Homosexuality as a Sin(off topic from other thread)

AtomicHorror · 16-12-2008 02:07AM

UU wrote: »

Oh please not this topic again!!! I always end up repeating myself but anyway...

Well as a homosexual man I think that I can rightfully offer a better opinion on my sexuality than anyone else can and no I'm not being superioristic but people end up making silly outlandish statements about something they really have no clue about! Firstly, it is not a choice! Why on earth would you choose to be gay? (considering the absolute crap you have to put up with!!!) You cannot choose who you are sexually attracted to. You can only choose who you have sex with.

As religion, in this case Christianity, is concerned, the issue of homosexuality is not the most clear because what was said about it is mainly featured in the Old Testament where the most clear statement said against it is in Leviticus but who on earth who follow Leviticus? It also says in that very same book that you can kill disobedient children, it is an abomination to wear fabric made from two different material,s to eat shellfish and to plant two on the same crops in the same field! Besides it actually only mentions gay man or more accurately sodomites. That means gay men who are anal virgins and lesbians are excluded!

In the New Testament, Jesus doesn't even say a word on the issue! He mentions prostitutes but homosexuals and prostitutes are not synonymous nouns! Besides, if homosexuality is so wrong then how come it occurs in hundreds of different species not just humans? Also what about bisexuals are they half sinning considering they're only half gay? Also nobody knows what God thinks! Even though I'm an atheist if still poses a question.

As a gay person I think discrimination is wrong as is any form of it. What is also wrong is how certain people seem to think gay relationships are their business. If two contending adults choose to be with each that is their choice and not your place to judge. Gay, lesbian and bisexuals will get our rights in this country and we will continue to fight against the discrimination and unequal laws that face us.

Firstly, let me say good on you for having the courage to be yourself despite the vile crap that I'm sure must be intermittently directed at you. It should be blatantly obvious to anyone that your desires could never be a choice. Your open stand on this is though, and a commendable one too.

The thing that always gets me is the blanket anti-gay thing. As you say, only "sodomites" are specifically mentioned. So are we to assume that lesbianism is okay? Should there be lesbian marriage under God? Their lifestyle certainly doesn't include any of the "harm" cited by Wolfsbane. I suspect the gaps between the definite parts of scripture are being rather conveniently filled with whatever people wanted to believe in the first place.

UU · 16-12-2008 02:14AM

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Firstly, let me say good on you for having the courage to be yourself despite the vile crap that I'm sure must be intermittently directed at you. It should be blatantly obvious to anyone that your desires could never be a choice. Your open stand on this is though, and a commendable one too.

The thing that always gets me is the blanket anti-gay thing. As you say, only "sodomites" are specifically mentioned. So are we to assume that lesbianism is okay? Should there be lesbian marriage under God? Their lifestyle certainly doesn't include any of the "harm" cited by Wolfsbane. I suspect the gaps between the definite parts of scripture are being rather conveniently filled with whatever people wanted to believe in the first place.

Heya thanks a million for your support!

Well I think it's a sad thing that some are homophobic. I mean my grandmother is an observant Catholic and she has no problem with me being gay because she believes in a loving God not a vindictive one (that is the sort of religion I respect by the way). To be honest I could stay here and have a big theological war with a Christian here who is anti-gay but there's no point because people know deep down what is right and what is wrong and if discrimination in certain cases is considered right then I really wouldn't want to associate myself with that person. But in Dublin anyway homosexuality isn't a stigma as much and I know many young people who are totally cool with it.

AtomicHorror · 16-12-2008 02:18AM

UU wrote: »

But in Dublin anyway homosexuality isn't a stigma as much and I know many young people who are totally cool with it.

I think that's more or less the case across the country, at least in urban areas and wherever there are universities! NUI Maynooth is, as far as I can tell, largely controlled by a shadowy yet fabulous LGB cabal.

UU · 16-12-2008 02:27AM

AtomicHorror wrote: »

I think that's more or less the case across the country, at least in urban areas and wherever there are universities! NUI Maynooth is, as far as I can tell, largely controlled by a shadowy yet fabulous LGB cabal.

