<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Evan</id>
	<title>Conservapedia - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Evan"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Evan"/>
	<updated>2026-09-23T08:13:35Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.35.14</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Heterosexuality&amp;diff=229577</id>
		<title>Talk:Heterosexuality</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Heterosexuality&amp;diff=229577"/>
		<updated>2007-07-13T04:03:38Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Evan: Skewed Statistics and Biased Views&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==empty sections==&lt;br /&gt;
What's the point of all the empty section headings? I'm not sure whether to ask why they are there, or why they are not complete (e.g. there are not sections for &amp;quot;heterosexuality and the common cold&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Heterosexuality and inanimate objects&amp;quot;). --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 04:47, 21 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
: Bit weird isn't it?  Is it a spoof?--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 04:49, 21 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::I think the intention is to end up with an article as informative and well balanced as the one on  [[homosexuality]].&lt;br /&gt;
::[[User:JC|JC]] did say &amp;quot;Content needs to be added. Its kinda science stuff I can't do it.&amp;quot;. Unfortunately I don't know any better either.&lt;br /&gt;
::One can only assume content will be forthcoming.&lt;br /&gt;
:::&amp;quot;Be strong and of good courage, and do it: fear not, nor be dismayed: for the LORD God, even my God, will be with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee, until thou hast finished all the work for the service of the house of the LORD.&amp;quot;  (1 Chronicles 28:20)&lt;br /&gt;
::[[User:BillyBoy|BillyBoy]] 06:04, 21 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Why? ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Why were my good faith edits reverted without discussing them first? [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:10, 13 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You're not going to convince me it was good faith. The Bible does NOT say that sex within marriage is bad. 1 Corinthians 7:5 [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 16:15, 14 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
:Not sinful, no, but it does say it's better to remain single and celibate, and that marriage is only for people who would otherwise be tempted to commit fornication (1 Corinthias 7:8-9). [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:26, 14 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
::If celibacy is the prefered thing, wouldn't we pretty quickly go extinct? Don't you think god would like us to keep on having babies?! [[User:Silverfish|Silverfish]] 16:38, 14 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
:::I don't pretend to know the mind of God. But I do know that Jesus was unmarried and celibate, and that Christians are called upon to be as like Jesus as they can. It's always worth striving for perfection, even though we know we will never achieve it. There will always be enough people who cannot resist temptation and therefore get married, so there's no risk of humans becoming extinct. But that doesn't mean that Christians who are unmarried (especially Christian children and teenagers who we are hoping will be the target audience of this site) should be looking forward to marriage. Rather, they should learn that celibacy is the ideal that they should strive for, and only if they can't resist sexual temptation should they consider marriage as a last resort. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:49, 14 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Saying ''why did you do that to me'' is not much of a rationale for your actions or intentions. The burden of proof here is the same as at Wikipedia, and you have to leave the article alone unless you can prove to your peers that your change is worthwhile. Changing it back merely because they haven't convinced you that you are wrong just heads us toward an [[edit war]]. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To use your own logic, I could simply edit your name out of the list of approved contributurs simply because you can't convince me to keep you around. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 16:33, 16 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Activity?==&lt;br /&gt;
The definition of heterosexuality has been changed from &amp;quot;sexual attraction&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;sexual activity.&amp;quot; Some interesting results emerge from this new concept:&lt;br /&gt;
#I am evidently not a heterosexual. Not tonight, anyway.&lt;br /&gt;
#In fact, anyone not actively engaged in sexual activity seems to lose heterosexuality as a trait.&lt;br /&gt;
#One may change from heterosexual to homosexual to bisexual to asexual, being whichever -sexual one prefers on any given night.&lt;br /&gt;
#No virgin may claim to have ever been a heterosexual, since the quality is dependent upon the activity. Heterosexuality springs into existence upon the initiation of sexual activity.&lt;br /&gt;
Needless to say, I find this particular definition wanting.--[[User:All Fish Welcome|All Fish Welcome]] 00:49, 24 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
: The article doesn't actually define &amp;quot;heterosexual&amp;quot;. You may find those results interesting, but other definitions have more confusing results. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 01:20, 24 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::&amp;quot;sexual activity&amp;quot; could include kissing etc, but probably doesn't include sitting on the other side of the classroom ''watching'' the girl of his dreams/boy of her dreams. I'm on the &amp;quot;orientation&amp;quot; side of the orientation/activity fence. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 10:22, 28 April 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::Don't be lured into this debate. It's a typical tactic of homosexuality advocates to quibble about such definitions. What they want to imply is that it's okay to &amp;quot;be homosexual&amp;quot; ''even in terms of Christian values'' as long as they don't violate church rules on behavior.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::Jesus covered that with his &amp;quot;look of lust&amp;quot; rule in Matthew 5:27-28 which says:&lt;br /&gt;
