Why is homosexuality wrong?

[Greatest I am]

Why is homosexuality wrong?
We all know what gays are and what they do. All of God’s laws are responses to a victim of some sort.
The one lied to is deceived.
The one who is killed is deprived of life.
The one stolen from looses his goods.
In the case of homosexuals there does not appear to be a victim or anyone hurt by the actions of the participant.
Why then does God discriminate against homosexuals?
It appears to go against His usual justice.
Regards
DL

[Terry]

Why is homosexuality wrong?

It isn't.

[drkitten]

Why is homosexuality wrong?
We all know what gays are and what they do. All of God’s laws are responses to a victim of some sort.
The one lied to is deceived.
The one who is killed is deprived of life.
The one stolen from looses his goods.


Who is the one injured when someone fails to respect the Sabbath? Who is the victim when someone worships an idol?

Who is injured when I covet something belonging to my neighbor? Remember that I'm not taking it, I'm just wanting it....

[Complexity]

Homosexuality is not wrong.

There are no gods.

[Garrette]

It's not wrong; it's just yucky. Unless it's women. Then it's really great.

[IMST]

If the punishment for homosexuality is in the "eye for an eye" style like those others, does that mean that as punishment for sex I receive sex?

Maybe there is something to this religion thing.

[this charming man]

Why is homosexuality wrong?
We all know what gays are and what they do. All of God’s laws are responses to a victim of some sort.
The one lied to is deceived.
The one who is killed is deprived of life.
The one stolen from looses his goods.
In the case of homosexuals there does not appear to be a victim or anyone hurt by the actions of the participant.
Why then does God discriminate against homosexuals?
It appears to go against His usual justice.
Regards
DL




It's not; not one iota.

[TheAnachronism]

It's wrong because homosexuals are in the minority. Duh.

Just like it's wrong to be left-handed or play the bagpipe.

[Oliver]

What are the phrases in the Bible about homosexuality? I don't
remember reading anything about gays in it - or anal-sex,
oral-sex, masturbation, yadda yadda yadda...

So who the **** is making this stuff up? :boggled:

[Professor Yaffle]

I think the catholic church's (current) reasoning for this (if you really wanted to know and it wasn't a rhetorical question) is that sex should only occur where there is a possibility of creating life. Sex should never be completely divorced from procreation. That's why they have a downer on contraception as well.

[slingblade]

It isn't wrong.

End of story.

[mijopaalmc]

Why is homosexuality wrong?
We all know what gays are and what they do. All of God’s laws are responses to a victim of some sort.
The one lied to is deceived.
The one who is killed is deprived of life.
The one stolen from looses his goods.
In the case of homosexuals there does not appear to be a victim or anyone hurt by the actions of the participant.
Why then does God discriminate against homosexuals?
It appears to go against His usual justice.
Regards
DL



Do you a detailed analysis of why some biblical scholars believe homosexuality is wrong?

Or do you want an explanation of why homosexuality is objectively wrong?

The first while quite lengthy is relatively easy to give in so far as it pertain to the kinship structure of and the religious pressure experienced by the ancient Israelites. However, the question of what relevance such an analysis bears to our modern society still remains.

The second is, of course, that homosexuality is not objectively wrong, and one of the reasons that the idea that it is wrong persists in society today is that it is perpetuated by those who think that ancient Israelite social structure are somehow relevant to today's society.

[slingblade]

What are the phrases in the Bible about homosexuality? I don't
remember reading anything about gays in it - or anal-sex,
oral-sex, masturbation, yadda yadda yadda...

So who the **** is making this stuff up? :boggled:

It's in the bible. Search it. Don't use your ignorance to advance a point. Educate yourself.

[Professor Yaffle]

What are the phrases in the Bible about homosexuality? I don't
remember reading anything about gays in it - or anal-sex,
oral-sex, masturbation, yadda yadda yadda...

So who the **** is making this stuff up? :boggled:

Copied from some website




Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."


Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

[ponderingturtle]

It's not wrong; it's just yucky. Unless it's women. Then it's really great.

No it might be hot, but remember if they can find sexual partners with eachother it lowers the odds of them choosing you.

Male homosexuality is great, female not so much.;)

[grayman]

What the Bible (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/homosexuality.html) says:

Lev.18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Lev.20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Rom.1:26-27
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

It's wrong 'cause God said so. So there! :p

[Garrette]

And in really big letters, too. Impressive.

[ponderingturtle]

I think the catholic church's (current) reasoning for this (if you really wanted to know and it wasn't a rhetorical question) is that sex should only occur where there is a possibility of creating life. Sex should never be completely divorced from procreation. That's why they have a downer on contraception as well.

So post menapausal women should not have sex then.

They always pull some of the weirdest ideas to try to rationalize their position. Still doesn't work.

[Garrette]

No it might be hot, but remember if they can find sexual partners with eachother it lowers the odds of them choosing you.

Male homosexuality is great, female not so much.;)Sigh...

You assume I have any odds to be lowered to begin with....

I think I'll cry now.

[ponderingturtle]

And in really big letters, too. Impressive.

Hey everyone knows God is all about large fonts.

[zombiebex]

I've got a bit of a theory as to where the "homosexuality is wrong" comes from, and it has a lot to do with the Christian guilt and hatred of sexuality. We're not supposed to enjoy sex, as awesome as it is, it's just supposed to be this dirty thing we have to do to make kids.

Now, two members of the same gender having sex are having sex for pleasure -GASP!- rather than it's "intended" purpose. So that's strike one.

Next next "evil" that is in homosexuality has to do with homosexual men. When Fundies talk about the evils of homosexuality, they nearly always talk about gay men. This has a lot to do with how we define men and women in our nutty Puritanical patriarchal culture. Women are sexual. Women possess all the sexuality, and must be "conquered" for sex. A woman is to be desired for sex and used for sex by a man. So a man who would possess sexuality that he can willingly give to a partner like a woman just screws up all definitions of what is man and what is woman.

Another issue is rape, tying in with the definitions of man and woman. A woman who is lower than man, who is less than man, who is to be used for sex... a woman can be raped. A man cannot, or rather by the "definitions," should not be raped. Enter in the very idea that a man can be violated in the same way as a woman, can be lowered to the standard that is "woman," can be terrifying.

So, it's all about shame, guilt, power over women, and the sexes needing to be clearly defined as either one or the other.

[drkitten]

I've got a bit of a theory as to where the "homosexuality is wrong" comes from, and it has a lot to do with the Christian guilt and hatred of sexuality. We're not supposed to enjoy sex, as awesome as it is, it's just supposed to be this dirty thing we have to do to make kids.

Nice theory, but there are a few holes in it. Basically, if you check the Biblical injunctions listed above, a number of them are from Leviticus, which is part of the Jewish tradition and predates Christianity and Christian thought by a few thousand years. And Jewish thought is not particularly anti-sex; in fact, sex for pleasure within marriage is specifically a mitzvot, regardless of the making-kids aspect.

[NobbyNobbs]

Copied from some website




Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."


Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."


I've seen these stanzas (wrong word, I know, but my brain just froze up on the right one) before, and I've always wondered how accurate the translation is. For example, I've heard that the first one quoted here can be interpreted as "Don't have sex with a man in the same bed where you have sex with a woman." It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but makes more sense than some other parts of the Bible.

Anyone know what the best translations of these verses are?

[Oliver]

Copied from some website


Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."


And you're sure it's not one of the hundred-thousands of mistranslations
and re-interpretations?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh.htm

Anyway: It furthers my point that all the guys in the bible are X-holes,
especially the ones trying to make sense out of this "is brown and smells".

[zombiebex]

Nice theory, but there are a few holes in it. Basically, if you check the Biblical injunctions listed above, a number of them are from Leviticus, which is part of the Jewish tradition and predates Christianity and Christian thought by a few thousand years. And Jewish thought is not particularly anti-sex; in fact, sex for pleasure within marriage is specifically a mitzvot, regardless of the making-kids aspect.

Didn't know that, but I would blame that on the roles of men and women and how women were viewed back then. Women weren't equal. They were to be bought, married, used for sex and to bear children. A man who allows himself to be lowered to the level of a woman and allows a man to have sex with him is appalling, and a man who would use another man for sex, dropping him to the "female" status, should also be punished.

[ponderingturtle]

I've seen these stanzas (wrong word, I know, but my brain just froze up on the right one) before, and I've always wondered how accurate the translation is. For example, I've heard that the first one quoted here can be interpreted as "Don't have sex with a man in the same bed where you have sex with a woman." It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but makes more sense than some other parts of the Bible.

Anyone know what the best translations of these verses are?

That does not seem to be a usable form of "as", for that reading to work it would have to be "where".

Of course strict readings are silly as male homosexuals can not have vaginal intercourse, and I don't think there is much support for other forms of sexual activity. But I am also unaware of general oral or anal prohibitions.

[NobbyNobbs]

To wit, here are two versions from the same website: (http://www.biblegateway.com/)

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

9Or do you not know that the unrighteous[a] will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived:(A) neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,[b] 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.



1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.


The first specifically mentions homosexuals. The second limits it to homosexual men. And the third doesn't mention homosexuality at all (just being effeminate!).

Particularly interesting is that the one that doesn't specifically mention it is the King James Version, which as I understand, is generally the most widely used version.

They can't all be proper translations. I wonder which is closest?

[Marquis de Carabas]

I've seen these stanzas (wrong word, I know, but my brain just froze up on the right one) before, and I've always wondered how accurate the translation is. For example, I've heard that the first one quoted here can be interpreted as "Don't have sex with a man in the same bed where you have sex with a woman."
I always took it to mean that queers have to do it standing up.

[zombiebex]

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."


I've heard/read somewhere that the word homosexuals in this passage is originally a slang term for male prostitute... lemme see if I can dig that up...

[ponderingturtle]

Didn't know that, but I would blame that on the roles of men and women and how women were viewed back then. Women weren't equal. They were to be bought, married, used for sex and to bear children. A man who allows himself to be lowered to the level of a woman and allows a man to have sex with him is appalling, and a man who would use another man for sex, dropping him to the "female" status, should also be punished.