Haha that would be an understatement to say the least! :P

Spyral · 16-12-2008 02:43AM

33 year old unmarried jewish man 2000 years ago... "seems pretty gay to me"..[bart simpson]

The Bible specifically condemns homosexual acts, but commends heterosexual acts carried out within marriage.

bible also condems shellfish... but since when do the fundies care about that ?

UU · 16-12-2008 02:50AM

Spyral wrote: »

33 year old unmarried jewish man 2000 years ago... "seems pretty gay to me"..[bart simpson]

bible also condems shellfish... but since when do the fundies care about that ?

I have a great idea! Lets protest outside seafood restaurants for their abomination!!! haha lol

AtomicHorror · 16-12-2008 02:55AM

Spyral wrote: »

33 year old unmarried jewish man 2000 years ago... "seems pretty gay to me"..[bart simpson]

bible also condems shellfish... but since when do the fundies care about that ?

I think they don't pay much heed to the old testament stuff. They have a new testament basis for the homosexuality=sin thing.

Fanny Cradock · 16-12-2008 03:16AM

UU wrote: »

I have a great idea! Lets protest outside seafood restaurants for their abomination!!! haha lol

Perhaps you should actually read up on what it says in the bible and Christians believe before launching into the comedy routine.

UU · 16-12-2008 03:24AM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Perhaps you should actually read up on what it says in the bible and Christians believe before launching into the comedy routine.

Oh quit being so serious and have a laugh for once! Geesh! :mad:

Fanny Cradock · 16-12-2008 03:29AM

Your 'joke' wasn't funny. Rather, through ignorance or otherwise, it was a misrepresentation of what Christians believe. Let's also try and avoid making me out to be a humourless sod because I'm a Christian - that happened independently of my beliefs.

You're banned for a week, btw.

Just kidding

:pac:

Or am I?

UU · 16-12-2008 03:35AM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Your 'joke' wasn't funny. Rather, through ignorance or otherwise, it was a misrepresentation of what Christians believe. Let's also try and avoid making me out to be a humourless sod because I'm a Christian - that happened independently of my beliefs.

You're banned for a week, btw.

Just kidding

:pac:

Or am I?

Well AtomicHorror never said it was Christians that happened to believe in it I just said it was what is said in the Bible, Old Testament in Leviticus. Even if Christians don't happen to follow the shellfish restraint, Jews certainly still do to this day. To them it is not considered Kosher and they have evidence from the same book you use to back up their view. I never said you're humorless because of your beliefs. I know many boring atheists so don't worry. :P

Nodin · 16-12-2008 09:44AM

wolfsbane wrote: »

studiorat said:

I'm telling you the author of the article you posted, Bruce Bagemihl, was gay:

Unless you can prove his data is incorrect, and is consistently so, that doesn't dismiss him as a source.

wolfsbane wrote: »

So any opinion of the obit writer of the NY Times is ipso facto impartial and truthful?:

No, but the governing bodies of the psychological and psychiatric proffessions in the US regard therapy to "cure" homosexuality as actively 'harmful'. As these are large, fairly conservative organisations you'd have to explain why they take that stance and why your bucko is out in the cold.

wolfsbane wrote: »

The heretic! Imagine, challenging the Magisterium. He should have been burnt at the stake - or at least struck off the register. :pac:

No, thats another guy, who tried the same thing, but less successfully. His name escapes me for the moment.

The Mad Hatter · 16-12-2008 10:49AM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Let's also try and avoid making me out to be a humourless sod because I'm a Christian - that happened independently of my beliefs.

Hang on - now you're a sod too?

Everyone on the gay bus!

sukikettle · 16-12-2008 10:55PM

Dear UU
You say you cannot help your sexuality but you can be delivered of homosexuality. Jesus was a deliverer as well as a healer. He loves you and wants you free

wolfsbane · 16-12-2008 11:08PM

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Firstly, let me say good on you for having the courage to be yourself despite the vile crap that I'm sure must be intermittently directed at you. It should be blatantly obvious to anyone that your desires could never be a choice. Your open stand on this is though, and a commendable one too.

