Law and Order! Or a good place for a friendly argument

[Hans_Oddcraft]

@Awesome_Lensfun1, my Calculus professor said “infinity is not a number.”

[Pig_Larkcape1]

@Hans_Oddcraft has waited around two years to continue that conversation with @Awesome_Lensfun1 about infinity.
Dedication

[Cinnar_Ratchetloop]

it’s the fact that i actually remember that conversation that baffles me.

[Levi_Orangeburst]

“infinity is not a number.”

[Hans_Oddcraft]

@Awesome_Lensfun1 comes back he be like:

[Sierepica_Fuzzywalker]

Wow, mood killer incoming.

Mood Killer (skip if you don't want your mood to be DESTROYED)

Members' Union

bruh this is insane

this has nothing to do with being gay

this has everything to do with not being mature enough to be rejected

if your feelings aren't reciprocated by another person because they are GAY, it's not because you're not good enough, it's because they're GAY

if any kind of rejection is most personal, it would be by someone who IS in fact attracted to the opposite gender

it's not personal at all, so why try to demonize gay people in that way.it seems like a major stretch to even say something like that.

This is assessment is correct. That was a horrible example to use to support point #2 here. It was wrong of me to assume an universal emotional reaction to something, or even to validate that particular reaction.

I may or may not be particularly inclined toward that reaction, but that is entirely on me. Most likely I am mixing up a heterosexual rejection that I delivered to someone else in the middle of a situation where I was first learning about homosexuality with a conclusion about homosexuals.

Members' Union

You shouldn't cast out your lover for being able to actually have the capacity to love someone other than you.

This is true, but sexual attraction is not love. Love is a commitment to the true good of another person.

Members' Union

You wouldn't divorce your husband for the reason that he is attracted to women when in fact the reason that you are married to him is because he's attracted to women.

There are other reasons to get married. I would not consider "attracted to women" a qualification for marriage to me. An asexual who has no sexual attraction at all would be just as acceptable.

Likewise, if "attracted to women" were the reason for getting married to a guy, that is a vast group of people. If he is suffering from attraction to women, why me? Why not someone else? There are many women who would make better wives and mothers than me. This doesn't make any sense.

Members' Union

In the same way, I wouldn't break up with someone I'm dating if they happened to be bisexual. That's just not thought out on so many levels.

Just because someone has the ability to do something, it doesn't mean they're going to do it. Why hate on people for what they could do, when we should judge by what they actually do

Also, what you're saying is incredibly selfish. Even outside of a religious context, people have the right to date who they want. If they want to break up with Person A, and date Person B then so be it. It's not anyone's business but theirs.

This assessment is correct, mostly.

It's not valid to break up with a heterosexual relationship to pursue a homosexual relationship though, even though it is valid to break up with one heterosexual relationship to pursue another or just to be single.

I'm looking at this sentence that I just wrote and I am having a "wat" reaction. I'm struggling, Pig. twitches alpaca ears

I mean, I wouldn't really be able to stop a proverbial boyfriend from pursuing sin, but if they abandoned me for it they would at least get a warning that they are driving into sin from me. I'm not going to enable their sin problem. However, I'm probably not going to pursue them after they have made such a ill-advised decision. If they quit their sin, I would wait and see if their repentance is real, but I'm forgiving enough to welcome them back eventually.

But could you really blame me for the "Drat! I wanted to marry that guy." reaction in that situation? I think I would accept that from myself and other women. Seems legit. Especially if the woman had sexual attraction to him.

I'm looking at this: if homosexuality didn't exist, both of the guys in a homosexual relationship could be married to women. So in theory, for every homosexual relationship, there could be 4 hurt people: the two guys and the two women who they are supposed to be married to, in God's sovereignty. The two women go without the marriage they want and suffer as a result. The guys hurt themselves. (Throw a surrogate mom or a sperm donor into the mix and kids who grow up without a mom or a dad, and it's a dumpster fire of human pain.)

Members' Union

Gay or straight, it's hurtful to your partner when you marry them for a reason other than attraction.

Really? What if I just like his company and he wants to do it with me or we both want the relationship for fun? What if we want to have kids? Unfortunately, I've never experienced sexual attraction, so you're going to have to explain this to me for me to get it. What's the offense? How does me not experiencing that in a marriage hurt the other person?

I have no sexual attraction. The term for me is heteroromantic asexual. This is a painful existence, and it makes it hard for me to understand this topic in some ways - that is the most painful part of it, not being able to understand people who do have sexual attraction. I can't relate to something I've never experienced. My defense of you guys being able to discuss it was very Beatrice Hall; I'm pretty incompetent with this subject, as you are obviously seeing.

