Religious Controversies: Homosexuality

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]farmerson12 wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
If the I Ching isn’t completely right, then there can be no right or wrong.

If the Qu’ran isn’t completely right, then there can be no right or wrong.

See how the whole “If there is no God/if the bible is wrong then there can be no right or wrong” argument is fucking stupid?[/quote]

Good gosh this is the dumbest strawman ever. never mentioned the bible or Christianity or the christian god.[/quote]

Who did you think I meant when I said Sky Wizard, babe? [/quote]

Look man. You clearly dont believe in any type of god, let alone the Christian God.

[/quote]

Wrong. I’m a pantheist, I believe in god. Just not Sky Wizard.

[quote]

So why bother with this post? Lets just say we werent talking about homosexuality, and were about murder, adultery, or robbery. Are they wrong to you? They are wrong to society and government but why to you? And I myself(as a Christian) havent decided on the homosexuality dicussion but you did mention that homosexuals get alot of mistreatment. Really? Check the media. Every show, movie, and newscast welcome them with open arms like everyone else. And Im glad they do bc whether they are wrong or not, they are human. Also I will admit that I do use the word “gay” alot. Ex: If my fiancee asked me if i would wear a pink shirt, I would no. If she asked why? I would say bc it looks gay. Meaning that it looks feminine. Its meaning has developed so much that many people say it without directing in a bigotry way. [/quote]

But the topic isnt murder or robbery, it’s homosexuality. If you want to talk about those things, make threads about them.

And, yes, poor you, when you describe anything you don’t like as “gay”, people call you a bigot. Imagine that… just the other day someone asked if I wanted taco bell and I said “Nah I dont want any of that spic shit”… and they called me a racist! Go figure![/quote]

Ok you (somewhat) answered 2 of my questions/statements and I respect that. But I am still curious why you argue with any of those who are against it when you arent a Christian. If someone made a thread saying that they believe homesexuality is wrong due to specific articles or verses speak against it, Im not going to bother saying anything in that thread. Why? Because its not my religion therefore why would my assumption matter in their retrospect? Again, Im trying to have an mature conversation so leave the bs and sarcasm out. It makes this whole thread alot faster

102

Why do people constantly argue over these things? Why do you personally care if someone is gay? Let them live their gay lives and be happy, they are not harming ANYONE. Let people live THEIR lives the way they want it. Everyone gets ONE LIFE so let them decide how they want to spend their only 100 years on Earth. Stop trying to persecute people over trivial things.

As for what is right and wrong. ITS SIMPLE, WHATEVER IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SOCIETY IS “WRONG” Everything else is subjective and depends on your culture.

I don’t need an imaginary person in the sky telling me how to live my life. I also do not understand how people can believe in something that has never been proven before in history.

As what cappedandplanit was saying about the sexual difference, he is right. It clearly states the HUSBAND is THE HEAD as Jesus is head of the church. What the fuck else does this possibly mean other than woman being beneath men. (If his quotes are correct)

103

[quote]BBriere wrote:
Being homosexual is not a sin. Practicing homosexuality is. I don’t believe it’s neccessarily either a choice or naturally ocurring. I believe certain people have desires for the same sex. That can’t be taught. Nobody had to teach me or millions of other horny boys to like girls. Meanwhile, we don’t all act on our carnal desires. If we did, you would have a lot more pedophiles in the world. The thing that I don’t understand is how a society that can slam a priest for being a pedophile can think it’s perfectly OK for two men to have sex. Both are wrong because they are both perversions.[/quote]

You sir, are a tard.

104

[quote]MangoMan305 wrote:
As what cappedandplanit was saying about the sexual difference, he is right. It clearly states the HUSBAND is THE HEAD as Jesus is head of the church. What the fuck else does this possibly mean other than woman being beneath men. (If his quotes are correct)
[/quote]

Consider the other side of the metaphor: does Jesus treat the church as people that are beneath him? No, His entire existence has been in service of the church which culminated in giving His life for the church.