The thing that always gets me is the blanket anti-gay thing. As you say, only "sodomites" are specifically mentioned. So are we to assume that lesbianism is okay? Should there be lesbian marriage under God? Their lifestyle certainly doesn't include any of the "harm" cited by Wolfsbane. I suspect the gaps between the definite parts of scripture are being rather conveniently filled with whatever people wanted to believe in the first place.

Let me remind you once again that 'harm' is not the basis of my rejection of homosexuality as a valid sexuality. God's word is.

As to lesbianism, it too is covered in the Romans 1 text: 26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

I'm short of time tonight - Xmas pressure! - but will come back to your other posts latter in the week, DV.

wolfsbane · 16-12-2008 11:20PM

UU wrote: »

Firstly, it is not a choice! Why on earth would you choose to be gay? (considering the absolute crap you have to put up with!!!) You cannot choose who you are sexually attracted to. You can only choose who you have sex with.

I'll just cover this point tonight. Hope to respond to the rest later.

Is paedophilia a choice? Why would anyone choose such a dangerous sexuality? They too say they are born that way.

No, there is choice for everyone. Enviromental factors work on our sinful dispositions, but the choice is ours. Perverted sex is a sinful response to our circumstances. We will have lesser or greater culpability depending on the pressures - but no excuses.

That applies to all sins - heterosexual, homosexual, theft, drunkenness, idolatry, murder.

We can't just pull one of those out and excuse it as natural. Rape and murder is natural, as evidenced in the chimpanzees.

Spyral · 16-12-2008 11:36PM

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Quite right. Putting one's life on the line for the safety of others is something that few people do. Statistically abnormal. Abhorrent? Rubbish.

Normality has no simple correlation with morality. Natural and unnatural are meaningless concepts. All we're left with is harm and benefit, which are based on the shared values of society.

So I'll ask again: in what way does the harm associated with homosexuality outweigh the benefit? Because it really looks like it does not at all. All you're left with is the authority of scripture.

what authority from scripture ? A scripture that's been translated back and forth by an orginisation with a severe bias against homosexuals..

AtomicHorror · 16-12-2008 11:46PM

wolfsbane wrote: »

Let me remind you once again that 'harm' is not the basis of my rejection of homosexuality as a valid sexuality. God's word is.

Yes, but surely you cannot abandon your own assessment of these things entirely? What if God's word has been compromised by fallible people? By your estimation of things, you must surely risk much by accepting morality on authority. And also, has it not been said elsewhere here that the morality of God speaks to all of us? Does that not suggest that something subjective is valid here?

wolfsbane wrote: »

I'll just cover this point tonight. Hope to respond to the rest later.

Is paedophilia a choice? Why would anyone choose such a dangerous sexuality? They too say they are born that way.

They most likely are. But there's a world of difference between desire and action. In action, the two are not comparable and it is insulting and bigoted to suggest otherwise. One cannot be expressed as action with consent, the other can. One is immoral in action, the other is not.

You see the difference, but you'd rather accept text than your own senses.

wolfsbane wrote: »

No, there is choice for everyone. Enviromental factors work on our sinful dispositions, but the choice is ours. Perverted sex is a sinful response to our circumstances.

I'd say you're just homophobic and like to use the Word as a convenient excuse not to have to face up to your irrationality, your fear and immorality.

AtomicHorror · 16-12-2008 11:48PM

Spyral wrote: »

what authority from scripture ? A scripture that's been translated back and forth by an orginisation with a severe bias against homosexuals..

I agree of course. But since the infallibility of the bible is unquestionable, just as the authority of it is, we're at an impasse.

PDN recently wrote somewhere that all systems, all ideologies, must be questionable to their core. A shame that there are so many who disagree. I guess they're afraid of that complicated world in which we sometimes have to make some calls on our own.