Members' Union

But if we allowed people to actually be open about who they were attracted to, then maybe you won't marry a gay person who is trying to look straight so his friends, family, and church don't cast him out and call him evil. Because when you say that you think gays are evil, they'll burn in hell, blah blah blah, then they are more inclined to pretend to be straight and that results in the letdown and the hurt you described.

Agreed. Openness about this should be encouraged. Dishonesty makes everything worse.

Members' Union

But... thats just life. She obviously liked him without his knowing, so in the long run he did nothing wrong to her by saying he liked people of the same gender. She had expectations. He failed those. Simple as that.

Life can be a box of fog rocks. The dude isn't wrong for being honest, but it still can hurt if you wanted him, is my understanding.

Members' Union

You support saying homosexuality is morally wrong, you say it's temptation rather than valid attraction,

Guilty as charged.

God: Homosexuality is an invalid attraction, an abomination, and morally wrong.
Miss_S: I'm not arguing with God on this one. If you have a problem with God's position, take it up with him. I'm just his follower and messenger of truth. If you're confused on God's position, consult Romans 1.

Members' Union

I've never spoken against homosexuality on this forum, that's pretty much you. So why are you telling me to be careful of (gay) people's feelings?

That was an argument from similarity between your posts and Faetrix's. I wasn't meaning to implicate you in the homosexual part of it. Dragging the homosexuality up to talk about suicide allowed me to talk about suicide without violating the privacy of anyone on the forum. It was a "dodge".

Sexual and Romantic Attraction

Members' Union

Okay so, remember that there is a difference between Sexual attraction and romantic attraction. @Sierepica_Fuzzywalker, your saying it like if a dude liked a dude, it means they automatically want to do things. Which is not the case in some cases.

This is true. But dude, I could write a whole essay on this. I actually did a whole Powerpoint with my analysis of all the different sexual and romantic attractions. I can send it to you over Discord if you want it.

But a homoromantic heterosexual lives a very different life than a homoromantic homosexual or heteroromantic homosexual or homoromantic asexual, yes. A homoromantic heterosexual usually can be married to a gal and have his guy pal best friend or best friends, and everything is cool. A heteroromantic homosexual will have close friends of the opposite gender despite being "gay", and a homoromantic ace will just have their group of same-sex friends.

And heteroromantic aces get very lonely. Sometimes they get married so they have someone of the opposite gender to talk to, and accept the birthing stuff as a cost to get the conversations and the hugs. glares at Pig for insulting my suffering I forgive you for that, man. You didn't know.

Members' Union

First, how is it violent?
Second, why would it ruin relationships? If they are really your friends/family, they should able to accept you whether they agree with you or not.

Second point first, just because they "should" doesn't mean they do. Many kids who come out end up on the streets, mostly because of the toxic political stuff I mentioned over in Member's Union.

First point second

I've already kinda of explained this already, the refusing to accept that what they are doing is an affront to God. But it causes physical and medical damage. I really can't explain the details because it's against the rules. I suppose I could explain it privately to you, if you really really want to know. It's really gross. I think it is better if you look it up yourself, if you are of the age to know how those parts of the body work.

Any relationship that doesn't follow God's commands is abusive on some level in my view. Even premarital relationships that include forbidden physical stuff are abusive because you are using that person as a dopamine dispenser instead of taking care of them, and this works the same way. The proper way to take care of that part of the body is to use it as God intended, so when you don't, you are hurting the other person for the highs. The other person isn't human to you, they are just a device to extract fun from. It's extremely hurtful, and it is NOT love.

Sorry, had to appease the Forum Overlords by staying on topic. Hope you all understand.

[Pig_Larkcape1]

things i like/Agreed

This is assessment is correct. That was a horrible example to use to support point #2 here. It was wrong of me to assume an universal emotional reaction to something, or even to validate that particular reaction.

I may or may not be particularly inclined toward that reaction, but that is entirely on me. Most likely I am mixing up a heterosexual rejection that I delivered to someone else in the middle of a situation where I was first learning about homosexuality with a conclusion about homosexuals.

glad we could clear that up

This is true, but sexual attraction is not love. Love is a commitment to the true good of another person.

I think sexual attraction is definitely a big part of keeping love alive for a lot of people, but I think the companionship element is important too. BUT I'm not very experienced in relationships so I'm probably not the best to talk on the subject.

There are other reasons to get married. I would not consider "attracted to women" a qualification for marriage to me. An asexual who has no sexual attraction at all would be just as acceptable.

I see how I could have expanded on that.

I would not consider "attracted to women" a qualification for marriage to me. An asexual who has no sexual attraction at all would be just as acceptable.

But you couldn't marry a gay dude, that's what I'm saying. Like, it's straights and bisexuals and that's pretty much the pool of selection.
I didn't think all attraction was sexual, tell me if you think that's wrong.

