A "gay" Episcopal priest's view of marriage

[LittleNipper]

What is your support for this bizarre, idiosyncratic notion, not advocated by a single reputable Biblical scholar?

So what you're saying is that the Bible does not differentiate by gender? It's gender nuetral?

Unless you don't believe women to be a part of the human race of man... Where there are NOT specific role differences, the Bible is gender nuetral, otherwise, the Word of GOD is specific (to the woman this to the man that --- to the husbnad this to the wife that).

 

[McBell]

The Bible treats the sins of man as mankind. Women are an important part of mankind. When it says men are not to lie with men as they do with women, the implication is that goes for the women also. Women are not supposed to be as thickheaded as men (according to some women), but perhaps that is changing.

so it is implied that woman are not to lay with men as men lay with woman?
Sounds to me like only one gender is allowed on top....

 

[Autodidact]

Unless you don't believe women to be a part of the human race of man... Where there are NOT specific role differences, the Bible is gender nuetral, otherwise, the Word of GOD is specific (to the woman this to the man that --- to the husbnad this to the wife that).

And obviously, a commandment about men should relate to men and not women is about a specific role difference. You haven't studied the Bible much, have you? Have you even read Leviticus 18?

7 " 'Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her.
8 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's wife; that would dishonor your father.
9 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere.
10 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter; that would dishonor you.
11 " 'Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father's wife, born to your father; she is your sister.
12 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's sister; she is your father's close relative.
13 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your mother's sister, because she is your mother's close relative.
14 " 'Do not dishonor your father's brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt.
15 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son's wife; do not have relations with her.
16 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your brother's wife; that would dishonor your brother.
17 " 'Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness.
18 " 'Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.
19 " 'Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period.
20 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your neighbor's wife and defile yourself with her...22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

You're trying to argue that these prohibitions were written for men and women? Any idea why it's fine to have sex with your sister's husband, but not your brother's wife? Or why a woman is only prohibited from having sex with another woman during menstruation? Find me a single reputable scholar who accepts your bizarre interpretation of this passage.

 

[shadze]

hmmm if this was a sexual example where is lesbianism .

 

[Father Heathen]

What contemptible and bigoted drivel ...

You may have a favorable view of nonsensical superstitions, slavery and stoning people to death for petty crimes but some of us simply have higher standards.

 

[Smoke]

really if you use this as a example all heterosexuals are in deeper trouble than the homosexual, after ALL THIER ARE MORE OF YOU. Lets see Jim Jones and Charles Manson just to note a few. You cant use sexual; lifestyle as a example, As Ive said over and over again if you judge one sexuality you judge them all.

Hitler, Stalin, Tamerlane, Hirohito, Genghis Khan, Mao ... all heterosexuals.

However, LittleNipper is so very troubled about homosexuality, that I'm not at all sure we can lump him/her in with the heterosexuals.

 

[T-Dawg]

Hitler, Stalin, Tamerlane, Hirohito, Genghis Khan, Mao ... all heterosexuals.

How the heck do you know they're homosexual? As far as I remember, none of those men ever got married... no, wait, Hitler got married about 2 hours before he commited suicide...
Naming historical figures isn't a very good argument for two reasons:
1.) Some people actually admire those people. I for one don't see the problem with Hirohito; most of the military actions in World War II were done by one of his officials (Admiral Yamato, I think). Then again, I never studied into WW2 much. And what's wrong with Mao? He was certainly better than the corrupt regime that preceded him.
2.) For every famous evil heterosexual, there's a famous evil homosexual. For example, Hitler's propagandist, Goebbels (I think that's how it's spelled...), was homosexual.

I don't think one's sexual orientation has an effect on authoritarian or violent tendencies.

However, LittleNipper is so very troubled about homosexuality, that I'm not at all sure we can lump him/her in with the heterosexuals.

Hehe, good point. LittleNipper's probably a closet homosexual.

Oh, and about this comment:

The hell you don't! Your disgusting attempt to exploit Ozzie's pain might have been deleted, but it wasn't forgotten. You're not just a proselytizer, you're a vulture.

Yes, it truly was disgusting. I didn't even notice that it was LittleNipper who made that comment (I think I know what you're talking about) until I saw this. Even LittleNipper couldn't be that cruel, right?

However, I really think that it's not entirely his fault. It's the church. He was obviously raised, condititioned, and beaten into his fundamentalism. He sincerely believes that trying to devalue Ozzie's deceased pet and trying to convince her that her love wasn't truly worth anything will somehow save her soul. It's sickening, appalling, and disgusting, and it comes from the church and family he was raised in, not from himself. Humans can only be what others mold them into.

 

[Smoke]

How the heck do you know they're homosexual? As far as I remember, none of those men ever got married.

Actually, every one of them married a woman, some more than one. But I think you missed the point, which was to mock the idiocy of LittleNipple's argument.

 

[Smoke]

However, I really think that it's not entirely his fault. It's the church. He was obviously raised, condititioned, and beaten into his fundamentalism. He sincerely believes that trying to devalue Ozzie's deceased pet and trying to convince her that her love wasn't truly worth anything will somehow save her soul. It's sickening, appalling, and disgusting, and it comes from the church and family he was raised in, not from himself. Humans can only be what others mold them into.

So nobody is responsible for his own actions?

 

[T-Dawg]

So nobody is responsible for his own actions?

They are, but I honestly don't think LittleNipper qualifies as being himself. He was beaten and bent into being an idiot fundamentalist hypocrite. He was raised in an environment that completely stifled thought.

In other words, I'm using LittleNipper's mental retardation as the defence for his cruelty (it's very common in legal courts, except they use "illness" instead of "retardation"). He can't be held responsible for his actions, because he's not capable of coherent thought, and therefore can't technically be called his actions, because they were not done by his will (of course, I'm being optimistic here...). He needs to be put into a place with "help," not thrown into a jail cell with the sane criminals.

 

[betchamad]

Homosexual is absolutely sin,this priest shall be ban off priesthood and ban from Church before he confesses his sin and stop those disgusts evil action.

 

[Zorro1227]

Homosexual is absolutely sin,this priest shall be ban off priesthood and ban from Church before he confesses his sin and stop those disgusts evil action.

Yippee another LN. Disgusting evil action. This comment is disgusting and evil. Please give scriptures to back up your claim.

 

[shadze]

Homosexual is absolutely sin,this priest shall be ban off priesthood and ban from Church before he confesses his sin and stop those disgusts evil action.

rubbish the only sin scripture writes about is same sex relationship within idol worship.
Now if we judge a sexual act in idol worship then we judge all sexual acts committed in idol worship. And this rubbish about man leaving father and mother to make one flesh
is not a example of sexual relationships or marriage. Since christ will marry his bride,
then he will commit a poligamist and same sex marriage. After all half of the bride are male anyway.:yes: