Why The Horrible Attitude Towards Homosexuality?

PDN · 31-08-2009 8:42am

Malty_T wrote: »

With respect, that is not what is being said. We are merely pointing out that for somebody thinking they are a sin and always will be and thus have no chance of salvation is pretty dam depressing I'd have to say.

Christians don't believe that anyone is a sin, always will be, and have no chance of salvation.

Christians believe that certain behaviours are revealed by God as being incompatible with Christian faith and practice (ie sinful). But everyone has the ability to choose to refrain from such practices if they want to be saved.

I could cite some examples to make this clear - but then some illiterate moron always goes, "So you're comparing homosexuality to ....!" even though no comparison is being drawn at all. So let me suffice by saying that there are all kinds of activities that one can think of that are incompatible with Christianity, but where the person committing those acts has a constant invitation and choice to stop doing so.

lugha · 31-08-2009 8:58am

Well, no Christianity is not anti-homosexual if you take what they say literally (i.e. it is the act rather than the being that is frowned upon) but then, if you follow the official line of the BMP you will say they do not regard other cultures as inferior or if you follow the official line of Sinn Fein you will say that they want Unionist to play a full role in the construction of a United Ireland. Of course if you peer in to the hearts of what the membership of these organisations really think, the reality is a lot different. As it happens I think anti-gay prejudice prevails in most societies and has little to do with religion. The criticism I would have of Christianity (and other religions and organisations) is that they feed this prejudice by condemning gay acts. Of course, as Jimi pointed out, Christians are just following the objective teachings of their church, they have no latitude to change them. Perhaps not in the short term. But I would be interested to know how Christianity managed revisionism in the past in relation to things like say, slavery. (I fully expect some revisionism will eventually happen too in relation to homosexuality. I always thought the Christian thinking on this is decidedly unchristian). I do of course deny that the objective morality of Christianity is all that objective but if you do make that claim, then surely you can see a failing of it here? I might present to you copious amounts of evidence to show that society might benefit greatly if we were to treat homosexuals equally, but a Christian would still be bound by their church’s teachings.

equivariant · 31-08-2009 10:23am

JimiTime wrote: »

So what do you suggest Christianity do? Reject what we hold up as Gods guidance (Bible),

Yes.

In the context of homosexuality, I find many Christians seem to run scared from 'Homophobe'. I think its a political weasel word personally. It has suceeded in stigmatising anyone who expresses an objective morality on the subject. Its a toothless word to me now, though many fear its teeth are razors. If someone says 'Homophobe', they could be talking about a violent Gay Basher filled with hatread, or a peaceloving person who happens to believe in objective morality. By casting it at someone though, will have the wolves decend on that person in seconds flat. The mob have a field day with it.

This is a fairly pathetic argument. It amounts to saying 'I don't like the implications of my belief system with respect to homophobia, so I reject the validity of the concept of homophobia'.

On the contrary, homophobia is a very real and frightening thing to many homosexuals. You talk about "peace loving people people who happen to belive in objective morality". However, if that objective morality happens to include discrimination against people based on their sexual preferences, then I don't think that they can be called "peace loving". I mean, to give an analogy, one doesn't talk about 'peace loving people who happen to believe that black people should be discriminated against'.

Also, this whole logic about, 'Yeah, but if you say its sinful, then that will cause people to hate or be violent towards homosexuals etc' is just nonsense. By that logic, if someone goes out and kills a load of burglers we can say 'Its societies fault for saying stealing is wrong'.

Your analogy makes no sense whatsoever. First of all, general society deems burglary to be wrong, it does not deem homosexuality to be wrong. Second, no one is suggesting that burglary should be punished by death. What point are you trying make here?

philologos · 31-08-2009 10:29am

equivariant wrote: »

Yes.

We cannot do that. We are a community who believe to have received moral guidance from God the Almighty. No guidance of man is suitable to replace this. We are told that we are given the Gospel, we are to keep to sound doctrine, and we are the custodians of this Gospel.

Christians are called to follow the path of Jesus, the path of the prophets before Him, and the path of the Apostles after Him.

Effectively you expect us to let the water into the boat.

equivariant wrote: »

This is a fairly pathetic argument. It amounts to saying 'I don't like the implications of my belief system with respect to homophobia, so I reject the validity of the concept of homophobia'.