It's not valid to break up with a heterosexual relationship to pursue a homosexual relationship

I think we've come to a agree to disagree on this, so that's poggers

But a homoromantic heterosexual lives a very different life than a homoromantic homosexual or heteroromantic homosexual or homoromantic asexual, yes. A homoromantic heterosexual usually can be married to a gal and have his guy pal best friend or best friends, and everything is cool. A heteroromantic homosexual will have close friends of the opposite gender despite being "gay", and a homoromantic ace will just have their group of same-sex friends.

I spent a good 10 minutes decoding this. But I'm glad I did because now I understand, I think.

things is sort of don't like/disagree

two women go without the marriage they want and suffer as a result

There's always going to be rejection and suffering, that's not exclusive to gay relationships and that kind of rejection for mates has been in human nature long before homosexuality made its debut. Besides, there are thousands of men and women who die without a partner every year. There's plenty of fish in the sea basically. And very few gay fish, so there's no need to worry about it in my mind.

Throw a surrogate mom or a sperm donor into the mix and kids who grow up without a mom or a dad

aaaaand there's this. Sure, a dad and mom can parent a kid. I also think a dad and a dad can parent a kid. Or a mom and a mom.

I think the reason a dad and a mom is a generally acceptable way to raise a child is because men and women help represent two tugging sides of personality that can still come together, quite symbolic of how a child's brain should develop.

But everyone is different. And the way they raise their kids will be different. So I think that the parenting thing is way too complicated to be summed up to only Mom and Dad. For example, I know a guy who has two dads and he's way more developed, kind, smart, and capable than a lot of my friends with Moms and Dads. That doesn't necessarily mean that he's that way because he was raised by two dads. That also doesn't mean that two dads is the way to go for everyone, but it definitely can be for some people.

Really?

not really, yeah. I severely screwed up on the wording for that one. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. During our talks, the thought of being ace in marriage didn't occur to me, mainly because I thought we were talking only about gay people, but ig the subject has expanded. So you're right when you kind of ripped into me for that

What if I just like his company and he wants to do it with me or we both want the relationship for fun? What if we want to have kids?

All this is cool. I have some ace friends so it's been explained to me in a sort of informal way.

I can't relate to something I've never experienced

it's aight dude, you're still cool. For me, it feels like hot and cold. Or red and blue. Loving someone feels red and hot. Being sexually attracted to someone feels blue and cold. Both feel good but in different ways. That's the only way I can experience it and the only way I can explain it. Maybe that helps lol, prob not.

For Miss S

So, I didn't know you were ace. I'm glad that you told me because now I feel like I understand the situation a little more. I'm sorry if I made you feel terrible about that. I know it's not my place to talk about it. So, have a thumbs-up as a peace offering

[Sierepica_Fuzzywalker]

Pig

So, I didn't know you were ace. I'm glad that you told me because now I feel like I understand the situation a little more. I'm sorry if I made you feel terrible about that.

If you made me feel terrible about it, I forgive it, but I probably felt no worse about it than usual.

It would have been nice if I had opened with "I'm an ace" when discussing this subject. I underestimated the power of my sexual orientation to mold how I view the homosexual debate itself and how I respond to information about it.

The problem is, the asexual orientation isn't against Scripture as far as I know - you could even use 1 Corinthians 7 to defend it if you were so inclined, so my brain can't declare it a sin and get rid of it, much as I would like it gone. I get irritated when people use my orientation as an excuse to defend homosexuality, because ace and homosexuality are not the same thing in the eyes of God. Not even close.

On the other hand, I defend the right to have the discussion because I'm technically one of them. Hopefully my deeply-rooted position on this matter is cleared up, to some degree.

Counseling (for Eerie)

(I thought being asexual was an abuse result and I would "recover" back to "normal" at one point. Now am I seeing that it is a part of myself that probably isn't going to change, so I need to learn to accept it.)

I also have suffered from hating said orientation and fearing the "heteroromantic" part of "heteroromantic asexual", and I have recently been advised to seek counseling for that. I've never been comfortable with it, and this discussion has really showed that. So yes, I probably do need counseling. Wow. @Eerie_Coppernight I always feared it would lead to unwanted birthing and I thought I was taking advantage of guys who were looking for marriage partners which led to self-hatred. But after years of living it, I recognize that it is incredibly passive and doesn't really do anything to the guys or me. Nobody notices my romantic attractions except for me - it's never as big of a deal as I feel it is.

Still, the self-hatred/anxiety explains why I didn't immediately own it at the beginning and go from there. I tend to think that guys hate it for wasting their time, too. Wise friend, you are.

Response to Pig

But you couldn't marry a gay dude, that's what I'm saying. Like, it's straights and bisexuals and that's pretty much the pool of selection.

