Homosexuality: Right or Wrong?

[Danqazmlp]

Just because a religion states it does not like a certain people, does not mean they should not marry. Should atheists not be allowed to marry?

[Bows]

Iconic, you just attempt to prove points using Jesus and yourself in ultimatums. If I'm wrong, then Jesus is wrong. If you say that, Jesus is wrong. Is Jesus wrong? Is Christianity wrong? Ugh.

[Dupin]

Jesus doesn't even speak out against homosexuality. Don't go quoting the Bible, as we all know Bible quotes are junk. There are hateful quotes against everything in the Bible. Jesus' main message was that we should all love each other. You might even say he's promoting homosexual orgies.

[Pepsiguy]

pro;

 

 

----------------------------

 

in other news

 

 

I wish i could fall of this planet and die right now. i feel so [bleep]ing betrayed. see today page 779 off topic.

honestly, i use to believe in god, but not anymore. logically does he even exist? and why would he still love us for all the things we have done, if i was him when adam and eve ate the apple, i woulda left. my whole family used to go to church and all that, but now since my parents divorce and a couple years later, my dad defies gainst god and he gives reasons, but i just cant remember.... but when god says you cant do this or that, what makes us different? uniqueness is probably most available when you dont have to do this or that for most of your life.this is what i dont like, people are narrow minded at times and wont set there experiences and religous aside, this is how people live, people need to get over the fact that if your not this, or you have to do this or your not gunna be saved, or your not gunna live a fruitful life with god, i thought he loved us all, if he did he would except you and other that are homosexuals, he would love those terrorist that kill people everyday, this is what makes me mad is that some christians say you going to hell or things like that cuase your different(sorry if i offended you or anyone in any ways)

anyone read this?

[GottaGetDownOnfriday]

Doesn't it say in the same area of the bible that tattoos and cutting hair is a sin?

[Dupin]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101006/pl_yblog_upshot/stars-urge-gay-teens-not-to-take-their-own-lives

 

I would like to urge everybody who likes Ayn Rand not to commit suicide. Anyone want to help me make a video?

 

E: My point is that I find this rather dumb and offensive. Yes, it's good that they're fighting bullying and encouraging homosexuals not to kill themselves, but suggesting that homosexuals are more likely to kill themselves than anyone else is silly.

[Pirate_Felix]

No...?

 

Also there is no right or wrong in Homosexuality

Its more like

Deal with it.

[meol]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101006/pl_yblog_upshot/stars-urge-gay-teens-not-to-take-their-own-lives

 

I would like to urge everybody who likes Ayn Rand not to commit suicide. Anyone want to help me make a video?

 

E: My point is that I find this rather dumb and offensive. Yes, it's good that they're fighting bullying and encouraging homosexuals not to kill themselves, but suggesting that homosexuals are more likely to kill themselves than anyone else is silly.

It'd be great if it just were so. Sadly, there are strong correlations between sexual orientation and suicidal tendencies. [1][2] And it's not surprising, honestly, with such problems like the impotence of not being able to change your feelings and fearing rejection from parents and peers.

[Hamtaro]

Er, no. The Bible preaches tolerance (at least in the New Testament), but fundies can't read. As I've said before, I'm a Conservative Christian and I support equal rights for homosexuals. And yes, marriage is cultural, if you're talking about almost every culture that ever existed. That's like saying they shouldn't be able to bake a cake because food is cultural.

 

Makes no sense as to why it's illegal.

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness—-That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it..." - Declaration of Independence

 

[spoiler=Relevent Bible Verses]Old Testament:

Leviticus-

-Leviticus 18:22 “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.”

-Leviticus 20:13 “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives”

-Leviticus 10:6 “Moses said to Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar, "Do not bare your heads or tear your garments, lest you bring not only death on yourselves but God's wrath also on the whole community. Your kinsmen, the rest of the house of Israel, shall mourn for those whom the LORD'S fire has smitten;”

-Leviticus 19:27 “Do not clip your hair at the temples, nor trim the edges of your beard.”

-Leviticus 11:6-8 “…and the pig, which does indeed have hoofs and is cloven-footed, but does not chew the cud and is therefore unclean for you. Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall not touch; they are unclean for you.”

-Leviticus 11:34 “Any solid food that was in contact with water, and any liquid that men drink, in any such vessel become unclean.”

-Leviticus 19:19 “…do not put on a garment woven with two different kinds of thread.”

Picking and choosing what you believe from this book of the Bible, eh?

 

-1 Kings 7:23 “The sea was then cast; it was made with a circular rim, and measured ten cubits across, five in height, and thirty in circumference.”

-Now, the formula to find the circumference of a circle is 2πr OR dπ (with π being pi, r being the radius, and d being the diameter). Plugging in the numbers from above into 2πr, we get 2π5. 2*5=10, 10 = diameter. 10π is what we are left with. π≠3. Pi is a number that no one has found the exact decimals for. Generally, 3.14, not exactly 3 is accepted as proper rounding. This would make the circular rim ~31.4 cubits in circumference, not 30 (to prove the Bible can be wrong in some cases).

-Deuteronomy 13:7-11 “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or your intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the LORD, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery.” Still a few billion late on this one I can see.

 

New Testament:

-John 13:34-35 "I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another. This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

-Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.”

-Galatians 2:21 “I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.”

 

[obfuscator]

Old testament is pretty silly tbh.

 

New testament is better.

[fakeitormakeit2]

I enjoy how people quote the Bible to validate why homosexuality is wrong. There are two major problems with that:

 

(1) Not everyone accepts the Bible, no matter how holy I or anyone might else believe it to be, as a medium of morality and therefore cannot be used as a dictation of morality in a public arena unless such moral is logically validated.

(2) It is sad few study theology in depth yet many makes large leaping assumptions. Jesus's life, death and resurrection fulfilled the terms of the old Law and he brought the new "Law" or the New Testament. Items in the Old Testament can be considered to have spiritual importance and there is much wisdom [such as the 10 Commandments] and inspiration to be found, but as Jesus said he came to fulfill the Law and His Law [the one he brought] is to be followed. Jesus doesn't say anything about homosexuality so we cannot assume what he would say and there is absolutely nothing in the New Testament other than a few sentences of the authors who signed as Paul.

 

So Christian and atheist alike, do not quote out of context.

 

Edit: Theologically, homosexuality is not defined as wrong. Sex that is considered sinful falls under two classifications: sex not oriented towards human reproduction and sex outside the bounds of marriage. Since marriage is classically defined as between a man and woman in Christianity. Since gay people cannot get married in the classical Christian definition of marriage, therefore it would be sex outside of marriage and not oriented towards reproduction, it is than considered sinful.

 

Gays may not get married in the classical Christian definition. However, I believe that gays should be allowed to be civilly united with equal rights if their conscience clarifies that it is correct to do so.

 

I find it disgusting how some fundamentalists can spout hatred against gays by quoting Leviticus outside the context of Jesus's "completion of the old Law" and yet they neglect the multitude of times in the New Testament [and Old!] that call for followers of God to be tolerant and kind to everyone.

[Hamtaro]

I enjoy how people quote the Bible to validate why homosexuality is wrong. There are two major problems with that:

 

(1) Not everyone accepts the Bible, no matter how holy I or anyone might else believe it to be, as a medium of morality and therefore cannot be used as a dictation of morality in a public arena unless such moral is logically validated.

(2) It is sad few study theology in depth yet many makes large leaping assumptions. Jesus's life, death and resurrection completed the terms of the old Law and he brought the new "Law" or the New Testament. Items in the Old Testament can be considered to have spiritual importance and there is much wisdom [such as the 10 Commandments] and inspiration to be found, but as Jesus said he completed the Law and His Law [the one he brought] is to be followed. Jesus doesn't say anything about homosexuality so we cannot assume what he would say and there is absolutely nothing in the New Testament other than a few sentences of the authors who signed as Paul.

