Thread:P4B2/@comment-30065616-20180815203739

"Why do you think they better be gay than brothers? I think they are brothers, yes. Moreover, the natural order of things is that a man should stay with a woman and vice versa, in the way God said it should be from the beginning, for if God accepted homosexuality, he would have given Adam a companion instead of a companion . Tell me: are you the foud of pedophilia or bestiality? No one is in favor of these practices, although they are considered acts of demonstrating sexual attraction by another living being. Why is homosexuality different and acceptable? Is it because it is practiced by adults and adults know everything and has consistency of everything? And churches, priests and the like that support this choice are against what God teaches. If you want biblical evidence, see Leviticus, chapter 20, verse 13. Of course, one must respect the choices of others. That's why God gave people the free-will, but He wants it to be used correctly, though He does not force anyone to do it. Each one decides what to do. And just as I try to respect the opinion of others, I ask you to do the same for mine. Howard and Harold are, and always will be, brothers and good parents to Clyde (never said he was bad parents), and nothing more."

Oh, so why did not you immediately say that you're a religious believer? So I would not have had to discuss this with you yet and to respect so your opinion, since you have such a rather complex mentality. Now I understand why you had such a special vision on Howard and Harold. What I want to say is that in the beginning you did not seem to be a religious believer at all, as you were writing in this way. However, returning to the question of your last speech, I can only say that I do not believe much what the Bible says, although I come from a very religious family (especially my paternal grandmother) and from a strictly Catholic country like my beloved Italy (I live near Rome, the capital of the Pope). I do not really define myself as a religious believer, but not even an atheist. I would rather define myself as a "spiritual", plus I prefer to believe in a Merciful God rather than a Castigator God. In addition, we do not always have to LETTERALLY follow all the sacred teachings in a book written about 2000 years ago. What I want to say is that while the teachings are considered fundamental as a source of inspiration for spiritual faith, they should not be interpreted and followed EVERYTHING to the letter. Perhaps many of them were worth 2,000 years ago, but today? For example, today we have to follow the example again what is written in “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her”? And we must do too? That is, lash out against a defenseless woman even if sinful? The Bible is not a book of Absolute Truth On Human Life and should not be interpreted as such only to be taken all to the letter .... Rather instead it is a book of Spiritual Search for the faith, between the Divine and the Land. All for faith. If while the Bible condemned homosexuality, Jesus Christ still said to "Love one's neighbor as yourself". If you faithfully follow the teaching according to Leviticus on chapter 20 with verse 13, then at the same time you are against the teaching of Jesus Christ. A nice dilemma, then. So the churches, priests and the like who support homosexuality are really not against with what God teaches in Leviticus, chapter 20, verse 13, but rather simply because for them that condemnation no longer makes much sense for today's life compared to ancient times. Rather, they are those people who prefer to follow the example of Jesus Christ to love their neighbor as themselves, believing in a loving, merciful God rather than in a strict God Castigator. Moreover, it was not God who condemned the sinful act with that phrase of Leviticus, but rather St. Paul. If God was the absolute perfection in person that he himself demands perfection in his Creation, then why did he create us with all those faults if we were born in his image and likeness? I believe that He loves us as we are, with defects as well as with merits. This teaches us that a parent must know how to accept his son lovingly and serenely for what he is, that is to be sincerely oneself. it does not matter if this child is not perfect in everything the parent wanted at the beginning. He is always his son. We are all children of God. If God created man, then he also created homosexuals. He created the... Diversity. God has created genetic diversity, plant diversity, intellectual diversity, sexual diversity, social diversity, etc. If nothing else, He created for this reason Bio-diversity in nature. In this regard, just this: While you think that a man should be with a woman and vice versa according to the natural order of things through the Will of God, then I can tell you that in the "natural" order there have been verified about 1500 animal species with homosexual / bisexual behaviors (I have said sexual "behaviors", not sexual relations. Always for homosexuality / bisexuality, only a few rare cases result in real sexual intercourse this time and these are often verified in some animal species, usually, intellectually and socially evolved as dolphins, elephants, some anthropomorphic monkeys and humans.) and many cases of homogenitoriality in about 250 species of monogamous birds. this too is part of the Bio-diversity, according to God's plan. Or rather, it is part of the Sexual Diversity in nature. Exactly how hermaphroditism, the partogenesis, the change of sexes during the beginning of puberty, etc. are part of it. to say that the word "Against Nature" is no longer considered to be very appropriate for the definition of homosexuality as it is not at all such, as the religious had made us believe in the past.

However, you can feel comfortable and peaceful: I already respect your opinion.

After learning that you are a religious believer, I will leave you alone. Goodbye, my dear. :) 