I think I will have to trust your assessment on this. I might previously have been inclined to believe that a heteroromantic homosexual could have married me in theory, but I probably underestimate the power of sexual attraction. It's an easy ace mistake to just forget sexual attraction exists and to discount it entirely.

I spent a good 10 minutes decoding this.

Understandable.

Sure, a dad and mom can parent a kid. I also think a dad and a dad can parent a kid. Or a mom and a mom.

I think the reason a dad and a mom is a generally acceptable way to raise a child is because men and women help represent two tugging sides of personality that can still come together, quite symbolic of how a child's brain should develop.

How I understand is that your parent of the same gender teaches you how to be the gender you are, while the one of the opposite gender tells you how you are to relate to the opposite gender. In my life, this theory has proven to be quite true indeed. I also watched a YouTube video by a girl who grew up with two moms and she said that she didn't know how to relate to the opposite gender as a result of her upbringing and found them scary as a result.

Perhaps that is confirmation bias, though. I also read an article about two moms who adopted a son, and they were careful to get male counsel for themselves and men in his life to deal with certain topics. So the problem can be mitigated, but that doesn't mean it isn't a problem. It would be easier if they had just done things God's way in the first place.

During our talks, the thought of being ace in marriage didn't occur to me, mainly because I thought we were talking only about gay people,

I thought so too. The truth is the truth, though. If people can be married without attraction, attraction is not necessary for marriage. That's why arranged marriages worked for thousands of years too.

But I understand that it is better with it, and people fought to have it, including the LGTBQ folks - they want to have who they are attracted to.

Loving someone feels red and hot.

Yes. Though I think the female version is more like warmth and affection. Temperature goes up.

Can't relate to the other thing.

[Levi_Orangeburst]

but sexual attraction is not love. Love is a commitment to the true good of another person.

You can have romantic attraction to the same sex... and be committed to their good.

How does me not experiencing that in a marriage hurt the other person?

I think Pig meant romantic attraction, which means you would marry for love, right?

but it still can hurt if you wanted him, is my understanding.

Naturally.

Homosexuality is an invalid attraction

God never said it wasn't valid for someone to be attracted to the same sex, he just said it was wrong. Validity means it is a proveable thing, and I could go out and prove right now that people like the same sex.

I can send it to you over Discord if you want it.

I'd be down for that.

Many kids who come out end up on the streets,

If they do that, those relationships need to be gone. You cant say the kid ruined them at that point.

I suppose I could explain it privately to you, if you really really want to know. It's really gross.

I'm good, I've already done pretty long studies on things like that.

[Sierepica_Fuzzywalker]

You can have romantic attraction to the same sex... and be committed to their good.

This is true, yes. I simply would define good as not doing physical homosexual things with them, in addition to all the other good things one might do.

I think Pig meant romantic attraction, which means you would marry for love, right?

I don’t think romantic attraction is necessarily all love is. It could be considered love in emotional form, but that ignores the intellectual and physical forms of love.

You can give someone truth, guidance, and wisdom (intellectual love) and serve someone food at a soup kitchen (physical love)without feeling a romantic attraction to them. Those actions would be no less loving for lack of said attraction occurring. These loves do occur in a marriage incidentally - the need for them cannot be avoided.

But yes, in that scenario I would still be “marrying for love” because my body’s emotions love that person. I then commit to maintaining this body condition of emotional love in reference to that person in my intellectual space and what I call the oversoul, to the best of my abilities to do so.

If they do that, those relationships need to be gone. You cant say the kid ruined them at that point

Most certainly. This indeed true and correct.

[Eerie_Coppernight]

I've already sent you Lewis' talks on the four kinds of love. At least, I sent you the one on storge I don't know if you've gotten into the others.

[Levi_Orangeburst]

I've already sent you Lewis' talks on the four kinds of love.

Screwtape?

[Sierepica_Fuzzywalker]

I watched all of them, Eerie. That is yet another reason why viewing romantic attraction as the only form of love is a highly impoverished view.

[Eerie_Coppernight]

No, radio talks.

That is yet another reason why viewing romantic attraction as the only form of love is a highly impoverished view.

It leads to much confusion as well.

[Levi_Orangeburst]

No, radio talks.

Gotcha, would you be able to send me those?

[Eerie_Coppernight]

I'll get them to you over chess.

[caleb_Larkmagnet1]

Can you guys please stop? These things shouldn't be on here. Not for my sake, but for the health of the forums, and the safety of the kids.

[Eerie_Coppernight]

We have long stopped in case you haven't noticed.

[Xonos_Darkgrate1]

If you consider just three hours ago to be "long stopped", I guess.
🤷‍♂️

[Jacoby_Elderfun1]