Essay~~

[ValidLogic]

I'm not looking for edits, I'm just showing an essay I wrote after discussing other essays in HYT. Feel free to critique, argue, whatever. -Logic

 

Homosexual marriage has always been the subject of social stigma. The sanctity of marriage has been targeted by some groups as something to 'protect,' but protect from what? Those who advocate for homosexual marriage have yet to propose any limitation or compromise on heterosexual marriage. In essence, those that advocate for marriage equality are reduced to a simple change: we want the homosexual community to enjoy the same freedoms, liberties and protection under the law as those of the heterosexual community enjoy. However, the central argument against homosexual marriage does not consist of an alleged limitation on heterosexual marriage. Several arguments I have heard against homosexual marriage are religion, the social stigmatization of homosexuals and the 'abuses' of marriage that would stem from allowing homosexuals to marry.

 

Religion has dictated people's morals for millennia. Perhaps one of the most widely used arguments against the homosexual's right to marriage is religion, namely Christianity It has been brought up countless times in debates about gay rights that "God hates gays" or something similar. God doesn't say it: the Bible wasn't written by God. But Moses does refer to homosexuals in the Book of Leviticus, "you shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination" (Leviticus 18:22). While this is a clear statement, it is later contradicted. The book of Sirach (also known as Ecclesiasticus) directs us to "recognize that your neighbor feels as you do, and keep in mind your own dislikes" (Sirach 31:15). You can use the Book of Leviticus as an argument, but you also have to look at the rest of the bible: if Leviticus 18:22 is saying that homosexuality is a sin, then isn't Sirach 31:15 expressing that it's inappropriate to suppress people's desires because we wouldn't like to be suppressed, thereby contradicts Moses?

 

Although the use of the Book of Leviticus can be a valid argument when considered in a vacuum, but it loses its validity when applied in reality. America is based on democratic values, which means it is the government's job to protect the people's rights; it is not a theocracy. America does not change its laws based on statements issued by the Pope or any other religious leader. To use religion to dictate law in a country where religion isn't the backbone of the legal structure is illogical.

 

To exemplify this, let's apply Biblical Law to America's current legal system. Adultery in New York is illegal: a class B misdemeanor punishable by 90 days in prison or a 500 dollar fine, but if we are going to use the Bible to dictate our legal system, then it becomes punishable by death (Leviticus 20:10). Homosexuals will be also punished by death (Leviticus 20:13), when in New York only the marriage of homosexuals is illegal. Fortune telling is illegal in New York when the fortune teller doesn't let the client know that it is for entertainment and receives the same punishment as an adulterer/adulteress. The Bible doesn't make this distinction – the fortune teller will be stoned to death regardless of their intent (Leviticus 20:27). But, this scenario is impossible.

 

The Constitution protects the masses from laws being created based on religious ideals. To quote the first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances". This means that your right to believe is protected, but the right of others to not have to follow your beliefs is also protected.

 

Time and time again, the stigmatization of homosexuals manifests. They are said to go against the 'norms' of society, making the idea of their marriage inappropriate. If we believe homosexuals are a social stigma and go against the norm, wouldn't Jewish people and African Americans be social stigmas too? Yes, by definition. The social 'norms' of America is Caucasian and Christian. But, do they have the right to marry? Yes they do. There was no logical reason to keep these people from marrying. Marriage didn't lose its alleged sanctity.

 

Several times in my discussions about the homosexual's right to marry, I have heard that homosexuals will abuse the right to marry. When asked which abuses would stem from their right to marry, economics is almost always the answer. If homosexual marriage is legal, two men or women could marry and benefit economically. Now, this benefit could be anything: social security benefits, taxation benefits, healthcare benefits and even gold-digging. This isn't the problem – the problem is that two men or women could marry each other and have no romantic or sexual interest in each other. This could pose a threat to the economy. Best friends could just marry to evade high taxes, but don't heterosexuals do this too? The reasons why people get married is limitless: people marry for love, money, social status, to please parents and even to deny their homosexuality. If heterosexuals do this, why can't homosexuals, or even friends of the same sex? The definition does not include love as the reason for marriage. Doesn't this mean that mean that the reasons for marriage are not bound by love? To say that homosexuals would abuse the right to marry is offensive because heterosexuals abuse it in the same way.

 

For decades, the decision about homosexual marriage has been a volatile subject. With religion being a chief factor in the discussion, the sanctity of marriage being 'threatened', the legal threats of same sex marriage and the fear of the stigma becoming the social norm, many people feel that homosexual marriage is inappropriate. If our government denies homosexuals right to marry based on a religious institution, it is going against the very Constitution upon which it swore to serve. We, as fellow human beings, have to respect the feelings and happiness of others. I know I wouldn't like to wake up one day and be told that I lost my right to marry. I'm sure you wouldn't either. And like Sirach 31:15 says, "recognize that your neighbor feels as you do, and keep in mind your own dislikes".

[Guest Rob]

You forgot to indent. C Minus.

 

No, I'm kidding. I thought it was quite good, but I can't be bothered to edit it, homework-type threads are usually locked. So, I suggest posting this in the "Real life help and advice" thread.

[ValidLogic]

You forgot to indent. C Minus.

 

No, I'm kidding. I thought it was quite good, but I can't be bothered to edit it, homework-type threads are usually locked. So, I suggest posting this in the "Real life help and advice" thread.

 

I'm sorry haha. I posted this because people wanted to read an essay I wrote. It's also just a discussion topic for those who agree/disagree. But thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed the read~~

[Dizzle229]

Are there really still people that oppose gay marriage?

[Vezon Dash]

^I oppose it lol.

 

You also need to reference Sodom and Gamorah, the two cities that God destroyed because of the homosexuals living there. And that book that starts with an S is not a real book is it?

[michel555555]

You could use some of the other passages from Leviticus to argue just how stupid it is to base laws around the bible. Such as being put to death for wearing clothing made of two different matterials. Or even just say how leviticus says that only men who lay with other men is an abomination, it doesn't mention anything about women. So then how can people then use leviticus to argue against lesbians. Great article but unfortunatly (I read this quote recently but can't remember who actually said it anyone know?) you can't use reason to argue against a state of mind that people weren't reasoned into to begin with. (something along those lines anyway)

[Hamtaro]

And that book that starts with an S is not a real book is it?

Martin Luther removed books of the Bible following his Protestant Reformation, including Sirach. The Catholics are the only ones (that I know of) that use the full Bible. The removal was purely political, of course, but stuck to this day for one reason or another.

 

On-Topic Edit: The essay was well-written with strong arguments. Most people already know how I feel about the subject (support), but I usually get flamed because of my reasoning, so I'll stay away from that.

[Saru Inc]

-- Don't be upset --

 

 

But, watch your phrases. I think the words "I have heard, have been brought up, etc." were used just a bit too often, a little more variety in that department would make the essay seem more real.

 

 

On the actual content, I mean, I guess I agree? Don't I have to? But I will say this, my opinion is, if you are trying to defeat an enemy, you must fight on their turf. This comes into the essay in that when debating Religion, I believe you should have gone for more of "in their shoes" approach. I did see a little bit of this, but one of the first sentences perturbed me a bit "...but God didn't write the Bible." And that is the issue, Christians believe God DID write the Bible. Though every word was written by Human hands, every single word came from God himself.

 

 

But I'm only pro marriage because when I meet the man I want to marry, I'm going to want to marry. I actually don't really care about all those economics. Well, I care, but that wouldn't even be a major reason at all.

[Diesel]

The Catholics are the only ones (that I know of) that use the full Bible.

 

Catholics don't even use a "full" Bible. There are more than 80 gospels that didn't make the cut into the Bible that we know today. (Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, Gospel of Truth, Secret Gospel of Mark, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, and Infancy Gospel of James to name a few)

[Giordano]

^I oppose it lol.

+1

[Hamtaro]

The Catholics are the only ones (that I know of) that use the full Bible.