 

So Christian and atheist alike, do not quote out of context.

(1) Agree with you completely.

(2) I've been studying theology for 11 years now (although the first seven years were essentially coloring pictures of saints and being tested on "God/Jesus/Holy Spirit is good"), so I feel I can discuss this. Testament means covenant, not law. While I won't get into all of the "cheesy" details, this simply means that God renewed his promise with his people (all people) in a second covenant (the first being given to Moses and the Jews). The only "rules" that Jesus affirms in the New Testament are the 10 Commandments; to love God with all one's mind, heart, and soul; and to love one another (while ignoring the Old Law as seen in [supposedly for you skeptics] performing miracles [working] on the Sabbath). While, true, we cannot tell what Jesus' stance would be, we can tell that he would be against the intolerance and abuse aimed at homosexuals.

[fakeitormakeit2]

I enjoy how people quote the Bible to validate why homosexuality is wrong. There are two major problems with that:

 

(1) Not everyone accepts the Bible, no matter how holy I or anyone might else believe it to be, as a medium of morality and therefore cannot be used as a dictation of morality in a public arena unless such moral is logically validated.

(2) It is sad few study theology in depth yet many makes large leaping assumptions. Jesus's life, death and resurrection completed the terms of the old Law and he brought the new "Law" or the New Testament. Items in the Old Testament can be considered to have spiritual importance and there is much wisdom [such as the 10 Commandments] and inspiration to be found, but as Jesus said he completed the Law and His Law [the one he brought] is to be followed. Jesus doesn't say anything about homosexuality so we cannot assume what he would say and there is absolutely nothing in the New Testament other than a few sentences of the authors who signed as Paul.

 

So Christian and atheist alike, do not quote out of context.

(1) Agree with you completely.

(2) I've been studying theology for 11 years now (although the first seven years were essentially coloring pictures of saints and being tested on "God/Jesus/Holy Spirit is good"), so I feel I can discuss this. Testament means covenant, not law. While I won't get into all of the "cheesy" details, this simply means that God renewed his promise with his people (all people) in a second covenant (the first being given to Moses and the Jews). The only "rules" that Jesus affirms in the New Testament are the 10 Commandments; to love God with all one's mind, heart, and soul; and to love one another (while ignoring the Old Law as seen in [supposedly for you skeptics] performing miracles [working] on the Sabbath). While, true, we cannot tell what Jesus' stance would be, we can tell that he would be against the intolerance and abuse aimed at homosexuals.

That's essentially what I said. And I always say covenant [on Tip.it, so I thought I'd change it up] and I found Law to be interchangeable with it in this instance, because although God makes several covenants to establish and renew His relationship it consists of Law. Linguistically 'diatheke' is closer to a testament or deposition rather than covenant [it's called the Old/New Testament after the Greek word 'diatheke' not the Hebrew word b'rith which means covenant]. By the way, Jesus's "covenant" is not the second, its about the sixth (depending upon what you call a covenant as the generally accepted ones are the covenants of Eden, Adam, Noah, Abraham which was reaffirmed several times i.e. Isaac and Jacob, Moses, the nation of Israel and David).

[Saru Inc]

Iconic, you just attempt to prove points using Jesus and yourself in ultimatums. If I'm wrong, then Jesus is wrong. If you say that, Jesus is wrong. Is Jesus wrong? Is Christianity wrong? Ugh.

 

Sounds about right. Bows have now proven the non existence of God.

 

pro;

 

 

----------------------------

 

in other news

 

 

I wish i could fall of this planet and die right now. i feel so [bleep]ing betrayed. see today page 779 off topic.

honestly, i use to believe in god, but not anymore. logically does he even exist? and why would he still love us for all the things we have done, if i was him when adam and eve ate the apple, i woulda left. my whole family used to go to church and all that, but now since my parents divorce and a couple years later, my dad defies gainst god and he gives reasons, but i just cant remember.... but when god says you cant do this or that, what makes us different? uniqueness is probably most available when you dont have to do this or that for most of your life.this is what i dont like, people are narrow minded at times and wont set there experiences and religous aside, this is how people live, people need to get over the fact that if your not this, or you have to do this or your not gunna be saved, or your not gunna live a fruitful life with god, i thought he loved us all, if he did he would except you and other that are homosexuals, he would love those terrorist that kill people everyday, this is what makes me mad is that some christians say you going to hell or things like that cuase your different(sorry if i offended you or anyone in any ways)

anyone read this?