This certainly fits with roman views of sex, but I am not sure it fits with Jewish ones. Romans held it was important for a proper roman man to be the penetrator, it did not matter so much what he penetrated.

And oral sex was right out, as that would corrupt the mouth and who would take anything they had to say seriously?

[The Atheist]

It appears to go against His usual justice.


Bollocks. It's completely in keeping with the christian god's ideas of justice and fairness:

"The world is wicked, so I'm going to kill everyone, including all of the innocent children, drowning them in their cribs!" Genesis 6:7

"Dirty fags! I'm going to kill all the children in Sodom as well!" Genesis 19:24

"Incest, the family game!" Genesis 19:31

"You're an atheist! I'm going to kill you and all of your descendants for the next FOUR generations, you scum!" Exodus 20:5

"People with leprosy are unclean and unworthy of me." Leviticus 13:3

[ponderingturtle]

The first specifically mentions homosexuals. The second limits it to homosexual men. And the third doesn't mention homosexuality at all (just being effeminate!).

This is not true, remember masterbation was defined as self abuse, so "abusers of themselves with men" would certainly seem to be male homosexuals

[zombiebex]

Aha, here's the info (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh2.htm) I was looking for:

The NIV and KJV of the Bible clearly condemn homosexual behavior at 1 Corinthians 6:9 (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibc1.htm) and Romans 1:28 (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibc.htm) in the Christian Scriptures. These translations generally interpret the Greek words "malakoi"and "arsenokoitai" as referring to homosexuals. We can be fairly certain that this is not the meaning that Paul wanted to convey. If he had, he would have used the Greek word "paiderasste." That was the standard term at the time for male homosexuals. We can conclude that he probably meant something different from persons who engaged in male-male adult sexual behavior. Down through the years, Christians have interpreted these words as referring to people of lacking a high moral standing, or to masturbators, or to men who sexually abuse boys, or to boys who are the victims of sexual abuse. Interpreting these passages as referring to sexually active homosexuals is simply the latest in a long series of attempts to make sense out of obscure words. The precise meaning is unknown.

[grayman]

"If loving you is wrong, I don't want to be right..." :g1:

[The Atheist]

And the third doesn't mention homosexuality at all (just being effeminate!).

Isn't a bloke being effeminate enough of a crime?

I always took it to mean that queers have to do it standing up.

Neeeeeearly.

The bible specifically states that "if you do a bloke as you do a woman"

I see that as:

Daisy chains are fine.

Doggy is not.

"If loving you is wrong, I don't want to be right..." :g1:

Hmmm.

If I'm always right and loving you would certainly be wrong....






You free Saturday Night?

[grayman]

Hmmm.

If I'm always right and loving you would certainly be wrong....






You free Saturday Night?

Yes, but my Saturday night will be your Sunday morning, and I wouldn't want you to miss church. :stone028:

[Dancing David]

It's wrong because homosexuals are in the minority. Duh.

Just like it's wrong to be left-handed or play the bagpipe.

They aren't really, many men in many macho cultures practice all sorts of homosexuality, especialy on their younger brothers. Then there is the whole down low thing, 'I have gay sex but I am not a homosexual'.

[grayman]

They aren't really, many men in many macho cultures practice all sorts of homosexuality, especialy on their younger brothers. Then there is the whole down low thing, 'I have gay sex but I am not a homosexual'.

Like the shirt I saw says, "I'm not gay, but my boyfriend is".

[Hokulele]

Those quotes from Leviticus are about sex? And all this time I thought they meant that you can only be dishonest about appearances and money with women, and dishonest about sports figures and *ahem* personal statistics with men.

[plumjam]

It's wrong because it hurts :eek:

[Crossbow]

It's not wrong; it's just yucky. Unless it's women. Then it's really great.

Amen to that!

;)

[Hokulele]

It's wrong because it hurts :eek:


How would you know this?

[Terry]

It's wrong because it hurts :eek:

If it hurts, you're doing it wrong. Seriously.

[Darth Rotor]

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 Nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Looks like Congress are all going to hell.

DR

[Cello Man]

My thoughts as a straight guy:

Lesbians are awesome. And if God frowns on a little man-love, why did he make Christian Bale so damn hot?

[Garrette]

Looks like Congress are all going to hell.

DRGiven Congress' state, perhaps they are already there.

On what circle did Dante place winners of the Golden Fleece Award?

[Darth Rotor]

Given Congress' state, perhaps they are already there.

On what circle did Dante place winners of the Golden Fleece Award?

The circle of long haired :goats. :)

DR

[Garrette]

The circle of long haired :goats. :)

DRHmmm....I'd have guessed shaved.

[tsg]

Why is homosexuality wrong?

Why are fundies so stupid?

[plumjam]

How would you know this?

My Dad told me ;)

[andyandy]

a question for the historically well informed....what is the history of homophobia? What was the Egyptian or Sumerian/Babalonian or ancient chinese view? when did homophobia become widespread? what levels of tolerance have been exhibited throughout history? how have attititudes differed across different cultures and different religions? Is homophobia a constant exhibit of religions throughout the world, or rooted in abrahamic monothesism?

i'm homo curious ;)

[Garrette]

a question for the historically well informed....what is the history of homophobia? What was the Egyptian or Sumerian/Babalonian or ancient chinese view? when did homophobia become widespread? what levels of tolerance have been exhibited throughout history? how have attititudes differed across different cultures and different religions? Is homophobia a constant exhibit of religions throughout the world, or rooted in abrahamic monothesism?

i'm homo curious ;)Homophobia has been the norm since Adam and Eve failed to have a daughter.

[Hokulele]

My Dad told me ;)


Ah, so you don't know this. Gotcha.

[Cello Man]

andyandy, I've heard that it (homosexuality) was seen as quite normal in feudal Japan.

[Oliver]

Why are fundies so stupid?


Because the same reason they fail in logics ...

Removed breach of Rule 4

[Darth Rotor]

andyandy, I've heard that it (homosexuality) was seen as quite normal in feudal Japan.
In some cultures, same sex play is something you do, or an appetite one sates now and again, rather than what one is. The nuances between pitching and catching vary with norms, place, and time.

The two most interesting bits I've encountered on this matter of social place of such preferences is in an article a few months back in Atlantic Monthly on the underground homosexual culture in Saudi Arabia, and a number of commentaries and personal anecdotes regarding conetmporary Afghan warlords at their catamites.

DR

[Gurdur]

Germanic tribesmen were disgusted by Roman legionnaires who committed homosexual acts, and would put them to death just for that.

Homosexuality in most sub-Saharan Africa was seen as a violation of social consensus and therefore very wrong (the why is a bit complicated) for centuries, way before Christianity or Islam arrived.

[Tobermory]

Just about all of you took the words right out of my mouth -- it isn't wrong, period. Moreover, most mammals exhibit this behavior. And given our exponential population growth and the many unwanted children all over the world, it may even be part of the solution to some of the problems we've created on our planet in the last few centuries or so.

Who cares what the bible says about homosexuality? Certainly the bible not a reliable source of information about, well, anything.

[Tobermory]

If it hurts, you're doing it wrong. Seriously.

What's wrong with a little pleasurable pain, anyway?

[ponderingturtle]

Homosexuality in most sub-Saharan Africa was seen as a violation of social consensus and therefore very wrong

I don't see why this makes sense.

[Terry]

What's wrong with a little pleasurable pain, anyway?

Nothing at all. Never the less, I stand by my statement, since the act that I think is being referred to shouldn't hurt.

[Gurdur]

I don't see why this makes sense.

I don't remember claiming it made sense.

I describe history, I don't prescribe it. If it was all up to me, a huge amount of things would have run differently.

[rocketdodger]

My opinion (and this is part of a greater theoretical examination of social behavior, if anyone is interested) is that the single greatest cause of homophobia is:

Society conditions us to think that competition is a prime goal -> homosexuals no longer compete in the mating game -> homophobes realize that they can no longer compete with homosexuals in this respect -> homophobes become frightened at the possibility that they can no longer (effectively) dominate (some) others in this way.

I liken homophobia to the frustration neighborhood boys get when the new guy doesn't want to play football with them -- it is one way they can dominate him and when he refuses to even play the game it frightens them, causing them to lash out.

[fls]

My claim, based on no biblical or historical scholarship, is that it was used as a way to draw "us" vs. "them" distinctions against a rival religious or social group of the time. I think religious proscriptions become entrenched because they offer a survival advantage or because they help strengthen social groups. It's unlikely that homosexuality is disadvantageous to survival, so I think it became part of the God of Abraham religion for social group reasons.

And....what Cello Man said, except substitute Halle Berry.

Linda

[plumjam]

Ah, so you don't know this. Gotcha.

well there was that unfortunate rolling pin accident.. I wished I'd been using olive oil instead of wholewheat flour :(

[Tobermory]

Nothing at all. Never the less, I stand by my statement, since the act that I think is being referred to shouldn't hurt.

Depends on size, experience, and position would be my "guess."

[DoubtingStephen]

The question "Why is homosexuality wrong?" is a loaded question.

Have you stopped beating your mother yet? is also a loaded question.

Religious delusions are what is wrong with this planet. Homosexuality is natural since it occurs in nature.

[Tobermory]

That's just semantics. The same question could be rephrased as "Is homosexuality wrong?"

Perhaps a more interesting question is "Why is homosexuality perceived as wrong?"

But the answer remains the same. Homosexuality is not wrong. And it's perfectly natural, as you point out.

The answer to the second question is easy too -- ignorance.

[Ladewig]

All of God’s laws are responses to a victim of some sort.


In the case of homosexuals there does not appear to be a victim or anyone hurt by the actions of the participant.

The Falwells and the Swaggarts would say the answer is that these sinners are harming themselves by separating themselves from God's wonderful love. Of course, those folks are sanctimonious a-holes who should be ignored.

[Charlie Monoxide]

If the punishment for homosexuality is in the "eye for an eye" style like those others, does that mean that as punishment for sex I receive sex?

Maybe there is something to this religion thing.Just to facilitate that, we'll stick you in jail with a bunch of other people of your own gender ....

Charlie (taking a wide stance on this issue) Monoxide

[darnell11]

I agree that homosexually isn't wrong. And I know that it does occur in nature, other mammals do it. But does that make it a natural behavior for humans? If there weren't any taboos of any kind, do you think most people would engage in it? Would you? Because I know there are gay people who only sleep with the same sex and vice versa.

[DoubtingStephen]

But does that make it a natural behavior for humans?


Homosexuality is natural for humans that are homosexual.

Most humans are not homosexual, many, or perhaps most of them think having gay sex is icky. I respect the rights of people that do not wish to have gay sex to refrain from having gay sex.

[Hokulele]

I agree that homosexually isn't wrong. And I know that it does occur in nature, other mammals do it. But does that make it a natural behavior for humans? If there weren't any taboos of any kind, do you think most people would engage in it? Would you? Because I know there are gay people who only sleep with the same sex and vice versa.


Is having red hair natural for humans?

[boloboffin]

Copied from some website




Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."


Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

The Septuagint translation of Leviticus 20:13 uses the words "meta arsenos koithn" to describe a man lying with a man in the bad way. The word "arsenokoitai" in 1 Corinthians is probably a Pauline neologism from this translation. This would make "malakoi" and "arsenokoitai" Paul's idiosyncratic way of condemning the generally acceptable ways of practicing homosexuality in the Roman world. He's holding both parties accountable. That's my view, and others may differ with good reason.

The Romans passage is a really interesting look into Paul's mind. Paul describes the women as exchanging a natural act for an unnatural one, and then describes the men as exchanging women for men. In other words, women turn men gay by giving up da badonkadonk. This makes this verse a rather foul midrash on the story of initial temptation from Genesis. Paul is trying to be as gross as possible here to underline how sinful the world is, and his going straight for euphemisms for anal sex shows the kind of audience he was going for. Personally, I also see this as a little more evidence that Paul's misogyny sprung from living so far back into the closet that he was passing mothballs, but that's really just my opinion.

I really do think the Bible condemns homosexuality quite openly and unequivocably. I also think the Bible is wrong, wrong, wrong on this and many other matters.

[Tobermory]

Is having red hair natural for humans?

Even if it weren't, I'd still dye mine red(dish).

[ponderingturtle]

I don't remember claiming it made sense.

I describe history, I don't prescribe it. If it was all up to me, a huge amount of things would have run differently.

I am not sure why you gave such weight to the social consensus.

[The Atheist]

Homosexuality is natural for humans that are homosexual.

Homosexuality is natural since it occurs in nature.

Homosexuality is not wrong. And it's perfectly natural, as you point out.

Just before you get too far down this track; killing one's offspring (and even eating them) is perfectly natural as well and practised by many different types of animals. (http://en.allexperts.com/q/Wild-Animals-705/Animals-kill-young.htm)

[ponderingturtle]

I agree that homosexually isn't wrong. And I know that it does occur in nature, other mammals do it. But does that make it a natural behavior for humans? If there weren't any taboos of any kind, do you think most people would engage in it? Would you? Because I know there are gay people who only sleep with the same sex and vice versa.

Why does a behavior need to be predominant to be natural?

[Tobermory]

Just before you get too far down this track; killing one's offspring (and even eating them) is perfectly natural as well and practised by many different types of animals. (http://en.allexperts.com/q/Wild-Animals-705/Animals-kill-young.htm)

I also support freedom of choice and am a big fan of Swift's A Modest Proposal. Just kidding about the latter. Sort of.

[Redtail]

It's wrong because it hurts :eek:

Well you know the old saying, once you go Black, you're gonna need a wheelchair.

Right on.

[Mr. Scott]

Personally, I also see this as a little more evidence that Paul's misogyny sprung from living so far back into the closet that he was passing mothballs, but that's really just my opinion.

I have similar suspicions. Take Pastor Ted Haggard and Senator Larry Craig as examples -- Haggard railed against the sin of homosexuality in his services, yet carried on a homosexual affair in private. Craig argued against gay rights but solicited anonymous sex in public bathrooms. Their anti-gay public side was a ploy they believed helped conceal their gayness.

There's a great passage in Hitchens' "God is Not Great" which I must paraphrase since the book is not by my side, that those who emphatically condemn acts of others are those who really want to act that way themselves.

My suspicion is that the authors of the homophobic passages of the bible either did it themselves secretly or really wanted to. I think the real root of homophobia, and for that matter erotophobia (//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotophobia), is envy.

[Darth Rotor]

My suspicion is that the authors of the homophobic passages of the bible either did it themselves secretly or really wanted to. I think the real root of homophobia, and for that matter erotophobia (//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotophobia), is envy.

If I follow your post correctly, this homophobia is a case of non-Freudian anus envy.

Did I hit close to the mark?

DR

[Mr. Scott]

If I follow your post correctly, this homophobia is a case of non-Freudian anus envy.

Did I hit close to the mark?

DR

Yes

[The Atheist]

I also support freedom of choice and am a big fan of Swift's A Modest Proposal. Just kidding about the latter. Sort of.

Spot on. Light years ahead of his time.

My suspicion is that the authors of the homophobic passages of the bible either did it themselves secretly or really wanted to. I think the real root of homophobia, and for that matter erotophobia (//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotophobia), is envy.

Agree entirely. Self-loathing produces strange results.

[ponderingturtle]

I have similar suspicions. Take Pastor Ted Haggard and Senator Larry Craig as examples -- Haggard railed against the sin of homosexuality in his services, yet carried on a homosexual affair in private. Craig argued against gay rights but solicited anonymous sex in public bathrooms. Their anti-gay public side was a ploy they believed helped conceal their gayness.

There's a great passage in Hitchens' "God is Not Great" which I must paraphrase since the book is not by my side, that those who emphatically condemn acts of others are those who really want to act that way themselves.

My suspicion is that the authors of the homophobic passages of the bible either did it themselves secretly or really wanted to. I think the real root of homophobia, and for that matter erotophobia (//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotophobia), is envy.

I don't think this holds for all cases. Does this mean that Mohammed must have been an alcoholic, why else would he have banned alcohol?

And imagine the true depths of the alcoholism that must have driven the government during prohibition to up the quantity of poison in industrial alcohol to punish those drinking it.

[OnlyTellsTruths]

I've seen these stanzas (wrong word, I know, but my brain just froze up on the right one) before, and I've always wondered how accurate the translation is. For example, I've heard that the first one quoted here can be interpreted as "Don't have sex with a man in the same bed where you have sex with a woman." It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but makes more sense than some other parts of the Bible.

Anyone know what the best translations of these verses are?


Young's Literal Translation (YLT)


Leviticus 18:22

22`And with a male thou dost not lie as one lieth with a woman; abomination it [is].



Leviticus 20:13

13`And a man who lieth with a male as one lieth with a woman; abomination both of them have done; they are certainly put to death; their blood [is] on them.


Corinthians 6:9-10

9have ye not known that the unrighteous the reign of God shall not inherit? be not led astray; neither whoremongers, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor sodomites,

10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, the reign of God shall inherit.


Romans 1:26-28

26Because of this did God give them up to dishonourable affections, for even their females did change the natural use into that against nature;

27and in like manner also the males having left the natural use of the female, did burn in their longing toward one another; males with males working shame, and the recompense of their error that was fit, in themselves receiving.

28And, according as they did not approve of having God in knowledge, God gave them up to a disapproved mind, to do the things not seemly;

I tend to equate the frowning upon homosexuality with the frowning upon sex that isn't specifically for procreation. Doubt I have to explain my stance further than that.

The word sodomy itself is beyond loaded, also note it's just sodomites in this translation.

Really I was hoping the topic was 'Why is Homosexuality <the> Wrong <Way to Procreate>' which is a way more fun conversation than this one!

Dare I ask what another 100 years of tech will give us in the areas of sex change? How much will your local Wal-Mart charge for a portable incubator set! I have a feeling the one for females will be a good 20% cheaper than the one for males.....

[Ichneumonwasp]

Has this already been covered?....if so, I apologize for not reading the whole thread......

In Leviticus it was considered wrong because it was a category breaker.

God created order from chaos. Our proper relationship with God is to abide by the categories (order) that he created. Men penetrate women. To penetrate a man, or for a man to act like a woman, is to break the ordered category that God created.

Same reasoning as the Kosher laws. You don't eat pork because pigs have cloven hooves but don't chew their cud. You don't eat shellfish because they swim in the sea but don't have scales and fins.

As to the real answer, I don't recognize the question. Why would anyone think it is wrong in this day and age?

[Garrette]

And....what Cello Man said, except substitute Halle Berry.Wrong. If God didn't want people to covet their neighbor's wife he wouldn't have invented Halle Berry. HB as a lesbian would be briefly titillating but a tragic waste in the long run.

Heavy sighs...

[Ichneumonwasp]

Wrong. If God didn't want people to covet their neighbor's wife he wouldn't have invented Halle Berry. HB as a lesbian would be briefly titillating but a tragic waste in the long run.

Heavy sighs...

Not if we had video. Lots and lots of video.

[Gurdur]

I am not sure why you gave such weight to the social consensus.

I merely gave a short description. I don't feel like posting a full anthropogical PhD at the moment. Social consensus was a very important part of sub-Saharan Africa for a very long time.

[fls]

Wrong. If God didn't want people to covet their neighbor's wife he wouldn't have invented Halle Berry. HB as a lesbian would be briefly titillating but a tragic waste in the long run.

Heavy sighs...

Maybe he was trying to kill two birds with one stone. No reason we can't both be attracted to her at the same time.

Linda

[this charming man]

Maybe he was trying to kill two birds with one stone. No reason we can't both be attracted to her at the same time.

Linda

Halle Berry makes me want to kill kittens.

/I hope people here know that euphemism.

[tsg]

Halle Berry makes me want to kill kittens.

/I hope people here know that euphemism.

I would have phrased it as "Halle Berry makes me want to make god kill a kitten."

But then I probably also would have substituted "Kari Byron" for "Halle Berry".

[ponderingturtle]

Same reasoning as the Kosher laws. You don't eat pork because pigs have cloven hooves but don't chew their cud. You don't eat shellfish because they swim in the sea but don't have scales and fins.

Muscles swim now?

[ponderingturtle]

I merely gave a short description. I don't feel like posting a full anthropogical PhD at the moment. Social consensus was a very important part of sub-Saharan Africa for a very long time.

But why does breaking the social consensus make something wrong? I can see why it would be punished by that society, but as a more general statement I don't get it.

[ponderingturtle]

Maybe he was trying to kill two birds with one stone. No reason we can't both be attracted to her at the same time.

Linda

Angelina Jolie would seem to fit that catagory better. She was fourth on a list of the person married women wanted to have extramarital sex with the most.

[Greatest I am]

Who is the one injured when someone fails to respect the Sabbath? Who is the victim when someone worships an idol?

GIA wrote
God.

Who is injured when I covet something belonging to my neighbor? Remember that I'm not taking it, I'm just wanting it....

You are hurt by showing your failings.

What does this have to do with the question?

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

It's not; not one iota.

If you do not see the difference then where is the victim?

Regards
DL

[tsg]

If you do not see the difference then where is the victim?

My cat's breath smells like cat food.

Purple monkey dishwasher.

[Greatest I am]

I think the catholic church's (current) reasoning for this (if you really wanted to know and it wasn't a rhetorical question) is that sex should only occur where there is a possibility of creating life. Sex should never be completely divorced from procreation. That's why they have a downer on contraception as well.

Good point but it does not take a rocket scientist to dither out that man's nature goes against the will of the nature that God gives man.

I don't think the benefits to God are worthy of God denigrating unjustly against a sub group of society that He created Himself.

Again, most of His laws go against those who create victims.

Why does He break His rules in the case of homosexuals?

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

It isn't wrong.

End of story.

This statement is as useful as the ones that say it is just right because the Bible tells us so.

You do not help the cause.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

I've got a bit of a theory as to where the "homosexuality is wrong" comes from, and it has a lot to do with the Christian guilt and hatred of sexuality. We're not supposed to enjoy sex, as awesome as it is, it's just supposed to be this dirty thing we have to do to make kids.

Now, two members of the same gender having sex are having sex for pleasure -GASP!- rather than it's "intended" purpose. So that's strike one.

Next next "evil" that is in homosexuality has to do with homosexual men. When Fundies talk about the evils of homosexuality, they nearly always talk about gay men. This has a lot to do with how we define men and women in our nutty Puritanical patriarchal culture. Women are sexual. Women possess all the sexuality, and must be "conquered" for sex. A woman is to be desired for sex and used for sex by a man. So a man who would possess sexuality that he can willingly give to a partner like a woman just screws up all definitions of what is man and what is woman.

Another issue is rape, tying in with the definitions of man and woman. A woman who is lower than man, who is less than man, who is to be used for sex... a woman can be raped. A man cannot, or rather by the "definitions," should not be raped. Enter in the very idea that a man can be violated in the same way as a woman, can be lowered to the standard that is "woman," can be terrifying.

So, it's all about shame, guilt, power over women, and the sexes needing to be clearly defined as either one or the other.

Are you saying that the Bible is not inspired by or the word of God?
Shame on you for truth.

Why do right thinking (in most cases) Christians buy into God acting inappropriately and against His usual mod-us operandi?

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Bollocks. It's completely in keeping with the christian god's ideas of justice and fairness:

"The world is wicked, so I'm going to kill everyone, including all of the innocent children, drowning them in their cribs!" Genesis 6:7

"Dirty fags! I'm going to kill all the children in Sodom as well!" Genesis 19:24

"Incest, the family game!" Genesis 19:31

"You're an atheist! I'm going to kill you and all of your descendants for the next FOUR generations, you scum!" Exodus 20:5

"People with leprosy are unclean and unworthy of me." Leviticus 13:3

Yes, those who read the Bible literally have a lot of juggling of verse to do to come up with a loving God.

No wonder they drop a lot of balls and eventually stop trying to justify their God.

I do not read the Bible literally and can find God within it's pages.
There is no doubt that the Bible is now our tree of knowledge of good and evil.
We just need to dither out who is saying what.
It has always been so.

Regards
DL

[drkitten]

You are hurt by showing your failings.

No, I'm not. Coveting isn't a failing, and in fact, it might actually be a virtue. (I covet that candy-apple red sports car my neighbor drives, so I will put in more time at the office to get the raise so I can afford one just like it.) I'm not only not hurt, but I"m actually helped by my covetousness.


What does this have to do with the question?

it illustrates that your question is based upon a false premise. Not all of God's commandments are based upon the idea that there is a victim, therefore there is not necessarily a "victim" involved in any given prohibition. Just as no one is injured by the act of coveting or worshiping idols, there need not be anyone hurt by (consentual) homosexuality.

I would go further, of course, and state directly that there is no victim.

[Greatest I am]

Just about all of you took the words right out of my mouth -- it isn't wrong, period. Moreover, most mammals exhibit this behavior. And given our exponential population growth and the many unwanted children all over the world, it may even be part of the solution to some of the problems we've created on our planet in the last few centuries or so.

Who cares what the bible says about homosexuality? Certainly the bible not a reliable source of information about, well, anything.

If you were right then we would not be discussing this topic.

Regards
DL

[Darth Rotor]

Muscles swim now?
I use my muscles to swim.

I think you meant mussels. :)

DR

[Greatest I am]

I agree that homosexually isn't wrong. And I know that it does occur in nature, other mammals do it. But does that make it a natural behavior for humans? If there weren't any taboos of any kind, do you think most people would engage in it? Would you? Because I know there are gay people who only sleep with the same sex and vice versa.

Some do, some don't, some mix it up.
Who is to say what is normal when there is no normal?

Regards
DL

[drkitten]

If you were right then we would not be discussing this topic.

We might still be. Lots of people believe that other "holy writ" are the inerrant word of a deity and a reliable source of information. I assume that you feel that the Bible is a more reliable source of information on morals than, say, the Tao Te Ching or the Rig Veda. I have students who feel exactly the opposite way.

Why should I believe you, and not Xiaoling or Vijay?

[Darth Rotor]

Some do, some don't, some mix it up.
Who is to say what is normal when there is no normal?

Regards
DL
Noting the remarks in Mr Scott's post #81, and your title for this thread, it is possible that you might change your forum name to "Gayest I am" if the OP indicates your baseline stance.

Or not.

This was a guess.

DR

[Greatest I am]

No, I'm not. Coveting isn't a failing, and in fact, it might actually be a virtue. (I covet that candy-apple red sports car my neighbor drives, so I will put in more time at the office to get the raise so I can afford one just like it.) I'm not only not hurt, but I"m actually helped by my covetousness.



it illustrates that your question is based upon a false premise. Not all of God's commandments are based upon the idea that there is a victim, therefore there is not necessarily a "victim" involved in any given prohibition. Just as no one is injured by the act of coveting or worshiping idols, there need not be anyone hurt by (consentual) homosexuality.

I would go further, of course, and state directly that there is no victim.

We agree here, so why would God discriminate without a reason?

Regards
DL

[drkitten]

We agree here, so why would God discriminate without a reason?

Because fictious entities created by small-minded people tend to be small-minded themselves. Look at the jealousy for which Zeus is legendary.

[Beerina]

I've got a bit of a theory as to where the "homosexuality is wrong" comes from, and it has a lot to do with the Christian guilt and hatred of sexuality. We're not supposed to enjoy sex, as awesome as it is, it's just supposed to be this dirty thing we have to do to make kids.

Too much thinking; it's much simpler than that.

To mate as much as possible, a male wants to be dominant. Sadly, they can do this by building themselves up (good) or tearing others down (bad).

"Hey, ladies, check out that guy. He's defective -- he doesn't find women sexually attractive! But I sure do!"

The rest is just cultural crap built on top of crap, with a healthy dose of "our group vs. theirs", which, again, sadly applies to many situations.

It isn't "homophobia". It's homo-hatred. :(

[Greatest I am]

We might still be. Lots of people believe that other "holy writ" are the inerrant word of a deity and a reliable source of information. I assume that you feel that the Bible is a more reliable source of information on morals than, say, the Tao Te Ching or the Rig Veda. I have students who feel exactly the opposite way.

Why should I believe you, and not Xiaoling or Vijay?

All Bible are worthy of some respect.
In my philosophy we are all created by a Perfect God and are all destined for Heaven regardless of the name we give God.

I was questioning why God or the Bibles would go against the usual eye for an eye balance of justice and why they would discriminate against actions that do not produce victims. No complaint should equal no sin.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Noting the remarks in Mr Scott's post #81, and your title for this thread, it is possible that you might change your forum name to "Gayest I am" if the OP indicates your baseline stance.

Or not.

This was a guess.

DR

A poor one.

I nor any of my four boys are gay.
To me this is just luck of the draw and has nothing to do with what i or their mother did.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Because fictious entities created by small-minded people tend to be small-minded themselves. Look at the jealousy for which Zeus is legendary.

This is OK for God but it does not tell us why so many people fall for the same crap and follow stupid trends.

Regards
DL

[Darth Rotor]

A poor one.


No problem, it was also a lame play on your forum handle.

Lead balloons for fifty, Alex. :(

DR

[ponderingturtle]

I use my muscles to swim.

I think you meant mussels. :)

DR

Fine I will generalize it to all bivalves except scallops. Also many crustations don't swim but walk.

[Ichneumonwasp]

Fine I will generalize it to all bivalves except scallops. Also many crustations don't swim but walk.

And it misses the point. They are sea dwellers.

But it does indicate the incredible problems with simplistic classification, which is one reason why those kosher laws seem so strange.

[Skeptic Guy]

Wonder where Greatest went? Troll?

[thatguywhojuggles]

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Telling lies is a sin regardless of who is telling them with you! :p

[ponderingturtle]

Wonder where Greatest went? Troll?

Someone is gone for 24 minutes in the middle of the day(likely anyway) and you wonder if he is a troll?

[tkingdoll]

It's wrong because if everyone was gay, we'd be extinct!

:whistling

[Terry]

Sure, because no gay person has ever had a child, ever...

[DoubtingStephen]

Sure, because no gay person has ever had a child, ever...

For example, I've never had 3 children, so that proves your point!

[Marquis de Carabas]

Sure, because no gay person has ever had a child, ever...
But gay people having children is unnatural!

Rinse

Repeat

[Garrette]

Maybe he was trying to kill two birds with one stone. No reason we can't both be attracted to her at the same time.

LindaI am desperately fighting not to respond how I want to respond to this.

But if we add Angelina Jolie to the mix like someone else suggested, I may not be able to hold out much longer.

[Garrette]

But gay people's having children is are unnatural!Fixed.

[Meadmaker]

I think that the straights who wrote the Bible were jealous that some people had found an effective method of contraception.

[The Atheist]

Sure, because no gay person has ever had a child, ever...

That's a very good, and completely true point, unless you finish the sentence off with; "... without the assitance of someone of the opposite sex."

Accordingly, your point is self-defeating until gay blokes can procreate without a woman. I think that's scheduled to happen some time after Sylvia Browne returns to earth with Jesus as her husband.

[firecoins]

Why is homosexuality wrong?
We all know what gays are and what they do. All of God’s laws are responses to a victim of some sort.
The one lied to is deceived.
The one who is killed is deprived of life.
The one stolen from looses his goods.
In the case of homosexuals there does not appear to be a victim or anyone hurt by the actions of the participant.
Why then does God discriminate against homosexuals?
It appears to go against His usual justice.
Regards
DL



God doesn't exist. Homosexuals do.

[DoubtingStephen]

God doesn't exist. Homosexuals do.

Thank Jehovah it's not the other way around!

[Terry]

That's a very good, and completely true point, unless you finish the sentence off with; "... without the assitance of someone of the opposite sex."

Accordingly, your point is self-defeating until gay blokes can procreate without a woman. I think that's scheduled to happen some time after Sylvia Browne returns to earth with Jesus as her husband.

I think you are missing the point. The point being that gay men can and do have sex with women and conceive children, regardless of the fact that they'd rather be getting it on with another bloke.

[Skeptic Guy]

Someone is gone for 24 minutes in the middle of the day(likely anyway) and you wonder if he is a troll?

My bad, I wasn't at the last page when I posted it. What I was seeing was over a day old since the last pole and thought he was just kicking the ant hill.

ETA: Besides, it is such a inane OP. It supposes there is a god and it's laws have any logic to begin with. And the title, "Why is homosexuality wrong?", it's not even wrong.

[Dancing David]

I agree that homosexually isn't wrong. And I know that it does occur in nature, other mammals do it. But does that make it a natural behavior for humans? If there weren't any taboos of any kind, do you think most people would engage in it? Would you? Because I know there are gay people who only sleep with the same sex and vice versa.

I think most young men have a time period where they would , um, intercourse anything that held still.

I think the issue with homophobia is that many of them have had a homosexual experience (ot impulses), they enjoyed it and then regretted it later.

Come on, kids do it all the time.

[tkingdoll]

Sure, because no gay person has ever had a child, ever...

Whistling smiley to imply innocence = post was clearly meant as joke.

[Foster Zygote]

It's wrong because if everyone was gay, we'd be extinct!

:whistling

Then the Catholic clergy must be super wrong.:p

[LBN]

If you were right then we would not be discussing this topic.
Of course we would. Secondary to porn, the internet was developed to waste time by arguing about anything. ;)

[Tobermory]

Of course we would. Secondary to porn, the internet was developed to waste time by arguing about anything. ;)

I was wondering when you would come to stand behind me in this thread...:covereyes

[LBN]

I was wondering when you would come to stand behind me in this thread...:covereyes
You know I stand behind you wherever you go. (Except maybe the ladies room because they hate when I do that.)

[zombiebex]

That's a very good, and completely true point, unless you finish the sentence off with; "... without the assitance of someone of the opposite sex."

Accordingly, your point is self-defeating until gay blokes can procreate without a woman. I think that's scheduled to happen some time after Sylvia Browne returns to earth with Jesus as her husband.

And lesbians can't conceive without a man somehow involved. I don't see the point you're trying to make.

The gay community doesn't want to take over and turn everyone gay, thus ending procreation. They don't deny that they need a member of the opposite sex to have kids. They like straight people, if my circle of friends is any indication. A friend of mine already has a dad picked out to donate sperm when she and her partner are ready for kids, and we all agree it would be the cutest baby ever. Dad is Asian, egg would be black, carried by a Jew. How awesome is that? Yay science!

[The Atheist]

And lesbians can't conceive without a man somehow involved. I don't see the point you're trying to make.

That was the entire point - no matter how gay one might be, the opposite sex is going to be required if kids are a desired outcome.

The gay community doesn't want to take over and turn everyone gay, thus ending procreation.

Pity, really. I think the dynamic of how homophobes handle the dichotomy homosexuality or no [other person] sex would be pretty entertaining!

[LBN]

In the future we will just reproduce through mitosis.

[rocketdodger]

It isn't "homophobia". It's homo-hatred. :(

Except that there are no instances of hatred without some underlying fear in humans, so homohatred includes homophobia.

[Wildy]

I was going to start a thread on it, but I think here might be a good place anyway.

Biblically speaking is there anything that God supposedly said that makes being a lesbian wrong?

[yairhol]

Homosexuality is wrong. Otherwise why would Ahmadinejad kill his people for being gay? Oh wait, he said there aren't any homosexuals in Iran. Right, he hung them all.

[TX50]

Germanic tribesmen were disgusted by Roman legionnaires who committed homosexual acts, and would put them to death just for that.


Where does that idea come from? I don't recall anything like that
from any of the Roman authors I've read. Many of the Roman historians
during the "Imperial periods" liked to compare the decadence of the
Romans with the virtue of the barbarians, so statements like the above
(if it's authentic) usually need to be viewed in context.

However, it is true that the Romans themselves were (perhaps surprisingly)
tolerant of all sorts of things.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Biblically speaking is there anything that God supposedly said that makes being a lesbian wrong?
I'm pretty sure it's biblically fine for a woman to have sex with another woman, as long as her father or husband commands it.

[yairhol]

I'm pretty sure it's biblically fine for a woman to have sex with another woman, as long as her father or husband commands it.
Can he join in if the women accept him?

[ponderingturtle]

Where does that idea come from? I don't recall anything like that
from any of the Roman authors I've read. Many of the Roman historians
during the "Imperial periods" liked to compare the decadence of the
Romans with the virtue of the barbarians, so statements like the above
(if it's authentic) usually need to be viewed in context.

However, it is true that the Romans themselves were (perhaps surprisingly)
tolerant of all sorts of things.

They where not that tolerant, it is just that they classed taboo actions in an entirely different fashion from what we are used to.

A roman man should not be penetrated, but only penetrate, and it did not really matter what the sex of the individual he penetrated was. Also oral sex was right out for a proper roman citizen, as who would take anything you say seriously after making your mouth unclean in that fashion?

So just because they had different taboos does not mean that they did not have strong taboos.

[ponderingturtle]

I'm pretty sure it's biblically fine for a woman to have sex with another woman, as long as her father or husband commands it.

Giddity.

[yairhol]

A roman man should not be penetrated, but only penetrate, and it did not really matter what the sex of the individual he penetrated was.
So that only leaves the possibility of the man penetrating a woman.
Was there a catch in that sentence that I did not get?

[ponderingturtle]

So that only leaves the possibility of the man penetrating a woman.
Was there a catch in that sentence that I did not get?

You are failing to take slaves and non citizens into account.

[yairhol]

You are failing to take slaves and non citizens into account.
I got it now. Roman times were the best, sexually speaking. Kind of like the U.S. in the 60's.

[ponderingturtle]

I got it now. Roman times were the best, sexually speaking. Kind of like the U.S. in the 60's.

Ah it was such a downer when they made child prostitution illegal, having to wait until your slave is 8 to have sex with them was a real blow to the scene.

[NobbyNobbs]

It's wrong because homosexuals are in the minority. Duh.

Just like it's wrong to be left-handed or play the bagpipe.



I guess you're really out of luck if you're a homosexual who plays the bagpipes left-handed....

[biomorph]

It's wrong because homosexuals are in the minority. Duh.

Just like it's wrong to be left-handed or play the bagpipe.

I guess that just leaves the ambidextrous bisexual bagpipe manufacturer as a fence-sitter........

regards
bm
:boggled:

[DoubtingStephen]

I was going to start a thread on it, but I think here might be a good place anyway.

Biblically speaking is there anything that God supposedly said that makes being a lesbian wrong?

Certainly there is nothing in the Bible, Old or New Testament, that condemns a woman for being lesbian. Likewise there is nothing in the Bible that condemns a man for being gay.

It is only sexual activity that is condemned in the context of homosexuality, and it certainly is possible for a male or female to be homosexual without ever having had any sex with another person.

The patriarchal and sexist attitude that prevails in the Bible would seem to suggest that a biblical author would consider sex to be impossible without at least one male involved. After all, women were merely property in those days.

A related question might be, if a woman has engaged in lesbian sexual activity does this forfeit her virginity, thus making her tainted goods with reduced or nil resale value?

[ponderingturtle]

Certainly there is nothing in the Bible, Old or New Testament, that condemns a woman for being lesbian. Likewise there is nothing in the Bible that condemns a man for being gay.

It is only sexual activity that is condemned in the context of homosexuality, and it certainly is possible for a male or female to be homosexual without ever having had any sex with another person.

The patriarchal and sexist attitude that prevails in the Bible would seem to suggest that a biblical author would consider sex to be impossible without at least one male involved. After all, women were merely property in those days.

A related question might be, if a woman has engaged in lesbian sexual activity does this forfeit her virginity, thus making her tainted goods with reduced or nil resale value?

More important biblical questions, if a person of the same sex rapes your daughter do you have to force them to marry your daughter? I was wondering about sons, but that standard does not appear to apply to sons in the case of heterosexual activities so it would be moot.

[Meadmaker]

The article below discusses specifically Jewish views on homosexuality, with a discussion of various interpretations of the old testament references to homosexuality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_homosexuality

Of course, Christians would also have some new testament references that may or may not be interpreted as condemning homosexuality for different reasons.

