designed it to require one man and one woman.
Argument #7: Interpretations of the Church
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that the church was wrong about "interracial" marriage and that they had to reinterpret Bible passages. First of all, the Bible has never contained any such verses to prohibit "interracial" marriage, so it is a blatant lie to claim reinterpretation of verses that do not exist. Second of all, the church was never wrong because you cannot be wrong about something that never existed in the first place. Certain individuals and/or denominations might have taught such things, derived from erroneously misinterpreted passages, but it is a false statement to claim the entire universal church taught such things. Finally, the verses often quoted and misapplied are commandments to Israel not to marry the people from the surrounding nations. This had nothing to do with "interracial" marriage. It had to do with spiritual purity. As God's chosen people, the reason Israel was commanded not to marry people from the surrounding nations is the same reason why Christians are commanded not to marry unbelievers. This argument, like their argument regarding slavery and women preachers, is an argument based on willful ignorance.
Argument #8: Ancient Terminology
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that the term "homosexual" as we understand it did not exist in ancient times. To say that the term "homosexuality" did not exist in ancient times is a stunningly irrelevant point, even if, for argument's sake, we grant that the word did not exist. So what if Hebrew had no word that precisely parallels our word "homosexuality"? When other words combine to describe (and condemn) homosexual acts, the presence or absence of any particular word is moot. Their argument here is a deceptive piece of psycholinguistic sleight-of-hand. Only a mentally blind partisan with an ax to grind could fail to find homosexual behavior in words as plain as those found in Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, and Romans 1:26-27. A description is exactly the same as a precise word. Anyone who denies this denies the reality of any language.
Argument #9: Intolerance and "Hate Speech"
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to accuse Christians of being intolerant. What is tolerance? Tolerance is the right to disagree with another person and tell them they are wrong while allowing them to do what they choose to do. Christians are not allowed to disagree with homosexuals; they are not allowed to hold their own "opinion." So who are the intolerant ones? Homosexuals! Furthermore, Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to accuse Christians of "hate speech" merely for disagreeing with them and telling them that what they are doing is wrong. How is that "hate speech"? When a Christian disagrees with homosexuality, the homosexual community, and those who support them, start attacking and threatening the Christian who disagreed with homosexuality. So who is guilty of hate speech? The intolerant homosexuals! It would be nice if people would start using their God-given brain to spot illogical inconsistencies like these, but unfortunately most people do not know how to think for themselves, let alone how to think period. They allow themselves to be emotionally manipulated by the lies of homosexuals. Common sense really is not very common these days.
Argument #10: "Orientation" (read Disorientation)
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that they cannot change their sexual "orientation." Orientation is "the relative physical position or direction of something." In other words, orientation is direction, which can be changed. Have you ever heard people say, "I'm feeling disoriented"? Disorientation is "the loss of one's sense of direction, position, or relationship with one's surroundings." Therefore, homosexuals are disoriented because their direction is wrong. What they are experiencing is a sexual disorientation. Their "orientation" can be changed, as is evidenced by hundreds of former homosexuals who have come to faith in the Lord Jesus, repenting of the sins of their former lives. If a person has strong and/or frequent temptations toward bestiality, where his/her thoughts seem to be dominated by it, does he/she have a sexual "orientation" toward animals? No! The temptations we experience do not determine who or what we are. If a person has strong and/or frequent temptations toward pedophilia, where his/her thoughts seem to be dominated by it, does he/she have a sexual "orientation" toward children? No! The temptations we experience do not determine who or what we are. Likewise, if a person has strong and/or frequent temptations toward the same sex, where his/her thoughts seem to be dominated by it, he/she does not have a sexual "orientation" toward homosexuality. Just because such thoughts seem to dominate your mind does not mean that is who or what you are. It is a false conclusion and assumptions made from a false conclusion. In other words, it is a logical fallacy. Homosexuals need to be reoriented from their disorientation.
Argument #11: Contradictory Oxymoron
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that there is such a thing as a gay "Christian." Aside from the fact that such is an oxymoron, a complete contradiction in terms, the truth of the matter is that a person cannot be a gay "Christian." Have you ever noticed how the emphasis is placed on "gay"? For a genuine Christian, the emphasis is always placed on Christ. Now, apart from all the passages in Scripture that condemn homosexual union and behaviour, the Bible makes it clear that, "If we say that we have fellowship with [Jesus] and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the light as He Himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin" (1 John 1:6-7). Homosexuals walk in the darkness of their sin, embracing their sin, defining themselves according to their sin. To claim they are gay "Christians" exposes themselves as liars because they do not practice the truth (the most obvious being repentance, a complete change in direction, not merely a change of mind). The evidence that a homosexual has truly come to saving faith will be seen in the fact that, "Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God" (1 Cor. 6:11). If this has happened, the former homosexual cannot and will not continue to walk in darkness but will crucify their flesh and kill sin in their life. "Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires" (Gal. 5:24). "If you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live" (Rom. 8:13). See 1 John 3:4-10. For those Christians who have been deceived into supporting this perverse abomination, I want you to pay close attention to this command from Scripture: "And do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them" (Ephesians 5:11).