 

ur mom read it

 

 

(I READ IT!)

 

Doesn't it say in the same area of the bible that tattoos and cutting hair is a sin?

 

 

Yar.

 

 

Ok, I don't know how many times I have to say the old things over and over and over. So this time I guess I'm just not going to say them. Fakeitormakeit is right, the New Testament invalidates like 90% of the old testament. I have two issues (note, these are a matter of opinion.)

 

1. Sex is made to reproduce, as stated in the Bible. And again, the age old argument: Barren women? They WANT to produce, yet they are physically unable too. Many gay men WANT to produce, but can't for two reasons, one being that much rainbow power in one baby would be like Jesus 2.0 The other? Not g rated.

 

2) I don't see sex as love between a man and a woman, and I don't believe thats what the Bible meant either. In religious terms? It is to show how much your love is for the other, how much your love is for God, and I forgot the third reason. (Not being sarcastic, I seriously like just forgot it... I'll edit this post later)

 

God wouldn't make gay men be gay, and then force them to be celibate. He doesn't force anyone to be celibate, even Priests make a very conscious choice.

[Alg]

God wouldn't make gay men be gay, and then force them to be celibate. He doesn't force anyone to be celibate, even Priests make a very conscious choice.

Asexuals.

Muhahahaha

 

Serious note: Wondering why Christians don't just disregard the old testament and focus on Jesus's teachings. That's what the religion is supposed to be, after all.

[Saru Inc]

Already discussed noob, asexuals have a sexual desire, but just not enough to ever act upon it.

 

nub nub in da tub.

 

 

@ Fakitormoremakeit, and gays should not be classically married because...?

[Zierro]

God wouldn't make gay men be gay, and then force them to be celibate.

 

What about pedophiles and zoos?

[Alg]

God wouldn't make gay men be gay, and then force them to be celibate.

 

What about pedophiles and zoos?

It could be argued that most of the hate is cultural, much like in the case of homosexuality.

[Zierro]

A person who has the biological desire to inflict pain or rape others could say that god made him that way too. Of course inflicting pain is immoral on a secular level and homosexuality is not, but I just don't see "god made me this way for a reason - not to go against it" as good rationale, because that could be said for many other things.

 

(God made men with immoral desires, but I would think that he does want them to go against their urges/desires/instinct/the way he made them.)

[Naraku893]

I think its wrong. And gross.

[Zygimantas]

I think its wrong.

May you explain why you think that?

[fakeitormakeit2]

God wouldn't make gay men be gay, and then force them to be celibate. He doesn't force anyone to be celibate, even Priests make a very conscious choice.

Asexuals.

Muhahahaha

 

Serious note: Wondering why Christians don't just disregard the old testament and focus on Jesus's teachings. That's what the religion is supposed to be, after all.

It's mostly disregarded but the Old Testament is still Scripture which shows the development of the Abrahamic systematic and moral theology. It still has many good points but it has been to read in light of the New Testament for Christians. Completely disregarding it is throwing away "Wisdom" (capital 'w') because we have developed past some parts. Any how, before anyone starts disregarding parts of the Bible, Christians need to start reading it first;as I've heard it brilliantly put, most Christian use their bible like a software license agreement, they just scroll to the bottom without reading it and click 'I Agree'.

 

@Bonkers, well for one thing they cannot be married in a classical definition because they would not be meeting the classical definition and no matter how much one may wish, it would still not be a man and a woman. I also don't think It's completely wrong to force churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, etc. to marry gays if it contradicts their tradition. As I said, civil unions for all.