*27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ &lt;br /&gt;
*28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::When I have time, I'll explain more about why [[homosexuality]] is a sin - both as a desire ([[sinful desire]] and as an act ([[sinful act]]). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 13:37, 11 July 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::We need to distinguish between sexual orientation and sexual activity.  A heterosexual person is a person who is attracted to a member of the other gender *regardless* of whether that person has ever actually had sex.  A heterosexual virgin is *still* heterosexual.  The same is true in reverse.  A homosexual person is homosexual even if that person never in his entire life has sex with a member of the same gender.  If a homosexual has sex with a person of the opposite sex, or vice versa he is *still* a homosexual, he has simply engaged in heterosexual activity.--[[User:Porthos|Porthos]] 13:44, 11 July 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Heterosexuality is not &amp;quot;the&amp;quot; natural sexual attration - it is a natural sexual orientation==&lt;br /&gt;
I changed that. I'd change your crap article on homosexuality but you locked it so nobody could put real neutral facts in there. [[User:GayMan|GayMan]] 17:12, 29 June 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Huh? What's a neutral fact, when it comes to religious values? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 13:31, 11 July 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Skewed Statistics and Biased Views ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ummm...I'm just wondering why there are no statistics about STD's and mental disorders listed under this topic.  It seems like all the negatives that are associated with homosexuals were posted on the Homosexual article, but I don't see anything saying that heterosexuals have mental disorders and sexually transmitted diseases and the statistics showing their promiscuity.  I mean...I understand that this is CONSERVApedia....but I don't think many article writers take into account the non-Christian, non-white, non-heterosexual community that consider themselves &amp;quot;conservative.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Evan</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homophobia&amp;diff=229386</id>
		<title>Homophobia</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homophobia&amp;diff=229386"/>
		<updated>2007-07-13T03:04:20Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Evan: /* &amp;quot;Internalized homophobia&amp;quot; */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Homophobia''' is, literally, &amp;quot;fear of homosexuality.&amp;quot;  Though the term can be used for a variety of purposes, its most common usage is to criticize people opposed to [[homosexuality]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Homophobia is a [[pseudoscience|pseudoscientific]] term originally intended to portray principled opposition to the [[homosexual agenda]] as an abnormal mental condition. Phobia, in this case, refers to any unreasoned fear without justification.  Please refer to definitions of &amp;quot;Claustrophobia&amp;quot;, or fear of enclosed spaces, or &amp;quot;Acrophobia&amp;quot;, or fear of heights.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It was introduced into scientific literature shortly before the American Psychiatric Association declassified its diagnosis of [[homosexuality]] as a [[mental illness]] in 1973. A 2002 research study by the [[University of Arkansas]] Department of Psychology, however, claimed that among non-homosexual homophobes no phobia exists.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.cwfa.org/articles/674/CFI/cfreport/index.htmNew Study Says There’s No Phobia in ‘Homophobia’], Martha Kleder, CWA, 6/28/2002.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Most homophobes are homosexual who suffer from &amp;quot;internalized homophobia&amp;quot;.  The is no agreement within the psychiatric and therapeutic professions on what the term actually means.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the National Association for Research &amp;amp; Therapy on Homosexuality (NARTH), gay-rights advocate Gregory M. Herek, Ph.D. wrote that the term &amp;quot;homophobia&amp;quot; was useful in pushing forward the gay agenda in our culture.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.narth.com/docs/creates.html Gay Psychologist Creates New Terms for Use in the Social Debate]. &amp;quot;In his paper on homophobia, stigma, and sexual prejudice, Dr. Herek suggests that although the term &amp;quot;homophobia&amp;quot; was useful in pushing forward the gay agenda in our culture, the term may be too limited in its scope today.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
It is primarily used by [[gay activist]]s to portray opposition to the [[homosexual agenda]] as irrational &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Charles W. Socarides, M.D., [http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/socarides.html How America Went Gay], ''America'', (November 18, 1995). &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
based on fear or hatred, and to smear Christians and others. It is intended to sound like a form of [[mental illness]], but unlike actual phobias, it is not a term for any recognized psychological condition. NARTH says,&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;The term &amp;quot;homophobia&amp;quot; is often used inaccurately to describe any person who objects to homosexual behavior on either moral, psychological or medical grounds. Technically, however, the terms actually denotes a person who has a phobia&amp;amp;mdash;or irrational fear&amp;amp;mdash;of homosexuality. Principled disagreement, therefore, cannot be labeled &amp;quot;homophobia.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.narth.com/menus/positionstatements.html NARTH Position Statements]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When used in this [[pejorative]] sense, the term is offensive and derogatory (see [[Mockery]]).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Etymology===&lt;br /&gt;