 

Catholics don't even use a "full" Bible. There are more than 80 gospels that didn't make the cut into the Bible that we know today. (Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, Gospel of Truth, Secret Gospel of Mark, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, and Infancy Gospel of James to name a few)

The early Ecumenical Councils (Council of Jerusalem, I believe) deemed those works non-cannon, as they didn't preach the true message of Jesus (considering the apostles present there knew him), save the Gospel of Thomas (which I'm not too familiar with). For instance, if anyone here is familiar with the Gospel of Greed, one (who is not trolling) knows that the man depicted as Jesus was the polar of opposite of how he appears in the 4 Gospels. Besides, the Apocrypha was written long before Jesus was born. For the cheesy explanation, we feel that the authors of those Gospels were not writing the inspired word of God, rather their own ideas. And, of course, those books were never part of the Bible to begin with. One could argue that, say, the Epic of Gilgamesh is missing from the Bible if you're going to count any written work as a missing book of the Bible.

[Vezon Dash]

This is what I was getting at.

The Catholics are the only ones (that I know of) that use the full Bible.

 

Catholics don't even use a "full" Bible. There are more than 80 gospels that didn't make the cut into the Bible that we know today. (Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, Gospel of Truth, Secret Gospel of Mark, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, and Infancy Gospel of James to name a few)

The early Ecumenical Councils (Council of Jerusalem, I believe) deemed those works non-cannon, as they didn't preach the true message of Jesus (considering the apostles present there knew him), save the Gospel of Thomas (which I'm not too familiar with). For instance, if anyone here is familiar with the Gospel of Greed, one (who is not trolling) knows that the man depicted as Jesus was the polar of opposite of how he appears in the 4 Gospels. Besides, the Apocrypha was written long before Jesus was born. For the cheesy explanation, we feel that the authors of those Gospels were not writing the inspired word of God, rather their own ideas. And, of course, those books were never part of the Bible to begin with. One could argue that, say, the Epic of Gilgamesh is missing from the Bible if you're going to count any written work as a missing book of the Bible.

[Saru Inc]

^I oppose it lol.

 

You also need to reference Sodom and Gamorah, the two cities that God destroyed because of the homosexuals living there. And that book that starts with an S is not a real book is it?

 

 

That's actually (no offence) an elementary view of the Soddom of Gomorrah. I've studied that, and that is not why God destroyed the cities. There are two major factors to it:

 

One: (The biggest one) The citizens did not respect the Guests of God, nor any guests.

One.Five: They cared not for the poor and the poverty stricken, only relishing in their gluttony.

Two: They attempted to impose their sexual promiscuity *which also distressed God, but was not related to Homosexuality at all* on the Angels of the Lord.

 

Homosexuality honestly had nothing to do with it.

 

Has anyone here read the story of Ruth? It's popularly held that she had a lesbian lover, when her husband died. And she loved the Lord, and the Lord loved her.

[Saru Inc]

Maybe, but maybe not.

 

 

I find Atheists do this a lot (sorry, it's nothing personal... Seriously) They say "why does GOD HAVE to have created the Universe? Why couldn't it have been the Big bang?" Well... Why couldn't it have been God? "THERES NO PROOF!" Well... How do you know he didn't create the Universe, and choose to idk, have the planets move in outwards directions like an explosion. Maybe the Human mind can't handle the true powerfulness of an Almighty God, and so they say it was an act of nature, because they can comprehend that.

 

 

----

 

Again Ring World, that doesn't really have anything to do with you at all, and is in fact a bit off topic. But I've been meaning to bring that up for a while. (And because this thread is for Gay Rights Essay, I'd be happy to debate any of these points I posted via pm with anyone who wants to -- it's really just food for thought)

[ValidLogic]

Wow. That's a lot of food for thought. Thank you guys. I have a lot of thinking to do about this essay.