(FWIW: For those who don't know, I'm a member of a Reform Jewish congregation.)

If you read it, you can see a very clear pattern of reasoning in the interpretation of the text on homosexuality. Whatever our biases are about the subject, the text says it.

[wuschel]

Why is homosexuality wrong?Having only skimmed through the responses, it seems that "mu" as the canonical answer hasn't been suggested so far?

[LBN]

I think we should wait for God to come down from the Sky and make a ruling on this one.

[firecoins]

I think we should wait for God to come down from the Sky and make a ruling on this one.
ummm yeah, that shouldn't take too long.:faint:

[XenonII]

It's not wrong; it's just yucky. Unless it's women. Then it's really great.

Homosexuality is a abominable sin worthy of death and unless they repent of that wickedness they will burn in hell for it. Same fate as anyone who is in open rebellion of God's commandments by calling an evil lifestyle "great". Romans 1:32 says that anyone that approves of that behaviour is as bad as they are and deserves the same fate.

Is incest and bestility "great" as well? They are the moral equivalent of homosexuality. The same Bible passage that speaks out against the sin of sodomy also speaks out against bestility and incest.

[Hokulele]

Xenon II, please cite the bible verse that states that anyone practicing homosexuality will specifically "burn in hell for it".

[DoubtingStephen]

Homosexuality is a abominable sin worthy of death and unless they repent of that wickedness they will burn in hell for it.

In order for this farcical claim to be true, Hell would have to exist.

In order for Hell to exist, your Imaginary Bearded Sky Daddy would have to exist.

[XenonII]

This is not true, remember masterbation was defined as self abuse, so "abusers of themselves with men" would certainly seem to be male homosexuals

Actually the correct quote from the KJV is "abusers of themselves with mankind" not "abusers of themselves with men". Mankind is not gender specific.

[XenonII]

Xenon II, please cite the bible verse that states that anyone practicing homosexuality will specifically "burn in hell for it".

Unrepentent homosexuals will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven:

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV)

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

[joobz]

Unrepentent homosexuals will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven:

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV)

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

WOO HOO!!! Female Prostitutes are allowed in heaven, I can't wait!

[Hokulele]

Unrepentent homosexuals will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven:

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV)

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."


That does not answer my question. Where does it say they will "burn in hell for it"?

Hint, there is no place in the bible that states that the only two possible destinations are heaven and hell. You are making an erroneous, unfounded assumption.

[XenonII]

My thoughts as a straight guy:

Lesbians are awesome. And if God frowns on a little man-love, why did he make Christian Bale so damn hot?

"Lesbians" are nasty and what they do is a crime against nature. Obviously women are not supposed to be "lesbians" (geez I bet some residents of a certain island are mightly peeved to be unfairly associated with those deviants) because the parts don't even fit! A man is supposed to make love to a woman, within a monogamous heterosexual marriage. It is a physical imposiblity for a woman to make love to another woman. Lesbians are only about lust and perverted lust at that.

Christian Bale is not "so damn hot" and no "straight" male would describe another male in such a shocking way.

[Hokulele]

WOO HOO!!! Female Prostitutes are allowed in heaven, I can't wait!


They are probably all lesbians. ;)

[XenonII]

WOO HOO!!! Female Prostitutes are allowed in heaven, I can't wait!

Female prostitutes fall under the sexually immoral and adulturer labels. Just because they are not mentioned specifically does not make it ok.

[Terry]

Obviously women are not supposed to be "lesbians" [...] because the parts don't even fit!

You, sir, have a limited imagination.

[joobz]

Female prostitutes fall under the sexually immoral and adulturer labels. Just because they are not mentioned specifically does not make it ok.
then why single out male prostitutes? Seems kind of redundant.

Personally, I think the missionary position is immoral, since it's typically hard for women to climax that way.

Sexually immoral = not pleasing your mate!

[XenonII]

That does not answer my question. Where does it say they will "burn in hell for it"?

Hint, there is no place in the bible that states that the only two possible destinations are heaven and hell. You are making an erroneous, unfounded assumption.

If they are not permitted to enter the Kingdom of God (unless they sincerely repetent of their satanic lifestyle and stop being a homosexual) where else would they go? I don't believe in this purgatory nonsense. Homosexuals will burn in hell as will every other unrepentent sinner. There will be no homosexuals in heaven, but there will be some ex-"gays":

1 Corinthians 6:11 (NIV)
And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

[Hokulele]

Just because they are not mentioned specifically does not make it ok.


Wait a minute, you are allowed to make up the rules as you go along? How do you know that it is not OK if it is not in the bible?

[Thunder]

Homosexuality is not wrong....straight men just find it very very weird.

[XenonII]

I think we should wait for God to come down from the Sky and make a ruling on this one.

He has already made his ruling perfectly clear on this subject through his Word in the Holy Bible. Although society is not compelled to put homosexuals to death, they are worthy of death.

"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:32.

[joobz]

He has already made his ruling perfectly clear on this subject through his Word in the Holy Bible. Although society is not compelled to put homosexuals to death, they are worthy of death.

"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:32.
Wow, this god guy you keep talking about sounds like a real jerk. Is he a friend of yours?

[Terry]

So, XenonII, had any lobster recently? Like that cotton/polyester shirt?

[Hokulele]

If they are not permitted to enter the Kingdom of God (unless they sincerely repetent of their satanic lifestyle and stop being a homosexual) where else would they go?


Nowhere, much like everyone else. You are making things up again, as nowhere in the bible does it state that there are only two options.

I don't believe in this purgatory nonsense.


Do you believe that god would be so unfair as to say that anyone who never read the bible goes to hell automatically?

[XenonII]

Wait a minute, you are allowed to make up the rules as you go along? How do you know that it is not OK if it is not in the bible?

It IS in the Bible it is just not specifically mentioned in the scripture quoted - 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - but it does fall under both sexually immoral and adulturey and when Jesus encountered the prostitute he didn't say something like "carry on what you are doing madam it is just fine and dandy"... no sir, he told her to "go and sin no more" (John 8:11).

[XenonII]

So, XenonII, had any lobster recently? Like that cotton/polyester shirt?

I haven't had any lobster for years, not that there is anything wrong with that.

[XenonII]

then why single out male prostitutes? Seems kind of redundant.

Personally, I think the missionary position is immoral, since it's typically hard for women to climax that way.

Sexually immoral = not pleasing your mate!

Sexually immoral = any type of sexual activity not conducted within the bounds of a monogamous heterosexual marriage where the possibility of procreation is left open. Sex is for procreation within marriage.

[joobz]

Sexually immoral = any type of sexual activity not conducted within the bounds of a monogamous heterosexual marriage where the possibility of procreation is left open. Sex is for procreation within marriage.

wow, I wouldn't say that too loud. You holding to such a sexually immoral view could earn you a place in hell.

[Terry]

I haven't had any lobster for years, not that there is anything wrong with that.

umm... Leviticus 11:9-12 ?

[Hokulele]

It IS in the Bible it is just not specifically mentioned in the scripture quoted - 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - but it does fall under both sexually immoral and adulturey and when Jesus encountered the prostitute he didn't say something like "carry on what you are doing madam it is just fine and dandy"... no sir, he told her to "go and sin no more" (John 8:11).


She wasn't a prostitute, but an adulterer. He also said that he didn't condemn her, so why are you allowed to?

[XenonII]

Wow, this god guy you keep talking about sounds like a real jerk. Is he a friend of yours?

YES and he is the best friend that anyone could ever have! Jesus Who is God is Himself your very BEST friend! He knows you much better than even your parents know you. He created you! You are very special to Him and He has great plans—a wonderful life!—for you! When you trust Him and live to please Him, He calls you His friend, just like He did Abraham!

And Abraham had faith (trust) in God and it was put to his account as righteousness (acceptance and right standing with God); and he was named the friend of God. James 2:23

For the wrong-hearted man (such as a homosexual) is hated by the Lord, but he is a friend to the upright. Proverbs 3:32

[joobz]

umm... Leviticus 11:9-12 ?
Why would you think XenonII would eat lobster? I've always thought trolls prefered naughty children.

[Hokulele]

Sex is for procreation within marriage.


Since I medically cannot have children with my spouse, I am sexually immoral?

Cool, I can add that to the collection of vices!

[Foster Zygote]

Sexually immoral = any type of sexual activity not conducted within the bounds of a monogamous heterosexual marriage where the possibility of procreation is left open. Sex is for procreation within marriage.

So if a married man and woman decide to use birth control to have sex just for the fun of it they are sexually immoral?

[scotth]

For "because it says so in the Bible" to be valid reasoning, you first have to explain to us how it is reasonable to think the Bible is anything more than a creation of man.

So far, no one has gotten close.

[Foster Zygote]

She wasn't a prostitute, but an adulterer. He also said that he didn't condemn her, so why are you allowed to?

Interestingly, that story is very likely a later addition that was popular simply because it was a compelling narrative.

[joobz]

YES and he is the best friend that anyone could ever have! Jesus Who is God is Himself your very BEST friend! He knows you much better than even your parents know you. He created you! You are very special to Him and He has great plans—a wonderful life!—for you! When you trust Him and live to please Him, He calls you His friend, just like He did Abraham!He also asked abraham to kill his own son. Not what I'd consider a "good" friend. He sounds more like the guy on the playground who would chase all the other kids with a piece of Poo on a stick.

[XenonII]

Why would you think XenonII would eat lobster? I've always thought trolls prefered naughty children.

Having proper morals and faith in God's Holy Word does not make one a troll. Neither does disagreeing with the abomination that is the homosexual lifestyle, so called same-sex "marriage" or the radical "gay" agenda.

If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, then his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town. ... Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. (Deuteronomy 21:18,19;21)

[XenonII]

Since I medically cannot have children with my spouse, I am sexually immoral?

Cool, I can add that to the collection of vices!

Only if you are engaging in sexual activaty. God created the sexual act for the purpose of procreation.

[Terry]

Having proper morals and faith in God's Holy Word does not make one a troll. Neither does disagreeing with the abomination that is the homosexual lifestyle

So... eating lobster isn't wrong, even though your holy book says it is, but I'm going to hell for being gay. Gotcha.

[XenonII]

So if a married man and woman decide to use birth control to have sex just for the fun of it they are sexually immoral?

Sex is not supposed to be a recreational hobby that one engages in "just for the fun of it". Birth control is highly immoral. It perverts God's intended function for sexual activity. It closes the door on procreation. Using any form of birth control is a grave SIN!

[Foster Zygote]

I'm still amazed that it's so difficult to tell a genuine fundamentalist from a parody. I'm also amazed that the most homophobic people on the planet all have such a big rod up their butts.

[joobz]

Having proper morals and faith in God's Holy Word does not make one a troll. Neither does disagreeing with the abomination that is the homosexual lifestyle, so called same-sex "marriage" or the radical "gay" agenda.
Why is marriage and gay in quotes? Do you think marriage is gay?

If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, then his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town. ... Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. (Deuteronomy 21:18,19;21)
What does this have to do with your anti-gay issue?

Do you have a gay son or something?

[joobz]

Sex is not supposed to be a recreational hobby that one engages in "just for the fun of it". Birth control is highly immoral. It perverts God's intended function for sexual activity. It closes the door on procreation. Using any form of birth control is a grave SIN!
Are you telling me god doesn't approve of my sex swing and gimp outfit?

oh man!

[Foster Zygote]

Sex is not supposed to be a recreational hobby that one engages in "just for the fun of it". Birth control is highly immoral. It perverts God's intended function for sexual activity. It closes the door on procreation. Using any form of birth control is a grave SIN!

Everybody sing!

DAD:
There are Jews in the world.
There are Buddhists.
There are Hindus and Mormons, and then
There are those that follow Mohammed, but
I've never been one of them.

I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is:
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.

You don't have to be a six-footer.
You don't have to have a great brain.
You don't have to have any clothes on. You're
A Catholic the moment Dad came,

Because

Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

CHILDREN:
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

GIRL:
Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.

CHILDREN:
Every sperm is wanted.
Every sperm is good.
Every sperm is needed
In your neighbourhood.

MUM:
Hindu, Taoist, Mormon,
Spill theirs just anywhere,
But God loves those who treat their
Semen with more care.

MEN:
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
WOMEN:
If a sperm is wasted,...
CHILDREN:
...God get quite irate.

PRIEST:
Every sperm is sacred.
BRIDE and GROOM:
Every sperm is good.
NANNIES:
Every sperm is needed...
CARDINALS:
...In your neighbourhood!

CHILDREN:
Every sperm is useful.
Every sperm is fine.
FUNERAL CORTEGE:
God needs everybody's.
MOURNER #1:
Mine!
MOURNER #2:
And mine!
CORPSE:
And mine!

NUN:
Let the Pagan spill theirs
O'er mountain, hill, and plain.
HOLY STATUES:
God shall strike them down for
Each sperm that's spilt in vain.

EVERYONE:
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is good.
Every sperm is needed
In your neighbourhood.

Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite iraaaaaate!

[Ladewig]

Having proper morals and faith in God's Holy Word does not make one a troll. Neither does disagreeing with the abomination that is the homosexual lifestyle, so called same-sex "marriage" or the radical "gay" agenda.

If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, then his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town. ... Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. (Deuteronomy 21:18,19;21)

You're silly.

[Lonewulf]

YES and he is the best friend that anyone could ever have! Jesus Who is God is Himself your very BEST friend!
Would this be before or after he sends me to hell for all of eternity, to burn in horrible agony until the end of eternity (which means forever, essentially), because I don't do whatever He says?

Most of my friends are hardly that spiteful, hateful, twisted, or immoral.

He knows you much better than even your parents know you. He created you!
Then why did he make homosexuality and general "kinkiness" seemingly genetic-influenced?

You are very special to Him and He has great plans—a wonderful life!—for you! When you trust Him and live to please Him, He calls you His friend, just like He did Abraham!
A wonderful life of throwing stones at people that don't agree with me. Yeeeeeeah, don't think so.

And Abraham had faith (trust) in God and it was put to his account as righteousness (acceptance and right standing with God); and he was named the friend of God. James 2:23

For the wrong-hearted man (such as a homosexual) is hated by the Lord, but he is a friend to the upright. Proverbs 3:32
"The best friend I could possibly have" doesn't usually mesh with, "Hates people that have sex with certain people, and thus will torture them for all eternity".

[Jimbo07]

You're silly.

I hope so...

... Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. (Deuteronomy 21:18,19;21)

I'm seriously hoping that you're not advocating violence here...

[DoubtingStephen]

So, XenonII, had any lobster recently? Like that cotton/polyester shirt?


God hates crustaceans (http://GodHatesCrustaceans.com/)!

God hates mixed fibers (http://godhatesmixedfibers.com/)!


Don't even think about going to a barber (http://godhatesbarbers.com/)!

[ZirconBlue]

There will be no homosexuals in heaven

Then who will do all the interior decorating? And, what? No good parties in heaven?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

XenonII, surely all of what you claim is moot anyway for did not Jesus Himself say "And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall be saved"? (John 11:26) If I believe, then I can do anything I want -- in particular ignore the demands of the Old Testament (that Jesus was rather in two minds about anyway).

I believe, therefore I am saved.

:boggled:

[Lonewulf]

Doesn't that technically make Satan "saved"? Satan believes that God and Jesus existed, to say the least.

[KoihimeNakamura]

My only comment ist he only phrase from the Bible that I actually admire.

"Let he who is without sin throw the first stone."

[Hokulele]

My favorite is "Judge not, that ye be not judged."

[KoihimeNakamura]

That's good too, but the one I quoted was also the title of an awful ST: DS9 episode. It comes to mind easier.

[Hokulele]

That's good too, but the one I quoted was also the title of an awful ST: DS9 episode. It comes to mind easier.


You're right. You win. :D

[XenonII]

wow, I wouldn't say that too loud. You holding to such a sexually immoral view could earn you a place in hell.

I don't hold to a sexually immoral (liberal) view, I hold to a Biblical view on sexuality and the Bible is clear. Sex is to be reserved for marriage for the specific purpose of procreation.

[XenonII]

She wasn't a prostitute, but an adulterer. He also said that he didn't condemn her, so why are you allowed to?

Same difference, they are both sins and I don't condemn anyone I just repeat what God has said through the Bible. Jesus may have not condemned her but he didn't accept her sin either. He told her to go and sin no more. If she repented before death she would have been saved but if she died in her sins then she is in hell amongst the many millions that are already there.

[XenonII]

Why is marriage and gay in quotes? Do you think marriage is gay?


What does this have to do with your anti-gay issue?

Do you have a gay son or something?

Gay is in quotes because homosexuals are not really gay. Homosexuals hijacked a perfectly good and inoffensive word to describe their choice of lifestyle. Gay used to mean happy but now thanks to the radical "gay" agenda is strongly associated with sodomy and other perverse sex acts.

Homosexuals stole this word to convince themselves and others what they were doing really led to happiness. However, Dr. Daniel Capron, a practicing psychiatrist, says, "Homosexuality by definition is not healthy and wholesome. The homosexual person, at best, will be unhappier and more unfulfilled than the sexually normal person".

The condition of being attracted to the same sex is not gay and is in fact known as SSAD (same sex attraction disorder). See National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (http://www.narth.com) for further information.

The facts about the homosexual's miserable lifestyle speak for themselves and are shocking. Homos are more prone to alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence, suicide, depression and other psychiatric disorders. Homosexuals are widely promiscious and the lifestyle is one of the "best" ways for catching and spreading AIDS (Anualy Injected Death Sentence) and other STDs.

Homosexuals prey on others, particuarly the young and are very active in the nation's schools trying to recruit others into their lifestyle and normalise their perversion within society. They can't reproduce so they must recruit! Despite homosexuals making up only 1-2% of the population they commit more than 33% of all reported child molestations in the United States.

Homosexuality was only removed from the list of mental illnesses in the early 1970s because homosexual militants stormed the annual American Psychiatric Association (APA) conference on successive years. "Guerrilla theater tactics and more straight-forward shouting matches characterized their presence".

The homosexual lifestyle is so damaging to the individual's health who practices it that it has found to be more deadly even than smoking! The homosexual lifestyle knocks decades off of a persons lifespan. The median age of death of homosexual males is 42 (only 9% live past age 65). This drops to 39 if the cause of death is AIDS. The median age of death of a married heterosexual man is 75. The median age of death of "lesbians" is 45 (only 24% live past age 65). The median age of death of a married heterosexual woman is 79.

Now homosexual activists after corrupting the meaning of the word gay, are trying to radically redefine marriage. Marriage is a word that descrbes a union of man and woman. Saying anything more on that is like trying to change history. The issue is not about what homosexed "couples" do amongst themselves. It is about the descriptor of recognition being twisted into something to suit those for which it was not, is not and should never be intended to describe.

Marriage is a priveledge and not a right. No one is denying homosexuals the priveledge of marriage. A homosexual man can marry a woman just as a heterosexual man can and a "lesbian" can marry a man just like a heterosexual woman is able to. What homosexuals are seeking is a special right. Homosexuality is a choice and science does not support their claim that they are born that way. These people define themselves based on their sexual behavior and they should not be granted special rights because of it.

[DoubtingStephen]

Gay is in quotes because homosexuals are not really gay.

Oh gurl, you do go on, don't you?

Could we agree on "festive" then?

Or possibly "fabulous"?

[fls]

Well, it could have been worse. You could have discovered that your best friend was racist or sexist, rather than just homophobic.

Always look on the "bright" side of life.

Linda

[Dancing David]

Homosexuality is a abominable sin worthy of death and unless they repent of that wickedness they will burn in hell for it. Same fate as anyone who is in open rebellion of God's commandments by calling an evil lifestyle "great". Romans 1:32 says that anyone that approves of that behaviour is as bad as they are and deserves the same fate.

Is incest and bestility "great" as well? They are the moral equivalent of homosexuality. The same Bible passage that speaks out against the sin of sodomy also speaks out against bestility and incest.

Is it Numbers 31 where God commands the extermination of the Midians or just keeping the virgins?