The word comes from combining the Greek prefix ''homo-'', meaning &amp;quot;same&amp;quot;, and suffix ''-phobia'', meaning &amp;quot;fear of&amp;quot;. In early usage by homosexual activists, the term described heterosexual fears that others might think they were homosexual &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.narth.com/docs/creates.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  The neologism was promoted by George Weinberg, a gay activist and psychologist, who attempted to define it in clinical literature shortly before the downgrading of homosexuality as a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association in 1973.  Weinberg claimed it was &amp;quot;the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals -- and in the case of homosexuals themselves, selfloathing.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Plummer, David, ''One of the Boys: Masculinity, Homophobia, and Modern Manhood'', [http://books.google.com/books?id=xHGz4f_2_7IC&amp;amp;pg=PA3&amp;amp;ots=U8ktZZgnAk&amp;amp;dq=George+Weinberg+homophobia&amp;amp;ie=ISO-8859-1&amp;amp;sig=d7hjCcZ1uuBlgdLyRjUJwEn51uA#PPA3,M1 pp. 3-4]: &amp;quot;'Homophobia was introduced into the clinical literature by George Weinberg in 1972, in ''Society and the Healthy Homosexual.'' &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  The term then entered common usage beginning with pornographic publications. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Gregory M. Herek, Ph.D., published ''Beyond 'Homophobia': Thinking About Sexual Prejudice and Stigma in the Twenty-First Century,'' in the April, 2004, issue of Sexuality Research &amp;amp; Social Policy. &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The terms meaning has not been accepted or agreed upon within the psychological therapeutic community.  William O'Donohue and Christine E. Caselles &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;William O'Donohue and Christine E. Caselles, [http://www.springerlink.com/content/n0264m864t146585/ Homophobia: Conceptual, definitional, and value issues], Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, Volume 15, Number 3, Springer Netherlands, September, 1993. ISSN 0882-2689&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; have concluded based upon research within the therapeutic community a clear understanding of the term has not been adequately evaluated and it is not clear whether the term can be accurately characterized.  They have concluded, &amp;quot;the construct of homophobia, as it is usually used, makes an illegitimately pejorative evaluation of certain open and debatable value positions, much like the former disease construct of homosexuality.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===&amp;quot;Internalized homophobia&amp;quot;===&lt;br /&gt;
The therapeutic community is largely divided between proponents of [[gay gene]] theory who believe a person is born gay and will always be gay, and proponents of [[Reparative therapy]] who believe with sympathy and understanding a homosexual can be relieved of afflictions if they so desire.  Gay gene advocates seek to criminalize so-called &amp;quot;homophobia&amp;quot;, despite many homophobes themselves being gay, whereas Restoration therapy advocates point out the cruelty of brainwashing a young person into believing -- based upon theoretical evidence -- there is no hope of ever leading a heterosexual lifestyle.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Dr. Joseph Nicolosi reports homosexuality is a symptom of an underlying problem of [[gender identity]]. Nicolosi says,&lt;br /&gt;
:In the classic triadic family we have a sensitive boy who did not get the close, affirming relationship with his father that would have confirmed him in his gender identity, and a mother who is likely to be over-close and standing in the way between father and son. The father was not supportive enough in affirming, recognizing and reinforcing the boy's maleness. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.narth.com/docs/griefwork.html Clinical Issues: Grief Work], Interview: Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Nicolosi adds many gay men admit that no matter how liberated they are, they always struggle, on some deeper level, with a sense of inferiority or self-loathing.  Some therapists refer to this as internalized homophobia. Nicolosi attributes this feeling to an internal process, unrelated to social stigma, which precedes same-sex attractions.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Ibid&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Homophobia as an &amp;quot;Irrational Fear&amp;quot; ===&lt;br /&gt;
The suffix &amp;quot;phobia&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Psychologists do not recognize it as a phobia in any generally recognized publication like the DSM IV.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; suggests an irrational fear, but it is most often used as a attack term by [[gay rights]] groups to suggest that opposition to [[homosexuality]] is irrational and hateful.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Eg, this site [http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_phob.htm] first defines homophobia as a dread or fear, but says that it includes those who write their Congressmen to oppose same-sex marriage.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  Dr. Sander J. Breiner of NARTH has stated, &amp;quot;it would be very valuable for society in general, and therapists in particular, to have a clear picture of homophobia separated from all the other topics that have been lumped under that rubric.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.narth.com/docs/coll-breiner.html HOMOPHOBIA: A Scientific Non-Political Definition], Dr. Sander J. Breiner, National Association for Research and Therapy on Homosexuality, 2003.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  Of the myriads of references to the term in popular and other sociologic publications Breiner observes, &amp;quot;There is no personal, internal, institutional, or cultural homophobia. The terms do not exist in the recognized scientific literature...There is only one homophobia, which has been properly defined,&amp;quot; in the the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://anxiety.psy.ohio-state.edu/phobia-d.htm Specific Phobia DSM-IV Criteria]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; developed by the American Psychiatric Association.  Breiner, an advocate of [[Reparative therapy]], acknowledges &amp;quot;There is no doubt that homophobia exists&amp;quot; as an irrational fear among both homosexuals and heterosexuals.  2 Timothy 1:7 says, &amp;quot;For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://bible.cc/2_timothy/1-7.htm 2 Timothy 1:7]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Anti-homosexual violence ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1990, Congress passed the Hate Crime Statistics Act, which required the Attorney General to collect data about crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin.  