 

See, it was written in the first person style (I believe, I've heard...) because it's a blog entry. We're posting these essays onto blogs accessible to anybody in the school district. So thank you for your ideas, I'll consider them (although I wasn't really looking for ideas <3)

[Rainbows]

Personally that is why I am agnostic,I have no certainty about the possiblity of a God creating the universe, but I dont see one as necessary for the world to continue to turn now that it is around. And nor could I prove in either direction of the existence of a God

 

I'd to take a moment to point that agnosticism is a position related to the existence of evidence, whilst a/theism is in regards to existence. Thus one is an a/theist, but can also be an agnostic a/theist.

 

That out of the way, I felt your essay was far too ameri-centric. If you live there, that's understandable, but there are other countries out there. :wink: Some of which fully recognise same-sex marriages.

Unfortunately, as history has proven, contradiction in religious texts seem to have little effect on the efficacy of people's beliefs.

 

My personal belief is that opposition to homosexual rights in general springs from the wide spread of Abrahamic religions, though it's certainly present in other belief systems. I think it also has to do with the central importance, until very recently, of reproduction and primogeniture in 'modern' societies (I think this also plays a key role in the historical oppression of women, see here for details). Sexual repression can also be a key element of social control.

 

Homosexuality (especially male) has predominantly been practiced to one degree of another by the ruling elite within a society, but the necessity of political marriages, etc has meant that it has generally not been afforded political sanction.

 

Finally, it's always easy to scapegoat a minority. :wink:

[Saru Inc]

Wow. That's a lot of food for thought. Thank you guys. I have a lot of thinking to do about this essay.

 

See, it was written in the first person style (I believe, I've heard...) because it's a blog entry. We're posting these essays onto blogs accessible to anybody in the school district. So thank you for your ideas, I'll consider them (although I wasn't really looking for ideas <3)

 

 

Ahhh ok. that makes sense.

 

 

I was just giving my opinion of it :(

 

 

Personally that is why I am agnostic,I have no certainty about the possiblity of a God creating the universe, but I dont see one as necessary for the world to continue to turn now that it is around. And nor could I prove in either direction of the existence of a God

 

I'd to take a moment to point that agnosticism is a position related to the existence of evidence, whilst a/theism is in regards to existence. Thus one is an a/theist, but can also be an agnostic a/theist.

 

That out of the way, I felt your essay was far too ameri-centric. If you live there, that's understandable, but there are other countries out there. :wink: Some of which fully recognise same-sex marriages.

Unfortunately, as history has proven, contradiction in religious texts seem to have little effect on the efficacy of people's beliefs.

 

My personal belief is that opposition to homosexual rights in general springs from the wide spread of Abrahamic religions, though it's certainly present in other belief systems. I think it also has to do with the central importance, until very recently, of reproduction and primogeniture in 'modern' societies (I think this also plays a key role in the historical oppression of women, see here for details). Sexual repression can also be a key element of social control.

 

Homosexuality (especially male) has predominantly been practiced to one degree of another by the ruling elite within a society, but the necessity of political marriages, etc has meant that it has generally not been afforded political sanction.

 

Finally, it's always easy to scapegoat a minority. :wink:

 

 

I would think it was supposed to be Americentric.

[Noxx]

I think this piece has a lot of truth in it. I wasn't the nicest person towards homosexuals for most of my teenage life. I guess that was only because in a way i was afraid i might be one? I was sure i would never be one but you know there is always that slight chance something goes wrong. One day my best friend came to me and told me he was gay, i did not love him any less and that's when i realised that homosexuals are people just like me. Just because he prefers to like guys does not make him any less of a man than it makes me. I like Pizza, he likes Pasta. Should i be opressed for my choice?

Also when you aply the Bible to ANY theory you will always get a diversity of answers (even amungst Christians themselves). I gave my heart to God this year but i can assure you that my view on the Bible and God differs in many ways from that of my friends. I still wear my Slayer shirt when i feel like it, i still listen to my death metal every day. I believe God gave us a choice for a reason. He wants us to live our lives, not His. He just wants us to give Him glory through everything we do. And at the end of the day you feel like you're giving Him glory by being Homosexual then that is the way you chose to give him glory. Just because society does not agree with it does not make it wrong.