It is an invalid concept to call disagreement hatred. I.E the word "homophobia" is being abused.

equivariant wrote: »

On the contrary, homophobia is a very real and frightening thing to many homosexuals. You talk about "peace loving people people who happen to belive in objective morality". However, if that objective morality happens to include discrimination against people based on their sexual preferences, then I don't think that they can be called "peace loving".

I have no doubt that homophobia is real, but the Christian standpoint is in no way homophobic.

equivariant wrote: »

Your analogy makes no sense whatsoever. First of all, general society deems burglary to be wrong, it does not deem homosexuality to be wrong. Second, no one is suggesting that burglary should be punished by death. What point are you trying make here?

Christians do not have to agree with general society. Our moral standard is based on what we have been revealed, rather than based on what the world thinks.

Turtwig · 31-08-2009 10:48am

PDN wrote: »

Ah, so it is sophistry! Do you also get outraged because Santa discriminates against bad children by not bringing them presents? What about the tooth fairy? He (she?) discriminates against children with no teeth! The swine!

Now excuse me, I'm off to the lawyers. I'm suing the estate of J.M.Barries for how my feelings have been hurt by Peter Pan. Imagine discriminating against me, saying I can't fly because of my age. Ageism!

Maybe you misunderstood, but it seems you definitely missed the point.
Homosexuality, is in Christianity's view only seen as 'act' however many would attest that it's alot more than that; it is innate within the individual. Are you saying that a gay can't love a fellow gay? In my mind, your book says that's sinful, and in my mind that would destroy anyone's confidence.
Imagine it this way, by analogy, let's say someone A falls in love with the opposite sex B and loves that person deeply. Only problem is that their love is forbidden by the rules of their relgion, how does that make the two people feel? Guilty? That they are not human? They are flawed,possibly? As they cannot bring themselves to love one another, but they also cannot possibly allow themselves to love the same sex because they're just not attracted to them, what do they do? And more importantly how is their mental health now?So in my mind you can gloss over it whatever way makes you comfortable but Christianity,is by and large is anti-homosexuality.

Also, a Christian Atheist does not follow with the belief in God, s/he just follows Jesus and his morals, as I cannot remember Jesus preaching anything regarding this I'd like to know if Jesus made any reference to homosexuality. . Interestly, though one of my friends who studied Christianity in depth claims that they are some sects of Christianity that allow homosexual acts..sadly she passed away, but I'm researching this ...

Actually one quick wiki was enough

Encylopedia of Truth :P wrote:

Some Christian denominations do not view gay sex as sinful or immoral. These include the Episcopalian Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, the United Church of Canada, the United Church of Christ, the Moravian Church, and the Friends General Conference (Quakers).[1][2][3] In particular, the Metropolitan Community Church was founded specifically to serve the Christian LGBT community.

equivariant · 31-08-2009 10:52am

PDN wrote: »

Because Christianity doesn't deny anyone access to salvation. God determines who is saved or not, and Christianity simply says, "We believe that the Bible reveals to us principles necessary to salvation."

I was only following orders so. (A noble tradition that you are appealing to there). If the principles revealed in the bible are homophobic, then you should as a moral being reject them. You accuse me of sophistry and then try to argue in this way?

So, I'm presuming you believe in God and salvation, yes? You wouldn't be committing the sophistry of accusing Christianity of denying some people the privilege of obtaining something that doesn't even exist, would you?

Ah, so it is sophistry!

Hardly sophistry when I openly acknowledge my atheism.

Do you also get outraged because Santa discriminates against bad children by not bringing them presents? What about the tooth fairy? He (she?) discriminates against children with no teeth! The swine!

Now excuse me, I'm off to the lawyers. I'm suing the estate of J.M.Barries for how my feelings have been hurt by Peter Pan. Imagine discriminating against me, saying I can't fly because of my age. Ageism!

Btw, Christianity doesn't teach that anyone's sexual preferences are sinful. It teaches that certain acts are sinful.

It is interesting that as a christian your argument has got so convoluted that you have to draw analogies between god and Santa/the tooth fairy/Peter Pan

I think that these analogies are indeed very appropriate. And you illustrate perfectly the folly of basing your morality on a non existent being.

The point is that no one condemns any activity as sinful based on the supposed revealed word of Peter Pan etc. I don't want to descend to ad hominem attacks as I am quite enjoying this discussion. However, I think that some of the posters here do seem to be confused about how to use an analogy in an argument.