[Dancing David]

Female prostitutes fall under the sexually immoral and adulturer labels. Just because they are not mentioned specifically does not make it ok.


And just because some follower of Peter or Sual says that something is this, you assume the God came down and used a typewriter to type the text.

Un proven assumtions abound:
1. God exists
2. God wrote the bible
3. God did not write any other sacred texts.

[joobz]

I don't hold to a sexually immoral (liberal) view, I hold to a Biblical view on sexuality and the Bible is clear. Sex is to be reserved for marriage for the specific purpose of procreation.
You hold to a heretical view. You are sexually immoral and will not be allowed into heaven.

[Dancing David]

He has already made his ruling perfectly clear on this subject through his Word in the Holy Bible. Although society is not compelled to put homosexuals to death, they are worthy of death.

"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:32.

Again assuming that the humans are writing the word of god?

Silly dufus, so you deny the Holy Spirit to all those who have it but don't meet your limited and pathetic interpretation. How do you decide that god did not inspire the Upanishads and Eddas?

[Dancing David]

I haven't had any lobster for years, not that there is anything wrong with that.

Bad boy , no shrimp either. You might get infected with Aphrodite!

[Dancing David]

Having proper morals and faith in God's Holy Word does not make one a troll. Neither does disagreeing with the abomination that is the homosexual lifestyle, so called same-sex "marriage" or the radical "gay" agenda.

If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, then his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town. ... Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. (Deuteronomy 21:18,19;21)

Do you keep a kosher household and celebrate passover?

Do you make your wife life in a shack after she has a baby or menstruates?

[Lonewulf]

Xenon's claims:

1) Homosexuality is a mental disorder.
2) There is some sort of "gay agenda", a sort of rainbow-colored Illuminati group that wants to take over the world. (Wonder if they're working with the jews?)
3) The APA said it's not a mental disorder thanks to this evil conspiracy group.
4) Homosexuals are child molesters.
5) "Marriage" is a "privilege", probably up to him to pass out to other people.
6) Gay people aren't really happy.

For evidence, he sites such sources as NARTH. http://www.narth.com/#

So, the question is, should I even try to argue with someone like this?

[Dancing David]

I'm still amazed that it's so difficult to tell a genuine fundamentalist from a parody. I'm also amazed that the most homophobic people on the planet all have such a big rod up their butts.


Evidently the rod is big enough to keep the feces inside.

[joobz]

However, Dr. Daniel Capron, a practicing psychiatrist, says, "Homosexuality by definition is not healthy and wholesome. The homosexual person, at best, will be unhappier and more unfulfilled than the sexually normal person".
By definition?


Sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
Sexual activity with another of the same sex.Nope. Nowhere does the definition say that. Sounds like the guy you quote is an idiot.

The condition of being attracted to the same sex is not gay and is in fact known as SSAD (same sex attraction disorder). See National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (http://www.narth.com) for further information.
Really?!? You are trying to get people to call homosexual's Sad instead of gay? that's the gayest thing I have ever heard.



Marriage is a priveledge and not a right. No one is denying homosexuals the priveledge of marriage. A homosexual man can marry a woman just as a heterosexual man can and a "lesbian" can marry a man just like a heterosexual woman is able to. What homosexuals are seeking is a special right. Homosexuality is a choice and science does not support their claim that they are born that way. These people define themselves based on their sexual behavior and they should not be granted special rights because of it.I can only assume this is a joke. I can't imagine how anyone would claim to follow christ and have such hatred. Unless, of course, they are a heretic.

[joobz]

So, the question is, should I even try to argue with someone like this?
No. But the attempt to relabel gay with SSAD is one of the funnier things i've read in a while.

[scotth]

Seriously Xenon, you can stop with the "God says" business until you give us a reason to think God exists and the Bible is true.

[DoubtingStephen]

Xenon's claims:

So, the question is, should I even try to argue with someone like this?

I suggest harsh and merciless ridicule, within the forum rules of course. I concede that it may not change the gentleman's point of view, but it makes me feel so gay.

[Ladewig]

They can't reproduce so they must recruit! Despite homosexuals making up only 1-2% of the population they commit more than 33% of all reported child molestations in the United States.


XenonII's mind is so closed that he won't consider the possibility that the statistics he quoted are fictious, so I won't even address his position.

Instead, I want to say that I really like the JREF board. If I popped into a Christian fundie board and made the claim that fundamantalist preachers account for a tiny percentage of the population and also account for more than 33% of all reported child molestations, I'd be banned faster than a blink of an eye. The JREF philosophy that all points of view (short of libel and other criminal statements) should stand or fall based only on their merits is a worthy point of view.

[ponderingturtle]

Female prostitutes fall under the sexually immoral and adulturer labels. Just because they are not mentioned specifically does not make it ok.

But remember there is nothing wrong with dressing up as a prostitute so that you can get impregnated by your late husbands younger brothers. That is just all kinds of sexy fun according to the bible.

[ZirconBlue]

I suggest harsh and merciless ridicule, within the forum rules of course. I concede that it may not change the gentleman's point of view, but it makes me feel so gay.


That's so ssad.





;)

[ponderingturtle]

God hates crustaceans (http://GodHatesCrustaceans.com/)!

God hates mixed fibers (http://godhatesmixedfibers.com/)!


Don't even think about going to a barber (http://godhatesbarbers.com/)!

You for got the Fig (http://www.godhatesfigs.com/) God hates those things.

[DoubtingStephen]

You for got the Fig (http://www.godhatesfigs.com/) God hates those things.

I knew there was something suspicious about Fig Newtons! After all, wasn't Newton one of those homosexual agenda scientist types?

[DoubtingStephen]

Homosexuals are widely promiscious and the lifestyle is one of the "best" ways for catching and spreading AIDS (Anualy Injected Death Sentence) and other STDs.

Do I get extra points if I have my annual injection more often than once a year? There's a copay on my health plan, and I don't want to be paying for frivolous injections if only one per year is required.

Also, if people miss a year, do they still die?

[Greatest I am]

Having only skimmed through the responses, it seems that "mu" as the canonical answer hasn't been suggested so far?

Say that again in English.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

I think we should wait for God to come down from the Sky and make a ruling on this one.

I already have.

No victim= no sin.

Regards
DL

[Lonewulf]

I already have.

No victim= no sin.

Regards
DL

You aren't God.

[Greatest I am]

Homosexuality is a abominable sin worthy of death and unless they repent of that wickedness they will burn in hell for it. Same fate as anyone who is in open rebellion of God's commandments by calling an evil lifestyle "great". Romans 1:32 says that anyone that approves of that behaviour is as bad as they are and deserves the same fate.

Is incest and bestility "great" as well? They are the moral equivalent of homosexuality. The same Bible passage that speaks out against the sin of sodomy also speaks out against bestility and incest.

So all the Christian churches that now embrace homosexuals as equals will collectively go to hell.

How droll.

Homosexuality has no victims.
Bestiality does and incest does.
How can they all have the same penalty.
Where is the balance of justice?

Regards
DL

[Lonewulf]

Bestiality has victims? What if the animal wants it and the person manhandling the beast is gentle? ;)

Incest doesn't quite have victims if both partners are willing. The problem comes when you have kids.

[Greatest I am]

Having proper morals and faith in God's Holy Word does not make one a troll. Neither does disagreeing with the abomination that is the homosexual lifestyle, so called same-sex "marriage" or the radical "gay" agenda.

If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, then his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town. ... Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. (Deuteronomy 21:18,19;21)

Are you offering this law as a Christ given law or as an Antichrist given law?

Strange that in genesis even a murderer could not be touched and here we have parents killing their children. Stange.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Sex is not supposed to be a recreational hobby that one engages in "just for the fun of it". Birth control is highly immoral. It perverts God's intended function for sexual activity. It closes the door on procreation. Using any form of birth control is a grave SIN!


Is this why the Vatican finally sold off it's prophylactic stock.

Regards
DL

[DoubtingStephen]

Is this why the Vatican finally sold off it's prophylactic stock.

Regards
DL

I heard it was because Satanic European condom manufacturers had laced the condoms with HIV (http://www.secularism.org.uk/86255.html).

I think it has something to do with Protecting the Sanctity of Altar Boys?

[Unalienable]

Religion doesn't follow any rule that all crimes must have victims. What about the prohibitions in the Old Testament against eating owls, eagles, and bats? Or keeping the Sabbath holy?

I think it comes down to this: some people find some behaviors so repugnant that they would prefer that nobody acts that way. They then seek to impose their beliefs on others to prevent them from performing that offensive behavior.

"Why can't they just mind their own business?" you may ask. Yes, very good question.

[Lonewulf]

I vote we all butt out and let the two religious fundies argue it out for amusement value.

[Greatest I am]

You aren't God.

If others can speak for God then so can I.
I am closer to Him than most.
Trust me.

Regards
DL

[joobz]

I vote we all butt out and let the two religious fundies argue it out for amusement value.
I agree. This deep probing into their anal retentive psyche is a bit too personal. I'd rather withdraw now before someone erupts in frustration.

[thaiboxerken]

It appears to go against His usual justice.


Your mistake here is that you're trying to assign reasonable thinking to an irrational belief. The biblical god is absurd, and as such, has many contradictory positions and many silly, arbitrary rules that make no sense.

[ThatSoundAgain]

If others can speak for God then so can I.

Hey, that's actually quite a cool principle!

God just told me to tell you this:


Dear Creation. I know I haven't been around much lately, but I'd like you to know that all this business with the wars you've got going on now is really quite amusing. It almost makes up for the general lack of brutal stonings of disobedient children these days. Almost.

Also, all you people who claim that morals only derive from my Divine Word, as of today the Divine Word is that murder and idol-worship is now moral, but only on tuesdays in odd-numbered months. Needless to say, the reverse is also true: On the aforementioned days, failure to commit murder and idolatry will be considered a grave sin, so get moving. There's bonus heavenly cookie points for effort.

If any of this is distasteful to you, well, tough luck. You can try filing a complaint (three copies, notarized) through the usual channels, but don't expect any miracles.

...

And quit groveling!


Trust me. God and me are like this.