AtomicHorror · 16-12-2008 11:51PM

sukikettle wrote: »

Dear UU
You say you cannot help your sexuality but you can be delivered of homosexuality. Jesus was a deliverer as well as a healer. He loves you and wants you free

There's nothing to heal. UU is healthy. UU is happy. He is honest about who he is and at peace with that. He holds no negative judgement against anyone who does not harm others. I'd go far as to suggest that this alone makes him healthier than some here.

sukikettle · 16-12-2008 11:58PM

Atomic I've met people healed of homosexuality. UU said he'd never have chosen to be born gay.

AtomicHorror · 17-12-2008 12:02AM

sukikettle wrote: »

Atomic I've met people healed of homosexuality.

Then you've met some people who are mentally repressed and probably very much mentally ill.

sukikettle wrote: »

UU said he'd never have chosen to be born gay.

No he didn't. He asked why anyone would make such a choice given the discrimination they would face- this was a statement intended to make a nonsense of the concept that homosexuality might be a choice. That's not the same thing as wishing to be something other.

rainbow kirby · 17-12-2008 03:33AM

sukikettle wrote: »

Atomic I've met people healed of homosexuality. UU said he'd never have chosen to be born gay.

It's not a disease, there's nothing to be healed of.

PDN · 17-12-2008 03:58AM

Spyral wrote: »

what authority from scripture ? A scripture that's been translated back and forth by an orginisation with a severe bias against homosexuals..

We have Hebrew and Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament and New Testament (ie the original languages in which they were written). Are you seriously suggesting that the passages which address homosexuality are mistranslated? If so, could you please provide some evidence for this extraordinary claim? I will be very interested to see how you will demonstrate that every reputable Hebrew and Greek scholar has somehow got it wrong.

Asiaprod · 17-12-2008 04:16AM

sukikettle wrote: »

Atomic I've met people healed of homosexuality. UU said he'd never have chosen to be born gay.

No he did not, what he said was

Firstly, it is not a choice! Why on earth would you choose to be gay? (considering the absolute crap you have to put up with!!!) You cannot choose who you are sexually attracted to. You can only choose who you have sex with.

As a general poster here
For my part, I very much doubt you have ever met anyone who has been healed of homosexuality. It is not a disease and there is nothing to be cured in that respect. It is a genetic or personal preference, and it is not unique to the human race. Show me medical proof please of someone who has been medically cured of homosexuality.

Moderators note
I would also like to see more dialogue from you in future posts, the last folk here who did nothing but spout articles or extracts from the bible and associated works came to a rather sticky end, I would hate to see that happen to you too. Read the posts and reply to their content, or ask further questions. This forum is not a soapbox for you to proselytize your beliefs. There is a right way and a wrong way to get your message across. I recommend you learn the right way as it will stand to you in the long run. As things currently stand, IMO your actions do in fact do your faith a great disservice.

Nodin · 17-12-2008 10:07AM

wolfsbane wrote: »

I'll just cover this point tonight. Hope to respond to the rest later.

Is paedophilia a choice? Why would anyone choose such a dangerous sexuality? They too say they are born that way.

No, there is choice for everyone. Enviromental factors work on our sinful dispositions, but the choice is ours. Perverted sex is a sinful response to our circumstances. We will have lesser or greater culpability depending on the pressures - but no excuses.

That applies to all sins - heterosexual, homosexual, theft, drunkenness, idolatry, murder.

We can't just pull one of those out and excuse it as natural. Rape and murder is natural, as evidenced in the chimpanzees.

Earlier you stated "'harm' is not the basis of my rejection of homosexuality as a valid sexuality. God's word is." Why then do you keep making invalid comparsions with clearly harmful practices to justify yourself?

Zombrex · 17-12-2008 10:56AM

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Yes, but surely you cannot abandon your own assessment of these things entirely?

Interesting point ... often the argument made on this forum for the actual existence of God in the first place is that it makes sense, that what is described in the Bible fits with what believers hold should be true, what makes sense to be true, that after rational assessment it was determined that God exists and is the god described in the Bible.

I always found these points rather unconvincing, and after a thread like this one, or say one on the genocide in the Old Testament, I find it even less convincing.