Turtwig · 31-08-2009 10:55am

equivariant wrote: »

some of the posters here do seem to be confused about how to use an analogy in an argument.

That would be me:(:o

equivariant · 31-08-2009 11:08am

Malty_T wrote: »

Also, a Christian Atheist does not follow with the belief in God, s/he just follows Jesus and his morals,

Off topic, I know, but from the pedant's corner, I wonder if it is appropriate to capitalize the word "christian" in the expression "christian atheist" (or indeed the word 'atheist')? Presumably such a person would view the word 'christian' as being no more worthy of capitalisation than any other adjective.

PS Do we have satanist atheists too?

robindch · 31-08-2009 11:08am

PDN wrote: »

But everyone has the ability to choose to refrain from such practices if they want to be saved.

Didn't realize that having gay sex was a barrier to going to heaven. Where exactly does it say that?

PDN wrote: »

The Ancient Greeks (or at least some of them) rejoiced in male homosexual behaviour, but, according to our old friend wikipedia: "The ancient Greeks did not conceive of sexual orientation as a social identifier, as Western societies have done for the past century..."

Try saying that to a resurrected Sacred Band of Thebes. I'd have thought that 300 gay warriors, no doubt equipped with rippling muscles daubed with olive oil, and camping it up with brass and leggings, would have had a fairly strong group identity and would probably take a fairly dim view of somebody saying they didn't.

PDN wrote: »

robindch wrote:

I bow to your superior knowledge of the fun to be had with a vacuum cleaner.

I did used to be an atheist. Remember?

If you reckon you need to have sex with a vacuum cleaner in order to be an atheist, then you're not doing atheism properly. No wonder you gave it up.

Feel free to drop drop over to A+A and we'll be happy to help you out if you feel you have any other, er, misconceptions.

lugha · 31-08-2009 11:15am

equivariant wrote: »

Off topic, I know, but from the pedant's corner, I wonder if it is appropriate to capitalize the word "christian" in the expression "christian atheist" (or indeed the word 'atheist')? Presumably such a person would view the word 'christian' as being no more worthy of capitalisation than any other adjective.

PS Do we have satanist atheists too?

I say big C as Christ was a person (and a God if you so believe). We write Newton not newton for example.

But then we write boycott rather than Boycott ....

Korasa · 31-08-2009 11:17am

Just going to throw in my two cents.

I am a man who recently refound religion after living about 10 years of my life as an avid athiest. The reason i was driven from religion is exactly what this topic was started about, disgusting prejiduce against groups who differ from what the catholic church deems "Acceptable".

While homophobia is evident in almost every culture i agree that many Christians are woefully ignorant in the way they treat homosexuals and i have even heard local preists using vulgar language in reference to homosexuals which i find truely disturbing. Christianity is at it's core, supposed to teach about love and respect for one another and yet people, who claim to be doing the work of god, twist and corrupt those teachings to suit the personal agenda of prejiduce because of something the don't understand.

I would not take anything this friend of yours says personally and while it is every persons right to beleive as they choose if you think it feasible you should consider trying to educate them in the matter and try to explain that it is everyones right to be happy and that any god should want us to be happy with the short time we have been given on this earth.

If it is something you would think about avoiding atleast go with the knowledge that not all devout christians are prejidicial and closed minded and that many of us do not look down on homosexuality but see it as two people embrassing who god made them and are doing there best to be happy. After all if god did indeed create us i would like think he would want people to be true to themselves and not live a lie.

equivariant · 31-08-2009 11:19am

Jakkass wrote: »

It is an invalid concept to call disagreement hatred. I.E the word "homophobia" is being abused.

I have no doubt that homophobia is real, but the Christian standpoint is in no way homophobic.

It is not "disagreement", it is discrimination that makes it homophobia. There is just no doubt that christian dogma discriminates against homosexuality. That, at least according to the Merriam-Webster definition quoted above, makes it homophobia.

philologos · 31-08-2009 11:21am

Explain yourself more. I'm interested.

Dublin_Gunner · 31-08-2009 11:29am

In my humble opinion, Christianity is used by some as a perfectly reasonable excuse for being horridly homophobic.

Are there not many encounters with homosexuality in the old testament?

I also find it highly hypocritical of the Church to denounce homosexuality - especially considering the abuses that have surfaced in the last 15-20 years.