In 1994, lawmakers amended the Hate Crime Statistics Act to include bias against persons with disabilities.  &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting Program, Hate Crime Statistics 2005:  About Hate Crime[http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/abouthc.htm]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 2005, law enforcement agencies reported 1,171 hate crime offenses based on sexual-orientation bias. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;U.S. Department of Justice — Federal Bureau of Investigation, [http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/table4.htm Uniform Crime Reports], Offense Type by Bias Motivation, 2005 Table 4. &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;   While the FBI reports statistics by victim class or bias motivation, race, religion, sexual orientation and disability, the FBI does not report the sexual orientation of known offenders.  Thus a conclusion that all offenders are heterosexual is faulty, and the methodology does not measure gay-on-gay violence.  In all of 2004, there was 1 anti-homosexual murder in the United States, and the FBI has reported none since. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;U.S. Department of Justice — Federal Bureau of Investigation, [http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2004/tables/HateCrime2004.pdf Uniform Crime Reports], Offense Type by Bias Motivation, 2004 Table 4. &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See also==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Homosexuality]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Opposition to homosexuality]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Gay agenda]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Gender identity disorder]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==External links==&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.adl.org/poisoning_web/homophobia.asp Homophobia Online: The Westboro Baptist Church], Anti-Defamation League (2001). Retrieved 05/23/07. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Politics]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Homosexuality]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Evan</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Heterosexuality&amp;diff=229366</id>
		<title>Heterosexuality</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Heterosexuality&amp;diff=229366"/>
		<updated>2007-07-13T02:45:33Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Evan: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Heterosexuality''' is the natural way that human beings and some animals reproduce. Human beings are encouraged to remain with and have sex with only one mate of the opposite sex. Some animals also do so (see [[monogamy]]).   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heterosexual attraction is naturally solely to the opposite sex; that is, men for women, and women for men.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Biblical Quotations  ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Old Testament ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that ''is'' thy neighbour's.&amp;quot; (Exodus 20:17)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;And if a man '''sell his daughter''' to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another ''wife''; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.&amp;quot; (Exodus 21:7-10)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.&amp;quot; (Exodus 22:16-17)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that ''is'' a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free.&amp;quot; (Leviticus 19:20)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;If a man find a damsel ''that is'' a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty ''shekels'' of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.&amp;quot; (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== New Testament ===&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.&amp;quot; (Matthew 5:28)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''It is'' good for a man not to touch a woman.&amp;quot; (1 Corinthians 7:1)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.&amp;quot; (1 Timothy 2:8-15)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:biology]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Evan</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Heterosexuality&amp;diff=229364</id>
		<title>Heterosexuality</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Heterosexuality&amp;diff=229364"/>
		<updated>2007-07-13T02:44:44Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Evan: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Heterosexuality''' is the correct way that human beings and some animals reproduce. Human beings are encouraged to remain with and have sex with only one mate of the opposite sex. Some animals also do so (see [[monogamy]]).   &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Heterosexual attraction is naturally solely to the opposite sex; that is, men for women, and women for men.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Biblical Quotations  ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Old Testament ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that ''is'' thy neighbour's.&amp;quot; (Exodus 20:17)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;And if a man '''sell his daughter''' to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another ''wife''; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.&amp;quot; (Exodus 21:7-10)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.&amp;quot; (Exodus 22:16-17)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that ''is'' a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free.&amp;quot; (Leviticus 19:20)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;If a man find a damsel ''that is'' a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty ''shekels'' of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.&amp;quot; (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== New Testament ===&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.&amp;quot; (Matthew 5:28)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''It is'' good for a man not to touch a woman.&amp;quot; (1 Corinthians 7:1)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.&amp;quot; (1 Timothy 2:8-15)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:biology]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Evan</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>