[quote]MangoMan305 wrote:
As for what is right and wrong. ITS SIMPLE, WHATEVER IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SOCIETY IS “WRONG” Everything else is subjective and depends on your culture.
[/quote]

Would you say that homosexuality was wrong before the advent of artificial insemination? If people had been wholly homosexual, humans would cease to exist. Isn’t that counter productive to society?

To answer the original question, the Bible is clear about homosexuality being wrong. I, however, absolutely do NOT think that the best way to reach the gay community is by calling them fags and pole smokers. These words are full of fear and hatred which is completely contrary to a real Christian faith.

105

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…okay Mike, i’ll bite, it’ll be fun:

[quote]
Unlike other things in nature, humans have free will. Thus, humans can make a conscious choice to engage in behavior that would otherwise be unnatural. That is the purpose of Natural Law - to impose a sense of what is natural because humans have the ability to essentially “override” what would otherwise be considered natural [/quote]

…not too long ago lefthandedness was considered “of the devil” and left handed children were forced to use their right hand. Did these children make a free-will choice to use their left hand? No. Was it free will to be forced to use their right hand? No. Besides, free will is a concept i don’t believe in: we don’t have free will. The distinction between natural and unnatural is subjective and influenced heavily by culture and society. This distinction is therefore far from universal, and thus invalid…

…so, religious notions of law are equal to Natural Law? How does that affect my statement since i believe in neither? If such notions change and as a result infringe on your preferences and life, would you still say it’s a valid position?

…the use of the word faith, as if faith is something magical, something more than opinion/prejudice is total and utter bullshit. Calling opinion faith does not make that opinion less of an opinion. Dress-up a turd and guess what; it’s still a turd. Please show the audience how faith adds truth to a certain position, and how faith is more than an opinion, please…

…Mike, how can homosexuality be a violation of Natural Law if homosexuality is prevalent in nature itself?[/quote]

You got me with the left-handedness argument. I’m not sure how a Natural Law theorist would argue that one. A Bible literalist would simply argue that the Bible doesn’t condemn being left-handed. So it seems clear that religion and faith play a big part in this issue.

106

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

…Mike, how can homosexuality be a violation of Natural Law if homosexuality is prevalent in nature itself?[/quote]

You got me with the left-handedness argument. I’m not sure how a Natural Law theorist would argue that one. A Bible literalist would simply argue that the Bible doesn’t condemn being left-handed. So it seems clear that religion and faith play a big part in this issue.[/quote]

…if being lefthanded was seen as “from the devil” without biblical condemnation, and this changed due to increasing knowledge of DNA and hereditary traits, the issue of homosexuality could have a different cause in religious circles since many other biblical condemnations aren’t observed by religious people. The fact that so many christian t.v. evangelicals were outed as gay inspite of their vigorous condemnation of homosexuality points to this. Thanks for playing!

107

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

…Mike, how can homosexuality be a violation of Natural Law if homosexuality is prevalent in nature itself?[/quote]

You got me with the left-handedness argument. I’m not sure how a Natural Law theorist would argue that one. A Bible literalist would simply argue that the Bible doesn’t condemn being left-handed. So it seems clear that religion and faith play a big part in this issue.[/quote]

…if being lefthanded was seen as “from the devil” without biblical condemnation, and this changed due to increasing knowledge of DNA and hereditary traits, the issue of homosexuality could have a different cause in religious circles since many other biblical condemnations aren’t observed by religious people. The fact that so many christian t.v. evangelicals were outed as gay inspite of their vigorous condemnation of homosexuality points to this. Thanks for playing![/quote]

LMAO - I really am enjoying this thread . . . never seen so many “experts” on Christianity in my life!

108

[quote]clip11 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
According to the bible, men lusting for other men is a sin. Period.

But I think a healthy Christian would see that everyone sins, and being gay isn’t any worse than committing adultery even in your heart (lusting after other women), or sex outside of marriage.

I’ve never understood the logic in thinking homosexuality is some how a special sin that should be singled out.