PDN - to a comment you made on the first page I think; How could you, as a Christian, state that homosexuality is tolerated, yet in the same breath say its practices are condemned in the New Testament?

Surely, they are one and the same, and this is merely another blindingly obvious statement of hypocrisy?

Christian standards of morality are derived from biblical teaching

Are you trying to state, that homosexuals, who have made their choice on who they wish to love - are devoid of morality because of it? Thats basically stating that homosexuality is not tolerated, though spun in a political way so as not to sound homophobic.

I will admit, I am most certainly not a fan of the Church (or religion in general), but I do believe that everyone should be allowed to practice what they wish - but most certainly should not force their own beliefs down anyone elses throats.

What happened to 'we are all Gods children'?? Or does that only apply if you follow the rules of the Church, and teachings of their book?

equivariant · 31-08-2009 11:31am

Jakkass wrote: »

Explain yourself more. I'm interested.

I thought that my argument is fairly clearly outlined above (whether or not you agree with it).

1. Homophobia = "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals" according to Merriam-Webster.

2. Christian dogma discriminates against homosexual practise in several ways. Most obviously, it declares homosexuals acts to be sinful, which could therefore lead to a person being excluded from salvation.

1+2 = christian dogma is homophobic.

I would like to point out that the OED has a rather different definition of homophobia. Specifically, it defines homophobia as "an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexuals." In particular, it does not explicitly include discrimination in its definition. Make what you will of that.

philologos · 31-08-2009 11:42am

equivariant wrote: »

I thought that my argument is fairly clearly outlined above (whether or not you agree with it).

1. Homophobia = "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals" according to Merriam-Webster.

2. Christian dogma discriminates against homosexual practise in several ways. Most obviously, it declares homosexuals acts to be sinful, which could therefore lead to a person being excluded from salvation.

1+2 = christian dogma is homophobic.

I would like to point out that the OED has a rather different definition of homophobia. Specifically, it defines homophobia as "an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexuals." In particular, it does not explicitly include discrimination in its definition. Make what you will of that.

Let's discuss.

I have no hatred or aversion towards homosexuals. I merely believe that it is immoral to engage in homosexual acts (I.E sex between two of the same gender). That's called a moral disagreement. I also believe it immoral to take ones sister as a rival to the other, or to take ones mother as a rival to ones daughter, or take ones daughter as a rival to ones mother, amongst numerous other guidelines concerning sexuality. To say that I am making in any way a special case is wrong. This rules out both 1 and 2.

Homosexuals are welcome to worship in our churches. We have no door policy that turns anyone away from the Gospel of Christ. We are told to be impartial to all people in the Bible.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that homosexuals specifically are denied salvation. If they are willing to repent and renounce their sin, they are members of the body of Christ. I had to repent and renounce my sin, and we all need to accept that we are sinners, and we need to be forgiven to receive salvation.

This is an issue that needs to be discussed in the churches. We need to discuss it for ourselves without outside interference. The problem is that Christianity is told to remain separate. We are to remain unstained by the world while we are here, and hold fast to God's commandments. This no doubt will bring Christians into conflict with non-Christians at some point.

Korasa · 31-08-2009 11:44am

equivariant wrote: »

2. Christian dogma discriminates against homosexual practise in several ways. Most obviously, it declares homosexuals acts to be sinful, which could therefore lead to a person being excluded from salvation.

In christianity no one regardless of action is denied salvation. There is a long standing beleif that when we die we will be judged for our actions against god and if we are at the time deemed unworthy of access to the afterlife we spend time in purgatory repenting however everyone can gain forgiveness in the eyes of god.

While many christian texts and some of the more traditional practices look on homosexuality as deplorable many of the.....younger followers in the church accept that anyone regardless of race/religion/sexual orintation deserves happiness.

The way i would like to see god see things is such, A life wasted is a life of sin be happy and thou shall enter heaven unchallenged.

greendom · 31-08-2009 11:49am

robindch wrote: »

.Jesus is famously silent on male and female homosexuality, and if one is going to ignore the nasty stuff in Leviticus, then the rules on who can sleep with whom come not from Jesus, but from the many and various interpretations of Paul's decidedly ambiguous prose.

.