I applaud the countries who took the step into making homosexual marriages legal, they deserve to be happy just like every other straight person.

God judges, don't get me wrong. But he only judges in good ways. "Love thy neighbour". He does not say "Love thy female neighbour".

 

All in all, well written piece.

[Faux]

if only people didn't need a piece of paper as proof that they love each other... maybe one day

[Giordano]

if only people didn't need a piece of paper as proof that they love each other... maybe one day

But, God won't know then. :cry:

[Noxx]

I think this piece has a lot of truth in it. I wasn't the nicest person towards homosexuals for most of my teenage life. I guess that was only because in a way i was afraid i might be one? I was sure i would never be one but you know there is always that slight chance something goes wrong. One day my best friend came to me and told me he was gay, i did not love him any less and that's when i realised that homosexuals are people just like me. Just because he prefers to like guys does not make him any less of a man than it makes me. I like Pizza, he likes Pasta. Should i be opressed for my choice?

Also when you aply the Bible to ANY theory you will always get a diversity of answers (even amungst Christians themselves). I gave my heart to God this year but i can assure you that my view on the Bible and God differs in many ways from that of my friends. I still wear my Slayer shirt when i feel like it, i still listen to my death metal every day. I believe God gave us a choice for a reason. He wants us to live our lives, not His. He just wants us to give Him glory through everything we do. And at the end of the day you feel like you're giving Him glory by being Homosexual then that is the way you chose to give him glory. Just because society does not agree with it does not make it wrong.

I applaud the countries who took the step into making homosexual marriages legal, they deserve to be happy just like every other straight person.

God judges, don't get me wrong. But he only judges in good ways. "Love thy neighbour". He does not say "Love thy female neighbour".

 

All in all, well written piece.

 

Can a christian be tolerant towards a sinner?

 

Im not an expert enough to know the verses by heart but I do know theres a verse that says basically that you should rid evil (sin) from your life.

 

And there is somewhere where it says "man should not lie with another man as he would his wife for it is an abomination"

 

So I ask you, if you are a christian and it says you should stay away from evil (sin) and sinful people, and homosexuality is a sin, does the christian faith allow for tolerance towards homosexuals? Im not saying its part of the doctrine to kill them but it is part of the doctrine to try and take them out of sin - basically try and convince them not to be a homosexual anymore.

 

 

 

Im not saying I support this, ive made my views on christianity already but im curious what you think of that.

You know like i said you'er going to get a diffirent answer from me than you will from the typical Christain. I'm not a hypocrit. I've smoked pot, i've been drunk, i've been there and done that and i don't hide it. If i get out of church and feel like a smoke i do it there and then, i don;t wait till i can hide in my car and do it. So my opinion on this is very open minded as aposed to the typical christian. Sure the Bible does say a lot of things about homosexuality being wrong but i personally have not yet seen a verse where it came from God's mouth. JC is a forgiving God and an understanding God. He will not give you homosexual urges if He did not mean for you to be homosexual. I think the way of living has changed a lot since Jesus walked the earth. Also, even if the Bible does say we should rid ourself of sinners it is not by killing them but rather than showing us right from wrong. It is not by dragging them to church or forcing them to repent/convert but by showing them RIGHT FROM WRONG. God (in my opinion) does not care wether you are a jew, muslin, christian or whatever, all he cares about is the way you live and how you respect those around you. You will not be judged on what you did wrong but rather by what you did right. A lot of modern churches lost the plot, my friend. And that is mainly why we live in such a godless world these days. The words in the bible were mainly written opinion based by conservatives and like i said life has changed and i wish someday the mindset of the people will too. And like i said also, God wants us to honour Him in what we do and if you feel it's by being homosexual then you do that.

But then again, like i also said, i'm a very openminded christian so my opinion might not be the best. I do however believe that if God did not aprove of my way of thinking something would have been done to change it.

So yeah i know its written in a confusing manner but i hope you understand what i'm trying to get at.