How can a guy that sleeps around condemn others for homosexuality?[/quote]

Well in the Old Testament, men were never punished for having sex with multiple women. The only case was when it was another mans wife. In fact, in the Old Testament, it never condemns a man sleeping with a woman. The story of David and Bathsheba was because he took another mans wife, not just because he had sex with Bathsheba. If she had been a single woman, it may or may not have even been mentioned in the bible. However, it does repeatedly condemns homosexuality, even requiring the death penalty for it. But thats from a biblical standpoint.[/quote]

Yes, lusting after women is a sin in the bible.

And if you are going to skim through the bible only seeing physical punishments, technically, god doesn’t punish any sin. sheep going to heaven and goats to hell isn’t a physical punishment.

109

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Or even consentual sex between a man and a woman who aren’t married.

Thats “perverse” and “sinful”, right, Pat? How about we compare homosexuality to that?[/quote]

I talked this subject in the very first response in the thread. AND several other have echoed the sentiment. Try reading the thread first.

110

[quote]MangoMan305 wrote:
Why do people constantly argue over these things? Why do you personally care if someone is gay? Let them live their gay lives and be happy, they are not harming ANYONE. Let people live THEIR lives the way they want it. Everyone gets ONE LIFE so let them decide how they want to spend their only 100 years on Earth. Stop trying to persecute people over trivial things.

As for what is right and wrong. ITS SIMPLE, WHATEVER IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SOCIETY IS “WRONG” Everything else is subjective and depends on your culture.

I don’t need an imaginary person in the sky telling me how to live my life. I also do not understand how people can believe in something that has never been proven before in history.

As what cappedandplanit was saying about the sexual difference, he is right. It clearly states the HUSBAND is THE HEAD as Jesus is head of the church. What the fuck else does this possibly mean other than woman being beneath men. (If his quotes are correct)

[/quote]

WHATEVER IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SOCIETY IS “WRONG”

This has never been proven and there is absolutely no evidence to support it. You’re an idiot by your own admittance.

And did you read the rest of the stuff about the head of the family? Do you realize christ let himself be tortured and killed to save the church. Do you realize that his entire life was in service of the church? If anything that sounds like he was beneath the church.

Let go with another analogy since no one will read or has an argument against all the other posts I’ve made on the subject. What is more important or valuable to you as a person, your head, or your heart? Does your head really make all your decisions?

111

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Hurting no-one else in no way ties into what I consider good or bad. I think suicide is wrong too.[/quote]

You really think suicide only hurts the person killing themselves??[/quote]

You really think a homosexual relationship effects no one but the consenting adults?[/quote]

There is a difference between two gay people making you squeamish and a mental trauma caused by suicide.

:open_mouth:

112

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If god made it that way, its valid.

Besides, if you don’t know the difference between social convention and religious god ordained structure, you’re hopeless. We aren’t discussing social convention.[/quote]

Presupposition that the Christian God exists. That’s still in the air.

The problem isn’t that you hate/dislike/condemn gays, it’s that people like you actively deny them rights.[/quote]

I never said he does exist. But the argument wasn’t about his existence, it was about the right or wrong of text.

And you need to check what you are saying about me because you’re showing yourself as an idiot resorting to stereotypes rather than actually addressing me or my beliefs.[/quote]

You said if God made it that way, it’s valid.

Big assumption there. I have only gone off what you’ve given me.

113

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]clip11 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
According to the bible, men lusting for other men is a sin. Period.

But I think a healthy Christian would see that everyone sins, and being gay isn’t any worse than committing adultery even in your heart (lusting after other women), or sex outside of marriage.

I’ve never understood the logic in thinking homosexuality is some how a special sin that should be singled out.

How can a guy that sleeps around condemn others for homosexuality?[/quote]

Well in the Old Testament, men were never punished for having sex with multiple women. The only case was when it was another mans wife. In fact, in the Old Testament, it never condemns a man sleeping with a woman. The story of David and Bathsheba was because he took another mans wife, not just because he had sex with Bathsheba. If she had been a single woman, it may or may not have even been mentioned in the bible. However, it does repeatedly condemns homosexuality, even requiring the death penalty for it. But thats from a biblical standpoint.[/quote]

Yes, lusting after women is a sin in the bible.