Good thread, intersting read. I find this bit very interesting and it makes me wonder why the Christian Church took it's anti homophobic acts line if it's principal speaker never pronounced on the matter. Is it a bit like purgatory or not eating fish on Fridays ? Cooked up by the Church for it's own reasons

equivariant · 31-08-2009 12:00pm

Korasa wrote: »

In christianity no one regardless of action is denied salvation. There is a long standing beleif that when we die we will be judged for our actions against god and if we are at the time deemed unworthy of access to the afterlife we spend time in purgatory repenting however everyone can gain forgiveness in the eyes of god.

This is not what I have read about various christian sects. It is clear that some people are condemned to hell based on their earthly actions, as well as the possibilities that you mention. Since homosexuality is viewed as sinful, this could clearly play a role in condemning someone. Moreover, even if homosexuality results in someone being place in purgatory, that still amounts to discrimination. I should state, that, personally, I find all these notions of hell, purgatory and salvation to be completely nonsensical. However, I didn't make up the rules - some lad over in Rome probably did.

While many christian texts and some of the more traditional practices look on homosexuality as deplorable many of the.....younger followers in the church accept that anyone regardless of race/religion/sexual orintation deserves happiness.

The way i would like to see god see things is such, A life wasted is a life of sin be happy and thou shall enter heaven unchallenged.

I'm not saying that all christians are homophobes. I am merely saying that the official dogma of many christian religions is homophobic.

equivariant · 31-08-2009 12:05pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that homosexuals specifically are denied salvation. If they are willing to repent and renounce their sin, they are members of the body of Christ. I had to repent and renounce my sin, and we all need to accept that we are sinners, and we need to be forgiven to receive salvation.

And if they do not think that it is a sin? Then presumably they will either be denied salvation (at least temporarily) or they are not really christian. Either way it is discrimination.

This is an issue that needs to be discussed in the churches. We need to discuss it for ourselves without outside interference. The problem is that Christianity is told to remain separate. We are to remain unstained by the world while we are here, and hold fast to God's commandments. This no doubt will bring Christians into conflict with non-Christians at some point.

No it is not just an internal issue for churches. Discrimination against a large section of the population by any organisation is an issue for all of society.

LordDorington · 31-08-2009 12:08pm

ozzirt wrote: »

It's pretty much a matter of personal perception and choices.

I hate broccoli but am not normally tagged as a Broccoliphobe, yet I also detest homosexuals and people are more than happy to hang the Homophobe label on me. Which in fact I do not mind, as I feel that it is quite normal and not in the least bit derogatory.

Someone once asked me, (several persons actually). Why exactly don't you like people who admit to being, or show signs of being Homosexuals? To which my answer was:

It's a bit like my dislike of persons who pick their nose and eat it in public,... I am revolted by it. Yet if one looks at it in all honesty, mucous is a naturally occurring bodily excretion similar to saliva, we swallow pints of it daily as it flows out of the nasal cavity and down the throat, and no body thinks twice about it.

Which brings it down to a single reason. It's a disgusting and anti social habit that goes against social expectations for people who consider themselves to be somewhat "civilised", or trying to be.

Brocolli's human rights are not protected under the constitution. Those of HUMAN BEINGS are.

philologos · 31-08-2009 12:09pm

equivariant wrote: »

And if they do not think that it is a sin? Then presumably they will either be denied salvation (at least temporarily) or they are not really christian. Either way it is discrimination.

God's standard is defined in Christian scripture. If one doesn't repent, one will be subject to God's judgement. The only way one can achieve salvation is through repentance.

If I had sinned, in any way as a heterosexual while remaining unrepentant, I would be subject to the same judgement.

There is nothing discriminatory about it if all are subject to the same conditions of judgement.

equivariant wrote: »

No it is not just an internal issue for churches. Discrimination against a large section of the population by any organisation is an issue for all of society.

It's an internal issue for us to deal with. We believe in God, and we want to serve Him best. Society has no say in what is sinful or not. That is God's decision.

Dublin_Gunner · 31-08-2009 12:10pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that homosexuals specifically are denied salvation. If they are willing to repent and renounce their sin, they are members of the body of Christ. I had to repent and renounce my sin, and we all need to accept that we are sinners, and we need to be forgiven to receive salvation.

How can you (i.e. practising Christian - not a personal question) say that 1. Homosexuality is not sinful, but 2. practising it is??

In other words, in order for a homosexual to be accepted into Church, wholly, he/she must discontinue practising homosexuality, therefore becoming not homosexual anymore?