[obfuscator]

I think this piece has a lot of truth in it. I wasn't the nicest person towards homosexuals for most of my teenage life. I guess that was only because in a way i was afraid i might be one? I was sure i would never be one but you know there is always that slight chance something goes wrong. One day my best friend came to me and told me he was gay, i did not love him any less and that's when i realised that homosexuals are people just like me. Just because he prefers to like guys does not make him any less of a man than it makes me. I like Pizza, he likes Pasta. Should i be opressed for my choice?

Also when you aply the Bible to ANY theory you will always get a diversity of answers (even amungst Christians themselves). I gave my heart to God this year but i can assure you that my view on the Bible and God differs in many ways from that of my friends. I still wear my Slayer shirt when i feel like it, i still listen to my death metal every day. I believe God gave us a choice for a reason. He wants us to live our lives, not His. He just wants us to give Him glory through everything we do. And at the end of the day you feel like you're giving Him glory by being Homosexual then that is the way you chose to give him glory. Just because society does not agree with it does not make it wrong.

I applaud the countries who took the step into making homosexual marriages legal, they deserve to be happy just like every other straight person.

God judges, don't get me wrong. But he only judges in good ways. "Love thy neighbour". He does not say "Love thy female neighbour".

 

All in all, well written piece.

 

Can a christian be tolerant towards a sinner?

 

Im not an expert enough to know the verses by heart but I do know theres a verse that says basically that you should rid evil (sin) from your life.

 

And there is somewhere where it says "man should not lie with another man as he would his wife for it is an abomination"

 

So I ask you, if you are a christian and it says you should stay away from evil (sin) and sinful people, and homosexuality is a sin, does the christian faith allow for tolerance towards homosexuals? Im not saying its part of the doctrine to kill them but it is part of the doctrine to try and take them out of sin - basically try and convince them not to be a homosexual anymore.

 

 

 

Im not saying I support this, ive made my views on christianity already but im curious what you think of that.

You know like i said you'er going to get a diffirent answer from me than you will from the typical Christain. I'm not a hypocrit. I've smoked pot, i've been drunk, i've been there and done that and i don't hide it. If i get out of church and feel like a smoke i do it there and then, i don;t wait till i can hide in my car and do it. So my opinion on this is very open minded as aposed to the typical christian. Sure the Bible does say a lot of things about homosexuality being wrong but i personally have not yet seen a verse where it came from God's mouth. JC is a forgiving God and an understanding God. He will not give you homosexual urges if He did not mean for you to be homosexual. I think the way of living has changed a lot since Jesus walked the earth. Also, even if the Bible does say we should rid ourself of sinners it is not by killing them but rather than showing us right from wrong. It is not by dragging them to church or forcing them to repent/convert but by showing them RIGHT FROM WRONG. God (in my opinion) does not care wether you are a jew, muslin, christian or whatever, all he cares about is the way you live and how you respect those around you. You will not be judged on what you did wrong but rather by what you did right. A lot of modern churches lost the plot, my friend. And that is mainly why we live in such a godless world these days. The words in the bible were mainly written opinion based by conservatives and like i said life has changed and i wish someday the mindset of the people will too. And like i said also, God wants us to honour Him in what we do and if you feel it's by being homosexual then you do that.

But then again, like i also said, i'm a very openminded christian so my opinion might not be the best. I do however believe that if God did not aprove of my way of thinking something would have been done to change it.

So yeah i know its written in a confusing manner but i hope you understand what i'm trying to get at.

 

So what you're saying is, you're Christian as long as it's convenient for you?

[Noxx]

I think this piece has a lot of truth in it. I wasn't the nicest person towards homosexuals for most of my teenage life. I guess that was only because in a way i was afraid i might be one? I was sure i would never be one but you know there is always that slight chance something goes wrong. One day my best friend came to me and told me he was gay, i did not love him any less and that's when i realised that homosexuals are people just like me. Just because he prefers to like guys does not make him any less of a man than it makes me. I like Pizza, he likes Pasta. Should i be opressed for my choice?

