I agree with what this article has to say. I think that his arguments were very clear and perfect for the audience he was addressing. People are beginning not to believe in the Bible any more. Therefore as Christians we must begin to show why the Bible is correct in stating that homosexuality is wrong, and/or use other arguments such as the ones Baucham used. I very much like the argument he uses about where to draw the line. If homosexuals fight for gay rights stating that it was how they were born, where does one draw the line. If the government gives in to these arguments, what's to stop middle-aged men from arguing that they were born with the sexual orientation toward little boys? The answer of course is that there is no good place to draw the line after homosexuality. This leaves us where we were before; homosexuality is wrong and should not be tolerated just as a middle-aged man "loving" little boys is not tolerated.
I do agree with the main point of the article that homosexuality is not the new black. I don't think that you can compare someone's sexuality with race. I especially liked when Baucham stated how you can find someones gender or race by looking at them or simply some testing where as with homosexuality you can't do that. Also his reference to Sandusky was clever. I thought it was interesting how he pointed out that we never denied gays or lesbians to marry but we do require them to marry the opposite sex so that means it doesn't pertain to a civil rights movement. His arguments were well thought out and he supported them very well I do agree with almost all of it. One thing though is that we should take a different reproach in solving this problem instead of hate and intolerance.
This article was pretty good. I liked all of his fluent talk which shows that he is really expressing what he thinks about same sex marriage. He is not being hypocritical by contradicting his idea. He clearly says that is not normal and that it will never be normal. The Sexuality one is obviously to have is their opposite gender. He makes good examples about the influence that this has toward the community. IF the community were to keep practicing this they would die in one generation humans will only be humans if they act like humans, not perverted animals.
I agree with what this article has to say. I think that his arguments were very clear and perfect for the audience he was addressing. People are beginning not to believe in the Bible any more. Therefore as Christians we must begin to show why the Bible is correct in stating that homosexuality is wrong, and/or use other arguments such as the ones Baucham used. I very much like the argument he uses about where to draw the line. If homosexuals fight for gay rights stating that it was how they were born, where does one draw the line. If the government gives in to these arguments, what's to stop middle-aged men from arguing that they were born with the sexual orientation toward little boys? The answer of course is that there is no good place to draw the line after homosexuality. This leaves us where we were before; homosexuality is wrong and should not be tolerated just as a middle-aged man "loving" little boys is not tolerated.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the main point of the article that homosexuality is not the new black. I don't think that you can compare someone's sexuality with race. I especially liked when Baucham stated how you can find someones gender or race by looking at them or simply some testing where as with homosexuality you can't do that. Also his reference to Sandusky was clever.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting how he pointed out that we never denied gays or lesbians to marry but we do require them to marry the opposite sex so that means it doesn't pertain to a civil rights movement. His arguments were well thought out and he supported them very well I do agree with almost all of it. One thing though is that we should take a different reproach in solving this problem instead of hate and intolerance.
-Amira Hadyeh
This article was pretty good. I liked all of his fluent talk which shows that he is really expressing what he thinks about same sex marriage. He is not being hypocritical by contradicting his idea. He clearly says that is not normal and that it will never be normal. The Sexuality one is obviously to have is their opposite gender. He makes good examples about the influence that this has toward the community. IF the community were to keep practicing this they would die in one generation humans will only be humans if they act like humans, not perverted animals.
ReplyDelete