Thos is the very same (though in a roundabout way) as saying homosexuals are not welcome.

Put any spin on it as you like, but in reality that is what is meant.

So is wanting to really kill someone not sinful, only actually killing someone is? That makes no sense at all. If thats the case, Adolf Hitler commited no sin, as he did not actually kill anyone himself.

There were questions of morality raised earlier in the thread, and I questioned it on the last page. In my opinion, if anything, it is the Churches morality that must be open to questioning, when they are openly preaching 'morals' that are fundamentally hypocritical.

philologos · 31-08-2009 12:16pm

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

How can you (i.e. practising Christian - not a personal question) say that 1. Homosexuality is not sinful, but 2. practising it is??

Is it possible to be in a relationship without having sex? Yes or no?

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

In other words, in order for a homosexual to be accepted into Church, wholly, he/she must discontinue practising homosexuality, therefore becoming not homosexual anymore?

Only homosexual acts. I.E having sex with one of the same gender.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Thos is the very same (though in a roundabout way) as saying homosexuals are not welcome.

Not particularly. Anyone is open to come and read and learn about what Christianity is irrespective of sexual orientation. It isn't my fault or anyone elses fault if people aren't willing to follow it's tenets.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Put any spin on it as you like, but in reality that is what is meant.

If anyone is putting any spin on here, it is the critics on this thread.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

So is wanting to really kill someone not sinful, only actually killing someone is? That makes no sense at all.

Both are actually. In Christianity if you are angry without cause it is the same as murder according to Jesus.

You are attempting to claim that the Christian attitude to sexuality is something else to what it actually is. I would welcome anyone of LGBT orientation to church, I would also expect the LGBT person to understand that Christians have guidelines and live according to the moral standard that they live by.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

There were questions of morality raised earlier in the thread, and I questioned it on the last page. In my opinion, if anything, it is the Churches morality that must be open to questioning, when they are openly preaching 'morals' that are fundamentally hypocritical.

How is it the churches morality that it must be open to questioning? I think we should discuss it, but I think that Christians within the church should be the ones doing this discussing. If you have no interest in keeping the Gospel, it isn't appropriate for society to be throwing demands to people within the church.

Question all you want, but asking us to change the commandments to suit you is a bit haughty.

Korasa · 31-08-2009 12:16pm

equivariant wrote: »

This is not what I have read about various christian sects. It is clear that some people are condemned to hell based on their earthly actions, as well as the possibilities that you mention. Since homosexuality is viewed as sinful, this could clearly play a role in condemning someone. Moreover, even if homosexuality results in someone being place in purgatory, that still amounts to discrimination. I should state, that, personally, I find all these notions of hell, purgatory and salvation to be completely nonsensical. However, I didn't make up the rules - some lad over in Rome probably did.

Don't get me wrong. I was not implying that homosexuals instantly warrent a place in purgatory it was more of a general statement inregards to those that do anything at all to offend god however I am not arrogant enough to assume i know what does and does not offend god. It's something i will not know until my own number is up.

I stand by my opinion, i follow in many of the teachings of Jesus Christ and his church however i disagree with many aswell, I am of the opinion that homosexuals have done nothing that could be considered a sin, I beleive that the teachings of the catholic church have been largly corrupted and twisted to suit someone elses personal agenda, I don't beleive any religous document should be used as a weapon of discrimination and those Christians who try are ignoring One of the key tenants of our faith, love for others, while taking one issue, that Jesus Christ himself never adressed, and blowing out of proportion because they wish to feel morally superior.

I agree with you on many points, that many view points expressed in the bible basically state that Homosexuality may send you directly to hell, however, the bible was written largely by man, and while created in gods image, man is flawed.

eightyfish · 31-08-2009 12:44pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Is it possible to be in a relationship without having sex? Yes or no?
Only homosexual acts. I.E having sex with one of the same gender.

Only celibate homosexuals are not sinning? What planet are you living on where sex is not important? Straight people have sex. (Except priests.) Gay people have sex. Sex in an integral part of life. To say it's okay to be gay as long as you don't have sex is, frankly, ridiculous.

Turtwig · 31-08-2009 12:48pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Question all you want, but asking us to change the commandments to suit you is a bit haughty.

This makes no sense to me as many Christians have acknowledged that homosexuality is not inherently sinful according to the bible?

Is it possible to be in a relationship without having sex? Yes or no?