And if you are going to skim through the bible only seeing physical punishments, technically, god doesn’t punish any sin. sheep going to heaven and goats to hell isn’t a physical punishment.[/quote]

Remember, the early church only had Old Testament as scripture. But I was saying that from a biblical standpoint, yes homosexuality is a"greater sin". According to the bible, what was the final act that caused Sodom and Gomorrah to be destroyed? What act is mentioned right before bestiality as a death sin?

114

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Hurting no-one else in no way ties into what I consider good or bad. I think suicide is wrong too.[/quote]

You really think suicide only hurts the person killing themselves??[/quote]

You really think a homosexual relationship effects no one but the consenting adults?[/quote]

There is a difference between two gay people making you squeamish and a mental trauma caused by suicide.

:O[/quote]

If you believe in the text, gay people is as much death as suicide.

115

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
I’m suggesting observing something for yourself. You’re making baseless personal attacks. Grow up, Irish.[/quote]

I haven’t attacked anyone . . . I merely said that your statement was just an allegation and alluded to the fact that in my circle we rarely, if ever discuss gays. In fact, this thread is probably the first time its come into any conversations I have had for at least 3 weeks.[/quote]

“Maybe you and your friends…” = attack.

And I’m not talking about “discussing gays”. I’m talking about calling someone you dont like a faggot, or describing something you don’t like as gay.

Please don’t act too stupid to understand the difference.[/quote]

Don’t do that either - if I don’t like someone, there’s a whole slew of names for them that I use that have nothing to do with where they stick their johnson and if I don’t like something I can actually articulate why I don’t and/or that I don’t like it without resorting to the use of a non-applicable adjective.

Not too stupid to understand the differenc,e, well, maybe I am too stupid to understand why you find it necessary to use the reference in a perjorative manner or why you think it is such a common use of the word.

Like I said, this may be a common thing in your circles, but your individual experience does not necessarily reflect society at large or that of anyone in this thread.

116

504×516 53.4 KB

[quote]BBriere wrote:
Meanwhile, we don’t all act on our carnal desires. If we did, you would have a lot more pedophiles in the world.[/quote]

Explain. Seriously.

Explain. Pedophilia causes immense trauma to its victims because of its nature. Homosexuality results in trauma because of bigotry.

117

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If god made it that way, its valid.

Besides, if you don’t know the difference between social convention and religious god ordained structure, you’re hopeless. We aren’t discussing social convention.[/quote]

Presupposition that the Christian God exists. That’s still in the air.

The problem isn’t that you hate/dislike/condemn gays, it’s that people like you actively deny them rights.[/quote]

I never said he does exist. But the argument wasn’t about his existence, it was about the right or wrong of text.

And you need to check what you are saying about me because you’re showing yourself as an idiot resorting to stereotypes rather than actually addressing me or my beliefs.[/quote]

You said if God made it that way, it’s valid.

Big assumption there. I have only gone off what you’ve given me.[/quote]

Like I said, we weren’t arguing validity of the christian god. We were arguing the morals of the bible. If you want to say “he doesn’t exist” that’s fine, but then that is where the argument ends. You cannot argue with me about the consequences of specific christian teachings and then resort to, “oh, he doesn’t exist, nany nany boo boo” when you’re losing the argument about the application of teachings. His existence is an entirely different argument. The application by a believer of the teachings can only be done with the presumption of belief.

118

[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
But I am still curious why you argue with any of those who are against it when you arent a Christian.[/quote]

They seek to trample the rights of those different to them.

Not really that hard to grasp, but I guess it’s easy to ignore.

119

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]BBriere wrote:
Meanwhile, we don’t all act on our carnal desires. If we did, you would have a lot more pedophiles in the world.[/quote]

Explain. Seriously.

Explain. Pedophilia causes immense trauma to its victims because of its nature. Homosexuality results in trauma because of bigotry.[/quote]

and gerbils . . .don’t forget the traumatized gerbils!

120

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
LMAO - I really am enjoying this thread . . . never seen so many “experts” on Christianity in my life![/quote]

You’re hardly an expert yourself.