There seems to be an awful lot of cyclical reasoning taking place. God is good, therefore his decree on homosexuality must be correct and moral. We hold it true because God has said it and because God is always good. We know this because ????

The decree on homosexuality isn't correct and moral though. Would anyone hold homosexuality as immoral unless they had been told by God that it is?

So what reasoning lead to the conclusion that God decision is good in the first place? What is the logic to get around this?

When people were rationally deciding that God is the god described in the Bible did they just ignore these parts?

It is a bit of a cop out to say that this is just what God says, because at some level everyone here who believes that had to make a decision that this is God, that a god who describes homosexuality as being an abomination is a god that actually exists (and is supposed to be good)

Once again I find myself as a non-believer bewildered at which part of this I'm supposed to take as evidence the Christian God exists and loves me.

When ever we get into these discussions it is always the excuse that one has to first believe God exists to trust that his views on something like homosexuality are moral and right.

I'm at a loss though of why anyone reading this stuff would think "Yes, that is clearly the god that exists"

** POSSIBLY this discussion belongs in A&A, not sure, will leave it up to the mods if they feel it should be moved over there to no offend in this forum

Mark Hamill · 17-12-2008 01:04PM

sukikettle wrote: »

Dear UU
You say you cannot help your sexuality but you can be delivered of homosexuality. Jesus was a deliverer as well as a healer. He loves you and wants you free

I dont remember Jesus ever converting someone from homosexuality to heterosexuality. I dont even remember Jesus saying anything about homosexuality being a sin, in fact, I seem to remember Jesus saying something about how we should all love our fellow man...

wolfsbane wrote:

Let me remind you once again that 'harm' is not the basis of my rejection of homosexuality as a valid sexuality. God's word is.

As to lesbianism, it too is covered in the Romans 1 text: 26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

Funny how Ruth and Naomi seem to be commended for being lesbians in the book of Ruth. Its also odd how god punishes these people with an act they enjoy, how can that be a punishment? Also Romans 1:32 says "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". So I'll ask again, why aren't you calling for their death? How do you console the fact that you are picking and choosing your interpretations of pieces of bible, some only a few lines apart? Do you not think your god will see through your deception, that all you have is your own homophobia and that the parts of the bible you hide behind are the just the bits you feel you can get away with?

wolfsbane wrote:

That applies to all sins - heterosexual, homosexual, theft, drunkenness, idolatry, murder.

Heterosexuality is a sin?

Mark Hamill · 17-12-2008 01:15PM

Wicknight wrote: »

There seems to be an awful lot of cyclical reasoning taking place. God is good, therefore his decree on homosexuality must be correct and moral. We hold it true because God has said it and because God is always good. We know this because ????

The decree on homosexuality isn't correct and moral though. Would anyone hold homosexuality as immoral unless they had been told by God that it is?

The way i see it, if god is the most good and moral being in existence, then all his decrees should be good and moral. And seeing as god is the most good and moral, then his decrees should be pretty much evidently good and moral. So unless humanity just doesn't understand anything much about being good and moral (and what that say about everything we do) it should be able to see a good and moral reason for homosexuality being wrong.
How many discussion in this forum have their been on homosexuality? On this website? On the internet? In the world? Now I may not have read/heard every argument against homosexuality, but I have yet to come across one self evident reason that even hints that homosexuality is bad and immoral.

Wicknight wrote: »

So what reasoning lead to the conclusion that God decision is good in the first place? What is the logic to get around this?

When people were rationally deciding that God is the god described in the Bible did they just ignore these parts?

I think its just a case that if you were to believe in the god of the bible, you'd almost have to believe he was good, because if he wasn't, you would have to admit that humanity is pretty much screwed and all this is for nothing. Its kinda like beaten wife syndrome, if you believe you love someone who hurts you, you have to believe that they are actually good, and that you deserve it because if they aren't really good, then you have made a monstrous mistake, and you are all alone.

The Mad Hatter · 17-12-2008 01:25PM

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Heterosexuality is a sin?

I think he means heterosexual sins, like sex outside marriage, masturbation, etc., etc.

Homosexuality as a Sin(off topic from other thread)

Comments