Argument #12: "Love" So-Called
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that "homosexuals should be allowed to love whomever they choose," because, after all, "it's not hurting anybody else." If that is the case, then if I want to "love" some female member of my family (my grandmother, my mother, my aunt, my sister, my daughter), I should be allowed to because "it's not hurting anybody else." Or, if I give in to homosexual temptations, if I want to "love" some male member of my family (my grandfather, my father, my uncle, my brother, my son), I should be allowed to because "it's not hurting anybody else." Or, in the case of polygamy, if I want to "love" multiple women and they want to "love" me, we should be allowed to because "it's not hurting anybody else." This argument pretty much goes hand-in-hand with the "consenting adults" argument. Likewise, even though consent is impossible, if I want to "love" my dog or some other pet or animal, I should be allowed to because "it's not hurting anybody else." (Apparently bestiality/zoophilia was recently legalized in Canada, and is already legal in certain States in the USA.) These people mistakenly associate their lusts, desires, infatuations, and the heat of the moment with the word "love," tossing it around loosely and carelessly. It is not loving to embrace sin, make room for sin, excuse sin, or cause another person to sin. There is nothing "loving" about homosexual relationships.
Argument #13: Unwanted Homosexuality
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that homosexuals "didn't want/choose to be gay." Sorry, but, yes, you did. You were not born that way, and God certainly did not create you that way. Let us examine the logic here. If you were born gay, that means that you have been dealt the worst hand possible in the universe. If God created you to be gay, that means He played the cruelest trick in the universe on you. Why? Two reasons: (1) If you were born gay, if God created you to be gay, you were born with a deliberately shorter life expectancy, having an imminent death sentence hanging over you. If you engage in homosexual behaviour, you are pretty much guaranteed to become diseased by contracting AIDS, the average homosexual having a life expectancy of less than half of that of the average heterosexual. (2) If you were born gay, if God created you to be gay, you were born without a possible future, having nothing to look forward to or hope in. Since you cannot reproduce, your family line ends with you. There will be no one to carry on your name or your legacy. If you did not want to be gay or choose to be gay, then you should not be embracing it and practicing it, you should be angry that you are not going to live as long as the average heterosexual or see yourself in the face and life of another being created in your image. The fact is, you did choose to be gay, and those rewards are still yours: shorter life expectancy and the end of your family line as you know it. By saying that you "didn't want/choose to be gay," you are admitting that you have a choice, because if you never wanted to be gay, guess what, you do not have to be!
Argument #14: Forgiveness
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue, "Jesus died to forgive all sins, including homosexuality." Because Jesus died to forgive the sin of homosexuality, you think it gives you a license to go ahead and commit it? Let me get this straight. Your argument is that because Jesus died to forgive the sin of rape, we are free to go out and rape women left, right, and center 24/7? Not only is your argument illogical, but it is also ludicrous! If you purpose to sin and habitually practice sin, do not expect to have forgiveness of that sin. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and 1 John 3 are explicitly clear on this. Jesus commands us to repent. Repentance is a 180-degree action. You stop what you are doing (the direction you are going), you turn around, and you start doing the opposite (going the right direction). It means to agree with God's assessment about you.
Argument #15: Twisted Judgment
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt the argument, "I don't judge you for having heterosexual relations with women behind closed doors, so don't judge me for having homosexual relations behind closed doors." This illogical argument is akin to arguing, "I don't judge you for giving charitably to people on the street, so don't judge me mugging people on the street," or, "I don't judge you for being honest and telling the truth, so don't judge me for being dishonest and lying." News flash! You cannot judge right action! You cannot judge correct behaviour.
Argument #16: False Appeal to Humanity
Homosexuals and pro-gay advocates attempt to argue that homosexuals should be allowed the "right to exist and enjoy their lives." Do they use this argument equally across the board for all people, or do they use it only for themselves because they have something to gain from it? What I mean is this: Should adulterers, murderers, rapists, pedophiles, zoophiliacs, liars, and thieves have the “right to exist and enjoy their lives”? If the homosexual says "No," then why not? Who are you to judge their lives? After all, they are “born that way” (born in sin, that is) and “cannot help themselves.” What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
I wish more people had discernment, wisdom, and understanding so they could think logically and spot the homosexual's fallacious arguments as if they were illuminated by flood lights. Nothing disturbs me more than people who do not possess the ability to think rationally and logically for themselves but instead mindlessly follow the ignorant masses. Love the homosexual, yes. Live out the Gospel before them, being the salt and the light, absolutely. But do not condone or support their sinful behaviour and lifestyle.