Only homosexual acts. I.E having sex with one of the same gender.

Who said anything about sex? Is kissing ok then???

JimiTime · 31-08-2009 12:48pm

equivariant wrote: »

Yes.

Well then, what you would have is a Pseudo-Christian a-la-carteism that is entirely subjective. Certainly not christianity anyeway. Now that may suit 'your' agenda, but as this is the Christianity forum, I would imagine that most deal with the matter on an 'actual' Christian basis. I.E. Include the writings of the bible.

This is a fairly pathetic argument. It amounts to saying 'I don't like the implications of my belief system with respect to homophobia, so I reject the validity of the concept of homophobia'.

I have no issue with the implications of following God at all. I simply believe that the word 'Homophobe' is a political, finger pointing, mud word. It has no meaning to me due to this. Sure, people like yourself believe in its meaning, I don't. Its water off a ducks back to me.

On the contrary, homophobia is a very real and frightening thing to many homosexuals.

I'm sure some are frightened by the fact that there are some folk wishing to do them harm. I'm sure those same people aren't frightened by some Christian who doesn't give them a second thought, but when asked is homosexuality sinful, says 'Yes'. It probably annoys, angers or frustrates sure, but frightens, no. Yet the word homophobe has become a description of both the above characters.

You talk about "peace loving people people who happen to belive in objective morality". However, if that objective morality happens to include discrimination against people based on their sexual preferences, then I don't think that they can be called "peace loving".

I can believe fornication to be wrong, and be peaceloving. I can believe Paedophilia to be wrong and be peaceloving. I can believe orgies to be wrong and be peaceloving, and I can believe homosexuality to be wrong and be peaceloving.

I mean, to give an analogy, one doesn't talk about 'peace loving people who happen to believe that black people should be discriminated against'.

That old silly chestnut. Being a black person is not an action or behaviour. Having sex with members of your own gender is an action.

Your analogy makes no sense whatsoever.

I'm afraid it does, you just missed it.

First of all, general society deems burglary to be wrong, it does not deem homosexuality to be wrong.

And?

Second, no one is suggesting that burglary should be punished by death.

That is exactly the point! If society says, 'Stealing is wrong', and some guy decides to kill or beat up thieves, we don't say, 'Thats socieities fault for saying stealing is wrong.' It is entirely the fault of the killer. Likewise, if Christianity declares homosexuality as sinful and someone decides to go beating or killing homosexuals, that person is responsible for his actions not Christianity.

Nick Oliveri wrote:

Just to clarify, are you saying that acting on such impulses are "moments of weakness" and depression? Or am I misunderstanding? If so, you could probably see how i came to this conclusion seeing as all of that was contained in the same paragraph.Just to clarify, are you saying that acting on such impulses are "moments of weakness" and depression? Or am I misunderstanding? If so, you could probably see how i came to this conclusion seeing as all of that was contained in the same paragraph.

You are misunderstanding, and in the context of the post I was replying to, I can't actually see how you misunderstood.

philologos · 31-08-2009 12:54pm

eightyfish wrote: »

Only celibate homosexuals are not sinning? What planet are you living on where sex is not important? Straight people have sex. (Except priests.) Gay people have sex. Sex in an integral part of life. To say it's okay to be gay as long as you don't have sex is, frankly, ridiculous.

I guess, you view Christian morality as ridiculous then. That's your choice, but we have the right to hold whatever moral viewpoint we feel is appropriate.

As for the fact whether or not it already happens is irrelevant. Marriage is deemed to be the place for sexual relations in the Christian faith. Anything outside of this is deemed to be sinful.

This is the difference between Christianity and social liberalism concerning sexuality.

This standard is applicable to me just as much as it is to anyone else.

eightyfish · 31-08-2009 1:02pm

Jakkass wrote: »

I guess, you view Christian morality as ridiculous then. That's your choice, but we have the right to hold whatever moral viewpoint we feel is appropriate.

I think that to pretend there is a difference between "homosexuals are sinners" and "the homosexual act is a sin" is ridiculous.

I also think that saying to gay people "you are welcome to our church, but you must renounce your sins" is an abusive (hence homophobic) statemtnt. It is your right to your belief, yes, but this kind of talk leads young gay people into all sorts of self-hate and self-doubt that is destructive.

Why The Horrible Attitude Towards Homosexuality?

Comments