Also when you aply the Bible to ANY theory you will always get a diversity of answers (even amungst Christians themselves). I gave my heart to God this year but i can assure you that my view on the Bible and God differs in many ways from that of my friends. I still wear my Slayer shirt when i feel like it, i still listen to my death metal every day. I believe God gave us a choice for a reason. He wants us to live our lives, not His. He just wants us to give Him glory through everything we do. And at the end of the day you feel like you're giving Him glory by being Homosexual then that is the way you chose to give him glory. Just because society does not agree with it does not make it wrong.

I applaud the countries who took the step into making homosexual marriages legal, they deserve to be happy just like every other straight person.

God judges, don't get me wrong. But he only judges in good ways. "Love thy neighbour". He does not say "Love thy female neighbour".

 

All in all, well written piece.

 

Can a christian be tolerant towards a sinner?

 

Im not an expert enough to know the verses by heart but I do know theres a verse that says basically that you should rid evil (sin) from your life.

 

And there is somewhere where it says "man should not lie with another man as he would his wife for it is an abomination"

 

So I ask you, if you are a christian and it says you should stay away from evil (sin) and sinful people, and homosexuality is a sin, does the christian faith allow for tolerance towards homosexuals? Im not saying its part of the doctrine to kill them but it is part of the doctrine to try and take them out of sin - basically try and convince them not to be a homosexual anymore.

 

 

 

Im not saying I support this, ive made my views on christianity already but im curious what you think of that.

You know like i said you'er going to get a diffirent answer from me than you will from the typical Christain. I'm not a hypocrit. I've smoked pot, i've been drunk, i've been there and done that and i don't hide it. If i get out of church and feel like a smoke i do it there and then, i don;t wait till i can hide in my car and do it. So my opinion on this is very open minded as aposed to the typical christian. Sure the Bible does say a lot of things about homosexuality being wrong but i personally have not yet seen a verse where it came from God's mouth. JC is a forgiving God and an understanding God. He will not give you homosexual urges if He did not mean for you to be homosexual. I think the way of living has changed a lot since Jesus walked the earth. Also, even if the Bible does say we should rid ourself of sinners it is not by killing them but rather than showing us right from wrong. It is not by dragging them to church or forcing them to repent/convert but by showing them RIGHT FROM WRONG. God (in my opinion) does not care wether you are a jew, muslin, christian or whatever, all he cares about is the way you live and how you respect those around you. You will not be judged on what you did wrong but rather by what you did right. A lot of modern churches lost the plot, my friend. And that is mainly why we live in such a godless world these days. The words in the bible were mainly written opinion based by conservatives and like i said life has changed and i wish someday the mindset of the people will too. And like i said also, God wants us to honour Him in what we do and if you feel it's by being homosexual then you do that.

But then again, like i also said, i'm a very openminded christian so my opinion might not be the best. I do however believe that if God did not aprove of my way of thinking something would have been done to change it.

So yeah i know its written in a confusing manner but i hope you understand what i'm trying to get at.

 

So what you're saying is, you're Christian as long as it's convenient for you?

Wat, is that what i made it sound like? No i'm not just a Christian when i find it convenient. I alway try and do the right thing regardless. I am just a more openminded Christian. What i am saying is that i have been there. I don't live that life anymore. Sure, i will still drink now and then but not nearly enough to get me drunk. But tat has got nothing to do with my views on homosexuality anyway. See that's the thing. Most people who don't lead a Christian life got this idea from somewhere that all us Christians are hypocrites when it's nothing like that. We are allowed to have out own opinions about things. We are allowed to make our own conclusions. I do not need to be some mindless zombie following rules. A lot of people from my church do not agree with the way i see many things. Maybe i am wrong? at least this way i know i can treat any one with the same fairness and that to me is what's important. I really hate the feeling that so many people do not know God the way i do. I hate the feeling that they choose not to know God because they feel they will have to give money or do good deeds. That's not what it's about. Its about being the best you that you can be. Anyway i'm straying away from your question.

