Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000167 EndHTML:0000004443 StartFragment:0000000457 EndFragment:0000004427

@Sacrifice. It is important to understand that the problem here is not se.xuality, or how fluid it is, but rather human nature, and how morality is. After reading your reply, I will assume that you believe in God. I will also assume that you believe in a set moral code (though it is arguably different than mine). In your example, you said, “For instance, I can claim I'm stra.ight, and only ever engage in se.xual activities with men, but still find women attractive. Even if I never desire a relationship with a person of the same se.x, many would still argue that I am on some level bi-se.xual, or perhaps "bi-curious".” The problem here is not the se.xuality that you identify with but rather, your character as a human being. We all have the choice to be straight or g.ay, just as much as we have the choice to do right or wrong, and saying that se.xuality is fluid is an excuse for who we really are as humans. And really, your vague example can apply to just about anything. Like, “For instance, I can claim I'm a Chr.istian, and only ever engage in Chri.stian activities, but sometimes doubt my faith. Even if I never desire to believe that there isn't a God, many would still argue that I am on some level athe.istic, or perhaps “semi-ag.nostic”. Does this mean spirituality is fluid? Or rather, does it simply show that I am human, and that I am not perfect and that I do not know anything. It comes down not to “why you believe what you believe” but rather “what you want to believe”.

As for your other example, let's set it up as a logic problem and assume your logic is correct. You could say, “If being ga.y makes me happy and God is happy when I am happy, then being ga.y makes God happy (and is therefore good, I think we both would agree that there is nothing wrong with a 'happy' God). So this problem is a mixture of an “And” and “If then” statement, and the logic appears to be good. Like I said, I believe that making God happy is good. Nothing wrong with that. Our difference lies with what makes God happy. However, your logic (unless you have some very twisted beliefs) is VERY faulty. Let me show you an example, “If kil.ling and ra.ping people makes me happy and God is happy when I am happy, then me kil.ling and ra.ping people makes God happy.” Same logic, same answer. So if you really believe what you said before (If being g.ay...God happy) then by your own logic you have to believe that WHATEVER makes you (or anyone) happy makes God happy. And that, my friend, is faulty reasoning.

It all goes back to humans being inherently bad. That we, ourselves can never ultimately make God happy. Because He is perfect and we are much, much less than perfect. Now, if you don't believe in a God then it is a different story. But, after reading your response, I am assuming that you do.

And...I'm not even going to bother to go in depth on your statement that “ho.mose.xuality has been observed in 1500 species”. This is complete absurdism. Male to male dominance in another species is not attraction to the same s.ex. And it is going to take more definitive proof then cases of two male penguins 'living' together or two male octopuses mating to say that something ridiculous like, “Obviously gorilla se.xuality is fluid because we observed two males living with each other.” You cannot equate a lifestyle to an animal any more than you can say that animals are mur.derers, adu.lterers, liers, thieves, procrastinators, or anything else. Animals, unlike humans, do not have the mental capacity, spiritual compass, or moral awareness to make such decisions. Animals are animals and humans are human. This also brings to mind nonsensical questions such as, “If a penguin is g.ay, and being ga.y makes him happy then is God happy?” Absurd.