[Alg]

It's mostly disregarded but the Old Testament is still Scripture which shows the development of the Abrahamic systematic and moral theology. It still has many good points but it has been to read in light of the New Testament for Christians. Completely disregarding it is throwing away "Wisdom" (capital 'w') because we have developed past some parts. Any how, before anyone starts disregarding parts of the Bible, Christians need to start reading it first;as I've heard it brilliantly put, most Christian use their bible like a software license agreement, they just scroll to the bottom without reading it and click 'I Agree'.

Good point. Better approach to it.

I just see a lot of problems caused by people quoting the Old Testament out of context (Both literary and historical) to prove a point when Christianity is the New Testament.

[Saru Inc]

God wouldn't make gay men be gay, and then force them to be celibate.

 

What about pedophiles and zoos?

 

I've not studied either of those cases, so to be honest I don't know. I couldn't give a very good answer, so I'll just tell you what I know from other people on this forum/internet. Both are just extreme fetishes in a sense. At least *again* that's what I've been told.

 

God wouldn't make gay men be gay, and then force them to be celibate.

 

What about pedophiles and zoos?

It could be argued that most of the hate is cultural, much like in the case of homosexuality.

 

I mean look at saudi arabia, men marrying girls. You're exactly right. And they did it back in the Bible time as well, so maybe it could be argued there's nothing wrong with pedophilia... Or bestiality.

 

 

A person who has the biological desire to inflict pain or rape others could say that god made him that way too. Of course inflicting pain is immoral on a secular level and homosexuality is not, but I just don't see "god made me this way for a reason - not to go against it" as good rationale, because that could be said for many other things.

 

(God made men with immoral desires, but I would think that he does want them to go against their urges/desires/instinct/the way he made them.)

 

Yea... That's not what I mean though. I guess I'm speaking more in spiritual terms, on a level of I was born gay because it isn't immoral. That's phrased awkwardly, but I can't think of a better way to say it at this time. I absolutely agree some "psychopaths" are born with no morals whatsoever, so may have an urge to inflict pain. I think where I draw the line, is where free choice of an innocent party is lost. Two gay/lesbian/transexual/bi/straight people who are both in love (or just want to [bleep]... to be honest) aren't hurting anyone. It's a cliche phrase, but I think it holds true. with Pedophiles and Bestiality, one of the parties cannot speak for themselves, and that's why I personally don't agree with them. Same thing with the urge to rape or inflict pain, they can have those urges all they want, and if someone is up for kinky sex, so be it. But the minute someone has pain inflicted on them as a result of the urge, that's where I call it wrong.

 

 

I think its wrong. And gross.

 

I think your avatar is wrong and gross. prove i am wrong

 

 

I think its wrong.

May you explain why you think that?

 

 

becuasee its wrong and gross lolduh

 

God wouldn't make gay men be gay, and then force them to be celibate. He doesn't force anyone to be celibate, even Priests make a very conscious choice.

Asexuals.

Muhahahaha

 

Serious note: Wondering why Christians don't just disregard the old testament and focus on Jesus's teachings. That's what the religion is supposed to be, after all.

 

@Bonkers, well for one thing they cannot be married in a classical definition because they would not be meeting the classical definition and no matter how much one may wish, it would still not be a man and a woman. I also don't think It's completely wrong to force churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, etc. to marry gays if it contradicts their tradition. As I said, civil unions for all.

 

And of atheists being married?

 

And why can traditions not change? Maybe the tradition was of a man and woman, because the world needed to populate? I'm not denying gays can't reproduce. Can you please explain to me logically why traditions cannot change? Do we still hold true to eye for an eye, raping of the enemies, taxation without representation (ironically sometimes still LOL ), or farming as a main way of life? These used to all be massive traditions, and now they are not. Would you have complained back then if they were changing them? Someone broke your arm, would you declare the inability to go against tradition, so that you could break his arm?

[Skeptical]

It's not right or wrong; it just is. Exactly like heterosexual love.

 

And since when are lesbians nasty? I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only male with that opinion...