I am always a Christian, just a weird one. One that is not affraid to admit that i have smoked pot or been drunk or had sex. What will i gain by hiding it anyway? The thing that makes the diffirence in hear and now. Will i do it again? I chose not too, and that is what makes me a better christian than i was before. This does not mean i live the perfect life, i am human after all.

 

What was it that i said that made you think i was only Christian when it suited me?

[obfuscator]

Wat, is that what i made it sound like? No i'm not just a Christian when i find it convenient. I alway try and do the right thing regardless. I am just a more openminded Christian. What i am saying is that i have been there. I don't live that life anymore. Sure, i will still drink now and then but not nearly enough to get me drunk. But tat has got nothing to do with my views on homosexuality anyway. See that's the thing. Most people who don't lead a Christian life got this idea from somewhere that all us Christians are hypocrites when it's nothing like that. We are allowed to have out own opinions about things. We are allowed to make our own conclusions. I do not need to be some mindless zombie following rules. A lot of people from my church do not agree with the way i see many things. Maybe i am wrong? at least this way i know i can treat any one with the same fairness and that to me is what's important. I really hate the feeling that so many people do not know God the way i do. I hate the feeling that they choose not to know God because they feel they will have to give money or do good deeds. That's not what it's about. Its about being the best you that you can be. Anyway i'm straying away from your question.

I am always a Christian, just a weird one. One that is not affraid to admit that i have smoked pot or been drunk or had sex. What will i gain by hiding it anyway? The thing that makes the diffirence in hear and now. Will i do it again? I chose not too, and that is what makes me a better christian than i was before. This does not mean i live the perfect life, i am human after all.

 

What was it that i said that made you think i was only Christian when it suited me?

 

Well, actually, if you knew anything about church doctrine, it does say that moral decisions are made by the higher authority of the church and in order to be considered a practicing catholic these rules should be followed.

 

I'm glad to hear you're willing to admit your shortcomings (according to church rule). Yet if you claim to be a practicing catholic, the church clearly teaches the way to be the "best you can be" is to repent of those sins and stop doing them.

[Noxx]

Wat, is that what i made it sound like? No i'm not just a Christian when i find it convenient. I alway try and do the right thing regardless. I am just a more openminded Christian. What i am saying is that i have been there. I don't live that life anymore. Sure, i will still drink now and then but not nearly enough to get me drunk. But tat has got nothing to do with my views on homosexuality anyway. See that's the thing. Most people who don't lead a Christian life got this idea from somewhere that all us Christians are hypocrites when it's nothing like that. We are allowed to have out own opinions about things. We are allowed to make our own conclusions. I do not need to be some mindless zombie following rules. A lot of people from my church do not agree with the way i see many things. Maybe i am wrong? at least this way i know i can treat any one with the same fairness and that to me is what's important. I really hate the feeling that so many people do not know God the way i do. I hate the feeling that they choose not to know God because they feel they will have to give money or do good deeds. That's not what it's about. Its about being the best you that you can be. Anyway i'm straying away from your question.

I am always a Christian, just a weird one. One that is not affraid to admit that i have smoked pot or been drunk or had sex. What will i gain by hiding it anyway? The thing that makes the diffirence in hear and now. Will i do it again? I chose not too, and that is what makes me a better christian than i was before. This does not mean i live the perfect life, i am human after all.

 

What was it that i said that made you think i was only Christian when it suited me?

 

Well, actually, if you knew anything about church doctrine, it does say that moral decisions are made by the higher authority of the church and in order to be considered a practicing catholic these rules should be followed.

 

I'm glad to hear you're willing to admit your shortcomings (according to church rule). Yet if you claim to be a practicing catholic, the church clearly teaches the way to be the "best you can be" is to repent of those sins and stop doing them.

I'm not catholic though. Believe it or not Christians do differ from the catholic church. And yes you need to repent, but not because you are forced too. In my church we are not forced to follow the views of the "higher authority". We are not puppets.

And what would be the use of hiding my shorcomings? In the end i just end up lying to myself. I just think the whole catholic system was set up by conservatives worried about what the world is going to think. Yet they are the ones (the priests, that molest children). Funny how the world works.